♦*n»" H

r

«•*'' ’I

V/ , f

OAK ST Rn^p

**fi

OF THE

U N I VERSITY
OF ILLINOIS

5-9S5-.T
1*6
v. 1 2.“ 14*

3.TJ cj V» 1 4" 8* p X •
S COp.vS _ _ .

NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY

UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

The person charging this material is responsible for its
renewal or return to the library on or before the due date.
The minimum fee for a lost item is $125.00, $300.00 for
bound journals.

Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons
for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from
the University. Please note: self-stick notes may result in
torn pages and lift some inks.

Renew via the Telephone Center at 217-333-8400,
866-262-1510 (toll-free) or circlib@illinois.edu.

Renew online by choosing the My Library Account
option at: http://www.library.illinois.edu/catalog/

The Corn Root- Worm . . 10

Extent and Amount of its Injuries . 11

Description . 15

I Life History . 18

Injuries to Corn.... . i . . 26

Natural Remedies . „ . . 27

Artificial Remedies . . . 28

Summary . 30

Studies on the Chinch-Bug— I

Life-History .

Natural Enemies .

Insects .

Birds . .

Parasites .

Topical Applications .

32

33

39

39

44

45
57

The Strawberry Crown-Borer .

Description .

Life-History .

Injuries to Vegetation .

Natural Enemies .

Methods of Prevention and Remedy

The Strawberry Crown-Miner .

As a Peach-Twig Borer .

As a Strawberry Crown-Miner .

Remedies .

The Melon Plant Louse .

Life-History .

Injuries to Vegetation...
Prevention and Remedy

Natural Enemies .

Summary .

Sxperiments with the European Cabbage Worm

Hot water . . . .

Powdered py rethrum...,. . . .

Tobacco smoke . . . . .

Sulphur .

Bisulphide of •*»

¥¥»¥»»» ??»»??»•?•»??*•••****•»??»«

.. 64
. 65
.. 66
.. 73
.. 73
.. 73

.. 76
.. 77
80

.. 81

.. 83
. 88
. 88
. 89
. 90
. 91

. 92

95

95

CONTENTS.

PAGE

Experiments with the European Cabbage- Worm-

Kerosene emulsion-. . 96

Saltpetre and salt . 96

Lime . . . 97

Tar-water . . 97

Miscellaneous Notes . 98

The Cherry Slug, or Pear Slug . 98

The White- marked Tussock Moth . 100

The Bag Worm . 101

The Army- Worm . 102

The Cabbage Cut- Worm . 103

The Stalk-Borer . 103

The Zebra Caterpillar . 103

The Purple Cabbage Worm . 104

Colaspis brunnea. . . 104

Diabrotica 12- guttata . 104

Macrobasis unicolor . 104

Epicauta vittata . 104

Epicauta cinerea..- . . . . 104

Epicauta pennsylvanica . 104

Epicaerus imbricatus . „• . 104

Flata conica . 104

Ormenis pruinosa . 104

Hydnocera pallipennie . 104

Lygus lineolaris . 104

The Food Relations of Predaceous Beetles . 105

Appendix—

The Lombardy Poplar-Borer . 121

The Phytopti and other Injurious Plant-Mites . . 123

The Mites . 130

Habits . 133

Descriptions of Species . 133

The Verbena Mite . 141

Remedies for Mite Attacks . ; . 142

Observations on the Angoumois Grain-Moth and its Parasites . 144'

The Angoumois Grain-Moth . 144

Summary of Life-History . 149

Natural Enemies . 150

Artificial Remedies . 152

LIST OF DESCRIPTIONS.

1. The Corn Root-Worm. [Diabrotica longicornis, Say): imago, p. 15; pupa, p. 16;
larva, p. 17; egg, p. 18.

2. The Ciiinch-B(tg Bacterium (Micrococcus insectorum, Bun-ill): p. 52.

t;

3. The Strawberry Crown-Borer ( Tylo derma fr agarics, Riley): imago, p. 65; larva,
p. 66 ; pupa, p. 66.

[

4. The Strawberry Crown-Miner (Anarsia liueatella, Zeller): imago, p. 79; larva,
n. 80.

T[ ” y «

15. The Melon Plant-Louse ( Aphis cucumeris, n. s.): winged female, p. 85; pupa,
p. 86; wingless female, p. 87 ; root form, p. 87.

6. The Cherry-Slug or Pear Slug ( Selandria cerasi, Peck): p. 99.

7. Apanteles orobence , n. s., p. 104.

I * c

8. The Lombardy-Poplar Borer ( Agrilus yranulatus , Say): larva, p. 121; pupa,

p. 122.

9. Phytoptus abnormis, n. s., p. 134.

.

10. Phytoptus acericola., n. s., p. 135.

11. Phytoptus quadripes, Shimer, p. 135.

12. Phytoptus fraxini , n. s., p. 136.

13. Ph ytoptus ulmi , n. s., p. 137.

14. Phytoptus salicicola. n. s., p. 138.

15. Phytoptus querci, n. s., p. 138.

16. Phytoptus thujce, n. s., p. 138.

17. Phytoptus pyri, Scheuten, p. 140.

18. The Angoumois Grain-Moth ( Gelechia ccrealella , Oliv.): imago, p. 146; larva, p.
146; pupa, p. 147.

19. Ileteropus ventncosus, Newport, p. 140.

20. Pteromalus gelechiai, u. s., p. 151.

I

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

i

i r. o t0 THE1£F°?,^ Root-Worm (Diabrotica longicornis, Say). Fig. 1, imago n

15’i ^U?a’ p> lb.’ , ?lg‘ 3’ larva entire, and front view of head, p. 17; Fio- 4 egg'

p. 18; Fig. 5, larva within root, p. 26. *

.^Y<7. 6. The Chinch-Bug (Blissus leucopterus, Say), p. 32.

7. The Chinch-Bug Bacterium ( Micrococcus insectorum, Burrill), p. 52

andTmago,pH64STRAWBERRY CrOWN-Borer Woderma fragarice, Riley), larva, pupa

Fig. 8. (bis). Work of Strawberry Crown-Borer; vertical section of the crown show
mg entire injury done by one borer, p. 71. ’ ow"

larvt' p.' 72W°rk ^ Strawberry Cr»w"-Bo'’er; crown fully excavated by more than one

Fig. 10. The Strawberrt Crown-Miner (Anarsia lineatella, Zeller), larva, p. 80.

Figs. 11 to 14 The Melon Plant-Louse (Aphis cucumeris, n. s.). Fit- 11 wintred
female, p. 85; Ftg. 12, pupa, p.86; Fig. 13, wingless female, ^ 87; Fig. li, rooTfofm

O I . ’

Figs. 15 to 17. Ihe European Cabbage Butterfly (Pieris ranee r I p;,, in 1
p. 92 ; Fig. 16, female, p. 92 ; Fig. 17, larva and pupa, p. P ' ’ g' 1S’ male’

anffarva, T"E CHERRY SL00 °R PEAR StU0 (&W„a cerasi, Peck), imago

lOO*' 20' THE WhITE'marked Tussock Caterpillar ( Orgyia leucostigma, Smith), p.
1 FPi 21‘l» t«e Bag-Worm (Thyridopteryx ephemerw/ormis, Haw.), larva; puna male

and female moths, and bag containing eggs, p. 101. ’ PP’ e

Fig. 22. The Army Worm ( Leucania unipuncta, Haw.), larva and pupa. p. 102.

Fig. 23. The Stalk-Borer ( Gortyna niula, Gu^e), moth and larva, p. 103.

Figs. 24 and 25. Pear leaves, showing galls of Phytoptus pyri , p. 125.

Fig. 26. Soft maple leaf, showing galls of Phytoptus quadripes, p. 128.

Fig, 27. Vertical section of Phytoptus gall from green ash, p. 129.

Fig. 28. Phytoptus quadripes, Shimer; side view, showing eggs within the body, p. 132.
Fig. 29. Egg of Phytoptus quadripes, Shimer, p. 133.

Fig. 30. Phytoptus thujce, n. s. ; ventral view, p. 139.

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.

Illinois State Laboratory of Natural History,

Office of State Entomologist.

Normal, Illinois, December 30, 1883.
Hon. J. B. Scott, President of the State Board of Agriculture:

Dear Sir : I have the honor to present herewith my first report
as State Entomologist of Illinois, the' twelfth in number of the
series from this office. Although the period covered by this report
r is ostensibly the entire year 1882, I deem* it proper to say that it
really relates only to the latter half of the year— my appointment
j to the office dating July 3. Although, as Director of the State La¬
boratory of Natural History, my attention had been more or less
f engaged for several years by questions relating to economic en¬
tomology, yet the nature of my duties was such as to forbid my
following the subject closely until I was made responsible for the
work. As a consequence of the brief period of time actually covered
by this report, much of the matter contained in it is necessarily of
a somewhat fragmentary character, since it has been impossible to
follow any species of insect through more than half the year.

I am happy to say that insect injuries to the crops, both of the
farm and of the garden, were this year considerably below the av¬
erage. While the cliinch-bug hibernated in extraordinary numbers,
and threatened serious injury early in the season, the cool and wet
weather occurring at the usual time of oviposition so far checked
its development, that the damage done was finally trivial, and there
is now a strong probability that we shall be practically unmolested
by this most grievous pest during the coming year.' Early in spring
the army-worm appeared in overwhelming numbers in grass lands,
in some parts of Southern Illinois, and a later brood occurred in
June here and there in the central part of State, — but their para¬
sites promptly reduced them to subjection, and no very serious in¬
jury was inflicted.

The season was, however, rather favorable to the development of
plant lice, and several species of these always-threatening insects
became locally destructive. The grain plant louse was heard of in
oats fields ; the corn plant louse was very widely and generally dis¬
tributed in corn, and probably contributed appreciably to the short

— H

6

crop of the year; a grape louse awakened some alarm by a sudden-
attack on the vineyards in Northern Illinois ; a plum aphis became^
a pest in nurseries of young plum trees ; and a melon aphis very
considerably diminished the yield of melons and cucumbers, even
destroying many fields in the early spring and summer.

Although a wet season is generally regarded as injurious to most
insects — especially if a low temperature conspires to retard mul¬
tiplication, one of the worst pests of our cornfields, the corn root-
worm, Diabrotica longicornis , Say, was evidently not unfavorably
affected by the weather this year. Its injuries were fully as serious
as ever before, and more widespread than they have before been known,
notwithstanding the fact that the eggs in the ground and the newly-
hatched worms were exposed to daily drenchings by cold rains until
the first of July. It is not impossible, however, that a cool and wet
fall would have an unfavorable effect on this worm, as it is at this
time that the eggs are deposited.

A good deal of complaint of the work of the Hessian fly has reached
the office, this fall, from Southern Illinois, and there can be little
doubt that this insect is at present increasing in numbers in that
region. The same may be said of the Angoumois grain moth, which'
works upon grain both in the stack and in store, and which must
certainly be vigorously attacked, if we would insure ourselves against
great and increasing loss. Among the common orchard pests I have
seen no especial outbreak, except in the case of the cherry slug and
the white tussock caterpillar, both of which were unusually abun¬
dant in the northern part of the State.

Among strawberry-growers, increasing anxiety is felt respecting
the ravages of the crown-borer and the strawberry root-worm, and
everything possible has been done which the brief time would per¬
mit, to complete the life histories of these insects and to work out
methods of preventing and escaping their ravages.

More or less work has been done on all the insects above men¬
tioned, as well as upon several others, and many of the results are
presented in this report. A considerable number of observations
and experiments are withheld, however, until the subjects to which
they relate can be more thoroughly worked out.

The field work of the season has been prosecuted as actively as
possible in all parts of the State. Early in July I visited the fields
of corn, sorghum and broom corn, at Champaign, and went from
thence up the Illinois Central to Chicago, stopping at frequent in¬
tervals for short trips through the country, and using every oppor¬
tunity to collect information concerning injuries, and to inspect the
growing crops personally. From thence I went to Waukegan, and
along the line of the Chicago and Northwestern to Freeport, re¬
turning south by the Central to Normal again. In August I went
to Stark county, for the special purpose of observing the work of
the corn root-worm. In this month, an assistant, Mr. F. M. Web¬
ster, spent three weeks in making field observations and collections
in DeKalb and adjoining counties, and later visited Mason county
for the same purposes. In September, another assistant, Mr. W.
IT. Garman, went to extreme Southern Illinois, charged especially
with the investigation of insects affecting the strawberry, but making.

■■■‘r

7

r,

totes also, on everything relating to economic entomology. He
isited Villa Ridge, Anna, Cobden, Tamaroa and Centralia, spend-
ag some time at each of these places, and in October he made
nother trip to Oarmi, and other points in the Wabash valley. In
September, I went with an assistant to Jacksonville and Jersey ville,
■nd in November brought the held work practically to a close by
aaking a third trip southward to Villa Ridge, Anna, Carbondale
nd Centralia. Field work was constantly in progress in the vicinity
f Normal, and numerous short trips were also made to points ad-
acent. It was the policy of the office to keep all parts of the State,
s far as possible, under intelligent supervision, and especially to
isit, either in person or by competent assistants, every point where
ny thing of especial interest to the economic entomologist appeared,
j diether in the way of insect injuries not yet clearly understood, or
estructive outbreaks of familiar enemies, which afforded opport¬
unities for held experiments for the control of their injuries.

1 For the purpose of securing early notice of such events, and also
rith the hope of distributing practical information concerning in-
f irious insects just where and when it was most needed, I early
)ok measures to put the office in immediate communication with
irmers and fruit growers throughout the State. With this end in
iew, I issued in July, through the usual channels of the depart¬
ment, and by every other method available, a circular inviting cor¬
respondence, not only from entomological observers, but also from
lose in want of information or advice respecting insects injurious
) their property. I am happy to say that this circular, widely
ublished by the press, had apparently an excellent effect. The
irrespondence of the office has rapidly grown, two hundred and
ighteen letters having been written on economic entomology since
le first of July, but it is not yet by any means as large as it
mould be; and I cherish the hope that those for whose benefit we
ce working will more generally form a habit of referring to us for
eeded information, and of contributing in turn to the common
;ock of knowledge from their own observation and experience.

The most important special investigations undertaken this season
] ere those upon the corn root-worm, the chinch-bug, and the straw-
prry crown-borer, together with studies upon the food of the pre-
| iceous insects and upon certain questions related to the food of
rds. Much time and thought was given to a research upon the
mtagious diseases of the chinch-bug, and some substantial progress
as made in a knowledge of the subject. Many experiments were
so made with insecticides, espedially for the chinch-bug, the plant-
?e, and the cabbage-worms. The life histories of the corn root-
irm and of the strawberry crown-borer were completed, and several
•eviously published mistakes of observation or inference were cor-
cted. A large number of dissections of those insects which have
| therto been reckoned almost wholly carnivorous, and therefore
I ghly beneficial, were made with a view to determining exactly their
due to the farmer, and the conditions under which they could live
j the absence of a supply of insect food. Substantially complete
! suits were reached for the two most important families of beetles
this class — the lady-bugs (Coccinellidse) and the predaceous ground
betles (Carabidse), and the results have been published this month

I.

8

in Bulletin 6 of the State Laboratory of Natural History. The
practical importance of these results as a part of the data of economic ,
entomology has led me to publish an abstract of the above paper j
in this report.

In preparing my report for publication, I have borne in mind the |
fact that economic entomology is a science of great extent, and of j
unusual difficulty, and that it requires for its most successful culti¬
vation the joint labors of a number of workers, each contributing i
his share to the common stock of knowledge. The main object of |
all our studies and experiments must be the improvement of agri¬
culture and horticulture, as far as these depend on a knowledge
and mastery of injurious insects, and they should undoubtedly
finally result in plain and simple descriptions, by means of which
the intelligent farmer and gardener can recognize their insect ene¬
mies and friends ; and equally plain and clear directions for the j
protection of their crops from insect ravages. But many of the
questions presenting themselves for solution, are too large and com¬
plicated to be fully solved by A single worker, in a single year, and
he will best help them to a solution who will publish from time to
time reports of progress, so full and careful that others can see just ■
what has been accomplished, and just where additional investiga¬
tion is next needed. It is on this account that I have gone, in
some of the papers of this report, into what may seem tedious and
unnecessary detail to those who look only for immediate practical
results from everything done or attempted by the State Entomolo¬
gist. My purpose, in these papers, has been either simply to ad¬
vance a difficult subject another stage, or else, where final conclusions
are announced on difficult or disputed points, to give the exact
grounds of these conclusions, so that those interested may see upon I
just what proofs they rest. In this way, I believe that we may be
sure that progress will be uninterrupted and secure.

The essential results of these more elaborate papers have been
briefly summarized at intervals, and attention has been specially
called to these summaries by foot-notes, for the benefit of those
caring only for general conclusions.

Besides the papers prepared by myself for the report proper, I
present herewith an appendix, containing contributions by others.

I am under obligations to Prof. T. J. Burrill, of the State Indus¬
trial University, for an article kindly placed at my disposal, on an,
insect injury to the Lombardy poplar, discovered by him.

One of the assistants in the Laboratory, Mr. W. H. Garman, haying
paid special attention for the past three years to the minute and little
known, but often decidedly injurious, mites known as the gall mites,
or Pliytopti, I have asked him to prepare a paper, treating this
group from the standpoint of the economic entomologist.

Another Laboratory assistant, Mr. F. M. Webster, has made, under
my direction, a special study of the Angoumois grain-moth, and
has at my request prepared a report upon this destructive insect
and its parasites.

I wish in this place to acknowledge my general obligations to my
above-named entomological assistants, Mr. Garman and Mr. Web-I

9

j| ter, to the first of whom I am particularly indebted for the accu-
ate original figures published in this report ; to the various corres¬
pondents of the office, especially to Dr. E. R, Boardman, of Elmira,
’tark county, and Mr. D. S. Harris, of Cuba, Fulton county; to
h*of. T. J. Burrill, of the State Industrial University at Champaign,
or determinations of fungi found in the stomachs of beetles, and
or much valuable assistance in the study of the plant parasites of
he chinch-bug ; and to the members and officers of the State Board
f Agriculture, especially to the Secretary, Mr. S. D. Fisher, and
he Assistant Secretary, Mr. C. S. Mills, who have let no opportu-
tity escape them to further the work of the office in every way pos-
ible.

My thanks are also due to the Illinois Central Railroad, as
epresented by its traffic manager, Mr. J. F. Tucker, to whose in-
elligent liberality I owe trip passes, both for myself and assistants,
o all points on his road, wherever and whenever we wTere called on
he business of the office.

Respectfully submitted.

S. A. Forbes,

Normal, III., Dec. 80, 1882. State Entomologist.

\

1

]

THE CORN ROOT-WORM *

(. Diabrotica longicornis, Say.)

Order COLEOPTERA. Family Cheysomelid^.

[A minute, slender, white grub, about two-fifths of an inch long, boring the roots of
corn in the ground from June to August, transforming into a grass-green beetle which
feeds upon the pollen and silk of the corn and upon the pollen ot other plants.]

The earliest published mention of this insect as a species injurious
to agriculture, is scarcely four years old, and yet it has become one
of the most destructive insects of the corn crop in Illinois, second
of late only to the chinch-bug in this respect, and scarcely second
to that. Until recently it was known to entomologists as a common
but harmless beetle, feeding in autumn on the flowers of the thistle,
goldenrod and other plants of the family to which these belong
(Composite) ; but none were acquainted with its life history, and
none suspected it of any injury to agriculture. That it should have
developed rapidly from this humble and insignificant condition into
one of the worst pests to the staple crop of the State, is an alarm¬
ing phenomenon, and one which will well repay the most careful
investigation. Now that its work is becoming known, there are many
indications that its mischief as a corn-root worm was noticed occa¬
sionally, but not understood, as much as ten or twelve years ago ;
but it seems incredible that it can have appeared at any previous
time in anything like its present numbers, or have done anything
like the harm which it now inflicts on agriculture, without attract¬
ing the general attention of farmers or coming to the knowledge of
such entomologists as Walsh, Riley and LeBaron. It is most prob¬
able, therefore, that this is another addition to the already long
list of insects which are naturally harmless, but which have been
stimulated to excessive multiplication and tempted to the most seri¬
ous ravages by the removal of some of the usual checks upon their
increase. Just what the changes in the ordinary condition of its
life have been, which have caused this destructive outbreak of the
corn-root worm, we can not tell positively at present, although I
shall have something to say on this point on another page ; but,
fortunately, we are able to determine wjjat must be done to reduce
it to its former limits. The great importance of a full and wide-

*For a summary of the contents of this article, see p. 30.

11

spread knowledge of this insect, both to the farmer and to the stu¬
dent of the general system of organic nature, will no doubt justify
an elaborate treatment of it in this report ; and I will therefore give
an account- of it as nearly complete as is now possible, presenting
not only the conclusions reached, but also all the evidence on which
they rest, so that the intelligent reader may judge of their sound¬
ness for himself.

Although two papers on this insect have already been published
in the ninth and tenth reports of this office, the information on
which they were based was confessedly incomplete, and some of the
theories there hesitatingly ventured have since proven incorrect;
and it therefore seems best to treat the whole subject independently!
1 have thought it necessary to give with special fullness the partic¬
ulars relating to the amount of the injury, the number of broods,
and the mode of hibernation, since it is upon these points that pre¬
vious reports have proven to be especially at fault.

EXTENT AND AMOUNT OF ITS INJURIES

The first published mention which has come to my notice of the
recurrence of this species as an injurious insect, is in the report of
iffie Commissioner of Agriculture for 1878, on the 208th page of
which Prof. C. V. Riley, entomologist to the department, remarks :
‘Mr. Gustavus Pauls, of Eureka, Mo., had his corn seriously dam¬
aged at the roots by the larva of a little beetle ( Diabrotica longi -
.’ornis, Say.,) that was not before known to have any such habits.”
,Prof. Riley was, therefore, not only the first to note the injury, but also
jjhe first to determine the species to which it was due. Later, referring
j;o this item in the American Entomologist for October, 18S0, Mr. Riley
jays: “The injuries of this insect to corn roots have, for some time,
been known to us. * * * We first received it in the larva

and pupa states in August, 1874, from Mr. H. Weber, of Kirkwood,
Mo.,, who found it burrowing in the roots of his corn, and doing
considerable damage. While the general resemblance to the known
arvae of Diabrotica vittata (the Striped Cucumber-beetle) showed its
Relationship, and we suspected it to belong to D. longicornis , on ac¬
count of the frequency with which this pretty, greenish species was
'ound in corn-fields, yet we failed to get positive proof by breeding
mtil August 14, 1878, when the first beetle was obtained from larvae

1 received the previous month from Mr. G. Pauls, of Eureka, Mo.”

In the Western Rural for May, 1179, a correspondent in Warren
bounty, Ill., says: “During the last few years our corn-fields in this
i section have been infested by a small white worm or larva, of which
(farmers generally know but little. Except in size, color and habits,
jt resembles the yellow wire-worm. Instead of disturbing the kernels
>>f com they attack the root, and as soon as corn is up, we find the
oots dying, and the inside of them filled with these little pests.
They enter the root at the base of the stalk, and burrow under the
>ark of the root until it is destroyed. They are at first very small,

1 md can scarcely be detected with the natural eye, but later they
Ijppear to be one-lialf inch in length, with seemingly all appearances
if the wire- worm in shape.”

12

In a letter to Prof. French, written in July, 1830, and published
in both the ninth and tenth reports of this office, Dr. E. L. Board-
man, of Elmira, Stark county, Ill., describes the injury done by this
worm to corn in his vicinity. The occurrence of the same pest in '
LaSalle county is shown by a communication from Marseilles, in
the Prairie Farmer for September 7, 1880, the writer of which says :
“We had as fine a stand as I- ever saw, and we expected a good
crop, but our corn seemed to stand still after about one foot high.

I examined mine, as I had some trouble the past two years. The
pest has been known here several years, damaging some fields as
much as seven or eight years ago. The worm is white in the young
state, about the size and looks of a cheese maggot.”

Injuries to the corn in Stark county were reported by Dr. Board-
man as scarcely less serious in 188i than those described during
the previous year. In August, 18S2, I paid a visit to that county
myself, for the purpose of examining the injuries done by the worms,
and found them not at all inferior to those of former years. In
several cases the owners of the fields estimated the probable loss-
at from twenty-five to seventy-five per cent, of the crop. In every case
examined, the seriously affected fields were those which had been in
corn for one or more years previously, and the degree of injury
almost always corresponded closely to the number of successive
years the ground had been in corn. A letter from Dr. Boardman,
received in November, after the corn was chiefly harvested, estima¬
ted the loss in his vicinity due to the corn root-worm at from
twenty to sixty per cent., with an average of thirty per cent.

During this same month of August, my assistant, Mr. F. M. Web¬
ster, went to DeKalb county, for the purpose of studying the com
root-worm and other insects, and found this species not less
abundant and injurious than I had found it farther west. The
presence of the white grub in many of the fields infested by the
root-worm, made it difficult to estimate exactly the amount of the
injury due to the latter. A careful comparison of some fields in.
which sometimes one and sometimes the other was at work, showed
that the damage due to the white grub was, on an average, about
one-fourtli that done by the root-worm.

To show the condition of things found in this region the following
abstracts of his notes are given : In one field, which had been in
com four or five years, fifty per cent, was destroyed. Another,
planted to corn for three years previously, was badly damaged. In
still another, which had been in corn but one year preceding, only
a few of the beetles were found, and none of the worms. On Mr.
Griswold’s farm, one field had been in corn three years, and another
but two, both having been otherwise treated alike. The crop was;
badly injured in the first, and but slightly so in the second. Where,
of adjoining fields, separated not even by a fence, one had been
previously planted to com, and the^ other had been in some other
crop the preceding year; the dividing line between the two was j
clearly indicated by the difference in the thriftiness of the corn. In
a field of Mr. Taylor’s which had been planted to corn for three i!
years previously, about a fourth of the crop was destroyed.

The work of the worm at Sandwich, in the same county, is suffi¬
ciently indicated in the following letter from Mr. Jas. Griswold, who I

lives near that place: “All our land that had the third crop of
was badly used up by the white grub and corn root-worm
y/e had two small fields, one of ten and the other of twelve acres!
that we thought too strong for oats, which should have given us
forty bushels per acre the present season. We got from the ten
acre piece about twenty bushels per acre, and from the other about
twenty-five. We had a piece of twenty acres of not quite as strong
I land, and not as badly damaged, from which we got about twenty-
five bushels per acre. Our sod corn saved us ; we had forty ac^s
that gave us from sixty to sixty-five bushels per acre.” The farmers
near Waterman reported in November, that on husking their corn,
the yield was much smaller than the stand of stalks would indicate’,
and that the hills pulled up easily and the roots had evidently
been eaten by the worms. In the field of Mr. Lattin, at Shabbona
Grove, the loss was from twenty-five to fifty per cent, of the crop,
and other fields in this vicinity were reported nearly ruined, the
worms being in almost every instance on old corn ground. In Lit¬
tle Rock, the damage to one field examined was estimated at twenty
per cent. ; in another, at least twenty-five per cent, was lost. The
same insect had been noticed in the roots of corn at Millington, in
Kendall county, in July, 1882.

A letter from Mr. H. W. Frazer, of Gibson, in Ford county, dated
| December 5, reported that the worms had done him a great deal of
(injury, as well as his neighbors, and that they were worse upon
high ground and upon low ground that had been tiled. .In McLean
county, near Normal and Bloomington, several fields were seen, in
which the yield was diminished from ten to fifty per cent., as shown
by comparison with the yield of adjacent fields not affected by the
root-worm. The insects were likewise abundant at Arrowsmith, in
McLean county, and Pekin, in Tazewell county, although no notes
of injury were received from those places.

A correspondent from Putnam county, writes under date of Sep¬
tember 8 : “I find here a small worm one-third of an inch long or
less, that works lengthwise of the roots of the corn, and checks its
growth so that it does not ear well,” referring evidently to the
species under consideration. In the vicinity of Mason City, in Mason
•county, many fields were examined in September, several of which
were badly infested, being worse upon high ground than on low,
?and also, as reported, more destructive in dry seasons than in wet.
jin Mr. Warnock’s field, near town, two-thirds of the corn was found
destroyed, the stalks lying flat and dead with the half-formed ears
.rotting. This corn should have yielded seventy-five bushels per acre,
but the ground had been planted to the same grain for several years
successively. Mr. Warnock had noticed the worms for ten or twelve
years previously, and remembers that serious damage was done as
,much as seven years ago.

- Mr. D. 8. Harris, an observer upon whose accuracy I have learned
:o rely, writes to me under date of January 8, 1888: “We have
Pound this insect much more numerous than anticipated. We did
lot examine a single field of corn in which its presence was not
nore or less manifest. In some fields there would be large, rank¬
growing stalk's of corn which did not ear out at all. These stalks,
upon being examined, were found to have been injured by the larvae

14

of this beetle after the corn hacl bugun to tassel out. Otuer stalks j
would be found leaning over at the ground, and then growing erect.
These stalks ^ere found to have been injured by the Mr before
the corn had developed more than four or five join.s. This was
known by finding the roots eaten off and destroyed for about one-
half their length, new roots having put out and furnished nourish- ;
ment to the plant, after the larvae had reached maturity. He ,
further says that a small field planted about the first of July was j
entirely destroyed by the larvae of this beetle before the corn reached
maturity. Stock was turned into this field, and it was used as a feed ■
lot during the entire winter. About the first of July, a 88*2, it was
planted again to corn, and again almost entirely destroyed.

During a brief visit in September, to Jacksonville, in Morgan
county, a few fields were examined near the city. In some which
had been planted to corn for several years successively, about twenty
per cent, of the hills were badly affected, and the yield was evi¬
dently greatly impaired. The worm was also found at work in the
vicinity of Jerseyville, in a large proportion of the fields inspected,
but was not doing very serious damage in any of them.

In extreme Southern Illinois, during a trip, from Cairo to Van-
dalia, a careful search of the fields discovered none of the worms
until Centralia was reached. Here a field of twenty acres, belong¬
ing to Mr. Gf. A. Brunton, had been previously almost entirely de¬
stroyed as a consequence of an injury, which, from his description,
was probably that of the corn root-worm.

From the foregoing data, we must conclude that the pest is widely
scattered through the corn-growing belt of Illinois, but is apparently
more injurious at present north of the center, where tlM damage is
sufficient to attract general attention, and to cause widespread
alarm. It has doubtless been more or less prevalent for ten or
twelve years, but has increased rapidly in numbers and destructive
energy for the last four or five. Its scarcity southward affords no
assurance of continuous exemption from serious harm.

Besides the occurrence of the pest in Missouri already noted, the
following report of its devastations in Iowa will be of interest :

In September, 1882, the Walnut News, a paper published in Pot¬
tawattamie county, in Southwestern Iowa, said: “For some time
complaints have been made that the corn was not earing as rapidly
as it should, and that the cause of it was a small worm eating the
roots. General attention was not attracted until this week; and
then, in those localities where the storm of Monday night was felt,
the universal prevalence of this pest became apparent. Acres of
corn fell flat, and when examined it was found that the roots had
been eaten to such an extent that it could not stand up under a
wind. Corn on stubble ground is not molested in the least, as near
as can be learned, but that which has been in corn the third year,
or more, is assailed most, and mainly upon the tops of ridges or
high dry ground. This is said to be one reason why the corn on
the ridges is so slow in earing and growing, the worms having taken
tne main root. In such cases, where the corn is not blown down,
new roots are forming, and the infested hills may mature, if the
season is sufficiently late. We have, directly and indirectly, com-

15

municated with twenty. five or thirty different persons who agree with
the above statement, and we have personally examined different
fields ; and while not able to find the worm spoken of in the suc¬
ceeding paragraph taken from the Atlantic Telegraph, and reported
• by others, we found the roots of the down corn, and some of that
| yet standing, black and decayed, and bearing evidence of having
jl been eaten off several weeks ago. The following from the Telegraph,

! dated at Anita, shows that the scare is not local: “Monday, Mr.’
E. 0. Demming brought in several specimens of growing corn eaten
off at the roots by a small worm, about half an inch long and not
much thicker than a good-sized pin. He thinks he will have, judg-
| ing from present appearances, some fifteen acres destroyed by this
pest. We understand it is found on other farms also. The fields
where they have worked here are damaged all the way from five to
fifty per cent.” The occurrence of this beetle in Southern Iowa in
June of the present year, was also reported to me by Dr. Boardman.

DESCRIPTION.

. A general description, sufficient to enable the ordinary reader to
distinguish this beetle, will be found in the tenth report of this
office, and in the summary at the close of this paper. A full tech¬
nical description of the insect in all its stages is, however, yet a
desideratum, and is herewith given.

Imago. — The adult beetle is
about one-fifth of an inch in
length by about half that in
breadth, and a little the widest
posteriorly. Its head is nearly
as wide as the thorax, smooth,
or nearly so, with a large cir¬
cular depression between the
eyes, from which a narrow groove
leads forward, dividing between
the antennae and enclosing be¬
tween the branches of the fork
an elevated ridge, which extends
downwards to the labrum. On
either side of this, and in front
of each antenna, the surface is
minutely rugulose. There is
also an angular depressed line

Fig.l. Diabrotica longicovnis. Say. Adult of just within each eye. The an-
the corn root- worm. Magnified io diameters, tennae are rather long, extend¬
ing backwards beyond the middle of the elytra. The second and
' jhird joints are short and equal, and together about as long as the
ourth. The remaining joints of the antennae are of nearly equal
ength. The first and second joints are nearly smooth, the remain¬
der pubescent. The eyes are black, the head and first joint of the
: mtennae are pale brown, or green, or brownish-green, and the rest
)f the antennae, the labrum and mouth parts, brown.

e The thorax is not as wide as the elytra, and is strongly narrowed
>ehind the middle, making the margin sinuate. The anterior angles

1C

are rounded, and the posterior obtuse. The sides of the thorax are
narrowly expanded and recurved, leaving a gutter-like margin along
the whole length. It is not margined behind. The disc is very
slightly pubescent, and sparsely and faintly punctured, most dis¬
tinctly posteriorly. A little behind the middle, upon each side of. the
median line, is a large conical fovea, but there is no median ridge
or groove. A strong, erect hair occurs in front of the posterior
angle, and another behind the anterior, and two or three short hairs
follow the latter. f

The elytra are coarsely and irregularly punctured, and sparingly
pubescent, with short stiff hairs. The surface is diversified by four
or five obscure and irregular ribs, of which the outermost is largest,
and forms a well marked longitudinal angle. This and the one next
it unite anteriorly in a prominent humerus. The edge of the elytron
is recurved like that of the thorax, forming a still deeper gutter
just within the margin. The thorax and elytra are commonly
brownish-green or grassy-green throughout, but the humeral angles
are occasionally touched with brown, as is likewise the smooth scu-
tellum. The sutural line is -also sometimes brown.

The epipleurse are green, and do not attain the tips of the elytra*
The legs and under surface of the body are pubescent except the
prosternum, which is smooth, or nearly so. The abdomen is sparsely
punctured. The thighs are usually green, but the tibiae, the tarsi,
and the sides of the metasternum are more or less deeply tinged with
brown.

Fig. 2. Pupa of the
corn root- worm, JJi-
abrotica longicornis.
Say. Magnified 10
diameters.

between the eyes.

Pupa. — The characters of the newly formed pupa
are well shown by the accompanying figure, but
as some changes occur previous to the escape of
the beetle, a description of the latest stage is
given. The length is .18 of an inch, and the
greatest width aboht one-tenth of an inch. The
color is pure white throughout, with the exception
of the brownish-red eyes, which now show through
the skin, and a pair of brown, horny, curved
hooks, attached to the tip of the abdomen, about
equaling in length the preceding segment. The
arrangement of the wings, wing covers, legs and
antennae, and the position of the head, are well S
shown in the cut. Two white erect hairs are seen
between the antennae, and another pair above and

Several scattered slender spines appear upon the back of the pro¬
thorax, as well as an irreguiar transverse row upon each of the
other segments of the thorax and abdomen. These hairs are espe¬
cially long and strong at the tip of the abdomen, and a few like¬
wise appear upon the tibio-femoral joints. The hairs, as well as
the forceps-like claws, already mentioned, at the tip of the body, |
doubtless serve to fix the pupa skin in the earth when the beetle
emerges. The spiracles are distinctly visible as small brown rings
upon the back of each of the first eight abdominal segments, but
upon the three remaining segments posterior to these they are not
apparent.

/

17

Fig. 3. Corn root-worm. Larva of Diabrotica longicornis, Say. Magnified
6 diameters. Head more highly magnified. Front view.

Larva. — The corn root-worm, when fully grown, just previous to
ts last moult, is four-tenths of an inch in length, by one-tentli that
Width, white and smooth under a low power ; but when more highly
magnified, the skin is seen to be minutely roughened with very
(small tubercles. The body is cylindrical, narrowing a little anteri¬
orly, the first segment being the shortest and narrowest of all.
There are a few scattered stiff hairs to each segment, most numer¬
ous anteriorly, and especially upon the head. The latter is nar¬
rower than the first segment, convex but flattened above, about two-
diirds as wide . as long, and smooth except for the hairs already
nentioned. It is yellowish- brown, a little darker in front and at
;he sides beneath. A narrow dark line extends along the middle of
;he head, widest posteriorly, where it is divided by the very narow
vhite suture, which forks at the middle, sending two narrow straight
tranches to the anterior angles of the head.

. Here the short, white, three-jointed antennae are situated, the first
oint about twice as wide as the last, and the second joint very
short. The eyes are wanting. The mandibles are dark with black
i ips, and the other mouth appendages are white. The thoracic seg-
nents all bear short, two-jointed legs, each about as long as the
segment to which it is attached. They are pale brown, armed with
short, stout spines, and terminating in a single claw and a flattened,
nembranous, oval appendage, which extends some distance beyond
she tip of the claw. . The top of the first segment is coriaceous and
mllowish-brown, while all the others are soft except the last, upon
which is a circular brownish patch of leathery consistence. Beneath
|7.his segment is a prominent retractile wart or tubercle, serving as
i false leg. The segment is entire and rounded posteriorly, where
t is set with a few long hairs or slender spines.

18

Just before pupating, the larva becomes very much shortened and
thickened, assuming more the form of a common grub. The ab¬
dominal segments now become much more distinctly marked, and
the head takes a vertical [position. The length in this, which may
be called the semi-pupa stage, is only about one-fifth of an inch,
and the greatest breadth .045 of an inch. The body now tapers
more posteriorly than ^.before, ;the last two segments being con¬
spicuously narrower than the preceding. In other respects the larva
remains unchanged.

Egg — The egg is of a dirty white
color and very minute, .025 of an
inch in length, and .015 of an inch
wide ; narrower at one end than at

Fig. 4. Egg of Fiabrotiea longicornis.

Under the microscope the surface is
seen to be thickly dotted with min¬
ute hexagonal pits, (about twenty in
its entire length,) and under a higher
power the bottom of each of these
Sayr^Magnified so diameters. pits exhibits still more minute de¬
pressions, seven or eight to each reticulation.

The only objects which I have noticed in the ground about the
roots of corn, which are likely to be mistaken for the corn root-
worm, are very young earth-worms, the larva or grubs of small
gnats’ and other flies, and young wire-worms. A careful examina¬
tion will readily distinguish the first two of these by the fact that
they are entirely destitute of legs, while, as already remarked, the
root-worm has three pairs of jointed legs just back of the head.
In this respect it agrees with the young wire-worms, which are
(also like the root-worm) 'destitute of appendages to the other seg¬
ments of the body. Their crust is, however, firmer than that of the
latter species, the head is longer, flatter and thinner; the body
also usually somewhat flattened, and the last segment commonly
either notched or variously toothed.

LIFE HISTORY.

Larva. _ The time of the first appearance of the larva in the

ground— the time, that is, when the eggs begin to hatch— is not yet
exactly known, as the worms have not been seen until the effect of
their work upon the corn has attracted attention to them.

A letter from Dr. Boardman (23d of October, 1882) says: “The
earliest date on which I have found the larva is about the 10th of ,
June ; but I think they would have been found earlier had search
been instituted. I did not look for them until I began to notice the I
change in the young corn.” Several farmers who had suffered from ■
the work of the worms, both in DeKalb and Mason counties, spoke
of noticing spots in the field where the corn had ceased to grow
while they were cultivating it ; and as the plowing of the crop is 1 1
nearly all done between the 10th of May and the 20th of July, the 1
visible work of the worms probably begins in June. A correspond- ;l
ent of the Western Rural, writing from Warren county, says that

e finds the roots dying with the worms inside them, as soon as
re c'orn is up. At Millington, the larv® were seen in the roots oi’
ie corn m July of the present year by Mr. Finney of that nlnpp
nd on the 26tli of July, 1832, they were likewise7’ seen agal by
r* Boardman. Mr. Bascom, of Sandwich, noticed them in the
^rn early in August of the same year. On the 18th of that month
; found them very abundant on Dr. Boardman’s place, in Stark
Dunty, where nearly all remaining were fully grown ’ One was
oticed, however, only .15 of an inch in length. They were con-
nuously observed by Mr. F. M. Webster and myself in McLean
ad DeKalb counties throughout the remainder of August. By Sen-
jmber, however, they had apparently all transformed, and I find
o mention m our notes of their appearance again during the fall
though the roots of corn and all other suitable situations were
loioughly seal died again and again until the middle of November

There is consequently every reason to suppose that the eggs com-
lence to hatch soon after the corn appears above the ground in
iring, and that the larvae begin at once to work upon the roots
it all get their growth and pupate before September, some cer-
fnly maintaining the larval condition until that date. Published
ention of the occurrence of the larvae in November in the roots of
Lgweed and other plants, has once or twice been made; but the
let that the slender grubs of Diptera commonly occur in’ such sit-
itions, and that these have already been several times mistaken
r the corn root-worm, together with the fact that neither Dr.
oardman, Mr. Webster, nor myself have been able to find these
orms later than September of this ynar, either in the cornfields
• m wheat, or in the roots of any plant outside the fields, after
e most careful, protracted, and oft repeated search under the
ost favorable circumstances, makes it likely that the reports above
entioned were incorrect. The extreme lateness and unusual warmth
the season this fall, would certainly have brought out the larvie
the eggs ever hatch at that time of the year.

The fact stated by Mr. D. S. Harris, in a letter to me, that one
his neighbors lost a field of corn by these worms, which was
anted about the first of July, 188*2, is the only evidence we have
the time to which the hatching of the eggs js continued. Mr.
arris is also very positive that he found these larvie, very abund-
it in the stems of the garden purslane (Portulaca oleracea), and a
vv of them also in the roots of ragweed ( Ambrosia artemisicefolia)
Ld lamb’s-quarter ( Chenopoclium album), weeds growing in an
r’ected corn-field.

Pupa — The earliest date at which the pupa has been observed is one
7en by Dr. Boardman, namely, the 29tli of June ; but the adult beetle
,s been seen a little earlier, and the pupa doubtless sometimes forms
June 15. I have no record of the occurrence of the insect in this
ate during July; but it was again reported by Dr. Boardman on the
i of August, and was found by me abundantly on the 18th of the
me month. In DeKalb county pupae were noticed by Mr. Webster on
e 21st of August, and also on the 24th, and again upon the 26th,
t were not found in any of the hills examined later than this date!
te transformations, therefore, beginning in the middle of June are

•20

probably complete or nearly so by September 1. The length of time
passed by one individual insect in the pupa state is not yet known.

Adult Beetle— As this insect is more likely to be encountered in a ‘
mature condition than in any other of its ^ stages, the dates of its J
appearance here given will afford a better idea of the period during
which the brood develops, than those derived from collections made
in the other stages. Dr. Boardman says : “I found the beetle in
Southern Iowa, this year, as early as the 25th of June; but the
earliest date on which I have found it in the latitude of Stark
county, is from the 1st to the 10th of July. I think that the
beetles’ commence to come out of the ground about the first half of
July, and continue until the latter part of August.” In another
letter from Stark county he says: “I could not find any beetles
here on the 28th or 29th of June, when I searched for them, nor
for some days after that time ; but I caught them one year ago on
the 1st of July.” J|

The first specimen obtained at Normal, this year, was collected
from a roadside plant, on the 27tli of July. No search for them
had been made in the cornfields, however, and the fact that a few'
days later, namely, on the 1st of August, they were found very
abundant in a field at Arrowsmitb, in McLean county, makes it
seem probable that they might have been collected earlier in this
situation. These specimens were fresh from the pupa, as shown by
their very light color. They were more numerous upon the corn, at
this time, than upon the weeds in the field. On the 7th of August
they were found abundant in cornfields at Pekin, chiefly gathered,
at the bases of the leaves where these join the stalk, and apparently',
feeding upon the pollen and anthers of the corn gathered there.
On the 18th of August, at Elmira, I found them at the bases of,
the leaves, and likewise on the silks of the corn, which they were
evidently eating freely at this time.' The insect was now chiefly in j
the pupa state, only a few larvae remaining ; while the beetles were \\
intermediate in number between the two other stages. On the 21st of
August, in DeKalb county, larvae, pupae and imagos were still found ;
and in’ DeKalb and Kendall counties the beetles were seen pairing
in the field, at various dates, from the 17th to the 25th. On the
26th, they were first noticed on the blossoms of thistles outside
the field, but many still occurred in the cornfield, behind the sheaths
of the corn and upon the silks. Their abundance in the last-named
situation in the fields near Jacksonville, two days later, has already
been noted. They were generally scattered through the field, but
most of them were in the silk at the tip of the ear. On the 4th of
September, at Normal, a few were still to be found in the tip of
the ear, feeding partly upon the silk, but also upon the terminal
kernels’ of the corn. At this time, however, most of them were
scattered upon the flowers of ragweed and smartweed in the field.
On the 11th, they were still noted feeding upon the silk and corn,
and likewise upon the blossoms of Helianthus outside the fields.
On the 16th of the same month they occurred, chiefly upon smart-
weed and ragweed, but a few were yet eating the silks of the greener
ears ; none were to be found about the bases of the stalks, and only j
two or three were seen behind the sheaths. They also occurred upon
the thistles and golden rod outside the field, but had not yet aban-

21

3ned the fields, to any considerable extent, in search of food. A
w were still feeding upon the kernels of corn at the tips of the ears,
n the 25th, Dr. Boardman, of Elmira, found the abdomens of the

1 1- . i , eggs. At this time, at Normal, they were

i en occasionally copulating, and occurred about equally upon flowers
smartweed and ragweed and in the tips of the ears of corn. In
Jpe field where the corn had been attacked by blackbirds, which had
I rn open the husks and pecked and broken the skin of the kernels,
ie beetles were nearly all found in the ear, and scarcely any upon
Le weeds. This fact indicates that the insect is commonly pre¬
dated from eating the corn by its inability to break the epidermis
!ter the grain has commenced to harden.

On the 27th, Dr. Boardman writes that in the mornings, when the
r is cold, he finds the beetles hiding under the clods and in crev-
es in the ground.

On the 1st of October, a letter from Mr. Sidney Lattin, of Shab-
>na Grove, in DeKalb county, contained the following item: ‘T
id, in gathering corn for feed, great numbers of the corn- beetle,
id a load of snapped ears contains hundreds, if not thousands, of
em.”

On the 3d of October, they were noticed in the University grounds
Normal, probably feeding upon the blossoms of clover, with which
|je campus was covered.

On the 7th, a few were still found in the silk of soft, green nub-
I ns of corn, and a few were obtained by sweeping dead ragweed
id smartweed in the field ; but the greenest clumps of smartweed
ire swarming with them.

On the 13th, in a weedy field of corn from which the stalks had
en cut, but very few beetles indeed were found either about the
^eds or upon the ground or under clods, an hour’s search yielding
ily three specimens; but in an adjoining turnip-field they were
jute numerous upon the leaves.

‘On the 14th of October, they were noted as evidently very much
ss numerous than before, in the fields of corn which had previously
en alive with them.

i On the 18th, I carefully searched the stalks and ground for Inher¬
iting beetles in one of the worst infested corn-fields, but found, in
i hour’s time, only three living beetles and two dead ones, the
tjtter covered with mold. In sweeping the weeds, but two or three
quid be taken in the course of a minute. The beetles had now
rtainly nearly all left the field, and eggs were found in the abdo-
^3ns of none of those obtained. In the clover adjacent to the corn
jB Diabrotica was abundant, sometimes four or five specimens oc-
rring on a head ; but none were found at the roots of the grass
under matted vegetation.

On the 14th of this month a careful search in .a badly infested
Id gave only a single specimen, found alive in the ground, and
other, dead, in the same situation.

On the 8th of November, dead females were seen in the ground,

■ en at a considerable depth, and frequently surrounded by clusters
the eggs which had been previously determined as those of Dia-
)tica.

•2

22

On the 9th, Dr. Boardman saw them flying quite actively at El¬
mira, and is confident that he has seen a few under rubbish as late
as December in former years.

The above data may be briefly summarized as follows: The
beetle makes its first appearance in the adult stage about the. middle
of June, and may then be found continuously in gradually increas¬
ing numbers through July, August and September, most abundantly at
first upon the corn, where it feeds upon the pollen and silk at the
tip of the ear (occasionally also upon the kernel), but afterwards
deserting the cornstalks for the blossoms of the fresher weeds in the
field. As these fail, through frost or over-ripeness, it takes to the
latest roadside flowers and clover and the like, now rapidly dimin¬
ishing in number, and in November almost wholly disappearing.

Numerous observations, made in all suitable situations, render it
extremely improbable that any considerable number of hibernating
individuals should have escaped our attention. While here and
there a specimen may survive the winter, it is certain that, in years
like the present, they perish, as a rule, in autumn.

For the purpose of determining more exactly the food resources
open to the adult, careful dissections were made of numerous speci¬
mens taken from a great variety of plants at various dates through¬
out the season, and the contents of their stomachs and intestines
were studied critically with a microscope. This was found especially
necessary, since it is often extremely difficult to tell precisely what
an insect is feeding upon ; and many mistaken inferences have been
based upon inaccurate observations of this sort. It has been in¬
ferred, for example, that the beetle was chiefly dependent upon the
pollen and other floral organs of ragweed, and that clean cul-.
tivation in the field and by the roadside would greatly reduce their
numbers. An examination of the following notes will show, how¬
ever, that it is not limited to fresh or living vegetation, but may
find an abundant food supply when all such sustenance is with¬
drawn, and that the measure recommended may well have an inju¬
rious effect, especially as far as clean culture is concerned, by com¬
pelling the beetles to leave the field before their eggs have been
deposited. In this event we should be deprived of the .only means
of arresting their ravages which has hitherto been hit upon, as
will be seen later when methods of remedy and prevention are dis¬
cussed.

In two specimens taken from the blossoms of the thistle on the
20th of August, only the pollen of that plant was found. Two others
from the corn-field, September 4, were crammed with the pollen of
corn and fragments of the silk. Two taken on thistles on the 7th
of September had eaten only the pollen of that species ; and those
taken upon ragweed and swartweed, September 9, contained nothing
but the pollen of those plants.

As the season progressed, however, a remarkable change occurred
in the character of the food, and in the condition of the beetles
themselves. Four specimens were dissected from a large number
obtained by sweeping the weeds in the corn-field on the 7th of No¬
vember. At this time most of the beetles had left the corn, but a

23

jood deal of lagweed was still green, and they were chiefly gathered
ipon this. J- lie contents of the stomachs of these four specimens
(onsisted partly of vegetable tissues which could not be precisely
letermined, but made about four-tenths 'of their food, while pollen
)f\ swart weed amounted to twenty-five per cent. The remaining
hirty-five per cent, consisted, however, of spores of fungi of the
ands ordinarily taken by lady-bugs (Ooccinellidffl). Helmmthospo-
ium amounted to^ about ten per cent., Uredo spores to seventeen
md lichen (?) spores to seven, while traces of Cladosporium and
ieptona likewise occurred. Even in a specimen taken from the tip
>f an ear of corn, about fifteen per cent, of the food was made up
>f these fungi, the remainder, of course, consisting of the corn it-
elf.

ihe alimentary canals of all these beetles contained large numbers
>f minute parasites, belonging to the genus Gregarina, one of the
lotozoans. As these had not been seen m any of the earlier speci¬
mens examined, they doubtless indicated the decline of the beetle,
jnd foreshadowed its disappearance for the year.

In three specimens taken from clover blossoms on the ISth of this
:aonth, the pollen and fragments of the petals of clover made about
: ixty per cent* of the food, and the remainder consisted of spores
jjf fungi, including Peronospora, Ustilago and Cladosporium. In
hese latter specimens the intestines were literally alive with para¬
des, a single beetle often containing hundreds of them.

From the above it is evident that this insect can find an abund-
nce of food upon dead and decaying vegetation, as the fungi eaten
y the specimens last examined were the common molds occurring
pon such tissues ) and all attempts to limit its life by depriving
Ipe beetle of food, will doubtless be unavailing.

It is in fact, even a more general feeder than the notes just given
ould indicate, as it has been seen feeding upon the cucumber vine,
nd also upon beans ; while a letter from Mr. Lattin, of DeKalb
Dunty, reports that he has found it eating into apples in his orchard,
pparently taking advantage of punctures in the skin made by
I ther insects, but enlarging these openings so as seriously to damage
l ie fruit. This same fact has likewise been reported to me from
i rundy county, where the adult beetle is believed to eat its way
ito thin-skinned apples without the assistance of other insects.

r

\ Egg— Until the present season, the eggs of this beetle had not
een seen ; neither was the time or place of oviposition known.
kne correspondent reported as early as the 25th of September that
;3 had found them at the base of the leaf of the corn, between the
death and the stalk ; but these eggs were lost before any oppor-
mity was had to compare them with known eggs of Eiabrotica;
id, as they were found in the midst of minute dipterous larvae of
arious ages, (taken at the time for the corn root- worm) and as the
muine eggs of the beetle could not be found afterwards in that
tuation, notwithstanding a protracted search made in various
tuations by several observers, (although dipterous larvae were
mndant there) it will scarcely be wise to conclude that the beetle
ys its eggs above ground until this observation has been verified.

24

Careful search for them was made at Normal at this same date m
all situations in the corn-fields, but without success. None were
found upon the stalks nor roots nor in the ground about them, nor
yet anywhere in connection with the roots of ragweed and smart-
weed abundant in the field; and a similar search was repeated
later with the same results. On the 18th of October, however, large
numbers of small dirty-white eggs were found by my assistant, Mr.

F. M. Webster, at Normal, in the ground not far from the bases of
the hills, at depths varying from one to four or five inches, both
where the corn was still standing and where the stalks had been
cut for fodder. A critical comparison under the microscope of these
eggs with those obtained by the dissection of a gravid female of
Diabrotica, was sufficient to' demonstrate their identity,— a conclu¬
sion confirmed by their number, situation, and all the circumstances
of the find. On the 20th of the same month they were found
independently in the same situation by Dr. Boardman, at Elmira,

(as reported in his letter of the *z3d) and frequent search at later
periods showed them by hundreds in every held which had been
infested by the beetle. In several cases, as already remarked, the
exhausted female was found in the ground in the midst of clusters
of eggs. From three or four to eight or ten were usually found
together, not in actual contact with each other, but scattered through
a space of about half an inch in diameter. Most of the eggs were
within an inch of the surface, but in some instances the female had
penetrated to a depth of about six inches. They were not contained
in any cell or special cavity, but were scattered through the ground,
entirely unprotected. A most careful examination, many times
repeated, of the earth between the rows, and of the roots of all the
weeds growing in the field, failed to discover so much as a single
egg outside a space a few inches across, around each hill. A simi¬
lar careful search of the roots of thistles, ragweed, and goldenrod
outside the fields, upon the flowers of which the beetles were feed¬
ing in great numbers, failed likewise to discover the eggs; neither
was there any evidence in the roots of these plants, either in the
corn-fields or elsewhere, that they had been infested by the larvae, j
In short, not the slightest indication was found that the beetle
breeds anywhere except in fields of corn. It is very probable that
a feAV develop in other situations ; but the number seems to be so
small as to defy discovery, except by accident. A remarkable excep¬
tion to this statement, not invalidating, however, its general correct¬
ness, was reported to me from Stark county. A field of oats had
lodged so badly as to be unfit for harvesting, and consequently grew
up in the fall to a dense mat of young oats, about six inches high.
This ground was plowed the following spring and planted to corn,
with the surprising result that the crop was almost ruined by the
corn root-worm. It is probable that the abundance of fresh and
tender vegetation in this field at a time when food for the adult
Diabrotica was becoming scarce in the corn-fields adjacent, served -
to attract here large numbers of the beetles before their eggs were
all deposited; and that the ground thus became stocked with eggs
in the fall.

From the bodies of the females collected on the 7th of Septem¬
ber, eggs were obtained of nearly full size, as many as fifty in num-

25

ber to each individual. A few were found early in October which
had not yet deposited all their eggs, and they were seen copulating
as late as September 25. From the above and from the dates given
[for the first appearance of the beetles, we may conclude that
opposition commences probably in August or September, and con¬
tinues into October, the bulk of the eggs apparently being laid about
the middle or last of September.

Doubtless a few scattering individuals of the early part of the
brood deposit them before these dates, but their number is probably
too small to have any special sign: aeance. That the eggs remain in the
ground throughout the winter, is a foregone conclusion, as is also
the fact that they do not hatch in spring until after the corn has
commenced to grow. If the larvae emerged earlier, they would, of
course, perish of starvation ; and that the hatching is not postponed
i long after the appearance of the corn, is proven by the early date
at which the effect of their work upon the root makes itself' appa¬
rent to the farmer.

With all these data before us, we can now make general state¬
ments which will stand the test of farther investigation. In the
first place, it is evident that the beetle hibernates, not in the pupa
stage, as has heretofore been surmised, nor yet as an adult beetle,
but chiefly or solely in the egg. It is also fairly certain that pre¬
vious writers upon this subject have been mistaken in supposing
1 that this species was two- or tliree-brooded. In order to exhibit more
f clearly the fact that only a single brood appears during the season,
a tabular summary of all the dates at which the insect was observed
in its different stages, is given herewith. From this it will be seen
that, larvae, pupae and perfect beetles were all to be found at any
time from the middle or latter part of June to the 1st of Septem¬
ber, and that beetles occurred continuously throughout the remainder
jof the season, no eggs being seen until the middle of October. On
the other hand, larvae and pupae did not occur later than September
1. As the first observations were made about a month after the
appearance of the corn above ground, it is certain that there was
not time for the development of an early brood :

•June 10....

L

Aug. 21 _

L

P

I

Oct 1

I

25....

I

24....

L

P

3^

x

....

28....

P

25....

I

I

....

July 1....

I

26....

L

P

I

13

I

“ " "

26....

L

1

28....

I

14 .

I

“ “ “ *

A.ug. 1....

L

I

Sept. 4 _

I

18.

I

TT

5....

P

11....

I

2<V

x

E

7....

I

16....

T

Nov. 9.

E

17....

L

P

25....

I

?E

Dec. —

I

18....

1

L

P

I

....

27....

I

Explanation— L, larvae; P, pupae; I, imagos or beetles; E, eggs.

An iuspection of this table will show that a period of about two
months is required to pass the entire brood through one of its trans-
ormations. Since the adult beetles appeared last year as early as
Tune 2-5, while pupae were seen in the ground as late as August 26,
t is certain that changes from pupa to imago must have occurred
hroughout this whole period, and the same reasoning will apply to
/;he change from larya to pupa, and likewise to the hatching of the

26

egg; and since the first larvae which survive cannot be hatched be¬
fore the corn appears above ground, — i. e., about May 15 to June
1, — it is probable that the eggs are not all hatched before the first

of August.

INJURIES TO CORN.

wmmm

Fig. 5. Corn root-worm, within the root. Enlarged.
The root has been broken in two, showing the larvm
still imbedded in it.

The larvae, after hatching, attack first the fibrous roots of the corn,
probably commencing usually near their tips, and working towards
the stalk. They penetrate the surface of the root, running .irregu¬
larly beneath it, devouring the substance as they go, causing the
death and decay of the root as fast as they proceed.

There are often ns
many as fifteen or twenty
in a hill, and most of the
roots of many stalks will be
completely, destroyed, a
condition of things evi¬
dent to the farmer as he
plows a badly infested
field, by the fact that no
corn -roots are brought up
on the plow. The diffi¬
culty is often apparent
in patches here and there, but sometimes affects the entire field
about equally. The growth of the corn is of course retarded, or
even entirely arrested, and many stalks at the end of the season
will be found from six inches to two feet in height. Others of the
usual height will form no ear, and many will scarcely put forth a
tassel. As the upper roots form, these are likewise invaded by the
worms, and the hold of the corn upon the ground is so weakened
that it is easily pulled up by hand or prostrated by an ordinary
storm. Often this falling of the corn is the first evidence to the
casual observer of any difficulty with the crop. If the mischief does
not proceed as far as this, and the corn both tassels and silks, the
ears often blight, either wholly or in part, and a field which may
seem scarcely injured will yield an extraordinary percentage of small
or worthless nubbins. This blight may be due, to some extent, to
the fact that the beetle feeds upon the silk before the grains are
fertilized by the pollen, but is probably chiefly to be attributed to
the sapping of the vitality of the plant, owing to the destruction of
its roots.

As an additional example of the final effect of these worms, a field
in Stark country, near Elmira, may be cited. Of this, Dr. Board-
man writes, November 9: “I find that the corn on badly infested
lands has nothing on the stalk. I examined one field, four miles
from my place, where the owner was husking, and should say that
one-fourth of the corn was rotting, or beginning to rot. I found on
cutting an ear open, that I could slice the cob as easily as if it were
a turnip. The infested corn is yielding from ten to fifteen bushels
per acre.”

27

NATURAL REMEDIES.

The ordinary natural checks upon the undue multiplication of in¬
lets are birds, other insects, and the vicissitudes of the weather,
gainst birds this species is of course completely protected in all its
:ages, except that of perfect beetle ; and although fragments of the
it ter would be very easily recognized in the food of a bird, I have
ever seen a trace of a single specimen in the thousand or more
Somachs whose contents I have examined. Indeed, at the season
f the year when these beetles breed, birds are not merely extremely
3arce in corn-fields, but almost entirely absent, most of the insec-
verous species being at this time attracted to other haunts by the
pening of the autumn fruits. It is, therefore, altogether unlikely
lat birds have any effect whatever to restrain the increase of the
Mm root- worm.

Unfortunately, we have as little evidence of any insect enemies of
iis pest. It is true that Prof. Riley remarks, in the article in the
merican Entomologist, already cited, that he has invariably found
in conjunction with a real wire-worm, which from its having been
>und preying upon locust eggs, he supposes to frequent the corn-
>ots for the food afforded by the Diabrotica larvae. In all the
Elections of these larvae, made from the Laboratory, however, only
single wire-worm was found, although everything occurring in the
round with the root-worm was preserved for examination. This
ire- worm, upon dissection, was proved to contain only vegetable
>od, and but a mere trace of that. A number of other dissections
ere made of insects occurring in the same situation, for the pur-
3se of determining whether any of them might possibly be feeding
pon either the larvae or the eggs.

Ten specimens of an abundant small beetle, Agonoderus comma,
ambers of which were found, August 8, under the clods and in the
mund about the roots of corn in a field which was suffering from
| serious attack of the corn root-worm, proved to have taken both
limal and vegetable food, but no traces of these larvae were appa-
:nt. In fact, from the contents of their stomachs it was evidently
apossible that they should have eaten any of the corn root-worms,
nother specimen of this species, taken in a similar situation, but
j a later date (August 20), gave similar results. Two minute pre-
iceous beetles ( Tacliys incurvus and Blechrus lineatus ) found on the
,h of November among the roots of corn where eggs of Diabrotica
bounded, were likewise innocent of any attack on the pest. The
omach of the first contained a few minute fragments of an insect
*ust, and that of the second was empty. All the other carabid
jetles captured at this time and place were found without food,
iving doubtless gone into winter quarters.

Thousand-legs (Myriapoda) were especially abundant here, more
• in fact than any insect, but these, upon dissection, proved to
ive fed only upon fungi and decaying vegetation. It is possible
hat some of the eggs, and perhaps the larvae also, may be destroyed
j insects in spring when their appetites are more active, but of
iis we have as yet no proof whatever.

There is equally little indication of any seriously injurious effect
:erted by rain or drouth. While it is true that the worm is said

28

by many to be most destructive upon high land and in dry seasons,
this seems to be due not to a greater number of worms in such sit¬
uations, but to the fact that the corn defends itself less easily by
throwing out new roots. Certainly the years during which this pest
is reported to have been especially destructive include about all the
varieties of weather known to our climate, some being extremely
dry and some extremely wet, some with the winter warm and open,
and others extraordinarily cold. In short, we have as yet no know¬
ledge of any natural check upon the increase of this species except
the necessary limit of its food supply.

If the inquiry be made, why, in the absence of conspicuous
natural checks upon its multiplication it has not long ago increased
beyond all bounds, and destroyed the entire corn crop of the coun¬
try, the reply must be that there is a very effective artificial check
upon this reproduction which has been unconsciously applied more
or less generally, and that it is doubtless due to this that the pest
has not increased more rapidly. The fact that the larva finds its
food, as far as known, only in the corn-fields, and that eggs depos¬
ited elsewhere must all, or nearly all, fail of development, makes it
necessary to the multiplication of this species that corn should be
cultivated upon the same ground during successive years. Wherever
rotation of crops has prevailed, consequently, it has met with seri¬
ous checks ; but on the other hand, where, for any reason,
continuous cropping of corn has been the rule, if has so increased
as to threaten to occupy the entire country. This is especially
noticeable in Stark county, in a region where the farmers have
nearly abandoned the cultivation of wheat on account of the rav¬
ages of the chinch bug. Evidently as a consequence of this, the
corn root-worm has become there more numerous and destructive
than in any other region known to me.

The future of this pest I believe- to depend almost entirely upon
the farmers themselves. If the continuous cultivation of corn on
the same ground is persisted in, unless something of which we have
now no hint occurs to arrest the progress of the insect, it is little
likely to confine itself to those fields in which it is undisturbed.
Multiplying at a rapid rate, it must eventually overstock such
ground, and, following the habit of insects generally, when its num¬
bers become excessive in any locality, it will probably, migrate in
swarms to other regions less thoroughly occupied. It flies readily
and actively, and might easily in this way become an almost uncon¬
trollable scourge.

ARTIFICIAL REMEDIES.

The inference from the foregoing to a frequent change of crops
as a method of preventing the injuries of this insect, is too plain
to require special comment. Not only our knowledge of the life
history of the species, but also the experience of those suffering
from its attacks, teach us that it will multiply indefinitely as long
as ground infested by it continues to be cropped with corn, while a
single season in grass or any small grain is sufficient to destroy
those in the ground. No matter how thickly stocked with eggs the
soil may be, we know of no reason to fear injury to any other crop

29

lan corn. Whether the other corn-like crops, such as sorghum and
mom corn, are liable to its attacks, I am not at present able to
,iiy. If the larvae were capable of living upon other generally culti-
ated cereals, the fact could not have failed to manifest itself long
go in badly infested regions. Much evidence of the efficacy of
)tation has been given already, and only two or three instances
jeed now be added. In a field planted to corn by Dr. Boardman,
ear Elmira, in Stark county, a part of the ground had been in
arn for several years previously, while a part had been in rye the
revious year. Of the first field some was heavily manured, the
unainder not. These fields were not separated even by a fence,
,nd yet when I visited them in August, it was easy to distinguish
yen at a considerable distance that part which had been in corn
le year before from that which had been in small grain. Although
le former in June was even more thrifty than the latter, in August
s inferiority was evident to the most casual observer. The crop
lised upon old corn ground, and not manured, yielded but fifteen
ushels per acre, while that which was manured averaged about
)fty bushels, and on the other hand that planted upon ground
)wed to rye, and not manured at all, yielded seventy bushels per
3re. All these fields were planted the same day, and treated pre-
:\sely alike throughout the season. A similar condition of affairs
Las found upon the farm of Col. Jackson, in this same region,
here three fields lying side by side, showed precisely similar differ-
lces, evidently dependent entirely upon the previous history of the
ind with respect to the kind of crop to which it had been devoted.
1 DeKalb county, evidence of the protection afforded by the rota-
on of crops, is afforded on a much larger scale. On a farm of
[COO acres owned by Hon. Lewis Steward, near Plano, rotation of
•ops has been the regular rule ; 1,603 acres of this land was
! anted to corn this year, and 700 acres were carefully examined by
Lr. Webster. In August, only ten acres of this entire tract was
tund affected by the corn root-worm, and this was where, in the
arrangement of the fields, a small tract of ground happened to
'ave been planted to corn the previous y^ar. All about Mr.
Reward’s place, on farms where rotation was not systematically
racticed, the damage done was serious and general. With respect
) other measures, the history of the insect gives us little hope of
Aective treatment. During its early stages as egg, larva and
upa, it is scattered and hidden in the ground beyond the reach of
ay agency except local applications to the soil, and to apply these
iroughout the field would be of course impracticable except on a
3ry small scale, unless some fertilizer shall perchance be found,
hich while improving the land shall likewise injure or destroy the
isect. Experiments with reference to this matter can easily be
>ade at small expense, and will doubtless repay the trouble, but
ill probably teach us nothing but the hopelessness of attacking the
bst in this way. The experience of farmers commonly shows the
Ivantage of enriching the ground, as a palliative merely, by
■tabling the corn to react against the partial loss of its roots, but
Lis does not at all diminish the number of- worms, nor protect the
3ld indeed against serious loss. Since the beetle feeds at first freely
. the field, exposed upon the corn and weeds., it would of course

BO

be possible to poison it by the usual insecticides, especially Paris
Green and London Purple, but this practice will doubtless be far
more expensive than the method of rotation, and would be highly
dangerous to stock. Clean cultivation in and outside the field,
which has been previously recommended, would have but little, if
any effect, since the beetle finds an abundance of food from the
corn* itself, and even in molds and decaying vegetable tissues,
if deprived of all other sources of support. Finally, too much
emphasis cannot be placed on the fact that an intelligent rotation
of crops constitutes our only present safeguard against what now
threatens to become a most destructive scourge unless met in this
way.

SUMMARY.

The corn root-worm, in the form in which it affects the roots of
corn, is a slender white grub, not thicker than a pin, from one-
fourth to three-eighths of an inch in length, with a small brown
head, and six very short legs. It commences its attack on the root
in May or June, eating its way beneath the surface, and killing
the root as fast as it proceeds. Late in July or early in Augustfl
it transforms in the ground, near the base of the hill, changing
into a white pupa, about .15 of an inch long and two- thirds
that width, looking somewhat like an adult beetle, but with the
wings and wing-covers . rudimentary, and with the legs closely
drawn up against the body. A few days later it emeiges as a
perfect insect, about one-fifth of an inch in length, varying in
color from pale greenish-brown to bright grass-green, and usually
without spots or markings of any kind. The beetle climbs up
the stalk, living on fallen pollen and upon the silk at the top of
the ear until the latter dries, when a few of the beetles creep
down between the husks, and feed upon the corn itself, while the
others resort for food to the pollen of such weeds in the field as
are at that time in blossom. In September and October, the eggs
are laid in the ground, upon or about the roots of the corn, and
most of the beetles soon after disappear from the field. They
may ordinarily be found upon the late blooming plants, feeding as
usual upon the pollen of the flowers, and also to some extent upon
molds and other fungi, and upon decaying vegetation. The insect
hibernates in the egg, as a rule, and this does not hatch until after
the ground has been plowed and planted to corn in the spring,
probably in May and June. It occurs in destructive numbers
throughout Illinois, from DeKalb to Morgan counties, and as far
west as Iowa, and also less abundantly in Southern Illinois. It is
at present most abundant and injurious north, where the chinch-
bug has compelled a partial suspension of the culture of wheat.

Although the adult beetles, when numerous, do some harm by
eating the silk before the kernels are fertilized by the pollen, andj
also destroy occasionally a few kernels in the tip of the ear, yet the
principal injury is done by the larva in its attack upon the roots.
The extent of this injury depends not only upon the number of the
worms, but also upon the soil and weather and the general condi¬
tion of the crop, being worst on high land and in dry weather.

31

;der specially unfavorable circumstances, the loss clue to the in-
,.t may amount to from one-fourtli to one-half or even three-fourths
the crop, but when the conditions are generally favorable, it rarely
ounts to more than ten or twenty per cent., and frequently even
less. Although the roots penetrated by the larva; die and decay,
•ifty corn will throw out new ones to replace those lost, and this
most likely to occur in moist, rich ground and in wet seasons,
e damage is therefore greatest on high ground and in dry weather,
\ the use of manure will palliate, but not wholly obviate the
ury.

So natural enemy of this insect has yet been discovered, nor is
I y thing known to indicate that changes of the weather have any
ions effect upon it.

^s the results of numerous observations and comparisons, it is
in that little or no mischief is done except in fields that have
n in corn during the year or two preceding, and a frequent
mge of crops is therefore a complete preventive. Beyond this the
history of the insect gives us little present hope of fighting it

Esctively, except at too great expense, as the eggs and worms are
ttered and hidden in the ground, and the perfect beetle is widely

!' persed throughout the field. Experiments will be instituted at
earliest possible day with a view to determining whether some
tilizer whose value to the crop will pay for its use may not have
destructive effect either upon the egg or the larva in the ground, but
pil such experiments are made and verified, intelligent rotation of
ps must remain our sole effective resource against this most
, eatening and destructive insect.

STUDIES ON THE CHINCH-BUG*— I.
( Blissas leucopterus, Say.)

I

I

Order HEMIPTERA. Family Lygaeidje.

Fin. 6. — Chinch -bug ( Blissus leucopterus , Say.) Adult and young, a and b, eggs; c, young
larva; d, tarsus, of same; e, larva after first moult; f, larva after second moult, g , pupa;.
h leg of same; i, beak; k, adult. The line below shows the natural size.

It requires neither figures nor rhetoric to enforce the importance
to agriculture of this especially destructive and unmanageable pest
of the grain fields. The fact that it is the most dangerous insect
foe with which they have to deal — that it taxes them more heavily
than all other such enemies combined, is burnt into the conviction
of thousands of farmers by repeated heavy losses and bitter disap¬
pointment.

Not the least serious feature of the situation is, the apparently
uncontrollable character of its injuries. Notwithstanding the intel¬
ligent thought and energy which have been concentrated for more
than a generation on this insect, it has continued to thrive ns
little affected by any action which human ingenuity has brought to
bear upon it as is the course of the weather or the orbit of the
earth. Its coming and its going, its abundance and its scarcity,
seem regulated by causes, thus far, beyond our reach.

It may be that the control of this pest is an impossibility, but
as long as there remains a “fighting chance” to the contrary, if
will constitute a standing challenge to the intelligence and enter¬
prise of the country, and one which the economic entomologist

* Summary statements of the results of these studies will be found on pp 38, 56 and .63.

88

; :st be the first to take up and the last to lay down. Until the
i ire subject of the life history, the relations, the economy, the
ij .-elopment, and the conditions of health and disease, have been
; stored, and without practical results— until they are, in fact, as
il known as those of the horse, or the dog, we need not despair
measures of relief against it. In short, the importance and dif-
jilty of the subject are such as to call for the most patient , thor-
ih and exhaustive research, before we abandon the contest as
peless.

t was in the spirit of these reflections, that I made a beginning
ni the study of this insect, last July, and the first results of the
tson’s work upon it are here reported. As the chinch-bug has
m somewhat fully treated by my predecessors, in previous reports
m this office, I have not thought it worth while to summarize
! well-known facts respecting it, but will pass at once, without
ther explanation or apology, to an account, first, of its history
ring the present season; second, of various checks upon its in-
ase, some of them newly-discovered ; and third, of certain arti-
al measures for its destruction, upon which I have begun to ex-
‘iment.

LIFE HISTORY.

Che life histories of insects are the foundations of economic en-
oology; these must be complete, definite and accurate, or all
e is indefinite and uncertain. And as the histories of insects
•y, according to latitude, and from year to year, it is necessary
it they should be studied in various localities, and under different
iditions. Without the knowledge thus acquired, we can neither cur¬
tly foresee the course of events respecting insect ravages, nor tell
en and where we may attack their authors to the best advantage, —
:1 yet, for various reasons, there is scarcely a single species of in-
ious insect whose life history is certainly and completely known.
,r lack of this definite and reliable knowledge, we are often left

I grope in a fog, where we should see by the clearest light of day.
e requirements of this subject are exceedingly simple. The secret

successful method is, close and contmuous observation. A species
jould be followed from week to week, and at times even from day
day, throughout the year, and through its periods of scarcity as

II as through those of its greatest abundance. The area super-
ed should be the largest which it is possible to cover thoroughly,
“I the time over which our observations are extended should be
' g enough to give us a knowledge of the variations from the av-
ge, due to differences of weather and other local or general con-
ions.

Respecting the cliinch-bug, a fairly complete life history, for an
1 3rage year during its periods of abundance, has been made out,
I some general knowledge has been gained of the bad effects of
remely wet weather ; but beyond this we have not heretofore

u6.

Is the year just closing has been in many respects an exceptional
3, I have thought it worth while to give a somewhat full sum-
|j,ry of our field notes on this insect, and we shall see that the

84

peculiarities of the season, the extremely wet spring and early sum¬
mer, followed by average weather, has had the effect not only to
modify the development of the chinch-bug, but to change considerably
the time, character and importance of its attacks on the crops.

During the first half of the year, I was not responsible for work
on the economic entomology of the State, and was altogether too
much occupied with other duties to make it possible to study the
life histories of injurious insects personally with any careful atten¬
tion; but I instructed my entomological assistant, Mr. P. M. Web¬
ster, to watch closely for the appearance of the chinch-bug, and to (
follow it throughout the year. He reported at frequent intervals the
occurrence of the adult in considerable numbers in the usual situa¬
tions up to July 1, but was unable to find anywhere any traces of
eggs or young, nor could he learn of their appearance from farmers,
or of any injury caused by them to wTheat or other small grains in
the vicinity of Normal. The first young specimens were, in fact
found early in July, in corn-fields not far from town. Thinking it
possible that the extraordinary and long-continued wet weather of
the first part of the season had prevented either the deposition or
the hatching of the eggs, and consequently the appearance of the
usual first brood, I wrote to several correspondents, stating the suppo¬
sition which I entertained, and making the following inquiries : Did
you see any young chinch-bugs previous to July 1 or thereabouts?
Did you search for them, or would you have been likely to see
them if they had occurred in your vicinity? I received replies only
from Prof. Burrill, of the Industrial University at Champaign, from
Dr. E. R. Boardman, of Elmira, Stark county, and from D. S.
Harris, of Cuba, Fulton county.

Prof. Burrill’s reply was as follows: “No; the bugs of July 12
wintered over in the adult state. I think, however, this is altogether
exceptional, and grew out of the fact that they could not deposit j
their eggs, if, indeed, produce them, on account of the wet and
cold. At any rate, I am positive that no early brood came out in
our section of the State.”

Dr. Boardman says: “Yours of the 4th received. In reply, II
would say that I had carefully searched for the chinch-bug from
early spring until the time of our field meeting, in June, and failed
to find a single young chinch-bug. I found a few old ones, but not
nearly as many as I found one year ago. On the 17th of June, at
Burlington, Iowa, I saw the old bugs in very large numbers for the
first time this season. They were flying in immense swarms east¬
ward, and on my return home I learned that their flight was noticed
here on the 19th, when they alighted in the corn-fields, and in some
fields literally covered the corn, but did not remain more than
twenty-four hours in such numbers. In my trip through Iowa, I
carefully searched where [ thought I would be most likely to find
the young, but found none. I saw a few old ones, but not in any
quantity ; their flight had been observed as far west as Creston,
which was as far as I went in that direction. The first young bugs
that I found in this locality were collected about the 10th of July.

I think I am as favorably situated for finding them as any one in
this locality, as my land is rolling, and I cultivate wheat every
year. The damage done by them here this year was very trifling,

If . •

I

35

icl I think I have not seen as few of them for the last five years
we had this year; yet we have enough saved for seed. I do not
lieve there was any early brood this year here.”

On the other hand, Mr. Harris writes : ‘‘In reply to your inquiry
the 4th inst., relating to the chinch-bug, I would say the
|ung chinch-bugs were very abundant prior to the 28th of June,
82. At this date both the adult and the young were very abun-
ait in both the rye and the winter wheat. But on the eve of the
tli, we had the heaviest rain ever known in this section (6^ inches
rain fell in less than two hours), and it destroyed both adults
id young completely, as far as I had opportunity of observing;
jt did not destroy the eggs already deposited in great numbers. ^ I
d not succeed in determining the date of hatching ; but on July 8
»e young bugs could be gathered by the handful in several of the
leatfields about Cuba. A large part of the brood was destroyed
a rain about the 15th of July.” That the young chinch-bugs, if
esent, should have entirely escaped the close and continuous watch
i three as careful observers as Prof. Burrill, Mr. Webster and Dr.
oardman seems to me incredible, yet in all three of the localities
ij which they made their search the species was abundant the pre¬
ding year, especially so at Champaign and at Normal. Near the
' • mer place it did considerable damage to broom-corn and sorghum,
d near the latter wheat fields were seriously attacked. As I have
reason whatever to doubt the exactness of the observations upon
mch the statements of Mr. Harris were based, I can only conclude
Sat the chincli-bug failed to develop an early brood in some local¬
es, but not in others. Mention was made in all the letters cited
the flight of bugs in midsummer, and a similar flight was noticed
jout the middle of June, south of Bloomington, in McLean county,
le superintendent of the county poor farm there reported that the
' was full of flying cliinch-bugs at that time, and spoke especially
J seeing a horse and rider literally covered with them. In a visit
[ Adams county in August, my assistant, Mr. A. B. Seymour,
Irned that cliinch-bugs had been very numerous there in early
ring, but were believed to have been killed by the rain.

My own first observations on the chinch-bug were made on the
)h ofrJuly, at Champaign, where I visited a large field of broom-
m belonging to Messrs. Bogardus and Johnson. These gentlemen
ported that ten days previously, old bugs were abundant in the
Id and were beginning to pair, but that only a few young were
p to be seen. At the time of my visit, nearly all the adults had
appeared, but some of those remaining were seen in copulo. The
ang were quite abundant, however, chiefly secreted between the
eath and stalks at the base of the broom-corn, but also frequently
curring outside. They were equally abundant on crab grass
<micum sanguinale) which was the most abundant weed in the
d. The common fox-tail grass (, Setaria ) was entirely wanting
re, having all been destroyed by these insects during the preced-
j: year. The growth of the broom-corn had been seriously checked
\l the bugs, but the recent weather had been favorable and the
>p seemed now reviving. A small field of sorghum near by had
m almost completely ruined by them, and other fields were tlireat-
id. They were also generally distributed through the corn, in the

same stage as that above described, but in smaller numbers. I
could bear of no appreciable injury done by them to small grain in
this vicinity. As swarms of adults were noticed in the air at Cham¬
paign about July _ , it is probable that the belds near there ^eie
infested by these flying hordes.

From the 12th to the 20th of July, I visited many belds at Fax-
ton, at Gilman, at Kankakee, at Ashkum, and near Waukegan. I
found the cliincli-bug in nearly every field of corn, in substantially
the same condition as at Champaign, much commoner in some fields
tnan in others, and evidently distributed without any reference to
the proximity of fields of other grain. Their number lapidly dimin¬
ished northward, until, at Waukegan, I found only two or three in
half an hoar’s search. A careful comparison was made at Cham¬
paign, and also at Normal, of belds which had been in corn the
year preceding and those now in corn following some other crop,
but no conclusive evidence was discovered of any greater abundance
of chinch-bugs in the one class of belds than in the other. On the
15th of July several belds were examined in McLean county. Mod¬
erate numbers of adults were found in the corn, but many more of
the young, most of the latter having just passed the first moult.
None were seen in the intermediate stages, and only a few eggs
were found. The adults were consequently of the preceding brood.
Sorghum belds in the vicinity were not infested, as far as noticed.
On *the 17th the old bugs were few in number in the belds exam¬
ined, and nearly all were young, in stages previous to the pupa.

Their occurrence in Piatt county, on the 22d of July, is recorded
by a writer in the Farmer’s Review of that date. On the 21th of
that month, Mr. F. S. Earle wrote me from Cobden, Illinois:
“For the past two or three weeks it has been pretty dry, and I
have heard a great many complaints of chinch-bugs in the corn ; but
we had a good rain last night that I hope will check their work.”

Hon. Wm. McAdams, of Otterville, in Jersey county, writes July
Both: “The chinch-bugs promised some time ago to injure badly
our corn, especially in nelds adjacent to the wheat-helds. Myriads
of them covered the rows, or several rows of corn next the wheat.
Patches of this corn were badly affected, turned yellow and ceased
to grow thrifty. The weather was very dry. But for some reason
which I am at a loss to explain, the chinch- bugs thrived but poorly
and at this writing have almost ceased to do much damage.”

On the 7tli of August, my assistant, Mr. A. B. Seymour, found
them injuring a held of broom corn in Adams county, about two
acres of which they had destroyed. In DeKalb county, on the 21st
of August, the bugs were noticed in the corn in small numbers, and
were said to be very abundant in some places. On the 8th of this
month, I visited the held of Bogardus and Johnson, at Champaign,
previously referred to, and found the chinch-bugs about as abundant
there as on my former visit. They had not seriously affected the
crop, however, as far as I could see, as the weather m the interval I
had been extremely favorable. About four-bfths of the individuals
were at this time in the pupa stage, and a very few adults were
seen, evidently of the same brood. On the 16th of August, in most
of the fields examined, about ninety per cent, were pupae, and many
were winged. At Jacksonville, on the 29th, chinch-bugs (mostly

dult) were found in all the fields, usually, however, in trivial num¬
bers, collected largely in the silks at the tip of the ear, but also
ccurnng on the stalks. A few were noticed in the third and fourth
tages, but none younger than these. But in one corn-field visited
tere, the bugs were swarming on all parts of the stalks, ears and
leaves. Scores were collected in the silk at the tip of every ear.
ieventy-five per cent, of those found in this field were adults*
numerous dead ones were seen upon the leaves and stalks and also
a the silk, embedded in a white fungus, which frequently entirely
overed the specimen. On the 30th, at Jerseyville, in Jersey county
, few occurred on the corn, of all sizes, from the adult down ' to
lose just hatched. These young were unquestionably the descend-
nts of the adults found with them, and consequently represented a
rter brood than that hitherto discussed. Large numbers of fresh
>upa skins were seen, and many of the adults had but just moulted.

. few dead specimens appeared, and a few of these had been
ttacked by the same fungus as that noticed at Jacksonville.

On the 4t.h of September, at Normal, nearly all were adults, and
'ccurred chiefly in the ears, both in the silk at the tip and behind
re husks. At Mason City, on the 6th of September, they were
umerous, but not abundant, upon the stalks of the corn and also
i smaller numbers in the silks. On the 15th of this month, adults
;erq noticed flying in small numbers at Normal. On the 16th, those
emaming in Mr. Conner’s field were all winged, occurring behind
le sheaths and in the tips of the ears. Very few were present here
owever. They seemed to have generally abandoned this field as
ist as they acquired wings. During a trip to Southern Illinois,
ley were found sparingly from September 9tli to 25th, at numer-
uis points, from Villa Bidge to Vandalia. Nearly all were adults,
fie remainder being in the preceding stage. Those noticed were
b tween the leaves and the stalk, and in the husks of the ear. A
iw were likewise seen at Carmi, on the first of October, all adults,
n the 25th of September, at Normal, they were scarce in all the •
jelds examined, chiefly nestled among the husks, sluggish and
pparently not feeding. On the 3d of October, numbers were found
pon the wing, and they were also abundant in the University
round, upon grass and weeds. They were now rather rare in the
prn-fields, having evidently scattered in search of winter quarters,
n the 17th, a very few adults were seen behind the sheaths of
)rn, but none could be found elsewhere, not even about weeds or
ader rubbish.

On the 7th of November a careful search wTas made in corn that
ad previously been badly infested by them, but none were to be
!*en upon the stalks or under the rubbish on the ground in the
/Id ; in the thickly-matted grass adjacent only a single specimen
as discovered by fifteen minutes’ search. On the 14th of this
onth the weather was cold and raw, and the ground was frozen
)out the hills of corn from an inch to an inch and a half in
i ipth ; a very few bugs were now found in the crevices of the
•ound, among the roots near the surface. At Champaign, on the
th, I visited again the field of Bogardus and Johnson, making a
.reful search for hibernating individuals about the stalks, under
e wTeeds in the field, and beneath the rubbish collected about the
—3

♦

38

hedge rows; not a single specimen was found in these situations,
although every temptation was afforded to hibernating insects, and
many other species occurred abundantly. To what resorts the swarms
which had developed in these situations had betaken themselves to
pass the winter, I am not able to say.

From the foregoing data we may construct a fairly full summary
of the history of the chinch- bug- for the year.

Although the season opened early, a period of cool and extremely
wnt weather set in about May 1, throughout Northern and Central
Illinois, and lasted until July. During all this time, although the
old bugs were present in numbers sufficient to threaten serious in-
iurv to all field crops, the usual early brood was either suppressed
here, or destroyed as fast as it appeared, except, possibly, in here
and there a more favorable locality, especially to the southward.
In Southern Illinois an early brood seems, however, to have ap¬
peared. From the middle to the last of June, swarms of flying
adults were seen throughout Southern Iowa and Central Illinois,—
whether of the hibernating brood of the preceding year, or adults
of an early spring brood which had developed at a distance, where
the weather was less destructive, it is impossible to say positively.
Their general appearance at about the same time in places so far
apart, and the fact that adults had been continuously present
throughout the season, while no young had been seen, makes it
seem very probable that these individuals on the wing were those
which had survived the winter; that the unfavorable weather had
prevented the deposition of the eggs, or had, perhaps even hindered
their development in the ovaries of the females, and that the bugs
were finally driven to migrate in swarms, in search of more suit¬
able breeding grounds.

The weather changed about July 1, and from that time forward was
unusually pleasant throughout the summer. The small grain was now
so far advanced as to afford no suitable food for the bugs, and these
flying swarms consequently settled and laid their eggs in maize, broom
command sorghum— of course scattering everywhere throughout the
field. For this reason, although the number occurring in several fields
was sufficient to do great and conspicuous mischief if they had entered
the corn in masses from without, as is their more ordinary practice, the
same number uniformly scattered attracted little attention and did!
relatively little harm. By the middle of July most of these eggs
were hatched, and the adults of this brood were gone by about July
20 Mature specimens of the following brood began to appear a few
days later, the first noted being August 8. (It is very likely that,
adults of one brood will be found to overlap those of the next, in
small number, so that no distinct division into broods can be de¬
tected, if these only are attended to.) By the last of August more
than half the brood had completed their development, and at this
time a few young of a following brood were seen at Jerseyville. This
seems to have been a local phenomenon, however, as nothing of the
kind was noticed later, in a long trip through Southern Illinois.

After the middle of September no immature individuals were seen,
and from this time until the middle of October flights of adults

89

i gam occurred, the corn fields being now generally abandoned. The
evelopmental period was consequently about two months, reckon-
ig from the time when the last eggs were laid until the transform¬
ation of the last of the brood was complete. Concerning their hi-
ernation, no new facts were elicited, except that they could not be
>und in or about the fields where they had hatched.

That the almost complete destruction or suppression of the spring
mod was due to the prolonged and violent rains, there can be no
lasonable doubt. The exact method in which rainy weather affects
le bugs is, however, as yet undecided. That it cannot be simple
lbmergence that destroys them is shown by a fact reported to me
y Hon. Win. McAdams. In his vicinity, in Jersey county, they
ere extremely abundant in the grain early in the spring, but were
.1 apparently swept out of the country by a long and violent storm,
ome days afterwards, when the water had subsided, he noticed in
-filing over the drift wood in the river bottoms immense numbers
‘ chinch-bugs among the rubbish, most of them still alive and
•awling about. On the other hand, it seems unlikely that simple
iposure to moisture has the effect attributed to rain. An experi-
ent made at the laboratory bears upon this question, and will be
orth reporting, although circumstances prevented its satisfactory
>mpletion. A number of hills infested by the bugs were success-
fily transplanted to boxes and variously treated with water for ten
iys. Some selected examples were thoroughly drenched every day,
>th ground and stalks ; in other boxes only the ground was watered ;

still others the corn was sprinkled every day, but the ground
'•otected ; and the remainder were left with only sufficient attention
keep the corn alive. During the time for which these experiments
^re continued, no appreciable effect whatever was produced upon
e bugs infesting the stalks. Those where the corn was watered
3re washed down upon the ground each time, but soon dried off
id climbed up the stalk. At the end of this time the bugs under
•servation all commenced to disappear indiscriminately, without
ference to the mode in which the corn had been treated, and the
periment was thus abruptly closed. Enough was learned, bow¬
er, to show that a succession of heavy daily showers for more
'an a week would have no appreciable effect upon these insects in
»at stage. The weather was warm and pleasant, and the condi-
>ns under which the experiments were carried on made it impossi-
3 to saturate the air. Further light will be thrown on this ques-
m by the facts detailed under the succeeding section.

ti

NATURAL ENEMIES.

Insects.

To many the subject of the natural enemies of injurious insects
i ly seem unimportant, since the prospect of utilizing them for an
ificial regulation of the numbers of destructive species is some-
iat remote. But with regard to such insects as are still under
i nstigation, no fact can be said to be unimportant, for the reason
lit the most insignificant data may, for all that we know to the
: ffrary, lead finally to the most useful conclusions. Further, a
actical knowledge of the economy of the injurious species is not

40

limited to a knowledge of the methods of destroying them or pre¬
venting their injuries. It is often scarcely less useful to be able to
predict the amount of their injuries and the length of time over
which these will probably extend ; and such prediction must almost
always take into account the variety, number, rate of multiplication
and activity of their natural enemies. The gardener, for example,
whose produce seems threatened by hordes of plant-lice, may rest
easy when he sees that the number of their parasites or carnivor¬
ous enemies is rapidly increasing, since the time must be short until
these entirely check the multiplication of their prey. Again, al¬
though no successful attempt has yet been made to increase the
number of our insect friends by special or artificial measures at any
given time or place, the possibility of the final success of such
efforts is always to be borne in mind. Cases are not infrequent,
however, in which it is possible to avoid involving the enemies of a
pest in measures taken for the destruction of the pest itself; so that
the beneficial species may easily be made to preponderate relatively
to the number of the injurious species remaining; but for this a
thorough knowledge of. the economy of both is of course essential.
Finally, since the conditions of insect life vary greatly from year to
year and even from generation to generation, a species of hitherto
trivial significance may hereafter rise to first-class importance as a
check upon the ravages of an insect enemy.

For these and other reasons, it has been customary 'for all writers
on economic entomology to give descriptions and life histories of all
known enemies of the injurious insects treated.

The earliest reference to insect enemies of the chinch-bug, which
has come to my attention, is in a paper by Mr. B. D. Walsh, upon
insects injurious to vegetation in Illinois, published in the fourth
volume of the Transactions of the Illinois State Agricultural Society,
for 1859-30. In examining a field of sweet corn in September, he
noticed numerous chinch-bugs in the husks (some imagos and some
pupae), and found also quite a number of specimens of four very
common species of lady-bugs (Coccinellidae), all the known American
species of which are more or less carnivorous. With the exception
of the chinch-bugs, and a few individuals of an allied species of
Hemiptera, there were no other insects under the corn husks. “The
idea at once occurred to me,” he says, “that these lady-bugs were
depredating upon the chinch-bugs, and I was confirmed in the
opinion upon finding a pupa, wdiich was evidently that of some coc-
cinellid, probably Coccbieila munda, Say, in the same situation.
Now, since the pupa was there, the larva must also have lived there,
for it is not the habit of these larvae to get into holes and corners
to complete their transformations ; and if the larvae lived there,
there was nothing else for them to live on but the above mentioned
two species of bug, the smaller of which never occurs in any great
numbers like the larger and more mischievous chinch-bug. That
the lady-bugs were then and there preying upon chinch-bugs, I have
but littie doubt ; but it does not necessarily follow that they habit¬
ually prey upon chinch-bugs. They might have been driven to prey
upon them for lack of more agreeable food ; as a cat will sometimes
eat bread, when she cannot obtain meat. Nothing but actual experi¬
ment and observation can determine the truth in this matter.” In

41

e autumn of i864,. Dr. Shimer ascertained that the spotted lady-
ig ( Hippodamia metadata) preys extensively upon the chinch-buo-
a particular held of corn, which had been sown thick for fodder
id which was swarming with chinch-bugs, he found, as he says’

• at this lady-bug ‘could be counted by hundreds upon every square
id ol giound, after shaking the corn; but the chincli-bugs were
numerous that these hosts of enemies made very little nercenti-
3 impression upon them. In a corn-field near Jacksonville, vis-
d by me on the 7th of September, 18S2, five species of lady-bugs
,re found extremely abundant on corn which was undergoing-
nous injury by hosts of chinch-bugs. There were often as many
fifteen or twenty to a hill, and larvae were likewise occasionally
en. As they were found on all parts of the corn, traveling about
lively among the bugs, the natural inference was that the latter
oracted them to the field. Previous studies of the food of this
only had shown me, however, that they were not by any means
- 8tn®t]y carnivorous as had previously been supposed, but that
sy often derived the principal part of their food from the ve^et-
le kingdom To learn the exact state of the case in this corn-
Ld I collected a number of all the species seen there, including
’P IciiVcE, made . careful dissections of a sufficient number of them
give me a fair average of their lood, mounted the contents of
sir alimentary canals and examined them with the microscope.

Three specimens of the common spotted lady-bug (Hippodamia
\adata) were dissected, but no traces of chinch-bugs were found
i t leir stomachs, while all but about thirteen per cent, of their
. consisted of the spores of lichens and various minute
Jgi, and the pollen of ragweed and other similar plants.
>aces of plant-lice were recognized, undoubtedly derived from the
coin plant-louse (Aphis maidis), which also abounded in
' field, Five specimens ot the convergent lady-bug (Hippodamia
,vergens,) had eaten about equal quantities of plant-lice and chinch-
fes, which togethei made only one-third of their food, the remain-
consisting of the same kinds of vegetation as those fust men-

r\ /A ' I ’ 1L 1 J 1 • /» it . . *'

^nech Three of these beetles, in fact, had eaten no insect food at
• lo my great surprise, two larvae of this species, taken at the
ne place and time, differed but little in food from the adults,
finch-bugs and plant-lice in about equal ratios, with fragments of
recognizable insects, made about one-fourth of the whole, the re¬
tailing three-fourths consisting only of vegetation of about the same
ids as before.

The icy lady-bug (Hippodamia glacialis) was represented by four
icimens taken in this field. The differences between their food
id that of the preceding species were purely trivial. Young cliinch-
'gs composed about eight per cent, of the total, and about eighteen
■ cent, was plant-lice. All the remainder was vegetation, divided
aut as before, between pollen of plants and Spores of fungi,
lien spores were also eaten freely, and were estimated at twelve
cent, of the whole.

he nine-spotted lady-bug ( Coccinella 9-potata) was represented
only a single specimen, which had taken no insect food what-

r, but had eaten only fungi.

42

Three specimens of the trim lady-bug ( Cycloneda sanguined) had
eaten plant-lice, pollen of dowers, and spores of the usual kinds;
but chinch-bugs did not appear in their food. The chinch-bugs
taken by all these specimens amounted to only eight per cent, of i
their entire food, and plant-lice to fourteen per cent., the remainder
being of vegetable origin. Only eighteen specimens from this held
were dissected, but the contents of their stomachs were of so uni¬
form a character that there was every reason to suppose that they
illustrated correctly the lood of the family at that time and place.

It would therefore seem possible that these beetles were attracted
rather by the stores of fungi in the held than by the chinch-bugs
and plant-lice.

The condition of the leaves and stalks of the corn, drained and
deadened by insect depredations, was such as to afford an excellent
nidus for the development of those fungi which spring up sponta¬
neously upon dead and decaying vegetation, and these weie in fact
extremely abundant. It seems, therefore, probable that whatever
credit has been heretofore attributed to lady-bugs as enemies of the
chinch-bug must be greatly diminished, partly on account of their
preference for fungi, and partly because it is not at ail impossible that
they were really feeding upon plant-lice, which escaped attention.

In the autumn of 1864, Dr. Shimer made the additional discovery
that the chinch-bug was preyed upon by a very common species of
lace-wing fly ( Chrysopaflorabunda ). These were not quite as abundant
as the spotted lady-bug among the corn, but still there were so
many of them that he thought there were one or more to every
stalk. “Every stroke of the cutter,” he adds, “would raise three or
four dozen of them, presenting quite an interesting spectacle as they
staggered along in their awkward, unsteady (light.” . And he not
only° actually observed the larvae preying very voraciously on the
chinch-bugs in the field, but he reared great numbers of them to
the mature fly by feeding them upon chinch-bugs. His account of
the operations of the larvae when in captivity is so interesting that
I quote the essential part of it: “I placed one of the larvae in a
vial, after having captured it in the field in the very act of. devour¬
ing chinch-bugs of all sizes, and subsequently introduced into the
vial a number of chinch-bugs. They had hardly reached the bottom
before it seized one of the largest ones, pierced it with its long jaws,
held it almost motionless for about a minute while it was sucking
the juices from the body of its victim, and then threw down the
lifeless shell. In this way I saw it destroy, in quick succession,
about a dozen bugs. Towards the last, as its appetite was becoming
satiated, it spent five or more minutes in sucking , the juices from
the body of one bug. After this bountiful repast, it remained mo¬
tionless for an hour or more, as if asleep. Never for a single mo¬
ment during the feast did it pause in^ the work. When not in
possession of a bug, it was on the search for, or in pursuit of others.
Occasionally the chincli-bugs would hasten to escape when pursued,
as if in some degree conscious of danger.”

As the lame of these lace-wings are incapable of taking any ex¬
cept liquid food, which they imbibe through their tubular mandibles, ;
there is no question here of the entire correctness of the contu¬
sions. I am in fact able to confirm them from our own note-books.]

43

Mr. Webster reports seeing a larva of Chrysopa feeding on young
inch-bugs in a field of corn at Normal, on the 30th of July, and
•other was detected in the act on the 5tli of August, in some corn
rich had been transplanted to the laboratory for experiment.
?gs of this insect were also noticed in a field infested by the
inch-bug, but neither bugs nor eggs were very numerous.

The following additional insect enemies are mentioned by Prof,
ley, in his seventh report as State Entomologist of Missouri:

“ The insidious flower-bug (Anthocoris insidiosus, Say) which is so
ten found preying on the leaf-inhabiting form of the grape Pliyl-
^era, and which is not unfrequently mistaken for the chinch- bug,
quite commonly found in connection with this last, and in all
obability preys upon it. The many-banded robber ( Harpactor
ictus , Fabr.,) also preys upon the chinch- bug. It is quite frequently
et with, and I have detected it in the act.”

Concerning these, Prof. Thomas says, in the Cliinch-bug Bulletin,
sued by the Department of the Interior, in 1S79: “The most
icient of these aids appears to be the Harpactor ductus, or banded-
Jg. I received, in 1878, notice from points in the Northwest
i at it was doing much service in destroying chinch-bugs, but it
es not develop in sufficient numbers to make any serious impres-
E>n on them in the years when they are abundant.”

In a field of corn near Normal, I noticed in July on the groand
out the stalks and occasionally crawling over the lower parts of
ese, numerous specimens of an extremely abundant, small, preda-
ous beetle, ( Agonoderus comma), which was at that time evidently
t just emerging as a perfect insect. As the lower parts of these
ilk s were likewise covered more or less completely with young
inch-bugs in stages preceding the third molt, and as the beetles
ire often seen wandering about, it seemed probable that the latter were
iding, at least in part, upon the bogs. Ten specimens were dis-
bted from this field, in four of which fragments of voimg chinch¬
es were detected, amounting to fully one-fifth of the food of the
'tire number. One had eaten an ant, of a species likewise very
undant in the same situation. In one, a trace of some insect
va was discovered, while the entire remainder of their food,
lounting to about half the whole, consisted of fragments of vege-
uon, the source of uhich could not positively be determined. It
d every appearance, however, of having been partly derived
1 'm the roots of the corn. This abundant predaceous beetle must
brefore be added to the list of the active enemies of Jthe chinch-
g. In the field in question, which was not very seriously infested,

3 number destroyed by them must have been sufficient to diminish
preciably the following brood.

The only mention of ants, in this connection, which I have seen,

, in the paper of Prof. Riley, already cited, where he says that
3 correspondents have reported to him that this insect destroys the
rs of chinch-bugs. This statement, however, lacks verification by
■section. The little ant ( Lasius flavus) mentioned above, was
md by me very common in all fields infested by the chinch-bug,
d is, in fact, excessively abundant everywhere. In many fields of
'ghum and broom-corn, their extraordinary numbers had attracted

44

the attention of farmers, one of whom told me that he had watched'
them until he satisfied himself of their usefulness by seeing an ant
carrying away a young chinch- bug in its jaws. I dissected a large
number of specimens, however, from various fields, with entire-
success, and found no trace of solid food nor of the characteristic
fluids of insects of any kind in any of their intestines, and I
am quite of the opinion that they frequented these fields for the
purpose of preying upon the exudations from the punctured corn,
and possibly also for the excrement of the bugs. The very
common habit of these ants of appropriating the fluids exuded by
plant-lice, is known to every one, and they have been seen likewise to
attend several other hemipterous insects for a similar purpose. I
myself saw one of them carrying a chinch-bug in its mouth, but
as I also saw them carrying about young corn plant-lice {Aphis
maiclis ) for the evident purpose of transferring them to a more suit¬
able situation, I greatly doubt their carnivorous intentions.

Birds.

Concerning the relations of birds to these insects, Prof. Riley re¬
marks : “The common quail of the Middle and Western States ( Ortyx
virginiana), otherwise known as the partridge in the Northern States,
has long since been known as a most efficient destroyer of chinch-
bugs, and the fact was some time ago published by myself in the
‘Prairie Farmer,’ and by others in various agricultural journals
and reports. We also have the corroborative testimony of Dr.
Shimer, who is a good ornithologist. In the winter time, when hard
pushed for food, this bird must devour immense numbers of the
little pests, which winter in just such situations as are frequented
by the quail ; and this bird should be protected from the gun of
the sportsman in every State wdiere the chinch- bug is known to run
riot. It is gratifying to know that this fact has become sufficiently
recognized to have gained for the bird legislative protection in
Kansas. Prairie chickens are also reported as devouring it, but I
do not know that any absolute proof has been given. Mr. J. W.
Clarke, of Green Lake county, Wisconsin, also reports seeing the
red-winged blackbird feeding on it.”

To these statements I have only to add that among the birds
shot in 1880, during midsummer, near Normal, when the chinch bug
was abundant enough in Central Illinois to cause some alarm, one
cat-bird, three brown thrushes and one meadow lark were found to
have eaten these insects in barely sufficient number to show that
the birds have no unconquerable prejudice against them. A single
house wren, shot in 1832, had also eaten a few chinch-bugs. A
little collection of fifteen birds representing eight common species
killed in a wheat fieid in which chinch-bugs were abundant and
injurious, were entirely innocent of any depredation on them. Not
a trace of a single specimen was found in any of the stomachs.
From the above it is clear that birds have no special objections to
this insect as an article of food, but on the other hand no sufficient
preference for it to induce them to search for it in its ordinary
situations, and their influence upon its numbers is, and probably
must remain, purely trivial.

45

I :

! ^ is very evident that the effect of the enemies thus far noted,
pon an insect as numerous and extraordinarily prolific as the
hmch-bug, cannot be very great. Unless they should, under special
lrcumstances, become much more abundant than they have ever
et been found, they could certainly, even under the most favorable
onditions, contribute little to the protection of the farmers’ crops

If.-' *

I come now, however, to a class of enemies which have hitherto
luded observation, but which, if they fulfill in future the promise
duch our present knowledge of them indicates, should be among
be most destructive enemies known to insect life.

No class of diseases is more fatal to man or more dreaded and
estructive among the domestic animals than the contagions diseases ,
diich are propagated from one individual to another* by means of
ome infinitesimal virus. When we remember that not only man
imself, but also nearly or quite every animal with whose economy
re are fully acquainted, suffers at times immense destruction from
iseases of this character, falls a victim, in other words, to rnicro-
3opic enemies, we may indulge a reasonable hope that those
lsects less known to us, but many of them scarcely less important,
re not altogether free from them ; and when we reflect that the
umber of horses or hogs or chickens could easily be vastly reduced
y using a little ingenuity to spread broadcast the germs of their
ontagious diseases, we need not despair of effecting something in
le same direction among our most noxious insect enemies.

TVe are not without several indications that contagious or epi¬
demic diseases of this nature occur among them at more or less
sequent intervals, and, fortunately, we have conclusive evidence of
pe possibility of propagating such diseases artificially. The earliest
^ggestion of the artificial cultivation of fungus parasites with a
iew to their use for controlling insect ravages is, as far as I know,
lat of Dr. J. L. Leconte, made in a paper read before the Ameri-
an Association for the Advancement of Science, in August, 1873,
here, in enumerating the checks available for the suppression of
lsects, he mentions the “communication of fungoid disease (like
rebrine, which affects the silk-worm) to other lepidopterous larvae, ”
nd adds in a foot-note: “I am extremely hopeful of the result of
sing this method. I have learned of an instance in which, from
ie communication of the disease by some silk-worms, the whole of
le caterpillars in a nine-acre piece of woods were destroyed.”

f The first description of anything resembling an epidemic or con-
igious disease among chinch-bugs, we owe to Dr. Henry A. Shinier,
d Mt. Carroll, Ill., who published a paper setting forth his obser¬
vations upon this insect, in the proceedings of the Academy of
atural Science of Philadelphia, for 1867. On pages 78-80 of that
ilume, he remarks as follows :

i “*Tuly 16. — A farmer four miles from here informed me that a
lack coleopterous insect was destroying the chinch-bugs on his
irm very rapidly; and, although I found his supposition to be an
:ror, yet I found many dying on the low creek bottom land from

46

the effects of some disease, while they are yet in the larva state— a
remarkable and rare phenomenon for insects thus in such a whole¬
sale manner to be dying without attaining their maturity, and no
insect enemy or other efficient cause to be observed capable of pro¬
ducing this important result.

July ‘22.— On the low grounds the young chinch-bugs are all dead
from the disease above alluded to, and the same disease is spread¬
ing rapidly on the hills and high prairies.

July 28. — In the fields where sixty days ago I saw plenty of eggs,
and forty-two days ago an abundance of young chinch-bugs, the
imagos are beginning to develop quite plentifully. Great numbers,
in all stages of their development, are dying of the prevailing
disease.

Aug. 8. — The majority of the chinch-bugs yet alive are in the
imago state, but they are being rapidly destroyed by the prevailing
epidemic disease, more fatal to them than the plague or Asiatic
cholera ever was to man. Scarcely one in a thousand of the vast
hosts of young bugs observed at the middle of June yet remain
alive, but plenty of dead ones may be seen everywhere, lying on
the ground, covered with the common mold of decomposing animal
matter, and nothing else, even when examined by the microscope.
Even of those that migrated to corn-fields a few weeks ago, in such
numbers as to cover the lower half of the corn stalks, very few are
to be found remaining alive; but the ground around the base of
the corn hills is almost literally covered with their mouldering, de¬
composing dead bodies. This is a matter so common as to be ob¬
served and often spoken of by farmers. They are dead everywhere,
not lying on the ground alone, but sticking to the blades and stalks
of corn in great numbers, in all stages of their development, larva,
pupa and imago.

Sept. 18. — After a whole day’s searching in the corn-fields, I have
just been able to find two larvae and a few imago , chinch-bugs,
against the great numbers alluded to in the corn about this time
last year.

This disease among the chinch-bugs was associated with the long
continued, wet, cloudy, cool weather that prevailed during a greater
portion of the period of their development. The disease was at its
maximum during the moist, warm weather that followed the cold
rains of June and the first part of July. During the summer of
3866, the chinch-bugs were very scarce in all the early spring, and
up to near harvest I was not able, with the most diligent search,
to find one. At harvest I did succeed in finding a few in some
localities.”

On page 234 of the same volume he further says: “The chinch-
bug has entirely disappeared from this region, so far as I have
been able to observe. I have made diligent search since spring,
with the object of obtaining a few living specimens, but up to this
time have not succeeded in finding a single specimen. I am con¬
vinced that the efficient cause of their destruction exists in the con¬
tinuation of the epidemic among them. Their overthrow is a cause
of great rejoicing among the farmers, and once more, as of yore,

thev have realized a bountiful wheat harvest. I have but one thing
«/

47

I

} regret in their annihilation; I neglected to obtain a good supply
f specimens, while they might have been secured by the wagon
)ad.”

Commenting upon the foregoing statements in the Chinch-Bug
bulletin, already mentioned, Dr, Thomas remarks: “Although the
lague among the bugs in this instance appears to have been some¬
what extraordinary, yet it is in accordance with "facts ascertained in
eference to other insects, and as Dr. Shimer is both a competent
nd reliable authority, we accept his statement as correct, and
elieve with him that it was owing as the originating cause to the
amp season. But we are inclined to believe that the moisture gave
ise to a minute fungus as the direct cause of the death of the
hinches./ I recollect very distinctly of a similar wholesale destruc-
ion of house-flies in Southwestern Virginia and East Tennessee in
849, by an epidemic. So rapidly was the disease propagated, and
o great the destruction among the flies, that the utmost caution in
ooking and drinking water was necessary. Every moist spot was
overed with the dead and dying. This I am satisfied was caused
y a fungus. I observed a somewhat similar epidemic prevailing
mong the grasshoppers in Western Minnesota, Dakota and North-
ra Iowa, in 187 A All over the plains the dead were seen clasping
he stems of grass and weeds, and before I was aware of this fact
lore than once I approached cautiously to capture a desired speci-
len, only to find it dead and rigid. In 1877 the rainy season evi-
ently caused an immense destruction of the larvae of Caloptenus-
oretus .”

My own observations upon this interesting subject began on the
d of August, 1882, at which time I commenced an examination of
le fluids of the bodies of specimens of various ages and from vari-
us situations, with a view to familiarizing myself with their appear-
nce in the normal condition of the insect, in order that I might be
ble afterwards readily to detect any departures from that condition
rhich circumstances should develop. On the 5th of August, upon
rushing some chinch-bugs under a cover upon a microscope slide,
nd fdiluting the fluids with freshly distilled water, I found them
ften swarming with minute rod-like bodies, which I took to be
I acteria, sometimes forming small adherent masses. Careful exam-
lation under a power of 1,000 diameters showed that these rods
ere usually formed of two, and sometimes four, oval particles,
flned end to end. Hundreds would often cross the field of view in

minute. In order to determine whether these bacteria occurred

I the circulating fluid or in some other part of the body, I cut off
le legs and head of a specimen in a small quantity of distilled
ater upon a slide, allowing the blood to escape. The quantity of
le fluid was, however, highly diluted, and I could find but two
acteria. Crushing the remainder of the body of this specimen as
sual, bacteria were present, but not abundant. On the 7th of
ugust I repeated this observation several times, with results
lentical in every particular with those just detailed, except that
le bacteria were much more abundant in some of the insects than
i others. Appreciating the possibility of the infection of the fluids
cammed from outside sources, I used every precaution to disinfect

II the tools and materials with which I worked. The water with
hich the fluids of the cliinch-bug wrere diluted had been freshly

48

distilled and re- distilled, and the forceps, knives, needles, slides and
cover glasses were all passed through the flame of an alcohol lamp
just before being used. In order to assure myself that the bacteria
observed came actually from the interior of the bugs, I carefully
washed several examples with a camel’s-hair brush in a drop of
water upon the slide, but could find no bacteria in the fluid used.
By crushing the same specimens and treating them as before, the
bacteria appeared in the usual numbers. It then occurred to me
that it was possible that the corn itself upon which these bugs were
feeding was in a diseased condition, and that the bacteria were
derived from its juices. 1 consequently took portions of the pith of
several stalks, crushed them upon the slide, and examined the sap
with high powers of the microscope. I found, of course, a multitude
of minute particles of various kinds and variously aggregated.
Most of them were agitated by the Brownian movement, but none
of them were recognizable as bacteria. These observations were
several times repeated, and I finally stained and mounted some of
the solid particles from the sap for more careful study under high
powers. On the 9th of August I made a visit to Champaign, and
went over the subject with Prof. T. J. Burrill, of the Industrial
University there, well known as an authority on everything relating
to bacteria. An abundance of the organisms already mentioned were
found in the fluids of chinch-bugs examined, but nothing new was
discovered. We also determined positively the absence of any
similar organisms in the juices of the corn.

On the 10th of August I found that chinch-bugs in the pupa
stage obtained at Champaign were swarming with the same bacterja
as those observed at Normal.

In order to determine the extent to \Oiich these micro-organisms
prevailed among other insects, I crushed plant-lice from melon vines
and from corn, beetles from various situations, and other insects,
but failed to find anything resembling the bacteria of the chinch-
bug. Next, wishing to’ ascertain whether cliinch-bugs of different
ages and stages of development differed with respect to the abund¬
ance of these parasites, (for so I began to consider them), I exam¬
ined on the 11th a number of specimens from Champaign which
had but just passed the first molt. Bacteria were present, but in
much smaller numbers than in pupre obtained at the same time and
place. This tallied entirely with previous observations, which had
led me to conclude that they were fewer in young bugs than in old.
In order still further to test the possibility of their being derived
in some way from the food of the insects, I next examined a num¬
ber of specimens which had been confined in a bottle for several
days, until they were nearly or quite starved. A specimen which
had just passed the second molt, and was dead, but still fresh and
plump, contained the bacteria in immense numbers, many of them
aggregated in clusters like the zoogloea masses of Micrococcus. Other
live specimens from the same lot also contained great numbers of
them. All the observations made upon this point tended to estab¬
lish the inference that the micro-organisms were entirely independent
of the food ingested, — a fact which placed them definitely in the
category of parasites. On the 14th of August, again I found them
very abundant, and showing by their connection in strings that they

49

Hx'J

ivere rapidly multiplying, in a bug which had been confined with-
>ut food in a bott e tor five days. The specimen was sluggish,
:>ut could still walk. A\ ith a view to locating more exactly their
irmcipal seat in the body, I crushed the head, thorax and abdomen
>r another upon separate slides. Very few bacteria were found in
he head. Ihey were much more abundant in the thorax but not
learly so common as in the abdomen, the fluids of which were lit¬
erally swarming with them. From this observation it seemed prob¬
able that they occurred chiefly m the alimentary canal. To satisfy
nyseh more exactly upon this point, I dissected, on the 15th, a pupa
rom Champaign, which had been kept without food since the 9th. I
■eparated the entire alimentary canal, with trifling injury, until I*at-
empted to detach it from the body at the vent. As soon as the needles
jenetrated the rectum, I noticed the escape of an extremely viscid

1-1 li 1Ci- ^ delicate film on the surface of the water in

mich the dissection was made. This fluid was seen by a power of about
ixty diameteis to contain numerous minute cell-like bodies, which un-
ter a high power appeared to be globular masses of bacteria. This
iscid him so interfered with the needles and entangled the tissues
hat the posterior portion of the intestine was torn to fragments
including the Malpgliian tubes, but the hard structures were removed
rom the. slide, and the cell in which the dissection was made, to¬
other with its contents, mounted, for study. Upon pressure with
he cover glass, globular masses of bacteria were seen escaping from
he stomach, similar in all respects to those previously studied,
mrnense numbers of free specimens occurred everywhere on the
hide, but scarcely anything else.

On the 16th of August; in a field of corn near Normal, belonging
o Mr. Conner, from which most of these specimens had been^ol>
amed, the chinch-bugs were evidently much less numerous than a
ortnight previously, and they were also apparently greatly retarded in
I levelopment. Not over ten per cent, had reached the pupa stage,
r md no adults had as yet appeared, while in other fields not far
distant, ninety per cent, w^ere pupae, and many were winged. In the
ormer field several dead bugs were found behind the sheaths of the
orn of all ages and sizes, but the mortality had evidently chiefly
effected the older bugs. Several were collected, both dead and alive,
jnd studied as usual. The fluids of one freshly dead were swarm-
ug with bacteria, as were also those of another in the third stage,
filich was still alive, but had a swollen and unhealthy look. Taking
t for granted that bacteria were most abundant in the alimentary
I anal, if not strictly confined to it, I next, on the same day, suc-
| essfully dissected the pupa of a chinch-bug which had been for
hree days in confinement. I removed the alimentary canal as far
s the Malpghian tubes, divided it in the middle, and placed the two
I -arts upon different slides. Bacteria were present in both slides,
at much the most abundant in that containing the posterior part
f the. intestine. They were nearly or quite as abundant in the
fater in which the dissection had been made, a fact probably due
3 the rupture of the alimentary canal during dissection. These
acteria were evidently rapidly multiplying, occurring on both slides
a zoogloea-like masses, and also in strings, of a length to simulate
acilli. On the 22d of August, the condition of things in the field

50

above mentioned was not materially changed, except that the num¬
ber of bugs had diminished still further, being now reduced, appa¬
rently, to about twenty per cent, of that occurring there on the
25tli of July. About two-thirds of those seen were pupae, but m a
half hour’s search only three adults were found.

In other fields at this time most of the bugs were in the adult
stage. Again, many were noticed dead behind the sheaths of the
corn and many of the living ones were torpid and could easily be
picked up or brushed about without their making active efforts to
escape. I examined one of these torpid specimens in the third stage
and found an excessive number of bacteria, rapidly multiplying,
many of them being in long strings. I also crushed an active speci¬
men in the same stage, and found the parasites numerous but less
abundant than in the preceding specimen, and none of them in
strings. I also crushed a dead pupa obtained at the same time,
still plump and fresh, and found immense numbers of the same
bacteria, most of them occurring in pairs. I then crushed an active
pupa which contained a great number of bacteria, many of them in
fours; scarcely fewer, in fact, than in some dead bodies.

In order to compare the condition of the insects in this field where
they were apparently disappearing, with that obtaining in other
situations, where no such disappearance was noticeable, I next col¬
lected a number of specimens from a small lot of corn, the stalks
of which were nearly half covered to the ear with bugs. A few of
these were adult, but nine-tenths of the remainder were pupae. Here
and there a dead specimen was noticed, and some were apparently
torpid. I crushed an active pupa upon the slide and found plenty
of bacteria in its fluids, but clearly fewer than in the specimens
examined from the other field. On the 23d I made a more exact
comparison by examining in immediate succession the fluids from
pupae taken from both fields. The specimen from a situation where
the bugs were apparently dying was swarming with bacteria, wdiile
in the example from the other situation but few were found, proba¬
bly not a twentieth part of those in the individual just mentioned.
On the 26th this observation was repeated. From a field where the
bugs were abundant and active and where none were found dead,
but all had reached the adult stage, I had some trouble to find any
bacteria at all, but in an adult from Mr. Conner’s field they were
very abundant indeed, at least twenty times as numerous as in the
■preceding specimen. A second observation only confirmed the other.
In Conner’s field the insects were now still less numerous than before,
about ten per cent, of those remaining being adult, and the others
all in the pupa stage. On the 4th of September the bugs in this
field did not seem to have further diminished in numbers, but were
curiously retarded in development. Not more than twenty-five per
cent, were adults, nearly all the others being pupae, with now and
then one of the preceding stage. Only one or two were seen dead.
In another field, from which collections were made for purposes of
comparison, the specimens were nearly all adults. The bacteria
were found perhaps more numerous in the bugs from Conner’s field
than in those from the second, but there was at this time no great
difference. On the 18th of September, specimens from Conner’s
field contained few bacteria, although they were certainly present in

|j aodeiate numbers. At this time, however, no espeeial difference
oulcl be detected related to a difference of situation, while in torpid
pecimens the bacteria were apparently no more abundant than in
I hose more active. On the 27th of the month, four bugs were
xamined from Conner’s field, and two from one of the others, but
.0 bacteria whatever were found in any of them. These bugs were
aken from the husks of the corn. They were in a sluggish condi¬
gn, and apparently had ceased to feed.

Believing that I had now obtained as definite proof as was possi-
le by this method that the bacteria observed were the cause of
be remarkable diminution of the bugs in one of these fields, I next
ttempted the artificial cultivation of the microphytes, with a view
d getting them free from mixture with other substances, for more
areful and convenient study.

I also wished to see whether the exposure of healthy chinch-bugs
) fluids containing the bacteria would have any effect upon the
isects ; and, if it would, whether those so affected would themselves
Dnvey the contagion to others.

A number of culture tubes were made, similar in character to
lose ordinarily used for the pure cultivation of microphytes, and
lied with hot infusions of corn and beef, made by boiling the pith
P cornstalks and small pieces of beef in a test-tube for fifteen or
jventy minutes. Some of these were carefully infected in the usual
fanner with fluids from crushed chincli-bugs, while others were left
ee. That containing the corn infusion produced only Bacterium
rmo and Bacillus subtilis. The bacteria from the insects developed
aly in the infected tube containing the beef infusion. In this tube
iyriads of these bacteria occurred, both in zoogloea masses and as
rparate individuals, but no other micro-organisms appeared. In
le of the fields which had been worst attacked by chinch-bugs, the
aves were dead as high as the ears. Here it was noticed that the
heath of the leaf was often gummed to the stalk by a thick exu-
ition, like half-dried glue. A few dead adults were noticed here,
rabedded in mold, but of a different kind from that seen at Jack¬
al ville. When portions of this exudation were moistened and
udied under the microscope, the fluid was found thick with bac-
ria, indistinguishable from those occurring in the bodies of the
sects, and the same were thickly scattered through the translucent
asses of viscid jelly. The inference was plain that they were de¬
wed from the excrement of the chinch-bug, in which they had
mtinued to develop.

52

On the 25th of September, several stained and mounted slides of
this material and of the contents of the various culture tubes, were
submitted to Prof. Burrill, of Champaign. The slides were carefully
studied by him, and to him I owe the determinations of the various
forms observed. The insect bacterium was described by him under
the name of Micrococcus insectorum, in the Eleventh Report of the
Illinois Industrial University, in the following terms:

“Cells obtusely oval, isolated or in pairs, rarely in chains of several
articles; .000022 in. wide, and .000027 to .00004 in. long, usually
about .000032 long; movements oscillatory only ; forming zoogloea (?).
In the digestive organs of chinch-bugs ( Blissus leucopUrus). * * *

The organism is somewhat similar to, but not identical with, Mi¬
crococcus bombycis, the ‘disease germ’ of the silk worm, which was
so fatally destructive to the silk industries of France, and which
became the subject of the successful studies of Pasteur. _ The form
of the organism approaches the typical shape of Bacterium, being
oval and short-cylindrical, with rounded ends; otherwise the char¬
acteristics are those of a true Micrococcus.”

Although this description was made from a slide of specimens
cultivated in the beef infusion, these had been previously carefully
compared with fresh specimens from the insects themselves, and
ascertained to be unquestionably identical.

In a test-tube of corn infusion boiled and left standing open in
the laboratory, where the examinations of these various fluids were

piogiGss, immense numbers of tliese Micrococci developed, many
- them single 01 double, but most in chaplets, like strings of
•ads. Careful measurement of individuals showed their identity
th those above described.

At this time, the general disappearance of the chinch-bug, and the
•nsequent difficulty of obtaining specimens for experiment put a
pod to the investigation, and the solution of the questions still
! maimng was necessarily postponed to another year.

The studies here reported demonstrate the frequent association of
peculiar bacterium (Micrococcus), essentially parasitic in char¬
ter, m the intestines of the chincli-bug, with a general diminution
numbers among those affected, together with an apparent retard-
ion of their development. They also show that this bacterium is
sily cultivable in both vegetable and animal infusions, and pro-
jbly multiplies spontaneously in the fluid exudations of corn-stalks
mctured by the bugs; The final step of the proof that it injuri-
isly affects its host is yet lacking, and cannot be supplied until
i opportunity is had to expose the insect artificially to its influence.
Besides this bacterium, another parasitic fungus, certainly de¬
ductive in character, was found to infest the chinch-bug ; and this
ems to me more likely than the other to have been concerned in
e wholesale disappearance of the bugs described by Dr. Shimer.
have already mentioned the occurrence of many dead specimens
a field at Jacksonville, attached to the stalks and leaves of the
rn and buried in the silk. These were all embedded in a dense
it of white fungus threads, which sometimes almost hid the body,
le general resemblance of this growth to the fungus which com-
mly attacks flies in autumn, often fastening them to the window
ne, and bursting from their bodies in the form of a white efflo-
scence, led me to suppose that this chinch-bug fungus was one of
3 same character, and not a simple mold, forming after death,
te bugs affected were both pupae and adults. Subsequent study
Mi the microscope demonstrated the correctness of the above sur-
se, as the fungus in question proved to belong to the same genus
’ntomophthora) as that infesting flies; a fact of which I was as-
i eed by Prof. Burrill, to whom some specimens were submitted.

) was not possible to determine the species of the fungus in the
Kge represented by my collections, but it was apparently different
fim that of the house-fly. Recent studies of these fungi by Euro-
rn biologists have confirmed the prevailing opinion that they are
ue destructive parasites, the causes and not the consequences of
imase and death. It seems not impossible that the white mold, of
i ich Dr. Shinier speaks in the paragraph I have cited, was really
i s parasitic fungus ; and if so, it was probably the cause of the
iidemic disease which he describes. This fungus often runs its
1 irse to a fatal result, without making any external appearance,
•sting forth only after death. It is proper to say, however, that
-Iso found three or four dead bugs at Normal, seemingly in the
^ue condition as those above described, but which were really
Lply buried in a harmless mold, as was easily seen with the
^roscope. The parasitic forms are distinguished from the molds
a glance, by the fact that in the former the threads are not di¬
ed off into cells by cross partitions, as they are in the latter.

— 4

54

Remarkable evidence of the wholesale destruction of cliinch-bugs
by this or some extremely similar fungus has lately been given me
by Hon. J. W. Robison, of Tazewell county, whom I have learned
to trust implicitly as a very close and intelligent observer. He re¬
members that several years ago, the cliinch-bugs in gram fields
died in vast numbers, accumulating in piles of as many as half a
bushel in a place, so that the masses could be seen at some little dis¬
tance among the grain. These collections of the bugs would be partly
dead and partly living, many of the former being covered with a
white mold bursting from their bodies, while the abdomens of the
latter would be distended and brown and smooth, and the bugs
themselves very sluggish. The abdomens of these living bugs would
frequently break off at a touch, and even fall to powder, the living
thorax afterwards walking away. The insects attacked and killed
were of all sizes and ages. The phenomena here described are so
closely similar to those appearing in the house-fly as a result of
its fungus affection, that there can be little question of their sub¬
stantial identity. According to Mr. Robison’s observations and
recollections, this affection of the chinch-bugs is much the most de¬
structive during periods of moist and sultry weather, such as is
usually more favorable to fungus growths in general.

I have already shown the possibility of artificially cultivating the
parasitic bacteria which I discovered ; and that this second ^parasite
could likewise be successfully reared, is rendered very probable by
the experiments on a similar fungus made by an eminent Russian
naturalist (Elias Metschnikoff), as published in the Zoologischer
Anzeiger for 1880, pp. 44-47. This article is of such special import¬
ance and interest in this connection that I translate it almost entire :

“The researches which I shall now report were undertaken by me
last year [1878], with the purpose of discovering some means of
combating an injurious beetle, Anisoplia austriaca, and some other
species of the same genus, extremely widely distributed throughout
all Southern Russia. I first established the fact that the larvae of
Anisoplia live in the earth, which subjected it to several diseases.
One of these was induced by the attacks of Leptoclera denticulata ,
Schn., while the others were caused by parasitic plants. One very
widespread putrid disease has a great resemblance to the ‘pebrine’ of
the silk-worm, but is distinguished by the fact that it is produced by
parasitism of a species of Bacillus in the blood, while the true pe¬
brine is due to a Micrococcus. Another disease, which 1 have called
the ‘green muscardine,’ is occasioned by a parasitic fungus, whose
spores, appearing after the death of the host, have a characteristic
green color. The fungus itself has a close resemblance to the species
of Isaria, its oval spores sometimes forming chains, and may be
called Isaria destructor. The spores sown upon the skin of the beetle
larva send forth a sac-like process, which penetrates the cuticle and
forms a mycelium under the skin. Oval conidia then appear, which
enter the blood, and are remarkable for an extraordinarily rapid
multiplication by fission and budding. Later they are transformed
into necklace-like gonidia (using this word according to Cohn), and
fill the entire body of the insect- After the death of the larva, fine
hyphse proceed from these gonidia, which soon form a white cover¬
ing over the whole body of the insect. Later, chandelier-like bundles

55

.

of sterigma (Sterigmenbiindel) spring from these, and bear the above-
mentioned green spores. After two or three weeks the whole body
of the insect is converted into a heap of dusky green spores. Sev¬
eral of the attempts made to infect Anisoplia larva? with these green
spores were successful, while in a few cases the grubs remained
healthy for a long time. The results were in all respects the same
as those in DeBary’s experiments with Isaria farinosa . Anisoplia
larvae killed by the green muscardine have now been found in widely
separated regions of Southern Russia. I have also found the disease
attacking another injurious insect among us, the turnip beetle
(Cleonus punctiventris) . During the present summer the green mus¬
cardine appeared among these beetles as a destructive epidemic. It
attacks the adult insect, as well as its eggs, larvae, and pupse. By
August, at a time when the epidemic had not yet run its course,
about forty per cent, of the entire generation of this year of Cleonus
punctiventris was destroyed by it. All attempts at infecting these
beetles, especially their larvae, resulted fortunately. Ninety Cleonus
larvae, which were brought in contact with muscardine spores for a
short time, all died in the course of twelve days. Upon many of
these one could very easily follow the germination of the spores,
j! The deadly effect of the disease began to show itself on the fifth
day after the infection, which short period was apparently explained
by the thinness of the cuticle of the larvae. Of the number men¬
tioned above, sixty-two died of muscardine, and twenty-eight from
other causes, in part of pebrine. Upon the beetles the muscardine
worked somewhat more slowly, but with equal certainty. Fifty-eight
recently transformed beetles were infected, and in the course of
fifteen days fifty-two were dead of muscardine, and six of other dis¬
eases. The largest number died on the seventh day. These, to¬
gether with many other experiments and observations, justify the
conclusion that Isaria destructor really produces an epizootic among
the injurious insects mentioned, similar to that which Botrytis bassii
produces in the silk-worm. This comparison to the fungus just
mentioned is all the more appropriate since Cleonus punctiventris is
likewise subject to a disease produced by this same Botrytis. The
white muscardine I could find only upon hibernating beetles, never
upon their larvae or pupae, or upon imagos recently transformed.
When I had reached the results above described, I thought it pos¬
sible to spread the green muscardine artificially by sowing spores.

* * * In order to procure the necessary quantity of

spores with which the earth inhabited by the grubs and Cleonus
larvae must be sown, it was at first important to find some medium
in which the fungus could be cultivated outside the body of the in¬
sect. I easily succeeded in finding a method by which to induce
this insect fungus to send out long runners, which formed a true
mycelium. For this it was only necessary to bury in moist sand
insects which had died with muscardine, and to leave them there a
fortnight. It was much more difficult, however, to induce the growth
| of the fungus in organic fluids. It was indeed easy to cause the
Isaria destructor to produce new spores in a hanging drop of sugar,
but for a long time I did not succeed in this experiment upon a
larger scale. I am very much indebted to my colleague, Mr. A. We-
rigo, professor of chemistry in Odessa, that he first called my atten-

56

ion to beer mash as a cultivating fluid. If one boils a little of this
n a flask, and, after cooling, sows it with spores, a rich mycelium
levelops, both within the fluid and upon its surface, and this pro-
luces the spores again. To guard against the invasion of other
ungi, which will ordinarily suppress the Isaria growing outside the
)ody of the insect, the flask must be stopped with a little disinfected
jotton or asbestos.”

By Dr. Sliimer, the enormous destruction of chinch-bugs in 1:66
vas ascribed to the indirect effect of the wet and cool weather. By
VIr. Walsh, who discredited the idea of an epidemic or contagious
lisease, it was accounted for as the direct effect of moisture.* The
phenomena connected with the action of parasites, which I have above
lescribed, were apparenty independent of any appreciable general
»ause, as they were most manifest at a time when the weather had
)een warm, dry, and altogether unexceptionable for from one to two
nonths. It is not unlikely, however, that wet weather may have the
)ffect to stimulate the development of this parasite, either directly
>r indirectly — a hypothesis which will reconcile all the facts now
mown, as well as the conflicting explanations of them which have
>een hitherto put forth.

The most important facts under the head of natural enemies may
>e thus recapitulated :

The chinch-bug is subject to attack by all the common lady-bugs
Coccinellidce) and their larvge, by a common predaceous ground
)eetle ( Agonoderus comma), by the larva of the lace- wing fly, and
>y one of the robber-bugs ( Harpactor cinctus ). A number of Cocci-
lellidce, however, captured among the chinch-bugs, were shown by
lissection to have taken only about eight per cent, of their food
rom these insects, the remainder consisting of plant-lice, spores of
nolds and lichens, and the pollen of flowering plants; .while the
predaceous ground-beetle mentioned (. Agonoderus ) was found to have
lerived about one-fifth of its food from the bugs, and the remainder
partly from other insects, but chiefly from the tissues of ordinary
olants. A few common birds are shown to feed upon chinch-bugs
pccasionally. The joint effect of these various ordinary enemies is
not necessarily insignificant, but is certainly of no great present
importance.

On the other hand, a much more important role is apparently
played by certain obscure parasites, not previously detected. One
of these is a minute bacterium ( Micrococcus insectorum, Burrill,) in¬
festing the alimentary canal, closely allied to the micrococcus found
in the stomach and intestines of silk-worms, and now known to
pause some of the destructive diseases of that insect. From the
fact that these parasites were extremely abundant in specimens from
a field where the bugs were rapidly dying, while in those from ad¬
jacent fields there were relatively very few, it was considered prob-

*American Entomologist, Vol. I, p. 175, 1869.

57

able that they were related to this destruction of the bugs. Thii
conclusion was supported by the fact that they were more abundan
m old bugs than in young, while the mortality referred to evidenth
also chiefly affected the older individuals. It was found easy t(
cultivate the bacterium artificially in organic infusions, but n<
opportunity offered to apply it to healthy insects. Until this exper
iment is made and the effects carefully studied, it must remaii
'possible that the coincidence noted was merely accidental, and of n<
particular significance.

Another parasite discovered is similar to that well known as *
common enemy of the house fly, and belongs to the same genu
( Entomophthora ). This attacks both old and young chmch-bugs, ant
finally embeds their bodies in a mass of mold. There is some reasoi
to believe that this was the active agent in an immense destructioi
of chinch-bugs which occurred in Northern Illinois in 1868, as describ
ed by Dr. Shimer, of Mt. Carroll. Evidence is adduced of the possi
bility of artificially cultivating this parasite also, and applying it tc
the destruction of insects.

TOPICAL APPLICATIONS.

Topical applications for the destruction of insects are often of th<
highest use to the horticulturist, whose crops are much more valu
able per acre than those of the farmer, and both require and repa?
much more careful and continuous personal supervision and manua
labor.

In agriculture, however, such measures have necessarily been o
little service, especially where farms are large and the work is don<
principally by machinery. To attempt to destroy the chinch- bugi
of any considerable territory by the direct application of even tli<
cheapest substances, would involve an amount of additional labo:
which could not be had all at once in the country, no matter hov
profitable its employment might be. The small farmer has, however
a certain very decided advantage in fighting insects, over one wh(
cultivates the soil on a large scale ; and to him a substance which,
at small cost, shall destroy the bugs in his wheat and corn, maj
make the difference between a total loss of his income for the yeai
and the preservation of his crops at the expense of a little additional
labor and outlay. The manner in which the chinch-bug most com
monly invades the corn-field, entering it on foot from one side whih
yet unable to fly, and attacking first the outer rows, affords abou'
the only opportunity to resist its assault upon the corn. Here its
advance has often been checked by boards set on edge and daubec
with coal tar, or by plowing and harrowing frequently a strip alon£
the field, which the bugs find it difficult to cross. Here, also, topical
applications may be used with fair prospects of usefulness. If at¬
tacked while congregated in a comparatively small space, and before
they have spread throughout the field (as they will usually do as
soon as they have acquired the power of flight) the bugs may be
exterminated before they have had an opportunity to do very seri¬
ous damage, provided that some inexpensive substance of easy
application may be found to destroy them.

58

The only insecticide which has hitherto been found effective under
these circumstances, as far as I know, is hot water, which has oc¬
casionally been used on a small scale; but it is of course difficult
and quite expensive to heat, keep hot, and apply a sufficient quan¬
tity of water to protect a field of corn. Believing it advisable to
exhaust every possible expedient for controlling the ravages of this
most destructive enemy of our crops, I early began experiments with
emulsions of kerosene, which have the advantage of cheapness and
abundance of the materials composing them, and have been found
1 deadly in small quantities to many other insects. The principal
drawback to the use of these emulsions is the labor of preparing
them, but this objection was obviated by the discovery that a simple
mechanical mixture of kerosene and water is equally effective and
: equally harmless to the corn with a carefully prepared emulsion.

As the kerosene emulsions have many other uses than the one here
given, taking effect upon by far the greater part of the soft-bodied
insects of all kinds, it will be worth while to give here an account
of the method of preparing them. The following is from an article
by Prof. Riley, published in the Scientific American for May 27, 1882 :

“There is a safe and ready method of diluting kerosene and similar
oils, and of rendering them miscible with water. The difficulty of
diluting them, from the fact that they do not mix well with water,
has been solved by first combining them with either fresh or spoiled
milk, to form an emulsion, which is easily effected ; while this, in
turn, like milk alone, may be diluted to any extent, so that particles
of oil will be held homogeneously in suspension. Thus, the ques¬
tion of applying oils in any desired dilution, is settled, and some¬
thing practicable from them may be looked for. Mr. Hubbard has
had no difficulty whatever in making a perfectly stable emulsion,
and the secret of so doing consists in the proper amount of churn¬
ings — for the whole process may be comparable to butter-churning,
with the exception that the oil and milk, in any desired proportion,
must be much more violently churned for a period varying with the
temperature from fifteen to forty-five minutes. On continued churn¬
ing, the liquid finally curdles, and suddenly thickens to form a white
and glistening butter, perfectly homogeneous in texture, and stable.
The whole amount of both ingredients solidifies together, and there
is no whey or other residue. If, however, the quantity of the mix-
1 ture is greater than can be kept in constant agitation, a portion of

the oil is apt to separate at the moment of emulsification, and will
, require the addition of a few ounces of milk, and further churning

i for its reduction. This kerosene butter mixes readily with water,

1 care being taken to thin it first with a small quantity of that liquid,

i The time required to ‘bring the butter' varies, with the tempera¬

ture: at 60° F., half to three-quarters of an hour; at 75°, fifteen
I minutes, — and the process may be still further facilitated by heat-

i ing the milk up to, but not past the boiling point. Either fresh or
sour milk may be used, and the latter is even preferable. The pres¬
ence of kerosene does not prevent or hinder the fermentation of the
milk ; on standing a day or two the milk curdles, and although
there is no separation of the oil, the emulsion thickens and hardens^
and requires to be stirred, but not churned, until it regains its former
smoothness. Exposure to the air not only permits the evaporation

of the oil, but also of the water necessary to hold the oil in emul¬
sion, and the kerosene slowly separates as the emulsion dries up
and hardens.

“The churning can be done very satisfactorily through an ordin¬
ary force-pump, such as the well-known aqusepult, it being repeat¬
edly forced from one vessel to another. If sour milk is used there
will be no further fermentation, and when kept protected from the
open air in a tight vessel the butter endures for any length of time.
The emulsion may be made of any desired strength, as the quan¬
tity of milk required to hold the oil does not exceed ten per cent.
Emulsions containing over eighty per cent, of oil are, however, not
readily held in suspension in water/ on account of their light specific
gravity, — yet those containing less than thirty per cent, of oil lose
value as insecticides, as the oil loses some of its power in becoming
emulsified. In other words, the killing-power of a diluted emulsion
depends, not so much on the amount used, as on. the percentage of
oil contained in it. Churn until the whole solidifies and forms an
ivory-white, glistening butter, as thick as ordinary butter at a temper¬
ature of 75° F. ; if the temperature of the air falls below 70°, warm the
milk to blood-heat before adding the oil. The diluted wash resem¬
bles fresh milk, and if allowed to stand, in two or three hours the
emulsion rises as a cream to the surface. The butter should there¬
fore be diluted only as needed for immediate use, and the mixture
should be stirred from time to time.”

My experiments with kerosene were made first upon hills of corn
transplanted to the laboratory, and the results were always verified
afterwards by application in the field upon a larger scale. The
emulsions used were of various strengths and composition, and were
variously diluted with water, soapsuds, and a solution of potash.
The following table of solutions and emulsions will be convenient
for reference in describing the experiments :

Solutions with which Dilutions were made.

1. Soapsuds
2 ‘ *

3. Potash ..

1 lb. soap

J ‘ «

1 “ potash

to 10 gal. water

“20 “
“50 “

< t
( «

| ‘

Emulsions as diluted.

Per cent, of
Kerosene.

A. 2 parts kerosene, 1 part milk, 45 parts water . 4

B. 1 part “ 1 “ “ 18 “ “ . 5

C. 1 “ “ 1 “ “ 18 “ solution 1 . 5

D. 1 “ “ 1 “ “ 38 “ “ 2 . 2%

E. 1 “ “ 1 “ “ 38 “ water . 2%

F. 1 “ “ 1 “ “ 38 “ solution 3 . 2%

G. 1 “ “ 1 “ 30 “ “ 2 . 3

H. 1 “ “ 1 “ solution 1, 18 parts solution 2 . 5

I. 1 “ “ 1 “ “ 1,13 “ “ 2 . . 6%

On the 22d of July, I transplanted several hills of corn to the
laboratory, placing them in boxes about a foot and a half wide by
two feet in length. The corn was from two to three feet in height
at this time. Each hill was infested with several hundred chinch-
bugs, which w7ere of various sizes below the pupa stage. They were
largely hidden behind the sheaths of corn, but were also exposed
above the leaves and upon the outer surface of the sheaths. All

60

the corn was waered once, immediately after transplanting, and
bore the removal well. it was kept under shelter, but in well
lighted rooms, and freely exposed to the air.

j Experiment 1. — July 22, at 9 P. M., I applied to. a single hill
from half a pint to a pint of emulsion “A,” throwing it with a
small syringe upon the bases of the stalks and surface of the ground.
For a check upon this experiment, I applied water to another hill
in the same quantity and in the same way. July 23, 9 A. M., the
hugs on the first hill were still alive, but torpid. July 24, at 11
A. M., about one-fifth of the bugs were completely dead ; the others
were still alive, but most of them torpid. July 26, 8 P. M., thirty
of the bugs were alive and back upon the stalks, apparently unin¬
jured, but all the remainder were dead. July 27, 10 A. M., the hill
was in the same condition. Treated again with emulsion “ B ,” on
the 28th, when all the bugs were killed. Those on the hill to which
water was applied were not injured in the least, but all were back
again upon the stalks in twenty-four hours.

Experiment 2. — Two hills were now selected in the laboratory, each
containing three stalks of corn about two or three feet high. The
first was thoroughly treated at 4 o’clock on the afternoon of the
24th, with emulsion “B,” which was thrown with a syringe upon
the lower six inches of the stalk and sheath, where it was about
one-fourth covered with young bugs. The other hill was similarly
treated with water. At ten the next forenoon about four-fifths of
the bugs were dead upon the first hill, some of them on the corn,
and others on the ground. Several small groups were still alive
under clods, but some of these were also dead. At 10 A. M. on the
26th, only thirty or forty bugs were found alive upon the corn, and
all the others were dead. On the 27th the situation was unchanged.
The bugs upon the hill drenched with water were at first washed
down upon the ground, but in a few hours were back again upon
the stalks uninjured.

Experiment 3 . — I next applied with a hand force-pump eleven
pints of emulsion “B” to eighteen hills of corn in the field, select¬
ing those worst infested by the insects. The weather was hot, and
bright and dry. To prevent interference from without, the hills
treated were surrounded by fence boards placed on edge and daubed
plentifully with coal tar. This application was made at 3 :80 P. M.
of the 25th, and at 11 :30 A. M. of the following day about four-
fifths of the bugs were entirely dead. The others were active and
apparently in process of recovery, although some of the fluid still
remained behind the sheaths of the corn. On the 27th of July, at
five P. M., I made a careful comparison of the hills treated with
others adjacent which had not been sprayed, and found that the
chinch-bugs upon the latter were about five times as numerous as
upon those to which the emulsion had been applied. The bugs
remaining within the enclosure were now fully revived and at work
upon the corn.

Experiment 4. — On the 27th of July, at 10 A. M., I applied about a
gill of an exceedingly strong solution of soapsuds, without kerosene,
to a hill in the laboratory. In twenty-four hours about four-fifths of
the bugs were dead, and most of the remainder back upon the
stalks.

Experiment 5.— On the 28th, a half pint of emulsion “0” was
rown upon a hill in the laboratory, at eleven in the forenoon A_t
P. M., the bugs were all dead but about a dozen. 4 careful
arch of the ground and corn three days later discovered but four-
8n bugs.

Experiment 6. —ha order to ascertain whether anything was gained
f„ an application of the emulsion at night, I treated carefully
irteen hills m the field with emulsion “C,” applying about half
nt to each hill, at 7 P. M„ of the 28th. The night was warm
id dry, and next morning at 9 o’clock nine-tenths of the bugs
;re dead. Those alive were nearly all under the clods where
me of the groups were molting. A few, accidentally protected by
dold of a leaf, escaped entirely. Pupae were apparently affected
a easily as younger individuals. . On the 29th, at 5 P. M., it was
dimated that ninety to ninety-five per cent, were dead, scattered
ery where on the corn, . behind the sheaths and exposed on the
tlks and leaves, and on the ground at the base of the hill. Most
J those alive were on the stalks, but some wTere yet under clods
fd even in them. On the 2d of August, at 5 P. M., it was con¬
ned that four-fifths of the bugs were finally killed, while the
pers were back behind the sheaths of the corn at work as usual.

j Experiment A— On the 31st of July, I spread upon a glass slide
l.thm a layer of emulsion “D” as I could apply with a camel’s-
]ir brush, and allowed five bugs to crawl over it. Four, whose
pies were reached by the fluid, died in an hour, but the one
naming was unaffected.

Experiment 8 — Upon the same day five ounces of emulsion “D”
re applied to a hill of corn in the laboratory, at 9 A. M. At

! D

M., about ninety per cent, of the bugs were dead.

Experiment 9.— August 1, at 12 M., half a pint of emulsion “E”
s applied to a hill in the laboratory. On the 2d, at 8 A. M.,
m one-half to two-tliirds of the bugs were dead, and those alive
re collected upon the highest points of ground. August 4, at
A. M., probably three-fourths of the bugs were found to'have been
fed.

Experiment 10.— August 1, 12 M., applied one half pint of emul-
n “D”. August 2, 8 A. M., nine-tenths of the bugs were dead.

pose alive were nearly all on the ground. This dilution with soap
(is holds much better than that with water

Experiment 11. —At 12 M., of the 1st, half a pint of emulsion
p” was also applied. On the 2d, at 8 A. M., one-half of the bugs
fj’e dead, the others were on the ground and on the stalks. On
4th of August nearly all were dead.

"Tie three experiments just described were intended to test the
ipara.tive efficiency of water, soapsuds and a solution of potash,
'diluents of the emulsion. The first effects were evidently in favor
soapsuds, showing that this is at least most prompt in its action.
h comparison of final effects was interfered with by the fact that
about this time the bugs on all the hills commenced to die
Tscriminately, as already detailed.

62

Experiment 12 — At 2 P. M., on August 2, half a pint of ernui
sion “D” was, applied to the worst hill in the laboratory. Aligns
3, at 9:30 A. M., nine-tenths of the bugs were dead; the othei
were scattered on the ground. August 4, 8 A. M., ninety-five pc
cent, of the bugs were dead, and the others were still torpid on ti
ground.

Experiment 13— On the 2d, at 5 P. M., applied one-lialf pints
emulsion “F” to a hill in the laboratory. At 10 A. M., on the $
fully ninety per cent, of the bugs were dead.

Experiment 14. — The next experiment was made on the 2d of Ac
gust, at 5 P. M., when a half-pint of emulsion “C” was applied!
several hills of corn in the field. At 11 A. M. on the following daj
nine-tenths of the bugs were found to be dead.

Experiment 15 — On the 18th of August one of my assistants, M
A. B. Seymour, applied a quart of emulsion “D” to four hills i
corn at noon, stirring the mixture just as it was applied, and at
P. M., nearly all the bugs were found to be dead.

Experiment 16.- He next applied a quart of emulsion “H”
three hills of corn at 6 P. M., with equal effect.

Experiment 17— In another experiment, made on the 19th of Ai
gust, with the same fluid, ninety to ninety-five per cent, of the but
were found dead three days later. A half-pint was poured upon eac
hill from a common garden sprinkler.

Experiment 18— On the 22d he sprinkled upon different hills equi
quantities of emulsions “D?’ and “H,” and found, two days late
that about ninety-five per cent, of the bugs treated with emulsio
“D” were dead, and about three-fourths of those upon which emu
sion “H” had been used.

Experiment 19.— On the 18th he made a mechanical mixture
one part of kerosene to twenty parts of the second solution, applyii
one quart to two hills of corn at noon, sprinkling the entire plan
At 6 P. M. nine-tenths of the bugs were dead, and no injury to tl
corn appeared.

Experiment 20.— On the 22d, at 12 M., he made an experiment!
compare the effects of an emulsion of soapsuds, one of fresh mill
both diluted with clear water, and also the simple mixture of kei
sene and soapsuds. He applied them with a sprinkler, and exai
ined the hills at 9 A. M. of the following day, when all the fluid
used were found to have been about equally effective, destroyii)
from ninety to ninety-five per cent, of the bugs.

Experiment 21. — In a final trial, two hills each were treated at til
same time with one-half pint of emulsions “II,” “I,” “B” and “w
and with mechanical mixtures of kerosene and water — one contaii
ing two and one-half per cent, of kerosene and the other three and on
half per cent. The result of this experiment showed that the^soa
emulsion was a little less effective than that with milk (“H”l
stroying only about sixty per cent, of the bugs, while “B” kill*
eighty per cent.), and that the simple mixtures were the mof
effective of all. That containing one pint of kerosene to forty1
water, killed eighty per cent, of the bugs, while the mixture oi o[!
to thirty killed ninety-eight per cent.

{Visible injury to the corn resulted from the use of any of
preparations, except in a single instance, where the emulsion
l with soapsuds was poured on the leaves of a young hill of
Settling in the bases of the leaves where they were rolled
er, the water evaporated, leaving the soap in a very strong
n, and this wilted the leaves and killed the top of the stalk.

i general result of these various experiments with kerosene
•es upon the chinch-bug, it may be said that a simple
nical mixture of water and three ner cent, of kerosene, is
to bugs of all ages, and does not injure half-grown corn if
id is kept well shaken up. It is possible that on more tender
tion it might be necessary to protect the plant by first making
! ulsion of the oil with milk or soapsuds, which can then be
1 1 freely with water or suds to any desired extent. The soap
suds emulsion seems, however, partly to mask the kerosene,
d when common hard soap is used. Soapsuds in the propor-
r one pound of soap to twenty gallons of water was found a
j diluent for the emulsion than water, but should not be applied
its which will catch and hold a portion of it for any length
e. The evaporation of the water will so increase the strength
suds as to injure the plant.

in applied by pouring or sprinkling, about one-half pint of
o each hill of corn was needed to destroy the bugs, from the
[ to a height of about two feet. If some device for throwing
y was used, a much smaller quantity would doubtless suffice.

e fined petroleum sells for about twelve cents per gallon when
by the barrel, the cost of an effective mixture would be
four mills per gallon, or not far from $8 for a quantity suffi¬
ce treat an acre of corn. By using cheaper grades of petro-
and more effective modes of application, the cost per acre
doubtless be reduced to about $5, exclusive of the labor of
ation. The average value of an acre of corn at the time when it
lly attacked by the bugs is estimated by intelligent farmers at
nd it therefore seems likely that it will sometimes pay to
'ae bugs in the corn-field with kerosene, — at any rate where
is abundant and convenient, and the necessary labor can

'her experiments are needed to determine the best apparatus
jribution and the cost of actual application. A sprinkler to
wvn by one horse between the rows could easily be devised
would answer a very good purpose, going over the field at
:s fast as a one-horse plow; but spraying machines similar
se used in southern cotton-fields would probably be more
■e.

also not impossible that this fluid could be made useful in
>f small grain, especially as the chinch-bug appears first in
3 here and there, spreading from these gradually through the

64

THE STRAWBERRY CROWN-BORER.
( Tyloderma fr agarics, Riley . )

(Order COLEOPTERA. Family Curculionid^.) J

Fig. 8. The Strawberry Crown-borer. {Tyloderma fragarice, Riley), a. larva; 1
beetle, side view: c. adult, dorsal view; d. pupa, from beneath.

I A thick footless white grub, about a fifth of an inch in length, with a browni;
lowT head, excavating the crowns of the strawberry during the summer and fall.!

This insect is one of the principal obstacles to successful si
berry culture in those localities where it has gained a footing,
anything throwing light upon possible methods of controlh
injuries cannot fail to have a very considerable value to lioit
turists, even in those regions hitherto exempt from its attacks,
characters and life history should be perfectly understood in
that all suitable precautions may be taken against invasion!
and that its first appearances may be recognized if unfortw
it should be transported beyond its present range. Although i
hitherto done but little harm in the northern or central pa
this State, the beetle certainly occurs as far northward as Mi
ota, and there is no' security that it may not become inj’
wherever introduced.

This insect has been known as one of the worst enemies o
strawberry for more than fifteen years, but it has never yet i
treated in our State reports, and, indeed, its life history is but,
completed.

65

[H

I

! st published notice of its injuries of which I am aware
Prof. Riley’s third report as State Entomologist of Mis-
i lislied in 1871. “This insect,” he says, “has done con-
| damage to the strawberry crop in the southern portion of
specially along the line of the Illinois Central Eailroad ;
e seen evidence of its work in St. Louis county, Missouri!
seting of the Southern Illinois Fruit Growers’ Association,
South Pass in November, 1867, several complaints were
parties from Anna and Makanda of a white worm which
; the roots of their strawberries, and in 1868 the greater
the plants of a ten acre field at Anna, belonging to Mr.
pie, was destroyed by it.” He further states, partly from
i knowledge and partly from information received from
r growers, that the grub hatches from the middle of June
Idle of July in Southern Illinois, and later farther north,
i,gg which, in all probability, is deposited in the crown of
and that it immediately commences to bore its way down-
> the pith. According to him, it undergoes its transforma-
e pupa and beetle stage within the root, the adult making
pice above ground during the middle of August. He in-
fthe beetle feeds upon the leaves of the strawberry, but is

Ivhetlier it hibernates as a beetle or produces a second
) brood of the worm, hibernating in the roots in the larval
fctle of importance has hitherto been added to this account,
;ed observations upon this insect, made by me since last
ive enabled me to clear up its fall and winter history,
Ji some other facts of practical importance.

1 DESCRIPTION.

,dy intimated, this insect, in the form in which it does its
;he grub or larva of one of the snout beetles, belonging, in
e same family as the peach curculio. It was first de-
Prof. Riley, in the report already cited, and his descrip-
}ie adult is herewith given. The larva and pupa are
.from fresh materials obtained this fall from strawberry
; out hern Illinois.

' [Tyloderma] frag aria, n. sp. — Imago. — Color deep chestnut-
■ipolished, the elytra somewhat lighter. Head and rostrum
/ and densely punctate, and with short, coarse, fulvous hairs,
j the tip of rostrum ; antennae rather lighter towards base,
r the scape much thickened at apex, joint 2 longest and
moderately long, 4-7 short, 8-10 connate, and forming a
. Thorax dark, cylindrical, slightly swollen across the
1 uniformly covered with large thimble-like punctures, and
I- short, coarse, fulvous hairs, unusually arranged in three
ss distinct longitudinal lines; pectoral groove ending be-
t legs. Abdomen with small remote punctures and hairs
denser towards apex. Legs of equal shortness, and with
ilated punctures and uniform very short hairs. Elytra
wish-brown, dilated at the lower sides anteriorly, and with
deeply punctured striae, the striae themselves sometimes
lore or less covered with coarse and short pale yellow

66

hairs which form by their greater density three more or less cq
spicuous transverse bands, the first of which is at the base ; betwe
the second and third band, in the middle of the elytron, is a smom
dark-brown or black spot, with a less distinct spot of the same c ,|I
below the third, and a still less distinct one above the second bant
Length, 0.13 inch. Described from four specimens bred from strati
berry- boring larvae. The black spots on the elytra are quite distil o
and conspicuous on two specimens, less so on one, and entire rt
obsolete on the other.” To this description 1 may add the inters n
ing and important fact that the wings of this beetle are very rw l
mentary, and wholly useless for flight.

Larva-White, except the head, which is pale-yellow. The mar
dibles are dark-brown, black at the edges, and bifid at the ti :
The labrum is narrowed from behind, broadly rounded, entire ai :
Bristly in front, marked by a transverse suture in front of the m
die. The antennae, situated outside the upper angles of the mr
dibles, are one-jointed, and excessively minute, being about .02 ran
in length. Just outside each antenna is a black, ocellus-like spj r
in full-grown larvae, wanting in smaller individuals. The head] e
smooth, except for about three transverse rows of slender hair i
The body is strongly arched, like that of a Lamellicorn, ea< ;
segment bearing a single row of very short, sparse hairs. . T i
first segment of the dorsum is smooth ; the remaining segmei
are divided into three transverse lobes, or folds, the first and la
of which are interrupted by oblique grooves. Below the spiracl
is a row of large, low, triangular tubercles, and beneath these '
second row, separated from the former by a longitudinal chaniii
The ventral segments of the abdomen have the usual form of
single transverse ridge, a triangular portion of each end of whir
is marked off by an oblique groove. The structure of the segmei]
is in fact almost precisely that of the strawberry root-worm, to I
hereafter described. The pectoral ridges of the thorax, howeve
bear upon each side three large, fleshy tubercles, each with two -
three stiff hairs at the tip. This larva, when stretched out, is on*
fifth of an inch in length by one-half that width.

Pupa — The pupa is white throughout, with the exception of 0
eyes, which show through the pupal envelope, at the base of ti
snout. The head and snout are bent against the breast, the lath,
about twice as long as wide, broadening towards the tip, where ^
is widely emarginate. The clubbed antennae extend scarcely beyoi
the tip of the snout. The middle of the head bears two longitudin
rows of stiff bristles, four or five in each row, and three rows
similar bristles extend transversely upon the thorax, while otlie
surround the margin. The posterior edge of each abdominal se
ment is likewise bristled, and a pair of incurved hooks terminal
the abdomen.

LIFE HISTORY.

Early in August I received a letter from Mr. F. S. Earle, of Col ,
den, saying: “I send you to-day a box containing specimens of tli
strawberry crown-borer, and some other insects that are workings
strawberries. Some years ago the crown-borer was very destructi'
here and at Anna, but for five or six years we have heard W

67

>bout it. Chancing to find a few of them in some plants in
rden, the other day, set me to looking about in the neigh-
fields. I find some spots, particularly in old patches, where
re pretty bad. In a small field of Mr. Goodrich’s i’ should
three-fourths of the plants were affected, and they are dying
:,st. In most of the fields examined I found no trace of them,
fear there is danger of their spreading from these infected
and becoming generally destructive again. It is certainly a
1 >n of great practical importance, to know whether it is likely
jad rapidly m the near future, or whether its natural enemies
]ever they may be— are likely to keep it within its present
’• If you can spare the time, I wish you would come down
vestigate this fellow. In the old fields the beetles have mostly
3 plants, but in new-set fields I find the insect, in almost all
of development. As we have eighty-five acres in strawberries,
naturally a good deal interested in these matters.”

onsequence of this request, I sent one of my assistants,
. H. Garman, to Southern Illinois, with instructions to give
' ole subject of insect injuries to the strawberry as thorough
:i mination as the season would permit.

|i

i isited various beds at Cobden, some old and some recently
l ; examined carefully the large field of Mr. Earle, at Anna,
iiveral plantations at Villa Bidge, giving especial attention to
| Mr. G. W. Endicott. On his return, he stopped at Centralia
parched the plants in the fields of Mr. Webster and Mr. Brun-
le was m Cobden on the 10th of September, at Anna on the
<nd at Centralia on the 28d. In every old bed examined, he
the borer present, and often very destructive. Throughout this
jfisit, larvae, pupae and adult beetles were found in the infested
Many of the latter still pale, having evidently recently trans-
from the pupa state.

worst fields were a small one on Mr. Endicott’s place, at
.fidge, and one on Mr. Brunton’s, at Centralia, both of which
en in strawberries for many years, but had lately been aban-
on account of the insect injuries. The new fields of young
likewise contained the borer, some more, some fewer, but
'post infested were in immediate proximity to old patches or
ledling plants which were found to contain the grubs. Even
which had taken root this summer from plants set new last *
* occasionally, but rarely, contained them. The fields exam-
s3re of about all the varieties now raised in Southern Illinois,
med equally liable to attack, and many of the plants were
n the worst affected beds.

ire to call special attention to the fact that, as late as the
!i September, he found the borer present in all stages of larva,

| nd beetle, in the fields of Mr. Brunton and Mr. Webster, at
ia. He brought back from the South a number of the plants
\e borers still in their crowns, and transplanted them to
f earth, where they were kept for further developments.

l these plants were examined, a month later, it was found
3 beetles had all transformed and emerged, eating outward
side of the crown, and were then dead on the ground in the

68

boxes. A letter from Mr. F. S. Earle, received about the same
time, gave similar information respecting the plants in the field, in
the following terms :

“I examined to-day [October 25] fifteen or twenty strawberry
plants that had been infested by the crown-borer. I found them all
deserted, the insects having escaped by a small hole in the side of
the crown of the plant, usually not far below the surface of the
ground. This coincides with my former observations, and seems to
show that the borer does not winter in the crowns. More than half
of the plants examined were still alive, but they were feeble, and
lacked vigor.”

Early in November I visited the same fields myself, and made a
protracted search, in every way I could devise, for eggs, beetles
and larvae, both in and about the plants, under rubbish, and on the
ground. The borers had all left the plants, not one being found in
any stage in the hundreds of crowns examined. Among the insects
collected at Villa Ridge, a single crown- borer beetle was found, ap¬
parently obtained by sweeping, and at any rate occurring on the
surface, outside the plant. I sent from here to the laboratory, at
Normal, a lot of the plants, to be searched for eggs. On those sent
from Centralia, my assistant failed to find any eggs whatever, but
as the roots were washed to free them from dirt before examining
them, it is possible that the eggs were lost in this way. The plants
from Villa Ridge were sent to Mr. Garman, with instructions to set
part of them out for observation, and to examine a part for eggs.
In searching thirty plants he found ten eggs, all exactly alike, and
all placed between the bases of the leaves, where the eggs of the
crown-borer would be expected to occur. Five of these eggs were on
young plants, and five on old. They were large for the eggs of this I
beetle, and probably belonged to some other insect.

On the other hand, out of a package of plants sent by Mr. Brun-
ton late in December, taken from his worst field, about fifty speci¬
mens were very closely searched, without discovering any of these
eggs. _ \l

In compliance with my request, Mr. Brunton very kindly took the
trouble to send me by freight, November 29, two grain sacks of
earth from his field, one taken from the border of the enclosure
under a hedge, where great numbers of insects were hibernating,
and the other containing plants and dirt together, as dug up from
the middle of the field.

These were carefully worked down through a set of wire sieves of
various degrees of coarseness, from one-half inch to one-twentieth
inch mesh, used in assorting the contents of the dredge in aquatic
collecting. The earth and plants were placed on the upper seives,
and the dirt washed through and away with a hose, leaving the
other material assorted according to size. This was then dried and
carefully looked over, bit by bit, so that not even the smallest insect
escaped us. By this method, we were absolutely sure of securing all
the beetles concealed in the earth. As a result of this search, so
conducted, four active crown-borer beetles were found. We thus
have proof positive that the beetle hibernates in the field, at least
in part.

69

II *
If

The following letter, from Mr. Brunton, dated November 23, will
fo of interest in this connection :

“I feel confident that no eggs of the crown-borer are to be found
| plants here, at this season of the year, and I have no hesitation

I saying that the crown-borers are not disseminated by plants re-
oved from here up to April 1, unless the beetles are in the earth
lliering to the plants.”

Mr. Brunton, Mr. Endicott and Mr. Earle are all agreed that they
3ver see the larvae in spring before fruiting time, nor, in fact,
itil they work the fields after the berries are picked.

Mr. Endicott, of Villa Pudge, a large strawberry grower of several
; jars’ experience, and a very close and intelligent observer, says
at he has never noticed the worms in the roots before June, but
at he sometimes finds them when hoeing the plants after the ber-
3S are picked. At this time the larvae have but just commenced
eat, forming little cavities at the bases of the leaf stalks. He
lieves that he would have been almost certain to see the borers
they had occurred in the crowns before April, as the time of
insplanting extends from February to that month. He has never
, diced the adult beetle except in the fall, and is confident that it
single-brooded.

The delay in printing this report\enables me to add a few facts
lating to the spring history of this insect, obtained by my assist-
d, Mr. F. M. Webster, on a trip made to Southern Illinois in
joril, 1883. On the 10th of that month, at Centralia, in pulling
vay the interwoven runners in old fields, or drawing off the mulch
uich had not yet been removed, he found quite a number of the
Jiult beetles on the surface of the ground near the plants, but saw
< indication whatever that they had yet deposited their eggs. On
e 12th instant, at Cobden, two specimens taken upon the ground
pulated while under observation. On the following day a number
others were found here, and on ’ the 17th they were seen
aringly in the strawberry fields at Villa Bidge, in some cases upon
e foliage of the plants. A careful examination of a considerable
limber of the plants taken from the worst infested fields failed to
scover anything resembling the eggs of Tyloderma, and the ex-
lination of a large number of crowns discovered none of the larvae
f any condition.

j Taking all these data into consideration, the following life history

II doubtless be found nearly if not precisely correct. The adult
| etle emerges from the crown all the way from July to October,
l is transformation covering a period of about two months, but all
i ally emerging before cold weather. It is barely possible that
i,tne of the earliest of these lay their eggs upon the plants in the
pi, at least in late seasons, but most, if not all, winter over as
I sties, and do not deposit their eggs until the following spring.

e eggs are placed upon the side of the crown between the bases
; the leaves. As soon as the larvae hatch they eat their way into
3 crown, and remain there excavating its substance, until they
pate. All the transformations are passed in the crown, and from
I s the beetle emerges as a perfect insect.

—5

70

The fact that in fields newly set in the spring, young plants root¬
ing from runners the same season are sometimes found infested by
borers in the fall, can only be accounted for on the supposition that
some of the beetles which have hibernated, are conveyed to the new
field on the plants or in the earth about their roots. It will per¬
haps be objected that these new fields may be infested from a dis¬
tance, notwithstanding the well-known sluggishness of the adult, by
beetles which take wing. This hypothesis is at once disposed of,
however, by a fact curiously simple and of easy observation, but
which has hitherto escaped attention, and which at the same time
accounts for the slow spread of the pest, viz : that the beetle is
practically wingless, and incapable of flight.

There can scarcely be a shadow of doubt remaining that this
species is single-brooded, since it has now been traced throughout
the entire period from the first of August to the first of May, oc¬
curring in the beetle stage during these nine months, and leaving but a
period of three months for the hatching and development of the
earliest larvae to the adult condition.

71

Fig. 8. Work of Strawberry Crown-borer (Tyloderma
ion of the crown, showing the entire work of one borer,
wth, and completed its transformations, and the
bottom of the burrow.

fragarice, Riley.) Vertical
The larva has acquired its
newly hatched beetle is shown at

73

INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

The mischief done by the crown-borer is too well known to require
Ipecial description here. There is usually about one insect to a
j /own, though occasionally two or three will be found. These finally
:cavate the whole interior, leaving only the shell or epidermis,
he growth is of course completely checked, and the plant fre-
lently dies, and badly infested plantations are speedily ruined,
single year of the work of the borer is, under ordinary circum-
ances, enough to destroy the field. It is not unfrequently the
tse, howevei, that the plant attacked will defend itself by putting
it a new crown, either from the side or the top of the old one, from
hich fresh roots strike forth, giving the strawberry a new lease of
e. This crown, of course, will be invaded in the following season
r the borer; but the plant, if vigorous, may even form another
own, and so on, for three or four years successively. Mr. Garman’s
>servations show that this process has occurred, apparently with
/tie injury to the strawberry plant, where the rows have been hilled
), either through accident or design. Even in low places in the
hid, where the earth has washed down about them, the fresh crowns
jfe strong and vigorous, and the plants apparently as healthy as if
ey had not been attacked. Some varieties of the strawberry resist
e attacks of the borer much better than others ; the Wilson being
le of the readiest to succumb, the Captain Jack and the Crescent
nong the hardiest.

r

NATURAL ENEMIES.

Mr. Garman found two parasitic grubs in the cavity of the crown
cavated by the borer, each lying in contact with a larva which
is very feeble, and in fact almost dead. These grubs were unfor-
i nately lost in transit, and I call only surmise that they were
| eking the juices of the borer.

These are the only possible insect enemies of the pest which
ive yet been observed.

METHODS OF PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

When we come to discuss methods of prevention, we see the im-
irtance of a correct knowledge of the life history of this species.

These are the questions of practical interest, answers to which the
/awberry farmer requires: First, can the borer be destroyed in
e field without sacrificing the plants? Second, when, if at all, can
ung plants be taken from an infested field, which shall themselves
free from the borer in any stage, and which can consequently be
ed m establishing new plantations without fear of transporting the
i sect ? Third, at what season of the year should infested plants
I plowed up and destroyed, with a view to exterminating plant and
j st together ? Fourth, can its spread from one field to another be
any way prevented?

First, can the beetle be killed in the field ? There is no longer
i y question that the adult insect is abroad during the months of
i igust and September, and also in early spring. As it certainly

|

|

74

does not leave the field, it must feed during the period of its active
life above ground, upon the tissues of the strawberry plant itself.
It has, like other beetles, a biting mouth, and there is, therefore, a
certain probability that its numbers could be reduced by the appli¬
cation of Paris green or London purple to the vines in autumn,
possibly also in early spring, before the plants commence to bloom.

The answer to the second question, when may young plants be
taken from an infested field with security that they will be free from
the eggs, depends, of course, upon the exact time of oviposition.
As there remains a slight possibility that a few of the eggs are
sometimes laid in fall, it is not absolutely certain that stools form¬
ing after July will be wholly free from them; but in all probability
tins will be the case. On the other hand, there is very little likeli¬
hood that the hibernating beetles usually commence the deposition
of eggs before April, and consequently plants taken up before this
month will be fairly likely to be free from them, but it is safest to
insist upon transplanting as early as is at all practicable. Every
day’s postponement after the opening of spring invites insects forth,
will incur additional risk of infection. It goes without saying, that
by far the most judicious course is to obtain plants for setting from
fields that have not been previously troubled by this insect.

At whatever time the eggs are laid, the answer to the third ques¬
tion must be substantially the same. To destroy the borer, the in¬
fested fields should be plowed up as soon as possible after the fruit
is harvested. However, if the ground is to be planted to another
crop, it would probably make little difference when the plowing was
done, unless other strawberry plantations were near at hand. The
sluggish and wingless beetle would doubtless perish in the field,
everf if it were present in full adult activity.

To prevent the Spread of the pest to newly set grounds, I know
of no method but that of isolation. _ The fact previously mentioned
that the beetle is extremely sluggish and without the power of
flight, not only explains the slow spread of the pest from one
part ’of the field to another, but also gives a hint of the distance
and kind of obstruction necessary to prevent its passage from field
to field. It is certainly unlikely that it could make its wTay unas¬
sisted over a space of more than twelve or fifteen rods ; probably a
street or a dusty road would be a fairly effectual barrier to its pro¬
gress, unless it was conveyed across by men or animals through
carelessness or accident.

Perhaps a division of the strawberry field into parallel belts,
separated from each other by areas devoted to some other crop,
would prevent communication of this insect from one belt to another,
if the intervening spaces were a few rods wide.

The only method which has yet been proven effective to prevent
the ravages of the crown-borer is that of frequent rotation of crops,
together "with the planting of new fields at a distance from the old.
This method has been applied with conspicuous success by Mr.
Endicott, at Villa Ridge, and an outline of his procedure is com¬
mended to general attention. In making a new plantation, he selects
in sprint the newest and strongest plants, sets these as usual, at a
distauce°from any other field, leaves them until their runners have

ven root, and then digs up and destroys those first set. His new
Id is then stocked with fresh plants, which have never been in
i! ltac^ with seriously infested crowns. Too much care can not be
cen to free the plants from dirt, in which the beetle might pos-
>ly he hibernating, and to shake and search them for specimens
ling in the foliage and the rubbish about the crowns. It is a
T unusual thing to find a borer in any of these plants during
i first or second year; not one in fifty thousand plants, accord-
to Mr. Endicott’s estimate.

_t is a general practice throughout the strawberry region to plow
a field after two crops have been taken from it, planting the
)und for a season to some other crop, usually to corn. These
? methods will probably serve to keep the crown-borer well in
nd. I do not think the process of ridging or hilling up the plants
s been tried in Southern Illinois, although I have been told that
is a favorite practice east. There, however, the crown-borer is
t yet known to occur.

itn short, unless experiments should prove the worth of poisons,
plied in fall or early spring, the main reliance must be placed
on occasional rotation, and the planting of new fields at a little
tance from the old, under conditions to make the transfer of the
>t impossible.

perhaps the plan of ridging or hilling up the plants will be found
iful in some instances.

n conclusion, I will only add that we should bear in mind the
t that the injuries done by the crown-borer are really much less
ious than has been generally supposed, for the reason that it
3 been confounded by horticulturists with other equally destruc-

Se but very different insects, the strawberry root-worms.

?rom these, however, it may be easily distinguished, notwith-
nding its close superficial resemblance, by the fact that it is
together footless, while the root-worms all have three pairs of
tinct jointed legs on the segments next following the head.

5

THE STRAWBERRY CROWN MINER.

I

(. Anarsia lineatella, Zeller.)

(Order LEPIDOPTERA. Family Tineuxe.)

[A slender reddish caterpillar, about two-fifths of an inch long, with the head and the
top of the first segment smooth and brownish-yellow, found excavating the crowns of
strawberries and boring the twigs and fruit of peaches.]

It is not all of the function of the physician to cure disease, how¬
ever deadly. If he does his whole duty to those whose health is
under his charge, he will watch for the approaches of disorder, and
give early warning and advice. So the economic entomologist will
find it profitable to scan the entomological field for such insects as
are likely to become injurious if conditions specially favor their
development. A timely word of caution might, for example, have
saved us the ravages of the crown-borer, as this insect is doubtless
a native of Illinois, finding its natural home in the wild strawberry
plants.

I have now to report the occurrence, in this State, of an insect
capable of injuries as serious as those of the species just described,
and like that infesting the crowns of the strawberry, but as yet not
known to have done any serious harm here in cultivated fields.
We shall see, however, that it has elsewhere demonstrated both its
disposition and its ability to work great mischief, and that it is well
worth the serious attention of the strawberry grower. If it fairly
gets a lodgment in our fields, it will apparently be very difficult to
control, for the adult insect has the power of flight, and cannot be
as easily headed off as the crown-borer; and on the other hand, it
has a suctorial mouth, and could not be poisoned like the beetle of
the root- worm. This insect, which I propose to call the crown
miner, is said by Prof. Riley to be the larva of a moth of the
family Tineidse, long known to science under the name of Anarsia
lineatella, (Zeller). This species occurs in Europe, as well as in
this country from Canada to Washington and west to Illinois.

The method of its mischief is very similar to that of the crown-
borer, as it bores in from the side and works downward, frequently
to the tip of the crown. Unlike the borer, it is an acfive insect,.

77

id keeps its burrow free from excrement, with which that of the
her is always packed. When its retreat is opened, the cater-
llar creeps readily backwards and forwards, or lets itself drop to
e ground by a thread.

This species, or one which has not hitherto been distinguished
iom it, occurs also in peach twigs, as first shown by Mr. 0-lover,
id afterwards by Profs. Riley, Comstock, and others; but some of
e facts make it doubtful whether the peach twig borer and the
rawberry crown-miner are really identical. I shall treat of it here
ider both heads, however, and will give first the facts relating to
3 injuries to the peach, following with an account of its work in
rawberry fields.

AS A PEACH TWIG BORER.

The first mention of this species in the United States of which I
ive any knowledge, was made in 1860, in a paper on the Lepid-
itera by Dr. Erackenridge Clemens, published in the fifth volume
the Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Pliila-
plphia. On page 169 of that volume, Dr. Clemens describes it as
new species, supposing it to be distinct from the European species
finch had been previously described by Zeller. A larva was taken
\r Dr. Clemens, full-grown and about to transform on the limb of
plum tree ; but he discovered nothing of its habits.

The next notice of it occurs in the report of Townend Glovei%
ntomologist to the Department of Agriculture, for the year 1872,
id published on the 112th page of the report of the Department
|r that year.

“In examining peach orchards in the neighborhood of the Mary-
nd Agricultural College, about the first week of May, almost all
e young twigs of the trees were observed to be killed at the extreme
>int or end, for a distance of one to one and one-half inches, and
e terminal bud entirely destroyed. On cutting open these dying
pigs, the injury was found to be caused by a very minute cater-
i liar, which, entering the twig near a bud, had entirely eaten out
e pith and interior, leaving only its “frass” and the exuding gum
mark the spot where it had entered. When confined in a glass
Be, after about a couple of weeks several of the larvae left the in-
red twigs and formed very loose cocoons on the sides of the box
among the rubbish and old leaves lying scattered on the earth,
id in about six to ten days, the perfect moth appeared. Speci-
ens were forwarded to Mr. Y. T. Chambers, of Covington, Ken-
cky, wTho is making a special study of our micro-lepidoptera, and
h decided it to be Anarsia (Zeller) pruinella (Clemens), probably A.
fieatella (Zeller), of Europe, the larva of which was described
A Mr. Clemens as taken June 16, full-grown, and about to trans-
! rm on the limbs of a plum, but no food-plant is mentioned. The
; il of the pupa is attached to a little button of silk, in an exceed-
| gly light cocoon. There was scarcely a single young tree in the
|jach orchard examined that was not more or less injured by this
tie pest, and at least as many as twenty to fifty injured twigs
3re found on some very young trees. After the insect leaves the

78

twig, the injured part dries up and breaks off. This insect was
also seen, though in much smaller number, last season, in Maryland
and Virginia, and apple trees are also frequently observed injured in
a similar manner in Maryland, and it is probable that the damage
is done by the same worm, but as we have not yet succeeded in
breeding them from the apple, we cannot say with certainty.

The larvae are about 0.25 of an inch in length, head black, body
dark reddish-brown, with lighter rings, the third ring being more
conspicuous and whitish ; the moth is quite small, and measures
0.40 to 0.60 of an inch in expanse of wings, and is a pale gray
color, with a few blackish spots on the upper wings. Should this
insect increase in numbers as much during the next year as it has
done since the last, it threatens to be a great scourge to peach
growers. The only way to destroy them is to go around the peach
orchard in May and June and cut off such terminal shoots as appear
to be withering or drying up, and then burn them with the cater¬
pillar inside. This, at least, would prevent their multiplying to such
an extent as to be very injurious at present. When not so very
numerous, they appear only to serve to somewhat prune the trees,
as they take off merely the tips of the branches.”

Prof. J. H. Comstock, formerly Entomologist to the United States
Department of Agriculture, adds an item to the account of its in¬
juries and also contributes to its life history, in his report for 1879,
published in the report of the Commissioner of Agriculture for that
year. He says of it :

“This insect has long been known as a serious pest in peach or¬
chards, destroying the terminal twigs of the trees. The young cater¬
pillar begins its work in the spring, at the time, or soon after, the
shoots begin to grow. These, when from one-half inch to one inch
in length, are punctured at the base, and are eaten off completely.
The leaves of the bud unfold and then wither. The twig, although
severed, does not drop off, but is held in place by the gummy sub¬
stance which exudes from the wound. Occasionally, all the twigs
on a tree are thus destroyed. This insect has also been found, by
Mr. Wm. Saunders, boring into the crown and roots of strawberries
in Ontario. And during the past summer I found the peculiar red¬
dish larvae in peaches which were grown on Blackstone Island, Vir¬
ginia. A search revealed them also in peaches on the department
grounds. The larva leaves the peach before transforming, and sus¬
pends itself to the outside of the fruit, spinning no cocoon at all.
The twig-inhabiting individuals mature in this latitude during May
and June. The fruit-inhabiting larvae are found during the latter
part of July and in August, and mature during September. It thus
appears that the species is two-brooded, the early brood feeding in
the terminal twigs and buds, while the later brood inhabits the fruit.
As a remedy, the trees should be examined early in May, and all
dying twigs pruned and burned, thus destroying the larvae. An in¬
teresting chalcid parasite has been bred from this insect, which we
have not had time to describe and name for this report.”

Mr. J. Pettit, of Grimsby, Ontario; has bred it from the twigs of
the peach, and it breeds from peach twigs also in Europe ; and Mr.
Glover has found it feeding on the buds of the peach.

'lie following description of the moth is taken from insects bred
n the peach, and may possibly not apply exactly to those from
strawberry. It is from the paper of Dr. Clemens already cited :

Fore wings of the moth ovate-lanceolate, with an opaque space
| the costa, towards the end of the costal nervure and the first
costo-marginal branch. Discoidal cell rather narrow, closed by a
rt nervure. The subcostal sends four branches to the costa, the
t from a point rather behind the middle of the wing, much sep-
ted from the second, and the last furcate on the costa before the
and a simple branch beneath the latter to inner margin just
eath the tip of the wing. The median subdivides into four
nches, rather approximated at their origins, the medio-posterior
nch being nearly opposite to the second marginal. Subcostal
pate at the base. Hind wings trapezoidal, costa retuse, slightly
irginate beneath the tip, hind margin obliquely rounded; broader
n the fore wings. Subcostal nervure rather attenuated toward
base, with a faintly formed intercostal cell, furcate. Discoidal
broad, closed, with a nervule given off to the hind margin,
lian three-branclied, medio-posterior branch distant from the
fers.

dead smooth, covered thickly with decumbent scales. Forehead
I ad, almost spherical; ocelli none. Eyes rounded, moderately
iminent. Labial palpi, second joint thick, with a very abundant tuft
hair beneath prolonged m front ; third joint smooth, slender and
ited, as long as the second. Maxillary palpi, short and distinct.
tyennae simple, scarcely more than one-half as long as the fore-
gs, slightly denticulated, basal joint smooth. Tongue scaled at
base, about as long as the labial palpi.

lead and face pale gray ; thorax dark gray. Labial palpi dark
;ous externally and pale gray at the end; terminal joint gray,
'ted with dark fuscous. Antennae grayish, annulated with dark
i[‘wn. Fore wings gray, dusted with blackish brown, with a few
dkish brown spots along the costae, the largest in the middle, and
rt blackish brown streaks on the median nervure, subcostal, in
fold, and one or two at the tip of the wing ; cilia fuscous gray.
\d wings fuscous gray; cilia gray, tinted with yellowish.”

oncerning the larva of this twig-borer, Prof. Riley says* that
j^n young it is paler, with a paler head, the body being yellow,
|ii joint with a crimson band superiorly, narrow on the thoracic
ts, and broad and divided transversely by a fine pale line on
feet.

Proceedings Ontario Society, 1882, p. 17

I

80

AS A STRAWBERRY CROWN MINER.

Fig. 10. Strawberry Crown. Miner. (Anarsia Uneatella, Zeller). Larva from crown of
strawberry plant. Magnified 9 diameters.

On the 8th of June of 1869, Mr. Win. Saunders, of Ontario,
Canada, found this larva boring the crowns of strawberry plants in '
his vicinity. One field mentioned by him was almost destroyed by
this pest and the leaf-roller together. Mr. Saunders’ account of
this species and of its injuries to the strawberry, (published in the
report of the Ontario Entomological Society for 1872), is so excel¬
lent that I cannot do better than to reprint the substance of it
here :

“This is a very troublesome insect where it occurs plentifully,
and takes a liking to the strawberry ; but, happily, ibis is not often
the case. We have never seen it affecting this fruit anywhere
excepting on the grounds of Mr. Luke Bishop, of St. Thomas,
Ontario, who first called our attention to it about the middle of
May, 1869, when he brought us a few specimens. During 1868 and
1869, they played sad havoc with his plants, destroying a large
proportion of them. We believe they have been less troublesome
since. The borer is a small grub or caterpillar, nearly half an inch
long and of a reddish color, which eats irregular channels in vari¬
ous directions through the crown and larger roots of the plant,
causing it either to wither and die, or else to send up weakened
and almost barren shoots.”

The following description of this larva was taken on the 20tli of
May, 1869 :

Length, .42 inch. Head rather small, flattened, bilobed, pale
brownish-yellow, darker in color about the mouth, and with a
dark brown dot on each side.

The body above is semi-transparent, of a reddish pink color,
fading into dull yellow on the second and third segments ; anterior
portion of second segment smooth and horny-looking, and similar
in color to head. On each segment are a few shining reddish dots—
yellowish on the anterior segments — or faintly elevated tubercles,
from each of which arises a single very fine short yellowish hair,
invisible without a magnifying power. These dots are arranged in
imperfect rows, a single one across the third, fourth and terminal
segments, and a more or less perfect double row on the remaining
segments. The under surface is of a dull whitish color, becoming
faintly reddish on the hinder segments, with a few shining dots;
those on the fifth, sixth, eleventh, and twelfth segments being arrang¬
ed in transverse rows, in continuation of those above. Feet and
prolegs yellowish white, the former faintly tipped with dark brown.
It spins a slight silken thread, by means of which it can suspend
itself for a time at a short distance from, its place of attachment.
The specimen described produced the moth on the 8tli of July
following.

;)n the 8th of June, we visited the grounds of Mr. Bishop, and
nd his strawberry beds badly infested — indeed, almost destroyed—
this pest, along with a leaf-roller, to be presently described. * The
i:er eats irregular channels through the crown, sometimes exca-
ing large chambers, at other times merely girdling it in various
ections, here and there eating its way to' the surface. Whether
se chambers and channels are due to the presence of more worms
n one in a single root, we were unable to determine with cer-
ity. Most of the cavities contained a moderate- sized, soft, silky
e, which, when opened, appeared nearly full of exuviae. These
es had served as a place of retreat during winter. Most of the
yae found at this date had eaten their way to the upper part of
crown of the plant, just under the surface, and were found about
center, with a hole eaten through the surface. From the fact
t a large number of roots were examined, and although almost
;rv one was more or less injured, but very few larvae were to be
did, we inferred that the probabilities were that the larvae, when
ture, usually leave the root, and undergo the change to chrysalis,
ler under the surface of the ground or amongst rubbish at the
face. One chrysalis only was found, and that was in the cavity
n a root. As soon as Mr. Bishop had discovered the destructive
SLracter of this pest, he, with commendable caution, refused to sell
T more plants until the insect was subdued, for fear of spreading
[, evil. He is of opinion that the insect came to him from some
of the United States, with some plants of the Hooker straw-
ry, as it was in a patch of these so obtained, that he first no¬
pal the insect working.

Specimens of the larvae gotten late in the season wintered over,

II were examined on the 12th of January following, when they did
appear so plump in body as those examined in July. They ap-
j to spend most of the winter in a torpid state within the silken
es before mentioned. Several were found thus sheltered at this
e, and one, whose original abode had been disturbed in the fall,
1 prepared for itself a similar casing within the fold of a straw-
ry leaf. In this latter instance the larva seemed quite active,

tving itself briskly about whenever touched. The chrysalis of the
3ct is very small, and of the usual dark reddish-brown color,
it one which was found on the 8th of June produced the moth
i, the 12th of July.”

t'his crown miner was found by one of my assistants, Mr. W. H.

I -man, at Normal, September 27, abundantly infesting the crowns
vvild strawberry plants which he was searching for crown-borers
1 other injurious insects. A number of these plants transferred
the laboratory for observation, are still alive in good condition,
d contain the living larvae.

■

Ye shall, therefore, probably be able to complete the life history
Ihe insect next year, with respect to the particulars which remain
unknown.

Remedies.

t

1 is evident that wild and seedling plants should be destroyed
‘-never possible, since they furnish a perfect harborage and breed-
!i

L

82

ing ground for these and other insects, and do no sort of good. If
this insect once gains a foothold in the field, it will apparently be
impossible to dislodge it, except by destroying the plants ; and this,
to be effective, should be done late in summer or early in fall. It
is probable that even this expedient, however, will be inefficient, if
the larva breeds in peach trees as well as in the strawberry; and
unless it were exterminated in both at once, it would be likely soon
to spread again from one to the other.

Strawberry growers are earnestly advised to search their fields in
spring and fall for evidence of the occurrence of this crown miner;
and especially to look after the wild and runaway plants in fence
corners and by roadsides. These plants are, at best, superior breed¬
ing places for strawberry pests, living, as they do year after year,
without “rotation;” and it is doubtless careless farming to permit
them to remain.

THE MELON PLANT-LOUSE.

(Aphis cucumeris, n. sp.)

Order HEMIPTERA. Family Aphidid^.

[A minut6, very sluggish, green or greenish-black insect, occurring in immense num-
spriing late summer upon the under sides of the leaves and also upon the
k Q u^uektnelons, watermelons, cucumbers, squashes, and other cucurbitaceous

devefopm&^of^e^lanti]111 and shnvel and lose their color, and greatly hindering

1

[Ttis plant-louse, coming from no one knows where, has clone,
:mg the last two years, widespread mischief to the plants which
ittacks. It was first noticed in the Farmers’ Review for Septem-
’ 2, 1880, by Dr. Cyrus Thomas, then State Entomologist of Illi-
i s, who says :

‘ There has been great complaint among our gardeners this sea-
i in reference to a plant-louse that is doing much injury to the
limeg and muskmelon vines, and also to the cucumber vines. In
re instances they have almost entirely destroyed entire fields of
es.”

le does not say definitely to what part of the State his remarks
i re reference, but implies in another part of the article that he is
ting of Southern Illinois.

n 1881, at Marengo, in Northern Illinois, where large fields of
i| umbers are raised for the supply of a pickle factorv, this louse oc-
'| red in great numbers, but disappeared before the end of the sea-
i| ^ without doing any grave injury. It also appeared in numbers
icient to attract attention upon muskmelons and watermelons in
itral Illinois. Early in the spring of 1882 it made an overwhelm-
attack in many localities upon both watermelons and muskmel-
i . In a garden at Normal, for example, it appeared upon the

i is when they had run about six or seven feet, soon literally cov-

g and killing them, (the striped cucumber-beetle assisting to some
1 rnt in this work), and the ground was plowed up and planted to
f ther crop. About the 1st of July it again attracted attention in
e fields of cucumbers at Normal, spreading rapidly and arresting
growth of the worst infested plants. Where muskmelons and
! imbers grew together, the latter were comparatively little injured,

|j the melons were sometimes almost completely destroyed, the
I amounting in some . cases to less than five per cent, of the

;j ) ; in fact, many of the hills in these fields did not run at all,

84

♦

but were less than a foot across in September. The leaves were
then small and curled, of an unhealthy look, the roots knotty and
diseased, and only here and there a melon could be found, hven
small garden patches of cucumbers, melons and squashes about
Normaf were vigorously attacked, and many of the vines were either
killed or prevented from fruiting. Muskmelons were almost always
most generally and seriously affected, cucumbers and watermelons
next, and squashes least of all.

The mischief done by this insect elsewhere is indicated by the
following extracts from my correspondence : Mr. 0. B. Galuslia
writes me from Morris, Grundy county, under date of July dl:
“My ten acres of melon vines are being swept with the ‘besom of
destruction’ by the Aphides I send you. I have never known this
insect on melon leaves before. It takes watermelons, muskmelons
and squashes, though I think it prefers the melons to the squashes,
and muskmelons to watermelons. They swarm in myriads, how¬
ever, upon both species. What species of lice aie these? If they
would operate on the upper instead of the underside of the leaves
they might be routed by dusting with lime (or ashes perhaps), but
as they are out of harm’s way in this respect I have not attempted
to molest them. Other melon fields near by are similarly affected.
On the 18th of September, in response to an inquiry as to the fur¬
ther history of the pest in his locality, Mr. Galusha writes : “1 have

received yours of the 15th, and am glad to say that the melon-lice
disappeared suddenly — I think about August 1, and melons recuper¬
ated considerably afterward, especially the muskmelons. I had begun
to plow up my two-acre patch of muskmelons— as there was very
little fruit set, and the vines were almost destroyed ; but could not
plow on account of the soil being so hard and dry. In a few days
the lice left, and I now have a good (or fair) show of melons on
the patch, just beginning to ripen. " The ground was in melons last
year ; i. e., a portion of it, say one-third.

It was also reported on the 23d of September, by Prof. Edward
G. Howe, of Chicago, as doing much damage to nutmeg melon
vines and inclining to spread.

Previous mention of injury by plant lice to plants of this order
has been made by Mr. Gentry, of Pennsylvania, who found an
Aphis infesting the blossoms of a wild cucumber; by Buckton, of
England, by whom a species of Aphis is said to infest the under
sides of the leaves of melon plants in Great Britain ; and byj
Miss Middleton, of this State, who describes a species m the Eight!
Report with the remark that it was found upon the leaves ot
squashes. The specimens found at Normal were certainly different
from the species described by Miss Middleton, belonging, in fact, to
another genus, and are apparently quite distinct from the Aphis
cucurbitce of Buckton, as described and figured by that author m ms
“Monograph of British Aphides,” volume 2, pages 56-57. A bnet
description of what is probably this species is given by Dr. Thomas
in the newspaper article already cited, but without name, as he was
inclined to believe that our insect was the Aphis cucurbitce of Buck
ton. Considering this species as new, I therefore propose for it tea
name of Aphis cucumeris.

^ig. 11. — Melon plant-louse ( Aphis cucumeris, n. s.) Winged female (parasitized).

Magnified 35 diameters.

WINGED FEMALE.

N

ead black, with red or black eyes, tbe latter usually with a red
brcle behind. Thorax sometimes jet black throughout, sometimes
a the protliorax yellowish. Abdomen yellowish-green with black
‘S, and with blackish margins to segments. Legs yellow, with
3, tarsi, and distal parts of tibiae and femora dusky or black,
licles cylindrical, black ; tail yellowish, rostrum yellow, with
-6

So

black tip. The antennae are six-jointed, (apparently seven), the sixth
with a setaceous tip three times as long as the basal part of the
joint. The sixth joint is the longest, the third next, the fourth and
fifth nearly equal. All except the basal joint are marked with ini-
bricated transverse ridges. The wings are more than twice as long
as the abdomen, hyaline, with stigma and veins dusky yellowish.
The tail extends beyond the tip of the body. Width of thorax .022
inch, of abdomen .08 inch, of head .014 inch. Length of body
.054 inch, of antennae .052 inch, of cornicles .009 inch.

PUPA.

Fig. 12.— Melon plant-louse ( Aph is cucuraeris, n. s.) Pupa.

Head and prothorax, base and tip of antennae dusky, eyes dark
red, sides of mesothorax and metathorax white, wing pads black,
abdomen brownish-yellow, except posteriorly, where it is green.
Whole body pruinose, legs white, tarsi and tips of tibiae black.

I

87

WINGLESS FEMALE.

Fig. 13. — Melon plant-louse (Aphis cucnmeris, n. s.) Wing¬
less female, magnified 40 diameters.

Body green or greenish-black throughout, antennae black at base
nid tip ; cornicles black, tail yellowish, legs pale, with tarsi and
ip of tibiae black. Body broad ovale, widest behind, thorax with-
>ut spine. Cornicles minutely roughened. Antennae with imbricated
ransverse ridges, _ excepting the two basal joints. Body .06 inch
ong, .037 inch wide, antennae .05 inch in length, cornicles .013 inch.

ROOT FORM.

Broad ovate, tapering and acuminate
posteriorly, pale bluish green. Head,
eyes, base and tip of antennae, two basal
and last joints of tarsi, tips of tibiae and
femora, and tip of cornicles, black ; legs
white. Beak very long, reaching to the
third segment of the abdomen, tip black¬
ish, mouth at and about the base of
rostrum dusky. Antennae short, reaching
the base of the abdomen, five- jointed,
and the fifth with a setaceous tip less
than twice as long as the basal portion ;
third joint about equal to the fifth.
Cornicles cylindrical, scarcely longer than
the following segment of the abdomen.
„ , , , , , 7 . Thorax with a spine each side. A tu-

XcucumJrit, n? sj^Root form,' mag- bercle on each side of the first and sixth
nifled 40 diameters. abdominal segments, visible only from

eliind, and a very small one on the metatliorax, behind the pro-
boracic spine. Length, .05 inch; width, .03 inch ; antenna?, .02 inch.

S3

On cucumbers and muskmelons, from May to September, 1882.

LIFE HISTORY.

There is yet very much work to do on the life histories of the
plant-lice, especially upon the subject of their fall and winter
history. A few are known to hibernate as mature insects — the
apple Aphis, for example — but most of the small number which
have been followed through the year, lay their eggs in autumn and
perish. The plant-lice hatching from these eggs are all wingless
females, as far as known. With respect to the cucumber Aphis,
there is no more certainty on this point than in any of the other
species. I searched carefully for eggs and living plant-lice after the
usual time of oviposition, but was unable to find either. This was
doubtless due to the fact that the plant-lice in all the fields under
our observation were almost completely exterminated by their para¬
sites, long before the vines were killed by frost. An hour’s search
in September, in one of the fields that had been worst infested, dis¬
covered less than a score of living plant-lice at that time, although
hundreds and thousands of their parasitized bodies still remained
clinging to the leaves. If their eggs were left in these fields, they
were of course far too few to be found by an indiscriminate search.
I have but a single fact bearing in any way upon their winter his¬
tory. Several observations made at Normal and elsewhere, indicate
that fields which had been in cucumbers or some similar crop dur¬
ing the preceding year, were much the most generally and injuri¬
ously affected by this plant-louse. If this should prove to be the
common rule, it would be fair to infer that the insect spends the
winter upon the ground where it developed, either as adult or in
the egg. Reference has already been made to the occurrence of a
form upon the roots. This I saw only late in the season in one of
the worst infested fields, where I made a thorough and protracted
search with a view to determining whether the species had a root-
form or not. Not over half a dozen specimens were found at that
time, but these were unmistakably of the same species as those
which occurred upon the leaves. From the general appearance of
the roots of the infected plants, it is not impossible that much of
the injury noticed was done earlier by the root-lice — perhaps more
than by those appearing upon the foliage.

INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

The evidences of the injury done by these lice were of the usual
kind. The leaves were curled and crumpled, with an unhealthy
hue, and were much smaller than those not troubled by lice, and
the entire plant was stunted, and evidently rendered thoroughly un¬
healthy. The roots were crooked and knotty, and destitute to a
great extent of fibrous rootlets. After the disappearance of the lice
in August, the affected plants recovered but slowly, although most
finally put out new foliage, and yielded a part of a crop.

89

•PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

The only preventive measure which I can suggest is based upon
le probability that the plant-lice winter in the fields where they grow,
rudence would consequently dictate that the kinds of plants attacked
y them should not be raised upon the same ground two years suc-
^ssively. It might suffice, however, to collect and burn the vines
1 the fall. If the eggs are deposited upon them, this would an wer
istead of a rotation of crops. The fact that the lice occur only on
le lower surface of the leaves, which soon curl and wrinkle so as
) protect them largely, made it very difficult to reach them with
ay of the applications usually made to insects of this class. Ex-
sriments were made, however, with substances in powder, with
uids, and with vapors.

The substances applied in powder were road dust and pyrethrum ;
le liquids were soapsuds and an emulsion of kerosene with milk :
ad the vapors were tobacco smoke and vapor of bisulphide of
irbon.

In

Several applications of dust were carefully made by hand to the
ader side of the leaves. It did not adhere everywhere, but where

did, the lice disappeared. As an average result, it was finally
included that from One-third to one-fourth of the insects were killed
: driven away by a single dusting.

Powdered flowers of pyrethrum were dusted with the powder gun
1 the under side of several leaves, which were thickly covered with
,3e. These leaves were picked and placed in water for more careful

ioservation. The powder was slow to act, not over five per cent, of
le lice falling in an hour, but later nearly all fell. Most of these
ere still alive on the table after twrenty hours, but they finally all
ed and dried up. Several other applications gave similar results.

Strong soapsuds was sprinkled on the under side of other leaves
lith little effect, although some of the lice were killed.

An emulsion of kerosene was made as follows : one pint of hero¬
ine and two pints of milk were pumped back and forth with a
cringe until a soft butter was formed, and this was diluted with
n times its volume of water. Thrown upon the leaves with a
7ringe, this killed about all it reached, and cleared many leaves
itirely, while on others a few remained.

For the application of tobacco smoke, a common bee-smoker was
fiained, filled with chunks of rotten wood mixed with cheap tobacco,
jid fired as is usual in smoking bees. An immense smudge was
Lsily made in this way, and kept under complete control. After
•me successful experiments in the laboratory, the apparatus was
l ken to the field. Merely to blow the smoke against the lice, without
i*nfining it in any way, had no effect whatever. Large pieces of
• /nvas (hay caps) were then obtained, and used to cover a section
a row. Under these the tobacco smoke was blown repeatedly
lie evening, keeping the space beneath well filled for the first five
j inutes, and then for ten minutes. On examination next morning,
>out ten per cent, of the lice were found dead as a consequence
five minutes’ exposure, and from fifty to seventy-five per cent, of
ose that had been exposed ten minutes. This experiment was

93

several times repeated, with the same average results. Even where
the vines were smoked so strongly as to slightly scorch some of the
leaves, the lice were not all killed.

The vapor of bisulphide of carbon was used more as a satisfaction
to curiosity than for any other reason. Several leaves with plant-
lice were placed under a bell- jar with a cubic inch of sponge steeped
with the poison, and left exposed to the fumes for ten minutes.
When examined, all were dead, and did not revive after an hour’s
exposure to the air. Five minutes exposure was^ hardly sufficient,
however, as the bugs, though seemingly dead at first, recovered in
about three-quarters of an hour, and began to crawl about.

As a result of these experiments, we may say that no effective
remedy was found applicable on a large scale, except at an expense
which would considerably outweigh the benefit, especially as the
probabilities are that the natural enemies of the plant-lice will put
a stop to their ravages even sooner than artificial measures can do.
For garden application I think tobacco smoke the most feasible
remedy, but it should be applied repeatedly, and care should be taken
to first shake and stir the vines, to drive away any of the winged
parasites of the lice, which would otherwise be sacrificed with their
hosts. There is little probability that the larvae of these parasites
which are still within the bodies of the lice, would be injured by the
smoke. Some form of the kerosene mixture would probably answer
nearly as well, except that it would doubtless kill these larvae, and so
retard the parasitism of the pests. A simple mixture of about one
part of kerosene to twenty of water, would probably answer for this
purpose, if kept agitated, &s well as the emulsion. A remedy strongly
recommended by Kaltenbach and some other European authors, is a
weak solution of common salt, (one and one-half to two per cent.),
thoroughly applied two or three times to the surface of the plant.

NATURAL ENEMIES

The natural enemies of these lice are of the usual kinds, and at¬
tack this species with their customary vigor. They include the
common Cpccinellidee and their larvae, the larvae of Syrphus flies,
and hosts of the parasitic Aphidius, which lays its eggs in the bodies
of the lice. The extent to which this parasitism prevails at any
given time, is a good index of the time the pest is likely to last, as
the parasites, when once well started, multiply very rapidly, and
will soon reduce the number of their hosts to insignificance. A par-
asatized louse may be recognized at a glance by the swollen body
and the pale brown color— very different from that of the living in¬
sect. Where any large percentage of these are seen, only some
unlucky turn of affairs can prevent the speedy suppression of the
plant-lice, and the owner need waste little further anxiety on them.

The completeness of their disappearance at Normal may be inferred
from the statement already made of the difficulty of finding a few
specimens, about the middle of September, in the worst infested
field in that vicinity.

91

!

SUMMARY.

is louse makes its appearance only in spring, and attacks cu-
taceous plants generally, soon after they commence to grow,
times killing them at once. It continues its depreciations upon
pecies of this order until frost kills the vines in fall, but prefers
i melons to watermelons, and the latter to cucumbers. A root-
also occurs, but with unknown effect. The species is subject
e attacks of the usual enemies, which greatly interfere with its
li ^es, and often suspend them. The eggs are laid in autumn,
ibly apparently by preference upon the same ground where the
s developed. It is therefore prudent to destroy the old vines,
;o avoid planting melons, cucumbers and squashes upon the same
id two years in succession.

ad dust, pyrethrum powder, tobacco smoke blown under the edge
sheet or canvass covering, a weak mixture of kerosene and
: (not over one part to twenty) are all more or less effective
beir artificial destruction ; but if their natural enemies are seen
very numerous, the probabilities are that the lice have about
lj led their course for the season and had better be left unmo-
1 1. Whatever artificial application is made, care should be taken
ake the vines and leaves to drive away the winged parasites,
1 might otherwise be sacrificed with their hosts.

|r

5

j

f

1 .1

92

EXPERIMENTS WITH THE EUROPEAN CABBAGE WORM.

(. Pleris rapes L.)

Fig. 15— European Cabbage butterfly, male. Fig. 1G.— European Cabbage butterfly, female.

Whenever any species of noxious insect becomes
abundant enough to attract general attention, the
agricultural press, the proceedings of agricultural
societies, and the conversation of those interested,
commences to teem with recommendations of reme¬
dies. If one attempts to collate these various recom¬
mendations, he is at first surprised, then bewildered,
then discouraged and disgusted at the number of
substances which his list will include and the ab¬
surd and contradictory statements made concerning
them ; and he commonly finds himself thrown back
at last upon the results of his own individual experi¬
ments. While the recommendations made are many
of them of the highest value, the difficulty is to dis¬
tinguish the useful from the worthless in the absence
of any exact and sufficient knowledge of the facts on
which they rest.

Under these circumstances, it evidently becomes one of the duties
of the State Entomologist not only to make careful and elaborate
experiments for the destruction of noxious insects, and to embody the
results of these experiments in the form of recommendations, but also
to give in full the evidence upon which his recommendations rest, in
order that each may see for himself the amount and value of the
proof.

No better illustration of this fact could have been selected
than the European cabbage worm ; and I have consequently taken
pains to experiment with a few of the substances most generally
recommended for the destruction of that pest. It was, of course, im¬
possible to make a thorough trial of any considerable number in the

Fig. 17.— European
cabbage worm
and chrysalis: a,
larva; b, chrys¬
alis or pupa.

93

[| l!

[) ■

ft

ngle season during which this work has been under my charge,
it the conclusions already reached have a definite and appreciable
due, which will probably make them welcome as a contribution to
le subject.

[ t HOT WATER.

One of the applications most frequently advised is that of hot
ater at a temperature sufficient to destroy the worms, but too low
» injure seriously the plants infested. A series of experiments upon
le subject, made by Mr. Coquillett, of McHenry county, are de-
i ;nbed in the last report of my predecessor, I)r. Thomas, but as
ley were made at a time and place when the cabbage worm itself
as not to be had, the conclusions arrived at are still open to ques-
on. As far as the species of caterpillars and plants experimented
jDon are concerned, Mr. Coquillett’s experiments seem quite conclu-
ve, but as various species differ greatly in their power to resist
jurious conditions, the inference from the species used by him to
te cabbage worm itself is not strictly warranted. For the purpose
testing the exact effect of water of different degrees of temper-
/mre upon the worms in the open air, and the cabbage plants
dacked by them, I sent an assistant, early in September, into
le field with an oil stove and a sprinkler, with instructions to
st the matter thoroughly. The water was heated to a given tem-
hrature, as indicated by a good thermometer, and applied imrne-
ately to the infested plants. At 180° F., no effect whatever was
roduced upon either plants or insects. At 140° the worms were
ot injured, although they were apparently a little stupefied at first,
id no perceptible effect was produced upon the plants.* At 158°
[>e worms were nearly all killed, but the cabbage plants themselves
pre also badly injured, the leaves, wherever the water struck, being
trboiled, and subsequently withering. At 160° the same effect was,
course, produced, but was still more marked. The cabbages at
pis time were well headed out, many of the worms were full-grown,
lid the others of various sizes from a half inch upwards. These

1:periments go to show that the worms are fully as hardy as the
ibbages.

j POWDERED PYRETHRUM.

r The general efficiency of pyrethrum as an insecticide has been so
illy attested, and its use for the protection of cabbages recom-
ended upon so high authority, that the experiments were under-
ken only for the purpose of exactly defining the conditions under
nich it could be most successly applied. The powder was obtained
pecially for this, experiment from Messrs. Lehn & Fink, of New
irk, by whom it was said to have been recently imported from
□rope. The powder was mixed for the first experiment with ten
ri,rts of flour, and left to stand one night before being used. Four
;arly full-grown worms were selected and brought to the labora¬
ry, where they could be carefully observed. The diluted pyrethrum
,is applied thoroughly with a powder-gun, and in ten minutes the
irms all exhibited their uneasiness by quick, jerking motions. In
teen minutes, they were crawling slowly about and writhing as if

| * An experiment, made later, with water at 145°, was equally unsatisfactory. The
ibages were considerably wilted, and only about one-third of the worms were hurt.

94

in pain. In twenty, they were also exuding a green fluid .rom their
mouths. In thirty, all were still alive, but were stupidly rolling
about on the table,. In forty minutes, one was lifeless, and the
others were curling up as if nearly dead. In fifty minutes, two were
still capable of motion, but the other two were helpless or nearly
so. In an hour, three still showed some signs of life, but were barely
able to move. In three hours from the time of application, three
worms of the four were entirely dead, and the fourth was motionless,
but showed some signs of life when irritated.

In the next experiment, a much smaller quantity of the powder
was applied to two worms, nearly full grown, and a third about half
full size. In ten minutes the small worm became uneasy. In an¬
other ten, one of the older ones was likewise affected, while the
young one was writhing about in pain. In forty-five minutes both
of the old worms were attacked, while the young one was nearly
helpless. In an hour and a half the young one was dead, ond one
of the larger nearly so, while the third showed the effects of the
poison, but in a much less degree. In six hours the larger worms
were crawling about, though somewhat stupid ; but by the next morn¬
ing, that is, in twenty-four hours, both of the old ones had recov¬
ered.

In the next experiment, a small quantity of the same mixture w^as
placed with the point of a knife on the backs of three worms of the
same sizes as those used in the preceding. In ten minutes none of
the worms gave any evidence of injury. In twenty minutes, how¬
ever, the young one and one of. the larger were curled up motion¬
less, both exuding a green fluid from their mouths, while the other
one was crawling about unaffected. In half an hour all of them
were moving about, though somewhat stupid. In another hour all
seemed to be recovering, and in six hours no further effect was per¬
ceptible. The worms all finally regained their usual activity.

Five specimens were then selected, two nearly full-grown, and three
about five-eighths of an inch in length. They were placed in a shal¬
low dish, and dusted with the pure pyrethrum powder, undiluted
with flour. This had the usual effect upon the young worms in
about five minutes, and in seven minutes upon the larger also. In
fifteen minutes all of the worms were rolling about in a helpless
condition. In an hour the smaller worms were nearly motionless,
and the larger growing weaker. In an hour and a half all were
apparently dead.

The preceding notes show the efficacy of pyrethrum, if freely ap¬
plied to the worms, whether pure or diluted with flour, one part to
ten. The dilution, however, slightly decreases the energy of its ac¬
tion. In order to determine whether the flour served as a simple
diluent of the pyrethrum powder, or whether it absorbed and retained
a part of the volatile and active principle of the plant and thus
become itself an efficient insecticide, I wrapped a small quantity in
a cloth, and imbedded it in a jar of pyrethrum powder, leaving it
there for three days. It was then removed and dusted upon four
cabbage worms, two nearly full grown, and two about half grown.
In twenty-four hours the twTo smaller worms wTere dead, and the
other ones unaffected. It is evident, therefore, that the flour absorbs
a part of the active principle from the pyrethrum.

TOBACCO SMOKE.

|! ■

\\e difficulty of reaching all the worms in a cabbage head by any
jication of a powder or liquid, after the head is pretty well
n, and especially after the worms have commenced to penetrate
tade it desirable to find some vapor which might be easily ap-
in a way to reach all the insects with destructive effect Ex¬
tents were consequently made — first with tobacco smoke. Three
age worms were confined under a bell- jar, and exposed to the
;e of a cigar for ten minutes. A full-grown worm was scarcely
-11 affected. Both the smaller ones, a little over half an inch in
h, were nearly lifeless, when removed from the jar. In a few
i s, however, they had entirely recovered, and were apparently
jured by their experience. Five individuals were next selected,
ing from half an inch in length to full-grown specimens, and
exposed to the smoke as before, for ten minutes, under a glass
All except one of the largest were badly affected, the three
; ler being apparently nearly dead. In an hour and a half the
!i larger ones were crawling about, but two of the others were
rently killed. In two hours more, however, all were crawling
jt except one, and that showed evident signs of life, and prob-
would have recovered in time. No experiments were tried with
||r exposure, because, even if successful, it would be found im-
jicable to apply tobacco smoke for a longer time in the field.

SULPHUR.

r some reason which I do not now remember, I thought it
i while to try a single experiment with the fumes of sulphur,
proved to be sufficient. The record is brief and conclusive : —
sed two minutes ; plant killed, worms uninjured.

■

BISULPHIDE OF CARBON.

e vapor of bisulphide of carbon was also used, not with any
: 3tation of a practical application to cabbage plants, but to
I ier test the hardiness of the worms. Two nearly full grown
mens were placed under a bell jar of about a gallon capacity,
about half a cubic inch of sponge was saturated with the fluid
placed under the shade with the worms. The effects were ap-
it in less than a minute, and in five minutes both the worms
rolling about, disgorging a green fluid. When the shade was
ved at the end of ten minutes the worms were not dead,
sompletely torpid. In three-quarters of an hour they showed
signs of life, and in four hours were evidently slowly recover-
In three hours more they had completely regained their
, ity and crawled away. Again, three worms, one half grown,
die others of full size, were exposed under a smaller jar for
i' ame length of time. When the glass was removed, none of
showed any sign of life. In three-quarters of an hour, liow-
the young one was crawling about and the old began to move,
in two hours longer, all had recovered and disappeared.

95

KEROSENE EMULSION.

The emulsion of kerosene which had previously been found
effective with the chinch-bug and plant-lice, was next tried upon
these worms. It was made of equal parts of kerosene and milk,
and diluted at first with fifteen parts of water. Three full-sized
worms were selected, with one half-grown, and thoroughly sprayed
with the mixture. All showed evident signs of discomfort, the
smaller ones being most affected ; but in three or four hours all
had fully recovered. A dilution of double the strength of the pre¬
ceding was next sprayed upon two full-grown worms, and two half¬
size. In four minutes all were writhing about upon the table, and
in fifteen minutes were nearly lifeless. Five hours later two were
dead, and the others helpless, and three finally died. A mixture of
medium strength, containing one part to twelve of kerosene, was
next applied to five of the worms, ranging from full-size down to
about one-fourth grown. In half an hour all were badly affected,
and the three smaller apparently dead. In forty minutes all showed
signs of life. In three hours the larger ones were crawling about,
while the smaller ones were torpid. Only one of the smaller worms
finally died, and all the others recovered.

From the preceding experiments it is clear that a mixture of
about one part of an emulsion to eight or ten of water (kerosene
five or six per cent.) will destroy the greater part of the worms,
and if applied before the individuals are full-grown, would appar¬
ently kill about all of them, — in fact, it seems to be scarcely less
efficient than pyretlirum, and is much cheaper, although the labor
of preparation on any large scale would be very considerable.
Neither of these insecticides can be used to advantage after the
cabbage has headed up to any considerable extent, as the worms
are then able easily to conceal themselves, and but few would be
reached by the spray or powder. This was shown by a field exper¬
iment with the kerosene emulsion, one part of kerosene to twenty
of water. Two heads were thoroughly wetted with the mixture applied
with a small syringe, at 4 :80 in the afternoon. One of these was
rather large and solid, the other much less compact. All the worms
exposed to the full action of the fluid were killed, but about nine-
tenths of them escaped. The plant was not at all injured by the
application.

SALTPETRE AND SALT.

Having seen frequent and very favorable mention of a solution
of salt and saltpetre, as a means of ridding the cabbages of these
worms, a solution of an ounce of saltpetre and four ounces of salt
to two quarts of water was sprayed upon several worms without
appreciable effect. Four full-grown worms were then thrown into a
dish containing the fluid and left two minutes, but were not injured
in any degree. Three others were kept in the solution for four
minutes, and ten minutes later had recovered and crawled away. I
conclude, therefore, that this insecticide would be effective only if
applied in sufficient quantity and for a long enough time to drown
the worms.

LIME.

rnshly air- slacked lime has also been recommended, and eight
! ns were thickly dusted with the powder to test its value. The
f morning after the application of the lime, only one of the eight
found to be at all affected, and that was still alive.

TAR-WATER.

spray of water that had stood for several days upon coal-tar
next thrown upon the worms, eight nearly full-grown and two
it half-size. Three of these which were thoroughly drenched
i the fluid, were found dead after several hours, but none of the
srs were affected.

mm the preceding experiments we infer that none of the sub-
ces tried were of any practical value except the pyrethrum and
'Sene, and that these could be used with good effect in the field
r early in the season, before the plants had formed a head, or
e the worm was still small. As the butterflies lay their eggs
sinuously for several weeks, any application, to be entirely suc-
ful, must be several times repeated.

MISCELLANEOUS NOTES.

The Cherry Slug or Pear Slug. ( Selcuidrict cerasi, Peck.)
Order HYMENOPTERA. Family Tenthredinim.

Fig. 18.

Fig. 19,

[A slimy, olive-green worm, half an inch long when full grown, gnawing away the
substance of \he upper surface of the leaves, in June and July, and again in August and
September.]

Although this species was carefully studied and fully described by
Prof. Peck in 1790, and also discussed at length by Dr. Harris in
his Insects Injurious to Vegetation in Massachusetts, _ I judge from
numerous inquiries received this summer, that it is not as well
known to horticulturists in Illinois as it should be. As it has not
yet been treated in the reports of the State Entomologists either of
Illinois or Missouri, a brief account of it and of the methods of meet¬
ing its ravages will not be without value.

This insect was quite abundant and destructive to the cherry
throughout the northern third of the State during the past summer,
although I neither saw nor heard of any especial injury to other
fruit trees. At Elgin, on the 18th of July, several cherry trees were
seen with their leaves completely denuded ; and smaller numbers of
the larvae were found on the cherry at Rockford, and on the pear
and cherry at Waukegan. It was also reported destructive to cher¬
ries at Montgomery, in Kane county, and was sent me by a corre¬
spondent from Aurora, on the 22d of July, where it was said to Rave
completely defoliated the Richmond cherry, and to have somewhat
injured sweet cherries, pears and the mountain ash. The effect of
this destruction of the leaves in midsummer is to compel the tree
to put forth new foliage, thus taxing its vitality in a way to en¬
danger the crop of the following year. As the larvae return again
for a second attack upon the trees in autumn, the consequences may
easily become serious.

99

Description and life history— The larvae, or slugs, as they are im-
roperly called, are white at first, but soon become covered with an
live slime, which gives them something of the appearance of the
uked snail to which the name slug properly belongs. They are
irther easily distinguished from any other larvae feeding upon the
)af by the fact that they are much thicker in front than behind,
ipering gradually posteriorly. They, have twenty very short legs’
ae first three pairs jointed, the remainder fleshy prominences, com-
lonly known as prolegs. The head is of a dark chestnut color,
mall, and usually concealed under the fore part of the body. They
ve mostly on the upper side of the leaves of the trees, eating away
11 the parenchyma, leaving only the veins and epidermis of the
nder side. The slugs shed their skins five times, and after the last
loult they lose their slimy covering and olive color, and are then
ellow and free from mucus. From the 1st of July to the middle
f August, having gained their growth, they leave the trees and bur-
)w to the depth of one to four inches, forming an oval cavity in
le earth, where the change to pupa occurs. From these cells they
scape in the form of saw-flies from the middle of July to the last
k August. The winged insect is about one-fifth of an inch in length,
nd is of a glossy black color, excepting the first two pairs of legs,
hich are a dirty yellow or clay color, with blackish thighs, and the
ind legs, which are dull black with clay colored knees. The wings
jte transparent, iridescent, with brownish veins, and with a smoky
oud or band across the middle of the third pair. These saw-flies
pay be found on the leaves of the trees in early morning, or in the
pol of the evening, at which time they are sluggish, and not easily
sturbed. Their eggs are laid singly within little semi-circular in-
sions through the skin of the leaf. From these a second brood of
ie slugs soon hatch, which get their growth and go into the
t’ound again in September and October, remaining there until the
(ill owing spring, when most of them are changed to flies and leave
teir winter quarters. Some of them, however, commonly remain
i ichanged in the ground until the following year, so as to continue
fete sypecies if any complete destruction should overtake the remainder
the brood. These spring flies lay their eggs as already described,
mally in June, the minute worms appeariug in about a fortnight
,‘terwards.

J Remedies. — Various substances have been suggested for the destruc-
on of this pest, but unfortunately some of those most generally
commended have really little effect. Among these remedies of
oubtful efficiency I may mention fine sand, and dust and ashes.
)me experiments made with these substances by Mr. Wm. Saunders,
Ontario, Canada, are worth quoting entire :

■f “As soon as the slugs were observed at work in the spring, they
bre treated to a plentiful supply of dry sand, thrown up into the
gher branches with a shovel, and shaken over the lower ones with
! sieve, which stuck thickly to their slimy skins, completely cover-
g them up. Thinking we must have mastered them by so free a
e of this long trusted remedy, we took no further heed of them for
me days, when, to our surprise, they were found as numerous as
> er. The next step was to test this sand remedy accurately to see
lat virtue there was in it. Several small branches of pear trees

ICO

were selected and marked, on "which there were six slugs, and these
were well powdered over — entirely covered with dry sand ; on exam¬
ining them the next morning it was found that they had shed the
sand-covered skin and crawled out free and slimy again. The sand
was applied a second and third time on the same insects with sim¬
ilar results, and now being convinced that this remedy was of little
value, they were treated to a dose of hellebore and water, which
soon finished them. Ashes were now tried on another lot, the same
way as the sand had been, with very similar results. It was also
intended to try fresh air-slacked lime, which we believe would be
effectual, but having none on hand just then, the experiment was
postponed and the opportunity of testing it lost for the season.

A far more serviceable remedy is powdered hellebore, and an ex¬
periment with this by the same entomologist is equally conclusive :

“On the 18th of August, at eight A. M., a branch of a cherry tree was
plucked, on which there were sixty-four slugs; the branch had only
nine leaves, so that it may be readily imagined that they were
thickly inhabited. A dose of hellebore and water was showered on
them about the usual strength, an ounce to the pailful, when they
soon manifested symptoms of uneasiness, twisting and jerking about
in a curious manner ; many died during the day, and only six poor,
sickly-looking specimens remained alive the following morning, and
these soon after died.”

Unquestionably, Paris green or other arsenical poisons would be
equally effective if applied to either brood of the worms ; but if the
trees were bearing, its use would of course be inadmissable except
for the second brood. Some have also recommended shaking the
flies down from the trees early in the morning, or late in the even¬
ing, catching them on cloths and taking care to destroy them before
they can escape.

The White-marked Tussock Caterpillar ( Orgyia leucostigma, Smith).

mzi

UBS

This beautiful caterpillar is
easily recognized by the four
large brush-like tufts of fine
hairs on the front part of
the back, and the two long
black pencils of hairs ex¬
tending backwards and for-
i wards from each end of the

Fio'^X ..-The mite-marked" Tussock caterpillar body. It was reported to me
(Orgyia leucostigma. Smith). last fall as occurring m un¬

usual numbers throughout the northern part of the State, and the
egg-clusters upon the leaves of apple trees attracted the general at¬
tention of orchardists in the fall. It has not been especially abundant
or destructive before since 1870, at which time it was treated in the
report of Dr. LeBaron, then State Entomologist. It was also further
discussed by Dr. Thomas in the seventh report, for the year 1877 ;
but as there is a present prospect of an unusual development of
this insect, it will be profitable to call attention to it at the present

101

}. The usual method of prevention recommended is that of re-
l.'mg the egg clusters in the fall. The eggs are laid by the female
Q the outer surface of the cocoon from which she has just
. rged, forming very conspicuous objects upon the leafless limbs
i they do not hatch until May or June, they may be removed at
time m the winter or early spring. Doubtless, if this has been
ected, the spraying of the foliage during the months of June or
member with Paris green or London purple, suspended in water
let also be a perfect remedy.

||* -Yyg..- • - ,

The Bag- worm ( Thyreodopteryx epliemerceformis, Haw).

Fig. 21.— The Bag- worm, ( Thyreodopteryx eph emerceformis
Haw), a, Larva, fully grown; b, male chrysalis; c, female
moth; d, male moth; e, bag containing female chrysalis
with eggs, fy fully grown lurvci currying its bug; o youn^r
worms. . ^ ^

N

e general abundance of this pest upon cedars and some other
in Southern Illinois calls for special mention. The small
f al hags, attached to the twigs of the tree, cannot be mistaken
i nv thing else. Many of these contain the eggs, which remain
iighout the winter and hatch in the following May. They may
Liquently be removed and destroyed by hand in the winter and
vg, or the trees may be protected by spraying with Paris oreen
per similar poison in June or July, when the worms are eat-
j he leaves.

102

The Army-worm, ( Leucanici unipuncta , Haw).

Fig. 22. — Army-worm {Zcucuniu unipuncta , Haw). Larva and chrysalis.

The army-worm appeared in destructive numbers throughout South¬
ern Illinois in March and April of this year, attacking especially
the grass and wheat, but did not attract general attention until
later in the season. Another brood of the worms appeared in June,
in Central Illinois, doing no serious damage, however, except in
restricted localities. As a contribution to the life history of this insect
the following dates of its appearance are noted. A living moth was
taken at Normal on the 18th of March. A colony of half grown
worms was seen at Bloomington on the 22d of June, and on the
24th another colony of about the same age was noticed in the lawn
of the poor farm, six miles below that city. On the 80th, moths
were found very abundant at Normal on the blossoms of red clover.
On the 1st of July many young army- worms in the first and second
stages occurred upon the grass at Normal; and on the Bd of that
month the brood noticed at the poor farm had all pupated in the
ground, while on the 12th moths were taken very abundantly at
sugar at Normal. On the 27th, however, the moths were scarce at
sugar, but on the 1st of August a few larvae, about three-eighths of
an inch long, were noticed in a field of oats in McLean county.
We have here, consequently, evidence of three distinct broods in
Southern and Central Illinois, although the cold and wet weather
of the early spring was especially unfavorable to the development
of insect life.

Near Centralia, damage was done by this worm in strawberry
fields, the foliage being eaten and the unripe berries gnawed from
their stems. ,

The history of the brood of worms observed near the poor farm,
in McLean county, is worthy of especial attention, as showing the
power of the checks to which this species is subject, and serving to
explain why two successive injurious broods rarely or never appear
in the same locality. When first noticed, on the 24th of June, these
worms were doing serious damage to a heavy growth of timothy
on high ground, marching from one side of the lawn to the other.
By the Bd of July, the season for the transformation to pupae had
been reached, but apparently not over twenty-five per cent, of the
worms succeeded in effecting the change, the remainder dying in
such numbers that the ground was reeking with a sickening stench.
At the same time clusters of the cocoons of one of the common
parasites of the army-worm were found everywhere abundant on the
surface of the ground, and in some cases on the dried remains of
the army-worm itself. Of seventy-six pupae of the worm, collected
in this field at this time, but one reached maturity.

103

The Cabbage Cut- Worm ( Agrotis annexa, Fr.)

The larva of this moth (kindly determined for me by Prof C V
ley) was found destroying young cabbage plants at' Normal’ in
e middle of April. It came out of the ground when the sun was
11 m, cut off the plants at or near the surface, and then ate
e leaves. In a garden containing 600 plants not over twenty
thirty were left. The owner killed about 200 worms on the
st day of their appearance, and 500 or 600 on the day follow-
?• The held was afterwards set to late cabbages, which were not
Dlested. The application of Paris green would have probably ex-
rminated the worms, if made in time.

u!' '

The Stalk-Borer ( Gortyna nitela, Guenee).

r

Fig. 23.— Stalk borer ( Gortyna nilela, Guenee). 1 Moth, 2 larva.

This worm was found injurious to oats throughout Central and
j-rthern Illinois, in July and August. The effect upon the grain
'S to blast the head, preventing the kernel from filling.

The entrance of the worm to the stalk was made anywhere from
3ve the first joint to the fourth joint below. The worms found in
e oats were not more than half grown, and the size of the open-
?s by which they entered the stalk made it evident that they were
hatched upon this grain. In some cases they emerged by the
■fice of entrance, and in others made a separate exit. The differ-
?e in size between the openings of entrance and exit was usually
Hal, showing that the worms grew but slightly in a single stalk,
t one larva to a straw was found, except in a single instance,
ere two had. met face to face. One of these had attacked the
Uer, and eaten away part of its head, although both were still
Lng. The damage done, as far as noticed, was within a few rods
ff the margins of the fields, showing that the worms had penetrated
m without. They had doubtless bred in the grass and other
pds adjacent, and such injury as resulted might probably have
■n prevented by keeping down the weeds outside the field.

The Zebra Caterpillar ( Mamestra picta, Haw.)

l single larva of this species was found at Normal in September,
ling upon kernels of corn in the ear.

104

The Purple Cabbage Worm ( Orobena rimosalis, Guenee.)

This species continues abundant in Southern Illinois, doing its
principal damage in September. It is also found injuring late cab¬
bages early in October. Many ol the larvae collected in Union county
during the latter part of September, were found parasitized. Several
masses of the white silken cocoons of hymenopterous parasites were
found upon shriveled remains of the cateipillais. This paiasite,
belonging to the group of Microgasters, is apparently new, and a
description is herewith given.

Apanteles orobence , n. sp. Length, two and a half millimeters.
Head, thorax and abdomen black; first two segments of the last
with the edges and under surface paler; antennse black throughout,
as are also the trochanters and coxae of all the legs ; femora and
tibiae all yellow ; tips of posterior femora dusky above ; tarsi more
or less dusky, especially those of the posterior legs. The wings are
hyaline ; the stigma and veins yellowish-brown. The mesothorax
and scutellum are thickly set with fine punctures, largest on the
latter ; metathorax coarsely and closely punctured, with a delicate
median carina ; the first two segments of the abdomen opaque and
closely punctured above, the remainder smooth and shining. Hie
first cubital cell angular externally, and extending beyond the middle
of the stigma ; posterior discoidal cell widely open. Described from
twelve specimens, male and female, bred from the cocoon.

Colaspis brunnea, Fab., was found in great numbers on clover in
fields at Waterman, Ill., in July, 1881.

Diabrotica 12-guttata , Oliv., was seen feeding upon the pollen of
corn in the field, August 1, 1882, and also upon blossoms of red
clover during the same month.

Macrobosis unicolor, Kirby, is reported by Mr. Webster to feed upon
the leaves of red clover.

Epicauta vittata, Fab., was seen by Mr. Webster, eating the fruit
of the tomato in 1881, and eating silk from ears of corn in the
fields in August, 1882.

Mr. Gfarman observed Epicauta cinerea, Forst, upon tomato plants
in Southern Illinois, doing serious damage by eating the leaves and
tender branches, a dozen sometimes occurring on a single branchlet.

Epicauta pennsylvanica, DeG., was also seen by Mr. Webster,
feeding upon the silk of corn in August.

Epiccerus imbricatus, Say, was found feeding on the blossoms of
red clover at Normal in June, 1882.

Flata conica , Say, Ormenis pruinosa, Say, and Hydnocera pallipen -
nis , Say, were all found abundant upon osage orange in August,
1882.

Lygus lineolaris, Beauv., was extremely abundant in fields of corn,
sucking the sap from the tassels, in July.

105

I

■■

1

THE FOOD RELATIONS OF PREDACEOUS BEETLES.

No facts are of more fundamental importance to a correct under-
ending of the general principles of economic entomology than those
ating to the fluctuations of numbers among insects. While it is
ibably true that all species fluctuate more or less, their numbers
Tying considerably, one year with another, it is certainly also true
it different species differ extremely in this particular, some re¬
dlining relatively constant, and others undergoing the greatest
cremes of abundance and scarcity.

Even without experience of the fact, we might easily see that the
lely fluctuating species must be most injurious to agriculture,
ainst the attacks of those insects which, appearing year after year
|i the same numbers, produce a uniform and steady drain on their
iri ources, the plants infested by them have necessarily learned to
|)tect themselves by producing a surplus of sap, of foliage, of
om and of Iruit ; and we consequently find it a general rule with
| nts of all descriptions, both wild and cultivated, that they will
' lure a considerable loss of numbers or of substance without ap-
Lciable injury to the organism or species as a whole, or to its
Toductive power.

j!

3ut against the overwhelming attack of those enemies which leave
or a time unmolested, and then burst forth in innumerable, de¬
ling hosts, it is far less easy for the vegetable world to defend
|'lf ; and such insect outbreaks never fail to leave their traces for
j onsiderable period. How greatly the damage to agriculture in¬
ked by insects of inconstant numbers, subject to uncontrollable
breaks, exceeds everything done to our crops by those of the
re constant class, a few comparisons of familiar species will make
lent.- If we contrast the consequences of a visitation of the “rocky
antain locust” with the effects on vegetation of even the corn¬
iest of our resident grasshoppers, or if we compare the damage
j\e by the chinch-bug with that attributable to all other members
’ ts order taken together, or the injuries of the army- worm with
j se of the common “grass-worms” of our meadows, we shall have
king but fair illustrations of the relative harmlessness of those
Lets whose numbers vary but little from year to year. In short,

| > not too much to say that if the oscillations of insects could be
I pressed so that each species should be represented each year by
identical number of individuals, by far the most important nroh-
s of economic entomology would be solved.

106

It follows, of course, from the above, as a general rule, that every
natural agency originating or stimulating oscillations of numbers
among insects is to that . extent an injury, and every agency tending
to prevent such oscillations, or to limit and reduce them aftei they
have arisen, is a benefit in that particular. In fact, so overshadowing
is the importance of insect injuries due to what we may call a disturb¬
ance of the balance of plant, and insect life, that the point oi view
from which all natural checks on insect multiplication should be con¬
sidered is that of their effect on such disturbances. Concerning a
predaceous or parasitic insect, an insectivorous bird, or a parasitic
plant, the main question of interest to the economic entomologist is,
what is its effect on insect oscillations?

In truth, however desirable total extermination of any insect may
be, it is evident that we cannot expect this result from the depre¬
dations of those of its enemies which are dependent upon it for
food. The adjustments of nature are not so clumsily made. The
best that we can expect from any predaceous or parasitic organism,
is that it shall hold the species which it infests, or upon which it
preys, steadily down to a fair average number.

Concerning every such organism, we have therefore three ques¬
tions to ask :

1. Does this bird, insect or plant originate any oscillations among
the species of insects which it affects? That is, are its numbers or
habits so inconstant from year to year, that insects which are at
one time vigorously attacked by it, are at other times relatively free
from its injuries, and allowed to multiply without restraint?

2. Does it prevent or restrain any oscillations of insects now noxi¬
ous, or capable of becoming so, if permitted to increase more freely?
That is, does it bring to bear upon any species a constant pressure
so great, that those insects would increase unduly, if this pressure
were removed by the destruction of this enemy?

3. Does it do anything to reduce existing oscillations of injurious
insects? Does it sometimes vary, either in numbers or habits, in
such a way as to affect injuriously to an extraordinary degree those
species which for any reason become superabundant for a time?

When these questions are answered for any beneficial species, or one
whose economic relations are in doubt, we shall be able to estimate
intelligently its usefulness, while without this such an estimate will
evidently be impracticable.

The present paper is an attempt to answer these questions, in
part, with reference to some of the most important families of car¬
nivorous insects.

The two most important families of insectivorous beetles, are the
ground beetles (Carabidee) and the ladybugs (Coccinellidse), the
latter noted for their destruction of plant-lice, and the former mak¬
ing a variety of insects their prey, and feeding, also, to some extent,
upon vegetation.

The view of the functions of these two families which is common
among entomologists, is certainly based upon insufficient data.
Observations of the food of these beetles have hitherto been left
almost wholly to chance, and have nowhere been systematically pur*

107

:d, — from which it has resulted that we know their habits only in
most conspicuous situations, and have not a fair idea of the
serai average of their food. Neither have observations of any kind
n numerous enough to enable us to detect clearly differences of
d habit in different species or genera of these families ; but, with
ght occasional exceptions, all Carabidae have been classed together
( essentially carnivorous. The following notes are a contribution
a more exact knowledge of this subject:

Clie method followed has been that of dissection. The alimentary
lals of beetles, taken in a great variety of situations, at various
-sons and at different times of day, have been removed, placed in
cerine on microscope slides, and opened with small knives and
unted needles, so as to display the contents completely. These
ye been studied with whatever power of the microscope was neces-
y, and mounted as microscope slides for permanent preservation
1 repeated examination.

y. few special collections of predaceous beetles were made in situ-
Jjons where some particular species of noxious insect was particu-
: ly abundant, with a view to determining to what extent the latter
U preyed upon by its supposed enemies.

i*

Tiose from the orchard infested by canker worms, and those from
orn field overrun by chinch bugs, were made by myself ; the other
ects dissected for this report, were partly obtained in the course
miscellaneous collecting, and partly secured for me especially for
purpose, by one of my entomological assistants, Mr. F. M. Web-
L', who kept careful notes of the situations in which the specimens
re taken, the hour of day when they were captured, and the objects
>n which it seemed probable that they had lately fed. Examples
the latter were frequently bottled, with the specimens, for com-
•ison.

The Predaceous Ground Beetles (Carabidce).

Tiis large and important family of beetles is distinguished by their
ider or filiform or slightly tapering antennae, taken in connection
ill their five- jointed tarsi; by the articulated outer lobe of the
if xillae, giving an appearance of six palpi, and by the large egg-
'bped posterior trochanters.

‘Tie fourth and fifth tarsal joints are not connate, but the first
ee ventral segments are ; and the first ventral segment is divided
i three parts by the hind coxal cavities. The antennae are eleven-
lted, and inserted at the sides of the head, between the base of
mandibles and the eyes.

ls their common name implies, they are found mostly on the
mnd. They never attempt to escape by flight, but run with
at rapidity.

i ly notes upon the food of this family are derived from the dis-
! tion and study of one hundred and twenty-five specimens, repre-
if ting thirty-eight species and twenty genera. Eighty- two specimens
■e collected in miscellaneous situations, twelve were taken in a
1 infested by cabbage-worms, ten in a corn-field overrun by

1 1

I

108

chinch-bugs, and seventy-one in an orchard which was being de¬
stroyed by canker-worms. The lirst collection, of eighty-two speci¬
mens from various situations, represented thirty-two species, belonging
to eighteen genera. They were obtained in different parts of the
State, from DeKalb county in the north to Union in the south, and
at all seasons of the year, from April to October, and doubtless rep¬
resent fairly well the food of the family in Illinois during the entire
year. The collections illustrating the food of the Carabidse as related
to the cabbage-worm were made in a field of young plants at Nor¬
mal, Ill., in April, 1882, where the larvie of Agrotis annexa were
abundant and destructive.

I

The collection showing the food of this family in the presence of
the chinch-bug consisted of ten specimens of a single species found
in July, 1882, very abundant about the roots of corn in a field
where the bases of the stalks were largely covered by young chinch-
bugs.

The third special collection consisted of seventy-one insects, rep¬
resenting nineteen species, obtained in May of two successive years
(1881 and 1882) in an orchard which had been infested for several
years with the canker-worm to such an extent as to cause the total
destruction of a large part of the trees.

Genus Calosoma.

This genus is represented by three specimens of the brilliant green
G. scrutator, collected in the orchard with the canker-worms, and by
nine of C. calidum, which were from various situations.

Extremely minute fragments of insect crust wore found in five of
these beetles, and were reckoned at about half the entire food of
the group, the remainder being distinguishable only as apparently
derived from animal sources.

Genus Scarites.

Two specimens of S. subterraneus, taken in 1882, one at Normal
and the other at Anna, in Southern Illinois, had eaten only animal
food, one-half of which was unrecognizable, and the remainder in¬
sects. Four specimens of the same species, taken in the cabbage-
field, have a similar record.

The above nineteen specimens, belonging to three species, were
the only examples of Carabidee proper whose food was studied, and
all agreed in a strictly carnivorous character.

Genus Galerita.

Seventeen specimens of Galerita janus (an abundant beetle, with
purple wing covers and rufous head and thorax,) had made a much
moie varied record. Four of these were from various localities, and
thirteen were from the orchard infested by canker-worms. All of
the group first mentioned had eaten insects, which amounted to
eighty-eight per cent, of their food, nearly all caterpillars of unde¬
termined species. The remaining twelve per cent, consisted of

109

etable food eaten by two of the specimens, and was apparently
ived chiefly from the seeds of grass. A larger ratio of animal
d is noticed in the thirteen taken where canker-worms abounded,
re vegetation amounted to only six per cent,, all of exogenous
gin, as shown by the branching bundles of spiral cells in the
fetable fragments noticed, while the animal food amounted to

f ety-four per cent.

f from the ratios of animal food taken by the examples from the
hard we subtract the ratio of canker-worms (fifty-two per cent.)
remainder is just seven times the ratio of vegetation eaten,
hailing the percentages of animal and vegetable food taken by
four specimens first mentioned, we find that here also the former
almost exactly seven times the latter. This goes to show that
! canker-worms eaten were in addition to the ordinary ratio of
mal food taken by this species under the usual conditions.

Genus Loxopeza.

>at three specimens of this genus were studied, all L. atriventris.
dr stomachs contained fragments of insects, pollen and anthers
blue-grass, and immense numbers of the spores of a fungus
ibably Plioma) which forms small black specks on dead wood,
ns of weeds, etc.

Genus Calathus.

ix examples of Calathus gregarius, three from DeKalb county
three from the orchard, were the only representatives of this
■us.

ne-third of the food of those first mentioned consisted of cater¬
ers, a second third of other insect larvae, and the remainder of
pollen of grass. The food of the second group was extremely
ilar, a third consisting, as before, of vegetation, another third
:anker- worms, and the remainder of insect fragments not further
uuninable.

Genus Platynus.

he stomach of a single P. decorus, taken in the orchard, con¬
ned only liquid animal food. Two examples of P. limhatus, both
n Southern Illinois, in April, had derived about four-fifths of
r food from the vegetable kingdom, partly seeds of grass and
fly the parenchyma of exogenous plants. The remainder con-
3d entirely of Aphides (plant-lice). These specimens were doubt-
too few to give a correct idea of the average food of the genus
i whole.

Genus Etarthrus.

i

ive specimens of E. colossus, taken at various dates and places,
derived about one-tenth of their food from endogens, and the
ainder wholly from insects. Twenty per cent, eaten by one of
i beetles was recognized as caterpillars. Scarabieidse are credited

110

with another twenty per cent., and undetermined larvae of Coleoptera
with about an equal ratio. Minute quantities of fungi were noticed
in the stomachs of two of these beetles, and traces of undetermined
algae in one.

Two examples of E. sodalis, taken in the Tazewell county orchard,
had consumed only insects, all canker-worms, except traces of an
ant and a single gnat.

The insect ratio of the food of the genus, as represented by these
seven specimens, stands at ninety-three per cent.

Genus Pterostichus.

Thirteen specimens were dissected, representing P. permundus , P.
sayi, and P. lucublandus.

The number of each species is not sufficient to give distinctive
food characters, and the genus may therefore best be treated as a
whole. Seven of the specimens, taken in miscellaneous situations
in Central Illinois, in April, May and September, had found about
one-fourth of their food in the vegetable kingdom, about one-third
of which consisted of fungi. Forty-three per cent, consisted of insects,
and a single mite occurred in one of the beetles.

Three specimens taken in the orchard infested by canker-worms
had eaten vegetation to the amount of about one-fifth of their food.
Caterpillars made eleven per cent., and undetermined insects two
per cent., the remaining ratio being accounted for by the presence
of liquid animal food. Two- thirds of the contents of three speci¬
mens taken among the cabbages consisted of animal matter, half of
which was clearly recognized as the larvae of Agrotis annexa infest¬
ing the field; the remaining third, composing the entire food of one
of the beetles, consisted wholly of fragments of grass.*

Genus Amara.

«

Six specimens of this species were dissected, three of A. carinata,
one of A. angustata, and two of A. impuncticollis. Three specimens
of A. carinata taken in Southern Illinois in April, 1882, had eaten
only vegetation, about one-fourth of the food being recognizable as
fungi. Ninety per cent, of that of a single A. angustata , taken in June,
consisted of mites, the remainder being fragments of grass. An A.
impuncticollis , taken in the orchard with the canker-worms, had eaten
only vegetable food, chiefly undetermined, but with traces of fungi.
Another of the same species, from the cabbage field, had derived its
food about equally from plant and animal sources, that from the
former consisting chiefly of grass.

Genus Dic^lus.

Three examples of Diccclus elongatus had taken only animal food,
as indicated by the fluid contents of the stomachs. One of these was
found in the orchard and the other in Central Illinois.

* A specimen of P. lucublandus was seen by Mr. F, M. Webster making a meal from a
dead P. sayi.

Ill

»v

Genus Chltenius.

iis abundant genus is represented by twenty-three individuals,
next to the largest number studied of any genus of Carabidse.
examples from Southern Illinois, collected from April to Sep-
oer, belong to the species C. diffinis, C. nemoralis, and C. tomen-

11?. The animal food of these was about three times the veg-
le. Two-thirds consisted of insects, of which caterpillars alone
) determinable, and earth-worms eaten by one of the beetles
e about eight per cent. More than half the vegetable food con¬
'd of fungi. Fragments of exogenous plants were recognized in
of the beetles. A single C. diffinis, taken among the cabbage-
ns, had eaten only insects, chiefly a caterpillar and a larva of
hetle ; a mere trace of endogenous vegetation was also detected,
ixteen specimens collected among the canker-worms, three were
rythropus and thirteen C. diffinis. Cut-worms made about one-
,1 of the food of the first, and earth-worms the remaining two-
Is. The latter were easily distinguishable by the peculiar spines
ed with dirt in the stomachs of the beetles. About ninety per
|. of the food of the other species was of animal origin, and
-it half the vegetable food was fungi. Insects made seventy-two
cent., nearly half caterpillars, of which the greater part (thirty:
per cent.) was canker-worms. Fragments of a fly were observed
re of the beetles, and another had eaten one of the Telephoridce.
js and myriapods (Geopliilus) had also been devoured by one.

■ i-

im - -

Genus Agonoderus.

fteen specimens of the superabundant little beetle Agonoderus
na were studied, ten of which were collected from the ground
it hills of corn in a field which was badly infested by chinch-
i, and contained also a great many plant lice ; while many ants of
jecies everywhere common, were seen about almost every hill,
pnents of chinch-bugs were found in four of the beetles, and
unted to about one-fifth of the food of all, and plant lice taken
lalf that number amounted to* about eight per cent. ; a single
J Lasius fldvus, eaten by one, was rated at five per cent., and
!r‘ insects brought the general average of the class up to tliirty-
per cent. Vegetation made just half the food, all fragments of
higher plants, except two per cent, of common fungi. Four
Umens, from different situations, had made a similar record,
ring only by the presence of a few mites in the stomach of one
Aes$ beetles. Eleven per cent, of fungi was taken by the group
mentioned. The circumstances of capture, together with the
ents of the stomach of one of these beetles, indicated that it
I made its meal chiefly from the seeds of June grass ; but the
i linder of the vegetable food could not be more definitely classi-
A single Agonoderus, taken among the cabbages, had eaten
i undeterminable food.

Genus Anisodactylus.

iis large and abundant genus is represented by thirty-one speci-
j s^belonging to six species. Nineteen specimens, collected in va-

112

rious places, belonged to the species A. rusticus, discoideus, baltl
morensis, harrisi, sericeus and opaculus. Animal matter made about
one- fourth of their food, recognizable insects being estimated at only
three per cent. ; the vegetation, as far as determined, was chiefly
derived from June grass and other grass-like plants.

The record of ten specimens taken from the canker-worm orchard
is not especially different from that of the foregoing group. Only
one of these had eaten animal matter at all, ninety per cent, of
the food of this consisting of undetermined Diptera. Here, again,
the recognizable vegetation was chiefly graminaceous, only ten per
cent, being clearly derived from exogenous plants. Two specimens
from the cabbage field afford no occasion for special remark. The
stomach of one was distended with liquid animal food ; that of the
other contained vegetation only.

Genus Amphasia.

Four examples of A. interstitialis indicated that this species is al¬
most strictly vegetarian, only three per cent, of the food consisting
of insects. Of the remaining ninety-seven per cent., little can be
said except that it was certainly of vegetable origin.

Genus Bradycellus.

A single specimen of B. dichrous had eaten only insects, which
could not be further classified.

Genus Harpalus.

Nineteen specimens of Harpalus were studied, belonging to the
three species caliginosus, pennsylvanicus and herbivagus. Twelve of
these, taken at various times and places, had obtained more than
nine-tenths of their food from the vegetable kingdom. Most of this
consisted of the pollen of flowers, and of the tissues of grasses, al¬
though various fungi amounted to thirteen per cent. Three speci¬
mens of H. caliginosus and H. pennsylvanicus, taken among the
canker-worms, had derived one-third of their food from those cater¬
pillars, while the other two-thirds consisted of vegetation, sixteen
per cent, being fungi, and the remainder chiefly seeds and exogenous
tissues. Four specimens of H. herbivagus, collected in the cabbage
field, in April, had eaten none of the cabbage-worms, and only ten
per cent, of insects (Diptera). The remainder of the food consisted
apparently of fragments of seeds, as indicated by the contents of
the cells of the fragments and by other microscopic characters. A
piece of the epidermis of grass was noticed in one of the beetles.
Taking the genus Harpalus as a whole, as far as these nineteen
specimens can be supposed to indicate its food, we find that only
about one- eighth of it consisted of animal substances. Insects stand
at nine ppr cent., two- thirds of them caterpillars, — ants and Diptera
making up the balance. Among the items on the vegetable side of
the account, we find fungi and pollen of Composite, each eleven per
cent., and seeds and other tissues of grasses, fourteen per cent.

113

Genus Patrobus.

ft

vo specimens of P. longicornis, one from Central and the other
I Southern Illinois, had eaten nearly twice as much vegetation
fjhimal food. The latter consisted chiefly of caterpillars, and in-
! 3d in fact nothing else but traces of plant-lice, eaten by one of
two. A little of the vegetation was derived from grass, but the
be of the remainder could not be satisfactorilv traced.

THE FAMILY AS A UNIT.

e have now to treat the various collections of Carabidae upon
i li this paper is based, as distinct and unbroken groups, without
ence to the genera of which they are composed. The eighty-
3 specimens of all the species obtained in miscellaneous situa-
are found to have derived forty-two per cent, of their food from
inimal kingdom, while the seventy specimens captured in the
ard so often mentioned, took seventy-seven per cent, of their
from the same sources. The individuals from the cabbage field,
Sver, show no such excess of animal food as those just men-
d, the ratios standing for them at forty-one per cent. If we seek
bcount for this striking surplus shown by the second group, we
find, in the first place, a difference of more than sixteen per
between the ratios of insects eaten by the first and second
ps respectively, — a fact clearly due to the presence of canker-
as where the second group wa's collected. This species was eaten
ixteen of the seventy beetles, and composed about one-fiftli of
contents of all the alimentary canals. This accounts, however,
*nly about half the difference noted, the remainder appearing in
arger ratios of other insects, of mollusks, of earth-worms, and
idetermined animal food.

is indicates either that other forms of animal life than the
er- worms were superabundant in the orchard, or else that the
ellaneous collections do not correctly represent the ordinary
of the Carabidae. The truth probably lies between the two.
extraordinary wetness of the season, together with the amount
ibbish on the ground in the orchard, gave these beetles an
ual opportunity to capture slugs and earth-worms, and
ded excellent harborage for all sorts of insects. On the other
, many of the beetles from other situations were preserved
^ally for dissection because the circumstances of their capture
,3 it seem probable that they were feeding upon vegetation.

careful study of the data indicates one interesting and important
with regard to the preferences of this family, namely, that wlieie
straordinary abundance of any kind of animal food appeared,

{ a consequent increase in the percentage of that kind appro¬
ved by the beetles, this increase was compensated, not by a
jfase in the other animal elements, but in the ratios of vegeta-
only,— a fact which clearly shows that the preferences of the
i bidie are for animal food. It should be noticed, however, that
irgument does not apply to all the genera, as is seen, for example,
calling the record of Anisodactylus. The ten specimens of this
3 taken in the orchard had eaten much more vegetation than
lineteen from various other places.

114

Continuing the comparison of the three separate groups, we find
that the beetles represented by the first, had taken insects to the
amount of twenty- six per cent. ; that those from the orchard had eater
about double this ratio ; while those from the cabbage field fell a
little short of it. This last fact is probably related to the time of the
year when these beetles were taken, — the middle of April in a very
late spring, when insect life in general was but just beginning to
stir abroad. The ratios of Diptera, Coleoptera and Hemiptera, were
but trivial in all these groups, and not worth separate mention.
The extraordinary difficulty of determining the elements of the vege¬
table food from the minute fragments found in the stomachs of these
beetles, makes it impossible to enter into much detail with respect
to this! The miscellaneous collections, and those from the cabbage
field, had found a little over half their food in the structures of
plants, while those from the orchard had obtained from this source
somewhat less than a quarter. Pollen of exogenous plants, which
will be found to form so large a ratio of the food of the family next
to be considered, appeared here only in three of the specimens, and
amounted to but three per cent, of the entire food of the first group.
These beetles fed much more largely on graminaceous plants, the
recognizable tissues of which amounted to about seventeen per cent,
in the first group, and eight in each of the special collections.
Fungi were reckoned at about one-tenth of the food of the beetles
included in the first collection, and only two per cent, of those from
the orchard. The • spores of the omnipresent Helminthosporium
make the most important contribution to this element of the food,
but a number of other genera were recognized.

A few words will suffice for a final discussion of the data relating
to all the collections, from whatever source derived. As already
remarked, a little over half the food of these one hundred and seven¬
ty-five specimens consisted of animal matter, about one-tliird being
insects, while mollusks, earth-worms, myriapods and Arachnida make
up the remainder.

All orders of insects are represented on the list, with the excep¬
tion of Orthoptera and Neuroptera. The ratios of none of these are
of any special importance, except that of the Lepidoptera, which
stands at fifteen per cent. Hymenoptera and Diptera are each one
per cent., and Coleoptera and Hemiptera each two. Among the
Coleoptera, only Scarabaeidse and Telephoridse were recognized;
among the Hymenoptera only a single ant ; and among the Hemip¬
tera, plant-lice and chinch-bugs only. About half the vegetable food
could be distinguished as exogenous or endogenous, the remainder
being of too indefinite a character to be positively assigned to either
class. As far as known, the endogenous food was more than twice as
abundant as the exogenous, and consisted almost wholly of grass or
grass-like plants. The fungi, which make somewhat more than a
fourth of the food, require no further special mention.

If, discarding the ratios given above, we look only to the number
of specimens in which the various food elements were detected,
we reach similar results. One hundred and seventeen individuals
of the one hundred and seventy-five exa?nined had eaten animal
food, and ninety-seven had taken vegetation. Insects were rec¬
ognized in eiglity-two, Lepidoptera in thirty-one (about one-

115

1

_

f of which had eaten canker-worms), Diptera and Coleoptera in
e and four respectively, and Hemiptera in seven. Earth-worms

(*e found in five, myriapods (Geophilus) in but one, and Arachmda
tes and spiders) in nine. Grass-like plants were taken by thirty-
and fungi by twenty-nine.

Scanning the totals for each genus, a few results are noted which
; worthy of special remark. First, we observe that at least two
y abundant genera, represented by specimens enough to give us
air probability that their average food is correctly exhibited, can
•dly be classed as carnivorous insects at all, namely, Harpalus,
h its nineteen specimens and twelve per cent, of animal food,
l Anisodactylus, with its thirty-one specimens and twenty-one

I cent, of the same. Amara and Amphasia should probably be
ced in the same category, six specimens of the first and five of
second having taken but twenty-three per cent, and seven per
t., respectively, of food of animal origin. The excessively abundant
modems ranks but little higher as a carnivorous insect, fifteen
mples having derived only about one-third of their food from
mal sources. On the other hand, twenty-three specimens of
| genius and seventeen of Galerita had taken about nine- tenths of
||iir food from insects, mites, myriapods and earth-worms. Thir-
1 q specimens of Pterostichus had obtained three-fourths of theirs
I! n similar sources, while Evarthrus and Calathus, represented by
j en and six specimens respectively, had averaged ninety-tlnee per
t. and sixty-seven per cent.

Che fact has already been alluded to that the Carabidge proper
1 eaten only animal food, and that nearly all this was of a fluid
macter.

lecond, we find the Carabidge dividing into at least three tolerably
binct groups as respects their food : first, those which seem usually
Jseize their prey and suck its juices, and take vegetation rarely,
it all ; second, those which take a much larger ratio of animal
d than of vegetable, but masticate and swallow it, as a rule, in-
ding indigestible fragments; and third, those whose habit is
entially vegetarian, but which still take solid animal food in
finished ratios. A fourth group, consisting of Lebia and its allies,
perhaps obscurely indicated by the facts relating to the three
cimens of Loxopeza atriventris studied. This will probably be
nd to feed largely upon pollen and fungus spores, after the man-
j of the Coceinelfidge ; and the fossorial Carabidge will, perhaps,
j stitute a fifth.

f we look now to the structures of these beetles for some expla-
ion of their differences of habit, we shall find corresponding
iations in the form and structure of the mandibles. Where the
Indibies are long and curved, and are destitute of basal molar
' cesses, but are provided at or near the middle of the cutting
I e with processes relatively long and sharp, the beetle seems to
1 substantially upon soft or liquid animal food. If they are of
lium length, somewhat slender, broad at base and tapering dis-
y, with the tip acute, and provided with basal processes which
not especially prominent or sharp, the food is chiefly animal,
solid structures are masticated and swallowed, and some vegeta-

L

116

tion appears in the alimentary canal; while, finally, if they are
short and quadrate, blunt at the tips, and provided either with
strong basal processes or broad opposed surfaces, vegetable food is
found to predominate. Calosoma is an example of the first of these
classes, Chleenius of the second, and Anisodactylus of the third.
The seeming exceptions to this generalization are found among
those genera of which too few specimens have been studied to war¬
rant general conclusions respecting their food.

The Lady Bugs ( Coccinellidce ).

This family shares with the preceding, the principal credit of
limiting the increase of other insects, its fondness for plant-lice
being well known.

Dr. Le Baron says of it in his excellent fourth report :

“The rounded or hemispherical form of these insects, commonly
known by the name of lady-birds, and their dotted coloration, render
them one of the most easily recognized of all the families of Cole-
optera. Their three-jointed tarsi and the broad hatchet-shaped ter¬
minal joint of the maxillary palpi, are their most distinctive organic
character's. The tarsal joints are always dilated and cushioned be¬
neath, and the second joint is deeply bilobed.

These insects seem to be specially appropriated to keeping in check
the extensive families of plant-lice, both the leaf-lice (Aphides), and
the bark-lice ( Coccides ), upon which they feed voraciously, in both
the imago and the larva states ; and they are also known to devour
the eggs of other insects. Mr. Westwood refers to some observa¬
tions which go to show that they must sometimes subsist on veget¬
able food, and I have seen the Coccinella 15-punctata, Oliv., with its
head deenly immersed in a ripe raspberry, implying that they some¬
times feed upon the juices of ripe and succulent fruits; but such
cases are rare and exceptional to their general habits.

The larvae are oblong, blackish grubs, and are usually thickly
beset with spines, which are also furnished with smaller spines or
prickles, giving them, when magnified, a formidable appearance.
These, as is the case with other larvae, are much more voracious
than the perfect insects.”

The collections from which the present notes are derived, are from
a variety of miscellaneous situations, and also from a cornfield men¬
tioned in the notes on the food of the preceding family, in which
chinch-bugs were superabundant, the purpose of the latter collection
being to determine the food relations of the Coccinellidae to those
insects. It so happened that the same field was infested by the corn
Aphis in great numbers, and the specimens obtained therein conse¬
quently illustrate to some extent the food of the lady-bugs in the
presence of plant-lice. It was in this last situation only that larvae
were collected, and the facts here given consequently relate almost
wholly to the adult beetles.

117

Genus Hippodamia.

Eleven specimens of H. metadata, taken in Northern, Central and
ithern Illinois at various seasons of the year, from April to Sep-
Vber, give an average of forty- six per cent, of animal food, all
Gets excepting a few mites eaten by three of the beetles, and
punting to only one per cent, of the food. The insect ratio, as
as recognized, with the exception of a single Podura, consisted
)lly of plant-lice, which amounted to thirty-five per cent., while
fifty-four per cent, of vegetable food contained only pollen of
ats and spores of lichens and fungi, the pollen and spores oc-
ring in about equal quantities. The former was chiefly from
fers of grass and composite plants, about seven per cent, of the
b and fifteen per cent, of the second.

'hree specimens of this species, taken in the corn-field at Jack-
ville, had eaten much smaller ratios of animal food, which
Dunted to only thirteen per cent., all insects. Traces of plant-
were recognized, but no structures of chinch-bugs occurred. All
five per cent, of the vegetable food was derived from spores of
gi. Three per cent, of the spores of lichens, and two per cent.
i he pollen of rag-weed and other Compositae, complete the record.

our examples of H. convergens, all taken at Normal in August
September, had eaten about the same amount of animal food as
preceding species (forty per cent.), but differed in the distribu-
| l of it by the fact that one of the specimens had eaten a myria-
; (Geophilus), and that a caterpillar had been taken by another.
3cts proper amounted to but twenty-five per cent., over half
At-lice. The vegetable food of this species stands at fifty-six per
t., as compared with fifty-four of the preceding, and the ratios
er this head are very similar to those just given for the other
sies. Pollen of Compositae (dandelion) makes thirteen per cent.,
lib of grass makes five per cent., spores of lichens two, and those
■ ungi thirty-three per cent.

ive adults, taken at Jacksonville, were found #to have made
ut one-third of their food of insects, equally divided between
it-lice and chinch-bugs, each eaten by one of the beetles. The
Station consisted, as usual, of pollen of Compositae (eleven per
it.), spores of lichens (two per cent.), and of fungi (seventy-one
t cent.)

wo larvae of this species, taken at the same place and time,
fered but little in food, to my surprise, from the adults just
itioned. Chinch-bugs and plant-lice in about equal ratios, with
:es of unrecognizable insects, amount to twenty-three per cent,
en of Compositae stands at five per cent., iiclien spores at
Gn, and spores of fungi at sixty-five.

f. glacialis was represented by four specimens, taken in the corn-
1. The differences between their food and that of H. convergens
e purely trivial. Insects amount to thirty per cent., all chinch-
s and plant-lice, twelve per cent, of the former and eighteen of
latter. The seventy per cent, of vegetable food is divided about
| before, between pollen of Compositae seven per cent., and spores
ungi fifty-one per cent. Lichen spores were taken more freely,
ever, and were estimated at twelve per cent., eaten by all the
lies.

—3

118

Genus Coccinella.

Six specimens of this genus were studied, three of C. 9-notata,
and three of C. 5-notata. All were from Central Illinois except one,
which was from Jacksonville. Excluding the last, the ratio of ani¬
mal food eaten by these specimens was not far from two-thirds of
the total, all plant-lice. Only a trace of pollen of Composite was
noticed in one of the insects. Fungus spores amounted to thirty
two per cent., (about half Helminlhosporium and Ustilago), and
lichen spores to four per cent. The Jacksonville specimen had
eaten only fungi.

Genus Cycloneda.

In the corn-field with the chinch-bugs, three specimens of C. san¬
guined were collected, which had eaten plant-lice,^ pollen of Com¬
posite, lichen spores and spores of fungi. The first made about
one-third of their food, the pollen grains were estimated at nearly
half, and lichen spores at three per cent. The eighteen per cent, of
fungi were of the usual character.

the family as a unit.

A summary and comparison of the food of these two groups, taken
singly without reference to their genera, develops some interesting
and unexpected facts. Although the corn-field in which the second
collection was made was teeming with insects of the kinds especially
tempting to the Coccinellidse, and although these beetles themselves
were there in truly surprising numbers, it is not easy to believe,
considering the tables upon which this discussion is based, that the
Coccinellidse were attracted to the field by the abundance of insects
available for their food. The beetles of the first group are seen to
have eaten nearly twice as many insects as those torn the field of
corn, while the fungi eaten were as thirty-six to fifty-six respectively.
Only eighteen specimens were dissected, out of the large number
collected in the corn-field, but the contents of their stomachs were
of so uniform a character that there was every reason to suppose
that they illustrated correctly the food of the family at that time
and place. It would therefore seem possible that these beetles were
attracted rather by the stores of fungi in the field, than by the
cliinch-bugs and Aphides. The condition of the leaves and stalks
of the corn, drained and deadened by insect depredations, was such
as to afford an excellent nidus for the development of those fungi
which spring up everywhere spontaneously upon dead and decaying
vegetation, and these were in fact extremely abundant. An alterna¬
tive explanation is perhaps more probable. The condition of the
field gave abundant evidence that the plant-lice had been very much
more numerous some time before ; and it is possible that, as a con¬
sequence of this decrease of food, and the increase of the Coccinel-
lide themselves, the latter had reached an excessive number, for
which the supply of plant-lice was really insufficient, and that for
this reason they had resorted to fungi.

The chinch-bugs taken by the specimens of the second group
amounted to only eight per cent, of their entire food, and plant-lice
to fourteen per cent. — less than half those taken by the other spec-

119

is, which stand at thirty-six per cent. The pollen eaten by each
ip w as thirteen per cent. — the same in both. If we combine the
collections, and treat the thirty-nine specimens of both as a
le, we find that insect food is about a third of the entire amount,
that the other animal elements are only trivial. The function
le beetles of this family of limiting the multiplication of plant-
is expressed by the fact that these insects compose a fourth of
food of this entire collection. The pollen of grasses and Com-
■ae make fourteen per cent., the spores of lichens four per cent.,
those of fungi nearly half the whole (forty-five per cent.)-

SuFFICJENCY OF DATA.

n.

le food of the Coccinellidas seems to be, on the whole, remark-
simple and uniform, consisting wholly of spores of the lower
togams, pollen grains, and plant-lice, and varying but little from
genus to another. This similarity is likewise reflected in the
,th parts, which agree as closely in form and structure as do the
s of the food. I have consequently little doubt that the data
I ed from the thirty-nine specimens here discussed, will be found
"lent for a correct general idea of the food of the family under
iary circumstances.

th respect to the Carabidae, we have other proof. In a brief
;jr published by me in 1880, in Bulletin No. 3, Illinois State
jjrafory of Natural History, based on an examination of only
tty- eight specimens belonging to seventeen species, the conclu-
Iwas announced that about one-half of the food of this family
sted of vegetation, and one-third of insects ; and the vegetation
bought to be about equally divided between cryptogams, grasses
L3xogens. If these figures or those of the present paper were
Tong, the probabilities would by very slight indeed that the two
ates would agree, especially as no comparison whatever was
of the two sets of data, until the tables were completed in
present form. When, therefore, we find that the one 'hundred
Jieventy-five specimens of the present paper, belonging to thirty-
; species, were estimated to have taken fifty-seven per cent, of
il food, and thirty-six' of insects, and that the ratios of crypto-
graminaceous plants and exogens are respectively five, eleven,
f ve, we must conclude that the above figures are a fair average of
"rdinary food of the family.

urring now and finally to the questions propounded at the
f; encement of this paper,* we have to note the replies which the
collected enable us to make.

far as the Carabidse are concerned, the answer must vary
ling to the genus and species — some being so far vegetarian
bit that their function as checks upon insect life is only
in importance. Respecting those which are to be properly
d as insectivorous, it is plain from the foregoing data that a
ensible effect must be produced upon already existing oscilla-
So many species were found eating a great excess of cater-
in the orchard where canker-worms abounded, that we cannot
that they had been tempted from their usual regimen by the

105.

i

120

superabundance of this one element. The fact that several of these
species are ordinarily dependent in part upon vegetable food is not
to be placed to their discredit, but, on the contrary, rather increases
their efficiency as checks upon insect oscillations, llie numbers of
any species strictly dependent upon insects foi food must, of course,
rise and fall with' the numbers of the species upon which it preys,
or indeed a little after them. There consequently can never be any
surplus of such species maintained for the suppression of arising
outbreak among the injurious insects. If, on the other hand, our
carnivorous beetles can sustain themselves during a deficiency of
insect food by resorting to vegetation, a large surplus may be held
ready for instant attack upon any injurious insect which commences
to appear in unusual numbers.

This argument applies with special force to the Coccinellidae,
which have been shown to feed so largely upon the Omnipresent
and everywhere abundant moulds and blights of vegetation.*

We are thus brought to see the points of evident superiority of
the insectivorous beetles over the parasitic Hymenoptera. The
latter must share in all the ups and downs of the host species, and
can only be of service in finally putting a period to uprisings already
well under way. In fact, there is considerable reason to suspect
that these strictly dependent parasites often cause the oscillations
which they afterwards have the credit of suppressing; and it is a
very significant fact, in this connection, that the most irregular and
destructive insects are, as a rule, the worst ridden by parasites.

When the army- worm, for example, commences to throng the fields
in hordes, an extraordinary opportunity is afforded its parasitic
enemies to multiply, and this increase in their numbers necessarily
proceeds at a geometrical ratio, until it is arrested by a resulting seri¬
ous diminution in the numbers of the worms themselves. The parasites
must thus necessarily far outstrip their hosts for a time, and, as a
consequence, eventually reduce them to insignificance. But with
the disappearance of the latter the parasites must suffer in turn;
and so an unending alternation goes on, needing no other explana¬
tion in many cases than the superabundance of parasites.

With respect to the families treated in this paper, however, we
have not a particle of evidence upon which to rest such a charge;
but everything indicates that their services to agriculture are ren¬
dered at no more expense than the trivial injuries to vegetation for
which a few of them are responsible.

* The discovery of this fact opens the way for some interesting and promising exp.erj-
ment. If any class of predaceous insects can be bred artificially to advantage, it is
probably the Coccinellidse, since the above kinds of food could be furnished .them in
unlimited quantities, at trivial expense. It remains to be seen, however, whether they
could reproduce without animal food,

121

APPENDIX.

THE LOMBARDY POPLAR BORER.
(Agrilus granulatus, Say.)

Order COLEOPTEJRA. Family Buprestid2E.

By Prof. T. J. Burrill.

A is known by every one that the Lombardy poplar lives but a
)rt time in the rich soils of the Mississippi valley, where its growth
i exceedingly rapid. Many suppose that this is due to some degen-
:dion, through the processes of propagation or otherwise, of the
astitutional vitality of the tree,. — that it is inherently short-lived.

After some studies upon this subject, I am quite sure, that the early
ith of the tree comes from other causes, and is due to agencies
;side the tree itself and not specially connected with the soil
5 climate. For the present note, one of these, and only one, may
mentioned.

About the middle of June a small beetle ( Agrilus granulatus , Say)
s its eggs in the crevices of the rough bark, depositing them
gly here and there, but sometimes only an inch or two apart, on
: trunk and limbs old enough to become roughened by the fissures
■1 cracks of the outer bark. The larvae penetrate the living bark
l gnaw tortuous galleries in it and the young layer of wood just
jieath. These galleries are at first as fine as the puncture of a
| nbric needle, and never become larger than one-tenth of an inch
!j diameter. For the most part they run in irregularly horizontal
factions, or crosswise of the grain of the wood. When numerous,
| they often are, they sometimes cross each other, but this is un-
s nmon. They are closely packed with the excrement of the larvae.

-he latter are exceedingly slender, 'slightly flattened, much eion-
ed, footless and white ; the first segment of the thorax is some-

1*22

what enlarged, and the minute but sharp jaws appaiently project
from its front. In October they bore obliquely into the deepey layers
of the wood, often one to two inches from the surface, and then
usually follow the grain up or down some inches, and turn obliquely
outward until within about an eighth of an inch of the suilace
wood, though this distance varies much. The last inch or there¬
abouts of the burrow is greatly widened and ends with an obliquely
rounded termination. The long, slender larva, towards the last of
this month and throughout the autumn and winter following, may
be found in the enlarged portions of its burrow with its head and the
first third of its body closely bent backward on the remaining two-
thirds of the length, and in this folded form filling the cavity gnawed
for itself in the wood. The bend of the body is always sideways,
and usually to the left.

About the middle of May the larvae transform, and the pupae are
found with their heads occupying the position of the fold just men¬
tioned and next to the rounded end of the burrow. The ventral side
is always outward, that is, toward the surface of the tree. Twto weeks
or thereabouts later the pupae become perfect beetles, and about
the first to the middle of June escape by gnawing outward, making
in so doing a very different cut from that previously made by the
larvae. Heen from without, the hole is doubly convex, the curvatures
being quite unequal, and meeting at a sharp or slightly rounded
angle on either side. As the insect emerges, its back is pressed
against the strongly convex side of the excavation.

The beetle is about half an inch long, slender and sluggish. It makes
little or no effort to avoid capture, which is easily enough done. It
appears to pass the night at rest in crevices, etc., and moves about
only during sunny weather. Eggs are deposited within a few
days after the mature beetle gains its freedom. It is thus described
by Say: “Body cylindrical, olive-green, granulated; head punctured,
with a profound sinus each side for the reception of the antennae,
tip rounded; eyes whitish, with a black, £ oblong, moveable pupil;
thorax with an oblique indented line each side, and a longitudinal
dorsal one ; basal edge sinuated ; scutel transversely elongated, with
an impressed transverse line behind ; elytra scabrous or granulated,
without striae or punctures ; an elevated longitudinal line, and an
indented large spot at base; tip serro-dentate. Length two-fifths of
an inch, nearly. This species has three hardly visible fulvous spots
on the elytra ; one on the depressed base, one near the suture
before the middle, and one behind the middle, also near the suture.
I have a specimen in which these spots are not at all visible. The
elevated line at the posterior angles of the thorax is short, but very
obvious.”

123

HE PHYTOPTI AND OTHER INJURIOUS PLANT MITES.*

By H. Garman.

'he injuries to plants by mites are commonly underestimated,
es are so small that their presence is often not perceived until
injury has been done, and we sometimes look for the cause only
find the empty skins left by our minute enemies. The fact
t injuries from this source usually give the plants the appear-
je of being diseased, while there are none of the ordinary
fcks of their having been attacked by insects, has led to some
)ute as to the part mites take in bringing about the diseased
iearance. The testimony of the more intelligent gardeners and
ticulturists, both of Europe and the United States, and of those
) have given the subject special study, should bear a good deal
veight, and upon its authority mites are not only injurious to
fits, but in some cases do “enormous” damage. Plant-feeding
1 3S have long been known in Europe as committing depredations
some of the most useful garden and hot-house plants. In all,
,)ml hundred plants have been enumerated which are subject to
tr injuries. In the United States, also, the same or similar species
mites attack some of our valuable garden plants and trees,
y many of our native plants are also infested ; and when the
es and the nature of their work are better known, I have little
bt that we shall find as many injurious species at least as occur
Europe, and that loss from supposed blight or killing by frost
in many cases be traced to the mites.

f damage done by mites in Europe, we have an abundance of
ence. The linden is badly injured some years on the continent
"he red spider, one of the spinning mites, which swarms upon
leaves. The same or a related species is very injurious in the

houses about Paris; and another, according to an English ento-
| ogist, “causes enormous damage, in dry seasons, to the hop
j’S.” The currant, pear, peach, vine, rose, and many others of
'most valued trees and shrubs, we are told, are badly damaged
• imes.

| - -

The present is merely preliminary to a more extended paper on the plant mites,

h the writer hopes to prepare. I wish hereto acknowledge my obligations to Prof.
Forbes for his kindness in translating Briosi’s article on the Phytoptus of the Vine
e, and in securing for my use many of the papers on Phytopti and their cecidii.

H

124

Giovanni Briosi, an Italian naturalist, after a thorough investiga¬
tion of the disease of the vine of Europe, says that where the galls
produced by the mites are very numerous, the development of the
fruit- buds is stopped.

Landois, a German investigator, declares that the injuries to the
vine from mites are quite as serious as those of the well-known
Oidium tuckeri, a parasitic fungus which devastates vineyards.

In our own country, injuries are also reported by florists and
gardeners, and one of our great staples, cotton, is infested by a mite
apparently belonging to the same genus as the injurious spinning
mites of Europe. Of this mite, the former Entomologist to the
Agricultural Department at Washington says, in one of his leports:

“ Much injury is done to the cotton leaf by a minute red spider, j
which presents very much the appearance of incipient rust, except
that the leaf is of a more rust-brown in spots, instead of the bright
yellow of the real rust. This red spider principally attacks the
under side of the leaf, the spots caused by its punctures turning
brown, and finally increasing until it is completely stung all o^er,
and falls from the plant. This family of the mites ( Acari ) do much
injury to vegetable life, as they are so extremely minute as to escape
the notice of the superficial observer. Bed spiders also injure the
rose, strawberry and vine, and seem to be very generally destructive
to vegetation.”

The Prairie Farmer for July, 1877, gives a paragraph relating to
their injuries, which will not be out of place in this connection :

“These [red spiders] are the most deadly enemies of our floral
pets which we have to contend with. ’ * * These insects

are so minute as to be scarcely visible to the naked eye, and often |
commit extensive ravages before the source of the mischief is dis¬
covered.”

The rust of the orange has been discovered by Mr. Wm. H. Ash-
mead, of Jacksonville, Florida, to be due to a mite which he names
Phytoptus oleivoms. Of the work of this mite, Mr. Ashmead says:

“The damage done is considerable, amounting to many thousand
dollars in the course of a year. The rust is due mainly to the
puncturing and exudations of the mites, millions of which are to be
found on a single orange tree, frequently covering the oranges and
leaves in the form of an impalpable yellowish dust,”

Che pear-leaf blister (Figs. 00 and 00,) is the result of a disease
ich is widely known, but not commonly understood to be due to
5 ravages of mites. Such is, however, the fact, as is now well
Dwn to foreign horticulturists. Recently, Prof. T. J. Burrill has
covered mites in blistered pear leaves in this State, and tells us
id they are identical with the European Phytoptus pyri *, a species
ich he thinks has been introduced with imported pear trees. In
1 account of this malady, which he has kindly furnished me (see
ytoptus pyri, Scheuten, at the end of this paper), he says, regard-
i the effect of this mite’s work upon the pear trees :

i* Trees are not killed outright, but much injury is done by this
j rk upon the leaves ; sometimes, also, the much more deadly
| ight ’ shoots from the minute wounds made by the mites. A tree

[j— - -

: Since the above was written, I chanced upon a reference to the work of this mite on
pear trees, in the report for 1872 of the U. S. Entomologist.

W

Figs. 24 and 25. Leaves of the pear tree, showing two stages of the galls pro
duced by Phytoptus pyri (after Sorauorj. H. Garman, del.

126 .

badly affected by the little blister-makers presents a pitiful appear¬
ance, with its speckled or spotted leaves and its stunted growth.
The fruit, if any, is poor in size and quality, ^and there is evidence
every way of the slow mischief accomplished.”

It has been supposed bv some that plants must be diseased before
insects will attack them, but Boisduval has shown that such is not
the case. Plauts in perfect health may be infected and injured by
placing them with those already attacked, or by bringing infested plants
among them. That strong and actively growing plants sometimes do
not appear to be affected by mite attacks, is what we should expect,
and is not necessarily evidence that mites have not inflicted injuries
upon them. In the case of the healthy plant, the growth may
overbalance the injuries, and the latter not be noticeable, while in
the unhealthy plant, the injury is more liable to overbalance the
gain to the plant by growth, and so attracts our attention. Moreover,
as in the case of the attacks of the chinch-bug upon corn, seasons
most favorable to the development of plant-feeding mites are, as a
rule, least favorable to vegetation, and their attacks are, in conse¬
quence, all the more dangerous.

The plant-feeding mites may be roughly divided into two groups:
those which live exposed upon the plant, and those which cause
abnormal growths on the leaves or stems, wdiich afford them shelter.
To the first group belong the spinning mites, Tetranychi, and those
of this group best known for their injuries belong to the genus
Tetranychus. These mites are commonly known as red spiders,
from their prevailing color and their habit of spinning a fine web
on the surface of the leaves they infest ; but they are true mites,
differing from spiders in their minute size and in the character of
their mouth parts. They work on the under side of the leaves, and
may be there found in great numbers on badly injured plants. To
the second group belong what are known as gall-mites (Phytopti)
from the galls and growths of hair which their attacks cause to
appear. They are best known from their galls, and the injuries
they inflict, since the mites themselves are so small that even
when abundant they escape detection. By opening one of the
galls .and washing it out in a little water, the mites will appear as
small whitish particles floating on the surface. Under favorable
conditions they become so numerous that they leave their galls and
collect upon plants in such quantities as to resemble a powdery
coating on the leaves and twigs.

Mites injure plants partly by puncturing them with their needle-
shaped maxillae, (of which each mite has a pair), and sucking the
juices of the plants, but quite as seriously also by interfering with
the respiratory and assimilative processes in which the leaves are
engaged. From this double injury the healthy green color of the
leaves is exchanged for a sickly yellow hue, or brown spots appear
at the points attacked, and by spreading and fusing, give a prevail-
ng brown color to the leaves. The disease, so-called, is known as
acariasis ; if the injury has been done by the gall-mites, it may be
called phytoptosis ; the former term comprehends the latter, and
answers all the requirements of convenience.

127

vVith the second group of injurious mites this paper has chiefly
do. Ihe peculiar deformities to which many of them give rise
ye placed by the earlier botanists among fungi, chiefly in the
jera Ermeum and Phyllerium, and the disease at that time was
led ermiosis. In 1737 a French naturalist, Reaumur, found in
. abnormal growth on the linden, a minute worm-like animal
icli he thought gave rise to the abnormal formations on the
ves. This animal was determined, by a later French entomolo-
t (Duges) to be a mite, and it received from him the geneiic name
ytoptus, from its plant-infesting habits. Since then, others of
se growths have been traced to their causes, and at present a
: g hst of plants may be given, each of which has its peculiar
ytoptus. The growths are now called by specialists, ceciclii, or
ij re exactly, acaro-cecidii.

m

idhe growths to which the Phytopti give rise are not always what
1 fl-d be called galls \ and in some cases they do not produce growths
iny kind, but live in the buds in such numbers that the latter
er develop, but remain blackened and swollen. Besides swellings
! ^ .leaf . substance called gails, the attacks of some of these
fees give rise to dense mats of twisted hairs on the under side of

!r es , and in the midst of these groves the mites live and propo-
3. These hairs differ very little in character from the ordinary
rs of the plant, being sometimes single and again many-celled,
the occurrence in dense groves and the frequent strange forms
ch they assume will ordinarily distinguish them from the normal
s of the plant. Some of the forms of these hairs may be worth
: eating. A common one is what may be called club-shaped, the
|* bemg slender towards the leaf, and expanding slightly towards
| extremity. Others of the hairs expand more abruptly outwards,
are quite short, being thus knob-like. Occasionally one occurs
! 1 gives off a lateral shoot, and often most of the hairs consti-
ng a grove are irregularly twisted. The usual form is, however,
r nearly that of the scattered hairs which may be found on other
;<s of the piant. The patches of these hairs are at first white,

« when old assume a rusty-brown color very like that of some of
fungi known as rusts. At this stage few mites will be found in
growths, the brown color of the hairs being due to their havino-
i exhausted and dried up.

123

Figure 2(i.— Leaf of the soft-maple ( Acer dasycar-
pum), showing the galls produced by Fhytoptus
quadripes. H. Ctarman, del.

The galls are quite as peculiar as the hairs, and assume the
greatest variety of forms. On the same plant this variation is not
wide, although there is great irregularity in outline and in size.
They may be distinguished from similar galls produced by dipterous
insects in that they always have' an opening by means of which
the mites can pass in and out. This opening is usually on the
under side of the leaf, and consists of a narrow slit or puckered
orifice, frequently almost obliterated by the closing together of the
margins, or concealed by a tuft of hairs similar to those described
as forming mats on the exposed surfaces of the leaves.

They consist of portions of the leaf which an unusually rapid
growth has caused to swell upward, thus forming a little pouch in
which the mites live. Since the attack is begun on the under side
of the leaf, these pouches project from the upper surface and have
the opening below. They stand up from the leaf like ten-pins or
tops, or form wart-like excrescences, in some of which the projec¬
tion is equal on both sides of the leaf. The size will average in the
neighborhood of a tenth of an inch. The outer surface may be
clothed with scattered hairs, smooth, or irregularly wrinkled, or pitted.
The colors change with age and differ with the plants. At first most
of them are like the leaves on which they grow in color, later becom¬
ing purple, yellow or some shade of brown, and finally blackening
and drying up.

129

The interior surface of a mite gall is rarely
as smooth as in other galls, but is rough¬
ened by irregular folds and processes, and
is sometimes clothed with hairs. The lat-

Besides the purse-like

a third abnormal formation on some plants

\di is produced by Phytopti. It consists of a simple fold of the
f not due apparently to any unusually rapid local growth, but
h as could be straightened out again dici the leaf admit of a
iciently vigorous pull. On our long-leaved willow, such a cecidium
1 uis. It extencis the entire length of the leaf, and ordinarily there
•ne on each side of the midrib. Dr. E. A. W. Thomas describes
milar cecidium which occurs on the European Lonicera nigra, and
ends around the entire margin of the leaf. The fourth kind of
idium is formed by the crowded masses of minute leaves and
?s whose development has been arested by the depredations of
mites.

’ormerly galls were thought to be due to a deposit of a liquid
: son by insects. At present it is pretty generally believed that
(y are caused by purely mechanical irritation. Briosi explains
formation of the mite-gall of the vine very simply and satisfac-
ly. He thinks that the puncturing of the cells of the leaves causes
increased flow of sap in the direction of the injured part, the
lit of which is that this gets an unusual supply of growth material,

[ the cells multiply more rapidly than those of the surrounding
ue. To make room for this additional tissue, the leaf swells
yard, leaving a hollow below which is closed in by the subse¬
nt growth of the leaf. A series of ceeidii may be selected from
uts which will illustrate the different stages in the development
one of the purse-shaped galls. There is a cecidium on the leaves
the box elder which consists of a dense cluster of hairs in a
cavity on the under side of the leaf. The position of these clus-
; of hairs is indicated above by a slight convexity differing in no
e in texture or color from the surrounding portions of the leaf.

! the oaks is another cecidium which is slightly more convex above
n the preceding, and finally becomes brown. This represents a
pnd stage. The third stage may be illustrated by galls on the
rt-leaved willow. In these galls the opening below is pretty
l closed and the outer surface is pitted and wrinkled. The fourth
' last stage may be represented by the galls on the maple, as in
m the openings are almost obliterated.

’he galls appear with the unfolding leaves in the spring. At the
best stage at which the leaves of the soft maple can be examined,
mte swellings are found on them indicating the site of the future
i s. They grow with the leaf, and by the time it has fully
anded, have completed, their growth. No galls appear on fully
1 eloped leaves, so that if a leaf once gets its growth, it is safe
n attack ; but when the Phytopti which cause the first galls increase
uch an extent as to make a migration necessary, they pass along
| branches to the terminal twigs, and may there produce new galls

130

on the unfolding leaves of the growing tips. This accounts for the
unequal distribution of the galls on the leaves of the plants ; they
are very rarely uniformly abundant on the whole leafage, loung
trees seem to be more liable to be galled than older ones, and
plants which are heavily shaded or otherwise unfavorably situated
seem to prove more attractive to the mites than those which get a
due amount of sunlight and rain. Several hundred of the galls
may occur on a single leaf, and sometimes there are few leaves on
a plant which are not galled.

THE MITES.

Among the many strange forms of Acarina, none have proved
more puzzling to entomologists than the members of the genus
Pliytoptus. In this case, the extremely small size of the animals
has been an additional hindrance to an understanding of their struc¬
ture, and, added to their abnormal form (abnormal even to the
class in which they belong), has led to much confusion and un¬
certainty as to their relations to other mites. There seems, how¬
ever, to be no longer reason for doubting that Phytoptus is an adult
mite, capable of laying eggs and reproducing its kind. I believe
none of those who have considered Phytopti the larvae of other mites
claim to have actually observed the transformation of one into the
other, or, indeed, to have made anything like a careful and scientific
demonstration of what they give as the genealogy of these mites;
and as several competent observers have recently seen the ova, and
one of them even the act of oviposition, we cannot longer withhold
from Felix Dujardin the credit of having been right, when in 1851
he claimed that he had seen ova within the body of Phytopti, and
that they must therefore be adult mites, notwithstanding their having
but two pairs of leg$. We may therefore define Phytoptus as a
genus of mites with two pairs of legs composed of five articles each,
and terminated by a claw and feather-like organ, as possessing a
tubular rostrum, including a pair of slender maxillae, and with a
long, transversely-striate abdomen, terminating in a protractile
sucker.

The minuteness of Phytopti is such that a microscope is neces¬
sary in studying them. They are invisible to the untrained eye,—
and even after being searched out with a lens, can only be seen,
with the closest scrutiny, as minute, .whitish specks. The length
varies, in specimens I have seen, from .003 to .004 inch. The
species differ so little, that quite a detailed description of one ap¬
plies equally well for all the members of the genus. They are
cylindrical, semi-transparent, with a disportionately long abdomen,
and very short cephalothorax. The latter constitutes not more than
a fourth of the entire length of the mite, is smooth and shining,
and continues forward without interruption into the rostrum. The
rostrum is little else than a hollow snout, cut off squarely at the
tip and slit open longitudinally below. In other mites a partial ros¬
trum is formed by the union of the bases of the mouth-parts with
the labrum, the terminal (distal) part of the organs remaining free.
In Phytoptus the fusion is carried further, and the chelipeds are
lost in the rostrum. Apparent joints may sometimes be seen just

re the chelipeds should be situated, but they are probably constric-
s, due to the downward curvature of the rostrum. The organs
1 which the leaves are punctured are two long, slender chelicerjp
ph lie in the hollow snout, 'and extend beyond the tip of the
ar when in use. The lower lip is a triangular body attached
eath and at the base of the snout, covering the beginning of the
ptudinal slit. Briosi says that it may be extended forward so as
lose the slit when the snout is applied to the leaves for the pur-
3 of sucking the sap. The adult Phytoptus has only four lec/s.
h two or three exceptions, adult mites of other kinds have ei^ht
, and their larvae never have less than six. Phytoptus is thuslm
I option to the rule, in this respect.

he developed limbs consist of five articles, with an appearance
wo others; the first is stout and extends but little beyond the
. At its extremity is a fold, which resembles a short article be-
m the first and second. The second is longest and stoutest of
In the first pair of legs, a short hair arises from the under side
his article, and in both pairs a long hair arises at its apex above
extends on over the succeeding articles. Then follow two arti-
| the second (distal) of which bears a constriction at about its
Idle, which gives it the appearance of two segments. Prom the
article a long hair arises and extends forward over the tarsus,
tarsus consists of a curved, cylindrical claw, slightly swollen at
ip. Beneath it is the so-called feather-like organ, consisting of
snder axis with a series of barbs arising from each side. The
abdomen is transversely striate, the regular stride separating
jiurface into narrow rings, which completely encircle the body.
j.*e rings or interspaces are covered with a series of minute tu-
les, only visible when highly magnified. The extremity of the ab-
en is a sucker, which can be freely protracted and withdrawn.

jie genital opening is situated just behind the margin of the
! alothorax on the under side, and is covered by a shield-shaped
A few slender hairs arise from the abdomen, and as
i are quite constant in position, should be mentioned. There are
:3 pairs of these above and three below. The first of the upper
3 is long, and arises at the margin of the cephalothorax ; the
nd pair is the longest of all, being in some species a third of
whole length, arises from the last interspace, and extends
sriorily. Between them is the shortest pair of all, (frequently

Rooked). In a species having 80 striae I find the most anterior

le ventral pairs of hairs twelve, and the median twenty-four
3 behind the cephalothorax, and the third pair six striae in ad-
e of the sucker.

ie internal anatomy of Phytoptus needs further study. The
.entary canal has not yet been traced through all its course,
ovary, when distended with ova, occupies nearly all of the ab-
nal cavity, extending from the opening near the margin of the
I alothorax backwards nearly to the tip of the abdomen. The
pre comparatively very large, and lie in a single series of about
I Those farthest forward, and thus nearest the genital opening,
i ilways largest and farthest developed. The anterior two or three
i distinctly the granular character of their contents, and differ
j from eggs which have been laid.. Towards the hind end

132

of the body the eggs become gradually smaller, and their contents
are not granular. " Only a few years ago Phytopti were generally
believed to be the larvae of other mites, and the statements of those
authors who claimed to have seen the eggs in their bodies, were
not credited. But with the recent improvements in microscopes,
there is no reason why any one may not convince himself that the
bodies described by Dujardin are really eggs Scores of specimens
of the Phytoptus which produces galls on the leaves ot our soft
maple may be secured in June, in which the eggs with nuclei and
nucleoli may be seen with perfect distinctness.

Fig. 28— Phytoptus quadripes, Shimer. Side view showing the eggs within the body.
From a camera lucida sketch. H. Garman, del.

Figure 28 is a faithful representation of one of these mites, taken
from a camera lucida sketch. The walls of the ovary are so delicate

133

fc'ki . ...

I they could not be traced to the outlet, but on several occasions
,ve seen the anterior ovum forced through this opening by the
sure of the cover-glass.

The eggs are attached singly to the walls and
hairs of the cecidii. They are slightly depressed,
nearly spherical, and those I have seen were light
yellow in color. Two examples of these eggs from

2q _ Fo-p- the ?reen ash measure .001 inch in diameter, and

>pt»s quadripes, as mm from soft maple .C02 inch in diameter. The

ifaga!iit0onh6the dev,el?Ping mite may be seen in some of the eggs,
3 of the soft maple an^ in one of those observed by the writer the
dasycarpum). . two pairs of legs and the abdominal stride ap¬
ed much as m adults.

le young mite, fresh from the egg, is very helpless. Several
s or the skm take place before it is mature, and many of
) molting young may be found by washing out a cecidium
rig their period of most active growth. At each molt there is
iriocj of inactivity, during which the mites lie encased in the
* old skm. _ Landois claims to have observed four molts, the
; occurring just after the mites leave the eggs, when the tarsal
ndage appears ; at the second there is only an increase in size ;

3 at the third, the first and at the fourth, the second pair of foot
P® appeals. One of ihe smallest young I have seen measured
inch m length, the adult from the same cecidium measured
inch m length.

HABITS.

e mites move about quite rapidly, when their size is taken into
'.deration, depending mainly upon the short legs for locomotion,
u s^ys that they also move in the same manner as the larvae of
aemdae, the terminal sucker playing the part of the false feet,
ve not witnessed this movement, but can easily believe them
tCu-r2°ve- as describes. The sucker seems to me to be
chiefly m clinging; and is doubtless of service to the mites
•eventing the weight of the long abdomen from pulling them
the under side of the leaves upon which they may be
>ing. While watching the mites at home in a nook of a gall
ud, I have sometimes seen them attach themselves by the
3r and swing the body about into a new position. The sucker
hold on whatever it touches, and the mites themselves are
times seized upon by their neighbors and dragged about by it.
apti hibernate in the perfect state during the winter, and while
them may descend to the ground for that purpose, as is
osed by Dr. Shimer and others, all of them certainly do not
>, for I have been able to obtain mature and active specimens
twigs at any time during the winter by bringing them into a
.i room, and at times from a temperature but little above zero F.

SPECIES.

die I am alive to the possibility that a species of Phytoptus

have a wide range of plant food, and produce very different
y

L

134

galls, according to the plant upon which it establishes itself, or that
aspecies may even vary with the plants on which it lives, it lias
seemed to me, all things considered, best to affix names to some of
the forms which I have noticed. I find that the size of the adults,
the number of transverse strife about the body, the number of. prongs
of the feather-like tarsal appendage, and in some measure the form
of the body, afford what seem to be characters of specific value.
Color may also in some cases be characteristic, but I find little
variation in that respect. In the United States but three species
have hitherto been indicated by name, one by 1 1. Hem> • ™e*>

another by Prof. T. J. Burrill, and the third by Mr \\in. H. Ash-
mead Prof. Burrill considers the species observed by him to be
specifically identical with the Pkytoptus pyn ot Europe (the mite
which causes the pear-leaf blister). The mites and galls described
below comprise but a small portion of those which occur in this
country, or even in that part of Illinois m which most of them were
found. Others have been noticed from time to time, when the w ork
upon which the writer was engaged would not permit his giv ms
them attention. I can say for the South Atlantic and Middle States
that these mites are decidedly common there, and I have little doubt
that the Phytoptus galls of the United States will number several

hundreds.

Phytoptus abnormis , n. sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the American linden or basswood,
Tilia americana, Linn. _ . I

The transverse strise of the abdomen number about 56. This mite
differs from all the other Phytopti I have seen in that the abdomen,
-just before the terminal sucker, is noticeably enlarged. But few speci¬
mens have been examined, as they have been very rare. In many
of the galls, comparatively large, elongate eggs occur, which pro¬
bably belong to some larger mite which preys on the gall-mites.

The gall is top-shaped, expanding above and contracting towards
the upper surface of the leaves into a neck. It measures .155 inch
in height, and .100 inch in diameter. The walls are deeply infolded,
sometimes giving rise to unequal lobes. The outer surface is smooth,
green and devoid of hairs. The cavity of the gall is made unsyni-
metrical by the deeper impressions of the wall. . The inside of the
latter is slightly roughened by small folds, and is clothed with long
acicnlate, unicellular hairs. These galls occur sparingly on the
leaves of large trees in open woods at Bloomington, Illinois.

Phytoptus, sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the poison ivy, Rhus toxicodendron
Linn.

The gall of this species is a small rounded elevation on the uppei
side of the leaf, having the usual opening below. It frequently covers
the greater part of the upper surface ; and in such cases the indi¬
vidual cecidii fuse and 'form granulate heaps, with a common open¬
ing below. On some of the leaves the galls are purple ana
pubescent, on others they are yellowish-green, and have very little
pubescence. The inside is clothed with white hairs. Galls of this

185

lml were abundant on the poison ivy at Normal, Illinois, in June
ool. A single mite was observed. ’

;

Phytoptus acericola, n. sp.

langdUCeS gallS °n the leaVeS °f the SUgar maPle> Acer saccharinum,

In five examples of this mite the striae were counted, and in three
f them numbered 30 and m the other two, 28 and 29, respectively
5 e prongs of the teather'like appendage seem to be three. The
ength is about .00/5 inch. This form was found in June both
mong knobbed hairs and in galls on the sugar maple, but there
ppeared to be only one species represented.

The gall is very slender, tapers to both extremities, and bears a
^rong resemblance m general form to the nail galls described by

. 1 V;u- y f1rom the leav(?s Of Ampelopsis. The walls are
.iiiformly thin, and present no internal roughness. The height is
lout .±9 inch, and the diameter .045 inch. Phytopti were abund-
pt m these galls collected at Bloomington, Illinois, June 22, 1881,

Phytoptus quadripes, Shimer.

I Produces galls on the leaves of the soft maple, Acer dasycarpum,

This is the Phytoptus upon which Dr. Henry Shimer founded his

C 87 To 49 tv18 ? CTSe y .slnfte species, the stri® numbering

tbit7,*? 42i 1 16 ^ng-h IS aboi!t -008 mch- The tarsal claw is
ghtly curved and ends m an evident knob. The feather-like ap-

ndage lias lour parrs of prongs. The color varies from pale yel-
vish to light orange. Sexually mature females, the young and
f.gs occur m the galls in June.

The galls appear with the unfolding of the leaves in spring as
-ght swellings of the parenchyma, and as the leaf reaches its per-
Slze .they expand usually into top-shaped galls, arising from the
per side of the leaf. The form varies to some extent, some of

L fa lS b?1mgudl800ld or more or less spherical, while occasion-
y two galls have a common neck and opening. At. first the

'or of the galls is like that of the unfolding leaf, dull purple or
pen;, later it assumes the light green color of the veins and
; n et? ’ ,, an<t stlh later changes, in many cases, to purplish
I wards the end of summer it. dries up and becomes black. 1 The
f*'er surface is smooth, but the walls are broadly and irregularly
pressed, making a very uneven outline. On the under side of the
rh the P0sitl0u o* the galls is usually indicated by an impression
.h a tuft of white hairs in the center, which tuft covers the
juiing into the gall. Occasionally the opening and tuft are borne
m a slight elevation. The height of one of the largest galls
isured from the upper side of the leaf, was .1 inch; the diam-
was .1,1 inch. T lie galls are attached at the sides of the veins
i‘. are s? numerous on some leaves as to cover the entire upper
i tace. 1 have seen trees on which there were very few ungalled

136

leaves and most of them had curled up and wer^

yeUow hue. 310 galls were counted on one leaf. Di. burner says

thousands occur on some lea\es.

Phytoptus, sp.

Gives rise to growths of hairs on the leaves of the box elder,
Nequndo aceroides, Moench.

Few specimens of this Phytoptus have been seen though the
growths have been carefully searched lor them. One of those ex
amined had 45 transverse striae, and was .005 inch long. ,

The sails or cecidii consist of mats of tangled white hairs on the
under side of the leaves, situated in slight concavities, on the
nnner side of the leaves the cecidii are seen as correspondingly
shotit convexities of the surface. The younger leaves and those of,
s oots a the base of trees are sometimes almost entirely converted

Kft thep,»li.r h.i,,

lpovpq Such leaves never expand, but curl up ana seem, uom
the abundance of the hairs, to be clothed with a fine mealy sub-
stance. These growths are similar to cecidii of certain oaks.

The growths are very abundant on box elders planted for shade
on the streets of Normal, Ill., and have been seen on young tiees
in the nurseries of the neighborhood.

Phytoptus fraxini, n. sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the green ash, • Fraxinas viridis,

” ig a very finely striate species, the strise numbering from 78
to k In one example 70 stri* were counted, but as m others the
number was so uniformly above 70, a mistake may ha\e been made
in counting The feather-like appendage has two pairs ot widely
divergent prongs. An example mounted m glycerine measures
.048 mm. in length. Eggs and young, occur in June.

The light-green color of these galls so strongly contrasts with the
dark leaves that the latter appear at a little distance tc i be sp tt d
with light It is a depressed wart-like gall. lhe _ center or iw
cavity if about in the plane of the leaf, as the projection above and
liplmv is nearlv equal. The outer surface is variously indented, in
sot! cases ^asif6 with the finger nail. The outline Been i from above
is elongate circular, or quite irregular. The opening beneath is
slit surrounded by a raised lip clothed with white hairs. One or
more folds with many-celled hairs at their tree edges project into
the interior dividing it into more or less perfect compartments.
The median’ of these folds is usually largest, and sometimes reaches
the bottom of the cavity just over the opening. Side folds may i»
formed from the primary ones. The largest gall measured was .13
inch in diameter and .13 inch in height, measuring the projection
on both sides of the leaf. Dr. F. A. W Thomas describes a still
more peculiar gall from a European Fraxmus This gall «
abundant in Central Illinois during the summer of 1880 and 1881.

137

!

ij[

i

I !

[n August of 1882 the trees were again examined, but not a single
gall was found. The early part of the season had been very damp,
and this had probably exterminated the mites.

| Phytoptus, sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the white ash, Fraxinus ameri-
J zcina, Linn.

Striae from 53 to 58. Feather-like appendage with two pairs of
prongs. Length .007 inch. The hairs on the underside of the
ceplialothorax are easily seen in this species.

The gall resembles very closely that on Fraxinus viridis. Like that
it projects equally above and below the leaf. The upper and under
surfaces have a slight clothing of white hairs. The walls are thick
and are produced into the cavity. The height, measuring that above
and below the leaf, is about .085 inch and the diameter is about the
same.

A very peculiar cecidum, quite different in character from the
above, was also found on the white ash, but no Phytoptus was
found in it. It consisted of innumerable small, deformed leaves and
twigs which had been prevented from developing by the mites. The
whole mass dries up and remains on the trees during the winter,
At that time resembling a fungoid growth.

} Both of these cecidii occurred at Bloomington, Ill., in June, 1881.

I

Phytoptus ulmi, n. sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the white elm, Ulmus americana,
Linn.

A slender species, with from 67 to 70 striae. Prongs of the feather-
(like tarsal appendage, three. Length of specimens preserved in

(alcohol .17 mm.

In general form this gall resembles that found on the leaves of
the soft maple, but it is smaller, more slender and contracts less
[Abruptly to the neck. It is from .077 to .09 inch high, and .055 to
.06 inch in diameter. It differs from the gall on Acer dasycarpum
further in having scattered unicellular hairs growing from the outer
surface. There is a tuft of pubescence over the opening beneath.
The walls are rather thick, with numerous folds projecting into the
(Cavity. The color is at times of the same dark hue as the leaves
ior it may be light yellowish-green. 'The gall occurs sparingly on
shade trees at Normal, Illinois, and young forest trees in the neigh¬
borhood of Bloomington are sometimes badly galled. The egg,
young, and adult of the mite, have been found in the galls in June
and July.

Phytoptus, sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the heart-leaved willow, Salix
fordata, Muhl.

The mite has 63 transverse abdominal striae.

The gall is a wart-like excrescence sometimes projecting above the
eaf, sometimes below, and again equally above and below. In some

i

138

examples the leaf is folded up around the gall forming a more or
less complete rim. Many of the galls are produced above into
nipple-shaped prominences. The color may be purple or pale green.
A specimen measured was .083 inch in depth, and .065 inch in
diameter.

Phytoptus salicicola, n. sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the long-leaved willow, Salix
longifolia, Muhl.

s'

Strhe of abdomen 46. Featlier-like tarsal appendage with three
pairs of prongs. Length .0075 inch. Abundant in the galls in
June.

This gall is one of the most remarkable deformations I have
seen. It consists of a narrow longitudinal upward fold extending
sometimes the entire length of the leaf. Usually there are two of
these folds on each leaf one on each side of the midrib. They
may be close to the midrib, midway between it and the margin, or
at the margin itself. In cases where the fold begins next the mid¬
rib at the base of the leaf, it may gradually leave it so as even¬
tually to form a mere fold of the margin. The opening is a narrow
slit running along the under side of the leaf. Color, as seen in the
hitter part of June, brown. My attention was drawn to this gall by
the peculiar appearance of the willow leaves due to the lessening of
their widths by the fold. A clump of shrubby willows growing in
the margin of a shallow pool of water in the vicinity of Normal,
Ill., was badly infested by the galls.

Phytoptus querci, n. sp.

Produces galls on the leaves of the bur-oak, Quercus macrocarpa ,
Miclix.

The mite is long and slender, and in a specimen seen among
washings from a cecidium, there appeared to be an abrupt descent
in the outline of the back from the abdomen to the eephalothorax.
Length .005 inch.

The gall is large, greenish-yellow, entirely open below and slightly
convex above. The hollow is densely filled with brown pubescence.
The form is variable but the outline usually regular. The surface
is smooth, or slightly roughened by the veinlets. Some of these
galls grow downward instead of upward and form brown velvety but¬
tons on the under side of the leaves. Specimens measured were
from .1 inch to .4 inch in diameter. Thirty galls have been counted
on one leaf. This is a common gall in Northern Illinois and Indi¬
ana, and has been found occasionally in the central part of Illinois.

Phytoptus thujce, n. sp.

Occurs on the leaves of the American arbor vitae, Thuja occident¬
alism Linn, in summer, and in the buds and under the leaves ip
winter.

139

Fig.W—Phytoptus thuja} (ventral view.) a. rostrum;
b, labium; c, chelicerm; d, appearance of joints
seen on the rostrum; e, tarsal claw; /.feather¬
like tarsal appendage; g. one of the first pair of
hairs on under sid^ of cephalothoax; h, one of
the second pair of hairs on the under side of
cephalothorax; i, genital plate: j, abdominal
sucker.

140

Adults of this mite measure from .005 to .0005 inch in length,
with the greatest transverse diameter about .002 inch. They are
whitish and semi-transparent. Oi the three pairs of hairs attached
to the dorsal surface, the first pair is attached at the posterior mar¬
gin of the cephalothorax, the second between the last two abdominal
striae just before the terminal sucker, and between the hairs of this
pair is the third pair, consisting of two short and straight hairs.
The hairs of the second pair are abruptly bent at about the fourth
of their length from the attachment. The first of the three ventral
pairs of hairs is twelve, and the second twenty-four, striae behind
the cephalothorax; the third pair is attached six striae in advance
of the terminal sucker. The legs are strongly compressed, project
downwards, and the feather-like tarsal appendage bears five pairs of
prongs. The striae of the abdomen number about 80.

In the latter part of the summer of 1880 my attention was called
by Prof. S. A. Forbes to the diseased condition of arbor vitae
hedges in and about Normal, Illinois, and upon searching the trees,
this Phytoptus was found creeping about the leaves. I was inclined
at the time to refer the condition of the hedges to injuries inflicted
by the mites earlier in the season ; for they were not sufficiently
abundant at the time the examination was made to cause serious in¬
convenience to the plants. Since then the trees have regained their
usual, thrifty appearance, and the mites, although still present on them
at all times of the year, have not been more abundant at any time
than they were when first discovered. The Phytoptus of _ the arbor
vitoe spends the winter in the buds and under the margins of the
leaves. It can be secured in midwinter by bringing infested twigs
into a warm room.

Phytoptus pyrif Scheuten.

The interesting observations on this and the following mite are
from the pen of Prof. T. J. Burrill.

Invisible to the naked eye. Under the microscope, white or with
transmitted light, brown. Nearly cylindrical. Varying in size. The
largest mites measure .19 mm. in length and .05 mm. in diameter.
Transverse striae 50-80. — Sorauer.

“In the spring of the year the leaves of the pear tree as they un¬
fold from the bud, are often studded with small red spots which,
upon closer looking, are also seen to be slightly thickened areas of
the leaf. The red soon changes to a brown color, indicative of the
death of the cells and tissues of the affected spot. When very

numerous, as these spots often are, they coalesce, forming patches

of various sizes, not unfrequently covering large areas of the leaf,
in which case the leaf usually prematurely falls. The common
name, pear-leaf blister, has been not inappropriately given to the dis¬
ease. The cause of the difficulty is the above-named mite, origin¬
ally known only in Europe where it was discovered and named
Typhlodromns pyri by the German naturalist, Scheuten. It was,
however, introduced into our country many years since, having no

doubt been brought over with pear trees, of which the importations

have sometimes been large. There are many localities with us now
where no signs of the disease are to be found, but the pest is very

Iily distributed throughout the United States, notwithstanding the
le powers of locomotion possessed by the mite. From the blis-
or galls of the leaf the mites pass in early autumn to the buds,
mg the scales of which they find the needful protection for the
| ;er, and it is mostly in this condition that distribution is accom-
jjhed by the affected stocks, cions or trees sent out from the nur-
,|3S. However, some of the mites do not escape from the leaves
>re they fall, and in this case may be scattered in an orchard
die wind. Their injurious operations are begun in April upon
undeveloped leaves in the bud. Here, as in other cases, they
vv through the epidermis of the under side of the leaf and infest
pulpy tissues within, depositing their eggs and multiplying by
ins or scores in the discolored area.

is not hazardous to say that the only remedy within practical
di is the total destruction of the mites by pruning and hand-
fifing. Before the number becomes very great upon a tree the
hfful gathering and burning of the affected leaves can be accom-
Ihed without serious difficulty, and by following up the process

Sa few weeks a perfect cure may be relied upon. If, however,
or nearly all the leaves are invaded, a severe pruning in winter
Spring (burning the twigs) should precede the attempt to free the
I of the pest by the summer work upon 'the leaves.

THE VERBENA MITE.*

he cultivated verbenas are subject to two diseases which cause

I" di annoyance to the propagators and growers of these beau-
l flowering plants. On^is known as mildew, the other as black
, These two maladies are entirely distinct in origin as well as
appearance, yet they have been, unfortunately, much mixed in
literature upon the subject, as well as in the popular use of the
‘as by florists. The first appears as a white, mealy powdering of
leaves, though the latter, after a time, die in spots or altgether,
\ then become dark colored. It is this latter condition that has
sed many to misuse the name more correctly applied to the
•ind disease, This mildew is a mold-like fungus growing upon the
face of the leaves and stems, and absorbing by contact the

pecimens of this mite were sent me for examination bv Prof. Burrill, and proveto
i ig to the peculiar genus Dendroptus, Kramer, and to the family Tarsonemida of Con-
ni and Panzago. They seem to represent a new species, and will be described in a
jj paper. Other species were discovered by me, several years ago, on the soft maple
.* dasycarpum,) and arbor vitse {Thuja occidentalis). and they would thus appear to have
le range of plant food. Those I have noticed have always been very rare. Professor
(ill’s observations show that they may become very abundant, and that we have in
'.a third group ot plant-mites which may commit as serious depredations as the
thing mites and Phytopti. Dr. Kramer is reported as stating that galls may be pro-
-d by species of Dendroptus which are not distinguishable from those of Phytopti. I
found Dendroptus in growths which were undoubtedly produced by a Phytoptus,
j; am not satisfied that the former ever cause growths of their own. In order that the
fs may be recognized where injuring plants, I subjoin a brief description :

: -y small, almost invisible to the naked eye. Body flattened, oval in outline when viewed
' above; anterior part separated from the posterior part by a distinct groove. Legs
p two anterior pairs widp.lv separated from the two posterior pairs. Three anterior
• of legs, essentially alike in both sexes, the last article having two divergent claws
i a disc, or plantula between them. Fourth pair of legs in the female almost rudiment-
consisting of but two articles and terminating in two long hairs. Fourth pair of legs in
aale consisting of four articles, the second of which is very large and expanded, and
med within; the fourth article is a simple, strong claw. There are a few scattered
> on the body, and Dr. Kramer describes the integument as made up of imbricated
•i, but these are so indistinct that they will not ordinarily be seen.— H. G.

i|

142

nutritious juices of the plant. It also occurs abundantly on the wild
verbena plants native in our own region, and often conspicuously re¬
duces their usual vigorous appearance.

The term black rust is distinctively applied to a peculiar discol¬
oration and enfeeblement of the youngest, terminal part of the stem
and youngest leaves. Most of these parts assume a dark purplish
color, but sometimes a sickly yellow instead. The changed color is
not due to the death of the leaves or their parts, as in the other
case, but occurs while growth is still in progress. With the effects
of mildew the plants are more disposed to grow slender and weak,
but tall ; where attacked by the black rust, however, terminal growth
is retarded, and flowering is almost wholly prevented. This latter
disease is only known on the cultivated plants, and as far as ob¬
served by the writer, only on the verbena, although something of
similar appearance occurs on others.

The agent is a mite which works on the surfaces affected, where
also it deposits its eggs and completes its development. When the
plants are removed from the house to the open grounds the enemy
accompanies them and lives upon them during the summer, to he
transferred very often again to the house, with the cuttings from
which propagation is practiced. Much injury and consequent dis¬
satisfaction occur. The living, crawling animal, with its sharp
mouth-parts, is much too small to be seen by the unaided eye on
the plants, and even with a good hand magnifier it requires good
handling, and perhaps special practice, to readily make them out.
But an affected leaf, under a compound microscope with an inch
objective, may be found swarming with the mites in various stages
of development.

They are killed by hot water at a temperature of one hundred and
twenty (120) degrees Fahr. The plants may be safely immersed in
such water for a half minute, and as this is practicable with potted
plants, a means of cure is accessible to all. It is also probable [(
that an emulsion of coal oil will effectually destroy the mites with¬
out injury to the plants.”

REMEDIES FOR MITE ATTACKS.

The remedies usually employed for mite attacks are such as have |
been found useful in destroying aphides. Sulphur applied in several
ways and combinations is the remedy employed with most success.
Simple flour of sulphur applied to the moist leaves is recommended
by Townend Glover as a means of destroying the red spiders which
cause rust on cotton. A mixture of soap, sulphur and water, and
also soapsuds and quassia water, are others which may be found
useful. Moisture, for some reason, is obnoxious to mites, and
thorough and repeated drenchings of the infested leaves with pure
water will be found sufficient in most cases to stop their depreda¬
tions. To be effective, other applications will need to be so thrown
upon the under side of the leaves as to reach the mites, for some
of them are very tenacious of life. I have kept Pliytopti floating on
glycerine twenty-four hours, and found them, at the end of that
time, apparently as active as when taken from the leaves. The
gall-producing Phytopti cannot be treated as readily as those which

143

posed on the leaves, since the former are protected by the
js in which they live. Fortunately, they are not ordinarily
/ migratory, and spread very slowly from the trees, and even
he branches on which they secure a lodgment. This fact is
mrtance to us, for, by plucking off the galled leaves when
rst appear and burning them, the mites can be prevented
■Increasing to an injurious extent. A sudden change of tem-
•e has, it is thought, resulted favorably to the gardener by
dug mites. Boisduval tells us that the work of the red spider
houses may be checked by taking the infested plants into a
pm. Carrying such plants into the open air has a similar
fit only being necessary to keep the roofs warm with mulching
h to enable them to stand the change. Other mites and the
Of the lace-winged flies prey upon plant mites, and doubtless
j:l service in reducing their numbers. The following useful
I ion is taken from “A Manual of Injurious Insects,” by
r A. Ormerod :

['king at this point of sulphur being generally an ingredient
fies or applications for the destruction of Red Spider and other
and the circumstance that, in its crude state, it does not
, e with most of the fluids used for this purpose, may account
Cl pent failures in home-made applications. In order to make
nine with whatever liquid may be used, the sulphur should
fad with an alkali, and the following recipe has been recom-
II: One pound of flour of sulphur and two pounds of fresh

I )iled together in four gallons of water ; or, to save the trouble
!ng, the sulphuret of lime may be purchased and used thus:

sulphuret, take four ources ; soft soap, two ounces to each
of the water, which is to be gradually poured on, the mixture
tirred during the time, when a uniform* fluid will be obtained
■ sediment, which may be used when cold enough to bear the
and has been found to destroy insect pests effectually and
!• This may be used as a syringing, or dip for infested
• or well rubbed with a brush into the infested bark.”

144

OBSERVATIONS ON THE ANGOUMOIS GRAIN MOTH ANI

ITS PARASITES.

The Angoumois Grain Moth.
(Qdezkia cerealella, Hliv.)

By F. M. Webster.

Order LEPIDOPTERA. Family Tineid;e.

1 A small, slender, brownish-gray moth, with broadly fringed hind wings, the larva-
which, a slender, white, fleshy worm, eats out the substance ot wheat and other grans
both in the field and in store 1

This insect, which is known also under the name of “fly weevil,
is one of the most destructive pests known to infest stored grain,

The rapidity with which it increases under favorable condition?
the nocturnal habits of the moth and the secluded habits of tli
larva, all combine to place it beyond the reach of natural or arts
ficial restrictions, and make its appearance in any locality a ver
serious matter.

The Neiv York Sun some years ago expressed the opinion that i
the progress of this pest 'could at that time be arrested by the Gov
ernment at an expense of five million dollars, it would be the bes
investment ever made for the people.

When we take under consideration the fact that this pest has beei
known to reduce the weight of grain infested by it fitly per cent
within a few months, the above figures do not seem in the lea?
exaggerated.

But the habits of the insect, and its confusion with other gran
feeding species, render it difficult to ascertain where it really occur
or exactly when it first appears in any locality ; and it is usual!
not until it has become fully established that it is noticed by farm
ers and others engaged in tiie growing and handling of grain.

HISTORY.

The history of this species reaches back nearly one hundred am
fifty years, when Reaumur found it to be very injurious to store
barley at Lucon, in the province of La Vendee, France, and learns
that it also destroyed wheat.

145

I

*

ntinued to increase in numbers until the year 1760, when it had
3 distributed over the adjacent provinces, swarming in grana-
id fields. Its depredations were then frightful, the damage to
being not only so great as to deprive the inhabitants of the
of paying their rent and taxes, but threatening them with
and pestilence from want of wholesome bread2.

3ems to have continued to work more or less damage until
vhen Dr. Herpin,3 who was engaged in a study of the insect,
that while it had disappeared somewhat from the central dis¬
it had continued to spread in others, and expressed fears of
rrence of the troubles of 1760; but these anticipations do not
]0 have been realized. On the contrary, the pest must have
r decreased in number; for in 1867 Dr. Boisduval,4 an emi-
^rench authority, stated that it was not found by entomolo-
>f that time. The first to call public attention to its presence
erica was Colonel Landon Carter, of Sabine Hall, Virginia, in
munieation to the American Philosophical Society of Phila-
a, in the year 1768.

mel Landon’s communication was published in the Transac-
Df the Society, where it was followed by some remarks by the
ittee of husbandry, to the effect that “it was said that injuries
sat by these fly weevils began in North Carolina about forty
previous,” which would carry the record back to about the
!.728.

mollis A. G. Bose, who was sent to this country by the French
iment in 1796, and resided for some time in Wilmington, N.
und the moths so abundant in that state as to extinguish a

h when he entered his granary in the night.

jm these two states — Virginia and North Carolina — it seems to
Upread over the state of Kentucky, and the southern part of
j Indiana and Illinois, and was found also in Massachusetts as
I as the year 1814.

precise date of its first appearance in Illinois, it is obviously
sible to determine.

?ould naturally follow the direction of emigration, particularly
the climate was suited to its development, it being almost
sible to transport grain from districts where the insect is
jtant, without including with it more or less in which the worms
, *s are present.

i Brackenridge Clemens states in the Proceedings of the Plnla-

ia Academy of Natural Sciences for 1860, that he had obtained
nens from wheat distributed by the Department of Agriculture
3 years 1854-55.

•3 Farmer's Review of July 28, 1881, calls attention to the pres-
of a new pest, a small moth, that had appeared in the gram
whose larva burrowed into and ate out the centre of the
Is, and also states that this larva attacks corn, not only in the
>ut after it has been shelled and placed in store.

3Srs. Halliday Bros., of Cairo, Illinois, say that it has caused
or less trouble in the elevators of that place for at least ten

1

146

Aside from the sample of wheat infested by this insect receive
during October, 1882, from St. Johns, III., it was found to have
done considerable damage in the vicinity of Carbondale, by Mr. Joi
Martin.

In this case the wheat was attacked in the shock and the depre.
dations were carried on during the time it was in stack, and whi!-
in store, damaging the crop from one-fourth to one-third.

Some of this grain I saw during April of the present year, bm
could get no trace of other ravages among farmers north of 8
Johns or south of Carbondale.

DESCRIPTION OF THE MOTH.

The adult insect has been so carefully described by Dr. T. )],
Harris (Injurious Insects, id Ed., p. 506), that I shall copy hi>
description in full :

•‘The wings expand a little more than half an inch. The bean
is smooth, and not tufted. The antennae are thread-like, with dis¬
tinctly marked joints.

“The feelers are long, and curved upwards; the terminal joints
naked, acute, and blackish near the tip ; the second or middle joint
rather shorter and thicker, hairy beneath, and blackish on the out¬
side ; the basal joint very short and hairy.

The tongue makes several spiral turns, and when extended, is
about half the length of the antenme. The body and fore wings are
of that tint of pale brownish-gray which the French call coffee-ami-
milk color, and have the lustre of satin.

“The fore wings are long and narrow, and are pointed at the
end; together with their fringes, they are more or less sprinkled
with blackish dots, especially near the tips.

The hind wings are blackish, with a leaden lustre ; they are nar¬
row, and very suddenly obliquely contracted to a point at^the tips;
they are entirely surrounded with a blackish fringe, which is wider
on the inner margin than the wing itself ; they are folded length¬
wise, when at rest, beneath the upper wings.

“The fore legs are blackish, and the liindermost legs are fringed
with long hairs on the inner side.”

DESCRIPTION OF THE LARVA.

When first hatched, the larva, or caterpillar, although not thicker
than a hair, immediately burrows its way into the kernel.

When full-grown, it is about one-fifth of an inch in length, rather
robust, gradually tapering posteriorly from the second segment.

Head brown, the lateral margins light, as is also the region of
the ocelli ; the anterior margin a little darker. The mandibles are
strong, bisetose, brown, with the inner margins nearly brown.
I hey are quadri-dentate, the lower tooth being the larger. From
this the teeth gradually decrease in size, the uppermost being the
smallest. The other mouth parts and antennae are brown ; the
latter are short, three-jointed, terminating with a bristle.

147

I

I

S

I 1

ie ocelli are white, six in number, arranged in the form of an
gate letter C, with the space enclosed varying from very dark¬
en to nearly black.

h the head, body and legs are sparsely-placed white, setaceous
|3 ; those on the head, first and last segments, and legs, are
er long. On segments two to twelve, inclusive, these hairs are
prominent, being placed in two transverse rows, those of the
rior row being much the shorter. On the first segment the
3 of both rows are equal ; on the thirteenth segment, they are
equal, but, from the form of the segment, they are placed in
rcular position.

le body, with the exception of the spiracles, is white, smooth,
densely covered with minute, erect spinules, which can only be
under a powerful glass. Traces of brown patches appear, in
3 examples, on the dorsal surface of the first segment. Spira-
dorsal hooks, and minute terminal hooks on the pro-legs,
In.

le legs are rather large at base, but taper rapidly, each termi¬
ng in a small hook.

'lie pro-legs, ten in number, are small, wart-like, and terminate
vo or three minute, robust hooks. (Curtis, in “Farm Insects,”
12, says that they terminate in a complete coronet of hooked
[ales, but this is certainly an error.)

(DESCRIPTION OF THE PUPA.

iis is a little over one-fiftli of an inch in length, the anterior
S-imity being obtuse, the posterior more acute, and surrounded
ring of sparsely-set setae.

! 3ad, thorax and wing-pads dark, tjie abdomen lighter-brown,
vings nearly reaching the posterior extremity. Eyes in mature
3 distinctly visible, and black.

i the abdomen are rows of setae, placed as follows : a double
on the margin, above the spiracles, placed in pairs; just below
close to the spiracles, a single row, one on each segment ; each
of the middle line of the body, another double row, the outer
y placed on the posterior, the inner on the anterior part of the
| lent.

lj t the inner side of the breast are a few scattered hairs, and on
| aeck two long, slender, conspicuous bristles.

I

HABITS OF THE MOTH.

II

e moth is nocturnal, and double-brooded under ordinary condi-
L but a high temperature so actively hastens the transformations
the number of broods and time of appearance is somewhat

jble:

lj . T.’ W. Harris, who bred the moths for three years in succes-
says that they appeared in considerable numbers in June and
Hist, which is probably about the time the broods normally ap-
But infested wheat kept in the laboratory since October,

148

1882, has produced moths continually up to date, (May 10, 1883),
these being more numerous during December and January.

The moth passes the winter in the larva state, but usually in a
cocoon within the grain. It then passes through the pupa state, which
occupies but a short time, coming forth probably in May or June,
according to latitude and temperature. The moths pair, and the
females deposit each from sixty to ninety eggs on the kernel, in
clusters, usually in the longitudinal channel. If the moths that ap¬
pear in June are allowed to do so, they will escape to the fields
and deposit their eggs in the young kernels of the new crop; but
otherwise they will deposit them on the kernels of grain in the bin
where they themselves were bred. The moths from the eggs come
forth probably about August, and constitute the second brood.*

The moths of this brood pair and deposit their eggs in the same
manner as their progenitors, but Olivier states that those which come
forth after the harvest make no attempt to escape, their instinct
seeming to have informed them that no more food remains in the
field for the support of their posterity.

I have sharply defined these two broods, in order the better to
give their life history, but in localities where the temperature is
favorable, moths in greater or less number will be noticed during
the entire year. In fact, only about a month’s time is required from
the time tiie egg is deposited to develop the moth.

HABITS OF THE LARVA.

In from four to seven days after the eggs are deposited by the
parent moth, the young larvae appear, and although very minute,
immediately penetrate the grain, usually at the point where the
plumule comes forth, this being the part most easily pierced. As
but one worm can occupy the same grain, the first to hatch will
enter the kernel on which the eggs were deposited, while the others
must seek homes in adjoining grains. There is very seldom, if ever,
more than one found in each grain. I have never found more
than one. Having once entered the kernel, the larva rarely leaves
it, except as a fully developed moth ; although I have sometimes found
one wholly or partly within an adjoining grain. In all such cases
which I have noticed, the grain originally occupied was attached to
the other by a cylindrical passage, constructed by the worm of the
same material as its cocoon.

As soon as the young worm burrows into the grain, it proceeds to
feed upon its substance, gradually enlarging its excavation as it
increases in size, leaving the clean, almost transparent hull entire, ex¬
cepting the original avenue of entrance, which remains untouched,
or at most, is only partly filled with loose particles of excrement.

While there is abundant substance in a grain for the support of
one worm under ordinary conditions, there is pretty good evidence
that the larvoe are often obliged (probably by a low temperature,
which would greatly prolong their lives in this stage, and conse-

* This brood is sometimes called the first, but the usage is made here to correspond
with the other papers in this report.

149

ntly necessitate additional food), to devour their excrement once
twice or even a third time. On the other hand, among grain
t in the laboratory during the winter, in a favorable temperature
greater part of the time, I have found kernels containing from
-fourth to one-third of the substance untouched, together with
empty chrysalis, showing that the worm had passed through its
ire transformations and yet had food to spare.

iter attaining its full growth, the larva withdraws to one side of
grain, cuts out a disc to provide for the escape of the moth,
is its cocoon, and either passes the cold season in a torpid state,
si transforms to the chrysalis at once, as the case may be.

’he larvae from eggs deposited by the second brood of moths at-
1 their full growth, or nearly so, before the first cold weather in
fall, and pass the winter in this stage, either within the cocoon
before it has been constructed.

>ut they may winter in almost any stage of their growth, as a
temperature only causes them to pass into a dormant state, to
ike and resume work when it rises above 60° Fah. At this tem-
ature, they mature in about three weeks. When the larva changes
the chrysalis, its head is at the circular disc which it has prv,-
usly cut ; the anterior extremity of the chrysalis is also in the
| ie position, and by the aid of the setae mentioned in the de-
iption, it pushes against this disc, and finally presses it out and
lies its escape, leaving the empty shell within.

’he presence of the insect, either as larva or chrysalis, in the

fin is not easily detected, the kernels looking as plump and of as
d color as though they were sound ; but in weight their difference
■ nstantly and strikingly apparent. I found, for instance, that, on
average, 8 65 grains of wheat will weigh one ounce, while it re-
red 1,085 grains of infested wheat, from the same stack, to weigh
j much, — and this too before the larvae had finished their work.
*eady method of determining the presence of the pest in grain is,
place a quantity in water, when the infested grains and those
cli have been eaten will generally float on the surface.

SUMMARY OF THE LIFE HISTORY.

’he insect passes the winter in the larva state, pupates in the
ing, and the moths appear in May or June. These pair imme-
fcely, and deposit their eggs on the young grains of the new crop
the field, if they are allowed to escape, or, if not, on the grain
the bins where they originated. These eggs hatch in from four
seven days, and the larvae burrow into the grain and themselves
isform to moths, about August, or often during the latter part
uly. These moths pair and deposit their eggs after the manner
;;he previous brood, and the larvae from these, nearly, if not
te all, reach maturity during the fall and transform the fol-
ing spring. The number of broods and time of appearance vary
fitly, with the climate and season, in warm countries broods fol-
each other in rapid succession during the entire year.

—10

150

NATURAL CHECKS.

(

Heteropus ventricosus, Newport. About the 12th of October, 1882, a
sack of wheat infested with larvae of the grain moth was received from
Southern Illinois, which, for want of time, was put aside for future
inspection. On the 13th of November, while examining the grains con¬
taining larvae, I noticed in a lot of fifty, three in which the worms were
dead, and on them were numbers of globular, yellow objects, which
proved to be a species of mite Heteropus ventricosus , Newport. Know¬
ing nothing of the predaceous habits of these mites, and the limited
literature at hand throwing little light upon the matter, I did not pay
much attention to the fact of their occurrence, until the 12th of Decem¬
ber, when, upon examining one hundred grains with respect to the
effect of heat on the larva, I found fourteen of the latter infested by
these mites.

In the meantime I had learned that this mite was known to be
of predaceous habit, in both England and France, (having been first
discovered by Newport, in 1849, in the nests of Anthophom retusa ,
collected at Gravesend, England,) and afterwards described by him
under its present name. It had also been found in France, in 1868,
by Jules Lichtenstein, of Montpellier, and described by him under
the name of Physogaster larvarum. This gentleman found it in bis
breeding cages, which it so completely overran, that, as he informs
me, he could not for six months breed a single specimen of Hymen-
optera, of Buprestidae, or Cerambycidae, or of some Lepidoptera.
If it has been" found by any other persons than these, or in any
other parts of the world, previous to its discovery here by me, I
have not been able to find the fact recorded,

On December 31st and January 1st, I examined one hundred in¬
fested grains of this wheat, which had been continually kept in
the laboratory since it was received, and found thirty-two per cent,
of the worms dead, infested by the mites.

While making these examinations I frequently threw the grains
containing infested larvae into a shallow glass dish, where they re¬
mained on my table until the warm weather during the latter part
of February, when the temperature of the laboratory at night was
much higher than it had been during the previous cold weather.
The effect of the change was soon plainly to be seen. The contents
of the dish began to swarm with newly developed mites, and a larva
dropped into their midst was immediately attacked, and after that its
life was of short duration. Larvae placed at some distance from
the dish suffered a like infection.

To test the matter I placed near the dish some weeds, in the pith
of which some larvae were hibernating, and in two days the mites
had found and destroyed them. These young mites when first
noticed are very minute, of elongate form, and extremely active,
running about in search of larvae ; and when one is found they imme¬
diately puncture the skin and suck the juices.

In a day or two the posterior segments of the abdomen begin to
enlarge, and this process continues until the inflated, bladder-like
abdomen becomes ten or even twenty times the size of the cepha-
lothorax.

151

ling this time they have gradually lost their ambulatory powers
emam stationary upon their victims. In the mean time changes
ly wonderful have been going on within the abdomen.

gs are continually forming, and within these the young mites
s continually developing, passing through their entire metamor-
I'S) which includes the acquisition oj the fourth pair of leas (an
pional character among mites) within the abdomen of* the

: er, from which they make their way as fast as they reach
itnty.

b females are quite prolific. I have counted frequently from
to fifty young and eggs within the abdomen, and believe that
: produce even more. The mothers survive the birth of a large
| ei’ ■" *2°^ a majority of the young. The male I have never
, and I am inclined to believe with Mr. Newport, that the
I !® parthenogenous. The minute size of these young mites
. s of their free access to the larvae of the moth, through the
small opening where this made its entry, and a single mite
vits progeny would be sufficient to destroy it.

jit this is very often the manner of attack is proved by the
fiat grains in which the larvae is badly infested frequently have
§ . break in the hull by which even a young mite could gain
|si°n- hike the larvae on which they subsist, their development
! *r(fed or increased by the temperature, they being quite active
! jemperatuie of 60 4 ah ; but in colder weather able to remain
fr abdomen of the parent for months in a dormant state
ng a rising temperature.

I'omalus gelechice, n. s. While examining the grain containing
; larvae) I frequently found pupae of a small hymenopterous
I and bred them in considerable numbers.

T first thought these parasites might be Pteromalus calanclrce.

:d but Mr. Howard has pronounced it a distinct species, and
pribed.

f Richard Owen, of New Harmony, Ind., in “The Cultivator”
pyember, 1846, is said to figure a parasite which Hr. Harris
I it might belong to the genus Pteromalus , but as I can find no
f.of a?W description having been published in this country, I
pescnbe it as follows :

3— Length of body, 2 mm ; expanse of wings, 3.8 mm ; width
r 0.6 mm. Head large, broader than thorax. Antennae

y clavate, moderately pilose, shorter than thorax; second joint
jj than first ; fifth joint more slender than sixth, but broader
fourth, and as long as both ring-joints together. Thorax
- than broad ; parapsidal furrows distinct ; the middle femora
i long slender spine on inner side near apex. Abdomen
3, sessile, robust, and obtusely triangular. Head, face, and
i of thorax coarsely cribrato-punctate, with scattered, fine
Abdomen smooth, . shining. Color: head and thorax steel-
abdomen black at tip; antennae fuscous throughout; femora
3nor and middle pair of legs scarcely darker than tibiae ; the

f

152

posterior femora dusky; tibiae fuscous; tarsi rather lighter colored,
last joint dark; base of abdomen fuscous; wing veins light brown,
stigmal vein half as long as marginal, and less than one-fourth as
long as sub-marginal.

The female is longer (2.5, to 3 mm) and more robust. The abdomen
is more acutely triangular, and not fuscous at base ; the ovipositor,
which is concealed when not m use, is reddisli-brown, and is passed
back and forward along a ventral, median, groove ; club of anten¬
nae darker. The femora are darker, and the spine, near apex of
middle femora, is stouter and longer than in the male.

Described from specimens bred from larva of Crelecliici ccTecilcllo.,

The species occurred in considerable numbers, and I found often
eight to ten pupae about a single larva. Afterwards the. adult insects
were found crawling about among the grains, taking wing whenever
an opportunity was afforded for escape.

They probably contribute considerably toward keeping the pest in
check, although I found them infesting only about three per cent,
of the larvae.

ARTIFICIAL REMEDIES.

As may be supposed, an insect passing so large a portion of its
period of existence in such seclusion, is an exceedingly difficult one
to reach with even palliative measures.

The principal part of the life-time of the . larva is passed in the
grain, with only the minute hole, by which it first entered, to admit
either fumes of various herbs, or gases, powdered lime, or other sub¬
stances.

Even this small avenue is cut off as soon as the worm spins its
cocoon ; hence it is scarcely to be wondered at that applications of
this character are productive of unsatisfactory results.

Heat, However, passes through all these obstructions and penetrates
the innermost recesses of the grain. Careful experiments, which I
made this winter, have proven that a temperature of 140° Fah. con¬
tinued for nine hours, literally cooks the larva or pupa ; that a tem¬
perature of 130° Fah., for five hours, is fatal, as is also 12(F Fah.,
kept up for four hours, while 110° Fah., applied for six hours was
only partially effective. Dr. Harris states, in “Injurious Insects,” p.
507, that a heat of 104° Fah., will be found effective if kept up for
several days.

In order to ascertain the amount of heat which wheat could with¬
stand without destroying its germinating qualities, 195 grains were
kept at a temperature of about 150° Fah. for eight hours. Of these,
twenty-two (or eleven per cent.) failed to grow; while of 312 not
baked, thirty-four failed to grow, (about ten per cent.), showing that
this degree of heat may be used without damage.

Curtis, in “Farm Insects,” states that 190° Fah. may be used;
but wheat which I kept a few hours at a temperature of 180° Fah.
failed to germinate.

153

; . .

otliing is gained by the use of such high temperatures, as a

1h lower one is equally effective. In fact a low temperature and
er time have been found to be superior.

ae French long ago learned the value of this remedy, and con-
cted insect mills after the plan of coffee roasters ; which for the
ler would probably answer a very good purpose.

or elevators they had rooms fitted up and heated by steam,
re as many as eight hundred sacks were treated at a time,
'hr being submitted to a temperature of 135° Fah., and resifted,
grain was found to be perfectly cleansed. Messrs. Halliday
i *., of Cairo, Illinois, use for this purpose a dryer, such as is in
for drying grain for export, and find that it does very good
ice, a temperature of 200° to 250° Fah. for five minutes being
cient.

f course care must be taken that all the grain is reached by the
i j ; hence, large amounts can not be readily managed.

room of this sort could be fitted up with steam pipes, and grain
ted at a small expense per bushel, particularly where steam is
1 as power for elevating.

he grain should be treated as soon after the moth has deposited
3ggs as possible, and before the larva has reached its full growth,
then all the damage possible will have been done. The proper
i 3, I think, will be found to be during August, or not later than
tember. It is very probable that wheat passed through this

Jung process and placed in a clean cool bin, which has been
; empt> for some time previous to rid it of moths, can safely

Icept during the winter, and far into the following spring, with-
sustaining any farther injury from this insect, if all windows or
jtr openings are guarded by screens to keep the moths outside
i entering.

eating grain as above directed, while it destroys all insects in-
fcng it, in whatever stage of development they happen to be at
time, does not in any way insure it against future attacks ;
roe care should be exercised to guard against reinfection,
hreshing grain immediately after harvest is an old and efficient
: edy, it having been demonstrated again and again that wheat
| shed early and stored in clean, cool, dry bins, will sustain little
10 injury, while grain from the same field stacked, and thrashed
r, will be found badly eaten, particularly if the stacks happen to
damp in the meantime.

rain in such condition, if stored, will be sure to heat, and any
in temperature causes in all cases increased activity in the pests,
act, grain supposed to be free from insects in any stage, has
i stored; and, as long as kept cool suffered no injury; but, be¬
ing damp and heating, these pests have developed in great num-

or the same reason, samples of grain kept in glass jars at a
; erately high temperature, as in offices, have been totally ruined,
i ough the grain appeared all right when put up.

levating grain during cold weather, in order to keep it cool until
in the spring, only retards the development of the insects.
3n once fairly ensconced within the grain, there are compara-

I

151

tively few chances against the larvae destroying the grain, if not at
once, in a few weeks or a few months. If the weather is too cold,
they simply suspend operations until it gets warmer. Hence, the
use of any ordinary degree of cold is only a palliative, and not a
remedy, unless the temperature is permanently kept below 50° Fah.
Concussion is also stated to destroy the eggs and the larva, and it
is not improbable that elevating grain and allowing it to drop a
considerable distance would destroy many eggs.

But the wheat which has been the basis of my studies, was sent
to the office direct from the threshing machine, and it has afforded
ample proof that the concussion sustained by passing through the
cylinder of a thresher, is not sufficient to offer any perceptible relief.

Applications of both salt and freshly slacked lime have proven
unsatisfactory in experiments which I have made, and the latter,
besides doing little good, probably kills the young parasitic mites,
and is also said to affect the market value of the grain.

1. Harris’ Insects Injurious to Vegetation, 2d edition, p. 500.

2. Loc. cit.

3. Recherches sur la Destruction l’Alucite, ou Teigne des Graines.

4. L’Entomologie Horticole, 1867, p. 5 1.

5. Encyclopedie Methodique, Vol. 1, p. 115.

INDEX TO ENTOMOLOGICAL REPORT.

INDEX

A

bnormis, Phytoptus, 134.

I cari 124.

1 caro-cecidii, 127.
leer dasycarpum, 133, 135, 141.
cericola Phytoptus, 135.
ceroides, Negundo, 136.

1 gonoderus. 111, 115.

comma, 27, 43, 56, 111.

I grilus granutatus. 121.

I grotis annexa, 103, 108, 110.

,lbum, Chenopodium , 19.

Imam, 110, 115.

angustata, 110.
carinata, 110.
impuncticollis, 110.

1 mbrosia artemisice folia, 19.
mericana, Fraxinus, 137.

Tilia, 134.

American Entomologist, 11, 27.

1 mprlopsis, 135.
imphasia, 112, 115.

inter stitialis, 112.

In aids fr agarics, 65.

1 narsia lineatella. 76.

as a peach twig borer, 77.

as a strawberry crown miner, 80.

larva, 78, 80.

moth, 79.

pupa, 81.

remedies for injuries of, 81.

1 narsia pruinella, 77.

1 nisoplia, 54, 55.
austriaca, 54.

Ingoumois grain moth, 6, 8, 144.
artificial remedies for, 152.
larva, description of, 145.

habits of, 148.
moth, description of, 146,
habits of, 147.
pupa, description of, 147.

history of, 144.
natural checks on. 150.
summary of the life history, 149.
angustata, Amara , 110.

1 nisodactylus. 111, 113, 115, 116.
baltimorensis, 112.
discoideus, 112.
harrisi, 112.
opaculus, 112.
rusticus, 112.
sericeus, 112.

annexa, Agrotis, 103, 108, 110.

Anthocoris insidiosus, 43.

Anthophora retusa, 150.

Ants. 43, 110, 112, 114.

Anzeiger, Zoologischer, article from, 54.

Apanteles orobence, 104.

Aphides, 109, 116, 118, 141.

Apliidius, 90.

Aphis, 84.

apple. 88.
cucumeris, 84.

injuries to vegetation, 88.
life history, 88.
natural enemies, 90.
prevention and remedy, 90.
pupa, 86.
root form, 87.
summary, 91.
winged female, 85.
wingless female, 87
cucurbitoe, 84.
m,aidis, 41, 45.
melon, 6.
plum, 6.

Apple aphis, 88.

Apples, eaten by Diabrotica, 23.
injured by Anarsia. 78.
injured by tussock caterpillar, 100.

Arachnida , 114, 115.

Arbor vitse, 138,140.

Army worm. 5, 102, 105, 120.

Arsenic. 100.

artemisice folia, Ambrosia, 19.

Artificial culture of Coccinellidce, 120.

Ash, green, 136.
white, 137.

Ashes, 99, 100,

Ashmead, Wm. H., 134.

on Phytoptus oleivorus, 124.

atriventris, Loxopeza, 109, 115.

austriaca, Anisoplia , 54.

B

Bacillus, 54.

subtilis, 51.

Bacteria, 47.

Bacterium. 52, 53. 54, 56.
termo, 51.

Bag worm, 101.

baltimorensis, Anisodactylus, 112.

Banded bug, 43.

Bark lice, 116.

IV

INDEX.

Barley, 144.

Bascom, George, 19.
bassii, Botrytis, 55.

Basswood, 134.

Bean, 23.

Beer mash as a culture fluid, 56.

Beetles, 55.

carabid, 27.

food of, 107.

Birds, 21, 44, 56.

Bishop, Luke, 80, 81.

Bisulphide of carbon, 89, 90, 95.

Blackbird, 21.

red-winged, 44.

Black rust, 141.

Blechrus linus, 27.

Blissusleucopterus, studies on, 32.
life history of, 33.
natural enemies of; birds, 44.
insects, 39.
parasites, 45.

topical applications for, 57.

Blister, pear- leaf, 125.

Blue grass, 109.

Boardman, Dr. E, R., 9, 12, 15, 18, 19.
on habits of chinch bugs, 34, 35.
on corn’root-worm, 18,20, 21, 22,26,29.
Bogardus & Johnson, 35. 36.

Boisduval on plant mites, 126,143.
bombycis, Micrococcus, 52.

Borer, Lombardy poplar, 121.

peach twig, 77.

Botrytis bassii, 55.

Box elder. 136.

Brady cellus, 112.
dichrous, 112.

Briosi, Giovanni, on Phytoptus. 123, 124, 131
Broom corn, 6, 29,38.
brunnea, Colap sis, 104.

Brunton, G. A., 14, 67, 68, 69.

on the crown-borer, 69.

Buckton, G.:B.. on Aphis cucurbitce. 84.
Bur-oak, 138.

Burrill, Prof. T. J., 8,9,48,53,134,140,141.
on habits of chinch-bug, 34,35.
describes Micrococcus insectorum, 52.
on the Lombardy poplar borertApriZws
granulatus), 121.
on Phytoptus pyri, 125,140.
on the verbena mite, 141.

C

Cabbage, 103,104.

cut-worm, 103.

worm, European, 7,92,108,112.
purple, 104.

calandrce, Pteromalus, 151.

Calathus, 109, 115.

gregarius, 109.
caliduvi ,Calosoma, 108.
caliginosus, Harpalus, 112.

Caloptenus spretus, 47.

Calosoma. 108, 115.
calidum, 108.
scrutator. 108.

Canker-worm, 108,110,111,112. 113, 115, 119,
Carabid beetles, 27.
food of, 107.

Carabidce, 106, 107, 113, 115, 119.
food of, 107.

Carbon, bisulphide of, 89,90,95.
carinata, Amara, 110.

Cat-bird, 44.

Caterpillars, 108, 109, 111, 113, 117, 119.

Cecidii, 127.

Cedar, 101.

cerasi, Selandria, 98.

cerealella, Gelechia, 152.

Chambers, V. T., on Strawberry Crow

Miner. 77.

Chenopodium album, 19.

Cherry, insects injurious to, 98.

Cherry slug. 6,98.

description and life-history of, 99.
remedies for, 99.

Chinch-bug, 5. 7,9, 10, 32,41,42,44,105,108,11
114,117,118,126.

life-history of, 33.
natural enemies of, birds, 44.
insects, 39.
parasites, 45.
summary, 56.
studies on, 32.

topical applications for, 57.
Chlcmius, 111, 115, 116.
dijffinis, 111.
erythropus, 111,
nemoralis, 111.
tomentosus, 111.

Chrysopa, 43.

plorabunda, 42.
cinctus, Harpactor, 43, 56.
cinerea, Epicauta, 104.

Cladosporium, 23.

Clemens, Dr. Brackenridge, on Anar
lineatella, 77,79.

Cleonus punctiventris, 55.

Clover, 21,23.104.

Coal-tar, 57.

Coccides. 116.

Coccinella, 118.
munda, 40.

novem-notata, 41,118.
quingue-notata, 118.
quindecim-punctata, 116.
sanguinea, 118.

CoccinellidcB, 7,40,56,90, 106,116,119.
food of, 116,

artificial culture of, 120.

Colaspis brunnea, 104.

Coleoptera, 114, 115.

larvae of, 110.
colossus, Evarthus. 109.

Composites, 10, 112.
comma, Agonoderus, 27,43,56,111.
Comstock. J. H., on Anarsia lineatella, 7

INDEX.

V

tonica, Flata, 104.
tonvergens, Hippodomia, 41,117.

Convergent lady bug, 41.

Coquillett, D. W.,on hot water as an insecti¬
cide, 93.

‘ordata, Salix, 137.
lorn, 5, 6, 10, 34, 103, 104.

eggs of chinch-bug laid in, 38.
plant louse, 5.
root- worm, 6,7,10.

artificial remedies for, 28.

eggs of, 18, 23.

imago, description of, 15.

life history of, 20.
injuries done by. 11,26.
larva, description of, 17.

life history of, 18.
natural enemies, 15.
pupa, description of. 19.

life history of, 18.
summary, 30.

hops, relation of, 29,30,31,74.
hown-borer, strawberry, 6,7,64.

Irown miner, strawberry, 76, 80.
lucumber, 6,23,83,84.
wild, 84.

beetle, striped, 11.
ucumeris. Aphis, 84.
hicurbitaceous plants, 83.

•ucurbitce, Aphis, 84.

artificial culture of Coccinellidce.
lutworms, 111.

cabbage, 103.
lycloneda, 118.
sanguinea, 42.

D

! asycarpum , Acer, 133, 135,141.

>eBary, 55.

ecorus, Platynus, 109,

>emming, R. C., 15.
lendroptus, 141.
enticulata, Leptopera, 54.
estructor, Isaria, 54.55,56.

Habrotica duodecim- guttata, 104.
longicornis, 6,10.
article on, 10.
artificial remedies for, 28.
eggs of, 18,21,23.
imago, description of, 15.

life history of, 20.
injuries done by, 11,26.
larva, description of, 17.

life history of, 19.
natural enemies, 26.
pupa, description of, 16.
life history of, 19.
summary, 30.
table of dates, 25.
vittata, 11.
iccelus, 110.

elongatus, 110.
ichrous, Brady cellus, 112.
ij finis, Chlainius 111.

Dilutions, 59.

Diptera, 19,112,114,115.

Dipterous larvae, 19,23.
discoideus, Anisodactylus, 112.

Dujardin, Felix, on Phytopti, 130.
duodecim-guttata, Diabrotica, 104.

Dust, 89,91,99.

E.

Earle, F. S., 36,66,68,69.

Parker, 65,67.

Earth worms, 18, 111, 113, 114, 115.

Elder, box, 136.

Elm, white, 137.
elongatus, Diccelus, 110.

Emulsions of kerosene, 58,59,60,61,62.
Endicott, G. W., 67.

on strawberry crown-borer, 69,74.
Entomologist, American, 11.27.
Entomophthora, 53, 57.
ephemera’/ ormi.s, Thyridopteryx, 101.
Epiccerus imbricatus, 104.

Epicauta cinerea, 104.

Epicauta Pennsylvania, 104.
vittata, 104.

erythropus, Chlcenius, 111.

European cabbage worm, experiments on.

bisulphide of carbon for, 95,
hot water for, 93.
kerosene emulsion for, 93.
lime for, 97.
pyrethrum for, 93.
saltpetre and salt for. 93.
sulphur for. 95.
tar water for, 97.

tobacco smoke for, 97.

Evarthrus , 109, 115.

colossus, 109.
sodalis, 110.

Experiments with European cabbage worm

F.

farinosa, Isaria, 55.

Finney, Thomas, 19.

Fisher, S. D., 9.

Flata conica, 104.
flavus, Lasius. 43, 111.

Flies, 18,47,53, 111.
syrphus, 90.

Flour and pyrethrum, 93.

Flower bug, insidious, 43.

Flowers, roadside, 22.

Fly, lace-wing, 42.

Fly, Hessian, 6.

Food of Carabidce. 107.

Coccinellidce, 1116.

Diabrotica longicornis, 22.

Lasius flavus, 44,

Food relations of predaceous beetles, the
105.

Forbes, Prof. S. A. 123,140.
fragarice, Analcis, 65.

Tyloderma, 64.
fraxini, Phytoptus, 136.

Fraxinus americana, 107.
viridis, 136,137.

VI

INDEX.

Frazer, H. W., on corn root-worm, 13.
French, Prof. C. H., 12.

Fungi, 30, 110, 111, 112, 114.
parasitic, 9,45,53.
spores of, 23, 109, 115.

G.

Galerita, 108,115.

janus, 108.

Gall mites, 8,126.

Galusha, O. B., on melon plant louse, 84.

Garman, W. H., 6,7,8.

finds strawberry crown miner, 81.
on strawberry crown borer, 67>68-.
on Phytoptus and other injurious
plant mites, 123.

Gelechia cerealella, 152.

artificial remedies for, 152.
larva, description of, 145.

habits of, 148.
moth, description of. 146.

habits of, 147.
pupa, description of, 147,
history of, 141.
natural checks on, 150.
summary of the life history, 149.
verucella, 144.
gelechice, Pteromalus, 151.

Gentry, Thomas G.. 84.

Geophilus, 111, 115, 117.
glacialis, Hippodamia, 117.

Glover, Townend, 141.

on strawberry crown miner, 77,78.

Gnats, 110.

Golden-rod. 10,20.

Goodrich, Theodore, 67.

Gortyna nitela, 103.

Grain, insects injurious to, 144.
moth, Angoumois, 6, 8, 144.
article on, 144.

Grain plant louse, 5.
granulatus, Agrilus, 121.

Grape, 6.

louse, 6.

Grass, 5, 37, 102, 109, 110, 112, 113.
blue, 109.

Grasshoppers, 47,105.

Grass worms, 105.

Green ash, 136.

Green muscardine, 54,55.

Gregarina, 23.
gregarius, Calathus, 109.

Griswold, James. 12.

Ground-beetles, food of, 106.

predaceous, 7, 107.

Grubs, parasitic, 73.

H

Harpactor cinctus, 43, 56.

Harpalus , 112, 115.

caliginosus, 112.
herbivagus, 112.
pennsylvanicus, 112.

Harris, D. S., 9.

on chinch-bugs, 35.
on corn root-worm, 13, 19.

Harris, Dr. T. W., on Selandria cerasi, 98.
Karris i, Anisodaclylus, 112.

Harrowing for chinch- bug, 57.

Heart-leaved willow, 137.

Helianthus, 20.

Hellebore. 100.

Helminthosporium, 23, 114.

Hemiptera, 40, 44, 114, 115.
herbivagus, Harpalus, 112.

Hessian fly, 6.

Heteropus ventricosus, 15^.

Hippo damia, 117.

convergens, 41, 117.
glacialis, 117.
maculata, 41.

I Hot water as an insecticide. 58, 93,141.
House flies, 47,53,54,57.
wren, 44.

Howe, Edward G-, 84.

Hubbard. H. G., 58.

Hydnocera pallipennis, 104.

Hymenoptera, 114.
parasitic, 120.

I

Icy lady-bug, 41.
imbricatus, Hpicocrus, 104.
impuncticollis, Amara, 110.
incurvus, Tachys,21.

Insecticides, 7, 89, 91, 99, 141, 142.
arsenic, 100.
ashes, 99,100.

bi-sulphide of carbon, 89,90,

coal-tar, 57.

flour, 93,94.

hellebore, 100,

hot water, 58,93,141.

kerosene, 58, 59, 62, 63. 89, 90, 91, 96, 97.

lime, 97,100,142.

London purple, 30,74.

milk, for emulsions, 58,59,62,63,89.

oils, 58, 59.

Paris green, 30,74,100,
petroleum; see kerosene,
plowing and harrowing, 57.
potash, 59,61.
pyre thrum, 89,91,93,94,97.
rotation of crops, 29,30,31, /4.
salt, 90,96.
saltpetre, 96.
sand, 99,100.

soap-suds, 59,60,61,62,63,89,141,142. ;
sulphur. 95, 141, 142.
tar-water, 97.
tobacco, 89,90,91,95.
water, 58, 59, 61, 62, 89, 90, 91, 96, 100, 141
insectorum, Micrococcus, 52,56.

Insects. 6, 12, 39, 117.
insidiosus, Anthcrcoris, 43.

INDEX

VII

nsidious flower-bug, 43.
aterstitiali*, Amphasia, 112.
owa, corn root- worm in, 14,20.
saria . 54.

destructor , 54,55,56.
farinosa, 55.
vy, poison, 134.

J

.'ackson, Col., 29.
anus, Galerita, 108.

une grass, eaten by Anisodactylus, 1 12.
eaten by Agonoderus, 111.

K

ialtenbach on remedy for plant-lice, 90.
kerosene as an insecticide, 58, 59, 62, 63, 89,
90,91,96,97.

Iramer, Dr., on Dendroptus 141.

jace-wing fly, 42,56.

Lady-bug, convergent, 41.
icy, 41.

nine-spotted, 41.
spotted, 41.
trim, 42.

Lady-bugs, 40,56,106,116.

Lamb’s quarter, 19.

Landois, Dr. H., 133.

Lark, meadow, 44.

Larvae, 116.

dipterous, 23.

Lasius flavus, 43,111.

Lattin, S.. 13,21.

Leaf-lice, 116.

LeBaron, Dr. William, 10, 100.

Lebia, 115.

Leconte, Dr. J. L., on fungus parasites of
insects, 45.

Lehn & Fink, 93.

Lepidoptera, 114.

Leptodera denticulata, 54.

Letter of transmittal, 55.

Leucania unipuncta, 102.
leucopterus, Blissus, 32. (See Blissus leucop-
terus.)

Lichens, 56.

spores of, 23.

Umbatus, Platynus, 109.

Lime as an insecticide, 97, 100, 142.

Linden, 134.
lineatella, Anarsia, 76.
lineatus, Blechrus, 27.
lineolaris, Lygus, 104.

Locust, Rocky Mountain, 47,105.

Lombardy poplar, 8.

borer of, 121.

London purple, 30,74.

longicornis, Biabrotica, 6, 10. (See JDia-
brotica longicronis.)

Patrobus, 113.
longifolia, Salix, 138.

Long-leaved willow, 138.

Loxopeza, 109.

atriventris, 109,115.
lucublandus, Pterostichus, 110.

Lygus lineolaris, 104.

M

McAdams, William, 36, 39.

Macrobasis unicolor, 104.
macrocarpa, Quercus, 138.
maculata . Hippodamia, 41.
maidis. Aphis, 41,44.

Mamestra picta, 103.

Many-banded robber, 43.

Maple, soft, 135, 137.

sugar, 135.

Meadow-lark, 44.

Melons, 6,83.

Melon Aphis, 6.

plant-louse, 83.

injuries to vegetation, 88.
life history, 88.
natural enemies, 90.
prevention and remedy, 89.
pupa, 86.
root form, 87.
summary, 91.
winged female, 85.
wingless female, 87.

Metschnikoff, Elias, experiments with par¬
asitic fungi, 54.

Micrococcus, 48,53,54.
bombycis, 52.
insectorum, 52,56.

Middleton, Miss Nettie, 84.

Mildew, 141.

Milk in emulsions, 58,59,62,63,89.

Mills, Charles S., 9.

Miscellaneous Notes, 98.

Missouri, corn root-worm in, 11.

Mite, 150.

verbena, 141.

Mites, 110,111,115,117,123.
gall, 8, 126.
plant. 123.
spinning, 126.
remedies for, 142.

Moisture, effect on chinch-bugs, 56.

Molds, 21,23,30,56.

Mollusks, 113,114.
munda, Coccinella, 40.

Muscardine, green, 54,55.

white, 55.

Muskmelon, 83.

Myriapoda, 27, 111, 114, 115, 117.

N

Negundo aceroides, 136.
nemoralis, Chlcenius, 111.

Nine-spotted lady-bug, 41.
nitela, Gortyna, 103.

Notes, miscellaneous, 98.
novem-notata, Coccinella, 41,118.

VIII

INDEX.

O

Oak, bur, 138.

Oats, 5.

insects injurious to, 103.

Observations on the Angoumois Grain
moth and its Parasites, 144.
occidentalis, Thuja, 138,141.

Oils as insecticides, 58,59,
oleivorus, Phytoptus, 124,
oleracea, Portulaca, 19.
opaculus, Anisodactylus, 112.

Orange, Osage, insects affecting, 104.
Orange rust, 124.

Orgyia leuco.'tigma, 100.

Ormenis pruinosa, 104.

Ormerod, Eleanor A., 142.

Orohena rimosalis, 104.
orobence, Apanteles, 104.

Ortyx virgvnianus , 44.

Osage orange, insects affecting, 104.

P

pallipennis, Hydnocera, 104.

Parasites.

Gregarina, 23.
insect,

on Angoumois grain moth, 150.
on army- worm, 102.
on crownborer, 73.
on melon plant louse, 88,90.
on purple cabbageworm, 104.
fungus,

on Anisoplia an striae a , 54.
on chinch-bug, 45,53,54,56.
bacteria, 45,52,56.
Entomophthora, 53,54,56,57.
Micrococcus insectorum, 52, 56.
on flies, 47,53.
on grasshoppers, 47.
on silkworm, 45,52.

Paris green, 30, 74, 100.

Partridge, 44.

Patrobus, 113.

longicornis, 113.

Pauls, Gustavus, 11.

Peach, bored by Anarsia, 77.
twig borer, 77.
larva, 79.
moth, 79.

Pear, 98, 140.

Pear-leaf blister, 125.

Pear slug, (See cherry slug).

Pe brine, 54,55.

Peck, Prof, A. J., on Selandria cerasi, 98.
pennsylvanica. Epicauta, 104.
pennsylvanicus , Harpalus, 112.
permundus, Pterostichus, 110.

Peronospora, 23.

Petroleum, (See kerosene).

Pettit, J., 78.

Phalcenidce , 133.

Phoma, 109.

Physogaster lav varum, 150,

Phytoptus, paper on, 123.
description of, 130.
habits of. 133.
of the vine, 123.
remedies for, 142.
species of, 133.
abnormis, 134.
acericola, 135.
consimilis, 137.
fraxini, 136.
oleivorus, 124.
pyri, 125,134,140.
quadripes, 133, 135.
querci, 138.
salicicola, 138.
thujas, 138,139.
ulnvi, 137.

picta, Mamestra, 103.

Pieris rapee, experiments on, 92.
bisulphide of carbon for, 95.
hot water for, 93.
kerosene emulsion for, 93.
lime for, 97.
pyrethrum for, 93.
saltpetre and salt for, 93.
sulphur for, 95.
tar water for, 97.
tobacco smoke for, 97.

Plant lice. 5, 7, 41, 42, 56, 84, 106, 109, 111, 113,
114, 117, 118, (see Aphis).

Plant louse, corn, 5.
grain, 5.
grape, 6.
melon, 83.

Plant mites, 123.
habits of, 133.
remedies for, 142.

Plants, cueurbitaceous, 83.

Platynus, 109.

decorus, 109.
limbatus, 109.

plorabunda, Chrysopa, 42.

Plum, 6, 77.

Aphis, 6.

Podura, 117.

Poison ivy, 134.

Pollen, 22, 23, 30, 57, 109, 112, 114, 115.

Poplar. Lombardy, 8.
borer of, 121.

Portulaca oleracea, 19.

Potash, 59. 61.

Prairie chickens, 44.

Prairie Farmer, on the corn root- worm, 12
on the red spider, 124.

Predaceous beetles, the food relations of
105.

ground beetles, 7, 107.

Protozoa, 23.

pruinella, Anarsia, 77.

pruinosa, Ormenis, 104.

Pteromalus, 151.

| ealandree, 151.

INDEX.

IX

gelechice, 151.
erostichus, 110.
lucublandus, 110.
permundus, 110.
sayi, 110.

nctiventris, Cleonus, 55.
irple cabbage worm, 104.
trslane, 19.

Tethrum, 89, 91, 93, 94, 97.
ri, Phytoptus, 125, 134, 140.
Typhlodromus, 140.

Q

adripes, Phytoptus, 133, 135.

tail, 144.

tassia, 141.

erci, Phytoptus, 138.

ercus macrocarpa, 138.

indecim- punctata, Coccinella, 116.

inque-notata, Coccinella, 118.

.gweed. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23.
oce, Pieris, (see Pieris rapes').
spberry, eaten by Coccinella, 116.
aumur, on plant mites, 127.
d spider, 123, 124, 126, 142.
d-winged blackbird, 44.
usa, Anthophora, 150.
us toxicodendron, 134.

'ey, Prof. C. V.;10, 58, 135.
on Analcis fragarice, 65.
on Anarsia Imeatella, 79.
on chinch-bug, 40.
on corn root- worm, 11, 27.
on kerosene emulsion, 58.
on quail eating chinch-bugs, 44.
losalis, Orobence, 104.
bber bugs, 56.
bber, many-banded, 43.
bison, J. W., on chinch-bugs, 54.
cky Mountain locust, 47, 105.
ot-worm, corn, (see corn root-worm),
ot-worm, strawberry, 6.
tation of crops, 29, 30, 31, 74.
st, black, 141.
st of the orange, 124.
iticus, Anisodactylus, 112.

S

icicola, Phytoptus, 138.
i lix cordata, 137.
longifolia, 138.
t as an insecticide, 90, 96.
tpeter as an insecticide, 96.
id, 99, 100.

i guinea , Cycloneda, 42, 118.

mders, William, experiments with the

herry slug, 99.

on the strawberry crown miner, 80.

>\ Thomas, description of Agrilus gran-
latus, 122.

sayi, Pterostichus, 110.

Scarabceidce, 109, 114.

Scarites, 108.

subterraneus , 108.

scrutator, Calosoma, 108.

Scheuten, description of Typhlodromus
pyri, 140.

Seeds, 109, 112.

Selandria cerasi, 98.

description and life history of, 99.
remedies for, 98.

Septoria, 23.

sericeus, Anisodactylus, 112.

Seymour, A. B., 35, 36, 62.

Shimer, Dr, Henry, 53, 133, 134, 136.
on chinch-bug, 41, 42. 45, 56.

Silkworm, 54, 55, 56.

Slug, cherry or pear, 6, 98.

Smart- weed, 20, 21, 22, 23.

Soapsuds as an insecticide, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63,
89, 141, 142.

sodalis, Evartlirus, 110.

Soft maple, 135, 137.

Sorghum, 6, 29, 38.

Chinch-bugs in, 38.

Spiders, 115.

Spinning mites, 126.

Spores of fungi and lichens, 23, 109, 115.

Spotted lady-bug, 41.

spretus, Caloptenus, 47, 105.

Squash, 83, 84.

Stalk-borer, 103,

Steward, Hon. Lewis, 29.

Strawberry, 6, 64, 76, 80.

Strawberry crown-borer, 6, 7, 64.
imago, 64, 65.
injuries to vegetation, 78.
larva, 65, 66.
life history, 66.
natural enemies, 78.
prevention and remedy, 78,
pupa, 65, 66.

Strawberry crown miner, 76, 80.
as a peach-twig borer, 77.
larva, 80.
remedies for, 81.

Strawberry root-worm, 6.

Strawberries, wild, 76, 80.

Striped cucumber-beetle, 11.

Studies on the chinch-bug, 32.

subterraneus, Scarites, 108.

subtilis, Bacillus, 51.

Sugar maple, 135.

Sulphur as an insecticide, 95, 141, 142.

Suiphuret of lime, 142.

Syrphus flies, 90.

Tachys incurvus, 27.

Tar. (See coal tar.)

Tar -water as an insecticide, 97.
Telephoridce, 114.
termo, Bacterium, 51.

X

INDEX.

Tetranychus, 126.

Thistle, 10, 20, 22.

Thomas, Dr. Cyrus, 93.

on chinch-bug, 43, 47.
on melon plant-louse, 83, 84.
on tussock caterpillar, 100.

Dr. F- A. W., 129, 136.

Thousand-legs, 127.

Thrush, brown, 44.

Thuja occidentalis. 138, 141.
thujce, Phytoptus, 138, 139.

Thyridopteryx ephemerceformis, 101.

Tilia americana, 134.

Tobacco as an insecticide, 89, 90, 91, 9o.
Tomato, injuries to, 104.
tomentosus, CliKenius, 111.

Topical applications for chinch-bugs, bi.
in agriculture, 57.
in horticulture, 57.
toxicodendron, RJlus, 134.

Trim lady-bug, 42.

Tucker, J. F., 9.

Turnip, 21. . . , _

Tussock caterpillar, white- marked, 6, 10 .

Twig-borer, peach, 77.

Tyloderma frag ar ice, article on, 64.
imago, 64, 65.
injuries to vegetation, 78.
larva, 65, 66.
life history, 66.
natural enemies, 78.
prevention and remedy, 78.
pupa, 65, 66.

Typhlodromus pyri, 140.

U

ulmi, Phytoptus, 140.
unicolor. Macrobasis, 104.
unipuncta, Leucania, 102.
Uredospores , 23.

JJstilago, 23.

Vasates, 135.

ventricosus, Heteropus , 15

Verbena, 140.
mite, 141.

verucella, Gelechia, 144.
virginianus, Ortyx, 44.
viridis, Fraxinus, 136, 137.
vittata, Hiabrotica, 11.

Epicauta, 104.

W

Walnut News, on corn root- worm, 4.
Walsh B. D., 10, 40,56.

Water, use of, 58,59,61,62,89,90,91,96,100,141.

hot, as an insecticide, 58,93.
Watermelon, 83.

Weber, H., on Diabrotica longicorms, 11.
Webster, F. M., 6,8,19,107.

on chinch bug, 34, 35, 43.
on Diabrotica longicomis, 12,29.

discovers egg of, 24.
on Epicauta, 104.
on Macrobasis, 104.

Observations on the Angoumois Gra
Moth and its Parasites, 144.
on Pterostichus, 110.
on strawberry crown-borer, 69.
Webster, Jabez, 67.

Werigo, A., 55.

Western Rural, 11,18.

Wheat, injuries to, 102,144.

White ash, 137.
elm, 137.
grub, 12, 13.

-marked tussock caterpillar, 6,100.
muscardine, 55. #

Wild cucumber, 84. .

strawberry, insects affecting, 76,8..

Willow, heart-leaved, 137.

long-leaved, 138.

Wire worms, 18,27.

Wren, house, 44.

Zebra caterpillar, 103.

Zoologischer Anzeiger, article from, M

THIRTEENTH REPORT

f

T>

!

OH THE

4

STATE ENTOMOLOGIST

NOXIOUS AND BENEFICIAL INSECTS

.*

j.

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Second Annual Report of S. A. Forbes,

For the year 1883.

X

SPRINGFIELD, ILL.:

H. W. Rokker, State Printer and Binder.

1884.

CONTENTS.

1,

PAGE

List of Descriptions . ; . 7

Letter of Transmittal . 9

The Wheat Bulb- Worm . 13

Introductory . 13

Literature . 14

Nomenclature . 16

Description . 17

Life History . 19

Recapitulation of Life History . 21

Injuries to Wheat . 22

Natural Enemies . 24

Artificial Remedies . . . 27

Summary . 28

The Wheat- Straw Worm . 30

Literature . 31

Description . 34

Life History . 35

Injuries to Grain . 36

Remedial Measures . 37

Notes on Insects Affecting Sorghum and Broom-Corn . 39

Literature . 40

Recent Observations . 41

Plant-Lice . 41

Chaitophorus flavus, n. s . 42

Description . . 42

Life History . 44

Injuries . 44

Natural Enemies . 45

Aphis maidis . . . 46

Description . 46

Life History . 47

Calendar . 48

Injuries to Broom-Corn and Sorghum . 49

Natural Enemies . 49

Remedies . 50

Sipiionophora, sp . 50

Schizoneura panicola . 51

Description . 51

Life History . 52

Summary . 53

The Corn Root-Worm . 55

The Black-Headed Grass Maggot . 1 . 57

Classification and Description . 58

IV

CONTENTS.

PAGE
... 60

Insects Injurious to the Strawberry . .

Introductory . .

List of Strawberry Insects . .

for them . .

A Classification of Remedial Measures .

Description and Discussion of Species . .

The Mason Bee .

The Strawberry False- Worm .

Literature .

• • .......

Description .

Life History .

Distribution and Abundance .

Habits and Injury to the Strawberry .

Natural Enemies...., .

Remedies .

..•••••••**•• »•••••«

The Rose Slug .

The Brown Strawberry Span-Worm .

The Horned Span-Worm .

The Green Strawberry Span-Worm .

Description .

The Smeared Dagger .

Literature .

Description . - .

Life History and Injuries .

The Army-Worm . .

60

61

62

64

(i(i

70

70-

71

71

73

73

75

75

75

76
76

79

80

80

82

82

8S

84

8-

Cut-Worms . . g<

Flea Beetles . . g<

The Strawberry Leaf Beetles . g,

Grasshoppers . * g

The Common Strawberry Leaf-Roller .

Literature . g

Description . o

Distribution . c

. . . *

Life History . c

Injury to the Strawberry . - . . _ c

Injuries to Other Plants .

Natural Enemies .

Remedies .

The Oblique-Banded Leaf-Roller.
The Plain Strawberry Leaf-Roller

Description .

Life History .

Remedies .

The Peach-Tree Leaf-Roller .

The Strawberry Leaf-Stem Gall...

The Maple Bark-Louse . —

The Strawberry Plant-Lice .

Literature .

Description .

Siphonophora fragarice —

Siphonophora minor, n. s..

Aphis, sp. ? .

Natural Enemies .

Remedies .

The False Chinch-Bug .

V

PAGE

The Red Spider . . . jpg

The Flea Negro Bug . . 106

Literature . 107

Description . 107

Life History . .

Injuries —

To the Strawberry . .

To Wheat . 109

To Other Vegetation . HO

Remedies . HO

The Strawberry-Flower Worm . HI

The Small Yellow Ant . 112

Injuries . . H3

The Stalk-Borer . . 114

The Strawberry Weevil . 114

The Tarnished Plant Bug . 115

Literature . 116

Description. . H7

Life History . 12i

Habits and Injuries to Vegetation-

In the Flower and Vegetable Garden . 121

In the Orchard . ' . 122

In the Strawberry Field . 123

Recapitulation . . . 128

Summary . . 128

Supposed Poisonous Effect . . 129

Natural Enemies . 180

Prevention and Remedy . 131

Summary . . 134

The Dusky Plant Bug . 135

Description . 13g

Life History . 138

The Strawberry Millipede . 138

The Strawberry Crown-Miner . . . 141

The Strawberry Crown-Borer . 142

Aphis, sp . .

Wireworms . 143

White Grubs . 143

The Strawberry Root- Worms . 144

The Common White Grubs . 144

The Goldsmith Beetle . 146

The Fig-Eater . . 149

The Strawberry Root-Worms . 150

Distinguishing Characters . 151

Common Characters . 151

Differential Characters . 153

Synopsis of Larvae . . ... 155

Synopsis of Pupae . 155

Colaspis brunnea . 156

Literature . 156

Description . . . 156

Life History . 157

Paria aterrima and Paria sexnotata . 159

Literature . 159

Description . 160

•

VI

CONTENTS.

Distribution .

Life History .

Scelodonta pubescent . .

Literature .

Description .

Life History .

Comparison of Life Histories .

Injuries to Vegetation . '

Natural Enemies .

Artificial Remedies . - .

Topical Applications to the Foliage .

Topical Applications to the Roots ....

Bisulphide of Carbon .

Carbolic Acid .

Plowing up and Transplanting .

Summary .

The Black Fruit Weevil . - . ‘ tt'i Stories '

Summary and General Comparison of Life Histones

Calendar of Strawberry Insects .

Summary of Remedial Measures .

Insects Injurious to the Apple .

The Green Apple Leaf-Hopper .

Description .

The Lesser Apple Leaf-Folder .

Explanation of Plates .

LIST OF DESCRIPTIONS.

it*

*

ni
\ ■

r

1. The Whe^t Bulb-Worm, ( Meromyza americana, Fitch): differential characters,

p. 17; imago, p. 17; egg, p. 18; larva, p. 18; pupa, p. 19.

2. Ccelinius meromyzce, n. s., p. 26.

3. The Wheat- Straw Worm, ( Isosoma tritici, Riley); imago, p. 35; larva, p. 35; pupa,

,p. 35,

4. Chaitophorus ftavus, n. s., p. 42; wingless vivipirous female, p. 43; pupa, p. 43;
.winged female, p. 43.

5. Aphis maidis, Fitch: winged female [aerial], p. 46; root form, p. 46; pupa, p. 47;
wingless female, p. 47.

$

6. Siphonophora sp.: wingless female, p. 50; pupa, p. 50; winged female, p. 50.

7. Schizoneura panicola, Thos.: wingless female, p. 51; winged female, p. 51.

8. The Black-Headed Grass Maggott, (Sciara sp.,?), p. 57.

9. The Strawberry False-Worm, (Emphytus maculatus, Norton): imago, p. 72; egg,
?. 73; larva, p. 73; pupa, p. 73.

10. The Brown Strawberry Span-Worm, (Cymatophora pampinaria, Pack.): larva,
a. 77; pupa, p. 77; imago, p. 77.

11. The Horned Span-Worn, (Nematocampa filamentaria, Guen.): larva, p. 79; pupa,

?. 79; imago, p. 79.

12. The Green Strawberry Span-Worm, ( Angerona crocataria, Fab.); egg, p. 80;
arva, p. 80; pupa, p. 80; imago, p. 80.

13. The Smeared Dagger, ( Apatela oblinita, Sm. & Abb.): imago, p. 82; larva, p. 82;

pupa, p. 82.

14. Phyllotreta vittata, p. 86.

15. Epitrix fuscula, p. 86,

16. Systena blanda, p. 86.

17. The Common Strawberry Leaf-Roller, ( Phoxopteris comp tana, Frol.): imago,
p. 89; larva, p. 90; pupa, p. 90.

18. The Oblique-Banded Leaf-Roller, (Caoecia rosaceana, Harris); larva, p. 94;

Mipa, p. 94.

19. The Plain Strawberry Leaf-Roller (Cacatcia obsoletena, Clem.): larva, p. 96;

mago, p. 96.

20. The Peach-Tree Leaf-Roller, (Ptycholoma persicana, Fitch): p. 97.

21. Siphonophora frag ar ice, Kock: wingless, viviparous female, p. 100; pupa, p. 100;

ringed viviparous female, p. 101.

22. Siphonophora minor, n. s.: wingless viviparous female, p. 101; winged viviparous

emale, p. 102.

VIII

descriptions.

23. Aphis sp., p. 102.

24. IH. False-Ohinch-Bug iNysius aniustatus. Uh.er); larva, p. 1051 Pupa. P. 1«.
imago, p. 105,

The Red Spider (Telranychus telarius, L.): p. 106-

26. The Flea Negro Bug tThyreocoris pulicarius, Germar): adult, P. 107: young, p.l 8.
97. Thyreocoris unicolor, p. 108.

98 Thvreocoris lateralis, p .108.

29. ' The Strawberry Flower-Worm tEccopsis permundana, Clem ): larva, p. :
pupa, p. HI; imago, p. 112.

30. the Small Yellow Ant ( Solenopsis fugax, Latr.), p. 112.

S1 The Strawberry Weevil (. Anthonommus musculus, Say): p. 114.

32 The Tarnished Plant Bug (Lygus lineolaris, Beauv.): adult p. 117; first stage,
r, 119- second stage, p. 119; third stage, p. 120; fourth stage, or pupa, p. 1-0.

' 33; The dusty Plant Bug tDeratocor is rapidus. Say): adult. P.1S6: second stage, p. 13.,

third stage, p. 137; fourth stage, or pupa, p. 138.

34 The Strawberry Millipede ( Cambala annulata, Say) : p. 840.

35’ The Goldsmith Beetle ( Cotalpa lanigera, L .): imago, P, HO; larva, p. 147; egg,
p. 147.

36. The Fig-Eater ( Allorhina nitida L.): imago, p. 150; larva, p. 150.

37 The Strawberry Root-Worms: distinctive characters , p. 151; com7non c/n*?'aC;
terl \JZ. v. 151: pup®, p. 152; Images, p. 153; differential characters, larvm. p. 153, pupa ,

n. 154.

38. Colaspis brunnea. Fab.: larva, p. 156, imago, p. 15<.

39. Faria aterrima, Oliv.: larva, p. 160; imago, p. 160.

40. Scelodonta pubescens, Mels.: larva, p. 164; imago, p. 164.

41. The Green Apple Leaf-Hopper ( Empoa albcpicta, n. s.) p. 181

42. Hemiteles sp., p. 183.

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.

Illinois State Laboratory of Natural History,

» Office of State Entomologist,

t Normal, III., December SO, 1888.

|

To his Excellency, John M. Hamilton, Governor of the State of Illinois:

Sir : I have the honor to transmit herewith my second
report as State Entomologist of Illinois, covering our operations for
the year 1888. An appendix, consisting of a complete index to
the twelve preceding reports of the office, and a full glossary of the
technical terms used in them, was all ready for publication with
this report, but so far passed the limit of the number of pages al¬
lowed me by the State Board of Agriculture, that it is necessarily
withheld.

NOTES of the year.

In the northern part of the State, few serious insect injuries to
crops have come under our observation, although the com root-
worm, the corn plant-louse, and the apple aphis, have been numer¬
ous and destructive rather beyond the average ; but the year has
been marked by some devastating outbreaks of injurious insects to
the southward.

The Hessian fly ravaged the wheat fields of Southern Illinois, greatly
diminishing the yield and the quality of that grain over large areas,
and completely destroying many fields, so that they were either
plowed up and devoted to other crops in spring, or left without
harvesting in midsummer. Owing to the abundance of their para¬
sites, and the long-continued drouth of the later summer, a very
large percentage of these insects were destroyed, and the danger of
widespread general injury another year was greatly lessened ; never¬
theless the “fly” has done considerable local injury this fall in the
Wabash Valley. The whole tenor of our observations of this insect,
made during the harvest and the two months following, was to the
j effect that it passes this season in the stubble, in the field, where
it might be easily destroyed by general and concerted action.

The two other capital insect enemies of Western agriculture, the
chinch bug and the army wrorm, have been practically out of the
! field throughout the season, the former having been so far reduced
\ ln numbers by its parasites, and the latter by the extraordinarily
wet spring of the year previous, that neither has made any appear¬
ance in force. The chinch-bug is not . far below the danger line,

10

i j if f>,A wpflther and other conditions should be favor-

coming — », * »« —

i n„oumois grain-moth ( Gelechia cerealella) has also met

on this insect, published in my last report.

An outbreak of the whc.l talb-.orm <M™^ ™

sratfft»- vsrJ; =<&•«* »•

iurv to a number of others. .

Tn extreme Southern Illinois, the forest tent-caterpillar (Clmocampa
JZSTJ, ” frigUM inroad - h* “ “fd ft

“lift mS S ft*” lift., to tail might have teen

ftftbg* ,te1oi“.g. o “id tree, in ,P„ng with P.ri. green,
or other similar poison.

ftreat numbers of these caterpillars were killed by a contagious
disease whffih swept them off just as they were ready to transform
to the chrysalis ; but vast quantities of the eggs are now upon t
trees ready to hatch in spring.

ftft “l 'SSl’Shf h.“e“dmo5

SH? rJ ft01 vzg ‘A-srtft" “

raviclus ) worked upon the strawberries in precisely the same man
ner and at the same time, being in some fields scarcely less ab

ant than the other. .

The season has been further characterized, to the economic ento-
mologist by the appearance of several more .or If s virulent con¬
tagious diseases among caterpillars and other mfets, ; e ur p
cabbage worm especially having suffered quite beyond example, ov
l. lr„e areas from this cause. It is difficult to believe that tins pest
can be injurious next year in this region, as for several years

past.

OBGAMZATION OF THE OFFICE.

Although the laws relating to the Entomologist’s ofnee m this
State make no provision, direct or indirect, for any assistance what-
ever to that officer, he being theoretically required to do even th(
simplest routine and mechanical parts of his work with Ins own
hands, the affiliation of the operations of this office with those o
the State Laboratory of Natural History, at Normal, has ,made
nossible and proper for me to use the resources of the Laboratoi.
and the services of its assistants for work in economic entomology
where this could be done with advantage to all concerned.

I have consequently made much use of the two or three entomo
logical assistants, both for field and laboratory work ; the genera

11

assistant has also often rendered valuable incidental service, and
the librarian of the Laboratory has spent much time in indexing and
arranging entomological literature, and in making the index to the
preceding reports of the office already mentioned.

I have further used a part of the small appropriation made by
the last legislature for the office and traveling expenses of the State
Entomologist, in payment for clerical assistance on the correspond¬
ence of the office, and on the preparation and publication of my
report.

FIELD OPERATIONS.

One hundred and fourteen days of the past season have been
spent by myself or my assistants in entomological field work, out¬
side of this county. Our collections and observations have been
made m thirty-one different counties of the State, from Cook and
Ogle on the north to Alexander and Gallatin on the south, and
from Madison, Hancock and Rock Island on the west to Cham¬
paign and Grundy on the east, the railroad and steamboat travel
performed on these trips amounting to very nearly six thousand
miles. In the intervals of these, longer journeys, field work has
been in constant progress in the vicinity of the Laboratorv.

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS.

The subjects which, above all others, haye claimed our attention
l(this summer, are the wheat bulb-worm, the Hessian fly, the straw¬
berry root-worms, the tarnished plant-bug, the corn plant-louse
and other insects attacking corn in the ground, the plant-lice
affecting sorghum and broom-corn, and the contagious diseases of
the European cabbage worm and other injurious insects.

The life-history and habits of the wheat bulb-worm, the tarnished
plant-bug and the strawberry root-worms have been nearly or quite
made out, and full reports on these insects are herewith presented.
Satisfactory progress has been made on the other subjects men¬
tioned above, as also on a variety of studies of inferior economic
importance; but a report of these investigations is withheld at
present, chiefly from reluctance to publish on unfinished subjects.

CHARACTER OF THE REPORT.

From the material available for this report, I have selected such
articles as were complete and of especial economic value at this
time, and have given an elaborate account of all insects known to
be injurious to the strawberry. I have selected this fruit for
especial treatment this year, because of the rapidly growing import¬
ance of strawberry culture in this State; because it seems to have
recened less than its share of attention in the former reports from
this office; and because more has been lately discovered relating to
its insect enemies than to those of any other crop.

It is my ambition and purpose to make my reports, as a general
rule, an exhibit of our own original work, and not a compilation of
work done by others ; but the advantage of occasionally treating the
subject of all insect injuries to a single crop as a whole, adding to

i

:

12

•1 o uiimmurv of what has been previously

grower° will * approve* S£ $lL§£ t £ch connection, of some
matter which is not new .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

My thanks are due, above all to my first
Garman, and to my entomologi cal a/s"’thflab^ , of the field

original figures of this report have been made.

The librarian of the Laboratory Miss Ange^V^ Milner^ has pre¬
pared, under my direction, an ea in the construction of

the* glossary *S anV Mis^M.' J. Snyder' has aided me in the prepara¬
tion of tlie^manuscript and the reading of the proofs.

v V -Rnqrrlman of Stark county, and Mr. D. S. Harris, of

F^ton^county^h^^^la^d ^g^gtQs^and^telligen^obsMTOtions

&K onatn%eTMrE*n&MX of Sot Messrs Ham-
other favors.

Respectfully submitted, ^ ^ FORBES,

State Entomologist .

13

THE WHEAT-BULB WORM.

( Meromyza americana, Fitch.)

Order Diptera. Family Oscinid.e.

Synonyms: The American Meromyza , Fitch, Riley. The Wheat- Stem Maggot, Lintner.

[Plate I, Figs. 1—8.

[A slender green, or greenish- white maggot, with two black mouth-hooks, gnawing
and tearing the tissues of the stalks of wheat and rye, in fall and spring, and again in
June; the first brood just above the root, and the second immediately above the upper

joint.]

INTRODUCTORY.*

This insect is probably one of our earliest pioneers, if not an
aborigine, its work having been noticed in the west at least thirty-
eight years ago, when nearly the whole region was a wilderness ;
but it has never been mentioned in the reports of this office, and
is almost entirely unknown to faroiers. This ignorance is largely
due, no doubt, to the fact that its work in autumn and spring has
been very commonly mistaken for that of the Hessian fly, to which
it bears a considerable resemblance; while its midsummer injuries
to grain which has headed out, are similar in general appearance
and effect to those of the stalk-borer.

It attacks winter wheat in autumn at the same time as the Hes¬
sian fly, working like that at the base of the stalk, just above the
root, and producing upon the young plant a precisely similar effect ;
while the larva itself is a slender, white, or greenish-white maggot,
which an unskilled observer would be little likely to distinguish
from that of the fly in the same stage. On the other hand, its
presence in a field of heading wheat in summer is betrayed only by
the apparent premature ripening of here and there a head of the
grain, which on examination is found to be blighted and worth¬
less, — an injury almost precisely imitated by the stalk-borer, the
only external difference being that a stalk infested by the latter
insect shows a small external opening through which the worm has
entered, while that bearing the bulb worm is entire.

It has also been generally ignored by wheat growers, from the
fact that its injuries are commonly relatively trivial at the season
when they are conspicuous, — i. e. in midsummer. The blighting of
one or two per cent, of the heads of a field of wheat is ordinarily
passed by as insignificant. Lately, however, it has shown a capacity
for mischief which has brought it to the front as always a danger¬
ous enemy, and sometimes a most destructive one, certain fields of

* For a summary of this article, see p. 28.

14

wheat in Central Illinois having been completely destroyed by it,
and others very seriously damaged, within the last two years _
Rp^cIps its mischief in the wheat field, and also in rye, there is

f^ts male xt decklelly important that this > insect should be gen er
ally recognized and thoroughly understood and will doubtless just y
as full an account of it as our observations and experiments will

enable me to draw up.

LITERATURE.

The earliest published mention of this insect which I have been able
to Hnd 4 in the ‘Trairie Farmer,” the early volumes of which are
a treasure-house of information respecting the first appearance and

a » *r«tx &

terms so vague as to leave one in doubt as to the insect intended ;
hot in this case there can be no uncertainty. In the September
number of the above journal for 1845 (p. 216) occurs the following

item :

“A NEW WHEAT iNSECT.-Tlie Michigan Farmer notices .a . newjheat
insect found preying upon the wheat m that State and whmh t
described as follows : It is the product of a small gree

with ’two forked black lines on its forehead, and in some cases a
streak of li«ht green extending lengthwise. The worm is found l
the straw just Ibove the upper joint, where ^evours th =
which would otherwise ascend to the head. J™
denote its presence by turning white premature y, g

in the milk. In one instance nine eggs were found w a _ smg
straw, one of which had just hatched. Have any of oui leaders

seen any such insect ? .

I have tried in vain to secure a copy of ^ the Michigan Farmer
referred to, but as no subsequent mention ot this insect was mad
in the Prairie Farmer, it is likely that the inquiry just quoted wa

not answered

It was not until ten years after this notice that Dr. I itch then
State Entomologist of New York, detected the fly in that State
where he obtained it by sweeping the heads of wheat m the fael
with an insect net. He did not determine the eariy stages but from
his knowledge of the habits ot the family (Oscimdaa) to which the
fly belonged, he believed the larva to be injurious to wheat.

In his second report as State Entomologist, published in 185i>,
Dr. Fitch describes the species, and mentions the occurrence m t n
wheat of “smooth, shining, footless little maggots, of paie-green
watery-white colors, commonly imbedded m the straw m small b
rows or cylindrical channels which they have excavated. Hr. b itcn t
specific description is as follows : “It is 0.17 [of an inch] m length
to the tip of its abdomen, and 0.20 to the end ot its wings. It if

yellowish-white, with a black spot on the top of its head, which is
continued backward to tl^e pedicel of the neck. Thorax with three
broad black stripes, approaching each other anteriorly but not com¬
ing in contact, the middle stripe prolonged anteriorly to the pedicel
of the neck and posteriorly to the apex of the scutel. Abdomen with
three broad blackish stripes, which are confluent posteriorly and
interrupted 'at each of the sutures. Tips of the feet and veins of
the hyaline wings blackish. Eyes bright green. Antennae dusky on
their upper side.”*

Next, in 1869, Prof, Riley published, first in the “Rural New
Yorker” for January 28, and afterwards in his first report as State
Entomologist of Missouri, an article on this insect, giving in the
latter publication a figure and description of the adult fly, and
rather rude and inaccurate figures of the larva and pupa, together
with an illustration of the character of the injury to wheat.
He notes the general prevalence of the insect in wheat fields near
St. Louis, and suggests hand-picking and rotation of crops as
remedial measures. Prof. Riley also gives Baron Osten-Sacken as
authority for the specific determination of his specimens.

The species was again noticed in New York in 1879, specimens
having been submitted to Prof. Lintner, who reported on them in
the “Country Gentleman” for that year (p. 585) ; in the thirty-ninth
annual report of the New York State Agricultural Society for 1879
(pp. 42-46) ; and again in his first report as State Entomologist of
New York for the year 1881 (pp. 221-227). These several articles
differ but little, and consist essentially of a summary of the obser¬
vations of Fitcli and Riley, with some additional notes on the char¬
acter of the injury, dates of transformation, and the general
appearance of larva and pupa.

Prof. Lintner’s descriptive remarks are as follows: “Immediately
above the joint, and surrounded by the remains of the stem,
larvae were discovered, a single one in each stem, of a watery-
green color, elongate, quite tapering toward the terminal end, and
subcylindrical at the other, and of a length of about one-fourth of
an inch. In some of the stems larvae had assumed the pupal
stage, not very unlike the larvae in general appearance, but show¬
ing the wing-cases, a more acute form at its head, and more
rounded at its anal extremity. The pupae were also imbedded
within the remains of the stem, at about the distance of half an
inch from the joint.”

In an addendum to his report (p. 344), Prof. Lintner further remarks :

| “When the examples of the transformed larvae referred to came
under my observation, the external .features of the pupa were so
well defined that, not being reminded at the time of its necessarily
coarctate form, the puparium was not noticed. My attention having
recently been called to this feature of the insect by an inquiry of

*This description is inaccurate in some particulars, and a fuller one will be given on

I another page. The general color is green and not yellow in every specimen I have seen,
and the thoracic stripes are often confluent anteriorly.

16

Professor Forbes, I am led to believe, from my recollections of the
snecimens, that the pupae were enveloped^m a thm, transparent and
closely adhering puparium. Such pupana are recorded of species
of CWorops— nearly allied forms, and occurring under almost iden-

tical conditions.”

The first recorded notice of the occurrence of this insect in Illi¬
nois which I have been able to find, (and this is a doubtful one,)
fs in the Prairie Farmer for July 17, 1880, although there can be
no question that the fly really existed here many years before p^
bably indeed, from the earliest settlement of the state. In the
above number, Dr. Thomas refers to this species with considerable
hesitation (and I think incorrectly), some pale cream-yellow larvae
found burrowing in the pith of the stalk, just above the lower ] units.

My own first note on this insect was published in circular No.
96 of the State Department of Agriculture, April 1, 1883, m which,
under the name of the “wheat-bulb worm I reported it as a serious
enemy to winter wheat in Fulton county, and in other paits of
Central and Southern Illinois; described and figured the larva, and
gave an account of its injury to wheat. The object of the note was
to elicit information respecting its distribution in the State, and. * e
amount of its injuries, before it should escape observation by trans¬
forming to the fly, and I consequently did not wait to breed it, but
issued the circular without scientific name. Later having reared
the larva to the imago, and obtained the eggs ol the latter. I d ■
scribed and figured the insect m all its stages m the Pram<
Farmer” for Aug. 4, 1838, gave a brief resume of its life history
and of the literature relating to it, and a fuller account of its m
iuries to wheat. 'In the meantime, an article by Mr. John Martet
had appeared in the “Prairie Farmer” for May 29th, 1883, describj
ing the autumnal injury to wheat, and correctly attributing it t<
this insect, which Mr. Marten seems to have bred from larva
found in wheat.

NOMENCLATURE .

Although this insect has had the good fortune to escape repeate
christening and description as a new species, it has received true
common names, given it respectively by Fitch Lmtner and mysel
The former writer followed the thoroughly unphilosophical and use
less practice of constructing vernacular names by anglicizing to
technical Latin names of genus and species and hence called this tc
“ American Meromyza.” Prof. Linker selected for it the title <
“wheat-stem maggot,” having had Ins attention called only to ti
iniury done in summer by burrowing m the upper part ot u
stem; and I, knowing, it at first only from the base ot the ste
immediately above the root, where it works m fall and spun
adopted for it the name of wheat-bulb worm, given by Miss Ormeic
to a European larva of the same family, which attacks wheat m u
old world at the same season and in the same way.

It seems important that the common name of an injurious inse
should, as far as possible, draw attention to its most characteristic at
serious injury; and I have for this reason retained m this ar ie
the name based upon the injuries of this species to growing w e

here is but one other insect known to attack the “bulb” of wheat
'ter the method of this maggot, and that is the Hessian fly, and I
rve thought it especially desirable to give our species a name
hich shall serve to distinguish it from the latter, with which it has
3en so generally confounded.

DESCRIPTION.

Differential Characters. The insects with which this species is
tost likely to be confounded in the larval stage are the Hessian
y in fall and spring, and the stalk- borer and the straw- worm in
ddsummer.

As compared with the larva of the Hessian fly in autumn, the most
seful distinguishing character of the bulb-w'orm is the presence of
le two slender, black hooks beneath the head, with the tips curved
ownwards and not towards each other, and which are kept in
[most constant motion, backwards and forwards. (Plate I, Fig. 4.)
hese are easily seen with a litfle attention, in both dead and living
trvae. The Hessian fly larva (Plate XV), on the other hand, has
o mouth organs whatever, the mouth being reduced to a mere
pening on the surface. During the winter and spring, until about
ie first of May, the discrimination of these species is easy, since the
fly” is at this time in the “flaxseed” state, the living larva being
aclosed in a tough brown case, about the size and shape of a flax-
3ed, while the bulb worm is a naked, greenish-white maggot. From
ais, again, the second brood of the larva of the Hessian fly may
e distinguished, like the autumnal brood, by the absence of the
louth-hooks, as well as by the exact character of the injury to the
Feat. The larva of the “fly” does not penetrate the stalk, like the
ulb worm, but lies imbedded between that and the inner leaves.

In this latter particular our larva resembles the wheat-straw w7orm
Isosoma tritici) (Plate II, Fig. 8, a and b), which also penetrates
be stalk ; but from this the spring brood of the bulb v'orm may be
Did by the fact that the straw worm has a distinct head very different
rom the first segment of the body, and armed with bilateral jaws
Pig. 3, d), while the head of the bulb worm is merely the pointed
nterior end of the body, and has only the longitudinal hooks before
aentioned. The straw worm also infests the upper part of the
tern but rarely, usually occurring two or three joints below the
ippermost, while the second brood of Meromyza is almost strictly
onfined to the stem just above the upper internode.

While the work of the latter has a superficial resemblance to that
>f the stalk-borer, the insects themselves are not at all alike, the
; atter being a small, striped caterpillar (Plate XI, Fig. 4,) with
ointed legs and with prolegs ; and the injuries are likewise readily
iistinguishable by the fact that the stalk-borer makes a round hole
rom the outside, usually at the internode, through which it enters
he cavity of the stalk.

Imago. (Plate I, Figs. 1 and 2.) About .18 .inch long by .8 inch
vide, pale yellowish-green ; head (fig. 2) produced in front of the
yes, broadly rounded anteriorly, marked above with delicate longi-
i udinal striae ; a triangular black spot on the occiput, including the

18

three ocelli, and surrounded by a triangular area which is^irregu-
larly corrugated, and bordered by a row of sparse, black bns^d
just outside the posterior angles of this area are two stout, erect
bristles similar, but smaller bristles border the eyes internally;!
otherwise the head is destitute of hairs. The eyes are of a beauti¬
ful bronze-purple color. . j

The thorax is marked by three very broad longitudmal blaoh
hands which occupy the greater part of the suiface. Ihe cenj
tol of these extends from the tip of the scutellum to the neck:
gradually widening anteriorly, and is continued to the ocelli as ar
obscure median stripe, outside of which is an angular brown
ish line bounding the corrugated area already mentioned, upon tk
head. The lateral thoracic stripes are usually distinct from tin
median one throughout, but occasionally touch it m front. The
terminate anteriorly at the margin of the thorax, and extern
posteriorly along the sides of the scutellum. _ Upon the surface o
the thorax are a few scattered, short, black hairs, with a small num
ber of long bristles intermixed, especially prominent near the pos
terior margin of the thorax and at the tip of the scutellum. Th
abdomen is also marked above by three longitudinal black bank
interrupted at the sutures and confluent postenoily.

The color beneath is a uniform pale yellowish-green, with th
exception of a triangular black spot upon each side, just above th
posterior cox*, and another smaller one above the middle coxa
The thighs are a slightly darker tint of the general color, the > tibii
and tarsi dusky, darkening distally. The posterior pair of thigh
are much thickened, being only about twice as long as wide an
are provided on the under surface with a double row of short, thici
black spinules. The posterior tibiee are strongly curved to contori
to the inferior margin of the thighs. The femora and tibiae, and th
tarsi above, are sparsely covered with short black hairs, but t
pubescence of the under part of the body generally is pale.

The two basal joints of the antenna? are yellowish-brown, dark*}
above: the basal joint very short, obconical, the second large, coe
pressed, its vertical depth being equal to its length, its hPP1
margin is nearly straight, and the lower broadly and regular
rounded, continuously with the terminal. The third joint is cyJi
drical, about twice as long as wide, and dusky, as is likewise t
flagellum. The mouth parts are green, with the exception ot t)
pafpi which are white, sometimes tipped with dusky. Ihe lace
smooth and destitute of bristles except for a scanty row ot sc
white hairs about the mouth

Eqq. The egg of the fly (Plate I, Fig. 5,) is snow-white, fus|
form' longitudinally ridged, the space between the ridges being co
cave and 'marked off into rectangular areas by still slighter riclgl
transverse to the others. It measures .028 of an inch m length,
.005 of an inch in breadth.

Larva. (Plate I, Figs. 8 and 4.) A very pale-green slend*
footless grub, tapering anteriorly, somewhat narrowed, but subtru
cate posteriorly; one-fourth of an inch in length by about one-eighj
that in width. The segments are thirteen in number, counting 1 1
head ; those in the center of the body a little wider than long. Ihe tcj

19

fierior segments narrow rapidly forwards, the one next the head
ng at its apex less than half the diameter of the fourth. The
:ee posterior segments are also somewhat narrowed, the penulti-
l,te being about three-fourths the diameter of the second preceding.

Che head (Fig. 4) is provided beneath with the pair of black,
»thed hooks common to many dipterous maggots. The antennae are
*y short, scarcely longer than broad, two- jointed, the second joint
iensile. There are two circular, apparently sensory areas below
j antennae upon the front of the head, doubtless representing
ixillary palpi. The mouth is beneath the. head, sucker-like in
m. The last or anal segment is divided into two lobes, and bears
on its posterior surface two breathing-pores or spiracles, each
arded by a circlet of about twelve depressed spines. The surface
the larva is entirely smooth and shining, except for some very
e transverse ridges ‘on the under side of the segments, evidently
3ful in locomotion. On each side of the base of the second seg-
■nt is a small, gill-like appendage, divided into two lobes, each
•e with six divisions.

Dupa. (Plate I, Figs. 6, 7 and 8). The pupa of this species is
at is technically known as a* coarctate pupa, contained within
) last skin of the larva, which is not shed previous to transform-
on, but remains as a protective envelope for the forming pupa,
the latter shows through its case, the color is green, except at
} ends, where, with the growth of the pupa within, the case is
b empty and transparent. It is about one-sixth of an inch long
one-fifth that width, and divided into ten clearly recognizable
gnents. The anterior of these, corresponding to the head and
it segment of the larva, is yellowish, shrunken, and corrugated,
out half the width of the third segment. The second and third
3 obscurely divided, the first being short, and narrowing rapidly
ward. Within it are observed the retracted maxillae of the old
va.

The remaining segments to the eighth are about equal in length,
)arated by deeply impressed sutures at first, the anterior sutures
coming gradually obliterated as the enlargement of the head and
>rax of the pupa within distends the envelope. The ninth seg-
;nt is the longest of all, the tenth being nearly equally long, but
rrower, and shrunken and wrinkled on its posterior border. The
venth, representing the twelfth of the larva, is only a brown and
Tugated rudiment. As the development of the pupa approaches
npletion, the eyes, wing-pads and legs are visible through the
nsparent covering, but they form no elevations of the surface.

LIFE HISTORY.

I

'It ** • .

Larva. My first acquaintance with the larva of this fly dates
m March 12, 1883, at which time Mr. D. S. Harris, of Cuba,
\lton county, informed me that lie had received from farmers in

I I vicinity specimens of winter wheat which had been killed by a
all, slender, footless maggot, infesting the plants just above the
)t. M my request, he kindly sent me examples of the injured
ieat containing the larvae, and these wrere received on the 20th of

20

March. In the accompanying letter he remarks that they presents
the same appearance then as in the November and December prej
ceding, his Attention having first been called to them at that time:

On°the 10th of April, I visited Cuba, and carefully examined th
damaged wheat fields. At this time the larvae were abundant a.
the bases of the stalks, all apparently full-grown, being of nearl
uniform size ; but no other forms were detected.

Tjarvae continued to occur in the wheat at Normal, Cuba an
Decatur as late as May 15, but on the 28d of that month non
could be found after long continued search m fields which had pre
viously been seriously infested by them.

The worms of the second brood first appeared in our collector
on the 26th of June, at which time they occurred m stalks ot wbe>
and rye iust above the upper joint, m fields ncai Warsaw,
western Illinois. By Prof. Riley, they have been found near S
Louis as early as the middle of June, and by Mr. Lmtner, in Ne
York, as late as “about the 1st of August.

Pupa. The pupa was first obtained by us on the 12tli of Apr
in some wheat sent from Centralia, Illinois, a few of the lan
occurring at the same time. On the 30th of April, a pupanu,
which had formed from the larva? obtained at Cuba was open
and found to contain a pupa apparently on the point o erne:
ing ; but careful search m the field on the 23d of May show
that all of this first brood had transformed to the fly at this dal
Bv Prof. Riley, the pupal stage of the second brood is said to li
from twelve to fourteen days; and Prof. Lmtner found the wsfj
still in this stage about August 1.

Imaao. I transferred from the infested field at Cuba, a lai
number of the plants containing the larvie, and placed them
breeding cages at the Laboratory on the 10th of April, for the pi
pose of rearing the perfect insect. In order to a certain identifi
tion of the fly, pieces of stems of wheat containing the larvae I
isolated in small vials, and kept until the latter transformed. 1
first adult emerged in one of these vials on the 4th ot May, c
others continued to appear in the bottles and breeding cages
frequent intervals until June 1, on which date a larva or pi
obtained May 15 from Cuba, Ill., emerged as an imago.

The first specimens of the imago collected in the open air v
obtained by sweeping strawberry iields on the 28d of May at wP
date careful search of wheat fields previously infested showed
larvae or pupae, but numerous adults. On the 24th of May, a m
her of adults were found in sweeping wheat at Normal, ana a s|
few in meadows containing June grass and timothy. I

Careful sweepings made in a variety of situations on the 15 til
June, at Normal, yielded none of the adults, neither could
be found on the 26th of June at Warsaw, in western Illinois
fields where the larvae of the second brood at that time occur
Clover meadows and other situations adjacent to these infested he
were carefully swept for adults, but none were obtained. At
seyville and Alton, it was likewise impossible to find them, aitho
evidence of the work of the larvae was not uncommon.

21

I _

n the 4th of July, however, adults, (now certainly of the second
id) were secured at Du Quoin, in sweeping stubble of wheat which
i been previously infested by the larvae. From this time forward,
lough continuous collecting was in progress, and fields of stubble,
.wberry fields, meadows, and other favorable situations were re-
tedly swept, Meromyza does not occur in our collections until
7th of September, at which time it was found in abundance in
able fields near Centralia. Winged individuals of this brood were
ected by Dr. Fitch, in “the latter part of June;” and by
f. Riley during the first week in July ; and some of Mr. Lint¬
’s specimens emerged as late as August 1.

)n this point, Lintner remarks: “Although Dr. Fitch mentions
occurrence of this fly in wheat fields during the latter part of
le, it appears that the first week in August is within its period
apparition in the State of New York, and, as indicated by the
tx still unchanged at that time, the flies will continue to emerge
oughout the month of August, and perhaps into September.”

?jgg. — Some of the adults obtained May 23d, from wheat fields
,r Decatur, were placed together in a bottle, and there they copu-
3d, and afterwards laid eggs. May 24, a number of adults, male
1 female, were confined in a breeding cage at the Laboratory with
ols of growing wheat, and on the 30th May it was noticed that
eral eggs had been deposited on the stems. Some of these were
shed down beneath the ensheathing bases of the leaves, about
inch above the surface of the soil, while others were cemented
the stem just at the margin of the sheath. One was found at-
hed to a piece of dried vegetation, and another upon the stem
a growing weed in the breeding cage. These eggs were deposited
gly, and placed lengthwise with the stem. June 26, at Warsaw,
'ew of the eggs were found attached to the stalks, not yet hatched,
ese were usually placed along the edge of the sheathing base of
i leaf, above the upper joint, sometimes being thrust a little way
der the edge ; and once an egg was found entirely within the
Bath, about an inch from the upper end.

Recapitulation of Life History.

Prom the above, we can infer with certainty the existence of two
Dods of this insect, the larvse.one appearing in autumn and of the <
j ier in summer. It must be admitted, also, that we have not ex-
ided the bare possibility of a third brood, at least under favorable
■cumstances, which may develop in August and September in volun-
3r wheat and rye, or possibly in grass, or some other plant. There is
ly the fact that we were unable to find the adult fly or, indeed,
b insect in any stage, anywhere in situations supposed most favor-
! le to it, in either July or August, to suggest the possibility of a
ird brood in this latitude.

i Assuming that there is no such brood, we find the life history to
, about as follows : The eggs from the autumnal brood of the
hs are doubtless laid as soon as the wheat is ready for them, a
nclusion supported by the fact that the adults have already been
I 'road many weeks — ever since the preceding harvest, and also by

k .

the fact that, as far as known at present, serious damage by tW
insect in fall has been confined to wheat sown eaily m the sea

^Furthermore, this species passes the midsummer period one stage ii|
advance of the Hessian fly, the latter summering as larva or pupa am
the bulb worm as an adult; and as the “fly” w known to improv
the earliest opportunity for oviposition afforded it, theie is a stil
stronger probability that the Meromyza will be even more incline,
to a prompt deposition of its eggs than the former species. ( Fror
these eggs the worms hatch in September and October, doing i g nail
much damage to wheat in fall, but continuing the work i:
spring. By the middle of April, they commence to pupate, but d
not all complete this transformation before the middle of May. Th
pupal state lasts about a fortnight, the flies emerging from May

to June 1, or thereabouts. . , A

Late in May and early in June the eggs for the next brood ai
laid under and about the sheaths of the upper leaves ot the no
heading wheat and rye; and these hatching, the larva tof the secon
brood make their way inward to the tender base of the young ped
cel of the head, iust above the upper joint. Here they may be four
feeding on the tissues of the stem from the middle of June to tt
first of August, by which latter date all have pupated and mo
have transformed to winged flies. These have been seen to emer;
from the pupa at intervals from July 4 to August 5, and, m a
probability, then remain in waiting for an opportunity to lay the
eggs- on the earliest wheat to appeal.

INJURIES TO WHEAT.

The wheat fields first visited afforded an excellent example of t]
amount and method of the injury to wheat done by the winter bro.
of the larva*. At a little distance, the whole surface of this he
looked brown and dead, as if killed by freezing ; but on close mspe
tion a stalk could be seen here and there which still remained gree
A careful search revealed the larva m about one stalk m eve
fifteen or twenty, most of those which were thoroughly dead
longer containing the insect. Even these, however, if not too mu
withered, invariably gave traces of previous injury of the kind d
tinctly visible in the fresher stems.

Where the larva was still at work, it was found imbedded 1
tween the bases of the inner leaves, and sometimes quite wit
the stalk, where it had gnawed and torn away the issues ot t
plant. There was no evidence that the substance ot the plant v
actually devoured ; but on the contrary, from the form of the moi

*An iniurv precisely similar to that done to wheat by the wheat- bulb worm, is

tremely common in blue grass and timothy throughout the t jfJ^e rarely b

due to this species; but the escape of the insect there is so prompt that I have rare y d f
able to find it in any stage after the injury becomes evidemt through the whitening L
Land nf Indeed a single pupa found beneath the sheath of a stem of timothy I

had beenfaSured in this w“y. is the only direct evidence I have of the character of
insect responsible for this mischief. This pupa was certainly dipterous, and ver> siml
in appearance to that of Meromyza, but differed in the proportions of the se^PeP nL i
especially in the size and distinctness of the terminal ones. I am consequently d I
if it was that of Meromyza, but think it more likely that it belonged to a species of ( h
ops hklwise very ahSdant earlier in the season. On the other hand the great abua^
ibo {\\r aP Mpromv/a in May in regions where very little winter wheat ana not in
?,l 1% '?a°Ld.6(S alout NoSalf hfkes it almost certain that the larvte live in s'omett
else than these grains.

23

i of the hooks by means of which the injury is done, it was evident
t the bulb-worm merely rakes and tears the tissues of the plant,
L sucks the sap exuding.

’he roots of the wheat were still measurably fresh, in many cases,
le the upper part of the stool was entirely dead, and it is not
jossible that some of these plants would have rallied by throwing
suckers so that the field would still have yielded a partial crop,
s was not, however, the opinion of the owner, and he had already
tly plowed up the ground with the intention of sowing it to oats.

n other fields of this neighborhood, the damage .varied from notli-
to about twenty-five per cent. ; and as nearly as could be gathered,
ording to date of sowing. Where the injury was partial, it appeared
spots and patches, not in any relation that could be detected to
erences of soil or level.

.’’he field worst infested had been sown to Hulse wheat during the
fc week of August, and the first of September. The soil was a
y loam, five years from the forest, the surface flat and without
inage. In 1881, it had been sowed to clover and timothy, and
ughed up in the following spring (1882), when it was planted to
n, but failed of a stand.

[’he owner of this field reported that the wheat had turned brown
patches late in October, and that before winter the whole area
s as brown as when we saw it. The injury was consequently
le in autumn. He had also noticed the same trouble, two years
iviously, in a field of wheat sown during the second week of Sep-
rber, on black prairie soil, high and rolling. This grain did well
oughout the winter, but began to fail in April, and was after-
rds ploughed up and planted to corn. Worms precisely like
>se found by us, occurred then in the field, at the base of the
m, near the root. He also reported that they destroyed a field
winter rye for a neighbor at the same time.

n none of these fields examined was there any evidence what-
er that any other insect had shared in the injury so clearly
ible. On the contrary, it was certain that the Hessian fly, if
3sent in the field at all, occurred in purely trivial numbers, as
t a single specimen was seen during all the search for the wheat-
lb worm made by myself and two others in this field.

In other parts of the State visited subsequently, the wheat-bulb
rm was found fr,om McLean county to extreme Southern Illinois,
nerally it was impossible to determine the amount of damage
eperly chargeable to this insect, since in Central Illinois the wheat
Ids had been greatly injured by freezing, and farther south the
jssian fly existed in extraordinary numbers.

Respecting the injury done by the second brood near Cuba, Mr.

S. Harris wrote me, under date of June 1, that in the fields
sited by me in spring, which had not been plowed up, about
e-third of the stalks were infested with the larvae of the second
3od, sometimes two or three occurring in a stalk, so many heads
ing blighted that the fields looked decidedly gray from a little

24

distance. In Hancock county, in Western Illinois, late in June, not oxt
two or three per cent, of the heads were blighted m the fields won
infested, and a still smaller ratio were damaged in the rye adjacen

In every case the head was destitute of kernels, and its growl
had often been arrested before it had reached full size. On strij
ping down the sheath of the upper leaf, the stalk was alwaj
found eroded and withered for a distance of an inch or so abo^
the internode, and the stem could, of course, be readily pulled 01
from the enclosing sheath. In Prof. Kiley’s notes of the work .
this brood near St. Louis, Missouri, he remarks: “In most fiea
about one per cent, of the ears w7ere thus affected, but in two fielc
near Hermann from three to four per cent. wTere injured in tbj
manner. Upon examination, I found that the last or ear-bearii
joint could invariably be pulled out of its sheath with but a slig.
effort, and that it was perfectly yellow and dry, while the lower ei
bore an irregular and gnawed appearance. Upon splitting open t.
first joint of the stalk, a space of about a quarter of an inch w
found to be completely corroded, so to speak, and filled with exci
mentitious matter.” Prof. Lintner says: “The heads were entire
destitute of kernels. Within some of the husks the remains of tj
blossoms were discoverable, showing that their development h;
been arrested before the formation of the grain. Upon removfj
the investing sheath, the stem was found to be discolored . a:
shrunken, and quite dry for three or four inches above the joiij
and near the joint it was so eaten and shriveled as to be uttei
useless for the purpose of conveying the sap.”

It will be seen that the injury done by this insect in fall a
spring, while similar in its effect to that of the Plessian fly, is quj
different in character. Both insects, indeed, infest the same part
the plant at the same season, but the Hessian fly does not gnaw
tear the substance of the stalk. It seems to depend rather upon t
effect of the pressure of its body imbedded within the sheath
arresting the flow of sap and causing it to exude from the stem.

The second attack of the bulb worm is not only made in a c
ferent way, but at a different point from that of the Hessian 1
the latter still confining itself to the lower part of the stalk, a
damaging the wheat, as before, through the irritation caused by 1j
presence of the larvae within the sheath ; while at this time, i
already related, the bulb worm attacks the plant and destroys
stem above the upper joint.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

The fact is well known that to the aid of parasites we owe
preservation of our wheat crops from continuous injury by the if
sian fly, — parasites which effect their purpose by piercing
bodies of the larvae imbedded in the plant, and depositing in e:
a minute egg which afterwards develops a maggot that devours i
host. The wheat Oscinidae of Europe are also kept within boul
by a parasite of similar habit, known under the name of Ccelit I
niger, and the presumption was consequently ver}' strong that sc:
corresponding enemy of our own species would be found.

Prof. Riley, indeed, remarks in the first report: “There is every
3ason to believe, however, that Nature has her own means of keep-
tg these hies within due bounds, for they are known to be preyed
pon by parasitic Ichneumon flies in Europe, and I noticed many
ies of this last description, of polished hues and active movements,
eftly darting through and resting upon the wheat plants of the
elds infested with the Meromyza.”

Mr. Lintner makes no mention of parasites in his article on this
pecies, and the first discovery of them was made by myself in
pril of this year, among specimens from the field at Cuba already
•equently referred to, which I was rearing to the perfect stage,
ideed, the first pupa-case of Meromyza which I opened (April 25),
mtained a well formed pupa of a hymenopterous parasite (Plate
[, Fig. 2), and on the 6th of May-two days after the adult Mero-
lyzas began to appear, — two mature specimens of this parasite oc-
urred in our breeding cages. These were evidently of the genus
oelinius, but of a species of which I have not been able to find
ny description, and which is probably new.

The abundance of these^ parasites in this field may be inferred
X)m the fact that out of fifty-five larvae obtained here, only twenty-
ne developed the fly, and the thirty-four remaining all gave origin
) the C oelinius, which continued to emerge from May 6 to May
9. Sweepings of these infested fields in April shielded none of this
pecies, and there can be no doubt that the eggs are deposited
ithin the bodies of the larvae in autumn.

Whether this same parasite infests likewise the summer brood of
irvae, we are unable to say ; but it seems extremely doubtful if it
i at that time as destructive to the host species as when the latter
> freely exposed to its attack among the leaves of the young wheat,
k probably partly on this account that the midsummer brood
3ems much less numerous and destructive than the autumnal. The
ttack of the parasite does not arrest the growth of the larva, and
msequently cannot prevent the injury to the plant; but, on the
mtrary, the infested worm goes on eating until it is ready to pu-
ate, and, indeed, actually transforms. The prevalence of the para¬
de must, however, greatly diminish the number of the perfect
lsects appearing in spring, and consequently of the midsummer
irvas. On the other hand, the relative immunity of the latter from
arasitism will not increase their own mischief in the field, but will
aye the effect to increase the number of the autumnal brood.

In short, as the parasitism takes effect only on the damage done
| y the generation succeeding that parasitized, and as it seems to
reveu Jchiefly among the winter brood of the larvae, it is the mid-
immer brood whose injuries are lessened by it, — from which it fol-
>ws that the autumnal and winter brood will ordinarily be found
le more mischievous of the two. There is, however, one circum-
jance to modify this conclusion. The autumnal damage, and even
iat of spring, is done at a time when the wheat plant is some-
mes able, by tillering, to replace in part the stalks killed by the
orms, while that of midsummer is irremediable. I add description
’ad figuremf this parasite.

I *»

26

Genius meromyza, n. s [Plate H J f- ^domel and
legs reddish yellow , basal se m euboidal, emarginate behind,

°f thf,n\t1T shhS i°Ibte wfth a few scattered gray hairs. A faint
smooth and shining aDove, ocelli. The eyes are nearly

median furrow leads mi | d smootlily excavated between

circular, and the front is ffelow the latter the

them, above the attachment of the t with yellowish gray

head is finely punctured and rather closely se^ ^ the labrlm

hairs The clypeus is simp e, t , dian earina. The palpi

broadly emarginate and with * at tip> reddish, except

are white. I “ is niceous. The antenn® are long and slender,
at the apex, wmc ? • , 11 „ crs4- 0j; which is inflated obcom-

composed of thirty-one 30 mte s the tost ot wmc t ted c

cal, the second is of about ^ the same iengm a about ^

MS’ In

iK„“sr atsaa’jar - —

throughout, except the two basal joints. ,

The »•— Cvi f..». ptofld

6VTr IwTy shaped hne of punctures into three areas, .the

nil row of coalse punctures and two or three small sunken areas,
which are likewise punctured. . ,

rk

everywhere with" sinuous rugosities

and sparsely beset with long gray hairs.

The peduncle of the abdomen is partly smooth above, bein

marked\vith only a few longitudinal rugosities near its distaienc

orless Tensed pubescent, the last four or five segments m tb
female being strongly compressed.

The le^s are all yellow, the posterior thighs and coxse being
little darkened. The two anterior pairs of coxae ^ smo°th a
vellow but the posterior pair is rugose, like the peduncle oi l
abdomen Wings yellowish, highly iridescent, veins and stign
ydCfsh-fuscoi. The middle humeral c^l - tnangula r acu
externally the posterior humeral linear, lhe radial ceil is o
pointed externally , the radial nerve being regdarly curved. T1
recurrent nervure extends very obliquely baciiwaid. . _

The male is similar to the female, except that it is some*"
smaller and that the abdomen is not compressed, and the pal
and antenn®. are darker and considerably longer, containing abo

thirty-seven joints.

27

ARTIFICIAL REMEDIES.

Dr. Fitch makes no suggestion of either preventive or remedial
measures against this insect, but Prof. Riley remarks: “Much can
be done in an artificial way by cutting off and destroying all the
infested stalks, which may readily be recognized by the signs already
described; but even if this plan should faithfully be carried out, it
is doubtful whether it would pay in a country where labor is so
scarce and demands such high wages as in ours. We therefore
have to fall back on the only practical means within our reach,
viz : that of varying the culture by alternate courses, and this style
af cultivation will have to be more generally adopted, should this
pigmy foe sufficiently increase to greatly diminish the yield of the
‘staff of life.’ ”

Mr. Lintner’s views are less hopeful. In his article on this
insect in his first report, he says ; “In the event of an increase of
the wheat-stem maggot to a serious extent, we regret to have to
state that, in all probability, very little can be done to control its
ravages, and our main dependence will have to be on parasitic aid.
Measures which can advantageously be employed in controlling
ither of our wheat pests, as turning over the soil or burning the
stubble, would be of no avail with this insect. Its pupation and
transformation to the perfect stage take place, as previously related,
vithin the plant, and it emerges before the grain is harvested. In
some of the countries of Europe, where the ravages of the Oseinidae
ire excessive, whenever they become extremely abundant, relief is
ound in a resort to the culture of other crops for a few years.”

The discovery of an autumnal brood puts us in a position to sug¬
gest more effective measures. For reasons detailed under the head
if “life history,” it is very likely that delay in sowing until after
he first frosts of autumn will wholly prevent injury by this insect;
ind certainly the general substitution of spring for winter wheat,
'or even a single season, would greatly diminish in number, or,
perhaps, very nearly obliterate both this species and the Hessian

ly.

I have lately received from Mr. D. S. Harris information very
lecidedly confirming the above view of the advantages of postponing
ihe sowing of the wheat to a late date, as a safeguard against this
nsect. As he lives in the neighborhood of its most destructive
levelopment, I requested him to look over the fields of growing
j ^keat to see what was the prospect of future injury in that
| vicinity, and he says in his reply: “I spent considerable time
luring October and November examining the wheat fields for this
nsect, but did not succeed in finding a single larva, nor did I find
tny indications of its presence that might not have been due to
)ther causes. I spent several hours (about November 1) in Mr.
Jlayberg’s field and those adjoining [these were those worst infested
ast spring], but could find no evidence of the presence of this
nsect. The wheat was thrifty and in good condition. Nor have I
>een able to obtain any information from the farmers in this vicinity
hat would lead me to believe that this insect is now present in
estructive numbers in this county. As to the cause of its sudden *
disappearance, I suggest the following : In this locality there was no

28

& tmtSSSKStiX* 2tf&°2S! Mr «U

but it “id not gem Sate until the late rains set in, and then it was

too late for the® wheat-bulb worm to find a
the flies having deposited their eggs by the 15th o* beptembe .

T+ ia rterhans worth while to mention, also, that many ol the
larvre and are still in the straw at harvest, and that prompt

threshing would be likely to destroy many of these. _

Tt is necessary to bear in mind, however, that there is a . strong
i i ;iiiv lb fViiq insect breeds in some of our native or cultivated
Cssts1 and that l! such be the case, no destruction of those occur¬
ring in' grain will be more than a partial and imperfect preventive.

SUMMARY.

The wheat-bulb worm, known as an enemy of wheat since 1845,

has but iust been completely studied, full descriptions of all the

stases and a complete account of the life history having been rs
stage. „ -nvaagnt vear. It makes its attack

on whSt J?ndWi”e in the form of a slender, small cylindrical mag-
on wheat ana rye , 00lor, footless, and without distinct

head? pointed It one end (the anterior), and tapering but obtuse at

the other.

e utiitu. .. . -i

Tt is a Quarter of an inch long when full-grown, and is composed
of twelve segments, not counting the head, which is minute and no
?aRdv distSshed. Within the latter are seen two longitudinal
black hooks? curved downwards at the tip, which are kept in con -
i. backward and forward motion as long as the insect is alive.
In this form it is found in October and November, throughout the
wintei and until the following May, concealed among the bases of
the leaves iust above the root, of young winter wheat, killing the
plant by gnawing and tearing the stem and leaves and sucking
sap. Where the larvae are numerous, they may easily totally

stroy a field of wheat or rye.

Here in April and May, the worms transform to pup®, . these
being much like the larval in general appearance, but shorter anc
Thicker and anparently, with less numerous segments, those at tm
ends being shrunken and inconspicuous. From this pupa the adu
av prneraes in June, a two-winged, greenish insect, only one fitt
of an inch long distinguished by strongly thickened posterior ting is |
anfby three longitudinal black stripes on the thorax and abdomen
These flies soon lav their eggs for a second brood, attach e
them usually near the edge of the sheath of the upper leaf of th
wheatjoften several of the white fusiform bodies (ongitudinaU

ribbed and less than .025 of an inch long) being ° thP sheatl
From these the young larvae hatch in June and enter ,

working their way down to the base of the stem of the lie.
the upper joint, where they immediately commence to feed upon tt
soft Tsues rf this tendered part of the stem. As a consequence
tie had of the grain is blighted and boom turns white .and t
stem within the sheath finally withers and blackens foi a hah

or more above the upper internode. This larva pupates in the
sheath, and the flies of this second brood escape from the straw in
July and August ready to lay their eggs on the young wheat in fall.

The multiplication of the species is severely checked by a hymen-
opterous parasite ( Coelinius meromyzcE), which seems to be much the
most destructive to the winter brood. As a remedy, late sowing
and rotation of crops are suggested as the simplest and most effec¬
tive preventive measures.

30

THE WHEAT-STRAW WORM.

( Isosoma tritici , Riley.)

Order, Hymenoptera. Family, Chalcidid^:.

[Plate II, Figs. 3 and 4.1

This inject although first noticed less than four years ago, has
now becXe a decidedly injurious enemy to wheat m Southern lUi-

S’r£n y ’^“t&ndtof dollars annually There is more-
over no reason to infer that it has yet reached its limit, although
it has already become, locally, at least as expensive a guest of the
wheat farmer as the Hessian fly.

On the other hand, these injuries and losses, serious as they are,
mav certainly be almost perfectly controlled and prevented by sim-
nle^ easy and inexpensive measures, which each may take mdividu
nl!v without depending on his neighbors for cooperation, provided
on lv that the characte?s and the life-history of these insects are
understood This is, in fact, one oi those simple and satisfactory
cases where a mere knowledge of the life history oi the injurious
insect is sufficient to suggest effective measures tor i s destruction
without awaiting the issue ot tedious and often difficult and expen

sive experiment. . ,

These facts will certainly justify a full and careful discussion o
the wheat-straw worm, and make it especially important that a
thorough knowledge of it be widely disseminated among those m-
terested in wheat culture m Southern Illinois It is tiue that tms
species has already been treated at considerable length m the
eleventh report of this office, m an article by Ripfi T* * '

but unfortunately at the time when this report was written, the
wheat-straw worm had not yet been distinguished from a very differ-
Int species which is probably one of its parasites ; and, as a con¬
sequence of this confusion, several statements were made which
involved not only technical, but practical errors. It is now apparent
that this species was there given the wrong generic name, that the
adult or imago described did not belong to the same species as t
larva, that the life history of the two species was mingled, and that
important but mistaken practical inferences were drawn from an 1 -
correct supposition that most of the adults were winged. Ii seems
indispensable, therefore, that the matter should be cleared up, and
economic recommendations made, based on a complete acquai -
ance with the habits and life history of the species ; but it is pro
per that, in presenting this account, I should disclaim all ciedit loi

,v

31

nything more than a revision and compilation of the more recent
ontributions of Prof. French and Prof. Riley, and a verification of
heir conclusions by fresh observations and collections.

LITERATURE.

I , .

This species was first mentioned, as far as known to me, in July
880, by Dr. Thomas and Prof. Riley; by the first in a com¬
aun ication dated July 9, and published in the “Prairie Farmer”
ar July 17, and by the second, in the July number of the “Ameri-
an Entomologist.”

Dr. Thomas, under the head of “Another Foe to Wheat,” men-
ions the fact that a few days before the wheat was cut in Southern
llinois, a small maggot was discovered working in the stems next
he joints. A brief general description of this larva and of its habits
5 then given, enough to indicate clearly that it was this species
Rich he had under consideration. From a number of infested
Feat straws, a single fly emerged in a breeding cage, and this fly
)r. Thomas at first erroneously connected with the larvae observed
i the wheat, and determined as probably a species of Chlorops.
le concludes by saying that as the worms are in the stems at har-
est time, and usually in the portion that remains as stubble, the
emedy which naturally suggests itself is burning the stubble imrue-
iately after the wheat is cut.

Prof. Riley’s note in the “Entomologist” consists of a reply to a
orrespondent from Andersonville, Tennessee, who sends him exarn-
les of this insect in vdieat stalks. He remarks that the larva is
ew to him, but belongs apparently to the Hymenoptera, and adds,
No remedy of a practical nature can be suggested at this time.”

In the “Prairie Farmer” for August 18, Dr. Thomas recurs to
lis insect, repeating the circumstances of its discovery and giving

technical description of the Chlorops to which he at that time
elieved it to belong.

On the 31st of December, Prof. Fi’ench published in the “Prairie
'armer” a fuller account of this species than any of the foregoing.
,□ this paper the hymenopterous character of the pest was first
illy established, and the supposed adult was briefly described under
ie name of Isosoma allynii, from specimens which had hatched in
lid summer. It will be seen later, however, that these adults were
i sally parasites, and belonged to the genus Eupelmus, none of the
Tie adults of the straw worm emerging until winter and spring,
rof. French also described the larva briefly, contrasting its habits
nd injuries to wheat with those of the joint worm ( Isosoma hordei,
larris), and giving some data for an estimate of the amount of
amage attributable to it. Under the head of remedies, he advised
urning the stubble and the straw, and also discussed the probable
fleet of wet and dry seasons upon its numbers. ’From the fact that

I I the time of writing many of his specimens w7ere still pupae in the
haw, he inferred that many hibernate in this condition, and lay
leir eggs on the wheat in spring.

I

In a brief note in the same publication for January 28, 1882,
Prof French gave some reasons for believing that rotation of crops;
would prevent injury by this insect In the same ; month he pub¬
lished under the name of Isosoma ally mi, in the Canadian E to
mologist ” a full description of the adult of the parasite, Eupe mus,
still under the impression that it was the imago of his wheat-straw
worm. With this misunderstanding m mind, it is evident from the
following paragraph extracted from this article, that this winged;
narasite (Eupelmus) emerges from the straw m July and August,
while the true straw worm passes the winter in the wheat stem m
the pupa state. This misconception ot the facts will be found to
have important implications, when we consider remedial measures

“About four-fifths of the larva) observed changed to pupae and
produced the imago, or died, the past season fiom July 20, w en
the first imago was found, to August ‘20 or, perhaps better, un -
went their changes between July 8 and August -0, but I think th s
the effect of the dry season. Those examined the last of November
were in the pupa state in the interior of the stalks down close to
or in the substance of the joint, both m the fields and m my bleed-
ing jars. Those were in the larva state the last of August. It . »
probable they pass the winter in the pupa state undei oidmaiy
circumstances to produce the imagines m the spring, and that those
hatching during July and August perish without ovipositing.

Following the above is a description of a species of Isosoma bred
from grass (Isosoma elymi) which must be mentioned here because
it was afterwards erroneously identified with the true wheat Isosoma.

March 4, 1882, Prof. Riley again takes up the discussion to goo
purpose. Having bred the larva successfully, he found the true
imago to be a new species of Isosoma which he discribes as Isosomi
tritici. He also gives an account of its habits, and points out tin

characters distinguishing it from the joint-worm Tsosoma /iorden I

this article Prof. Packard is quoted as authority for the comma
occurrence of this straw worm in Virginia ancl other southern sec i
tions. The supposition of Prof. French respecting the hibernation c
this species is confirmed by Prof. Riley who says that it winters a
larva or pupa, and issues in March and April, although aftei; a lat
and warm autumn individuals emerged m December and January
Prof. Riley also determined “Isosoma" allynii to be a parasitic specie

of Eupelmus

Next in the “Prairie Farmer” for March 11, and again for May *2
Prof. French mentions and confirms Prof. Riley’s determination <
his adult specimens as a species of Eupelmus, but announces tm
he has successfully bred a genuine Isosoma from wheat straws coi
taining the straw worm, and believes this to be the same as n
Isosoma elymi bred from stems of grass, and described m the Can.
dian Entomologist” for January 8, as already mentioned a boy
Again, in the “Canadian Entomologist” for March, he reiterat
this view, and mentions the common characters of the forms.

It is important to note, however, that two of these are inaccural
the head and prothorax of Isosoma tritici being smooth and srnnn

83

istead of “dull” and “coarsely punctate,” and the antenna; of both
ymi and tritici being not nine-jointed, but eleven- or twelve-jointed,
ccording to sex.

T

In this same month Prof. Riley also repeats in the “American
aturalist” the substance of his “Rural New Yorker” article, and
ives figures of the larva of Isosoma tritici.

Then comes the full and valuable paper of Prof. French in the
ileventh Report of the State Entomologist of Illinois (Dr. Thomas),
ublished in May, 1882,. but evidently written before some of the
apers already cited, as in the body of this article the wheat-straw
'orm is still treated as Isosoma allynii. In a foot-note added to the
aper, however, the misconceptions of the article are in part cor¬
seted, and that view of the subject is taken which was presented
1 Prof. French’s letters published in the “Prairie Farmer” in March
nd May.

As the Eleventh Report is doubtless accessible to nearly every
ne who will see this, it is unnecessary to analyze that article fur-
ler than to perform the indispensable office of calling attention to
few conclusions based on imperfect information, which have prac-
cal consequences of economic importance :

1. It is now evident that the hymenopterous insect referred to on
age 74 of the Eleventh Report was parasitic, and the remarks on
he time of pupation, on page 79, and the description of the adult,
n page 80, are to be construed with reference to that fact.

2. This same confusion of species renders inconclusive the reason-
:ig, on page 81, respecting the effects of drouth upon the develop¬
ment of the straw worm, and the consequent inferences as to the
revalence of the pest in future ; and,

3. The discrimination of this species has the important result to
isprove the following statement in the last three lines on page
0. Speaking of the burning of the stubble, Prof. French says:
As in other remedies of this kind, to be effectual it must be par-
icipated in by all the farmers of a community, as the insects can
eadily fly from field to field.” It is the parasites that are winged,
/hereas it will soon be shown that less than one in twenty of the
dult straw worms which have hitherto been reared have the power
f flight. Evidently, therefore, each farmer may almost wholly pro-
ect himself, without depending on his neighbors, by destroying the
traw worms in his own fields ; and even simple rotation of crops
/ill be a valuable protective measure.

i We also arrive at the equally interesting and important conclusion
hat (presuming Eupelmus to be parasitic on Isosoma) if the burn-
eg of the stubble is postponed until fall, the parasites will all have
scaped, and will he prepared to lend their services another year,

; /hile the unparasitized straw worms will themselves all be destroyed.

• The next printed mention of this species is in the “Canadian
| Entomologist” for May, 1882, (Yol. XIY, p. 97), in which Prof,
bench reports that he finds his Isosoma elymi (from grass) and Riley’s
sosoma tritici (the wheat-straw worm) entirely distinct, and gives the
•rincipal differential characters between these species, and also
| >etween Isosoma elymi and Isosoma horclei.

i

34

Then in his report as Entomologist to the United Stales Depart¬
ment of Agriculture for 1S81 and 1882, Prof Riley publishes a
review of the subject and a list and summary of its previous litera¬
ture with a plate containing figures of larva and imago, and also
describes a parasite bred from Tennessee specimens, as Stictonotn\
isosomatis In “extracts from correspondence, m this report, the
recen t on of specimens of this Isosoma from Missouri is noted, with
the statement that “the crops that were infested by the worm were
very poor Tnd grew mostly in fields that had been sown m wheat
four or five years in succession.” These straw worms had pupated

October 25.

Next we have the following important note by Prof. ™

the “American Naturalist’' tor January, 1883 I was in tnree
wheat fields yesterday, two that were m wheat last year and one in
clover The first two had about ninety-three per cent, of the stalks
containing from one to three worms each; the other not moie than
five ner cent, where examined — a good proof of the efficacy ol e
alternation of crops. The season was very favorable for the growth
of the wheat, but the heads were short and not well filled at tne

ends.”

Finally, this complicated and embarrassing record terminates, for
the 'present, with a long and interesting article by Prof French in
the “Pacific Rural Press,” of San Francisco tor Octobei _ 20, 1 ,

called out by the receipt of some wheat stubble from Stockton, Cali
fornia, said to have been infested by the Hessian fly

None of this latter insect occurred in the straw, but the real cul¬
prits were the wheat-straw worms, a few of wlucli had pupated when
received (September 25), but most of which were still m the larval
staoe. Ninety-five per cent, of the straws were infested, one hun¬
dred of them containing one hundred and fifty-nine larvae. These
were found in the second and third interned*,, counting from tl
ground up more frequently than anywhere else, though they wen
found in the fourth and fifth also. In only one instance were Pv
found in one internode. They were mostly m the lower part of I the
internode, just above the joint, sometimes even buried in i the : h
tissue of the joint, though some were to be found in all parts of th
internode. In most instances they were to be found inside th*
natural hollow of the stem, but in some instances they had eatei
a channel outside of this.

Prof. French found Eupelmus allynii also in the straws, thus con
firming the hypothesis of its parasitism on Isosoma. He recoin
mends burning the stubble and alternation of crops as remedies.

DESCRIPTION.

The following descriptions of imago and larva are quoted froi
page 186 of the report of the United States Commissioner ot Agr.
culture for 1881 and 1882 ; that of the pupa is original, and draw
up from individuals removed from wheat straws from Perry count?
n Southern Illinois, on the 10th of January:

35

H

Imago. (Plate II, Fig. 3, f, g, li and i). Female. Length of
ly, 2.8 mm. ; expanse of wings, 4 mm. ; greatest width of front
ig, 0.7 mm. ; antennae, sub-clavate, three-fourths the length of
rax; whole body (with the exception of metanotum, which is
ily punctate,) highly polished and sparsely covered with long
rs toward end of abdomen; abdomen longer than thorax, and
iter. Color, pitchy-black ; scape of antennae, occasionally a small
ch on the cheek, mesoscutum, femoro-tibial articulations, coxae
>ve and tarsi (except last joint) tawny; pronotal spot large, oval,
l pale yellowish in color ; wing veins dusky yellow and extending
>eyond middle of wing ; sub-marginal three times as long as mar-
al ; post-marginal very slightly shorter than marginal, and stigmal
) shorter than marginal.

)escribed from twenty-four specimens. Of these twenty-four
cimens, only one was fully winged ; two were furnished with hind
gs only, and the rest were wingless. Male unknown.

,arva. (Plate II, Fig, 3, a, b, c, d and e). Length, 4.5 mm.
irly -J- inch) ; of the shape indicated in Fig. 3. Color, pale yel-
; mouth parts brownish. Antennae appearing as short, two-
ted tubercles. Mandibles with two teeth. Venter furnished with
double longitudinal row of stout bristles, a pair to each joint.
;h joint bears also, laterally, a short bristle. Stigmata pale,
ular; ten pairs, one on each of joints *2 (mesothoracic) to 11.”

}upa. (Plate II, Fig. 4). The mature pupa is 3 mm. in length
.8 mm. in transverse diameter. It is of a wasp-like form, and
srs but slightly from the wingless imago, except that the legs
antennae are applied closely along the under surface and sides
he thorax and abdomen, and are inclosed in a thin, transparent
icle. The general color is jet black, and the various spots and
•kings of the imago are visible through the pupal envelope. This
i fact so thin that it does not conceal even the hairs upon the

omen.

il A'

LIFE HISTORY.

s is clearly apparent from the foregoing, this insect is unques-
ably single-brooded, the eggs doubtless being laid upon the wheat
^pnl and May. The young larvae penetrate the stem, develop
mature within the straw, commence to transform to pupae as
y as October, and apparently complete their transformation
>re spring. In March and April the perfect insect emerges,
iliar seasons and exceptional conditions having, however, the
nary effect to retard or hasten the transformation.

ur own observations upon the life history of the species fully
Irm the latest conclusions of Profs. Riley and French. Early
uly the larvae were found in the wheat stubble and straw near
Quoin, Anna and Villa Ridge, in Perry, Jackson and Pulaski
ities, in Southern Illinois, and numbers of specimens were sent
3 to the Laboratory, where they were placed in breeding cages
f kept without especial treatment, at the ordinary temperature of
air, during the summer, fall and early winter. When examined
anuary, all the larvae still remaining unchanged were dead, and
! Fe living Isosomas were in the pupa form, with the exception

»

36

of three, one of which had already emerged as an adult insect
while two or three had completed their transformations m the straw
and escaped when this was opened. All the adults were wingless
and the pupae removed for examination were likewise destined t

appear as wingless females.

INJURIES TO GRAIN.

Under this head, I can only add to the aqSonnt g'V® 1*7 Pj?
French in the Eleventh Report from this office, the fact that th
straw worm was found in 1883, everywhere prevalent through.*
Southern Illinois along the line of the Central Railroad, froi
Du Quoin southward. Its abundance was clearly dependent, to
very considerable extent, upon the crop to which the ground ha
been previously devoted, no injury being apparent unless wheat is
been raised in the same field for at least one year preceding.

Although the Hessian fly was extraordinarily destructive at Du Quo1
this year, a careful estimate was made of the relative abundance
this insect and the wheat-straw worm, with the result that th.
seemed to be about equally injurious. In some fields it was dete
mined that, on a general average, half the straws were infested
these latter larvae. They were usually so low m the straw as to
left in the stubble, by far the greater number occurring between t
root and the fourth internode above, the majority being just abo
the third joint. Occasionally, however, one was seen above t
fourth or fifth. Many of the stalks infested were of less than avt
age length, and sometimes two or three specimens occurred m

single stalk. •

In order to make the present account of this insect practica
complete, I quote from the Eleventh Report the remarks of li
French upon the character of the injury: “The larvae were fou
inside the culm or stalk, a few inches from the ground, very seldi
in the straw between the head and the upper joint, more frequen
in the straw below this upper joint, and in the next internode bele
They were in the interior of the stalk, usually close to or a li
above the joint or node, working in the soft tissue forming !
interior, the natural cavity serving in most cases to contain the
but in some instances they gnaw a partial channel to one side
this. Where the stalk is large they may sometimes be found ccj
pletely imbedded in the tissue of the stalk, just outside the. hoi
center, but in such instances they were always pretty close to oil
the joint, where the stalk tissue is thickest.

“Sometimes more than one worm would be found in the same ehj
but in such cases they would be found in different parts of the; si
internode or in different internodes, it being no uncommon thin I
find two internodes infested. In no instance did 1 find as
swollen by their presence, as in the case of stalks infested ^
joint-worms ( Isosoma hovdci), there being no external mdicatioi
the presence of the "worm other than a somewhat premature rij
ing of the grain and less of it in the head. While the natj
cavity in the internodes furnished them a retreat often large enol

37

contain them, the walls of this cavity were considerably gnawed
n half an inch to an inch and perhaps more, often almost or
ce hard to the exterior.

r*

The manner in which the injury is done by this worm seems to
er from that of the ordinary joint-worm more in the way than
the effect. According to Dr. Fitch and others, the presence of
worm in the hard tissue of the outside of the stalk, whether of
joint or of the internode, a little removed from the joint, arrests
flow of sap by the hard, knotty gall, but this seems to arrest
flow more from breaking the internal fibers of the internode,
this case there is not so often a breaking down of the stalk as
h the joint- worm, for the erect position of the culm is not inter-
ad with, and the outer or stiff portion remains entire till the
feet insect is ready to emerge. The chief influence upon the
eat seems to be exerted during the later stages of its growth,
en the worm is approaching its maturity, as it is then probably
more rapid feeder. As evidence of this, the heads are fully
med, to all appearance, but the grain in them is light, and they
en prematurely, showing that the supply of material for the full
'elopment of the head has been cut off.”

REMEDIAL MEASURES.

the greater part of the larvae remain in the stubble, especially
the grain be not cut very close, and as they continue here in one
m or another, at least until mid-winter, and usually until the
towing March or April, it is at once evident that nearly the en-
3 brood may be exterminated by burning the stubble. In case of
ight yield, or when the wheat has grown up to weeds, it will
en be difficult to burn the field over, but if the insect is at all
^tractive, it will doubtless pay to run a mower over the field,
rning the vegetation after it has dried.

The usual absence of wings and the slight locomotive power of so
nute an insect, give us another resource against its injuries, since a
nple rotation of crops must almost wholly prevent the adults from
j/ing their eggs in wheat as they emerge from the stubble in spring,
ch of their number as have the power of flight may doubtless
d suitable situations for oviposition ; and if a field of wheat lies
joining to one in which that grain had been raised the preceding
;ar, the adjacent border might become infested by even the wing-
Ls females, but doubtless this injury could not extend far.

Whether it will be best to take any measures against those indi-
luals carried away in the straw, it is impossible to say with cer-
, nty without further observation and some slight experiment. It
not unlikely, however, that these are killed in threshing ; and
en if this is not the case, as the greater part of the straw is
mmonly fed before the adults would emerge in ordinary seasons,
ry few of those infesting the straw could possibly be available for
e maintenance of the species the following year. At any rate, the
nple and easy precaution of burning the remnants of strawstacks
i rly in spring, would remove all possible danger from this source.

38

Tn brief the burning or destruction otherwise of the stubble, oc¬
casional rotation of crops, and possibly the burning of surplus strarv
in sni'ino- would completely destroy this insect, or keep it so
thoroughly under control that its injuries could no longer be reck¬
oned of any importance ; and fortunately the usual wingless con*.
tTon of the pest makes it possible for each individual to defen,
himself without liability to have all Ins efforts disappointed by the
neglect of others.

39

-

►f

i*/ v

hi

1

l

i ; NOTES

i INSECTS AFFECTING SORGHUM AND BROOM-CORN.

n-

INTRODUCTORY.

Although decidedly among the minor products of the State at
ssent, these crops are of sufficient importance to repay well at-
ltion to their insect enemies. From the crop report of the State
ipartment of Agriculture for 1683, we learn that the area
sorghum in Illinois for that year was 14,023 acres, and
it of broom corn 33,922 acres ; the value of the former crop being
imated at $604,157, and that of the latter at $1,481,717. The cul-
•e of sorghum has lately acquired an additional importance not
licated by these figures, from the fact of the recent discovery of
ithods of manufacture of sugar from the syrup, which are said to
economically profitable, if applied on a large scale.

[f the present promise of progress in this direction is made good,
shall soon see an enormous expansion of sorghum culture
•oughout the greater part of the State; and as this expansion is
ely to result in a very irregular distribution of the area devoted
this plant, the regions immediately surrounding the sugar manu-
tories being largely cropped with it, year after year, the oppor-
fity afforded for the development and multiplication of its insect
umies must be very greatly increased. Doubtless, therefore, the
uries due to insects thus far apparent, furnish us a mere
it of those to be expected in the future, unless the producer of
ghum uses greater foresight, watchfulness, and intelligence in this
pect, than has heretofore been the rule among those interested
other farm crops. To the economic entomologist, the unusual
1 interesting opportunity seems likely to be afforded to watch the
it beginnings of serious mischief to an expanding crop, and to
e timely Avarning of the approach of danger.

n previous reports from this office, the insects injurious to sor-
im and broom-corn ha\7e received no attention ; the latter plant
ng not even* mentioned in any of them. In fact, I do not know
4 any report or paper on the insect enemies of these crops has
n published in this country ; all the literature relating to them
listing only of brief and scattered notes.

n the present article I propose to • collate these scattered items,

1 to report the results of my own observations, made in Central
nois, during the past season.

t is deemed scarcely worth while to treat broom- corn and sorghum
arately, since, notwithstanding their widely different agricultural
s, they are so closely related in the botanical system as to make

L

‘Z.XJ

n dv lilrplv that they will be found affected by the same in-

a K.i. w.f y "° 81

of the matter goes, this has proved to be strictly true. I

literature.

In Bulletin 1 .1 .SLgft'&l.'

tl» “Sierf, Antor. Florid*- iwfta Oe.iionrj .<

v „ hants of sorghum (without specifying whicli^ species is in-

; jUr/Viv the larvie of Agrotis (cut-worms). the weevil is also

S liv itr Neal to be very bad in young broom-corn in Honda,
said by ur. . t renorted by him to attack the leaves,

and larvae of Hehotlis are ^ repor ea oy^ ig evidently some

buds, young* ’^is item s“ce broom-corn has neither ears nor silk,
tnTit’ ‘seems likely that this remark was intended to apply to ordi-

nain [he'reporf1 of the United States Entomological Commission foi
1877 the 'act is noticed that sorghum is commonly remarkably free
from Sury by grasshoppers, even the voracious and almost omniv¬
orous Colorado grasshopper ordinarily passing it by.

The fact has been repeatedly mentioned by writers on the chinch
hni that both broom-corn and sorghum were peculiarly liable to th,
injurious attentions of this insect, as it seems to decidedly prete

them to Indian corn. .

Mention l has also been made by r T» jn the elaborat

S-Knffl’, the 8th report of the State Bute

moloaist of Illinois, mentions the occurrence in Europe of a plan
louse (Sipha) upon sorghum, which he believes likely to infest th

plant in this country also. . T,„

Tn a valuable paper on the plant-lice of Italy, by Griovanm Pai
mention is made of the four following species of the.

mttuiiuii Tnrnntpra arammu

insects infeshng sorghum in tbit ‘coun^' -fo^tera grammu
occurs upon the under surface of the leaves of a great Vcllle >
Xinaceous plants, including both corn and - sorghum ; Aph
avena t the common grain Aphis, well known m Illinois, occurs
autumn upon various species of sorghum, including Sorghum sac<h
ratum beneath the sheaths of the superior leaves at the base of t
nATiioie of seeds : Sypha maydis is said to occur rarely upon .
under surface of the leaves of Sorghum saccharatum; and
hoveril is found from June to December upon the loots of a g
number of graminaceous species, including all the cultivated vanet.

of sorghum. ^ -p

Finally in the Third Biennial Report of the Kansas State Boa
of Agriculture (1888), Prof. A. E. Popenoe gives an account of t
appearance of the corn plant-louse (Aphis mmdis) on sorghum

that State. _

* Flora degli Afidi Italiani, flnora osservati dal Prof. G. Passermi. (“Dal Bullel
Entomologico, Anno III.’’) . ^

t ffieM*odf SUbtensteln to repre. ent two of the ... I

of Schizoneura corni, Koch. See American Entomologist, 1880, p. 178.

RECENT OBSERVATIONS.

PLANT-LICE— APHIDES.

Order Hemiptera. Family Aphidid.®.

■

My own attention was especially called to the subject of sorghum
usects by the following letter from H. A. Weber, Esq., superin-
endent of the sorghum sugar manufactory at Champaign, in this
hate, and a patentee of one of the most important processes for
rystalizing the syrup of that plant :

“Some of our best fields of sorghum cane are suffering from the
iepredations of insects. An examination made this morning seemed
o show that the greatest injury was done by a yellow Aphis. The
ringed insect has the same color. This louse works chiefly at the
>ottom of the stalk, on the under side of the leaves. Whether it
.ffects the roots or not, I could not determine. There is also a
ead-colored Aphis which works on the top of the plant, but I do
lot think that it is doing much damage. Occasionally a stalk seems
o have been killed by this insect; but the yellow louse lias devel¬
oped in immense numbers, and I cannot remember of ever having
een it on sorghum before. I would be very glad to know if this
asect has been investigated; and if not, could you find the time
o come over here and examine into the difficulty yourself?’’

I received in the same mail with the foregoing a few specimens
'f the plant-lice mentioned, which proved to represent two species, —
*ne the ordinary plant-louse of Indian corn, AjAds maiclis, and the
•ther a form new to me, evidently allied to Cliaitophorus, but appa-
ently of a species undescribed. These specimens of both species
vere in various stages of development, including a few winged
emales and many pupae, together with young of all sizes.

On the 25th of July I visited Champaign for the purpose of examin-
ng the infested fields. In one about a mile north of town, belonging
o the Sugar Manufacturing Company, I found the sorghum seri-
>usly infested by these two species of plant-lice.

The corn plant-louse attacked only the upper, fresher leaves of
he sorghum, nearly all the lice, in fact, being concealed within the
oil of growing leaves at the tip of the stalk. The second species
Chaitophorus) had, however, the peculiar habit of working only upon
he oldest leaves, fully exposed on their under surfaces, clustered
isually near the mid-rib, but occasionally distributed in patches on
tearly the whole surface of the leaf; and now and then a small
! olony would be seen upon the upper surface also.

42

n n „ Htirrl ^necies less abundant, ( Schizoneura

In ^ThTl was tond^PC^ts. Both the Schizoneura
Ihos.) was to ] .P - occurred upon the common grass-

and the Chaitophoius i nd panicum, the former upon

like weeds in the ^11’ l1r)" ‘ the leaves. The Chaitophorus was
the roots, and the latter P { gragg beneath infested rows

found, however, only upo 1 , • upon the grass in the

of sorghum, not a single specimen being seen upon ^ ^

bare spaces ot the he , consequently, that this plant-

itself was not infested, it was clear, cons l ^ from the gra88

louse passed from ^ 0“ the other hand, appeared

both in corn and sorghum fields.

In corn-fieids adjacent 8eparated^ a search.

though in the border of the sorghum. field nearest, this species

was extremely abundant and decidedly injurious.

ij-i Urxiria in the vicinity of Champaign wcic visited at
Several other fieldnl/V t, all' tbree of these plant-lice were

this time, and m al j gpecies being frequently massed

generally distributed, the two aerial species o g u anA

in overwhelming numbers sc . as thickly to ^crowa dot ^ q{

the upper leaves, with evide y the corn plant-louse was

the P!r,on tteCrootToflysorghum, associated with the grass root-louse
seen upon t • 7 ,\ oirporlv freouently mentioned. In one field

(?i “f,lfourtlf species was Ad upon the leaves, apparently a Si-
still a fourth » 1 rlptpvrnined exactly m the absence of

phonophora, but not to be determined exactly n f

U-preserved winged specimen^ Ujas jertamly ^ ^ ^

!TY ts end is briefly characterized on another page. The corn
plants , an ch ehy chaitophorus were also found upon broom-

S t this Si ; but the rooilouse was not detected there.

STSd “““ptaHome (4. »«».

only upon the springing tassels.

Chaitophorus flavus, n. s.

[Plate III, Pigs- I— 4-]

DESCRIPTION.

The genus Chaitophorus, established by Koch in 1854 is es^eciall:
(lkilmmished by the pilose antenme, the filament of the last joint o
which" is longer than its basal part, by the large ca"dab> a“d^eyrini
very short nectaries, wider than long. It is also saia
Buckton and Thomas to have the antenme 7-jomted, like Aphis

43

but if this character be insisted on, the present species must be ex¬
cluded from this genus, and placed in a new one to be erected for
i its . benefit, distinguished by antennae with but “six” mints (pro¬
perly but five).

Wingless viviparous female. _ (Plate III, Fig. 2.) The wingless
forms of this species are bright lemon-yellow throughout, varied
only by four curved longitudinal rows of black points on the back,
two on each side the middle line. They are of a regularly ovate
form, with antennae and legs of medium length; but are especially
distinguished from our other common plant-lice by the longitudinal
rows of stout, erect bristles upon the head, and upon the back of
both thorax and abdomen. These rows of bristles are ten in num¬
ber, each bristle arising singly from a small, pointed tubercle. They
ire also placed in rows transversely, one row to each segment of
the abdomen. Six additional bristles, rather stouter than the
ithers, project conspicuously forward from the front of the head,
letween the bases of the antennae.

The latter are five-jointed, about two-thirds as long as the body,
md sparsely hairy or spinose, bearing two stout hairs upon each of
be two basal joints, four on the third, and one on the fourth. The
burth joint is about two-thirds as long as the third, the scape of
be fifth a little shorter than the fourth, and the filament about
jqual in length to the third.

The beak is very short, barely reaching the coxa? of the second
lair of legs.

The honey-tubes have the form of low, truncated cones, not more
ban two-thirds as high as broad ; and the tail is prominent and
itout, about as long as wide. The legs are conspicuously hairy
hroughoup and the ventral segments are also provided with fine
bort hairs.

The head and body are 1.5 mm. long by .6 mm. wide; the an-
ennae are 1.5 mm. long, the honey-tubes .1 mm. wide at base, and
he tail .15 mm. long.

Pupa. (Plate III, Figs. 3 and 4). This is colored throughout like
he wingless female ; is 1.7 mm. long by .75 mm. wide, the antenna?
)eing .75 mm. long, and similar in other respects to those of the
orm just described. The body is ornamented with rows of spines,
is in the wingless female, from which the pupa differs little save
n the presence of wing-pads. --

Winged female. (Plate III, Fig. 1). This form is of materially
Afferent shape from those just described ; the thorax being well distin¬
guished from head and abdomen, and of a rounded outline, while
he abdomen is contracted at base and pointed behind.

The general color is a pale lemon-yellow, with rnesothorax and
aetathorax darker, verging upon brownish-orange. Upon the abdo-
aen are eight longitudinal rows of black spots, and a row of black

* Aphidid® Italic® Hucusj® Observat®, pp. 7 and 9.

+ Monograph of the British Aphides, Vol. IT, p. 8.

the State Entomologist on the Noxious and Beneficial Insects of
ie State of Illinois, p. 103.

U

I

i i ^ fhivd and fourth rows of spots on each side

an? alternating with them. ‘ Beneath, the whole body is immaculate.

The eyes are red, and the yellow,

the tarsi, which ¥e ,® =, ? „ mm in greatest width. The wing

fsVe2 3gmm In lmigth 1 The^ntenme are a little shorter than the

ho? measuring a trifle over 1 mm. in length, and the joints are
body, measuring a um , female. The antennal hairs are

iiS

SErs'r S Tfz ar

sir ? Jsssr sp. g «» StFTO,',bort’ “,y

reaching to the coxae of the second pair of legs.

LIFE HISTORY.

The original discovery of this species in sorghum fields, in July,

at Champaign, has already been mentloned’t^ge3t1hgetr Jf Juj6 it was
in which it occurred at this season. On the dist or jury, it ™

sUl^in|lhe same ^ondition on the

McLean county it was found in all stages on the lower leaves o
the sorghum -but in October a protracted search in the fields at
Champaign which had previously been infested by it, failed to dis-
eove?a single specimen, and it has not been seen since m any situ¬
ation/ Its life history in autumn, winter and early spring is, there-

fore, unknown.

injuries.

In both sorghum and broom-corn fields visited at Champaign, the
nrincinal damage from which the plants were, suffering had evi-
SX been done earlier in the season, and .it. was consequently
impossible to tell precisely how much of this injury might be du
t ,,1-mt-lice which were then on the leaves, and how much

££ ifi. .pr«t. n. “L rr. “5

however must without doubt, be charged to this insect, as m ^
strictlv coincident with the presence of the lice. From two or thr
to six^or eight of the largest leaves were brown and shriveled where
the Chaitophorus was most abundant, and one or two more we
often reddened and partly dead Even

had been almost completely killed, patches of tfiese pla t-hce wer
still to be seen, as if reluctant to quit their hold until the last di ]
of sap had been extracted.

In these same fields the corn plant-louse was commonly present
but this was as closely confined to the upper part of the s _
being usually concealed within the rolled bases of the p

leaves.

45

K

Besides this injury to the foliage, another which had had appa¬
rently a more disastrous effect upon the growth of the plant was
evident upon an examination of the roots. In looking over the field,
patches could be seen here and there in which, nearly every stalk
was dwarfed, being from six inches to a foot shorter than in other
parts of the same tract. On pulling up these dwarfed stalks, the
lowest roots would be found entirely dead, usually only the upper
circlet of those latest formed giving any sign of life whatever, and
in some cases only one or two of these would be fresh and soft. In
fact, fields were visited at this time in which this injury, to what¬
ever due, had been so serious that the plants upon acres together
were either dead or barely alive, hundreds and thousands of
e stalks which should have been two or three feet high having
grown not more than five or six inches. In these worst cases,
usually only one short living rootlet would be found, and this
always one of the most recent. There was nothing in the ground
or upon the plant at this time in sufficient abundance to account
for this condition of the roots, but everything indicated the proba¬
bility that it was to be attributed to root forms of the plant-lice
infesting the leaves and stalks, which had done the mischief at some
earlier period. If this supposition is correct, it is of course impos¬
sible to say how much, if any, of this damage may have been done
by the single species now under consideration.*

The preference of this louse for the oldest and lowest leaves of
the plants attacked by them, is an extraordinary fact, it being the
common habit of plant-lice to concentrate upon the freshest, tender-
est and most succulent parts of the vegetation infested by them.

Although the fields in which this species occurred contained great
I numbers of a common small yellow ant, (Lasius flavus,) and of a
still smaller species, ( Solenopsis fugax,) it was a remarkable fact that
neither of these seemed to be paying any special attention to these
superabundant plant-lice. The Lasius was peculiarly attentive to
the corn plant-louse at the tips of the stalks, attracted of course
by the honey-like excretion from the nectaries of this insect; but
evidently cared nothing for the yellow lice, although these are like¬
wise provided with nectaries which must certainly serve for the
excretion of a similar sweet fluid.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

At the time of my visit to Champaign, the natural enemies of
! these plant-lice were exceedingly few. During several hours search
[ of the fields, perhaps a dozen eggs of lace-wing flies were seen,
and a single lace-wing larva. Three or four adult Coccinellidae were
likewise collected, but not a single larva of this family. Two or
f three larvae of Syrphus flies were noticed, but, except for these, the
i plant-lice were left to unrestricted multiplication, within such limits
as the weather and other general conditions might set.

‘ t No birds were seen in these sorghum fields except a few chickens
in the vicinity of one of the houses. Curiously enough, these were
i actively engaged in devouring the plant-lice, pecking them off the

*It is not impossible that this injury was of a fungous origin; but characteristic
examples of it, submitted to Prof. Burrill, did not sustain this view.

ki

base* of1 the would* oTtef'be^fpHnkTed ’ with lSe thThad thus

been dislodged.* ,

Aphis maidis, Fitch.

rPlate III, Fig. 5; Plate IV, Figs. 1, 2 and 3.1

The abundance of the common corn plant-louse m all the fields
of sorahum and broom-corn visited has already been noticed. This
vevv common and widely distributed species has received from ento-
Xl far less attention than its importance would warrant
having in fact been studied only bv Fitch, Walsh and Thomas’ as
for ns8 the nublished literature of the species indicates It seems
lw common consent to have been left in the genus Aphis, to which
•it was assigned by Fitch, but the form of the lioney-tubes assimi¬
lates it to the genus Ehopalosiplium of Koch, and ^stinet^ seP n

vo+oa H from Anliis as limited by Buckton. iiiese geneia cdu
liardly be considered’ real, however; and nothing is to be gained by
disturbing the nomenclature of the corn plant-louse, especia y as
1 as the leneral aspect of a true Aphis. The honey-tubes, swollen
in the middle and* dilated at the tip, will serve to distinguish the
species from any other of our Aphides.

DESCRIPTION.

The following description of this species given merely to render
rA hie its distinction from the other plant-lice infesting these
kops is quoted fn part from the Eighth Report of the State Ento-

“Mr. Walsh describes those he found infesting the roots [see
Plntp TV FiV 8 1 as having the general color, both of the pupa ana
ner ect insect pale green the female pupa usually has three short,
transverse^ dark lines on the thorax, and three similar ones on he
abdomen. ’ The antennse are unusually short, scarcely reaching the
tip of the thorax; the honey-tubes are also rather short ; the fi^
discoidal vein is farther from the second than the second is from
the third, and the stigma is prominent and pointed at eac en
He states that the pupa is dusted oyer with a whitish bloom 1
that of a plum, and with dusky markings.

Winged female [atrial]. (Plate III, Fig. 5) Head and thorax
of a shining black ; abdomen pale greenish-yellow, dotted dl°ng
lateral margin with black; honey- tubes black similar to those ot
the wingless individuals ; legs dusky, paie at the immediate has ,
antennse about half the length of the body ; beak very slioit, scarce y

* This fact is an interesting illustration of J^.e us* ar Dele* up oritherelar

respecting the habits of birds. I n.H v 6 Up H rvn h I i s h e d in the Bulletin de la Society

4 Jnnr. V\-iv»rJc? orrrT lnGPdfQ tTV 1\T. Oil clt d 1 GFl IS. pilOllSll Al aucI V

affirm that we should count birds among the agents thpv have so much other

repeat, do not amuse themselves with so minute a prey when they have so muci
food; and I am convinced, besides, that plant-lice are not to dffimr taste ^gfn^di.
fowl as a chicken will “amuse itself by the h^nr, as I saw several do g, distaste

SS,»SebfrSI cheek upon the multiplicand

of Aphides.

47

reaching beyond the base of the forelegs. Wings erect in repose, of
usual form, third discoidal vein twice forked, transparent; veins
slender, slightly dusky, the stigma elongate fusiform and rather
slender ; the subcostal vein for some distance from the base recedes
somewhat from the costal, and then at about two-thirds the dis¬
tance approaches the costa; the first vein about three times as far
from the second at the tip as it. is at the base ; the second is
slightly farther from the base of the third than the base of the first.
The second fork arises near the apex of the wing; the stigmatic
vein curves somewhat sharply at the base, and then is nearly
straight to the tip.”

The head and body are 1.2 mm. long by .57 mm. wide. The
antennae measure .85 mm.; the third joint is a trifle longer than
the fourth and fifth together, and the sixth considerably exceeds the
third in length, its filament being about twice as long as the basal
part. Wing 2.4 mm. ; honey-tubes .12 mm., tail one-half
jthat length.

Pupa. (Plate IV, Fig. 2). The body is 1.5 by .86 mm. ; antennae
63 mm., the relative length of the joints as in the winged female.

Wingless female. (Plate IY, Fig. 1). Body 1.43 mm. by .85 mm.;
boney-tubes .14 mm., antennae .7 mm. long, the relative length
ef the articulations about the same as in the winged female.
The color is pale green, with the head and transverse
bands of the thorax dusky. The antennae, beak, legs, honey-
tubes, tail, and tip of the abdomen are black, as are also
several rows and dashes on. the back of the abdomen, quadrate
blotches on the sides and under surface of the thorax, and a patch
ibout the base of the rostrum. The eyes are red. The body of a
bill-grown individual measures 1.4 mm. by .93 mm. The antennae
ire about .6 mm. long, the fifth joint about equal to the basal part
if the sixth, the fourth a trifle shorter, the third and the filament
if the sixth of equal length, each a trifle longer than the fourth
md fifth taken together. The rostrum is very long, attaining the
ibdomen.

[ LIFE HISTORY.

I am not at present prepared to give in full the life history of
lie corn plant-louse, not having yet complete proof of the exact
1 lonnection between the root and aerial forms, or of the place and
node of hibernation. I will, therefore, content myself with giving
it this time the dates and stages under which we have actually
collected the species in Illinois.

j It first makes its appearance upon corn under ground, late in May
md early in June, attacking not only the roots, but likewise the
grouting stem beneath the surface. The wingless root form has
leen collected here by us on the 22d of May, and at several dates
n June from the 1st to the 30th. It continues abundant, in this
stage, on corn roots throughout the month of July, and was also
| )btained by me upon sorghum roots in smaller numbers on the 25th
md 31st of that month. It so happened that we made no search
or the root-louse in August, but it was found early in September,
md also upon the 8th of October, the latest date at which we were

48

nhlP to discover it. Repeated and thorough search made m Novem¬
ber in corn fields previously infested by both the root and aerial
forms as well as in fields of sorghum and broom corn, yielded not
a single specimen. A few winged root-lice were obtained on the 7th
o£ jUne upon the roots of corn, and, again, upon the ,9tli of July,
but none others were seen during the season.

T h fi vp not seen the corn-louse upon the foliage until after the mid-
n 1 nf Tn W but it may be found then and thereafter either upon sorghum,
brol coYrn oV So,6 unSl October, infesting at first the upper

leaves of these plants, afterwards collected upon the tassels of the
leaves ot t ie P - d beneath the husks at the

vT’nf eab During al these months, wingless and winged

L “3* !»»«■' together ; tat I « not yet .bl,

clearly to differentiate the successive generations.

The appended table will serve to summarize the data given.

CALENDAR OF CORN APHIS.

1 O

<<1

Root Form.

13

IQ

cd

tn

cc

Aerial Form.

a

IQ

CD

&

IQ

CD

03

CP

Sj

S3

*d

P

P

IQ

CD

P-

Remarks.

May.

June

July

« i
< t

August.
‘ (

% •

Sept....

22

1

6

Corn

7

13

29

30

3

25

27

29

31

11

20

28

Corn

Sorghum
Corn .

Sorghum .

Oct.

6

25

2

Corn

Corn ....

Sorghum.

Sorghum..

Corn, broom
corn and
sorghum . . .

Sorghum .

Corn .

Panicum .

Corn

Corn

Sorghum and
cbm .

Sorghum.

Sorghum-

Sorghum.

Corn .

Panicum..

Corn husks.
Sorghum. ..

Sorghum.

Corn .

Panicum.

Sorghum.

On upper leaves.

Reared in labor'tory

Tops of sorghurr
and beneath huskt
of corn.

Tops of sorg’um anc
bases of leaves.

Wherever the species occurs either m the root or aerial foim
great numbers of the common yellow ant, Lasms Jiavus , may like
wise be seen in close attendance upon it. Early m spring tb
ant sinks its burrows beside the hills of corn, and when disturbe.
may often be seen to grasp the root-lice m its mandibles and tinn
them away to a place of safety. Later, it attends _ in a si
manner the aerial lice upon the leaves, sharing their care m tin
stage with another species.

It remains faithful throughout the summer, to such root-lice a
still occur in the ground ; and it is a very unusual occurrence ,o un

49

ce upon roots not attended by ants, or to find ants frequenting a
ill of corn which is not infested by root-lice. There can be no
jubt that the latter are carried from place to place by the ants ; and
ley are probably scattered by them through the corn fields in
)ring, especially in cases where the ground has not been previously
ifested by this Aphis.*

INJURIES TO BROOM-CORN AND SORGHUM.

My observations on this species in fields of sorghum and broom-
irn began at too late a date to give me any direct information as
> the work of this louse upon the roots in spring; but we have
luch reason to believe, both from analogy and from the condition
f the sorghum at this time, that root-lice had infested this plant in
manner similar to that in which they make their first attack upon
orn.

Their effect upon the foliage is to redden and curl the growing
aves, injuring the plant much more seriously than the Chaitophorus
[ready discussed, not only depriving it of the healthy activity of
s leaves, but likewise arresting the development of those on which
le further growth of the plant especially depends. When great
umbers of these plant-lice are collected upon the leaves at the tip
f the stalk, the latter will turn yellow or red.

Whether or not they have any injurious effect upon the tops of
le sorghum upon which they cluster later in the season, I am
nable to say; but they are said to injure the quality of the “brush’'

E broom-corn by staining it red, doubtless through the action of a
ingus which almost always follows the plant-louse injury upon
3th the leaves and the tops of all the plants attacked by it.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

The natural enemies of this species are those already referred to,
ad well known as a universal check upon the multiplication of
iant-lice in general. The most effective seems to be a parasitic
phidius which I have seen totally exterminate entire colonies, so
fat among hundreds of swollen bodies of plant-lice upon the leaves
f a hill of corn, not a single living individual was to be found.

* I have this season demonstrated that the corn root-louse may live, at least at times,
mnoneof the grass-like weeds most abundant in corn fields, Panicum glabrum. We
ansferred, in July, to the Laboratory, some specimens of Schizoneura panicola infesting
e roots of grass, placing in the box of earth with them some Panicum glabrum . upon
hichitwas hoped that the Schizoneura would fix itself and continue its development.

| hesc specimens, however, apparently died, as neither they nor any plant-lice which
; )uld have descended from them were seen again; but upon the blades and heads of Pani-
im a hundred or more individuals of the eorn plant-louse afterwards appeared. The
’ass bad been carefully searched for plant-lice when placed in the breeding cage, but
lubtless a few individuals were overlooked, either in the earth or beneath the sheaths of
ie leaves. In the absence of other food, they bred and multiplied freely upon the grass,
id in August were represented by all the aerial forms of pupa, apterous, and alate
j males. There were no lice of any kind upon the roots.

L

50

REMEDIES.

In respect to treatment it is too early to make any recommend*
lions as effective measures can be taken against tins pest only whei
ks “life history is fully understood. It is c ear as a resu. t ot n.au;
observations made by us m all parts of the State during the las
two years, that ground which has been previously in corn, or grass
is far more liable to injury by the corn-louse than if it has been pie
viously in small grain. There is, therefore, every probability that i
judicious rotation of crops will be found to impose a- sufficient chec.
upon the multiplication of this insect, when its life history is know]

in full.

Siphonophora, sp.

In sorghum fields at Champaign, on the 25th of July, I notice
upon the leaves of Panicum a few specimens of a p ant-lou s :e init
I had not previously seen, being associated there with Chaitoplim
Jlavus, and occurring upon the same plant. It was dearly a t
phonophora, but although a. considerable numbe of pup® we
obtained, I secured only a single winged specimen, the wings
which had been crumpled by accident. I unfortunately neglected
make notes of the colors while fresh, and am therefore unable
determine definitely the species, but will give here only so much .
a description of it as is necessary to distinguish it from the otto
plant-lice occurring in these fields. It was again found upon tl
leaves of sorghum, and likewise upon the tops of the same plan,
on the 11th of August but all the specimens obtained at th
time were wingless females and pupae.

Wingless female.— The wingless female is regularly ovate m fori
the body being 1.8 mm. long by .7 mm. wide. The antennae >
not quite reach the tip of the abdomen, and measure 1.1 mm.
length. The honey-tubes are black, long, prominent tapering Ire
the base, minutely roughened, and extend beyond the tip of t
abdomen, measuring 8 mm. in length. The tail is prominent, neai
cylindrical in form, broadly rounded at the tip, one-lialf tlie leng
of the honey-tubes, and about one-third as long as wide. Ihe lL|
ment of the antennae is unusually long, measuring more than ore
third the entire length of the antennae.

Papa.— The body of the pupa is about 1.5 mm. long by .75 mj
wide, and the antennae are .9 mm. long. The filament of the sn
joint is more than twice as long as the third, the basal part or t;
joint being about half the fifth. The fourth and fifth, ai_e neal
equal, the latter a little the longer. The honey-tubes are similar
those of the wingless female, and measure .17 mm. in length,
terminal joints of the antennae are black, and the others pale , I
thighs are dark, the tibiae pale, except at the tip, and the taj

dusky.

Winged female.— Of this form I can only say that the antenj
are slightly longer than the body (nearly 1.5 mm. m length), at
that the filament in the specimen measured was .6 mm. long. J
wings have the structure of the genus Siphonophora, thiee dis|
yeins, with the third twice forked.

Schizoneura pcinicola, Thos.

[Plate IV, Fig. 4.1

This species, first described by Dr. Thomas in 1879, is extremely
mdant and widely distributed upon roots of Panicum and Setaria
fields of corn, and occurred likewise, not uncommonly, upon roots
sorghum at Champaign, in July. I have as yet found it upon no
ier plants, except in a single instance, where two specimens were
;en upon the roots of corn in June. The decided preference of
! species for grass roots is however very clear, since where the
•ts of corn and grass were closely intertwined the Schizoneura has
;n invariably found upon the latter only.

DESCRIPTION.

V ingles s female. — The body is very broadly convex, sometimes
)orbicular. The antennae reach about to the end of the thorax,
j rather thick and heavy, and not tapering. The apical joint is
;htly thickened, the third joint longest, the fifth rather longer
n the fourth, and slightly gibbous on one side at the tip. The
tk is long, reaching fully to the hind coxae. The general color is
ite, or a very pale yellowish. The head and thorax and about
>-thirds of the mesotliorax are dusky, as are also a transverse
id upon the metathorax, one upon the first segment of the abdo-
n, heavy transverse bands upon the sixth and seventh segments
the abdomen, irregular patches at the tip of the body, quadrate
tches on the sides of the abdomen and a few scattered dorsal
cks. The coxae and legs are dusky, and there is a quadrate patch
black beneath the vent, and one upon the sides of the metathorax,
e two terminal joints of the rostrum are dusky, and a dusky cir-
ar patch surrounds its base. The two basal joints of the antennae
also dusky, and the two terminal ones are nearly black. The
s are red, with a black postocular tubercle. The antennae are
ise throughout, the hairs being longer toward the tip. The head
l whole body are also pilose, with longer hairs at the tip of the
lomen.

Vinged female. — This is described by Dr. Thomas as follows:
he front wings with the third discoidal vein once forked; third
n obsolete at base ; first and second veins arising very near each
er ; stigma short, rounded behind ; fourth vein nearly straight ;
tal bent outward next to the base, leaving a rather wide space
ween it and the sub-costal. Antennae short, reaching about to
base of the front wing; slightly hairy; third joint rather longer
n the fourth and fifth united ; sixth slightly longer than the fifth,
h a very short, indistinct, blunt spur at the tip. Beak rather
g, reaching nearly to the hind coxae, slightly hairy. Eyes present
l of the usual size or nearly so.”

?o this description I may add that the head and thorax are black,
abdomen pale, with imperfect dusky bands on the first and
ond segments, a quadrate dusky discal blotch, two terminal dusky
ids, a series of quadrate dusky lateral spots, and two rows of
ck specks between these and the discal blotch. The antennae are
iky throughout, sparsely pilose but not scabrous, 0.57 mm. long ;
legs are black ; and the tip of the abdomen and the band upon

the preceding segment are also black. The beak is long, reachii
to the abdomen ; the body measures 1.57 mm. by .7 mm. ; and tt
win" is 1.7 mm. long. The tip of the abdomen is hairy, the tail ,
minute, the cornicles wanting, being represented by a simple pore,
the surface, measuring 0.13 mm. in diameter and having the appes
ance of a black circlet within a dusky patch.

LIFE HISTORY.

Some remarkable discoveries have recently been made in tl
country and in Europe with respect to the life history of the Schu
neurse which produce galls upon the leaves of trees, but muc 1 e
is known of those which frequent the roots of grasses. By Lie
tenstein, some of the latter are believed to be intermediate stages
forms which pass the rest of their lives upon other plants ; l
until his conclusions are supported by careful experiment, they cf
not be accepted as established.

Mv own observations of this species cover only the period fi
June to October. On the lBtli of June, winged and wingl,

females were found upon the roots of Setaria and Pamcum m ct

fields, and specimens were noticed likewise upon the roots oi

single hill of corn. On the 25th and 31st of July, the wingl

female was seen upon the roots of sorghum at Champaign, an
the 11th of August upon the roots of grass ; and on the AM
October again, the same form occurred upon sorghum roots.

As this species was found everywhere 'most carefully guarded *
watched by ants, I have little doubt that its life history is at le
extremely similar to that of its European ally, Schizoneura verm ■

:

Pass.

Early in July Lichtenstein found upon the roots of Setaria vir
and S. verliciUata, in Europe, winged individuals of bcliizone
venusta, a species with which our own S. pamcola is piobably 1
tical. These being unable to penetrate the earth, remained stab
ary until found by ants; which then bit off their wings, dug i«
in the earth, and through these carried the now wingless lice to
small rootlets of the grass, afterwards visiting them regularly

their honey- dew.

From these lice, another winged generation descended later
which the ants gave a very different reception. Instead ot br
off their wings, as if to hold them captive, the ants dug new ct
nels to the surface to enable the lice of this generation to esc.
and spread the species abroad. As the ant in question is ano^
species of the genus Lasius, to which our own nurse of the 1
lice belongs, there is every probability that the association of tl
Aphides and ants will be found to have in this country similar
poses to those discovered in Europe.

By Lubbock, Lasius flavus has been seen to collect the loot fc
and the eggs of plant-lice in autumn, and to convey them tc
own nest for hibernation, protecting them during the winter,
scattering them abroad again in spring upon the plants which
lice normally infest.

53

.any facts which have come under my observation go to show
; a similar service is rendered to the lice of our corn and sor-
m fields by this same everywhere abundant ant.

Summary.

y way of recapitulation of the facts relating to the plant-lice
sting sorghum and broom-corn, we may say briefly that four of
se species are now known to injure these crops, three of them
cting the foliage and tops, and the fourth confining its injuries
die roots. It is also probable that at least one of those hitherto
ad only upon the leaves, likewise seriously injures the plant by
ining the sap from the roots early in the season. All four of
se species continue their depredations until October, retarding the
wth of the plant by appropriating the sap and deadening the leaves,

L in broom-corn further injuring the crop by staining the brush,
i first of these species, which may be called the yellow sorghum
ut-louse, described here under the name of Chaitophorus flavus, may
distinguished from the others by its nearly uniform lemon color in
stages, and by the fact that it attacks only the lower leaves of
plant, upon the inferior surface of which it clusters, usually
Test the midrib, having the effect, when numerous, to deaden
leaves entirely for a variable distance above the ground. On a
re minute examination, it may be recognized by the fact that the
ennae are but five-jointed, while in the other aerial species they
six-jointed, that the lioney-tubes are low, conical tubercles, and
t the back of all the forms is ornamented with several longitudinal
is of small tubercles, bearing stiff bristles.

Tie second species is the well known plant-louse of Indian corn,
his maidis, and occurs chiefly upon the upper leaves of the plant
;il the head appears, when it attacks this also. The color of
3 species is dark green in all except the winged forms, and in
se the head and thorax are black. The antennae are short, not
re than two-tliirds the length of the body ; the honey-tubes are
>minent, cylindrical, slightly enlarged* in the middle and expanded
the tip. The slender terminal portion of the antennae, called in
s paper the filament, is only about equal in length to the third
at of the same.

Che third aerial species is s’imilar in general appearance and in
aation to the corn Aphis just described, but may be distinguished,
on careful examination, by the fact that the filament of the
tennae is one-third its whole length, being nearly twice as long
the third joint, while the cornicles are cylindrical and taper
qflarly from the base to the tip. The root-louse is white or
lowish-white, and easily recognized by the fact that it is entirely
ffitute of honey-tubes, these being replaced by circular pores
ich open upon the surface. The antennae will likewise serve for
recognition, as they are without the slender, filament-like termi-
1 portion with which all the other species are furnished. From
3 root form of the corn plant-louse, which sometimes occurs in
mection with it, this species may be distinguished by the two
aracters last mentioned — the absence of the honey-tabes and of
; 3 antennal filament.

The life history of none of these forms is completely known or
knowledge of the Chaitophorus and the Siphonopliora being confine
to the period of their appearance upon the foliage m summer. It
root-louse and the corn plant-louse certainly commence their attac
in spring, and continue, in some of their stages, throughout tt
season, the former infesting likewise several grass-like plants wine
are among the common weeds of corn and sorghum fields, out lat<
commonly attacking only sorghum, corn and broom-corn.

Both of these latter species are continuously attended by certai
abundant ants which assist in their distribution and protect the]
from their enemies. There is much reason to believe, also, tin
these ants render them efficient service during the winter by trail
porting them to suitable quarters for hibernation, and it is probab
that they spread them about again in spring and place them upc
the roots of plants suitable for their food.

Beyond the fact that the corn plant-louse is obviously much mo
numerous and destructive in fields that have been pre\iously in coi
or grass, we have at present no clue to preventive or remedi
measures against these insects ; but it is probable that a comple
knowledge of their life history will enable us to construct a syste
of rotation which will restrain their multiplication, and keep the
injuries within due bounds.

By Dr. Thomas, the application of lime fertilizers to the soil
recommended for the purpose of preventing injuries by root-lice, b
apparently more on theoretical than expeiimental grounds. 1.
fact that one of the sorghum fields at Champaign most infested ,
plant-lice, and in which the older roots were thoroughly deaden e
had been treated to a heavy dressing of superphosphates, mdicat
that this form of fertilizer, at any rate, would have no lnjurio
effect upon the plant-lice. There is evident need of careful pi
systematic experiment with respect to the actual value of the app
cation of any substance to the ground for the purpose of controlh:
the root-lice, which shall be sufficiently beneficial to the crop to p
the expenses of its use.

THE COEN ROOT-WORM.

(. Diabrotica longicornis , Say.)

Order Coleoptera. Family CHRYsoMELTDiE.

j [Plate Y, Figs. 1—5.1

4

[n an elaborate account of this species published in my first
nual report, I remarked that it was not yet known whether this
ect would be found injurious to broom-corn or sorghum. In my visits
sorghum fields in Champaign, in July, I found it sparingly in
reral fields which had been planted to sorghum for two or more
irs in succession, working upon the roots of these plants in a
inner precisely similar to that in which it attacks the corn.

1

It did not occur here, however, in sufficient numbers to threaten
•ious injury to these crops, being, for example, less numerous in
•ghum fields than in fields of corn adjacent which had been
>pped for a longer time without rotation.

rhe only practical conclusion which it is at present necessary to
iw is this: When a field of corn has been badly infested by this
3t it will not be prudent to plant sorghum there the following
ir,* since the young worms hatching from the eggs in spring might
uly make a most destructive attack upon the sorghum plants.

[ append here a summary account of this insect extracted from
3 article in my last report, already referred to :

“The corn root-worm, in the form in which it affects the roots of

m, is a slender white grub, not thicker than a pin, from one-
lrth to three-eighths of an inch in length, with a small brown

ad, and six very short legs. It commences its attack in May or
ne, eating its way beneath the surface, and killing the root as
’>t as it proceeds. Late in July or early in August it transforms in
3 ground near the base of the hill, changing into a white pupa, about
;een hundredths of an inch long and two-thirds that in width, look-
; somewhat like an adult beetle, but with the wings and wing¬
ers rudimentary, and with the legs closely drawn up against the
iy. A few days later it emerges as a perfect insect, about one-
h of an inch in length, varying in color from a pale greenish-
)wn to bright grass-green, and usually without spots or markings
any kind. The beetles climb up the stalk, living on fallen pollen

56

‘incl unon the silk at the tip of the ear until the latter dies, wher
o few of them creep down between the husks, and feed upon thd
corn itself, while others resort for food to the pollen of such weeds
in the field as are at that time in blossom. In September and Oc
tober the eggs are laid in the ground upon or about the roots o
the corn and most of ,the beetles _ soon after disappear from tb
field They may ordinarily be found upon the late blooming p a 3
feeding as usual upon the pollen of the flowers, and also to som
extent upon molds and other fungi, and upon decaying vegetation
There can he no doubt that the insect is single -brooded, tha
it hibernates in the egg as a rule, and that this does not bate]
until after the ground has been plowed and planted to corn in tb
spring, probably in May and June.”

THE BLACK-HEADED GRASS MAGGOT.

j ( Sciara , sp. ?)

Order Diptera. Family Mycetophilid^e.

[Plate IY, Figs. 5-9.1

This insect, although not seriously injurious, as far as known,
evertheless sometimes makes a peculiar attack on seed corn in the
:ound, at a time and under circumstances to occasion considerable
arm, and possibly to do some mischief. For the purpose of reas-
iring those who may encounter it in their corn fields, if for no
her reason, it will doubtless be worth while to treat it briefly.

This larva first came to my knowledge as a corn insect, late in
lay of the present year, at which time Dr. Boardman, of Stark
runty, transmitted to me a footless, smooth, white, cylindrical
jiva, about one-half inch long, with a jet-black head, which had
t ed Idy In m from a farmer of his county with the in-

trmation that it was destroying the newly planted corn in the

:ound by eating out the substance of the grain, sometimes as many
^ three or four being found in a single kernel. By a letter from
r. Boardman, dated May 28, I learned that the field attacked had
3en in pasture for ten years preceding, partly in blue grass and
urtly m timothy, and that a portion of it had been broken up for
)m in the fall, and the remainder not until spring. The larvae
ere very abundant throughout the field, not only in the grains of
)rn, but everywhere in the turf, where they were apparently feed-
ig on the dead and decaying grass. The blue grass ground con-
imed more of them than the timothy, and that plowed in spring

tore than that broken up the previous autumn. Where they were

lickest, the earth was said to be literally alive with tliem.^ The
I >rn was just coming up, but was in very bad condition, and a
age part of it was being eaten up by the maggots. They were
iso found abundant in many other fields in this vicinity, but only
here the ground had been in grass the preceding year.

On the 30th of May, a farmer living near Towanda sent me ex-
tuples of maggots which he had noticed in his corn, together with
kernels injured by them, which, on examination, proved
) in® same as those above referred to. The corn had, most of
! , sprouted but feebly, the season being excessively cold and wet,
Qd otherwise especially unfavorable. Some of the grains were
terally packed with the larvae, one having no less than ninety-
iree clustered in and upon it.

— 5

53

mtggZ* ‘were^tatot'aUVnTtoim’very

£“> l\oSSrso°u°nTtyor health,

orewhedreflTte Xlup a lef |M K

bfthe lln4* yand°much Tit dJSS^^piito oT thffield where
the seed had all started freely, there was no appearance of any m-
j-Vip l n WrP here being confined to the dead glass, unuuiutT
rotting vegetation. Other corn fields adjacent, which had not been
previously in grass, were free from the laivie. J

Similar observations were made at Normal, June 1, where the
mascots were found common on old grass lands, devouring corn that
had Med to terminate, or which was growing feebly, but never
as far as seen! eating a sound grain or attacking a perfectly Wealthy
ubint Some infested stalks showed, howevei, but slight traces or
feebleness and it is barely possible that now and then a hill was
destroyed ’which would have rallied and saved itself if it had not

be^ifothetlDurposee<ofS’verifying these observations, a number of the
larval ^re placed in a pot of earth in which several grains of corn
hadbeen planted some days before, but only a part of which hae
sprouted 1 On the 4th of June, this was examined and several ol
the larvae were found at work on one of the partially dead kernels
which had sent up an unhealthy shoot about two inches hig .

Bv the favor of correspondents, specimens of these larval were
freouentlv received from various points in Northern Illinois, and n
one instance from Cedar county, in Eastern Iowa. In every .ca*
where the information could be obtained, it was found that th
conditions precedent were exactly as above described— the group
having been Invariably broken up from grass the year precedm
The latest mention of this insect in our notes occurred July 1C
at which date examples were received from Chatsworth, in Living,

ton county.

CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION.

I made numerous attempts to rear these larvae, but i ttl/ fal]®f
exception and therefore the e?act species _ cannot be determine
The ^characters of the larva itself are sufficient, however, to s.
that it belongs to the order diptera, or two-wmged flies, and to ti
family Mycetophilidas, which includes a great number of sma
onat-like insects excessively abundant m spring, many of who.
larv* are known to feed either on fungi or on decaying vegetatio
Careful comparison of the mouth parts of this larva with thos
this family described and figured by Baron Osten-backen, m tlie
volume of the Proceedings of the Philadelphia Entomological Societ
shows that our species probably belongs to the genus Sciaia,
beyond this fact it is not now possible to go.

This larva (Plate IV, Fig. 5,) is cylindrical, smooth, white exce
the head, which is jet-black. The body is divided into twelve se
ments, not including the head, the three anterior of which

hortest, and are frequently somewhat retracted within each other,
he terminal segment of the body is bent abruptly downward
eyond the middle find constricted before the tip. The body is soft
nd flexible, and the movements of the maggot are sluggish.

The head, viewed from above, is broad-ovate in outline, narrow-
lg forwards, and somewhat abruptly rounded in front. It is smooth
i ad shining, about as long as the first segment, within which it is
•equently more or less retracted. Its width is about three-fourths
s length. The entire larva is one-third of an inch in length when
ill- grown, and about one-fortieth of an inch in transverse diameter •
ad of nearly uniform size throughout, only the first two or three
igments being slightly narrower than those succeeding them. It is
larked with neither hairs nor punctures, and provided with no
vomotor structures whatever. The shape and proportions of the
ifierent segments of the body are sufficiently shown by the cut.

The larvae of this family differ from those of most diptera, not
ily in having a well defined head, but also in having a somewhat
implicated mouth apparatus, which consists in this larva of a
brum, two mandibles and two maxillae, with a rudimentary struc-
ire possibly representing the labium. The labrum (Plate IY, Figs,
and 9,) is a thick, fleshy organ attached to the front of the head
xmt half as long as wide, deeply emarginate in the middle, the
teral lobes formed by this emargination being broadly and regu-
rly rounded. The base of the labrum is firmly supported by a
jarly complete black, chitinous ring. The mandibles (Fig. 7) are
ladrate in form, entire, except the terminal extremity, which is
vided into four obtuse lobes or teeth, the two inner of ‘which pro-
angles to the others. This toothed extremity of the
andibles is yellowish-brown, the remainder black. The maxilla
ig. 6) are composed of three parts, a subtriangular, basal part
ae stipes), and a larger, terminal part composed of two pieces, the
ner of which is oval, and provided at its margin with about six or
ven large, obtuse teeth, the proximal ones of which are largest,
i le outer part is oblong in outline, as long as the inner, and bears
>on the under surface, near the tip, a circular, membranous area,
mi which springs a minute, inarticulate palpus.

If further observations should chance to show that this larva may
come_ injurious, it should not be difficult of destruction. Probably
simple burning of the grass preparatory -to breaking up the sod
[mid be sufficient.

03

INSECTS INJURIOUS TO TIIE STRAWBERRY

INTRODUCTORY.

The strawberry is now, perhaps, the most popular fruit in th
Uate certainly eaten by more people, and piobal y » c
mantities than any other perishable fruit. The greater part of thi
mnortance it has acquired within a very few years, largely as
3eauence of devices for the rapid transportation of such fruit
ind their preservation in transit m good condition for delivery a
markets many hundreds of miles from the place of production. Thi
has had the result not only to multiply many times the area oj(
which the individual fruit grower could distribute . his
but greatly to extend the season during which this fiuit could
had at reasonable prices in the principal markets of the State.

v ,,. ti.a* shipments of strawberries are regularly made from tl
southern lea cffio New York City and from Cental Mississrpj
Tn rhicaffo the fruit being cultivated as a specialty by a aP
increasinf number? on farms from fifty to one hundred and fit
acres the insect enemies of this crop have acquired an econom
importance very different from that which they had when the coi
mercial demand for strawberries was supplied cl iiefly
nlus of the family garden. As might be expected, also, the g
Increase in the area devoted to this fruit, and the growing disp
sition to cultivate it in large tracts instead of m isolated Patel*
have ■ noticeably stimulated the multiplication ot such insects
found their natural food in the wild strawberry of tins ' region , a
seem also to have attracted the attention and invited the attack
other species which originally depended for food upon other plan

Forty species of insects are now known to attack the strawbal
with more or less injurious effect, besides one 11mf?'pe? even inJ
mite not properly to be classed as insects. All the seven in.
orders are represented by them, except the Neuroptera and to
latter very few insects injurious to man belong. 1 our ot the
are Hymenoptera (a mason bee, an ant and two saw-flies) ; thirteen
larva; "of Lepidoptera, all belonging to four families of moths ,
is a dipterous insect (a gah-fly), and fourteen are Coleoptera.rei
senting the five families, Scarabseid®, Elatend®, Chrysomeh
Curculionidae and Otiorhynchid*. The two Orthopteia aie
grasshoppers, and the eight Hemiptera include a scale insect, t
plant lice, and four Heteroptera.

/

61

Ten of these species devour the root and crown of the plant, all
loleoptera but one, which is the larva of a moth. The leaf and its
etiole are attacked by two of the Hymenoptera, by all the Lepid-
| ptera except two, by the single dipteron, by eight of the Coleop-
3ra, by both of the Orthoptera, by five of the Hemiptera, and by
ae red mite. The flower and fruit are damaged by the ant, the
talk-borer, one of the leaf-rollers, by a snout beetle, by two plant
ugs, and by the myriapod.

Less than a fourth of the known enemies of the strawberry really
eriously injure it in a way to demand earnest effort for their sup¬
pression, the remainder being too few in number or too local in
heir occasional outbreaks, to do more than threaten the crop with
ossible future mischief. Of these enemies of the strawberry of the
rst class, but two devour the leaf— -the strawberry slug and the
mf-roller; four attack the roots— the white grubs and the three
Dot-worms; one bores the crown — the crown-borer; and two injure
he fruit— the tarnished and the dusky plant bugs.

) In the following classified list, the species are arranged with refer-
nce to their systematic relations, and the first-class insects are
istinguished by italics. The common names given are usually
hose by which they have been most generally known in Illinois,
'he references in parenthesis, after the technical names, are to the
.classification of insect injuries” on pp. 65 and 66.

j LIST OP STRAWBERRY INSECTS.

Hymenoptera.

1. Osmia canadensis, Cresson, (A lb*) Mason Bee.

2. Solenopsis fugax, Latr., (C la) Small Yellow Ant.

3. Emphytus maeulatus, Norton, (A 1*) Strawberry False-Worm.

4. Selandria rosre, Harris, (A 1*) Bose Slug.

Lepidoptera.

5. Cymatophora pampinaria, Peck, (A 1*) Brown Strawberry
pan- Worm.

6. Nematocampa filamentaria, Guen., (A 1*) Horned Strawberry
pan- Worm.

7. Angerona crocataria, Fabr., (A 1*) Green, Strawberry Span-
lYorm.

j 8- Apatela oblinita, Sm. & Abb., (A 1*) Smeared Dagger.

9. Leucania unipuncta, Haw., (A 1*) Army worm.

10. Gortyna nitela, Guen., (C lb) Stalk-borer.

11. A-grotis sp., (A 1*) Cutworms.

j 12. Phoxopteris comptana, Frol., (A 1**) Common Strawberry Leaf-
i Roller.

I 13. Eccopsis permundana, Clem., (B 2) The Strawberry Flower-
i^orm.

14. Cacoecia rosaceana, Harris, (A 1**) Oblique-banded Leaf-

oiler.

I 15 • Cacoecia obsoletana, Clem., (A 1**) Plain Strawberry Leaf-

roller.

|

.

i

L|

62

16 Ptvcholoma persicana, Fitch, (A 1**) Peach-tree Leaf-Roller.
1L Anarsia lineatella, Zeller, (D la) Strawberry Crown-Mmer.

Dipt era.

18. Cecidomyid®, (A 2a) Strawberry Stem Gall-Fly.

Coleoptera.

19. Elateridse, (D 2a) Wire Worms.

20. Lachnosterna, sp., (E 2) White Grubs.

21. Cotalpa lanigera, Linn, (E 2) White Grub.

22. Allorhina nitida, Linn, (E 2) White Gnib.

90 Pnria aterrima Oliv., (E 8) Strawberry Loot-Worm.

24*. Scelodonta pubescens, Mels., (E 8) Strawberry Root-Worm.

25. Colaspis brunnea, Fabr., (E 8) Strawberry Root-Worm.

26*. Colaspis tristis, Oliv., (A 1*). -p

27 Phyllotreta vittata, Fabr., (A r ) Cabbage Flea Beetle.

28! Systena blanda, Mels., (A 1*) Yellow-striped Elea Beetle.

29. Epitrix fuscula, Crotch, (A 1*) Downy Flea Beetle.

30. Tyloderma fragarm l\ iley, (Lib) Weevil

31. Anthonomus musculus, Say, (C lc) lhe btiawbeny weevil.

32. Otiorhynclius sulcatus, Boh., Black Fruit-Weevil.

Orthoptera.

33. Acridium americanum, Drury, (A 1*) Grasshopper.

34. Pezotettix femur-rubrum, (DeG.) Stal., (A 1 ) Red-legged

Grasshopper.

Hemiptera.

35. Pulvinaria innumerabilis, Rathvon, (A 2b) Maple Bark -

36. Siphonophora fragarise, Koch, (A 2b) Strawberry Plant-
37 Siphonophora minor, n. s., (A 2b) Strawberry Plant-

38. Aphis, sp., (A 2b) Strawberry Plant-Louse.

39. Nysius angustatus, Uhler, (A 2b) False Chinch Bug.

40. Lygus lineolaris, Beauv., (C 2) larnished bla_^t Bug.

41. Derceocoris rapidas, Say, (C 2) Dusky Plant Bug.

42. Thyreocoris pulicarius, Germ., (B 1) Flea Negro Bug.

Louse.
Louse, |
Louse,

Myriapoda.

43. Cambala annulata, Say, (C Id) Strawberry Millipede.

Arachnida.

1

44. Tetranychus telarius, L., (A 2b) Red Spider.

LITERATURE.

The original literature of the subject consists largely of scattere.
accounts of individual insects given in the reports 01 Prob R1 eY5
State Entomologist of Missouri, the reports from this othce prece

ig the eleventh making only occasional mention of previously ascer-
dned facts. In the latter report, two of the special enemies
f the strawberry wTere discussed at length.

The first article which I have seen containing an attempt to
imm arize what was known of the strawberry insects, is by William
aunders, of London, Ontario ; and was published in the Third Re-
Drt of the Ontario Entomological Society, for 1872. This includes
even species ; and in the same publication for the following vear,
supplementary article was printed, adding one more.

In the 20th annual report of the Massachusetts State Board of
gnculture, published in 1873, Dr. A. S. Packard, Jr., discusses at
ngth the injuries done to the strawberry by the common white
■ub and by the larva of Cotalpa, and also mentions small snails
5 enemies of the plant. This paper was reprinted, during the same
iar, in the “American Naturalist” (September, pp. 524 to 548).

In 1875, a few species were treated under this especial head, in
report on economic entomology by Dr. Packard, published in the
eport of the United States Geological and Geographical Survey of
;e Territories for 1875.

Prof. G. H. Perkins, in 1877, summarized the known facts relat-
g to fifteen species, in a paper on Injurious Insects, published in
e Report of the Vermont State Board of Agriculture ; and to this
>t the present writer added ten species, in an address on Insects
Meeting the Strawberry, delivered at New Orleans before the Mis-
ssippi Valley Horticultural Society, in 1883, and published in the
ansactions of the society for that year.

Besides the above, the strawberry pests have been briefly dis¬
used by Miss Treat, in a little work on Injurious Insects of the
arm and Garden, published in 1882, where six species are men¬
ded; and more at length by Prof. G. H. French, in the Trans-
tions of the Illinois State Horticultural Society for 1881, where
a species are discussed; and by Mr. Saunders in his admirable
)rk on Insects Injurious to Fruit, published in 1883 (twenty species).

64

A CLASSIFICATION OF INSECT INJURIES TO THE STRAW¬
BERRY, WITH SUGGESTIONS OF REMEDIES FOR THEM.

The study of economic entomology, is primarily and essentially 8
study of insect injuries to vegetation, and only secondarily, and o
necessity, a study of the insects themselves. To acquire such e
knowledge of these injuries as will enable those interested eit er c
prevent or to remedy them, must be its mam object; an objec
which can often be attained without a full knowledge of the causa
which have conspired to produce them. In other words it, is some
times possible to pass directly from a description of the injury t
a description of remedial measures, without requiring the perplexej
farmer or gardener to take into account the technical charactere
names life history and habits, of the insect causing it. Whereve
this is possible, the immense advantage is obvious, and shoul

never be neglected.

Where as is too often the case, the injurious insects themselves ar
put to the front as the main objects of study, their injuries bem
treated merely as incidents in their life history, one must maste
the whole science of his insect before he can arrive at a remedy fc
its ravages; and as this requires an amount of skill and specie
knowledge far beyond the average farmer the practical consequent
is that his reliable information is usually confined to a very fe
species so destructive and abundant that their aspect and habits ai
matters of common knowledge, kept alive by tradition. Even m then
numerous cases where a simple examination of the insect injury wi
not point the way at once to the correct remedy, it is often
necessary to add more than a few words of the simplest descnptic
of the insect causing it, to enable the ordinary, intelligent observ;
to distinguish it from any other attack with which it is likely
be confounded.

In short, while the safest and best method is unquestionably
become as well acquainted as possible with our insect enemies ther
selves, as well as with the consequences of their attacks, still
should be borne in mind that much of practical value may be learn
and applied without any detailed entomological knowledge, provid
that descriptions of insect injuries are skillfully drawn up ai
properly classified.

Furthermore, this grouping and classification of like injuiies, wifi
out unnecessary reference to the various kinds of insects by win
they have been produced, has this additional decided advantag
that the discussion of remedial and preventive measures may
made to apply to an entire group of injuries, instead ot to separt
species of insects, as is now the common method.

65

!

|

The following discussion of the insect enemies of the strawberry
s been prepared, as far as possible, with these points in view,
iiave given first a classification, or synopsis, of insect injuries to
ls plant, arranged in the form of an ordinary key for the deter-
ination of species in natural history, but containing no unneces-
ry references to the insects themselves ; and have added indica¬
ms of the proper remedies, in the form of figures and letters re-
rring to the classification of remedies on a following page. In
king up subsequently for description and discussion, the sepa-
te species of insects known to attack the strawberry, I have
ranged these also on the same plan, grouping together under each
bdivision of the classification of insect injuries, all the species
>w known to produce that especial form of injury.

As an illustration of the use of the “key” given above, let us
ppose that the strawberry grower notices, after the fruit is har-
sted, that many of the leaves of his plants are folded or rolled
gether; and that on opening these he discovers a caterpillar in
e fold which has evidently been eating away the surface of the
if. This injury comes under “Injuries to the Leaf and Leaf
em” (A). Looking at the next line below this in the table he
aces it at once in the class of injuries (1) done by eating away
e tissue of the leaf. Following the key still further, he finally
icides that it is not done by an exposed insect (b*) but by an
sect rolled in the leaf (b**). Against this group lie finds the
ferences 3c, 4a, by the first of which he is cited to the discus-
on of the method of destroying insects of feeble locomotive power,
midsummer, after the fruit is picked, by mowing and burning
rer the field ; and by the second, to the use of arsenical poisons.

A. Injuries to the Leaf and Leaf Stem.

The tissue of the leaf eaten away.

a. When the plant is in fruit.

* By an exposed insect, 4c, 3a.

** By an insect concealed in a rolled or folded leaf,
3a .

b. When not in fruit.

* By an exposed insect, 4a.

I ** By a concealed insect, 3c, 4a.

i The tissue not eaten, but pierced, and drained of sap.

a. A gall on the stem, 3a.
si b. Not making gall, 4cde.

B. To the Flower and Flower S.tern.

By an exposed insect, 3b, 4c.

By an insect concealed in a cluster of webbed leaves and
blossoms, 3a.

66

C. To the Fruit, Ripe or Unripe.

1. The substance eaten away. j|

a. By a small yellow ant. (No remedy needed.)

b. By a brown caterpillar, striped with white, 3g.

c. By a snout beetle. (No remedy known.)

d. By a cylindrical, brown, thousand-legged worm, 3f.

2 The berry shrunken and knotty, the seeds on the shriveled parts .
well developed, with plump kernel, numerous greenish bugs
occurring on the fruit, 3b, 4c.

I). To the Crown and Main Root.

1. The interior bored out.

a. By a small reddish caterpillar, with sixteen legs, lc.

b. By a small, white, footless grub, with brown head, led,

2bc.

2. The substance gnawed and perforated.

a. By a hard, straight, slender, cylindrical larva (wire-

worm.) . , .J

b. By white grubs four or five times as long as wide, with

abdomen at least twice as long as head and thorax,
and with tip of body swollen, rounded, and smooth,
lab, 3c.

c. By small white grubs not more than one-fifth of an inch!

in length, about twice as long as wide, with abdomen
but little longer than head and thorax, and with tip of
boclv not swollen or smooth, 4af, lede.

E. To the Fibrous Roots.

1. By a hard, cylindrical, straight larva. (See above, D, 2a.)

2. By a large white grub. (See D, 2b.)

3. By a small white grub. (See D, 2c.)

CLASSIFICATION OF REMEDIAL MEASURES.

Preventive and remedial measures against insect attacks may be
conveniently arranged under five general heads :

1. Methods of culture, including the preparation of the soil.

2. Barriers to progress.

3. Capture and direct destruction.

4. Topical applications.

5. Protection, or artificial multiplication, of natural enemies.

1. Under methods of culture we include all measures like rota
tion of crops, selection of time of planting, and the like, which an
intended to take advantage of the insect through some fact in itf
structure, habits, or life history.

. Barriers to progress may be opposed to the spread of the
irious species from place to place, or directed to preventing the
ividual insect from gaining access to its food or place of ovipo-
on.

. The capture of insects may be accomplished either directly,
hand, or indirectly, by lures and traps ; and their destruction
an captured may, of course, be effected in a great variety of
ys, differing according to circumstances and convenience.

. Topical applications may be either destructive or repellant,
3nded to kill the insect or to drive it away. The destructive
ncies are either in the nature of internal or external poisons, —
ing by contact or by their action after being taken into the
nentary canal. The internal poisons can rarely be used except
the orders provided with masticatory mouths, which therefore
) and chew their food before swallowing it ; and they are not
ally available against such insects as take their food by suction
ough a beak or proboscis.

Index* the above system of classification of remedial and preven-
3 measures, we may now arrange, for convenient reference, the
des of resistance to the attacks of strawberry insects which have
s far been devised.

1. Modes of Culture.

a. Grass lands should sometimes be cultivated for two or three
ji*s in some hoed crop, to expel the root-eating insects which
our not only the roots of grass, but also those of strawberries,
s measure is especially recommended against the various white

bs.

b. In the vicinity of towns where gas is manufactured, the
e used in purifying the gas becomes saturated with sulphur, and
umulates as a waste product, known as gas lime. In a fresh
te this is destructive to both vegetable and animal life, but on
usure to the air it is eventually converted chiefly into the car-
late and sulphate of lime, both valuable fertilizers for many soils.

'hese facts suggest the following procedure to free the soil from
.ious insects, preparatory to a change of ci*ops. First treat the
face to a dressing of fresh gas lime late in summer or early in
umn, and plow this under at once, and then apply a second
ssing of the lime to the plowed surface. A's the rain washes
3 into the soil, it will destroy the earth-inhabiting insects both
that part of the soil turned over and for some distance beneath.
3 details of this procedure are still subjects for experiment, and
ther the amount to be used, nor the length of time it is neces-
y to leave the fresh lime in the ground before planting, have as
been definitely ascertained. The value of this application as a
iilizer will also vary according to the character and history of
soil.

68

1 c Notwithstanding the utmost care against the invasions oft
noxious insects, occasional rotation of crops will probably he neces¬
sary, in which case the ground should ordinarily be plowed m mid- :
summer, after the picking of the fruit.

Id In establishing a new plantation, it is best that the new
plants should be removed from the old field as early m spring as;
possible, as a safeguard against the deposit of eggs upon them by
noxious insects which may be hibernating in the held and awaiting
the opening spring for oviposition. Occasionally it becomes nece»J
sarv to take additional precautions against the tran3fei of the eggB|
of iniurious species from old fields to new. kor this purpose the
young plants should he set in the new held and allowed to remain!
until the runners have started and taken root, after which tiM
plants hrst set should be dug up and destroyed. In this way the
held is finally stocked with plants which have not been previously
in contact with those seriously infested.

1 e. As a security against the transfer of eggs of insects laioi
upon or about the roots of strawberry plants, it is sometimes adviSj
able to wash these thoroughly after removal from the earth.

2. Barriers to Progress.

2 a. To prevent the entrance of hordes of injurious insects hki
the army worm, the practice of plowing a furrow around the held
(afterwards deepened, if necessary, with a spade) has been ionn<
efficient. The insects accumulating in the furrow may be destroyei
by dragging a log of wood along it, or by digging holes at interval :
in the bottom of the furrow, in which the insects will accumulate
where they may be easily crushed en masse.

2 b. To prevent the spread of insects which are destitute c
wings, and have but feeble locomotive power (like the crown-borer
it is recommended that newly established fields be separated fror
old by an interval of a few rods in width devoted to some otlid

crop. I

2 c. As a still greater security against such invasion from with
out, the practice of establishing new fields at a considerable distanci
from the old has been found especially useful.

8. Capture and Direct Destruction.

8 a. For some insects infesting the strawberry field, no cheap*'
or more satisfactory method can be used than that of capture ar
destruction by hand.

8 b. Sweeping back and forth along the row with an ordinal
insect net is a ready means of capture available for such exposij
insects as do not cling closely to the plants. It may be used |
advantage for those attacking the flower and fruit at a time vat
less laborious measures are not allowable.

8 c. For species of feeble locomotive power, which infest tl
leaves in summer, after the fruit has-been gathered, it is a comiiK
and very useful practice to mow the field in dry weather, burning .
over in a brisk wind after it is thoroughly dry.

69

»

d. . Some of the worst insects which infest the strawberry appear
the adult stage in swarms during a comparatively short period,
i may then be entrapped by attracting them by lights exposed in
fields, and so arranged that the insects approaching the lights
11 be caught in vessels of water. A glass lantern so suspended
r a tub of water that beetles flying against the glass will drop
) the water beneath, is a simple and effective device which may
depended upon to capture the May beetles and other adults of
various white grubs., If the water be covered with a film of
osene, the insects falling into it will be speedily killed. The
ecial object of this method of warfare is to destroy the adults as
y emerge, or as they resort to the field to lay their eggs.

■ e. As a general measure of protection, it is sometimes expedient
rake and burn the mulch and rubbish late in autumn, after
ects have resorted to their winter quarters.

) f. For thousand-legs in the strawberry field, the plan of seat¬
ing slices of potatoes or other vegetables between the rows, and
ing by hand late at night and early in the morning the myria-
Is attracted to them, has been recommended by good authority.

g. Thick-stemmed weeds in and about the field should be de-
iyed if the stalk-borer is likely to be injurious.

4. Topical Applications.

t

: a. For all leaf-eating species occurring in summer after the
it is inched, except possibly those which feed concealed within
rolled and curled leaves, sprinkling or spraying with Paris green
London purple in powder or suspended in water, is a feasible
aedy. It must be remembered, however, that this method is of
avail against insects which do not gnaw or bite the tissues of

■ ; plant. It is recommended to destroy the leaf-eating beetles
ose young are the strawberry root-worms. For this purpose the
son should be applied during July and August. It is, of course,
portant that it should be used no more freely than is absolutely
3essary to accomplish the end desired.

L h. Powdered hellebore is used, like the arsenical poisons men-
aed in the preceding section, for the strawberry false-worm, Em-
.jtus maculatus.

1 c. For those species appearing exposed while the fruit is upon
) plants, as well as for all those which are not provided with
ing mouths, powdered pyrethrum is one of the most useful appli-
dons. This may be either dusted upon the plants, due care being
^en that it shall reach both the under and the upper surfaces of
) leaves, or it may be thrown in a spray of water from a hand
ce pump.

1 d. The kerosene emulsion may be applied for the same pur¬
se as the pyrethrum mentioned above, except that it is not avail-
le during the fruiting season.

1 e. Applications of sulphur to the leaves, as well as a spray of
ong soapsuds, are useful for some purposes.

1 /. For subterranean larvae appearing locally, bi-sulphide of car-
n or carbolic acid may be poured into small holes made in the
rand, as recommended on another page under the discussion of
nedies for the strawberry root-worms.

• . ' »»

4 II

DESCRIPTION AND DISCUSSION OF SPECIES.

On the following pages I have discussed in detail all the insects!
known to me to be injurious to the strawberry, within oui limits,
together with a few others to the attacks of which we are liable ;|
but I have treated each species, as a general rule, with referenced
to its injury to all the crops which it affects, not confining myself|
to the strawberry only.

Whenever a species has been fully discussed in former reports of;
this office, I have commonly contented myself with referring to suchi
previous discussions, except where the reports in which they wereji
published are out of print.

A. INSECTS INJURIOUS TO THE LEAF AND LEAF STEM.

1. Eating away the tissue of the leaf.

* Exposed Insects.

The Mason Bee, (Osmia canadensis, Cresson.)

Order Hymenoptera. Family Apid^e.

I notice this insect here on the strength of a paragraph by Mr
Wm. A. Saunders, contained in the report of the Entomologica
Society of Ontario, for 1872. “This,” he says, “is the name of t
small hymenopterous insect, a sort of wild bee, which has prove*;
destructive to the foliage of some strawberry plants during the pas
season, in the township of Oxford.

In both sexes, the head, thorax, and abdomen is green, an*
more or less densely covered with whitish down or short hairs, thos
on the thorax being longest. The wings are nearly transparent
with blackish veins. The female is larger than the male. Th
length is .85 inch, and the spread of the extended wings about hal
an inch.”

Mr. Pettit says: “The insects were taken in East Oxford, July ‘A
on a few strawberry plants in a garden. The plants, perhaps nearl
one hundred in number, had been nearly all denuded of their leaver
and a search in the evening having failed to reveal the authors c;
the mischief, I examined them again in the heat of the day, an
found the little culprits actively engaged in nibbling away the rt
maining shreds of the leaves. They appeared to chew the frau

71

K ;

its into a pulp and carry it away, but the little time I spent in
erving them was insufficient to determine anything further re-
cting their habits. Doubtless in this instance the leaves so
sumed were used in the construction of suitable nests, in which
deposit the eggs and rear the young of those insects.”

f this species should ever become seriously destructive (as is
y unlikely), its injuries could probably be checked by the use of
pet poison, since the time when it made the attack above de-
ibed, was after the fruiting of the plant.

The Strawberry False- Worm, ( Emphytm macalatus, Norton).

[Plate V, Fig. 6.1

Order Hymenoptera. Family Tenthredinidje.

'his insect, a green or yellowish slug-worm, which devours the
ves of the strawberry in midsummer, seems capable of mischief
serious as any attacking that plant; but it is removed from the
t rank of strawberrry insects by the fact that it is evidently es-
ially subject to some undiscovered check upon its multiplication,
ch prevents its appearance in undue numbers, except at com-
atively rare intervals. As far as known, it has not usually oc-
red in destructive numbers for more than two years in succession
:t;he same place.

'rom any other strawberry caterpillar, it may be at once distin-
ffied by the number of its legs, which is twenty-two, including
three pairs of thoracic legs ; while the true caterpillars of the
lidoptera have never more than sixteen legs, all told.

LITERATURE.

his species was first described in 1861, from adult saw-flies cap-
id in Connecticut,* and again in the transactions of the Ameri-
Entomological Society for 1867 (p. 232), where its occurrence
Maine and New York also was reported ; but nothing was known
its early stages, until six years later, when the larva was dis-
ered in strawberry fields in Illinois and Iowa. Its life history
. first published by Prof. Riley in the Prairie Farmer, of Chicago,
May 25, 1867, the article being illustrated by figures of all
?es but the egg ; and brief notes by the same author also appeared
die transactions of the State Horticultural Society of Illinois for
t year. In the issue of the Prairie Farmer for June 22, 1867,
ition is made of the occurrence of the larva on strawberries in
stern Iowa and Central New York.

early two years after (January, 1869), the same writer repeated
substance of the preceding accounts in the American Entomolo-
; and notes upon it, drawn from the same sources, were also
>n in Packard’s Guide to the Study of Insects (1869), and in the
rd Eeport of the Ontario Entomological Society (1872). In the
i irth Report of that Society, published the following year, the first
earance of this insect in the strawberry fields of Canada, was

L - -

Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, Vol. VIII, p. 157.

L

i

mentioned by Mr. William Saunders, and a good account of the
Character and amount of its injuries was given, together with a
description of the results of some experiments made upon it with
hellebore. This article also contains a description of the larva, and \
additional notes on its life history. ' I

In the transactions of the State Horticultural Society of Illinoi|
for 1877 Mr 0 B. Galusha relates his discouraging experience
with the’ pest in Illinois; but Prof Biley gives the fullest account,
of the species yet published, m his last (ninth) report as State
Entomologist of Missouri. This last article includes descriptions and
life histories of all stages, and figures of all except the egg, together
with notes on distribution, and injuries to the strawberry, and briefl

suggestions of remedies. > J

Full summaries of previously ascertained facts were published int
the Eighth Keport of this office (1878) ; and in the Transactions oft
the State Horticultural Society of Illinois, for the year following, j
Miss Emily A. Smith records her observations on this species m
strawberry fields in Central Illinois, expressing a doubt of the occur-,
rence of more than one brood, at least m this latitude. The ravage?,
of the larva in New Jersey are briefly mentioned m the American
Entomologist for 1880 (p. 109) ; and in 1881, another general account
of the species, with some personal observations, was given in th(l
Horticultural Transactions of our State Society for 1881. In tnd
first Beport of Prof. Liptner, as State Entomologist of New Yorlj
(1832), the species is merely mentioned as one of those susceptibly
to poisoning by hellebore. In the Transactions of the State Hortij
cultural Society oi Iowa for 1882, Prof. Herbert Osborn relates thj
results of some experiments upon it with arsenical poisons, an
Miss Alice B. Walton notes the occurrence of the species m nei.
beds early in the season, but remarks that, tor some unexplainc
reason, the second brood did not appear. Finally, a compilec
illustrated article on this species,- taken chiefly from Biley s flint
Missouri Beport, was published in the Transactions of the Mississip]
Valley Horticultural Society for 1888.

Besides the above, the usual number of republications, more (j
less full, of the original observations of Biley, Smith, French, an
others, have appeared in the agricultural and horticultural papers!
in the Beports of the United States Department of Agncultu
(1867 and 1878); in the American Naturalist (Vol. VII, p. 524);:
the Annual Beport of the United States Geological Survey (187
p. 796); in a report on the Injurious Insects of Vermont, by lrc
G. H. Perkins ; in Psyche (II, 97) ; and in the Tenth Beport fro
this office (pp. 64, 65 and 68).

description.

Imago. This is a four-winged insect, with the wings shaped mu
like those of a bee, but provided with a greater number of trai
verse veins. The body is black, with an interrupted brownish ba
on either side of the abdomen. The head is transverse, ink
punctured, widely but not deeply channeled at the sides of t|
ocelli, from the nasus to the summit. The edge of the napus<
moderately crenate, and a ridge extends down its middle. 1|

73

tennse are nine-jointed, filiform, reaching the base of the thorax,
ther stout, slightly serrate, and somewhat ferruginous beneath ;
3 third joint longest, the fourth and fifth equal. The eyes are
Eminent, the mandibles short and wide, with one inner tooth. The
ixillary palpi are long and slender, the first joint minute, the
ical joint shorter than those before it; the first and second joints
the labial palpi shortest. The abdomen is rather long, cylindri-
1 in the males and carinate in the females, and suddenly com¬
essed at the apex. Nasus, labrum, tegulae and edge of collar
litish; a brownish interrupted band on each segment of tergum ;
's varying from reddish-brown to white, their coxa?, except at the
), the femora of the four anterior legs beneath, apical joints of
eir tarsi, the femora of the posterior legs, apical half of tibise, and
eir tarsi, except base of basal joints, black; inner claw tooth
ort ; wings hyaline, faintly clouded. The male has the antenna)
jch flattened and brown beneath ; the bands on abdomen whitish ;
is with less of black, coxae and posterior femora above black. The
igth varies from two-tenths to twenty-two hundredths of an inch,
d the expanse of the wings from forty-two to forty-seven hun-
edths.

Egg.— The egg is said by Prof. Riley to be white, opaque, and
ree-hundredths of an inch long.

Larva. — The larva, when full-grown, is from six-tenths to sixty-
e hundredths of an inch in length, varying in color from pale
eenish to dirty yellow, with a faint whitish bloom along the dorsal
d sub-dorsal regions, inclining, in most cases, to deep blue-green
the thoracic segments. There is a broken band along each side,
a deeper shade of green, composed of spots or patches which
alesce on the anterior segments, but are distinct and separate
hind ; below the bands the body is paler, with a faint yellowish
it. Under surface, pale yellowish and semi-transparent ; feet and
olegs — of which latter there are eight pairs — all pale yellowish.
3ad of a more decided yellow than body, with usually a dark brown
ot above, one of nearly the same size at the upper front, and two
fcher smaller ones at each side, joined by a brown line, the ante-
)r spot being lower down than the other. In certain specimens
ese two are blended, and there is only a triangular spot on the
p of the head, while the depth of the shading on the body is also
riable.

In the Transactions of the Illinois State Horticultural Society for
67, Prof. Riley speaks of a possible second variety of this larva,
ffering principally from that above described in that the head has
t one black spot upon each side.

Pupa, — This is of a dingy greenish-wliite color, the members
ing somewhat paler than the body.

LIFE HISTORY.

According to Prof. Riley’s observations, the adult flies appear in
rly spring and soon lay their eggs, depositing them in the petioles
the leaves, pierced for this purpose by the ovipositor of the
nale. These hatch in about a fortnight, and the young worms

being made smooth by a soit of gum. j

Tn° these cells they soon change to pup*, from which a second
1 Z^nf flips is produced by the end of June and beginning of July.,

it fli the intoence of July weather, the whole process of egg;
Under the influence ?,, JLated and the second brood of worms,
depositing, etc., is iap y P ’ > art 0f August, and form

following, when they become pupal and flies again, as relate .

Mr Saunders’ observations do not quite agree with the above ac-,
b c i fnnnrl ■Hip larvte some partly and some fully giowrU
Olathe 3th of July! at London,’ Ontario, these specimens commencing:

to enter the earth July 2l>. . . 0 . , !

Mr Oalusha Secretary of the Illinois State Horticultural Society, re,

says ^that 'lie failed to Ind any second brood mJuly, «•£>£•£

closelyTand p^fn" July, conceatfthe £S

oT'theTeaLworms Two yeaif later, however, Mr. Galusha is quote,

of Morris informs me he has carefully watched for them and t
b s knowledge they have not made their appearance twice the sam
season Mr8 Biley has undoubtedly studied them farther south, an
similar to other insects they may prove double-brooded where t

seasons are longer.” . , ,

In the Transactions of the Iowa State Horticultural Society ft
1882, Miss Alice' B. Walton records the absence of a second broo

at Muscatine. . ,

These are the only published observations on the life ^history ■
Q-necies which I have been able to find, and it is mucn to
regretted that the interesting and important question °f the numbj
of broods must be left in some uncertainty. The lan a nas -
too rare in my vicinity of late years to enable me to throw any adc

“ at w& Eme°rr indEidua

were taken by sweeping at Normal.

^Entomologists are too apt to forget that the aUon^aa^velf^and ' that^rrors are

of observations only, but of inferences f tom o . from1 mistakes of observation.

more likely to arise from mistakes i of .^erence t^Jrom^^ which the inf ere n<

this account it is best, whenever Possible, t(V.u™ Controversy arising, the difficulty rc

s,udy of ,he whole ™bieot- de no""-

75

DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE,

In Illinois this species has been reported from various situations
roughout the State, from Rockford on the north, to Carbondale to
e southward, and from Peoria, McLean and Grundy counties in
ntral- Illinois. To the eastward, it is known from Maine, Connec-
ut, New York, New Jersey, Ontario and Michigan, and to the
stward from Iowa and Missouri. It did considerable local mis-
lef in Ontario in 1873, and was so destructive in some parts of
vva in 1874, as to compel the plowing up of the plants. In 1877,
was equally destructive in Grundy county, Illinois, where some
lit growers sacrificed their fields to destroy the insect; and here
continued a serious pest during the two years following. Com-
rnly however, although it is rarely altogether absent from straw-
rry fields, it is practically harmless, not occurring in numbers
Sficient to make any visible impression on the plants.

HABITS, AND INJURY TO THE STRAWBERRY.

The eggs, "which are laid in the leaf-stalk, imbibe moisture as they
Mure, and consequently cause a swelling of the stem. The gravity
the injury done by the larvae has already been mentioned under the
ceding head, and it only remains to say that they attack the
nt by riddling the leaves with holes, with the necessary effect,
en numerous, to retard its growth, or sometimes even to kill it’
I to greatly diminish the fcrop. “When not feeding they rest on
j under side of the leaf coiled in a spiral, the tail occupying the
iter, and fall to the ground at the slightest disturbance.”

NATURAL ENEMIES.

4r. Galusha has remarked that the part of an infested field which
3 freely visited by chickens was not injured by the worms, and
. Hofmeister, of Iowa, reports that bluebirds and chipping-spar-
rs ate them greedily in his fields ; but with the exception of these
► rather indefinite items of information, we have no knowledge of
1 natural enemy of this pest. There can be little doubt, however,
t parasites, either insect or fungous, really infest this species,
I may be discovered by properly directed observations. In fact
/ extraordinary inconstancy of its numbers would of itself be suffi-
it to indicate strongly the action of destructive parasites, either
mal or vegetable.

REMEDIES.

very much regret to have to treat of remedies for this insect
le the very basis of remedial recommendations is yet in some
14. If this insect is two-brooded, as reported by Riley, a second
xl of larvae appearing on the leaves in July and August, it may
iestroyed by simple and easy measures ; while if the opinions of
^•Galusha and French and Miss Smith are to be accepted, it
- difficult species to manage, and its attacks must be met, as far
possible, by quite other methods.

76

To destroy a first brood in bearing fields, it will of course be
necessary to use means which will not injure the fruit. The only
insecticide which it will be proper to employ under these circum-
stances is pyrethrum, and it is not certain that this would be effei
tive as no experiments have been made upon this precise species.
I have found it sufficient, however, for the destruction of the rose-slu?
(Selandria rom, Harris), a species closely allied to that under con¬
sideration. Further than this, I know of no feasible remedy, excepl
hand picking, or capture with an insect net As the .larvae an
easily startled, and drop to the ground when alarmed it is not im
possible that they might be . swept from the vines with a net, and
destroyed by emptying them into a pan or bucket containing a filn,

of kerosene upon water.

If the fruit-grower should be watchful enough to detect the nie
in earlv spriim, as they frequent the vines for the purpose of deposit)
ing thL eggs it is quite likely that lie might protect his fields b|
usrng the insect net to capture them, in the cool of the day, whej
they are sluggish, and slow to take flight.

To destroy the second brood, where it occurs, or the first in youn
fields not yet in bearing, or where the crop itself has already bee
ruined Paris green or London purple will be found efficient, accon
ing to the observations of Prof. Osborn reported in the Transactor
of the Iowa State Horticultural Society for 1882. Hellebore wou]
doubtless prove equally effective, as this is the general specific f(
all saw-fly larvae. It is further quite likely that mowing and bun
ino- the fields, as for the leaf-roller, would likewise serve for tl
extermination of the second brood of this species.

The Eose Slug, ( Selandria rosae, Harris.)

Order Hymenoptera. Family Tenthredinimi.

This species is mentioned here only to call attention to the h
that it has been reported by Mr. Townend Glover, formeily Um .
States Entomologist, to attack the strawberry when its ordm£|
food fails.

The Brown Strawberry Span-Worm.

(■ Cymatophora pampinaria, Pack.)
Order Lepidoptera. Family P h ALiENiDiE .

This species was found by us in midsummer so frequently, fill
ing upon the leaves of the strawberry in Southern Illinois, as
make it worthy of brief mention here. It is a slender loop

>

caterpillar, brown in general color, about an inch in fiir
and gives origin to a gray moth which expands from three-rouu

*Prairie Farmer, October 5, 1867, Vol. XX, p. 212.

77

an inch to an inch, the wings being variously lined and clouded
th black. Specimens obtained August 1st, pupated on the 11th
that month, and emerged on the 22d. Half grown larvae collected
, . the 6th of September, probably represented a second brood.

Larva. The full grown larva is thus characterized in Packard’s
onograph of the Phalaenidse of North America: “When fully
own, it measured one inch in length, and was of a pale yellowish-
een color, with a broad reddish-brown stripe edged with black on
e back, and on each side of the fifth ring was a small black spot.
’Ptember 4th, after spinning a few threads over itself it became a
ipa, and was transformed to a moth November 14th.”

Half grown larvae obtained at Centralia, September 6th, had the
[lowing characters : Pale yellowish-green upon the sides, deepen-
g to. brown beneath, finely and irregularly lined with brown,
ese lines breaking up on the posterior segments into an irregular
arbling of brown and pale green. Beneath each spiracle on the
rtless legs is a black blotch, largest on the anterior segments,
le back is reddish-brown, lined with greenish-white. The two
adian lines enclose a narrow stripe of brown between them, in
lich are scattered points of white, forming an imperfect median
te. The lines next outside these are likewise somewhat imperfect,
t those at the border of the dorsal brown shade are nearly con-
iuous. Counting the interrupted median line, there are conse-
ently seven in all upon the back. All these are jagged in outline
d slightly zigzag in course.

The upper surface of the head is divided into two lobes by a deep
lgitudinal groove. It is drab-brown, with a herring-bone mark of
lite on either side of the above groove. Outside of this is a
^ged longitudinal white line, continuous with the sub-dorsal lines
the body ; and still outside these another longitudinal white line,
e space between the two latter being marked by a few irregular,
lique white dashes. The side of the head is also brown, lined with
lite.

The two medial dorsal lines unite in one on the cervical shield,
lich thus becomes five-lined. The legs are brown, mottled with
aenish-wliite, the outside of each bearing a large, oval, whitish
ace, surrounding a small black oval spot. The entire surface of
3 larva is sparingly set with black piliferous tubercles, which are
ranged in transverse rows, two to each segment. The spiracles
3 pale, ringed with black.

Pupa. — The pupa is said by Dr. Packard to be half an inch long,
d light brown in color.

Image >. The following description of the moth is quoted from
ckard’s Monograph already cited: “Antennae moderately pectin-
3d. Palpi pale gray, blackish on the sides, white at the tip and
the under side of the basal joint. Head dark in front, pale on
; 3 vertex ; a few dark scales between the insertions of the antennae.

I dy and wings pale ash ; both wings somewhat produced toward
3 apex. F ore wings speckled with brown scales, a large blister at
3e.; three prominent lines, the inner broadly curved, the curve
ltinuing across the median space, the line heavy and black, sub¬
tly angulated outward below the costa, broadening on the costa

78

A ™ +1,0 mprlian vein and anguiated outward slightly on the sub-
and on tn. Pe^ti tl ’ rowed on to the base of the hind wings.

The Second or middle line begins as a broad, triangular costal patch
ine secoi , , une an(j curved around ]ust outside

oT the simple discal dot (which seems, however, to form one side of
o rinale o f which the outer two-thirds are formed by the curve in

Ef tr “Mt

Sfe. ~ss-‘«s:ar s&s

7up posta- below it and at the base a point on the second venule;
from the’ third tooth the line sweeps around continuously to the
tliM median venule, with a black point on each venule ; below this
the linecurves regularly inward, pointed outward on the sub-median
vein - a dull-brown, almost blackish shade borders this line. A sub-
marainalz ezag distinct, white line, the scallops within filled wi t
Mack From each white point a narrow, dark streak connects with
each black intervenular dot. A dark shade in the extra-discal inter-
sDace. Fringe on both wings gray, faintly checkered with paler
H *+ -Mio hlonlr dnf^ Hind wings pal© within the extia-discal
E at the ext erne base a Mack line da straight shade just below
the discal dot wh“h is black, linear, distinct. The third is narrow
black, distinct! nearly straight, pointed [ slightly ^outward on the costal
vpin and with a very prominent tooth on the first sub-costal ^ei ,
between thT median vein and the inner edge a little curved inward.
Bevond s a brown shade. A broad, sub-marginal, dusky shad ,
inSng a zigzag, white line. A black, marginal scalloped line
Beneath pale ash, with a very faint ochreous tm ; ; ■ ^sca _ dot on th
fore wing three times as large as on the hind wings . middle aiea oi
the fore" wings smoky. A very . broad, marginal black sh ahade,
leaving a whitish apex, and the adjoining portion of the fiinge p er
On the hind wings the shade is narrower, disappearing at the mne.
angle of the wing, and leaving the edge of the wing pale. Bott
wines mottled with rather broad, transverse streaks. A distinc
Mack band at the base of the abdomen ; the hind edges of the secom
and succeeding segments dusky ; the basal segments unusua y
Anterior pair of legs dusky with narrow paler ’ „h.e js iareer
fhiolv uale with a pencil of hairs, as usual, lhe lemale is large
a little more dusky above and beneath, but with the same markings.

From related species, this may be distinguished, according ^
Dr. Packard, “by the very distinct line at the base °f ^6 ^abdo

the basal ring beyond being unusually white, a?HfdhfMrd line 01
of the wings having a broad marginal shade, while the^tlnrdh^o

the fore wing is deeply but quite regularly sinuate, and
costa acutely dentate, while in G. Humana it is instead obtuse)
curved. It varies a good deal, especially m the tint of the brow,
shade accompanying the third line. It does not apparently
much in size.” The species is widely distributed, from Maine an
Pennsylvania to Alabama, Texas and Nebraska, and u is said
fped likewise upon the leaves of the pear.

79

The Horned Span-Worm.

(. Nematocampa filament aria, Guen.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Phal^nid^e.

This very curious measuring worm may be easily distinguished
m any other species by the occurrence upon the back of two
equal pairs of long fleshy filaments, situated on the third and
h abdominal rings, the posterior pair shorter than the others, and
:h pairs curled at the ends.

it is among the minor enemies of the strawberry, not being con¬
ed to this plant, and occurring, as far as reported, only in trivial
mbers.

:[t was first observed, by Harris, in Massachusetts, in 1841, but his
bes, description and figure, were not published until 1869, in his
tomological Correspondence. In the meantime, the species had
m described and figured by Guenee, in 1857,* under the name by
ich it is now known.

't was probably first mentioned as a strawberry insect in Packard’s
ide to the Study of Insects, published in 1869. Hr. Harris found it
ding upon the oak, willow and rose ; and it has since been noticed
m the pear, currant, maple, hazel, hickory and raspberry.

Che following descriptions are from Hr. Packard’s Monograph of
! Phalsenidse :

Larva— Body cylindrical, head large, with two unequal pairs of
g, slender, fleshy filaments, situated on the third and fifth abdo-
aal rings, the posterior pair shorter than the others, curled at the
l and finely tuberculated. Head pale rust-red, marbled with a
1 paler hue. Head full on each side of the median line, flattened
front. Half-way between the metatlioracic legs and the first pair
filaments, are two subacute tubercles, which are rust-red ; when
four filaments are uncurled, they are as long as from the head
the tubercles. The anterior pair of filaments are pale rust-red
leath at base, brown above, but tipped with white. A distinct
sal line from the prothorax to the second pair of filaments ; a
r of small tubercles next to the last segment, tipped with pale
t-red. Body wood-colored above and beneath ; thoracic rings
enish above, succeeded by rust-red between the tubercles and first
r of filaments ; behind these, variously marked with light and
k-brown. An oval dark spot behind the last pair of tubercles
l extending into the anal plate. Anal legs rusty, lined above
h a whitish line. Length, 0.70 inch. It feeds on the strawberry
l currant in June.

yu,pa. — Body rather thick, conical, pale horn-brown, slashed and
| ckled with dark-brown. The pupa appeared in Salem, June 17.
lgth, 0.40 inch.

mago. — The moth is of a pale-ochre color, with brown veins and
isverse stripes, a brown inner line much curved. An outer sin-
e line, with a supplementary line just inside, touching the outer
M on the submedian vein and in the extradiscal space, and form-
a large circle, one side of which touches the outer line. Beyond

Uranides et Phalenites, tome I, p. 121.

80

the line, the border of the wing is dull-brown, with the apical region
clear. Hind wings streaked transversely as on the fore wing, with
the outer third brown, apex included. Beneath much paler; veins
not colored • wings speckled and the markings the same as above,
bSt flu outer edge 'of hind wings pale yellow, e.then «th .or ^
out traces of outer line. Length of body, male, 0.28 0.33, o ore-?|

wing, female 0.35—0.45; expanse of wings 1.00 inches.

This insect is single-brooded as far as known; but its life history
is not fully made out. The larvae have been noticed from the latter
part of May to the middle of July, and their transformation to puprf
has been reported at various dates from June 15, to the 15th of
July while the appearance of the imago lias ranged from the 8th
to the 27th of the latter month. It is not likely that any remedy
for the injuries of this insect to the strawberry will be required, but
pyrethrum during the fruiting season and Pans green or London
purple later in the year, would doubtless answer every purpose.

The Green Strawberry Span-Worm.

(. Angerona crocatciria, Fab.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Phal^nidze.

This species is, like the preceding, one of the minor enemies
of the strawberry, but being a less general feeder, is more
likely to inflict noticeable injury. The original description by lab-
ricius dates from 1798, but the first mention of the larva as an
injurious insect which I have been able to find, is in Dr, Packards
“Guide to the Study of Insects” published in 1869. Additional items
of interest concerning its life history and its relations to horticul¬
ture, appeared in the Canadian Entomologist for April 1871, with
descriptions of the egg, larva and pupa and dates of the transfor-
mations ; and a good description of the imago is given in Dr. rack-
ard’s Monograph of the Phalsenidse quoted below.

DESCRIPTION.

Each female lavs about two hundred and twenty eggs m patches
or clusters, from forty to fifty in each group. When first depositee
they are vellow, later, bright red, and when about to hatch becom
a grayish" brown. They are oval, depressed, about .3 of an men u
length by .2 in width. The surface is everywhere minutely pitte<

with shallow depressions.

The newly hatched larva is about .1 of an inch in length , Lea<
rather large, bilobed, pale-brown with a few fine short hairs aa
several black dots on each side. Body above, dull yellowish-gre
with a dark brown stripe on each side, about half way towara
spiracles. Below this the sides of the body are paler, with a wintis
bloom over the surface. There are a few short brownish am
most numerous on terminal segment. Under surface pale wmtisr
with a dusky patch of red about the base of the two pairs ol pr<
legs. Feet and prolegs pale, semi-transparent.

The mature larva is from 1.50 to 1.75 inches in length, bod
gradually increasing in size from head to prolegs ; geneial co

81

lowish-green. Head square and flattened above, with three longi-
linal, purplish-brown and whitish stripes, which are continued on
it segment. There are also two small projections like rudimentary
;ennae, one on each side of head .03 inch long. Body yellowish-
en, an indistinct whitish dorsal line, a rather broad whitish line
each side, just below spiracles, bordered above with faint purple,
ich increases in depth of color towards the posterior rings, and
monies a purple stripe on anal prolegs with a resemblance to
inverted A. Beneath, same color as above, but with faint inter-
fled longitudinal lines. Spiracles white, bordered with purple,
ove on each segment, from second to seventh inclusive, are five
nute black dots (four in a square and one in front towards the
id), and all the rings have a yellowish band on the swelled part
ere the succeeding segment is inserted. Legs pale green.

Che pupa is .50 to .60 inch in length, and of a dark olive green
or, with the exception of the abdomen, which is pale greenish
low, and has a row of black dots on each side, and another dor-
row. The wing cases are very prominent, and from their strong
itrast with the abdomen in color make the chrysalis a pretty ob-
t. The pupa is found* in 'the fold of the leaf, which is partly
led, and fastened together by a slight silken web.

Che moth is a bright ochre-yellow. Body concolorous with the
lgs ; antennae with yellow scales ; front yellow ; palpi yellow,
)tted with pale brown, like the legs. Fore wings spotted with
Le brown, and crossed by two broad, broken, liglit-brown lines ;
; inner on the inner quarter of the wing curved and consisting of
eut three spots ; one on the costa, one on the inner margin, one
the median vein (the middle one often wanting). Outer line
?ved, often forked on the first median cell, sending a smaller
inch straight toward the apex ; this branch often obsolete, and
) whole line obsolete in the middle of the wing, and sometimes
nting on the costa. The same line is continued on to the hind
lg ; it is usually obsolete in the middle of the wing. No inner
e on the hind wing. Fringe yellow, spotted with brown at the
ts of the venules. Beneath as above. Length of body, male,
5; of fore wing, male, 0.68-0.85, female, 0.95-1.06; expanse of
igs, 2.00-2.20 inches. A common form, at once known by the
ght ochre-yellow wings, its large size and broadly pectinated
de antennae. The wings vary much in the extent of the spots
d bands.

3nly one brood has thus far been noticed. The eggs are laid in
ne and hatched early in July, the pupa being found in this same
■nth, and the imago commencing to emerge in from ten to fourteen
ys later.

V

Che larva is said to be injurious not only to the strawberry, but
the gooseberry and currant also, and it is reported by Mr. Saun¬
as feed uPon several other plants. It may doubtless be de-
1 oyed, if it should chance to require so much attention, by the
3 of pyretlirum or Paris green.

; |

.

b'

L ;

82

The Smeared Dagger.

(. Apatela oblinita, Sm. & Abb.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Noctuid.®.

[Plate YI, Fig. 3.1

TIip larva of this species is a caterpillar covered with red bristles
proceeding from crimson warts, with a bright yellow band along the
sides IUias never been reported as especia ly injurious but leeds
on the strawberry, together with a number of other plants.

LITERATURE.

Tt was originally described m Smith and Abbott s Daiei Lep
It was originally t „ • 1797 d reported to teed on the

lonterous Insects ot Heoigia, in n wi«70 /-n 97^ t

-otton and willow. In the American Entomologist foi 18/0, (p. ^5,)
Prof Kdey noted its injuries to the grape, and its occurrence on a
^ I 'I+vr nf esneciallv the common smart-weed ( Poly -

ZTuinhldrJpiper) In his report as State Entomologist of Missouri
for That year*^ he described and figured imago, larva and pupa and
gave an outline of the life history of the spe.es a. far as know
tmrl rlpqerintions of three of its parasites. He lui tiier sam mai
eats cotton and asparagus, has been very numerous on peach trees,
and sometimes denudes both the apple and the willow.

It was first mentioned as a strawberry insect by Mi. 1 lam
Saunders in the Third Report of the Ontario Entomological Society,
already frequently cited, and was also reported there to eat the iasp-
berryandthcf Lombardy poplar. Its occurrence m large numbers n
Pennsylvania upon smart-weed (Polygonum) is reported m the tto

ceedings of the Philadelphia Academy tor 187o, by Mr. Gentry, wuo
also gives some notes on its life history.

4 summary account of the species may be found m the seventh
Report T“mythis office; Bom/ addition*^

history are given in the tenth volume of the Canadian Hntomoio
gist (p. 66); a note of its abundance in New York

SseoteTfesIrTbePd more' or lS ’filly byVrof.Aerkhis by Pro!
Erench and bv Mr Goquillett,-by the last-named writer in the
Tenth Report of the State Entomologist of Illinois, where the hazel
and corn are added to the list of its food plants. . • ^

scription from his third report leaves little to be desired.

DESCRIPTION.

“Imago. [Plate VI, Fig. 8, c]. . Front wings oblong apex mor®
or less prolonged ; posterior margin sometimes rounded, sometim .
straight^ color asffigray, caused by numerous dark-brown atom
more or less suffused on a white ground, from which the ordin J

* Third report, p. 70.

S3

es are barely discernable in the better marked individuals ; a row
distinct black dots along the posterior border ; the ordinary spots
presented by blurred marks or entirely obsolete ; the undulate line
'oss posterior fourth of wing distinct, and relieved inside by a pale
ncident shade, with the teeth quite aciculate and with the psi-spot
characteristic of the genus, but rarely traceable ; fringe narrow
1 generally entire. Hind wings pure white, with a faint row of
rk spots around posterior border. Under side of both wings
ite, with faint lulvous tint and faint irrorations ; each wing show-
the brown discal spot and the row of points at posterior border,
ad and thorax speckled gray ; abdomen whitish-gray ; antennae
>rt, simple in both sexes, gray above and brown below ; palpi
all. Two specimens with the front wings very dark, showing the
[inary lines and spots conspicuously, and with the antennae brown
)ve as well as below. Average length, 0.75; expanse, 1.75 inches.”

^ arva . — [Plate VI, Fig. 3, a]. “Prevailing color, black. Each
it with a transverse, dorsal, crimson-red band across the middle
m stigmata to stigmata, and containing six warts, each furnish-
ten or twelve or more stiff yellow or fulvous bristles, and the
> dorsal ones being farthest apart. A sub-dorsal, longitudinal,
low line, interrupted by this transverse band and at incisures in
h a manner that the black dorsum appears somewhat diamond-
ped on each joint. A broad, wavy, bright-yellow stigmatal line,
taining a yellow bristle-bearing wart in middle of each joint.
;eral space occupied with different sized, pale yellow spots, largest
ards dorsum. Head chestnut-brown. Venter crimson-black, with
ffle-bearing warts of same color. Stigmata oblong-oval and pale,
pracic legs black; prolegs with black extremities. Such is the
mal appearance of this larva, but it is very variable. In some
yellow seems to predominate over the black, and there is a
re or less distinct dorsal line. In some this dorsal line forms a
:e speck at the incisures of the middle joints. The transverse
nson band is often entirely obsolete, and the warts distinctly
arated, while in others where this band is distinct, the warts
[uently coalesce.”

'upa. — Almost black, and shagreened with the exception of a
)oth and polished rim, at posterior border of joints, which become
fish, especially ventrally, on the three joints immediately below
g-sheaths. Terminal joint horizontally compressed, squarely cut
and furnished with a little brush of short, evenly-shorn, stiff,
ms bristles.

LIFE HISTORY AND INJURIES.

his insect _ hibernates in the cocoon (Plate VI, Fig. 3, b), and
ns to be either single- or double-brooded, according to latitude.
Missouri there are two broods in a year, by Prof. Riley’s account,
moths of the first brood escaping from the cocoons in May (the
se resulting appearing chiefly in June) ; and the second brood of
hs occurring in July and the larvae late in the fall. In the
th-east, the moths escape from the hibernating cocoons in June,
■eported by observers in Canada* and Massachusetts,! and the

pi '•** * _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Report of the Entomological Society of Ontario, 1872, p. 28.

Ihe Canadian Entomologist, Vol. X (1878), p. t »(). Psyche, Vol. II, p. 34 (May and June,

l

*

84

larva; are reported only in September and October, during which
months the pup® are found. Previous to the pupation the larva
srpins a cocoon of silk within a bunch of leaves, or sometimes

attached to a twig.

iiacneu iu a iwig. . .

I have not myself seen this species on the strawberry in Illinois;
and it is reported as a strawberry insect on the authority oi Mr.
Saunders who says that he has found it “feeding very commonly
on this plant. If it were to become too abundant to be destroyed
by hand, it would, of course, be easy to kill it with arsenical poisons,
administered in midsummer, as even the first brood ol the cater¬
pillars, where there are two, does not appear until after the straw*

berries are picked.

The Army Worm ( Leuccinici unipuncta, Haw.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Noctuid^.

[Plate VI, Fig. 1-2.1

Passing mention may be made in this connection of this de¬
structive0 pest, which last year swept through strawberry fields m
Southern Illinois, stripping the plants of foliage, and leaving the
unripe fruit upon the ground gnawed from the stems.

The fields might be protected from its attack by the barriers used
bv grain farmers to arrest its march. The most successful of these
is a deep furrow plowed around the field, the inner wall of which
may be made slanting from the top of the furrow downwards
and inwards towards the field, by the use of a spade, lhe
worms collecting here may be killed by dragging a log along the
furrow; or holes may be dug in it at intervals, m which the}
will rapidly collect, where they may be mashed by thousands. 11
is also probable that the progress of an army of these worms coulc
be arrested by thoroughly treating a belt of the plants m front o
them with Paris green. It should be remembered that measures o
this sort which will not pay for ordinary farm crops may never
theless be employed with great profit for products as valuable as tn<

strawberry.

Cutworms, Agrotis, sp.

An illustration of the damage to strawberries which these insect,
are liable to do under favoring conditions, is afforded by the accouE
given by Mr. Saunders, in the article already cited, of the minne
due to a species- occurring in Canada, but the name or wincii j
does not mention. He says: “This is an insect which has
most unusually injurious during the past season on fruit plantatioE
on the borders of Lake Huron, near Sarnia. At first its habits w
not understood, and it pursued the ‘even tenor of its way . unmterrup ^
night after night ; the perplexed fruit-growers not knowing why it Wc
that every day the foliage on their fruit trees and strawberry pa c
grew slimmer. But soon it was found that the enemy waR a mg
worker, and this knowledge of its habits was at once turne

sount, and niglit watches instituted with the view of counteract-
[ this insidious foe, and with good results, as many as eighteen
ndred having been killed by one fruit-grower in one' night.”

‘Their manner of life may be thus described: The moths from
ich the worms are produced appear on the wing during the month
August, * and soon after pair and deposit their eggs on the ground
on some plant or other substance near the ground ; they
)bably hatch in the fall, and feed for a time on the leaves of
iss and .other plants then abundant ; and after attaining but a
iall measure of their growth, they burrow into the earth, and then
nain in a torpid state during the winter; but the warmth of
ring revives them, and soon they are abroad and active. During
3 first few weeks, while they are still small, the quantity of food
3y consume is not sufficient to attract much attention ; but as
3y approach nearer maturity, that is, about the time when the
ses first put out their tender foliage, the quantity of food they
nsume is enormous. In the day time they rest tolerably secure
>m harm, by burrowing a short distance under ground, and towards
?ht they sally forth from their hiding places to begin their work
destruction. They are extremely active in their movements, and
tvel over quite a space of ground in a very short time, eating
nost everything green in their way; they climb the trunks of
;es, and not only the young foliage, but the buds also, leaving the
abs almost bare, and before the light of another day dawns they
jreat to their hiding places and rest in quiet. When full-grown
ey burrow deeper into the earth, and form for themselves an oval
il or chamber, in which they change to chrysalis, and from which
e moths are produced early in the autumn to continue the race.

this instance these caterpillars took a decided liking for the
'awberry vines, and in spite of the most vigilant search for them,
y after day and night after night, they defoliated a large patch
the vines to such an extent that they were utterly ruined,
iarly all through the month of June they literally swarmed, and
arcely a night passed without considerable damage being clone by
em.”

Concerning remedies for its attack he adds: “The battle must be
aght with this insect while in the larva or caterpillar state, and
en the surest way of disposing of them is to catch and kill them.
r searching around the vines just under the surface of the ground
iring the day, many may be turned up and destroyed, and by in-
ecting again at night when they are active and busy, their ranks
ay be still further thinned, and by continuing this treatment, day
ter day, they may no doubt be kept under. Probably dusting the
aes with hellebore would poison them as it does other leaf-feeding
sects; this measure is at least worthy of a trial.”

86

Flea Beetles (Haltidda.)

It is not known that these insects have ever been severely injun-
ous to the strawberry ; but as they are often very common upon
these p ants, and as' some of them are exceedingly destructive to
other vegetation, it seems worth while to notice them here, they
are easily distinguished by their swollen hind thighs, which give some
of them a nower of leaping scarcely exceeded by the flea itself.

° Three species, all minute, are known to infest the strawberry : the
noflTusTabbage flea beetle (P^treta vritata), and^wo others no
heretofore reported as injurious to this tiuit ,—Epitnx jusciua ana

S2/The first" may be distinguished by its smooth and shining surface,
black with two broad, irregular, yellow stripes on the wing covers.

Ev’itrix fuscnla is of about the same size as the cabbage flea
beetle but shorter and thicker. It is black throughout, except the
antemne and tarsi, which are red, and the elytra are covered ,j4
a conspicuous coat ot gray pubescence. Ihe thorax is coarsely
punctured^ and marked with a transverse impression before- the

^tsunaiunda, already known as injurious to corn was especially
abundant on the leaves of the strawberry near Anna in Southern
Illinois where it was certainly feeding upon that plant, as i nae
demonstrated by dissection. It may be easily distinguished from t e
other flea beetles by its elongate form, and by its ochre-yellow coloi,
wi h a broad pale stripe on the middle of each wing-cover The
punctures on the latter are irregularly distributed, instead of being

arranged in rows, as in the other species. ,,

Although Phyllotreta vittata was abundant on cabbages m Southern
TilirmU in the soring of 1883, I did not notice it on strawberries
adjacent, and I doubUf it is likely to require the especial attention

of the strawberry grower.

The Strawberry Leaf Beetles.

Paria aterrima, Hald.

Scelodonta pubescens, Mels.

Colaspis brunnea, Fab.

Golaspis tristis, Oliv.

The three species first mentioned are the adult beetles of the root;
worms of the strawberry, and will be fully described and figure;
on another page. They are mentioned here to call attention to th
fact that the! all feed, at least for a time after emerging fron
the earth, upon the leaves of the strawberry plant one of then

(Faria aterrima) occasionally doing conspicuous mischief. As t
species has the longest adult life of any of the root-worms, it is th;
most likely to do harm as a leaf-beetle; and is m tact, the t
one the injuries of which have attracted attention hitherto. I :
beetles should become abundant enough to require remedial
ures poisoning with Paris green and other suitable substances,
recommended in the discussion of these insects given under tb
bead of strawberry root-worms, will be the most suitable leme y.

87

Grasshoppers.

Pezotettix Jemur-rubrum. Acridium americanum.

[Plate X, Fig. 1.]

Ye have found the young of both the above species feeding upon
leaves of the strawberry in considerable numbers in Southern
nois. Mr. F. S. Earle wrote me in July, 1882: “A few days
) I noticed some ‘flocks’ of young grasshoppers [probably of this
cies] that were literally eating up some strawberry plants. They
:e quite small, apparently just hatched, and there were not enough
them to do any serious harm, but they made a clean sweep as
y went.”

** By an insect rolled or folded in a leaf.

The Common Strawberry Leaf-Roller.

IS ' » vt> ’

(Phoxopteris comptana, Frol.,

= Anchylopera fragarice, Riley.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricid;e.

[Plate VI^ Fig. 7.1

his is by far the most destructive known enejny to the straw-
ry, often utterly ruining the field, year after year, wherever it
i a foothold and is not effectively checked by artificial measures ;
, fortunately, although it has caused the strawberry growers of
tral and Northern Illinois and of adjacent States the loss of
ay thousands of dollars, a mode of arresting its ravages, first
posed by my predecessor, Dr. Thomas, has served completely to
ck its progress and to bring it under the easy control of the
ticulturist. It has not hitherto been reported as injurious to the
thward, but has been regarded as a northern species. This
ndant and destructive strawberry leaf-roller, which has for
3ral years been on the lists under the name of Anchylopera
'arice or Phoxopteris fragarice, proves to be identical with a' Euro-
n species (originally described in 1828), which seems not to have
i reported as feeding upon the strawberry at all in the old world ;
ougli, according to Prof. Fernald, it lives there upon several
era and species of the same family of plants as that to which
strawberry belongs, and also upon at least two species of
latae.

LITERATURE.

he earliest notice of a leaf-roller of the strawberry in this country
sared in the “Canada Farmer” for August, 1867, and subsequent
dopments have made it likely that ours was the species mentioned,
he “Prairie Farmer” for October 5 of that year, Prof. C. Y. Riley
lowledges the receipt of strawberry leaf-rollers from Northern

88

Indiana sneaks of them as a new enemy of the strawberry, but
Indiana, speaks further than to refer them to the Tortncidae.

T°h,‘ »“ l? W«l.h and Riley, and

1 and ti mired bv them in both larval and immature stages,

mS the LmToiAnl^opem fragarue, in the “American Ento-
un()e - n, £ Tanuarv 1868 In this article the authors also give
“0l 1 amount of the life history of the insect, of the amount and

character of its injuries, together with notes on its distribution and
chaiactei oi J suggestions of remedies against its attacks,

Stape° Cr eaTeVwfh slight additions, in the first report of
Prof Rdev as State Entomologist of Missouri. From this account
we learn that it had been noticed by strawberry growers m Northern
Illinois for several years before it had come to the attention of ento-

mologists. 18T3 it wag placed among strawberry “insects

of the second class,” in an address printed m the Transactions of
?! atJT Horticultural Society for that year— an opinion which be
could not have held if he had been acquainted with its fully devel¬
oped capacity for mischief.

r., 1877 it was reported by the committee on general horticulture
r *n <5h,te Horticultural Society as numerous, but not as bad as
of the intVie “Prairie Farmer” for December, 1877, Dr. Cyrus

TlZ^Lsc ires serious nfuries reported from Tazewell and McLean
counties in Illinois, and from Waupun, in Wisconsin. He notes it
counties qmlthward- re-describes the larva; gives an account

^^ite habits and We history; reports the insufficiency of tobacco
und Paris green as remedies ; recommends burning the field over it
autumn and suggests that heavy rolling might possibly destroy th
bisects. ’ In the report of the State Entomologist for this yeai, this
article is reprinted without material change.

Tn the sunnlement to the index to his reports as State Entomo
lncrist of Missouri* Prof. Riley remarks: “This has been referrei
\ f Phorteris comvtana Frohl., and while the two very closely re
semble each other, Prof. Fernald informs me that he yet believe
fragarm to be distinct. . 1Qftf

In the Transactions of the State Horticultural Society for
the occurrence of this leaf-roller in destructive numbers m Easter
Towa, is mentioned and the results are reported of some experiui
wbh remedial° measures undertaken by fruit growers m Muscat.*

Tn Vol XVI of the Transactions of the State Horticultural bocie
of Illinois (1882), Mr. H. K. Vickroy reports the good resultsj
mowing and burning the field to destroy the leaf-roller. P

bv the writer, in the Transactions of the Mississippi Valley H
cultural Society for 1883, extracts from previous reports aie give,
and the fact is noted that the insect often hibernates as a ,
In the Transactions of the Minnesota Horticultural boc'«ty ^01 ^
Mr 0. W. Gibbs describes the very destructive work of this u ■
near Minneapolis, and makes some critical remarks on

♦Transactions State Horticultural Society, 1877, p. 14.
tUnited States Entomological Commission, Bulletin VI, p. 57.

89

jested; and in the Western Rural for May 10, of that year, a
’respondent at North Bend, Indiana, mentions the occurrence of
) leaf -roller there in destructive numbers.

Besides the above, there have been published, as usual, many
wspaper and other summaries, more are less complete, of ascer-
ned facts, which it is not necessary to cite, because they add
Ihing to our knowledge of the species in any of its relations.

In Prof. Fernald’s Catalogue of the Tortricidse* of North America,
s species is entered as Phoxopteris fragarice, Walsh and Riley*
d its brief bibliography and synonymy are given. It is there
signed to its proper genus, but is still held distinct from comp -
ici ; but in a letter dated March 13, Prof. Fernald informs me
it, after a critical examination of his European and American
iterial representing comptana and fragarice, he is of the opinion
it they are not distinct, but belong to, one variable species.

DESCRIPTION.

Although so prominent in the literature of economic entomology,
s species has been very imperfectly described. The following
scription of larva and pupa is drawn up from specimens collected
i strawberry fields in Illinois ; but that of the moth was kindly
itributed by Prof. C. H. Fernald, of Orono, Maine, the leading
lerican authority on this family of Lepidoptera.

Imago. — (Plate VI, Fig. 7, c.) “Expanse of wings, 10-13 mm.
tad and thorax, light reddish brown to dull ashy brown ; palpi,
,cous on the outside, darker towards the apex, lighter at the base
d within; last faint nearly concealed by the long hairs of the
ond. Antennae dark fuscous, paler beneath. Fore wings with a
ge, semi-ovate spot of the same brown color as the thorax, resting on
} basal half of the hinder margin (inner margin of some authors),
I extending two-thirds of the way across to the costa, where it
not always clearly limited from the costal third of the wing,
ich is white, tinted with brownish or ochery and marked with a
ies of minute brown costal streaks with more or less sprinkles of
) sarne color. The outer edge of the semi-ovate spot varies some-
at in form as in other species of this genus. The ground color
the basal half of the costa, changing more or less to a silvery
ly in its course, extends across the wing beyond the semi-ovate
)t, as a narrow, oblique band, to the hinder margin, wTiere it ex-
ads outward and upward, covering a large area on the anal angle
I including an oblique brown spot before the angle. The part of
) wing above this is concolorous with the semi-ovate spot and
fked on the outer half of the costa with four pairs of oblique
ite streaks, the inner one of which extends to the outer margin
ittle below the middle. Some specimens show7 one or two hori-
ltal black streaks near the middle of the outer part of the wing,
nges sordid white or tinged with ochery, brown at the apex and
j 1 immediately below by two white streaks with brown between.

: _

- - — - - - - — - _ — - .■

^Transactions American Entomological Society, Vol. X, p. 68, May, 1882.

-7

90

toe wS^uscous’ AS’ thf costTiemaksUof toe

PeSvai^lrom U^Zl^C^S, iS England!

and 5 from Germany.” [Fernald.]

,TJ1 , VT Wl-„ 7 a b d) The larva is thus described

i LWnU>7nmfpdW-r“The larva measures, when full grown, 0.35
by Walsh and ±iuey . segment tapering thence very

of an inch. Largest o • CT fr0^ very light yellowish brown

slightly to the last. Co ? gociv ^ somewhat translucent,

" $sr3? HEfHIs 1

segmlTs.^Thf VaTfs taVyeUow^ finely, transversely rugulose.1
with the frontal sutures very deeply impressed. I

, tsrSL t. ""Si:

r H? & ^ssrAaw «

ing larger from before backwards, and the latter smaller.

DISTRIBUTION.

The species has heretofore been reported from Europe,

Nova Scoti! Maine, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa
Northern Illinois, Northern Indiana, Missouri and CaWornia

this State the localities mentioned in ?7y°u%f0^ntshriii an
tribution are Princeton, Normal Bloomington Morns bter g
Prophetstown, all lying north of the center ol the State.

Indeed in his Seventh Report (1878), Dr. Thomas remarks:
bn ^ been as I learn doing considerable nrjury to strawberry plant
du ing this autumn in Central and Northern Illinois, but so far
have gheald no complaint against it in the Southern part of t
btnte- i'll fact it appears from all the evidence 1 can obtain, io
a northern insect, seldom extending further south than the sou
border of the central section of the State.

91

At Alton Mr. E. Hollister informs me that it was noticed for the
•st and only time m 1876. On the other hand, Mr. B. Pullen of
entralia, a well known member of the State Board of Agriculture,
.ites me in a lecent letter i <<The strawberry leaf-roller is not
)W to us here, but _ it has never been very destructive, and its
esence m a field this year does not necessarily insure an increased
imbei next. I have seen more or less of them for ten years past,
ave known them to be quite numerous in places one year and
e next so few as scaicely to attract attention.5 I regret to be
liged to add that observations and collections made during the
st summer in Southern Illinois, show that it has extended its
vages to that section in a way to indicate that it meets there with
' c^1J:na^lc .ch®ck. It was quite abundant, although not destructive
a field of Mr. Earle’s, near Anna, in Union county; and in
^vas discovered to have seriously damaged a field belonging
Mr. Condit, at Centralia. It is evident, therefore, that straw-
rry growers throughout the State are liable to its attacks.

LIFE HISTORY.

According to the general account of the species by Walsh and
ley, “there are two broods of this leaf-roller during the year, and
3 worms of the first brood, which appear during the month of
ne, change to the pupa state within the rolled-up leaf, and become
note reddish brown moths during the fore part of July. After
iring in the usual manner, the females deposit their eggs on the
mts, from which eggs in due time hatches a second brood of
rms. These last come to their growth towards the end of Sep-
aber, and changing to pupae, pass the winter in that state.”

Cho species was known to them, however, only from the latitude
.Northern Illinois. Our very scanty subsequent observations bear-
■ upon the life history of the species in that region are consistent
h the account of it given above, except that it has been noticed
Normal that a considerable number of the moths hibernate,
rearing on the wing during the first warm days of early spring!
ese belong, of course, to the second brood. On the 20th of June
the present year, the larvae were found rather abundant in fields
it Normal, and several placed in breeding cages commenced to
erge as moths on the JOth of that month, the last transforma-
is occurring July 10th. From the brief account of the insect in
Sixth Report from this office, we learn that living larvae were
eived by Dr. Thomas, from Tazewell county, in Illinois, on the
of November, and that his correspondents had noticed them on
Lr plants as early as the last week in September.

he data obtained from Southern Illinois during the past sum-
, by collection and breeding, do not correspond to the current
3unt of the life history of the species, and indicate the probable
I |ri'euce of another brood, in that latitude. On the first of July,

! larvae were found abundant in the fields, and a number of speci-
is sent to the Laboratory on the 9th of that month, were reared
weeding cages. Pupation was nearly but not quite complete by

92

t i 01 nnrl flip first ima^os appeared on the 24tli. ^ Several
emerged' on the 27tli, and the last of the lot completed their tram-

fcnnations July ^ to Union county, in Southern Illinois

Aimist 2 all stages were found in the fields ; and from larvae and
pup* collected at this time the moths appeared at intervals from

^WThout additional data it will be impossible to make out the full
life htatory of this leaf roller to the southward but fortunately we
have enough to show the time at which remedial measures should j

there be applied.

INJURY TO THE STRAWBERRY.

The method and amount of the injury have been sufficiently
characterized by previous writers. The larvae begin by forming a
web upon the upper surface of the leaf, by means of which, m some
unexplained way they double the two halves of the leaf together, so
that, the insects themselves are concealed m the told. Mere they
eat away the surface of the leaf, so that it withers and turns brown.
Tt, i» not an uncommon thing for them to destroy the held com¬
pletely, so that scarcely a single green leaf will be apparent. They
thus not only ruin the crop, but may even kill most of the plant.

outright.

INJURIES TO OTHER PLANTS.

Mr. John Shoemaker, of Muscatine, is cited in th® State Horti¬
cultural Report of Iowa, for 1882, as authority for the statement
that this species affects the raspberry, occurring on -p 1
raspberries adjacent to infested strawberries. It was found
common ?n red raspberry fields in Southern Illinois last August,
doubling up and destroying the leaves of this plant m a manner
precisely siLilar to that of its attack upon the strawberry. It was
somewhat less abundant than in strawberry fields near by, but was
still numerous enough to menace the future ol that crop. lhes*
specimens agreed in larval characters, m every particular, with those
found in strawberry fields, and a number of them which were reared
o the fmago produced the same moth. It was also rarely found
upon the blackberry in the same vicinity; and I am informed ly
Prof. Pernald that Miss M. E. Murtfeldt has bred it from this plant

near St. Louis.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

No parasite or other natural enemy of this species lias hitherto
been reported; but from a breeding cage containing larvae ot ™
and another leaf-roller* presently to be described, I obtained last
July, specimens of a hymenopterous parasite belonging which

Bracon. Unfortunately, however, it is .impossible xo tell from w

of these species this parasite was bred.

REMEDIES.

The only remedy suggested by Walsh and Riley is the C0™P^
destruction of the plants at the season of the year when larvae and
pupae are upon the vines. In the ‘‘Prairie Farmer lettei _

* Oaccecia obsoletana.

93

homas, already cited, both Paris green and tobacco water are said

> be ineffectual ; and here, for the first time, a remedy is suggested
liicli has pioven to be an easy and perfect method of controlling
le ravages of this insect. “Where it will not pay,” he says, “to
dopt this method, and the patch is badly infested, I am inclined

> the opinion that burning will be the most effective remedy
over the plants with straw after the worms enter the pupa state
l the fall and burn over thoroughly. It is possible that rolling
vice or thrice with a heavy roller may destroy most of them but

is somewhat doubtful.”

In the following year this method was tried at Normal, with the
aprovement of first mowing and then burning the field soon after
fiffit was gathered. Phis procedure was completely success-
il. The plants were not injured, but speedily sent up new, strong
aves, which made a dense growth by fall; and the plants the
lloving year weie but slightly injured by the insect. A repetition
this treatment for two more years in succession reduced the leaf¬
ier to complete insignificance, and it has not since appeared in
lat region in injurious numbers. This remedy has also been else-
bere extensively employed, and it is now the standard method of

i j mg ^ie leaf_ro^er- Mr. H. K. Yickroy, who has burned his
fids over five or six times, informs me that his plants have never
;en damaged in the least by the process. He first mows the whole
)ld over as close to the ground as he can cut with a mower, and
aves the cut weeds and foliage to dry a few days, so that it’ may
lrn readily. He then loosens and rakes up the straw mulching
metimes spreading it lightly over the rows, and fires the field in a
ntle breeze. If he had no mulching on the field, he would sprinkle
raw lightly over it. To test the endurance of the plants, he has
led straw a foot high on the rows, and burned it without the
ightest injury to the strawberry plant. It is possible, however that
ther during or immediately before a very dry time, the plants
lght be damaged by burning. In the first instance, they might
irn too deeply ; and in the second, the new leaves might be too
iw to start. For Southern Illinois, until the life history of the
sect in that latitude is complete, w^e can only say that the fields
ould be mowed and burned late in June or early in July.

If there are any instances in which this remedy is not applicable,
where strawberries are raised upon the same ground with plants
lich would be injured by burning, no _ method of destroying this
st is known, unless it be by giving chickens access to the field in
idsurumer. Of this, Mr. Gibbs, of Minnesota, says: “My only
'Pe of saving my crop next summer is in the. services of numerous
oods of chickens that I intend to scatter in coops set here and
ere about the fields ; and I indulge in this hope confidently, for
e leason that a neighbor of mine across the road from my place
d quite a large patch entirely free from the insects last summer,
'-hough his vines were grown from plants taken the previous year
im my infested field. The only difference between his patch and
Y field was that he had a hundred or so of young chickens among
? vines all the spring, while I had no feathered protection except
»m a few bircis that had escaped ‘the slings and arrows of out-
?eous fortune' at the hands of our village boys.”

94

The Oblique-Banded Leaf-Boller.
(■ Caccecia rosaceana, Harris.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricid.®.

This leaf-roller of the apple* has been several times reported to
transfer its attentions, at least occasionally, to the strawberry. In
W'ftnide to i the Study of Insects,” Dr. Packard says of this species:
“We found on the 23d of June, the fully grown larva on the leaves
of the strawberr), doubling them up and binding them together by

a few silken threads. . ,,

“The worm is pale livid, greenish above and paler beneath, with a I
lhe worm ib pale » & side of the hinder edge of the pro-

^^““he head is very pale honey-yellow with two black spots ;
one near the insertion of the mandibles, and the other on the side
ill w of the head. The posterior half of each segment is
transversely wrinkled a few times. The body is scattered over with
a few minute tubercles, each giving rise to a fine nair. It is .80 of

an inch long.

“Ono snecimen spun its slight cocoon on June 26th, the pupa
appearing1 June 30th. It is sometimes attacked by ichneumons

“The nupa is pointed on the vertex of the head and on the back
t i ^Lrlnminal ring are two rows of spines. On the abdominal
°±Z\ he bZn cocoon are ?hree pairs of minute hooks, the two
outer pairs supported on a pedicel, by which the chrysalis is re ■
tehied^n place in the cocoon. The moth usually appears the last
of June. There is a second brood in August.

Tt will be seen that this is a much larger species than the true

to^the tt r b 8foTdhsdthbey

loosely than the other. •

It feeds on a great variety of plants, of which the rose,
apple, peach, cherry, plum, strawberry, beans and cotton-plant a

the most important.

TVip moth is dark reddish brown, the ground color of the anterior
wings commonly being crossed obliquely, from before backwards and
outwards by abroad, dark reddish brown band, with a basal patch
and an apical spot of the same color, all these areas partially
limited bv slightly darker brown lines. The paler portions of the
S are h-reSmly striated with reddish brown lines three o winch
originate in the costal spot, and respectively just before, in, and
above' the internal angle. Fringes dark brown apical! y, bee°“^
naler below Posterior wings dull fuscous internally, deep ocnr
Lvond Under surface of both pairs ochreous, deeper m color
am call v where they are frequently speckled with brown irroratioiis.
The l&rand aSnTare dark reddish brown The anterior maj
ain of the wing of the female is slightly excavated before the ape ,
as is also the posterior margin, making the apical angle ,lo°k as,lf
it were somewhat produced, so that, when closed, the outline of

.For a full account of its injuries in the apple orchard, the reader is referred to the
Eleventh Illinois Report, pp. 10-15.

95

{

mgs is slightly bell-sliaped. This is less apparent in the male than
'• the female. The male measures 22-25 mm. (about one inch)
3ross the expanded wings, and the female, 24-30 mm.

This leaf-roller is well known in Illinois as an enemy of the apple,
.it I have not heard of it in this State in strawberry fields ;
though we have here a very similar species, abundant enough to
treaten* some injury, which will be next described.

The periods of this species are such as to render it susceptible to
le same treatment as that already found effective for the straw-
irry leaf-roller proper,*

The Plain Strawberry Leaf-Roller.

( Caccecia obsoletana, Clem.)

|

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortrichle.

From collections of leaf-rollers made by an assistant in strawberry
Ids in Union county, in Southern Illinois, last July, a number
moths were bred which had the general appearance of the oblique-
/nded leaf-roller ( Cacoecia rosaceana), but differed especially in the
mi of the wings, which had scarcely a trace of the characteristic
luosity of the front and outer margins of the latter species, and
the obsolete character of the oblique band of the front wings,
re reduced to two brown spots, one on the costal, and the other
. the internal margin of the wing.

As these leaf-rollers were scarcely less abundant in some fields
ar Anna and Centralia than the Phoxopteris, it became a matter
importance to understand the species and its life history, and I
nsequently submitted a pair of them to Prof. C. H. Fernald,

' - determination. From him I learned that the moths represented
o nominal species, the male being Cacoecia obsoletana , and the
nale C. transiturana , forms which however he had already sur¬
ged to be actually males and females of one species.!

My larvae consisted of two lots, one collected the 9th of July, and
e other the 81st of that month, from the same fields, near Anna,
om each of these lots, both males and females emerged, all the
lies having the characters of obsoletana , and all the females of
msiturana; a fact which at once demonstrated the identity of the
o forms. Both species were originally described and published in
3 same work, at the same time ; but as obsoletana occurs on an
rlier page than transiturana, the former must be accepted as the
3cific name.

The literature of this species relates wholly to the characters and
-ssification of the imagos.t The larva and its food plant have
nained hitherto unknown.

I"

' — - — - ■

.*Tyoin a remark made by Mr. Coquillett, in the article on this leaf-roller, cited above
U,) it is clear that this species is subject to the deadly contagious disease of lepidop-
dus larvas known as “ schlaffsucht .”

tSee Transactions American Entomological Society, Vol. X, p. 12, foot-note.

; XLoc. cit., p. 12, Nos. 37 and 38.

96

DESCRIPTION.

Larva —This is a plump, smooth, green caterpillar, about an inch
lone concolorous except the head, the first thoracic segment and
the legs The head is yellowish, with the anterior margin and the
month warts brown. The ocelli are four m number, arranged in a
semicircle at the side of the head, the two anterior being muM
larger than the others. There are two or more long hairs on the
vertex, and a number of others collected about the ocelli.

The first thoracic segment is brown and leathery above, but with
a few Ion o' hairs which are not set on tubercles. At each end oil

this dorsal coriaceous plate, is a white spot set v e ;

The two remaining thoracic segments have each a single transverse
row of six pale, piliferous tubercles, the row being double at the
ends • but all the other segments except the penultimate have two
Tot. These tubercles are much largest on the posterior segments,
and the rows extend entirely around the fourth, fifth, te ,
eleventh and twelfth,— those which are destitute of prolegs. .

Imago. _ The moth has the palpi, head and thorax browmsli-

ochreous The anterior wings vary from ochreous to ferruginous,

with numerous irregular, transverse pale brown ®^eaks |nf
rpntral fascia obsolete centrally, indicated on costa ana internal
margin by two ochreous brown spots, frequently containing centra J y
an aggregation of purplish brown scales. Sub-apical costal spot
like preceding sometimes obsolete. Posterior wings pale ochreous,
fringes paler! Beneath, both pairs of wings ochreous, the anterior
paiif deepest in color. Abdomen and under surface, of thorax bright
ochreous Expanse of male 21-24 mm., of female 30 mm. in one
specimen, the anterior wings are dark reddish brown, and the oblique
band is much plainer than usual, being merely interrupted m the
middle. In all, the position of the median and apical band
plainly marked out by well-defined dark boundary lines.

LIFE HISTORY.

Larvae of this species, obtained July 9, in Southern Illinois, and.
sent to the Laboratory, commenced to appear as moths on the 24th
and continued until the 30th, when the last emerged. Th°Be co 1
lected July 31, transformed to the imago from August 1/ to August |
20 and full-grown larvae were still on the vines August 7. It i£i
probable, therefore, but not certain that there are two bioods
this species, corresponding closely to those of the oblique- bande
leaf-roller.

REMEDIES.

The remedies proper to this species are evidently the same a
those applying to the lesser strawberry leaf-roller the apphcatioi
poisons suspended in fluid being somewhat more like y : v , i
because the larva wraps itself less closely m the leaves of the plan

97

!

if

The Peach Tree Leaf-Roller.

f

(Ptycholoma persicana, Fitch).

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricidve.

This species, which has also been known to economic entomo-
iists under the name Lozotcenia fragarice , has not been ascertained
occur in Illinois, its recorded localities being limited to New York
d New England; neither has it been anywhere, as yet, reported
>ecially destructive either to the strawberry or the peach, upon
th of which it feeds.

-t appears early in the spring, during May and June, webbing
I folding the leaves of the plants together, and feeding upon them
ile thus concealed. Within the clustered leaves it pupates about
) middle of June, the moth emerging early in July.

Che larva is pale green, with a whitish streak along each side o'f
back, and a pale, dull yellowish head. The moth is said by JJr.
ch, who described the species from the peach, to have the fore
lgs rusty yellow, varied with black, their basal third much paler
my yellow; a large triangular white spot on the middle of the
;er margin ; and a transverse white streak forward of the middle
the hind edge, which is divided by the veins crossing it into
)ut four spots, and is bordered on • its anterior side bv a curved
ck band. Width, 0.65 in.

^ more elaborate description may be found in the monograph of
, Packard, cited in a preceding article.

2. Piercing the tissue and draining the sap.

a. Forming a gall on the leaf stem.

Strawberry Leaf- Stem Gall.

Concerning this species, all the information which I have is con¬
ned in the following extract from Saunders’ “Insects Injurious to
lit” :

‘This is an elongated gall, an inch or more in length, found on
stalk of the leaf of the strawberry near its base, produced by
undetermined species of gall-fly. Its surface is irregular and its
3r red, while the internal structure is spongy. If these galls are
*ned about the middle of J uly, there will be found in each, about
center, a small, milk-white, footless grub, semi-transparent, with
mooth, glossy skin, a wrinkled surface, and a few fine, short
rs. Its jaws are pale brown, and its length at this period is
»ut one-sixteenth of an inch, the body tapering a little towards
h extremity. This insect doubtless changes to a chrysalis within
gall, from which the flies escape later in the season, or early
following spring.”

98

b. Not forming a gall.

The Maple Bark-Louse.

( Pulvinaria innumcrahilis, Rathvon.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Coccm®.

[Plate X, Fig. 4.1

No member of the family of bark-lice (Coccidse) has yet been re¬
ported from the strawberry, and I was consequently much interested
bv the discovery, on the 26th of last September, of well developed
examples of the family occurring abundantly upon leaves of escaped
strawberry plants, near Normal. In some places these were so
numerous that every leaf bore from one to five or six; and very few
roadside strawberries about the town were free from j^m. I
were usually attached upon the upper surface of the leaf although
an occasional individual occurred beneath. On examination, these
pioved to be examples of the above well-known soft-maple bark-louse
which had made their way from the adjacent maple trees to the
leaves of the strawberry. The latter had

dnrincr the summer, and it is therefore probable that 11 the maple
trees had* bemr vigorously attacked by bark-lice, the strawberry
plants near them would likewise have suffered m the same ratio
Curiously nearly all the specimens upon the strawberry leaves TOJ
males, while upon the maple leaves above them males were ex¬
tremely rare. An occasional female was seen upon the strawbeny,
however living in the larval stage with beak inserted, and appar¬
ently thriving as well as her mates upon the foliage of the maple
above Many of the males were pup®, others were imagos upon
the point of Emerging ; and empty shields from beneath winch th
insect had escaped were not uncommon. The lea\es of the maples
had scarcely begun to fall as yet, and there was every indication in
the appearance of the bark-lice, and in the conditions present, that
they Phad fixed themselves upon the strawberry when young,
and had developed there without difficulty, feeding upon the juices

of that plant.*

The Strawberry Plant-Lice.

Siphonophora frag aria, Koch.

Siphonophora minor, n. s.

Aphis, sp.

Order Hemiptera. Family ApHimmE.

I have never learned of any serious damage to strawberries ffi
Illinois inflicted by plant-lice, although certainly two, anflprobaMJ
three, species infest that plant within our limits. Howevei, , UK
appearance of plant-lice upon any kind of vegetation of e“°“
value, is never a matter of indifference, since the enormous lepi
ductive power of these insects renders them always a source

danger. _ _ _ : _ —

* Another maple coceid, of a species undescribed, also appeared upon the strawberr
here.

99

Multiplying generation after generation throughout the season,
' each new generation, under favorable circumstances, soon itself
imencing to multiply, it is easy for a species ordinarily quite
Lgnificant suddenly to burst its bounds, if conditions become tem-
arily never so little favorable, and to appear in overwhelming
nbers, inflicting extraordinary damage. It is therefore unques-
lably well that strawberry growers should know that their plants
subject to such attacks; and they should likewise unquestiona-
be able to recognize these insects when they occur in their
Is, and should be made acquainted with the measures needed to
train them, provided any such sudden and destructive outbreak
es place.

i

LITERATURE.

Si

'he first mention of the occurrence of any plant-louse on the
nwberry in the United States, which has come to my knowledge,
sontained in the Rural World of December, 1675, where Prof.
?y briefly characterizes a variety of Siphonopliora fr agarics, Koch,
‘ter the name of immaculata, and reports its occurrence in West-
Missouri. Next, in the second bulletin of the Illinois State Labo-
>ry of Natural History, published in 1877, Dr. Cyrus Thomas,
a State Entomologist of Illinois, in a list of the plant-lice of the
te belonging to the tribe Aphidini, merely mentions a green
it-louse upon the strawberry, which he assigns to the above
eies. In his report as State Entomologist, for 1879, Dr. Thomas
iffy treats this plant-louse, translating the original description of
*h, and adding, “This species feeds upon the strawberry plant,
acially the under sides of the leaves and the stalks of the unripe
t._ A species which I presume is identical with this has been
isionally observed on strawberry plants in this State, but so far
iave been unable to procure specimens. In 1875, Prof. Riley
dved from Mr, W. W. Hopkins, of Kansas City, specimens of a
it-louse which was injuring his strawberry plants. From a copy
lis notes on these specimens, which was verv kindly sent me, I
n that they differ from Koch’s description in wanting the spots
the sides of the abdomen in the winged female, and in the head
he wingless female being yellow ; yet he decides without serious
bt, that they belong to Koch’s species. He names this variety
laculata.

he next reference to a strawberry plant-louse is that contained
i paper* by Prof. Riley and Mr. Monell, published in the same
c, in which the latter indicates the peculiarities of the variety
laculata, and expresses the opinion that it is possibly a distinct
dies.

f - - -

'Jotes on the Aphididac of the United States, with Descriptions of Species Occurring
of the Mississippi. Bulletin of the United States Geological and Geographical Sur-
’f the Territories, 1879, Volume V, Number 1.

i

100

The specimens observed by these writers were obtained at Kansai
City Missouri; and the strawberry plants on which they occurred
had ’been received from Palmyra, New York and bouth Bend, Indi-
ana, from which places the species was probably imported.

The appearance of a plant-louse upon the strawberry onjMj
opposite side of the continent, was reported in the Pacific hural
Press” for May 15, 1880, the editor of that paper expressing the
opinion that plants infested like those sent him would lose then-
vigor, and produce poor fruit, even if the plant were not utteily

ruined. _ . <

In a paper on Insects Affecting the Strawberry ,* I gave, in 1883, a figure
of a plant-louse and its egg, found upon the crowns of strawberry
plants in Central and Southern Illinois in autumn ; referring Ins,
provisionally, to Siphonophora fragana, Koch, but saying in a foot¬
note “The form figured above, from Southern Illinois, has the
aspect of an Aphis, and it is possible that the Illinois species is no
Siphonophora frag aria, as was supposed by Dr. Thomas. I ntil the
aerial forms can be seen, however, I prefer to leave the matter as

above.”

Mention of the occurrence of plant-lice upon the s.trawberry m
Europe was made by Walker, in 1852, and by Koch m 1855, both
referring to the species already mentioned.

In 1861 Passerinit announced two other species upon tlie straw¬
berry in Italy, Aphis chloris, Koch, and a root-louse, Rhizobm
sonchi, upon the roots.

In his work upon British Aphides, published m 1876, Buckton
gives a full description of the pupa and the winged and wingless
female forms of Siphonophora fragaricz, and mentions likewise its oc¬
currence on the strawberry in England m 1876, upon the stalks of
the unripe fruit.

description.

Siphonophora fragarim. — Although this species is not positively
known to occur' in Illinois, yet its appearance m Missouri unde
the circumstances described, makes it altogether likely t la i +
also be found within our limits. It is thus described by Buckton,

Apterous viviparous female.

Inches. Millimetres

Size of body . ™»*0.<U0

Length of antennae . 0.100

Length of cornicles . 0.02o

Whole body shining green except tho cornicles, which are tippe-
with black and straight. Eyes red. Antennae long and dark olive
Legs pale, with dark femora and tibia joints, lail yellow.

Pupa. — Reddish green with a smoky line down the dorsum. Tbora
and wing cases grey ; the last with blackish tips.

* Transactions of the Mississippi Valley Horticultural Society,
t Aphididae Italic® huj usque observatae.

1 Monograph of the British Aphides, Vol. II, p. 125.

101

ianse of wings .

) of body .

gfch of antennae
gtli of cornicles

Winged viviparous female.

Inches.

. 0.850

. 0.090x0.040

. 0.100

. 0.025

Millimetres.

8.80

2.27x1.01

2.54

0.64

■ead, thoracic lobes, antennae, nectaries, tibiae, and femora points
h. All the rest of the body green. Abdomen with four round
:k spots on each side of the carina and several obscure marks
n the dorsum. Eyes red. Cubitus and wing insertions bright
ow, other veins black. Stigma greyish. Tail yellow. Wholly
m on the under side. Some specimens are of a redder shade
l the rest.

. fragariee is likewise much like S. rosce , but it has no crescentic
;s near the nectaries.”

1

Siphonophora minor , n. s.

bis species was first noticed June 1, 1888, in considerable num-
,! cm the under sides of strawberry leaves at Normal, Ill. The
its infested were stragglers, which had grown up thickly in the
le of some rows of soft maple trees. The lice were young,
no winged forms were seen until autumn. For the purpose of
iring unquestionably authentic specimens of the mature forms,
amber of these infested plants were transferred, with the lice
u them, to a breeding cage in the Laboratory, where they were
; alive all summer, the lice multiplying freely, although not at
extraordinary rate. They attached themselves both to the
| ole and to the under side of the leaf, but, reared in the shade
on unthrifty plants, they did not become numerous enough to
5e the leaves to curl. They were carefully examined, from time
ime, in the expectation that winged females would make their
earance ; but, although wingless viviparous females, and even
ae, occurred as early as July, the first winged examples emerged
)ber 6. From this time forward this form was common in the
5 until the plants were allowed to die out, some time in Novem-
Wingless individuals also continued to develop on the plants
he open air, and did not differ in any way from those reared in
[ inement.

Tingless viviparous female. This plant-louse is exceptionally
11 and of delicate appearance, even adult ova-bearing females
g almost white. The eyes and antennae are black (except the
f short basal joints of the latter, which are pale), and the tibiae
tarsi are dusky ; but otherwise the entire body and all its ap-
lages are a uniform, very pale greenish yellow. It is only in
older specimens that even the antennae and legs are dark.

| ie body is more slender than usual, and the legs and antennae
exceptionally long. The length to the base of the tail is 1.1 mm.
1 inch), and the greatest breadth .52 mm. (.024 inch). The
nnae are more than half as long again as the body (1.8 mm.),

I 6th joint being much the longest, equaling the 3d and 4th taken

\m

together The terminal part of this joint is five times as long as
ihe basal part. The 4th joint is but a little over haU as long a8
thp Rd the 5tli being two-thirds as long. lhe antennae are not
pubescent if we except a few very short hairs on the three basal

The lioney-tubes are slender, cylindrical, nearly straight, a little
expanded at tip, and about .33 mm. long, being a little longer than
the 5th joint of the antenme.

The tail is short, .08 mm. in length, and is slightly pubescent.

All about the head and on the terminal segments of the abdomen
are scattered a few stout, short, capitate hairs, which, m the young,
are likewise distributed over the hack.

Dhe beak is of the usual length, barely attaining the hind coxae.

Winqecl viviparous female. The general color of this form is green,
the head, eyes, antennae, lobes of the meso- and metathorax, tibia
and tarsi being black, and the edges of the abdomen and a band

along its middle, dusky. " .

The thighs are pale ; the stigma and the longitudinal veins of the
wings colorless, the other veins dark. The metatliorax is dusky

beneath. . ,

The body, antennae, honey-tubes and tail measure about as in the
wingless female, the proportions of the antennal articles being also
the same. The wings are large, expanding 2.2o mm.

Aphis, sp.

[Plate X, Figs. 2—3.1

In the latter part of September, 1882, an assistant, Mr. Garman
observed upon strawberry plants near Centralia, numerous ic lus
of dark green plant-lice, gathered on the crowns and between the
bases of the roots, at and just beneath the surface of the earth It
November, I found them still abundant at this place, and in the
same situation as before. They were all wingless, and of vanou.
sizes, but most of them adults, actively engaged m oyiposition th
eggs, some black, some yellow and freshly laid, being abundant

among them. 19

In some fields near Centralia, half or two-thirds of the stools wen
occupied by them ; but I was not able at that late season, o
mate the damage due to them.

No plant-lice of any species were seen upon the strawberry else
where in Southern Illinois, nor have any been seen there since
Even in these very same fields, not a louse of any sort was au
covered the following May, at which time, the plants were thoro g .
searched for them.

The same species was also found in the same situation upon p an
near Normal, in the latter part of September, a fact showing tn
wide distribution of this form.

It was to this species that reference was made in my paper o
insects affecting the strawberry, already cited ; and the figure

103

|t

n is of this Aphis, and not of Siphonophora fragarice. In the
'.nee of specimens of the winged forms, I have not ventured to
a name to this species, especially as I am in doubt whether it
lid be regarded as a root form, properly so-called, or whether it
n aerial plant-louse, which had simply resorted to the crown at
season for protection and reproduction.*

here describe and figure this form, merely for the purpose of
sequent identification.

bis is a short [ovate plant-louse, with short five-jointedt anten-
not on tubercles; a thick, prominent tail, and straight, cylin-
al, slightly tapering honey-tubes.

be general color is a dark, bluish green. The basal joints of
antennae, the legs, the honey-tubes, and the tail, are yellow ; the
1 yellow or green. The tips of the honey-tubes, the tarsi, the
>-femoral articulations, and the distal joints of the antennae are
:. Young specimens are pale green throughout.

ie body of an adult is about .1 mm. in length, by three-fourths
vide. The honey-tubes measure .2 mm., the tail .1 mm., and
antennae .8 mm. The third joint of the antennae is about twice
i.ong as the fourth, the basal part of the fifth being a little
ter than the latter, and its filament about three times as long.

(l^v ■ )

NATURAL ENEMIES.

.1 the plant-lice agree in being peculiarly susceptible to attack
i. variety of enemies, — minute parasitic Hymenoptera, chiefly of
genus Aphidius, the larvae of Syrphus flies, and many species
idy-bugs (Coccinellidae), both in the adult and larval stages.

have already remarked the parasitism of the species last de-
; >ed, and Siphonophora minor was not less subject to this kind
■ttack. Indeed, even the specimens kept in the breeding cages
ughout the summer, were many of them killed by parasites be-
autumn.

lese insect enemies are frequently rather slow in concentrating
ittack, the lady-bugs and the Syrphus flies not usually com-
ciug to reproduce until the spriug is well over, and the para-
Hymenoptera not commonly becoming numerous enough to
; e any decided impression upon the host species until the latter
) themselves appeared for some time in destructive numbers. It
— — —

t is worthy of remark that many even of these partially subterranean individuals
een recently parasitized, showing that their hymenopterous enemies follow them
r the surface.

decline to call the thread-like terminal part of the last joint of the antennae, com-
o many plant-lice, a separate article. The fact that it is really continuous with the
?r basal portion is of easy observation, the two parts being separated only by a
sensory pore, beyond which the joint suddenly narrows. I see no sufficient reason
isrepresenting the facts by considering this an articulation, especially as in some
(like Schizoneura panicola) the terminal filament is reduced to a short thick lobe,
i is not then called an article.

&

104

„ii_, pqrlv sDrine while the fruit is de\ eloping and I
iipenhfg that plant-lice are most likely to injure the strawberry in t
a way to call for artificial interference. \ t

remedies.

The standard remedies for the devastations of plant-lice are pyre-
thrum and the kerosene emulsion, the first of which may be applied
at anv time and the second whenever the plants aie not bearing
rineninefruit If the plant-lice should occur on the leaves m con-
siderabfe numbers after the fruit is picked, it would doubtless be
easy to control them by mowing and burning the field as for the

Tn case the Aphis which I have described should be found upon
the crowns in fall, it would be decidedly imprudent to use plants
from tMs fi“d for setting new fields the following spring, as many
ofThe crowns would be almost certain to contain the eggs I think
that it is entirely probable, however, that such plants could be freed
from” either the eggs or the lice by dipping them in water upon
which was a thin film of kerosene, care being taken, ot course, that
kerosene enough was not used to injure the plants.

The False Chinch-Bug.

(Nysius angustatus, Uhler, — N. destructor, Riley.)
Order Hemiptera. Family Lyg^eid^.

[Plate X, Fig. 5.1

This insect is one of the many causes of the circular ®P§

with which the leaves of strawberries become discolored during tb
summer, and it occasionally becomes abundant enougb to locoD
siderable mischief. It is commonest in autumn m p fields ; which u
overgrown with purslane, upon which it seems to feed by p^ieterence
hut of course under these circumstances, it is little injurious to tm
strawberry. I have found it especially abundant m strawberry field
at Centralia; and it is probable that the following item from t |
Western Rural for 1870, by a fruit grower of Centralia, refeis

this species :

“A new insect, to us here, lias appeared on our strawberries b
the first time the past season, damaging the crop very muob._
resembles somewhat the chinch-bug, so destructive to our wheat ar
corn and judging from the peculiar odor they emit on being masne
I should think them very nearly related. Some claim that they a
of a different species altogether. Whether this be so or not the
interested in the cultivation of the strawberry are anxiously look
forward to another season to see if they are to continue th

depredations.”

It has also been known to injure seriously the tohage of 7^
grapes, of potatoes, turnips, beets, cabbages, etc. T e ,

broods maturing is not known. In November, the adults, m g
with a few pupae, may be found abundant among hibernating ms

105

» f

d as it is found in all stages in midsummer, it is probable that
least two or three broods occur. Its resemblance to the chinch-
I g has led to many errors, although it could not possibly be mis-
ien for its more destructive relative by any one who remembers
3 peculiar white X-shaped blotch on the back of the latter. The
incli-bug has also a decidedly black head and thorax, while the
called “false chinch- bug”* * is of a nearly uniform pale or tarnished

own color.

. _

This species was first described by P. R. Uhler in 1872 in the
eliminary Report of the United States Geological Survey of Mon-
na and Adjacent Territories, from specimens obtained in Colorado,
though it was said also to inhabit Dakota and Canada, and has
ice been ascertained to occur in California, Kansas, etc.

Prof. Riley’s description (from which the following is somewhat
ndensed) was published in his Filth Report as State Entomologist
Missouri, in 1873, under the name of Nysius destructor, and re¬
lated under the same name in the supplement to his report, in
81, t Riley’s and Filler’s species having been maintained as dis-
lct until now. In reply to a recent letter of inquiry, Mr. Uhler
rites me under date of February 18, 1884 :

“A very close comparison of Riley’s Nysius destructor with my N.

| igustatus, (Hayden’s Report on Montana, p. 406,) induces me to place
as a synonym of the latter. There are only minor variations of color
id structure to separate them. But I now have long series of
>th extremes with intermediate varieties from many localities —
est and North.”

Little has been added to Prof. Riley’s original account of the
ibits and injuries of the species.

Larva. — “Dingy yellow, with more or less distinct longitudinal dark
lies, especially on head.”

Pupa. (Plate X, Fig. 5, b.) “Same color, with more distinct red
id brown longitudinal lines, and two little tooth-like pale yellow
[rocesses at inner base of hemelytra pads, indicating the wings; the
idomen paler than the rest of the body.”

Imago. (Fig. 5, c.) “General color grayish brown. Head more or
ss distinctly pubescent; the surface usually brown, with a distinct
Lack, longitudinal line each side, broadening on the crown, but
Bnerally leaving the orbit of the eyes pale ; these lines sometimes
tore diffuse and occupying the whole surface, except a median
rown spot at base of crown, and a narrow, paler spot on the clypeus ;
Belli piceous ; rostrum piceous, paler at the base and reaching to
ind coxae ; antennae either pale yellowish brown or darker brown,
le torulus and first joint darkest. Thorax with the pronotum
i arrowing anteriorly, the sides slightly sinuate, irregularly and more
)arsely punctate than the head, more or less pubescent, dingy
ellow or brown, with a transverse black band near the anterior
Ige ; also five more or less distinct longitudinal dark lines, the

*This vernacular name had been applied to another common species by Fitch (his
ntkocoris pseu o-chinche , which is now called Triphleps insidiosus. Say), long before
ilcy used it for this; but as it seems more appropriate to this species, I have allowed it

• stand in this connection.

tUnited States Entomological Commission, Bulletin No. VI, p. 74.

—8

central one more persistent and leading on the posterior margin to
a pale shiny, impunctate spot ; scutellum usually dark, coarsely
punctate Legs pale yellow, inclining more or less to brown ; cox*
dark at base, pale at tip ; trochanters pale ; front and middle femora
spotted more or less confluently on the outside with brown ; tibia
ringed with brown at the base. Hemelytra either colorless, trans¬
parent, and prismatic, or distinctly tinged with dingy yellow;
shallowly punctate and very finely pubescent. Venter piceous,
minutely and regularly covered with gray pubescence ; female dingy
yellow, except at base ; female paler than male, and generally
larger. Average length, .13 inch. Described from numerous speci-

mens.”

v311o •

In the strawberry field it can be attacked, if necessary, by thft
measures recommended against the tarnished plant-bug.

The Red Spider.

( Tetranychus telarius, L.)

Class Arachnida. Order Acarina. Family AcARiDiE.

This abundant and everywhere well-known pest, although not an
insect belonging instead to the mite family of the class Aiachmda,
may be mentioned here merely to call attention to the fact that it
is reported as sometimes injuring the strawberry. _ Its method of
attack is too well known to gardeners to need special description.
It may be sought where the leaves of the strawberry are observed
to turn gray or yellow without any cause observable on ordinary
inspection. If present, the mites will be revealed to close scrutiny
as numerous moving greenish or reddish points (each usually witn a
black blotch on either si;le), which, under a glass, are seen to have
eight legs, and to be without distinction of thorax and abdomen.

Spraying with soap-suds, or dusting with flowers of sulphur, are
the usual remedies for this pest.

B. Injuring the flower or flower-stem.

1. An exposed insect.

The Flea Negro Bug ( Thyreocoris pulicarius, Germar),

Order Hemiptera. Family Corimeljenidve.

[Plate X, Fig. 6.]

The economic relations of this species are very similar to those o
the tarnished plant bug, soon to be described. Like that specie*
this insect withdraws the sap from the freshest and most succulen
parts of a considerable variety of plants, including the strawberry
and often occurs in numbers sufficient to do appreciable harm.

LITERATURE.

This species was first described by Germar, in 1839, in the
Zeitsehrift fur die Entomologie,” but it was not known as injuri-
is to horticulture until nearly thirty years thereafter, when, in the
Canadian Farmer” for August 1, 1867 (p. 32), it was reported by
r. Bethune as an enemy of the strawberry.

In this country it was first noticed by Prof. Biley, in the “Prairie
armer” for August 15, 1868, as infesting the leaves of the new
owth of grapes, and also as injurious to strawberries.

In the Transactions of the State Horticultural Society of Illinois
r 1868, Mr. T. A. E. Holcomb records the occurrence of this insect
uo years previously in Southern Illinois, on the blossoms of Core-
>sis, which it utterly ruined. He also mentions the dates of its
rliest appearance on strawberries, raspberries, and other plants,
id alludes to its injuries to the raspberry near Quincy in 1866.

In 1869, Prof. Biley again refers to it in the “American Entomolo-
3t” (volume I, page 207) as a strawberry pest at Alton, and describes
e method of its injury. He also speaks of it as injurious to the
ince and the cherry in Southern Illinois, recommends its capture
th an insect net, and suggests the use of cresylic soap.

In 1870, it was reported by Hr. Le Baron, then State Entomologist
Illinois, in an article published in the “Prairie Farmer” for
ne 4, as particularly injurious to the young foliage of the pear in
daski county.

In his Second Missouri Beport, Prof. Biley describes it briefly
d figures the adult, says that it has a great passion for the
fit of the raspberry, reproduces a letter from a correspondent
4pecting its injuries to the strawberry at Centralia, and enumer-
3S the other plants on which it is known to occur. Ho also
commends propagating its wild food plants, Ceauothus americanus
d Veronica peregrina, near the strawberry patch as a decoy, and
an sprinkling them with cresylic soap. In 1873, in an exceed-
,dy suggestive and practical article on the classification of in-
ious insects according to the gravity of their injuries, Dr. Le Baron
) ices this species among strawberry insects of the third or fourth

tn the Beport of the Ontario Entomological Society for 1873, Mr.
unders refers to the flea negro bug briefly, mentioning its injuries
strawberries in Canada in 1867 and 1868; and, finally, in his
wenth Missouri Beport (1875), Prof. Biley repeats the discussion
it already given in his Second Beport.

DESCRIPTION.

Idult. — From any other strawberry insect this is very easily dis-
| guished. Although it has a slight superficial resemblance to a
lie, and is often mistaken for one at the first glance, it is a true
h and is hence provided with a stiff, jointed beak. It is finely
ictate, glossy black in color, except that the tibiae and tarsi are

Transactions State Horticultural Society of Illinois, new series, Vol. VII, p. 92.

brown and the outer edges ot the wing covers white so that the
insect’ looks as if its back were narrowly edged with that color.
The scutellum is extraordinarily large, covering nearly the whole
back with a smooth, convex, shining black plate, grooved at the
e(joes so that the wing covers shut partly beneath it. The general
form of the body is semi-oval, regularly rounded behind ; the head
and thorax triangular. The size is about 0.12 inch m length by
three-fourths that in width.

Vourni —The young are like the adults in general appearance and
color but are smaller, and their abdomens have a relatively un¬
finished appearance. The large, glossy black patch which extends
backward from the middle of the thorax, and represents the
scutellum of the full-grown bug, is here divided into transverse bars
corresponding to the segments of the body, and beside these, the
unner abdominal surface is uncovered (the wings not having been
developed), of a grayish-brown color, finely punctate with black.

Other species.— At least two other species of this genus occur m
Illinois both larger than the above, but much less numerous. le
largest ’ (T. unicolor) is about twice as long as T. pulicanus and is
qf once distinguished by the absence of the white edge to the wing-
covers C other species (T. lateralis) is about 0.18 inch , m
length, and is distinguishable from pulicanus only by its greatei size.
Probably these species have similar habits to T. pulicanus, h ut they

have been, so far, too few in number to be conspicuously injurious.

•

LIFE HISTORY.

The adults emerge from their winter quarters under leaves auc
rubbfsh! in earlT spring, the first recorded date of them appearanc,
on the blossoms of the strawberry being April 23. On the rasp
berry they have been noticed June 10; and later m the month, oi
Coreopsis; Ceanothus, etc. It was not uncommon on strawberrie
in Southern Illinois during the month of May, 1883, but all t
specimens then seen were adults, and I find no mention of th
appearance of young before June.

Prof. Riley remarks that in the month of June, under Ceanothu
and Veronica, the species “may be found m countless numbers (,
ail «izes and ages, from the small light brown wingless newly hatclie
fndivfduals, to8the full-fledged jet black ones In fact they bred]
on these weeds.” A number of specimens sent me from Montgorm
county on the 29th of the month, were all young, ranging ho j
the pupa down. On the other hand, all the specimens appearing 1
our collections from strawberry fields m June and July were ad.
and I doubt if the species breeds on the strawberry, or makes mo,
than an early attack on it in spring, when the young leaves of t
early growing plant afford it attractive food. A laige numbei
this species obtained by sweeping the stubble of wheat early m Ju i
were adults, almost without exception, probably one in twenty b
in the preceding or pupa stage. They were very abundant, especial
in the edges of the field, feeding on a wild Coreopsis not yet
bloom. In fact, it is only during the midsummer season that t|

109

)ung occur in our collections, and we have, therefore, no evidence
more than a single brood. That all are full-grown by autumn is
•rtain, and in this condition they hibernate.

INJURIES.

To the Strawberry,

The negro bug appears on the strawberry in April, choosing the
ossoms as its favorite point of attack. Mr. Ayers, of Villa Ridge,
ported to Dr. Le Baron that he had counted from ten to fifteen of
lem m a single blossom, puncturing the plants with their beaks
id causing them to wilt and perish. Prof. Riley attributes to it
ie same noxious effect on flower and fruit, but says that it does
ie mischief by puncturing the stem. Concerning the amount of
image which this insect may do, we have little exact information,
has not been sufficiently common in strawberry fields under my
vn observation to exhibit its powers of mischief. In Canada it
is been reported as “very troublesome;” in Alton it is said to
ive occurred “in swarms” upon the strawberries, and judging from
e effects of its assaults on other plants, it seems capable of
rious annoyance to the strawberry grower.

To Wheat,

This species has not heretofore been reported as an enemy to
heat, but my suspicions were aroused bv its abundance in fields
| that grain, at Carbondale, in April, 1883, where numbers of adults
; Bre taken in the sweep-net. The freedom of the wheat from weeds,

! ade it altogether probable that the negro bugs were living at the
pense of the growing grain. From a farmer in Montgomery
•unty, I received in June some examples of this insect, with the
formation that it was “literally killing the wheat.” “To-day,” he
,ys, “in traveling beside a wheat field, I noticed that the road was
ive with them ; and, on getting into the field, I found that four¬
ths of the wheat was dead. The grain was shriveled, or had been
lied before the kernel was shaped. I have heard several farmers
ention the fact that the bugs are in their fields.”

A few days after, in Perry county, the same species was found
j/ry abundant in fields of wheat stubble, by an assistant, to whom
farmer said that the platform of his reaper had been black with
em when he cut the grain. These were gathered, after the wheat
is cut, upon the weeds among the grain, that upon which they
Bre most common being apparently the ordinary wild Coreopsis of
e region ( Coreopsis lanceolata), although it was not yet in blossom
the time.

In a recent letter to Mr. A. T. Strange, of Walshville, from whom
e information quoted above was received, I expressed some doubt
aether the injury noticed in heading wheat was really due to this
sect, and he replied to me, giving the following reasons for
Iieving them to be the author of the mischief: “I found them
a wheat field near my house, in great quantities, over about one
j :re of ground; I saw some of them on the wheat stalks, and in

110

K”r.v£nth„7 srdet? *| \

rmSVTSrk ,L‘pa“’7° i? ,ss;;k;. ». ;

A B “opelandC of Walshville, and Mr. Frank Morrison, of Bay-
’ n(i Went into a wheat field a few days prior to the time I say J
them ’ and they found the bugs very abundant. On striking the I
wheat stalks, they would fall from the heads to the ground, from |
two to five from a single head ; and the wheat where this was found,
was very poor, much poorer than elsewhere on the same farm. Mr.

A T. Weathers, of Walshville, and other farmers here, noticed le ,
and remarked to me that they were injuring their wheat. 1 rom
the foregoing we must conclude that it is highly Proba^e tliat .^e
have hi "this abundant, and wide-spread insect another threatening

enemy to one of our staple crops.

To Other Vegetation.

« j i

Its iniuries to the raspberry were mentioned by Mr. Holcomb, j.
who have June 10 as the date of its first appearance on the blos-
soms°under his observation. Riley says that it ‘‘is sometimes so
plentiful as to render the berries perfectly unsalable by the bed-bug
aroma which it communicates to them, as well as by sucking out
their juices. Wherever it occurs, the nauseous flavor which it im¬
parts to every berry which it touches will soon make its presence
manifest though the little scamp may elude ocular detection. He
remarks in another place that it had been sent him with an account
of its having ruined a crop of raspbernes.

Mr. Saunders, in his “Insects Injurious to Fruit,” adds the black¬
berry to the list of fruits which it defiles with its disagreeable odoi.
To the pear the grape, the cherry, and the quince, its mischief con-
fists chiefly ’in puncturing the tenderest twigs and leaves, and suck¬
ing the sap, with the necessary effect to hinder their growth, <j
perhaps to shrivel and wither the leaves. It occasionally occurs in|
very large numbers on cherries, “causing the stems of the younf
fruit to wilt and shrivel. It also attacks the blossoms and leaves
but seems to do most damage on the stems. On the grape it ha.
been noted at Alton and at Centralia, a letter from a fruit growe -
there to Mr. Riley, reporting that he had found all the new growt
of vines planted the preceding fall covered for a foot or more from .
the ground with the insects, the vines having, as a consequence,
unhealthy look. In many instances, also, the under sides of th.||
leaves were covered with them. Mr. Holcomb reported that it utterl.
destroyed the blossoms of Coreopsis in his garden; and it also teed
and breeds with especial freedom on a prairie plant,— the JNe^
Jersey tea ( Ceanothus americanus).

REMEDIES.

No experiments have been made for the destruction of this sp^ciefl
and only general recommendations can be offered. Its lar io(
will probably render it insensible to pyrethrum, and, unfortunately
the kerosene emulsion is not permissible in the stiawberry e >

Ill

e time when this insect is most active. Unless, therefore, pyre-
:um should prove more effective than seems likely, there is no
parent remedy for its injuries to the strawberry crop, except cap-
re with the insect net. This method would probably be found as
ective as any other in combating it in the vineyard and nursery,
hough the application of kerosene would here be proper.

2. An insect enclosed in a webbed cluster of leaves and blossoms.

i

The Strawberry Flower Worm ( Eccopsis permundana, Clem.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortrichle.

This is an especially annoying and destructive leaf-roller, because,
like the other species mentioned, it prefers the flowers and flower-
ds to the leaves, webbing a cluster of them together, and feeding
them within the ball. It attacks not only the strawberry, but
3 blackberry, raspberry, hazel and Spiraea.

Mr. Saunders mentions a fruit grower in Canada, who lost nearly
If his strawberry crop from the ravages of this insect in 1868 and
39, and Prof. Comstock found it doing a great deal of damage to
spberries near Ithaca, New York, in 1880. On this plant and the
tckberry it spins the terminal leaves together into a more or less
isted mass, within which it feeds. This species has not been re-
rted from Illinois, but as it certainly occurs on both sides of us,
•m Maine to Missouri, it doubtless infests our fields also.

It was first described by Dr. Clemens, in the Proceedings of the
liladelpliia Academy of Natural Sciences for 1860 (p. 356); and
3ms first to have been reported as an enemy of the strawberry by
\ Saunders, in the Report of the Ontario Entomological Society
■ 1872 (p. 20). Prof. Comstock’s account of its work on the rasp-
rry is contained in his Report as United States Entomologist for
80. The larva is very briefly described by Clemens and Saunders,
d the latter writer gives a few particulars relating to the life
dory of the species. Prof. Comstock describes the larva and pupa
3 Exartema permumdana) , and gives an account of their transform-
ons as observed in New York.

The larva which works this mischief is about five-eighths of an
;h in length when full-grown, of a dark green color, touched with
i ilowish at the junction of the segments, the head and cervical
j ield being pitchy black. It is unusually active when disturbed,
ickly letting itself down from the rolled leaves by a fine silken
*ead. If, however, it is not further disturbed, it gradually draws
3lf up again.

The pupa is of a light brown color, two-fifths of an inch long;
vers of the hind wings with a rounded prominence at the base,
•dornen terminated by a three-pointed prominence, with the usual
nute hooks.

112

The moth has a wing expanse of half an inch. Fore wings dull
yellowish or greenish brown, varying much in color, with irregular
lighter markings crossing the wings obliquely. Hmd wings ashy

brown.

This is a peculiarly difficult insect to deal with. Coming at a
time when it will not do to treat the plant with arsenical poisons,
and working apparently beyond the reach of othei topical applica¬
tions, it is difficult to contrive any treatment of it which will not
involve a sacrifice of the crop, except the tedious and expensive
mode of hand picking. It is possible that pyrethrum suspended in
water would effect the purpose by penetrating the clusters of webbed
leaves, but as I have not seen the species in Illinois, I have hadjj
no opportunity to experiment. I append, for the sake of accuracy
of determination, the original description of the moth:

“Palpi dull yellow7, apical joint fuscous. Fore wings with a large,
dark brown basal patch, varied with testaceous or yellowish. The
central fascia is dark brown, varied with testaceous, and is sepa¬
rated from the basal fascia by a yellowish band, containing dull j
silvery scales, or a tarnished silvery band; exteriorly, the fascia
throws off three more or less distinct, short, rounded projections, ,
two near the middle of the wing, and the other at the mnei maigm,
with a triangular patch exterior to the latter ; from the costa, near ;
the tip, is an oblique, dark brown band, varied with testaceous
scales, to the hinder margin, beneath the middle. The interspaces
between these markings are filled up with yellowish, somewhat silvery j
hued, or with dull, tarnished silvery hue. and the markings are
edged with yellow. Costa with yellowish white streaks, with central
dark brown streaks. Hind wings dark fuscous/’

C. Injuring the fruit, ripe or unripe.
1. By eating away its substance,
a. A smabUyellow ant.

The Small Yellow Ant ( Solenopsis fug ax, Latr.)

Order Hymenoptera. Family Formicid.e.

This is a minute yellow ant, very abundant everywhere, and com¬
monly nesting under stones,* which was discovered last spring and J
summer to be the author of considerable mischief in the corn field,
and also to eat holes in ripe strawberries. r

It belongs to the sub-family Myrmicina, which is characterized
especially by the fact that the peduncle of the abdomen is competed
of two nodes, instead of one, as in the larger and more abundant
sub-family, Formicina.

*Mr. Aug. Forel makes the interesting statement that this minute ant, nests without
danger within the homes of larger hostile species, where it inhabits galleries so smau
that its enemies cannot follow it into its retreats. From these it sallies out to prey ui
the young of its hosts, and perhaps also to filch from their stores of food. It has like
the habit of protecting root-lice. It is not confined to these double nests, ho vve\er,
forms its independent establishments.

113

'he workers of this species (which are the individuals ordinarily
a) are only 1.4 mm. long. The second article of the abdominal
uncle is articulated to the front end of the oval abdomen, and is
inversely oval, viewed from above, conspicuously broader than
y, and almost smooth. The first article is narrowed forwards,
lylindrical form, thickened posteriorly and above. The head is
joth; the clypeus bears two longitudinal, parallel ridges, and is
rntely bi-dentate on the anterior edge ; the antennse are ten¬
ded, the last two joints very large, forming a club by themselves ;
mandibles are expanded towards the tips and terminate with a
■ of teeth; the maxillary and labial palpi are bi-articulate ; the
y is rather abundantly provided with long hairs, and these are
ecially conspicuous upon the legs; the thorax is but slightly
>ressed above, and the metanotum has neither teeth nor spines.

INJURIES.

>n the 6th of .June, at Normal, just as the corn was appearing
ve the ground, it was observed that these ants were very abund-
in many fields, both old and new, usually collected about the
uels of corn in the earth. It was at first supposed that they
e in attendance upon plant-lice, but their frequent occurrence in
3 where no plant-lice were to be seen, negatived this supposition,
sn the kernels of corn about which they were collected were
wed and hollowed out, with the ants in the cavity. Plants which,
e thus attacked were invariably shorter than others adjacent,
ing a stunted appearance. This same species was noticed again,
7 abundant, in many other fields on the 12th of June, and a
ael which had apparently been originally sound, was found
wed away, the substance of it being drawn out and scattered
ut in the earth, after the manner of ants.*

'n the 15th, several of these specimens were brought to the
)oratory and placed in a tin box with earth. This was connected
ii another box containing earth in which some kernels of corn
e placed. After two days, these ants began work, biting and
fing out pieces of the kernels and dragging them away, a single
often carrying a fragment as large as the head of a pin.

a the strawberry field, their work was but rarely seen. Here,
acting the largest and ripest berries, a little group of them would
u bury themselves almost out of sight in a cavity gnawed out
j ;he fleshy fruit.

These insects do not swallow the solid portion of their fooJ, but tear and lick it away,
•opriating only the fluids of the substance fed upon. This peculiar method of feeding
, es it impossible to determine the food of ants by dissection. Four of the very s eci-
i s which had been previously taken in the act of destroying kernels of corn, were most
' tuliy dissected, and the contents of their alimentary canals were displayed on glass
s and studied with the microscope. No starch grains or other solid particles were
ie, neither did the contents of their intestines give the starch reaction with iodine.

114

\

b. A brown caterpillar, striped with white.

The Stalk Borer ( Gortyna nitela, Guenee.)

I

Order Lepidoptera. Family Noctuimi.

[Plate VI, Fig. 4.1

Concerning the work in the strawberry field of this well-known
and wide-spread insect, I can add nothing to the mere mention,
made by Prof. Riley in his Third Report as State Entomologist oi
Missouri, — that it sometimes bores into ripe strawberries. It is vers
unlikely that it could do any noticeable damage m this way, unless i
its breeding had been encouraged by permitting the unrestraint!
growth of thick-stemmed weeds in or near the strawberry field. J

The Strawberry Weevil (Anthonomus muscuius, Say.)

Order Coleoptera. Family Curculionide.

Under the above caption, Prof. A J. Cook, of the State Agriculturs
College of Michigan, announces in the Report of the Michigan Hoit
cultural Society for 1888 the appearance m that State of a new straw
berry pest,” which was said by a fruit grower to be ruining hi
entire strawberry crop in July, by puncturing the rui f nthon^

muscuius and a number of related species occur also in Illinois an
we are therefore liable to the same injuries which have attracte
attention in Michigan. In the absence of any further informatic
concerning this matter, I quote from the article of Prof. Cool,;
“This strawberry weevil, of which I can find no mention anywbe.
as a strawberry pest, proves to be Anthonomus muscuius , and w
described by Thomas Say many years ago.. His description is
follows- Dull rufous; scutel and elytral spotted bands whitisl
Inhabits United States. Body more or less dull rufous, or piceoui
punctured. Head piceous; rostrum with elevated lines ; antem
rufous; club dusky; thorax piceous, very much crowded with pun
tures; small recurved, distant whitish hairs; scutel oval whit
elytra with oval impressed strife of large punctures ; rufous with t
edge piceous ; two or three undulated macular whitish bands ot she
hairs' ; beneath piceous ; feet rufous. _ Length, including rostra!

1 of an inch. Variety an obscure piceous, almost black, ban
obvious. This varies considerably in its depth of coloring.

This description, like all of Say’s, leaves little to he desired,
"those sent me all are black but one, which !S very reddish, a,
without the maculate lines. Mine are also a little longer, |
mm., or nearly one-eighth of an inch long.

Of the natural history of this insect I as yet know nothing. j

115

'j ■ ■. •

REMEDIES.

I •

i this matter I can only suggest. I should try the pyrethrum
kerosene, as described above, and if they were of no avail, I
ild hope to study out its natural history in hopes that that
Id furnish suggestions that would lead to an effectual cure.”

Greenish or yellow bugs, sucking the juice from the young
berries, and causing them to shrivel, harden and become
knotty.

*The Tarnished Plant Bug, ( Lygus lineolaris , Beauv.)

*

Order Hemiptera. Family Capsid.e.

[Plates XI, XII, and XIII.]

s an injurious insect, this species is characterized by its wide
ribution, its general abundance, its relatively constant numbers,
extraordinary variety of plants upon which it feeds, and its
itual choice of the freshest, tenderest and most succulent parts
die species attacked by it. It extends throughout nearly the
le United States, even ascending mountain ranges above the
ler line, and is abundant in Canada and British America. It
no season of incubation, but is to be found alive during every
of the year, actively feeding except during its period of winter
•idity, from November to March. While there is some evidence
ji; it is more abundant in dry than in wet years, these differences
not remarkable, and bear no comparison to those of the chinch-
j- and the army worm, and most first-class insect pests. As for
food plants, the number and extreme differences of the species
j ited by it are such that it cannot be said to show any marked
erences, except for the tenderest growing structures from time
ime available for its sustenance. It shifts its point of attack
i the leaf and flower-buds of fruit trees, to the young fruit of
strawberry and the blackberry ; thence to the springing tassels
orn in the field, and to the foliage of many plants of the flower
len. Potatoes and cabbages likewise suffer from its attentions,
from its common occurrence almost everywhere in collections
le in midsummer, we infer that it doubtless draws for its sup-
upon many plants which it has not been actually seen to
cture.

1 ot withstanding its great abundance and its long known injuries
isome of the most valuable products of the garden and the
i iard, it has never been treated or described in our State reports,
has thus far been merely mentioned incidentally, by Dr. Le Baron,
as first report. As a consequence, however, of its extraordinary
idance in strawberry fields last spring, and its apparent con-
ion with a most serious and hitherto unexplained injury to the
wberry crop, it has lately come to the front as an injurious
ies, in a way to make an exhaustive article upon it desirable,
more so as our experiments for its destruction have resulted
rably, and we have some recommendations to make, of practical
j e.

For summary of this article, see p. 134.

116

LITERATURE.

This species was first described by Palisot de Beauvois under the i
name of Coreas lineolaris, in a work on insects collected in Africa I
and America, published in parts, between the years 1805 and 1821. i
It was next described by Say as C apsus oblineatus, in 1881, in a
paper entitled, “Descriptions of New Species of Heteropterous Hemip-
tera of North America. Say notes the similarity of his species to .>
that described by Beauvois, but nevertheless considers them distinct, j
He records its occurrence at various points, from Pennsylvania tc
Indiana and Missouri.

The first important mention of it as an injurious insect, we owe
to Dr. Harris, who in his “Treatise on Insects Injurious to Vegeta,
tion” (1841), describes it as Phytocoris lineolaris, notes its injury tc
various blooming plants and to the potato, gives a very good accoun
of its habits, and makes some recommendations for its destruction!
based, however, upon conjecture, and not upon experiment.

He knew nothing of its life history beyond the fact that it occurred
in April and also in October, and probably hibernated as an adult)
He believed its abundance at certain seasons to be due to dr
weather, and accounted for the effects of its puncture by supposinjl
it to poison the plants attacked.

In the Prairie Farmer for 1860, (p/ 808), and for May 2, 1861m
this species is charged by Mr. B. D. Walsh with injuries to th,|
apple, quince and pear. The second of these articles was illustrated.

In the Second Report of Prof. Riley, as State Entomologist ( :
Missouri (1870), occurs the next important article upon this specieil
Besides rehearsing the facts already published by Harris, lie reporlj
it as seriously injurious to various fruit trees, and to cabbages, tip
nips and other garden vegetables; mentions the place of oviposi
tion, and gives an (inaccurate) descriptive note on the young. r.j
assumes, with hesitation, that two generations occur during, til
year. He also recommends some additional topical application!
but not upon experimental grounds.

In the “American Entomologist and Botanist” for September, 1871
Prof. Riley reprints this article from his entomological report, add
some important items respecting injuries to vegetation, and detail
the results of some experiments made by a correspondent, for tJ
destruction of the pest in orchards.

In 1872, a valuable article was published by D. B. Wier, in t I
Prairie Farmer for January 27 of that year. Mr. Wier s experien
with this plant bug in his nursery was especially interesting, and
gives a veiy full description of its injuries to fruit trees, together wi i
some additional items relating to its life history.

A brief account of the species appeared in 1879, in the entomo
gical report made to the State Horticultural Society of Iowa, ,
Prof. Herbert Osborn, of the Iowa Agricultural College. This, no

* Insectes recueillies en Afrique et en Amerique dans les royaumes d Oware a Sc
Dominique et dans les Etat-unis pendant les annees 1781-1797.

+ Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., IX, 313.

!

117

•i a^s llttle to °ur previous knowledge of the insect, except to
>rt its occurrence in destructive numbers in the orchards of Cen-
Iowa.

/ •

; was not mentioned in the numerous and voluminous reports of
Fitch as State Entomologist of New York, nor in that of Prof.
Jtner, his successor. Dr. Fitch gives, however, a detailed account
mother species of the genus which occurs throughout the United
tes, and seems to have become especially destructive in New
k, duung the ^eai 1869. This is the Lygus linccitus , of Fabricius*
pecies whose life history, habits, and injuries to vegetation, are
•emely similar to those of the insect under consideration. This
common enough in Illinois to attract the attention of Dr. Le Baron
L870, and was briefly treated by him in his first report, under
name of the “Four-striped plant-bug, Capsus (. Phytocoris ) quad-
ttatus, Say.”

a the State Deports of Illinois, as already said, our “tarnished
at bug has received no attention, beyond incidental allusions
le to it in the second of the series (pp. 62, 65 and 66.)

! dult. (Plate XI, Fig. 1). This species, when mature, is about
-fifth of an inch by half that in width, oval in general outline, and
owish or greenish yellow in general color, more or less striped
. mottled with dusky.

'he head forms a nearly equilateral triangle, with obtuse angles,
upper surface is shining and nearly smooth, sparsely pilose, and
l two rows of rather coarse punctures on either side of the
Idle line. The eyes are prominent, rounded, and red or black
color. The head is yellow, with a median black stripe which
3nds on to the nasus as a black or rufous patch. Each side of
i median stripe is another, running nearly parallel with it, which
however, often nearly obsolete. These stripes extend to the
es of the antennae, around which is a rufous area which sends a
row line backward just within the upper margin of the eye. A
dish band also extends forward upon the side of the head from
anterior end of the eye to the base of the rostrum, where it
3ts a similar line which passes backward along the sheath of the
Arum. The head is sometimes wholly yellow, without markings,
l those described may be variously obsolete or wanting.

he thorax is trapezoidal in outline, strongly narrowed forwards,
anterior margin being about half the length of the posterior.
D latter is regularly rounded, the sides are straight, and not mar-
fid. Just within the anterior border, a sub-marginal, impressed
5 marks off a smooth, marginal callus, and behind this the ante-
fourth of the disk of the thorax is separated by a less deeply
iressed line, before which the surface is nearly smooth. The
face of the pronotum generally is coarsely and rather closely
pictured, the punctures being somewhat smaller and thicker on
| sides and posterior declivity, where they have a tendency to a
ial arrangement. From each puncture springs a short, pale,
1 tk hair.

I

L

118

The anterior marginal callus is white or yellow, as is also th<
me a nn; » ^ f the pronotum of a well-markei

snecten ia clneSy biack with five longitudinal white or yello,
strioes The median of these is the most lnegulai m width ei
minding broadly in front into a somewhat triangular area, wh.c! >
often connects Interiorly with the pale stripes adjacent ThisW,
also sometimes widened posteriorly, so as to cut off the hinW
extremities of the adjacent black stripes. In very dark specimens;
the Tl ow stripes of the thorax are lost posteriorly m the genera,
bl-tck of the surface, and there is often a narrow black collar ow
the neck All the margins of the pronotum are commonly white |

The side of the prothorai is yellow, with two very broad, longitudd
nal black bands, which unite in front but do not quite reach til
margin behind. The side-pieces of the meso- and meta-thorax ar
Zskv with yellow edges, and the coxae are dusky externally; rl
pale specimens both these and the side-pieces are concolorous.

Tn such specimens, the yellow of the thorax often predominate!,
being then marked with six longitudinal black stripes, more 01 1M

C0Theicutellum is hairy, and transversely rugose. It is ordmanl,
black with a Y-shaped mark, the short stem of which reaches tbl
tin of the scutellum, while its lateral arms enclose a tnanguk
black patch between them, and leave a narrow black stripe outsid
The extreme margin of the scutellum is yellow. Sometimes tl;
included triangle is longitudinally divided by a narrow black !■
and in dark specimens the Y-shaped white mark is often reduced
a triangle of three white points. _

The wing covers are sparingly’ pubescent with yellow hair, ar
coarsely and closely punctured, the punctures being more or 1
confluent so as to give the surface a rugose appearance. Th
are so irregularly and variably mottled with dusky and yellowM
Is to defy definite description. The regions most likely to be d
cidedlv darkened are the posterior part of the conum and t.j|
SSle of the clavus, opposite the tip of the scutellum The cun*
is usually yellow, with a black dot at its tip, and often 1

others at the basal angles. The hemelytra may, however, be almt;
wholly black, or reddish black, with, perhaps, a narrow pale stn
alongthe middle of the corium. The membrane is always cloudtj

at least, with dusky.

The abdomen is pubescent, and minutely punctured. It varies |
color from black, or reddish black, with two broad yellowish str jl
to yellow, with a median, basal black blotch, and two i^eml tol
stnnes. The spiracles are always yellow, and the yehow latea
stripes extend forward upon the sides of the thorax. The eg jj
Pubescent tibi® spinose. The posterior thighs are pale at ba
black or dusky beyond, with three pale rings, the last one ternpn 1
The hind tibiee are pale, with two dark rings near the upper end a
one at the lower; the tarsi pale with black tips. The other W
are like the preceding, but less vividly and extensively coloied. j

The antenn* are dark, except a wide, median ring on the seco,
article, which is pale. The first joint is shortest and thmkest soj
what clavate,. and about as long as the head is wide. I he secci

A

119

it is iiiiear, as long as the third and half the fourth taken
pther. ihe two last joints are very slender, the last slightly
rter than the other.

he beak is long and slender, reaching to the last pair of legs
| may be either pale or dark, but is always black at tip.

irst Stage. (Plate XI, Fig. 2). — Shortly after hatching, the
ng plant bug is of a pale green or sulphur- yellow color; about
sventieth of an inch long, and fifteen hundredths of an inch wide,
general form is that of an ellipse with flattened sides, both ends
lg rather obtuse, and the sides nearly parallel, diverging very
htly, however, to the fourth abdominal segment.

he head is triangular, a little longer than the first thoracic seg-
lt, the color slightly darker before the eyes. The thoracic seg-
lts are similar to the abdominal, but about twice as long. They
of equal width, but the first is a little longer than the second.

here aie ten segments in the abdomen, counting a rudimentary
1 one. The first two are very short and closely united; the re-
ncler of about equal length, except the ninth, which is the longest,
the dorsum of the third abdominal segment is a median orange

J •

he legs are very long, the hind tibiae being half as long as the
fie body. The tarsi are two-jointed, the first joint very short
obliquely articulated, the second four or five times as long and
adrical. The legs are white, except an orange ring at the prox-
1 end of the tibiae.

he antennae are four-jointed, and nearly as long as the body,
first joint is short and thick, the remainder more slender and
xl, each being about twice as long as the first. All the articles
1 white, except the last, which is orange.

he beak is very large and long, reaching to the last abdominal
nent. The joints are four in number, and of nearly equal length.

t slightly older specimens in this stage, the antennae, tarsi, and
terminal joint of the beak become dusky, and a transverse black
k appears at the posterior border of the orange abdominal spot,
entire surface, in this stage, is sparsely covered with short
k hairs.

y-coitd Stage. — (Plate XI, Fig. 3). — In this stage the length is
twelfth of an inch, and the greatest width half as much. The
)men is now much broader than the thorax, having an ovate
p, with the third and fourth segments the widest. The second
j third segments of the thorax are wider than the first, which
i ows forwards, being in front scarcely wider than the head. The
1 segment is hardly more than half as long as the second, and
j hind angles of both these are free, and somewhat produced
i .yards. A quadrate, median black spot occurs on the suture
een the third and fourth abdominal segments, divided trans-
ply by a slit-like opening of the gland within.

j i the thorax are four more or less deeply marked black spots
i rcular form, two on either side of the middle of the first and
ad segments.

120

The legs are as before, except that' the tibial rings are more highly;
colored and there are more or less evident traces of a second red¬
dish ring below, as well as of two femoral rings of the same color. :-
near the tibio-femoral articulation.

The antennal are relatively shorter than in the first stage owing
to the greater development of the body, and reach about to the fifth!
nlvlnminal segment. Their color is darker, all the joints being red-1
dish dusky, with white articulations. The second joint has also »«
aler shade at the middle, and the basal joint is nearly white. Ini
the bore highly colored specimens the antennal are distinctly nnge -
with pale at the articulations, and at the middle of the second joint
The tarsi (still two-jointed) and the tip of the beak are almost black

Third Stage. (Plate XII, Fig. 1.) This stage differs from thif
preceding chiefly in the greater size, the length being now eleven o
twelve hundredths of an inch, the width about halt the length , aU
in the greater development of the posterior angles of the meso- aa|
metanotum, which now begin to take the form of wing pads a®
reach backwards so as to enclose the ends of the first, and ofte|
of the second abdominal segments. The abdomen is now abou
twice a" e as the protliorax; and the beak has the joint;!
nnenual the second being the shortest. The legs and antenna ai
more highly colored than before ; there is a black spot beneath th |
posterior angles of the prothorax. 1

In the more strongly marked specimens, the head, abdomen, legs, aD!i
antenm^are more or less strongly suffused with crimson the tea
ha vino: a median longitudinal red stripe, with two short oblique ml
on each sTde The thorax is dusky, marbled with paler, with
median white line, and pale spaces surrounding the lour black spo
and is sometimes variegated with crimson. The under side oi t
head and the tip of the abdomen beneath are also marked wi

fourth Stage , or Pupa. (Plate XII, Fig. 2.) The “pupa” is d
cidedly broader than the other stages, the average length e.

hundredths of an inch, and the width seven hundredtl
The head and the prothorax have the adult form, and the scuteUr
is well marked as a semi-circular, bimaculate, median pait of t
second thoracic segment; this segment (the mesonotum), in tact, n
nearly covers the third, or metanotum. .

The wing pads now extend to the fourth abdominal segmen , a
are about equal in their greatest length to the first two segme
of the thorax taken together. They are irregularly marbled a
lined with dusky, while the prothorax, besides the two black spe
shows four longitudinal dusky or crimson lines parallel with its maigi
In some the abdominal sutures are crimson, and a cumson
crosses each segment In fact the pup® show an extiaoidm,
variability of color, evidently independent of age, and piobabiy
lated to sex

iteci to sex. _ . . , ,

The tarsi are still two-jointed, the second joint long and sienc
With the basal half pale, giving the tarsi a handed appea ai
The antennae are less distinctly ringed than befoie , and tl
diminish in thickness from the first to the last and in length h
the second. In some specimens, a pale v-shaped maik 01

121

atellum includes the black spots. Other individuals (probably fe-
iles) are an almost uniform green above, except for the five dor-
l black spots.

LIFE HISTORY.

I

The life history of this species cannot yet be given in all its de¬
ls, but the essential facts are well enough known. The adults,
th a very few pupae intermingled, pass the winter under rubbish
d matted vegetation, in a variety of situations, no preference
mg shown for one kind over another. They are consequently
ind in the woods among the dead leaves, under boards, in grass,
der the broad leaves of mullein, and in general wherever a suit-
le shelter against the winter weather offers.

With the earliest warm days of spring they venture forth, and
llect upon whatever tender springing vegetation of tree or shrub
ers them a supply of sap within the reach of their rather slender
aks. On their food plants they lay their eggs; although the pre-
jrie time when they commence this operation has not yet been made
t, nor indeed, has the egg itself ever been seen. The young soon
pear, however, mingled with the adults as early as the latter part
April and the first of May, (in Southern Illinois), and feed with
lj 3m side by side. By the middle of May, the older individuals
ve matured, and then all stages may be found together upon the
ine plants; but the winged forms scatter widely, and in June and
ly are generally distributed wherever suitable food occurs. Young
all stages and adults of both sexes have been found by us, dur-
g this last summer, in every month from May to September in-
tsive, — a fact which makes it difficult to say how many broods
pear. It is certain that there are two, but whether more than
it, it will probably be impossible to tell with certainty without
iring specimens in confinement. By the middle of October, the
! ung have about all transformed, and from that time forward few
ft adults are to be seen. These frequent goldenrod, cabbage, turnip
d other autumnal plants, and betake themselves in due season to
fir winter quarters, as already related.

t

HABITS AND INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

Both young and old of this species are quick to take alarm, the
111 flying readily, and the young dropping to the ground for con-
ilment. On cool mornings and evenings, however, when stiffened
't exposure, they are easily approached. They are, at this time,
rnlly concealed among the expanding leaves.

In the Flower and Vegetable Garden.

^s already reported in discussing the literature of this species, the
ention of Mr. Harris was first drawn to it by reason of its injuries
flowers and vegetables. Dahlias, marigolds, balsams and asters
re mentioned by him as subject to its attacks, and he also found
30 destructive to the foliage of the potato as seriously to diminish
produce of the fields in his vicinity. It principally attacked the
Is, terminal shoots, and most succulent growing parts of these
— 9

* •

122

and other plants, puncturing them with its beak, and drawing off
the 8ap The parts attacked withered shortly afterward, turned black,
and in a few days dried up, or curled, and remained permanently

stunted in their growth.

Concerning the injuries of this species to the potato, Prof. Riley
remarks • “I have passed through potato fields along the roa
Mountain Railroad in May, and found almost every stalk blighted
and black from the thrusts of its poisonous beak, and it is 1 ot al
nil surprising that this bug was some years ago actually accused of
heins the cause of the dreaded potato-rot.” He also reports that a
aentfeman living near Chicago was almost baffled by its injurious
punctures in Ins efforts to raise late-planted cucumbers. It is not
a al likely that this account exhausts the species of garden vege-
tables liable to its attacks, but doubtless almost anything affording
it attractive food in the season of its necessities would suffer

similarly.

In the Orchard.

The best account extant of its work in the orchard and nursery
is that given by Mr. Wier, in the “Prairie banner article already
cited He writes from a full heart, having, m one year, suffere a
loss from this insect of about a thousand dollars worth ot young
trees He says: “What the chinch-bug is to the spring wheat
grower this bug is to the nurseryman and fruit grower m regions
adapted to its multiplication ; and, like the chinch-bug, there seems
to be no means of combating it with much chance ot success. I

have lost, within the last three years, by its ravages ^XhokS
and orchard, enough to pay the salary of our State Entomolog st,
I have closely studied it during that time and to-day I fed Jhat
shall have to stand by next spring utterly impotent to combat it
successfully and see it blast my winter s work of giaftmg, in a
great measure, and destroy every germ of plum and Pe“' ,on
grounds, making my rows of young pear and plum trees look as
they had been singed with fire during four long weeks.

As soon in the spring as the first buds on our pear, mountain M
and quince begin to burst, and the days are bright and warm theM
bugs commence to feed on them and every bud that they pew
with their poisonous beaks is utterly destroyed. As the teimma
bud is the first to push, it goes first, and then each su°°®f
down the branch ; so if the tree is small and there aie bugs ,e"°“g„
every free bud on the tree is killed, and it has to push lta d°irnm
buds. These are destroyed in the same way, and the tree stand
for a long time after this rough treatment, apparently consideim
whether life is worth the immense effort of arranging cells foi j
points of growth, to be destroyed m their incipiency. it goe
work, and doubtingly, timidly and weakly sends ou ; its i best , thou
spindling, effort. If the Capsus captures this last effort and t
tree is weak in its store of food, it throws up the sponge , f not, :
makes a weak, unsightly growth, for the reason that the new shoot

do not start from proper axes. .

The buds of root grafts cannot stand many stoppings ; so wn
these bugs are plenty, the rows show this, indeed. A t ® ^
and destroying in this way for about a month, the female lay

123

gs and dies. It is asserted as a fact that the beaks of the bugs
e poisonous to the plants on which they feed. I have not found
is to be so. I have been unable to discover any other injury
i an the same mechanical injury that would result from any punc-
re, if attended with the same depletion of sap.

i This, bug is very quick in its motions. You may approach a plant
which dozens of them are feeding ; as soon as they discover your
proach, they all dodge around quickly to the opposite side of the
*nt, out of your sight; if you disturb them, they either fly away,
ley are brisk flyers, and are called flies by many), or drop to the
3und. Early in the spring, they are dormant on cool mornings
d are easily picked off or shaken down and destroyed.”

Prof. Riley remarks in his Second Entomological Report: “Quite
rly last spring, while entomologizing in Southern Illinois, I spent
lay with Mr. A. J. Ayres, of Villa Ridge, and was surprised to
rn that he had become quite discouraged in his efforts to grow
mg pear trees, on account of the injuries of a certain bug which
on examination I found to be the ‘Tarnished Plant-bug.’ ” In the
icle in the “Entomologist and Botanist” to which I have referred
« a previous page, he further says: “This insect has been very
unous the present year. Mr. J. P. Jones, of Keytesville, Chari-
I county, Mo., complained bitterly to us this spring of its injuries
pear and apple trees in his section ; Mr. D. B. Wier, of Lacon,

, considers that it has damaged his crops to the amount of
; 000 ; and the acl interim committee which lately visited his
hards, report but little fruit on the pear trees on account of its
ving poisoned and killed the blossom buds. No doubt the extreme
f weather has had much to do with the increase of these pests.”

Che apple, pear, cherry, plum and quince, are among the fruit
|es reported as especially subject to its attacks; and Prof. Riley
p. a^so noted it as an enemy of the grape, which it injures much
it does the twigs of trees.

In the Straivberry Field.

Beyond a conjecture of Prof. Riley, that an injury to strawberry
ces referred to him by a correspondent, was due to the punctures

I this insect,.* and a general statement by Mr. Townend Glover,

I I species is injurious to that plant, evidently based upon the
ve surmise of Mr. Riley,! I do not know that it has ever been
pected of an attack upon the strawberry until the present year.

Yy own attention was first called to the matter by a letter from
^srs. Earle & Sons, of Cobden, Ill., who are among the heaviest
iwberry growers in the country.

nder date of May 14, Mr. F. S. Earle wrote me from Anna,
iois:' “We are in trouble again. This time it is a green ‘bug’
! t is sucking the juice out of the green berries, causing them to
: ier and partially dry up — ‘button’ it is called by strawberry
| vers. This ‘buttoning’ has been known for a long time, and it

f

American Entomologist, Vol. I (1869), p. 227.

Eeport of the U. S, Department of Agriculture for 1875, p. 126.

j24

lias proved one of the worst of the many difficulties encountered in |
n\ business Many fields of berries that promised a large ciop up I
to a “few days before picking, have been known to wither up and [
disappear so as to be almost total failures. _ I

“For the last two weeks I have noticed these green insects on the I
berries and have wondered what they were doing, but I did not pay ,
much attention to them till last Saturday morning, when I made

the° unpleasant discovery that many of ^fthlT thet Zc \

bidlv. It then occurred to me, lor the first time, that these insects g

micdit be connected with the trouble. I have since examined all out I

fields quite carefully, and have been in several others, both here and I

at Oobden, and I am now quite thoroughly convinced that sue u I

“This is a trouble beside which the crown-borer and root-worm I
sink into insignificance, but I do not think any one lias thought o
charging it to insects before. I judge it has already damaged our S
croo to the extent of from five to ten thousand dollars. 1 lie weather I
has been Quite dry for the past month, which has I suppose ,
increased the trouble. As I write a fine shower u falling, which!
will I hope, check further injury for the present.

Accompanying this letter was a vial of insects, which proved on
examination to be all adults and young m various stage*, of Lygm J
hneolaris In consequence ot this information, I spent the time l
from the 17th to the 22d of May in the strawberry fields at Anna,!.
Oobden Villa Ridge and Oentralia, thoroughly and carefulml
searching twenty-live different fields, with Bo}e reference to the ,
relations of this insect to the injury complained ot. Ilie tar
nishecl plant bug was by far the commonest insect m these stra#
bprrv fiplrls occurring in numbers many times exceeding those ot
all the other species taken together, except at Centraha where tl
duskv plant bug, Derceocoris rapidas, was scarcely less abundant. Id
the st?awberry° fields at Anna, probably not far from one-ten
were aduhs most, if not all of them, having recen ly transfom
from the pupa; while the remainder were of all stages, trom m
niipa to those iust hatched. At Villa Ridge, a somewhat greatej
ratio of adults was noticed, while at Centralia the ratio was no|

especially different. J

Wherever these insects occurred in a strawberry held, they ve
seen only upon the fruit. Even where abundant, there would b
none upon many of the berries, and upon others from one to thufiji
or four. Ordinarily, when undisturbed, they seemed to _ neslM
between the hull and the base of the berry ; and it is pi i-obabl > 1. d
it was from this point that they abstracted the sap. 1^ ''
quite active in their habits, especially in the heat of the day, tb •
adults flying readily, and the young escaping with agility.

The injury complained of, and presumably due to the bags, cot
stated ofk drying and hardening of the beri-y before he wcepU
expanded, leaving the fruit hard and small and black if the lnjuiy «
total or knobbed at the tip or deformed at one side, if mcompletl

It was noticed that the seeds upon the affected berries were plutc !

and well-filled, on the shrunken parts as well as eisewhere. Th

seems to be a character by which the buttoning ot the beiiif.

125

1

ticed here at this time may be readily distinguished from a simi-
defoimity, apparently occasioned by a failure of fertilization,
stances of this latter injury were common at Normal about the
st of June, where the Orescent and other varieties maturing hut
tie pollen were badly buttoned; but here, invariably, the seeds
i ; aclienia, of the shrunken area were blighted and empty even
diough the shells had grown to the ordinary size.

The weather at Cobden, I was informed, had been extraordinarily
y and cool for about three weeks, until the 14th of the month
mg thus especially unfavorable to the growth of the plants and
I e maturing of the berry. This drouth likewise probably stimulated
; e development and multiplication of the insects themselves. At
ntialia, howevei, the weather had been entirely favorable through-
t the season, hut the injury in question was found equally pre¬
lent there.

This buttoning had first been noticed by Mr. Earle, in the first part
May, but had greatly increased in gravity within the few days pre-
img my visit. The insects had first attracted his attention on
e 12th of the month, although he had no doubt that they had been
j esent for some days in scarcely inferior numbers.

[ found in all my comparisons of different fields with each other,
d especially of variety with variety, a remarkable difference in
3 number of the insects, according to the variety of plant in cul-
ation, some kinds containing two or three times as many of the
: gs as others. In the Crescent, for example, except in a single
dance, at Villa Ridge, but few were found ; while in the Mount
rnon and Bidwell they were excessively abundant. In one field
j on Mr. Earle s farm, where Miner s Prolific and Crescents had
8n planted in alternate rows for the purpose of securing a fertili-
'uion of the latter, a careful search and count of adjoining rows
the two varieties, showed that the insects were two and a half
pes as numerous in the Miner’s Prolific as in the Crescent; while
patches of the Bidwell and Mount Vernon immediately adjoining
3 above, they were at least three times as numerous as in the
ner’s Prolific. The Sharpless was also badly infested, while in
3 Downings, Wilsons, and ‘lNo. 2,” the plant bugs were only
)derately abundant.

j The fact was repeatedly noticed that in those fields and varieties
here relatively few were found, the ratio of adults was much greater
m in situations where the insect was more abundant, — clear evi¬
nce that the difference between the numbers infesting these various
ids had been greater earlier than it was at the period of my visit,

3 larger ratio of adults in some fields being clearly due to the
|;t that the matured individuals scattered from the field where they
^eloped as soon as they acquired wings.

Jnly one or two cases afforded an opportunity to inquire into the
' set of a mulch of straw or leaves upon the ground ; but these
t tded to show that this had no especial effect upon the abundance
( the insect. The Bidwells, Crescents and Miner’s Prolific, already
|mtioned,_ belonging to Mr. Earle, in which the numbers of the
| ects varied greatly according to variety, had all received precisely
'1 3 same treatment as to mulching ; while the field of Mt. Vernons,

126

sww«{ a at aa

weeds.

T ,™ some reason to believe that the difference in the suscepti¬
bility' of the different varieties was connected with the time ot theirl
n tine forth their leaves in spring, it being a general rule as
far as mv observations went, that those which were worst affected
* ‘ iv^parliest to soring up after the season opened; but with

respect to this, many more observations are necessary before a conv

elusion can be reached. ]

Tf w already been said that a certain connection was ap-
narent between the number of insects occurring in any field and .tM

amount of buttoning of the berries visible; and this is a matter of
amount or ouuonu necessary to go considerably into

such importance that it will pe nece»bd,iy tu k theorv

resnect to the evidence collected, lo test tins t
of ti e Tnsecr ong n of this well-known but hitherto unexplained
■gjury, was the main object of my field work during the whole

period of my stay. . . . . T •

Evervwhere in the fields of Mr. Earle, at Anna which I visited
T found a close correspondence between the amount of buttoning and I
the number of bugs on the plant. I made many careful companj
sons, first estimating and noting the extent of the ! ^jury, ^ and ;
with an insect net sweeping back and forth ® ' f gtroke,

uniform a manner as possible, making a definite uum , i •
and then counting and recording the number of plant bugs taken m

the net.

In a field of Mr. Finch, at Anna, I made a comparison of the
Orescent and Sharpless varieties, the latter of which was much
affected and the former but little. Twenty sweeps of the net m the
Orescent gave but nine insects, five of which were winged, while the
same number of sweeps in the Sharpless yielded thirty-two only five
of wlfich were°wLgedP The fields were adjoining and had received
the same treatment throughout. |

In Mr. Endicott’s field, at Villa Ridge, fifty sweeps of the net, m
a field of “No. 2” which was badly affected, gave sixty- six bug ,

ten were adult while in the field of Crescents adjoining,
every third row of which was “No. 2,” but little affected, fifty sweeps
of the net gave twenty bugs, of which tweive were aduffs bon
rows of badly damaged Sharpless near by yielded twenty-four bus
(of which half were adult) to twenty-five sweeps of the net.

In a field of Crescents belonging to Mr. Davidson, at Villa Ihdse,
(the only field of this variety seen during the trip which i was bai y
buttoned), fifty sweeps of the net gave eiglity-two of the insects.
On the other hand, some Dowmngs belonging to Mr. liobir .
which were considerably injured, gave only sixty bugs to fifty sweeps,
and Wilsons, in which, likewise, many of the berries weie bm
toned, gave but seventeen bugs to twenty-five strokes. I
two latter cases it seemed clear that the injury o 'C err
attributable, at least in part, to something else than the

injury.

127

n the examinations thus far made, I had not been able to find
7 instance which should exactly test the hypothesis that the injury
ler examination was due to the insect only. In every case where
i fields were contrasted, there was some additional difference
ween them than that of abundance or scarcity of the plant bug ;
ler a difference in variety, in location, in treatment, or in the
ount of rust occurring. The first fields visited at Centralia, how-
r, gave me the example I had been seeking.

-Wo large fields of Wilsons, of the same age, separated only by a
3et, upon soil of precisely the same character, mulched ‘ alike,
l otherwise treated identically, as I was informed by Mr. Brunton,
*e found to differ to a marked degree, at least in the places ex¬
ited, with respect to the amount of buttoning apparent. In one
d the berries were in very good condition, while in the other,
f or more of those examined were buttoned and deformed. In
former, seventy-five strokes of the net gave thirty-one insects;

[ in the latter, fifty strokes gave eighty-nine.

next examined a field belonging to Mr. Brunton, containing
scents, Downings and Wilsons, all on new ground, and also a
| ch of Wilsons which had been in berries previously. These were
side by side, and of the same age and previous history. In the
scents no injury was observed, nor yet in the Wilsons adjoining.
M Downings were considerably injured, and the Wilsons in that
i t of the field which had been in strawberries previously were
ly buttoned. In the uninjured Wilsons, twenty-five sweeps of the
gave but seven bugs; and in the injured Wilsons, fifty sweeps
e twenty. In the Downings, which were considerably buttoned,

/ sweeps yielded forty insects; and in the badly injured Wilsons,
nty-five sweeps gave sixty. Another field of Wilsons, a little
i oved from these, somewhat damaged, but not badly, yielded
ty bugs to twenty-five sweeps. The plants in all these fields
e more or less affected by rust, but in about equal ratio. A
nber of other fields of Wilsons were examined, but the results
e so strictly identical with those already given that it is not
assary to narrate them in detail.

,

he fact has already been mentioned of the occurrence of another
lies, the dusky plant bug, Derceocoris rapidus, in the same fields
l Lygus lineolaris. Although generally much less abundant than
other, in some fields at Centralia its numbers amounted to a
d or fourth those of Lygus. Everywhere both were in the same
:es, and were evidently working upon the berries in precisely the
e manner; consequently in the preceding details respecting the
! iber of plant bugs present, both species have been included. A
irate discussion of Derasocoris is, however, given elsewhere.

Ithough many other plants were of course present in the straw-
i y fields, these plant bugs were only occasionally seen upon any
hem. In one field of Mr. Earle’s, in which the insect swarmed,
kberries were placed in alternate rows with the strawberries, but
as a very unusual thing to find the insects upon a blackberry

'\i.

i

ft

■

128

RECAPITULATION.

For tile purpose of summarizing my observations respecting the J
relations of the tarnished plant bug to this strawberry injury,
nrpnared the following table, dividing the fields m which actual |
counts were made into three groups, according to the amount o| I
“buttoning” apparent, and giving the total results of the examination^ I

under each.

Summary.

- - -

Injured, or
none.

Injured,
but fair.

1

Badly injured. |f

1

Varieties.

| No. of fields...

No. of sweeps.

No. of bugs —

!25

-o

So

d 50

w ^

: cd

• i-S

No. of fields. .

No. of sweeps.

No. of bugs ...

No. of bugs per
100 sweeps...

No. of fields...

No. of sweeps.

No. Of bugs. ...

55 ft

mi

!?»
%n iff

rsf

— N

2

45

16

36

1

50

75

70

82

140

62

164!
199 1.
8Q jj

5

200

84

42

3

100

8/
i a

87

L

Downing .

NumDer 2 .

Sharpless. . . .

”’i

"50

"20

"40

l

5U

4U

Ov

l

l

50

25

66

24

m

96|s

--IS

u reset? ii L ctiiu i-vw. . . - .

,8

205

120

41

4

150

127

85

7

270

383

142

5

The fields covered by this table, nineteen in number, situated at
Anna! Villa Ridge, aid Centralia, relate to so many km I

plants, and to so great a variety of ’soil, circumstance and situation;,
that we may reasonably assume that all accidental differences cance
each o6th“tyand that the differences, shown by the general averjgj!,
exhibit only such results as are fairly attributable to the work ||

msects

In the first group of eight fields, where the berries were injure,
little or none including Crescents and Wilsons, two hundred an.
ninety-five sweeps were made, capturing one hundred and twenty C
the insects, or forty-one to the hundred strokes of the jk lu™
second group where the berries were injured, but not senousij
comprising three fields of Wilsons and one of Downmgs one huudre,
and fifty sweeps gave one hundred and twenty-seven of the mse
being eighty-five to the hundred. _ ■

In the last group of seven badly injured examples,
Downings, Sharpless, Crescents, Wilsons, and Iso. 2, two hundre
and seventy sweeps yielded three hundred and eighty-three insect
amounting ^to one hundred and forty-two to the hundred sweeps

The totals of this table give seven hundred and fifty net stroke
and the entire yield was six hundred and thirty bugs, an ave
of eighty-eight to the hundred strokes ; we have, therefore, 1
third group about three and a half times as many plant bug
the hundred as in the first, while the average of those moderate
injured is almost the same as the general average ot the tor
groups taken together.

Hear as the proof is thus made of some evident connection
ween the abundance of insects in the field and the injury done
the berries, this is rendered still more positive, by a fact already
ided to, but not readily shown in this table, viz : that those
is in which the injury was the least contained a larger ratio of
dts than the others, these winged individuals having evidently
sntly entered them from worse infested fields, so that the differ-
es in number of bugs between injured and uninjured fields must
re been decidedly greater before any of the insects of this brood
their wings, than when these collections were made.

Infortunately my notes are not complete in this particular, but
twenty-nine insects from fields but little injured, seventeen were
dts (fifty-eight per cent.) ; while of two hundred and four collected
3re the damage was serious, only sixty-eight were adults (tliirty-
se per cent). I ought to say in respect to the method of these
ervations, that I was in nearly every case accompanied by the
rer of the fields, and that the estimate of damage was made by
l, and entered upon my notes before the plants were searched
insects.

Itrong as this evidence may seem, it should have no more than
due weight. What we have demonstrated is a decided proba-
ty of a connection of some sort between the injury to the berries
l the presence of the plant bugs, and a considerable probability
,t this connection is that of effect and cause; that the injury
iue, at least in part, to the absiraction of the sap from the berry
the bug at a critical time in the development of the fruit.

ninal proof of the amount of the injury due to the work of the
ect, can only be had by experiment. For instance, two ad join-
portions of the same field must be treated precisely alike in all
pects, except that the plant bug shall be kept down in one, and
! >wed free course in the other ; when a comparison of the fields
1 give us exact grounds for a conclusion.

SUPPOSED POISONOUS EFFECT.

before leaving this subject of the injuries to vegetation, it will be
rth while to advert to one matter of both scientific and practical
srest, — that of a supposed poisonous effect upon the plant due to
punctures of this insect.

)r. Harris says: “They principally attack the buds, terminal
>ots, and most succulent growing parts of these and other herb-
nus plants, puncturing them with their beaks, drawing off the
>, and, from the effects subsequently visible, apparently poisoning
parts attacked. These shortly afterwards withered, turned
ck, and in a few days dried up, or curled, and remained per-
nently stunted in their growth.”

tiley remarks: “Its puncture seems to have a peculiarly poison-
i effect, on which account, from its great numbers, it often
»ves a really formidable foe. It is especially hard on young pear

130

and quince trees, causing the tender leaves and the young shoot* I
and twigs to turn black, as though they had been burned by fire.
On old trees it is not so common, though it frequently congregates |
on such as are in bearing, and causes the young fruit to wither
and drop.” His remarks on a supposed connection between the j
punctures of this insect and the potato-iot, have been alieaQml

quoted. tl

It will be remembered, however, that Mr. Wier, who had a much I
more extended experience with this in sept than the gentlemen just j
quoted, saw no evidence of any other injury to the plant than that N
naturally to be explained by the abstraction of sap from young ana I
orowin^ structures, and I may add that there was nothing whatever,
either °in the appearance of the buttoned strawberries, or m the
cell-contents of the injured parts, to indicate that they were surtei* 1
ing from any other than a mechanical injury. It would require, in tj
fact, the very strongest evidence to warrant a belief in so extraordi¬
nary a phenomenon.

It is contrary to the order of nature that a habit of . this sorj ■
should be acquired, unless it were beneficial, directly or indirectly,
to the species acquiring it. It is not only impossible to show that
the plant bug would be benefited by any such supposed poison¬
ing of its own food, but it is at once evident that it would b$ |
seriously injured thereby, since this would amount to the promp||
destruction of the very parts of the plant from which it was draw¬
ing its own food supply.

Assuming, as we doubtless should do, the correctness of the obser- u
vations reported both by Harris and by Riley, we may easily explaiijl
them without violence to probability, by the supposition of the j
coincidence of the potato-rot in one case, and in the other, of one of d
the common blights of Iruit trees, with the presence of these insects |j
upon the foliage. Indeed, with respect to the pear- blight, at least,
it is pot at all impossible that the plant bug may convey the con- 1
tagion from one tree to another, since it has now been faiily well |
proven that this disease is spread by means of a microscopic virus
contained in the sap of affected parts.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

There are few species of really destructive insects which seem soj
free from natural checks upon their increase, as this plant bug. in
fact, with the exception of the injurious effect produced upon its |
rate of multiplication by extraordinary wet weather, (a trait wbicli i
it shares with a great variety of other insects), no destructive nat-i
ural agent has yet been reported, and none worth serious considera¬
tion has come under my own observation. It is free, as far as we
know, from the attentions of either plant or insect parasite ; and, j
while it has no apparent protection against the depredations of birds,
yet they do not seem to prey upon it to any important extent.

In the food of three hundred and fifteen robins, cat-birds, and
other thrushes, taken at all seasons of the year, and carefully

131

ied by me, only two birds, both robins, had eaten this species,
these in merely trivial amount. One hundred and eight blue- birds
not taken it at all, although from their food-habits and haunts,
would suppose the insect especially exposed to their notice,
y specimens of the common black- throated bunting of Central
ois, shot at the time when this plant bug swarms most abun-
;ly upon vegetation everywhere, had eaten only a single speci-
i. These instances will serve to illustrate the fact that for some
:plained reason this abundant species is scarcely at all endan-
d by the presence of insectivorous birds.

PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

is evident upon a moment’s reflection, that we cannot hope to
ce seriously the numbers of this insect except by the most gen-
measures, since it is so widely distributed at all seasons,
ething to this end may probably be done by clean farming,
cially by burning the rubbish on the ground in late autumn, when
plant bugs may be caught in hibernation; but we shall un¬
itedly have to depend on repelling their attacks when they threaten
cy, rather than on forestalling them by preventive measures.

need not weary the reader with a rehearsal of the various un-
ded recommendations which have been made for the destruction
lis insect, since only two of them have been previously tested
etual trial, and one of these was an entire failure. The exper-
e of Mr. Ayers, as reported by Prof. Riley in the American
>mologist and Botanist, is here in point. He says, “Mr Ayers
many applications of different kinds this spring to ward them
but even some cresylic soap, which we sent him for that express
>ose, proved ineffectual, as the following experience will show :

I first tried it according to directions, one pound of soap to ten
•ns of water, and it was impossible to kill the bugs with it ex-
by drowning ; and they would swim in it an unaccountably long
before they would die. I then doubled the strength, using one
Ld of the soap to five gallons of water. After immersing one of
1 in this twice it would get dry and fly away ; but by keeping
wet with it for ten minutes, it would finally kill him. I thor-
dy saturated several rows of trees with it at the strength above
! id, and three hours afterward found the bugs as thick as ever,

1 sucking away at the buds and leaves, as if nothing had hap-
d.’ ”

Ayers finally protected his pear trees by going over all of
l in the morning, and shaking each branch, causing the bugs
dl into a basin of soapsuds. Three repetitions of this operation
ed to be sufficient.

om my experience with them in the strawberry fields, last spring,
ve no doubt that they could be easily and very profitably cap-
l by boys with insect nets, and a little kerosene in tin buckets,
linly in the nursery, this method would be cheap and effective,
(eating the twigs back and forth with the net, in the cool of the
when the insects are sluggish, great numbers of them could be
lly caught ; and by occasionally inverting and shaking the net

132

over the kerosene, these would be instantly killed. I think that the
same method would be effective in the strawberry fields as well, *
unless this beating of the plants should interfere to some extent f
with fertilization.

Pyrethrum. As far as topical applications are concerned, I am
able to report that we have in pyrethrum a perfectly effective J
agent, which has at the same time the inestimable advantage, to
the strawberry grower, of being wholly harmless to the plant and % |
the consumer of the fruit. Recognizing the fact that ting1
was almost the only substance at all likely to prove useful H
which it was permissible to apply to strawberries while m i
fruit, I began to experiment with pyrethrum the first day of my i:
visit to Southern Illinois, in May. Some plant bugs of all ages, i
exposed in a vial to a little powdered pyrethrum,. began to show its H
effects in four minutes, by tumbling and sprawling about on their
backs and sides, both old and young being equally disturbed. In ,
nine minutes some of the youngest were helpless and unable to i.
walk, and in two more minutes nearly all but two were on their,
backs, the youngest motionless, the others feebly struggling. . In two ^
hours all were motionless or helpless, except one pupa, which var
reviving. This last finally recovered and escaped, but the others all

finally perished.

Some additional experiments, made at the Laboratory this fall,
were still more conclusive. Twenty-one adults were confined undffll
a bell glass and dusted with a mixture of one part of powdered ,
pyrethrum to ten parts of Hour, at 8:10 A. M., November 5, and a.
11 :4 5 only two were active, the others being but feebly alive. AL
1 -30 all were on their backs, showing signs of life only by a slow,
action of their legs. In 24 hours three or four were feebly alive r
and the remainder dead ; white in 48 hours all were dead.

Several trials were made with pyrethrum suspended in water, o.i
which the following is a fair sample: Thirty- five adults wer« i
sprinkled with water containing powdered pyrethrum in the ratio oj
15 grains to the pint, at 11:05 A. M., November 8. At 12 M. nearl;
all were lying on their backs, strongly affected ; at 6 :45 . m thij
evening, only eight were at all active, and the next morning bui,
three were able to keep their feet. On the afternoon of the 9th, all
were dead but four, and these succumbed during the night.

Trial was next made of both the flour and the water mixtures}
to test the supposition that the confinement of the insects had
increased the efficiency of the pyrethrum in the above experiments
Twenty of the bugs were thoroughly treated with water in whic.
twenty grains of pyrethrum to the pint had been shaken up, anj
the insects were then enclosed in a netting bag and exposed to thj
air. In an hour all were helpless, the greater number being appai
ently dead. Four hours after the treatment, five were feebly movin i
their legs, but made no attempt to walk, the fifteen remaining bem,
all apparently dead. In twenty-four hours all were dead but tw(|
and these perished a few hours later.

At the same time one part of pyrethrum powder was mixed witj
ten parts flour, and sprinkled upon twenty adults which were the

i

188

osed similarly to the open air. As this powder had been left
n for three or four days, it had doubtless greatly diminished in
iiency, and its action was less prompt than the smaller propor-
t suspended in water. In an hour many were still alive, but
I e were at all active. In four hours nine of the specimens could
k when placed upon their legs, and the remaining twenty-nine
ij Id all move their legs, but were otherwise helpless. In twenty-
; r hours all were dead but two, which could move their legs very
I vly and feebly, and by the morning following all were dead.

Tom the above experiments it is clear that in pyretlirum we have
: extraordinarily effective insecticide for this species, and that it
i be safely applied either in powder diluted with flour, or sus-
ded in water, — in the latter case being sprayed or sprinkled upon
plants.

he Kerosene Emulsion. — While this substance would be equally
dicable either to the strawberry field, the vegetable garden, or
orchard, it was found worth while, also, to experiment with a
lewhat cheaper insecticide, viz., the kerosene emulsion. This
ild, perhaps, be inapplicable to the strawberry field, except early
die season, as the kerosene would be apt to injure the flavor of
fruit ; but in the garden and orchard it might be applied as
lily as pyretlirum.

'or the first experiment, an emulsion of equal parts of kerosene
I milk was mixed writh twenty parts of water, the dilution emi¬
nently containing only two and one-half per cent, of kerosene,
pray of this was thoroughly applied to thirty-five adult plant
;s collected under leaves on the ‘22d of November, and in two
rs nearly all seemed dead, but in two hours more three were
imencing to revive. After another two hours, these three were
ning about, and two more were slowly reviving. In twelve hours
r of the specimens had fully revived, one showed some signs of
] , and the remainder were all motionless and apparently dead.

ks the specimens used in the preceding experiment were enclosed
a large bottle after being treated with the emulsion, a second
:i ilar experiment was tried upon forty-two individuals exposed to
open air. These were stupid with cold wThen brought in from
field* but all revived in a warm room, and became extremely
; ive. A fine spray of the dilution was applied until all were
j roughly wetted. These wrere then placed on blotting paper in the
tom of a breeding cage. In three hours, fifteen were seemingly
id, not moving at all when touched, but the remainder of them
e variously active, some of them crawling about. In another
i:ir and a half only four were dead, seven of the others being
3rd, and all the others scattered about the breeding cage, ap-
ently unharmed. In twenty hours six of the bugs were dead,

| 3e showed some signs of injury, but the remainder seemed en-
ly unharmed.

kn experiment was next tried upon twenty-five specimens with a
i, lure of kerosene emulsion of twice the strength of that given
ve, containing, consequently, five per cent, of kerosene. These
e placed under a large bell jar, so that they were exposed to the

i

I

134

air but were not dried off as in the preceding case by being placffl ft
upon blotting paper. In twenty minutes all those treated were ,
helpless and in two hours their condition was unchanged. In j
twenty hours all but eight were dead, and five hours later these |

had likewise perished.

Finally this last experiment was repeated substantially upon |
thirty-five5 adults, except that immediately after spraying them IS]
kerosene emulsion, they were placed upon absorbent paper, and ex- 1
posed to the air in a breeding cage. In half an hour two had j
crawled away, and one of the others showed signs ot life. In an it
hour and a half all three of these had escaped, one more was de-*
cidedly active, and a fifth was feebly active. In another hour thirtv
were apparently lifeless, the remaining five having recovered agj
escaped Seven hours after the application these thirty were stil*
motionless and, evidently, altogethei dead, . V II

As a result of the experiments with the kerosene emulsion, it rd
clear that spraying with a mixture containing five per cent, ot kero--:
sene is an effective remedy, and that it will be found available for*
field use The escape of a few of those experimented upon wpj
probably, chiefly due to the unequal mixture of the fluid.

SUMMARY.

The tarnished plant bug is one of the true bugs, con™f^ue*J ,j
destitute of jaws and provided with a suctorial beak Ihe aduly
or winged form is about a fifth of an inch m length by half that,
m width, oval, yellow, or greenish yellow more or less striped Or.
mottled with dusky. It is extremely variable, but the most constant)
marks are five longitudinal white lines on the thorax (often reducecj
to spots, which then occupy the anterior margin), a white y- shape
mark on the scutellum, which is sometimes broken into three jli
points arranged in a triangle, and a white blotch tipped with blaci
near the end of the wing covers.

The young are much less variegated than the adult, and mor
distinctly green. There are four stages between the egg and tnj
mature insect, corresponding to as many different moults, in ai|l
except the first stage, the young may be distinguished by the preej
ence of five black dots upon the back arranged m a pentagon!
form.

The old bugs winter under rubbish upon the ground, emerge ear
in spring, cluster upon the unfolding buds of fruit trees, the ir^
foliage of strawberries and other early vegetation, and there a,
their" eggs, old and young together draining the sap of these succuiei
growing parts. The effect is to arrest the development of the leaje-
and even to kill them, and in the case of the strawberry to inter ten
with the growth of the fruit, sometimes, at least, causing what ; .
known as the “buttoning” of the berry. Later m the season, tr
buds and leaves of flowering plants and vegetables, especially ,
cabbage and potato, are attacked. A

There are at least two broods in a year, one maturing in Me
and June, and the other in July and August, and it is possible
there is still another intermediate.

r

U

185

lthough a very few of these insects are devoured by birds, no
ural enemies are known to have any positive effect upon their
sobers; There is some evidence, however, that wet seasons are
irious to them.

he general distribution of these plant bugs at all seasons of the
r makes it impossible to exterminate them or seriously to
inish their numbers by artificial means, unless the clearing up
burning of rubbish late in autumn might have that effect,
attention of the orchard ist and gardener whose fruits and vege-
es are threatened by this insect, should rather be directed to
isures for defending directly the crops endangered. The insects
/ be caught easily in cool mornings by beating with an insect
the tips of the twigs and leaves of the plants in which they
ally lie concealed at that time, and may then be readily killed by
king them out into a bucket containing a little kerosene, or a
of kerosene on water. They may also be destroyed by sprinkling
lusting the foliage with pyrethrum, or spraying it with diluted
>sene emulsion. Any and even all these measures of defense may
lsed with great profit whenever the insects are numerous enough
hreaten any serious damage.

Te need yet to know the precise time and place of oviposition ;
jj degree of injury attributable to this insect, the conditions
er which this injury is peculiarly likely to become serious, especi-
in the strawberry field, and the exact number of broods appear-
in the course of the year.

dditional experiments with preventive and remedial agents are
vise to be desired.

The Dusky Plant Bug.

Derceocoris rapidus, Say.

Order Hemiptera. Family Capsids.

[Plate XIV, Figs. 1 and 2.1

Ais insect has not* hitherto been suspected of any injury to culti-
d vegetation, as far as I can learn, nor has it even been men-
ted in the literature of economic entomology. Its occurrence
; ywliere in strawberry fields last spring, with the mischievous
I ished plant bug already treated, both in the same ages, stages
: situations, and both found only on the fruit, left no room for
)t that this species was in part responsible for the mischief
irent.

! ; Anna its numbers were not remarkable, but at Centralia, in
s whose appearance gave evidence of damage scarcely inferior
i that noticed further south, I found it hardly less numerous
its companion. It is quite as widely distributed as Li/gus
laris, occurring from the Atlantic region to San Francisco ;
is less abundant, but still an extremely common insect through -
i Illinois.

U

■

ij '

j

186

This species was first described by Say under the name of Capsi, f
ravidus, in bis “Heteropterous Hemiptera of North America pub.)
lished in 1881,* and afterwards by Herrick- S^haefter! (1848) an
C. multicolor. In IJbler’s List of Hemipteia \\ est ol the Mississippi*
jhver (1876), it is catalogued under the genus Calocons , of l ieberi
but in his notices of the Hennptera Heteroptera m the Harris Col • *
lection! (1878), it is assigned to Derseocoris (Lirschb.), to which it |

clearly belongs.

DESCRIPTION.

Adult.-CPlate XIV, Fig. 1.) The adult is narrowly oval in out'
line about one-fourth of an inch (7 mm.,) m length and eleven;,
hundredths of an inch wide. The general color is dusky, bordered
with yellow, except the head and thorax, which are oiange brown, J

The head is triangular in outline, strongly arched above nearly |
smooth, provided with a few sparse, short hairs which becomej
longer and thicker in front of the antenme. There is a broac
shallow depression upon the vertex, and in front of this, upon eithei^
side of the middle line, a series of faint oblique grooves running
backwards and outwards nearly to the eye. Its color is orangtg
brown, deepening almost to black upon the tylus. The base aicl
tip of the rostrum are black, the remainder orange brown, like thf
head. The eyes are red or black. * _ j

The antennae are very long, reaching the tip of the abdomen J
The first joint is longer than the head, much thickened externally
shining black, and provided with short, appressed hairs. The secon
joint is nearly three times as long as the first, slender and straightl
slightly thickened outward, black, with a broad white band on tM
basal two-thirds. The third joint is about twice as long as the first «
white on the basal half and red or black distaliy. The fourth join
is about half as long as the third, with the basal third white an jjj

the remainder red.

The thorax is trapezoidal in outline, strongly narrowed for war*
the anterior margin being two-thirds the posterior. The ^ ^
strongly arched and the posterior angles broadly rounded, in
disc of the pronotum is feebly and sparsely punctured, obscurel j
rugulose and spaiingly provided with short, yellowish hairs,
transverse callus immediately behind the head is pale yellow, tin
remainder of the prothorax a darker yellow, the anterior tourm
being orange brown, the same color as the head. On the postencj
third is a transverse black band, rarely attaining the margins o
-either side, and usually constricted in the middle, often, m lac
completely divided, when it forms twro oblong black blotches 'pl&c®
transversely. The punctures and hairs of the propleura are H
those of the disc. Its color is brownish yellow, bordered below wit
paler. The side pieces of the thorax are brown shading into blacn
the coxoe, orange brown.

* Die Wanzeartigen Insektens, Y ol. VIII, p. 18, pi, 254. fig. 794.
t Troc. Dost. Soc. Nat. Hist., Vol. XIX, p. 400.
t Complete writings, Leconte’s edition, Vol. I, p. 239.

Che scutellum and wing covers are black, tinged with yellowish
i nearly umcoloious except at the sides, where they are broadly
j’gined with yellow. The cuneus is more or less tinged with red
ng sometimes almost carmine. The membrane is uniform dusky’

1 V(^ns black. The wing covers are more coarsely haired than
thorax, somewhat more evidently punctured, and minutely
J;ulose, as is also the scutellum, which is likewise of the same
or as the wing covers.

"he abdomen is black, with a red vitta upon either side, which
Dften inteiiupted on the posterior half of each segment, and con-
led forward on to the thorax, where the color changes to yellow.
3 last segment of the abdomen is wholly red.

-he thighs are brown, tinged with reddish, the tibiae yellow, and
se and the tarsi tipped with black. The tibiae are very strongly
nose, the posterior, especially, being armed on all sides with

nt, black spines ; and the thighs are provided with similar spines

bin.

Second Stage.— No examples of the species in the first sta^e
•e found in our collections. In the second stage, it is easily
ognized by the fact that the head, prothorax, and middle of the
loinen are red, the intermediate region being yellow or green,
other distinguishing characteristic is the snow-white tip andTbasai
I? to the terminal joint of the antennae, the remainder of the
it being red. In this stage the species is about .08 of an inch
g, and .04 wide.

he head is smooth, a little wrider than the prothorax, and pro-
ed with a very few, scattering, black hairs. The prothorax is
rower than the remaining segments, smooth and shining. The
sothoracic segment is about twice as long as the metathoracic,
h being green or yellow in color, and sparsely provided with
•3k hairs. Their posterior angles are free, projecting very slightly
kwards. The first two abdominal segments are closely united
it very short. The abdomen expands considerably, its general
line being broad ovate, widest before the middle. The color
I eath is led, except at the middle of the base of the abdomen,
jjre it is green. The femora and tibiae are red, the tarsi white with
ek tips. The rostrum is very long, reaching to the fifth abdom-
1 segment. The antennae are likewise long, the tip of the third
it attaining the end of the abdomen. They are pale in color at
base, reddening distally, the terminal joint being variegated
h white, as already mentioned.

hird Stage. — This stage is distinguished chiefly by the more
anced development of the second and third segments of the
rax, the posterior angles projecting backwards, making the hind
*gm widely emarginate. The scutellum is now outlined by a
laped groove upon the second segment. The abdomen is tinged
1 red, and the colors remain in general as in the preceding stage,
j antennae, however, are now red throughout, with the exception
he bases of the second, third, and fourth joints, and the tip of
latter, all of which are white. They are still considerably longer

138

thfm the body. The latter has now assumed an almost regularly
ova? form .measuring nearly one-fifth of an inch in lehgth and being

^Fwcrth'staqe or “Pupa.” -(Plate XIV, Fig. 2.) This is rather nar-

™ nvl in form a little widest behind the middle, four mm. wide

hv two ong The general color of the body is light green : the head

and eves and a broad transverse band across the anterior part of

tlm oronotum are red, and there is a transverse red patch upon

\ht abdomei? posterior to the wing pads; the latter are dusky except
the arniomen, p green ; the antennal are much louger

and base of the last joint, and

tanb of the penultimate, which are white ; the body is green

i with the exception of the tip of the abdomen, which is red

T'th side - the cox* and femora are red, the latter, somewhat

11 with ’white at the tip ; the tibiae of the two anterior pairs of

kg?d and aU the^tarei, are white with dusky tips; the tibiae of the

posterior legs are red.

life history.

* i. pnhripri in May this insect was found in all stages ex—

cepthhe fu ^r::rzd z Si

collected, a finally, pup* and adults were seen. From!

these d^aH is evident that the life history of the species corresponds,!
closelv to that of Loans lineolaris, and that the broods are probablyji
two in number The exact similarity of this species, with respect
I l iu;t0 m<l life history to the tarnished plant bug already dis¬
ced makes it e dent that measures found effective for tha
Secies wifi likewise serve for this. The reader is there ore re errec.
to the discussion of the injuries to vegetation, and methods of p
vention and remedy, given under the preceding species. . lj

d. By a cylindrical, brown thousand-legged worm.

THE STRAWBERRY MILLIPEDE.

Cambcila annulata (Say) Cope.

Class Myriapoda. Order Diplopoda.

In May, 1883, I received from Mr. C. W. Butler, of Anna, Illm^
a single slender, cylindrical millipede (thousand-legs , said to bt i
hppn taken from the interior of a ripe strawberry. It was abo
inch and a haTf in length, and had entered the berry by a sma
hole about one-sixteenth of an inch in diameter. W hen ,^|
was coiled within the berry, entirely . concealed m a cavity ab
size of a Lima bean. I referred this specimen for determin

139

3

learned from him that it was the species origi-
ly described by Say as lulus annulatus, but referred by Cone to
genus Cambala.* During this same month, Prof. French of

rbondale, reported to the “Prairie Farmer” the occurrence of what
3 probably the same species of milJipede in an old held of straw-
ries m Car bon dale, Jackson county, where it was doing consid-

b e ^Pury, attacking, however, according to his observations only
over-ripe and softened fruit. ’ y

n the “Western Rural” for December 22d, Dr. E. L. Sturfevant
ector of the New York State Experiment Station, is said to have

!?ii lnT rVif,theSe ln8e0tS as oocurr'ng under decaving straw!

eath a smgle^'rr'y" ^ iudividuals beҤ'

'be earliest American observations of this form of injury to the
iwberry with which I am acquainted, were recorded in the second
lme ot the American Entomologist, page 59, in the number f-r
•ember, 1869; where Mr B. D. Walsh, then State Entomologist
linois, repoiied having found, during the preceding summer two
met thousand-legged worms, lulus and Polydesmus, burrow ino-
i| strawberries near Rock Island, Illinois, but only in very small
ibers. A different injury to the plant was described bv the
writer on page 34 of the Practical Entomologist for December
>. A correspondent writing from New York incloses to Mr’
sh a specimen of the genus Julus with the following statement
terning its injuries to vegetation:

This destructive worm has possession of the length and breadth
jy garden, and of many others in the vicinity. In the daytime
out of sight, inhabiting the ground, but is often found on Run¬
up a stone or a piece of board. During the night it travels

st°nnf there'11/ aCe » tbe f?unf 9ften in Egging I have found
st of them, from the patriarchs of a mahogany color down to

i as were no bigger Ilian small nieces of white thread The

itment against them is this: They feed on the line fibrous roots

iost plants, but are especially destructive to strawberries. These

slowly work at, gradually dwarfing them to mere weeds blos-

3 and fruit having vanished forever. The same dwarfing i’s geen

lany other plants, young trees and vines, which must be referred

le same agency. Their scattered position in the ground efifect-

r conceals them from any warfare that I am able to wage

r. Walsb regarded the species as new, and described it under
! name lulus multistriatus ; but on page 70 of the same volume,

(ten ihes this species with lulus ceruleocinctus of Wood me-
ply described. 5 F

, Europe an species of Iulidae has long been known to burrow the
ol the strawberry m a manner precisely similar to that here
■ted. In his Entomologie Horticole,” Boisduval says that this
gean strawberry millipede, Blaniuhts guttnlatus, “is usually
jt under the straw in strawbeiry beds; it introduces itself into
irnt, at the time ot maturity, devours the pulp, and remains

roceedings American Philosophical Society, Vol. XI, (1869) p. 181.

140

coiled up in the interior like a small snake. The hok by ^ which it

ratberries^re pfckeTXh undoubtedly contain Iuli. We onki
straw Dernei £ ih m uv their cracking between our teeth

ThisV small myriapod prefers the larger species of strawberry, bu
the small ones which grow on Fragana vesca are not exernp . [I
The following is Say’s description from his “Complete Writings, •
Yol. II, p. 25:

“Rotlv cylindrical, immarginate, above brownish with a slight tin

.« fed immaculate beneath yellowish white ; segments each wil

«Lut fifteen elevated obtuse lines, of which four are equal dorp

f nvrifo m larger, oblique oue on the stigmata and about te

demeasin“in size to the feet, anterior segment as long as thethre

succeeding ones conjunctly and glabrous, posterior one glabrou
succeeaii g i ^ the tvV0 precedmg ones, united an

obtusete rounded at tip°; head whitish before; antenna white; eye
transverse linear, black; vertex not distinctly impressed; a ratM
common species in the Southern States. . '*

To this I may add that the antenme are much shorter and thickj
firm tho^e of lulus, and the eyes are greatly reduced, being reprj
sen Ll only by a single series of not very distinct ocelli on ejc !

tains under logs and in rotten wood. _ P

The Tnlidfe have been frequently charged with causing a scab
onnearance of the surface of potatoes, and have been occasions
Wvn to <maw and penetrate the tubers in the ground. They to
afso heeniouud devouring the bulbs of lilies and other garc

flowers. # . -n ..

Tn the Eleventh Eeport from this office (p. 44), Mr. Coquillet u
scribes an injury to corn in the ear, done by lulus impresm
which because of this practice, he gives the common name o |
rmmanod Dr. F. W. Godmg, of Ancona, informed me last l
that he had found a millipede boring the stems of his cunants.
a letter of that date he says :

“I send yon by this mail two specimens of the common ‘thousa
Wcred worm ’ which I obtained from my currant bushes, whi<
the act of Siting the pith of the stalk, They appear to have gna
off the top of the brush, and then quietly fed upon the pi • 1

The specimens accompanying this letter were the abundant I

impressus , Say. . nJJ

In Europe, various species of Iulids have been reported by Oil
in his Farm Insects, as distinctly injurious to roots of whoa , I
bJe and onions, to potatoes, to sprouting beans m the garden,!
to°neas and potted plants. He has aiso known them to J|
cauliflower and cabbage by gnawing the plants just beneat I

surface of the soil.

141

bey live largely on decaying vegetable matters, however and
le of the species, at least, clearly prefer these to the fresh tissues
slants. The eggs of the lulidse may often be found in +he spring
masses of from sixty to seventy, in holes excavated in the ground'
i young are quite different in appearance from the adults, having
eight rings and but few legs. Tlieir development is rapid, and
f probably attain their full maturity before midsummer. Many

;he adults live over winter, and may be found in early spring in
usual places selected by insects for their hibernation. The
dm are chiefly nocturnal animals, remaining concealed by day
!i ; wandering freely about at night. The only mode of destroying
m which has hitherto proved useful, is that of entrapping them
slices of potato turnip apple, or masses of other attractive food
(ttered through the held, and covered with pieces of board, under
eh the myriapods will collect during the night in considerable
abers. it these lures are then visited late in the evening and
f early in the morning, before the worms have scattered to their
ng pieces, they may often be captured by scores and hundreds
killed in hot water or kerosene.

r. Sturtevant trapped them successfully in a garden where they
e injuring Sweet Williams, by exposing small lumps of mingled
r and molasses, taking as many as thirty-live worms at a time,
er a lump the size of a silver dollar; but attempts to poison
n with Paris green were total failures, this substance having
apparent injurious effect on them.

D. Injuring the Crown or the Main Root.

-

h

r

1. Boring out the interior.

A small, reddish caterpillar, with sixteen legs.
The Strawberry Crown Miner.

Anarsia lineatella , Zeller.

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tineecue.

[Plate VI, Figs. 5 and 6.1

Shis species having been already treated in my preceding report,
reader is referred to that publication, pages 76-82.

I

142

b. A small, white, footless grub, with brown head.

The Strawberry Crown- Borer.

Tylodermci f vagaries, Riley.

Order Coleoptera. Family Curculionid^e.

[Plate IX, Fig. 6.1

A full and elaborate account of this species was given in my last
report, and I recur to it here only to add a few particular re-
specting its life history. _ . _ ,, ,

Thp Infest observations mentioned in the article m the lwelrth
Report were made on the 10th of April. 1881. On the 20th of May
i du. up at Oentralia a great number of plants from fields in which
the borers had been abundant the previous year, and opened the
crowns without finding so much as a single specimen. On the 15th
of June, a very few adult beetles were still to be seen in strawbeny
fields at Anna, as reported to me by Mr. 0. W. But ler <

nlace On the 9th of July, at Anna, larvae of the new brood woe
found in the main roots of strawberries, by my assistant, Mr. Barman;
and at Villa Ridge on the 11th, larv®, pup* and moot ly trans-
formed images occurred in the same situation On the 12th pupa
and imao-os but just transformed, were also found at Anna, and a
few larvae occurred among plants which had been set that spring.
On the 1st of August, mature larv* and seveial adults were taken
from the crowns of strawberries at Cobden, although they were here
as e'sewhere throughout Illinois, very rare, even in fields where
they had been abundant the year before.

On the 6th of August, all the stages were found at Oentralia, the
larv* being all full-grown. On the 6th of September when Mr
Webster visited this place, no larv* occurred in the plants, but adults
and pup® only were taken from them. These were in the margin
of a field adjacent to some runaway strawberries which had spread
throughout the orchard, where they had been allowed to grow with¬
out interference for several successive years On the [th ot •
eember, Mr. Garman found at Anna a single adult taken in the
upper part of the root of the strawberry plant; and several oc¬
curred on the 10th among rubbish in a field which had not been
mulched.

These observations extend somewhat the period over which the i
development of the brood is scattered, but give us no slightest h nt
of a second brood. It also appears that in rare instances bee
hibernate within the crown of the strawberry, and consequently may
be conveyed to a new field by plants dug up in the spring. ’
ever, as only a single beetle lias been found by us m these ' . JJ

tions, out of the many hundreds of crowns examined, it is evirten ,
that this is too ..infrequent an occurrence to have any lmportanH
significance. Respecting the undoubted tact of a grea c i
in the numbers of this insect as compared with those occurring law
year, I have no explanation to offer, since the weather would noi^
seem to have been unfavorable to them.

143

Aphis, sp. Plant-louse.

u sPecies of plant-louse belonging to the genus Aphis, but not
ermined as to species, because only the wingless female has yet
n seen, was common at Centralia, in Southern Illinois, in No-
lber, 1882, at which time it was concentrated upon the crown of
plant, and upon the main root, between the bases of the fibrous
Is, just beneath the surface of the ground.

s it doubtless occurred upon the leaves earlier in the season,
ias been treated more at length on another page, under the head
nsects affecting the foliage.

i ■

2. Gnawing and perforating the substance.

i

i

a. Hard, straight, slender, cylindrical larvae (wire-worms).

mm

Wire -Worms.

i

i

Elateridce .

[Plate VII, Figs. 4 and 5.1

iese well-known insects are treated at some length in the sixth
rt of this office (pp. 21 to 32), where strawberries are mentioned
ng the plants subject to their attack; and to that article the
er is referred for a sufficient discussion of them.

White grubs, four or five times as long as wide, with abdomen
at least twice as long as head and thorax, and with tip of

body swollen, rounded and smooth.

k

The White Grubs.

Lachnosterna , sp.

Cotalpa lanigera, L.

Allorhina nitida, L.

j e above species, to be treated at some length under the head of
its injurious to the fibrous roots, are mentioned here also be-
} they likewise devour the main root of the strawberry, often
inly killing the plant.

144

c.

Small white grabs, not more than one-fifth of an inch in length, J
about twice as long as wide, with abdomen but little longer
than head and thorax, and with tip of body not swollen.

The Strawberry Root-Worms.

Colaspis brunnea, Fab.

Paria aterrima, Oliv.
Scelodonta pnbescens, Mels.

i!

For similar reasons to those mentioned above, the root-worms are
to be included under this head. All gnaw and perforate the main
root of the plant, often completely riddling it. Their injuries will be
fully discussed under the section relating to the fibrous roots.

E. Injuring the fibrous roots. .

1. Hard, cylindrical, straight larva (see page 140).

2. Large white grabs.

The Common White Grubs.

Lachnosterna, sp.

Order Coleoptera. Family Scarab.zeid.ze.

[Plate VII, Fig. 1.1

These universally abundant and thoroughly well-known insects
compel the especial attention of the strawberry grower because o
their injuries to the roots of his plants. They have been so ire
quently described and figured in generally accessible works that l
is not necessary to enter into detail in this connection, but 1 ay
thought it best to summarize here the essential lacts relating t|

them. 'If

The insects commonly known as the “white grubs, or gru |
worms” (Plate VII, Figs. 1,2), belong to a variety of species wine
have been clearly discriminated in the beetle stage, but not in tii
larval condition. They are all large, soft- bodied, thick, white gru
with yellowish or dark brown heads. The skm is so thin an
transparent that the air tubes and viscera can be seen througn l

The adults (Plate VII. Figs. 1, 3 and 4), are the “May beetles
or “June beetles,” or “dor-hugs,” so abundant in early summe
when they attract especial notice in their evening nights. l
bodies are oblong oval, convex, and generally of a brownish cow
The antennae are commonly ten-jointed, the club consisting ol tn
leaf-like pieces, which open and shut like the leaves ol a boo
The clypeus is short and wide, and the mandibles have a bio

145

W- v s

iding process on the inner side, flattened internally, and crossed
1 ridges, like a millstone. The 'thorax is transversely quadrate, or
i| rly so, and the extremity of the abdomen is exposed beyond the
ig covers. The legs are rather long, the first pair being armed
ernally with two or three teeth ; and the claws are bifid at the
These beetles appear in vast swarms during the month of
y— earlier or later, according to the season and the latitude,
sy are quite voracious, and often strip the leaves from both fruit
1 ornamental trees. Forest trees are likewise frequently attacked
them, especially the oak, but in this stage they do not attack
strawberry, all the damage to that plant being done by the
vae in the ground.

K

>oon after pairing, the female creeps into the earth, especially
erever the soil is loose and rough, and dies after depositing forty
fifty eggs. These, hatch in the course of a month, and the grubs,
wing slowly, do not commonly attain full size until the early
ing of the third year, when they construct an ovoid chamber
i 'd with a gelatinous fluid, change into pupae, and soon after into
ties. Occasionally, however, individuals complete their trans-
tnation in the ground in autumn, and hibernate in the adult con-
on, without leaving their pupal cells until the following spring.

-he injuries done to the strawberry by this grub are similar to
se inflicted upon other plants, as they devour both the princi-
and fibrous roots. These injuries are most apparent, of course,
strawberry fields which have been newly set upon ground pre-
usly infested by the grub, especially upon old grass lands; but
re is some evidence that the beetles lay their eggs freely in the
iwberry fields themselves.

1his is one of the most unsatisfactory species with which the
i iwberry grower has to deal, and no efficient remedy has as yet
n discovered for its ravages. The fact that the beetles are strongly
racted by light at night, during their most active season, may be
d to lure them to destruction, by so arranging reflecting lamps
lanterns that the beetles flying against them shall drop into tubs
water upon which enough kerosene has been poured to form a
>•

1 ffie grubs in a field already planted can probably be success-
y combated only by digging them out and killing them by hand
;3rever their presence is betrayed by the withering of the plants.

|l promising field for experiment is afforded by the probability
i t fresh gas lime may be used to advantage to clear of white
bs ground which has been previously infested by them, but
ich it is desired to use for strawberry plantations. This sub-
! uce, being a waste product of gas works, can usually be had in the
i'inity of towns, for the expense of hauling. In its fresh state it
I atal to vegetation, and can therefore be applied only when the
und is being plowed up for another crop. On exposure to the
however, it parts with most of the sulphur, which renders it
irious to plant-life, and becomes converted chiefly into carbonate
i l sulphate of lime, in which condition it is a valuable fertilizer
most soils. For the purpose of destroying the grubs in the

I

'

i

146

ground, gas lime should
plowed under in autumn,
earth, a second dressing

ately after plowing. . jji ■

The value of this application is attested by Mr. J. H. Hale of
Connecticut, who writes me that he has used gas lime to help rid
the land of grubs, and that following this, he has had grand crops

of berries.

The use of flour of sulphur for the purpose of repelling the grubs
from newly set plants is also recommended by Mr. Hale. He says:
“In a field full of them we saved all of our strawberry plants by
mixino- flour of sulphur in and around the roots of each plant at
time of planting; and in some rows where this was not done, most
of the plants were destroyed.” , J

The Goldsmith Beetle.

Cotal'pa lanigera, L.

be thickly spread upon the surface and
and allowed to remain all winter in the «
being also applied to the surface immedi-

Order Coleoptera. Family Scarab^ed^.

1

[Plate VII, Fig. 2 and 3.1

The larva of this species is so extremely similar to the common
white grub described in the preceding article, that the two are
doubtless ordinarily confounded.

It is however, usually much less abundant than the preceding, I
although it sometimes occurs locally in destructive numbers. Hie
larva is known to feed upon the roots of clover as well as upon
strawberries, and it is probably an indiscriminate feeder.

The beetle (Plate VII, Fig. 2) is about nine-tenths of an inch long,
broad oval in shape, of a lemon-yellow color above, glittering like
burnished gold on the top of the head and thorax ; the under side
of the body is copper-colored, and thickly covered with whitish wool, j
and the legs are brownish yellow, or brassy, shaded with green L
These fine beetles begin to appear in Massachusetts about the mid¬
dle of May, and continue generally till the 20th of June. In the j
morning and evening twilight they come forth from their letiea s,
and fly about with a humming and rustling sound among the |
branches of trees, the tender leaves of which they devour. I ear
trees are particularly subject to their attacks, but the elm, hi^^oiy,
poplar, oak, and probably a*lso other kinds of trees, are fiequen e
and injured by them. During the middle of the day they remai
at rest upon the trees, clinging to the under sides oi he leaves, |
and endeavor to conceal themselves by drawing two or three leaxes
together, and holding them in this position with their long unequal i
claws. In some seasons they occur in profusion, and then may oe
obtained in great quantities by shaking the young trees on wincn
they are lodged in the daytime, as they do not attempt to ny w i
thus disturbed, but fall at once to the ground.*

• •

*Harris.

147

he following comparative description of the larva of the goldsmith
le is quoted from Prof. Packard :

arva. (Plate VII, Fig. 3.) “The larva is a whitish grub, about
inch and three quarters long and over half an inch thick, with
dlowish brown scale on the part corresponding to the thorax,
o nearly resembles the young of the May beetle that it requires
ose examination to tell them apart. The proportions of the two
much the same ; if anything, the Cotalpa is slightly shorter and
ker, and its bo ly is covered with short stiff hair, especially at
end, while in the May beetle the hairs are much finer, sparse,
the skin is consequently shiny. They also differ in the head,
eing fuller, more rounded in Cotalpa, the clypeus shorter and
convex, while in the May beetle it is flattened. The upper lip
rum) is in Cotalpa longer, more rounded in front and narrower
he base, and full convex on the surface, while in the young May
le it is flat. The antennae are larger and longer in the goldsmith
le, the second joint a little over half as long as the third, while
je May beetle grub it is nearly three-quarters as long; the third
' is much longer than in the latter grub, while the fourth and
are of the same relative length as in the May beetle, but much
ver. The jaws (mandibles) are much alike in both, but not quite
cute in the Cotalpa as in the other, nor are the inner teeth so
ainent. The maxilla is much longer and with stouter spines,
the palpi are longer and slenderer in the grub of Cotalpa than
le other, though the joints have the same relative proportions in
; the basal joint is nearly twice as long as in the May beetle.

le under lip (labium) is throughout much longer, and the palpi,
gh two- jointed in each, are much longer and slenderer in the grub
otalpa than in that of the May beetle.

le feet are much larger and more hairy in the Cotalpa. Both
3 are about an inch and a half long, and a third (.35) of an
thick at the widest part.”

ie eggs are said by Dr. Lockwood of New Jersey to be one-tenth
n inch in length, waxy-white, and semi-translucent, long ovoid
!>rm, and perfectly symmetrical.

ie life history of this species was unknown until determined by
Lockwood in 1869. The following summarized account of it is
ensed from his article published in the American Naturalist
hac year (pages 186-192, and 441-442). The beetles, as already
d, appear in May or June, pair in the latter month, and de-
their eggs almost immediately. Those observed hatched in
ty-seven days, but the ordinary period is probably about three
s. The young larvae were one-third of an inch in length, by
enth of an inch in thickness, dull white, with dull yellow
is and legs,#and the contents of the extremity of the abdomen
! ing dark through the transparent skin. They fed and flourished
the roots of clover and grass. Their life history is apparently
ical with that of the ordinary white grub, although its details
ot be made out with certainty. The transformations observed
completed in the earth in autumn, the beetles not emerging
the ground, however, until the following May.

ft! i

14S

The latter are believed by Dr. Lockwood to prefer cultivated land
for the deposition of their eggs, differing in this respect from the
June beetles, which- find their favorite breeding place m old sod.
The adults are similar in habit to Lachnosterna. They are known
to feed upon the leaves of pear, hickory, poplar, and oak, as well
as sweet -gum and blackberry. They feed in the morning and even-
incr twilight, flying and buzzing about among tbe trees and showing
the same susceptibility to light as the June beetle The injury to
the strawberry of which the larva is capable, may best be described
in the words of Dr. Lockwood himself.

“When on a visit in September last to the farm of a celebrated
strawberry grower, in Monmouth county, N. J., my attention was
directed to certain large patches badly thinned out by, as the phrase
went, ‘the worm.’ The plants were dead on the surface and easily
pulled up, the roots being eaten off below.

It was observable that the fields which presented the worst ap¬
pearance were all of the same kind of plant; that known as Wil¬
son’s Albany Seedling. Besides this, there were nine other varieties i
under culture: Barnes’ Mammoth, Schancks Excelsior, the Asn-
culturist, Triomphe de Gaud, Cutter’s Seedling, the Jucunda, riue
Apple, Early Scarlet, and Brooklyn Scarlet. While the Wilson stood
second to none of these as a prolific fruit-bearer, yet it lell behind
them in vigorous plant growth. Hence, while every kind was more
or less affected, the other varieties seemed saved by their own
growth and energy from a destruction so thorough as was that of
the Wilson. These patches were all planted in the spring, and all
received the same treatment, the ground being kept open and tree
from weeds. The amount of the spring planting was seven and a

half acres.

Of the Wilson’s there were three different patches, in places quite
separated from each other, and on not less than five different kinds
of soil. These patches were among and contiguous to those ot me
other varieties. While all suffered more or less, the cmet injury
befell the Wilson’s, of which not less than two acres were irretriev-

ably ruined

An examination turned up the depredator, who was none other
than the larva of the Goldsmith beetle, now engaged in the mst j
one of its allotted three summer campaigns ot mischief, These,
grubs were from the eggs deposited in June, m the well 1 e( ®
clean soil, which, I have said elsewhere, I thought the Cotalpa pre-
ferred to meadow or grass lands.”

Bespecting remedies, the remarks made under the preceding species
will apply to this.

149

I

“The Fig Eater.”

Allorhina nitida, L.

Order Coleoptera. Family Scarab^iid^.

[Plate VII, Fig. 6.1

This species, abundant southward, but unknown in the northern
rt of the State, is included among insects injurious to the straw-
rry, upon the strength of a statement made by Prof. Riley, in
e first volume of the American Entomologist (p. 24d). Speaking
the adult beetle, he says :

“In the larval state they feed on the roots of plants, and are
metimes quite injurious to the strawberry.”

The larvae are so similar to the common white grub in appear¬
ed and habits, as well as in food preferences, that, like the pre-
ding species, they have doubtless been commonly confounded

th it.

The adult beetle is called the “fig eater” in the Southern States,
>m its habit of feeding upon the ripened fig, and it is also known
devour other fruits as well.

The larva seems commonly to live upon the roots of grass, but
obably feeds like its nearest relatives, almost indiscriminately, ac-
rding to situation. The following observations made by Mr. L. 0.
3 ward, and reported in the Canadian Entomologist for October,
79, will illustrate the normal habit of the larva :

“While walking through the Capitol grounds a few hours after a
avy shower ol rain, I observed these larvae in great numbers upon
e stone pavement, north and east of the Capitol building. I
unted up to three hundred, and then came to a spot where they
ore so thick that I had to give it up. I certainly saw thousands,
arly all of which were dead, either from heat or from having been
Adden upon Upon interviewing the superintendent of the grounds,
learned that at this season of the year the grubs always make
eir appearance in like numbers after a hard rain. This gentle-
I an informed me, and his statement was corroborated by several
hers, that frequently the sweepers of a morning, in going over
e walks, would collect at the bottom of the hill as many as a bushel
the grubs. The pavement is edged on both sides by a two-inch
rb, and the larvae falling over this are unable to return; only
ose grubs inhabiting the earth near the curb would reach the
ilk, and the great numbers killed in this way after every shower,
fiord an index to the immense number which the entire lawn must
ntain. Yet, in spite of this most serious drawback, as one would
Rurally call it, the grass over the entire plot is so fresh and green
to call for universal admiration.”

! “The movements of the larvae upon the smooth pavement were
ry interesting. The characteristic bend of the body unfits tLem
r walking on smooth surfaces, and every live individual that I
served was upon its back moving forward quite rapidly by the

L

alternate expansion and contraction of the segments. This mode of
locomotion seemed strange at first, but upon reflecting that the
•probable natural position of the larva m the earth is upon its bacjj
with its legs grasping the grass roots, it seemed not so unnatural
after all. The strong transverse corrugations and rows ot bristles
upon the dorsum, taken in connection with the extremely business,
like and natural air with which the larvae took this position, and
the rapid progress which they made while in it, would seem to indi¬
cate that the back is used for locomotion with these insects more
than has perhaps been suspected.

This beetle may be readily distinguished from the other large leaf
beetles by the fact that the scutellum is invisible, being conceal*!
by a backward projecting process of the prothorax. ihe head is
quadrate, with an obovate extension in front ; upper surface with a trail*
verse ridge on each margin and one in the middle. Elytra with roundejl
shoulders, and slightly narrowing posteriorly with two slight, longi¬
tudinal ridges on each. General color, a beautiful velvety green,
with a broad margin of orange yellow around the elytra. Length,
three-quarters of an inch ; width of elytra across the shoulders,
about one-half the length. The antennae have a club at the end
similar to that of the previous genera ; all the claws of the feet are
simple and equal, neither split nor unequal m size ; the anterior

coxae conical and prominent.

From the common white grub, the larva may be distinguished,
when living, by the fact that when placed upon a smooth surface
it turns upon its back and progresses in that position, whereas the
common white grub crawls awkwardly upon its legs. Ihe larva ot
Allorhina is further distinguished by the fact that all the segments
are densely hairy, while in that of Lachnosterna the three thoracic
segments, and the three abdominal segments preceding the last, are
destitute of pubescence, and furnished with only a few long, slender

hai rs .

The life history of this species and its habits in general are so
strictly similar, as far as known, to. those of the white grub, that
the remarks concerning remedies against that species will apply also

to this.

8. Small white grubs.

The Strawberry Koot-Worms.

Colaspis brunnea, Fab.

Paria aterrima, Oliv.
Scclodonta pubescens, Mels.

Order Coleoptera. Family Ckrysomelidje.

[Plate VII, Fig. 7. and Plates VIII and IX.l

In nearly every strawberry field visited during the past two year:
in Southern Illinois, except those recently established, varying ruin
bers of small, thick, white grubs could be found infesting the root;

151

.1 crowns of the plant, either eating the smaller roots or pene-
ting and mining the interior of the crown and main root. These
re usually confounded by fruit growers under the general name of
*own-borer;” but a cursory examination was sufficient to show
d at least two insects were represented by them, one form, which
urred only in the crown and main root, being destitute of legs,
i the other, found most commonly in the earth about the plant’
hough sometimes penetrating the crowns from without, being
'ays provided with three short pairs of jointed legs on the seg"
nts immediately behind the head. The first, or "footless, form
s the true crown-borer , {Tyloderma frag aria,) which was fully dis¬
used in the last report from this office; and the second was evi-
ltly that known as the strawberry root-worm, to which Prof. Riley
s the first to call attention.

-

t was at first assumed that these root-worms represented but a
gle species; but actual breeding of specimens taken from various
Pities in Union county, and at different seasons of the year, has
illy demonstrated the fact that they belong to three distinct, but
lely related species, all members of the same family, (Chryso-
i-idae,) and of the same tribe (Eumolpini), but of different genera.
Vhile the injuries inflicted by these various root- worms are ap-
ently identical, their periods and life histories are somewhat
erent, and it will consequently be best to treat them separately,
save repetition, I give first the characters common to all three
cies, following these by a separate discussion of each.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERS.

'he root- worms may be known from the crown-borer w (Plate IX,

. 6, a), to which they bear a strong superficial resemblance, by
absence of jointed legs in the latter, as already noticed; and
n young white grubs, (Plate VII, Fig. 1, 2) with which they are
n associated in the ground, both feeding alike upon the root of
strawberry, by their relatively shorter and thicker bodies, by
greatly inferior development of the abdomen, and by the fact
t they are not nearly as much arched from before backwards as
grubs.

i the root-worms, the length is only about twice the breadth,
le in white grubs of that size, it is four or five times as great.
Jthe former the abdomen is but little longer than the head and
tjx taken together, while in young white grubs it is at least twice
ong. The latter insects have also the posterior half of the abdo-
l somewhat swollen, rounded and smooth, while in the root-
ms the terminal segments are smaller than the preceding, and
at least equally wrinkled and tuberculate.

' COMMON CHARACTERS.

j arvcc. —The root-worms here treated (Plate VII, Fig. 7; and IX,
3.) are all of nearly the same size, 3 to 4 mm. long (.12 to
iuch) by half as wide, and all are white, except the head and
1 segment, which are pale yellowish brown. The segments are
ve in number behind the head, with a rudimentary thirteenth

152

one in which the vent is situated. The first segment, the one beat- |
ing ’the first pair of legs, is of a firmer consistence than the others, «
leathery and smooth above, and as long as the two following together;
and each of the remaining eleven is marked on the back by about j
three transverse dorsal folds, which terminate on the sides m large, t
low elevations, pointed ovate in form, (the pointed ends "jM I
upwards), one to each segment of the body, except the first and the |

last. ]

The spiracles are nine in number, the first larger than the others, 1
and placed between the first two thoracic segments, the remainder |
on the abdominal segments lrom the first to the eighth. 1 hey are P
at the lower ends of the ovate elevations mentioned above, and just I
within a tortuous longitudinal groove which separates these eleva- J
tions from a series of prominent tubercles which extends along the l
sides one tubercle to each segment. Still beneath the just* men- I
tioned row of tubercles, is another longitudinal groove, and a second !
series of tubercles; and these, again, are separated from the ridges |
which extend across the under surface of the body, by still another *
irregular longitudinal groove. Finally, these ventral ridges, which ?
are but one to a segment, have their ends cut off by a series of |
oblique grooves, each extending from before backwards and inwards, |
thus forming a fourth series of elevations, — these last being on a 1
line with the coxae, of the legs borne by the thoracic segments.

There is little peculiar in this external structure of the segment,
and it differs but slightly from that common to a great many soft- ir
bodied, subterranean larvae.

The legs are about as long as their corresponding segments, and !
white with the exception of their claws, which are dark brown at |
the tips. They are provided with a few slender, white hairs, becoffi-l
ing shorter and more spine-like towards the end of the leg.

The head is smooth, somewhat flattened in front, with a few
slender, scattered hairs. The clypeus is transverse, trapezoidal,
narrowing forwards, and the labrum is rounded m front. ike air ;
teume are minute, white, three- or four-jointed, the outer angle or ^
the third joint being continued in a cylindrical process (sometime- ,
appearing as a separate, accessory article) which reaches to the m _

(* , l j _ ! M 1 n m fl/Mi h im’nT

of the triangular fourth joint.

J

The maxiiloe are moderately developed. The cardinal and basa
pieces are not well distinguished; the maxillary lobe is armed witi
stout spines within ; the palpi are prominent and four-jomted. M
labium is thick and semi-circular, with little appearance of a p ;
pigerous tubercle. The labial palpi are slender, cylindrical, and um .
ticulated. The mandibles are dark brown, with black tips, and art;
without marginal teeth or lobes.

Pupa. — (Plate IX, Fig. 2.) The pupae are three and a half
long by two and a half wide. They are white, except the eyes an )
the^mandibles, which show through the outer envelope red or wao ,

* Theee ventral tubercles are more prominent in the larva of Oolaspis than in^a | :
other genera, and are a Iso more strongly spinose; but they are tin iri an

in the figure publish- d in the Third Report of the State Entomologist of Missouri, a

reproduced in the American Entomologist for 1880.

■an the pupae are matured. The head is bent against the breast
l the legs folded against the body beneath, the posterior pair
Qg applied against the sides of the abdomen, and the thighs of
two anterior pairs projecting at right angles. The wing covers
wrapped around the posterior pair of legs, and the antenna?
brace the knees of the two anterior pairs.

■he front of the head is set with a few long spines with inflated
es, and three transverse rows of similar spines appear upon the
rax, one near the anterior border, another near the posterior,
l the third intermediate. Six similar hairs occur upon the scutel-
i, and a row of about six or eight boiders each of the ab-
iinai segments above. The three last segments are variously
jiied with spines, differing in shape and direction according to the
us , and the knees of the last pair of legs are furnished with
i it hooks and long slender hairs with inflated bases. The sheaths
;he antennae are beset externally with conical tubercles.

Idults.— The adult beetles all belong to the great family Chryso-
f idae, which contains many of the most destructive enemies of
iculture, and to the group Eumolpini. As defined by Leconte
[ Horn m their recent revision of the “Classification of the Coleop-
t of North America,” this group is thus distinguished: “Body
mg, convex, rarely rounded or oval, usually metallic, sometimes
faceous or spotted. Head moderate, deflexed, front wide eyes
re or less emarginate; antennae filiform, or slightly thicker ex-
lally, usually long; widely separated at the base. Prothorax
erally with distinct lateral margin, which is, however, rarely
ced. Pygidium covered by the elytra, which are rounded at tip.

• j cox? seParated by the prosternum, globose, cavities closed
md- . ^egs moderate, the front ones sometimes elongated ; tarsi
ad, third joint deeply bilobed, claws appendiculate or bifid in our
era.

{

DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERS.

s may be inferred from the fact that these root-worms all belong
l ’he same tribe of their family, the characters which distinguish
ii m their immature stages are few and trivial. The adult
des belonging to separate genera, may be discriminated without
culty ; but the larvae of Scelodonta and Paria especially, are
ost indistinguishable.

I y an attentive examination, the larvae of Colaspis may be easily
| irate d from the others, by the decided prominence of the two
s oi tubercles at the ends of the ventral ridges, (Plate IX, Fig. 4, E, a,
7> Ly the strong spine-like hairs which these tubercles bear,
also by the peculiar character of the posterior segments beneath
+ if ^ and 13). In Scelodonta and Paria the eleventh

twelfth segments are similar to the preceding in structure, except
i they are decidedly shorter, and the tubercles upon their dorsal
les are much more prominent. Each makes, however, a com-
i e ring, encircling the abdomen, and the rudimentary thirteenth
! uent is scarcely more than a soft papilla containing the vent.

lit in the larva of Colaspis, the twelfth ventral segment is deeply
| widely emarginate posteriorly,, divided, in fact, into two triangu-

— 11

154

lir nieces between which the unusually developed thirteenth seg¬
ment anpears These lateral portions are fringed with spines on
the posterior two-thirds of their inner margin, and the segment is
lonXdinallv divided beneath. These two _ segments together are
about one and a half times the length of the preceding. Their
dorsal portions are likewise elongate, as compared with the er
“s being scarcely, if at all, shorter than the next segment m

advance.

In the form of the mouth parts, this root-worm is likewise distin¬
guished from at least one of the others, the tips of the mandibles

margins are uniformly cuived.

It is in these latter structures only that any character can
be found by which the larva of Scelodonta may be separated
from that of Paria. In every other minutest particulai of form and
structure even to he number, distribution and arrangement of the
hails “non the surface, these two larvse agree precisely. But
while the tips of the mandibles of Scelodonta aie either entire,
or if notched, are so lobed that the central division is much the
longest those of Paria (Plate IX, Fig. 5, B,) are obtuse at the
extremity and distinctly emarginate, being sometimes deeply bifid.

It must be confessed, however, that none but an expert will be
able to distinguish between these two species in the larval stage ,
and it is not fmpossible that this trivial character will be found too
variable to be depended on, except where a considerable number of,
specimens are studied together. _

The pup® may be separated by differences m the armature o
the posterior segments of the abdomen especiaily the las^lhi*
segment in the pupa of Golaspis, (Plate IX, ii§- -> »/ |

ingtwJ staple hool, the poinfs of which curve towards each oth^

while in both Paria (Fig. 5, A) and Scelodonta, (Fig. 1, A) these
hooks are larger and longer, and curve dorsally instead of lnwaids.
In front of these hooks are two pairs of lateral spines, one attac e
to the ultimate segment and the oilier to the peuultin: >
mer of which in Golaspis extend directly outward, while in the other
larvse they project backward instead.

There are likewise slight differences in the spines upon the lmee#
of the pupa. In Colaspis a strong curved hook arises from t ft
anterior inferior angle of the tibio- emoral articulation of all the
legs, that of the anterior pair being, however, very small. In b«“°
donta and Paria, on the other hand, we have a stout spine upon
the posterior legs, but the corresponding angles of the two anterior
pairs are unarmed. I

The most careful comparison of the pupae of the two m01,® c
related species, has enabled me to detect only a single dff erencj
between them. In Scelodonta (Fig 1, A), the terminal ! abd( innnai
hooks have each a strong, erect tooth or spine attached t° PP
side of the base while in Paria (Fig. 5, A) this spine is wanting.

k

!

[These differences of larvae and pupae may be thrown, for con-
lence, into a table as follows :

vi

SYNOPSIS OF LARViE.

Mandibles bifid at tip.

a. Inner edge of mandibles excavated before tip, anal seg¬

ments shorter than preceding, ventral tubercles not orom-
ment- Paria.

b. Inner edge of mandibles not excavated, anal segments more

developed than preceding, ventral tubercles prominent
with long hairs. Colaspis. ’

#

Mandibles entire at tip, inner edge excavated, anal segment short
ventral tubercles not prominent. Scelodonta.

SYNOPSIS OF PUPJE.

s

Amal hooks simple, incurved.

Colaspis .

A.nal hooks recurved.

a • Hooks short and stout with strong erect tooth at upper
side of base and two long hairs on posterior margin.—

Scelodonta.

b. Hooks slighter, simple, or with slender hair at upper side
of base, no hairs on margin. n-~-

Paria.

e beetles may be very easily distinguished, the Colaspis being
Uy °f a pale clay-yellow, ranging to a yellowish brown, smooth
lot shining, concolorous throughout, or occasionally with the
and thorax green; while Paria is shining black above, varying
own with four black blotches upon the wing covers, but always
pale legs ; and Scelodonta is purple or green, with a bronzed
llic lustre, and covered with a gray pubescence, of which both
ther species are destitute.

'ropose now to give the literature, descriptions and life histories
ich of the species separately, as far as is necessary for the
nt purpose, and afterwards to treat of the injuries to vegetation
)f measures for the control of all three of the species together.

Colaspis brunnea, Fab.
[Plate VIII, Fig. 4; IX, Fig. 3 and 4.1

LITERATURE.

This species was first described by Fabricius, in 1788, and one of
its several varieties was described by Say in 1824, under the name
of Eumolpus jlavidus* under which species name it has most gen¬
erally been treated by economic entomologists. Owing to its depre¬
dations upon the grape, it has received from Prof. Eiley the ver¬
nacular name, the “Grape-vine Colaspis.

Its iniuries to vegetation were first referred to by Townend Glover,
who in the Report of the United States Department of Agriculture
for 1865 page 91, remarks (doubtless referring to this species:)
“This vear I had a Colaspis very similar to the Colaspis strigosa,
brought to me in Washington, and said to be very injurious to the
foliage of the grape-vine, in which the perfect insects eat innumerable
small holes.” The same fact was brought to the knowledge of Dr
Fitch in 1866, and in the “Country Gentleman of August 30. for
that vear he gives a brief account of it in answer to a correspond
dent who’ wrote that it was destroying his grape-vines, en masse. In
the second volume of the “Practical Entomologist, page 68, Mr.
Walsh, in the following year, reports _ its occurrence, likewise, in
Ohio and Illinois, where he found it injurious to the terminal shoots
and young leaves of the grape.

In the Third Report of the State Entomologist of Missouri, for
1871 Prof. Riley treats this species as a grape-leaf pest, figures and
describes the beetle and the larva, and notes also tne fact that the
latter devours the roots of strawberries. His description ot the larva
was drawn from two poor alcoholic specimens ; but on page 64 ot
his report for the following year, having received m the meantime
numerous examples from strawberry . fields m Southern Illinois, he
revises the description, giving additional figures of the head and
mouth parts, and of a ventral segment. _ There is some reason to
believe, however, that this second description really relates to a
different species from the first, being probably one ot the two othei
forms of the root-worms to be discussed hereafter.

In the third volume of the American Entomologist for 1880, Riley
reiterates the statements of his third report, and likewise reprints the
figure of the larva there published.

Subsequent mention of the species in the thirteenth Report of the
Ontario Entomological Society, in the Transactions of the Rhn
State Horticultural Society for 1881, in a work on Insects Injurious
to Fruits by Mr. Saunders, and in the Transactions of the
issippi Valley Horticultural Society for 1882, add nothing to oui
knowledge of this insect or its life history.

1

I

1

*

DESCRIPTION.

Larva. — (Plate IX, Fig. 3, and Fig. 4 A-E). To the * larvj
characters given on a preceding page, I here add the lol owing
details: The antennae (Fig. 4, A) are situated just outside

^Complete Writings, Vol. 1, p. 196.

(

157

ses of the mandibles. The joints are short and quadrate, the
st and the fourth about equal to the third. The epistoma is
j msverse, about three times as wide as long, narrowing rapidly
•.ward, the anterior margin concave for the reception of the labrum
.The mandibles (Fig. 4, C) are curved, rather narrow,
3 width being about two-thirds the length, and comparatively
Dad and obtuse at tip, where they are more or less clearly emar-
late or sometimes trifid. Externally each bears two strong
,nder hairs at the base.

The cardinal piece of the maxilla is not distinct from the basal,
le maxillary lobe (Fig. 4, B, c) is about two-thirds as broad as
lg, rounded at the tip, and provided with about ten spines of
rying length along the inner margin, the two basal of which are
T strong, and about half the length of the lobe. This last reaches
ly a little beyond the third joint of the palpus. The palpi (d)

3 four- jointed, the first joint broad, imperfectly separated within,

3 second shorter, the third about as long as the first and second
gether, the fourth narrow, cylindrical, and one-half the length of
3 third.

The labrum (a) is thick and fleshy, nearly semi-circular in outline,

3 palpigerous tubercle scarcely evident ; the palpi (b) unarticulate,
mdncal, narrowed distally, and about as long as the third joint
the maxillary palpus. The ligula is fleshy, broad, and bilobed.

The tubercles at the ends of the ventral ridges project downwards
f°nd the general ventral surface (Plate IX, Fig. 4, E, a and b),
;h bearing about ten hairs of varying lengths, the three or four
- gest being longer and stronger than any others on the larva,
e hairs on the median part of the ventral ridges form an unbroken
v, about nine in number, alternately longer and shorter, with many
y short ones intermingled. The longest of these hairs are as
g as the corresponding segments.

Adult— (Plate VIII, Fig. 4). In the genus Colaspis the anterior
: rgm of the thorax is straight beneath, not projecting in the form
lobes behind the eyes, and the head is destitute of supraocular
oves. The thorax is margined at the base, and the second joint
the antennae is shorter than the third.

| -he species Colaspis brunnea is entirely ochreous or testaceous;

I id sparingly punctate ; antennal tubercles smooth, coppery ; eyes
arginate ; thorax rather transverse, sides broadly rounded, re-
i :ed> somewhat explanate ; base rounded, thickly and deeply (disk
re sparingly) punctate ; elytra with eight smooth sub-costate inter-
i :es, the punctures between them sometimes uniseriate, and at
ers irregular or triseriate ; thoracic epipleurae punctate. In variety
i ipennis the head and thorax are metallic green ; elytra brown,
li four yellow costate interstices. Every lead can be found
ween these extremes.

LIFE HISTORY.

Ill

he adult beetle is said by Fitch to appear in the latter part o:
ie, continuing through the month of July. Prof. Biley, in his
| rd Missouri Beport, says that the larva commences to pupate ir

T':

158

June the beetle appearing in that month and continuing to issue !
from’ the ground till fall. On the 19th of May m Union county
amoncr a Considerable number of root- worms of other species, I
found°a few half-grown larvie of this, easily distinguished fiom those
of Scelodonta pubescens, with which they occurred, by their greatly
inferior size at that time. On the 28th of June I received from
Mr Earle specimens of this species in both lie larva and imago
stages the latter having just emerged The adults were now abun-
dant on the leaves of strawberries, and many also occurred on the
foTace of the grape, adjacent to the strawberry held, associated m
both cases, with a dark; steel-blue species ot the same genus ( Colas-

pis tristis). .

An assistant, Mr. Garmau, obtained adults by sweeping stubble
fields at Du Quoin on the 4th of July, and sent from Anna, on the
9th specimens of larvie, pup* and adults all obtained from the
earth P Two of the latter were from oval cells m the ground, within
whicli they had lately transformed. He also found adults very
common on the foliage of the strawberry at this date and reported
imacros abundant on grape leaves on the lltli. By the lotn, all
the Cv* and pup* had emerged, but the adults were found in
sweeping the leaves of the strawberry where they continued common
untilP August 1st. It is especially worthy of remark that the only
field in which Colaspis larv* were found had been se in the spring
of that year, the ground having been previously m wheat.

Our collections of the adults made in Northern and Southern
Illinois represent only the months of June and July, but. m the
course of extended and careful search of the earth in a considerable
number of strawberry fields made in the months of September,
October, November and December in parts of Southern Illinois now
known to be infested by this species, not a single specimen of Colaspis
was encountered. Among these fields was the one fiom winch t e
larv* pup* and young imagos were sent me in June ; but m which a
long search in early September failed to discover a single specimen in
any stage. These and other fields in the region in which the larvae
had occurred, were also most carefully hunted over early m l Decern-
her by digging up the earth, and raking up the mulch but not a
single Colaspis occurred in any stage, even where strawberries were
raised among grapes.”

The above facts warrant us in assuming that the species is
single-brooded, that the larv* are hatched in spring (wHetHe from
eggs laid in autumn or from those deposited by hibernat g
is not yet known,) that they get their growth m- June or July, and
that the adult beetles may be found during the remainder ,
season, at first in strawberry fields and afterwards in .the _ vineya ids,
and indeed, quite generally distributed. They are at this season,

I

* Perhaps exception should be made of a angle f LJLftvpe havlns°every peculiarity
with those of Scelodonta. This was cle.arly of the .Colaspis type, having eve spepies

of Colaspis 6rwrmca, but was very much largeT than full gr P and was further

taken together with pupae, and themselves evide^ntyabouttotr^ all over

remarkable for the strong, conspicuous brown hairs borne i on hbr,0^ a little over

the dorsal surface. This s p e c 1 men s o me wh at s hr nke n in ale oho m t Without

5 mm. in length, by 3 mm. in width. It wa® T l^nn’ot suggest a determina-

fuller knowledge of the larvae ot the genera of this group, 1 cannot suggest

tion for this specimen.

159

attered through the woods, where they feed on the wild grape,
midsummer they are also often abundant on clover.

Note. — Adult specimens of Colaspis tristis were collected by sweep-
g the foliage of the strawberry in June, in such numbers that it
very probable that this species will be found to have similar
: obits and history to those of C. brunneci. They were feeding on the
aves of the strawberry in August.

1

!«■

Paria aterrima, Oliv.
and

Paria sexnotata, Say.

[Plate VIII, Figs. 1, 2 and 3, and Plate IX, Fig. 5.1
LITERATURE.

£

The first of the above-named forms, described originally by Olivier*,

'I -s re-described by Say under the name of Colaspis striata , in 18241,
d a form now reckoned a variety of this species was described
I Leconte in 1859, under the name of Paria opacicollisX .

Paria sexnotata , very doubtfully distinguishable from the species
it mentioned, has likewise been frequently described, first by Say
18241, and again by the same author under the name of 4-notata,
Leconte as 4-guttata, and by Dejean as gilvipes.

is an injurious insect, this was first mentioned in the Report of
h Ontario Entomological Society for 1878. In the brief account
it there given, the adult is said to have been extremely injurious in
nada, completely riddling the strawberry leaves in fields near Dela-
re. It was next mentioned in this connection by Prof. A. J. Cook, of
nsing, Michigan, who, in a paper read before the Ingham Horti-
tural Society in 1880, and published in the Report of the Horti-
tural Society of Michigan, for that year, reported this species as
root-worm of the strawberry, occurring in destructive numbers
ir Lansing, Michigan. A review by Prof. Riley of Prof. Cook’s
per, with some additional details, appeared in the third volume
the American Entomologist, in 1880 ; and a revision of the origi-
U article of Prof. Cook was published in the report of the State
ard of Agriculture of Michigan, for the year ending August 31st,
10. Another account of the species, with some additional notes
in its habits, was given by myself in the Transactions of the
nois State Horticultural Society for 1882, and again in the fol-
dng year in a paper on “Insects Affecting the Strawberry,” pub-
led in the Transactions of the Mississippi Valley Horticultural
uety for 1883.

! Encyclopedic methodique, dictionnaire des insectes (.iusqu’a la lettre E).

Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Vol. Ill, p. 444; Com-
e Writings, Vol. II, p. 212.

: Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, Vol. XI, p. 23.

h

160

DESCRIPTION.

In additional to the general characters of the strawberry root-
worms given on a preceding page, the following details will serye
to distinguish this more accurately from the allied species.

Larva _ The brown hairs of the transverse ventral ridges are few

and short all shorter in fact than the corresponding segments.
The ends ’of these segments are cut off. by oblique grooves, consti¬
tuting triangular tubercles with their apices inwards, Facia oi them
bears from five to seven hairs, of which about thiee are longer than
the others. The hairs of the median portion of the ridge are di¬
vided into two groups by a narrow median naked strip, ihe vent
is surrounded by a circle of about ten short hairs. The two rows
of lateral tubercles are smooth and shining at the apices, and bear,
each two or three rather slender hairs. The dorsal hairs are about
six to each segment, and arranged in irregular, transverse rows.
On the last four segments all the hairs are longer and stouter, and
those on the back of these segments are likewise moie numerous.
On the last two abdominal rings the dorsal arches are broken into
four prominent tubercles, sometimes blackened at the apex, and
bearing especially strong spinous hairs.

The antennae are three- jointed, very short, little more than twice
as long as wide, the length of the basal joint being just about its.
width. The cylindrical process of the penultimate joint, is segmented
off, forming an accessory article, beside the last one.

The eyes are represented by a cluster of a varying number of
minute pigment specks, situated a little distance abo\e the base of
the antennae ; but they show no external appearance of a cornea, or
other optical structure. The clypeus is about as long as the la brum;
and upon the middle of the anterior surface of the latter, are four
long hairs, arranged transversely, and at the inferior edge 01 the
posterior surface is a row of fourteen strong curved hooks or
projecting backward. The maxillary palpi are strong and thick, the
two basal joints being broader than long, the third about as long as
wide, and the fourth ovate. The tip of the third joint extends
scarcely beyond the end of the maxillary lobe.

The latter is not longer than broad, and is armed with about ten
stout, blunt spines at its inner margin. The general form ot the
mandibles, seen from above, (Plate IX, Fig. 5, 13) is triangular,
their length being scarcely greater than their width at the base.
The tip, seen from beneath, is obtuse, and more or less conspicu¬
ously emarginate, often decidedly lobed, in which case the lobes are
equal. It is never trifid and never acute. Occasionally this bi-lobate
character of the mandibles is indicated only by a longitudinal gioove,
which scarcely renders the tip emarginate. The anal segment o
this larva is used as a proleg in locomotion, the grub looping along
on a smooth surface after the manner of a Phalsenid larva.

l

Adult. — (Plate VIII, Fig. 1). From the other genera of the group,
the genus Paria is distinguished by the fact that the antenoi mar
gin of the thorax, instead of being carried directly over, curves or
ward beneath and behind the eyes in a way to form lobe- 1
processes of the pronotnm, called postocular lobes. The body

161

oth and shining; the prothorax with a distinct lateral margin,
tibiae are sulcate, the antennae thickened toward the end, and
middle and hind tibiae toothed toward the tip.

aria aterrima is oblong, short, varying from yellowish red to
k, the legs being, however, always pale. In the lighter speci-
s, the ventral segments and three spots on each elytron are black,
head (Plate VIII, Fig. 2) is coarsely punctate, the sides of the
ax are slightly rounded, and rather sparsely punctate. The
ra are deeply punctate-striate, with smooth intervals, the striae
g obsolete before the apex.

aria sexnotata is said to be distinguished by the much more
state head, and by the less punctate, minutely alutaceous thorax.

DISTRIBUTION.

lese forms occur throughout the whole country, from the Atlantic
m to California, and from Massachusetts and Michigan to the
/hern States. They are abundant on the juniper ( Jiiniperus
minis), and on the wild crab apple ( Pyrns coronaria ) as well as.
i he strawberry; and occur less commonly on a considerable
3ty of plants, both tame and wild.

LIFE HISTORY.

have already said that the early stages of this insect (the larvae
daily) are almost indistinguishable from those of another species
genus, occurring in the ground with it, and attacking the straw-
y plant in precisely the same manner. When we take into
unt the further fact that this second root-worm belongs to a
ies whose early stages and life history have hitherto remained
lown, we see how inevitable it was that these two larvae should
) been confounded, and that some errors should have resulted
i this confusion when the attempt was first made to clear up
* life history.

7 the repeated breeding of larvae taken at various times and
es during the last year, and by numerous collections and field
rvations of these insects in all their stages, we are now placed
i position to elucidate the life histories of both Paria and
odonta.

ist April the adult beetles were found not uncommonly in straw-
Y fields at Centralia, Cobden and Villa liidge, having evidently
y emerged from their winter quarters ; but the most careful
i 3h of the fields infested by root-worms yielded no Paria larvae,
>eing Scelodonta at that time.

i the 18th of May, the adults were again obtained in consider-
numbers by sweeping the foliage of strawberries at Villa Eidge ;
on the 15th of June, a few were seen in the ground, about the
i of the strawberries, by Mr. C. W. Butler, of Anna, probably
ged in oviposition.

f the 20th of J uly, Mr. Garman found larvae and pupae of this
ies among the strawberry roots at Cobden, and adults on the
ge ; and on the 26th all stages were sent me from Lansing,

L

162

Michigan, by Mr. C. M. Weed. Again August 1, all stages were
found by Mr. Garman at Cobden and larv* and imdgos were also
collected at Anna on the 10th, and sent me by Mr. Ear le. On the
11th the larvae and pupae were less common than before, but the
beetles were more abundant on the leaves. Many of the latter were
also concealed in the mulching, and several were taken from cave

ties in the earth. • „ . _ , , 1 ,

Some of the larvae and pupae sent from Cobden August 1st were
kept in earth at the Laboratory (after a careful study of the living
specimens for subsequent identification) until they transformed, the
fost beetle emerging on the 11th. On the 24th the earth was ex.
amined, and three more adults were found. . 1

These were the last immature examples seen, scattering adults
only occurring in our collections during September, October and

November. , ,,

December 8, adults were taken at Cobden m abundance on the
ground under the mulching, and under leaves and rubbish in

unmulched fields. _

Tabulating these data, we get the following exhibit: _

Date.

Imago.

Larva.

Pupa.

Centralia .. .

Cobden -

Villa Ridge.

April 10 .

“ 13 .

“ 17 .

Hay 18 .

June 15 .

July 20 .

“ 26 .

August 1 . . . Cobden

• * io . Anna .

“ ii . Emerging —

<* 24 . ! 4 ‘ -

September lb . jCobden .

“ 13 .

Anna (in ground) ...

Cobden .

Michigan .

October 1 -

November 11.
December 8 ..

Normal ....
Villa Ridge.
Cobden ....

Cobden ..
Michigan
Cobden ..
Anna -

Cobden .

Michigan .

Cobden .

1

Evidently, here we get no glimpse of a second brood, either early
or late, but we find the beetles hibernating as mature insects, lay¬
ing their eggs in the ground in June (if we may give this interpre¬
tation to Mr. Butler’s observation of June 15), and appearing as
adult beetles again late in July and m August. That an early
brood actually occurs is rendered further very doubtful, by the act
that large collections of root-worms were made for me by an assistan ,
April 18, in the very fields at Cobden m which Pana larvae were
most abundant in July and August, but that every one o . 6

April larvae was Scelodonta. If it be said that the possibility
distinguishing the larvae of these two genera is doubtfu , an
Ihe supposed Scelodonta larvae just mentioned may rea y
belonged to a spring brood of Paria, the reply must be th 1
agreed not only in characters, but also m size and stage of adv
ment, with other larvae taken at the same time, and afterward,
to Scelodonta,— a fact totally inconsistent with the supposition tna
the former were Paria, since the periods of the two genera aie qu
dissimilar, Scelodonta unquestionably hibernating almost exclusive!)
as a mature larva, and Paria as a beetle.

\i

/

168

e have next to notice the fact that the above account of the
)ry of this species does not agree with that given by Prof. A.
ook in his Ingham paper, in which he says :

Phis species is without doubt two-brooded. In March they were
by Mr. Ezra Jones, through whose kindness I have been sup-
1 with specimens. In April and May they were very numerous,
last of May the beetles disappeared. Now, June 19, they are,
die most part, in the pupa state, in earthen cocoons, about an
and one-half beneath the surface of the ground. I find many
grown grubs or larvae, and a few smaller larvae which were
d to be feeding on the tender rootlets. Certainly in July another
ration of beetles will come forth. Whether there are more than
broods or not, I am unable to state, but shall be able to de-
ine during the season. I presume they pass the winter as
jos, from their early appearance as beetles in the spring. They
exist in the winter as pupae, and very likely some do, which
d account for their scattering along as they do, during the
on.”

my earlier papers on the life history of this species, I followed
. Cook in his statement that it was double-brooded, not having
[, until this autumn, his revised account of the life history of
! a in the Report of the Michigan State Board of Agriculture
idy cited. In this he says :

'his species is either two-brooded, or else the beetles which come
i in J uly and August hibernate, and do not lay their eggs until
next spring. * * * In July the beetles came forth. That
3 beetles lay eggs again that season is possible, but I think
remain until the next season, and do not pair and lay eggs
the following spring.”

j own investigations had led me to believe, however, that Paria
single-brooded, and that the larvae and pupae to be found in the
ad in early spring were those of another species, having no
ection with the Paria beetles at that time on the leaves.

•y further uncertainty as to the identity of the conditions oc-
ng in Michigan and in Southern Illinois, was dispelled by the
pt of Scelodonta, larva and imago, from strawberry fields at
■ing, in collections of root-worms and leaf-beetles kindly sent
>y Mr. C. M. Weed, — the larva on the 25th of June and the
e on the 26th of July.

Scelodonta pubescens, Mels.
r

LITERATURE.

[Plate VII, Fig. 7; Plate VIII, Fig. 5; and Plate IX, Figs. 1 and 2.1

•

is species has a shorter bibliography than the others, and has
k before been mentioned as an injurious insect,
was described as Eumolpus pubescens by Melsheimer, in 1847*,
daced by Leconte in the genus Heteraspis of Chevriolat in 18591.
is genus was identified with Scelodonta of Westwood, in Hen¬
’s index to Leconte’s descriptions of Colcopteral, and our species

roc. Phil. Acad. Nat. Sci., Vol. III. p. 169.
nithsonian Contributions, Vol. XI, p. 23.
rans. Amer. Entomological Society, Vol. IX, p. 252.

a

I

became therefore, Scelodonta pubescens; but in the new edition of
the classification of the Coleoptera of North America, published in
February, 1888, the generic name Graphops is proposed by Leconte
and Horn, in place of Heteraspis, and under this name Leconte
himself referred to the species in a letter to me written under date
of June 24th, 1888. In a letter dated December 1, Dr. Samuel |i
Henshaw informs me that in proposing Graphops as a name for this g
genus, Dr. Leconte undoubtedly overlooked the previous synonymy, i
and says that he is supported by Dr. Horn in maintaining Scelo¬
donta and reducing Graphops to a synonym. In collections, and in j
the scanty literature of the species, it is most generally known as I
Heteraspis pubescens, Mels. j T ,

description. ‘I :

Larva. (Plate VII, Fig. 7) The description of the larva of Paria !
aterrima given above, will answer for this species, also, point by point,
until we come to the mandibles, (Plate IX, Fig. 1, C) the tips of
which are commonly entire, .and rather obtuse, although rarely
unequally lobed or trifid, the central lobe being then much the most »
prominent ; while the inner edge of the mandible is excavated for I

its distal third. 3

Adult. (Plate VIII, Fig. 5). The genus Scelodonta (Graphops, t.
Heteraspis) is thus defined by Leconte and Horn:

“Prothorax with the anterior margin straight beneath; head with j
deep supraocular and frontal lines; body pubescent; posteiior tibia
not toothed.” The thorax is not margined at the sides, and the
prosternum is separated from the side-pieces of the prothorax.

Scelodonta pubescens is thus described by Crotch,, in the Proceed- 1
ings of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences for 1878:1
“Oblong, aeneo-cupreous, sparsely clothed with a gray pubescence; :j
surface" alutaceous ; head little punctate, deeply foveolate ; thorax1;,
about as long as broad, sparsely punctate ; sides more or less trails-,
versely rugose ; elytra sparingly punctate, with traces of seriate |
punctures, and a sutural stria evident behind; base with a
margin; under side densely but obsoletely punctulate. L. 18, Mid-'
die and Southern States.”

LIFE HISTORY.

My first specimens of the larva of this species were obtained in ||j
August, 1882, two half-grown individuals and one adult beetle ^
occurring with a small collection of the larvae and imagos of
from strawberry fields in Southern Illinois, sent me by Mr. I. »-||
Earle, on the 7th of that month.

On the 11th of September of the present year, large and small
larvae of this species were found devouring the strawberry roots ir|i
Union county, and a single adult was taken by sweeping in t Oi
field. On the 9th of November, 1882, full-grown larvae were, a buna
ant in a number of fields at Centralia, Anna and Villa Bidge, a
having now attained their growth, and gone into winter quaiters^
They occurred at various depths in the earth, from one to three o ;
four inches, and often at a considerable distance from the plans.

165

liad hollowed out for itself in the ground a little oval cell,
th within, and there, curled up like a white grub, was awaiting
chances of the winter. Many hundreds of these larvae were
'tiled, but not a pupa was found, nor yet a single adult beetle,
of the latter were obtained in strawberry fields at Cobden, in
nber of the present year, showing that a sprinkling of these
3S hibernate. That it is only a sprinkling was clear, not only
the great numbers of mature larvae of the species in the ground
3 time, but likewise from the fact that adults of Paria aterrima
collected by the hundred, although the strawberry roots had
much less seriously attacked by that species than by Scelodonta.

e following spring (April 12tli), the larvae were still in these
e retreats, unchanged, often as many as fifteen or twenty in
iround a single stool of the plants. On the 16th of this month,
idults were seen by Mr. Webster in a strawberry field, but
were the only mature individuals captured during several days
reful and active field work.

q umber of these encysted larvae were brought to the Laboratory
\ at this time, for the purpose of watching them in their trans¬
itions.

!! ,y 9th, the root-worms were still in their winter condition ; but
le 20th pupation was well under way, and about half those in
ields were now in the pupa stage. A thorough search yielded
iult specimens ; and no young larvae of any sort were found
them.

the 7th of June a single adult beetle emerged from the lot of
} brought from the South in April, thus giving us the first clue
ie species we were dealing with. The next day three more
mens came out, and on the day following the earth was examined
ully, and all the specimens were removed. Fifteen adults of
>donta were thus obtained, all still in their cells but two; and
these were one pupa and three larvae, one of which was dead.
15th, many adult Scelodontas were found in the ground in
n county, with larvae and pupae as well, but no adults could
ot by sweeping the vines; but June 19th, two more adults
ged from a lot of southern larvae kept in the Laboratory since

the 25th of June, a specimen was sent me from Michigan,
orting to be a “root-worm of the first brood,” but which proved
ibsequent study to be a larva of Scelodonta. This was the only
men found there in this stage by my correspondent, although
mber of pupae were seen at the same time, which were unfor-
bely lost in transit. On the first of July, Mr. C. W. Butler, of
i, reported the frequent occurrence of the adults on heads of
t, one pair being taken in copulo , He had also taken the
)le to breed a number of the larvae from the strawberries, and
merging proved to be Scelodonta pubescens. A few beetles which
dormed in our breeding boxes, wTere placed in a cage with grow-
trawberry plants on the 22d of June. They immediately com¬
bed eating the leaves, making small, round holes or emargina-
at or near the edge. Some of these beetles escaped, but others
i in the cage until July 30, when they were removed. The leaves

166

of the plants had been considerably riddled, in the meantime, not¬
withstanding the fact that the beetles were rarely seen upon them.
In confinement, the species is sluggish and prone to hide in rub-
bish, and it is perhaps of nocturnal habit.

Careful search of previously infested strawberry fields late in July
and early in August, gave us but a single beetle of this species.

The above data enable us to say definitely that this insect is single-
brooded, like its congeners, that it hibernates as neaily or quite full-
grown larva in oval cells in the earth, an insignificant number of
beetles of the preceding brood likewise sometimes surviving the winter;
that the change to pupa occurs in May, and that the beetles appear
above ground in June. In July, doubtless, the eggs are laid, prob¬
ably in the ground, the young larvae attacking the roots of the
strawberry in that month and in August. It is thus in the late
summer and early autumn months that this species does its mis¬
chief, as its active larval life terminates by November, even in a
very warm and open season, and the larva does not seem to awake
to feed in spring. A J

COMPARISONS OF LIFE HISTORIES OF THE ROOT-WORMS.

It will now be interesting and profitable to bring together, side by
side, the life histories of these three companion species, as may be
easily done in tabular form.

In the following table each species is given three vertical columns,
one for each of its stages ; and each month of the year is given a
horizontal band, intersecting all the colunis ; the period of the ob¬
served occurrence of the species in each stage being represented by
a black line in the proper" column extending through the horizontal
spaces corresponding to the months or parts of months in which
specimens have been actually collected in that stage. Where the
occurrence of any stage at any time is a matter of inference instead
of observation, this black line is replaced by a dotted one.

Finally, the three left-hand columns of the table show the rela¬
tion of the periods of active larval life of the three species; the
times when the larvae of each are getting their growth, and when,
consequently, their mischief as root-worms is done.:

Months.

Scelodonta.

Colaspis.

Paria.

Active
Larval Life.

Imago

Pupa.

Larva

Imago

Pupa.

Larva

Imago

Pupa.

Larva1

Scelo¬

donta

Paria.

Colas¬

pis...

y

7 . .

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

!•

^ .

1

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

•

i

i

■

•

i

i

•

•

i

i

•

•

i

■

i

•

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

1

<

!

5 1 1

i

i

i

1

1

i

i

!

r

5

4

‘

f . - .

L _

5

2

2

1 16

1

. - .

4

3

l

i

i

i

7

7

i

i

i

i

i

i

6

6

i

)er .

1

1

1

1

1

er .

i.

5

f

3r .

i

i

i

i

1

i

i

i

i

'o specimens of preceding year, taken in the field. 2— From Michigan. 3— Taken
’• 4— Half-grown individuals. 5— Dormant, in cells in the earth. 6— Emerging;
I 'ound. 7— Reported from Michigan as maturing July 15.

A stuclv of this table brings out clearly one very instructive fact,
and hints at several others. We have, in these root-worms, three
closely related species, attacking the same part of the same plant
in precisely the same way, at the same stage m their development, j:
and strictly dependent upon this plant, as far as is known, lor then
continued existence. One would say that here were all the con¬
ditions of a most determined struggle for existence between these i
three species, in which one or more of them must succumb, it is v
indeed interesting to see how this issue is evaded, and an adjust- l
ment reached by which competition is reduced to a minimum. The J
Oolaspis larva makes the earliest attack upon the plant, beginning its |
work upon the roots certainly as early as the first of May (half- J
grown individuals having been taken on the 15th), and finishing m
June, all being full-grown and preparing to pupate by the end of r
that month. Next comes Paria, in July and August, neither ex- J
treme of its period being exactly defined by our observations ; and p
finally comes Scelodonta, adults of which were copulating July 1,
young larvae occurring August 7. As far as now known, the bcelo- j
donta larva is left in undisturbed possession during the remainder f
of the year, although there is a break in our observations during
October. Certainly by November it has completed its work, and i
retired, full-grown and ready to transform, into its subterranean cell.

It seems clear, furthermore, that this curious succession of periods |
is related to a difference of habit with respect to hibernation. Un- ^
doubtedly, Scelodonta winters as a larva; and Paria as an adult, |
As Colaspis larvae were only half-grown May 15tli, they very probably |
hatched from the egg that spring ; and as the adult Colaspis emerged I
' about two months before the new brood of Paria, it seems hardly r
possible that both could have developed from eggs laid that spring.
It is much more likely that Colaspis hibernates in the egg. On tins F
hypothesis, we shall have the eggs of Colaspis deposited in autumn, l
those of Paria in spring, and those of Scelodonta in midsummer; |
the first genus hibernating in the egg, the second as an adult, ana ,
the third as full-grown larva, with the necessary result that their ,
attacks upon their common food-plant are delivered successively.
The advantage of this arrangement is evident where we reflect that:
by this means as many of each species are fed upon the strawberry
as it would be possible to maintain of all three if they came inter
simultaneous competition.

As a general rule, only the surplus structures of a plant may be ■
destroyed by insects, since habitually to destroy more, would , m the j
natural order, eventually exterminate the plant, and with it the id- ^
sect itself. As the strawberry plant grows continuously throughou j
the season, such an available surplus of root growth is continuous yj
produced, but if all the root- worms were to attack it together, thejjt
would be limited to the surplus produced during one or two months u
whereas by distributing their periods of activity, they are able y
appropriate the whole, and avoid conflict altogether.

The fact is worthy of notice that the times of the appearance o i
the adult beetles are not as widely separated as the periods oi
val activity, the interval from the commencement of the aa

169

iod of Scelodonta to the end of the transformations of Paria being
ut two months while the active larval life of the various species
Pds over about seven months. This is a matter of importance
1 respect to remedial measures.

INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

•y adults —Colaspis brunnea is reported by Prof. Riley to feed as
adult at first upon the strawberry leaves, and later upon the
7eJL °/ §iapes, both tame and wild. It has also been found bv
Webster feeding upon the blossoms of clover and willow and
n its frequent occurrence in collections variously distributed, it
irobably not closely limited to any small variety of food plants,
cultivated vegetation, however, its only appreciable injuries are
>e done m the strawberry field and the vineyard.

aria is likewise a somewhat general feeder, certainly devour-
strawberry leaves often to an extent to make it a serious pest
also, occasionally at least, eating the leaves of the raspberry*
,ct noticed by me this summer. It also doubtless eats those of the
per, upon which it is very commonly found, and of the wild
> apple. By Dr. hitch this beetle was reported as abundant
eahes cinquefoil or Potentilla. Considering its general
nbution throughout the period of its activity in the' adult stage

1 quite likely that it feeds upon a very considerable variety of

its.

Respecting the food habits of Scelodonta, our information is less
piete. Experiments made at the Laboratory with beetles bred
i the root- worm, as reported on a previous page, show, at least,

, it will feed freely upon the strawberry in confinement; and its
mence in strawberry fields at other times than its breeding sea-
makes it likely that it voluntarily resorts to them for food. It
seems to have a special preference for the evening primrose
■Ji/iera biennis, upon which it is said to be most frequently found
ollectors. In July of this year it occurred occasionally near straw-
y fields, upon heads of millet.

ie above memoranda respecting the food habits of these various
ies, may be generalized in a word by saying that while their
preference seems to be for the foliage of the strawberry they
not by any means limited to this plant, but can probably find

m almost any situation where foliage and bloom are in suitable

ltion.

’/ larva.— The destructiveness of these lame to the roots and
.ns of strawberries, has already been sufficiently asserted • and
have not a particle of information to the effect that in this
3 these insects are capable of living upon any other plants
jever. bull the difficulty of proving a negative is proverbial
no search for them in other situations has been made sufficient
arrant us in saying that the larvae develop only in the straw-
7 plant.

3re the mischief done by them is certainly greater than that to
ttnbuted to the better known crown-borer, the beetles being not
more numerous, at least in Southern Illinois, but also making
rently a more destructive attack upon the plant.

— 12

170

While their first attentions seem to be given to the smaller roots,
thev also freely gnaw and penetrate the main root, occasionally perfo¬
rating it from side to side, in different directions. I have seen
roots of strawberries from fields infested by these larva* which
looked as if they had been riddled with fane shot The gravity of
their attacks is shown by the fact that frequently the first evidence
of their presence in a field will be the death of the vines, m patches

here and there.

* I r— filial 1 1JL -L v/ •

As to the possible differences in the method of attack, and the
degree of injury done by the different species involved, little can as
yet be said,' but what is known indicates that all are substantially
alike in these respects. My own observations . have been made
almost entirely upon the work of Scelodonta, which I have thus far
found more abundant than both the others taken together.

The following letter from. Mr. F. S. Earle, written June 28, of the
•present year, describes quite clearly the character of the mjuiy done i
bv Colaspis : “To-day our foreman called my attention to some
plants that were dying in one of our new-set fields. On examina¬
tion, the crowns were found to be bored through, and the roots
eaten in the same manner as plants attacked by the bcelodonta
larvae but at first no insects were found about the roots, though 1
noticed a few light brown beetles (see accompanying specimens)
feeding on the foliage. Later I was fortunate enough to find larvae,
-pupae and just transformed beetles in the earth about the roots. In
one instance all three forms were found under the same plant.
The larvae form cells in which to pupate, as does bcelodonta.

On a visit to Union county early in December, Mr. Garman noticed
that very few plants were living in the field from which he had
obtained the Paria larvae in July. _ ) J

From the data collected under the head of life histones of the
species, it is clear that in a field infested by all _ three of the root-
worms, these injuries to the roots will be continuous from early
spring until late autumn, each species supplementing the work of
the others; that, in fact, the strawberry plant may be the victim of
one or another of these pests during the whole time ot its active

growth.

if

*

:

I

NATURAL ENEMIES.

My treatment of this topic must necessarily be extremely brief. j;
Beyond the fact that f have found an occasional Colaspis or bcelo- ^
donta in midsummer in the stomachs of birds, we know nothing j
whatever of the natural enemies of the root-worms. That they are i
altogether free from such enemies, is not at all probable, but their
discovery will require more continuous observation and larger co - I
lections than I have yet had opportunity to make. Taking in o
account what is known with regard to the dangers threatening other ;
subterranean larvae, it is altogether likely that these will be found
subject to fungus diseases which might m all probability be propa¬
gated artificially if they were once understood, and it is in tn
direction -that observations and experiments will be most useful ana
promising.

171

v

ARTIFICIAL

REMEDIES.

Topical Applications to the Foliage.

^ ® first account of the Colaspis larvae, in his third

ort, he says : “The only way to prevent the ravages of the worm
;ch we yet know of, is so to protect newly set plants that the
ties will not get access to them. I have had no opportunity to
m experiments, but it may turn out that some application to the
and or to the plant, such as ashes, soot, lime, or salt, will ward
the perfect beetle. The same remedies used in killing the Colo-
3 Potato-beetle would also kill this species.”

l discussing the Paria root-worms, Prof. Cook remarks : “I feel
am that either Paris green or London purple would certainly
uoy the beetles, if applied to the plants as we apply them to
;roy the potato beetle or canker worm.”

rom Prof. Burrill, of the Industrial University, I learn that a

u s^raw^er.lies 011 ^ie University grounds was attacked

’.he beetles of Paria aterrima , that the leaves were dusted with
■S. green, and that the beetles immediately disappeared, no fur-
mjury being done to the vines. There is good reason to sup-
t, consequently, that this remedy would prove effective, as far as
adult beetles of all these species are concerned, and would thus
f 6 a check, at least, upon the increase of the larvae. Such appli-
ms would of course not be permissible during the fruiting sea-
- and, foitunately, the adults of none of these species emerge
1 after the berries are picked.

hether it is their usual habit to remain in the fields until after
• eggs are laid, escaping to other situations and resorting to
r food plants only after this indispensable office has been per¬
ked, is a point of importance upon which we have as 'yet no
j vledge. Fruit growers are agreed, however, as far as my in-
tation goes, that the root-worms spread usually from old fields
ew somewhat slowly, as if by a gradual progression from side
de ; and if this be true, it is altogether likely that the common
i o of all the species is to lay their eggs before dispersing gener-
j and the practice of poisoning the adults in the field will be
Y effective as against the root-worms themselves,
i e time when the poison is to be applied will of course depend
ly upon the species by which the field is infested. If all three
iresent, it will be absolutely necessary that several repetitions
e treatment should be had, beginning in June, when the Scelo-
is are emerging, and continuing until August, when Paria comes
. If Colaspis only is present in the field, July will be the proper
to poison the plants* *. There is a bare possibility that the
s and ground might be sprinkled with substances which should
I to repel the adults in search of places for the deposit of their
I and Prof. Piley has thought it worth while to suggest ashes,
lime, or salt, for this purpose ; but there is extremely little genuine
1'imental evidence of the effectiveness of measures of this class.

he arsenical poisons are now so well understood that it is hardly necessary to re-
w,arniry against their excessive use. They serve their purpose
i I; utl e,d i Wlth i?ust or plaster, or suspended in large quantities of water; but even
ley should not be used on the same ground year after year, without occasional

* oi crops.

i

172

Topical Applications to the Roots.

The first appearance of the root-worms in a field can usually be
detected by the dwarfed aspect of patches of the plants, which
apparently cease to grow. It is not impossible that at this time
effective use could be made of some insecticide which should arrest
the progress of the difficulty by destroying the larvae m the ground
in these5 isolated areas. With a view to testing partially the prac¬
ticability of this method, I arranged, in December, the conditions of
a series of experiments with bisulphide of carbon and carbolic acid,
which experiments were carried out by Mr. Garman at the Labora-
torv For this purpose, full-grown living larvae of Sceloclonta pubes-
cens were obtained December 7, in Southern Illinois, where they
were at this time hibernating. !

Bisulphide of Carbon.

Experiment 1. — On the 14th of December, one of these larvae was
placed under a small glass dish, with a bit of sponge containing a
drop or two of bisulphide of carbon. The larva at once began to
roll about, as if suffering from the effects of the vapor, and at the
end of two minutes was apparently dead. At the end of ten minutes
it was taken from under the dish. Twelve minutes later it showed
signs of life, but in an hour and twenty minutes it was dead.

Experiment 2. — Two living larval of Scelodonta were placed in a
piece of thin muslin with a little earth, and then buried at the
bottom, near one end, of a crayon-box of earth*. A small hole was
then made in the earth near the opposite end of the box, and about
half a teaspoonful of bisulphide of carbon was poured into it, the
hole being filled with earth. In fifty-five minutes the larvae were
apparently dead, but an hour and twenty minutes later one showed
signs of life. In forty minutes more this one was evidently recover¬
ing and two and one-half hours later was apparently unharmed,
while the other larva seemed dead. Eight hours after the adminis¬
tration of the bisulphide, the second larva showed some signs of
life, but in twenty-five hours this one was evidently dead ; the first,
however, recovered.

Experiment 8. — This experiment was. a repetition of the preceding,
but with less satisfactory results. Five hours after treatment the
larvae were both alive, and were then returned to the earth and
again treated to bisulphide of carbon as at first. Two and one-fialt
hours later they were found to be still alive.

Experiment 4.— In this experiment, two . larvae were placed in the
earth as before, a teaspoonful of bisulphide of carbon was poured
into a hole made in the middle of the box, consequently about
three inches from the buried larvae. One hour later both insects
were seemingly dead, and in sixteen hours were evidently past
recovery.

I*

l

ft

1

I

a

I

I

i*

1

It

* The boxes of earth used in these experiments were 6 M inches long by 4 inches wide,
and 3% inches deep.

173

J J V T AVAUIIIIJ ALcJciU.*

. Tbe foree’oin.o- fiY-nftrirnpn+c! florvi/inDlMj-n u,„i _ n

>n would prove effective in practice only over a smalfer area.
In Fiance, where this substance has been the subject of in:

I -1 . — ~ ~ mu OUUICUlJ U1 11111 U.“

Brable experiments for the destruction of the root' form of the
ape phylloxera, it has been found desirable to use it in such forms
to preveiff its too rapid evaporation and escape from the soil :
i? wll,e1n th1ls condition is observed, it is at once less liable to
lure the plant, and more likely to destroy the insect. To this
cl it has been combined with other substances in the form of
did cubes, or mixed with absorbent powders, like diatomaceous
I'rth, or tnpoli. Lately, the sulplio-carbolate of potash has been
md a convenient and effective substance for administering the
i sulphide of carbon and carbolic acid in combination.

Carbolic Acid.

[Experiment 6. A single full-grown larva of Scelodonta was placed
der a glass dish with a bit of sponge moistened with a little strong
.;bolic acid, in seventeen minutes this larva showed signs of
| easiness, and in twenty-five minutes more, was apparently dead.

aJ. i 0ur nan? twenty minutes after treatment it was taken from
V dlslb and three hours later was dead and discolored.

i Experiment 7. Two root-worms were placed in thin muslin and
! near the bottom, at one end of a crayon-box, as described
the above experiments with bisulphide of carbon. These were
; ated with about a teaspoonful of carbolized water poured into a
je near the opposite end of the box. In nineteen hours they were
: loved from the earth and found to be dead. Fifteen hours after-
ms they showed no signs of recovery.

Experiment 8.— In this experiment, which was precisely like the
f eeding, the result was unfavorable. The larvae were not exam-

cl until forty hours after treatment, and at that time were both
re.

: experiment 9.— In this experiment, which was similar to the pre-
mg, the two larvae were found alive an hour and forty minutes
>r being treated, and were returned to the box again. Carbolized
er was again administered, as before, but in six and one-half
rs both root-worms were still alive.

174

Experiment 10.— Two Scelodonta larv® were treated as above,
with a saturated solution of carbolic acid, and, forty minutes after¬
wards, were taken out and found alive but stupid. They were re¬
turned to the earth at once. Three and one-half hours later they
were still living, and were again returned to the earth. A hole was
now made as before, and in this a lump of crystallized carbolic acid
about as large as two peas was dropped; but even this was not
effective, and seven hours later both were apparently still uninjured.

Experiment 11.— The experiment just mentioned was repeated with
twiceVe quantity of the solution of carbolic acid, but with the same
results as before. Examined two hours after treatment, and again
in eight, the root-worms were alive and well.

Experiment 12.— Two larv® were next buried, as usual, and a hole
was made at the middle of the box, in which a half teaspoonful of
bits of crystallized carbolic acid was dropped, tne hole being then
closed with earth. In an hour and a half the larv® were seemingly
dead, and were returned to the earth after examination. Sixteen
hours thereafter neither showed any signs of life.

From the experiments just related, it is clear that carbolic acid
can be used with effect only in a form more concentrated than any
aqueous solution, and that a teaspoonful of the crystallized acid is
about equal in efficacy to the same quantity of the bisulphide of

carbon.

With reference to possible injury of the plants by either of these
insecticides, no opportunity could be had for experiment until nex
year, and the results thus far obtained are therefore of oniyp •
visional value. Field experiments would likewise be needed to de¬
termine whether these substances could be used economically, pro¬
vided they should prove to be harmless to the plants and entirely
destructive to the worms. For field application, a small hole shou
be punched with a stick near the infested plant, and a halt tea¬
spoonful of the bisulphide poured in, or an equal quantity ot crude
carbolic acid. The hole should then be closed by pressure with
the foot, leaving the vapor to penetrate the soil m aU directions
To those unfamiliar with the properties of the bisulphide, notice
should be given of its highly dangerous quality, as the vapor is
poisonous when breathed, even in small quantities ; and is also in¬
flammable and highly explosive.

PLOWING UP, AND TRANSPLANTING.

We come now to the consideration of two topics of a practical
importance not at all inferior to that of the artificial destruction o
the root-worms, viz: to the selection of the time when the field
should be plowed up, if it is desired to destroy the vines and insects
together, and also of the time when new sets may be transplants
with assurance that they will not be stocked with the eggs o j
of the various species.

A careful examination of the comparative table of the life histo¬
ries of the different species will show that the plants may be de¬
stroyed by plowing up the field, to the best advantage, shortly a
the picking of the fruit, provided, that is, that the field is infested

i

175

all three of the species at once. At this time the larvae of Co-
pis will be found about half grown, and would unquestionably be
led with the vines. Those of Scelodonta, on the other hand, will
matured, and many of them would probably complete their
nsformations and emerge as adults, while the Paria, at this sea-
1, would be found as an adult beetle upon the leaves, probably
5 having yet deposited its eggs. These two latter species would
lsequently not be destroyed, but would be inevitably driven from
) field in search of food, and plants set out in the ground plowed
would be no more subject to attack by them than all the other
ds of the vicinity.

n the absence of definite knowledge as to the time of oviposition
Colaspis and Paria, it will be impossible to say positively whether
nts taken up in the spring will be free from the eggs of these
jcies. Certainly plants at that season would be free from the eggs
Scelodonta, and that root-worm could only be conveyed by care¬
less in failing to shake the earth from the roots of the plants
noved. The probabilities are that the eggs of Paria are not laid
il rather late in spring, and that consequently spring transplant-
would be a safe practice as far as this species is concerned.

)n the other hand, as has already been shown, there is good rea-
l to suppose that Colaspis eggs are deposited in autumn, and that[
rsequently, this species might easily appear in the new fields
ablished. For complete security against infection in the estab-
lment of new plantations, the method recommended in last year’s
ort, in my article on the Strawberry Crown-borer, is the only one
own to me. This method has been applied with conspicuous suc-
s by Mr. Endicott, at Villa Ridge, and an outline of his proce-
•e is worthy of general attention.

n making a new plantation, he selects, in spring, the newest and
mgest plants, sets these as usual at a distance from any other
d, leaves them until their runners have taken root, and then digs
and destroys those first set. His new field is thus stocked with
;h plants, which have never been in contact with seriously infested
pis.

ii

SUMMARY.

Ve are now ready for a statement of the general results of the
ervations and studies on the root- worms here reported.

Ve find that the so-called root-worm of the strawberry really
resents three species of closely allied beetles, all belonging to the
at family of plant-feeders, Chrysomelidse, but to different genera
[.species; Colaspis brunnea, Paria aterrima, and Scelodonta pu-
ens.

! 'or a summary statement of the distinguishing characters of these
ious root-worms, in their different stages of adult, larva and pupa,

| reader is referred to page 153.

he life histories of these insects, as far as known, are curiously
Brent in respect to the times and periods of their development. The
a of Colaspis appears early in the season, and does its mischief
, iffy in the months of April and May, the beetles beginning to emerge

k

|

L

176

in June. That the eggs are laid the preceding year is highly prob¬
able, in which case the species hibernates in the egg.

Paria, on the other hand, certainly passes the winter as an adult,
doubtless laying its eggs in spring, and making its principal attack
upon the plants in June and July, the beetles emerging in the latter
part of July and early in August. Scelodonta hibernates in the
larval condition, (most of the worms having gained their growth the
previous autumn,) pupates in the spring, and emerges in May and June.
The eggs are probably laid in July, and the larvae make their attack
upon the plant in August and September, continuing it, possibly, to
October as well. Certainly by November they have formed cells
in the ground for their hibernation.

The beetles of all these species live in part upon the leaves of
the strawberry, especially at first, but scatter afterwards elsewhere,
finding their food in various kinds of vegetation,— Colaspis, especially
upon the grape, Paria upon the Juniper and crab apple, and Scelo¬
donta upon the evening primrose, and probably also upon heads
of grass.

In their larval stage all, as far as known, depend strictly on the
roots of strawberries for food, devouring especially the smaller fib¬
rous roots, but also penetrating and perforating the crowns.

An attack in force is extremely destructive, and rapidly kills the
plants affected. Often as many as fifteen and twenty larvae occur
in and about an infested stool. This mischief is maintained through¬
out the season, the species attacking the plant successively, Colaspis
first, Paria next, and Scelodonta last.*

It should be especially noted that the damage generally attributed
to the true crown-borer, Tijloclerma fragarice, in Southern Illinois,
is really largely, perhaps chiefly, due to the root-worms treated in
this article.

Finally, in the absence of conclusive experiment for the artificial
destruction of these pests, it will be worth while to say only that
Paris green or London purple applied cautiously to the leaves from J une
to August, will take effect upon the mature beetles as they emerge
from the earth, and will thus unquestionally limit the increase of
the larvae, while it is not impossible that applications _ of carbolic
acid, bisulphide of carbon, or similar substances destructive to larval
life, m ly be profitably made to the earth of infested fields, with a view
to destroying the larvae in the ground. It is especially likely that this
last, or some similar measure, will prove worth while if used in
time, for the destruction of the root-worms when they first make
their appearance in the field in isolated patches.

To destroy plants and insects together the field may be plowed
up immediately after picking, although this remedy will actually kill
only the larvae of Colaspis, which at this time will be partly grown
in the ground. The emerging adults of Scelodonta and the beetles
of Paria already abroad, will, however, be forced elsewhere for food,
and liability to subsequent infection of the field will not bo great.

I

I a

R

a

H

*It is possible that other species of Chrysomelidfe occur as root-worms m the straw¬
berry, especially as other forms are common upon the leaves in spring. Prominent
among these is Cryptocepalus quadrimaculatus.

\

177

if

obtain new plants free from infection by any of these root-worms,
best that they should be transplanted in spring, but there is a
iin probability that even at that time they will contain the ego's
naspis. To rid the new field of these, it will be necessary to
7 Jfie first runners to set, and then to destroy the recently
ped stools from which they sprang, leaving the field stocked only
new stools, formed since the plants were set out.

c. By a black Snout-beetle.

The Black Fruit-Weevil.

(Otiorhynchus sulccitus, Boh.)

Order Coleoptera. Family Otiorhynchid.e.

is is a European insect, well and unfavorably known to the
eners of England and the Continent, and destructive, both in
arval and matured conditions, to a variety of horticultural pro-
i. _ It is in the former state that it attacks the strawberry,
iring the roots and penetrating the crown somewhat after the
ods of the root-worms previously treated.

hough it has not yet been observed in strawberry fields in
ica, and has not in fact been reported as an injurious species
is country, still it has been for some time established in the
./rn States, having been imported from the old world many
ago. It is proper, therefore, that such brief mention of it
be made here as may serve to warn the fruit grower against
I ice it has pioven in its native home to be one of the most
mageable of the insect enemies of horticulture.

e. larva is footless, like the crown-borer, and is described as
wish white, with a brown head, and provided with brownish
| . It is known to feed upon the roots of raspberries, straw-
! is, and various garden plants, from midsummer until autumn,
bernates in the larval stage and transforms in the following
ig, emerging as a beetle in April or May.

3 adult is oblong, brown-black, sub-opaque, the surface sparsely
I coarsely punctured, and sparsely hairy. The thorax is sub-
Irical, widest in front of the middle, not longer than wide,
led with rounded, shining tubercles, each bearing a short hairl
j fiytra are broadly striated, and the striae coarsely punctured,
ntervals each with a row of shining, rounded tubercles, rather
y placed, and with small patches of short, yellowish hair
i darly distributed. The body beneath is black and shining, and
sparsely hairy. . The length is thirty-four hundredths of an
As the adult is wingless like the beetle of the crown-borer,
lvasion . of a field may be easily guarded against by proper
utions in transplanting.

178

SUMMARY AND GENERAL COMPARISON OF !

LIFE HISTORIES.

The foregoing discussion of separate species of stiawbeny insects
has given all the information in my possession respecting remedies
available against each, and the proper time for applying them;
but it remains to summarize the facts in such form that the straw¬
berry grower, whose field is infested by more than one noxious
species, may be guided to such a choice of measures and of times
of application as will enable him to combat all his insect enemies
with the least trouble and expense.

The first thing needful will evidently be a calendar of the injuri¬
ous species, such as will enable him to tell in what condition every
insect infesting the field will be at each season of the. year. With !
this he may see at once what will result to each species from each
measure proposed. I have consequently prepared a table of dates
and stages of the insects treated, by consulting which one may see |
at a glance the periods of the transformations, and the stages in j
which each species occurs at any time. Running along the head-
lines of the table, one has a brief epitome of the life history of
each species; and following the vertical column, one may learn m |
what stage and situation each will be found at any given period.

This table is, of course, far from complete, since the life histories !
of but few species have been made out in full. In some minor j(
instances it is not impossible that it may be found inaccurate, j<
although all possible pains have been taken to select the data from
the best authorities, as far as they were not derived from our per-
sonal experience. Observations made in those years when the j
seasons are very much accelerated or retarded, will possibly, also,,:!
be found to differ somewhat from the particulars of this table, anu ;
differences due to latitude may likewise occasionally be noticed.

This must, therefore, be taken merely as a general statement of >
the truth, subject to future correction ; but understood with these
limitations, it will be found useful for guidance in practical work.

180

SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL MEASURES. J]

The attention of the practical fruit grower is properly concentra-
ted on the relatively small number of insects known as positively
destructive, the other species infesting his crops being regarded
rather as suspicious characters than as actual criminals. If we seek
to extract the essential substance of the preceding discussion of the
strawberry insects, we shall find that the really important practical
measures can be briefly summarized in a few sentences.

Recollecting what was said on a preceding page, of the straw¬
berry enemies of the first class,* and analyzing the recommenda¬
tions of remedies found effective against them, we shall see that the
capital measures of defense are about five in number. If we apply
pyrethrum, or use the hand net, or some mechanical device of sim¬
ilar action, for the tarnished plant bug and its allies, which attack
the plant before its fruit is picked ; if we poison the foliage in mid¬
summer to kill the beetles of the root-worms, or use carbolic acid
or bisulphide of carbon or its compounds in the ground, to destroy
these insects on their first appearance in the field ; if w7e mow and
burn the field in midsummer after the fruit is picked, to extermin¬
ate the leaf-rollers and other leaf-eating insects; if we change the
crop occasionally, when noxious species multiply inordinately; and
if proper pains be taken to prevent the transfer of the crown-borer
from old to new plantations, we shall have done about all that thef
economic entomologist can advise against the worst enemies of tlr_
strawberry. While it is not to be supposed that the strawberry in- 1
sects can be completely cleared out of an infested field, and alto- >
gether kept out afterwards, it is certain that where noxious insect -
are numerous and destructive, the above measures of defense will 3
be found highly profitable, considered merely as an investment oij
time, labor and money.

*Page 61.

f

r

II

li

\i

1 1
i

-ft;

j

181

||

■Br;;/

H'

I

If

INSECTS INJURIOUS TO THE APPLE.

■

I .

I I -

THE GREEN APPLE LEAF-HOPPER.

Ii:

Empoaalbopicta, n. s.

Order Hemiptera. Family Jassidae.

LPlate XIY, Figs. 3 and 4.]

feret to have to add another species to the already alarming
f insects which attack the foliage of the apple. On the ‘26th
te my attention was called by the owners of the Home Nur-
it Normal, to an injury to the fresh and tender foliage of
young apple trees; and, upon investigation, I found that a
3 leaf-hopper of the family JassidiP was partly responsible for
schief. _ This species occurred upon the leaves in such numbers
n walking between the rows, one would drive them upwards
ids. A careful examination showed that from two to six or
were present upon every young leaf, with their beaks inserted,
g the leaves to curl, and shrivel, and turn first yellow and then
. At this time nine-tenths of the specimens were in the larval
ial stages, only a very small number having yet acquired their

the 6th of August, the same species was discovered excessively
ant upon young apple trees at Centralia. The majority of
were now fully developed adults, but all the stages are repre-
: in our collections. The effect at Centralia was as apparent
| Normal, in the curling and discoloration of the leaves.

' P. R. Uhler, of Baltimore, was kind enough to study speci-
for me, which I sent to him, and has informed me that they
| ent a species new to science, belonging to the genus Empoa

1 3h.

DESCRIPTION.

i •

i is a slender, linear-ovate leaf-hopper, 2.8 mm. long by .8 mm.
.cross the pronotum. The general color is pale green, with a
yellowish tinge, the abdomen being somewhat paler. The
thorax and abdomen are variously marked with white.

I

182

The head is not quite as long as the protliorax, is regularly and
broadly rounded in front, the vertex slightly convex, with a slender |
longitudinal raised line, vanishing forwards. The ocelli are on the
anterior margin of the vertex, where it bends downwards to
join the front, and are more than twice as far from each other
as from the eyes. The cheeks are expanded laterally so as j
partially to cover the anterior coxae ; and the vertex is marked by a
median* white line with a white blotch on either side of its base. =
Each ocellus is situated in a circular white spot, and a series of
irregular dashes of white borders the eye m front. The fiont is
irregularly and variably specked and blotched with white, and the -
iu"® are also slightly marked, especially immediately beneath the I ,
eye. The basal joint of the antennas is no longer than broad, the |
second joint is nearly twice as long as the preceding, the third
slender fusiform, longer than the first and second together, the ft
entire antenna with its bristle being considerably longer than both |
head and prothorax. , I I

The pronotum is about as long as the scutellum. Its posterior .
border is straight, and its anterior regularly arcuate, giving the
whole a semi-lunar form. Along its anterior margin is an are of
six or eight irregular or variable spots or blotches, the middle pair i
being usually quadrate. This row is continued backwards, along i
the "sides of the thorax to the abdomen, beneath the wings, as a I
broken, irregular band. The scutellum is large, triangular, longi*
tudinally depressed m the middle, with a lineai transverse mipres- §
sion marking off the posterior third. It has a white lateral border, |
interrupted at the transverse impression ; and on either side of the ^
middle is a longitudinal white stripe, the pair being usually con- l
nected in the middle by a short, transverse line. These stripes t
extend from the transverse impression to the base of the scutellum,
reaching forward beneath the pronotum. Beyond the impression is |
a triangular white patch connecting the ends of the longitudinal |
stripes above mentioned.

The abdominal segments are irregularly washed with whitish in j|!
transverse bands, widest on the sides, where they form a nearly i
continuous stripe, and interrupted on the middle of the back except ^
on the last segments, where they are unbroken. The genital valves
are lightly washed with white beneath.

The elytra are yellowish, and the wings hyaline. In the former |
(Plate XIV, Fig. 4) the terminal vein coincides with the marginal i
the elytra, while in the latter it is sub-marginal, leaving a narrow ■
border of membrane beyond it. The legs are green, the tarsi paler, ^
the tarsal claws or spurs pale brown. • I

Three other species of this family have been reported as injurious
to the apple: two by Walsh* (Erythroneura malefica, Walsh, and ii-
maligna, Walsh), and one by Lintneri ( Jassus irroratus, bay).

* Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, Vol. IX, p. 331.
t First Annual Report of the Noxious and other Insects of the State of New York.p. 33 >

188

The Lesser Apple Leaf-Folder.

.

( Teras malivorana, Le Baron.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricid,e.

i species, originally described by Dr. Le Baron in his first
, and again by Dr. Thomas in the seventh of the series from
>ffice, has not been reported as especially injurious since its
il discovery, in 1870. Late in June of this year the attention
proprietors of the Home Nursery at Normal was attracted by
asted and withered look of many of their young apple trees,
ury which assumed alarming proportions before the middle
y. On investigation, this proved to be largely due to the above
eaf-roller, which had nearly attained its growth, and was already
erming to the pupa. These larvae evidently represented the
l brood, as indicated by Le Baron’s dates, and our breeding
j show the existence of a third brood also. Of specimens
ed July 5, the first pupa was observed on the 17th, and the
loth appeared August 7, the brood continuing to emerge fora
iys thereafter; and a number of full-grown larvae, collected in
jiilia on the 6th of August, emerged on the 20th.

species has been noted for its apparent subjection to some
ctive influence which has the effect to reduce it speedily to
ificance ; whether parasitic attack or susceptibility to weather,
it been known. From the specimens reared by us, a single
lopterous parasite emerged on the 24th of July, which belonged
genus Hemiteles, and apparently to a species undescribed,
was a male, and no other examples were obtained, I have not
it it best to give it a specific name.

'Iteles, sp. — The head and the body are black, except the
ir two-thirds of the abdomen beneath, which is yellow. The
ftsal joints of the antennae are white in front, and the three
r following joints are somewhat pale interiorly, but otherwise
[itennae are black. The legs are yellow, except the coxae and
nters, which are white on the two anterior pairs and black on
i sterior. The terminal basal joints of the hind legs are dusky,
te tibiae are also ringed with black at either end.

larvae in our breeding cages were also attacked by the very
of some hemipterous insect of the family Pentatomidae, —
mtly one of the common “tree bugs” belonging to the genus
istus.

184

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

Plate I.

THE WHEAT BULB WORM. 4 !

(Original.)

Fig. 1. Meromyza americana, imago, or adult fly; magnified twelve
diameters.

Fig. 2. Head of same ; more highly magnified.

Fig. 8. Larva; magnified sixteen diameters.

Fig. 4. Head of the above ; more highly magnified.

Fig. 5. Egg; magnified sixty diameters.

Fig. 6. Pupa enclosed in puparium; magnified thirty diameters.

Fig. 7. The same, removed from puparium; ventral view.

Fig. 8. The same ; dorsal view.

Plate II. !

THE^WHEAT STRAW-WORM, AND THE PARASITE OF MEROMYZA AMERICANA.

Fig. 1. Ccelinius meromyza: parasitic on the Wheat Bulb Worm;
imago. (Original.)

Fig. 2. The pupa removed from the pupa case. (Original.)

Fig. 8. The Wheat Straw Worm, Isosoma tritici: a , larva, ventral
view ; h, do., lateral view ; c, antenna ; d, mandibles ; e,
anal end, ventrally ; /, imago ; g, h, front and hind wings j
of exceptional individuals ; i, aborted wing in the norma ;
flies — all relatively enlarged. (After Biley.)

Fig. 4. Pupa, magnified. (Original.)

185

Plate III.

SORGHUM PLANT-LICE.

I

(Original.)

1. The Yellow Sorghum Aphis, Chaitophorus jlavus, n.’s., winged

\ivipaious female ; magnified twenty diameters ; a, antenna
of the same, more highly magnified.

2. Chaitophorus flavus, wingless viviparous female ; mag¬

nified twenty-five diameters.

3. Chaitophorus flavus, pupa, side view.

4. The same, dorsal view.

5. The corn Plant Louse, Aphis maidis, winged viviparous

female; magnified twenty-three diameters; a, antenna ; c
honey-tube, more highly magnified.

1

Plate IY.

CORN AND SORGHUM INSECTS.

|

(Original )

1. Aphis maidis, wingless female.

2. The same, pupa.

3. The same, root form, wingless female.

4. Schizoneura panicola, from sorghum roots ; magnified twenty

diameters; a, antenna, more highly magnified.

5. Black-headed Grass Maggot, Sciara, sp. ; magnified five

diameters.

6. Maxilla of the same.

7. Mandible.

8. Labrum, upper surface.

9. Labrum, lower surface.

Plate Y.

j 1* Diahrotica longicornis, imago of Corn Boot-Worm ; magnified
ten diameters.

i 2. Corn Boot-Worm larva; magnified six diameters.

3. Corn root broken across, to show larva within.

4. Egg of Diahrotica longicornis ; magnified eighty diameters.

5. Pupa of the same.

6. The Strawberry Worm, Emphytus maculatus: 1, ventral view

of pupa; 2, side view of same; 3, enlarged sketch of per¬
fect fly, the wings on one side detached; 4, larva crawl¬
ing, natural size ; 5, perfect fly, natural size ; 6, larva at
rest; 7, cocoon; 8, enlarged antenna, showing joints; 9,
enlarged egg. (After Biley.)

186

Plate VI.

STRAWBERRY INSECTS : LEPIDOPTERA.

Fig. 1. The Army Worm, Leucania unipuncta.

Fig. 2. The Army Worm moth.

Fig. 8. The Smeared 'Dagger, Acronycta oblinita: a, larva; b, pupa;
c, moth.

Fig. 4. The Stalk-Borer, Gortyna nitela : moth and larva.

Fig. 5. Anarsia lineatella ; moth and larva, (natural size and mag¬
nified), and injured peach twig. '

Fig. 6. Larva of the same; magnified nine diameters.

Fig. 7. The Strawberry Leaf-Roller, Ancliylopera comptana ; a,
larva; b, anterior segments, magnified; c, moth; d, last
segments. (After Riley.)

Plate VII.

STRAWBERRY INSECTS : COLEOPTERA AND THEIR LARVAE.

Fig. 1. May Beetle, White Grub, Lachnosterna fusca: 1, pupa in
its earthen cell ; 2, larva ; 8, 4, beetle, side and back view.

Fig. 2. The Goldsmith Beetle, Cotcdpa lanigera; adult. (After
Packard.)

Fig. 8. Grub of the same.

Fig. 4. Click Beetle, imago of Wire Worm.

Fig. 5. Wire Worm.

Fig. 6. The Fig Eater, Allorhina nitida : a, grub or larva; b, pupa;

c, imago; d, mandible of larva; e, antennae; /, leg; g,
maxilla.

Fig. 7. The Strawberry Root-Worm, larva of Scelodonta pubescens.
(Original.)

Plate VIII.

STRAWBERRY ROOT WORMS : ADULT BEETLES.

Paria aterrima ; magnified sixteen diameters. (Original.)
Head of the same, more highly magnified. (Original.)
Leg of the same. (Original.)

Colaspis brunnea, natural size, and more highly magnified.
Scelodonta pubescens ; magnified sixteen diameters. (Original

Eig- 1-
Fig. 2.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.

187

Plate IX.

STRAWBERRY ROOT-WORMS AND CROWN-BORER.

Larval and pupal characters of Scelodonta pubescens: A,
tip of abdomen of pupa, side view with anal hook more
highly magnified; B, terminal segments of abdomen of
larva, viewed from beneath ; C, mandible of larva. (Orig¬
inal.)

Pupa of above species. (Original.)

Larva of Colaspis brunnea. (Original.)

Larval and pupal structures of Colaspis brunnea : A, an¬
tenna of larva; B, labium and maxillse of larva: a, labi¬
um ; b, labial palpi ; c, maxillary lobe ; d, maxillary palpi ;
C, mandible of larva; D, labrum of larva; E, terminal
abdominal segments of larva, viewed from beneath; a, b,
ventral tubercles; c, vent; (11, 12, 18, indicate the cor¬
responding segments ;) F, spines upon the terminal abdom¬
inal segments of pupa viewed from beneath. (Original.)

Larval and pupal structures of Faria aterrima : A, tip of
abdomen of pupa, side view ; B, mandible of larva. (Orig¬
inal.

The Strawberry Crown-Borer, Tyloderma fragarice : a , larva ;
b, c, imago.

Plate X.

-

STRAWBERRY INSECTS : ORTHOPTERA AND HEMIPTERA.

!

1. The Red-Legged Grasshopper, Pezottettix femur -rubrum.

2. Strawberry Plant-Louse, Aphis sp. ; magnified sixty diam¬

eters. (Original.)

3. Egg of the same. (Original.)

4. The Maple-Tree Bark-Louse, Pulvinaria innumerabilis, female

in autumnal condition ; a , specimens attached to twig ;
b, dorsal view, magnified; c, same, ventral view.

5. The False Chinch-Bug, Nysius angustatus : a, leaf of potato

showing injury; b, pupa; c, adult. (After Riley.)

6. The Flea Negro Bug, Thyreocoris pulicarius ; natural size,
magnified. (After Riley.)

Plate XI.

STRAWBERRY INSECTS

LYGUS LINEOLARIS.

(Original.)

1. Adult; magnified fifteen diameters.

2. First stage ; magnified fifteen diameters.

3. Second stage ; magnified fifteen diameters.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.

Plate XII.

STRAWBERRY INSECTS : LYGUS LINEOLARIS.

(Original.)

Third stage ; magnified fifteen diameters.
Fourth stage; magnified fifteen diameters.

Plate XIII.

STRAWBERRY INSECTS : STRUCTURES OF LYGUS LINEOLARIS.

(Original.)

Fig. 1. Abdomen of female, from beneath.

Fig. 2. Hemelytron: a, corium; b, clavus ; c, membrane ; d, cuneus;
e, outer cell of membrane;/, inner cell; I, wing.

Fig. 3. Leg, and tarsal claws.

Fig 4. Head; a, eye; b, basal joint of antenna; c, tylum ; d, e,
setae ; f, g, h, i, joints of the labium composing the beak.

Plate XIV.

(Original.)

Fig. 1. The Dusky Plant Bag, Derceocoris rapidus, adult, magnified
nine diameters.

Fig. 2. Pupa of the same, magnified nine diameters.

Fig. 3. The Green Apple Leaf-Hopper, Empoa albopicta, magnified
twenty diameters.

Fig. 4. Hemelytron and wing of the same.

1

Plate XV.

*

Fig. A. Side view of the female Hessian FJy, greatly enlarged.

a, three joints taken from the middle of the antenna of
the female; a1, the three terminal female antennal
joints; a11, the four basal,- and a111, the two terminal
male antennal joints; b, a maxillary palpus ; c, scales
from the body and wings ; d, e, side and vertical view
of the last joint of the foot, showing the claws and
foot-pad or pulvillus between them, and the scales on
the joint.

Fig. B. Larva magnified, with the “breast-bone” in the second ring
next to the head.

Ba, the breast-bone highly magnified ; Bb, head from be¬
neath, enlarged ; Be, larval spiracle and its tubercle and
trachea leading from the spiracle.

Fig. C. . Side and front view of the pupa or chrysalis. _ The abdo¬
men of the side view is rather long, as the insect, when
drawn, was just emerging from the semi-pupa stage,
which it assumed December 1.

Fig. D. The flaxseed, puparium, or pupa case.

The line by the side of the complete figures denotes the natural

length of the insect.

189

Plate I

Fig. 7.

Fig. 1. ..

/

Fig. 6.

Fig. 4.

V

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 8.

192

Plate IV.

Fig. 8.

198

Plate Till.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 5.

198

Plate X.

1st stage

Fig

Fig. 1.

199

Plate XI.

Fig. 3.

ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.

age 21, line 14 from bottom, after larvm, insert of.

age 42, line 2 from bottom, after Passerini, insert *:
iter Thomas, insert t.

last line, after Bnckton, insert t.

age 43. The foot-notes on this page should have been
ane 4 from the bottom, for Hucusjae, read Hucusqute.

age 65, line 14, for above, read below.

placed at the bottom of page

age 86, line 10, for Epitrix , read Crepidodera.
age 86, line 14. for Epitrix , read Crepidodera.

age 86, line 16 from bottom, for pubescens, read nebulosus.

age 88, line 4, for immature, read mature.

age 88, line 18 from bottom, for Phoxteris, read Phoxopteris.

age 98, foot-note. The scale insect referred to in this foot note has been proven by
,ung to belong to the genus Aleurodes of the family Ab>urodida3, the species being as
[described. An Aleurodes is renorted to occur in myriads in England, in the middle
: y. sometimes covering the whole under side of each leaf. The young larvm are said
nd upright, or on one end, beneath the leaves.*

age 98, line 17, for latter, read former.

age 106, line 12 from bottom, for flowers, read flour,
age 107. line 5, for Canadian, read Canada,
age 115, line 6, insert greenish before yellow.

age 116, first foot-note, for recueillies. read recueillis; for Amerique. Amerique: for
or Dominique, Dommgue; for Etat, etats; and for annees, annees.

age 128, table, in heading of first column, after Injured, insert little.

! age 136. first foot-note, for Wanzeartigen, read Wanzenartigen, and for Insektens,
ten. these foot-notes were so arranged by the printer that the references to the
,re incorrect, The * should be replaced by a +, the t by a t, and the t by a *.

age 139, line 24, for Julus, read lulus,
age 140, line 6. for Fragasia, read Fragaria.
age 149, line 9, for beetle, read beetles.

: age 150, line 6 from bottom, for pubescens, Mels., read nebulosus , Lee.

hen the first adult beetles emerged from strawberry root- worms in our breeding
| , as related on p. 165, par. 5, 1 sent a pair of them to the renowned coleopterist, the
j 'r. J. L. Leconte, with a request that he would do me the favor to determine them,
characteristic courtesy, he replied to me, June 24, in the following letter:

have examined carefully the specimens of Graphops [Scelodontaf, which were
| received just after my arrival here.

find that they are without doubt C. pubescens: that species differs from the allied
curtepenniS' and marcassitn, by the more elongate form and by the punctuation of
■othorax b>ung rugose only at the sides.” Under the name thus furnished me, the
9 in the text was written.

xly in April. 1884, circumstances led me to a review of this determination, and
1 the apprehension that an error had been made, I submitted an example of this
i al 1<?f- brP.d fr<)™ strawberry root- worms, to Dr. G. H. Horn, of Philadelphia, inform-
j m at the time, of the earlier determination by Leconte.

j his reply, dated April 15, he identifies the species as nebulosus t and says,

; name I now give you is absolutely typical as far as Leconte’s collection goes. Last
1 eI\ • s health was so poor and eyesight so deceptive, that I do not wonder that
j ot his comparisons were erroneous.”

is decision makes necessary most of the following changes in the article on this
j ;s in this Report:

ge 158, line 5, for pubescens, rpad nebulosus.

ist of the Homopterous Insects in the British Museum, Part IV. p. 1092.

II

ADDENDA.

page ]58( for lines 6 and 7 from bottom substitute the following.

Tr was first described as Heteraspis nebulosus, by Leconte in an article On the Coleop-
tera ofV Kan sas and Eastern New Mexico, published in Vol XI of the Smithsonian Contri-
Imthmsto Knowledge, in 1859; and its relations to allied species were more exactly define
by Crotch, n 1872, on page 85 of the Proceedings of the Philadelphia Academy ot Natural

Sciences for that year.

Page 163, line 12 from bottom, for pubescent, read nebulosus.

1 Cl f-y o X VOj X x xj. o ' 1 ^ '

Page 164 line 1, for pubescens, read neb lotus. Line 10, commencing at “In collec¬
tions,’’ strike out the remainder of the paragraph.

For paragraph 5, substitute the following:

Scelndnnta nebulosus is thus described by Crotch in the Proceedings of the Philadel¬
phia Academy already cited.

•• Hef era spis nebulosus, Lee. Also very near H. pubescens and with the cl ypeus truncate,
but the thorax is not rugose, but has smooth reliefs on the disk: th ; elytra are more evi-
dently striate-punctate; the pubescence is stronger and more marbled, the basal margin
of ihe elytra is incomplete. L. .13. Kansu-, Iowa, and Wise >nsin.

The qnecimen received from Lansing, referred to on p. 163 of this Report, provestobe-
long to this specins; and it has likewise been received at the Laboratory, from Massa¬
chusetts, under the name of Heteraspis pubescens.

Page 165, line 6 from bottom, for pubescens, read nebulosus.

Page 167, strike out the two 6’s in the right hand column of the table.

Pa^e 169 nar. 4. We have no evidence that Scelodonta nebulosus prefers (Enothera
bienn.i s for food, all the examples collected upon that plant having proved to belong to b.

pubescens.

Page 172, lines 11 and 12, for pubescens, read nebulosus.

Page 175, lines 8 and 9 from bottom, for pubescens, read nebulosus.

Page 176, last line, for Cryptocepalus, read Oryptocephalus.

INDEX

<

1 1. See Smith and Abbott.

! um americanum, 62, 87.

|l is, 40.

i peeies. Cl, 84. See Cutworms,
i eta, Empoa, 181. See green apple
hopper.

| >des on strawberry, addenda, I.
in a riitida, 62, 149.
alendar, 179.
escription, 150.

! istinguished from common white
grub, 150.
distribution, 149.
abits, 149.
ljuiies to figs, 149.

strawberries, 143, 149.
emedies, 150.

Eupelmus, 34.
sosoma. 31, 32, 33.

ij can Entomological Society, Transac-
i tions. See under Transactions,
j ntomologist cited, 31,71,72,82,107,123,

; 139, 156. 159.

ntomologist and Botanist cited, 116,

| 131.

i eromyza, 13, 16. See wheat-bulb
worm.

aturalist cited, 33,34,63,72.

I ana, Meromyza, 10,13-29. See wheat-
worm.

anum, Acridium. 62, 87.
anus, Ceanothus, 107, 110.
a lineatella, 62, 141. See strawberry
n miner.

i opera fragariae. 87, 88. See common
beiry leaf- roller.

>na crocataria, 61, 80. See green
berry span-worm.

J nois gi ain-moth, 10.
j itus, Nysius, 62, 104-106. See false
i h-bug.

ta, Cambala, 62, 138. See strawberry
rede.

us, lulus, 139. See strawberry mil-

*

'■ tall yellow, 61, 112. See small yellow
int.

How, 45, 48.

Anthoeoris pseudo-chinche, 105.

Anthonomus museulus, 62, 114. See straw¬
berry weevil.

Ants attending plant- lice, 45,48,49,52,54.
injuring corn, 113,

strawberries, 60.

Apatela oblinita, 61, 82-84. See smeared
dagger.

Aphides, 41-54. See plant-lice.

Aphidius, 49, 103.

Aphis, 46.

apple, 9.
avenae, 40.
chloris, 100.
grain, 40.

maidis, 40, 41, 42, 46-50, 53. See corn
plant louse,
species, 62, 98.

description, 103.
distiibution. 102.
enemies, 103.

habits and mode of life, 102, 103.
remedies, 104.
root form, 103, 143.

Apple, 181-183.
aphis, 9.

injuries to, by forest tent caterpillar,

10.

green apple leaf-hopper, 181.
lesser apple leaf-folder. 183.
oblique banded leaf-roller, 94.
smeared dagger, 82.
tarnished plant bug, 123.
insects injurious to the, 181-183.
leaf-folder, lesser, 183.
leaf-hopper, green, 181.

Arachnida, 62.

Army worm, 9.

calendar, 179.
injuring sorghum, 40.

strawberries, 61, 84.
remedies, 84.

Arsenic for Emphytus maculatus, 69, 72.
leaf-eating insects, 69.
smeared dagger, 84.
strawberry flower worm, 112.
insects, 69.

Ashes for Colaspis larvae, 171.
strawberry root- worms, 171.

IV

INDEX.

Asparagus, 82.

Aster, 121.

aterrimo, P aria, 62, 86, 144, 150, 159-163, 16o. See
Paria aterrima.

Attracting to food plants of minor value,
flea negro bug. 107.
to lamps and fires,

Allorhina nitida, 69, 150.
goldsmith beetle, 69, 148.

May beetles, 69, 145.
strawberry insects, 69.

avenas, Aphis, 40.*

Ayers, A. J., on flea negro bug, 109.
on tarnished plant bug, 123, 131.

B

Baits of flour and molasses for strawberry

millipede, 141.

potato, etc., for millipedes, 69, 141.
Balsam, 121.

Bark-louse, maple, 62, 98.

Barriers to progress of army worm, 68.
crown-borer, 68.

insects of feeble locomotive power, 68.
migratory insects, 68.

Bean, injury to by iulids, 140.

oblique-banded leaf-roller, 94.

Bee, mason, 60, 61, 70, 179. See mason bee.
Beet, injuries to by false chinch bug, 104.
Bethune, Rev. C. J. S., on fleanegio bug,
107.

Bidwell strawberry, 125.
biennis CEnothera, 169, addenda, II.

Birds destroying plant-lice, 45, 46.

strawberry root- worms, 170.
tarnished plant bug, 135.
Bisulphide of carbcn for Scelodonta nebu-
losus, 172.

strawberry root-worms, 69, 172, 176,
180.

subterranean larvae, 69.

Blackberry, injuries to, by common straw¬
berry leaf-roller, 92.
goldsmith beetle, 148.
strawberry flower worm, 111.
tarnished plant bug, 115.

Black fruit-weevil, 62, 177.
description, 177.
injury to strawberries. 177.

Black-headed grass maggot, 57-59.
breeding in grass, 57, 58.
classification, 58.
description, 58.
food plants, 57.
injuries to corn, 57, 58.
range, 57, 58.
remedy, 59.

Black-throated bunting, 131.
bland a, Systena, 62, 86. See yellow-striped
flea-beetle.

Blaniulus guttulatus, 139.

Bluebird, 131.

destroying strawberry false-worm.ft
Blue grass, 22, 57.

Boardman, Dr. E. R., observations on
black- headed grass maggot, 57.
Boisduval, Entomologie Horticole cited,
139.

on European strawberry millipede, Kf

Borer, crown, 61, 62, 68, 142, 151, 176, 179. See j
strawberry crown borer,
stalk, 17, 61, 114, 179. See stalk
borer.

Boston Society of Natural History, Pro- I
ceedings. See under Proceedings,
boyeri, Pemphigus, 40.

Bracon, 92.

Brooklyn Scarlet strawberry, 148.
Broom-corn, injuries to, by Aphis maidis. J
46, 49.

Chaitophorus flavus, 44.
corn root- worm, 55.
plant lice. 11, 41, 53, 54.
insects affecting, 39-56. See notes
on insects affecting sorghum and
broom-corn.

Brown strawberry span-worm, 61, 76-78.
calendar, 179.
description, 77.
distribution, 76, 78.
habits, 77.

injuring the pear, 78.
strawberry, 76.

brunnea, Colaspis, 62, 86, 144, 150, 156-15?.

See Colaspis brunnea.

Buckton, G. B., Monograph of the British
Aphides cited, 43, 100.
on Chaitophorus, 42.
on Siphonophorafragarise, 100.

Bulb worm, wheat, 10, 11, 13-29. See wheat-
bulb worm.

Bulletins of the Division "of Entomology, j
U. S. Department of Agriculture, b
Illinois State Laboratory of Natura:
History, 99.

U. S. Entomological Commission,^. |i

Bunting, black-throated, 131.

Burning grass to destroy black-headc |
grass maggot, 59.
mulch to destroy strawberry in- I

sects, 69.

remnants of straw- stacks to de- i
stroy wheat-straw worm, 37,$- it
rubbish to destroy dusky P'an:
bug, 138.

strawberry insects, 69.
tarnished plant bug, 131.1 . j,
straw to destroy wheat-straff
worm, 31.

strawberry fields to desr

common strawberry leaf j

roller, 88, 93.
leaf-eating insects, 180.

INDEX.

V

leaf rollers, 76, 180.
oblique-banded leaf-roller,
75.

plain strawberry leaf-rdller,
96.

strawberry false-worm, 76.
insects, 68.
plant-lice, 104.

stubble, to destroy wheat-bulb
worm. 27.

-straw worm, 31,33, 34,37,38.

1, T. J., observations on Paria ater-

i, 171.

*, C. W., observations on Paria ater-
ima, 161, 162.

ibservations on Scelodonta nebulo-
sus, 165.

>bservations on strawberry crown-
borer, 142.

ibservations on strawberry millipede,

138.

t

,ge flea beetle, 62, 86.
alendar, 179.

'injuring cabbages, 86.
strawberries, 86.

i,ge, injuries to, by European cabbage
worm, 10, 11.

i:3ia obsoletana, 61, 92, 95. See plain
strawberry leaf-roller,
rosaceana, 61, 94. See oblique-
banded leaf-roller,
transiturana, 95.
iar of strawberry insects, 179.
oris. 136.
ala, 139.

annulata. 62, 138. See strawberry
millipede.

la Farmer cited, 87,107.
ensis, Osmia, 61,70. See mason bee.
dian Entomologist cited 32, 33, 80, 82,

19.

is multicolor, 136. See dusky plant

i ’

j iblineatus, 116. See tarnished plant
bug.

tuadrivittatus, 117. See tarnished
I plant bug,

apidus, 136. See dusky plant bug.

| ring with insect net, dusky plant bug,
1 138,180.

alse chinch-bug, 106.
lea negro bug, 107, 111.
j trawberry false-worm, 76.
arnished plant bug, 131, 135,180.

lie acid for Scelodonta nebulosus, 173.
trawberry root-worms, 69,173,176,180.
ubterranean larvae, 69.

rd, 130.

ing and killing cutworms, 85.

Cauliflower, injuries to by iulids, 140.
Ceanothus, 108.

americanus, 107,110.

Cecidomyidse, 62.
cerealella, Gelechia, 10.
ceruleocinctus, lulus, 139.

Chaitophorus, 41,42.
flavus, 54.

common name, 53.
description. 42.
enemies, 45.

found with Siphonophora, 50.
injuries compared with those of
corn plant-louse, 49.
to broom-corn, 44.
to sorghum, 44.
life history, 44.
summary of article on, 53.

Cherry, injuries to by flea negro bug, 107,

110.

oblique-banded leaf-roller, 94.
tarnished plant bug, 120.

Chickens, 46.

destroying Chaitophorus flavus, 45.
common strawberry leaf-roller,
93.

strawberry false worm, 75.
Chinch bug, 9, 105.

false, 62, 104-106,179. See false chinch
bug.

Chipping sparrows destroying strawberry
false worm, 75.
chloris, A.phis, 100.

Chlorops, 22.31.

Chrysomelulse, 60, 153.

Cinquefoil, 169.

Classification of insect injuries to the
strawberry, with suggestions of remedies
for them. 64-66.

Injuries to the crown, 66.
fibrous roots, 66.
flower and flower stem, 65.
fruit, ripe or unripe, 66.
leaf and leaf stem, 65.
main root, 66.

Classification of insect remedies, 66-69.
barriers to progress, 68.
capture and direct destruction, 68.
modes of culture, 67.
topical applications, 69.

Clemens, Dr. B., on Eccopsis permundana,
111.

Climatic influences, effect of on wheat-
straw worm, 33.

Clisiocampa sylvatica, 10.

Clover, 34.146,147,169.

Coccid, maple, 98.

Coccinellidse, 45, 103.

Coelinius, 25.

meromyzae, 26, 29.
niger, 24.

Colaspis Orunnea, 62,156-159.
calendar, 179.

I

VI

INDEX.

characters distinguishing it from
crown borer and white grubs,
151.

from Paria, and Scelodonta, 153-
155.

in common with Paria and Scel¬
odonta, 151-153.
description, 155.
eggs, when deposited, 175.
enemies, 170.
food plants, 169.
injuries to grapes, 169.

strawberries by adults, 86,169.
larvae. 144, 150, 169.

larva distinguished from larvae of Pa¬
ria and Scelodonta, 153-155.
life history. 157-159.

compared with that of Paria and
Scelodonta, 166-169.
literature, 156.
remedies, 86, 171-175,
plowing, 174.

topical applications to foliage, 171.

roots, 172.
transplanting, 174.

synopsis of differential characteris¬
tics, 155.

summary of article, 175-177.

Colaspis, grape-vine, 156. See Colaspis
brunnea.
species, 158.

striata, 159. See Paria aterrima.
strigosa, 156.

tristis injuring the strawberry, 62,86,
158,159.

Coleoptera, 60,61,62.

Colorado grasshopper, 40.

Commissioner of Agriculture, Reports of
U. S. See under Reports.

Common strawberry leaf-roller. 61,87-93.
calendar, 179.
description, 89.

distinguished from oblique-banded
leaf-rollei. 94.
distribution, 90.
enemies, 92.

injuries to blackberries, 92.
raspberries, 92.
strawberries, 87, 92.
life history, 91.
literature, 87-89.
remedies, 92, 180.

communis, Juniperus, 161.

comptana, Phoxopteris, 61, 87. See com¬
mon strawberry leaf-roller.

Comstock. J. H., on strawberry flower
worm, 111.

Contagious diseases of caterpillars, 10.
European cabbage worm, 10,
forest tent caterpillar, 10.
insects, 10.

Cook, A. J., 12.

on Anthonomus musculus, 114.
on Paria aterrima, 159, 163, 171.

Cope, E. D., on strawberry millipede, 139, ho.
Copeland, A. B., observations on the flea
negro bug. 110.

Coquillett, D. W., on Apatela oblinita, 82.
on corn myriapod, 140.
on oblique-banded leaf-roller, 95.
Coreopsis, 107,108,110.
lanceolata, 109.
wild, 169.

Coreus lineolaris, 116. See tarnished plant
bug.

Corn, 42,50,51.

injuries to, by subterranean insects
11.

black-headed grass maggot, 57.
corn myriapod, 140.

plant-louse, 11, 42, 47,48, 49, 50,53,54.
root- worm, 55.
root-lice, 48,54.

Schizoneura panicola, 51,52.
small yellow ant, 112,113.
smeared dagger, 82.

Systena blanda, 86.
tarnished plant bug, 115.
myriapod, 140. ✓

plant-louse, 9,11,46-50.
aerial form, 47,48.
ants attending, 48.
calendar, 48.
classification. 46.
description, 46.
enemies, 49.
food plants, 49.
habits, 41,42.

injuries to broom-corn, 43,49.
corn, 47.

sorghum, 40,41,42,43,49.
life history, 47.
literature, 40.
remedies, 50.
root form, 47,48.
summary of article, 53,54.

Corn root-worm, 9, 55.
description, 55.
food plants, 55.
injuries to corn, 55,56.

sorghum, 55.
life history. 55.
preventive, 55.
corni, Schizoneura, 40.
coronaria. Pyrus, 161.

Cotalpa lanigera, 62,146-148.
calendar, 179.
description, 146.

distinguished from common white
grub, 148.

from May beetles, 147.
food plant's, 146, 148.
injuries to blackberry, 148.
strawberry, 143, 146,148.
trees, 148.

INDEX. vn 1

'e history, 147.

destructor, Nysius, 104-106. See false

terature, 63.

chinch-bug.

;medies, 148.

Diabrotica longicornis, 55. See corn root-

. injuries to, by oblique-banded leaf-

worm.

3- 94.

Digging up and killing by hand the grub of ! ,

neared dagger, 82.

goldsmith beetle, 148.

y Gentleman cited, 15,32.

grub of Allorhina nitida, 150.

PPle, injuries to by Paria. 161, 1C9,

white grubs, 145. d

Dipping plants in kerosene and water to

adera fuscula. Addenda, I.

kill strawberry aphis, 104. d

nt strawberry, 125, 126, 127, 128.

Diptera, 61, 62. ;

c soap for flea negro bug, 107.

Diseases of caterpillars, 10. o

rnished plant bug. 131.

European cabbage worm, 10. f

[iria, Angerona, 61,80. See green

forest tent caterpillar, 10. «

1 'berry span-worm.

insects, 10. |

, G. It., on Seelodonta pubescens,

oblique-banded leaf-roller, 95. 1

strawberry root-worms, 170. if

•borer, 61, 62, 68. 142,151,176,179,180. See

Ditching to arrest migration of army |

strawberry crown-borer.

worm, 68, 84. |

iner, 62, 141, 179. See strawberry

injurious insects, 68. !

crown miner.

Dor-bugs, 144. j

eg army worms, 68,84.

Downing strawberry, 125, 127, 128.

igratory insects, 68.

Downy flea beetle, 62, 179. See Epitrix fus- l

cephalus quadrimaculatus, 176.

cula.

|oer, injuries to, by tarnished plant

Dusky plant-bug. 10,61,62, 135-138.

22.

calendar, 179.

tion of grass lands in some hoed

description, 136.

for root-eating insects, 67.

distribution, 135. 1

jrawberry root insects, 67.

injuries to strawberries, 124, 127, 135.

lite grubs, 67.

life history, 138.

onidae, 60.

literature, 136.

t. injuries to, by Angerona crocata-

remedies, 138.

! ia, 81.

Ilipede, 140.

smatpcampa filamentaria. 79.

jfi Seedling strawberry, 148.

E

j off and destroying infested stalks

S wheat bulb worm, 27.

! ms, calendar, 179.

Earle, F S., on Colaspis brunnea, 170.

uring fruit trees, 84.

on grasshoppers. 87.

sorghum, 40.

on Paria aterrima, 162.

strawberries, 61,84,85.

on Seelodonta nebulosus, 164.

3 history, 85.

on tarnished plant bug, 123.

uedies, 85.

Early scarlet strawberry, 148.

I phora humaria, 78.

Early transplanting of strawberries to pre-

■ mpinaria, 61, 76-78. See brown

vent ihe deposit of insect eggs. 68.

trawberry span worm.

Eccopsis permundana, 61, 111. See straw-

berry flower worm.

Eggs of forest tent caterpillar destroyed,

D

10.

insects, safeguards against their de-

*

| 121

posit and transfer, 68.

Lg vegetation, 56,58.

strawberry aphis destroyed, 104.

on Paria gilvipes, 159.

insects destroyed, 106.

| oris rapidus, 10, 62, 124, 127, 135-138.

Elateridae, 60, 62, 143.

[ isky plant bug.

Elm, 146.

( ing oggs of forest tent caterpillar,

elymi. Isosoma, 32, 33.

Emphytus maculatus, 61, 69, 71-76. See

1 awberry aphis, 101.

strawberry false- worm.

! insects, 68.

Empoa albopicta, 181. See green apple

i eds to prevent njuries of stalk-

leaf- hopper.

orer,69, 114.

Emulsion of kerosene for dusky plant bug.

1 tion of flrst setting of young straw-

138.

plants, to destroy insect eggs, 68.

4

false chinch-bug, 106.

*

VIII

INDEX.

flea negro bug, 110, 111.
plant-liee. 104.
strawberry insects, 60.

plant-lice, 104.
tarnished plant bug, 133, 135.

Endicott, Mr., method of preventing attack
of strawberry crown-borer and root-
worms, 175.,

Entomological Commission, , Reports of U.
S. gee under Reports.

Epitrix fuscula, 62, 86. See downy flea
beetle.

Erythroneura malefica, 182.
maligna, 182.

Eumolpini, 153.

Eumolpus flavidus, 156.
pubescens. 163.

Eupelmus, 32, 33.
allynii, 34.

European cabbage worm, 10, 11.
strawberry millipede, 139.

Euschistus, 183.

Evening primrose, 169, 176.

Exartema permundana, 111. See straw¬
berry flower worm.

F

Fabricius, J. C., on Angerona crocataria,
80.

on Eumolpus flavidus, 156.

False chinch-bug, 62, 104-106.
calendar, 179.
description, 105.

distinguished from true chinch-bug,
105.

food plants, 104.
injuries, 104.

to garden vegetables, 104.
grapes, 104.
strawberries, 104.
literature, 105.
nomenclature, 105,
number of broods, 104.
remedies, 106.

resemblance to true chinch-bug, 104,
105.

False-worm, strawberry, 61, 71-76, 179. See
strawberry false-worm.
femur-rubrum, Pezotettix, 62, 87.

Fernald, C. H., 89.

on Cacoecia obsoletana, 95.
transiturana, 95.

on Phoxopteris comptana, 87, 88, 89, 92.
fragarise, 88, 89.

Fig, 149.

Fig eater, 149. See Allorbina nitida.
filamentaria, Nematocampa, 61, 79.

Fitch, Dr. Asa, on Colaspis brunnea, 157,
169.

on Meromyza americana, 14,16,21,27.
on tarnished plant bug, 117.
on wheat-straw worm, 37.

flavidus, Eumolpus, 156,
flavus, Chaitophorus, 42, 49, 50, 53, 54. 8ee
Ghaitophorus flavus.

Lasius, 45.48.52.

Flea beetle, cabbage, 62,86,179. See cab¬
bage flea beetle.

downy, 62, 179. See Epitrix fuscula.
yellow-striped, 62, 179. See Systena
blanda.

Flea beetles, 86.

characteristics, 86.
injuring ihe strawberry, 86.

Flea negro bug, 62,106,111.
calendar. 179.
description, 107.
food plants. 107,108,109, 110.
injuries. 106.

to fruit trees, 110.
grape, 110.
raspberry, 110.
strawberry, 109.
wheat, 109.
life history, 108.
literature, 107.
other species, 108.
remedies, 107, 110.

Flower worm, strawberry, 61,111,179. See r
strawberry flower worm.

Flowers, garden, 115,140.

Fly, Hessian, 9,11,13,17,24.

Forbes, S. A., paper on Insects Affecting the p
Strawberry cited, 63,100,159.
previous article on Paria aternma, |i
159.

strawberry insects, 63.
strawberry plant -lice, 100.
wheat bulb-worm, 16.

Report as State Entomologist of Illi¬
nois. See under Reports.

Forell, Aug., on habits of Solenopsisfugax

112.

Food plants used as decoys for flea negro
bug, 107.

Forest tent caterpillar, 10.
contagious disease, 10.
remedies, 10.

Forest trees, 10.

Formicina, 112.

Four- striped plant bug, 117. See tarnfcbed
plant bug.

Fragaria vesca, 140.

fragariae Anchylopera, 87,88. See comnior F
strawberry leaf-roller.

Lozotaenia, 97. See peach-tree leaf- 1
roller. . ]

Siphonophora. 62, 99, 100, 103. See S - ■
phonopliora fragariae.

Tyloderma, 62, 142, 151, 176. See straw j
berry crown-borer.

French, G. H., on Apatela oblinita, 82.

I

INDEX

IX

Empbytus maculatus, 72, 75.
Eupelmus a’lynii, 32, 34,
f Isosoraa elymi. 33.
hordei, 33, 36.
species, 32.
i strawberry insects, 63.

\ strawberry millipede, 139.
i wheat-straw worm, 30, 31, 32^33, 34, 36.

ees, injuries to, by cut-worms, 84.
rnished plant bug, 115, 116.
eevil, black, 62, 177.

149.

Solenopsis, 45, 61, 112. See small
Ij w ant.

56, 58.

is diseases of strawberry root-

is, 170.

r plowed around the field to arrest
ration of army worm, 68, 84.
igratory insects, 68.

, ,, Epitrix, 62, 86. See downy flea

\

e.

y, strawberry stem, 60, 62. 97. See
‘ /berry stem gall-fly.
la, O. B.,on Emphytus maculatus, 72,

l flowers, 115, 140.
egetables, 116, 122.

n, H., 12.

xperiments on insecticides for
strawberry root-worms, 172-174.
bservations on Colaspis brutmea, 158.
bservations on Paria aterrima, 161,
162. 170.

bservations on strawberry crown-
borer, 142.

bservations on strawberry plant- lice,

102.

ne for Allorhina nitida, 150.
oldsmitli beetle, 148.
isect depredations, 67.
trawberry insects, 67.
rhite grubs, 145.

lia cerealella, 10.

y, T. G., on Apatela oblin'ita, 82.

jical and Geographical Survey of the
itories, Reports of U. S. See under
)rts.

ir, on Thyreocoris pulicarius, 107.

O. W., on the common strawberry
roller, 88, 93.

is, Paria. 159.

*, Townend, on Colaspis brunnea,156,
n rose slug, 76.
n tarnished plant bug, 123.
g, Dr. F. W., observations on milli-
iS, 140.

Goldsmith beeetle, 146-148. See Cotalpa
lanigera.

Gooseberry, 81.

Gortyna nitela, 61, 114. See stalk borer.
Grain, 50.

aphis, 40.

moth, Angoumois, 10.
graminum. Toxoptera, 40.
granariae, Siphonophora, 40.

Grape, injuries to, by false chinch-bug, 104.
flea negro bug, 107, 110.
grape-vine Colaspis, 156, 158, 169, 176.
See Colaspis brunnea.

Graphops, 164, addenda, I.

Grass, 21, 33, 42, 49,50, 51, 52, 54, 58, 59, 67, 121,
147, 176.
blue. 22, 57.

June, 20.

maggot, black-headed, 57-59. See
black- headed grass maggot.
Panicum. 48, 51.
glabrum, 49.

root-louse, 42, 52, 53, 54. See Schizo-
neura panicola.

Setaria, 51.

verticillata, 52.
viiidis, 52.
timothy, 14, 20, 57.

Grasshopper, Colorado, 40.
red-legged, 62.

Grasshoppers, attacking strawberries, 60,
62, 87.

Green apple leaf-hopper. 181,
description, 181.
first occurrence, 181.
injuries to apple, 181.

Green strawberry span-worm, 61, 80.
calendar, 179.
description, 80.
habits, 80, 81.
injuring the currant, 81.
gooseberry, 81.
strawberry, 80, 81.
literature, 8<>.
remedies, 81.

Guenee, A., on Nematocampa filamentaria,
79.

Uranides et Phalenites, cited, 79.
guttulatus, Blaniulus, 139.

H

Halticidse. 86.

Hand-picking and destroying
strawberry false-worm, 76-
strawberry flower worm, 112.
wheat bulb-worm, 15.

Harris, D. S., observations on the wrheat-
bulb worm, 19, 23. 27.

Harris, T. W., Entomological Correspond¬
ence cited, 79.

X

INDEX.

on Nematocampa filamentaria, 79.
on tarnished plant bug, 116, 121, 129, 130.
Treatise on Insects Injurious to Veg¬
etation, cited, 1 10.

Hayden’s Report on Montana, cited. 105.

Hazel, 79, 82. 111.

Heliothis, 40.

Hellebore for cutworms, 85.

Emphytus m iculatus, 69, 72, 76.
saw-fly larvae, 76.

Hemiptera, 60, 61, 62.

Hemiteles, species, 183.

Henshaw, Samuel,

on Graphops and Scelodonta, 164.
on Heteraspis and Scelodonta, 163.

Herrick- Schaeffer,

Die Wanzenartigen Insekten, 136.
on Capsus multicolor, 136.

Hessian fly, 9, 11, 13, 17, 24.

Heteraspis. 163, 164.

pubescens, 164. See Scelodonta pubes-
cens.

Heteroptera. 60.

Hickory, 79. 146, 148.

Hoeing for root-eating insects, 67.
strawberry root insects, 67.
white grubs, 67.

Hofmcister, Mr., on birds eating Emphytus
maculatus, 75.

Holcomb, T. A. E., on flea negro bug, 107,
110.

Hollister. E., on the occurrence of the com¬
mon strawberry leaf-roller, 91.

hordei, Isosoma, 31, 32, 33, 36.

Horn, George H. See Leconte and Horn,
on Graphops and Scelodonta, 164.

Horned span-worm, 61,79.
calendar, 179.
characteristics, 79.
description, 79.
food plants, 79.
habits, 79, 80.

injuring the strawberry, 79.
literature, 79.
remedies, 80.

Hot water for strawberry millipede, 141.

Howard, L. O., on Allorhina nitida, 149.

humaria, Cymatophora, 78.

Hymenoptera. 60.61.
parasitic, 103.

I

Ichneumon flies, 25.

Illinois State Department of Agriculture,
Circular, cited, 16.

State Entomologist Reports. See un¬
der reports.

State Horticultural Society, Transac¬
tions. See under Transactions.

State Laboratory of Natural History
Bulletins. See under Bulletins,
impresses, lulus, 140.
innumerabilis, Pulvinaria, 62,98.

Insect remedies, classification of, 66-ffl, j
See classification of insect remedies.

Insecticides: arsenic, 69,72,84, 112.
ashes, 171.

bisulphide of carbon, 69,172,176,180.
carbolic acid, 69, 173. 176, 180.
cresylic soap, 107, 131.
emul-ion, kerosene, 69,104,106,110,11]
133, 135.

gas lime, 67,145.
hellebore, 69,72,76,85.
hot water, 141.

kerosene. 69, 76, 104,115,131,135,141,115,
148.

emulsion, 69, 104, 106, 110,111,133,135.
lime, 54, 171.

London purple, 69,76,80,171,176,180.
milk, 133.

Paris green, 10,69,76,80,81,84,86,88,93,

171.176. 180.

poisons, 10,71,86,96,180.
pyrethrum, 69, 76, 80, 81,110,111,112,115,

132. 135. 180.
salt, 171.

soapsuds, 69,106,107,131.
soot, 171.

sulphur, 69,106,146.
tobacco, 88,93.
water, 69,76,104,135,145.
hot, 141.

Insects affecting sorghum and broom-corn, |
39-56. See notes on insects affecting
sorghum and broom-corn,
injurious to the apple, 181-183.

Insects injurious to the strawberry, 60-180, 1
calendar of, 179.
classification of injuries, 61-66.
to the crown, 66.
fibrous roots, 66.
flower and flower stem. 65.
fruit, ripe or unripe, 66.
leaf and leaf-stem, 65.
main root, 66,

introductory, 60.

life histories, summary and general ,
comparison, 178.
list of strawberry insects, 61.
literature, 62.

remedies; classification of. 66-69.
barriers to progress, 68.
capture and direct destruction,
68.

modes of culture, 67,
topical applications, 69.
suggestions of, 64-66.
summary, 180.

species, description and discussion
of, 70-177.

INDEX.

XI

i

jjuring the crown, 141-144.
fibrous roots, 144-177.
flower or flower stem, 106-112.
fruit, ripe or unripe, 112-141.
leaf or leaf st^m, 70-106.
main root, 141-144.
ummary of life histories, 178.

i emedial measures, 180.
s of Illinois, Reports of State Ento-
*>gist on. See under Reports,
f Missouri, Reports of State Entomol¬
ogist on. See under Reports.
fNew York, Reports of State Ento¬
mologist on. See under Reports.

If Vermont. See under Reports.

>sus, l riphleps, 105.

Rate Horticultural Society, Transac-

s. See under Transactions.

us, Jassus, 182.

aa allynii, 31,32,33.

lymi, 32,33.

ordei, 31,32,33,36.

I ’itici, 17, 30-38. See wheat- straw
worm.

i iatis, Stictonotis, 34,

, 140, 141.
r 140.

mnulatus, 139. See strawberry milli¬
pede.

eruleocinctus, 139.
npressus, 140.
mltistriatus, 139.

: irroratus, 182.

I worm, 36,

J. P., on injuries of tarnished plant-
123.

f dofthe Academy of Natural Sciences,
idelphia, 159.
la strawberry, 148.
eetles, 144.
rass, 20.
r, 161,169,176.
rus communis, 161.

K

? State Board of Agriculture, Reports,
i mder Reports,
ne for Allorhina nitida, 69,150.
tsky plant bug, 138.
lse chinch-bug, 106.

| )ld smith beetle, 69,148.

; ay beetles, 69.

I rawberry false-worm, 76.
rawberry millipede, 141.
rawberry plant- lice, 104.

' rawberry weevil, 115.
rnished plant bug, 131,135.
ne emulsion for dusky plant bug,
138.

i lse chinch-bug, 106.

flea negro bug, 110,111.
plant-lice, 104.
strawberry insects, 69.
strawberry plant- lice. 104.
tarnished plant bug, 133,135.

Killing by hand grub of Allorhina nitida,
150.

of goldsmith beetle, 148.
white grubs, 1 45

Koch, C. L., on Chaitophorus, 42.
on strawberry plant-lice, 100.

L

Lace-wing flies, 45.

Lachnosterna, 62, 143, 144, 179.

Lady-bugs. 103.

lanigera, Cotalpa, 62, 143, 146-148. See Co-
talpa lanigera.

Lasius flavus, 45,48,52.

Late sowing to prevent injury from wheat-
bulb worm, 27,29.
lateralis. Thyreoeoris, 108.

Leaf-beelles, strawberry, 69, 86.

-folders, lesser apple, 183.

-hopper, green apple, 181.

Leaf-roller, common strawberry, 61,87,179,
180. See common strawberry leaf-
roller.

oblique-banded, 61, 94, 179, 180. See
oblique-banded leaf-roller,
peach-tree, 62,97,179, 180. See peach-
tree leaf-roller.

plain strawberry, 61, 95, 179, 180. See
plain strawberry leaf-roller.
Leaf-rollers, strawberry, 61,180.

Leaf-stem gall, strawberry, 97.

LeBaron, Dr. Wm., on common strawberry
leaf-roller, 88.
on flea negro bug, 107.
on lesser apple leaf-folder, 183.
on tarnished plant bug. 115.

Reports as State Entomologist of Illi¬
nois. See under Reports.

Leconte, J. L. See Leconte and Horn,
on Heteraspis pubescens, 163.
on Paria opacicollis, 159.

4-guttata, 159.

Leconte and Horn, Classification of the
Coleoptera of North America, cited,
153.

on Chrysomelidae, 153.
on Graphops and Heteraspis, 164.
on Scelodonta, 164.

Lepidoptera, 60,61.

Lesser apple leaf-folder, 183.
injuries to apple, 183.
parasites, 183.

Leucania unipuncta, 61, 84. See army
worm.

Lichtenstein, Jules, on Schizoneura venus-
ta, 52.

Lilies, 140.

I,

XII

INDEX.

Lime for Colaspis larvae, 171.
root-lice, 51.

strawberry root-worms, 54.
lineatella, Anarsia, 62,141. See strawberry
crown miner.

lineatus, Lygus, 117. See tarnished plant

lineolaris, Coreus, 116. See tarnished plant
bug.

Lygus. 10, 62, 115-135, 138. See tarn¬
ished plant bug.

Phytocoris, 116. See tarnished plant
bug.

Lintner, J. A., on Emphytus maculatus, 72.
on Meromyza americana, 15, 16, 20, 21,
24, 25, 27.

on Jassus irroratus. 182.

List of strawberry insects, 61.

Lockwood, Dr. Samuel, on Cotalpa lani-
gera, 147, 148.

Lombardy poplar, 82.

London purple, caution against excessive
use 171.

directions for preparation, 171.

London pm pie for Colaspis, 171, 176.

Faria, 171, 176.
horned span-worm, 80.
leaf-eating insects, 69.
strawberry false-worm, 69.
strawberry insects, 69.
strawberry root-worms, 171,176,180.
Scelodonta, 171, 176.

longicornis, Diabrotica, 55. See corn root-
worm.

Lozotsenia fragarise, 97. See peach-tree
leaf -roller.

Lubbock, Sir John, on Lasius flavus,
52.

Lygus lineolaris, 10, 62, 115—135, 138. See
tarnished plant bug.
lineatus, 117. See tarnished plant
bug.

M

maculatus, Emphytus, 61, 69, 71—76. See
strawberry false-worm.

Maggot, black-headed grass. 54.

wheat-stem, 13, 16. See wheat-bulb
worm.

maidis, Aphis, 40, 41, 42, 46, 53. See corn
plant-louse.

maleliea, Erythroneura, 182.
maligna, Erythroneura, 182.
malivorana, Teras, 183.

Maple bark-louse injuring the strawberry,
62, 98.

coccid, 98.
soft 98, 101.

tree, injuries to by horned span-
worm, 79.

maple bark-louse, 98.

Marigold. 121.

Marten, John, on Meromyza americana, 16,
Mason bee. 60,61.70.
calendar, 179.
description, 70.
injuries to strawberries, 70.
remedies, 71

Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture,
Reports. See under Reports.

May beetles, 69,141,147.
maydis, Sypha, 40.

Meadows, 21.

MeRheimer, on Eumolpus pubescens, '
163.

Meromy za, 22.

American, 13, 16. See wheat bulb-
worm.

americana, 10,13—29. See wheat bulb-
worm.

meromyza}, Coelinius, 26,29.

Michigan Farmer, cited, 14.

Horticultural Society, Reports. See
under Reports.

State Board of Agriculture, Reports.

See under Reports.

Milk and kerosence for tarnished plant
bug, 133.

Millipede, European strawberry, 139.

strawberry, 60.62, 138 — 141. See straw¬
berry millipede.

Miner’s Prolific strawberry, 125.

Minnesota State Horticultural Society, ,
Transactions. See under Transactions,
minor, Siphonophora, 62, 98, 101, 10o. Bee
Siphonophora minor.

Mississippi Valley Horticultural Society,
Transactions. See under Transactions.
Missouri State Entomologist, Reports. See
under Reports. 1

Mite, 60. I

red, 61.

Modes of culture to prevent depredations j
of root-eating insects, 67.

strawberry root insects, 67. |

white grubs, 67.

Molds, 56.

Monell, J. T., on Siphonophora fragarte. j
var. immaculata, 99. See Riley and ^

Monell. |

Morrison, Frank, observations ontbenea

negro bug, 110.

Mt, Vernon strawberry, 125.

Mountain ash, 122.

Mullein, 121.

multicolor, Capsus, 136. See dusky Plan
bug.

mult istriatus, lulus, 139.

Murtfeidt, M. E., on common straw bern
leaf-roller, 92. ]

musculus, Anthonomus, 62, 114. See stra
berry weevil.

Myriapod, 61.
corn, 140.

INDEX.

XIII

*da, 62.

„ina, 112.

N

■. J. C., on insects injurious to sor-
and broom-corn, 40.
us, Scelodonta. 62, 86, 144,150, 158,163,
da, I, II. See Scelodonta nebu-

ug, flea, 62, K'6, 111, 179. See flea
i bug.

3ampa filamentaria, 61. 79.

} era, 60.
sey tea, 110.

>rk State Entomologist Reports.

I der reports.

Delinius, 24.

ortvna, 61, 114. See stalk-borer,
llorhina, 62, 143, 149. See Allorhina

trawberry, 125, 126, 128.
the year, 9.

a insects affecting sorghum and
room-corn, 39-56.
roductory, 39.
rature, 40.

; ent observations on
J1 corn root- worm, 55.
plant lice, 41.

-ngustatus. 62. 104-106. See false
linch bug.

tructor. 104-106. See false chinch

'tg.

i

O

tries to, by goldsmith beetle, 146,

| 8.

ned span-worm, 79.
is, Capsus, 116. See tarnished
1 ug.

Apatela, 61, 82-84. See smeared

banded leaf-roller, 61, 94.
ndar, 179.
racteristics, 94.
dription, 94.
ase, 95.

inguished from plain strawberry
if-roller, 95.
nies, 94.

I plants. 94.

;its, 94.

ry to the apple, 94.
strawberry, 94, 95.
edies, 95, 180.
ta, Cacoecia, 61, 92, 95.
i Try leaf-roller.

See plain

! i biennis, 169, addenda, II.
i Pari a aterrima, 159.

5.

Entomological Society, Reports,
er reports.

opacicollis, Paria, 159.

Orchards, injuries [to, by tarnished plant
bug, 117.

Orthoptera, 60, 61, 62.

Osborn, Prof. Herbert, on Emphytus maeu-
latus,72, 76.

on tarnished plant bug, 116.

Osten-Sacken, Baron C. R., determination
of Meromyza americana, 15.

Oscinidae, 24. 27.

Osmia canadensis. 61, 70. See mason bee.
Otiorhynchidm, 60.

Otiorhynchus sulcatus, 62, 177.

P

Pacific Rural Press cited, 34, 100.

Packard, Dr. A. S., Jr., Guide to the Study
of Insects cited, 79, 80, 94.
Monograph of the Phalaenid® of North
America cited, 77, 79, 80.
on Angerona crocataria, 80.
on Cotalpalanigera, 63, 147.
on Cymatophora pampinaria, 77, 78.
on enemies of the strawberry, 63, 80.
on Nematocampa filamentaria, 79.
on oblique-banded leaf-roller, 94.
on peach tree leaf-roller, 97.
on strawberry millipede, 139.
on wheat-straw worm, 32.

Palisot de Beauvois, 116

Insectes recueillis en Afrique et en
Amerique dans les royaumes
d’Oware, a Saint Domingue et dans
les etats unis pendant les annees
1781-1797, cited. 116.
on Coreus lineolaris. 116.

pampinaria, Cymatophora, 61, 76-78. See
brown strawberry span-worm.

panicola, Schizoneura, 42,49,51-53, 103. See
Schizoneura panicola.

Panicum, 48.

glabrum, 49.

Parasites of Angoumois grain-moth, 10.
Aphis, species, 103.

Chaitophorus flavus, 45.
common strawberry leaf-roller, 92.
corn plant louse. 49.

Hessian fly, 24.
lesser apple leaf-folder, 183.
Siphonophora minor, 103.
strawberry false-worm, 75.
wheat-bulb worm, 25,27,29.
wheat Oscinidm, 24.
wheat-straw worm, 33,34.

Parasitic diseases of strawberry root-
worms, 170.

Hymenoptera, 103.

Paria aterrima, 62, 159-163.
calendar, 179,

XIV

INDEX.

characters distinguishing it from
crown-borer and white grubs,

151.

from Colaspis and Scelodonta,
1,53-159.

in common with Colaspis and
Scelodonta, 151-153.
description. 160.
distribution, 161.
enemies, 170.
food plants, 169.

injuries to strawberries by adults, 86, !

169.

larvae, 144,150, 169.

larvae distinguished from larvae of Co¬
laspis and Scelodonta, 153-155.
life history, 161-163.

compared with that of Colaspis and
Scelodonta, 166-169.
literature, 159.
remedies, 86, 171-175.
plowing, 174.

topical applications to foliage, 171.

roots, 172.
transplanting, 174.
summary of articles, 175-177.

Paria gilvipes, 159.
opacicollis, 159.

4 -guttata, 159.

4-notata, 159.
sexnotata, 159-163.

Paris green, caution against excessive use.

171.

directions for preparation. 171.
for army worm, 84.

Colaspi^, 171,176.

common strawberry leaf-roller,
88, 93.

forest tent-caterpillar, 10.
green strawberry span-worm, 81.
horned span-worm, 80.
leaf- eating insects, 69.

Paria, 171,176.

Scelodonta, 171, 176.
strawberry false-worm, 76.
strawberry insects, 69.;
strawberry leaf beetles, 86.
strawberry root-worms, 171, 176,
180.

Passerini, G-.,Aphidid® Italicae Hujusqu®
Observat® cited, 43, 100.

Flora degli Afldi Italian! cited, 40.
on Chaitophorus, 42.
on sorghum plant-lice, 40,
on strawberry plant-lice, 100.

Pea, injuries to by iulids, 140.

Peach, injuries to by oblique-banded leaf-
roller, 94.

peach tree leaf-roller, 97.
sm«ared dagger, 82.

Peach-tree leaf -roller, 62,97.
calendar, 179.
description, 97.
injuries to peach, 97.

injuries to strawberry, 97.
mode of life. 97.
range, 97.
remedies, 180.

Pear, injuries to by brown strawberry span-

worm, 78.

flea negro bug, 107,110.
goldsmith beetle, 146, 148. m
horned span-worm, 79.
tarnished plant bug, 122,123.
Pemphigus boyeri, 40.
peregrina, Veronica, 107.

Perkins, Gf. H., on Apatela oblinita, 82.
on Emphytus maculatus, 72.
on strawberry insects, 63.
permundana, Eccopsis, 61,111. See straw¬
berry flower worm.

Exartema, 111. See strawberry flowe?
worm.

Perris, M. Edouard, on the relations oi
birds and insects, 46.
persicana, Ptycholoma, 62,97. See peach-
tree leaf-roller.

Pettit, Mr., on mason bee, 70.

Pezotettix femur-rubrum, 62,87.
Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences
Proceedings. See under Proceedings.
Plioxopteris, comptana, 61,87. See common
strawberry leaf-roller,
fragari®, 87,88,89. See common straw¬
berry leaf-roller.

Phyllotreta vittata, 62, 86.

Phytocoris lineolaris, 116. See tarnished
plant bug.

quadrivittatus, 117. See tarnished
plant bug.

Pine-apple strawberry, 148.

Plain strawberry leaf-roller, 61, 95.
calendar, 179.
description, 96.

distinguished from oblique-banded
leaf-roller, 95.
injuring strawberries, 95.
life history, 96.
literature, 95.
remedies, 96, 180.
two nominal species, 95.

Plant bug, dusky, 10, 61, 62, 124, 127, 135-1:38,1/9.
See plant bug, dusky.

Four-striped, 117. See tarnished plan

bug. «

tarnished, 10, 11, 61, 62, 106, 11H3U'* -
See tarnished plant-bug.
Plant-bugs, *61.

Plant-lice, d, 41-54.

ants protecting, 52, 54.

enemies, 45, 49, 103.
food pi mis, 4z, 51,52,54.
habits, 41, 4 1,54.
injuries, 99.

to broom -corn, 44,49,53.

. corn, 52.

sorghum, 41, 42, 44, 49, 50, 51, i

53.

INDEX.

-erature, 40.
medies.50,54,104.
productive power. 08.
ot forms, 42.

•ecies, descriptions and habits of,
12-53.

mmary of article on, 53.

*ce, strawberry, 60,(52,98-104, 143. See
strawberry plant-lice,
rn. 9. 11, 40, 41, 42, 44, 46-50, 53, 54. See
iorn plant-louse.

How sorghum, 53. See Chaitopho-
’us flavus,

potted, 140.

I ? to destroy Colaspis, 175, 176.

I -ria, 175, 176.
elodonta, 175, 176.

•awberry root worms, 174, 176.
teat-bulb worm. 27.

ljuries to, by oblique-banded leaf-
oiler, 94.

•nished plant bug, 122, 123.

1 for forest tent-caterpillar, 10.

| i-son bee, 10.

pn strawberry leaf-roller, 96.

; awberry leaf beetles, 86.
awberry root-worms, 180.

>6.

3, Prof. A. E., on corn plant-louse, 40.
sorghum insects, 40.

, 146, 148.

mbardy, 82.
ft. . .

injuries to, by false chinch bug

i *4.

1 ds,140.

nished plant bug, 115, 121, 122.
la, 169.
lants, 140.

1 Entomologist cited, 156.

i Farmer cited, 14, 16, 31, 32, S3, 71, 76, 87,

>7, 116, 122, 139.

tary Report of the U. S. Geological
of Montana and Adjacent Terri-
Jited, 105.

on of insect depredations. See
es and preventives for insect
ations.

3, evening, 169, 176.

ngs of the Boston Society of Nat-
story, 71, 116, 136, 182.

I ladelphia Academy of Natural
aences, 82, 111, 163.

! ;hinche, Anthocoris, 105.

| 'ited, 72, 82, 83.

1 ma persicana, 62, 97. See peach-
i f-roller.

| s, Eumolpus, 163. See Scelodonta
\ ms.

Heteraspis, 164. See Scelodonta neb-
ulosus.

Scelodonta, 164; addenda, I, II.
pulicarius, Thyreocoris, 62, 106-111. See
flea negro bug.

Pullen, B., on the common strawberry leaf-
roller, 91.

Pulvinaria innumerabilis, 62, 98.

Purslane, 104.

Pyrethrum for dusky plant bug, 138, 180.
false chinch bug, 106.
flea negro bug, 110, 111.
green strawberry span-worm, 81.
horned span-worm, 80.
plant-lice, 104.
strawberry false- worm, 76.
flower worm, 112.
insects, 69.
plant-lice, 104.
weevil, 115.

tarnished plant bug, 132, 135. 180.

Pyras coronaria, 161,

quadriguttata, Paria, 159.
quadrimaculatus, Cryptocephalus, 176.
quadrinotata, Paria, 159.
quadrivittatus, Capsus, 117. See tarnished
plant bug.

Phytocoris, 117. See tarnished plant
bug.

Quince, injuries to, by flea negro bug 107
110.

tarnished plant bug, 122, 123,

rapidus, Capsus, 136. See dusky plant bug.
Deraeocoris, 10,62,124,127,135-138. See
dusky plant bug.

Raspberry, injuries to by common straw¬
berry leaf-roller, 92.
flea negro bug, 107, 108, 110.
horned span-worm, 79.
smeared dagger, 82.
strawberry flower worm, 111.
red, 92.

Red-legged grasshopper, 62.
mite, 61.

raspberry, injuries to by common
strawberry leaf-roller, 92.
spider injuring the strawberry. 62, 106.
remedies for, 106.

Relations of birds and insects, 46.

Remedial measures, Classification of, 66-69.

See Classification of insect remedies.
Remedies and preventives for insect depre¬
dations, 64-69, 180.

Aphidius. 49, 103. *

arsenic, 69,72,84, 112.

INDEX.

ashes. 171.

attracting to food plants of minor
value, 107.

to lamps and fires, 69,145.
baits of flour and molasses, 141.

potato, etc., 69, 141.
barriers to progress, 66.68.
birds, 45, 93, 131, 170.
bisulphide of carbon, 69,172,176. 180.
black-throated bunting, 131.
bluebirds, 75,131.
burning grass, 59.
mulch, 69.

remnants of straw- stacks, 37,38.
rubbish, 69, 131, 135.
straw, 31.

strawberry fields, 68,76,88,93,180.
stubble, 27,31,33,37,38.
capture and direct destruction, 66,68.
capturing with insect net, 76, 107, 111,

131,135,180.

carbolic acid, 69, 173,176,180.
cat-bird, 130.
catching and killing, 85.
chickens, 45, 75, 93,
chipping sparrow, 75.
climatic influences, 33.

Coccinellidae, 45,103.
contagious diseases, 10,95, 170.
cresylic soap, 107,131.
crushing, 68,84.

cultivation of grass lands in some
hoed crop, 67.
culture, modes of, 66,67.
cutting off and destroying infested
stalks, 27.

destroying eggs, 10,68.
weeds, 69,114.

destruction of first setting of young
strawberry plants, 68.
digging up and killing by hand, 145.
dipping strawberry plants in kerosene
and water, 104.
direct destruction, 68.
ditching, 68, 84.

early transplanting of strawberries, 68.
emulsion, kerosene, 69,104,106,110,111,
133, 135.

food plants used as decoys, 107.

furrow plowed around the field, 68, 84.

gas lime, 67, 145.

hand picking, 15, 68, 76, 112.

hellebore, 69, 72, 76, 85.

hoeing, 67.

hot water, 141.

Hymenoptera, 103.

kerosene, 69, 76, 104, 115, 131,135,141,145,
148.

emulsion, 69, 104, 106, 110, 111, 133. 135
killing by hand, 145.
lace-wing flies, 45.
lady bugs, 103.
late sowing, 27, 29.
lime, 54,171.

milk, 133.

modes of culture, 66,67.
parasites, 24, 29, 32, 33, 75, 92, 183.
parasitic diseases, 170.

Paris green, 10, 69, 76, 80, 81, 84, 86,18 ,93,

171.176.180.

plants from infested fields, how to
transplant. 174,175,177.
not to be used, 104.
plowing, 27, 174,176.
poison, 10,71,86,96,180.
prompt threshing. 28.
pyrethrum, 69, 76, 80, 81, 110, 111,112,11s,

132. 135.180.
robins, 130,131.

rotation of crops, 15, 27, 29, 34, 37,88,50.

68.180.

safeguards against the deposit and
transfer of insect eggs, 68. •
salt, 171.

separation of fields, 68.
soapsuds, 69,106,107,131.
soot, 171.

substitution of spring for winter
wheat, 27.
sulphur, 69,106,146.
sweeping with insect net, 68,76,
syrphus flies, 45,103.
threshing, 28,37.
thrushes, 130.
tobacco, 88,93.
topical applications, 66,69.
transplanting, 174,175,177.
trapping in kerosene and water, 69.
in water, 69.

washing the roots of strawberry
plants, 68.

water, 69,76,104,135,145.
hot, 141.

Report, Illinois Crop, 16.

Illinois State Entomologist, 33,
36,40,43,46, 55, 62, 63,72,82,88,90,
91,94,107,115,117,142,183.

Kansas State Board of Agriculture,
40.

Massachusetts State Board of Agri¬
culture, 63.

Michigan Horticultural Society, lit
159,

State Board of Agriculture, (j
163.

Missouri State Entomologist, 15,25.64
72, 82, 88, 105, 107, 114, 116, 123, 156, 157, 171.
New York State Entomologist, 14. 1*
27,72,117,182. i

Ontario Entomological Society, 66, - ■ b
71,82,83,107,156,159.

U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture. ,
34,72,123,156.

Entomological Commission.

Entomologist, 111.

Geological and Geographical i
Survey of the Territories 1
63, 72.

INDEX.

XVII

Vermont, Injurious Insects of, 72.

State Board of Agriculture, 63.
•bius sonchi, 100.
alosiphum, 46.

, C. V. See Riley and Monell, and
Walsh and Riley.

)n Apatela oblinita, 82,83.
m common strawberry leaf-roller, 88.
>nEmphytus maculatus, 71,72,73,74,75.
on Eupelmus allynii, 32.
on false chinch bug, 105.

>n flea negro bug, 107, 108, 109.
m grape-vine Colaspis; 156,157,169,171.
>n Meromyza americana, 15,20,21,24,

| 25, 27.

! >n Paria aterrima, 159.

>n Siphonophora fragariae, var. im-
maculata, 99.

)n sorghum insects, 40.

>n stalk-borer, 114.

>n strawberry insects, 62.

>n strawberry leaf-rollers, 87.

>n strawberry plant-lice, 99.

>n strawberry root- worms, 151.

>n tarnished plant bug, 116, 122, 123, 130.
>n wheat- straw worm, 31,32,33,34,35.
eports as State Entomologist of Mis¬
souri.

See under Reports,
and Monell. Notes on the Aphididse
ie United States cited, 99.

, 130.

oating tarnished plant bug, 131.
ice injuring com, broom-corn and
hum, 42,45,47,48,49,52,53,54.
j ouse, grass, 51.53,54. See Schiz-
jj oneura panicola.

! traw berry, 100.

| worm, corn, 9, 55. See corn root-
worm.

worms, strawberry, 11, 61,' 62, 86, 144,
150—177, 179. See strawberry root-
worms.

sana, Cacoecia, 61,94. See oblique-
: led leaf-roller.

; Selandria, 61,76.

! iphonophora, 101.

179,94.

I lug injuring the strawberry, 61,76.
j on of crops to destroy corn plant-
I louse, 50.

1 trawberry insects, 68, 180.
rheat-bulb worm, 15,27,29.

Oscinidae, 27.

-straw worm, 33,34,37,38.
j New Yorker cited, 15,33.
j /orld cited, 99.

tjuries to by wheat-bulb worm, 13,23.

iards against the deposit and trans-
’ insect eggs, 68.
r Colaspis larvae, 171.

strawberry root worms, 171.
Saunders, Wm. A., Insects Injurious to
Fruit cited, 69,97,110,156.
on Angerona crocataria. 81.
on Apatela oblinita, 82,84.
on cutworms, 84,85.
on Emphytus maculatus, 72, 74.
on flea negro bug, 107, 110.
on mason bee, 70.
on strawberry flower worm, 111.
on strawberry insects, 63.
on strawberry leaf-stem gall, 97.
Saw-flies, 60.

Say, Thomas, Description of the Insects of
North America cited, 136, 140, 159.
Description of New Species of Heter-
opterousHemiptera of North Amer¬
ica cited, 116, 136.
on Capsus oblineatus, 116.

rapidus, 136.
on Colaspis striata, 159.
an Eumolpus flavidus, 156.
on Faria 4-notata, 159.

sexnotata, 159.
on strawberry millipede, 140.

Scale insect, 60.

Scarabaeidae, 60.

Scelodonta, 163, 164.

Scelodonta nebulosus, 62, 163-166, addenda,
I, II.

bisulphide of carbon for, 172.
calendar, 179.
carbolic acid for, 173.
characters distinguishing it from
crown borer and white grub, 151.
from Colaspis and Paria, 153-155.
in common with Colaspis and
Paria, 153-155.

description, 164, addenda, II.
enemies, 170.
food plants, 169.
identification of, addenda, I.
injuries to strawberries by adults, 86,
169.

larvae, 144, 150, 169.

larva distinguished from larvm.of Co¬
laspis and Paria, 153-155.
life history, 164-166.

compared with that of Colaspis
and Paria, 166-169.
literature, 163, addenda, I.
remedies, 86, 171-175.
plowing, 174.

topical applications to foliage, 171
roots, 172-174.
transplantation, 174.
summary of article, 175-177.

Scelodonta pubescens, 164, addenda, I, II.
Schizoneura, 52.
corni, 40.

Schizoneura panicola, 49, 51-53, 103.
attended by ants, 52.
description, 51.

XVILI

INDEX.

food plants, 51, 54.
injuring broom-corn, 54.
corn, 54.

sorghum, 42, 51, 54.
life history, 52;
occurrence, 51.
remedies, 54.

summary of article, 53, 54.

Schizoneura venusta, 52.

Schlaffsucht, 99.

Sciara species, 57-59. See black-headed
grass maggot.

Selandria rosrn, 61, 76.

Separation of fields to prevent the spread of
crown-borer, 68.

insects of feeble migratory power, 68.
Setaria, 51.

verticillata, 52.
viridis, 52.

sexnotata, Paria, 159-163.

Schanck’s Excelsior strawberry, 148.
S.harpless strawberry, 125, 126, 128.
Shoemaker, John, on injuries of the com¬
mon strawberry leaf-roller, 92.

Sipha, 40.

Siphonophora fragarias, 62, 98, 100, 103.
description, 100.
enemies, 103.
range, 100.
remedies, 104.
var, immaculata, 99.
granarim, 40.
minor, 62, 98, 101.

description, 101.
enemies, 103.
first occurrence, 101.
habits, 101.
remedies, 104.
rosae, 101.
species, 50, 53, 54.

Slug, rose, 61, 76.

strawberry, 61.

Small yellow ant, 45, 61, 112.
classification, 112.
description, 113.
habits, 112.

injuries to corn, 112, 113.

strawberries, 112, 113.
mode of taking food, 113.

Smartweed, 82.

Smeared dagger, 61, 82-84.
calendar, 179.
description, 82.
food plants, 82.
injuring fruit trees, 82.

strawberry, 82, 84,
life history, 83.
literature, 82.
remedies, 84,

Smith and Abbott, on Apatela oblinita, 82.
Rarer Lepidopterous Insects of Geor¬
gia cited, 82.

Smith, Emily A., on Emphytus maculatus,

72. 74, 75.

Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge
cited, 159, 163.

Snails, 63.

Snout beetle, 61.

Soapsuds for flea negro bug, 107.
red spider, 106.
strawberry insects, 69.
tarnished plant bug, 131.

Solenopsis fugax, 45,61, 112. See small yel¬
low ant.

sonchi, Rhizobius, 100.

Soot for Colaspis larvse, 171.

strawberry root- worms, 171.

Sorghum, injuries to by Aphis maidis, 46,49,
Chaitophorus flavus, 44.
corn root-worm, 55.
plant-lice, 11,41,53,54.

Schizoneura panicola, 51.

Siphonophora species, 50.

Sorghum, insects affecting, 39-56. See
Notes on insects affecting sorghum
and broom-corn.

plant-louse, yellow, 53. See Chaito¬
phorus flavus.

Span-worm, brown strawberry, 61, 76-78, 179.
See brown strawberry span-worm,
green strawberry, 69. 80, 179. See ;

green strawberry span-worm,
horned, 61,79,179. See horned span-
worm.

Sparrow, chipping, 75.

Spiraea, 111.

Stalk-borer, calendar, 179.

distinguished from wheat- bulb
worm, 17.

injuring strawberries, 61,114.
remedies, 9.

Stictonotis isosomatis, 34.

Strange, A. T., on the flea negro bug, 100.
Strawberry, 10,11,20,21.

article on insects affecting, 60-180.
Bidwell, 125.

Brooklyn Scarlet, 148.

Crescent, 125,126, 127,128.
crown-borer, 61,62,142.
calendar, 179.

distinguished from strawberry
root- worms, 157.
injuries, 176.

to strawberries. 142.
life history, additional notos, H«,
prevention, 68,180.
crown- miner, calendar, 179.

injuring strawberries, 179.

Cutter’s Seedling, 148.

Downing, 125,127,128.

Early Scarlet, 148.
false-worm, 61,71,76.

INDEX.

XIX

■

!!

abundance, 71, 75.
calendar, 179.

check upon multiplication, 71.
description, 72.
distinguished from other straw¬
berry caterpillars, 71.
distribution, 75.
enemies, 75.
habits, 75.

injury to strawberries, 75.
life history, 73.
literature, 71.
remedies, 69,75.
ower worm, 61,111.
calendar, 179.
description, 111,112.
injuries, 111.

to blackberries. 111.
to raspberries, 111.
to strawberries, 111.
literature. 111.
remedies, 112.

se«ts injurious to the, 60-180. See
insects injurious to the strawberry.

(sects, list of, 1.
acunda, 148.
af beetles, 86.

injuries to strawberry, 86.

remedies, 69, 86. See strawberry
root- worms.

af-roller, common, 61,87,179, 180. See
common strawberry leaf-roller,
af-roller, plain, 61, 95, 179, 180. See
plain strawberry leaf-roller,
af-rollers, 61, 180.
af-stem gall, 97.

I illipede, 60,62,138-141.
description, 140.

European, 139.
injuries, 140.

to strawberries, 138.
literature, 139.
remedies, 69, 141.

; iner’s Prolific, 125.
t. Vernon, 125.

*0. 2,” 125,126,128.
ine apple, 148.
ant-lice, 60,62,98-104.
enemies, 103.

injuries to strawberries, 98, 101,
102, 104, 143.

literature, 99.
remedies, 104.
reproductive power, 98, 99.
species described, 100-103.
root form, 143.
ot- worms, 11, 61, 62, 150-177.

bisulphide of carbon for, 172.
calendar, 179.
carbolic acid for, 173,
characters, common, 151-153.
differential, 153-155.
distinguishing, 151.

from strawberry, crown
borer, 151.

from white grubs, 151.
enemies, 170.
food plants, 169.
injuries. 169.

to grapes, 169.

to strawberries, by adult
beetles, 86,170.
larvm, 150, 169.

life histories compared, 166-169.
plowing and transplanting to
destroy, 174.

remedies, 69, 86, 171-175, 176, 180.
species, descriptions of, 156-106.
number of, 151.

summary of article on, 175-177
synopsis of differential charac¬
teristics, larval, 155.
pupal, 155.

topical applications to foliage
for, 171.

roots for, 172-174.

Schanck’s Excelsior, 148.

Sharpless. 125, 126,128.
slug, 61.

span-worm, brown, 61, 76-78, 179. See
brown strawberry span-worm,
span-worm, green, 61, 80, 179. See
green strawberry span-worm,
span-worm, horned, 61, 79, 179. See
* horned span-worm,
stem gall-fly, 62,97.
description, 97.
gall, 97.

Triomphe de Gand, 148.
weevil, 62,114

calendar, 179.
description, 114.
injuries to strawberries, 114.
remedies, 115.
wild, 60.

Wilson, 125, 126, 127, 128, 148.

Straw worm, wheat-, 17, 30-38. See wheat-
straw worm.

striata, Colaspis, 159. See Paria aterrima.
strigosa, Colaspis, 156.

Sturtevant, Dr. E. L., on strawberry milli¬
pede, 139, 141.

Substitution of spring tor winter wheat to
prevent injury from Hessian fly, 27.
wheat-bulb worm, 27.
sulcatus, Otiorhynchus, 62,177.

Sulphur for red spider. 106.
strawberry insects, 69,
white grubs, 146.

Sweeping with insect net for strawberry
false-worm, 76.
strawberry insects, 68.

Sweet gum, 148.

Sweet William, 141.
sylvatica, Clisiocampa, 10.

Sypha maydis. 40.

Syrplius flies, 45, 103.

Systena blanda, 62, 86. See yellow-striped
flea beetle.

XX

INDEX

T .

Tarnished plant bug, 10, 11, 61, 02, 1 15-135.
calendar, 179.
cresylic soap for, 131.
description, 117-121.
distribution, 115.
enemies, 130.
food plants, 115.
habits, 121-129.
injuries, 106,121-129
to flowers, 121.

fruit trees, 121, 123.
garden vegetables, 121,134.
grapes, 123.
mountain ash, 122.
strawberries, 123-12!).
kerosene emulsion for, 133.
life history, 121.
literature, 116.

poisonous effect of puncture, 129.
prevention, 131-134.
pyrethrum for, 132.
remedies, 131-134,180.
summary of article, 134.
telarius, Tetranychus.62,106.
Tent-caterpillar, forest, 10.

Teras malivorana, 183.

Tetranychus telarius, 62, 106.

Thomas, Dr. Cyrus, on Chaitophorus,42.

on common strawberry leaf-roller,
87,88,90,91,93.

on larvae found in the pith of the
wheat stalk, 16.

on lesser apple leaf-roller, 183.
on Meromyza americana, 16.
on plant-lice, 99.
on Siphonophora fragariae,99.
on sorghum plant-lice, 40.
on strawberry plant-lice, 99.
on wheat-straw worm, 31.
on remedies for root- lice, 54.

Reports as State Entomologist of Illi¬
nois. See under Reports.
Thousand-legged worms, 138, 140.

Threshing to destroy wheat-bulb worm, 28.
wheat-straw worm, 37.

Thrushes, 130.

Thyreocoris lateralis, 108.

pulicarius, 62, 106-111. See flea negro
bug.

unicolor, 108.

Timothy, 14,20,57.

Tobacco for common strawberry leaf-roll¬
er, 88, 93.

Toxoptera graminum,40.

Transactions of American Entomological
Society, 71, 89, 95, 163.

Illinois State Horticultural Society, 63.
71,72,73,88,107,156, 159.

Iowa State Horticultural Society, p |
74, 76.

Minnesota State Horticultural Society

88.

Mississippi Valley Horticultural Soci¬
ety, 100, 156, 159.
transiturana, Cacoecia, 95.

Transplanting strawberries without infect- j
ing new fields with Colaspis, 175, 177
Paria, 175, 177.

Scelodonta, 175, 177.
strawberry root-worms, 174, 175, 177.
Trapping in kerosene and water—
Allorhina nitida, 69.
goldsmith beetles, 69.

May beetles, 69, 145.
strawberry insects, 69.

Trapping in water—

Allorhina nitida, 69.
goldsmith beetle, 69.

May beetles, 69.
strawberry insects, 69.

Treat, Mary, Injurious Insects of the Farm I
and Garden, cited, 63.
on strawberry insects, 63.

Trees, 52, 85, 146.
forest, 10.
fruit, 84, 115, 116.

Triphleps insidiosus, 105.

Triomphe de Gand strawberry, 148.
tristis, Colaspis, 62, 86, 158, 159.
tritici, Isosoma, 17, 30-38. See wheat-stray
worm.

Tyloderma fragarise, 62, 142, 151, 176. See I
strawberry crown- borer.

Turnip, injuries to, by false chinch-bug,
104.

tarnished plant bug, 116.

U

Uhler, P. R., List of Hemiptera West of the
Mississippi River, cited, 136.
on dusky plant bug, 136.
on false chinch bug, 105.
on green apple leaf-hopper, 181.

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division
of Entomology, Bulletins. See un¬
der Bulletins.

Reports of Entomologist. See under
Reports.

Entomological Commission, Bulletins.

See under Bulletins.

Reports. See under Reports.
Geological and Geographical Survey
of the Territories. See under Re¬
ports.

unicolor, Thyreocoris, 108.

unipuncta, Leucania, 61, 84. See army
worm.

inde::. x.a

ibl^s, garden, 116, 122.

| ition, decaying, 56, 58.
a, Schizoneura, 52.

| nt State Board of Agriculture, Re-
?. See under Reports.

,ica, 108.
eregrina, 107.
llata, Setaria, 52.

Fragaria, 110.

!<y, H. K., on common strawberry
mf- roller, 88, 98.

. Setaria, 52.

, Thyllotreta, 62, 86.

W

| *

r, on strawberry plant-lice, 100.

, B. D. See Walsh and Riley,
n Aphis maidis, 46.
n Colaspis brunnea, 156.
n Erythroneura maleflca, 182.

! maligna, 182.
n strawberry millipedes, 139.
n tarnished plant bug, 116.
and Riley, on common strawberry
! roller, 88, 90, 91, 92.

i, Alice B., on Emphytus maculatus,

ng the roots of strawberry plants to
: roy insect eggs, 68.

! ers, A. T„ observations on the flea
o bug, 110.

•. H. A., observations on sorghum
t-lice, 41.
er, F. M., 12.

‘ bservations on Colaspis brunnea, 169.
bservations on strawberry crown-
borer, 142.

I C. N., observations on Faria aterri-
162.

j 5, 21, 42,54.

; estroyed to prevent injuries of stalk-
borer, 69, 114.

1, 40.

•lack fruit, 62, 177.

trawberry, 62, 111, 179. See straw¬
berry weevil,
rn Rural cited, 89, 104, 139.
injuries to by flea negro bug, 108,

109.

lessian fly, 9.
ulids, 140.

srheat-bulb worm, 10, 13, 22.

-straw worm, 30.
t-bulb worm, 10, 11, 13-29.
losc-ription, 17.

i

\t*

w

distinguished from Hessian fly, 17.
stalk-borer, 17.
wheat-straw worm, 17.
first occurrence, 13.
habits, 13.
injuries, 13.

compared with those of stalk-
borer, 17.
to rye, 13, 14, 23.
timothy, 14.
wheat, 13. 22.
literature, 14.
life history, 19.
nomenclature, 16.
remedies, 27.

summary of article on, 28.

Wheat Oscinidse, 24.

-stem maggot, 13, 16. See wheat-bulb
worm.

Wheat- st raw worm, 30-38.
description, 34.

distinguished from wheat-bulb worm,
17.

first occurrence, 30.
injuries to grain, 36.
life history, 35.
literature, 31.
remedies, 37.

White grubs, 61, 62, 144-146.
calendar, 179.
description, 144.

distinguished from larvae of fig-eater,
150.

goldsmith beetle, 146.
injuries to strawberries, 143, 145.
life history, 145.
literature, 63.
remedies, 69, 145.

Wier, I). B., on tarnished plant bug, 116,
122, 123, 130.

Wild crab apple, injuries to, by Paria, 161,
169.

strawberry, 60.

Willow, injuries to, by Colaspis brunnea,
169.

horned span-worm, 79.
smeared dagger, 82.

Wilson strawberry, 125, 126, 127, 128, 148.
Wire-worms injuring strawberries, 62, 143.

Y

Yellow ant attending plant-lice, 45, 48.
small, 61, 112. See small yellow ant.
so: ghum plant louse. 53. See Chai-
tophorus flavus.

-striped flea beetle. 62, 179. See Sys-
tena blanda.

FOURTEENTH REPORT

OF THE

STATE ENTOMOLOGIST

ON THE

XIOUS AND BENEFICIAL INSECTS

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Third Annual Report of S. A. Forbes,

For the year 1884.

I

I

i

i

SPRINGFIELD, ILL.:

H. W. Rokker, State Printer and Binder.

CONTENTS.

Page.

i )f Descriptions . . . jjj

r of Transmittal . . 2

ij duetion . 3

j -ibutions to Agricultural Entomology . 9

On New and Little-Known Corn Insects . 11

The Root Web Worm, . . j2

Description.! . 14

Distribution . Id

Life History . Id

Natural Enemies . Id

The Sulphur Leaf Roller . . . 17

Literature . 17

Description . 18

Life History . 19

Injuries to Vegetation . 19

Natural Enemies . 20

The Red-Banded Leaf Roller . 20

The Common Lady Bug . 21

The Brassy Flea Beetle . 22

Leaf Hoppers . 22

Grasshoppers (Acrididae) in Corn . 22

A Contribution to the Life History of the Corn Plant Louse . 23

Literature . 23

Nomenclature . 25

Description . 25

Life History and Habits . 26

Parasites and Predaceous Insects affecting the Corn Louse . 30

Notes on Insects Injurious to Wheat . 34

The Larger Wheat Straw Worm . 34

Description . 35

Life History and Distribution . 35

The Lesser Wheat Straw Worm . 3d

Contributions to a Knowledge of the Life History and the Parasites of the Hes¬
sian Ely . 38

Life History . 39

Parasites . 44

Note on the Wheat Midge . 50

Description . 51

Life History . 53

Injuries to Grain . 54

Remedies . 54

The Wheat Bulb Worm . 54

The Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm . 55

Literature . 55

Nomenclature . 58

Description . 58

17

CONTENTS.

Distribution . .

Life History .

Character and Extent of Injuries to Vegetation .

Natural Enemies .

Prevention and Remedy .

The Grain Leaf Hoppers .

Cicadula nigrifrons .

Cicadula guadrilin^atus .

III. Brief Notes on Sorghum Insects .

The Yellow Sorghum Plant Louse .

The Sorghum Bark Louse . .

IY. On Some Clover Insects . ---

Cymatophora crepuscularia .

The Clover Bark Louse .

Description . . .

Clover Mites .

Miscellaneous Notes .

Contributions to Horticultural Entomology .

I. On New and Imperfectly Known Strawberry Insects .

Note on the Life History of the Strawberry Slug .

The Lesser Strawberry Aphis .

The Tarnished Plant Bug .

Description of Egg .

Lophoderus velutinanus .

Supplementary Notes on the Strawberry Root Worms .

II. Oa a Few Grape Insects . . .

Petrophora diver silineata .

The Vine-loving Fruit Fly .

Phytoptis vitis . - .

III. On New Insect Enemies of the Blackberry and Raspberry .

The Blackberry Leaf Miner .

Description of Genus . . .

Description of Species . .

Loplioderus velutinanus .

Pyrrhi i umbra . .

Literature .

Description .

Distribution and Life History .

Injuries to Vegetation .

The Raspberry Plume Moth . . .

IV. On the Speckled Cutworm as a Cabbage Worm . .

Description . . . .

Life History . .

V. Notes on Insects Injurious to the Apple and P ear .

Patana contracta .

Piston ypsilon . .

The Apple Leaf Roller . .

The Apple Leaf Skelefonizer and the Lesser Apple Leaf Roller

Crepidodera helxines .

The Apple Plant Louse .

The Yellow Jumping Pear Louse .

The Willow Saw Flies. . .

VI. On Some Insect Enemies of the Soft Maple .

Notes and Experiments on the Soft Maple Bark Louse .

Kerosene Emulsion .

Whale Oil Soap .

Page.

• 59

.... 60
.... 61
.... 64
.... 66
.... 67
.... 67
.... 68
.... 79
.... 70
.... 71
.... 72
.... 72
.... 72
.... 73
.... 73
.... 74
.... 75

. . . ► i7

. . . . 77
.... 79
...'. 79
.... 79
.... 81
.... 81
.... 83
.... 83
.... 83
.... 84
.... 87
.... 87
.... 87
.... 87

89

90

90

91
93

93

94

95
95
95
97

97

98
98
98
100
103
103
105
107

CONTENTS.

V

1 -

I »

u '

Laundry Soap

Pyrethrum. ...

Carbolic Acid.

Washing off the Females and Egg Masses with Water

The Oblique-Banded Leaf Holler . .

Pandemis lamprosana .

Aleurodes aceris .

Lygus invitus . .

Description .

Insects Injurious to the Elm .

The Elm Borer .

The Elm Plant Louse .

in Elm Bark Louse . .

The Three-Banded Leaf Hopper .

’ [. Brief Miscellaneous Notes .

ation of Plates .

v

i .

f

[I i

appendi::.

Page.
.... 108
.... 108
... 108
... 108
... 109
... 109
... 110
... 110
... Ill
... 112
... 112
... 114
... 115
... 115
... 116
... 119
. .. 124
... 136
... 137

LIST OF DESCRIPTIONS.

1. The Root Web Worm ( Cr ambus zeellus, Fernald): larva, p. 14; pupa, p. 15; imago,

p. 15.

2, The Sulphur Leaf Roller ( Dichelia sulphur e ana, Clemens): larva, p. 18; pupa,
p. 18; imago, p. 18.

8. The Red-Banded Leap Roller (Lop hoderus triferanus, Walk.), p. 21.

4. The Cohn Plant Louse (Aphis maidis , Fitch): winged viviparous female [root
form), p. 25; pupa of same, p, 25; wingless viviparous female Lroot form], p. 25; winged
viviparous female [aerial form], p. 26; pupa of same, p. 26; wingless viviparous female
[aerial form], p. 26.

5. Adialytusmaidaphidis, n. s., p. 31.

6. The Larger Wheat Straw Worm ( Isosoma grande, Riley), p. 35.

7. Eupelmus allyni, French: female, p. 37; male, p. 37.

8. Semiotellus destructor, Say; male, p. 45; female, p. 46.

9. Pteromalus pallipes, n. s., p. 46.

10. Pteromalus fulvipes, n. s., p. 47.

11. Tetrastichus cafinatus, n. s., p. 48.

12. The Wheat Midge (Ceciclomyia tritici, Kirby.): egg, p. 51; larva, p. 51; pupa, p.
52; imago, p. 52.

13. The Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm ( Laphygma frugiperda, Guen.): larva, p.
59; pupa, p.59; imago, p. 58.

14. Exorista infestans, n. s., Williston: female, p. 65; male, p. 65.

15. Cicgdula nigrifrons, n. s., p. 67.

16. Cicadula guadrilineatui , n. s., p. 68.

17. Tze Sorghum Bark Louse ( Coccus sorghiellus, n. s.), p. 71.

18. The Clover Bark Louse (Coccus trifolii, n. s.), p 72.

19. Bryohia pratensis, n. s., Garman, p. 73.

20. Bryohia pallida, n. s., Garman, p. 74.

21. The Tarnished Plant Bug (Lygus lineolaris, Beauv.): egg, p. 79.

22. Phytoptis vitis, Landois, p. 86.

23. The Blackberry Leap Miner (Metallus rubi, gen. et sp. nov.): genus, p. 87, spe
cies, p. 87; imago, p. 87; larva, p. 87.

24. Pgr rlda umbra, Hiibn.: larva, p. 89; pupa, p. 89; imago, p. 89.

25. The Raspberry Plume Moth (Oxyptilus delavaricus, Zeller): larva, p. 91,pu
p. 91; imago, p. 92.

26. The Speckled Cutworm ( Agrotis c-nigrum, L.): larva, p. 93; pupa, p. 94.

27. Biston ypsilon, n. s. : imago, p. 95; larva, p. 96.

LIST OF DESCRIPTIONS.

he Yellow Jumping Peak Louse (Trioza pyrifolice, n. s.), p. 99.

Yioza diospyri , Ashmead, p. 100.

leurodes aceris, n. s., p, 110.

laptus aleurodis, n. s.; female, p. 111.

ygus invitus. Say. p. 111.

he Elm Borer ( Saperda tridentata, Oliv.): larva, p. 113; imago, p. 114.
n Elm Bark Louse (Lecanium, sp.), p. 115.

Jematus robinice, n. s., p. 116.

< ccopsis exoletum , Zeller: larva, p. 117; imago, p. 118.

YII

I

'iVMr-W.
t ; :

• ►, r ,*» . m i

■ v

1 *> v' i - .< • ‘
■* * •

* 'AH ?»-* !»X

' 'V*

»

L- '

■ v .y /• .

■ ,i •. / ;

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.

Illinois Industrial University,

Office of State Entomologist.

Champaign, III., December 81, 1884.

1 Excellency, John M. Hamilton, Governor of the State of Illinois:

I have the honor to transmit herewith my third report as
Entomologist of Illinois, covering the operations of the office
|a year 1884.

des the articles presented in the report proper, I have pre-
an elaborate paper on certain contagions diseases of insects,
i numerous studies and experiments made at the office for the
/tion of the virus of such diseases and their propagation by
;| al measures. This study has not yet reached the stage of
successful application in the field on a large scale, and I
herefore decided to withhold the results, for the present, from
ition here, and to publish them instead as a contribution to
3 in the Bulletins of the State Laboratory of Natural History.
iace thus saved I have decided to use for an index to the
velve reports of the State Entomologists of Illinois ; and this
: lented herewith as an appendix to my present report.

Respectfully submitted,

S. A. Forbes, State Entomologist.

INTRODUCTION.

ENTOMOLOGICAL CALENDAR.*

the year 1884 we can not accord any peculiar distinction in the
3 of economic entomology in Illinois, unless we consider the
il prevalence of the soft maple bark louse (. Pulvinaria innum-
s) and a notable outbreak of the grass worm ( Laphygma frugi-
as especially remarkable events. The general damage to the
by insects, was, as a whole, decidedly below the average, not
;le one of the great scourges of agriculture having attracted
tl attention or done conspicuous damage except in one or two
ces and in limited localities. I wish I might believe that this
[fas due in any considerable measure to the progress of the
i ir knowledge of economic entomology and to an increased dis-
>n to apply its resources to the war against our insect enemies,

; judge that it is to be attributed to providential rather than to
i interposition.

i average weather of this season and the preceding, inclining
Ti to extraordinary moisture, except during the period when
3ssian fly is peculiarly subject to injury by drouth, has supplied
ions on the whole unfavorable to a high rate of multiplication
i| j those species peculiarly susceptible to meteorological infiu-

Hessian fly, so destructive last year throughout Southern
3, was so far decimated by its parasites and by the long
i and heat of summer, that we have not encountered it in
ctive numbers except in Clark county, in Eastern Illinois, in
ies where it did not last year prevail. The fact that the fly
ed here when the weather was not different from that of more
rly localities infected last year, shows that we owe the arrest
ravages in these localities less to the weather than to other
, — chief of which are, of course, its parasites.

er the above head it is proposed to give, each year, a summary of the principal
f interest in the field of economic entomology within the State, with principal
e to the great insect pests whose numbers vary widely from year to year, so that
;roductions may afford a continuous history of the oscillations of the most im-
species. Here also will be introduced those species first recognized as injurious to
are during the year which the report covers, where these seem of sufficient im-
3 to deserve special mention in this connection.

4

The chinch BUG was not heard of from farmers anywhere in %
State, nor found unusually abundant by us in our -field observations.
As a contribution to the life history of the species in “off years,
the following memoranda for 183B and 1884, are worthy of record,
During the former year we first noted the chinch bug on the 14th
of March, in Central Illinois. The adults were still in their winter
quarters, occurring about roots in matted grass under old boards
and rubbish. April 10, in Southern Illinois, they were still found
in the rubbish of strawberry fields, and occasionally among deal
leaves in the woods. On the 20th of that month, a very few were
encountered in wheat fields near Carbondale. On the 2bth, at
Normal, they were still collected by the hundred, under boards, not
having ’yet emerged from their winter quarters in Central Illinois.
Indeed, on the 7th of the following month, we found them there in
the same situation, and in rubbish about wild strawberry plants.
On the 20th May. at Centralia, I saw a few adults in wheat
fields, and on the' 24th, at Decatur, they were relatively abundant
in wheat at the bases of the plants, many of them coupled.

Specimens placed alive in an empty vial soon deposited their eggs, ,
but careful search about the roots of the plants failed to discover
any, and it is probable that oviposition was but just beginning. On I
the 6th June, adults were found quite numerous just beneath the
surface of the ground, about young corn in the field. Many of
these were pairing and laying their eggs about the roots. On the
19tli June, young chinch bugs emerged from eggs deposited the
23d of the preceding month. On the 23d June, we found the adults,
still pairing, in corn fields, and young individuals very numerous
between the sheath of the lower leaf and the stalk. On the 26th,
at Warsaw, the adults were still to be seen among the roots of
wheat, together with many young in the first stage. A few chinch
bug eggs were also found in the same situation ; and adults stiil
occurred at this season among the roots of corn. On the 29th, at
Godfrey, Illinois, a few miles above St. Louis, young chinch bugs
were noted frequently in wheat fields, mostly in the first stage, (that
immediately following the egg), but a few in the second. Adults
were also still occasionally to be found. On the 2d July, the young
were noted as still occurring beneath the sheaths of corn, none
having yet emerged to the outer surface. All the stages were now
found in wheat fields, although pupae were relatively rare. On the
25th July, in Northern Illinois, young were found beneath the
sheaths of the leaves of corn, mostly in the second stage. From
this time to October 1, a hiatus occurs in our observations for lew,
but at the latter date all sizes still occurred upon the corn, con¬
cealed beneath the bases of the leaves, ranging in age from adults
to those newly hatched. On the 11th November, both imagos ami
pupae were found hibernating under the bark of an old log at Noi-
mal.

In 1884, considerable numbers were found March 24, under boards
at Normal, scattered under leaves and rubbish in woods, and m
similar situations. They were apparently less numerous than even
the year before. April 14, adults were seen under boards and rub¬
bish in Southern Illinois. May 9 and 10, they were occasions )
obtained by sweeping grass, having evidently now emerged ho

5

winter quarters. _ On the 16th, adults were noticed at the bases
plants in rye fields, (doubtless engaged in laying their eggs),
Iso at the bases of the stalks of sprouting corn. On the 19th,
nville, they were likewise seen at the bases of stalks of wheat,
/ere taken by sweeping the meadows. In the former situation
-were several times observed in coitu. On the 22d, considerable
ers, all adult, were obtained from rye. No young could be
ed, although the adults were frequently paired. The latter
also occasionally numerous in corn fields. On the 24th, they
taken frequently by sweeping oats, and likewise found coupled
the roots of corn. On the 5th July, the young were noted
mtly at bases of stalks of rye in fields at Normal, and on the
were seen occasionally on corn beneath the sheaths. August
11, adults and pupae were frequently taken on corn, and on
1st, both adults and young of several stages, some, evidently
first, occurred at Effingham in fields of corn between the
and stalk. September 25th, at Godfrey, adults were found
igly preparing to hibernate under rubbish in the strawberry
Imagos, with occasional pupae, were likewise found between
isks of ears of corn.

m the above we may infer the usual existence of two broods
it least the occasional occurrence of a third, even in those

Iis when the results of their multiplication are relatively in¬
cant, and the insects themselves escape general notice. Their
story in time of peace hence does not differ materially from
luring seasons of immense and wide-extended ravage.

I

army worm was not heard from anywhere as a notably in¬
's species, although occasional individuals were noticed in the
as usual, in the course of our field operations. A fresh female
was noticed May 3, having evidently just emerged from the
ilis. On the 27th May, mature larvae were found feeding upon
of wheat in the field. Transferred to a breeding cage, these
d the earth June 7, one emerging June 28, and the other

r

i .

corn root worm ( Diabrotica longicornis) , has continued its in-
| to the staple crop of the State, interrupted only by the grow-
sposition to practice rotation of crops as a remedy against it.
e information acquired during the last year is in the line of
previously published, no case of considerable injury having
observed by us or reported to me upon ground not recently in
or two or more years.

collections and observations also confirm the previous account
life history as published in my first report. The earliest date
appearance of the larvae in the earth, which we have our-
noticed, is June 14, (1883). I found the larvae about half
I in fields of corn near Polo, in Ogle county.

ing the summer just past, less injury was done to corn than
le previous seasons, owing to the wetness of the weather in
summer, in consequence of which the affected corn rooted
firmly and was able to maintain itself notwithstanding the

i

l

attacks of the insects. Indeed, during July, I found many roots of I
corn burrowed lengthwise by nearly full-grown larvae, but never-
theless not killed by this violence.

The adult was first seen by us this year, July 21, at which time
pupae and full-grown larvae, together with others not matured, were
abundant in the earth. Eggs were again found in the earth about j
standing corn stalks in October of this year, dead adults occurr¬
ing at the same time under leaves and in the ground.

The damage inflicted by this insect has in some cases within my
observation amounted during the last year to a nearly total loss of
the crop, one farmer reporting a rapid falling off in the yield
from sixty bushels to six per acre, owing evidently to the ravages
of this insect only.

In extreme Northern Illinois, I detected, in July, the notorious
WHEAT midge, (probably the most destructive of wheat insects), in
fields of spring wheat then just ready for harvest. Considerable
damage had been done to here and there a field in that vicinity.
The importance of a general knowledge of the characters and hab¬
its of this most destructive pest is so great, that I have prepared a
brief synopsis of the essential facts relating to it for this Keport.

In autumn, in fields of fall wheat, occurred a sudden irruption j
of a caterpillar which had not attracted attention in Illinois I
for more than a dozen years. This species, almost universally
mistaken by farmers for the army worm, was the grass worm,
(Laphygma frugiperda), sometimes called also the fall army worm.
It ate to the ground large tracts of winter wheat, and where these
areas were not resown, the ground still remains bare. The lam
went into the earth in October, and most of them are passing the
winter in the pupa stage.

The wheat straw worm (lsosomci tritici) still remains a growing
evil where winter wheat is raised, and an additional species of very
similar habit, called the greater wheat straw worm ( Isosoma
grande), was discovered by us this year in Central and Eastern
Illinois.

The wheat bulb worm, an outbreak of which occurred two years
ago in Fulton county, has not been found seriously injurious since,
except in a field of rye this fall, in central McLean county. This
grain was sown in July as pasture for stock, — a fact which coniirms
my former supposition with respect to the injurious effect of early
sowing, where injury by this insect is to be anticipated.

A new enemy to corn (the root web worm) which I first
detected last year, was not bred to the imago until the present
season. In abundance where occurring, and magnitude of its
injuries, it promises to become one of the most important pests of
the corn grower. An article upon this insect is published upon another
page.

The imported cabbage worm (Pieris raped), although still notably
injurious, has been clearly less so this year than for several years
preceding, owing unmistakably to the general prevalence and extreme
destructiveness of the cabbage-worm disease mentioned in the intro-

7

m to my report for last year. In several cabbage fields in
al Illinois, I saw, in August and September, the work of this
arrested and the insect itself almost exterminated by an out-
of this disease.

epidemic extremely similar to the above, possibly identical with
|d not impossibly derived directly from it, has prevailed exten-
during the season among the silk worms of Illinois, having,
stance, almost completely destroyed a lot of these worms at the
trial University which were being reared for experimental pur-
I have this season successfully cultivated the virus of this
ie and applied it to the destruction of other insects.

p forest tent caterpillar, an outbreak of which species oc-
d last year in Southern Illinois, was again seen in the same re-
his season, but in number so greatly reduced as to inflict little if
lefinite injury. The condition and fate of examples collected
in Southern Illinois this year and kept in breeding cages
they perished, confirmed my supposition of a destructive con-
is disease among them, apparently the principal cause of their
pearance last year. This was one of the diseases known as
rdine, similar to that of the silk worm occasioned by the well-
j 1 fungus Botrytis has si ana.

bably the most notable entomological event of the year was
xtraordinary abundance of the maple bark louse ( Pulvinaria
>erabilis), which species occurred in destructive numbers through-
le State, at least from Chicago to Shelby ville, and probably
arther south. . Notes upon the life history, and details of ex-
ij ents upon this species with insecticides, will be found upon
er page.

i cherry slug ( Selandria cerasi) continued abundant this year,
ling its ravages farther to the south than the year before. It
xtremely abundant in Central Illinois, at least as far south as
lington, many trees being nearly defoliated by it.

apple leaf skeletonizer ( Pempelia hammondi) and the lesser
leaf roller ( Teras malivorana) were each more abundant,
7, in Central Illinois, than the year before, and continued their
es in nurseries until a later date, in some cases almost wholly
iting advance in growth of young nursery stock.

grape pomace fly, the larvae of which abound everywhere in
apples and in old pomace at the cider mills, was this year
ed as extremely injurious to grapes in Western Illinois,
er grape pest, well known in Europe, but not hitherto reported
lerica, (the grape phytoptus), was discovered by us this season
t.nois, infesting certain of the native varieties. The Grape
oxera, concerning whose status in Illinois I have received this
l several inquiries from foreign consuls, has maintained about its
average during the present year, doing occasional damage to
varieties especially susceptible to it, but producing little or no
upon the total yield of the vineyards of the State.

8

The tarnished plant bug, whose work in strawberry fields attracted
especial attention last year, and led to the publication of an elabo¬
rate article in my last Eeport, has continued about as before. It$
injuries in strawberry fields were, however, decidedly less conspicuous,
owing to the more favorable character of the season. _ The straw¬
berry root worms and the crown borer were seemingly neither
more nor less abundant than usual.

Contributions to Agricultural Entomology.

.

k w Ei* ri

«• * « v,- .* i

I

*

ALE I. ON NEW AND LITTLE KNOWN COEN INSECTS.

arranging for this report, our notes of the season on insects
dus to corn, I have assumed that in the present state of our
I edge, nothing could be reckoned really insignificant which
now affected or threatened to affect in future, a crop so im-
lt as this to the prosperity of the State. The balance of hi¬
de in any cultivated region, is so unstable in character, sub-
d changes dependent upon differences of season and agricul-
practice, and upon a variety of other causes not well under-
that it is possible that the most trivial species affecting a
:may rapidly rise to be one of the most destructive, especially
>e its normal habit to produce several successive broods in a
1. In such an event the importance of accurate knowledge of
prising species will be readily appreciated, and our acquain-
I! with the life history of all should be such that we may be
readily and correctly to divide them into the groups of dan-
h and indifferent species. Our observations of the year, have
iquently not been confined exclusively to the major insects in-
s to corn, but have covered the minor species also, with a
:o thus laying the foundations for a complete knowledge of the
;t of insect injuries to this crop in Illinois; and the following
is to be regarded as preliminary to an elaborate and extensive
lent of the subject in a future report.

K

I

I

1. The Root Web Worm.

( Crambus zeellus, Fernald.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Crambid^:.

(Plate I. Figs. 1-3.)

The discovery of an insect new both to science and to agricul¬
tural entomology, and capable of serious injury to the most im¬
portant crop of the State of Illinois, is, fortunately, at this date an
unusual event, so thoroughly, of late years, has the ground been
scanned; and yet, long as is the list of insect enemies of Indian
corn, we have no reason to suppose that it is yet complete.

The balance of animal life is continually shifting, even in old and
long-settled countries, species formerly rare or unknown coming to
the front, and others formerly abundant and perhaps destructive,
retiring temporarily from view. Not only do insects of other regions
invade our own territory, but a peculiar collocation of circumstances
often favors the undue multiplication of some one or more of our
native species, with the result to convert an insect harmless from
its rarity, into a very serious obstacle to the success of agriculture;
and it is to be noted that having once reached this dangerous
prominence, it is a rare thing for an insect to permanently lose its
hold on the agricultural products of the country.

In respect to the species treated in this article, we may at least
congratulate ourselves that it has been detected early in its career,
before it has reached really dangerous numbers, and prompt and
thorough study of its economy and of its life history may give us
the means of controlling it before it can do serious mischief.

On the 7th June, 1883, my assistant, Mr. Webster, who had been
detailed to study the work of the black-headed grass maggot in
corn fields*, brought to the office some supposed cutworms — bristly
reddish larvae, which he had found gnawing the roots of corn below
the surface, in fields in McLean county, on both old and new
ground.

They were not seen again during this season, but on the 19th
May of the present year I received the same species from Mr. E.
A. Gastman, superintendent of public schools at Decatur, with the

* See 13th Report of the State Entomologist of Illinois, pp. 57-59.

tation that they had been sent him from Harristown by a
% who reported that they were doing serious damage to the
of his young corn. On the 22d of that month they were again
le, by Mr. R. H. Mills, of Dwight, in Livingston county, with
[lowing note :

r corn is being badly damaged by small worms. I send you
! lens of them, all of which were found in one hill. There are
y not more than three or four in a hill. The corn is large
a so that we are cultivating it. I shall be very glad if you
ve me some information in regard to the worms. They are
g bad work with the corn in our fields.”

the 28d, Mr. D. C. Tomlinson, of Osco, Henry county, sent
her specimens of the same species, from a field of corn on
and timothy sod, which had been plowed up early in April,
hole field had been so completely destroyed by this larva, in
iction with two species of cutworms, as to necessitate replant-
He found the new larvae (now three-eighths to seven-eighths of
h long,) partly or wholly encased in a web within the ground.

the 27th May, I visited Dwight for the purpose of searching
gilds . of Mr. Mills from which the web worms had been sent
The corn in this field was injured most in patches. Over one
)f about one-fourth of an acre, many hills were missing, and
one-third of those remaining were damaged, with a plant occa-
ly killed. Upon digging into the affected hills, the caterpillars
[found just beneath the surface, sometimes as many as five or
; a hill, each in a retreat formed by loosely webbing together
os of dirt irregularly cylindrical in shape, one and one-half to
|nches long, and about one-half an inch in diameter. The
was found in a silk-lined tube within this mass (the tube not
Is perfectly constructed), which in some cases opened at the
e, its presence being indicated by a circular opening about the
f wheat straw, in the earth next a stalk of corn.

% first attack upon the plant was made by gnawing the outer
e beneath the ground and above the roots. Occasionally the
was completely severed, as by a cutworm, but usually not, the
showing rather a disposition to work upwards, eating a super¬
furrow or burrowing lengthwise along the center of the stem,
oer parts of the field, only here and there a stalk was attacked,
oliage was also frequently eaten, the lower leaf first and then
; pper ones, the larva evidently leaving its burrow for this pur-
The tips of the leaves were eaten off, or irregular elongate
were eaten through them, — probably at night, as I have never
,jhe larva abroad by day. Where the corn was largest, webbed
)S of dirt were frequently found which contained no larvae, a
/hich I was at first inclined to suppose indicated that the in-
nhabiting them had transformed, especially as the larvae found
of quite uniform size and apparently full grown. I failed to
t, single pupa, however; and as our breeding experiments did
field the insect for more than a month, it seems more likely
these empty webs had been abandoned by worms which had
in search of younger stalks.

On the 7tli June, after several hours of careful search in cornfields
near Lexington, McLean county, where I selected by preference the
least thrifty fields, I found no living larvae, and but a single mass
of webbed dirt at the base of a stalk precisely similar to those formed
by the web worm, the hill containing it having been evidently dam¬
aged some time before.

A number of the larvae were brought to the office and placed in
earth in a breeding cage on the 28th May. On the 14th June
those in the breeding cage were transferred to fresh corn.
Many of them were dead, but nine active specimens remained. On
the 33tli the corn was renewed and another search was made. No
larvae were found and but two living pupae. A single imperfect moth
was released from the earth in which it had completed its trans¬
formations, but it was not able to expand its wings and could not
be determined. One of the other pupae was unfortunately crushed
by accident, and the other was badly infested by mites which clung
closely to its crust about the head with inserted beaks. These were
carefully picked away, and this sole remaining pupa was returned
to thoroughly calcined earth to complete its transformations. On the
22cl July it emerged as a small gray moth, evidently belonging to
the family Pyralidae.

From Prof. C. H. Fernald, to whom I referred the specimen, I
learned that it was a species of Crambus new to him and probably
undescribed. On the 3d July Mr. Mills, of Dwight, wrote me that
the larvne had almost entirely disappeared from the corn fields, and
that the season had been so favorable to the crop that no percepti¬
ble damage had finally resulted, with the exception of the loss of a
few hills here and there.

DESCRIPTION.

Larva. — The presence of this larva in the earth may be suspected
when an irregular mass of webbed dirt is found among the roots of
the corn, an inch or less beneath the surface. If this mass be
picked open, the larvae will usually be found safely ensconced within.

The individual web worm is characterized by its pale reddish
brown color, nearly black head, dusky yellow neck or cervical
shield, and by the extraordinarily large ‘ ‘piliferous tubercles,” each
bearing an unusually long black hair. These “tubercles ’ are not
elevated, but consist of smooth shining areas, of a firmer consis¬
tency and a darker tint than the adjacent surface.

The head is dark chocolate brown, slightly and irregularly rugose,
and bears scattered long hairs of a yellowish color. Upon the front
is an S-shaped white mark which does not coincide with the sutures
of this region, the branches of the S lying some distance outside
the corresponding sutures, and the common stem being relatively
short. The cervical shield is yellowish, with a white median line, a
whitish anterior edge, and an oval black spot on the sides near the
middle of the lateral margin. Surface with a few scattered long
dark hairs. Below the lateral edges of the cervical .shield, are two
large piliferous tubercles with the anterior spiracle situated in an
emargination at the upper posterior angle. The second and third

15

Crambus zeellus, n. s. Fernald.
panse of wings, from 18 to 24 mm.

»i, head and thorax, pale leaden gray. The labial palpi
forward as far as the length of the head and thorax. The
ary palpi are as long as the head.

) wings, dull leaden gray, mixed with ashy and whitish,
illy on the outer part, and crossed beyond the middle by two
tted dull ochre yellowish lines, overlaid more or less with dark
The first line crosses the end of the cell where it is
ted. The second crosses the wing about half way between
ist and the end. The terminal line is dark brown, and a
>rownish cloud extends obliquely in from the apex to the
line, but does not reach the costa. A narrow ochre-yellow
Dmewhat curved, extends from the middle of the base of the
;o the second line near the anal angle, and a similar line,
l less plainly marked, runs parallel, between this line and the

i !6 published in Vol. XVII, 55, March, 1885.

ats of the thorax each bear two rows of piliferous tubercles, —
iterior of four large quadrate spaces, the posterior of two,
mes united on the middle line.

n the fourth to the tenth segment, the piliferous tubercles
the spiracles are in two transverse rows of four each, those
anterior row being quadrate with rounded angles, and at least
*e as the interspaces between them, and those of the posterior
ansversely elongated, about twice as long as wide. The lateral
le of the anterior row immediately above the spiracle is emar-
at its posterior inferior angle, on all the segments from the
’;o the ninth. On these segments is a smaller tubercle, im-
fcely behind and beneath the spiracle, and two additional ones
between the spiracle and the proleg. Directly before jmd
jit each proleg, is a narrow arcuate tubercle, bearing several
airs. The hairs upon the dorsal tubercles are at least as long
corresponding segments of the body.

anal shield is smooth, of the same dark reddish brown color
piliferous tubercles, and bears a few long brown hairs. The
.es are all dark brown, the anterior the larger, and the two
^or next in size. The ventral surface is a little paler than
rsal, the prolegs have a yellowish tinge, the thoracic legs are

i

?th of a full-grown specimen .6 to .8 of an inch, its greatest
.1 inch.

Ijz. — The pupa is smooth, shining, pale brown, the abdomen a
larker, without hairs or spines. Eyes reddish brown, bilobed
abdomen with an obtuse horny tip.

gth .4 inch, breadth .1 inch.

jo. — Prof. Fernald, whom I requested to prepare a description
moth, kindly furnished me the following, in advance of its
ed publication in the Canadian Entomologist: *

16

binder margin. The terminal space is more or less giay. Outer
margin regularly excavated below the apex. Fringes, pale metallic I
lead color. Hind wings, pale fuscous with lighter fringes. Under
side of the body and all the wings, pale fuscous.

Habitat Maine, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Illinois, Missouri."

DISTRIBUTION.

From the observations here recorded, it is rendered probable that
this species is distributed generally throughout Central Illinois at |
least, having been actually received by us -from Henry, Macon, j
McLean, and Livingston counties.

LIFE HISTORY.

The small size of the individuals observed earliest in the season per¬
haps makes it possible that they came from the egg last spring; and
the brood represented in our collections must have completed its de¬
velopment by the end of July. Whether a second brood appears is
altogether uncertain.

The injuries inflicted occur so early as to permit replanting in
most seasons in case they should prove to be of serious import;
and this species is consequently to be classed with the cutworms so
far as the effect of its injuries to corn are concerned.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

With the exception of the mites which attack the living pup* in
our breeding cages, and which were probably responsible at least in
part for the death of most of the larvae which we tried to rear, the
only natural enemy of this species observed by us was a common
predaceous ground beetle, Pterostichus sayi, of which there were
numerous examples in an infested field near Dwight. The crop of
one of these contained a black fluid and no solid structures, (an
indication that the beetle had recently drained some insect of its
juices), and the other was full of fragments of a dark, thin-skinned
caterpillar with but few hairs. This was probably a web worm, as
these beetles had been noticed, by the owner of the field, abundant
in badly injured hills infested by those insects.

ARTIFICIAL REMEDIES.

Kespecting artificial remedies, I can at present make only a few
suggestions. When corn is replanted on account of the ravages oi
this web worm, the second planting is liable to be attacked and
destroyed in turn, since the larval life of the brood lasts too long
to permit a postponement of the replanting until the injuries of the
insect are arrested by pupation. As the larvae are all collected in
the old corn hills, it is clearly inexpedient that this corn be plowed
up until the cultivation of the field positively requires that tins
should be done. As long as it is left for the larvae to feed on, the}
are little likely to desert it for the new planting, and they, may
even remain feeding on it until their active larval life is practically
completed and their season’s mischief finished.

17

)d it is much to be desired that some rapid and easy mode
ying some cheap insecticide to these larvae in the ground
invented, since where their injury is sufficient to compel
• .ng, every worm in the field could be destroyed by the ap-
n of a little kerosene or Paris green to the old hills "of corn.*
i the injury is not total it is easy to capture the worms by
i/ithout injury to the corn. As they lie secured by day in
und just beneath the surface immediately beside the corn,
ay be turned out of the earth by a motion of the finger, —
bbed nest always serving to show their position. I do
bt that the labor of boys could very profitably be utilized in
y, even in large fields of corn.

2. The Sulphur Leaf Poller.

( Dichelia sulphureana, Clemens.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricid.e.

[Plate I. Fig. 4.1

Injuries to agriculture due to this species have been hitherto
cant in Illinois, as far as my observation extends, but as
ve attracted sufficient attention in other parts of the coun-
varrant treatment in the reports of the United States Ento-
\ t, and as I have found that they affect, to some extent, by
: most important crop in Illinois, brief notice of them is evi-
lesirable.

LITERATURE.

species was first described by Clemens in 1860, in the Pro-
4 of the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences for that year,
3, as Croesia? sulfur eana. In 1864 it was again described by
le author in the Proceedings of the Entomological Society
idelphia, under these additional names : Croesia? fulvoroseana,
virginiana, and Croesia? gallivorana , the form described
he latter name having been received from Illinois.

1 re general description, including all under one specific name,
f • with notes on distribution, is given by Eobinson in the
tions of the American Entomological Society for 1869, (Yol.
78).

A Report of Prof. Comstock for 1881, as United States En-
ist, was published the only elaborate article upon this species
as yet appeared, he treating it especially as a clover insect,
ig the larva and pupa, giving an account of its life history
3ated by his observations and breeding experiments, and
izing the facts known respecting its distribution.

> the above considerations apply also to the wire worms in corn, since these are
athered wholly in the corn hills in infested fields.

1-2

18

By Prof. Packard, in 1882, in the second volume of Papilio, page
182, the larva was re-described, the occurrence of the insect in
Maine was noted, and observations were added upon its food plants
and the date of its transformations.

In the same year, Prof. Fernald mentions the species in his list
of North American Tortricidae, and gives its synonomy, distribution,
and choice of food plants.

In 1888, Mr. Coquillet, of Illinois, described the larva again, and
gave some additional notes upon its food plants and life history.

DESCRIPTION.

*

Imago. — This insect may be described in general terms as a
brownish yellow moth, the fore wings of which are marked by two
Y-shaped brown bands (the apex of the angle backwards) so placed
that when the wings are closed these markings form an X.

The palpi are long, nearly or quite twice the length of the head,
yellow above, deep red laterally and beneath. The antennae are red¬
dish brown; the head and thorax are yellow above, tinged with red
or purple at the sides; the patagia red in front, yellow beyond.
Anterior wings golden yellow, finely reticulated with red or purplish,
(sometimes the reticulations are wanting), costa tinged with purple
at base. A purple spot on the middle of internal margin throws out
two diverging lines, one of which attains the costa at the basal
third, the other ending just below a similarly colored subapical costal
spot. The internal margins more or less tinged with purple, some¬
what constant and deepest towards the base ; fringes yellow. Pos¬
terior wings above and beneath varying from pale yellowish fuscous
to dark fuscous or blackish. Under surface of anterior wings clouded
centrally with fuscous ; the margins paler, sometimes yellow. Abdo¬
men brownish, legs pale silvery brown, anterior ones darkest. Ex¬
panse, female, 14-17 mm. ; female, 17-19 mm.

Larva. — Cylindrical, slightly fusiform, 14-15 m.m. long. Head and
cervical shield varying from pale honey-yellow to yellowish brown,
the rest of the body yellowish green, translucent, showing the darker
green of the alimentary canal. Eyes, third joint of antennae and
tarsi blackish. Piliferous tubercles (slightly paler than the rest of
the body) on each segment, arranged in a trapezoid, each bearing a
brownish hair half as long as the body is thick. Spiracles green,
ringed with brown. At the end of the supra- anal is a flattened
spinose tubercle.

Pupa. — The pupa is thus described by Prof. Comstock in the fle-
port of the Department of Agriculture for 1880:

“Length, 8 m.m. Color, dark shining brown, lighter at the end
of the wing covers and the parts covering the palpi and base of the
antennae. Front rounded and smooth. Abdominal segments on the
dorsal side armed with two transverse rows of small spines, inclined
backward, those on the posterior edge of each segment finer ana
closer than those of the other row. Abdomen terminated by a pro¬
tuberance, flattened above, rounded at the end, hollowed out under¬
neath the base, and armed with two fine hooks on each side, ant
four from the end.”

species has a wide range, occurring throughout the country
laine and Massachusetts to Illinois and Missouri, and Florida
3xas.

LIFE HISTORY.

, Comstock believes this leaf-roller to be at least three-brooded,
vae of the first brood occurring in May, of the second, in June,
the third, in August.

■ae collected by him May 13 pupated in part on the 19th and
1 id as moths from the 19th of May to the 3d of June. Those
3d June 20 pupated July 1 and emerged July 5-14; and those
August 15 pupated September 1 and emerged September 1-16.
larvae were found October 21.

laine, larvae collected by Packard the first week in August
d August 7 and transformed to the imago August 16 and 17.

linois there seem also to be several broods, as indicated by
lowing facts from our breeding- cage records, but it is not pos-
> fix their number or to assign them limitations of time.

ae collected May 17, this year, began to pupate on the 30th
emerge June 7. Those obtained May 23 pupated June 11-21
mmenced to emerge June 19. Others taken June 7 emerged
6-28. Those pupating July 6 emerged July 11, (Coquillet),
ose taken August 18 pupated on the 20th and completed their
Tmations on the 31st of the same month.

ie, without actually breeding from the egg, we can only say
e insect breeds all summer and that it apparently hibernates
larval stage, as indicated by the late date of Prof. Comstock’s
mentioned above.

INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

species has been repeatedly bred by us from corn, during
resent year, the larvae being found in May and June
the young leaves of the plant from side to side and feeding
the cylindrical case thus formed.

>rof. Comstock it was reported injurious to clover, both white
d, near Washington, folding the leaflets into a kind of tube
wing the edges together with silken threads spun for the pur-
‘ ‘Sometimes,’ ’ he says, “they spin two leaflets loosely to-
or to the flower head when they are nearly full grown. They
rom either end of this tube, and feed upon the surrounding
of which, when the larvae are young, they eat only the
surface, leaving the veins and the epidermis of the upper
itact, but when nearly full grown they eat irregular holes
l the surrounding leaflets and flower heads.

e larvae are very active when disturbed, and wriggle from
abes, suspending themselves by a single thread, by which
m let themselves down to to the ground, and if further dis-
they wriggle about with great energy.”

20

In addition to tlie plants above mentioned, this leaf-roller has 1
been found by Packard upon the pine, and by others upon the lo- I
cust, grape, strawberry, cotton, and orange. Mr. Coquillett bred it
from Verbena hastata, Dr. Kellicott from Ranunculus acris, Mr. Walsh I
from grass and willow. We have bred it this summer from the
following list of plants besides corn: common burdock (Lappa
major), red clover, Verbena urticifolia Monarda fistnlosa, and Erigeron
canadense. Although its injuries have not been reported serious, its
wide distribution, its abundant food resources, and the number of
successive broods, bring it within the list of species capable of
serious mischief under favoring circumstances.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

Prof. Comstock says, “One of the larvae on clover was found to
be infested with a hymenopterous parasite, which, however, failed
to emerge.”

In our own breeding cages three hymenopterous parasites emerged
this summer, all true Ichneumonidae.

8. The Red-Banded Leaf Roller.

(Lophoderus triferanus, Walk.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricid^l

This species occurs somewhat rarely in Illinois, and has not been
reported throughout its wide range to do any injury except to the
cranberry in Massachusetts, where its larva is locally known as one
of the cranberry worms. We bred it, however, during this past
season, from pale green leaf rollers in young corn, and consequently
may regard it as worthy of brief mention, especially as its local
abundance in cranberry plantations in Massachusetts would indicate
a capacity for excessive multiplication which makes it^ a possible
source of danger in the great corn fields of the Mississippi A alley.

The presence of this larva and of that of the sulphur leaf roller
just treated, is indicated in corn fields by the folding lengthwise or
rolling of the leaves in May and June. If these leaves be opened,
a green wriggling larva will be found enclosed in a web within.

The moth hatching from these folded leaves in June, if Lophoderus
triferanus , may be recognized as an insignificant brown . species,
about a half inch across the spread wings. The fore wings are
reddish brown except on the terminal fourth which is gray specklec
with black, as is also the basal half of the posterior edge of the
same wings.

A more detailed description is given beyond.

The species was first described by Walker in 1863, as Cacoecia
triferana, and again by Clemens in 1865, in the proceedings of tne
Entomological Society of Philadelphia, under the name of loi ^
incertana. A better description of the moth, with figures of nia

nale, is given by Robinson in Volume II. of the Transactions
American Entomological Society, under the same specific

I ' '

! n injurious insect it is mentioned by Dr. Packard in the
husetts Agricultural Report for 1870, and in the Tenth Report
! G-eological and Geographical Survey of Colorado and Adja-
irritory, 1576. By Miss Murtfeldt it is reported as injurious
rose, in the third volume of the American Entomologist
and by Prof. Lintner as a clover insect in the Annual
of the New York Agricultural Society for the same year.

1 the foregoing articles except the first, this species is treated
Clemens’ specific name, but in Fernald’s Catalogue of the
idse of North America, (1882), this is reduced to a synonym
Iker’s triferanus. The larva was not distinguished in our
g cages from that of the preceding species ( Diclielia sul-
ici), consequently I am unable to give a detailed description
Clemens’ description of the imago is as follows :

ochreous or brownish ochreous except the minute third
vhich is blackish. Head and thorax ochreous or brownish
,is.

L’ior wings pure pale reddish brown within the central fascia,
on internal margin, which is broadly covered at base with
ti brown scales forming a rather prominent irregular spot
:1 by an aggregation of intermediate pale ochreous and black-
es to the fascia. Central fascia broad, distinctly dark brown,
nes reddish brown. The sub-apical costal spot is dark brown
oarated from the central fascia by a reddish brown shade,
maining outer portion of the wing pale ochreous except a
pus brown spot above the anal angle. Fringes dark ochreous.

irior wings fuscous above, testaceous beneath. Fringes pale
Dus, much clouded centrally with dark fuscous.

nse, male 15, female 19 mm.”

species has been collected from Maine and New York to
; and Texas, and has been found feeding on the cranberry,
ft maple, oak, apple, rose, beans, Gnaphalium polycephcdum,
strawberry, and corn.

[specimens, collected on May 29, emerged June 80.

I

4. The Common Lady Bug.

(Hippodamia macidata, DeG.)

Order Coleoptera. Family Coccinellid^.

* are a thousand things in the experience of every naturalist
r that the adjustments of Nature are rarely exact.

the best of our zoological friends occasionally turn against
le most insectivorous of birds fails to discriminate in its
s between the enemies and the friends of man, and the re-

22

nowned “lady bugs,” kindly looked upon by the whole civilized
world as friends of no uncertain color, have also occasional lapses
from virtue, when pressed by hunger or actuated by whim.

The common spotted lady bug. is often abundant in corn fields,
where, as dissection usually demonstrates, it is in search of the
falling pollen of the plant, or of minute fungi which speck the
withered leaves, or of the plant lice which infest the foliage, tas¬
sels and husks ; but last August, we saw it eating the exposed ker¬
nels’ at the tip of the ear, hollowing out their substance, and partly
buried in the cavities thus made.

But it is perhaps fortunate that the lady bugs have the power of
sustaining themselves for a time on other than their favorite food,
for no one who knows the efficiency of this species as a check on
the multiplication of the corn plant louse can fail to yield it gladly
the few kernels of corn needed to tide it over a period of danger¬
ous scarcity of its animal food.

5. The Brassy Flea Beetle.

(' Chcetocnema pulicaria, Or.)

Order Coleoptera. Family Chrysomelidhl

This abundant little flea beetle, one of the commonest and most
widely distributed, was twice noticed in young corn during the last
season in numbers sufficient to inflict noticeable injury at the time,
by riddling the leaves with small holes.

6. Leaf Hoppers,

Tettigonule.

Jassus inimicus, Say.

Cicadula nigrifrons, n. s.*

Cicadula quadrilineatus, n. s.*

Macropsis nobilis.

Among the various species of leaf hoppers found upon young corn,
those above mentioned have occasionally occurred in our experi¬
ence in sufficient numbers to injure the plant appreciably in June
and July. The three species first mentioned are more fully treated
under the head of Insects Injurious to Wheat.

7. Grasshoppers (Acridid.e) in Corn.

The damage done to Indian corn by the common species of grass ;
hoppers has been often enough reported, and is known to every
one, but the species responsible for it have rarely been precis

*See page 03.

ied. During the present season the following species have
ound noticeably injurious to this crop in Illinois :

Red-Legged Grasshoppers, Pezotettix femur-rubrum, DeG., and
nis, Riley. The most evident injury to corn done by these species
came to my knowledge, was that reported by Dr. F. W.
y. In a letter dated August 29, he says: “For the first time
r life I have this summer seen damage done to crops by
?. The corn bordering on grass lands has been considerably
i, causing the ear to be small and undeveloped. They ate
ives, husks, tops and ends of the ears. The injury was done
! femur-rubrum and atlanis; also many narrow winged ‘katydids’
vith them.” [Probably Orchelimum vulgare.']

dium americanum, Drury. — In Union and Perry Counties, in
nber this great bird grasshopper (so closely related to the
ian locust as to startle one as he notices its abundance in ex-
Southern Illinois), was occasionally found doing considerable
je in the borders of cornfields, sometimes completely stripping
xlks of leaves. It never swarms, however, and has not the
;d power of migration of its relative, and has hitherto done no
3 injury.

! > ptenus differentials, Thos. — This species, one of our most
ant, was the commonest grasshopper in cornfields in Southern
3 this fall, feeding not only on the leaves, but on the corn at
) of the ears, and sometimes gnawing down the side of the

I

lelimum vulgare, Harris. — In some situations this common grass
was about as abundant as Caloptenus differentials, and sim-
injurious.

Contribution to the Life History of the Corn Plant Louse.

(Aphis maidis, Fitch.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Aphiddle.

By H. Garman.

knowledge of this insect is made up of scattered contributions
have been made from time to time since the year 1856, when
sa Fitch, in his second report on the noxious, beneficial and
i insects of the State of New York, named the insect and de-
d the aerial form. At the time his report was written, Dr.
had seen only the larva, wingless female, pupa and winged
3 of the aerial form, and these were supposed by him to occur
j ipon the peduncles of corn ears.

B. D. Walsh next discovered the root form and described its
apterous female, pupa and alate female (Proc. Ent. Soc. Phil.,
land Trans. Ill. State Ag. Soc., 1865). He mentions the fact
bis form is attended by small ants.

lis list of the plant-lice of the United States, published in
in 2 of the Illinois State Laboratory of Natural History, 1877,
^rus Thomas adds to our information the statement that the
i form occurs on the corn silks as well as on the ear-stalks.

24

1

Id the years following this until 1882, the notes on the coin ■
louse which appeared in periodicals added nothing new to its history
being chiefly repetitions of the matter given in the three articles
above referred to. But in the Stark County (Illinois) News in 1882
Dr. E. B. Boardman published an account of the insect in which
we find a few facts additional to those already given. The aerial I
form is said by this writer to appear on the tassels in the latter
part of July and to be also attended by small ants. The lice are
said to occur “all the way up the stalk,” are badly parasitized bv '
a small ichneumon fly and are preyed upon by the lady bug,
Coccinella 9-notata.

Prof. -S. A. Forbes in his report for the year 1882, as Illinois
State Entomologist, adds the three lady bugs, Hippodamia metadata ,
H. convergens , and H. glacicdis to the list of corn plant louse ene¬
mies, and the ant which attends the lice is identified by him as

La si ns Jiavus.

The next addition appeared in the third biennial report of the Kan¬
sas State Board of Agriculture, 1888. In this report Mr. E. A.
Popenoe states that he observed in his state, corn plant lice living
upon sorghum cane and found the larvae of a syrphus fly preying
upon them.

The latest of the more important contributions appeared in Prof. I
Forbes’ report as State Entomologist for 1883. In this article, I
broom corn is added to the list of corn louse food-plants and ex- !
act data as to the occurrence of the two forms during the season
are given. Panicum, a common grass of corn fields, is shown to be
a possible food-plant.

These authors have given us the essential facts as far as they
are at present known. Besides their work only a few scattered
notes and more or less imperfect summaries of the information they
give, have appeared in print. As thus recorded the history is im¬
perfect in several important particulars. (1) It does not tell us
where the males and egg-laying females appear and when and where
the eggs are laid, and (2) it does not tell us positively what relation
the root and aerial forms bear to' each other. It was with the pur¬
pose of deciding these points that the observations recorded in what
follows were undertaken.

A marked irregularity in the growth of corn often noticed in the
spring of the year, is frequently found on investigation to be the
result of attacks of the root form of the corn louse, and large colo¬
nies will in such cases be found on the bases of the stems and on
the roots of the dwarfed plants. Such plants frequently do not re¬
cover from the damage done them, but yield at the harvest, if any¬
thing, small or imperfect ears. The aerial lice also sometimes dwarf
the plants where they occur in great numbers, but when the fore
part of the season is favorable, the plants gain such a start by
the time this form appears that subsequent injuries will not check
the growth. ,

The damage wrought by these insects occasionally reduces a crop
one-half or three-fourths, but damage so severe as this is exceptional
and confined to limited areas. The uniform presence of the lice,
however, and their wide distribution, taken with the value of the crop
they affect, makes them very damaging pests to the people of this

■

Taking the acreage for com in Illinois as 6,586,201, the
nnber given in the report of our State Agricultural Department
(.182, an average loss in a year of as little as one bushel to
ten acres would amount to about 658,620 bushels of corn, rep-
ung at least $100,000 in money, an amount sufficient to pay
i xpenses of a State Entomologist for fifty years,

NOMENCLATURE.

ft*

those who have written upon the corn louse, with the excep-
>f Prof. Forbes, have used without question the technical name
7naidis. There can be little doubt, however, that the corn plant
belongs to the genus Rhopalosiphum, as this genus is used
e great authorities on the classification of aphides. The char-
stic swollen cornicles are not as well marked as in some mem-
Sf the genus Rhopalosiphum, but will serve at a glance to dis-
sh this species from members of the genus Aphis. The old
has so frequently appeared in these reports that a change is
eemed desirable here.

' I

DESCRIPTION.

'iged viviparous female [root form]. — Head black. Thorax brown -
jack. Abdomen above pale green with about three marginal
spots and numerous small, dark specks over the surface,
tnae dark with pale at the articulations. Prothorax pale in the
e ; meso- and metathorax chiefly brown. Cornicles black with
black at their bases, chiefly inside. Cauda dusky, with several
7,erse dusky marks before it. Thorax chiefly dark below, with
paces about bases of limbs brownish. Under side of the abdo-
I pale green ; two transverse dark marks before the cauda. Legs
y black; tibiae for basal two-thirds pale. Length of body 1.8
width of body, .9 mm. ; antennae, .7 mm ; cornicles, .12 mm. ;
2 mm.

>a of winged ' viviparous female [root form]. — Head obscurely
. Thorax obscure reddish brown. Abdomen above pale dull
j, without spots. Antennoe dusky only at tip. Eyes reddish-
! i. Wing-pads obscurely dusky. Cornicles black. Cauda dusky,
•al color below greenish. Rostrum dark at base and tip. Tarsi
ips of tibiae dusky. Length of body, 1.61 mm. ; width of body,
;[n.

agless viviparous female [root form]. — Head black above. Pro-
pic segment black ; the following three body segments each
a transverse dusky mark on their middles. Abdomen pale
| with black marginal spots and with numerous smaller specks
the surface. Antennae dusky at tip and slightly also at
Eyes reddish brown. Cornicles black. Cauda dusky ; pre-
by two transverse black marks. Abdomen beneath with two
^erse black marks before the cauda, otherwise nearly uniform
peen below, Rostrum black at base and tip. Coxae, femora
7, tips of tibiae and the tarsi black. Body widely oval in out-
Antennae short, about half the length of the body and head ;
md second articles equal in length, first largest ; third article

‘26

longest ; fourth and fifth subsequal and about equal to the thickened '
proximal part of the sixth. Cornicles short, tapering towards the
tip, not swollen, extremities flared. Cauda short and wide. Length
of body, 1.4 mm. ; width of body, .93 mm. : antennae, .57 mm.

The young of this form are paler in color and have proportionally j
longer rostra and shorter cornicles.

Winged viviparous female [aerial form]. — Head black. Thorax
chiefly black above. Abdomen pale green, faintly bluish at sides,
with three marginal black spots on each side preceding larger spots
which surround the bases of the cornicles. Antennae chiefly black,
Cornicles black. Cauda green, edged with black. Segments behind
the cauda dark-edged. Head and thorax beneath chiefly black,
Abdomen pale green, with two transverse black marks preceding the
cauda. Legs pale at their articulations ; middle part of tibiae often
pale. Rostrum chiefly black. Body more slender than that of the
female of the root form. Antennae rather long; fourth and fifth
articles each longer than the basal part of the sixth. Cornicles
moderately long, swollen in the middle. Length of body, 2 mm.:
width of body, .87 mm. ; antennae, about .85 mm. : cornicles, .2 mm.:
wing, 2.65 mm.

Pupa of winged viviporous female [aerial form]. — Head dark brown, |
often presenting an appearance of two longitudinal dark "bands.
Body chiefly pale green. Wing-pads, cornicles and tip of cauda
black. Antennae chiefly dark. Beak dark at base and tip. Legs
nearly all dark; tibiae pale proximally. Length of body. 1.6 mm.;
width of body, .62 mm. ; antennae, .7 mm. ; cornicles, .12 mm.

Wingless viviparous female [aerial form]. — General color pale green,
with cauda, cornicles and greater part of the rostrum, antennae, and
legs black. Head with two broad, approximated, longitudinal dark
bands which give the prevailing color. Abdomen with the usual
marginal black spots and the black patch about the base of the
cornicles. Antennae dark at base and apex. Eyes reddish brown.
Anterior legs mostly pale. Rostrum dark at base and apex. More
slender than the female of the root form and of a brighter green
color. The cornicles are swollen in the middle. Length of body,
1.97 mm. ; width of body, 1 mm. ; antennae, .75 mm. ; cornicles,
.17 mm.

The young of this form differs from the adults in the same manner
as do those of the root form, i. e. they are more slender, have
longer beaks and shorter cornicles.

Towards fall the green color worn by the adults is changed for
darker colors and often females which are still giving birth to young
are bluish black. A meal-like coating can be detected on the bodies
by examination with a lens.

LIFE HISTORY AND HABITS.

Naturalists hold to the belief that it is not in accordance with
natural law that a species of animal should reproduce indefinitely
without the union of the male and female sexes. It is true that
when supplied with heat and food artificially, certain species of
Aphides have been induced to reproduce for long periods without

27

Lge, but it is held that this could not be continued for any
length of time without injury to the species, and eventually,
bought, would result in its extermination. There are certain
1 3 of plant lice, however, of which no males or oviparous
t‘S have been seen. Such species are thought to produce males
yg laying females locally or only at seasons which from some
wn cause are especially favorable to this method of reproduc-

ervations made by the writer during the past season indicate
mbit for Aphis maidis. From the latter part of May when
lant louse appeared on the corn till the middle of November
the corn had long been dry and the ground had been many
frozen, the corn louse was followed with special care ; and
'a hundreds of individuals were dissected under the micros-
only wingless and winged viviparous females were seen during
iason. About October 6th, most of the sorghum cane in Cen-
[linois was ripe and ready for the mill. Aphis maidis had been
l the season abundant on the blades and to save itself must
depart. Upon examination the species was found to be repre-
l mostly by pupae and alate females. The pupae, as was found
j ufining them, were rapidly maturing and the winged adults
^leaving the sorghum and scattering in all directions. While
jjing at the edges of such fields at this time one’s person inter-
i the flight of many of these winged lice. The roots were
jearetfully searched for the root form, but it was not to be found
tees where at the beginning of the season it was common.
3 plants were searched with the glass for eggs, and, though
of them had afforded nourishment to hundred of axdiides dur-
le summer, no eggs could be found. The lice which were thus
l to leave the sorghum field doubtless resorted to the corn,
t was less advanced and for some time afterward continued to
ih them appropriate food.

;h the advance of the season the lice upon corn were also de-
1 of food. But in this case the irregular development of the
i which prevailed in most fields served to collect the lice into
colonies by driving them gradually from their stalks to the
er and less matured ones. At the last most of the lice were
found between the outer husks of the greener ears and upon
ed and immature stalks. These had not all collected there as
id females, for the wingless louse showed itself capable of leav-
stalk and finding a better one. Both wingless and winged
es of of the aerial form were now isolated and confined : both
found to give birth to living young. On the ninth of Novem-
umerous specimens were collected in the fields and carried to
ouse. Among them were many winged females, some pupae
i few young. All proved to be viviparous. Some of them
i alive November fifteenth ; on the twentieth of this month the
vinged female died with its body distended with matured em-
(11 were counted.) The last to succumb was a pupa which
some days later.

e specimens seen in the fields November 9fch, were the last
observed alive out of doors. Previous to this date there had
J severe frosts, and the corn was nearly all dry and hard. The

i

•28

lice obtained at this time were found chiefly among the husks o[
nubbins and in crannies between the ensheathmg part of the leaves,
They were evidently restless, and the warmth of the sun at midday
aroused some of them to endeavors to find better quarters. These
were found wandering about the stalks. An almost microscopic ex¬
amination of stalks which had supported thousands of aphides was
made after the lice disappeared without finding an egg. The root
form of the corn louse has not to my certain knowledge been ob¬
served later than October 8. Its period has probably passed and
its purpose been served when the warm weather of July comes on,
and with it the aerial form. But to make sure as to whether or
not this form was hibernating in the ground, the roots of weeds,
grasses and corn in cornfields were searched in November, but with¬
out finding them. In the same fields at this time, the hibernating
viviparous females of Schizoneura panicola were abundant on the
roots of blue grass and timothy.

From these observations, it seems to me evidently either that (a)
Aphis maidis matures its egg-laying brood locally ; ( b ) that this brood
matures on some plant other than corn, or (c) that the brood appears
at intervals greater than one year, the species being in the mean¬
time maintained by hibernating viviparous individuals.

(a) The area over which the foregoing observations were made
will doubtless be quite uniformly infested early the coming spring
with corn plant lice. That these lice can have been so distributed
over so extensive an area, and at so early a date after hatching
from the eggs of locally developed oviparous females, can not be
believed.

(■ b ) If eggs were produced on some plant other than corn, it must
have been by plant lice born of the viviparous females which de¬
serted the corn. The development of such a brood would have been
possible even after the first of November; for Aphis mail matured
its oviparous brood on the apple trees after this date. When the
winged viviparous females of the corn louse began to mature rapidly
and scatter through the fields in the fall, close watch was kept of
available plants to see whether or not the lice resorted to them for
this purpose. Volunteer corn, which grew up along railroads late
in the season, became almost invariably stocked by these migrating
individuals, but on no other plant could the adults and young be
found. Wheat, oats and the perennial grasses seemed to be the
most likely to be resorted to, and the roots and stalks were
thoroughly examined. The lice peculiar to these plants were often
found in very great numbers, but in not a single instance was any¬
thing found established on them which could be taken for Aphis
maidis.

(c) The hypothesis that the lice hibernated as alate viviparous
females was the only one, then, left to me, and though not thoroughly
satisfied with the nature of the evidence, I am disposed to believe
that this is the usual manner of passing the cold months, and that
the oviparous brood appears only under specially favorable circum¬
stances, perhaps locally. This conclusion is held subject to revision.
It is what seems most probable with the results of two seasons ob¬
servation before me.

! following observation bears upon the relation of the root and
forms to each other. On the k25th of June a number of the
orm were colonized on the roots of corn growing in the labor-
and on the 5th of July one of these lice was observed to have
ished itself upon one of the leaves. On the 6th of July it was
to have given birth to two young during the preceding night,
p of the root lice were observed upon the leaves, but the plant
8 stage began to die, and the experiment ended. I have little
, however, that this would have proved the beginning of a
7 of aerial corn lice.

the light of these observations, the history of the lice during
"ear seems to be this : Reproduction is carried on during the
months by the viviparous (mostly wingless) females of the
form. In the fall viviparous winged females predominate,
g to distribute the species and (generally) by hibernating pass
l* the winter months. In the spring these females resort to the
and bases of the stems, where they are then protected from
>ld, and multiply here until the warm weather of the latter
)f July sets in, when their descendants migrate to the leaves,
| and silks, founding there the colonies of aerial lice.

account of the life history of this plant louse would be imper-
L/ithout some notice of the little ant. Lasius flavus. In the spring
lit is almost invariably to be found with the root lice, carefully
ing the latter, and when the burrows are exposed carrying them
and concealing them in the earth. During the fore part of
ler it occurs on the plants among the aerial lice, but when the
bason of late August and early September sets in, it burrows
into the earth and is not often seen except after rains, when
ns up its burrows. With the fall rains it again comes to the
!;e and may be found to the end of the season with its young
olonies of Schizoneura panicola on the roots of grasses. Its
se in attending the corn louse is doubtless to secure the sweet
which a tap from an antenna will cause a full fed louse to
p But I am disposed to believe that the ants attend Schizo-
panicola for the purpose of browsing upon the waxen coat
covers that species. I have several times seen the ants gath-
ibout a detached mass of this wax and apparently eating it.
j tne nests of these ants one finds in winter masses of plant lice
vhich have been collected the previous fall. The ants carry
about as the do the plant lice. Why they are collected, I am
[e to say. A natural inference is that they collect them to stock
1 5 in the vicinity of their nests in the spring.! It may be they
8ed as food, as, indeed, from the results of some experiments
jping them indoors I suspect the lice are occasionally.

I - -

L

iring the past summer I have repeatedly seen the ants secure this favor, and to
prise the sweet droplet was always discharged from the vent, never from the

as.

j quantity of these eggs were collected last spring and giveD to a colony of ants
I doors. They hatched small green plant lice which at once scattered in all di-
i s. They would not make their home on any of the plants offered them, and so
1 st.

Kf • - *

80

The following table shows the dates at which the lice have been 1
observed. It is deficient in not showing the relative abundance at
the different dates of the stages, larva, pupa, and adult females:

Date.

Root Form.

•

Aekial, Fokm.

Larva. . . .

Pupa .

Winged

female..

Wingless
female . .

Larva....

Pupa .

[

Winged

female..

® -

h

«S

: a

TVT siv Hi _ _ . _ ...

X

X

X

44 22 .

X

.Turn a 1 . . .

X

“ « .

X

X

X

X

“ 7 .

X

“ 13 .

X

“ 95 .

X

X

X

“ 99 . :...

X

.Till v 3 . .

X

• • fi .

X

“ 21

X

“ 25 .

X

X

X

X

X

X

“98 ... .

X

“ 29 .

X

X

• * 31 .

X

X

A wss 2 _ . . _ . .

X

X

X

X

“ 11 .

X

X

X

X

“ 20 .

X

X

X

“ 28 .

X

X

X

fipnt. 4 .... _

X

X

X

“ 5 . .

X

X

X

X

‘ ‘ 6

X

4 4 8

X

4 4 18

X

X

4 4 19

X

44 22 .

X

4 4 25

X

X

Opt 2

X

X

X

4 4 6 .

X

X

X

X

4 4 7 .. .

•

X

X

X

X

4 4 8

X

X

4 4 9

X

X

X

< . Y!

-

X

X

“ 25 . .

X

X

X

X

4 4 30

X

X

X

X

Nov 1

X

X

X

44 8

•

X

X

X

4 4 9

X

X

X

4 4 15

X

X

The species will probably be found to occur in every county of the
State. We have observed it or had it reported from the following:
Stephenson, Ogle, DeKalb, Rock Island, Kendall, LaSalle, Putnam,
Stark, Livingston, Warren, Peoria, McLean, Tazewell, Mason, Me¬
nard, Champaign, Morgan, Jersey, Fayette, Effingham, Marion,
White, Madison, Union, and Pulaski.

PARASITES AND PREDACEOUS INSECTS AFFECTING THE CORN LOUSE.

A most efficient check on the further increase of the corn louse
exists in a small four- winged fly, belonging to the genus Adialytus,
which deposits its eggs within the bodies of the lice and in its
larva state feeds upon their tissues. The greater part of a colony
of the lice is sometimes thus infested, the lice containing the grubs
which hatch from the eggs being known by their brown swollen
bodies, or at an earlier stage by a slightly yellowish color. 11^
adult Adialytus is a slender, active ichneumon fly, about .06 inc
in length. Its feelers and legs are long and slender and the abdo¬
men is very flexible so that it can easily be bent upon itself. 1 ie

1 color is black, with yellow mouth-parts and legs. The
are transparent and beautifully iridescent under the magni-
glass. The male closely resembles the female, but has two
irticles in each of its antennae and has the tip of its abdomen
instead of sharp pointed. The following more detailed des-
n will serve to distinguish the species from those which in-
her plant lice.

ilytus maidaphidis, nov. sp. Head and thorax black, shining,
h. Abdomen reddish brown, darkest on the middle of the
nts, with a few short whitish hairs. Front with whitish hairs,
age dull black. Mouth-parts pale honey yellow. Coxae of an-
and middle legs, trochanters of all the legs, anterior and
1 femora, anterior tibiae and tips of middle and hind tibiae
•yellow. Posterior femora mostly black. Limbs clothed with
ised silky white pubescence, thickest on the tibiae and tarsi,
coxae black. Tarsi dusky. Wings transparent, iridescent, with
yellow at base and a basal half of costa. Stigma smoky
, with a touch of yellow at its inner angle. Nerves black.

subsplierical. Eyes large and -prominent. Three ocelli
cuous. Antennae of 13 articles in the female ; with 15
e male. Two proximal articles equal in length, shorter
he others, about as long as wide. The succeeding articles
equal in length, about twice as long as wide. Distal article
tale longer than the others ; in the male it is about equal to
The articles are longitudinally, finely carinate. Thorax ob-
elevated anteriorly, impunctured. Abdomen spindle shaped,
sed, pointed in the female, blunt in the male. Legs long and
r ; femora spindle-shaped, about three-fourths the length of
triae. Tibiae slender at base, gradually enlarging to their ex¬
iles. First article of tarsi long and uniform in diameter; about
g as the three succeeding together. Second article a little
than the following ones and slightly swollen. Three distal
s subequal. Length, 2 mm.

ing the summer and autumn these little flies may be seen
ig rapidly about on the corn which is infested with lice, and
ched will be seen now and then to approach a plant louse,
gently with the antennae, and if the louse seems to be satis-
y, the abdomen of the parasite is suddenly bent downwards
len forwards between the legs, the victim is stabbed by the
sharp pointed ovipositor and an egg is inserted at the same
n its body. The parasitized louse continues to feed after the
is been deposited as if nothing had occurred to discommode
1 if young may continue to grow until the natural size is
id. All this time the great grub hatched from the egg is
y upon its tissues and growing rapidly so that by the time it
|s growth the body of its host is swollen out greatly beyond
ual proportions. The grub seems to avoid the vital organs
host until the last so that the louse does not entirely succumb
he grub is ready to become a pupa, at which time it seems
i our all the remaining tissues or crowd them aside to make
i [or itself. The body of the louse has by this time become
and dry, and though outwardly looking like a very plump
louse is really only a skin enclosing a parasite. By some
, not ascertained, the swollen body becomes glued to the leaves

82

and there remains until the parasite emerges. The grub of the '
Adialytus is yellowish white, thick-bodied and short. It lies bent
upon itself and when removed is perfectly helpless. The pupae lies
in the same position, is also white, with the large eyes showing
conspicuously at the sides of the head. The adult emerges within
the dried skin of the louse it has inhabited and at once gnaws
a round piece out of the back of the latter, generally near the pos-
terior end of the body, and pushing this piece out emerges through
the opening made. Often these pieces which are gnawed out adhere
at one side, so that after the parasite has emerged they fall back
in place and the empty skin looks much as before. The parasites
emerge in great numbers in the fall of the year at the time the
winged females become most abundant, and I believe many of them
hibernate as adults. An examination of a great number of swollen
plant lice in midwinter, however, reveals a few with living grubs.
Lice that are infested with this parasite seem never to produce
young, their whole existence being given up to bringing the unwel¬
come guests to maturity. The wingless females seem to suffer most
from its attacks, by far the greater number of swollen bodies repre¬
senting this form, but a good many pupae and winged females also
become infested. The greater immunity of the winged louse is prob¬
ably due to its greater activity; when disturbed, in warm weather,
it takes wing readily.

Syrphus Fly Larva. — Next to the small hymenopterous insect just
described, the larvae of small dipterous insects known everywhere as
syrphus flies are most destructive of the lice. These larvae are con¬
siderably larger than their prey, and spend their time creeping
about among the herds of lice on the corn ears and tassels. They
seize the plant lice in their mouths, and in a few minutes have
sucked out all their juices. Great numbers of lice are destroyed by
a single larva in the course of a day, as they are very active and
voracious. They occur throughout the summer months, and are
sometimes found as late as November. Their empty pupa skins are
sometimes found with a round hole in the posterior part, from which
some parasite, has emerged.

The 8yrphus fly larva is elongate cylindrical, transversely wrinkled
with a blunt posterior end, tapering more nearly to a point anter¬
iorly. The head is not much different from the other body seg¬
ments. On each side of the mouth is a black, hard, toothed jaw,
which serves to hold the lice. There are no eyes. The color is pale
green when the alimentary canal is filled with the juices of plant
lice ; at other times it is yellowish brown. Its length is about three-
tenths of an inch.

The adult is a handsome two-winged fly, with large reddish brown
eyes, transparent iridescent wings, shining, greenish black thorax,
and with the abdomen alternately striped transversely with black
and yellow. The head is chiefly yellow, with a frontal tuft of shod,
dark pubescence, and a wide black band extending down the front
to near the base of the antennae, with silvery pubescence behind the
eyes. The three basal articles of the antennae are orange yellow;
the bristle is black. A wide yellow stripe extends from the anterior
margin of the thorax on each side to the bases of the wings, where

irminate abruptly. Legs pale yellow. Interior surface of
en also pale yellow.

’8e of this fly kept in confinement, pupated during the first
: August, and the flies emerged between the fifteenth and
-fifth of September. During this period the larvae were ob-
j among the lice in the fields, a fact which indicates several

during the summer. The only dies obtained were accident-

stroyed, and their species can not therefore, be definitely de¬
ed. The larvae creep like leeches, and when they have seized
t louse, raise the anterior part of their bodies so as to pre-
le struggles of the prey freeing it from their grasp. A Euro-
pecies is said to devour as many as one hundred plant lice
hour. I have watched our species on several occasions,
en when hungry they did not finish one louse in less than
nutes, and three or four lice at one time seemed to satisfy

Generally but one or two larvae occur in a colony of lice.

Smaller Two-Spotted Lady Bug ( Hyperaspis signata, Oliv.) —
ady bug has a reputation as a destroyer of the destructive
jmse of the maple trees. It occasionally occurs also among
:*ds of corn plant lice in the com fields.

Plain Lady Bug ( Cycloneda sanguined, Linn.) — The adult of
:ly bug is also found among colonies of lice. It is less com-
5 a rule than the following species, but in some fields in the
Dart of the State which we visited, it was the more abundant

two.

jj Spotted Lady Bug ( Megilla maculata, DeG.) — This lady bug is
[jin in all its stages upon corn and destroys great numbers of
n the autumn and winter great numbers of the adults, some-
i housands in a heap, may be found under boards at the edges
fcorn fields.

other lady bugs, Hippoclamia glacialis and Coccinella 9-notata
>een observed in the fields but neither occur in sufficient
■s to be of any great service.

Lace-wunged Fly ( Chrysopa sp.) — The larva of one or more
of these Hies are frequently seen devouring the aphides, and
nally are locally abundant in the fields.

Artificial Piemedies.

•tificial remedies but little can be said. The corn fields are
3 that an application of any of the insecticides which can be
uccessfully for smaller crops would be impracticable. The
bs and predaceous insects may be depended upon to prevent
neral increase in the numbers, and where local outbreaks
more than one season’s serious damage can probably be
by burning off old fields in the fall as soon as the corn is
and to some extent also by planting on ground which has
n in com. For garden corn the use of a solution of kerosene
;>n thrown upon the corn from a garden engine carried on a
uld be sufficient to destroy the lice.

-B

. 34

AETICLE II.— NOTES ON INSECTS INJUEIOUS TO WHEAT,

1. The Larger Wheat Straw Worm.

(Isosoma grande, Eiley.)

Order Hymenoptera. Family Chalcidime.

In May of this year, Mr. Garman collected from wheat fields in
Clark county, in Eastern Illinois, and sent to the Laboratory (where
they were received May 21,) straws containing a larva similar to
that of Isosoma tritici, but larger, and evidently differing from that
in life history. These were imbedded in the center of the stalk,
just above the lowest joint, where they caused a bulbous enlarge¬
ment of the stem, the plants containing the insects being dwarfed
or killed in every case noticed. The fact that the inner surface of
the stem containing the larvae had been eaten and torn was plainly
perceptible.

On the 6th of June, the living, winged adults emerged from these
examples, and all the remaining straws contained at this time pupae
in the pupal envelope. The straws had been kept too dry, however,
and the insects had died within them. On the 24th of May, adults
of this species were found not uncommon in wheat fields at West
Union, and on the 27th at Mount Carmel, in Wabash county, where
a few stalks of wheat which had been evidently inhabited by the
worm were likewise noticed. At Carmi, in the same county, on the
30th, stalks which had been injured by them were again observed,
although none contained the larvae ; but several imagos were taken
within them, as also at Eldorado on the day following. At Villa
Ridge, on the 3d of June, many dwarfed stalks of wheat were found
in the fields from which this species had apparently emerged, but
no specimens were taken here by sweeping. No further observations
were made upon this species throughout the year, but I learned
from Mr. F. M. Webster, an assistant to the Entomologist of the
United States Department of Agriculture, that he found it after¬
wards in wheat fields in Indiana, near the Illinois line.

[From the last Eeport of the United States Entomologist (1884),

35

eel since the above was written, I learn that Mr. Webster
this larva at Normal on the 29th of May.

ie of the specimens obtained by Mr. Webster, were described
t\ Riley under the name of Isosoma grandis in the Bulletin of
rooklyn Entomological Society for December 1884, pages 111
12, with the remark that they were reared from wheat stems

DESCRIPTION.

I ‘ following description is in part compiled from that of Mr.
and in part drawn from specimens bred and collected by us.

lgth of body from 4.2 to 4.8 mm. ; expanse 7.6 mm. ; antennae
?r, little clavate, but about half the length of the thorax, the
smooth except the mesonotum, which is decidedly rugulose.
3 large, yellowish in color, less hyaline than those of Isosoma
the veins reaching the outer third, the sub-marginal four
as long as the marginal. All the specimens observed were
d females. Abdomen equal to or longer than the thorax, some-
stouter than in Isosoma tritici, ovate-acuminate in form. The
is tawny, with a narrow black shade down the middle, and
er beneath the eye, the posterior surface black. The scape of
ntennae and first joint of flagellum yellow, the remainder black,
oronotum is large, and a brighter yellow than that of tritici.

are two tawny spots upon the back, and the propectus is yel-
i front. There is also a large tawny spot upon the pleura,
the middle coxae. The abdomen is shining black throughout,
*>t the tips of the anal appendages, which are yellow), and is
(sparsely covered with pale hair averaging about one-half the
l of the segments to which they are attached. The tarsi are
A as are also the anterior tibiae in front and within, the other
being tawny and more or less shaded with dusky. The
or coxae are yellow in front, the posterior yellow externally,
emora have each a definitely limited suboval yellowish spot
! , near the tip, extending two-fifths the length of the femur on
ont pair, smaller on middle pair, and shorter and less definite
0 posterior.

m Isosoma tritici, to which this species is most nearly allied,
y be distinguished by its larger size and especially by the far
r amount of tawny and yellow colors. The larva is about 6
in length, of a greenish yellow color, distinguished from that
id only by its larger size.

pupa, from 4.5 to 5 mm. long, varies in color from white
j earlier stages, to the colors of the adult when prepared to
e. It is distinguished from that of tritici by its larger size
1 1 all our specimens by the presence of wing pads folded around
)sterior legs.

u

LIFE HISTORY AND DISTRIBUTION.

lough this species has been observed over so short a period,
cts specified are such as strongly to indicate that it is single-

u

36

brooded ; that the eggs are laid by the adult upon the young wheat
in autumn ; that the larvae hatch and hibernate within the stem,
pupating in May and emerging late in that month and early in June! 1
They leave the stem, in fact, at about the time the young Isosom j
tritici commences its attack upon the wheat, and consequently these
two species, although specifically clearly distinguished, nevertheless !
alternate like two broods of the same form.

Concerning the distribution of this species, it can, at present, only
be said that it occurs in Western and Southern Illinois and in parts |
of Indiana adjacent. As this insect inhabits the wheat only during
the period of the growth of the plant, escaping before the grain is [
harvested, and passing the interval a3 a free imago, it is difficult,
to see how its injuries may be prevented, unless, indeed, late sow-
ing, as practiced for the Hessian fly, may be found to affect this
straw- worm also.

2. The Lesser Wheat- Straw Worm.

(. Isosoma tritici, Riley.)

.

Order TIymenoptera. Family Chalcidid.e.

(Plate I, Fig. 5.)

Observations made during the present season add one or two
points of interest to the life history of this destructive species. The
period when it begins its injuries has heretofore been a matter of
inference, but it was this summer found by Mr. Garrnan at work in
the wheat as early as June 5, many of the larvae being at this time
only a millimetre in length, and evidently but recently hatched.
The exact character of the injury produced by these young larvae is
well illustrated by the accompanying figure, exhibiting the cavity
from which a very small straw worm was removed.

The parasitism of Eupelmus allyni upon this species and Isosoma
hordei has been placed beyond question by recent observations of
Prof. French, reported in the Canadian Entomologist for July, 1884,
pages 123 and 124. As evidence on this point, he says :

UA single joint of rye containing several galls formed by Isosoma
hordei was put into a bottle and corked up, so that no insects could
get out or in. In due course of time a specimen of E. allynii was
found in the bottle, and the hole from which it had gnawed its way
out of one of the galls was plainly to be seen. Afterward the other
galls gave forth I. hordei. In this case there could be no question
but that the specimen of E. allynii came from the gall made by
I . hordei. If no hordei had hatched from the other galls, this would
have been evident, for the galis made by this species are too char¬
acteristic to be mistaken by any one at all familiar with their "work.

I have bred quite a number of this species from the inside of the
stems of wheat ; and in all cases they came from the cavities in¬
side the stalk that had been gnawed by Isosoma tritici. Though
this species of Isosoma makes no gall, its manner of eating the

mt'SM

37

around the inside cavity is rather characteristic, so much as
readily recognized after a little observation. I have found a
5 grass worked in by another species of an allied insect,
le manner of work is so different as to be unmistakable.
a elymi makes a cavity on the inside of Elymus canadensis that
fe nearly like that made by I. tritici in the wheat, but they
somewhat.

be fields I have found specimens of E. allynii emerged from
ipa skin, but still inside the cavity of the stem ; others with
)le by which they expected to emerge gnawed so that they
almost get out, and they still there with the body protruding,
bhers when they had gone, the clean-cut hole indicating where
had obtained their freedom. I have bred many specimens
the straws after they had been collected, and the conditions
-he same as those in the field, the inside of the stems in all
being examined before putting them into the breeding jar.

m these facts I do not see how I could avoid the conclusion
Eupelmus allynii was a parasite on the two species of Isosoma. ”

10 description of this important parasite has yet appeared in
ports of this office, the original specific description of Prof,
i, published in the Canadian Entomologist for January, 1883,
3 appended, accompanied by an original figure.

Enpelmus allyni, French.

Order Hymenoptera. Family Chalcidid^e.

(Plate I. Fig. G.)

DESCRIPTION.

‘ ale. — Average length, .10 of an inch. Color of body and an-
! uniform black, the first with a slight greenish luster. Head
' .025 of an inch wide, about two thirds as long; the antennae
3 enlarged at the ends, hairy; microscopic hairs moderately
*ed over the head and thorax. Thorax, as well as head,
ired ; wings hyaline, dotted over with microscopic hairs, the
in its widest part about the width of the head. Abdomen
illy tapering from near the base, the ovipositor slightly ex-

* color of the legs vary slightly ; in five specimens the anterior
isterior legs have the femur fuscous except at the ends ; the
vith basal half fuscous, the rest yellow; the middle pair of
p yellow throughout, except the terminal tarsi. Two speci-
have all the femurs fuscous, yellow at the ends. One speci-
as all the femurs pale red, and the tibiae fuscous, but this is
ly a change from yellow by the poison bottle used in killing.

marked like the first five, with the yellow replaced by pale
notlier is like the first five, except that the middle tibiae are
s clouded at base.

— In this sex the body, wings and antennae are colored like
nales, but the antennae are a little more slender at their ends,
cad and thorax have about the same measurements, but the

38

abdomen is a little shorter, the whole insect being from .06 to .07
of an inch. The legs have all the femurs yellow, front tibiae
yellow, middle and hind tibiae fuscous, except at the apices, which
are yellow ; feet as in the females.

(Cecidomyia destructor, Say.)

I

he

3. Contributions to a Knowledge of the Life History and the

Parasites of the Hessian Fly.

Order Diptera. Family Cecidomyidje.

uMw

(Plates £1 and III.) ^

m I

Notwithstanding the enormous losses inflicted upon agriculture in
Illinois by this most destructive enemy of one of our important
staple crops, the details of its life history, upon which strictly
depend the value of measures for the prevention or control of the
injuries, have not been fully or accurately made out for any part
of the Mississippi Valley, the statements current on this subject
appearing in agricultural papers and in the writings of our local
entomologists, being mostly derived from the statements of HerHck,
Fitch, Harris, and other observers, who have studied the species in F
the North Eastern States.

It is, beyond question, chiefly to its parasitic enemies that we
owe such immunity from the Hessian fly as we now enjoy, these
clearly constituting the principal natural check upon its continued
existence in destructive abundance ; but our ignorance of its para¬
sites is even greater than that of its life history, for almost noth¬
ing definite has been learned concerning them since the observa¬
tions of Herrick, of Connecticut, made in 183*2 ; Certainly, therefore,
time and labor spent in acquiring more definite knowledge of the
details of the life history of the Hessian fly, and the number,
kinds, seasons and habits of the parasites will be well employed,
even if it should serve only to shake the confidence of our agricul¬
tural community in such remedial measures as may have been
heretofore recommended.

As soon after entering upon the duties of State Entomologist as
time and opportunity offered, I began observations upon this insect
with the view and hope of constructing a complete account of its
life history in the southern half of Illinois,— the only region late y
affected by it, since winter wheat culture, although now rising to
importance in the northern part of the State, has been too lateq
revived there to expose the flelds to danger from the Hessian fly*
The results here presented fall something short of a comple e
account of the life history of this insect throughout the year, bu
they nevertheless throw unexpected light upon the matter, and are
deemed worthy of report as a statement of the present condition o
the investigation.

89

observations were directed almost wholly to the midsummer
• of the insect, the facts respecting its autumnal injuries and
ernation being sufficiently well settled. As a fair example of
rrent view of the summer history, we may take the following
t from Packard’s “Guide to the Study of Insects” :

j) flies appear just as the wheat is coming up ; they lay their
)r a period of three weeks, and then entirely disappear. The
ts hatched from these eggs take the flaxseed form in June
fly, and are thus found in the harvest time, most of them
ling on the stubble. Most of the flies appear in the autumn,
aers remain in the puparium until the following spring. By
g the stubble in the fall, their attacks may best be prevented.”

.11 be seen, however, from the observations here reported, that
ove history is inaccurate for Southern Illinois, and that the
Y mentioned by the author is, as a consequence, to a great
inapplicable.*

dlowing the life history of the fly through the season by means
iiding experiments and field observations and collections, the
ial embarrassment has arisen from the immense prevalence
asitism in the summer brood, so that breeding cages contain*
rdes of the larvae and flaxseeds would yield scarcely a single
d fields in which they had destroyed the crop would send forth
of the adult insects that the most diligent sweeping at the
of their emergence would not obtain a single specimen.

.

LIFE HISTORY.

1888.

observations for 1888 began at Centralia, April 10, at the
Vhen the Hessian fly was abundant in the pupa state, and
so rapidly emerging in the winged form. From a large num-
wheat plants containing the flaxseeds sent to Normal at this
flies continued to emerge until the 20th of the month, after
no more appeared. These imagos laid their eggs in the
{jig cages almost from the first.

the 5th of May young larvae of the spring brood were collected
^uoin, some of them scarcely more than hatched, and others
own. These were placed in a closed fruit jar in a room ad-
y the office at Normal, and kept under cover at the ordinary
Aature of the out-door air; and to my surprise, on the 28th
y, two imagos appeared in the jar. Upon June 4, four more
3d, three males and one female, and others at intervals until
j['L5.

The 17th of May, examples of both free larvae and flaxseeds
eceived from Odin, in Marion county. On the 24th, we col-
larvae only, from wheat fields in Decatur, in Macon county,

, 3 but fair to state that in his later papers Dr. Packard revokes the recommenda-
ted above, for the burning of stubble in fall, and describes it on the contrary as a
> likely to be productive of the greatest harm; but not on the ground that the
s, which it is intended to destroy, have most of them given exit to the fly, but
n ground which seems to me wholly untenable, viz: that the harm done by the
ion of the parasites must far overbalance the benefit done by burning the
s in the field.

40

and on the Bel of June, flaxseeds were sent me from Macoupin
county. June 12th, flaxseeds occurred in rye near Granville, Put.
nam county, and on the 26th they were found upon the bases
of fallen stalks of wheat in fields near Warsaw, in Hancock county.
On the 29th and BOfch flaxseeds still unhatched, containing living
larvae, occurred in fields at Godfrey, in Madison county, and near
Jersey ville; and on the 4th of July they were found in the ripened
fields of wheat and in stubble at DuQuoin, in Perry county.

Careful sweeping of the infested fields at Warsaw, Jerseyville and
DuQuoin. yielded no adults. At Effingham, on the 7th, great num¬
bers of the flaxseeds, some of which were demonstrated to contain
living larvae, were found on the stubble, and also upon the stand¬
ing grain where harvesting was in progress. In badly infested fields
they collected upon the platforms of the harvesters in surprising
numbers. At Anna, in Union county, on the 9th, the flaxseeds
were also noticed in the stubble, and at Villa Ridge, still further
southward, specimens were obtained at the same date, which after¬
ward yielded the adult insect in our breeding cages. On the 20th
July I made an examination of flaxseeds collected at DuQuoin on
the 4th of that month, and found the larvae in them still living, and
not yet pupated. Some of these living larvae were dissected, and it
is certain that they had not been parasitized. On the second of
August, at Anna, careful and long continued sweeping of the fields
failed to procure any of the imagos. On the 5th August flaxseeds
were again obtained from fields in DuQuoin, and on the 7th of that
'month others were sent me from the same locality which contained
living larvae, although many of them were empty shells, from which
parasites had already escaped.

On the 6th September I received from an assistant in the field
about fifty flaxseeds collected at Centralia, which I carefully exam¬
ined. All but six of these were empty shells, and only one con¬
tained a demonstrably living and active larva. Three at least of
the other five were dead, while the other two were soft and possi¬
bly living, but if so, dormant.

In sweepings sent from wheat stubble near DuQuoin, which had
been previously infested by the fly, the adult insect was at this time
found very sparingly indeed. Our next observations in this year
were made Dec. 9, at Anna, where larvae and flaxseeds were abund¬
ant, and on the 27th of that month their , occurrence at Albion, m
White county, was noted by a correspondent of the office.

1884.

Commencing April 9 of the present year the occurrence of flaxseeds
was reported from Marshall county by a correspondent of the office,
and on the 19th of May young larvae, some of which were but a few
hours hatched, were found by Mr. John Marten, a former assistant oi
my predecessor, Dr. Thomas. On the 21st of this month, larvae
were collected at Marshall by an assistant, which, kept in breeding
cages at the ordinary temperature of the air, yielded adult flies on
the 20tli of June. On the 25th of May both larvae and llav-
seeds were obtained at Robinson, Crawford county, and on the Id
at Mount Carmel. Flaxseeds were found at Carmi and Eldorado

41

clays later, and both free larvae and flaxseeds were received
. i correspondent at Robinson on the 2d of June.

the following day flaxseeds were received from West Union
rk county, which, placed in open fruit jars and moistened
rly, being otherwise exposed to conditions as exactly similar to
prevailing in the fields as I was able to supply in the Labo-
;j yielded adults from the 22d to the 28th June, while flaxseeds
eel at the same date from Villa Ridge, in extreme Southern
3, gave the imago from the 17th to the 20th of that month,
eels obtained on the 4th at Anna, in Union county, yielded
ult on the 22d. Flaxseeds occurred again on the 6th and
DuQuoin, and stalks received from Robinson on the 14th
tied a number of them and a single partly grown, naked larva,
eds were collected at Robinson on the 17th, at Anna on the
ng day, at Robinson on the 20th, and at Anna on the 24th.

cimens of flaxseeds received from Robinson on this date
the adidt fly in our breeding cages four days later. In Mar¬
in the 25th, and at Robinson on the 27th and 30th, flaxseeds
Collected. One of those from the place last mentioned was
| when opened, to contain a living larva ; but others were evi-
dried up, and several had already yielded parasites when
ed. Those obtained from Marshall on the 25th were found in
me condition, several containing living larvm and others being

up or parasitized.

*1 .

the 28tli imagos were noted pairing in the breeding cages, nav-
st emerged from the flaxseeds obtained June 3 at West Union,
na, on the 1st July, a most thorough and long continued search
viously infested fields was made for the adult fly, the stubble
ill standing grain being carefully swept by us and the shocks
in being examined at great length. Situations adjacent to the
fields likely to yield the fly were also carefully gone over ;
aile numbers of other species of Cecidomyidae were collected,
single adult Hessian fly resulted from this search.

: seeds still continued to come in" from Eastern Illinois, — some
shells and others containing healthy larvae being received on
t and 5th July from Marshall, on the 7th from Villa Ridge,
a the 12th from Anna.

the 5th of this month a most extended and careful search was
again in wheat fields near Anna by Mr. C. W. Butler, with
me negative results as those of July 1, and my faithful cor-
dents, E. C. Madison, of Marshall, and Thomas S. Moore, of
;on, both reported that they were unable to find the imago,
necl flaxseeds still occurred at Anna on the 12th, and on the
>f that month my assistant, Mr. W. H. Garman, carefully,
r several hours, searched the straws and stubble with the view
ing the possibility of the occurrence of a second brood of
ds in the. upper part of the straw, — the descendants of the
merging in May and June. None occurred in the upper joints;
3r, although they were still abundant at the bases of the

42

On the 20th October of this year, the work of this fly was again
evident at Robinson, larvae occurring in three fields out of ten ex-
amined by my friend Mr. Moore.

As confirming the evidence from our breeding cages of the early
hatching of a considerable percentage of the flaxseeds of the spring
brood, I quote from a private letter from Mr. John Marten.* He
says, '‘I have found but few of the spring brood of larvae, as I wrote
you in my last, and no flaxseeds ; but on June 8, I found an adult
female sticking in the oil on my lamp in my room. During the
subsequent week I found four others on lamps. I was not well
enough at the time to go to the fields, or I might possibly be able
to report something more interesting now.”

I append a tabular exhibit of the observations reported above in
order to bring the details more clearly under the eye.

* Mr. Marten was for a long time assistant of Dr. Cyrus Thomas, my predecessor in
the office of State Entomologist, and is in every way an intelligent and competent ob¬
server, thoroughly acquainted with the Hessian fly, in whose midst he has lived for years.

CALENDAR.

1888.

a

o

Date.

Larvae.

Flaxseeds.

Imagos.

Remarks.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8
9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20
21
22
23

April
( <

May
< <

June

i i

July

Aug.

Sept.

Dec.

• «

c •

10..

14..

5..

17..

24..

28..

3..

DuQuoin

Odin .

Decatur .

12

4-15

Centralia

Centralia,

Odin .

Macoupin Co. ...
Granville .

Centralia

Centralia

DuQuoin

DuQuoin

26

29

30

4
7
9

20

5
7

6
6

9..

27..

Anna

Warsaw ...

Godfrey....

Jerseyville

DuQuoin ..

Effingham.

Villa Ridge

DuQuoin...

DuQuoin.. .

DuQuoin...

Centralia..

Kansas

Anna...

Albion

Centralia

Breeding Cage
Breeding Cage

Bred from No. 3

Bred from No. 3

Living larvae

Living larvte
Living larvae,

1884.

24

Apr. 9

Marshall .

25

May 19..

Albion

26

“ 21..

Marshall .

27

“ 25..

Robinson .

Robinson .

8

“ 26..

Robinson .

Robinson .

9

“ 27..

Mt. Carmel .

Mt. Carmel .

0

“ 30..

Carmi .

3l

“ 31..

Eldorado . .

32

June 2..

Robinson.

Robinson .

33

“ 3..

West Union .

34

3..

Villa Ridge .

35

4..

Anna .

Just hatched ..

Calendar — Continued.

Larva.

Flaxseeds.

Imago.

DuQuoin .

Villa Ridge .

DuQuoin., .

• •

Robinson .

Robinson .

Robinson .

/ ....

Anna .

Villa Ridge .

Robinson .

Marshall .

Anna .

West LTnion .

Robinson .

Robinson .

Anna .

Marshall .

Robinson .

Robinson .

West Union .

Robinson .

Marshall .

Marshall .

Villa Llidge .

Anna .

..

Robinson .

Remarks.

Young . . .

Bred from No. 34 .

Bred from No. 34 .

Bred from No. 2G .

Bred from No. 35 .

Bred from No. 33 .

Contained liv’g larvae

Bred from No. 47 .

Bred from No. 33. In¬
sects in copulo .

Living iarvm .

Living larvae .

mgh on a subject as difficult and important as that of the
imer history of the Hessian fly it is probably best to await
nal data before attempting to establish a final conclusion, it
e admitted that the facts above stated strongly suggest the
esis of a normal completion, before harvest, of the transfor-
s of a considerable part of the destructive spring brood of
ivse.

with a sense of disappointment that I make this statement,

; condition of things greatly diminishes the value of mid-
I r measures for the protection of our wheat fields, if it does
ieed render them almost wholly useless. While undoubtedly
rning of the stubble in the summer and other measures of
t must destroy a considerable number of larvae and pupae, it
possible that enough adult flies will have escaped before har-
continue the species in scarcely diminished numbers.

ay be objected that the earliest imagos that escape from the
brood of larvae may immediately lay eggs, and thus give
to an intercalated brood of larvae which form flaxseeds before
;, — perhaps in immature and stunted plants ; but it was to
ant above all others that our attention was especially given
ar; plants of all ages, from infested fields, being examined
idreds at a time, with almost microscopic thoroughness and
ith the express purpose (and I may add the lively hope) of
Ting such young larvae. The results of all this labor were,
t, absolutely negative. Not a single larva was found which
ued at all possible to suppose could have descended from
later origin than those escaping from the flaxseeds which
ent the winter in the fields.

44

PARASITES.

Surprisingly little of a definite and accurate character lias been
published on the parasites of this interesting and important insect
and nearly all the facts now current have been derived from almost
the first competent observer of the fiy in America. The only species j
carefully described is Semiotellus destructor, first noticed by Say. and I
studied, as to its habits and life history, with some care by him.
and especially by Prof. Herrick, of Yale College in 1838. One other
parasite, Platygaster error, has been described by Fitch, but its life
history has been only imperfectly worked out and inaccurately
stated. A few other forms have been mentioned, without names or
full descriptions, by Herrick, Fitch and Cook.

The data herein presented are in themselves very incomplete, but
are as full and definite as I have been able to make them, with
two years study, in respect to the life histories of the parasitic
species found to affect the Hessian fly in Illinois in any important
way.

The common Semiotellus destructor is here reclescribed in detail
and descriptions are given of three new species bred from infested
wheat, and mention is made of two others not fully studied,— and
for all these species I have given full abstract of our breeding cage
records.

It is proper to say that, as my studies were made with principal
reference to the life history of the Hessian fly itself, I was especially
solicitous to depart as little as might be from the natural condi¬
tions of the species, and hence did not remove the flaxseeds from
the straws, as would have been desirable for the breeding of the
parasites only. From this it results that some of the parasitic
species may have infested other wheat insects than the Hessian by,
Indeed, as Eupelmus allyni appeared quite frequently in these breed¬
ing cages, and as this species has been supposed to be parasitic on the
wheat straw worm only, it is not impossible that some of our straws
were inhabited by this last species also, and that some of the new
parasites herein mentioned belong to Isosoma.*

Semiotellus destructor, Say.

Order Hymenoptera. Family Chalcidid^.

This is far the commonest of the parasites of the Hessian fiy in
Illinois, 85 per cent, of those appearing in our breeding cages (ex¬
cluding Eupelmus) belonging to this species. It has been repeatedly
described by Say, Fitch and Packard, but so imperfectly or inac¬
curately that I have not found it easy to identify the species posi¬
tively. Not doubting, however, that our most abundant form belongs
here, I give a fresh description of both sexes, carefully drawn Iron
alcoholic specimens.

*Prof. Riley writes me that he has repeatedly bred Eupelmus allyni from the Hessian
fly.

DESCRIPTION.

—A minute black bronzed insect, 1.9 mm. long, with the

n blotched with white at base.

_ __

bronzed greenish black, thickly coarsely punctured on all
3sed surfaces, convex before without frontal grooves, concave
.64 mm. wide by .68 mm. in vertical depth ; eyes and ocelli
1, the former oval in outline, the posterior margin more
than the anterior, broadest above the middle, A7 mm. in
diameter, .15 mm. in antero-posterior : ocelli in a triangle
vertex, lateral ones a little nearer to the eye than to each

mse inserted below the middle of the front, 1.4 mm. long,
ed, counting the minute third and fourth joints and not
g a minutely rudimentary apical one; four basal joints
remainder black, joints from the fifth to. the tip densely
with erect black hairs, each segment with a ring of a few
pressed yellow hairs; the scape or first joint is about .8 mm.
th, second joint one-third that length, third and fourth
measuring together about .08 mm., visible only under
power, the fifth measuring .11 mm. in length. The
'rom the fifth to the tenth are slightly compressed, and
y decrease in length ; the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth
ire more closely united, forming a cylindrical club with a
tip, the thirteenth joint being conical. The first joint of
) is about equal to the joint preceding. The minute apical
is about .06 mm. in length.

horax is .9 mm. in length, about half as wide in front as
idest between bases of front wings, where it measures .68
Color bronzed greenish black on all surfaces, densely
punctured everywhere, like the head, and provided, as is
d, with scattered minute yellowish hairs. Thoracic [sutures
4y impressed. Prothorax with hind margin deeply concave,
es with deep obliquely vertical grooves. Mesotliorax with
transverse sutures in front of the scutellum ; parapsidal
extending half way to this transverse suture. Sides of
>rax widely excavated obliquely forward and upward from
8B. Scutellum somewhat vaulted, narrowed forwards, post¬
al narrow. Mesonotum declivous, convex from side to side,
mtline nearly straight.

5 coarsely hairy throughout; front wings 1.4 mm. long, .64
de at widest part, hind wings .1 mm. in length ; stigmal
of fore wing nearly as long as costal vein, expanded at tip ;
al vein vanishing insensibly towards tip of wing. Very
•aces of median and submedian veins may be made out by
animation.

slender, posterior pair longest, ends of tibiae nearly attain-
tip of the abdomen ; spurs of middle tibiae stout, curved at
rly as long as first joint of tarsi. Tarsi all similar, spinous
", first joint longest, others shortening to the fourth, the fifth
3 long as the second. Tibiae all white, tarsi white except

46

the last joint, which is dusky. All the femora more or less dusky
pale at each extremity ; trochanters pale, the coxae bronzed like the
thorax.

Abdomen shining, impunctured, about 1.2 mm. long by .45 mm.
wide, oval in outline, narrowing toward either extremity ; seven dis¬
tinctly visible segments, the first about as long as the two following,
second short, seventh conical. General color of the abdomen piceous
or bronzed black, first segment bronzed green at the extreme base
with a quadrate yellow patch above, which sometimes extends on
to the second. A similar but paler patch beneath, covers the first
three or four ventral segments. All the^segments are sparsely hairy
upon the posterior half.

Female. — Th.e female is extremely similar to the male, but may be
distinguished at once by the abdomen and the antennae, the former
being more broadly ovate, more acutely pointed, and bearing a sting¬
like ovipositor beneath, usually indeed exserted at the tip. The color
of the abdomen is darker, the pale area at the base being smaller,
less definite and of a chestnut tint. The antennae are pale through¬
out, somewhat shorter than those of the male, with the joints less
hairy and more distinct. The club is pointed ovate, shorter than that
of the male, and not distinguishable into separate joints, so that the
recognizable segments in the female antennae are eleven in number
instead of thirteen, as in the male. The club is equal in length to
the two joints preceding, the tip acuminate and slightly recurved.

LIFE HISTORY.

Our earliest* specimens of this species were obtained June 3 from
Hessian fly larvae, collected on that date at Villa Ridge, in extreme
Southern Illinois. The earliest collection from which this parasite
emerged was made on the 27th May at Mt. Carmel, the adult Semio-
tellus appearing on the 22d of the following month. The latest ex¬
amples of this species to appear in our breeding cages emerged
July 26, from flaxseeds collected on the 24th June at Anna, Illinois.
Further details respecting the periods of this species will be found
in the table at the end of this paper.

It is worthy of note that although our breeding cages containing
straw and stubble infested by the Hessian fly were all reserved for
more than a year, no examples of this parasite occurred therein in
spring, although by Herrick it is reported to emerge at that time.

Pteromalus pallipes, n. s.

(Plate IV. Fig. 1.)

A short thick species with the head broader than the thorax, the
abdomen ovate and obtuse. Head and thorax bronzed black,

* Although it has been heretofore supposed that the winter brood of the larva; of tin
Hessian fly was never parasitized. I find among our breeding cage notes an entry to uy
effect that six living chalcid parasites were taken on the 10th May. 1883, from a cage 'i-
Which multitudes of Hessian flies had been bred, the wheat containing them having Dee
collected April 10, atCentralia, Ill.,— a date so early that only the winter brood of l it *
could possibly have occurred in it. I greatly regret that, owing to a removal of
I can not get access at this writing to the specimens on which this statement was case •

I set everywhere with punctures of medium size. The occiput
e dorsum of the thorax with a few scattered appressed hairs,
mt of the head is vertically grooved for the long first joints
(antennae. Eyes pale red, mouth parts brown. The antennae
Dut as long as the head and the thorax, thirteen- jointed, the
)int pale yellow, second joint dusky, the remaining joints
The first joint is about equal in length to the four follow-
le third short, that and fourth together shorter than the
and about equal to the fifth, the joints widening from the
| ) the fifth, (except the third which is not wider than the
), the following joints to the eleventh of about equal diameter,
tapering rapidly, the last three not being clearly distin-
1. The first joint is nearly smooth, the second somewhat
all the others black-pubescent, each with a transverse ring of
ppressed yellow bristles.

meso-scutellum is broadly rounded behind, the sides with an
ar excavation, the meta-scutellum with an elevated margin and
lent median carina. The sides of the metathorax are densely
gl with long black hairs.

gs transparent, veins dusky yellowish, the post-costal and
Jl of equal length, about two-thirds as long as the costal,
membrane sparsely pubescent, the veins with a row of stiff,
(lack hairs. Patagia dusky yellowish.

legs are pale yellow throughout, except the coxae, which
the body color. The abdomen is smooth and shining
; the under sides of the three posterior segments which are
ent. It is black above and piceous beneath, the edges of
gments being somewhat tinged with brown.

fcth, 2.5 mm. ; head, .95 mm. wide ; thorax, .7 mm. by 1.06 mm.
jintennae, 1.25 mm. ; wing, 1.9 mm.

specimens from which the above description was drawn, were
ged and were bred June 5, 1884, from flaxseeds and larvae
Hessian fly, obtained at DuQuoin, in Perry county, July 4,

/

breeding cage from which these specimens emerged yielded
ler parasites, but, when examined, were found to contain
pupa cases punctured as if for the escape of parasitic Al¬
together with a few containing dried up larvae.

Pteromalus ? fulvipes, n. s.

i

(Plate IV. Fig. 2.)

er this head I describe, with some hesitancy, several speci-
whose generic relations it is difficult to make out, owing to
:t that all the examples obtained were wingless. The essential
lance to Pteromalus leads me, however, to place the species
i that genus.

| head and thorax a dark bronzed green, and the abdomen
dark steel-blue. The head is not grooved in front for the
int of the antennae, but is, like the thorax, thickly punctured

F

48

throughout, somewhat more coarsely so than in P. pallipes. The
dorsal outline of the metascutellum is concave, the metathorax
being nearly truncate posteriorly, owing to a tuberosity projecting
> from its upper posterior part. Metascutellum not margined or
carinate. Antenna; eleven (thirteen) jointed, joints distinct except the
third and the last three. In the female the first joint is pale yel¬
low, the second dark fuscous, and the remaining joints black. All
but the first thickly black pubescent, those beyond the second
having each a circlet of long appressed hairs.

In the male the antennae are pale yellow throughout, similar in
appearance to those of the female, but with the last two joints
closely united, forming a compact ovate club. In both sexes two
minute sub- joints occur between the second and third joints. Wings
in all the specimens seen rudimentary, legs pale, the coxae, femora
and upper half of the tibiae, tawny yellow, the remainder of the leg
being pale yellow, except the tip of the tarsus, which is. dusky.
Abdomen smooth, blue black above, lightening into piceous beneath,
ovate, acute, in the female; smaller, obtuse, and more nearly oval in
the male.

Total length 2.12 mm. ; head, .7 mm. wide ; thorax, .45 mm. ; abdo¬
men of female, .62 mm. by 1.05 mm. ; antennae, .82 mm.

This species appeared in our breeding cages of the Hessian fly
during the months of June, July and August, in 1883 and 18S4.
Flaxseeds collected August 7, 1883, at BuQuoin, from stubble in
the field, yielded the parasite August 17 ; parasites emerged June
21 from flaxseeds collected at Marshall on the 21st of May; those
obtained at Robinson, in Clark county, May 25, emerged from the
flaxseed June 20; and others obtained at Robinson, June 14, gave
the parasites July 10.

Tetrastichus carincitus, n. s.

A slender, smooth, dark steel-blue species, 2 mm. in length, with
pale legs, four- jointed tarsi and eight-jointed antennae.

The head is very short, not wider than the somewhat slender
thorax, impunctured, as are also the thorax and abdomen. Eyes
large, dark red, broadly elliptical, occupying the whole longitudinal
diameter of the head and even encroaching upon its posterior sur¬
face. Front broadly bisulcate for the reception of the. scapes of the
antennEe. Antennae short, eight- jointed, joints very distinct, except
those of the ovate club, (three in number), which are very closely
compacted. Second joint shorter than the third, which is longer
than fourth and fifth, these being subequal. First and second joints
of the club nearly equal, thicker than the preceding. Flagellum ol
the antennae pale, provided with a few erect black hairs, and long
appressed yellow ones.

Prothorax is very short ; the mesoseutum very long, narrowing
posteriorly, when it is broadly truncate against the scutellum, regu¬
larly convex, minutely carinate longitudinally on the middle lme,
parapsidal grooves complete. Scutellum vaulted, with two longitud¬
inal carinae. Abdomen of female pointed ovate, broadest in iron
of the middle, somewhat flattened above.

I

49

rather long, pale yellow ; fore tarsi dusky, middle and hind
isky at tip; all the tarsi four-jointed, first joint of front and
tarsi shorter or no longer than the second, that of hind tarsi
j of all.

sntire surface is very sparsely provided with coarse yellowish
ongest and most numerous at the tip of the abdomen.

hi vein very stout, provided with unusually long hairs; stig-
hn short; postcostal nearly obsolete; no trace of median or
ian.

species was bred with the preceding in our breeding cages
le collections made at Anna June 24.

summary exhibit of the facts concerning the life histories of
cies above described, I append a table showing in detail the
f collection and emergence for each, including also, for con-
e sake, Eupelmus allyni, from the same breeding cages.

CALENDAR.
Semiotellus destructor.

Place of Collection.

Date of Collec¬
tion.

Date of Emergence.

pbinson .

June 22,1884 .

est Union .

Lt,

June 3,1884....

22, 1884 .

“ 28,1884. .

11a Ridge . . .

3,1884....

July 1,1884...

11a Ridge .

“ 3,1884....

J une 3, 1884

[ina .

“ 4,1884....

June 13— July 18, 1884 .

ina .

“ 6,1884....

June 22 — July 10 18)44

taQuoin . .

“ 7,1884....

June 20, 1884

ina .

“ 24,1884....

July 10-26,1884

obinson .

“ 27,1884....

June 27,1884 ...

obinson .

“ 30,1884....

July 10,1884.

irshall .

July 7,1884....

July 7,1884

Pteromalus pallipes.

lQuoin .

July 4.1883....

June 5, 1884 . .

Pteromalus fulvipes.

irshall .

May 21,1884 _

June 21,1884 .

•binson .

May 25-6, 1884.. .

June 20-1.1884

• binson .

June 14,1884. ..

July 10,1884

irshall .

June 25,1884 _

July 26,1884....

lQuoin .

Aug. 7,1883....

Aug. 17,1883 _

Tetrastichus

CARINATUS.

ft

na .

June 24,1884....

July 10-26,1884.

-4

50

Calendar — Continued.
Eupelmus allyni.

Cata¬

logue

No.

Place of Collection.

Date of Collec¬
tion.

Date of Emergence.

2194....

Villa RidcP _ _ _

June

3, 1884....

June

13- July 1,1884....

Arm a. . . .

4,1884....

t (

13— “ 18,1884....

9'MQ

Anna. _ _ . .... . .

6.1884....

22— “ 10,1884 .

7,1884....

20,1884 .

24,1884....

July

t «

10-26, 1884, .

4566 .. ..

4349.. ..

25,1884....

26.1884 .

t <

30,1884....

t t

10,1884 . .

July

7,1884....

i t

7,1884 .

4'JOO • • • •

3806....

Aug.

7,1883....

Aug.

17,1883 .

As a general result of these observations, we may say that, with
the single exception of Pteromalus pallipes, all the parasites bred by
us from wheat containing the Hessian fly emerged before the August
following the laying of the eggs from which they hatched, and that
the former species survived the winter in the flaxseeds of the dies,
not emerging until the succeeding summer.

4. Note on the Wheat Midge.

( Cecidomyia tritici, Kirby.)

Order Diptera. Family Cecidomyid^e.

(Plate IV. Fig. 3.)

This frightfully destructive enemy of wheat appeared during the
last summer in extreme Northern Illinois in numbers and under cir¬
cumstances to demand the attention of the economic entomologist;
and although its life history and habits have long been well known,
its occurrence in the West in numbers sufficient to attract attention
has been so rare, that very little is known of it by the farmers oi
our State. It consequently seems best to give here a brief report
of the observations made this summer in the wheat fields of Mc¬
Henry county, together with a synopsis of its life history and such
recommendations of remedial measures as are warranted by our
present knowledge of the insect.

My attention was first called to its prevalence in that, region by
a letter, dated July 25, from Mr. R. W. Lane, of Chicago, who
transmitted heads of wheat from Genesee Depot, Wisconsin, which
I found to be seriously infested by the midge. Thinking it possi¬
ble that the same insect was at work in adjacent parts of Ilhnob,
I visited the fields of the Fox River valley from Elgin northward,
on the 80th and Blst of that month. In every field but one which
I entered in the vicinity of McHenry and Ringwoocl, where spring
wheat only was raised, I found the midge larva upon the heac s
wheat, usually in only here and there a blackened head, m son

however, these damaged and shriveled heads were so numer-
to have apparently reduced the crop from ten to twenty-five
it. ; an injury which the farmers had noticed, but which none
en able to account for to their satisfaction, the presence of
dge having entirely escaped them. The heads upon which it
id were those which had filled imperfectly — sometimes con-
no plump kernels, and sometimes fairly well filled except at
of the ear.

1 the account of its life history, given later, it will be seen
ie midge was now near the end of its life above ground, and
bt by far the greater part of those which had previously in-
the wheat had already entered the earth. The wet weather
preceding week had in fact supplied the conditions most fav-
to this migration of the larvae.

e were not, on an average, more than three or four midge
o a head, and these were commonly found on the outside of
me, only occasionally on the kernel within. The observa-
ere given should at least serve to put the farmers of the
n part of the State on their watchful guard against this in-
he most dreaded and destructive foe of spring wheat known
sulture ; and in the hope of making them personally ac¬
id with this enemy of their harvests, I append here a suffi-
escription and figures to enable the reader to recognize the
in its various stages, and such an account of its life history
justify the recommendations made for the limitation of its
!;e.

DESCRIPTION.

—The eggs, as laid upon the wheat, are scarcely more than
redth of an inch in length, about one-sixth as thick as long,
ng oval form, very nearly cylindrical, with rounded ends,
surface is smooth and shining, and they are almost colorless-
with a faint tinge of pale red. When several are together,
ass, they appear of a deeper reddish yellow color.

j — The larvae are, at first, less than a hundredth of an inch
ssembling the egg closely, from which, however, they may be
y distinguished by the fine transverse lines separating the
ts. When under examination the larva is usually quiescent
placed in water, when it immediately awakes from its seern-
ep. When wet and in motion (alternate contraction and
ion) several parts of its structure not perceptible before are
visible.

juiescent larva is about three times as long as broad, meas-
i)8 in. by .03 in., and is oval, thickest in the middle and slightly
l in each direction, the ends being rounded or but faintly
i -pointed. It is slightly depressed and on the under side very
bly flattened, but with no indications of feet. Its surface is
y granular, like that of the common earth worm of our gar-
: ad also appears to be slightly coated over with a glutinous
a, whereby it adheres to a needle which touches it, and often
vo or more worms are placed in contact they in dying be-
I .ued to each other. Its joints are indicated by very fine im-

52

pressed transverse lines, whereby it is divided into_ ten or twelve
segments of equal length, except at the ends where it is difficult to
definitelv distinguish them. It is of a rich yellow color varying in
different individuals from lemon to orange-yellow, and usually a
small greenish or blackish cloud is seen placed lengthwise in the
middle of the body on its under side, which is evidently caused by
internal alimentary matter.

The moving larva is of a more elongated and elliptic form, taper¬
ing to an acute point at its fore end and much more blunt behind.
Thirteen segments are now plainly to be seen. Of these the three
first and the last have a smooth surface and are whitish and semi¬
transparent, only the nine intervening opes being yellow and with
their surface granulated. Each segment is fringed at its end with a
row of small hairs like eyelashes, which are continued along the
whole length of the edge. The head is conical, longer than
broad, tapering to an acute point in front, and has a depression on
each side near the middle where is inserted a short thread-like pro¬
cess, forming with its fellow a pair of horns, which are articulated
at their bases. The last segment is cut off transversely in a straight
line ; but as the worm crawls, when it draws the hind part of its
body forward with each step it takes, this hind end becomes strongly
concave. When the worm is dry and endeavoring to crawl on a dry
surface, this end of its body becomes wholly different. It is then
strongly concave, its angles acute and tooth-like, with two similar
teeth between them which may be of the same size or retracted,
showing their points only. On each side of this last segment a
rounded tubercle is sometimes protruded from beneath, bearing a
conical point and- resembling a proleg. Under the same circum¬
stances the head is wholly retracted, leaving only the ends of its
horns visible.

PiiVa. — The cocoons in which the larvae enclose themselves resemble
little round grains smaller than a mustard seed. When coated
with dirt, as they usually are, it is almost impossible to discover
these cocoons even with the aid of a magnifying glass. The naked
larvae that are sometimes found in the earth in the spring are
doubtless those which remained in the wheat after its harvesting.

Imago. — The following remarks condensed from Fitch’s Report
will constitute a sufficient description of the imago to enable the
intelligent observer to recognize it, especially when taken in con¬
nection with the figures, copied on a larger scale from Fitch s plate.

The individuals of this species differ so widely as to color, size,
and perfection of organs and members, that no study of those
points will enable one to distinguish this fly from other species
when specimens are gathered in other situations than on whea .
We can then recognize it only when it shows the following essential
characters :

The body nearly one-tenth of an inch long, bright orange or
lemon-yellow, and tarnished or slightly smoky on the back, forwar
of the wings ; the wings clear and glassy and having a small cross
vein near their base ; the antennas about as long as the body am
composed of twelve oblong joints which are narrower in tiieu
middles and separated, by short pedicels.

53

are assured a midge-fly is this species when it possesses all
characters. But many flies also pertain to this species which
fully possess them, some departing from the standard in one,
in another particular, whereby it happens that no one of
characters is constant and found in all the members of this
. All the bright yellow midges which occur in our wheat
luring the latter half of June may be regarded as the wheat

i

LIFE HISTORY.

fly or perfect insect makes its appearance in ordinary seasons
h before the middle of June, in the latitude of New York, but
ching varies with the latitude and the progress of vegetation.
ool season hastens, a cold season retards insects and vegeta-
; ike. Under ordinary circumstances this fly lives about three
but if the season be wet and the fly numerous it is seen
much longer, sometimes until the middle of August. Mois-
Lf its life, dryness smothers and suffocates it, consequently it
remain upon the wheat heads during the heat of the day,
fits upon the lower part of the stalks until the sun begins to
, when it returns to its operations upon the heads. On damp
days the insect is as active in the day as at night, and
shaded by trees, or wheat on low lands, are the most severely
ill. If at the time the fly is abroad, depositing its eggs, the
r be extremely dry, the crop escapes ; if unusually wet
r prevails, the grain will be severely injured.

le deposition of its eggs the only aim of the fly seems to be
Lee them in some crevice of the headlet where they will be
ratively secure from enemies, and sheltered from the sun and
lich would shrivel them. From the form apd character of
lipositor it is evident that the fly is restricted to crevices for
posit of its eggs. They are, perhaps, most commonly placed
little orifice at the summit of the outermost chaff, but may
ad in any narrow opening upon the headlets which the fly is
> discover. Sometimes a single egg is found, but they are
!r in clusters of from two to ten. The young larvae appear in
a week after the egg is laid. In whatever situation hatched,
iust find their way at once to the germ or kernel from which
erive sustenance. Attaching themselves first at the base of
j rnel they afterwards, as they increase in size, usually with-
arther up the side. The larvae mature in about three weeks
ay often be seen descending to the ground as early as July
ile some of the parent flies are still depositing their eggs.
}f the larvae throw themselves to the earth with a skip from
irds; others crawl down enveloped in a pellicle of water; and
hers crawl in a serpentine track till the globule of water in
the larva is moving becomes so large that it is upon the
>f running down the straw, when the larva lets go its hold,
carried to the earth.

a mistake to suppose that only the larvae which go into the
before harvest live and produce the flies of the following
Experiments indicate that few if any of the larvae would be

k

i

54

dead at the end of even six months. Their vitality is astonishing.
No extremity of hunger or thirst seems to kill them and water does
not drown them. They are perfectly amphibious.

INJURIES TO GRAIN.

This insect effects its injury by sucking the milky juice from the
young kernel, without any apparent gnawing of the surface, thus
causing the grain to shrivel and blight, the heads remaining sub¬
stantially unfilled. Not unfrequently the crop is. utterly ruined, and
the loss "in whole states, like New York and Ohio, has occasionally
reached a total of two-thirds or three-fourths the entire average
yield.

*

REMEDIES.

No application of remedial or preventive measures has hitherto
arrested the ravages of the midge, although it is not impossi¬
ble that they have somewhat mitigated the gravity of its attack.
The only ones hitherto suggested which even promise usefulness are
those of destroying the screenings of the mill when the wheat is
threshed and cleaned immediately after harvest; or, for the pur¬
pose of getting rid of the midge larvae remaining on the grain, that
of deep plowing of the old fields of wheat with the hope that the
larvae remaining in the ground may thus be buried beyond the hope
of resurrection, when their transformations are completed the follow¬
ing year.

Besides these, we have the heroic remedy of refraining from the
cultivation of wheat where the success of the crop is threatened by
the previous appearance of the midge, — doubtless the most effective
measure provided it be generally adopted.

5. The Wheat Bulb Worm.

(. Meromyza americana, Fitch.)

Order Diptera. Family Oscinid.®.

(Plate IV. Figs. 4-9.)

Since the outbreak of this insect in Fulton county, described in
my report for last year, it seems to have entirely disappeared ironi
that locality, not a single field, this year, having given the slightest
evidence of its presence; a fact doubtless due to the destruction
effected by the parasite described by me in the article above men¬
tioned.

Indeed, in all our observations and collections, made in different
parts of the State during the past season, no evidence was seen o
anything more than trivial injury by this insect until late in Octo er,
when Mr. N. S. King, of Normal, called my attention to a field oi
rye which had been mysteriously checked in its growth and seeme
likely to be entirely ruined. An examination of this field made o

.st October showed that the outer stalks of nearly every
vere dead, although, owing to the recent rains, new leaves
eing sent up from the center of the stool. The stand was
pon the ground, but the owner reported that it had been ex-
at first. On examination, the greater part of the dead stalks
Dund to harbor the larvse of Meromyza about half grown,
taken from the stalks these larvae traveled with considerable
7, using their mouthhooks to draw themselves forward.

field of rye was sown unusually early (July 9) for pasture,
entirely consistent with respect to the conditions favorable to
by this pest. Late sowing remains the only preventive
re against it.

6. The Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm.

( Lapliygma frugiperda, Guen.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Noctuiml

(Plate V. Figs. 1 and 2.)

ibundant southern insect well known in fields of cotton and
i the Southern States, but rarely noted in Illinois, has twice
ed in this latitude in numbers so extraordinary as to attract
l attention and to do very considerable mischief in fields of
winter wheat in autumn, and once in corn fields in midsum-
It first appeared here fifteen years ago, and has since been
nly by entomological collectors, until the autumn of the pres¬
ir. Its occurrence was first announced to me on the 2d Octo-
Mr. H. C. Mclntire, of Topeka, Tazewell county, who wrote :

ave this day mailed you a box containing specimens of a
that is devastating wheat fields in this part of our county,
latch on land that was in oats this last year, and they are
the wheat clean. Hundred of acres in this part of the county
clean at it is possible for land to be, not a green thing left,
land that was in oats, they go to wheat that was in wheat
iting it clean as they go.”

days later, Mr. F. E. Buckley, of Tremont, wrote me:

;ire is a worm working in the winter wheat in this section,

I is causing much consternation among the farmers. Many
* the army worm. In a field of wheat of twenty acres, visited
writer this morning, this pest could be seen working in large
rs. Throughout the entire field there were probably on an
1 3, from a dozen to a dozen and a half worms to the square
rorms from one-fourth to one-half inch in length to full grown
A full grown one is about one and a half inches in length,
semed to have entered my wheat from an adjoining corn field
north, and are working towards the south. In many places
:s is quite thick, as the wheat was sown upon oats stubble,
e worms do not touch the oats. They cut the wheat off close
ground and eat it up clean, or else climb the spears and eat

L"

56

On the 9th I visited Tremont, and saw the species at work in
the wheat fields, although it had at this time nearly closed its
career for the season, by far the greater part of the brood having
entered the earth for pupation. On the 10th and 1 1th, an assistant.
Mr. C. A. Hart, made a trip through the fields of Tazewell and

Mason counties, carefully observing the insect in the field and col-

lecting specimens for the breeding cages.

LITERATURE.

This species was first described by Smith and Abbott, in their
“Rarer Lepidopterous Insects of Georgia,” in 1797, under the name
of Phalcena frugiperda. Its character as an injurious agricultural
insect was first observed in the Southern States.

In a description of the imago and larva by Guenee, in his work

on Noetuelites, Yol. I, p. 159, published at Paris in 1852, the gen¬

eral distribution of the moth of the grass worm is given, as known
at that time.

In the Patent Office Report for 1855, is an article by Townend
Glover on Cotton Insects, containing a somewhat extended account
of this species under the title of “grass worm” or “grass caterpil¬
lar,” but without scientific name. A description of the larva and
moth are given, and figures of these and also of the chrysalis. A
valuable account of the habits of the larvae in Georgia, of their in¬
juries to vegetation, and of their destruction by ants is also given
in this article.

The earliest notice of the occurrence of this species in. the Valley
of the Mississippi with which I am acquainted, is contained in the
first report of Mr. C. Y. Riley, as State Entomologist of Missouri
[1868]. On page 87 of this report he mentions the injuries to wheat
due to this insect, (especially to wheat sown upon oat stubble), and
makes some suggestions of preventive measures against its attacks
in future. The farmers of this region, however, reported to him that
the same insect had been known to attack the wheat in the fall,
for many years previous. Mr. Riley uses no technical name in this
article, but calls the larva the “wheat cutworm.”

The earliest mention of its occurrence as an injurious species in
Illinois, was made by Walsh and Riley, who in a paper on the
boll worm or corn worm ( Heliothis armigera ), published in the
American Entomologist for November, 1869 (Yol. II, p. 42) report
having received our species from Tuscola, in Central Illinois. Not
recognizing it, they regarded it as a new species of Prodenia, and
proposed for it the nam e- Prodenia daggyi. They reported it. as feed¬
ing externally upon the leaves of corn, and likewise eating into the
heart of the young plant.

On page 328 of the same volume, Riley reports the receipt from
many parts of Missouri and Illinois of the “fall army worm, its
injuries being most marked in the northeastern part of Missouri-
He here distinguishes the species from the true army worm, adds
several plants to its dietary, and doubtfully identifies it with the
species previously called by him the “wheat cutworm.”

md *

, < J *
is* /va.*-

• '*.•• i *.
' • • * k * », *.

57

1**1.' 'BSr H

>wing this, on page 363, in the number for December, 1870,
a long article upon this insect, which is there called the “fall
jyorm,” and described and discussed as Prodenia autumnalis n. s.
otli and larva are figured and very fully described, a brief
tion being also given of the pupa. Two varieties of the
are distinguished and described as fulvosa and obscura; the
mce of the worm in destructive numbers during that season
ly parts of Kansas, Illinois and Missouri is noted ; compari-
its characters and habits with those of the common army
s made at length, the probable number of its broods and other
in its life history are discussed, and an account is given of its
of oviposition, and a description of the egg. In Riley’s second
page 41, this species is referred to as Laphygma frugiperda of
and Abbott, but evidently not identified by the writer with
heat cutworm” of his previous report.

is third report, that for 1870, Riley again recurs to the subject,
g the grass worm at length, but now7 under the name of Pro-
autumnalis. This article is substantially the same as that.
/ mentioned, published in the Entomologist and Botanist for
ber 1870, but with some additional details with respect to its
i|3 to vegetation in Missouri and also concerning its life his-
ld pxira sites.

ie observations of Riley are referred to next in the report of
lited States Department of Agriculture for 1871, but no addi-
particulars are there given ; and in the report for 1872 of this
the occurrence is recorded of the “grass army worm,” as it
sd, in Georgia, in destructive numbers, devouring corn, grass,
a crops.

ie Eighth Annual Report of the State Entomologist of Missouri
|S, Mr. Riley again refers to it in an article on the true army
and in a foot note concedes the identity of the species with
alcena frugiperda of Smith and Abbott and the Laphygma
rda of Guenee.

“grass army worm” is first mentioned in the Illinois Reports
seventh of the series, pages 97 and 219, in a brief article by
Chomas, compiled chiefly from previously published notices,
ntaining some additional particulars respecting its life history
; part of Central Illinois where it was first observed.

tion of its carnivorous habit under peculiar circumstances as
id by Mr. Glover in the Report of the Department of Agri-
1 for 1855, (p. 100) is made in Prof. Comstock’s elaborate
upon Cotton Insects published by the United States Depart-
)f Agriculture in 1879.

[ ve also seen a brief notice of its occurrence in cotton fields,
i letin No. 3, of the United States Entomological Commission,
its is barely mentioned as sometimes very abundant in cot-
ids and likely to be mistaken for the true cotton worm

ie American Entomologist for January, 1880, advanced sheets
above article were printed containing the same notice.

58

In the Tenth Eeport from this office, a brief paragraph contain¬
ing no new information is devoted to this species. In the Report
of the Entomologist of the United States Department of Agriculture
printed in the Report of the Department for 1881 and 1882, Mr.
Riley speaks of this species while discussing insect injuries to grow¬
ing rice, noting its occasional injury to that plant, and making sug¬
gestions for the arrest of its ravages when they become serious. In
Mr. J. A. Lintner’s First Report as State Entomologist of New York
(1882), the grass w>rm is simply included in a list of species in-
jurious to the apple.

* ‘ 9

NOMENCLATURE.

This insect, as already remarked, was first described under the
name of Plialcena frugiperda , and has since received the scientific
names of Prodenia daggyi, Riley; Prodenia autumnalis, Riley; and
Laphygma frugiperda, usually incorrectly printed Laphrygma in
the articles of Walsh and Riley.)

Its common names have been equally numerous. The prevalent
one in the Southern States is, apparently, the “grass worm" or
“grass caterpillar,” while to the northward it has been, perhaps
more generally, called the “fall army worm.” Riley first gave to it
the name of wheat cutworm, and by many it. is erroneously styled
the “army worm,” on the supposition that it is the fall brood of
that far more common and destructive pest. In order to avoid this
erroneous association of our species with the common army worm,
it seems to me decidedly best that the name of fall army worm
should be dropped and that of grass ivorm be commonly used in¬
stead.

DESCRIPTION.

Imago. — Front wings narrow, apex broadly rounded. General col¬
or brownish grey, varied with bluish white, dusky and fulvous. A
bluish white patch at the apex of the wing, usually containing a
few black points. Subterminal line arcuate, of the same color, con¬
tinuous with this patch in front, sometimes obsolete at the terminal
angle of the wing, but sometimes complete. Before the subtermi¬
nal line and within the apical patch is a dark blotch upon the
middle of the wing, which sometimes contains one or two triangular
black points. Transverse anterior and transverse posterior line.'
sometimes obsolete, when present, double, zigzag. Base of wing
slightly paler, with a longitudinal black blotch in the middle.
Orbicular spot obliquely oval, pale testaceous, with an oblique mark
of same color immediately without. Reniform spot obscure, distin¬
guished in front and behind by small whitish blotches, the postenoi
linear, often shaped like the letter e, the anterior variable. bp°D
the costal margin, a series of whitish dashes, four of them between
the reniform spot and the apex, and as many more, obsolete, between
that and the base. Terminal line pale, subterminal space dark,
divided into quadrate blotches by the nervures. Fringe paler gra),
the scales tipped with black between the nervures. Under surface

59

but paler anteriorly and terminally and fulvous along the

(Posterior wings translucent, nearly white in some lights,

* in others, dusky on anterior margin and on anterior half
‘i* margin. Head, thorax, and abdomen, nearly uniform gray ;
with a Y-shaped black mark in front.

a. — The larvae collected this autumn were dark, the general
being that of a nearly black insect with a broad buff band
the stigmata, and a narrow yellow subdorsal line. The dor-
black or a very dark brown with a yellow median line, and
ar white lineations along the border of the dorsal space. The
sal band is also black, slightly mottled along the lower margin,

1 3d above by a yellow line which is itself bordered above and
by a shade of deeper black. The stigmatal band is drab,
1 with pale brown ; the stigmata black, partly within the sub-
tal band and partly within the subdorsal band. In one
en, the dorsum is pale chocolate brown with scarcely a
af the median line. The heads in all are jet black ex-
n the sides, behind the eyes, where they are somewhat
:1 with whitish. The Y-shaped mark upon the front is white
:eply impressed. The cervical shield is black, with the median
id subdorsal yellow lines continued upon it. Upon the caudal
the median line widens to a more or less triangular blotch,
ib rum is brown, the basal joint of the antenme is wholly
the second joint white with a black ring at the base, and the
oint brown. The venter is greenish brown beneath the buff
band, becoming nearly yellow towards the bases of the pro-
Each of the latter has a glossy black patch upon its outer
1:3. Between these legs the surface is a brownish green. The
ventral area is finely mottled with yellow.*

DISTRIBUTION.

luenee, this species is reported to occur in North and South
i ?a, and likewise to have been received by him from Tasmania.

following is the description of the larva and pupa of this species given by Mr.
, i page 117 of his Third Report as State Entomologist of Missouri:

a.— Ground color very variable, generally dark and pitchy black when young, but
1 after the last moult from palp brown to pale dirty green, with more or less pink
iv admixed— all the markings produced by fine, more or less intense, brown, crim-
’ yellow mottlings. Dorsum brownish with a narrow line down the middle, ren-
•nspicuous by a darker shade each side of it. A dark, subdorsal band one-third
as each joint is long; darkest at its upper edge, where it is bordered and dis-
i eparated from dorsum by a yellow line which, except on joint 11, where it deflects
i pwards, is quite straight; paler in the middle of each joint. A pale, either buff or
i lored substigmatal band, ^ordered above and below by a narrow, yellow and
I ie. Venter pale. Head pale yellowish brown, with sometimes a tinge of green or
e triangular piece yellowish, the Y-mark distinct and white, the cheeks with four
less distinct lateral brown lines and with dark brown mottlings and nettings,
ecome confluent and form a dark curved mark at the submargin behind the
! ind each side of the stem of the Y. Stigmata large, brown, with a pale annula-
1 just within the lower edge of the dark subdorsal band. Legs either light or
ervical shield darker than body with the narrow dorsal and subdorsal lines ex-
conspicuously through it; anal plate also dark, narrow and margined by the pale
al lines-both plates furnishing stiff hairs, but without tubercles. Piliferous
i s on joints 2 and 3, arranged in a transverse row, and quite large, especially on
i :>n joints 4-10 the superior eight are arranged as follows: 4 in a trapezoid in dor-
1 e, the posterior two as far again from each other as the anterior two, and two
stigmata, one above and one behind; on joint 11 the dorsal 4 are in a square, and
j 12 in a trapezoid, with the posterior and not the anterior ones nearest together;
i acic joints have each a large subventral tubercle just above the legs. Length
inch. Described from numerous specimens.

i— Formed in the ground, without cocoon; of normal form, bright mahogany-
md with a distinct forked point at extremity.

I

60

— r

It seems to be abundant throughout the Southern States, but I do
not know of its occurrence north of the latitude of Central Illinois.
The destructive outbreaks which I have encountered in my reading
on this species, occurred as follows : In 1845 and 1854, in Georgia;
1868, in Central Illinois and Northeastern Missouri; 1870, Kansas!
Illinois and Missouri; 1872, Central Georgia; 1878, Washington
county, Illinois ; and 1881, in Georgia.

In Illinois, this autumn, we found it generally distributed in de¬
structive numbers throughout the eastern two-thirds of Tazewell
county and all of Mason county. From D. S. Harris, of Cuba, in
Fulton county, and from E. Boyer, at Lewiston, I heard that it
had generally prevailed in that county. Letters from Menard, Mason,
Macon and Madison counties to the east and south, _ and from Stark
on the north, reported no occurrence of the worm in those regions,
and fixed the limit of the outbreak in those directions ; but to the
west it extended to the Mississippi river, having been reported by
correspondents in both Pike and Hancock counties. The area
infested was therefore a triangular one, the apex of the triangle
being near eastern McLean county, and the base extending along the
Mississippi from Pike to Hancock.

LIFE HISTORY.

In 1854, the caterpillars were abundant in Georgia during the
last days of September and the beginning of October. “When about
to change,” says Glover, “they formed cocoons of silk under stones
or in the ground near the surface, interwoven with particles of
earth, and came out perfect moths from the 24th to the 80th of
October; and, as these specimens were kept in a room without arti¬
ficial heat, I conjectured that those in the open field would appear
about the same time.” They were also believed to have injured the
rice in that State in June of the same year.

In Missouri, in 1868, the larvae were received by Eiley on the 10th
of October. They came to their growth the latter part of October
and entered the earth, where Eiley believed that they would pass
the winter in the chrysalis state.

In 1869, Walsh and Eiley received specimens from Central Illinois
in July, and the moths made their appearance towards the end of
the same month. ^

In 1870; Eiley expressed the opinion that there are at least two
broods, and probably three or four in a year. “Those worms which
appeared,” he says, “in such multitudes in August and the fore part
of September, in due time produced moths, and these gave birth to
a new generation of worms, which began to make their presence
manifest towards the end of October. And it will be remembered
that, as stated in our last number, we bred the moth as early as
July, in 1868, from worms received from Mr. Daggy.”

In the above year they were noted in Central Missouri on the
26th of August. In 1881 they occurred on the rice in Georgia, in
May, going into the ground for their transformation in the first ana
second weeks in June ; and a later brood occurred in August.

During the present autumn they were first noticed by our corres¬
pondents during the third or fourth week of September, at which time

61

pemed about half grown ; but by October 10 the greater part
1 were already in the ground, where most of them still con-
Few pupse occurred at this time, most being in the short-
irepupal stage. From the larvae bred in the laboratory, col-
from wheat fields October 11 and kept in a room without
il heat, three moths emerged November 8, three more Novem-
and another between that date and the 28th. The remain-
i still alive in the earth as pupae, at the present writing
iber).

pupae in the field were usually buried from one to two inches
i the surface, erect or inclined, in smooth-walled earthen cells,
few had only partly hidden themselves before the necessities
dmorphosis overtook them.

l the above data it is not easy to construct any consistent
I tr of this species, the statement made by Riley in the Ento-
[ it and Botanist for December 1870, seeming to conflict with
ter observations reported. The larvae occurring that year in
;d and the fore part of September” in Missouri, if they really
■ :igin to a second brood, which “began to make their presence
st towards the end of October,” must have produced the
late in September and early in October, — that is at the very
when the brood of larvie observed by us this fall were com-
their growth and entering the ground for pupation, not to
until spring. In fact, the statement above quoted seems in¬
fant with Riley’s own report of his observations for 1868, when
• ’eceived October 10, entered the ground later in the month,
re believed to hibernate as pupre, pupation in 1868 thus being
ynchronous with the occurrence of growing larvae of a later
n 1870. As Riley rests the above cited report for 1870 on
pise data, but makes it only as a general statement, it is
s not impossible that it involves an error of inference. More
ly, however, it represents exceptional conditions. If we thus
h it either as irreconcilable with observed facts, or as an un-
| )ccurrence, we have left sell-consistent proof of three broods
South and of at least two, and possibly three, as far to the
is Central Illinois. The larvae of the first of these appears
r and June, pupating in the latter month and in July, and
the imago late in this month. A second brood of worms oc-
the South in August, and a third late in September and
a October. The last corresponds to the observations in Illi-
is autumn, and probably hibernates as pupae, with scattering
! of autumnal imagos, such as have occurred in our own
g cages this year.

CHARACTER AND EXTENT OF INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

i ar back as 1845, this species was reported to attack corn,
sane, and upland rice.

I eorgia, in 1854, the grass worms devoured grass, young grain,
j nost every green thing which came in their path.

nances have been known,” says Mr. Glover, “in which, urged
r were by necessity and starvation, they actually devoured
of odder that were stored away for winter consumption.

62

Deep ditches cut in the earth to stop them were immediately fille,{
up by the multitudes which fell in and perished, while eager mil-
lions still rushed over the trembling and half-living bridge, formed
by the bodies of their late companions, bent on their mission of
destruction and devastation.

* * * * When pressed by necessity, however, as has

already been stated, they will feed upon cotton leaves. I raised
about thirty of them upon this food alone, merely as an ex¬
periment, and they grew and perfected their transformations, al¬
though appearing to prefer a grass diet if it could be obtained.”

In Missouri, in 1868, they destroyed much young wheat sowed on 1
oats ground, but did not trouble wheat sowed in the same fields on
wheat stubble. They were here found to feed \yith equal relish on
the young plants of both oats and wheat, and a variety of grasses.

In Illinois, in 1870, they fed in July upon the young corn, de¬
vouring the leaves, eating into the heart of the young plant, and,
later, boring large holes through the ears, burrowing them in all
directions. They were also reported to Mr. Riley to feed upon the
leaves of the peach and apple, upon the under sides of which the
imagos laid their eggs. If these were deposited upon other trees,
like the sycamore, the larvae, when they hatched, instead of eating
the leaves, descended from the trees to feed upon more succulent
herbage belowr.

According to the observations in wheat fields reported for 1863,
wheat which had been completely eaten up was not necessarily
ruined, some that had thus been cut off in the fall making a good
stand the next spring, in one instance, at least, being even better
than that which had not been touched.

[On the other hand, Mr. F. E. Buckley, of Tremont,.who was the
first to report the occurrence of these larvae to me this fall, writes
me this spring that the wheat eaten off was almost invariably destroyed
and did not rally again. “On my piece containing twenty acres,” he
says, “one-third of the ground was bare. Wherever the worms
worked, the wheat is killed and did not come up again; and in
other instances I know of in this vicinity, the result was the same.
One piece of about ten acres sown on very rich ground (oat stubble,
of course,) which was completely destroyed, does not show half an
acre of living grain.”]

In Missouri, the worms have also been reported to destroy turnips,
and buckwheat as it was just coming into bloom ; while meadows
were so ravaged that nineteen-twentieths of the grass was considered
entirely killed. Oats and timothy were among the crops destroyed
by them, the former being devoured when it had reached a height
of six inches. Corn silks and soft corn xvere likewise eaten. Corn
fodder, tomatoes, rye, potatoes, and cucumbers have been destroyed
by them in various parts of Missouri, and in some vineyards they
did great damage by gnawing around the stems and causing the
bunches to drop off.

In corn fields, they were said by a correspondent of Mr. Riley s,
not only to devour greedily the leaves and stems, but to bore large
holes through the ears, burrowing them in all directions. In Ceor-
gia, in 1872, besides devouring corn and grass, they destroyed the

68

p in some localities. The following year they made havoc
e winter wheat in Washington county, Illinois, in September,
ug the plants when they were two or three inches high ; and
nail damage was also done to corn. In Mr. Riley’s report
L and 1 82, the first and second generations are said to lay
ggs on the growing stalks of rice. The worms, hatching,
he plants badly, and when in great numbers eat them to the
Grass, cabbage, strawberries, and beans were among the
injured in Georgia during this year by a later brood.

imtral Illinois, this fall, the injuries were confined, as far as
ervation extended, to old oats ground, with the exception of
or two formerly in wheat, on which volunteer grain had
up in extraordinary quantity. We could hear of no damage
in the fields of oats early in the season on ground after-
Visited by the grass worm when cropped in wheat. In very
:ases the loss was total, and many thousand acres of winter
vere entirely killed by the worms in the area infested this
Most of the fields were plowed and resown, but occasionally
s left. The destruction of a whole field was rarely complete,
e area being usually in bands and patches, in the center of
tljhe plants were eaten to the ground, while around the mar-
e damage was less severe. Where the wheat was early sown
d reached a height of five or six inches, stubs of an inch or
ere left by the worms, and from these the plant partly revived.

aumber of worms in a field, as indicated by the pupge dis-
le in the ground, was about six to ten to a square foot;
h some farmers asserted that a handful could have been
d, earlier, in their fields by a single sweep of the hand.

l Mr. Harris, of Cuba, I have received the following detailed
ft of the method and amount of the injury done in a field
His observation :

64

‘‘I send you a rough sketch of a field infested by the grass worm
last fall. I visited this field five times after the worms made their
appearance, the first visit being about October 1, and the last one
about December 6.

Upon my first visit to this field I found the worms actively at
work in the spots marked 1, 2, 8, 4, they having seemingly begun
at the center of the spaces and worked in all directions. Upon my
second visit, the worms had eaten every green thing in space 1,
over an area of six or seven acres, and many of them had entered
the ground to pupate. In space 2 and 8 they had eaten about one
half of the wheat, making it look ragged and thin on the ground.
(The spaces indicated as 2 and 3 were about one half acre each.)

In space 4, they had destroyed all the wheat at the center, but
had not extended their ravages so far as in No. 1, probably not
more than half an acre being entirely eaten off, while about three
acres was partially eaten, less damage being done as the boundary
was approached.

At this time (second visit), I found more worms at work in No.
4 than in No. 1, but they were scattered over a relatively larger
space.

When I returned on my third visit, about Nov. 7, I found No. 1
had been resown with the drill without plowing, while the other in¬
fested spaces had not been resown.

These parts of the field presented a yellowish, sickly appearance,
and did not recover at all before cold weather. The leaves began
to turn brown at the tips and dry up, while there was very little
if any growth from the center. Even where the wheat was but
little eaten by the worms, it presented a stunted appearance. The
worms climbed upon the blades of the wTheat and ate them, instead
of cutting off the plant at the ground, so there was but little dam¬
aged except that actually consumed. But the ravages of this worm
are greater than can be accounted for by the actual amount of the
herbage eaten. They seem to produce an effect similar to that pro¬
duced by a too free use of fertilizers upon growing plants.

This field of wheat was sown upon oats stubble plowed under
without burning.”

Natural enemies.

In the Southern States where the common species of ants seem
to be much more predaceous and ferocious in their habits than with
us, they apparently interpose a notable check on the multiplication
of the grass worm.

“At a plantation in the vicinity of Columbus,” in Georgia, says
Glover, “where ^the caterpillars were very numerous, and had already
devoured all the grass on one side of a field which was divided into
two equal parts by a broad and sandy carriage road passing through
the center of it, the grass on the other side having been untouched,
it was interesting to observe the operations of numerous colonies ot
ants that had formed their holes or nests in the road, and were
lying in wait for any unfortunate grass worm, the natural desire o*

for a fresh supply of food, should tempt it to cross this
dus path. First one ant more vigilant than the rest would
> the attack ; then another, and another, until the poor cater-
entirely covered by its pigmy foes, and completely exhaust-
strength by its unavailable efforts to escape, was finally
to succumb to superior numbers and die as quietly as pos-
vken the carcass was immediately carried off by the captors
"r nests, or, when too heavy to be dragged away at once, they
m it as it lay in the road. This warfare was carried on
lay as long as the grass worms prevailed, and no doubt their
rs were diminished in this way to a considerable extent.”

liley the occurrence of considerable numbers of a Tachina
e was noted in 1870; and we, ourselves, noticed the eggs of
parasite this fall on at least fifty per cent, of the worms col-
by us, most commonly fastened near the head. The imago of
these parasites emerged in a breeding cage on the ‘28th Novem-
d believing it new, I sent it to Dr. Williston, of New Haven,
ticut, who, at my request, kindly furnished me the following
tion :

Exorista infesta, sp. n., Williston.

laic. Palpi reddish yellow at the tip ; third joint of the antennae
bhrice as long as the second ; a single row of bristles extends
le front a little ways on the sides of the face above ; the bristles
face below do not reach the middle ; legs black ; scutellum
sh, the tip of the abdomen reddish yellow. Length 6-7 mm.

.£. Face grayish wThite ; on each side of the lower part of the
front there are but three or four minute bristles above the
larginal bristle. Antennae black, the third joint about three
ts long as the second, of nearly equal width, straight on its
largin. Front light ochraceous on the sides, in the middle
rather broad, parallel, opaque black stripe, reaching from
41i to the base of the antennae; on the lower part there is a
row of not very stout bristles on each side, extending but a
ays on the face. Palpi black, the distal end reddish yellow.

light grayish pollinose, the dorsum showing four rather
, black stripes, indistinct behind. Scutellum obscure yellow,
dsh yellow, narrowly black at the base. Tegulae yellowish
Abdomen black, the second and third segments very indis-
r reddish on the sides, the fifth segment almost wholly red-
llow ; second segment opaque; third and fourth shining,
r whitish pollinose in front, but variable in different reflections,
vholly black. Wings hyaline ; last section of fourth vein
/tely curved inwards, posterior cross vein gently sinuous.

. Front narrow above, the median black stripe narrower than
emale, and gently widened in front. Palpi black at the base,
es of the third and fourth abdominal segment broadly reddish,
ise as in the female.

3 specimens : one female (No. 5422), bred by Professor I orbes
japhygma frugiperda, and a male and a female, collected by
[gene Keen in Fairmont Park, Philadelphia. The females

66

agree closely throughout ; the male differs in the broad red sides oi
the abdomen, but I have scarcely a doubt of its identity.”

No other enemies of this pest have been noted except its own
fellows, but its cannibalistic habit is quite pronounced and remark-
able. Glover says, in the report already cited, ‘‘The grass cater¬
pillars, when in confinement, very often kill and devour each other;
and when one is maimed in the least, it stands a very poor chance
for its life. Several intelligent planters state that, when the grass
and weeds are entirely devoured, and no other vegetable food is to
be found, they will attack each other and feed upon the still living
and writhing bodies of their former companions. One grass cater¬
pillar, which was kept in confinement, although furnished with an
abundance of green food, actually appeared to prefer to feed upon
other caterpillars, no matter of what kind, so long as their bodies
were not defended by long, bristling hairs, or spines.”

That this is not a practice to which the worms are impelled by
confinement, is shown by the fact that the older worms have been
seen to destroy the younger by hundreds when a plenty of other
food was available, — a fact mentioned by Mr. Howard in the Keport
of the Commissioner of Agriculture for 1881 and 1881.

Beyond an occasional dead worm in the fields in October, pre¬
senting the post mortem appearance of schlaffsucht , I saw no evi¬
dence of contagious disease among these larvae, and presume that
the Tachina parasite above mentioned will be found the principal
enemy they have to fear.

In the past this insect has not been decidedly injurious in the !
same locality in the Northern States for more than one year at a
time, and in the prevalence of parasitism we probably have the ex¬
planation of this fact. There is, therefore, little reason to fear a
recurrence of the insect in any considerable numbers next year, in
the region devastated by it this fall.

PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

The female moths, when searching for a proper place of deposit
for their eggs, are evidently attracted to the ground upon which the
larvae do their damage by the presence of an abundance of green
food for the latter, — a fact which immediately suggests early plow¬
ing of ground intended for winter wheat, as a preventive measure.
Doubtless except for the allurement of growing vegetation, the eggs
of the imago would be planted elsewhere, or so widely scattered as
to effect no appreciable damage.

Certainly in that region where the grass worm prevailed last year
it would be prudent to plow early after oats when it is intended to
plant wheat.

If, however, this precaution has been neglected and hordes of
the larvae appear in the wheat fields, it will doubtless prove dit*
ficult to arrest their ravages. No opportunities for experiment
have as yet offered, notice of the appearance of the larvae in tne
wheat having been received too late to permit trial of remejua
measures ; but it may be worth while to suggest heavy rolling
as a measure likely to be practicable and efficient in some m-

| , This has occasionally been found useful for the destruction
;rue army worm. One farmer in Mason county, who noticed
3 grass worms were extending their ravages rapidly from
jtral area in which he first noticed them, believed that he de-
J the brood and prevented further injury by plowing under
' sted area and rolling it heavily immediately thereafter. If
3ition to migration, like that of the army worm, is apparent,
i :ch of the host may be arrested by measures which have
and more or less efficient in the case of the last named in-
tat is, a furrow may be plowed across the line of their
when the worms collecting therein may be destroyed by
y a log along the furrow. If their appearance is easily de-
vhile they are still small, it might not be unprofitable to
them with Paris green or other form of insect poison, but
instances it will doubtless be less expensive to resow the
than to attempt the somewhat doubtful remedies here pro-

1

7. The Grain Leaf-Hoppers.

Order Hemiptera.

i,

Family Jassid.e.

at number of species of minute leaf-hoppers are found upon
grain, usually inflicting only insignificant or temporary
I , even if their effect is finally appreciable ; but a few species
and by us last summer abundant enough in fields of growing
in May and June, to constitute a menace to the crop where
ditions were not otherwise entirely favorable to its growth,
these, confined to the cereal crops as far as our observations
jrere new to science ; while a third, wide spread, occurring in
dilations and upon a considerable variety of plants, is a
l species, described originally by Say under the name of
I rroratus.

irst two are closely allied to Jassus inimicus, Say, described
* the describer of that species adding the remark that it is
depredate, in the larva state, on the roots of wheat in Yir-

Cicadula nigrifrons, n. s.t

(Plate V. Fig. 3.)

>derately slender, yellowish green species, with four black
,/t the anterior margin of the vertex. The head is sublimate,
rounded in the middle, its antero-posterior diameter next
5 being about three-fourths its median diameter. Its color
yellow, irregularly mottled with white, with an arc of four
r black points at its anterior margin, the outer of these just

>lete writings, Vol. II, p. 382.

ugh this species differs by characters commonly esteemed generic from the
md from any other genus known to me, yet in the present state of the generic
ion of our American Homoptera I have not thought it best to multiply descrip-
enera, but content myself with indicating the distinctive characters in the
sompanying.

68

above and within the ocelli. There is a slender impressed median line,
black or dark brown ; and a depressed spot upon each side appears
midway between this and the eye.

Front, bluish black, with a few yellow median points and a row
of transverse yellow lines interrupted across the middle. Cheeks
black above, yellow behind; basal joint of the antennae blackish be¬
neath ; clypeus black in the middle and at the margins, yellow at
the sides. Lores yellow, bordered with black. Pronotum longer
than the head, but slightly narrower, strongly arcuate in front, base
nearly straight, yellow anteriorly (where it is also mottled with
white), shading to dark green posteriorly, owing to the black tint
in the mesonotum showing through the transparent pronotal
shield. A few faint dusky blotches just behind the eyes.

Scutellum yellow somewhat mottled with white except two deeper
yellow blotches just within the lateral angles. A very slender black
impressed line. * Hemelytra yellowish hyaline, veins yellowish green;
the costal margin broadly thickened, punctillate.

Tergum black, posterior margins of the segments yellow. Thorax
bluish black beneath, except the outer margins of the lateral plates
of the mesothorax, which are yellow. Abdominal segments bine-
black, bordered with yellow posteriorly, the two or three last seg¬
ments largely yellow-black, or dusky only in front. The hypopygium
nearly all yellow, connexivum chiefly yellow irregularly mottled
with blue-black. Valvules of the female yellow beneath and behind,
black above and in front, spinose with long yellow bristles.

Coxae all blue-black ; anterior and middle femora with about two
rings of black, tibiae irregularly and variably specked or ringed with
black, legs otherwise pale, except the points of attachment of the
larger spines, which are black.

Total length .14 inch ; length of head .001 inch ; of thorax .013
inch ; of scutellum .018 inch ; width of head .088 inch ; width of
scutellum .025.

This species was collected by Mr. Garman at Mount Carmel on
the 2Sth*of May, 1884, where it was abundant in growing oats; at
DuQuoin on the 7th June, where he found it common in young wheat
and .again on the 5th July, when it was obtained by sweeping in
wheat stubble. At Anna, July 14, it was very common on young corn,
and occasionally occurred upon musk melons, August 2.

Cicadula quadrilineatus, n. s.*

(Plate V. Fig. 4.)

Similar in general appearance to Cicadula nigrifrons , but differing
in wing veins and color markings. Head with two round black
spots upon either side of the middle of the base, about equidistant
from the median impressed line and from the eyes. In front o
these a transverse black line extending from eye to eye but inter-

^Differs from the preceding and from typical European species.of Cicadula by soDie
structural characters; but the above generic assignment expresses its true relations-

at the middle of the vertex, followed by a second heavier
metimes interrupted and sometimes not, the two being nearly
by a bar at the ends of the first.

;i much as in nigrifrons, but yellow, with a median black
and black transverse lines interrupted in the middle. Cheeks
|ss black than in the other species. Pronotum about as in
i ms, but the dark tint extending farther forward, leaving only
ow margin of definite yellow, which is sometimes blotched
| Jack in front. Scutellum with black impressed line much
r, usually somewhat lobed posteriorly, and with two round
iots in front of it upon the middle of the scutellum. The
of the mesonotum extends farther back than in the other
, reaching sometimes to the middle of the scutellum, which is
narked in front by an irregular band of black, sending two
riangular processes backwards, with a smaller process between

*3 green. Upper margins of the thoracic plates much washed
ellow. Thighs striped with black rather than banded. Eos-
black. Fourth ventral segment almost entirely yellow, the
|j and third with a median yellow stripe. Hypopygium of the
dark, connexivum yellow, slightly blotched with blackish,
es of the female chiefly yellow, somewhat dusky above,
n black, the penultimate segment broadly edged posteriorly
ellow.

species was first brought to our notice as an injurious insect
53, 1884, when it was collected by Mr. Garman in fields of
oung wheat near Decatur, in such numbers as to suggest the
feility of its injurious influence. It was this spring collected
:>-e numbers from young wheat at Marshall, May 22, and at
Union on the 24th, where it seems to have been very abun-
! At DuQuoin, on the 7th of June, it was found associated
he previous species in wheat, and August 4, a few specimens
ollected from sorghum at Champaign. It has occurred rarely
i young corn.

ARTICLE III.— BRIEF NOTES ON SORGHUM INSECTS.

My last report contained a paper on such insects as infest the
sorghum plant as were then known to me, and to these I now add
a few notes on one of the species therein treated, together with a
description of a second species occurring upon the roots, first
observed this year.

1. The Yellow Sorghum Plant Louse.

( Chaitophorus flavus, Forbes.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Aphidime.

(Plate YI. Figs. 1-4.)

This species, discovered last year, was first observed July 25, and
the facts of its earlier life history were of course unknown, but our
observations of the present season carry the record a month farther
back.

On the 2-th of June, in fields of sorghum at Champaign which
had been replanted, when the plant was only three or four inches
high and showed but three or four of the leaves, one of these was
occasionally reddened with a small cluster of the above plant lice
beneath it. Each of these consisted of a single full-grown female
(winged in all cases but one) surrounded by a group of wingless
young, sometimes evidently but just born. One of these winged
females was dead in the center of a group of still living young.
These fields were among those worst infested by this louse last year.

I searched carefully and extensively for root lice, but in vain.
Every stalk seen which showed any signs of ill condition was dug
up and examined, but no root lice of any sort were found. It
seems probable, consequently, that the Chaitophorus emerged from
the ground in spring, crawled up to the lower leaves of the young
plant, and there commenced at once to multiply ; and it seems
unlikely that any root form of this species will be found. Inis
year, as last, I noticed that the qnts paid no attention to this plant
louse, although Lcisius flavus and other species were not uncommon
in the fields at the time.

(Coccus sorghiellus, n. s.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Coccid^.

mg our collections from the sorghum plant made at Cliam-
this year, was a single vial of specimens bearing a close
dance to the species of Rhizobius, but evidently belonging to the
ae, a family not hitherto found upon the sorghum plant.

body is oval, distinctly segmented, .07 of an inch long by .027
inch wide, and .024 of an inch deep. The surface was cov-
y a bluish bloom, and in one alcoholic specimen examined, a
mass, including a cluster of long hairs, adhered to the anal
iity. The antennae are short, reaching to the coxae of the first
4 legs, distinctly eight- jointed, the first two joints thick and
equal in length, the third as long as the second, but more
! /ed, the fourth the shortest of all, about as wide as long,
'of the three following joints is slightly larger and longer than
eceding, and the eighth is as wide as the second, cylindrical,

! early as long as the sixth and seventh together.

j, rostrum is very short, conical, projecting from between the
!, of the first pair of legs, not as long as the femur, and its
about half its length. The maxillary filaments are four in
r and attain the abdomen.

eyes, placed upon the sides of the head at a distance behind
,ses of the antennae about equal to the first joint of the latter,
ack and simple, each consisting of a single ocellus. The tarsi
one- jointed, two-thirds as long as the tibiae and tapering
rly to the single claw, which is strongly curved, with a pair
ider capitate hairs, longer than the claw, springing from its
Tibiae and femora of about equal length ; antennae and legs
y hairy, and scattered hairs occur upon the surface of the
md tip of the abdomen.

only form seen was the wingless female, and belonged appar-
)>;o the genus Coccus, as defined by Signoret.* It was collected
t 4.

aales de la Societe Entomologique de France, trimestre de 1869, p. 102.

2. The Sorghum Bark Louse.

ARTICLE IV.-ON SOME CLOVER INSECTS.

1. Cymatophora crepuscularia , Tr.

Order Lepidoptera. Family Phal^nid^:.

(Plate VI. Fig. 5.)

Larvae from which the above was bred were taken on white clover
at Normal, June 21, the imagos emerging July 10. The larvae were
an inch long, slender, with only four prolegs. The head is widely
bilobed and reddish brown above, yellowish varied with reddish
brown in front, with two small approximate black spots on the mid¬
dle of the front. The body is green, thickly covered with white
granulations, with some black ones intermixed, and has an obscure
reddish dorsal stripe. The posterior margins of the middle segments
are narrowly bordered with yellow. On the penultimate segment is
a large transverse blackish spot, with two small kidney-shaped yel¬
low spots near its middle, approaching each other posteriorly. The
legs are pale brown, blackish at base ; prolegs pale brown, blackish
at base; prolegs black without, pale within; spiracles brown.

The same larva occurred in our collections on the rose and the
common locust; taken from the former June 20, and from the latter
July 4. We also collected it July 25, from the box elder (. Negundo
aceroides), the specimen pupating August 4, and emerging August IB.

2. The Clover Bark Louse.

(Coccus tr if olii, n. s.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Coccm®.

(Plate VI. Fig. 6.)

On the 3d of May, at Normal, there occurred on the roots of
white clover examples of a root coccid, resembling Rhizobius in gen¬
eral appearance, but differing from it in the antennae, and especially
in the tarsi and tarsal claw. They were protected by a small yel¬
low ant, Lasius flavus, in whose nests they occurred, and were
carried away by them like plant lice, when the nest was exposed.

78

i

DESCRIPTION.

)Ocly is elliptical, broadly and equally rounded at both ends,

| circular in transverse vertical section, distinctly segmented ;
covered with a waxy bloom, smooth except for a few small
the anal extremity. Feet, eyes, and antennae minute. The
.11 of an inch long, a little more than half as wide, and a
3S than half as deep ; the abdomen decidedly shorter than the
,nd thorax ; the antennae .003 of an inch long, their length
■in the distance between their bases, obscurely seven- jointed ;
t joint as wide as long; the second a little shorter and much
er than the first ; the third and fourth a little smaller than
ond and not distinctly divided ; the fifth and sixth distinct,
n length, and about equal to the first ; the seventh long,
ical, equal to the two preceding, obtusely pointed at tip.
antenna minutely sparsely hairy under a high power. Eyes
consisting of a single ocellus and a black speck on the side
head, directly behind the antenna, the third joint of which
out reach them.

.01 of an inch in length, each reaching about one half way
ji'ellow of the opposite side. Tarsus one-jointed, as long as the
; apering regularly, terminating in a single stout curved claw ;
,nd femur of about equal length ; trochanter as long as the
Legs very minutely sparsely hairy throughout. Rostrum very
, in the form of a thick tubercle projecting downwards in
f the bases of the anterior legs, scarcely longer than wide,
half the length of the femur.

1 8. Clover Mites.

formal, early in May, the general occurrence of a large and
;uous brownish red mite was noticed upon clover and blue
the former of these plants, especially, sometimes suffering
y from the pest. The leaves of the clover turned yellow and
rowth was arrested where the mite was abundant. The effect
he blue grass was similar. The species, which proved to be

3 here described by my first assistant, Mr. H. Garman.

>

Bryobia pratensis, n. s., H. Garman.

(Plate VI. Fig. 7.)

i oval in outline as seen from above or below ; but little
ced. Outline as seen from the side also oval, increasing in
towards the posterior extremity where it is abruptly truncated,
ly convex above, much less so below. Entire surface rugose
i tore or less parallel, waved striae. Striae of dorsal surface of
en coarser and more regular than those of the ventral surface
the cephalothorax.

; i .scattered, curved, finely denticulate, scale-like appendages
j 3d to the dorsum and at the margins. These scales expand
fnly from their bases to their tips, where they are widest and
! lightly rounded denticulate margins. The four conical promi-
whicli extend forward over the mouth parts at the anterior
uty of the cephalothorax, each bears one of these scales. The

* 74

two median prominences are longest, and are united at their bases
Palpi very stout, the basal articles with a few long hairs; inner
ramus of forceps thumb-like and with spinose hairs ; outer ramus a
strongly curved hook.

Legs with strong, plumose, spine-like hairs on their basal articles,
which hairs grow less and less stout towards the distal extremity of
the limbs until upon the distal articles they form long, slender seta.
Anterior legs equal to the body in length, tapering but slightly to
the distal extremity. Two basal articles about equal, the proximal
slightly the stronger. Third article longest, twice the length of the
sixth. Fourth article nearly as long as the sixth, about half the
length of the fifth. Adhesive hairs fewer and more slender than
those of the other legs. Legs of the three posterior pairs much
shorter than the anterior, and with less difference in the lengths of
the articles composing them.

The eyes consist of two approximated ocelli on each side of the
cephalothorax. Adults in life marked with red and black. The
pattern has been destroyed by alcohol. The majority of those ex¬
amined have large anal protuberances. -

Length of body .088 inch; width of same .025 inch.

With the above, another mite, similar, but paler and smaller,
was frequently taken in meadows. It is thus described by Mr.
Garni an :

Bryobia pallida , n. s., H. Gar man.

A small, pale species agreeing with B. pratensis in general form.
Anterior legs slightly longer than the body, with the fourth article
markedly shorter than the sixth. Scale-like appendages somewhat
wider and shorter proportionally. Two outer of the frontal processes
wider at their tips than those of B. pratensis. Median pair of pro¬
cesses more slender than the outer and united for half their length.
Color whitish. Length of body .024 inch ; width of same .015 inch.
Occurs with the preceding on grasses in meadows. The anal pro¬
tuberance is conspicuous in most of the examples seen.

4. Miscellaneous Notes.

The larva of Hcematopis grataria , Fabr., was seen at Effingham,
August 21, abundant upon white clover.

Dichelia sulphureana, Clemens, was repeatedly bred from clover
leaf rollers during the season.

From small green leaf rollers collected on clover May 14, images
of Cacoecia rosaceana, Harris, and of Tortrix pallorana , Fobs.,
(Plate YI, Figs. 8 and 9) were bred, the imagos emerging during the
middle of June. The latter species was also bred from the common
ragweed, ( Ambrosia trifida), specimens collected May 16, pupating
June 12, and emerging six days later. Another example collected
on Erigeron canadense , May 17, pupated in a fold of the leaf Ma)
80, and completed its transformations on the 7th June,
other clover leaf rollers taken May 23, examples of Ilypena scam,
Fabr., emerged.

II.

i-

ntributions to Horticultural Entomology,

LE I.— ON NEW AND IMPERFECTLY KNOWN STRAW¬
BERRY INSECTS.

Note on the Life History of the Strawberry Slug.

(Emphytus maculatus, Norton.)

i

Order Hymenoptera. Family Tenthredinim.

(Plate VII. Fig. 1.)

ry article on strawberry insects published in my report for
found myself obliged to leave in doubt an important point
life history of this insect owing to the conflict of observa-
s reported by previous writers on this species.

le fullest and most authoritative article upon it, that by Mr.
n his Ninth Report as State Entomologist of Missouri, the
mt is made that it is double brooded, the adult flies of the
ood appearing by the end of June and the beginning of July.

• the influence of July weather,” he says, “the whole process
depositing, etc., is rapidly repeated, and the second brood of
descend into the earth during the fore part of August, and
heir cocoons, in which they remain in the caterpillar state
i the fall, winter, and early spring months, till the middle of
Dllowing, when they become pupte and flies again as related.’’

the other hand the observations of Mr. Saunders, made in
l, Ontario,* those of , Mr. Galusha and Miss Smith, in Central
, as reported in the Transactions of the State Horticultural
', and the statements of Prof. French, in Southern Illinois,
ied in the same Transactions ; together with those of
dice B. Walton, relating to the life history of this species
! latitude of Muscatine, Iowa ; — all report the absence of
rnd brood, or report their failure to detect it, the dates
oy Mr. Saunders being, in fact, inconsistent with it.f The
hus left in uncertainty is practically the most important in
3 history of this insect, since if two broods occur (the second
ing after the fruit is gathered), the multiplication of the
. may be easily and cheaply arrested by the application of

th Report of the Ontario Entomological Society, page 18.
these references see my report for 1883, p. 71.

78

hellebore or arsenical poisons to the vines in July; but if, on the
other hand, the spring brood is the only one, it must be combatted
.if at all, while the fruit is on the vines, when no poisonous appli¬
cation would be permissible. To determine this point for Central
Illiuois, careful observations were made throughout the season, and
a large number of individuals were reared.

On the 12th May, in Normal, McLean County, newly hatched
larvae of this species, were observed upon strawberry leaves, and
numerous eggs with the partially developed larvae within them.
These eggs, some of which were kept for identification until the
larvae emerged, were not placed in the petiole, as observed by Riley,
but were thrust beneath the epidermis on the upper side of the leaf’
a crescentic slit having first been made by the ovipositor of the
female. Attempts were made to carry these newly hatched lame
through their transformations, and a few of them survived until
June 5, at which date they were about half grown. Several young
Pentatomidae, apparently Euschistus, appeared in the cage at this
time, and to their predaceous habit the disappearance of the lam
was attributed.

On the 18th of June, strawberry slugs of this brood were found
upon the leaves in the field, and on the 21st about 150 specimens
were collected and placed in a breeding cage. These were fully
grown, and began at once to enter the earth, nearly all having
disappeared by June 24. On the 19th of July, those in the earth
were examined, and found much shortened up for pupation but not
yet transformed. At this #time strawberry fields where they had
been previously abundant, averaging as many as two or three to
each leaf, were swept carefully and extensively with an insect net,
but not a single strawberry slug was found.

On the 1st September, the larvae in the earth were examined but
found still untransformed, most of them enclosed in small cocoons.
On November 24, these conditions were practically unchanged; one
of the larvae was dead, although yet fresh, but the others examined
were living and in perfect condition.

[Delay of publication permits me to add that the above saw-flies
were emerging May 14, 1885, from the lot secured for breeding June
21, of the year before.]

The above experiment shows conclusively that in the latitude of
Central Illinois, and during ordinary years, the strawberry slug or
false worm has but a single brood, and that this is matured before
the strawberry harvest is completed, a fact which so modifies the
possibilities of effective attack upon the species that we are practi¬
cally limited to the application of pyrethrum* or other harmless in¬
secticides for the purpose of destroying the larvae, and to the use oi
the insect net for the collection of the adult flies as they appear
upon the vines in May for the deposit of their eggs, and later for
the capture of the larvae.. These last are detached from the leaves
at a touch, and I doubt not may' be collected without great trouble
or expense by sweeping with an insect net. From this they could
be shaken at intervals into a bucket of water covered with a nlm
of kerosene.

VvV-' •• •

.

. ■ ' • -

2. The Lesser Strawberry Plant Louse.

( Siphonophora minor , Forbes.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Aphidihe.

pecies, first described last year from strawberry plants at
has been, observed during the last season, throughout the
and southern part of the State, from Bloomington and
gn to Alton and Centralia. It was first noticed this year,

, on strawberry plants at Normal, only the wingless form
y at that time. It was collected at Centralia, August 6, and
as late as September 25, at which time it still occurred
;m the under sides of the leaves. It has not thus far done
reciable injury as far as known.

3. The Tarnished Plant Bug.

(. Lygus lineolaris, Beauv.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Capsid/e.

(Plate VII, Fig. 2; and Plate VIII.)

pecies, treated as a strawberry insect at considerable length
ist year’s report, has been carefully observed this season, to
ie some unsettled points respecting its life history and its
to the strawberry. Our notes began April 1, when Mr.
was sent to Southern Illinois to collect the facts relating
fe history of this species in spring. At this time he found
t abundant among the young and tender leaves of mullein,
strawberry fields and elsewhere, — not down among the older,
ives, where they would naturally have resorted if in search
th and protection only. That they were feeding upon the
Ls shown by the abundance of greenish fluid with which
lies were distended. Very few specimens were found except
on these plants.

|,3 4th April a pair were taken in copula, and on the 7th I
i eggs from the ovary of the female, seemingly fully de-
On the 2d, large numbers of the adults from Southern
vere fed with strawberry plants and mullein in a breeding
the Laboratory, in the hope of obtaining their eggs and de-
g their breeding habits. They resorted chiefly to the mul-
soon commenced to die from some cause not determinable,
fies and females perishing rapidly. On the 17tli a pair of
t re seen in coitu, and on the 18th the plants contained in
!’ were thoroughly searched for eggs, but without success.
J2d I saw and watched for some time a specimen on the
ie of a half-open strawberry leaf, with its beak inserted in
! ib, evidently feeding upon the plant, and this observation
bated next day, the plant bug now piercing the petiole of a
anded leaf.

ution of Egg. — On the 26th April, careful search was again
the strawberry plants in the cage, and a single egg was

80

found on the petiole of a dead leaf, so loosely placed among the
hairs that it fell off on handling the plant. This egg was umui&.
takably that of Lygus, as was shown by comparison with those oh
tained from the female by dissection. It was slender, cylindrical,
slightly curved, round at one end, truncate and compressed at the
other, the longer diameter of this truncate end being three times
that of the shorter. The angle nearest the concave side of the eg?
was produced so as to make this outline somewhat sinuate. Tk
egg was smooth, shining, pale watery yellow, .92 mm. long and i
.25 mm. in diameter at its widest part. The greatest diameter of
the truncate end was .22 mm., and the shortest .077 mm.

The adults were found coupling in the field April 28, on flowers
of the common cowslip (Caltha palustris), upon which they were now-
very abundant. They were not noticeably numerous in strawberry
fields until late in April, when a few were observed, in Union county,
seemingly attracted by the opening blossoms. At this time they
were also extremely common upon blooming currant bushes at
Normal.

The young of the year first appeared about the middle of April,
upon strawberry plants at Anna, and were abundant there by the
3d May. At Normal the species was not found in strawberry fields
until the 12th May, and these were all adults of the preceding year.

In pursuance of my recommendation, Mr. F. S. Earle, of Anna,
made some field experiments upon this species with pyrethrum, ap¬
plying it quite thoroughly on one or two of the worst affected areas
in his strawberry plantation. The pyrethrum used was purchased in
the market, and was understood to have been effective upon other
species of insects. It was diluted with from one to three parts of
flour and applied with a sulphur bellows, first to about half an acre
of Bidwell plants, when they were a little past their fullest bloom,
and the application repeated in two or three days over about half the
area. In each case enough was used to dust the plant quite thorough¬
ly. It was also dusted on nearly an acre of Duchess plants, after
the bloom had mostly fallen. Mr. Earle reported that a day or two
after the application, he made as careful an estimate as possible of
the number of plant bugs remaining on the rows which had been
dusted and on those which had not, and concluded that there were
from one-half to one-third less on the dusted rows. As this result
hardly seemed to justify the trouble and expense of application,
nothing further was attempted.

I am not able to account for the unsatisfactory results of this ex¬
periment as compared with laboratory experiments made the preced¬
ing year at Normal and described in my last year’s report, but incline
to suspect the quality of the pyrethrum. . *

The fact that the adults are very generally ’attracted in great num¬
bers to turnips, cabbage, mullein, and other succulent plants in fall
and spring, makes it possible that the number of the following brood
in any limited area might be considerably diminished by bordering
the field with a row of some of these plants as an attraction to the
adult plant bugs. Those lured in this way might then be destroys
with pyrethrum in spring.

i

81

8. Lophoderus velutinanus, Walk.

jpecies, already mentioned as occurring in corn, was likewise
n the strawberry this year, a leaf roller collected July 20
on the 25tli, and emerging at a date unknown as the imago
pecies.

Supplementary Note on the Strawberry Root Worms.

L

Order Coleoptera. Family Chrysomelid.e.

report for last year appeared an elaborate article on these
pp. 150-177), containing an account of the curious correla¬
te life histories of the species included under this head, by
: which they attack their food plant successively, the three
yintly occupying the ground as larvae throughout the year,
dew to verifying this account, all opportunities have been
for further observation, and the data thus collected are
n, together with additional economic notes.

Pavia aterrima, Oliv.

.

9th May this species was seen near Normal in copula , on
y leaves, upon which the beetles were feeding, during May
\ first part of June.

)onse to an urgent letter of inquiry from Mr. Wm. Jackson,
3y, respecting the complete destruction by insects of some
p strawberries in his neighborhood, I sent an assistant thither
dr 25, with directions to ascertain the cause of the injury.
Ids were visited at Upper Alton and Godfrey. In two of
|> greater part of the leaves had been riddled and killed, only
the center of each stool remaining green. The third was so
from the same cause, that it had been recently plowed up
yner.

S search of these fields revealed no insect capable of doing
hief except Pavia atervima, and this was so abundant as to
l ground for the suspicion that it was the author of the
; —a suspicion fully confirmed by the fact that in the recently
jield, the young leaves occasionally put forth had been
nawed in the manner characteristic of the work of this
It is possible that the extensive damage to these plants
ily due to the earlier work of the larvae in the roots.

'odonta ncbulosus, Lee. and Scelodonta pubescens , Mels.

(Plate IX. Fig. 1-3.)

llections of this season and the results of breeding cage
its all serve to confirm our former account of the life his-
. nebidosus and yield the further interesting fact of the
he, beside, of another very similar species, which feeds only
yening primrose (Oenothera), and whose life history is very
from that of the first.

! *awberry species was bred by us June 9 to 28, from larvae
in Southern Illinois from April 6 to 9. Two larvae obtained
seemingly only half grown, yielded small adults June 18.

j i
>

82

The primrose species {pubescens) was first noticed by us in Southern
Illinois, April 4, on the primrose along the borders of strawberry
fields, where it was found in copula at that date, and also on the
16th and ltth of the same month. Specimens transferred to breed-
ing cages at Normal were also seen copulating as late as May l;]
and 20.

Confined in the breeding cage, these beetles ate freely of the
leaves of the primrose, soon killing one of the plants exposed to them,
but refused to touch the strawberry, those plants placed with them on
the 19th April having been uninjured May 25.

No eggs were found in our breeding cages, nor did any larva*
develop in the jars of earth containing the plants on which the
adults were feeding. The primrose species certainly hibernates as
an adult, laying its eggs in spring, the old imagos living at least
until midsummer ; but the further life history is unknown. As its
occurrence in strawberry fields may sometimes needlessly alarm the
strawberry grower, the distinguishing characters of the species are
worthy of mention.

In nebulosus (from the strawberry) the form is thicker, the thorax
more convex dorsally and less rugose at the sides, and the elytra much
more closely punctured. Counting from the sutures to the humeral
tuberosity there are seven or eight more or less distinct rows of :
punctures in nebulosus, and about fifteen such rows in pubescens,

ARTICLE II.— ON A FEW GRAPE INSECTS.

1. Petrophora diversilineata , Hiibn.

insect, well known as injurious to the grape, has here-
been considered single brooded (except possibly in extreme
m latitudes) and supposed to winter in the larval stage, but
nervation made last year indicates that it is double brooded
kthern Illinois.

/sb collected on the grape in Union county, September 13,
were found in the imago stage in the breeding cage February
5, although the date of their appearance is not known. In
ickard’s Monograph of the Phalsenidae of North America, the
ence of the imago is recorded in New York and Massachusetts
July 3 to August 17, and our autumnal larvae must conse-
y have been the descendants of that brood.

I '

2. The Vine- loving Fruit Fly.

(Drosophila ampelophila, Loew.)

Order Diptera. Family DROsoPHiLiDiE.

(Plate IX. Figs. 1-3.)

n Mr. A. Williams, of Moline, Illinois, I received, October 10,
3h of grapes containing great numbers of a white footless
t by which most of the berries had been hollowed out, with
formation that this insect was making havoc with most of the
in his vicinity. These specimens were bred and yielded great
ts of the above common pomace fly — one of the most abun-
pecies in orchards in autumn, when the fallen fruit is rotting
i )he ground. This fly likewise swarms around cider mills, the
breeding in vast numbers in the pomace.

later note Mr. Williams remarks: “This maggot has nearly
the entire crop in this locality. It began on the vines about
ears ago.”

species, first described in 1862 by Loew, has been sev-
imes noticed by economic entomogists, — chiefly by Lintner
Comstock, the former of whom published an article
( it in his first report as State Entomologist of New

York (188*2), and the latter, an illustrated article in the Report of
the Entomologist of the United States Department of Agriculture
for the same year. By Lintner the species was treated chiefly on
account of its injuries to preserved fruits, and was by him given
the name of the pickled-fruit fly. Prof. Comstock describes and
illustrates the species fully, less with reference to its own injuries
than for the purpose of enabling the fruit grower to distinguish it
clearly from the apple maggot— -a very much more destructive insect.

The fly is of wide distribution, occurring throughout Middle and
Southern Europe and Southern Africa, as well as over Eastern
North America. It is, in August, September, and October, one of
the most numerous of species, wherever an abundant fruit supply
is accessible, as it multiplies rapidly by many successive generations.
By Prof. Comstock, each of the three preliminary stages— egg.
larva, and pupa — is reported to continue . from three to five days’
and in some cases the fly begins to deposit its eggs when not more
than two days old, the entire generation thus completing its cycle
within less than a fortnight.

By both Lintner and Comstock the fact of its injury to grapes is
mentioned upon the authority of correspondents, the first remarking
in a foot note, that examples of the fly had been received by him
from the Bev. Samuel Lockwood, of Freehold, New Jersey, with the
statement that the larvae had infested his ripe grapes during the
autumn of 1881. Prof. Comstock’s information of this habit was
obtained from a correspondent in New York, who reported the larvae
to eat out completely the inside of the grapes “which while hanging
on the vines, have first been picked open by birds. The decaying
juices running out on the other berries of the cluster, spread decay
and thus give more foothold for the larvae. Indeed, the larvae bore
from one grape to another, while the imagos are constantly, by eggs,
putting in new colonies until the cluster is nearly or quite destroyed,
nothing remaining but the empty grape skins.”

By Prof. Lintner, the same species was bred from jars of pickled
plums to which the adults had doubtless got access while depositing
their eggs.

No natural enemies of this species are thus far known, and it is
not easy to suggest feasible remedies for its injuries in the vine¬
yards. Unquestionably the practice of enclosing the clusters in
paper bags, as is customary for protecting grapes from rot and
birds, would be effective /against these insects also; audit will
doubtless be decidedly to the interest of the vine grower to> prevent
the accumulation of decaying and fermenting fruit about his prem¬
ises where the larvie may breed.

Thf Grape Leaf Mite.

( Phytoptus vitis, Lanclois.)

Order Acarina. Family Phytoptime.

The occurrence in the vineyards of Europe of a microscopic leaf
mite, first described by Landois under the above name, has been
known for a number of years, the injury resulting being conspicuous

85

l ^

; rious, and amounting in fact to one of the established and
jized diseases of the vine ; but in this country nothing of the
as hitherto been reported. On the 15th May, in a vineyard
ormal, belonging to the Phoenix nursery, I observed two grape
|>f the variety known as “Taylor’s Bullet,” the leaves of which
uriously curled and crumpled, on some of the vines scarcely
remaining unaffected. A careful examination of the injured
is under a microscope, demonstrated the existence on the
surface of the leaves, of considerable numbers of a minute
>tus having the general appearance of that described from
ian vineyards; and a further search in this vineyard showed
J number of other vines more or less seriously affected, some
f young Clintons being in fact so extensively diseased that
a leaf could be found which did not give evidence of the
ee of the mite.

1 Concords immediately adjoining, and other thick-leaved and
varieties, there seemed to be neither trace of the injury nor
Pliytoptus. It is possible, however, that the mites were
y present on these leaves, but that these varieties were not
(tible to injury by them. Owing to the thick felt of hairs
the leaf surface, it would have been extremely difficult to
I ffrate the mites even if they had been present in considerable
trs.

injury presents the form of peculiar warty elevations upon
per surface of the leaf, and corresponding depressions on the
surface, these varying in size from one-twentieth to one-tenth
inch in diameter, although adjacent elevations are frequently
■ into irregular patches of much greater size. The larger
M the leaf did not share in this deformity, and the effect
iy distortion such as might result from a shortening of these
and the consequent folding and crumpling of the leaf,
seased leaves were much smaller than natural, and were fre-

7 more or less folded together lengthwise, and the edges were
mietimes considerably incurved. On the older foliage, where
ury was of longer standing, the elevations on the upper sur-
ere more or less browned or reddened, but when fresh they
till the natural green of the plant. Many elevated spots upon
eaves were pale, sometimes almost transparent, owing to the
ve formation of the chlorophyll — a complete demonstration of
erference with the function of the leaf and the consequent
ipon the vigor of the plant, produced by these parasites.

European writers describe and figure a peculiar development
ormal hairs (technically called an erineum) upon th6 concave
is of the diseased patches on the leaves, but in the Clintons
tylors nothing of this sort occurred, the inner surfaces of the
(as these morbid elevations are called) being entirely smooth
stitute of pubescence of every kind. It is possible that the

8 of an erineum was due to the early period at which the
was observed, but I think it more likely that it is to be ac-
I for either as due to the difference in species of the Ameri-
d the European grapes and the consequent difference in the
n of the leaf from the injuries inflicted, or else that the

of Phytoptus occurring here is not actually identical with

ij

*

86

the European leaf mite— a supposition in favor of which I shall
adduce some further proof. It is worthy of remark that upon even
the worst infested plants at Normal the youngest or smallest leaves
were usually quite uninjured.

This same mite was subsequently found by my assistant, Mr.
Gfarman, upon wild grapes in Southern Illinois, producing upon the
leaves there an identical deformity. It seems extremely improbable
that the European species could have been conveyed to this coun¬
try and have become so wide spread as to reach the wild vines in
forests without having hitherto attracted attention in vineyards; and
I am consequently inclined to believe that the vineyard mite of
America has spread in the reverse direction that it is a native
species probably belonging to our wild vines, and has from them
entered our vineyards.

Indeed microscopic study of the mite itself discovers some minor
points in which it disagrees with the figures and descriptions of the
European Phytoptus vitis. The body is less strictly cylindrical,
and the lateral branches of the tarsal plume are less numerous.
The descriptions of the European forms by Landois and Briosi are
however so inconsistent with each other (the original description of
Landois giving, for example, one hundred and twenty as the num¬
ber of abdominal rings, and that of Briosi from sixty to sixty-six)
that it is impossible to make an intelligent comparison of our form
with theirs without authentic specimens. I have consequently treated
our species under the old specific name.

The specimens examined by me varied in length from .45 to .64
of an inch, and in greatest diameter from .014 to .019 of an inch.
The body is broadest immediately behind the legs and thence tapers
regularly, as seen from above, to the posterior extremity. The rings
number about sixty-five ; the tarsal plume has certainly but four
lateral filaments, and not five, as reported for Phytoptus vitis by both
Briosi and Landois.

Plant diseases due to Phytopti have hitherto been controlled only
by the use of sulphur, the method being described in my Eirst he-
port, page 142. As such applications are already in use for fungus
affections of the grape leaf, they will doubtless be found conveniently
applicable for Phytopti in the vineyard.

]■

I

E III.— ON NEW INSECT ENEMIES OF THE BLACK¬
BERRY AND RASPBERRY.

1. The Blackberry Leaf Miner.

( Metallus rubi, gen. et sp. nov.)

Order Hymenoptera. Family Tenthredinidte.

(Plate IX. Fig. 7.)

1 3 12th August, at Normal, Mr. Garman found mining the
cultivated blackberries, small white larvae with brown heads,
ansformed early in September to small saw flies, one spec-
terging on the 9th and another on the 10th of that month,
isformations occurred in the earth, the larvae having deserted
es as early as September 6.

DESCRIPTION OF GENUS.

or tibiae with a single spine, other tibiae with two ; antennae
ded, third joint longer than the fourth, but not twice as long,
hort, about as wide as the thorax ; the latter subglobular ;
i wings with two marginal and three submarginal cells, the
irginal the smaller, the first submarginal curved, longer than
i nd, the third largest of all ; lanceolate cells petiolate.

I,

DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES.

i, — Head, thorax, and abdomen shining black, clothed with
llowish pubescence ; antennae sparingly pubescent, strongly
i sed, third joint about five and a half times the length of the
1 ourth and fifth equal, sixth, seventh, and eighth successively
shorter, the ninth longer than the eighth; legs pale, all the
| md the posterior tibiae fuscous ; wings smoky, almost black,
ns black, but slightly tinged with fulvous. Length, 8.5 mm.
8.5 mm.

bed from two specimens bred from blackberry leaves.

1 — The larva is 8.5 mm. in length by 1.25 mm. in breadth,
pal, skin minutely roughened. The second and third thoracic
3 and the first abdominal are much thickened vertically,

ii convex dorsal outline to this region. From the second

. , \

88

thoracic segment the outline slopes rapidly downward to the front
the head being wedge shaped, viewed laterally, and only about half »
the depth of the second segment. The head is fiat beneath, slightly
rounded above, about two-thirds as wide as the thorax; antenni
and mouth parts very short ; eyes wanting. The color is brown both
above and beneath. First thoracic segment trapezoidal, viewed
laterally ; a large brown chitinous prosternal area extending forward
to the mouth parts and laterally to the legs; a brown patch upon :
the dorsum of this segment. Small brown chitinous sternal areas
to the two succeeding thoracic segments, and a still smaller one on
the first abdominal.

Legs very short, not longer than their respective segments; pro¬
legs fourteen in number, (counting the two anals),* having the form
of low, flattened tubercles, each with a brown chitinous patch upon n
the outer part. The pair of anal prolegs are nearly encircled by i
two dark brown chitinous arcs.

Segments of the body deeply separated ; sides with two lateral
rows of obscure tubercles ; spiracles brown, minute, except the first
on the middle of the first thoracic segment, which is larger and is
surrounded by a small brown chitinous patch.

Described from a single specimen taken from the blackberry leaf, j

2. Lophoderus velutinanus, Walk.

From leaf rollers of the blackberry, collected at Normal, June 30>
specimens of this species were obtained July 10 to 18. The food
plants heretofore recorded for it are oak, balsam fir, and maple.

8. Pyrrhia umbra, Hfibn.

Order Lepidoptera, Family Noctuid.e.

8

fPlate X. Fig. 1.'

Late in May and early in June we found repeatedly, feeding upon
leaves of blackberry at Normal, large whitish larvae, with a lemon-
yellow band upon the sides, and numerous conspicuous small black
tubercles upon each segment. Numbers of specimens were bred, re¬
sulting in orange-brown moths of the above species.

LITERATURE.

This species, common to this country and to Europe, has been
repeatedly noticed in American entomological publications, most of
the references to it, however, being of a purely technical sort-
Under the name of Heliotkis exprimens , it is mentioned by Grote
and Kobinson in their descriptions of American Lepidoptera,* with
some remarks on its distribution and synonomy.

In 1878, the authors catalogued it as Chariclea exprimens A

* Transactions American Entomological Society, Vol. Ill, p. 180.

+ Transactions American Entomological Society, Vol. IV, page 432.

e Seventh Report of the State Entomologist of Illinois, that
3, the occurrence of the species at Carbonclale is noted by
rench, brief descriptions of larva and imago are given, and
i is made of its injuries to the rose.

If

scription of a larva of an allied species, Pyrrhia angulata,
mg to some authors identical with this), was given by Mr.
Jit in the first volume of Papilio (1881). In Volume X of the
ctions of the American Entomological Society (1888), Mr. J.
th figures the fore wing of both these species, (considering
% a variety of umbra), and quotes Mr. Coquillet’s description
larva of the former. By Smith the species is placed under
us Cliariclea. On page 259 of the same volume, Mr. A. R.
)bjects to this generic assignment and insists upon Pyrrhia
proper generic name for the species, not considering Cliariclea
>geneous group, as defined by its author. He also insists
re specific distinctness of angulata . In the third volume of
, pages 135-86, Messrs. Edwards and Elliot give descriptions
full-grown larva and pupa of this species under the name of
h exprimens, and mention Desmodium as a food plant.

DESCRIPTION.

a. — The full-grown larva is 1.36 inches in length, pale bluish
tbove and greenish beneath, with a bright lemon-yellow stripe
he side, including the stigmata, and above this a pale bluish
if about the same width heavily bordered with black above
neath. The dorsal and sub-dorsal regions are pinkish bluish
marked with irregular specks and lines having a tendency to
,3 themselves in five black stripes most conspicuous on the
and third thoracic segments.

head is pale chestnut, inclined to orange ; cervical shield
covered by eight large square black blotches in two rows of
,eh, the middle blotches of the posterior row being much the
of all ; abdominal segments each with four large conspicuous
us black tubercles upon the dorsum, one in front of the spiracle,
d below the edge of the yellow stripe, and another above the
1 the proleg. The jointed legs are all black, prolegs shining
vithout and dusky at the tip. The anal segment is widely
>d with black posteriorly, and a broad black patch extends
l from the middle of this arc. On the two segments preced-
s, the dorsal piliferous tubucles are much more conspicuous
isewhere. Spiracles black.

h. — The pupa is three-fourths of an inch in length, shining,
t*own, the spiracles slightly darker, surface smooth except for
arge punctures on the abdominal segments; abdomen termi-
in two slender, slightly hooked spines.

o. — The front wings and thorax of the imago are brownish
' varied with yellowish, hind wings pale yellow at base, brown -
on posterior half. Examined with a glass the brown color
front wings is seen to be irrorate with reddish scales. Trans-
.nterior line red, zigzag with three angulations; orbicular well
l, of the ground color of the wing ringed with red. Middle

transverse line distinct, obtusely angulated opposite the reniform
spot, the posterior boundary of which it reaches, thus running obli¬
quely to the posterior margin. At the angle of this line is an ob-
scure reddish shade which invades the reniform spot.

Posterior transverse line broader than the others, oblique, nearly
black. Between this and the subterminal line is a purple shade,
heaviest inward. The latter line is irregularly scalloped, being den¬
tate on the veins. A slender terminal line ; fringes purple whitish at
base, costa with two oblique white marks in the vicinity of the
transverse line or between that and the subterminal.

Fringe of posterior wings white, slightly tinged with purplish;
under surface of both wings pale yellow, with purple shades corres¬
ponding to those of the upper surface, and a purple spot representing
the reniform.

DISTRIBUTION AND LIFE HISTORY.

This species has been reported from Canada to Pennsylvania and
Illinois, occurring in the last throughout the whole State. Speci¬
mens found upon blackberries, May 28, pupated about June 15 and
commenced to emerge on the 5th July, the last of this lot appear¬
ing August 21. Another specimen entered the earth July 10, and
emerged on the 18th August. With Prof. French of Carbondale,
larvae obtained early in June had all entered the earth on the 19th,
and emerged from August 5 to 81. On the other hand, larvae of
Pyrrhia angulata (not impossibly identical with this) obtained by
Coquillet from smartweed (Polygonum pennsylvanicum) September 15,
entered the earth on the 27th and disclosed the imagos on the 22d
May of the following year, and a few days thereafter. It is conse¬
quently possible that this species is two brooded.

INJURIES TO VEGETATION.

The injuries to vegetation noted thus far, are confined to the
worthless plants Desmodium and Polygonum, and to the rose and
the blackberry. By Prof. French, in Jackson county, the young
larvie, when about half an inch in length, were noticed eating and
disfiguring roses, feeding within the flower rather than on the out¬
side, and seeming to prefer the bases of the petals.

At Normal, as already mentioned, the larvae were found only upon
the blackberry, devouring the leaves. The damage was occasionally
decidedly serious, in some cases nearly every cane bearing one or
more of the larvae. These were feeding upon the tender leaves near
the ends of the stalks, in company with Oxyptilus delavaricus.

91

4. The Raspberry Plume Moth.

(Oxyptilus delavaricus, Zeller.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Pterophorime.

i.

(Plate X. Fig. 2.)

May we found occasionally at Normal, feeding upon the
the blackberry, a very peculiar, small green larva, having
resemblance to the raspberry slug, ( Selandria ruin), but
to the Lepidoptera. This larva, new to us when first
was determined by breeding to be that of the plume moth,
delavaricus, of the family Pterophoridse.

isect has already been noticed in Saunders’ Insects In-
• Fruits (pp. 314 and 315), where figures of the larva and
3 given, and all these stages are briefly described, but the
not there identified. For the determination of the speci-
d by me I am indebted to Prof. Fernald, of Orono, Maine.

va, when full grown, is about .4 of an inch long, of a pale
or, sometimes slightly streaked with pale yellow; with a
nsverse row of six large tubercles to each segment, each
rearing a spreading cluster of stiff spines which are slightly
te at their tips. The dorsal rows of tubercles are larger
;e upon the sides, and the spines upon the former (six or
number) are likewise the longest of all. Scattered spines
r elsewhere on the body.

olegs of this larva are of very unusual form. They arise
k wart-like bases, and extend downward a distance equal
irds the depth of the body, as smooth, straight, slender,
appendages, which expand suddenly at their tips. The
pair of these prolegs, however, thicker than the others, are
h spines.

rsal joints of the articulated legs are similarly slender,
and elongate, and each terminates with a movable claw
)f shutting back against the tip of the extremity.

ad is yellowish, smooth, with a few long bristles in front,
irts dusky, thoracic legs nearly black, the abdominal pro-
at base, but rapidly darkening and becoming black on the

If.

ipa is green when fresh, angular, margined on each side
Vliitish ridge, and with a double row of clusters of stout
spines along the back. The abdomen is slender and acute ;
pads extend three-fourths the length of the body, the head.
lx being decurved so as to give the front of the pupa an
truncate outline. The back of the thorax is beset with
3nder simple spines ; wing pads and under surface of the
>oth except for a thick transverse tuft of hairs upon the
r the under side of the abdomen, a short distance behind
f the wing pads.

8 mm.

v.r.C,
./ ■<

i i ) / »

•Hub
; •

• i .

• ■ , o*

pm

;

. «- ■*

I

92

General color of the imago, chocolate brown ; antenna black
specked with white internally; thorax brown, with a white collar
and a carious metallic purple reflection. The abdomen is brown
white at the base, and variously wliite-specked above, almost wholfl
white beneath.

The fore wings are of the general color, minutely specked with
bluish white, especially along the costa, and crossed by two trans¬
verse white bands beyond the origin of the fissure, the inner of
which is the wider, although both are frequently reduced to narrow
lines, or occasionally obsolete. The fringe of each lobe of this win
is black, with a large cream-colored patch at the apex, except that
that of the posterior lobe is white on the proximal half. The
slender posterior lobe of the hind wing is brown at the base, white
in the middle, and black on the terminal third, except for a cream-
colored patch upon the fringe of the apex. The markings beneath
repeat substantially those of the upper surface.

Specimens obtained May 28, pupated on the leaves from June i
to 11. They commenced to emerge on the 18th, and had completed
their transformations by the 18th of that month.

*?j IV. ON THE SPECKLED CUTWORM AS A CABBAGE

WORM.

( Agrotis c-nigrwm L.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Noctuid,e.

j (Plate X. Fig. 3.)

times during the last three years, my attention has been
a large brownish gray caterpillar, marked with oblique
hes upon the posterior part of the back, found in June
boring the heads of early cabbage. The character of the
licted was much more serious than that done by the com-
bage worm, ( Pieris rapes), not only because of the larger
e caterpillars but especially because of their habit of im¬
penetrating the head and mining in all directions, a single
s destroying the head more completely and in less time
Id scores of the ordinary cabbage worm. This caterpillar
s determined as the larva of Agrotis c-nigrum, a common
10th, a determination verified later, several times, by breed-

one of the common cutworms, feeding habitually upon
l upon a great variety of vegetables, but whose injuries to
have been hitherto, unnoticed by economic entomologists,
I am aware, except those done to the young plants by a
the larvae preceding that which attacks the full-grown cab-
ir observations on the injury noted have been confined to
ty of Normal, with the exception of a single report from
/Boardman, of Stark county, accompanied by specimens
tworms which he found eating holes in the heads of his
and causing them to rot. He reported them in July of
nt year as quite common on his heads of cabbage and on
bis neighbors.

DESCRIPTION.

| lical full-grown larva has the following characters :

i 2 inches in length by 0.2 inch in width at the widest part
dy, and is much narrowed anteriorly, the first segment be-
han half the width of those at the middle of the body,
y, the diameter hardly lessens, so that the body is obliquely
behind.

The general color varies from greenish to fawn, freshly moults
specimens being bright green. In a mature specimen the fawn color
is plainly mottled with black and white. There is a delicate 1
obscure dorsal line of white, more or less evidently bordered bv a
darker shade, deepest upon the incisions, producing an appearance
of obscure black points. From these points oblique lines pass for.
ward and outward across the dorsal space to the subdorsal line
these lines being paler than the ground color and bordered anteriorly
with black. These black dashes become more conspicuous on the
posterior segments than the accompanying pale lines, and are there
converted into oblique triangular blotches. In some examples these
blotches are evident the whole length of the body.

The subdorsal space is more densely varied with black than the
dorsal, giving the sides a darker tint, but the ground color is the
same. The lower part of the subdorsal space is more distinctly
gray than the upper. A narrowish white stigmatal line margins
the sub-stigmatic space above ; this latter being a reddish drab,
variegated with whitish.

The venter and prolegs are slightly paler and reddish. The
head is reddish brown, with two pale brown longitudinal lines. The
stigmata are white, ringed with black. The cervical shield is in¬
conspicuous and colored like the body. The piliferous tubercles are
small, and the hairs short. In some specimens the lower border of
the subdorsal space is marked by a row of longitudinal black
dashes. The subdorsal space itself is decidedly darker, and the
sub-stigmatic space is a yellowish tint.

The pupa is seven-eighths inch long by two-eighths inch in great¬
est diameter, reddish brown, foie part opaque, segments of abdo¬
men roughened at articulations, otherwise smooth and shining.
Abdomen terminating in two slender spines, with two minute spi-
nules at their bases, one on each side.

LIFE HISTORY.

Our data indicate at least two broods of the species, and there is
possibly a later one also. The larvae have appeared in our collec¬
tions from April 24 to May 6, and again in the middle of July.
Those taken in April pupated from the 26th of that month to the
6tli May, the imagos emerging from the 10th May to the -1st,
a single belated specimen appearing on the 11th June. Speci¬
mens pupating on the 26th emerged five days later. Larvae taken
from cabbage on the 16th July entered the ground on the 25th,
and emerged from the 15th to the 19th August. As the larvae
obtained in April were adult, the species evidently hibernates in the
larval stage. From the specimens in our breeding cages emerged
two hymenopterous parasites of the sub-family Cryptides, but which
I have not further determined.

■

ICLE Y. NOTES ON INSECTS INJURIOUS TO THE

APPLE AND PEAR.

1. Datana contract a < Walker.

Order Lepidoptera. Family Bombycid.e.

a a number of yellow-necked apple caterpillars collected on
trees August 13, 1883, and used in an experiment upon a
ious disease of insects, two pupae resulted, one of which
|d. This, to my surprise, proved to be an unquestioned
i contracta, agreeing in every essential particular with the de-
on and figures given by Grote and Robinson in Volume YI of
oceedings of the Entomological Society of Philadelphia.*

discal spot upon the first brown line of the anterior wing is
ident, however ; the first and second lines meet on the inner
i of the wing; and the fourth line is nearly obsolete. In other
its the correspondence is exact. The larva pupated Septem-
, 1883, and the moth emerged June 23, 1884.

f

2. Biston ypsilon, n. s.

Order Lepidoptera. Family Phal.enid>e.

(Plate X. Fig. 4.)

mgle looping larva, two inches long, was obtained from the
near Warsaw, June 26, 1883, and fed upon apple leaves until
’, when it entered the earth for pupation. Here it remained
April of the following year, on the 8th of which month the
moth was noted in the breeding cage.

go. — The single male specimen bred is of a brownish gray color ;
dusky gray; palpi black; antenme dusky, widely pectinate;
: gray, with three transverse dark lines, the anterior and middle
::e, the posterior straight. The front wings are brownish gray
id with black on basal and terminal thirds, marked with three
erse black lines with the space between the first and third
,;ray minutely specked with black, these specks taking the form
msverse lineations on the costa. The inner line is obliquely
•;e, its inner end being about half the distance of the outer from
ase of the wing. The third line is sinuate, bending broadly
i ;d around the end of the discal cell and then running nearly

I ,ge 14, and Plate II, Figures 5 and 6.

96

directly to the internal margin. The middle line is straight, and
joins the inner end of the third before it reaches the internal mar¬
gin. About one-half the distance from the third transverse line to
the posterior margin is a jagged, pale, transverse line extending
across the wing. The posterior wings are pale gray, marked with
two transverse lines, the inner of which is straight and the outer
sinuous like that of the fore wing. Beyond this is an obscure sub¬
terminal whitish band. Upon the middle of the wing, between these
lines, is a distinct black spct. The wing beyond the outer trans¬
verse line is more irrorate with dusky, the fringe pale with black¬
ened scales in the intervals between the veins. The first segment
of the abdomen is covered with long gray pile ; the remaining seg-
ments are fulvous brown, with a double row of black blotches along
the middle.

Larva. — Length, when full grown, two inches. The general color
is a reddish drab, ornamented with numerous irregular longitudinal
stripes of a reddish hue, varied with yellow and bordered with jagged
lines of black. Four of these bands are continuous upon the back,
but vary greatly in width. On the sides they are much interrupted,
the stripe below the spiracles being broken up into irregular patches.
That immediately above the spiracles is regularly interrupted, dis¬
appearing at the middle of each segment. On the last two segments
all the bands are much interrupted and very irregular. The dorsal
stripes are confluent a little behind the middle of each segment,
from the fourth to the eighth, with the exception of a central stripe
of the ground color, by which all the transverse bands are broken.
These confluent band-like areas of the longitudinal stripes are, at
first, yellow, but all change to russet with the lajst moult, except
the anterior one, which remains a bright lemon-yellow. The surface
is smooth with the exception of a transverse row of about five black
hairs to each segment, each : arising from a minute tubercle. There
is also a prominent tubercle behind each spiracle (excepting that
upon the first segment), bearing a black hair at its apex. This row
of lateral tubercles is variegated with rose and yellow, and each is
surmounted by a jagged black line, which includes the black spiracle
in the area described by it. The ventral surface has the same ground
color as the dorsal, and is similarly marked with longitudinal stripes,
which are, however, less distinct than the above. The head is irreg¬
ularly punctate, patches of the punctures being black, giving the
surface a mottled appearance. The general color of the head and
first segment is lighter than that of the other parts of the body.
The anterior segment has a yellow front margin, interrupted in the
middle by the median stripe already described. The legs are ringed
with black and yellow at the articulations, and are elsewhere more
or less spotted with black. Upon the antepenultimate segment aie
two prominent black tubercles, one upon either side of the median
stripe, each bearing a stiff bristle at its apex ; and similar bristles
are scattered over the dorsal surface of the succeeding segments.
The last segment with the corresponding prolegs is punctate vit
black, and bears two smaller setose tubercles similar to those above
mentioned. The preceding pair of prolegs are irregularly stripe

ttled with black, rose, and yellow, like the sides. Some
!?se rows of minute black hairs are visible upon the under
two or three to each segment.

3. The Apple Leaf Roller.

(Caccecia rosaceana, Harris.)

"

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortriciml

irva of this insect, well known to be injurious to the apple
habit of rolling and eating the younger leaves, was ob-
arly last May engaged in a much more mischievous attack,
[he stamens and pistils out of the freshly opened flowers,
lowers disappeared, these larvae resorted to the young leaves,
g to the usual habit of the species. Specimens collected on
of May, pupated June 9, and emerged as imagos June 16.

4. The Apple Leaf Skeletonizer.

(Pempelia hammondi, Riley.

The Lesser Apple Leaf Roller.

(Terns malivorana, LeBaron.)

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricule.

(Plate X. Fig. 5.)

^series near Normal my attention was called this year, as
the extraordinary abundance of the above insects, the effect
e presence began to declare itself most evidently late
Much of the young nursery stock was so seriously affected
this active growing season that its growth was completely
L ; and as these larvae remained active this year until the
ill in autumn, a large percentage of the young trees made
growth whatever. The varieties with thick and woolly
vere, however, little attacked, the moths having evidently
the smooth and thinner-leaved varieties when depositing
*s. We made various experimental attempts upon these in-
the field, using a force pump for the distribution of a
emulsion and of pyrethrum suspended in water. We also
powdered lime with a bellows, but none of these applications
ifficiently pronounced effect to make their continuance ad-
A small percentage of the worms would die when thoroughly
[ with the fluids, but rolled as they were in the leaves and
l by their webs, it was impossible to reach them with any
(.ness. On one occasion three days after a complete drench-
i ie trees with the kerosene emulsion, ten still living larvae
en from a single small tree about three feet high.

;-7

98

Against these insects, methods of protection must evidently !,e
the main reliance. If the nurseryman waits until their injuries
alarm him, the time for checking their ravages is substantially
past. Both these species pupate in the leaves, either upon the tree
or upon the ground, and may be destroyed by collecting and bur¬
ning the rubbish between the rows ; or watching for their first ap¬
pearance early in the season, the foliage may be sprayed with ar¬
senical solutions, or with Paris green or London purple in suspen-
sion, thus poisoning the young larvae as they hatch or the older
ones’ as they extend their webs.

5. Crepidodera helxines, L.

Order Lepidoptera. Family Chrysomelid.e.

The little flea beetle was noticed June 22, riddling the leaves of
apple trees near Normal ; and the common cucumber flea beetle,
Crepidodera cucumeris, was also detected at the same work as early
as the 10th of May.

6. The Apple Plant Louse.

[Aphis mail, Fab.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Aphidim.

/ ' jg!li

In his article on this species in the Eighth Report from this
office, Dr. Thomas expresses a doubt whether the common apple
leaf aphis of Illinois, is the above species or that described by Fitch
from Mercer county, Illinois, under the name of Aphis maltfolia .*
Careful examination of the winged form of all the apple aphides in
the collections which we have made during the last two years in
Southern and Central Illinois, shows not a single specimen of
malifolice, all being distinctly mail.

It is worthy of remark that the second fork of the third vein of
the anterior wing is often very small, and sometimes even dis¬
appears entirely, so that this vein presents but a single fork,— a
character which, taken by itself, would exclude such specimens from
the genus Aphis. When present, the fork varies from one-half to
one -sixth or one-seventh of the length of the first.

7. The Yellow Jumping Pear Louse.

• ( Trioza pyrifolice, n. s.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Psyllih®.

(Plate X. Fig. (5.)

The injuries to the pear done by the common jumping pear louse
[Psylia pyri) are well known to economic entomologists, and nave

racterized in a brief article upon this insect published by
nas in our Eighth Entomological Report. I have here to
le occurrence in Illinois of a second species of this family,
in habit, (and apparently in life history also), to its well-
slative.

h 1 • •

s a small yellowish species which we found at Normal on
of May, and occasionally thereafter, puncturing the blades
petioles of the leaves of the pear trees. It presents all the
rs of the genus Trioza, having, however, the frontal lobes
nclined (projecting downward decidedly more than forward)
present the aspect of a beak.

irages .1 inch in length. The surface is opaque, thorax
i yellow, abdomen blackish brown. The head is twice as
long across the eyes, nearly as wide as the thorax ; the
ery widely emarginate in front, the foveae opaque but not
very large, occupying nearly the whole of the upper surface,
ex is usually black, edged with yellow posteriorly, but the
sometimes reduced to a transverse blotch surrounded by
>r even to two black spots occupying the centers of the
The face is black, frontal lobes diverging somewhat, hairy,
longer hairs varying in color from white with black tips to
lack. The antennae are as long as the head and thorax,

; basal joints and the basal half of the third white some-
aded with dusky. The third joint is four-fifths as long as
1th and fifth together. The last two joints are thickened,
mited, forming a slight club, and the last bears a minute
al appendage at its inferior tip and a short hair above.

aim narrow, white in the middle, brown, or black on the
ith a white point upon the lower edge. The dorsulum
naked, a little longer than the mesonotum, closely and
r punctured, brownish yellow, often clouded with dusky,
jstinctly seen in front, where brownish blotches sometimes
one upon either side of the middle. The sutures are all
osterior margins straight in the middle ; the sides, a little
in front of the suture, bearing each a short black spine.

mesonotum and scutellum are brownish yellow, alutaceous
dorsulum, with a conspicuous lanceolate or oval longitudi-
m stripe or blotch on each side the middle, and an oblique
utside this, usually less evident than the preceding. Scutel-
lted, plain in all the specimens examined. Wings hyaline,
rownish yellow.

egs of the first and second pairs are sometimes wholly
xcept the tarsi, which are black, but the femora are some-
msky only above, and the tibiae only in front. The hind
are commonly dusky above, but the tibiae and the basal
the tarsus pale. Abdomen purplish brown with pale posterior
( the segments; conspicuously hairy at tip.

bed from ten specimens.

er species of Trioza, ( T . diospyri), first described by Ash-
>m the persimmon in Florida, and found by us abundant
tree in Southern Illinois, was likewise occasionally seen at

Normal on the pear. As the persimmon is unknown in this vicinity,
the species doubtless occurs on other trees. We have not found it
however, upon cultivated fruits in numbers to indicate any proba¬
bility of injury to them.

This species is larger than that just described, shining black,
more or less pubescent, especially upon the head and thorax. The
frontal lobes are short, very obtuse and project forward from the
vertex.

It is probable that Trioza pyrifolia , like Psylla pyri, winters a<
an adult and lays its eggs upon the young leaves m spring. The
young of the common species fix themselves habitually upon the
young twigs or wood of the previous year, and, piercing the still
soft bark with their long beaks, remain stationary except when dis¬
turbed. The fluid excrement of the louse attracts ants and other
syrup-loving insects, as does that of the Aphis. As the larvae obtain
their growth, they spread to the under sides of the leaves. Where
these insects are abundant, the continual drain upon the sap of the
young twigs arrests their growth, and the tips of the leaves and
twigs may die.

The various insecticides found available for plant lice take effect
likewise upon these jumping leaf lice, the most promising topical
application doubtless being the kerosene emulsion with soap.

8. The Willow Saw Flies.

(. Dolerus arvensis, Say; Dolerus bicolor, Beauv.)

Order Hymenoptera. Family Tenthredinule.

(Plate X. Fig. 7.)

From one of the most intelligent and observant fruit growers of
my acquaintance, I have heard from time to time of a “steel-blue
fly” which clustered in spring upon the buds and blossoms of the
pear, either eating them or blighting them and causing them to
drop. On the 80th March he sent me specimens from his pear
trees, and I found them to be the adults of the above two species
which are known as willow saw flies,— so-called because their [ reen,
many-footed larvae feed on the leaves of willows. The evidence
against these saw flies lay in the fact that they were abundant and
busy upon the opening buds and fresh blossoms of the pear and oi
some other trees, for many days in succession, and that the blos¬
soms afterwards fell without setting fruit. Afterwards a similar
but more positive charge against these insects appeared m tlie
correspondence of the “Western Bural’ ’ of Chicago, for Ma} c
1884, as follows :

“Enclosed you will find a couple of bugs that are working on
fruit trees here. They ruin many blossom buds by sucking the sap
out of them, sometimes causing them to fall off just before opening.
They make their appearance as soon as the trees begin to gr0 •

notice there are two colors of bugs — red and black. Is
y way to get rid of them ? Poison won’t do it, for I have
fjndon purple. They suck the sap mostly, although I think
the season they eat the leaves some, but am not sure of it.
rk on pear worse than others.”

rst of these species, Dolerus arvensis, was originally de¬
ny Thomas Say in 1824, and the second, less common but still
t, by Beauvois, in 1805. Although the larvae of the former,
have been known for a long time to feed upon the leaves
v, they have not otherwise, so far as I am aware, been
1 of * any injury to vegetation of economic importance, all
ences to them in the literature of entomology being of a
technical character. From other insects occurring in similar
s, with which they are at all likely to be confounded, they
distinguished by the following characters in addition to
the family Tenthredinidae, to which these insects belong :

rst, Dolerus arvensis, is a little more than one-third of an
length by about one-third as wide, and measures not far
>- thirds of an inch across the extended wings. The head
(y are dark steel blue except the thorax, which is variegated
ow and black.

ther species, Dolerus bicolor, is a trifle smaller than the
iwnish yellow except the wings, the head, the middle of the
,md the legs, all of which are black.

hese insects are abundant everywhere in early spring, and
le of both, similar in appearance to green caterpillars, but
shed by the possession of eleven pairs of legs, feed upon the
[: the willow a little later in the season.

1 watching in the field soon convinced me that these saw
e neither biting nor piercing the buds or flowers, but that
e merely licking off the semi-fluid exudation from the sur-
he bud scales. Dissecting the specimens and examining the
of their stomachs with the microscope, I found only a clear
Ihout a trace of solid matter except occasional spheres con-
f clusters of threads of fungous parasites. Critically search-
surface of a bud scale which these flies had but just
>ver, I saw that no injury whatever had been done to the
f the plant, even the slender hairs with which the scales
ered being wholly undisturbed. Watching the flies with a
could see that their biting jaws remained ail the time closed,
their flap-like maxilla) were continually employed in mop-
the moisture from the viscid surface, and as they have no
arts capable of piercing the substance of a plant, it was
■i,t no injury was being done. Finally, I confined a lot of
flies in a breeding cage with pear buds not yet open. The
industriously worked over the surfaces of the unopened buds
l entered the flowers as they expanded, but did neither any
injury whatever. The buds afterwards all opened out in
Jb bloom, and remained fresh for several days, while the
flies, having lapped up all the syrup available, starved to
the midst of the uninjured blossoms. A little experiment

j

showed that they were especially susceptible to the influence of
pyrethrum, and that a single thorough application to a tree would
kill all upon it at the time.

The above brief account of these insects is given merely to set at
rest the fears of those who, like my correspondents, may be led to
attribute to them serious mischief really due to quite other cause?.

:iCLE VI.— ON SOME INSECT ENEMIES OF THE

SOFT MAPLE (ACER DASYCARPUM).
ft

4otes and Experiments on the Soft Maple Bark Louse.

4

( Pulvinaria innumerabilis, Rathvon.)

m

Order Hemiptera. Family Coccid^l

(Plate XI. Figs. 1 and 2.)

annoying and even destructive species, which attracted so
attention four years ago and then suddenly disappeared from
ommenced, last year, to appear again in noticeable numbers
soft maples throughout Central Illinois, and during the season
,3sed was excessively abundant throughout the State from at
Is far south as Shelby ville to our northern limits. Notwith-
y the length at which it has been treated in former reports
is office, and the numerous articles upon it which have ap-
in the agricultural and political papers during the last few
p*eat numbers of my correspondents were unacquainted with
ae and life history of the species. In fact, fully half the
logical correspondence of this office during the months of
nd July related to this bark louse. In the earlier articles
in the Beport, some premature conclusions were reached
spect to its life history, and I do not know that exact ex¬
it has heretofore been made with respect to its destruction.

females of the preceding year which had wintered upon the
f the maples, began to attract general attention early in June,
wing by this time attained their full growth _ and developed
tony egg masses beneath the scales into which their bodies
•ome practically converted. By the middle of June it was
see that the lice were abundant almost everywhere upon the
1 and they commenced to appear likewise upon a number of
*ees and plants. On the 14th, we noticed them upon the pear
i elder at Normal, and on the 16th, upon the grape and wal-
Quincy, and upon the pawpaw, grape, and honey locust, at

104

As the young hatched, they spread in great numbers over the vege¬
tation in the vicinity of the trees where they had their origin, and
attached themselves to a great variety of plants, both shrubby and
herbaceous, besides those mentioned above. We found them upon
the bass-wood, green ash, American elm, black locust, osage orange
plum, and cherry, and in their second stage upon leaves of clover
and smartweed, upon wild cucumber, and upon the gooseberry
In fact, their young occurred, in the middle of July, upon nearly ali
the herbaceous plants within one or two hundred feet of infected
trees ; clover, plantain, Polygonum, mustard, various grasses, and
Biclena frondosa, being the species apparently preferred. The latter
plant seemed to suffer considerably from their attacks, the leaves
being paled, spotted with yellow, and slightly curled when worst in¬
fested. By the latter part of July the larvae in the second stage
were common upon the under sides of the leaves of strawberries
near infested trees, causing them to contract and curl.

The ultimate fate of these individuals which fixed themselves upon
herbaceous plants and throve there, for a time at least, we neglected
to make out, but it is probable that the greater part of them per¬
ished in autumn, although some may have succeeded in migrating
at this period (when the young upon the trees are passing from the
leaves to the twigs) to woody plants on which they could maintain
themselves until the following season. The fact that in nurseries we
sometimes found the young very abundant upon the suckers at the
bases of the trunks of trees which were themselves but little infested,
tended to confirm this supposition.

I noticed a marked difference in the stage of advancement of the
brood upon different trees, some retaining still a considerable per¬
centage of the eggs unhatched in the cottony masses attached to the
twigs, after others had practically yielded all their young, and the
obsolete bodies of the females and the egg masses had fallen to the
ground, or were hanging in ragged shreds from the branches of the
trees. As late as July 13, on some trees in Bloomington, fully
twenty-five per cent, of the eggs were still unhatched. By the 20th
of the month the young had nearly all left the nests of the mother
bark lice and were established on the leaves, although a few eggs
could occasionally be found which were still unliatched.

By the 16tli August the injury effected by this new brood was at
its height, and many trees in the vicinity of Bloomington lost a
considerable part of their leaves, and the others were blackened and
dwarfed, giving the branches a bare and unthrifty look.

By the 30th October all the living bark lice had deserted the
leaves, except a few found occasionally upon the petioles, but
thousands of them occurred upon the under sides of the twigs and
branches of nearly every tree of the species worst infested, ( Acer
dasycarpum), the twigs being often crowded to their very tips.

The common insect enemies of the species were moderately abun¬
dant throughout the season, the small black Coccinellid beetle.
Hyperaspis signata, whose larva is found embedded within the egg
mass devouring the eggs, being the most destructive.

dilute hymenopterous parasite described by Miss Emily A.
nder the name of Coccophagus lecanii * was not infrequent,
is specimens emerged in our breeding cages early in Octo-
vhich time also the adult Hyperaspis appeared abundantly,
insignificant percentage of the brood was actually parasit-
.vever,»and the number of these parasites occurring was far
ose of the year 1880, at which time the last previous up-
f this species culminated. There is consequently every
ity that the maple bark louse will be certainly not less
t next year than this, but probably far more so, and that
following will be marked by their almost total disappearance.

teresting observation of my first assistant, Mr. H. Garman,
nserted from his notes dated July 24.

st of the goldfinch, Chrysomitris tristis, was found to-day in
'3 orange hedge, and on examination proved to be covered
with the silken nests and bodies of the female of Pulvi-
• mmerabilis. These had been collected some distance away,
were no maple trees in the neighborhood. There were no
3 on the leaves of the hedge at a distance from the nest,
-he neighborhood of the latter the leaves were covered with
>me still active. The fact illustrates a means of dispersal
bark louse which does not seem to have been noted by

Experiments.

le purpose of testing precisely the value of various local
ions to trees infested by the maple bark louse, I instituted
of experiments with all the substances likely to be of
c use, and the results are herewith given.

Kerosene Emulsion .

e 18th July, when the leaves of the trees were generally in-
y the young, we began experiments with the kerosene emul-
;mg a strong soap suds for the preparation of the emulsion,
iting with water to give two and a half per cent, of kero-

iment 1. — At three p. m., a single leaf bearing many young-
dipped in this fluid for a moment, and two hours later a
of the insects were taken from the leaf and examined with
scope. All were evidently dead, and those on the leaf also

can Naturalist, Vol. XII, p. 661. J. Duncan Putnam in his admirable article on
l innmnerabilis published in Volume II of the Proceedings of the Davenport
of Sciences remarks, in a foot note to page 332, concerning this species: I
inch inclined to think that Platyqaster lecanii ; described by Fitch in his 5th
Report, as infesting Lecanium guercitronis may prove to be really a Coccoph-
y allied if not identical with this species. The description applies too well, to
eve that the two species belong to different families. In this event Dr. I itch s
,to the Proctotrupidae is of course wrong.”

:>t able, however, to agree with Mr. Putnam in this matter, as the descriptionby
hich he refers states that the antennae of his species are threadlike, with the
ider, three times as long as thick, the last one not enlarged; whereas, in the
; of Uoccophaaus lecanii bred by us from Pulvinaria, the antennae are somewhat
e joints less than twice as long as thick, and the last one is decidedly enlarged.

106

commenced to loosen at tlie margins and cuil upwards. At
on the following morning a single example only was found capai

of slight motion.

Experiment 2. — This was a repetition of the first experiment wi
identical results except that all the plant lice examined on 1
morning of the 19th were absolutely dead.

Experiment 8. -In this case the same solution was applied to
infested leaf with a camel’s hair brush with the same effects, all t
bark lice being dead at eight the following morning.

Experiment 4.— On the 22d of the month a two and a half ]
cent, dilution of the kerosene emulsion was thrown with a foi
pump and a tubular nozzle upon a branch of a soft maple ti
The leaves wnre not as thoroughly wetted as desirable. 1 oui dt
after about half the young bark lice were alive, although it is p
sible that the branch treated had been restocked, by young fr<
other parts of the tree, as the insects were still moving about and
precaution had been taken to prevent such migration.

Experiment 5. — On the same day a branch of soft maple attacl
to the tree was dipped in a two and a half per cent, dilution
kerosene, and on the following day three-fourths of the bark 1
were dead. Four days after a few were still alive, but not enoi
to do any appreciable harm, and another application would don
less have killed them all.

Experiment 6.— On the 29th the same experiment was tried w
a five per cent, dilution of kerosene, the emulsion being made v
whale oil soap, and common soap suds being used for dilution. 1
days later the bark lice remaining on the leaves of this branch were
dead.

Experiment 7. — On the 29th, on the other hand, an applicat
was made to a branch by dipping in a two and a half per C(
dilution, soap suds being again used as the diluent, and five d
thereafter no considerable diminution in the number of living b
lice was apparent. It seems likely, however, considering the len
of time that had elapsed between the experiment and the ohsei
tion, that the branch had been restocked by young from other p,
of the tree, as the lice were still actively crawling about.

Experiment 8.— On the 81st of the month the leaves of a bra
of soft maple which was stocked with young bark lice were dip
in a five per cent, dilution of kerosene emulsion like that use*
the preceding experiment. Five days later a few living bark
still occurred upon the leaves, but nearly all had disappeared.

Experiment 9. — On the 6th August a similar experiment
made with a similar fluid, but containing ten per cent, of keros'
The branch treated was not examined until nine days afterwa
The leaves were not at all injured by a solution of this stren
Many bark lice still remained upon them, but they had perl
been restocked with living young.

In all the preceding observations the effect upon this bark
was determined by microscopic examination, the sign of death n

107

nnon being the cessation of the heart’s action. As the young were
transparent when viewed by transmitted light, the motion oi the
heart of living specimens was easily detected.

Whale Oil Soap.

From the 19th to the 22d several experiments were tried by dip-
nine the leaves in a solution of whale oil soap, or brushing then
surfaces with it, but as the strength of the solution was not noted
in these preliminary trials, I need only say that they were m a
cases effectual.

Experiment 10.— On the 23d a branch of a tree infested with
bark lice was dipped in a suds of whale oil soap containing a pound
to a gallon of water, and on the morning of the following day the
lice were all dead. Two days later, however, the leaves dipped in
this solution showed signs of injury, the margins of most of them hav¬
ing blackened and dried up. Naturally the younger leaves at the
tin of the branch were most severely injured, some having been
almost wholly destroyed. On the 29th, nearly all the leaies iai
fallen off this branch.

Experiment 11.— On the 25tli July, leaves were dipped in a solu¬
tion containing a quarter of a pound of whale oil soap to the gal¬
lon. and on the 26th the bark lice were mostly dead, only a small
percentage showing a feeble movement of the heart.

Experiment 12.— The above experiment was varied by using a so¬
lution double the strength just mentioned. On the following day
all the specimens examined were dead.

Experiment lS.-On the 28th, experiment 12 was repeated with
identical results, all the bark lice being dead two days later.

Experiment 14. — This was a repetition of experiment 11. The
twins were not examined, however, until five days atterwards.

S time, at least seventy-five per cent, ot bee npon the

lpavpq were dead and many which were not killed seemed to nave
been driven from the leaves as if the soap suds were obnoxious to
ttm TMs was shown by their having fixed themselves upon
petioles and twigs, a fact not elsewhere observed so early m t

season. The leaves were again very slightly injured at then
gins, and a few, perhaps, eventually fell before then time.

Experiment 15,-A repetition of experiment
treatment not a single living baik louse cou c , i 0 ^at

containing a hundred or so, all being brown and loosened, so tnat
a touch dislodged them. The leaves, howevOT, were slightly bkaek-
ened at the . margins, and some were doubtless mjuied enoug

cause them to fall. .

satisfactoiy^thaii th§se with the kerosene emulsion an appheation
of the suds, strong enough to effect the P^°*f;b«f ^

to injure the leaves at least as much as t ie

done.

108

Laundry Soap.

Experiment 16. — Three applications of strong solutions of lamn
soap were made with a brush to infested leaves, from the 19th
the 2*2d July, with the effect to destroy all the bark lice, oc
sionally, however, with trifling damage to the leases. The effect
these applications apparently differed but little from those of
whale oil soap.

Py rethrum.

Experiment 17. — Although expecting nothing from the applicat
of pyrethrum, we made a few experiments with it, commencing J
19. As they were all entirely inefficient, the results need not
given further than to say that the fresh pyrethrum powder suspern
in water in quantities varying from a tablespoonful to the gallon
to an excessive proportion was applied by brushing and dippi
without any effect whatever. Pure pyrethrum was also dusted ui
the leaves without result.

Carbolic Acid.

Experiment 18.— July 19, leaves infested with the young bark
were thoroughly wetted with carbolized water (a teaspoonful of
pure liquid acid to the gallon) and examined five hours later,
bark lice were all alive. This experiment was twice repeated, b
in the laboratory and the field, with only negative results.

A few additional experiments were made with tobacco water ((
half pound tobacco to a gallon of water) ; with hellebore (one ou
to the gallon) ; and with a weak solution of caustic soda, in
cases without any favorable result, every individual. being apparei
alive in from one to three days after treatment.

As a general result of the above series of experiments we i
say that a kerosene emulsion diluted with soap suds to a strer
of from two and a half to five per cent., was found effective du
the month of July and did not injure the leaves. This was
only substance experimented with which gave any promise of
fulness, with the exception of the whale oil and soaps, which were ^
ject to the drawback already mentioned ; that is the liability to in
the leaves if used in a solution strong enough to destroy the 1
lice. Possibly if it were washed off shortly after application
recommended by Dr. Lintner, the injurious result might be
vented, but this would too greatly increase the trouble and expt
of the application.

Washing off the Females and Egg Masses ivith Water.

From correspondents in Northern Illinois, I learned that lab
June, the practice became somewhat general of washing off the
masses and the outworn bodies of the females with jets of w
from the hydrants, throwing the water into the tree by means <
hose, but I have not yet been able to learn with what m
This method was, apparently, usually applied under the mist;

109

notion that the principal injury to the trees was done by these last
year’s females, and that if they were removed the damage would be
arrested. The real injery, I need not say, is done later in the sea¬
son by the young hatching from the egg masses which make these
females so conspicuous in spring and early summer. It is possible,
however, that the method is a valuable one, as the washing away
of the eggs before hatching, may not improbably result in the des¬
truction0 of many of them. The young which hatch upon the
ground would doubtless, most of them, make their way back to the
tree but if the rubbish beneath the tree were raked and burned
after the egg masses had been dislodged by the water, the multi¬
plication of the pest might probably be kept below the limit of in¬
jury. '

TSince the above was written, I have received from Mr. S. M.
Dunning, of Chicago, who thoroughly tried the hydrant method last
.Tune twigs of a maple tree from which the egg masses had' been
carefully and completely washed off. The under sides of these twigs
were well covered, in March, 1885, with half grown females, ^scarcely,
if at all, less abundantly so than was to have been expected it no
treatment had been applied. The nearest other maples were across
a dusty city street, and it is scarcely likely that the young were
conveyed so far. A box elder in the same lot which was also at¬
tacked by the bark lice, but not treated, may have divided its par¬
asites with the maple; but, curiously, this tree had this spring
fewer lice than the maple above mentioned. It is, therefore, 1 -

probable that the mere dislodgement of the egg masses with the
water jet had any real effect on the numbers of the young lice. n-
deed it may have easily done more harm than good by destroying
w thin the egg masses the larva of the Coccinellid* to whose mul¬
tiplication we have to look for the principal check on the ^orease
of the next brood. This is, perhaps, the explanation of the interior
abundance of bark lice upon the box eider, as jus men lonei .
struction of the egg masses by burning, after dls odfing the,“ I ^
water, seems to be necessary to any promise ot mler

method. Further experiment is needed, however, and will be nnclei

taken the coming season.]

2. The Oblique-Banded Leaf Holler.

(Gaccecia rosaceana, Harris.)

This nearly omnivorous species (not

from the maple), was by us found rolling the ' month

c arpum in May, pup* and larv* collected on the 20th of that montn

emerging from July 9 to 18.

3. Pandemis lamprosana, Robs.

Order Lepidoptera. Family Tortricid.®.

(Plate XI. Fig. 3.)

Among the leaf rollers upon the maple collected May 10, was one
of which we kept no description, which resulted m an g
Pandemis lamprosana.

110

4. Aleurodes aceris, n. s.

Order Hemiptera. Family Aleurodidje.

(Plate XI, Figs. 4 and 5.)

I have noticed, for several years, a peculiar bark louse upon
leaves of the maple, but have not bred it until the present ye
The fully developed pupal scale is oval in general outline, sornew1
lyrate, broadest posteriorly, contracted in front of the midc
Margins entire, surface densely granulated. The color is cho
late mottled with white, the white varying in amount and tend
to form three transverse bands. The central segmented area
usually irregularly mottled with white, and a quadrate patch,
eluding the vent, 'is almost always brown ; but, otherwise, the cc
may vary from nearly uniform brown to almost white. Out'
sometimes slightly emarginate posteriorly. Lengthy .095 of an im
greatest width, .045 ; width at anterior fourth, .CL6.

The imago is pale yellow throughout; legs and abdomen pal
wings milky white ; rostrum black at the extreme tip ; veins yell
ish; first joint of the antennae scarcely longer than wide, the
maming joints filiform, the second nearly as long as the four
lowing and about four times as long as the first, the fourth Ion
than the third, the third and fifth about equal, the sixth fusifo

At Tamaroa, in Southern Illinois, soft maple trees were fo
badly infested by this bark louse, but elsewhere it has occurred
only trivial numbers. There are apparently two broods of this spe<
in a year, scales collected in August, 1883, emerging April 1(
•24, 1884, and others, collected during the present summer, em<
ing August 4. From these larvae several hymenopterous paras
belonging to the genus Elaptus escaped September 6, the specie:
which is apparently new.

Elaptus aleurodis, n. s. Plate XI. Fig. 6. Female. Length .03 o
that of inch ; the head .005 inch ; front wings .032 of an inch long
.001 inch wide; posterior wings .0032 inch wide at the widest point ;
tennae as long as the head and whole body; scape stout, arcuate, ri
to the top of the head, about as long as the three following joi
nearly smooth, as is also the second joint ; remaining joints den
pilose; the club not jointed, as long as the three joints preced
first joint obconic, second about the same length but narro
Color black, surface shining, abdomen alutaceous, head and th<
punctured, antennse yellow, legs entirely yellow, . femora and t
of the middle and posterior legs black, their tarsi yellow.

Described from three specimens bred from Aleurodes aceris.

5. Lygus invitus, Say. >

Order Hemiptera. Family Capsids.

*

(Plate XII. Fig. 1.)

Brief mention may properly here be made of a species whos*
juries to vegetation have not hitherto been serious, as far as kn<

but which deserves attention as the near relative of one of . the most
injurious horticultural species (the tarnished plant bug), and also
because, from its own abundance and habits, it may well become
the author of serious mischief.

Although not agreeing precisely with any descriptions of Capsids
accessible to me, I have little doubt, after careful study of about
forty specimens collected in June, that the species is that described
by Say as Capsus invitus. It differs materially from Say’s original
descriptions, but corresponds closely in most particulars with the
description of a type specimen of Say’s, published by Uhler in his
notes on the Heteroptera in the collection of Dr. Harris, * varying
from that only in some color characters of little moment in so vari¬
able a genus.

DESCRIPTION.

The following description is condensed from that of Uhlei, modi¬
fied with respect to color to conform to our own specimens.

General color pale obscure yellow, varying to yellowish green.
Antennae and transverse carina at base of head very slender, the
former nearly as long as the hemelytra. Surface ot head polished,
impunctured, clothed with short hairs. Tylus slender, short. Dyes
lame prominent. Pronotum smooth, very convex, sparingly hairy,
finely densely and mostly confluently punctured, the punctures
forming obscure transverse rugosities. The head and fore part ol
the thorax are slightly darker yellow, the antennae are sometimes
pale throughout, sometimes embrowned at tip and also at tip ot
second joint. A broad band on the pronotum a little within the
margin,' extends backwards along the inner edge of the clavus, is
continued as a dusky shade through the middle of the membrane
deepest along the inner edge of the inner cell, and extends 1 ■ .

into* an indefinite dusky shade. This line is intersected at the tip
of the corium by a transverse band of the same color extending to
the edge of the hemelytra. When the wings are closed, these marks
give the appearance of a median black stripe crossed at the tip o
the corium by a black band, and forking at the scutellnm. In the
darker colored specimens the pronotal bands are frequently con¬
nected by a basal shade. The posterior halt ot the laiger cell of
the membrane is usually white. In many yellowish spemmens the
cuneus alone is green. The posterior thighs aie < omnu '

on the distal half, and the anterior tibiae are often brown at tip.
Length to tip of hemelytra 6 mm. Humeral breadth l.bb mm.

On the 12th May the younger leaves of many of the common so
maples (Acer dasycarpum) near Normal, were observed to ^ muled
and specked with numerous semi-transparent spots, evidently t
work of the larvae of this capsid, found abundantly upon e a ^ ec ^
leaves. On the 30th May, specimens collected were all of the se o

and third stages. On the 1st June, the Ins month

in the breeding cages and on the trees. By ie o • ' an(j

nearly all the specimens collected bad transformed ’

the experiment was not carried farther.

* Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, Vol. XIX, p. 407.

112

ARTICLE VII. INSECTS INJURIOUS TO THE ELM.

1. The Elm Borer, (Saperda tridentata, Oliv.)

Order Coleoptera. Family Cerambycid^l

(Plate XII. Fig 2.)

For several years past my attention has been attracted by
gradual decay and death of the rows of white elms ( Ulmus america
in the towns of Normal, Bloomington, and Champaign. The diffici
with the trees commonly commences, to declare itself from the n
die of summer to autumn, when the leaves, first upon the termi
twigs and then upon the larger branches, are seen to stop tl
growth, change their color, and ultimately to fall. This loss is r
urally followed speedily by the death of the branches themseh
as is clearly evident the following spring, when these remain bl
and lifeless while the rest of the tree is putting on its folia
Usually the higher branches of the tree are those first affected,
the whole top soon seems to blight, and in a year or two the i
perishes utterly. This difficulty, commencing here and there, extei
slowly from tree to tree along the rows, finally inevitably destroy
every tree of this species in the immediate vicinity.

In the autumn of 1888, I directed an assistant, Mr. Webster
dig up a tree which had nearly died in this manner during
summer, and to carefully examine the larger roots, the trunk,
all the branches, with a view to ascertaining, if practicable,
cause of the difficulty. The roots were found unaffected, but
peeling the bark from the trunk, about half-grown larvae of Sapc
tridentata appeared in considerable numbers in the still living p;
of the wTood, and those of Magdalis armicollis (Plate XI. Fig.
were abundant where the bark and wood were already dead,
manner in which the bark had been mined and burrowed by
Saperdas, gave sufficient evidence of the cause of the death of
tree, the borers having again and again completely girdled the tri

Both the trunk and branches of this tree were cut up in lenj
and boxed for the purpose of determining the details of the
history of the species. The specimens were boxed Aug. 8,
cracks of the boxes being closed by pasting over them strip
paper, and each having left a glass covered opening in the top
which it was assumed that the insects emerging would be attrac
Later, this cover was removed, and a glass jar was inverted <
the opening.

113

Nothing emerged until the following spring, except a single para¬
de taken September 14. On the 9th April, living larvm of Sapercla
rere found still within the wood, but no imagos had appeared in
lie boxes, neither were any pupae discovered. On the 17th of that
a0nth, both larvae and pupae were detected, and on the 2d of May,
he first imagos appeared, three in number. On the third another
oiago emerged, on the 5th five more, on the 7th eighteen, on the
;th eleven, and on the 12th twenty-three, this being the largest
lumber taken from the boxes at once. Beetles continued, however,
o emerge at frequent intervals until the 22d June, at which time
he last appeared, one hundred and eighteen in all, having been
,aken alive. On the 15th September, the boxes were opened finally,
horoughly searched, and fifty-three more dead Saperdas were found.
Fhe boxes in which these specimens transformed, had been kept
mcler cover, but at the natural temperature of the air.

Although the elm borer has evidently been for several years both
aumerous and increasing in the neighborhood where this tree was de¬
stroyed, the amount of parasitism developed by the experiments
was quite insignificant, only eight parasitic insects, belonging to
three species, appearing in the boxes as against the one hundred
and seventy-one examples of the adult borer; and, indeed, as the
same pieces of wood contained a great host of the larvse of Magdalis
amicollis, from which multitudes of imagos of this species emerged
during this spring, it is impossible to say that some or most of this
small number of parasites may not have escaped from the latter
species.

Since the time of Harris, the elm tree borer has been well known
as a destructive enemy of this most magnificent and beautiful of
the shade trees of our towns and cities. It seems first to have at¬
tracted attention as an enemy of the elm in Boston, in 1847, at
which time the trees on the Boston common were found by Harris
to have suffered terribly from the ravages of this insect. “Several
of them,” he says, “had already been cut down, as past recovery;
others were in a dying state, and nearly all of them were more or
less affected with disease or premature decay. 1 heir bark was per¬
forated, to the height of thirty feet from the ground, with numerous
holes, through which insects had escaped; and large pieces had
I become so loose, by the undermining of the grubs, as to yield to
| slight efforts, and come off in flakes. The inner bark was filled
! with the burrows of the grubs, great numbers of which, in various
stages of growth, together with some in the pupa state, wTere found
therein; and even the surface of the wood, in many cases, was fur¬
rowed with their irregular tracks. Very rarely did they seem to
have penetrated very far into the wood itself; but their opeiations
were mostly confined to the inner layers of the bark, which thereby
became loosened from the wood beneath.”

The borers, (the larvae of the beetles) are similar in form and
general appearance to the notorious round-headed borer of the
apple, belonging, indeed, to the same genus. They rarely exceed
three-fourths of an inch in length, are destitute of feet, and have
the usual enlargement of the first segment of the body immediately
behind the head. The body is white, subcylindrical, _ a little flat¬
tened, with the lateral fold of the body rather prominent , end or
—8

114

the body flattened, obtuse, and nearly as wide at the end as at
first abdominal ring. The head is one-half as wide as the ]
thoracic ring, being rather large. The prothoracic segment, or t
next to the head, is transversely oblong, being about twice as br
as long; there is a pale dorsal corneous transversely oblong shi
being about two-thirds as long as wide, and nearly as lon^
the four succeeding segments; this plate is smooth, except on
posterior half, which is rough, with the front edge irregular
not extending far down the sides. Fine hairs arise from the li
edge and side of the plate, and similar hairs are scattered over
body and especially around the end. On the upper side ot e
segment is a transversely oblong ovate roughened area with
front edge slightly convex, and behind slightly arcuate. On
under side of each segment are similar rough horny plates,
arcuate in front, with the hinder edge straight.

The beetle resulting from this larva is of a dark brown color, ;
a tint of gray, owing to a thin coating of very short down,
ornamented with a curved line behind the eyes, two stripes on
thorax, and a three-toothed or three-branched stripe on the c
edo-e of each wing-cover of a rusty red color, lhere are alsc
black dots on the thorax, two above, and two on the sides ;
each of the angles between the branches and the lateral stripe
the wing-covers is marked with a blackish spot. The two hr
branches are oblique, and extend nearly or quite to the suture ;
anterior branch is short and hooked. Its average length is a
half an inch ; but it varies from four to six-tenths of an inch,
males are smaller than the females, but have longer antennae.

From the present appearance of the elms throughout the t<
of Central Illinois where I have had an opportunity to exa^
their condition, and from the rapid progress which this pest lias i
among them during the last two or three years, it seems extre
likely that it will totally exterminate the trees unless it be pror
arrested by general action. The only remedy available is urn
tionably the destruction of affected trees in autumn and wmte
fore the beetles have a chance to emerge from the trunks. In t
this measure should usually be taken by the authorities, since
vidual action could not be depended on to more than palliaft
difficulty. If every elm which is in the unhealthy condition i
described, and which, upon examination, is found to liaiboi
borers beneath the bark, w7ere cut down in autumn and bmne
fore spring, the multiplication of the borer might be cnee
checked ; but if the destruction of the trees be postponed un
late as May, a part of all of the beetles maturing each year a
escape to carry the mischief elsewhere.

2. The Elm Plant Louse.

(Schizoneura rileyi, Tlios.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Aphidihe.

Finding an elm at Normal seriously infested by this louse
apparently upon the point of death from the effects upon its to

115

L tried the experiment of applying pyrethrum for the destruction of
die insect. A large branch was dusted with a mixture of one part
pyrethrum to ten of flour, at 9:30 a. m., July 4, and soon after
die lice began falling from the twigs. At 6 p. m. only a few re¬
mained, and by 8 a. m. of the second day thereafter all had fallen
off and were lying dead upon the table. Spraying the foliage of
these trees with water in which pyrethrum was suspended in the
proportion of about a tablespoonful to a gallon of water would, con¬
sequently, in all probability, destroy the lice, or at least so effectu¬
ally check their multiplication as to prevent injury to the trees.

gf ,

3. An Elm Bark Louse.

( Lecanium , sp.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Coccnx®.

On the twigs of the white elm, at Normal, we found, this last season,
a large brown bark louse very similar in size, shape and general
appearance to the maple Pulvinaria previous to the appearance, of
the cottony egg mass beneath the body of the female, but differing
especially in the fact that the eggs were not enclosed in the waxy
filamentous masses or nests characteristic of Pulvinaria.

As we obtained only the adult female, we had not the material
for determining or describing the species. The matured scales aie
nearly circular, 5 mm. in diameter, vaulted, emarginate before and
behind, the upper surface more or less shining, dark brown, irregu¬
larly pitted on the central area, (where, however, it is nearly smooth),
and deeply and irregularly punctured on the sides, — below the punc¬
tures irregularly rugose. The eggs are oval, .099 mm. in length by
.048 mm. in transverse diameter. Beneath females obtained July
2, were eggs in various stages of development, young which had just
hatched, and those which had just passed the first moult.

4. The Three-Banded Leaf Hopper.

(Typhlocyba tricincta, Fitch.)

Order Hemiptera. Family Coccid^e.

About the middle of June, this pale yellow leaf hopper, distin¬
guished by two transverse dusky bands, (one across the nil i e
and one at the tips of the wing covers), and a dusky cloud upon
the scutellum, was abundant enough upon the leaves ol the
white elm, at Normal, to do considerable damage. 1 his species, e-
scribed by Fitch in his Third Report as State Entomologist of New
York, (p. 74), was originally found by him, in abundance, on rasp-
berry and currant bushes, and on grape vines.

116

ARTICLE VIII.— BRIEF MISCELLANEOUS NOTES.

1. Black Locust.

(Nematus robinice, n. s.)

(Plate XII. Fig. 5.)

From a number of saw fly larvae found infesting the black lo
(. Robinia pseudacacia) at Normal, we bred during the latter pai
July a small saw fly related to Nematus bivittatus and aureope
but apparently undescribed.

Body stout, pale brownish yellow; mesothorax with a black
upon each side ; metathorax with a transverse black band contin
with the posterior extremities of the mesothoracic stripes; ter
blackish with the sides and posterior margins of the segmeni
the general color; prothorax between the ends of the mesothoj
stripes a little darker brown; head slightly darker than the l
with a quadrate black spot upon the occiput, extending forwai
include the ocelli. This area is slightly -shining, but the adja
surfaces of the head are dull, punctured, and rather densely pi
cent. Antennae longer than the head and body, third and fo
joints equal; clypeus emarginate in front. The under parts and
are uniform pale yellow brown, except the tibiae and tarsi of
posterior pair which are dusky, and the genital valves of
female, which are black. Wings hyaline, veins fuscous, costa
stigmata yellowish, second submarginal cell slightly angled ai
recurrent nervules, of which there are two about equally rem
from the two extremities of the cell. First submarginal quad
distinct ; posterior margin of wing behind the lanceolate cell sli;
tinged with yellowish.

Length of body 4 mm. ; expanse 10 mm.

Described from a single female.

The larva from which this specimen was bred entered the gr
July 8, 'the imago emerging on the 26th.

2. Onion. — At Champaign, July, 1883, my attention was c
by Prof. Burrill, to some hairy larvae that were destroying onio
his gardens, as far as their numbers enabled them. Although
seemed to be the larva of Spilosoma virginica, Fab., its colors
somewhat unusual, and we bred it for identification ; but
imagos proved to be unquestionably that species.

A )

■j - / / / /- c

117

3. Egg Plant. — At Godfrey, September 25, the leaves of egg
plants were found badly riddled by a small flea beetle, Crepidodera
yaeumeris, Harris.

4. Larch. — In June, the foliage of the larches in the grounds of
the* University at Normal, were seriously affected by the red spider
( Tetranychus telarius, L.,) some of the trees seeming likely to die.
On one of those worst infested we tried the effect of spraying with
a kerosene emulsion made with soap, and diluted to contain two
and a half per cent, of kerosene. The insects were greatly reduced
in number by a single application, but not all killed. The trees soon
revived appreciably as compared with those not treated.

5 Willow.— The leaves of the willow at Normal were generally
infested both in 1888 and 1884, by the larvae of Apatela oblinita,
those collected July 6 pupating on the 11th and emerging on the

29th.

Orgyia leucostigma, Smith, was rather abundant on the willow in
the University grounds at Normal.

Larvae of Plagiodera lapponica, L., taken on the willow at Normal,
June 24, commenced to pupate July 1, and to emerge on the 3d,
the last of about sixty appearing on the 8tli.

The adult, Crepidodera helxines, L., was found repeatedly through¬
out May in Central and Southeastern Illinois, devouring the leaves
of willows and scarcely less commonly upon the Lombardy poplar
and the balm of Gilead, doing decided injury to young trees m the

nurseries.

6. Cherry.— From my friend, Dr. E. R. Boardman, of Elmira,
Stark county, I learned on the 9th June that the common willow
slug ( Nematus ventralis, Say) had almost completely defoliated a line
tree of wild cherry on his grounds. The species lias long been
known as an enemy of the willow, but has not been heietotoie le-
ported as injurious to any fruit tree.

During this month of June the cherry slug ( Selandria cerasi. Peck)
was especially abundant, completely whitening the leaves of many
trees, and doubtless killing some. The efhcacy of hellebore for the
destruction of this insect is well known, but as the use of so poi¬
sonous a substance is often unadvisable, we experimented somewhat
carefully with two other insecticides— the kerosene emulsion and
pyrethrum, a five per cent, dilution of the former, containing wo
and a half per cent, of kerosene, and one ounce to a gallon ol the
latter. We found these in both cases entirely effective, only a small
percentage of the larvae treated escaping.

7. Currant and Gooseberry.— The green apple leaf hopper ( Empoa
dbopicta, Forbes,) was seen by us upon the currant and gooseberry
at Normal, in numbers sufficient to do serious injury, causing the
leaves to curl and shrivel.

A number of leaf rollers of the currant, collected at Normal on
the 12th May,— white, smooth, with sliming jet black head mouth
parts, and cervical shield, prothoracic segment excep
reddish with two oblong black tubercles upon the sld®® °gth's s®g;
fflent, the anterior legs black, tarsi of the otlieis dus y, S

118

f

June 9 as small olive-drab moths, determined by Prof. Fernald
Orono Maine, as Eccopsis exoletum, Zeller — a species not hereto
reported west of New York, and whose larval history was unknoj
Each segment of the larva bears one or two transverse rows ot 1
black hairs about half the length of the segment each row cont
in2 five or six hairs. The head and cervical shield are also spar
hairy and the legs considerably so. The first spiracle, wholly wi
the anterior segment, is conspicuous, dark brown ; the others mu
and pale. Head and cervical shield wholly unmarked except a 1
slender median line on the latter. Length .4 of an inch.

The anterior wings of the imago are olive-gray, crossed by a me
shade of deep olive, and slightly deepening also towards the tern
margin The whole surface of the wing is finely irrorate with blac
snecks arranged in the form of slender waved lines, of which t
are from twelve to fifteen on the length of the wing An ob
dusky shade extends from the posterior margin at the base ot
wing to the middle of the discal cell. A black apical spot it
sented by five whitish bands upon the costa, each divided
slender olive line, all these bands tending upward to a point on
outer margin a little behind the apical spot The basa ha
costa with alternating black and white spots, the former being
plainer ends of the wavy lines already mentioned 1 nnge co

orou ' . ^ • \ _ i _ ... i * ... i . rre\A • -f VI T» CtC± V»nlp rill!

margim ^ H^d wings dusky , slightly bronzed; fringe pale duel
tip • antennse brown ; palpi white beneath,, dusky at the tip , t
bronzed gray, plain; legs black, ringed with pale.

The same larva was found upon the gooseberry May 16, puj
June 9, in leaf, and emerged on the 16th of that month.

119

EXPLANATION OF PLATES *

Plate I.

Fig. 1. The Root Web Worm, Crambus zeellus ; magnified one and
a half diameters. (Original.)

Fig. 2. Imago of same ; magnified two diameters. (Original.)

Fig. 3. Corn plant injured by Root Web Worm: a, tubular nest in
the earth; b, gnawed surface of stalk; c, tip of seveied
leaf drawn into mouth of nest. (Original.)

Fio-. 4. The Sulphur Leaf Roller, Dichelia sulphureana; magnified
two and tlireefourths diameters. (Original.)

Ficr. 5. The Wheat Straw Worm, Isosoma tritici : a, larva, ventral
view; b, do., lateral view; c, antenna; d, mandibles, t,
anal end, ventrally ; /, imago ; g, h, front and hmd wings
of exceptional individuals ; i, aborted wing m the noimal
flies,— all relatively enlarged. (After Riley.)

Fig. 6. Parasite of the Wheat Straw Worm, Eupelmus allyni ; mag¬
nified nine diameters. (Original.)

Plate II.

The Hessian Fly, Cecidomyia destructor , and its transformations
A healthy stalk of wheat on the left, the one on the right
dwarfed and the lower leaves beginning to wither and
turn vellow; the stem swollen at three places, near the
ground where the flaxseeds (li) are situated, between the
stem and sheathing base of the leaf,
a. Egg of the Hessian fly (greatly enlarged as are all the
figures except e and h) ; b, the larva, enlarged, the m
bv the side, m this and other figures, showing the natural
length; c, the flaxseed, pupanum, or pupa case ; d, the
pupa or chrysalis ; e, the Hessian Fly natural size, laying
itseggs in the creases of the leaf ; /, female Hessian Fly
much enlarged ; g, male Hessian Fly mueh en arged ^
flaxseed between the leaves and stalk; i, Chalcid oi ich
neumon parasite of the Hessian Fly, male, enlarged.
(From 10th Report,)

*The drawings for the original eutsonthe foilowingpla^es ^('Ijgf^PlateXLh which
larman, with the exception of Fig. 3, Plate 1, 1? ig. 4, ciate a±, auu x s

?ere drawn by Mr. H. Garman.

Plate III.

Fig. A. Side view of the female Hessian Fly, greatly enlarged.

a, three joints taken from the middle of the antenna of
female; a1, the three terminal female antennal joints;
the four basal, and a111, the two terminal male anten
joints; b , a maxillary palpus; c, scales from the b
and wings ; cl, e, side and vertical view of the last j<
of the fooc, showing the claws and foot-pad or pulvi
between them, and the scales on the joint.

Fig. B. Larva magnified with the ‘ ‘breast-bone” in the sec
ring next to the head.

B a, the breast-bone highly magnified ; B b, head from hem
enlarged ; Be, larval spiracle and its tubercle and trac
leading from the spiracle.

Fig. C. Side and front view of the pupa or chrysalis. The abdoi
of the side view is rather long, as the insect, w
drawn, was just emerging from the semi-pupa stage wl
it assumed December 1.

Fig. D. The flaxseed, puparium, or pupa case.

The line by the side of the complete figures denotes the nati

length of the insect. (From 10th Report.)

Plate IV.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 8.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.

Parasite of the Hessian Fly, Pteromalus pallipes; magni
eight diameters. (Original.)

Parasite of the Hessian Fly, Pteromalus fulvipes; magni
seven diameters. (Original.)

The Wheat Midge, Diplosis tritici : a , male ; b, female
natural size; c, wing, greatly enlarged ; d, antennal jc
ol male; e, do., of female;/, ovipositor; g, eggs, gre
magnified ; h, flower of wheat, showing larvae on ker
i, larva in repose; j, do., crawling; /^natural size
enlarged view of anterior end when moving ; l, posh
end, with teeth protruding to aid in motion. (After Fit

The Wheat Bulb Worm, Meromyza americana, larva ; i
nified sixteen diameters. (From 13th Report.)

Pupa enclosed in puparium ; magnified thirty diame
(From 13th Report.)

The same ; ventral view. (From 13th Report.)

Egg; magnified sixty diameters. (From 13th Report.)

Imago, or adult fly ; magnified twelve diameters. (F
13th Report.

Plate V.

Fig. 1. The Grass Worm, Laphygma frugiperda : a, adult la
b, head, front view ; e, dorsal view of abdominal
ment ; cl, lateral view of abdominal segment.

, 121

Fig. 2. Imago of the Grass Worm : a , typical form ; b, c, varieties.

Fig. 3. Grain Leaf Hopper, Cicadula nigrifrons ; magnified five and
three-fourths diameters ; front wing and front view of
head more highly magnified. (Original.)

Fig. 4. Grain Leaf Hopper, Cicadula quadrilineatus; magnified five
and three-fourths diameters ; front wing and front view
of head more highly magnified. (Original.)

Fig. 5. Sketch of wheat field infested by the Grass Worm, show¬
ing areas denuded.

Plate YI.

Fig. 1. The Yellow Sorghum Aphis, Chaitophorus flavus, wingless
viviparous female; magnified twenty-five diameters. (From
13th Report.)

Fig. 2. Chaitophorus flavus, pupa, dorsal view. (From 13th Report.)

Fig. 3. The same, side view. (From 13th Report.)

Fig. 4. Chaitophorus flavus, winged viviparous female; magnified
twenty diameters ; a, antenna of the same more highly
magnified. (From 13th Report.)

Fig. 5. Cymatophora crepuscularia. (Re- drawn by Mrs. Garman from
Packard’s Monograph.)

Fig. 6. Omitted.

Fig. 7. Clover Mite, Bryobia prateusis; magnified twenty-one diame¬
ters. (Original.)

Fig. 8. Apple Leaf Roller, Cacoecia rosaceana; larva, pupa, and
moth.

Fig. 9. Tortrix pallorana. (Original.)

Plate VII.

Fiff 1 Strawberry Worm, Emphytus maculatus: 1, ventral view of
g‘ * pupa ; 2^ side view of same ; 3, enlarged sketch of perfect
fly, the wings on one side detached ; 4, larva crawling,
natural size; 5, perfect fly, natural size ; 6, larva at rest ;
7, cocoon ; 8, enlarged antenna, showing joints , 9, en¬
larged egg. (After Riley.)

Fig. 2. - The Tarnished Plant Bug, Lygus lineolaris, adult ; magni¬
fied fifteen diameters. (From 13th Report. )

Plate YIII.

Fig. 1. The Tarnished Plant Bug, Lygus . lineolaris fourth stage;
magnified fifteen diameters. (From 13tli Report.)

Fig. 2. The same, second stage ; magnified fifteen diameters. (From
13th Report.)

Fig. 8. The same, first stage; magnified fifteen diameters. (From
13th Report.

122

Plate IX.

Fig. 1. The Strawberry Root Worm, larva of Scelodonta pubesce

Fig. 2. Pupa of Scelodonta pubescens.

Fig. 3. Imago of Scelodonta pubescens; magnified sixteen diamete

Fig. 4. The Yine-Loving Fruit Fly, Drosophila ampelophila. (1

drawn by Mrs. Garman from Comstock’s Report.)

Fig. 5. Egg, larva, and pupa of the same. (Re-drawn by M
Garman from Comstock’s Report.)

Fig. 7. The Blackberry Leaf Miner, Metallus rubi; magnified tin
diameters. (Original.)

Plate X.

Fig. 1. Pyrrhia umbra. (Original.)

Fig. 2. Raspberry Plume Moth, Oxyptilus delavaricus; magnifi
(Original.)

Fig. 3. Moth of the Speckled Cutworm, Agrotis c-nigrum. (Origin:

Fig. 4. Biston ypsilon. (Original.)

Fig. 5. The Apple Leaf Skeletonizer, Pempelia hammondi : a, lar
natural size ; b, one of middle segments of larva, ma^
fied; c, head and first three segments, dorsal vie
d, adult moth.

Fig. 6. Yellow Jumping Pear Louse, Trioza pyri ; magnified se
diameters. (Original.)

Fig. 7. The Willow Saw Fly, Dolerus arvensis. (Original.)

Plate XI.

Fig. 1. The Soft Maple Bark Louse, Pulvinaria innumerabilis
twig with adult fly and egg masses ; b, mature fen
scale seen from above; c, mature female scale seen f]
beneath.

Fig. 2. The same in autumnal condition : a, twig with half-gr(f
female scales; b, autumnal female scales seen from abej
c, the same seen from beneath.

Fig. 3. Pandemis lamprosana. (Original.)

Fig. 4. Aleurodes aceris , mature scale ; magnified five and a
diameters. (Original.)

Fig. 5. Imago of the above. (Original.)

Fig. 6. Elaptus aleurodis; magnified twenty-three diameters. (Oj
nal.)

Plate XII.

Fig. 1. Eygus invitus; magnified four diameters. (Original.)

Fig. 2. The Elm Borer, Saperda tridentata; natural size. (Origii

Fig. 3. Magdalis armicollis; magnified. (Original.)

128

Fio 4. Parasite of Corn Aphis, Aclialytus maidaphidis: a, first,
second, and third articles of antenna of female ; b, distal
article of antenna of female ; c, mandible of female ; d,
maxilla and palpus; e, four distal articles of antenna of
male ; /, hind leg of female ; g , valve of ovipositor ; li,
fore wing of female ; i, hind wing of female ; j, abdomen
of female ; k, abdomen of male, side view ; l, ovipositor,
separated from valves ; sh, sheath ; la, lancelet ; m , larva
of Adialytus, taken from body of Corn Aphis in Decem¬
ber. (Original.)

Fig. 5. Nematus robinice; magnified three diameters. (Original.)

f

129

Plate VI.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 9.

Fig. -i.

Fig. 1.

9

Fig. 8,

Plate VII

Fig. 3.

Fig. 5.

182

Plate IX.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 2

Fig. 7.

188

Plate X.

Fig. 1.

0

Fig. 4.

*

Fig. 3.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 5.

Fig.?

136

ERRATA

Page 3, line 10 from bottom, for infected, read infested.

Page 5, line 6 from bottom, after 1883, insert, at which time.

Page 6, line 6 from bottom, for grower, read fields.

Page 14, line 8 from bottom, for S.readY; line 9 from bottom, for S-shaped, r >
Y-shaped; line 18 from bottom, for larvae, read larva.

Page 16, line 22, for attack, read attacked.

Page 17, line 7, for secured, read secreted.

Page 18, line 9. after history, add, in Papilio, Vol. Ill, p. 99.

Page 22, foot note, for 63. read 67; line 10 from bottom, after nobilis, insert Harris; 1
14 from bottom, for Tettigonidae, read Jassidae.

Page 23, lines 21 and 27, for Caloptenus, read Pezotettix.

Page 24, line 21 from bottom, for the first when, read where.

Page 26, line 1 , for subsequal, read subequal; line 21, for viviporous, read viviparo
line 13 from bottom, for differs, read differ.

Page 27, line 18 from bottom, for their stalks, read the more advanced stalks.

Page 28, line 17, for evidently, read evident.

Page 29, line 12 from bottom, for the first the, read they.

Page 30, line 3, for females, read female.

Page 33. line 1, for interior, read inferior.

Page 35, line 22, for pronotum, read pronotal spot.

Page 36, strike oat lines 26-28.

Page 44, line 20, strike out “and mention is made of two others not fully studied.
Page 45, line 17 from bottom, for sutures, read suture.

Page 48, line 5 from bottom, for when, read where.

Page 54, line 13 from bottom, for 9, read 8.

Page 61, line 16 from bottom, for appears, read appear.

Page 66. line 20, for the second 1881, read 1882.

Page 68, line 12, for in, read of.

Page 72, strike out line 7 from bottom (reference to plate); lines 16 and b, strike
“prolegs pale brown, blackish at base.”

Page 77, line 8 from bottom, strike out report.

Page 82, line 3 from bottom, for more, read less.

Page S3, line 18, for 1-3, read 4-5.

Page 89, line 12 from bottom, for tubucles, read tubercles.

Page 94, line 20 from bottom, after is, insert of.

Page 104, line il from bottom, strike out the.

Page 105, line 7. for those, read that; line 10, for probably, read possibly; line 9 f
bottom, for guercitronis, read quercitronis.

Page 106, line 2 from bottom, for this, read these.

Page 108, line 6, for those, read that; line 14 from bottom, before soaps, read eomn
Page 109. line 3, for injery, read injury.

Page 110, line 16 from bottom, strike out “that of.”

Page 112, line 13 from bottom, for XI, read XII.

Page 114, line 7 from bottom, after part, for of, read or.

Page 117, line 21, after adult, insert of; line 8 from bottom, for albopita, read albopi

APPENDIX

TO THE

GENERAL INDEXES

TO THE

FIRST TWELVE REPORTS

OF THE STATE ENTOMOLOGISTS

OF ILLINOIS,

B. D. Walsh,

i^Si/LeBaron,

Cyrus Thomas,

and S. A. Forbes.

CONTENTS.

Introduction .

Systematic list of species .

General index to insects .

General index to food plants .

General index to remedies, natural and artificial,

Page.

. Y

....IX

. I

. 69

. 95

INTRODUCTION.

The office of State Entomologist of Illinois was established by an
act of the Legislature, approved and in force March 9, 1867, by
which the Governor was authorized to appoint “by and with the
consent of the Senate some competent scientific person as State
Entomologist, who shall hold the appointment for two years and
until his successor shall be appointed.” This officer was required
to investigate the entomology of Illinois, and particularly to study
“the history of the insects injurious to the products of the horticul¬
turists and agriculturists of the State;” and was directed to “collect
and preserve a cabinet of insects to be deposited at the Illinois In¬
dustrial University.” He was required to “prepare a report of his
researches and discoveries in entomology for publication by the
State annually;” and his salary was fixed at the sum of $2000 per
annum.

The first appointee under this law was Benjamin Dane Walsh, of
Rock Island, nominated by Governor Oglesby, June 11, 1867, at an
extra session of the Legislature. The Senate, however, declined to
act on the Governor’s nominations at this special session, adopting,
June 18, a resolution postponing such action until the next regular,
meeting of the General Assembly, and Mr. Walsh’s appointment was
therefore not completed.

He nevertheless entered at once on the duties of the office,^ and
prepared a report for the year 1867 as “Acting State Ento¬
mologist,” which he submitted, not to the Governor, but to the
State Horticultural Society. This report was published in 1838 as
an appendix to Volume I of the new series of the Transactions of
the Society (for 1867), and an unknown number of copies were also
issued separately, in pamphlet form, with a slightly different title
page.

At the next regular session of the Legislature, an act was passed
“for the relief of the State Entomologist” (in force March *5, 1869)
which recognized Mr. Walsh’s appointment “and the faithful dis¬
charge of his full duties from the date of his nomination, diiected
“that he should receive the compensation provided by the statute
under which he was appointed, as full compensation for his services
from and after June 11, 1867, and until otherwise provided by
law.”

On the 12th November, 1869, Mr. Walsh died from the effects of
a railway accident, without presenting any other report than that
for 1867, already mentioned.

VI

INTRODUCTION.

His successor was William LeBaron, of Geneva, Kane Co., i
pointed April 2, 1870. LeBaron’s First Annual Report, the seco
of the series, counting that of Walsh as the first, was for the yi
1870, and was published in August, 1871 as a separate pamphl
the first edition, printed in February, having been destroyed
fire before publication. I have not been able to as certain that
was published in any other form.

Le Baron’s Second Report, number three of the series, covei
the year 1871, and was published in 1872 in Yol. III. of the Repo
made to the General Assembly at its Twenty-seventh Session, c<
vened January 4, 1871 ; and also as an appendix to the lransacti<
of the Illinois Horticultural Society for the year 1871.

His Third Report (the fourth from the office), for the year 18
was published during the following year in the Reports made to
General Assembly for the session of 18/3. It consisted of two pai
the first devoted to injurious insects simply, and the second, pai
separately, consisting of an introduction to general and econoi
entomology, intended to prepare the way for a series of system?
reports on the several orders of insects.

The Fourth (and last) Report of Dr. Le Baron, cited in the
lowing index as the fifth of the series, consisted of a reprint of Part
of the preceding Report, followed by a systematic treatise on
order Coleoptera, paged continuously with the foregoing, the wl
being issued as the Report for 1873. It was printed in the appen
to the Transactions of the State Horticultural Society for that yt
and was also issued separately as an independent volume, co
righted by the author.

Although Dr. Le Baron continued in office until the expiration
his term, April 9, 1875, no report seems to have been presented
the year 1874. His successor, Cyrus Thomas, was appoir
April 13, 1875.

In the meantime the Legislature had, by an act “to change
fiscal year,” approved March 29, 1875, and in force July 1 of t
year, directed that the reports of a number of State officers, inci
ing the State Entomologist, should be rendered to the Governor
or before the first day of November in the year 1876, and bienni
thereafter, closing with the fiscal year preceding each regular ses<
of the General Assembly; and had further directed that no oi
annual or biennial report should be made by any of the offi<
mentioned. Dr. Thomas’s First Report (the Sixth of the State E
mologist) was rendered, in accordance with this law, towards
close of the year 1876, and related to that year and the preeed
It is styled the “Sixth Report of the State Entomologist of Illii>
* * * * First Biennial Report, by Cyrus Thomas, Ph. D., S
Entomologist of Illinois.” This Report was published in the Tr;
actions of the State Department of Agriculture for 1876 (Yol.

Notwithstanding the direction above cited with respect to
period to be covered by the successive reports of Die Entomologist.
Legislature passed, during the session of 1877, an act, appr<
and in force May 25 of that year, authorizing the State Boar
Agriculture to append to and publish with their Annual Report

INTRODUCTION.

VII

Annual Report of the State Entomologist,* and repealing all acts and
parts of acts inconsistent with that in which the above authoriza¬
tion is given, so far as the same related to the State Board of Agri¬
culture. This law was interpreted by Dr. Thomas to make it the
duty of the State Entomologist to report annually instead of bien¬
nially, and his Second Report (the seventh in all) was consequently
rendered in 1877, and related to the work of that year. It was
printed, as authorized by the above law, as an appendix to the
heport of the State Department of Agriculture, and two hundred
copies are understood to have been issued separately in pamphlet

form.

The succeeding Reports, from the Eighth to the Eleventh, (from
the third to the sixth of Thomas), have a similar history, all being
annually published as appendices to the Agricultural Report of the
corresponding year, and issued separately to the number of two
hundred copies. These appendices are all paged separately, and
are not mentioned upon the title page of the Report of the Depart¬
ment nor in the lettering upon the back of the volume.

The Eleventh Report (for 1881) was the last by Dr. Thomas, as
lie tendered his resignation early in 1882, to take effect June 30, or

that year.

The present incumbent, Stephen Alfred Forbes, was appointed
Julv 3 1882, and his first Report, the Twelfth of the office and
the last here indexed, although made as for the entire yeai then
current, actually related only to the lattei half of it.

To complete the record of the office to the date of writing, it may
be added that the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Reports, for the years
1883 and 1884, were printed, like the preceding, as appendices o
the Transactions of the State Department of Agriculture for the
corresponding years, and that the usual editions of two hundred
copies each were issued separately.

No office accommodations have ever been furnished the State
Entomologist by the State, and the location of the office lias con¬
sequently varied with the personal residence of the Kntomo ogi t,_
that of Mr. Walsh at Rock Island of Dr LeBaron at bene'a, o
Dr. Thomas at Carbondale, and that of Prof, t orbes at first at the
State Normal University, at Normal, but transferred to the I lmois
Industrial University, at Champaign, at the beginning ot the current

year. , . , ,

The first legislative appropriation to the State Entomologist for

any expenses other than those of salary anc e P ^700 was

of his reports, was made at the session of WB, when |700 «as
appropriated for the illustration of the lepoi s o ' j

the years 1872 and 1873, and lor the necessary stationery a ^
postage stamps to be used m the performan , . , .

duties Dr. LeBaron had received, however, Pr,evl0“8m1l0ot{hlL^ ^
from the contingent fund of the Governor, the sum of ?Ab8o,

•This provision was reiterated in 1883, in the amended law relating to the State Boat d
if Agiicuiture.

VIII

INTRODUCTION.

$2,500 of which was intended and used for the purchase of
Walsh Collection of Insects, afterwards destroyed in the Chic;
fire.

The next special appropriation to the office was made as an it
in the appropriation bill for the State Laboratory of Natural I
tory at Normal for the years 1888 and 1884, by which $500
annum was assigned to the office and incidental expenses of
State Entomologist.

No provision has ever been made for a library for the Entonn
gist, or for a collection of the insects of the State for his use of
than that required by law to be deposited with the State Industi
University.

The incidental association of the office of State Entomologist w
that of Director of the State Laboratory of Natural History, broil;
about by the appointment of the latter officer to the former office
1882, has, however, given to the State Entomologist command
the resources of the State Laboratory of Natural History, includ
its entomological collections and library, and has enabled h
since the above date, to draw upon the corps of assistants of t
establishment for a large amount of important service.

The scope and variety of the fourteen reports of this office
sufficiently indicated by the voluminous lists and indexes necess
to give convenient access to their contents. In volume they
exceed the literature of the economic entomology of any other St;
amounting in all to 2,158 pages, of which 104 have been con
buted by Walsh, 419 by LeBaron, 1,187 by Thomas, and 648
Eorbes. They may broadly be said to contain four classes or r
ter, — (1) original contributions to entomology, chiefly prepared w
reference to economic applications, characteristic especially of
first four and the last three reports; (2) treatises on the ciassib
tion of single orders of insects, as in the 5th and 6th Repv
(Coleoptera), the 7th and 10th (Lepidoptera), the 8th (Homopi
especially Aphides), and the 9th (Ortlioptera) ; (8) full summaries
existing knowledge respecting the most important injurious inset
as the Hessian fly and the army worm; and (4) monographs of
the insect enemies of a single crop, as of the insects affecting
strawberry, in the 13th report.

Probably no one conversant with the facts can doubt that
State Entomologists of Illinois have devoted themselves faithfi
and with distinguished success (far, in fact, beyond their rat
meager opportunities) to the “investigation of the Entomolog\
Illinois, and particularly to the history of the insects injurious
the products of the agriculturists and the horticulturists of
State.”

Champaign, III., June 30, 1885.

SYSTEMATIC LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES,

ARTHROPODA.

INSECT A.

(iv, 203; vi,65, appendix.)

HYMENOPTEEA.

(iv,25; v,25; vi,71; x,63.)

Scoliad^.

Tiphia inornata, Say, vi, 100.

ICHNEUMONID.E.

Ichneumon suturalis, Say, x, 41.

Pezomachus minimus, Walsh, x, 40.

Ophion purgatus. Say, x,4l.

Paniscus geminatus, Say, vii.218.

M>soehorus vitreus, Walsh, x,39.

Pimpla conquisitor, Say, vii, 119.

Braconidje.

Mierodes carinodes. Ores ,xi,18.

Mierogaster glomeratus, Linn., ix, 20.

militaris, Walsh, x,38.

Aphidius avenaphis. Fiteh, viii, 176.
laetncaphis, Fitch, viii. 175.
polygonaphis, Fitch, viii, 175.
vibnrnaphis, Fitch, viii, 175.

Trioxys cerasaphis, Fitch, viii. 176.
populaphis, Fitch, viii. 176.
salieaphis, Fitch viii, 176.

Toxares triticaphis, Fitch, viii,l<6.

PROCTOTRUPIDiE.

Platygaster lecanii, Smith, vii, 129.

Chalcidibzb.

Chalcis albifrons, Walsh, x. 40.

Haltichella perpulchra. Walsh. x, 39 (Hock-
eria perpulchra).

Eupelmus allyni, French, xi, 73 (Isosoma
allynii).

Anhelinus mytilaspidis, LeB., ii, 34.

Glyphe viridescens, Walsh, x, 39.

Pteromalus gelechise, Webster, xii, 151.

TENTHREDINID2E .

(X, 63.)

Cirabex americana, Leach, var. laportei,
Lepel, x,65 (O. laportei).

Abia caprifolittm. Norton, x, 66.
cerasi, Fitch, x, 66.

Pristiphora identidem, Norton, x,69.
grossularise, Walsh, x, 69.
ruflpes, St. Farg., x, 70.

Euura orbitalis, Norton, x,69.
salicis-ovum, Welsh, x,69.
salicis-gemmn, Walsh, x,69.
salicicola, Smith, x,69.

Nematus ventricosus, Klug, x, 68; xi,46.

, ventralis. Say, x. 68.

salicis-pisum, Walsh, x. 68.
trilineatus, Norton, x. 68.
salicis-pomum, Walsh, x, 68.

Emphytus maculatus, Norton, vii, 111; x,68 .

Dolcrus arvensis, Sav, x, 67.

Selandria rubi, Harr., vi,61;x,67.
tilise. Norton, x.67.
cerasi. Peek, x,67; xii, 98.
rosae. Harr., ii. 79; x.66.
caryse, Norton, x, 66.
juglandis. FPch, x,67.

Lophyrus abbotti, Leach, x,70.

Urocerid.e.

(x, 70.)

Urocerus albicornis, Fabr., x,71.
abdominalis, Herr.. x,71.

Tremex columba, Linn., vi.41; x,71.

Where these differ from

!T¥nJ«^s.reAhlL(hl°lIlu5,.lTfiArbleTLTe"teY'inTal'enthTrw.(./(<i>- .he Page

th'-sp used in the reports, the
references.

X

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES

LEPIDOPTERA.

(iv, 25; v. 25; vi, 71 : vii, 209; x, 72, 145.)

Rhopaloceres.

(vii, 269.)

Papiltonid^:.

(vii, 135,269; x,73.)

Papilio ajax, Linn., vii, 135; x.74.
philenor, Linn., v i. 136; x, 73, 164.
asterias, Fabr , vii, 137; x.74, 173.
troilus, Linn., vii. 133; x,74.
turnufi, Linn., vii, 139; x, 74. 173.
cresphontes, Cram., vii, 139; x,75.
Pterin®, x,76.

Pieris monuste, Linn., ix,32.

beekeri, Edw., ix, 28; 33 (P. protodice,
var. beckerii).
sisymbtii, Bd., ix.28,34.
occidentaiis. Peak., ix, 28, 34; ix, 29 (P.
calyce).

protodice, Bd.-Le C., vii, 141; ix, 25, 28, 33;
x, 76. 178.

napi, Esper, vii, 143 (P. oleracea); ix, 28,
36; ix, 26.28,29 (P. oleracea); ix, 28 (P.
frigida); ix, 28,32 (P. venosa); x, 77 (P.
oleracea).

virginiensis, Edw., ix,29.
rap®, Linn., vii, 144; ix, 8, 31; ix, 29 (P.
yreka); ix.29 (P. rapm, var. novangli®);

ix, 32 ( P, venosa, var. marginalisj ; x, 77,
179; xi,32; xii,92.

brassie®, Linn., ix,35.

Callidrya-1 eubule, Linn., vii, 147; x,78.
Colias o® sonia, Stoll, x,78.

eurytheme, Bd., vii, 147; x,78.
philodice, Godt., vii, 147; x, 78.

Terias nicippe, Cram., vii. 148; x,79.
lisa, Bd.-LeC., vii. 148; x,79'.

Nymph alidje.

(vii, 148, 269.)

Danais archippus, Fabr., vii, 149; x, 79, 161.
Nymphalin®, x,80.

Agraulis vanill®, Linn., x,80.

Argynnis idalia, Dr., vii, 149; x, 81,162.
diana, Cram., vii. 119; x,81.
cybele, Fabr., vii. 150; x,81.
aphrodite, Fabr., vii. 150; x,8l.
alcestis, Edw., vii, 150; x,82.
atlantis, Edw., x, 82.
egleis, Bd., x, 164.
myrina, Cram., x, 82. 161.
bellona, Fabr., x, 83, 183.

Euptoieta claudia, Cram., vii, 150; x, 80.
Melitaea phaeton, Dr., x, 83.

baroni, H. Edw., x,163.

Phyciodes nycteis, Doubl.-Hew,, x,83 (Mel¬
itaea nycteis); x, 162 (P. harrisii); x, 165,
tharos, Dr., vii, 151; x, 83 (Melitaea tharos) ;

x, 163.

Eresia texana, Edw., x, 164.

Grapta intern gationis, Fabr., vii, 151; x
164.

comma, Harr., vii, 152; x, 84, 163.
fuunus, Edw.. vii, 152; x,84.
gracilis, Gr., vii, 152.
progne. Cram., ii,59 (Vanessa prog
x.85.

j-album, Bd.-LeC., x, 85.

Vanessa antiopa, Linn., vii. 153; x.85, 163
milberti, Godt., x.85 (Grapta milbe
x, 164.

Pyrameis atalanta, Linn., vii, 153; x,86.
huntera, Dr., vii. 153; x,K6. 153.
cardui, Linn., vii, 154; x, 87, 153.

Junoma coenia. Hub., vii, 154 (J. lavinia
87 (J. lavinia).

Limenitis Ursula, Fabr., vii, 154; x, 87, 162
arthemis,Dr.,x,88.
disippus, Godt., vii, 154; x, 88, 162.

Apatura celtis, Bd.-LeC., vii, 155;x,88.
clyton, Bd.-LeC., vii, 155; x,89.

Paphia troglodyta, Fabr., vii, 156 (P. and
x, 89 (P. glycerium).

Debis portlandia, Fabr., x,92.

Neonympha canthus, Bd.-LeC., x, 91.
gemma. Hub., x,91.
eurytris, Fabr., vii, 156; x. 90, 184.
sosybius, Fabr., x, 91.

SatyrinaB, x. 90 (Libythea wrongly indue

Satyrus alope, Fabr., vii, 156; vii,15<
nephele); x, 92; x,92,180 (S. nephele).

Libythea bachmanni. Kirtl., vii. 157; x.i

Thecla m-album, Bd.-LeC., x,92.
humuli, How., vii, 157; x,92.
acadiea, Edw., x,93.
calanus, Hub., x,93.
strigosa, How., vii, 157; x,92.
smilacis, Bd.-LeC., x, 93.
poeas, Hub., x,93.
irus, Godt.. x,94.
niphon, Hub., x, 94.
titus, Fabr., x,94.

Chrysophonus thoe, Bd.-LeC., vii, 158;
hypophyleas, Bd., vii, 158 (C. americi
x,95 (C. americana.)

LYCiENID^.

(vii, 157, 270.)

Lycsena scudderi, Edw., x,95.

pseudargiolus, Bd.-LeC., vii, 158;

x,96 (L. neglecca).
comyntas, Godt., vii, 158: x,95.

Hespeeid^;.

(vii, 159, 270.)

Ancyloxypha numitor, Fabr., x, 96.

Pamphila zabulon, Bd.-LeC., x, 197 L
tone hobomok.)
sassacus, Scudd., vii, 159; x,97.
huron, Edw., vii, 159.

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES.

SI

Pamphila phyl®us, Dr., x. 96,176.
otho, Sm.- Abb., vii,160.
peckius, Kirby, vii. 160; x, 178.
mystic, Scudd., x,97.
cernes, Bd.-LeC., vii, 16ft.
manataaq.ua, Scudd., vii. 160.
metacomet, Harr., vii, 161.
maculata, Edw., x,176.
palatka, Edw., x,153.
delaware, Edw., x, 96, 174.

Amblyscirtes vialis. Edw.. vii, 161.

Pyrgus tessellata, Scudd., vii, 161.

Misoniades lucilius, Lintn., vii, 16 1 (Thanaos
lucilius); x,97.

juvenalis, Fabr., vii, 162 (Thanaos juve-
nalis); x,97.

Pholisora catullus, Fabr., vii, 162; x,98.
Eudamus pylades, Scudd. ,x,98 (E.bathyllus.)
bathyllus, Sm.-Abb., vii, 162.
lycidas, Sm.-Abb., vii, 162.
tityrus, Fabr., vii, 163; x, 98, 153.
proteus, Linn., x,184.

Heteroceres.

(vii, 269.)

Sphingid^e.

(vii, 163, 270; x. 99.)

Hemaris tenuis, Gr., x, 159 (Sesia tenuis),
diffinis, Boisd., vii, 163 (Sesia diffinis) ;
x, 99, 160, (S. diffinis).

thvsbe. Fab., vii, 164 (Sesia thysbe); x,
98 (S. thysbe).

Thyreus abboti, Swains., vii, 164; x,100.
Deilephila chamaenerii, Harr., x,159.

lineata, Fabr., vii, 164; x, 100,159.
Philampelus pandorus, Hubn.. vii, 165; x,
101,175.

achemon, Dr., vii, 165; x. 101, 182.
Choerocampa tersa, Linn., x, 159.

Everyx myron. Cram., vii. 166 (Darapsa
myron); x, 103 (Choerocampa pampina-
trix).

Ampelophaga versicolor, Harr., x, 158
(Darapsa versicolor).

Paonias excaeoatus, Abb.-Sm., vii, 167
(Sm^rinthus excaecatus).

Triptogon modesta, Harr., x.159 (Smerin-
thus modestus). /

Cressonia juglandis, Sm.-Abb., vii, 167
(Smerinthus juglandis.)

Ceratomia amyntor, Hub., vii 167; x, 102.
Daremma undulosa. Walk., x, 102 (D. Bron¬
tes) 159

catalpae, Boisd., x.104 tSphinx catalpae.)
Diludia jasminearum, Bd-L. C., x, 103.
Phtegethon’ ius Carolina. Linn., vii, 168, (Ma-
crosila Carolina); x, 103, 158.
celeus, Hubn., vii, 169 (Macrosila5-macu-
lata); x, 104 (M. 5 maculata.)
cingulata, Fabr., x. 104, 158, (Macrosila
cingulata.)

Sphinx drupiferarum, Abb.-Sm., x, 104.
Kalmi®, Abb.-Sm., x, 104.
chersis, Hubn., x. 105.
gordius, Cram., x. 105 fLethia gordius.)
Ellema coniferarum, Abb.-Sm., x, 105.
(Sphinx coniferarum.)
bombycoides, Walk., x, 105 (Sphinx har-
risii.)

pineum, Lintn., x. 105 (Sphinx pineum.)

HEgerid.®.

(vii, 169, 270; x, 106.)

Melittiaceto. Westw., vi,41(.Egeria cucurbi-
tae); vii, 173 (HE. cucurbit®); x, 107 (HE. cu¬
curbit®.)

Alcathoe caudatum, Harris, vii, 172 LEgeria
caudata); x, 108 (HE. caudata.)

Bembecia marginata, Harr., vi, 40 (HEgeria
rubi); vii, 175 (HE. rubi); x, 108 (HE. rnbi.)
Sciapteron polistiformis, Harr., i, 24 (Algeria
polistiformis); vii, 171 (HU. polistiformis);
x, 108 (HE. polistiformis.)
anthracipennis, Boisd., x, 109 (HEgeria
anthracipennis.)

Fatua denudata, Harr., x. 109 LEgeria asili-
pennis.)

Podosesia syring®. Harr., vii, 174 (HEgeria
syring®); x. 109 (HE. syring®.)

Sannina exitiosa, f>ay, vi, 38 LEgfwia exiti-
osa); vii, 169; (JE. exitiosa); x, 107 (HE. exiti¬
osa).

HEgeria pictipes, G. & R., x. 109.
pyri, Harr., vi, 40; vii, 170; x, 107.
acerni, Clem., vi, 40; vii, 173; x, 108.
tipuliformis, Linn., vi, 39; vii, 172; x, 107,
151.

tili®, Harr., x, 109.

ZYG.2ENID.E.

(vii, 176, 270; x, 110.)

Alypia octomaculata, Fabr., vii. 176; x, 110,
172.

Psychomorpha epimenis. Dr., vii, 177; x,
m,i72.

Endryas unio, Hubn.. vii. 178; x, 111,173.

grata. Fabr.. vii, 179; x. 111,173.

Scepsis fulvicollis, Hubn., vii. 179 (Ctenucha
fulvicollis); x. 171.

Ctenucha virginica. Chap., x, 170.
A^oloithus falsarius. Clem., x, 112,

Harrisina americana, Harr., vii, 179(Acoloi-
thus americana); x, 112 (A. americana.)

Bombycid^;.

(vii, 179.271; x,113.)

Hypoprepia fucosa, Hubn., x. 184.

Utetheisa bella, Linn., vii, 180; x, 113.
Callimorpha interrupto-marginata, De B.

vii 181. . .

lecontei, Boisd.. ii,47(C.lecontei. var.ful-
vicosta) vii, 180 C fulvicosta); vii, 181;
x, 113; (C. fulvicosta); x, 114.

XII

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES

Arctia nais, Dr., vii, 181 (A. phalerata); x, 115,
171 (A. phalerata).
arge, Dr., vii, 182; x, 115. 170.

Pyrrharctia isabella, Abb -Sm., vii, 182; x,
115 (\rctia isabella); x,169.

Leucarctia acraea, Sm., vii, 79, 183; x, 115 (Arc¬
tia aoraea); x, 170.

Spilosoma virginica, Fabr., vii, 80, 183; x, 116,
176.

Hyphantria textor, Harr., ii, 18; vii, 111, 185;
x. 116.

Euchaetes collaris, Fitch, x,169.

Ecpantheria scribonia, Stoll, vii, 184; x, 116.

Halesidota tessellata, Abb. -Sm., vii, 185; x,
116, 168.

carym. Harr., x, 168.

Orgyia leucosigma, Abb.-Sm.,ii,13; vii. 185;
x, 166; xii.100.

Parorgyia clintonii, G. and R., x,165,
parallela, G. and R., x, 166.

Empretia stimulea, Clem., vii, 187; x,117.

Limaeodes fasciola, H.-S., vii, 187 (L. lati-
clavia); x, 117 (L. laticlavia)

Thyridopteryxephemeraefurmis, Steph., vii.
187; x, 118; xii, 101.

Perophora melsheimerii, Harr., x, 156.

Datana ministra, Dr., iv, 186; vii, 189; x, 119,
167.

' perspicua, G. & R., x, 119.

Edema albifrons, Abb.-Sm., vii, 191; x. 120.

CEdemasia concinna, Abb.-Sm., vii, 190
(Notodonta concinna); x, 119 (N. concinna).

Coelodasys unicornis, Abb.-Sm., vii, 191
(Notodonta unicornis): x, 120 (N. unicor¬
nis); x, 47; x, 181 (N. unicornisn

Actias luna, Linn., vii, 192; x, 124, 178,

Telea polyphemus, Linn., vii, 191; x, 124
(Attacus polyphemus); x, 176.

Phiiosamia cynthia, Dr., vii. 194 (Sarnia
cynthia); x. 125 ( attacus cynthia).

Callosamia promethea, Dr., vii, 193; x, 125
(Attacus promeihea); x, 176.

Platysamia cecropia, Linn., vii, 193 (Sarnia
cecropia); x. 126 (Attacus cecropia); x, 177
(Sarnia cecropia).

Columbia, Smith, x, 177 (Sarnia Colum¬
bia).

Hemileuca maia, Dr., vii, 195 (Eucronia
maia); x. 127, 163, (E. maia).

Hyperchiria io, Fabr., vii, 195; x, 127, 169.

Eacles imperials, Dr., vii, 196; x, 121,

Citheronia regalis, Fabr., vii, 195; x. 122, 162.

Anisota stigma, Fabr., x, 120 (Dryocampa
stigma).

senatoria, Abb.-Sm., vii, 196 (Dryocampa
senatoria); x, 120, 161, (D. senatoria).
virginiensis, Dr., x, 121 (Dryocampa
pellucida).

Dryocampa rubicunda, Fabr. vii, 196; x,121.

Clisiocampa americana, Harr., vii, 110, 197;
x, 122, 155.

disstria, Hubn., vii, 198 (C. sylvatica); x,
123 (C. sylvatica).

Gastropacha amerieana.^Harr., x, 166.

Tolype velleda, Stoll., vii, 197 (Gastrop;
velleda); x,166.

Cossus centeren^is, Lintn., x.151.
Prionoxystus robiniae, Peck, vi. 42 (Xyle
robiniae); vii, 198 (X. robiniae); x, 152
robiniae).

Noctuid^;.

(vii, 199,271; x,129.)

Pseudothyatira cymatophoroides. Gu
x, 129.

Platycerura furcilla, Pack., x, 168.
Apatela occidental^, G. & R., x 129.
lepusculina, Guen., vii, 201 (Acron;

lepusculina); x, 130.
americana. Harr., vii, 2"0 (Acron;

americana); x, 130.
rubricoma, Guen., x,132.
superans, Guen., ii, 51 (Acronycta sui
ans; x, 131.

hamamelis, Guen., x, 131.
oblinita, Abb.-'m., vii, 201 (Acron:
obliniia); x, 131, 170.

Arsilonche albovenosa, Gr., x, 171 (A. 1
rici).

Agroris c-nigrum,Linn., vii, 89, 202; x, 132
bicarnea, Guen., vii, 204.
subgothica. Haw., vii, 89, 204; ix, 141
132.

tricosa, Lintn., vii, 205; x,132.
herilis, Grote, vii,90,205;x, 133.
cupida, Gr., x, 135.
clandestina, Harr., vii, 95,213; x, 135.
messoria, Harr., vii, 92, 209; x, 134.
scarulens, Riley, vii, 208; x,l33.
tesseilata, Harr., vii. 91, 206; x, 133.
annexa, Tr., x, 136; xii, 103.
ypsilon, Rott., vii, 93. 210; ix, 141; x,13j
saucia. Hub., vii, 94. 211; x. 134.
lubricans. Guen., x,135.

Mamestra adjuncta, Boisd., x, 136.

picta, Harr., vi,60 (Ceramica picta);
226 (C. picta); ix,51 (C. picta); x, 185;
103.

subjuncta, G. & R., vii, 214; x,136.
distincta, Hubn., x, 136.
renigera, Sleph., vii, 215; x, 137.
Hadena devastatrix, Brace, vii, 96, 216; x
arctica, BoLd., vii, 96. 217; x, 137.
Laphygma frugiperda. Abb.- Sm., vii, 97
(Prodenia frugiperda) ; x, 138.

Prodenia commeiinae, Abb.-Sm., vii, 21!
138.

lineatella, Harr., x, 139.

Nephelodes .minians, Guen., vii, 99, 220,
violans); x, 139 (N. violans).

Gortyna cataphracta, Gr., vii. 221.

nitela, Guen., iii, 141: vii, 100, 112,221;
222 (G. nebris); ix, 142; x, 151; xii, 103.
Achatodes zeae. Harr., vii, 100,222.
Heliophila albilinea, Hubn., vii, 223 (Lei
nia harveyi); x, 186 (L. harveyi).

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES.

XIII

Heliophila phragmitidicola, Guen., vii, 224
(Leucania phragmitidicola); x, 186 (L.
phragmitidicola.

pseudargyria, Guen., x, 139 (Leucania
pseudargyria).

unipuncta, Haw., vi.56 (Leucania uni-
puncta); vii, 101,224 (L. unipuncta); x, 5
(L. unipuucta); xi,49 (L. unipuncta);
xii, 102 (L. unipuncta).

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Guen., ii.56 (Am-
phipyra pyramidoides): vii,225;x, 180.
Scoliopteryx libatrix, Linn., vii, 227.
Lithophane antennata, Walk., vii, 227 (Xy-
lina c-inerea.
laticinerea, Gr., vii, 227.

Cramhodes talidiformis, Guen., x,180.
Adisophanes miscellus, Gr.,x,180.

Aletia argillacea, Hubn., vii, 228 (Anomis ar-
gillacea).

Oalpe canadensis, Beth., x, 137, 172.

IViesilla cinereola, Guen., x, 180.

Plusia aerea, Guen., ix. 45.
aereoides, Gr., ix.45.
balluca, Gey., vii, 228; x,45.
contexta, Gr., ix,46.
putnami, Gr., ix,49.
biloba, Stepli.. vii, 229; ix,46.
verruca, Fab., ix,48.
dyaus, Gr., ix,47.

precationis. Guen., vii, 229; ix,47; x,148.
on, Guen., ix,48.

ni, Hubn., vii, 229 (P. brassiere): ix, 40 (P.

brassicae); x, 140 (P. brassicae).
oxvgramma, Gey. ix,49.
simplex, Guen., ix,48; xi, 38.

Reliothis armiger, Hubn., vii, 102, 231; x,150;
xi, 82.

Pyrrhia exprimens. Walk., vii, 233 (Heliothis
exprimens).

Hypena evanidalis, Rob., x,148.

scabra, Fabr., vii, 245 (H. humuli); x, 148.
Drasteria erechtea, Hub., vii, 233; x,148.
Catocala, vii, 234.

desperata, Guen., vii, 234.
amatrix, Hubn., vii, 235.
cara, Guen., vii, 235.
ultronia, Hubn., vii, 235.
neogama, Abb.-Sm., vii, 236.
grynea, Cram., x,183.
arnica, Hubn., x, 182 (C. lineella).
Pseudaglossalubricalis, Gey., x, 138, 182.
Chytolita morbidalis, Guen., x, 138. 182.
Philometra serraticornis, Gr., vii, 246.

PhaLJENID.®.

(vii, 236,272.;

Choerodes transversata Dr., vii, 244 (Eutra-
pela transversata.)

Caberodes confusaria, Hubn., vii, 244.
Eudalimia subsignaria, Hubn., vii, 243 (Eu-
gonia subsignaria.)

Endropia bilinearia, Pack., vii, 243.

Angerona crocataria, Fab., vii, 243.

Nematocampa filamentaria, Guen., vii, 242;
x, 148.

Synchlora rubivoraria, Riley, vii, 238.
Dyspteris abortivaria, H.-S., vii, 238.

Eufitchia ribearia, Fitch, vii, 237.

Hibernia tiliaria, Harr.,x, 149; xi, 25.

Phigalia stigataria. Minot, vii, 241.

cinctaria, French, vii. 241.

Anisopteryx vernata, Harr., iii, 99; vi, 16,
vii, 110, 239.

autumnata. Pack., vii, 238; x, 148 (A.
pometaria.)

Petrophora diversilineata, Hubn., vii, 237.
Eupithecia interrupto-fasoiata, Pack., xi,
23.

Pybalide.

(vii, 245, 272.)

Aglossa domalis, Guen., vii, 248 (A. pin-
guinalis.)

Asopiafarinalis, Linn., vii, 247 (Pyralis fari-
naiis); x, 157.
costalis, Fabr., 247.

Botis penitalis, Gr., x, 15 4.

flavidalis, Guen , vii, 218.

Mesographe rimosalis, Guen., ix. 37 (Pionea
rimosalis); xii, 104 (Orobena rimosalis.)
Eudioptis nitidalis. Cram., vii, 251 (Phacel-
lura nitidalis.)

Desmia maculalis, Westw., vii, 248.

Phycis indiginella, Zell., i, 34 (Phyeita
nebulo); iii, 117 (P. nebulo); iii, 117 (P.
juglandis); vii, 250 (P. juglandis); x, 157.
(Acrobasis nebulo.)

Pempelia hammondi. Riley, vii, 252.

Galleria cereana. Fabr., vii, 253.

TOETBICIDE.

(vii, 254, 273.)

Teras Cinderella. Riley, vii, 255 (Tortrix
Cinderella).

malivorana, LeB., ii. 20 (Tortrix malivo¬
rana); iii. 159 (Teras malivorana); vii,
254 (Toririx malivorana).

Cacaecia rosaceana, Harr., vii, 256 (Loxo-
taenia rosaceana); x, 153 (L. rosaceana);
xi, 10 (L. rosaceana).
rileyana, Grote, vii. 256 (Tortrix rileyan a).
Tortrix quercifoliana, Fitch, vii, 114, 257,
(Argyrolepia quercifoliana); ix, 142.
Conchylis rutilana, Hub., x, 153 (Dapsilia
ru til ana).

Eudemis botrana, Schiff., vii, 257 (Penthina
vitivorana).

Eccopsis malana, Fern., xi,16.

Penthina nimbatana, Clem., x,153.
Sericorisinstrutana. Clem., x, 153 (Exartema
faseiatana?).

Phoxopteris nubeculana, Clem., x 153.

comptana, Frol., vii, 258 (Anchylopera
fragarise).

Grapholitha prunivora, W alsh, i, 78 (Semasia
1 prunivora).

XIV

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Linn., i,27; iv, 167;
vii,260; x,151; xi. 19.

Tineid^:.

(vii,262,273.)

Tinea dorsistrigella, Clem., vii,262.

tapetzella, Linn., vii,264.
rusticella, Hub., vii,264.

pellionella. Linn., vii,265.
biseliella. Hum., vii.265.
granella, Linn., vii,265.

Gelechia flavocostella, Clem., x,153.

cerealella, Linn., vii,266; xii, 144.

Anarsia lineatella, Zell., xii, 76.

Coleophora malivorella, Riley, x,156.
Plutella cruciferarum, Zell., vii.266; ix,52.
Dakruma convolutella, Hubn., vii, 251
(Myelois convolutella).

Pteeophobid^:.

(vii, 267, 273.)

Pterophorus periscelidactylus, Fitch, vii,
268.

Dipteba.

(iv, 25; v, 25; vi,73.)

CECIDOMYID.E.

Cecidomyia destructor, Say, x, 193.

(Es tehee.

CEstrus ovis, Linn., ix,60.

Tachinid,e.

Nemoraea leucanias, Kirk., x,36.

Exorista flavicauda, Riley, x, 37.

phycitae, LeB., iii, 123 (Tacbina phycitae).

Teypetid^e.

Trypeta pomonella, Walsh, i, 29.

Hippoboscid.e.

Melophagus ovinus, Linn., ix,63.

COLEOPTERA.

(iv, 25.26; y, rEntire Report devoted to this
orderl; vi [Pt. ii devoted to this orderl;
xii, 105).

CicindeijID^e.

(vi, 87.)

Cicindela 6-guttata, Fabr., vi, 88.
vulgaris. Say, vi, 88.

CAEABID.E.

(xi, 88; vii, 107, 113.)

Calosoma, xii, 108.

scrutator, Fabr., vi, 88.
calidum, Fabr., vi, 89.

Pasimachus elongatus, Lee., vi, 89.
Scarites, xii. 108.

Aspidogiossa subangulata, Chd., vi, 89.
Galerita, xii, 108.

Loxopeza, xii, 109.

Lebia grandis, Hentz, vi, 90.

Calathus, xii, 109.

Platynus, xii, 109.

Evarthrus, xii, 109.

Pterostichus. xii, 110.

Amara, xii, 110.

Dicaelus, xii, 110.

Chlaenius, xii, 111.

Geopinus incrassatus, DeG., vii, 218.
Agonoderus, xii. 111.

Anisodactylus, xii. 111.

Amphasia, xii, 112.

Bradycellus, xii, 112.

Harpalus, xii, 112.

caliginosus, Say, vi, 90.
pennsylvanicus, DeG., vi, 90.
Patrobus, xii. 113.

CCCCINELLID.E.

(vi, 172; xii, 116, 118.)

Megilla maculata, DeG., vi, 173 (Hipp
mia maculata); viii, 173 (H. maculata
Hippodamia, xii, 117.

glacialis. Fab., vi, 173; viii, 174.
convergens, Guer., vi. 173; viii, 173.
Hippodamia 13-punctata. Linn., vi, 173:
174.

Coccinella, xii, 118.

9-notata, Hb., vi, 173; viii. 174.
Cycloneda, xii, 118.

sanguinea, Linn., vi, 173 (Coccii
munda); viii, 174 (C. munda.)
Harmonia picta, Rand., vi, 174 (Coccii
picta.)

Anatis 15-punctata, Oliv., vi, 174; vii,
viii, 174.

Chilocorus bivulnerus, Muls, vi,174
128; viii, 174.

Hyperaspis signata. Oliv., vii, 128.

Deemestid.®.

(vi, 92.)

Dermestes laraarius, Linn., vi, 92.
Attagenus pellio, Linn., vi, 92.
Anthrenus musmorum, Linn., vi, 93.

NITIDULID.E.

(vi, 19.)

Ips fasciatus, Oliv., vi, 91 (Ips 4-signn

LIST OF GENERA

£

AND SPECIES.

XV

Trogositibe.

'enebrioides maurifanica, Linn., vi, 93.

ELATERTDE.

(vi, 19,115; vii, 19.)

Ldelocera impressicollis. Say, vii, 27.
discoida, Web., vii. 27.

Uaus oculatus, Linn., vi. 116: vii 2'».

Jryptohypnus abbreviates, Say, vii, 27.

?later nigrieollis, Herbst., vii, 28.
linteus, Say. vii, 27.
hepaticus, Mels., viii, 28.
sanguinipennis, Say, vii, 27.
obliquus, Say, vii, 28.

Monocrepidius lividus, DeG., vi, 118; vii, 28.

Ludius attenuatus, Say, vi, 119; vii, 29.

Orthostethus infuscatus, Germ., vi, 117; vii,

27.

Agriotes mancus, Say, vi, 118.

Melanotus incertus. LeO.. vii, 29,
depressus, Mels., vii, 29.
flssilis, Say. vi,117; vii, 30.
communis, Schon., vi, 118; vii, 30.

Limonius griseus, Beauv., vii, 30.

Melanactes morio, Fabr., vi, 118.

Buprestide.

(vi 109.)

Chalcophora virginiensis, Dr., vi,112.

Dicerca divaricata, Say, vi, 112.

obscura, Fabr., var. lurida, Fabr., vi,113
(D. lurida).

Chrysobothris femorata, Fabr., vi, 110.

Agrilus ruflcollis, Fabr., vi,114.
granulatus, Say, xii,121.
lateralis. Say, vi,H4.

Ptinide.

(vi, 120.)

Ptinus fur. Linn., vi, 121.

brunneus, Duftsch, vi,122.

Sitodrepa panicea, Linn., vi, 122 (Ano bium
paniceum),

Sinoxylon basilare, Say. vi,124 (Bostrychus
basilaris).

Amphicerus bicaudatus, Say, vi, 123 (Bos¬
trychus bicaudatus).

Lucanide.

(vi, 93.)

Lucanus elaphus, Fabr., vi,94.
dama. Fabr., vi,95.

Platycerus quercus, Web,, vi,95.

SCARABEIDE.

Melolonthinae, vi,97.

Serica vespertina, Enoch, vi, 202.
sericea, Ill., vi, 102.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Fabr., i,24; vi,
103; vii, 34.

Lachnosterna fusca, Frohl , vi, 97 (Phyllo-
phaga fusca); viii, 33 (P. fusca).
fraterna, Harr., vi, 101 (Phyllophaga fra¬
ternal.

tristis, Faor.,vi, 100 (Phyllophaga pilosi-
collis).

Rutelini, vi,104.

Anomala varians, Fabr., vi, 105.
binotata, Gyll., vi. 105.
lucicola, Fabr., ii. 54; vi,105.

Pelidnota punctata, Linn., vi, 106.

Dynastes tityus, Linn., vi, 96.

Cetoniini, vi, 107.

Euphoria melancholica, Gory, vi, 108 (Eury-
omia melancholica).
inda, Linn., vi,108 (Euryomia inda).
Allorhina nitida, Linn., vi, 107 (Gymnetis
nitida).

CERAMBYCIDE.

(vi, 146.)

Prioninae. vi,147.

Prionus laticollis. Dr.. vi,147.

imbricornis, Linn., vi, 148.

Cerambycinse, vi,148.

Phymatodes amcenus, Say, vi, 148 (Callidium
amcenum).

Chion cinctus, Dr., vi, 149.

Eburia quadrigeminata, Say, vi,149.
Elaphidion villosum, Fabr., vi, 150.

parallelum, Newm ., vi,150.

Cyllene robiniae, Forst., vi, 151 (Clytus rob-
iniae).

Glycobius speciosus, Say, vi, 151 .Clytus
speciosus).

Neoclytus capraea, Say, vi, 151 (Clytus
capraea).

Lamiinae. vi, 152.

Saperda Candida, Fabr., vi,152.
vestita, Say, vi,156.
tridentata, Oliv., vi,156.

Chrysomelide.

(vi, 157.)

Lema trilineata, Oliv., vi,158.

Crioceris asparagi, Linn., vi,158.

Fidia viticida, Walsh, vi, 160.

Chrysochus auratus, Fabr., vi, 164.

Colaspis brunnea, Fabr., var. flavida, Say,
vi, 164 (C. flavida).

Doryphora decemlineata, Say, ii, 63; iii, 162;
vi, 160.

Gastroidea polygoni, Linn., vi, 171 (Gastro-
physa polygoni).

Diabrotica 12-punctata, Fabr., vi,166.
i vittata, Fab., vi,165.

longicornis, Say, x,44; xi,65; xii,10.
Graptodera chalybea, Ill., vi,170 (Haltica
chalybea).

Phyllotreta vittata, Fabr., vi,168 (Haltica
vittata.)

XVI

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES.

Crepidodera helxines, Linn., iii, 137 (Haltica
helxines).

cucumeris, Harr., vi, 167 (Haltica cu-
cumeris).

Psylliodes pimctulata, Mels., vi, 168 (Haltica
punctulata).

Blepharida rhois, Forst., vi,167.

Cassidini. vi, 171.

Cassida nigripes, Oliv., vi, 172.
bivittata, Say, vi, 172.

Coptocycla aurichalcea, Fabr., vi, 172
(Cassida aurichalcea).
guttata, Oliv., vi, 172 (Cassida guttata).

Beuchid^.

(vi, 127.) .

Bruchus pisi, Linn., vi, 127.
obsoletus, Say, vi,128.
granarius, Linn., vi,129

Meloid^.

(vi, 125).

Macrobasis unicolor. Kirby, vi,126.
Epicauta vittata, Fabr., vi, 125.
cinerea, Forst., vi, 126.

Otioehync 'ID®.

Epicserns imbricatus, Say, vi,131.
Pandeletejus hilaris, Hbst., vi,132.

Curculionid®:.

(vi, 129.)

Ithyoerus noveboracen is, Forst., vi,130.
Hylobius pales, Hbst., vi,133.

Pissodes strobi, Peck., vi,133.

Magdalis armicollis. Say, vi, 132.

Coccotorus scutellaris, LeC., i, 72 (Anthono-
mus prunicida); vi,136 (A. prunicida).
Anthonomus quadiigibbus, Say, vi, 135.
Conotrachelus nenuphar, Herbst., i, 64; vi,
137.

crataegi, Walsh, vi,141.

Tyloderma fragariaB, Riley, xii. 64.
Craponius inaequalis, Say, i, 13 (Coeliodes
inaequalis); vi, 142(0. inaequalis).
Trichobaris tiinotata, Say, vi, 142 (Baridius
trinotatus).

Balaninus nasicus, Say, vi,134.

Calandeid^.

Sphenophorus seulptilis, Uhler, vi, 144
(S. zeae); vii, 34 (S. zeae).

Scolytid®:.

(vi, 144.)

Seolytus quadrispinosus, Say. vi,145.
Phlceohinus dentatus, Say, vi,146 (Hylurgus
dentatus).

Pendroetonus terebrans, Oliv., vi, 146

(Hylurgus terebrans).

HEMIPTERA.

(vi, 72; viii, 9, 11.)

Heteroptera.

(iv,25; v,25; vi, 72; viii, 9, 12).

Cydnid.®,

Murgantia histrionica, Hahn, vi,59.

Podisus spinosus, Dali., vii, 218.

Lygjeid^:.

Blissus leucopterus. Say, iii, 142 (Micro
leucopterus); vii, 40; xii, 32.

PHYTOCORID.E.

Pcecilacapsus vittatus, ii, 61 tCapsus qua*
vittatus).

Homoptera.

(iv,25; v,25; vi,72; viii, 9, 11.)

Cicadid^:.

Cicada septendecim, Linn., iii, 124.

Psyllid^:.

(viii, 10, 12,33,211.)

Diraphia, viii, 13.

vernalis, Fitch, viii, 14.
femoralis, Fitch, viii 14.
calamorum, Fitch, viii, 14.
maculipennis, Fitch, viii, 14.

Psylla, viii. 15.

pyri. Schmidt.iii, 134; viii, 16.
rubi, W. & R., viii, 17.
tripunetata, Fitch, viii. 18.
quadrilineata, Fitch, viii, 18.
carpini, Fitch, viii. 18.
annulata. Fitch, viii, 18.
urticsecolens, Fitch, viii, 18.
quadrisignate, — , viii, 18.

Aphidid.®.

(viii, 5, 10, 19-211 l Report devoted chief! :
the family].)

Aphidinae, viii, 44.

Siphonophorini. viii, 46.

Siphonophora, viii. 46.

rudbeckiae, Fitch, viii, 49.190.
ambrosiae. Thomas viii, 50.
rosae, Reaum., viii, 50.
avenae. Fabr., viii, 51.
viticola, Thos., viii, 55.
setatiae, Thos., viii, 56, 192.
euphorbise, Thos.. viii, 56.
euphorbicola, Thos., viii, 57.
asclepiadis, Fitch, viii, 58.
erigeronensis, Thos., viii. 58.
coreopsidis, ihos., viii, 59.

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES

XVII

Siphonophora lactucse, Linn., viii,60.
polygoni, Walk., viii, 62.
salicicola, Thos., viii,68,192.
verbenae, Thos.. viii, 63.
rubi, Kalt., viii, 64.
pisi, Kalt., viii, 64.
gerardiae, Thos., viii, 65.
heuoherae, Thos., viii, 66.
cucurbitae, Thos., viii, 67.
tanaceti, Linn., viii, 68.
fragariae, Koeh., viii, 68.
mentbae, Buckton, viii, 68.
absinthii, Linn., viii, 69.
achy.rantes, Moneli, viii, 187.
calendulae, Moneli, viii, 190.
calendulella. Moneli, viii, 188.
crataegi, Moneli, viii, 189.
fragariae, Koch, var. immaculata, Riley,
viii, 191.

liriodendri, Moneli, viii, 189.
sonchi, Linn., viii, 189.
tulipae, Moneli, viii, 188.

Phorodon, viii, 69.

humuli, Schrank, var. mahaleb, Fonsc.,
viii. 72.

scrophulariae, Thos., viii, 72.

Myzus, viii, 74.

cerasi, Fabr., viii, 75.
persicae, Sulzer, viii, 76.
ribis, Linn., viii, 76.

Drepanosiphum, viii, 78.
acerina, Walk., viii, 78.
quercifolii, Walsh, viii, 79.
acerifolii, Thos., viii, 47 (Siphonophora
aeerifoliae); viii, 47,
tiliae, Koch, viii, 188.

Megoura, viii, 73.

solani, Thos., viii, 73.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 79.
dianthi, Schr., viii, 80.
tulipae, Thos., viii, 80.
berberidis, Kalt., viii, 81.
rhois, Moneli. viii, 194.
salicis, Moneli, viii, 194.

Apkidini,viii,83.

Siphocoryne, viii, 83.

pastinacae, Linn., viii, 84.

Aphis, viii, 84.

mali, Fabr., viii, 85.
malifoliae, Fitch, viii, 86.
pruni, Koch, viii, 87.
rumicis, Linn., viii, 88.
eircaezandis, Fitch, viii, 89.
maidis, Fitch, vii,75,
brassicae, Linn, viii, 91.
cerasofoliae. Fitch, viii, 93.
apocyni, Koch, viii. 94.
nerii, Fonsc., viii, 95.
diospyri, Thos., viii, 95.
viburni, Scop., viii, 96.
vornoniae, Thos., viii, 97.
cephalanthi, Thos., viii, 97, 192.
impatientis, Thos., viii, 98.
symphoricarpi, Thos., viii, 99.

—11

Aphis middletonii, Thos. viii, 99.
carduella, Walsh, viii, 100.
sambuci, Linn., viii, 100.
cornifoliae, Fitch, viii, 101, 193.
crataegifoli, Fitch, viii, 101.
medicaginis, Koch, viii, 101, 192.
amygdali, Blanch., viii, 102.
populifoliae, Fitch, viii, 102.
pinicolens, Fitch, viii, 102.
atrinlicis, Linn., viii, 193.
cucumeris, Forbes, xii,83.
helianthi, Moneli, viii, 194.
hyperici, Moneli, viii, 193.
lutescens, Moneli, viii, 191.
caryella, Fitch, viii, 170.
fumipenella, Fitch, viii, 171.
maculella, Fitch, viii. 171.
marginellus. Fitch, viii. 171.
punctatella, Fitch, viii, 171.

Hyalopterus, viii, 82.
pruni, Fabr., viii, 82.
aquilegiae, Koch, viii, 83.

Chaitophorus, viii, 103, 200.
nqgundinis, Thos., viii, 103.
populicola, Thos., viii, 103.
lonicera, Moneli, viii, 104.
viminalis, Moneli, viii, 105,200,
salicicola, Moneli, viii, 105.
candicans (?), viii, 105,
quereicola, Moneli, viii, 201.
smithiae, Moneli, viii, 200.

Myzocallis, viii, 105.
bella, Walsh, viii, 106.
hyperici, Thos., viii, 108.

Lachnini, viii, 114.

Lachnus, viii, 115.

salicicola, Uhler, viii, 115.
dentatus, LeB., iii, 138; viii, 116.
caryae, Harr., viii, 116.
strobi, Fitch, viii, 117.
laricifex. Fitch, viii, 117.
abietis, Fitch, viii, 117.
alnifoliae, Fitch, viii, 118.
quercifoliae, Fitch, viii, 1118.
salicelis, Fitch, viii, 119.
ulmi, Linn., viii, 119.
populi, Linn., viii, 119.
longistigma, Moneli, viii, 119.

Phyllaphis, viii, 120.
fagi, Linn., viii, 120.

Sipha, viii, 120.

rubifolii, Thos., viii, 121.
maydis, Pass., viii, 122.

Callipterus, viii, 109, 195.

betulaecolens, Moneli, viii, 198.
ulmicola, Thos., viii, 111.
quercifolii, Thos., viii, 112.
castaneae, Fitch, viii, 114.
asclepiadis, Moneli, viii, 197..
bella, Walsh, 197.
caryae, Moneli, viii, 199.
discolor, Moneli, viii, 198.
hyalinus, Moneli, viii, 198.
punctata, Moneli, viii, 198.

XVIII

LIST OP GENERA AND SPECIES.

Callipterus quercicola, Monell, viii, 199.
walshi, Monell, viii, 196.
ulmifolii, Monell, viii, 196.
mucidus, Fitch, viii, 172.

Pemphiginae, viii, 122,

Schizoneurini, viii, 125.

Schizoneura, viii, 125,

lanigera, Hausmann, i, 55 (Pemphigus
pyri); viii; 126.
rileyi, Thos., viii, 136.
pinicola, Thos., viii, 137.
panicola, Thos., viii, 138.
querci, Fitch, viii, 139.
tessellata, Fitch, viii, 139.
imbricator, Fitch, viii, 139.
fagi, Linn., viii, 140.
strobi, Fitch, viii, 140.
ulmi, Linn., viii, 140.
fungicola, Walsh, viii, 141.
caryae, Fitch, viii, 141.
cornicola, Walsh, viii, 141.
americana, Riley, viii, 202.

Pemphigini, viii, 145.

Pemphigus, viii, 146.

fraxinifolii, Riley, viii, 146, 210.
rubi, viii, 147.

populicaulis, Fitch, iv, 193: viii, 149.
formicarius, Walsh, viii, 150.
formicetorum, Walsh, viii, 150.
pseudobyrsa, Walsh, viii, 151.
vagabundus, Walsh, viii, 151.
rhois, Fitch, viii, 152.
ulmi-fusus, Walsh, Viii, 153.1
popularia, Fitch, viii, 153.
populi-globuli, Fitch, viii, 153.
populi- venae, Fitch, viii, 154.
acerifolii, Riley, viii, 209.
populi-monilis, Riley, viii, 205.
populi-ramulorum, Riley, viii, 209.
populi-transversus, Riley, viii, 208.

Hormaphis spinosus, Shimer, viii, 206.

Glyphina, viii. 142.

ulmicola, Fitch, viii, 142, 204.
eragrostidis, Middleton, viii, 144.

Vacuna, viii, 145.

Chermesinae, viii, 155.

Chermes, viii, 155,

pinifoliae, Fitch, viii, 156.
laricifoliae, Fitch, viii, 156.

Adelges abieticolens, Thos., viii, 156 (Cher¬
mes abieticolens).

Phylloxera, viii, 157.

vastatrix, Planchon, i. 21 (Dactylo-
sphaera vitifoiiae); viii, 158 (Phylloxera
vitifoliae).

earyaeeaulis, Fitch, viii, 160.
caryaefoliae, Fitch, viii, 161.
caryaevenae, Fitch, viii, 162.
caryae-globosa, Shimer, viii, 163.
rileyi, Licht., viii, 163.
caryae-semen, Walsh, i, 23 (Dactylo-
sphaeracaryae-semen).
caryae-globuli, Walsh, viii, 164.
spinosa, Shimer, viii; 164.

Phylloxera caryae septa, Shimer, viii. It
forcata, Shimer, viii. 164.
depressa, Shimer, viii, 164.
cornica, Shimer, viii, 164.
caryae-gummosa, Riley, viii, 164.
caryae-ren, Riley, viii, 164.
caryae-fallax, Walsh, viii, 164.
castaneae, Hald., viii, 164.

Tychea, viii, 167.

erigeronensis, Thos., viii, 168.
panici, Thos., viii, 169.

Rhizobiinae, viii, 164.

Rhizobius, viii, 165.

lactucae, Fitch, viii, 165.
poae, Thos., viii. 166.

Coccid^:. '

Chionaspis furfureus, Fitch, i, 53 (Aspidi
harrisib.

pinifoliae, Fitch, ii, 83 (Mytilaspis r
foliae); iii, 161 (M. pinifoliae).
salicis, Linn., i, 40 (Aspidiotus sal
nigrae).

Mytilaspis pomorum, Bouche, i, 34 (A
diotus conchiformis); ii, 24 (Mytila
conchiformis); iii, 159 (M. conehiform:

Pulvinaria innumerabilis, Rathv., vi
(Lecanium acericola). „

ORTHOPTERA.

(iv, 25; v,25; vi,70.)

Acbidid^:.

(ix, 73-140, [Illinois species; synopsis, s
nymy, descriptions, etc!.)

Mermiria bivittata, Serv., ix,97.

Truxalis brevicornis, Linn., ix, 97.

Chloealtis viridis, Scudd., ix,99.
conspersa, Harr., ix, 99.

Syrbula admirabilis, Uhl., ix, 100.

Stenobothrus maculipennis, Scudd., h
curtipennis, Harr., ix,104.

Stetheophyma lineata, Scudd., ix.104.

Tragocephala viriaifasciata, Harr., i>

Tomonotus sulphureus, Fabr., ix, 107.
sordida, Burm., ix,107.
nietanus, Sauss., ix, 108.

(Edipoda aequalis. Say, ix,109.
collaris, Scudd , ix, 110. .

Carolina, Linn., ix, 111.
belfragii, Stal.. ix, 111 .

Trimerotropis verruculata, Scudd., ix,
maratima, Harr., ix, 113.

Mestobregma cincta, Thos., ix, 113.

Hippiscus neglectus, Thos., ix, 114.
corallipes, var. rugosus, Scudd., ix
discoideus, Serv., ix, 116.
phoenicopterus, Burm., ix,117.

Camnula pellucida, Scudd., ix,U8.

Pezotettix unicolor, Thos., ix, 118.
minutipennis, Thos., ix, 119.

LIST OF GENERA AND SPECIES.

XIX

pezotettix viola, Thos., ix,120.
scudderi, Uhler, ix, 121.
spretus, Thomas, i, 82 (Caloptenus
spretus); vi,44 (C. spretus); vii, 36
(C. spretus); ix,121 (C. spretus).
atlanis, Riley, vii, 38 (Caloptenus atlanis' ;
ix, 124 (C. atlanis).

femur-rubrum, DeG., i, 99 (Caloptenus
femur-rubrum); vii, 38 (C. femur-rub¬
rum); ix,124 fC. femur-rubrum).
bivittatus, Say, ix,126 (Caloptenus bivit-
tatus).

differentialis, Thos., ix, 127 (Caloptenus
differentialis).

Acridium rubiginosum, Harr., ix,128.
emarginatum, Uhler, ix,128.
americanum, Dr., ix,129.

ARACHNID A.

(iv, 1.)

Trombidid^i.

Trombidium gryllaria, LeB., iii, 157 (Atoma
gryllaria); ix,136 (Trombidium locusta-
rum).

Gamasid.®.

Uropoda americana, Riley, vii, 218.

Tyroglyphid®.

Heteropus ventricosus, Newport, xii, 150.

Sarcoptid®.

Psoroptes equi, Gerv., ix,64.

Phytoptid®.

NEUROPTERA.

(xii, 123.)

Phytoptus abnormis, H. Garman, xii, 134.
acericola, H. Garman, xii, 135.

(iv,25; v,25.)

V

fraxini, H. Garman, xii, 136.
pyri, Scheuten, xii, 141.
quadripes, Shimer, xii, 135.

Hemerobina.

querci, H. Garman. xii, 138.
salicicola, H. Garman, xii, 138.

Chrysopa oculata. Say, viii, 177.
illepida, Fitch, viii, 178.
chlorophana, Burm., viii, 178.
plorabunda, Fitch, viii, 178.
pseudographa, Fitch, viii, 178.

thujae, H. Garman , xii, 138.
ulmi, H. Garman, xii, 137.

MYRIAPODA.

(iv, 1.)

Julus impressus, Say, xi,44.

VERMES.

PL A TYHELM1NTHES.

CESTODES.

TREMATODA.

Taenia coenurus, Kuch, ix,69 (Coenurus cer
ebralis).

Fasciola hepatica, Linn., ix, 67 (Distoma
hepaticum).

GENERAL INDEX TO INSECTS,

' A

abbreviates, Cryptohypnus, vii, 27.
ibbotti, Lophyrus, x, 05, 70.

Thyreus, vii, 164,280,283; x, 100,

Abbott’s Saw-fly, Lophyrus abbotti, x, 65, 70.
Abbott’s Sphinx, Thyreus abbotti, vii, 164,
280,283; x. 100.

abdominalis, Urocerus, x, 71.

Aberrant Wood-beetles, iv, 37; v, 37,92,93,

101; vi, 82.

Abia caprifolii, x, 65,66.

cerasi, x, 64,65, 66.
abieticolus, Chermes, viii, 156.
abietis, Chermes, viii, 157.

Lachnus, viii, 117.

Lophyrus, x, 65,70.
abnormis, Phytoptus, xii, 134."
abortiva, Chloealtis, ix, 92.
abortivaria, Dyspteris, vii, 238, 280.

Abraxas ribearia, vii, 237.
absinthii, Aphis, viii, 69.

Siphonophora, viii, 69.
acadiea, Thecla, x, 93.

Acalles, v, 143.

Acanthocephala, ix, 59.

Acanthoderes, v, 158;

Acari. (See Mites.)

Acaridae, ix, 65.

Aearina, ix, 59,64, 65. (See Mites.)
acaroides, Aphis, viii, 211.

Acarus, i, 35,44; ii, 32,33,35; iv, 1; v, 1,65; vi,
19; xii, 124. (See Mites.)
scabiei, i, 44.
aceentifera, Piusia, ix, 43.
acericola, Lecanium, vii, 5,108,109,120,278,
281.

Phytoptus, xii, 135.
j aeericorticis, Lecanium, vii, 121,281.
acerifolise, Siphonophora, viii, 47,78,195.
acerifolii, Drepanosiphum, viii, 195,
Pemphigus, viii, 209.
acerina, Aphis, viii, 78.

Drepanosiphum, viii, 78.
aceiis, Aphis, viii. 49.

Drepanosiphum, viii, 78.
acerni, ^Egeria, vi, 40,44, pp. iii, iv; vii, 173,
281; x. 106,108.
acetosa, Aphis, viii, 88.

Achatodes, vii, 272.
zeae, vii, 100,222.278.

achemon, Philampelus, vii. 165,280,283; x,
101,182.

Achemon Sphinx, Philampelus achemon,
vii, 165.280,283; x, 101,182.

achyrantes, Siphonophora, viii, 187.

Acilius, v, 51.

Acmseodera, v, 95,96.
pulchella, v. 96.
tubulus, v, 96.

AcmaBops, v, 156.

Acoloithus, vii, 271.

americanus, vii, 179,280,283; x, 112.
falsarius, x, 112.

Acorn Weevils (See Nut Weevils).

acrsea, Arctia, x. 115: xi, 62.

Leucarctia, vii, 79,183,278,280; x, 170.

Acrida brevicornis, ix, 92.

Acrididse, vi, 70; ix, 73, 80,82, 86, 87,92, 131. (See
Locusts.)

Acrid inee. ix, 80,81,83,87.

Acridini, ix, 83, 86, 90.

Acridium, ix, 86.

alutaceum. ix, 128.
ambiguum, ix,96.

americanum, vi, 45; ix, 81,91,96,129,131,
133,135. (See American Locust.)
var. ambiguum, ix, 91,96,130,133.
americanum, ix, 91.
bivittatum, ix, 96.
carolinianum, ix, 94.

* carolinum, ix, 94.
damniflcum, ix, 96.
differentiate, ix, 96.
emarginatum, ix, 91,96,128,134.
ensicornu, ix, 92.
femorale, ix, 95.
femur-rubrum, ix, 95.
flavovittatum, ix, 96.
hemipterum, ix, 93.
laterale, ix, 96.
marginatum, ix, 93.
ornatum, ix, 96.
peregrinum, ix, 130,133.
phoenicopterum, ix, 95.
rubiginosum, ix, 91,96,128.
rusticum, ix, 96.
sanguinipes, ix, 96.

2

INSECT INDEX.

sordidum, ix, 93.
sulphureum, ix, 94.
tuberculatum, ix, 95.
verruculatum, ix. 95.
virginianum, ix, 93.
viridifasciatum, ix. 93.
xanthopterum, ix, 94.

Acrobasis jnglandis, vii, 250; xi. 14.

nebulo, vii, 249; x, 157. (See Apple Leaf-
crumpler.)

Acronycta, ii, 151; vii, 271.

americana, vii, 200,278,279,281.
lepusculina, vii, 201,279.
oblinita. vii, 201.279,282; x, 131,170.
populi, vii, 201,279.
prunivora, ii, 53.
superans, ii, 51.

Actias, vii, 271.

luna, vii, 192; x, 124,178.
aculeatus, Hylesinus, v. 147.
aculiferus, Leptostylus, v, 159.

Adela, v,10.

Adelges, viii, 34.
laricis, viii, 34.

of the spruce, Cherm.es abieticolens (?)
viii, 156.

Adelocera, v, 98.
discoidea, vii, 27.
impressicollis, vii, 27.

Adephaga, iv, 19; v, 19.

Adetus, v, 158.

Adipsophanes miscellus. x, 180.
adjuncta, Mamestra, x. 136.
admirabilis, Stenobothrus, ix, 93,102.

Syrbula, ix, 88,93, 100.

/Egeria, vi. 37,39; vii, 270, 277; x. 110.

acerni, vi, 40,, 44, pp. iii, iv; vii, 173,281;
x, 106, 108.

anthracipennis, x, 106, 109.
asilipennis, x, 106,109.
caudata, vii, 172,279,282; x, 106,108.
cucurbit®, vi, 41, 44, p. iv; vii, 173, 277,279,
280; x, 106,107.

exitiosa, i, 0:80; vi, 33,34,38,44, pp. i, iii;

vii, 169,281; x, 106,107,108.
pictipes, x, 106,109.

polistiformis, i, 24: vii, 171, 280; x, 106, 108.
pyri, vi, 40, 44, p. iii; vii, 170; x, 106,

107.

rubi. vi, 40,44; pp, i, iii; vii, 175,282; x, 106

108.

syring®, vii, 174,281; x, 106,109.
tili®, x, 106, 109.

tipuliformis, vi, 39,44, p. ii; vii, 172,279:
x, 106,107,151.

TEgeria, Pear-tree (See Pear-tree Borers).
iEgerian, Maple (See Maple JEgerian).
iEgerians, iEgerid®, vi, 34,36,72; vii, 169,269,
270; x, 106.

.Egeriid®, vi, 34,36,72; vii, 169,269,270; x,106.
®nea, Arthromacra, v, 113.

Lagria, v, 113.

®quale, Spharagemon, ix, 94.

®qualis, Gryllus, ix, 94.

Locusta, ix, 94.

(Edipoda, ix, 90,94,109, 112.
Stenobothrus, ix; 93.

Trimerotropis, ix, 94.

®rea, Dibolia, v, 173.

Plusia, ix, 43,44,45.

®roides, Plusia, ix, 44,45.

®rosa, Brachys. v, 96.
affinis. Oryssus, x, 71.

Agabus, v. 51.

Agathidiid®, v, 63.

Agathidiides, v, 63.

Agathidium, v, 63,75.

Aglossa, vii, 272.

pinguinalis, vii, 248,280.

Agonoderus, v, 48; xii, 111,115.
comma, xii, 27,43,56,111.
pallipes, v, 49.

Agraphus, v. 137.

Agraulis vanill®, x, 80.

Agrilus, v, 95, 96.

granulatus, xii, 121.
lateralis, vi, 37,43, 114.
ruflcollis, v. 94,96; vi, 35,37,43, 114; l
iii.

Agrion, i, 61.

Agriotes, v, 99.

mancus, vi, 23,24,25,27,118; p. iv; v
29.

obscuris, vi, 24.
pubescens, vii, 29.

Agrotis, vi, 11.' 90; vii, 83,84,97,99,202,27
136. (See Cutworms.)
annexa. x, 136; xii, 103, 110.
bicarnea, vii, 204,
clandestina, vii, 95,213,278; x, 135.
c-nigrum, vii, 89,202,278; x, 132, 184;
cochrani, vii, 92,209.
cupida, x, 135.

herilis, vii, 90,204,205,278; x, 133.
inermis, vii, 211.
jaculifera, vii, 206.
lubricans, x, 135.
messoria, vii. 92,209, 278; x, 134.
nigricans, var. maizi, vii, 91,207.
ortoni, vii, 211.
repentis, vii, 92, 209.
saucia, vii, 94,211.278; x, 134.
scandens, vii, 208; x, 133.
subgot hie a, vii, 89,204,205,206,278; i>
x, 132.

suffusa, vii, 210.
telifera, vii, 84.210.
tesselata, vii, 91, 206,278; x, 133.
tricosa, vii, 205,206; x, 132,
ypsilon, vii, 93,210,278; ix. 141; x, 13^
ahaton, Pamphila, vii, 160.

Ailanthus Silkworm Moth, Sarnia (Att
cynthia, vii, 194, 277; x, 125.

Ajax Butterfly, Papilio ajax, vii, 135,27
x, 74.

ajax, Papilio, vii, 135.279,281; x, 74.

INSECT INDEX

8

alabamas, Chrysobothris, vi, 111.

Alaus, v, 98.

oculatus, v,99; vi, 25.116, pp. i, ii; vii, 26.
albicornis. Urocerus, x. 71.

Xiphidra, x, 71.
albifrons, Chalcis, x, 40.

Edema, vii, 191; x, 120.
alcestis, Argynnis, vii, 150; x, 82.

Alder Blight, Schizoneura tesselata, viii, 139
Alder-leaf Lachnus, Lachnus alnifolise,
viii, 118.

Aleochara, v, 67,73.

Aleocharides, v, 68,70,72,74.

Aletia, xi, 82, 92,99.

argillacea. vii, 228,279.
aletiae, Tachina, xi, 97.

Aleurodidae, vii, 72; viii, 10,11,26,33.

Alexia, v, 182.

Allecula,.v. 119.

Allorhina nitida, v, 89; vi, 107.
allyni. Eupelmus, xi. 81.

Isosoma, xi, 73.

Almond Aphis, Aphis amygdali, viii, 102.
alnifolise, Lachnus, viii, 118.

Alope Butterfly, Satyrus alope, vii, 156; x,

92.

alope, Satyrus, vii, 156; x, 92.
alticola, Plusia, ix, 44.

Alucita, iv, 183; vii, 273.
alutaceum, Acridium, ix. 128.

Alypia, vii, 270; x, 110.

octomacuiata, vii, 176,280; x, 110,172.
Amara, v, 39,47,48,49; xii, 110,115.
angustata, x, 41; xii, 110.
carinata, xii. 110.
impuncticollis, xii, 110.
amatrix, Catocala, vii, 235,279.
ambiguum, Acridium, ix, 96.

Amblyscirtes, vii, 270.

vialis, vii, 161.
ambrosia, Aphis, viii, 211.
ambrosise, Siphonophora, viii, 50.

American Copper Butterfly, Chrysophanus
americana, vii, 158,282; x, 95.

Lackey Moth. (See Apple-tree Tent
Caterpillar.)

Locust, Acridium amerieanum, vi, 45,
Description, ix, 91, 129.

Eggs, ix. 131.

Figure, ix, 81.

Habits, ix, 133,135.

Injuries by, ix, 135.

Synonymy, ix, 96.

Yellow variety, Acridium america-
num, var ambiguum, ix, 91,96,130,
133.

Maple Moth, Apatela (Acronycta) ameri¬
cana, vii, 200,278,279,281; x, 130.

Procris, Acoloithusamericanus, vii, 179,
280,283; x, 112.

Tent Caterpillar. (See Apple-tree Tent
Caterpillar.)

Yine-chafer, Light-loving Vine-chafer,
Anomala lucicola, ii, 54; v, 89; vi, 105,
p. ii.

americana, Acronycta, vii, 200,278,279,281.
Apatela, vii, 200; x, 130.

Chrysophanus, vii, 158,282; x, 95.
Clisiocampa, vii, 110, 119, 197, 277, 279; x,
122, 123, 155. (See Apple-tree Tent
Caterpillar.)

Ctenucha, vii, 179.

Cyrtaeanthacris, ix, 96.

Gastropacha, x, 166.

Schistocerca, ix, 96.

Schizoneura, viii, 202,211.

Silpha, v, 58.

Uropoda, vii. 218.

amerieanum, Acridium, vi, 45; ix, 81,91,96,
129, 131, 133, 135. (See American Locust.)
Platydema, v, 125.

var. ambiguum, Acridium, ix, 91,96, 130,
133.

amerieanum, Acridium, ix, 91.
americanus, Acoloithus, vii, 179,280,283; x,

112.

Gryllus, ix, 96.

Necrophorus, v. 58.

Procris, vii. 179.

amoenum, Callidium, vi, 38, 43, 148, pp. ii, iii.
Amphalocera, xi, 83.

Amphasia, xii, 112, 115.
interstitialis, xii, 112.

Amphicerus bicaudatus, vi, 38, 43, 123, pp. i,
ii, iii.

Amphionycha, v. 158.

Amphipyra pyramidoides, ii, 56; vii, 225.
Amphorophora, viii, 42.
ampla, Plusia, ix, 44.

Amputating Brocade Moth. (See l^ellow-
headed Cutworm.)
amput atrix, Hadena, vii, 217.

Amycla, viii, 35.
amygdali, Aphis, viii, 102.
amyntor, Ceratomia, vii, 167,279; x, 102.
Anabrus simplex, vi, 54.

Analcis, v, 135,142,143.

fragarise, v, 143; vi, 38,43,83,85; p. iv; xii,
65.

anargyra, Plusia, ix, 50.

Anarsia lineatella. xii. 76.

pruinella, xii, 77.

Anaspis, v, 114.

Anatis 15-punctata, vi,174; vii, 128; viii, 174;
xi, 27.

Anchylochira, v, 96.

Anchylopera, vii, 273.

fragarise, vii, 108,258,282.

Ancyloxypha numitor, x, 96.
andria, Paphia, vii, 156,279,280.

Angerona, vii, 272.

croeataria, vii, 243,279.

Angoumois Grain Mcth, Fly Weevil. Gele-
chia cerealella, vii, 266,280,283; xii, 8,144.

4

INSECT INDEX

angulata, Aspidoglossa, v, 43.

Photinus. v, 107.

Scarites, v, 43.
angulum, Plusia, ix, 50.
anguslacollis, Meloe, v, 115.
angustata, Amara, x, 41; xii, 110.
angustatus, Macrodactylus, v,87.
angusticornis, Truxalis, ix, 92.
Anisodactylas, v, 47, 48,49; xii, 111, 113, 115,
116.

baltimorensis, v, 48; xii, 112.
diseoideus, xii, 112.
harrisi, xii, 112.
opaculus, xii, 112.
rusticus, xii, 112.
sericeus, xii, 112.

Anisophleba, viii, 35.

Anisoplia, xii, 55.

austriaca, xii, 54.

Anisopteryx, vii, 241,272.

autumnata, vii, 238,277,278,279,281; xi, 26,
31.

pometaria, vii. 238, 277, 279, 281: x, 148.

(See Spring Canker-worm.)
vernata, iii, 99; vi, 16, 89; p. i; vii 107,
110,119,238,239,277,278,219; xi, 25,26,29,31.
(See Spring Canker-worm.)

Anisota senatoria, vii, 196.

Anisotoma, v, 63.

Anisotomidae, v, 36,56,63.

Annelida, ix, 58.

annexa, Agrotis, x, 136; xii, 103,110.
annulata, Brochimena, ii, 62.

Psylla, viii, 18.

Annulated Psylla, Psylla annulata, viii, 18.
annulipes, Aphis, viii, 211.

Anobium. v, 102.

panieeum, v, 101; vi, 122; p. i.
tenuistriatum, v, 102.

Anoecia, viii, 35.

Anomala, v, 83,88,89; vi, 107.
binotata, vi, 105; p. ii.
lucicola, ii, 54; v, 89; vi, 105; p. ii.
varians, ii, 54; v, 89; vi, 105; pp. i. ii.
vitis, ii, 54.

Anomis, vii, 272.

argillacea, vii, 228,279.
xylina, vii, 228.

Anomoea, v, 169.

laticlavia, v, 169.
anonyma, Tachina, xi, 97.

Anopiitis, v, 174.

Anorthosia punctipennella, i, 79.

Ant, Yellow (See Yellow Ant).

Anthaxia, v, 95,96.

Anthicidas, v, 34, 112, 113,116.

Anthicus, v, 116.

Anthobium, v, 75,
protectum, v, 75.

Anthocoris, iv, 197.
insidiosus, xii, 43.
mus'culosus, iv, 197.

Ant horn yia brassicao, v, 67.

Anthonomides, v, 135,140,141.

Anthonomus, v, 132,141.
pomorum, v, 141.

prunicida, i, 15,66,72; ii, 94; v, 141; vi, 13
143, p. iii.
pyri, v. 141.

quadrigibbus, i, 77; v, 132,140,141; vi. 8
85.135, pp. i, ii, iii.

Anthopliagus, v, 75.

Antbophora retusa, xii, 150.
anthracipennis. JEgeria, x, 106,109.
Anthrenus, v, 60,61.
castaneae, vi,93.
musasorum. vi, 93. p. iii.

Anthribidas, v, 127, 128, 129.

Anthribus, v, 129.

Antiopa Butterfly, Yanessa antiopa. vii, It
279,282,283; x, 85,163.

antiopa, Vanessa, vii, 153,279,282,283; x, £
163.

Ants, Formicidas. i, 60; iv, 6; v, 6; vi, 71; x
43,44, 110,111,112,114.

Apanteles orobenae, xii, 104.
aparines, Aphis, viii, 88.

Apatela, americana, vii, 200; x, 130.
hamamelis, x, 131.
lepusculina, vii, 201; x, 130.
oblinita, vii, 201; x, 131.
occidentalis, x, 129.
rubricoma, x, 132.
superans, x, 131.

Apatura, vii, 270.

celtis, vii, 155,279,280; x, 88,89.
clyton, vii, 155; x, 89.
herse, x, 89.

Aphalara, viii, 212.

Aphanobius sordidus, vi, 117.

Aphelinus mytilaspidis, ii, 34; iv, 200.
Aphidae, vi, 72; vii, 6,71,278; viii. 19. (^
Plant Lice.)

Aphiden, viii, 34.

Aphides. (See Plant Lice.)

Aphides, Gall-making. (See Gall-mak
Aphides.)

aphidicola, Formica, i, 61; viii, 150.
Aphididae, viii, 6,10, 11,19,33,35. (See PI
Lice.)

Aphidiides, viii, 175.

Aphidina, viii, 19.

Aphidinae, vii, 74; viii, 19, 29,35,36,38.39,42
134,182, 195. (See Plant Lice.)

Aphidini, viii, 39, 40, 42, 45, 46, 83, 114.
Aphidiphaga, v, 178,182.

Aphidius, viii, 55; xii, 90.
avenaphis, viii, 176.
lactucaphis, viii, 175.
polygonaphis, viii, 175.
viburnaphis, viii, 175.

Aphidius, Cherry-louse. (See Cherry-lo
Aphidius.)

Cranberry-louse. (See Cranberry-lo
Aphidius.)

Grain-louse. (See Grain-louse Ai
dius.)

Lettuce - louse. (See Lettuce-louse
Aphidius.)

Poplar-louse. (See Poplar-louse Aphi¬
dius.)

Wheat-louse. (See Wheat-louse Aphi¬
dius).

Willow-louse. (See Willow-louse Aphi¬
dius.)

Aphis, viii, 79,122.

Characters, i, 56; viii, 34,36,37,38,40,84.
Classification, viii, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 44, 80.
Compared with Calaphis betulella, viii.

111.

Hyalopterus, viii, 82.

Lachnus, iii, 139.

Myzus, viii, 74.

Phorodon, viii, 69.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 79.

Sipha, viii, 120.

Food plants, i, 60; viii, 16, 27, 28, 38.
Habits, viii, 38,85.

Nomenclature, viii, 16.

Reproduction, viii, 29,30.

Typical species, viii, 42.

Aphis absinthii, viii. 69.
acaroides, viii, 211.
acerina, viii. 78.
aceris, viii, 49.
acetosa, viii, 88.
ambrosia, viii, 211.
amygdali, viii, 102.
annulipes, viii, 211.
aparines, viii, 88.
apocyni, viii, 94.
armata, viii, 88.
asclepiadis, viii, 191.

var. lutescens, viii, 191.
atriplicis. viii, 88, 193.
avenae, viii, 51,176.
beecabungae, viii, 97.
bella, i, 60; viii, 106,107,197.
berberidis, viii, 81.
betulse, viii, 110.
betulascolens, viii, 110,198,199.
bicolor, viii, 211.
brassicae, viii, 91.
bursaria, viii, 34.
capreae, viii, 84.
carduella, viii, 100.
caryae, viii, 116.

■ caryella, viii, 170.
var., viii, 171.

costalis, viii, 171.
cephalanthi, viii, 97,192.
cerasi, viii, 42,93.
cerasifoliae, viii, 42,93.
cerealis, viii, 51.
chenopodii, viii, 88.
cireaszandis, viii, 89.
coreopsidis, viii, 193.
eorni, viii, 101.
cornifoliae, viii, 101,193.

crataegi, viii, 101.
crataegifoliae, viii, 101.
cucumeris, xii, 83.
cucurbitae, xii, 84.
dahliae, viii, 88.
dauci, viii, 181.
diospyri, viii, 95.
diplepha, viii, 211.
discolor, viii, 211.
euonymi, viii, 88.
euphorbias, viii, 57.
fabae, viii, 88.
fagi, viii, 43,120.
fraxini, viii, 147.
fumipennella, viii, 171.
furcipes, viii, 211.
galliscabri, viii, 88.
genistae, viii, 88.
gibbosa, viii. 211.
granaria, viii, 51,181.
helianthi, viii, 194.
hordei, viii, 51.
hortensis, viii. 88.
humuli. viii, 42,87.
hyperici, viii, 193.
impatiens, viii, 98.
laburni, viii, 88.
lactucae, viii, 61.

lanigera, viii, 43, 126, 133. (See Woolly
Aphis of the Apple-tree.)
lathyri, viii, 64.
lutescens, viii, 191.
maculella, viii, 171.
mahaleb, viii, 70,72.

maidis, vii, 71, 75, 278; viii, 31, 89; xi, 67;
xii 41 44.

mali, vii, 73; viii, 23,25, 42,85. 86,89,94,121,
130; xi,9. (See Apple-tree Plant Louse.)
malifoliae, viii, 86.
marginella, viii, 171.
marginipennis, viii. 211.
medicaginis, viii, 101,192.
middletoni, viii, 99.
nerii, viii, 95.
onobryehis, viii, 64.
oreaster, viii, 211.
papaveris, viii. 88.
pastinacae, viii, 84.
persicac, viii, 42.
pilosa, viii, 211.
pinicolens, viii, 102.
pisi. viii, 64.
populi, viii, 105.
populifoliac, viii, 102,151.
pruni, viii. 42, 72, 82, 87.
prunifoliae, viii, 87.
punctatella, viii, 171.
pyri, viii, 101.
quercifolias, viii, 79.
quercus, viii, 108.
rhodryas, viii, 211.
ribicola, viii, 76.
ribis, i, 60; viii, 76.

INSECT INDEX.

ribis-nigri, viii, 61.
roboris, viii, 34.
rosae, viii, 34,42.
rubecula. viii, 211.
rumicis. viii, 88.

var. atriplicis, viii, 193.
salicicola, viii, 192.
salicti, viii, 115.
sambuci. viii, 100.
sambucifoliae, viii, 100.
setariae, viii. 192.
solid aginis, viii, 49.
sonchi, viii. 60.
symphoricarpi, viii, 99.
thlaspeas, viii, 88.
tulipae, viii, 81,188.
ulmariae, viii, 64.
ulmi, viii, 43,119,136.
vernoniaB, viii, 97.
verticolor, viii, 211.
viburni, viii, 96.
vicas, viii, 88.
vitis, viii, 55.
xanthelis, viii, 211.

Aphis. (See Plant lousej

Almond. (See Almond Aphis.)

Apple leaf. (See Apple leaf Aphis.)

Apple-tree. (See Apple-tree]plant-louse.)
Bean. (See Bean Aphis.)

Beech. (See Beech Aphis).

Bireh. (See Birch Aphis).

Bottle-grass. (See Bottle-grass Aphis).
Cherry-tree. (See Cherry-tree Aphis).
Dogwood - leaf. (See Dogwood -leaf
Aphis).

Elder. (See Elder Aphis).

Elm-leaf. (See Elm-leaf Aphis),
found on the Willow, Siphonophora
salicola, viii, 63,192.

Grain. (See Grain Plant-louse).
Grape-inhabiting. (See Grape Louse).
Hickory gall. (See Hickory gall Aphis).
Hop. (See Hop Aphis.)

Ironweed. (See Ironweed Aphis).
Knotweed. iSee Knotweed Aphis).
Maize or Corn. (See Corn Plant-louse).
Margined Spurge. (See Margined
Spurge Aphis).

Melon or Cucumber. (See Melon Plant-
louse).

Milkweed. (See Milkweed Aphis).
Mouldy.. (See Mouldy Aphis).

Oat. (See Grain Plant-louse),
of the Apple-tree, Woolly. (See Woolly
Aphis of the Apple-tree),
of the Canada Flea-bane, Siphonophora
erigeronensis, viii, 58.
of the Elm-leaf Cockscomb Gall, Gly-
phina (Byrsocrypta, Colopha) ulmi-
cola, vii, 76; viii, 43,89, 142,204.
of the Elm-tree, Woolly. (See Woolly
Aphis of the Elm-tree.)
of the Oat, Woolly. (See Woolly Aphis
of the Oak).

of the Spanish Needle, Siphonopho |
coreopsidis, viii, 59.

Peach-tree. (See Peach-tree Aphis).
Pine-inhabiting. (See Pine-inhabitii
Aphis).

Plum, Plum-leaf or Plum-tree. (S'
Plum Aphis).

Poplar-leaf. (See Poplar-leaf Aphis).
Bose. (See Rose Aphis).

Snowball. (See Snowball Aphis.)
Snowberry. (See Snowberry Aphis).
Spotted-spurge. (See Spotted-spurj
Aphis).

Spotted Willow. (See Spotted Willc
Aphis).

1 Strawberry. (See Strawberry Aphis)
Tamarack. (See Tamarack Aphis).
Tansy. (See Tansy Aphis).
Thorn-leaf. (See Thorn-leaf Aphis).
Touch-me-not. (See Touch-me-n
Aphis).

Verbena. (See Verbena Aphis).
Aphodiidae, v, 37,79,70,81; vi, 70,80,82.
Aphodius, v, 81,
fimetarius, v, 81.
oblongus, v, 81.
terminalis, v, 81.
serval, v. 81.

aphrodite, Argynnis, vii, 150; x, 81.
Aphrodite Butterfly, Argynnis aphrodi
vii, 150; x, 81.

apiarius, Trichodes. v, 109.
apicalis, Phiionthus, v, 68.
apicatus, Elater, v, 100. *

apiculata, Locusta, ix, 95.

Apidse, vi, 71.

Apion, v, 142.

Apionides, v, 135,142.

Apis, v. 2.

apivorus, Promachus, ii, 64; vi, 162,163.
Aploneura, viii, 37,41,42,43.
apocyni, Aphis, viii, 94.

Apomerides, v, 133,135, 142.
Apotasimerides, v 133, 142.

Apple-bud Worm, Eccopsis malana, xi,
Curculio, Four humped Curculio, Anti
nomus quadrigibbus, i. 77; v, 132,1
141; vi, 83,85,135, pp. i, ii, iii.

-leaf Aphis, Aphis malifoliae, viii, 86.
Apple Leaf-crumpler, Rascal Leaf-crun
ler, Leaf-crumpler, Phycita (Acrobat
nebulo, i, 34; iii, 104,106,117; vi,18.
Compared with apple-bud worm, xi,
Figure of crumpled leaves contain
larvae, iii, 117; vii, 249.
imago, iii, 117; vii, 249.
larva, anterior part, iii, 117; vii, 2
larva in case, iii, 117; vii, 249.
wings, iii, 119; vii, 250; x, 157.
wings of individual bred on cri
apple, iii, 119; vii, 250; x,157.
Food-plants, i, 34; vii, 250,279.

Imago, iii, 118,123; vii, 249.250.

INSECT INDEX

7

Insect enemies, i, 34; iii, 121,123; xi,13.
Larva, iii, 118; vii, 249; x, 157.

Life history, i, 34; iii, 118; vii, 249.

Name, iii, 118.

Quails feeding on, iii, 121.

Range, i, 34.

Remedies, i, 34; ii, 15; iii, 105, 121; vi, 11,18;
vii, 250.

Specific identity with Phycitau jglandis,
iii, 117,119,120,122,123; iv, 188; vii, 251.
Apple-leaf Folder, Lesser. (See Lesser
Apple-leaf Folder.)

Skeletonizer, Pempelia hammondi, vii,
252, 277.

Tyer, Green. (See Green Apple-leaf
Tyer.)

Apple Maggot- fly, Trypeta pomonella, i,29.
Midge, Sciara (Molobrus) mali,i,19,3l,32.
-root Plant-louse. (See Woolly Aphis of
the Apple-tree.)

Apple-tree Bark-louse. (See Oyster-shell
Bark-louse.)

Borer, Flat-headed. (See Fiat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.)

Round-headed. (See Round-headed
Apple-tree Borer.)

Caterpillar, Unicorn. (See Unicorn
Prominent.)

Apple-tree Plant-louse or Aphis, Apple
Plant Louse, Apple Louse, Aphis mali.
Climatic influences, xi, 9.

Color of thorax, viii, 23.

Compared with other species, viii, 86.94,
121,130.

Description, viii, 85.

Eggs, time of deposit, viii, 32.

Example of group, viii, 45.

Figure of head and antennae, viii, 89.
of insect, viii, 85.
of wing, vii, 73; viii, 25,85.
Hibernation, viii, 32.

Occurrence in 1881, xi, 9.

Remedy, xi, 9.

Type of genus, viii, 42.

Apple-tree Tent Caterpillar, American Tent
Caterpillar of the Orchard, American
Lackey Moth, Clisiocampa americana, ii,
18; vii, 110.

Eggs, vi, 12; vii, 197; x, 123.

compared with those of forest tent
caterpillar, x, 123.

Figure of eggs, x, 122,155.
of larva, x, 122,155.
of pupa, x, 122, 155.

Food plants, vii, 197,277,279; x, 123,155.
Habits and mode of life, vii, 111; x, 122,155.
Hibernation, vii, 197.

Insect enemies, vii, 119.

Larva, vii. 197,198; x, 122,155.

Moth, vii, 198.

Occurrence in 1877, vii, 107, 110.

Remedies, vi, 12, 13; vii, 197.

Web, x, 122.

Apple Weevil. Anthonomus pomorum, v,141.

Worm. (See Codling Moth.)
aquilegim, Hyalopterus, viii, 83.

Arachnida, v, 1; ix, 58,65; xii, 114,115.

Araneina, ix, 59.

arboricola, Strigoderma, v, 89.

Archippus Butterfly, Danais archippus, vii,
149,281; x, 79,161.

archippus, Danais, vii, 149,281; x, 79,161.
Arctia, vii, 271; x, 110.
acrasa, x, 115; xi, 62.
arge, vii, 182,278,281; x, 115,170.
isabella, ix, 53; x, 115,169.
phalerata, vii, 181,280; x, 115, 171.
arctica, Hadena, vii, 96, 217,278; x, 137.
Arctiidae. iv, 188.

Arcypteralineata, ix, 93.

arge, Arctia, vii, 182,278,281; x, 115,170.

Arge Tiger Moth, Arctia arge, vii, 182,278,
281; x, 115,170.
argentifera, Plusia, ix, 50.
argillacea, Aletia, vii, 228,279.

Anomis, vii, 228,279.
argus, Chelymorpha, v, 176.

Argynnis, vii, 270.

alcestis, vii, 150, x, 82.
aphrodite, vii, 150; x, 81.
atlantis, x, 82.
bellona, x, 83,183.
cybele, vii, 150; x, 81.
diana, vii, 149,282; x, 81.
egleis, x, 164.

idalia, vii, 149,282; x, 81,162.
myrina, x, 82.161.

Argyrolepia, vii, 273.

quercifoliana, vii, 4,114,257,279,281; ix,
142.

ariadne, Odontota, v, 175.

Arina spinosa, ii. 64, 66; iii, 162; iv, 184; vi.
^ 162,163.

armata, Aphis, viii, 88.

Armed Heliothis. (See Corn worm.)

Armed Soldier-bug, Spined Soldier-bug,
Soldier-bug, Podisus (Arma) spinosus, ii,
64,66; iii. 162; iv, 184; vi, 162,163; vii, 119,218.
armicollis, Magdalis, v, 139; vi, 38, 43. 132, p. ii.
armigera, Heliothis, vii, 4,102,231,278,279; x,
150; xi, 5,82. (See Corn Worm.)
armus, Limonius. v. 100; vi. 25.

Army-worm, Black-worm, Leucania
(Heliophila) unipuncta, vii, 33,98; x, 2,5;
xii, 120.

Alternation of increase and decrease,
xii, 120.

Birds feeding on, vi, 57; xi, 15.

Broods, vii, 224; x. 5,27; xi, 57.
Chronological history, x, 6.

Climatic influences, vi, 56,57,59; vii, 224;
x, 33,48,56; xi, 58.

Cutworm habits, vi, 57,58; vii, 81,101; x.
5, 17,55.

Eggs, vi, 58: x, 9.

Figure of parasite, vii, 225; x, 38.
of larva, vii, 101; x, 5; xii, 102.
of moth, vii, 101; x, 5.

8

INSECT INDEX.

Figure of pupa, vii, 101; x, 5; xii, 102.
Food plants, vi, 56,58, pp. ii.iii.iv; vii,
101,278.280,283; x, 15,16; xi, 8,49,50; xii,
102.

Habits and mode of life, vi, 57,58; vii,
vii, 101,224; x, 102; xi, 49,64.
Hibernation, vi. 59; vii, 224; x, 27.
Injuries, vi, 56,75; x, 15; xi, 49.

Insect enemies, vii, 119,225; x, 36; xi, 52.
53,63; xii, 102,120.

Larva, vi, 75; vii, 102,225; x, 8,12: xi, 49,56.

notices of, x, 23; 12, 102.

Life history, x, 5.

Literature, x, 2,5,6.

Migrations, vi, 57,58; vii, 101; x. 16,55;
xi, 61.

Moth, vii, 102,225; x, 18.

dates of captures of, x, 21; xi,54,55;
xii, 102.

Natural history, x,7.

Occurrence in 1875, vi, 3. 56.
in 1880, x, 2.
in 1881, xi, 4,8.
in 1882, xii, 5, 102.

Proper home of the species, x, 33; xi, 51.
Pupa, x, 18.

Remedies, vi, 59; vii, 101,225; x,36,42.
Terms of life, x, 20.

Army-worm, Fall. (See Fall Army-worm.)
Wheat head. (See Wheat-head Army-
worm.)

Arphia sanguinaria, ix, 94.
sulphurea, ix, 94.
panthoptera, ix, 94.

Arrhenodes, v, 131.

septentrionalis, v, 131.
septentrionis, v, 131.

Arsilonche henrici, x, 171.
arthemis, Limenitis, x, 88.

Arthromacra aenea, v, 113.

Arthropoda, ix. 58.

Articulata, v, 1; ix, 57.
arvensis, Dolerus, x, 64,65,67.

Arytsena, viii, 212.

Arzama, vii, 84.

Ascaris lumbricoides, ix, 70.
asclepiadifolii, Siphonophora, viii, 58.
aselepiadis, A.phis, viii, 191.

Callipterus, viii, 196, 197, 198.
Siphonophora, viii, 58,191.
var. lutescens, Aphis, viii, 191.
Siphonophora, viii, 191.

Asemini, v, 153.

Asemum, v, 153.

Ash-gray Blister-beetle, Macrobasis uni¬
color (Lytta cinerea), ii, 64, 66; vi, 126,
pp. i, ii.

Pinion, Lithophane (Xylina) cinerea,
vii. 227,277,279.280, 282.

Ash-tree borer, Neoclytus (Clytus) capraca,
v, 154; vi, 38,44,151, p. i.

Asida, v, 123.

Asilidce, iv, 20; v, 20; vi, 73; ix, 61.

asilipennis, iEgeria, x, 106,109.

Asilus Flies, ix, 136.

Asiphum. viii, 35,200.

Asopia, vii, 272.

costalis, vii, 247,278.
farinalis, x, 157.

asparagi, Crioceris, v, 165; vi, 158,165, p. i.
Asparagus beetle, Crioceris asparagi, ii,
v, 165; vi, 158, 165, p. i.

Aspidiotus, i, 38, 39; ii, 45.

conchiformis, i, 31,54; ii, 87. (See O
ter-shell Bark-louse.)
harrisi, i, 53; vii, 108,277.
pinifolise, i, 39.
salicis-nigraB, i, 40.

Aspidoglossa angulata, v, 43.

subangulata, vi, 89,140.

Asterias Butterfly, Parsnip worm, Car
worm, Papiiio asterias, vii, 137,138,1
281; x, 74,173.

asterias, Papiiio, vii, 137, 138,280,281; x,74,
asteris, Try pet a, i, 33.

Astoma, iii, 158.
gryllaria, vi, 56.

atalanta Butterfly, Pyrameis atalanta,
153,281; x, 86.

atalanta, Pyrameis, vii, 153,281; x, 86.
Ataxia, v, 158.

Atemeles, v, 73.

cava, v, 73.
ater, Ocypus, v, 69.

Aterpides, v, 134.

Atheroides, viii, 34.

serrulatus, viii, 34.

Atlious, v, 99,100; vi, 25.
atlantis, Argynnis, x, 82.

Caloptenus, vi, 45; vii, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40;
92, 96, 122, 124, 125, 131. 132, 134. (See Les
Locust.)

Atoma, iii, 158.

gryllaria, iii, 157; ix. 136.
atra, Lucidota, v, 106.
atrata, Pimpla, vi, 42.
atriplicis, Aphis, viii, 88, 193.
atriventris, Loxopeza, xii, 109,115.
atrox, CEdipoda, ix, 95.

Atrytone hobomok, x, 97.

Attacus cecropia, x, 126.
cynthia, x, 125.

polyphemus, iv, 23; v, 23; x, 124; xi, 5
promethea, x, 125.

Attageuus, v, 60.

pellio, v, 60; vi, 92, p. iv.

Attelabides, v., 135, 141.

Attelabus, v, 141,142.

attenuatus, Ludius, vi, 25, 119; vii, 29.

Aulonium, v, 66.

auratus, Chrysochus, v, 168; vi, 164, p. ii
aurichalcea, Cassida, vi, 172, p iv.

Coptocycla, v. 177; vi, 172.
aurifera, Plusia, ix, 42,50.
austriaca, Anisoplia, xii, 54.
autodice, ix, 27,28.

INSECT INDEX.

9

autumnalis, Prodenia, vii, 98,219.
var. fulvosa, Prodenia. vii, 219.
var. obscura, Prodenia, vii, 219.
autumnata, Anisopteryx, vii, 238,277,278,279,
281; xi, 26,31.

aven®, Aphis, viii, 51,176.

Siphonophora, viii, 29, 51.
avenaphis, Aphidius, viii, 176.

Praon, viii, 176.

Azure-blue Butterfly, Lyeaena pseudargi-
olus, vii, 158; x, 95.

B

Babia, v, 129,169, 170.
biguttata, v, 170.

bachmanni, Libythea, vii, 157; x. 90.

Badister, v, 46, 47.

Bag- worm, Basket- worm. Cedar-worm,
Thyridopteryx ephemeraeformis. vii, 187;

xii, 101.

Description of moth, vii, 188.

of pupa, vii. 187.

Egg, place of deposit, ii, 86.

Figure of eggs, x, 118; xii, 101.
of larva, x, 118; xii, 101.
of moth, x, 118; xii, 101.
of pupa, x, 118; xii, 101.

Food-plants, vii. 188; xii,. 101.

Habits, vii. 188; x, 118; xii, 101.

Life history, vii, 188; x, 118.

Occurrence, vii, 188; xii, 101.

Prevention and remedies, vi, 13; vii, 188;
xii, 101.

Bagous, v, 140.

bajulus, Hylotrupes, v, 154.

Balaninides, v, 135,140; vi, 85.

Balaninus, v, 132,140.

nasicus, vi, 83, 134, p. ii.
balluca, Plusia, vii, 228,280; ix, 44,45,50.

Balm of Gilead Plant-louse, Chaitophorus
candicans, viii, 105.

baltimorensis, Anisodactylus, v, 48; xii, 112.
barbita, Magdalis, vi, 132.

Baridiides, v, 135,144.

Baridius, v, 144.

trinotatus, vi, 142, p. iii.

Bark beetles, Heteromerous (See Hetero-
merous Bark beetles).

Borer, Hickory (See Hickory Bark Borer).
Bark Lice, Coccides, Coccidae, classifica¬
tions, vii, 120; viii, 11,33: ix, 60.

Eggs distinguished from larvae of mites
i, 46.

Food plants, i, 23.

Galls, i, 44.

Habits and mode of life, ii, 87.

Insect enemies, v, 129,183; xii, 116.

Larvae distinguished from larvae of
mites, i, 42,46.

Males and females compared, i, 40.
Prevention and remedies, i, 46,47; vi, 10,

1,13.

Proboscis, ii, 29.

Two-winged form, iv, 13; v, 13.
Bark-louse, Apple or Apple-tree (See
Ovster-shell. Bark- louse).

Black-willow (See Black-willow Bark-
louse).

Harris’s (See Harris’s Bark-louse).
Maple-tree or Maple (See Maple Bark-
louse).

Oyster-shell (See Oyster-shell Bark-
louse).

Bark-miner and Borer, Elm-tree (See

Elm-tree Curculio).

Hickory (See Hickory Bark Borer),
of the Pine-tree (See Pales Weevil).

Bark Miners (See Short-horned Wood-
borers).

baroni, Melitaea, x, 163.

basilare, Sinoxylon, v, 103; vi, 38,43,124, pp.
i, ii, iii, iv.

basilaris, Bostrichus, v, 103; vi, 124.
Basket-worm (See Bag-worm),
bathyllus, Eudamus, vii, 162,277,280,283; x,
98.

Bathyllus Skipper, Eudamus bathyllus, vii,
162, 277,280,283; x, 98.

Batracbedra salicipomonella, i, 79.
Batrachidea, ix, 86.

Batyle suturalis, v, 155.

Bdellidae, ix, 65.

Bean Aphis, Aphis rumicis, viii, 88,181,183.
Weevil, Bruchus obsoletus=B. fab®, v,
129; vi, 128, p. i. (See Pea and Bean
Weevils.)

Beautiful Wood-nymph, Blue Caterpillar
of the Vine, Eudryas grata, vii, 176,178,280,
283; x, 111,112,173.
beccabung®, Aphis, viii, 97.
beckeri, Pieris, ix, 27,28.

Bed-bugs, Cimicid®, vi, 73: ix. 59,60.
Bee-killer, Nebraska. (See Nebraska Bee-
killer.)

lice, Braulina, ix, 61.

Moth, Wax Worm, Galleria cereana, vii,
253, 277, 283. (See Clear Wing; see
Thysbe Clear Wing.)

Beech Aphis, Phyllaphis (Aphis) fagi, viii,
43,120.

Blight, Schizoneura fagi, viii, 140.

-tree Blight, Schizoneura imbricator,
viii, 139.

Bees. Apis, Apid®, iv, 2,17; v, 2,17,117; vi,
71; ix, 60.

Beetle-mites, Oribatid®, ix, 65.

Beetles., Coleoptera, iv, 24; v, 24; vi, 68, 79;
ix, 60.

Borers, vi, 37.

Capturing and preserving, iv, 14; v, 14.
Characteristics, iv, 25.26; v, 25,26; vi, 79.
Classification, iv, 25,35; v, 25,32.
remarks on, iv, 29; v, 29.
suggestions to aid in, iv, 32; v, 32.
Description, iv, 26; v, 26; vi, 79.

10

INSECT INDEX

Families, vi, 70, 8(5.

Figure of typical beetle, iv, 27; v, 27; ix,
78.

antennae, iv, 28; v, 28.

Food, iv, 19,29; v, 19,29.

Larvae, iv, 8,29; v, 8,29; vi, 77,79; x, 61.
Nomenclature of parts, iv, 26; v, 26.
Parasitic species, v, 112.

Pupae, iv, 29; v, 29; vi, 80.

Structure, iv, 9,11,12,13,26; v, 9,11,12, 13,
26; vi, 79.

Synopsis of tribes, v, p. xvi.

Synoptical table of families, vi, 86.
Beetles, Aberrant Wood (See Aberrant
Wood beetles).

Darkling (See Darkling Beetles).
Heteromerous Bark (See Heteromerous
Bark beetles).

Fungus (See Heteromerous Fungus
beetles).

Ground (See Heteromerous Ground
beetles).

Lamellicorn Dung (See Lamellicorn
Dung beetles).

Land Scavenger (See Land Scavenger
beetles).

Long-borned (See Long-horned Wood-
borers).

Parasitic (See Parasitic Beetles).
Predaceous (See Predaceous Beetles).
Ground (See Predaceous Ground
beetles).

Plant-louse (See Lady-bugs).
Saw-horned Wood (See Saw-horned
Wood beetles).

Short-winged Scavenger (See Short¬
winged Scavenger beetles).

Snout (See Snout Beetles).

Soft-winged Predaceous (See Soft-
winged Predaceous beetles).

Stag (See Stag Beetles).

Tetramerous Plant (See Tetramerous
Plant beetles).

Tiger (See Tiger Beetles).

Trimerous Fungus (See Trimerous Fun¬
gus beetles).

Water Scavenger (See Water Scavenger
beetles).

belfragii, Mermiria, ix, 92.

Gldipoda, ix, 90,94,111.
blanda, Systena, v, 173.

bella, Aphis, i , 60 ; viii, 106,107,197.
Callipterus, viii, 196,197.

Deioptia, vii, 180.

Myzocallis, viii, 106.

Utetheisa, vii, 180; x, 113.
bellona, Argynnis, x, 83,183.

Bembecidae, vi, 71.

Bembediides, v, 41, 49.
berberidis, Aphis, viii, 81.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 81.

Berosus, v, 54.
betulae, Aphis, viii, 110.

Callipterus, viii, 110.

Glyphina. viii, 142.

betulaecolens, Aphis, viii, 110,198,199.

Callipterus, viii, 196,198.
betulella, Calaphis, viii, 110,111,199.
bicarnea, Agrotis, vii, 201.
bicaudatus, Amphicerus, vi, 38,43, 123, pp
ii, iii.

Bostrichus, v, 102; vi, 123.
bicolor, Aphis, viii. 211.

Languria, v. 181.

Notoxus, v, 116.

Odontota, v. 175.
bicornis, Hoplocephala, v, 125.
biguttata, Babia, v, 170.
biguttatus, Endomychus, v, 182.
bilinearia, Endropia, vii, 243,279,281.
bilineatus, Stenobothrus, ix, 103.
biloba, Plusia, vii, 229; ix, 43,44,46,47.
bimaculata, Plusia, ix, 44,50.
binotata, Anomala, 6, 105, p. ii.

Bipartiti, v. 43.
bipustulata, Nitidula, v, 60.

Birch Aphis, Callipterus betulae, viii, 110.
biseliella, Tinea, vii, 265,278,280.
bivittata, Cas-ida, v, 175, 177; vi, 172, p. iv.
Mermiria, ix, 87,92,97.

Opomola, ix, 92.

Opsomola, ix, 92.

Saperda, v,157; vi, 38, 84,152. (SeeRoui
headed Apple-tree Borer.)
bivittatum, Acridium, ix, 96.
bivittatus, Caloptenus, vi, 56; ix, 90, 91,
120, 126,133,134,135.

Gryllus, ix, 96.

bivulnerus, Chilocorus, ii, 93; v, 184; vi, 1
vii, 128; viii, 174.

Blackberry Flea-louse, Psylla rubi, viii,
Black- C Rustic (See spotted cutworm).
Currant Borer, iEgeria caudata, vii, 1
279,282; x, 106,108.

Cutworm (See Greasy Cutworm).

Fly, Dolphin, Collier, viii, 183.

Gnats, Simulidae, vi, 73; ix, 59.

-legged Diraphia, Diraphia femora
viii, 14.

Tortoise-beetle, Cassida nigrip
v, 177; vi, 172.

-willow Bark-louse, Aspidiotus salic*
nigrae, i, 40.

worm (See Army worm).

Blaps, vi, 123.

Blapstinus, v, 123.

Blatta, v, 129.

Blattidae, vi, 70; ix, 73,80,82.

Blechrus lineatus, xii, 27.

Bledius, v, 71.

Blepharida, v, 166,171,172,176.

rhois, v, 172; vi, 167, p. iv.

Blight, Alder, (See Alder Blight).

Beech (See Beech Blight).

* -tree (See Beech-tree Blight).
Hickory (See Hickory Blight).

Oak (See Woolly Aphis of the Oak).
Pine-tree (See Pine-tree Blight).

INSECT INDEX.

11

lind-eyed Sphinx, Smerinthusexceecatus,
vii, 167,277,282.

ilissus leucopterus, vii, 15,40,278,283; xi, 6;
xii, 32, (See Chinch-bug),
var. albivenosus, vii, 56.
basalis, vii, 56.
dimidiatus, vii, 56.
femoratus, vii, 56.
fulvivenosus, vii, 56.
immarginatus, vii, 56.
melanosus, vii, 57.
nigricornis, vii, 56.
opterus, vii, 56.
ruflpedes, vii, 56.

Blister-beetle, Ash-gray, (See Ash-gray
Blister-beetle).

Margined (See Margined Blister-
beetle).

Beetles, Caniharides, Blistering Beetles,
Meloidse, iv, 20; v, 20, 110, 112, 113, 114, 119;
vi, 80,83,86,125.

Blow-flies, vi, 74.

Blue-bottle Flies (See House Flies).

Blue Caterpillar of the Vine (See Beauti¬
ful Wood-nymph).

(See Eight-spotted Forester).

(See Grape-vine Epimenis).

(See Pearly Wood-nymph),
boisduvali, Cypherotylus, v. 180,181.
Bolbocerus, v, 81,82.
farctus, v, 82.
fllicornis, v, 82.
lazarus, v, 82.

Boletobius, v. 74,75.

Bolitophaga, v, 178.

Bolitophagus, v, 125.
cornutus, v, 125.

Boll worm (See Corn worm).

Bombycidse, iv, 172; vi.72; vii, 176, 178, 269,

271; x, 113.

Borer and Bark-miner, Elm-tree, .(See Elm-
tree Curculio).

Apple-tree. Flat-headed, (See Flat-
headed Apple-tree Borer).
Bound-headed (See Round-headed
Apple-tree Borer).

Ash-tree (See Ash-tree Borer).

Black Currant (See Black Currant
Borer).

Cherry-tree (See Cherry-tree Borer).
Currant (See Currant Borer).

Elm-tree (See Elm-tree Borer).
Flat-headed (See Flat-headed Apple-
tree Borei ).

Grape Root (See Grape Root Borer).

(See Broad-necked Prionus).
Hickory Bark (See Hickory Bark
Borer).

-tree (See Hickory-tree Borer),
-trunk (See Hickory-trunk Borer).
Honey-locust (See Honey-locust Borer).
Legged Maple (See Maple Algerian).

Lilac (See Lilac Borer).

Locust (See Locust Borer; see Locust
tree Carpenter Moth.)

Lombardy Poplar (See Lombardy Pop¬
lar Borer).

Peach-root (See Peach Borer).

-tree (See Peach Borer),
twig (See Strawberry Crown Miner).
Pear-tree (See Pear-tree Borer).
Pine-tree (See Pine-tree Borer).
Raspberry (See Raspberry Cane Borer).
Round-headed Apple-tree (See Round-
headed Apple-tree Borer).

Shagbark Hickory-tree (See Shagbark
Hickory-tree Borer).

Squash-vine (See Squash Borer).

Stalk (See Stalk Borer).

Sugar-maple (See Sugar-maple Borer).
Twig (See Parallel Longhorn).

and Axil (See Twig and Axil Borer).

Borers, vi, 9, 11,32,77,113.

(See Bark-borers; Root-borers; Stalk-
Borers.)

Long - horned (See Long - horned
Borers).

Short-horned (See Short-horned Wood
Borers).

Boring Hylurgus, Hylurgus terebrans, v,
146; vi, 38,43,146, p. iii.

Bostrichides. v, 101.

Bostrichus. v, 101,102.

bicaudatus, v, 102; vi, 123.
basilaris, v, 103; vi, 124.

Bot Flies, Breeze Flies, (Estridss, vi, 73, 74;
ix, 59,60,61.

-fly, Horse (See Horse Bot-fly).

Ox (See Ox Bot-fly).

Sheep (See Sheep Bot-fly).

-ticks. Nycteribidse, ix, 61.

Botis, penitalis, x, 154.

Bottle-grass Aphis, Siphonophora setarise,
viii, 56, 192.

Botys, vii, 272.

flavidalis, vii, 248.
bovis, Hypoderma, ix, 61.

Brachelytra, v, 33,36,66.

Brachinides, v, 41,44,46.

Brachinus, v, 44.

fumans, v, 44.

Brachyacantha, v. 184.

Brachybamus, v, 140.

Brachycera. i, 32.

Braehyderides, v, 134, 137.

Brachyides, v, 94.

Brachys, v, 95,96.
serosa, v, 96.
ovata, v, 96.
terminans, v, 96.

Brachystylus. v, 134.

Brachytarsus, v, 129.

Bracon charus, vi, 110.
bractea, Plusia, ix, 42,44,50.

12

INSECT INDEX.

Bradycellus, v, 48,49; xii, 112.

clichrous, xii, 112.
brassicae, Anthomyia, v, 67.

Aphis, viii, 91.

Papilio, v, 3.

Pieris, ix, 14,19,35.

Plusia, vii. 229,278; ix, 14,19,25,40,43,44,
47,50; x, 140; xi, 38.

Theridion, ix, 21.
brassicella, Cerostoma, ix, 52.

Brassy Dibolia, Dibolia aerea, v, 173.
Braulina, ix, 61.

Breeze Plies (See Bot Flies).

Brenthian, Northern (See Northern Bren-
thus).

Brenthidae, v, 127,128,130.

Brenthus, v, 131.
minutus, v, 131.
septentrionis. v, 131.
septentrionalis, v, 131.
brevieollis, Cratonychus, vi, 117; vii, 30.
brevicornis, Acrida, ix, 92.

Gryllus, ix, 92.

Ludius, vi, 23; vii, 21.

Prionus, v, 152.

Pyrgomorpha, ix, 92.

Truxalis, ix, 87,92.97,133.
brevipennis, Opsomala, ix, 92.

Brevirostres, v, 132,133,136; vi, 83, 130.
Broad-necked Prionus, Grape Root Borer,
Prionus laticollis, v, 151; vi, 36, 38, 43, 147; p.
i, ii, iii.

Brochimena annulata, ii, 62.

Brontes, v, 65,66.

planatus, v, 65.
brontes, Daremma, x, 102.

Bruchidse, v, 35,127,128,129; vi, 70,81,83,85,86,
127.

Bruchus, v, 129.
fabas, vi,128.

granarius, ii, 6; v, 129; vi, 129; pp. i, iii .
obsoletus, v, 129; vi,128; p. i.
pisi, v, 129; vi, 127; p. iii.

Bruchus, Grain (See Grain Bruchus).
brunnea, Colaspis, xii, 104.

Parandra, v, 152.

brunneus, Ptinus, v, 101,102; vi,122; pp. i, ii.
Bryoporus, v,75.

Buck Moth, Maia Moth, Saturnia (Eucronia)
maia, vii, 195, 279, 281; x, 127,163.

Bud Mites (See Plant Mites).

worm (See Corn worm).

Buffalo Gnats, i, 32.

Bugs, Hemiptera, 10,60.

Capturing and preserving, iv, 14; v,14.
Characters, vi, 69, 76, viii, 9; iv,75.
Classification, iv, 24,25; v, 24, 25; vi,68, 69,
72; viii, 9, 11; iv, 60.

Habits, iv,32; v, 32.

Key to order, viii. 11.

Larvae, vi, 76; x,60.

Metamorphosis, iv,8; v, 8.

Mouth parts, iv, 12; v,12.

Preyed upon by predaceous gro
beetles, xii, 114, 115.

Pupae, vi, 76.

Sounds, iv, 7; v,7;

Sub-orders, vi,69,76; viii, 9, 11.
bulbipes, Trombidium, viii, 108.
bumeliae, Prociphilus, viii, 147,
Buprestidae, iv, 28, 30, 37; v, 28, 30, 37, 92,9
97; vi, 35, 37, 70, 77, 80, 82, 84, 86, 87, 109; xii
(See Saw-horned Wood-borers.)
Buprestis, v, 94. 95, 96.

ocellata, v, 106.
bursaria, Aphis, viii, 34.

Butterflies and Moths, Caterpillars, L
doptera, vi, 71; x, 62.72; xii, 114.
Analytical classification of families
genera, vii, 269.

Classification, iv, 25; v,25; vi,68; vii
ix, 60.

Description, vi,69.

Eggs, place of deposit, vi, 74.
Families, vi, 71.

Food of larvae, i, 79; x,72.

Habits, vi, 79; x, 72.

Injuries, iv,30; v,30; vi,75.

Insect enemies, vi,74; xii, 150.
Larvae, vi,75,77; x,72.
of iEgeridae, x, 106.

Bombycidae, x, 113.
Butterflies, x.73.
Lepidoptera, x, 142, 145.
Noctuidae, x, 128.

Sphingidae, x,99.

Zygaenidae, x, 110.
Metamorphosis, iv,8; v,8.
Structure, iv, 1,2, 6, 12, 13,14; v,l,2,6,
14; vi,75; x, 61.

Byrrhidae, iv,36; v, 36, 56, 62.

Byrrhus, v, 62, 119.
pilula, v, 62.

Byrsocrypta, viii, 34, 38.
pseudobyrsa, viii, 151.
ulmicola, viii, 43, 142, 204.
vagabundus, iv,194; viii, 151.
vitifoliae, viii, 158.

Byrsopsides, v,134.

C

Cabbage bug, Harlequin (See Harle
Cabbage bug).

Butterfly, European (See Euro]
Cabbage worm).

Southern (See Southern Cab)
Butterfly).

Cutworm, Agrotis annexa, x, 136;
103,110.

Flea-beetle (See Striped Flea-beet
Flies, i,32.

-garden Pebble Moth, Pionea forfle
ix, 40.

Pionea. Purple Cabbage worm, Orol
(Pionea) rimosalis, ix, 2,37; xi, 8,36
104.

INSECT INDEX.

IB

Plant-louse, Aphis brassiere, viii, 45,91.
Plusia, Plusia brassiere, vii, 229,278; ix,

" 14,19,35,40,43.44,47,50; X, 140; xi, 38.

Spider, Theridion brassiere, ix, 21.

Tinea, European Cabbage Web Moth,
Plutella cruciferarum, vii, 266,278,280,
282; ix, 52.

worm, Imported (See European Cab¬
bage worm).

Purple (See Cabbage Pionea'.
worms, Pieris, xii, 7.
aberodes, confusaria, vii, 244, 272.
addis flies, Phryganea, i, 62.

©nia, v, 105.

©ruleipennis, Chrysomela, v,168.

©ruleus, Encyclops, v, 156.

©sonia, Colias, x, 78.
alamorum, Diraphia, viii, 14.
lalamus Diraphia, Diraphia calamoium,
viii, 14.

Jalandra, iv. 183; v, 64,144.

Mandrre, Pteromalus, xii, 151.
lalandrides, v, 135,144.
ialanus, Thecla, x, 93.
lalaphis. viii, 37,38,110,199.

betulella, viii, 110,111,199.

Dalathus, v, 44,48,49: xii, 109,115.

gregarius, v, 49; xii, 109.
calendulre, Siphonophora, viii, 190.
calendulella, Siphonophora, viii, 188.
calidum, Calosoma, ii, 64; v, 42; vi, 89,162,
163; vii, 118,11.9,218; x, 41; xi, 27; xii, 108.
oaliginosus, Harpalus,ii,64; iv, p. vii, 10,26,27;
v, 10,26,27; vi, 90,162,163; ix, 78; x, 41; xii,
112.

Calleida, v, 44,45.
callidice, Pieris, ix, 28.

Caliidiini, v, 153,154.

Callidium, v. 154.

amoenum, vi, 38, 43, 148, pp. ii, iii*
sp., vi, 149.

Callidryas, vii, 269.

eubule, vii, 147,278; x, 78.

Calligrapha. v, 166,167.

Callimome puparum, ix, 18.

Callimorpha, vii, 271.

fuivicosta, ii, 49; vii, 180; x, 113.
interrupto-marginata, vii, 181.
lecontei, ii, 6,47; vii, 181; x, 114.

var. fuivicosta, ii, 47; vii, 181.
militaris, ii, 49.
vestalis, ii, 49.

Callimorpha Pear Caterpillar, Pear Catei-
pillar, Solitary Caterpillar, Callimorpha
lecontei, and C. fuivicosta or C. lecontei,
var. fuivicosta, ii, 6,47; vii, 180,181; x, llo,

114.

Callipteriden, viii, 35.

Callipterus, viii, 35,37,38,39,41,42,43.82,104,
106, 108, 109, 114, 118, 120, 170, 187, 192, 195, 199.
asclepiadis, viii, 196, 197,198.
bella, viii, 196,197.
betulre, viii, 110.

betulrecolens, viii, 196, 198.
caryre, viii, 196,199.
caryellus, viii, 170.
var, viii, 171.

costalis, viii, 171.
castaneae, viii, 114.
discolor, viii, 196, 198.
fumipennellus, viii, 171.
hyalinus, viii, 196,198.
juglandis, viii, 113.
maculellus, viii, 171.
marginellus, viii, 171.
mucidus, viii, 172.
punctata, viii, 196, 198.
punctatellus, viii, 171.
quercicola, viii, 196,199.
quercifolii, viii, 43, H2.
quercus, viii, 108,113,196.
ulmicola, viii. 111.
ulmifolii, viii. 195,196.
walshi, viii, 195, 196.

Callosamia, vii, 271.

promethea, vii, 193,277,279,281; x, 176.
calmariensis, Galeruca, v, 171.

Caloptenus, ix, 86, 106,132,134.

atlantis, vi, 45; vii, 35,36,38,39,40; ix, 92,

96.122.124.125.131.132.134. (See Lesser
Locust.)

bivittatus, vi, 56; ix, 90,91,96,120,126,133,

134. 135.

differentials, vi. 44, 45; ix, 91,96,127,131,

132. 133. 134.
femoratus, ix, 96.

femur-rubrum, i, 99; iii,158; vi, 45,56; vii,
35, 36, 37, 38; ix, 86,91, 95, 96, 121, 122, 123, 124,

131.133.134.135. (See Red-legged Lo¬
cust.)

italicus, ix, 132.

spretus, i, 82; iii, 158; vi, 44, pp. ii, iii, iv ;
vii, 35,36.38,39,40; ix, 74,76,92,96,121,124,
125,126,131,133,135; xii, 47. (See Rocky
Mountain Locust.)

Caloptenus, Lubberly (See Lubberly Ca¬
loptenus).

Striped (See Striped Caloptenus).
Calopteron, v, 105.
dimidiatum, v, 105.
reticulatum, v, 105.
scapulare, v, 105.
terminale, v, 105.

Calosoma, v, 42, 43; xii, 108,116.

calidum, ii, 64; v, 42; vi, 89,162,163; vii,
118,119,218; x, 41; xi, 27; xii, 108.
externum, x, 41.

scrutator, vi, 88; vii, 118; x, 41 ; xi, 27, xii,
108.

wilcoxi, x, 41.

Calpe canadensis, x, 137,172.
calyce, Pieris, ix, 27,29.

Camnula, ix, 84.

pellucida, ix, 88,95,118.
tricarinata, ix, 95.

1 campestris, Cicindela, iv, 4; v, 4.

14

INSECT INDEX

canadensis, Calpe, x, 137,172.

Dendroides, v, 117.

Candelaria, Fulgora, v, 106.
candicans, Chaitophorus, viii, 105.

Candida. Saperda, vi, 35,38,44,83,84,152, pp.
i, ii, iii, (See Round-headed Apple-tree
Borer.)

Canker-worm, Fall (See Fall Canker-
worm).

Spring (See Spring Canker-worm).
Yellow (See Yellow Canker-worm).

Canker-worms, Anisopteryx, Insect ene¬
mies, xii, 108,109,110,111,112,113,115,119.

(See Spring Canker-worm.)

Cantharides (See Blister Beetles).
Cantharis, v, 116.

Canthon, v, 81.
lasvis, v, 80.

canthus, Neonympha, x, 91.
capistratum, Choeridium, v, 80.
caprae, Clytus, y, 154; vi, 38,44,151, p. i.

Neoclytus, vi, 36,38,151.
capreas, Aphis, viii, 84.

Siphocoryne. viii. 84.
caprifolii, Abia, x. 65,66.

Capsidas, ii, 66; vi, 73; viii, 12.

Capsus, ii, 62.

linearis, ii, 62, 65, 66.
ciuadrivittatus, ii, 61.
cara, Catocala, vii, 235,279.

Carabidas, iv, 14.24,34, 36; v, 14, 24, 34, 36, 38,
39,92,111.119.121; vi, 70,80,81,87,88; xii, 7,106,
107, 108, 119. (See Predaceous Ground-
beetles.)

Carabides, v, 41,42,46.
caraboides, Trogosita, iv, 183.

Carabus, v, 39,40,42,43.

Cardiophorus, v, 98.
carduella. Aphis, viii. 100.
cardui, Pyrameis, vii, 154,278,282; x, 87,153.
carinata, Amara, xii, 110.

(Edipoda, ix, 94.
carinatus, Tomonotus, ix, 94.
carinoides. Microdes, xi, 18.

Carmonia picta, vi,174.
carnifex, Copris, v, 81.

Pbanaeus, v, 81.

Carnivora aquatica, v, 36,50.
mollipennata, v, 37, 104.
terrestria, v, 36,37.

Carolina. Copris, v, 80.

Locusta, ix, 94.

Macrosila, vii, 168,280,281,282; x, 103,158.
(Edipoda, ix, 88,94,111,134.

Carolina Locust, (Edipoda Carolina, ix, 88,
94,111,134.

Sphinx (See Tobacco Worm Moth),
caroliniana, Locust a, ix, 94.
carolinianum, Acridium, ix, 94.
carolinum, Acridium, ix, 94.
carolinus, Gryllus, ix, 94.

Carpenter Moth, Locust-tree. (See Locust-
tree Carpenter Moth.)
carpenteri, Ceraphron, viii, 54.

Carpet Moth, Tinea tapetzella, vii, 264,2
carpini, Psylla, viii, 18.

Carpocapsa, vii, 273.

pomonella, i, 19,27,30,31,32,67,81; iv,
v, 64; vii, 260,277; x, 151; xi, 19,31, (
Codling Moth.)

Carpophaga, iv, 19; v. 19,128.
Carpophilides, v, 59.

Carpopbilus, v, 59.

Carrion Fly, v, 6.

Carrot Plant-louse, Aphis dauci, viii, 18
worm (See Asterias Butterfly;,
caryas, Aphis, viii, 116.

Callipterus, viii, 196,199.

Eriosoma, viii, 141.

Halesidota, x, 168.

Lachnus, viii, 116.

Schizoneura, viii, 141.

Scolytus, v, 146,148; vi, 145.
Selandria, x, 64,65,66.

caryaecaulis, Pemphigus, viii, 160.

Phylloxera, viii, 160.
caryae-fallax, Phylloxera, viii, 164.
caryaefoliae, Phylloxera, viii, 161,164.
caryae-globosa, Phylloxera, viii, 163.
caryae-globuli, Phylloxera, viii, 164.
caryas-gummosa, Phylloxera, viii, 164.
caryaa-ren, Phylloxera, viii, 164.
caryae-semen, Dactylosphasra, i, 23.

Phylloxera, viii, 163,164.
caryaevenae, Pemphigus, viii, 162.

Phylloxera, viii, 162.
caryae-septa, Phylloxera, vi, 164.
caryella, Aphis, viii, 170.
var., Aphis, viii, 171.

costalis. Aphis, viii, 171.
caryellus, Callipterus, viii, 170.
var., Callipterus, viii, 171.

costalis, Callipterus, viii, 171.
Case Bearer (See Walnut Leaf-crumple
casci, Piophila, i, 32.

Casnonia, v, 44.

pennsylvanica, v,45.

Cassida, v, 42. 162, 175, 176,177; vi, 83,171.
aurichalcea, vi, 172, p. iv.
bivittata, v, 175, 177 ; vi, 172, p. iv.
cyanea, v, 176.
guttata, vi, 172, p. iv.
nigripes, v, 177; vi, 172.
pallida, v, 177.
thoraciea, v, 177.

Cassidariae, v, 162.
cassidea, Chelymorpba, v, 176.
Cassididae, v, 162; vi, 85.

Cassidides, v, 127, 161, 163, 175.

Cassidinae, vi, 157,171, p. iii.
casta, Pieris, ix, 27.

var. cruciferarum, Pieris, ix, 27.
castanea, Trogosita, iv, 182,183.
castaneae, Anthrenus, vi, 93.

Callipterus, viii, 114.

Chermes, viii, 164.

Phylloxera, viii, 164.

Castnia, x, 110.

INSECT INDEX.

15

t

castoria, Pieris, ix, 27.

var. resedae, Pieris, ix, 27.
catalpae, Sphinx, x, 104.
cataphraeta, Gortyna, vii, 221.

Caterpillar Hunter, Green- spotted. (See
Rummaging Beetle.)

Red-spotted. (See Fiery ground-
beetle.)

Caterpillars. (See Butterflies.)

Catocala, vii, 199,234,272.
amatrix, vii. 235,279.
cara, vii, 235,279.
desperata, vii, 234.279.
grynea, x, 183.
lineeila, x, 182.
neogama, vii. 236,279.
ultronia, vii. 235.279.

Catogenus, v, 65.66.

rufus, v, 66.

Catops, v, 55, 57.

catullus, Pholisora. vii, 162, 281; x, 98.
caudata, Algeria, vii, 172,279,282; x, 106,108.

Silpha, v, 58.
cava, Atemeles, v, 73.

Cebrionidge, v, 37,92,93.

Cecidomyia, i. 19,61,62,63, 79.

destructor, i. 18; ix, 3,5; x, 200; xi, 7,29.
leguminicola, x, 201.
tritici, i, 7,18.

Cecidomyidae, vi, 73; x, 200.
cecropia, Attacus, x, 126.

Sarnia, vii, 193,277,279,281; x, 126, 177.
Cecropia Moth. Cecropia Silk Worm, Atta¬
cus (Samia) cecropia, vii, 193,277,279,281;
x, 126,177.

Cedar worm. (See Bag worm.)

Celery worm, Silver-marked Moth, Plusia
simplex, ix, 43,44.48,50; xi, 8,38,58.
cellaris, Cryptophagus, v, 62. ^

celtis, Apatura, vii, 155,279,280; x, 88,89.
centerensis. Cossus. x, 151.

Centipede, Flattened. (See Flattened Cen¬

tipede.)

Centipedes, iv, 58.

Centrinus, v, 144.

cephalanthi, Aphis, viii, 97,192.
Oerambycidae, v, 9,30,34,127,150,160, vi, > ' ,

77,81,83,86.146,150.

Cerambycides, v, 148, 150, 152, 155, 157 , m, 6.
Cerambycinae, vi, 83, 84, 148, 152.

Cerambycini, v, 153, 154.

Cerambyx, v,150.

Ceramica, vii, 271.

exusta, ix, 52. .

picta, vi.60; p. iii; vii, 226, 280, 281, 28-; ix,

51; x, 185.

Ceraphron carpenteri, viii, 54.
cerasaphis, Trioxys, viii, 176.

cerasi, Abia. x, 64,65,66.

Aphis, viii, 42, 93.

Myzus, viii, 75.

Selandria. x, 64,65,67; xii,98.
Trypeta, i, 33.

cerasifoliae, Aphis, viii, 93.

Myzus, viii, 93.

Ceratomegilla, v,184.

Ceratomia, vii, 270.

amyntor, vii, 167,279; x, 102.
quadricornis, vii, 167.

Ceratopogon, i, 19.

Cercopidae, vi,72; viii, 11.

cerealella, Gelechia, vii, 266, 280,283; xii,144.

eerealis, Aphis, viii, 51.

cereana, Galleria, vii. 253, 277, 283.

cerebralis, Coenurus, ix, 69.

cernes, Pamphila, vii, 160.

Cernes Skipper, Pamphila cernes, vii, 160.

Cerophytum, v, 98.

Cerostoma, ix,54.
brassicella, ix. 52.
porrectella, ix,54.

Ceruchus, v,78.
piceus, v,78.

cervicalis, Scymnus, viii, 132.

Cerylon, v,66.

histeroides, v.66.

Cestoidea, ix, 59.

Cetonia, iv,26; v, 26,90,91.
inda, ii, 56.

Cetonian, Indian (See Indian Cetonian).
Melancholy (See Melancholy Cetonian).

Cetoniidae, v, 37, 79, 83, 84, 89; vi, 70, 80, 82, 84, 86,
87, 107.

Ceutorhynchides, v, 135, 143.

Ceutorhynchus, i, 17, 20 ; v,143.
curtus, i,16.
inaequalis, i, 16.

Chaerocampa pampinatrix, x, 103.
tersa, x, 159.

Chmtochilus, ix, 54.

Chgetocnema, v, 172,173.

Chafers (See Leaf Chafers).

Vine (See Vine Chafers).

Chaitophorus, viii, 34, 36, 40, 42, 102, 103, 105, 195,

200.

candicans, viii, 105.
lonicera. viii, 104.
negundinis. viii, 193.
ononedis, viii, 106.
populi, viii, 119.

populicola, viii, 42, 102, 103, 119, 201.
quercicola, viii, 201.
salicicola, viii, 105.
smithies, viii, 200.
viminalis, viii, 105,200.

Chalcid Four- winged Fly, Semiotellns des¬
tructor, x, 210.212,231.

Chalcides. (See Chalcis Flies.)

Chalcididae, ii, 32,92; vi,71,110; viii. 54; ix, 17;
x.212.

Chalcis albifrons, x,40.
mytilaspidis, iv,200.

Chalcis Flies, Chalcides, Chalcididm, i,20;
ii, 15, 32.92; iii, 121; vi, 71, 74, 110; vii. 129,130-

viii, 54 ; ix,17; x,212; xi, 28.’
fly of the Apple or Oyster-shell Bark-
louse, Chalcis of the Bark-louse,

ff

\

1

16

INSECT INDEX.

Aphelinus (Chalcis) mytilaspidis, ii, 32;
iv, 21, 200; v, 21.
chalcites, Plusia, ix,42.

Chalcophora, v,95.

virginiensis, v,95; vi, 112; p. iii.
chalybea, Graptodera, v, 172, 173; vi,170.

Haltica,v,172, 173; vi,170, p. i.
chamaenerii, Deilephila, x, 159.
charus, Bracon, vi, 110.

Chauliognathus, vi, 107, 115.
marginatus, v, 108.
pennsylvanicus, v,108.

Checkered Rustic (See Corn Cutworm).
Tussock Moth, (Halesidota tessellaris),
vii, 185, 279; x, 116, 108.

Cheese Fly, Piophila casei, i, 32.

Mites, Tyroglyphin®, ix, 65.
Chelymorpha, v, 176.
argus, v, 176.
cassidea, v, 176.
cribraria, v, 176.
chenopodii. Aphis, viii, 88.

Chermes, viii, 25, 33, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 155.
abieticolens, viii, 156.
abietis, viii, 157.
castaneae, viii, 164.
laricifoliae. viii, 156.
laricis, vii, 74; viii, 155.
pinifolias, v'iii, 43,156.
pyri, iii, 134.

Chermesinae, vii, 74; viii, 36,37,39,41,123,134.
155.

Chermiden, viii, 35.

Cherry Abia, Abia cerasi, x, 64,65,66.

-leaf Plant-louse, Aphis cerasifoliae, viii,
93.

-louse Aphidius, Trioxys cerasaphis,
viii, 176.

Slug, Pear Slug, Selandria cerasi, x, 64,
65,67; xii, 6,98.

-tree Aphis, Myzus cerasi, viii, 75.

Borer, Dicerca divaricata, v, 95; vi,
37, 43, 112, 113, 114, pp. i, ii, iii.
chersis, Sphinx, x, 105.

Chestnut Gay Louse, Callipterus castaneae,
viii. 114.

Chilocorus, v, 184.

bivulnerus, ii, 93; v, 184; vi, 174; vii, 128;
viii, 174.

tripustulatus, v. 184.

Chinch bug. Chintz bug, Biissus (Micro¬
pus) leucopterus, ii, 61; vii, 40; viii, 6; ix,
60; xii, 7,9.

Beak, vii, 44.

Birds feeding on, vii, 54; xii, 48.

Broods, vii, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 57. 58.

Climatic influences, iii, 155; vii, 5,43,50,
51, 54, 55; x, 3, 43, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56;
xi, 99; xii, 5.

Description, vii, 41.

Egg, vii, 55.

Figure of beak, vii, 55; xii. 32.
chinch bug, vii, 41.55; xii, 32.
egg, vii, 55; xii, 32.

larva, vii, 55; xii, 32.
leg, vii, 55; xii, 32.
pupa, vii, 55; xii. 32.
tarsus, vii, 55; xii, 32.

Frogs feeding on, vii, 54.

Habits and mode of life, vii, 44,54,55.
Hibernation, vii, 43,55,57.

History, vii, 41,57.

Increase and decrease, ii, 6.39; vii, 54.
Injuries, iii, 142,143,155; vii, 5,15,40,48,4
51,52,278,283; xi, 6; xii. 28,32.

Insect enemies, iii, 145,155; vii, 60; vi
178; xii, 39, 56, 111, 114, 116, 117, 118, 126.
Larval stages, vii, 56.

Life history, xii. 33.

Migration, vii, 51,53,59.

Occurrence in 1870, ii, 6.

1871, iii, 142.

1874, vii, 5, 14.

1877, vii, 5,107.

1879, ix, 3.

1881, xi, 3, 6.

1882, xii, 5.

Parasitic diseases, xii, 45,56.

Pupa, vii, 56.

Range, iii, 142,143,156; vii, 48.
Remedies, iii, 144; iv. 21; v, 21: vii, 5,4
49,51,42,53,61; x. 43; xi, 6; xii, 57.
Varieties, vii, 56.

Chion, v, 154.

cinctus. v, 154; vi, 38,43,149, p. ii.
garganicus, v, 154; vi, 38,149.
Chlaeniides, v, 41,45,47.

Chlaenius, v, 45,46: xii. 111,115,116.
difflnis, xii, 111.
nemoralis. xii, 111.
pennsylvanicus, v, 45.
sericeus, v, 46.
tomentosus, xii, 111.

Chlarays. v, 169.
dispar, v, 170.
plicata, v, 169.

Chloealtis, ix, 84, 87.
abortiva, ix, 92.
conspersa, ix, 92,99.
curtipennis, ix, 93.
viridis, ix, 92.99.
chloridice, Pieris, ix, 27,28.

var. beckeri, Pieris, ix, 27.
Chloroneura malefica, i, 69.
chlorophana. Chrysopa, viii, 178.
Chlorops, xi,73.

Chceridium, v, 81.

capistratum, v, 80.
chrysites, Plusia, ix, 50.

Chrysobothris, v, 95.
alabamae, vi, 111.
fastidiosa, vi, 111.

femorata, v, 94,95; vi, 12,13,35,37,43,8
110, 113, 152, pp. i, ii, iii, iv. (See Fla
headed Apple-tree Borer.)
lesueuri, vi, 111.
obscura, vi, 111.

INSECT INDEX

17

Chrysobothris 4-impressa, vi, 111.

semisculpta, vi, 111.

Chrysochraon, ix, 99.
conspersum, ix, 92,99.
viridis, ix, 92,99.

Ohrysochus, v, 166,168.

auratus, v, 168; vi, 164, p. ii.
cobaltinus, v, 168.

Chrysomela, v, 162,165,166,167.
caeruleipennis, v, 168.
conjuncta, v, 167.

10-lineata, vi, 160 (See Colorado Potato-
beetle).

elegans, v, 167.
exclamationis, v, 167.
juncta, v, 165.
pulclira, v, 167.
similis, v, 167.

chrysomela, Locusta, ix, 93.

ChrysomelidEe, v, 29, 31, 34, 127, 128, 161, 177, 178;

vi, 70,81,83,85,86,157.

Chrysomelides, v, 126, 127,163,165,170.
Chrysomelinas, v, 162; vi, 157.

Chrysomelini, v, 165,166.
chrysomelus, Gtryllus, ix, 93.

Chrysopa, i, 62; vi. 140; vii, 60,129,253; viii,
55,177; xii, 43.
chlorophana, viii, 178.
eriosoma, viii, 136.
illepida, viii, 178.
oculata, viii, 177.

var. chlorophana, viii, 178.
illepida, viii, 178.
plorabunda, viii, 178; xii, 42.
pseudographa, viii, 178.

Chrysophanus, vii, 270.

ameiicana, vii, 158,282; x, 95.
thoe, vii, 158,279,282; x, 95.

Chytolita morbidalis, x, 138,182.

Cicada, iv, 2,7; v, 2,7; ix, 60,75.

septendecim, iii, 124; vi, 75.

Cicadidae, vi, 72; viii, 11.

Cicindela, i, 72; v, 38,39,42,43; vi, 70.
campestris, iv, 4; v, 4.
repanda, x, 41.
sexguttata, v, 39; vi, 88.
vulgaris, vi, 88.

Cicindelidae, v, 24,36,38,39,92; vi, 80,81,87.
Cimbex laportei, x, 64,65.

Cimicidse, vi, 73.

Cinara, viii, 34.

cincta, Mestobregma, ix, 90,95,113,

(Edipoda, ix, 95.
cinctaria, Phigalia, vii, 241,277.
cinctus, Chion, v, 154; vi, 38,43,149, p. ii.
Harpactor, ii, 23,64; vi, 162,163; vii, 60;
xii, 43,56.

Cinderella, Tortrix, vii, 255,277.
cinerea, Cupes, v. 103.

Epicauta, vi, 126,162,163, p. iii; xii, 104.
Lytta, ii, 64,66.

Lithophane, vii, 227,277,279.

Xylina, vii, 227, 277, 279, 280, 282.
cinereola, Telesilla, x, 180.

cinereus, Melanotus, v, 100; vi, 117; vii, 30.
cingulata, Macrosila, x, 104,158.

Trypeta, i, 33.

cingulatus, Leistotrophus, v, 69.

Oncideres, v, 159; vi, 83.
cinnamopterus, Staphylinus, v, 69.

Cionus, v, 128.
circaezandis, Aphis, viii, 89.
circumcinctus, Perillus, vi, 162.

Cistela, v. 119.

Cistelidae, iv, 34; v 34,118,119.

Citheronia regalis, vii, 195, 278, 279, 280, 281,
282,283; x, 122,162.

Cladobius. viii, 35,36,42,201.
clandestina, Agrotis, vii, 95,213,278; x, 135.
Clandestine Owlet Moth (See W-marked
Cutworm).

claudia, Euptoieta, vii, 150; x, 80.
clavata, Coptocycla, v, 177.

Clavicornes, iv, 32,36; v, 33, 36, 52, 55, 177, 178,
179; vi, 87.

Clavipalpi, v, 178.
clavipes, Cucujus, v. 65,66.

Clear Wing Bee Moth, Sesiadiffinis, vii, 163;

x, 99,160.

Thysbe (See Thysbe Clear Wing).
Cleonides, v, 133,136.

Cleonus, v, 136.

punctiventris, xii, 55.

Cleridae, v, 33. 37, 93, 104, 108; vi, 70, 80, 82.

Clerus, v, 109.
dubius, v, 109.
nigrifrons, v, 109.
nigripes, v, 109.
sanguineus, v, 109.

Click beetles (See Wire worms).

Climbing Cutworm. Climbing Rustic,
Agrotis scandens, vii, 208: x, 133.
clintonis, Parorgyia, x, 165.

Clisiocampa, vii, 185,271.

americana, vii, 110, 119, 197, 277, 279: x, 122,
123,155. (See Apple-tree Tent Cater¬
pillar.)

sylvatica, vi, 89; vii, 198, 277, 279, 281; x,123.
Clivina, v, 43.

Clothes Moth, Tinea dorsistrigella, vii, 262.

Tinea rusticella, vii, 264,278.

Clover Drasteria, Drasteria erechtea, vii, ’
233,278; x, 148.

-hay Worm, Asopia costalis, vii, 247,278.
Clytini, v, 153,154, 155.
clyton, Apatura, vii, 155; x, 89.

Clytus, v, 154.

caprae, v,154; vi, 38, 44, 151, p. i.
robiniae, v, 149, 154; vi, 36,38,44,83,84,151,
p. ii.

speciosus, v,154; vi, 38, 44, 83, 151, pp. iii, iv.
c-nigrum, Agrotis, vii, 89,202,278; x, 132,184;

xi, 51.

cobaltinus, Chrysochus. v,168.

Coccidae, ii,29,88; iv,13; v,13; vi,72; viii, 11,
33. (See Bark Lice.)
coccinatus. Eros, v,105.

Coccinella, ii, 35 ; v, 42, 183,184; xii, 118.

18

INSECT INDEX.

Coceinella munda, vi,173; vii, 60, 119; viii,147,
xii,40.

9-notata, ii, 64; vi, 162, 173; viii.l • 4; xii.41,118.

picta, vi, 174.

15-punctata, v, 183; xii,116.

5-notata, xii,118.

Coccinellidse, ii, 93; iv,201; v,30, 31, 35, 1/8,182;
vi, 70, 81, 84, 172; viii, 54; xii, 7, 23, 40, 56, 90, 106,
115, 116, 119. 120. (See Lady-bugsd
coccineus, Endomychus, v, 182.

Coccus, v,184.
mali, viii, T26.

Coccus of the Pine (See Pine-leaf Scale-

insect).

Cochineal Insect, Coccus, v,184.

Cochran Rustic (See Dark-sided Cut¬
worm).

cochrani, Agrotis, vii, 92,209.

Cockchafer, English (See English Cock¬
chafer).

Cockroach, Blatta, v,129.

Cockroaches, Blattidse, v,117; vi, 70, 74, 76,
ix, 60, 73, 80, 82.

Codling Moth, Codling worm, Apple worm,
Carpocapsa pomonella, i, 27, 81, iv,167.
Birds feeding on, iv,181.

Broods, i, 27, 32; iv,172.

Cocoon, vii, 260.

Compared with other worms found in
apple, xi,19.
plum curculio, i, 67.

Figure of apple occupied by codling
worm, iv, 167; vii, 260; x,151.
cocoon, iv, 167; vii, 260; x,151.
larva, iv,167; vii, 260; x,157.

head of. iv,167; vii, 260; x,151.
moth, iv. 167; vii, 260; x,157.
pupa, iv, 167; vii, 260; x, 157.

Food plants, i,29; vii, 261, 277; x,151.
Fungus on, iv, 184.

Habits and mode of life, i, 28; x, 151; xi, 19.
Injuries, vi, 45; vii,260; xi,19.

Insect enemies, iv, 181; v,60.

Larva, x, 151; xi, 19.

Life history, iv,167;|vii,260.

Moth, vii, 260, 262.

Occurrence in 1866, i,30.

Pupa, vii, 260.

Range, iv, 167.

Relations to other insects, i, 9,31.
Remedies, i, 29; iv, 172,184; vi,13,14; vii,
261; xi,20.

Tongue, iv,171.

Coeliodes, i, 17; v, 143;
curtus, i, 16.

inaequalis, i, 13; vi, 142, p. ii.

Coeliodides, v, 143.

Coelodasys unicornis, vii, 191; x, 147.
Coelogaster, v, 143.

Coenurus cerebralis, ix, 69.

Colaspis, v, 166,168.
brunnea, vii, 104.
flavida, vi, 164, pp. ii, iv.

Coleophora malivorella, x, 156.
Coleoptera, v, p.'xvi, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 24, 25
112; vi, 37,68.70,77,79,86,172; ix, 60; xii,
115. (See Beetles.)

Colias, vii, 269; ix, 26.
caesonia, x, 78.

eurytheme, vii. 147,278,281; x. 78.
philodice, vii, 147, 278, 281; x, 78.
collare, Spharangemon, ix, 94.
collaris, Disonycha, v, 173.

Euchmtes, x, 169.

(Edipoda, ix, 90,94,110.

Stenispa, v, 174.

Collier. (See Black Fly.)

Colon, v, 57.
colon, Omosita, v, 60.

Stenus, v, 72.

Colopha, vii, 74; viii, 142.
eragrostidis, viii, 144.
ulmicola, vii, 76; viii, *142, 144,204.
Colorado Potato-beetler Ten-lined Pot
beetle, Colorado rPotato-bug,: iDorypl
(Chrysomela, Myocorina) JlO-linoata,
ii, 6.63; iii, 162; vi, 125,160.

Beetle, vi, 161.

Chickens feeding on, ii, 67.
Classification, vi, 83.

Climatic influences, ii, 64; vii, 107.
Compared with D. juncta, vi, 161.
Eggs, vi, 74.

Figure of beetle, ii, 63.
eggs, ii, 63.
larva, ii, 63.
leg, ii, 03.
pupa, ii, 63.
wing-case, ii, 63.

Food plants, i, 58;Iii, 71; vi, 161,162, r
iii; vii, 280,282.

Habits, xi, 7.

Hibernation, vi, 162.

Insect enemies, ii, 64,65,67; iii, 162; b
vi. 89,91,162.

Larva, vi, 161.

compared with'larva of lady-bit
15.

Life history, vi, 162.

Occurrence in 1870, ii, 64.

1871, iii, 162,163.

1877, vii, 107.

1881 xi 7.

Range.'i, 8.82,102; iii, 163; xi, 82.
Remedies, ii, 68; iii, 162,164; iv, 21;

vi, 163; ix, 4; xi, 7.

Skunk feeding on, ii, 66.
Synonyms, vi, 160,

Time of first appearance£in Illinois
colossus, Evarthrus, xii. 109.
columba, Tremex, vi, 34,41,44;;pp. i, ii,
x,71.

Columbia. Sarnia, x, 177.

Colydiidse, v.36.56, 66.

Colydiides, v, 66.

Colydium, v, 179.

Colymbetes, v,51.

INSECT INDEX.

19

comma, Agonoderus, xii, 27, 43, 56, 111.

Grapta, vii, 152, 279,281; x, 84, 163.

Comma Butterfly, Grapta comma, vii, 152,
279,281; x, 84, 163.

commelinm, Prodenia, vii, 219; x,138.
communis, Melanotus, v, 100; vi,25,118; vii,
28,30.

complanatus, Polydesmus. xi,45.
compositus, Platypus, v,146.
compressa, Schizoneura, viii, 138.

Comyntas Butterfly, Lycrnna comyntas,
vii, 158, 278, 279, 282; x,95.
comyntas, Lycsena, vii, 158, 278, 279, 282; x, 95.
conchiformis, Aspidiotus, i,34,54; ii, 87. (See
Oyster-shell Bark-louse.)

Mytilaspis, ii, 24. 46, 87, 89, 94; iii, 159. (See
Oyster-shell Bark-louse.)
corecinna, Notodonta, vii, 190; x, 119.

ffidemasia, vii. 190.
conlusaria, Caberodes, vii, 244.

Coniatus, v, 128.
eonica, Plata, xii, 104.
coniferarum, Sphinx, x, 105.
conjuncta, Chrysomela, v,167.

Zygogramma, v, 167.

Conosoma, x,74.

Conotrachelides, v.135, 142.
conotracheli, Porizon, vi,139.

Conotrachelus crataegi, vi,141; pp. ii, iii.
nenuphar, i, 15, 64; v,132, 142; vi, 83, 85, 90,
137,143; pp. i, ii, iii. (See Plum Cur-
culio.)

conquisitor, Cryptus, vii, 119.

Pimpla, vii, 119.
conspersa, Chloealtis, ix,92,9S).
conspersum, Chrysochraon, ix,92,99.
contexta, Plusia, ix, 43, 44,46.
convergens. Hippodamia, ii, 64; v, 184; vi,
162,163,173; viii. 173. 174; xii, 41, 117.
Convergent Lady-bird. Hippodamia con¬
vergens, ii, 64; v,184; vi, 162, 163,173; viii,
173,174; xii, 41, 117.

convolutella, Myelois, vii, 251, 279, 280.

Copper Underwing (See Green Cream-spot¬
ted Grape-worm.)

Copridm, v, 37, 79, 80; vi, 70, 80, 82,

Copris, v,81.

carnifex, v,81.

Carolina, v,80.
marginatus, v, 80.

Coprophaga, iv,19; v,19.

Coproporus, v,75.

Coptocycla, v,177; vi, 171.
aurichalcea, v, 177; vi,172.
clavata, v,177.
guttata, v,177; vi, 172.
purpurata, v, 177.

Copturus, i,17.
corallina, Locusta, ix,95.

(Edipoda, ix,95.
corallipes, CEdipoda. ix.U4.

var. rugosus, Hippiscus, ix, 89, 95, 115.
Coreidae, viii, 12.
coreopsidis, Aphis, viii, 193.

Siphonophora, viii, 59.

Coreus tristis, ii, 61 ; iv,6; v,6; vi,162.
Corisidm, vi,73.

Corn Curculio, Sphenophorus zeas, vi, 144,
p. ii; vii. 34, 278.

Cutworm, Striped Cutworm, Check¬
ered Rustic, Agrotis tessellata, vii, 91,
206,278; x,133.

Myriapod, lulus impressus, xi,44.
Plant-louse. Maize or Corn Aphis,
Aphis maidis, vii, 5,71,75,278, viii, 28,
31,89; ix, 2; xi,67; xii, 5,44,116.
Root-worm, Diabrotica longicornis, x,
44; xi, 65; xii, 6,7, 10.

Sipha, Maize Sipha, Sipha maydis, viii,

122.

Corn worm, Boll worm, Tomato worm, Bud
worm, Armed Heliothis, Heliothis armi-
gera, vii, 102.
as a Boll worm, xi, 83.

Corn worm, xi. 85.

Tomato worm, xi, 89.

Classification, xi, 83.

Climatic influences, xi, 98.

Egg, x. 50; xi, 90.

Figure of eggs, x, 150.
larva, x, 150.
moth, x, 150.
pupa, x, 150.

Food-plants, vii, 102,231,278,279; x, 150;
xi, 82,90.

Habits and mode of life, vii, 231; x, 150;
xi, 83.

Injuries, vii, 102,103,231; xi, 90.

Larva, vii. 103,231.232: x, 150; xi, 91.

Life history, vii, 103.

Moth, vii, 104,232; x, 50; xi. 96.

Names, vii, 102,231.

Occurrence in 1877, vii, 4; in 1881, xi, 5.
Parasites, vii, 104; xi, 97,102.

Pupa, vii, 232; x, 50; xi, 93.

Range, vii, 102; xi, 82.

Remedies, vii, 104,232; xi, 97,100.
corni, Aphis, viii, 101.
cornica, Phylloxera, viii, 164.
cernicola, Eriosoma, viii, 141.

Schizoneura, viii, 141.
cornifolige, Aphis, viii, 101,193.
cornu, Hamamelistes, i, 22.
cornutus, Bolitophagus, x, 125.

Passalus, v, 78.

corticalis, Trogosita. iv, 182; v, 64.
Corydalis, iv. 2; v, 2.
coryli, Aphis, viii, 106.

Corymbetes. v, 99,100.
hamatus, v, 100; vi, 25.
hieroglyphicus, v, 100; vi, 25.

Corynetes ruflpes, v, 110.

Coscinoptera, v, 129,169.170.
dominicana, v, 169,170.
vittigera, v, 170.

Cosmia trapezina, i, 79.

Cossidae. vi, 34.

Cossonides. v, 135,144.

Cossonus, v, 145.

20

INSECT INDEX

Cossus, vi, 42.

centerensis. x, 151.
ligniperaa, v, 5.
robiniae, vi. 42.
eostalis, Asopia, vii, 217,278.

Cotalpa, v, 89.
lanigera, v, 89.

Cottonwood Dagger, Apatela (Acronycta)
lepusculina, vii, 201,279; x, 130.
Cotton-worm Moth, Aletia (Anomis) argil-
lacea, vii, 228,279.

Counterfeit Golden-eye, Chrysona pseudo-
grapha, viii, 178.

Crabrionidae, vi, 71.
craccas, Aphis, viii, 88.

Crambodes talidiformis, x, 180.
Cranberry-louse Aphidius, Aphidius
(Praon) viburnaphis, viii, 175.

Crane-flies, ix, 60.
crataegi, Aphis, viii, 101.

Conotrachelus, vi, 141. pp. ii, iii.
Siphonophora, viii, 189.
crataagifoliae, Aphis, viii, 101.

Cratonychus brevicollis, vi, 117; vii, 30.
Cratoparis, v, 129.

Cream-spotted Grape-worm, Green. (See
Green Cream-spotted Grape-worm.)
Cremastochilus, v, 90,91.

Crepidodera, v, 172,173.

helxines, v, 173.

Creophilus, v, 69.
villosus, v, 69.

Cresphontes Butterfly, Thoas Butterfly,
Papilio cresphontes, vii, 139,279,281,282;
x, 75.

cresphontes, Papilio, vii, 139,279,281,282; x,
75.

Cressonia juglandis, vii, 167.
cribraria, Chelymorpha, v, 176.

Crickets, Gryllidas, iv, 8; v, 8; vi, 70,76; ix,
60,73,82.

Wingless (See Katydids),
crinitus, Cryptophagus, v, 62.

Criocephalus, v, 153.

Crioceridae, v, 162.

Criocerides, v, 127,163,164,170.

Criocerinae, vi. 157.

Crioceris, v, 162,164,165,176.

asparagi, v, 165; vi, 158, 165, p. i.
trilineata, v, 164; vi, 158.

Crocallis elinguaria, i, 79.
crocataria, Angerona, vii, 243,279.
Crown-borer, Strawberry. (See Strawberry
Crown-borer.)

Miner, Strawberry. (See Strawberry
Crown Miner.)

cruciferarum, Plutella, vii, 266,278,280,282;
ix. 52.

erucigerus, Panagaeus, v, 46.

Cryptobium, v. 70,71,72.

* pusillum, v, 71.

Cryptocephalides, v, 127,163,168.
Cryptocephalinae, vi, 157.

Cryptocephalus, v, 162,168,169,170.

Cryptohypnus, v, 99.

abbreviatus, vii. 27.

Cryptophagidae, v, 36,56,62,178.
Cryptophagus cellaris, v, 62.

crinitus, v, 62.

Cryptoplides, v, 140.

Cryptorhynchides, v. 135,142,143.
Cryptorhynclius. v, 143.

Cryptosiphum, viii, 42.

Cryptus conquisitor, vii, 119.

grallator, vi, 110.

Ctenucha, vii, 179,271; x, 110.
americana, vii, 179.
fulvicollis, vii, 179.
virginica, x,170.

Cucujidm, v, 36, 56, 65, 178.

Cucujus, v, 65,66.
clavipes, v, 65,66.
testaceus, v, 65.

Cucumber Aphis (See Melon Plant-lous
Beetle (See Striped Cucumber-beetl
Flea-beetle, Hairy Flea-beetle, Epiti
(Haltica) cucumeris, v, 173; vi, 167, r
ii, iii.

cucumeris, Aphis, xii, 83.

Epitrix, vi,167.

Haltica, v, 173; vi,167, pp. ii, iii.
cucurbitae, iEgeria, vi, 41,44, p. iv; vii, 11
277,279, 280; x, 106, 107.

Aphis, xii, 84.

Melittia, vii, 173.

Siphonophora, viii, 67.

Culicidas, vi,73.
culinaris, Uloma, v, 124.

Culprit Leaf-hopper, Chloroneura mal
flea, i, 69.

Cupes cinerea, v, 103.

Cupesidm, v, 37, 92, 93, 101, 103; vi,70, 80.
cupida, Agrotis, x, 135.

Curculio, Apple or Four-humped (See For
humped Curculio).

Corn (See Corn Curculio).

Elm-tree (See Elm-tree Curculio).
Grape (See Grape Curculio).
Gray-sided (See Gray-sided Curculi
Parasite, Sigalphus curcuiionis, i,70,!
vi,139.

Plum (See Plum Curculio).

Quince (See Quince Curculio).
Curculionidae, v, 29,34,35.119,127,128,129,11
131, 145, 146, 161; vi, 35, 37, 70, 77, 81, 83, 85, 86, 11
(See Snout-beetlesJ
curcuiionis. Sigalphus, i, 70 ; vi, 139.
Curculios (See Snout-beetles).

Short-snouted (See Short-snouted Cn
culios).

Currant Borer, zEgeria tipuliformis, vi,E
44, p. ii; vii, 172, 279; x, 106, 107, 151.
Caterpillar, Spinous. (See Spinous Cr
rant Caterpillar.)

Fruit-worm, Eupithecia interrupto-fa
ciata, xi, 6,23.

Plant-louse, Myzus (Aphis) ribis, i, (
viii, 76.

v-' CJ

INSECT INDEX

21

Currant Saw-fly, ii,6; iv,21; v,21.

-worm. Imported. (See Imported Cur¬
rant-worm.)
lursoria, ix, 80,82.
iurtipennis, Chloealtis, ix,93.

Locusta, ix,23.

Stenobothrus, ix,88,93, 104.
urtus, Ceutorhynchus, i,16.

Coeliodes. i,16.
uterebra, ix,61.

utworm, Black, (See Greasy Cutworm).
Cabbage (See Cabbage Cutworm).
Climbing (See Climbing Cutworm).

Corn (See Corn Cutworm).

Dark-sided (See Dark-sided Cutworm).
Dingy (See Dingy Cutworm).

Glassy (See Glassy Cutworm).

Greasy (See Greasy Cutworm).

Speckled (See Speckled Cutworm).
Spotted (See Spotted Cutworm).

Striped (See Corn Cutworm).

Variegated (See Variegated Cutworm).
Western Striped (See Western Striped
Cutworm).

Wheat (See Wheat Cutworm).

W-marked (See W-marked Cutworm).
Yellow-headed (See Yellow-headed Cut¬
worm).

Cutworm Lion (See Fiery Ground-beetle).
Cutworms, Agrotis, Hadena and Mames-
tra, vii, 31 , 97, 99, 202.

Birds feeding on, vii, 88.

Classification, vii, 271.

Climatic influences, vii, 89; x,55.
Description, vii, 82.

Food plants, vii, 280.

Habits, vii, 81, 82; x, 17, 136; xi,61,62.
History, vii, 82.

Injuries, vii, 81.

Insect enemies, vi. 90; vii, 217; xi,64; xii,

111,

Moths, vii, 82.

Names, vii, 81.

.Remedies, vi.ll; vii, 82, 83, 202, 218.

cyanea, Cassida, v,176.

Microrhopala, v, 175.
cyanipennis, Gaurotes, v,156.
eybele, Argynnis, vii, 150; x.81.

Cybele Butterfly, Argynnis eybele, vii, 150.

x,81.

Cybister, v,51.

Cychramus, v, 59.

Cychrus, v,42,43.

Cyclica, v. 162.

Cyclocephala, v,85.

Cycloneda, v,184; xii, 118.

sanguinea, xii, 42, 118.

Cyclopthalmes , v, 137.
eylindricum, Orthosoma, v,152.
Oylindrorhinides, v, 134, 137.

Cyllene robini®, vi, 38, 44, 151.

Cymatodera, v, 109.

cymatophoroides, Pseudothyatira, x, 129.
Oymindis, v,44,45.

Cynipid®, vi,71; x,63.

Cynips, i, 63, 79; x,210.
nubilipennis. i, 78.
quercus-sculpta, i, 78. 79.
cynthia, Attacus, x, 125.

Sarnia, vii, 194, 277; x,125.
cyparissi®, Siphonophora, viii, 57.
Cypherotylus. v. 181.

boisduvali, v, 180, 181.
Cyrtacanthacris americana, ix,96.

differential! s, ix,96.
Cyrtotriplax, v, 181.

Cyst- worms, ix,58.

Dacne, v, 180,181.
fasciata, v, 181.
heros, v, 181.

4-maculata, v, 181.

Dactylosph®ra, i, 21.
cary®-semen, i, 23.
globosa, i, 21; viii, 163.
vitifoli®, i, 21,22; viii, 158.
Daddy-long-legs, Phalangium, ii, 64,65.
daggyi, Prodenia, vii, 97,219.

Daggy’s Corn- worm. (See Fall Army- worm.)
dahli®, Aphis, viii, 88.
dama, Lucanus, v, 77,78; vi, 95, pp. i, ii, iv.
damnificum, Acridium, ix, 96.

Danaid®, x, 79.

Danais, vii, 269.

archippus, vii, 149,281; x, 79,161.
Danewort Butterfly, Callidryas eubule, vii,
147,278; x, 78.
daplidice, Pieris, ix, 28.

Dapsilia rutilana, x, 153.

Darapsa, vii, 270.

myron, vii, 166,280.
versicolor, x, 158.

Daremma brontes, x, 102.
undulosa, x, 159.

Darkling Beetles, Tenebrionid®, Tenebri-
onides, iv, 34; v, 34,111,113,121,122,123,124,
130; vi, 80,83,86.

Dark May-beetle, White Grub, May-beetle,
Lachnosterna (Phyllophaga) fusca=L.
quercina, i, 16; v, 85,87; vi, 89,97,101,102,
pp. i, ii, iii, iv; vii, 33.

Dark-sided Cutworm. Reaping Rustic,
Cochran Rustic, Agrotis messoria, vii,
92,209,209,278; x, 134.

Dart, Devastating (See Glassy Cutworm).
Gothic (See Dingy Cutworm).

Master (See Western Striped Cut¬
worm).

Perplexing (See Perplexing Dart).
Dascyllid®, v, 93.

Dasytes, v, 108.

Datana, iv, 189; vii, 271.
major, iv, 190.

ministra, iv, 186; vii, 189; x, 119,167.
perspicua, iv, 190; x, 119.
dauci, Aphis, viii, 181.

v • , • i it r * i ' > ■ ’ «*' 4 <•».'

( X

22

INSECT INDEX.

Debis portlandia, x, 92.

decemlineata, Chrysomela, vi, 100. (See
Colorado Potato-beetle.)

Doryphora, i, 8,58,82; ii, 63; iii. 162; v,
167; vi, 83,89,160, pp. ii. iii; vii. 107,280,
282; ix, 4; xi, 7. (See Colorado Potato-
beetle.)

Myocoryna,vi,160. (See Colorado Potato-
beetle.)

Polygramma, vi, 160.
decorus, Platynus, xii, 109.

Deilephila, vii, 270.
chamcenerii, x, 159.

lineata, vii, 164,277,280,281,282,283; x, 100,
159.

Deiopeia bella, vii, 180.
delaw are, Pamphila, x, 96,174.

Dendroides. v, 117.

canadensis, v, 117.

Dendroptus, xii, 141.

dentatus, Hylurgus, v, 147; vi, 38, 43, 146, pp.
ii.iii.

Lachnus, iii, 138; viii. 115,116.
depressa, Phylloxera, viii, 164.
depressus, Melanotus, vii, 29.
Dermatodectes ovis, ix, 66.

Dermestes, v, 60.

lardarius, v. 60; vi, 92, pp. i. iv.
Dermestidse, iv, 36; v, 36,54,56,60; vi, 70,81,
86,87,92.

Derobrachus, v, 151,152.

Desmia, vii, 272.

maculalis, vii, 248,280.

Desmiphora, v, 158.

Desmocerus, v, 156.
palliat.us, v, 156.

desperata, Catocala, vii. 234,279.

Semiotellus, x, 210,211,212,231.
destructor, Cecidomyia, i, 18; ix, 3,5; x, 200;
xi, 29.

Devastating Dart, (See Glassy Cutworm),
devastatrix, Hadena, vii, 96,216,278; x, 137.

Rhyparochromus, vii, 41.

Devil’s Horses, Soothsayers, Mantidm, vi,
70; ix, 73,80,82.

Diabrotica, v, 171, 172.

12-guttata, xii, 104.

12-punctata, vi, 166, pp. ii> iii, iv.
longicornis, x, 44; xi,65; xii, 6, 10.
4-vittata, i, 52; ii, 77; v, 170, 171, 172; vi,83,
165,169, pp ii, iii, iv; x, 44; xi, 66, 69, 70;
xii, 11.

diana, Argynnis, vii, 149,282; x, 81.

Diana Butterfly, Argynnis diana, vii, 149, 282;
x,81.

dianthi, Rhopalosiphum, viii. 80.

DiaperidEC, v, 34, 121, 124, 125, 180.

Diaperides, v,125.

Diaperis, v,125.
hydni, v.125.
rufipes, v, 125.
diasema, Plusia, ix, 44.

Dibolia, v, 172, 173.
serea, v, 173.

Dicadns, v,46; xii, 110.

elongatus.xii.110.

Dicerca, v,95.

divaricata, v,95; vi, 37, 43, 112, 113, 114; i
i. ii, iii.

lurida, 5,95; vi, 37, 43, 113; p. ii.
Dichelonycha, v,86.
elongata, v,86.
linearis, v, 86.

dichrous, Bradycellus, xii, 112.
Dicrepidius, v, 99.

Dictyopterus, v,105.
differentiale, Acridium, ix,96.
differentials, Caloptenus. vi,44,45; ix,91,
127, 131, 132, 133, 134.

Cyrtacanthacris, ix,96.
diffinis, Chlsenius, xii, 111,

Hem arts, vii, 163.

Sesia, vii, 163; x, 99, 160.

Diludia jasminearum, x, 103.

Dimera, viii, 10.

dimidiatum, Calopteron, v, 105.

Dingy Cutworm, Gothic Dart, Agro
subgothic a, vii, 89, 204, 205, 206, 278; ix, 1
x, 132.

diospyri, Aphis, viii, 95.
dlplepha, Aphis, viii,211.

Diplocheila, v,46.

Diplodonia marginepunctella, i, 79.
Diplodus luridus, vii, 119.

Diplosis tritici, x, 202,213,217.

Diplotaxis, V, 86,88.
sordida, v,88.

Diptera, i,32; iv, 8. 12, 13, 14, 24, 25; v, 8, 12, 13
24,25; vi, 68, 69, 73, 77; vii, 217; viii, 172; ix
136; xii, 114, 115. (See Flies.)
nemocera, i, 16.

Diraphia, viii, 13.

calamorum, viii, 14.
femoralis, viii, 14.
maculipennis, viii, 14,
vernalis, viii, 14.

Diraphia, Black-legged. (See Black leg;
Diraphia.)

Calamus. (See Calamus Diraphia.)
Spotted-winged. (See Spotted-win;
Diraphia.)

Vernal. (See Jumping Plant-louse.)
dirhoda, Siphonophora, viii, 67.
Disagreeable Golden-eye, Chrysopa i
pida, viii, 178.

discoidea, Adelocera, vii, 27.

CEdipoda, ix,95.

discoideus, Anisodactylus, xii, 112.

Hippiscus, ix, 89, 95, 116.
discolor. Aphis, viii, 211.

Callipterus, xiii, 196, 198.

Disippus Butterfly, Limenitis (Nymph
disippus, ii, 95 ; vii, 154; x, 88, 162.
disippus, Limenitis, vii, 154; 10,88,162.

Nymphalis, ii, 95.

Disonycha, v, 171, 172.
collaris, v,173.
triangularis, v,173.

INSECT INDEX.

23

lispar. Chlamys, v.170.
listincta, Mamestra, x,136.
listomahepaticum, ix,67.

militare, ix,67.

Ditoma, v. 66.

iivaricata, Dicerca, v, 95 ;.vi, 37, 43,112, 113, 114,
pp. i, ii.iii.

divergens, Plusia, ix,44.|
diversilineata, Petrophora, vii, 237, 280.
Dog-wood Leaf Aphis, Aphis cornifoliee,
viii, 101. 193.

Dolerus arvensis, x, 64, 65, 67.

Dolphin. (See Black Fly.)
domestica, Musca, i, 55.
dominicana, Coscinoptera, v, 169, 170.

Donacia, v. 160, 161, 162, 163.

Donaciides, v, 163.

Donacinae, vi,157.

Dor-beetle. (See English Cock-chafer.)
Dorchaschema, v, 158.

Dorcus. y,77, 78.

parallelus, v, 78.

dorsistrigella, Tinea, vii, 262.

Doryphora 10-lineata, i, 8,58,82; ii,63; m,162;
v 167; vi, 83, 89, 160, pp. ii.iii; vii, 107,280,282;
ix, 4; xi, 7. (See Colorado Potato beetle.)
juncta, x.167; vi,161.
doryphorae, Ly della, ii.64,67; vi, 162, 163.
Dotted-legged Plant-bug, Euschistus
punctipes. xi, 27.

Dragon-flies. Mosquito-hawks, Libellulidae
i. 61; vi,71; ix,60.

Drasteria, vii, 272.

erechtea, vii, 233, 278; x, 148.
Drepanosiphiden, viii, 34.

Drepanosiphum, viii, 34, 40, 42, 73, 78, 80.
acerifolii, viii, 195.
acerina, viii, 78.
aceris, viii, 78.
quercifolii, viii, 79.
tilise, viii, 188.

Dromius, v, 44. 45, 49.

Drop worms. (See Measuring worms.)
drupiferarum, Sphinx, x, 104, 105.

Dryobius, viii, 35, 42.

Dryocarapa, vii, 271.

pellucida, x,121.
rubicunda, vii, 196,279. 281; x, 121.
senatoria, vii, 196, 279, 281; x, 120, 161.
stigma, x, 120.

Dryocampa, Senatorial. (See Senatorial
Dryocampa.)

Dryopthorus, v,145.
dubius, Clerus, v.hD.

Dularias, v,154. .

Dung beetles. (See Lamellicorn Dung

beetles.),

duodecimguttata, Diabrotica, xii.lt 4.
duodecimpunctata, Diabrotica, vi,166, pp.

ii.iii, iv. . . ,

Dusky Locust, Tragocephala vindifasciata,

var. inf uscata, ix, 88, 93, 106, 134.
dyaus, Plusia, ix, 43, 44, 47, 5f.

Dynastes tityus, v.84; vi,96, p.ii.

Dynastidse, iv,37; v.37,79, 83, 84; vi, 70, 80, 82,
87,96.

Dyschirius, v,43.

Dyspteris, vii, 272.

abort ivaria, vii, 238, 280.

Dytiscidoe, iv,36; v, 36, 50. 53, 92; vi, 70, 80, 81.
Dytiscus, v,50,51.
fasciventris, v, 50.
marginalis, v,50.

Eacles, vii, 271.

imperialis, vii, 196; x, 121.

Earth-louse, Lettuce. (See Lettuce Earth-
louse.)

worms, xii, 111, 113, 114, 115,

Earwigs, Forficulidm, Forficula, iv,14; v,14;
ix, 73, 80, 82.

Eastern Locust, (Edipoda migratoria, vi,
46,48.

Eburia, v,154.

quadrigeminata, v,154; vi, 36, 38, 43, 149,
p. ii.

Eccopsis malana, xi,16.

Ecpantheria, vii, 271.

scribonia, vii, 184, 279, 281, 282, 283; x,116.
Edema, vii, 271.

albifrons, vii, 191; x, 120.
egleis, Argynnis, x. 164.

Eight-spotted Forester, Blue Caterpillar
of the Vine, Alypia octomaculata, vii, 176,
280; x, 110,172.

Elaphidion, v, 154,159.

parallelum, v, 152; vi, 36,38, 44,83, 150, p. i.
villosum, vi, 38,43,150, i,iii,iv.

Elaphrus, v, 42,43.

ruscarius, v, 42; x, 41.

elaphus, Lucanus, v, 78; vi, 94,96, pp. ii.iii.
Elasmocerus, v, 109.

Elater, v, 99.

apicatus, v, 100.
hepaticus. vii, 28.
linteus, v, 100; vi, 25; vii, 28.
nigricollis, v, 100; vi, 25; vii, 28.
noctilucus, v, 66.
obliquus, vii, 28.
oculatus, v, 99.
rubricollis, v, 100; vi, 25.
sanguinipennis, v, 100; vi, 25; vii, 2/, 28.
scapularis, v, 100; vi, 25.

Elateridse, iv, 28,34,37; v, 28,34,37,92,93,96,
106,121; vi, 21,70,80,82,85,86,87,115,119, pp.
ii.iii, iv; vii, 19, 278. (See Wire-worms.)
Elaterides, v, 98.

Elaters. (See Wire-worms.)

Elder Aphis, Aphis sambuci, viii, 100.
elegans, Chrysomela, v, 167.

Eleodes, v, 123.
elinguaria, Crocallis, i, 79.

ellipticum, Platydema, v, 126. .

Elm-leaf Aphis, Schizoneura ulmi, vm, 11. ,
124,140,204,211.

24

INSECT INDEX

Elm Sphinx, Four-horned Ceratomia, Cera-
tomia amyntor, vii, 167,279; x, 102.

-tree Borer, Pigeon Tremex, Trernex
eolumba, vi, 34, 41, 44, pp. i, ii, iii. iv.
Curculio, Elm-tree Bark-miner and
Borer, Magdalis armicollis, v, 139;
vi, 38,43, 132, p. ii.

Saperda. (See Three-toothed Sa-
perda.)

Elmis, v, 52.

elongata, Dichelonycha, v, 86.
elongatus, Dicaelus, xii, 110.

Pasimachus, ii, 64; v, 43; vi, 89,90, 162,163;
x. 41.

elymi, Isosoma, xi, 81.

Emarginate Locust, Acridium emargin-
atum, ix, 91, 96, 128, 134.
emarginatum, Acridium, ix, 91,96,128,134.
Emperor, Eyed (See Eyed Emperor}.

Tawny (See Tawny Emperor).
Emphytus, maculatus, vii, 108,111,282; x,64,
65.68.

Empretia. vii, 271.

stimulea, vii, 187,278,282; x, 117.
Encoptolophus sordidus, ix,94.

Encyclops, v, 156.

cseruieus, v, 156.

Endalus, v, 140.

Endeis, viii,35,42.

Endomychidae, v, 178, 180,181.

Endomychus, v, 179, 181, 182.
biguttatus, v, 182.
coccineus, v, 1S2.

Endropia, vii, 272 .

bilinearia, vii, 243, 279,281.

Engidas, v, 178.

English Cockchafer, Dor-beetle, Melolon-
tha vulgaris, v,3.

Enoplium, v, 109.
ensicornu, Acridium, ix,92.

Entozoa, ix,58,59.

Ephedrus plagiator, viii, 54.

Ephemera, iv, 13; v, 13.

ephermeraeformis, Thyridopteryx. ii, 86;

vii, 187; x, 118; xii, 101. (See Bag Worm.)
Ephemeridas, vi,7L.

Epicasrus, v, 137.

imbricatus, vi,131, pp. i, ii; xii, 104.
Epicauta. v,116; ix,136.

cinerea, vi, 126, 162,163, p. iii; xii, 104.
pennsylvanica, xii, 104.
vittata, vi, 125, 162, 163, p. iii; ix, 4; xii, 104.
epigasa, Plusia, ix,44.

Epimenis, Grape-vine. (See Grape-vine
Epimenis.)

Epitrix, v. 173.

cueumeris, vi, 167.
eciui, Gastrophilus, ix,6l.

Psoroptes, ix,64.
eragrostides, Colopha, viii, 144.

Glyphina, viii, 144.

epimenis, Psychomorpha, vii, 177,178,280; x,
111, 172.

erechtea, Drasteria, vii, 233, 278; x. 148.

eremicola, Osmoderma, v,91.

Eresia texana, x, 164.

Ergates, v, 151,152.

erigeronensis, Siphonophora, viii, 58.

Tychea, viii, 100, 168.
erinaceus, Panscopus, v, 136.

Eriophilus mali, viii, 131.

Eriosoma, i, 8,56; iv, 199; viii, 34, 38, 153.
caryas, viii, 141.
cornicola, viii, 141.
fungicola, viii, 141.

lanigera, i, 8, 55; viii, 126, 128, 136. (S'

Woolly Aphis of the Apple-tree.)
mali, viii, 126.

pyri, iv, 198; viii, 128,136. (See Wooll
Aphis of the Apple-tree.)
ulmi, viii, 136.

eriosoma, Chrvsopa, viii, 136.

Erirhinides, v, 134, 139.

Erirhinus, v, 140.

Eros, v, 105.

coceinatus, v,105.

Erotylidae, v, 35, 177, 178, 180.

Erotylus, v,180.
error, Platygaster, x.212.
erythroptera, Locusta, ix, 95.
erythropterus, Gryllus, ix, 95.
eubule, Callidryas, vii, 147, 278; x,78.
Eucerata, v. 127, 148.

Euchastes collaris, x, 169.

Eucnemides, v, 98.

Eucnemis, v,98.

Eueronia, vii, 271.

maia, vii, 195, 279, 281 ; x, 127, 163.

Eudamus. vii, 270.

bathyllus, vii, 162, 277,280,283; x,98.
lycidas, vii, 162.
proteus, x, 184.

tityrus, vii, 163, 277, 281 ; x, 98, 153.

Eudocimus, v, 139.

Eudryas, vii, 270; x, 110.

grata, vii, 178,280, 283; x, 111, 112, 173.
unio, vii, 178, 279, 280; x. 111, 173.
Eufltchia, vii, 272.

ribeari a, vii. 237, 280.

Eugnamptus, v,142.

Eugonia, vii, 272.

subsignaria, vii, 243, 277, 279.
Eumetopona ministra, iv, 186.

Eumolpides, v, 127, 163.

Eumolpini, v,165.
euonymi. Aphis, viii, 88.

Eupelmus allyni, xi.8l.
euphorbias, Aphis, viii, 57.

Siphonophora, viii, 56.
euphorbicola, Siphonophora, viii, 57,
Eupithecia interrupto-fasciata, xi,6,23.
Eupoda. v, 162.

Eupogonius, v. 158.

Eupsalis minuta, v, 130, 131.

Euptoieta, vii, 270.

claudia, vii, 150; x, 80.

Eurema lisa, ix. 32.

INSECT INDEX.

25

European Cabbage Web Moth. (See Cab¬
bage Tinea.

European Cabbage worm or Butterfly, Im¬
ported Cabbage worm, Rape Butterfly,
Pieris Rapae, ix, 8, 25, 27, 29, 31, 34 ; xi, 32.
Broods, number of, ix, 17; x, 78.
Chronological history, vii, 144; ix, 9.

Eggs, ix, 11,14.

Figure of larva, x, 77, 179; xii, 92.

male and female butterflies, x, 77, 179;
xii, 92.

J Food plants, vii, 144, 145, 278, 280; x,78; xi,
32.

Habits and mode of life, vii, 145; ix, 9,12,
14,39; x, 179.

Imago, vii, 145, 146; ix,10.

Insect endmies, vii, 146; ix,2,17; xi,35,63.
Larva, vii, 145; ix, 13, 14, 35; x, 77, 179; xi,32.
Life history, ix.ll.

Occurrence in 1879, ix,37.

1881, xi,7.

Pupa, vii, 145; ix,16,35.

Range, vii, 144; ix,2; xi,82.

Remedies, vii, 145; ix,21; xi,32; xii, 92.
Euryomia, v,90.
fulgida, v,90.
inda, v,91: vi,108, pp. i,ii.
melancholica, v,91; vi,108, p. i.
vestita. vi,108.

Eurytheme Butterfly, Colias eurytheme,
vii, 147, 278, 281; x,78.

earytheme, Colias, vii, 147, 278, 281; x,7b.
Eurytris Butterfly, Neonympha eurytris,
vii, 156, 280; x, 90, 184.

eurytris, Neonympha, vii, 156,180; x, 90, 184.
Euschistus punctipes, xi,27.

Eustrophus, v,120.

Eutrapela, vii, 272.

transversata, vii, 244, 280, 281 . 282,

Euura orbitalis, x, 64, 65, 69.
salicicola, x, 64, 65, 69.
salicis-gemma, x.65,69.
salicis-ovum, x,65,69.
evanidalis, Hypena. x,148.

Evarthrus, xii, 109, 115.
colossus, xii, 109.
sodalis.xii.H0.

Evening Silky Leaf-chafer, Serica vespert-
ina, v,8S; vi, 102, p. iv.

Exartema fascianatum, x,153.
excaecatus, Paonias, vii, 167.

Smerinthus, vii, 167,277,282.
excavata, Microrhop'ala, v, 175.
excavatum. Platydema, v, 126.
exclamationis, Chrysomela, v,167.

Zygogramma, v,167.
excrementi, Geotrupes, v, 82.

Geotrypes, v,82.

Excrementivora. v,79.

lamellicornia, v,37,80.

Exema, v, 170.
exesus, Tomicus, v, 147.
exitiosa, JEgeria, i, 24, 80, 281; vi,33, 34, 38,44.
pp. i,iii; vii, 169; x,106, 107, 108.

Exochomus, v, 184.

tripustulatus, v, 184.

Exorista, iii, 124.
flavicauda, x,37.
leucanise, x.37; xi,53,63,
osten-sackeni, x,37.
phycitae, iii, 123.

exprimens, Heliothis, vii, 233, 282.

Pyrrhia, vii, 233, 282.
externum, Calosoma, x,41.
extranea, Leucania, x,9, 19.
exusta, Ceramica, ix,52.

Eyed Emperor, Apatura celtis, vii, 155, 279,
280; x, 88,89.

Eye-marked Golden eye, Chrysopa oculata,
viii, 177.

F

i

fabas, Aphis, viii, 88.

Bruchus, vi,128.
fagi, Aphis, viii, 43. 120.

Phyllaphis, vii. 120.

Schizoneura, viii, 140.
falaeer, Thecla, i, 70
Falagria, v,73.

Fall Army-worm. Daggy’s Corn-worm,
Laphygma (Prodenia): frugiperda, vii, 97,
219,278; x,138.

Canker-worm, Anisopteryx autumnata,
vii, 238. 277, 278, 279, 281 ; xi, 26, 27, 31.
Web-worm. Hyphantria (Spilosoma)
textor, ii, 18; vi, 13; vii, 107, 111, 185, 277,
278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283; x, 116, 154.
falsarius, Acoloithus, x, 112.
farctus, Bolbocerus, v,82,
farinalis, Asopia, x,157.

Pyralis, vii, 247, 278, 282.
fascianatum, Exartema, x,153.
fasciata, Dacne, v, 181.
fasciatus, Ips, v,60; vi,91.

Panagmus, v,46.
fascicularis, Hemirhipis, v,97.
fasciventris, Dytiscus, v,50.
fastidiosa, Chrysobothris, vi.lll.
faunus. Grapta, vii, 152, 280; x,84.
feisthamelii, Plusia, ix,50.
temorale. Acridium, ix,95.
femoralis. Diraphia, viii, 14.

Oxyporus, v,70.

femorata, Chrysobothris, v, 94, 95; vi, 12,13,
35, 37, 43, 84. 110, 113, 152, pp. i, ii, hi. iv.
(See Flat-headed Apple-tree Borer.)
femoratus, Caloptenusix,96.
femur-rubrum, Acridium, ix, 95.

Caloptenus, i, 99; iii, 158; vi,45, 56; vii, 35,
36. 37, 38; ix, 86, 91, 95, 96, 121, 122. 123, 124, 131
133,134,135. (See Red-legged Locust,)
Melanoplus, ix,96.

Feronia, v, 48.

ferruginea, Lycoperdina, v, 182.
fervidana, Tortrix, x.154.
festiicae, Plusia, ix,46,50.

26 INSECT INDEX.

Fickle Midge, Sciara (Molobrus) inconstans,
i, 19.

ficus, Psylla, viii, 16.

Fidia, v, 166, 168.
longipes, v,168,

yiticida, v, 168; vi,160. pp. ii, iii.
viticola, v, 168.

Fiery Ground-beetle, Red-spotted Cater¬
pillar Hunter, Cutworm Lion, Calosoma
calidum, ii, 64 ; v,42; vi, 89, 162, 168; vii,118,
119,218; x, 41; xi,27; xii,108.

Fifteen-spotted Lady-bird, Anatis (Cocci-
nella) 15-punctata, v, 183; vi, 174; vii,128;
viii, 174 ; xi,27; xii, 116.

Figure 8 Minor Moth, Mamestra renigera,
vii, 215; x ,137.

filamentaria, Nematocampa, xii, 242, 279; x,
148.

Filicornes, iv, 36 ; v, 36, 37, 92; vi, 87.
fllicornis, Bolbocerus, v, 82.

Odontaeus, v, 82.

fimbriatus, Stiretrus, ii, 64; vi, 162.
fimetarius, Aphodius, v, 81.
Fire-fly,Lightning-beetle,Photinus pyralis,
v, 106,107.

Fir-tree Saw-fly, Lophyrus abietis, x, 65,70.
flssilis, Melanotus, v, 100; vi, 25,117,118; vii,
30.

Five-spotted Sphinx. (See Tomato worm.)
flabellata, Pyrochroa, v, 117.

Flata conica, xii, 104.

Flat-headed Apple-tree Borer. Flat-headed
Borer, Chrysobothris femorata, v, 95; vi,
37, 152.

Beetle, vi, 110,111.
classification, v, 95.

Eggs, vi, 110.

/ Example of family, vi, 84.

Figure of beetle, v, 94; vi, 110.
head of larva, v, 94; vi, 110.
larva, v, 94; vi,110.
pupa, v, 94; vi, 110.

Insect enemies, vi, 110.

Larva, vi. 35, 110.

injuries done by, vi, 75.

Life History, vi, 110.

Plants injured by, vi, 43, 110, pp. i, ii, iii, iv.
Remedies, vi, 12, 13, 111.

Varieties, vi, 111.

Flattened Centipede, Polydesmus com-
planatus, xi, 45.
flavica«da, Exorista, x, 37.
fiavida, Colaspis, vi, 164, pp. ii, i v.
flavidalis, Botys, vii, 248.
flavifrontella, Tinea, vii, 262,278.
flavipes, Platydema, v, 126.
flavocostella, Gelechia, x, 153.
flavovittatum, Acridium, ix, 96.
flavus, Lasius, xii, 43,111.

Flea-beetle, Cabbage (See Striped Flea-
beetle).

Cucumber or Hairy (See Cucumber
Flea-beetle).

Flea-beetle, Grape-vine (See Grape-v
Flea-beetle).

Punctulated (See Punctulated FI
beetle).

Small Bronze (See Small Bronze FI
beetle).

Striped (See Striped Flea-beetle).
Turnip (See Turnip Flea-beetle).
Flea-louse, Blackberry (See Blackbe
Flea-louse).

Pear (See Pear Flea-louse).

Fleas, Pulicidae, vi, 73; ix, 59,61.

Flesh Flies (See House Flies),
fiexuosus, Mycetophagus, v, 61.

Flies, Blue-bottle (See House Flies).
Flesh (See House Flies),

Forest (See Forest Flies).

Gall (See Gall Flies).

Horse (See Horse Flies).

House (See House Flies).

Robber (See Robber Flies).

Flies, Two-winged Flies, Diptera.

Classification, i, 32; iv, 24,25; v. 24,25
68,69; ix, 60.

Distinguishing characteristics, iv,
v, 25; vi, 67,77.

Families, vi, 73.

Larvae, vi, 77.

Metamorphoses, iv. 8; v, 8.

Name, iv, 13,24; v, 13,24.

Parasitic, vii, 217; viii, 172; ix, 136.
Structure, iv, 12, 13, 14; v, 12, 13, 14.
Flower-bug, Insidious (See Insid
Flower-bug).

Fluke, Liver (See Liver Fluke).

Flukes, ix, 58,59.

Fly Weevil (See Angoumois Grain Motl
Folded Tape-worm, Taenia plicata, ix,
forcata, Phylloxera, viii, 164.

Forda, viii, 33, 35, 37, 41, 43.

Forest Flies, Horse ticks and Sheep ti
Hippoboscidae, vi,73,76; ix,61,64.
Lackey Moth. (See Tent Caterpilk
the Forest.)

Tent Caterpillar. (See Tent Caterp
of the Forest.)
forficalis, Pionea, ix,40.

Forficula, iv, 14; v,14.

Forficulidae, ix, 73, 80, 82.

Formica, x,40.

aphidicola, i, 61: viii, 150.
formiearius, Pemphigus, viii, 150.
formicetorum, Pemphigus, viii, 150,
Formicidae, vi,71.
formosa, Plusia, ix, 44.

Fornax, v, 98.

Four-horned Ceratomia. (See Elm Sph
-humped Curculio. (See Apple Curci
-lined Psylla, Psylla quadrilineata,
18.

-striped Plant-bug. Capsus (Phytoc
quadrivittatus, ii, 61.

INSECT INDEX.

27

fox-colored Staphylinus, St aphylious vul-
pinas, v. 69.

ragarise, Analcis, v,143; vi, 38, 43, 83, 85. p. iv;

xii, 65.

Ancb y lop era, vii, 108, 258, 282.

Siphonophora, viii,68.

Tyloderma. xii, 64.

var. immaculata, Siphonophora, viii, 68,
191-

fratella, Plusia, ix,44.

fraterna, Phyllophaga, vi,99, 100,101, pp. i,ii,

iii.

fraxini, Aphis, viii, 147.

Pemphigus, viii, 211.

Phytoptus, xii, 136.
fraxinifolii, Pemphigus, viii, 146,210.
frigida, Pieris, ix,27.
frontalis, Ptinus, vi, 122.

Fructivora rostrata, v, 126, 127.
frugiperda, Laphygma, vii, 97, 219, 278, x,138.
Prodenia, vii, 219.

Fruit-worm, Currant (See Currant Fruit-
worm.)

fucosa, Hypropopia, x,184.
fulgida, Euryomia, v,90.

Fulgora candelaria, v,106.

lanternaria, v, 106.

Fulgoridae, vi,72; viii, 11.
fulvicollis, Ctenucha, vii, 179.

Scepsis, x, 171.

fulvicosta, Callimorpha, ii,49; vii, 180; x,113.
fumans, Brachinus, v,44.
fumipennella, Aphis, viii, 171.
fumipennellus, Callipterus, viii, 171.
funebrana, Opadia, i,81.
fungicola, Eriosoma, viii, 141.

Schizoneura, viii, 141,197.

var., Schizoneura, viii, 141.

Fungus beetles, Heteromerous. (See Heter-
omerous Fungus beetles.)

Trimerous. (See Trimerous Fungus
beetles.)

1; Fur Moth. Tinea pellionella, vii, 265, 279.
fur, Ptinus, v, 102; vi, 121,122.
furcilla, Platycerura, x,168.
furcipes. Aphis, viii, 211. _

fusca, Lachnosterna, v, 85,87; vii, 33.

Phyllophaga, v, 85, 87; vi, 89, 97, 1°1, 102,
pp. i, ii, iii, iv; vii, 33.

G

Galerita, v,44; xii, 108.

Ijanus, v,44; xi,63; xii, 103.
lecontei. xi,63.

Galeruca, v, 170,171,172.

, calmariensis, v,17 1.

vittata. v, 170; xi,165, p. iii.

Galerueidce. v,162.

Galerucides, v, 127,163,1<0.

Galerucinae, vi, 157,165.

Galerucini, v, 171.

Galerucitae, v, 162.

Galgulidse, viii, 12.

Gall Flies, Gall Gnats, Cecidomyidae, vi, 73:
x, 200. (See Gall M akers.)

Lice. (See Gall-making Aphides.)
Gall-louse, Grape-leaf. (See Grape Phyllo¬
xera.)

Hickory-vein. (See Hickory-vein Gall-
louse.)

Poplar. (See Poplar Gall-louse.)

-bullet. (See Poplar-bullet Gall-
louse.)

-leaf. (See Poplar-leaf Gall-louse.)
-vein. (See Poplar-vein Gall-louse.)
Red Elm. (See Bed Elm Gall-louse.)
Vagabond. (See Vagabond Gall-louse.)
Gall Makers, Gall Flies, Cynipidse, i, 79; vi,

71; x, 63.

-making Aphides, Gall Lice, iv, 193, 198-
Mites. (See Plant Mites.)

Plant-louse. Sumach. (See Sumach Gall

Plant-louse.)

gallsegenitella, Gelechia. i, 79.
Galleria, vii, 273.

cereana, vii, 253,277,283.
galliscabri, Aphis, viii, 88.

Gamasidee, ix, 65.
gamma, Plusia. ix, 41,42,43,44,50.
garganicus, Chion, v, 154; vi, 38,149.
Gastropacha, vii, 271.
americana, x, 166.
velleda, vii, 197, 277.

Gastrophilus equi, ix, 61.

Gast.rophysa, v, 166,167.

polygoni, v, 167; vi, 6, 171. p. ii-
Gaurot.es, v. 156.

cyanipennis, v, 156.

Gay-louse, Chestnut. (See Chestnut Gay-
louse.)

gei, Siphonophora, viii, 65.

Gelechia, vii, 273.

cerealella, vii, 266,280,283; xii, 144.

fiavocostelia. x, 153.
gallmgenitella. i, 79.
gelechi®, Pteromalus, xii, 151.
geminata, Stelidota, i, 18.
geminatus, Paniscus, vii, 218.
gemma, Neonympha, x, 91.
genistse, Aphis, viii, 88.

Geodephaga, iv, 36; v, 36,37.

Geometer, Raspberry. (See Raspberry
Geometer.)

Strawberry. (See Strawberry Geometer.)
Geometridee, vi. 72.

Geometrids. (See Measuring worms.)

Geophilidae, ix, 73.

Geophilus, xii, 111,115.

Geopinus, v, 48.

incrassatus, v, 49; vii, 218.
georgicana, Lachnosterna, v, 8<.

Phyllophaga, v, 87.

Geotrupes, v,81, 82.

opacus, v, 82.
splendidus, v, 82.
Geotrupidse, iv, 36; v,
Geotrypes, v, 81,82.

37,79,80,81; vi, 70.80.

28

INSECT INDEX.

Geotrypes excrementi, v, 82.
opacus, v, 82.
splendidus, v, 82.
gerardim, Siphonophora, viii, 65,
gibbosa. Aphis, viii, 211.
gibbosus, Ligyrus, vi, 98.
giganteus, Goliathus, v, 90.
glaeialis, Hippodamia, vi, 162,163,173; viii, !
174; xii, 41,117.

Glassy Cutworm, Devastating Dart, Ha-
dena devastatrix, vii, 96,216,278; x, 137.
glauconome, Pieris, ix, 28.
globosa, Dactylosphmra, i, 21; viii, 163.
glomeratus, Microgaster, ix, 20.

Glow-worm, Lampyris noctiluca, v, 106.
glycerium, Paphia, x, 89.

Glycobius speciosus, vi, 38,44, 151.

Glypha, xi, 13.

Glyphe viridescens, x, 39.

Glyphina, viii, 35, 4 1, 43, 142, 145, 204.
betulae, viii, 142.
eragrostidis, viii, 144.
ulmicola, viii, 89, 142, 204.

Gnats, xii, 110. (See Mosquitoes.)

Black (See Black Gnats).

Buffalo (See Buffalo Gnats).

Long-legged (See Long-legged Gnats).
Goathead Locusts, Tragocephala, ix, 85,134.
Goat- weed Butterfly, Paphia andria, vii,
156,279,280.

Goerius olens, v, 68.

Golden Chrysochus, Chrysochus auratus,
v, 168; vi, 164, p. ii.

Golden-eye, Counterfeit (See Counterfeit
Golden-eye).

Disagreeable (See Disagreeable Golden¬
eye,).

Eye-marked (See Eye-marked Golden¬
eye).

Weeping (See Weeping Golden-eye).
Yellow-headed (See Yellow-headed
Golden-eye).

Golden-eyes (See Lace-winged Flies).

Golden Tortoise-beetle. Coptocycla (Cas-
sida) aurichalcea, v, 177; vi, 1 ?2, p. iv,
Goldsmith Beetle, Cotalpa lanigera, v, 89.
Goliathus giganteus, v, 90.

Gomphocerus infuscatus, ix, 93.
radiatus, ix, 93.
viridifasciatus, ix, 93.

Gooseberry Span-worm Moth, Eufitchia
ribearia, vii, 237,280.

worm, Myelois convolutella=Pempelia
grossularia, vii, 251; xi. 6,23.

Gordius, ix, 137.
gordius, Lethia, x, 105.

Gortyna, vii, 222,223,272; xi, 83.
cataphracta, vii. 221.
nebris, vii, 100, 114,222.
nitela, iii, 141; vii, 4,7,81,99,100,108,112,
221,278,280,288; ix, 142; x, 151; xii, 103.
(See Stalk Borer.)
zeae, iii, 141.

Gothic Dart (See Dingy Cutworm).

gracilis, Grapta, vii, 152.

Grain Beetles, Calandra (Sitophilus).iv, 1
v, 64, 144.

Bruchus, Grain Bruchus of Euro
Bruchus granarius, ii, 6; v, 129; vi,
pp. i, iii.

-louse Aphidius, Aphidius (Praon) avt
aphis, viii, 176.

Moth (See Wolf Moth).

Angoumois (See Angoumois Gr,
Moth).

Moths, Alucita and Tinea, iv, 183; v,
vii, 273.

Plant-louse, Wheat Plant-louse, Oat
Grain Aphis, Siphonophora (Aph
avenae=Siphonophora (Aphis) gran
rim, vii, 5; viii, 6, 29, 45, 51, 176,181; ix
xii. 5.

grallator, Cryptus. vi,110.
granariae, Aphis, viii, 51, 181.

Siphonophora, viii, 6. 54.
granarius, Bruchus, ii. 6; v, 129; vi, 129, i
i, iii.

Sitophilus, i,7.
grande, Lathrobium, v,71.

Grandipalpi, v,42.

grandis, Lebia, ii, 64 ; v,45; vi,90. 162.
granella, Tinea, iv,183; vii, 265, 280, 283.
granulatus, Agrilus, xii. 121.

Grape berry Moth, Penthina vitivoran
vii, 257, 280.

Curculio, Coeliodes inmqualis, i, 13; ^
142, p. ii.

-inhabiting Aphis. (See Grape Louse
Leaf-folder, Desmia maculalis, vii, 2
280.

-leaf Gall-louse. (SeeGrapePhylloxer
Louse, Grape-inhabiting Aphis, Sip
onophora viticola, viii, 55; xii, 6.
Phylloxera, Grape - leaf Gall - lous
Phylloxera (Dactylosphaera) vitifolh
i, 21, 22; iv, 198, 199; vii, 76; viii, 5, 28, 31,.
89, 133, 158, 163, 182.

Root Borer, iEgeria polistiformis, i, :
vii, 171, 280; x, 106, 108. (See Broa
necked Prionus.)

-vine Colaspis, Colaspis flavida, xi,lt
pp. ii, iv.

Epimenis, Blue Caterpillar of tl
Tine, Psychomorpha epimenis, v
176,177,178,280; x, 111, 172.

Fidia, Fidia viticida, v, 168; vi, 16
pp. ii, iii.

Flea-beetle, Steel-blue Flea-beet
of the Grape-vine, Graptodei
(Haltica) chalybea, v, 161, 172, 17
vi. 170, p. i. •

Plume, Pterophorus periscelidact:
lus, vii, 268, 280.

-worm, Green Cream-spotted. (St
Green Cream-Spotted Grape-worn
Graphisurus, v,158.

Grapta, vii, 270.

comma, vii, 152, 279, 281; x, 84, 163.

INSECT INDEX.

29

rrapta faunus, vii, 152, 280; x,84.
gracilis, vii,152.

interrogationis, vii, 151,277,279,280; x, 84,
164.

j-album, x,85.
milberti, x,85.
progne, ii, 59 ; x. 85.

Iraptodera, y, 171, 172.

chalybea, v, 172, 178; vi,170.
irasshopper, Hateful. (See Rocky Mount¬
ain Locust.)

Parasite, Locust Mite, Trombidium lo-
custarum=Atoma gryllaria, iii, 157 ; ix,

136.

Red-legged. (See Red-legged Locust.)
Grasshoppers. (See Katydids; see Locusts.)
?rata, Eudryas, vii, 178, 280,283; x, 111,112,173
}ray-sided Curculio, Pandeleteius hilaris,

vi, 38, 43, 132. pp. iii, iv.

ireasy Cutworm, Black Cutworm. Lance
Rustic, Agrotis ypsilon=A. telifera, vii,
84,93,210,278; ix,141; x,134.

Greater Leaf-roller, Oblique- banded Leaf-
roller, Loxotaenia (Lozotaenia)rosaceana,

vii. 256, 277, 282; x,153; xi,10.

Great Leopard Moth, Large Black Bear,
Ecpantheria scribonia, vii, 184. 279, 281, 282,
283; x, 116.

Green Apple-leaf Tyer, Tortrix Cinderella,
vii, 255, 277.

Chestnut -backed Plum Caterpillar,
Apatela (Acronycta) superans, ii, 51;
x,131.

Cream-spotted Grape-worm, Copper
Underwing, Pyrophila (Amphipyra)
pyramidoides, ii, 56 ; vii, 225, 279, 280,281,
282; x,180.

Dolphin, Siphonophora pisi, viii,64.
-spotted Caterpillar Hunter. (See Rum¬
maging Beetle.)

striped Locust, Tragocephala viridi-
fasciata, var. virginiana, ix, 88,93,105,
106, 134.

Maple worm, Rosy Dryocampa, Dry-
ocampa rubicunda, vii, 196,279,281;

x, 121.

regarius, Calathus, v, 49; xii, 109.
riseus, Limonius, vii, 30.
rossulariae, Pempelia, vii, 251; xi, 6,23.

Pristiphora, x, 64,65,69.

(round-beetle, Fiery. (See Fiery Ground
beetle).

Janus. (See Janus Ground beetle.)
bound beetles. (See Predaceous Ground
beetles.)

Heteromerous. (See Heteromerous
Ground beetles.)

Irub worms. (See White Grubs.)

:ryllaria, Astoma, vi, 56.

Atoma, iii, 157; ix, 136.
iryllidae, vi, 70; ix, 73,82.
iryllus aequalis, ix, 94.
americanus, ix, 96,

Gryllusbivittatus, ix, 96.
brevicornis, ix, 92.
carolinus, ix, 94.
chrysomelus, ix, 93.
erythropterus, ix, 95.
serialis, ix, 96.
succinctus, ix, 96.
sulphureus, ix, 94.
virginianus, ix, 93.
viridifasciatus, ix, 93.
grynea, Catocala, x, 183.
guttata, Cassida, vi, 172, p. iv.

Coptocycla, v, 177; vi, 172.

Gymnetis, v, 90.

nitida, v, 89,90; vi, 107.

Gynandropus, v, 48,49.

Gyrinidae, iv, 36; v, 36,50,51,53; vi, 70,80,81.
Gyrinus, iv, 10; v, 10,51.

Gyrophaena, v, 73,75.

H

Hadena, vii, 202, 271. (See Cut- worms.)
amputatrix, vii. 217.
arctica, vii, 96,217,278; x, 137.
devastatrix, vii, 96,216,278; x, 137,
Haemorrhagia thysbe, vii. 164.
liaemorrhoidalis, Oryssus, x, 71.

Hair Moth. Tinea biseliella, vii, 265,278,280.
-worms, Gordius sp., ix, 137.

-worms, ix, 58,59.

Hairy Flea-beetle. (See Cucumber Flea-
beetle.)

May-beetle, White Grub, Lachnosterna
(Phyllophaga) pilosicollis, v, 87; vi, 100,
pp. i, ii, iii.

Saperda, Saperda vestita, vi, 156, p. ii.
Halacaridae, ix, 65.

Halesidota, vii, 271.
caryae. x,168.

tessellaris, vii, 185,279; x, 116, 168.
Haliplus, v,51.

Hallomenus, v,120.

Haltica, i,52; v, 141, 162,171,172; vi,83,157.
chalybea, v, 172. 173; vi,170, p. i.
cucumeris, v, 173; vi, 167, pp. ii, iii.
helxines, iii, 137: v, 171.
nemorum, vi,169.
pubescens, vi,167.
punctulata, vi,168, p. ii.
vittata, vi, 168, pp. ii, iii, iv.

Halticinae, vi,165.

Halticini, v,171.
hamamelidis, Hormaphis, i, 22.
hamamelis, Apatela, x,131.

Hamamelisteo, i,22.
cornu, i,22.
spinosus, viii,206.

hamatus, Corymbetes, v, 100; vi,25.
Hammer-headed Wood-borers. (See Saw -
horned Wood-borers.)
hammondi, Pempelia, vii, 252,2/7.

30

INSECT INDEX’

Hand-maid Moth. (See Yellow-necked
Apple-tree Caterpillar.)

Handsome Plant-louse, Callipterus (Aphis,
Myzocallis) bella, i, 60; viii, 106, 196, 197-
Harlequin Cabbage bus, Murgantia histri-
onica, vi,59, p. ii; ix,7.

Harnessed Moth, Arctia phalerata, vii, 181,
280; x, 115. 171.

Harpactor cinctus, ii, 23,64; vi, 162, 163; vii,
60; xii, 43, 56.

Harpalides, v, 41, 46, 47.

Harpalus, iv, 28; v, 28, 47, 48,49,150; xii, 112,
115.

caliginosus, ii, 64; iv, p. vii, 10, 26,27; v,
10,26,27; vi, 90,162,163; ix, 78; x,41; xii,
112.

herbivagus, 12,112.

pennsylvanicus, v,47; vi,90, 140; x,41; xii,
112.

harrisi. Anisodactylus, xii, 112,

Aspidiotus, i,53; vii, 108,277.

Odontota, v. 175.

Phyciodes, x,162.

Sphinx, x, 105.

Tragosoma, v, 152.

Harris’s Bark-louse, Aspidiotus harrisi, i, 36,
37,39,40,45,53; vii, 5, 108, 277.

Harvest Mites, Trombidiinae, ix,65.

Snouted. (See Snouted Harvest Mites.)
harveyi, Heliophila, vii, 223.

Leucania, vii, 223; x,186; xi,8.

Hateful Grasshopper. (See Rocky Moun¬
tain Locust.)

Haustellata, iv,25; v,25.

Hawk Moths, Humming-bird Moths, Sphinx
Moths, Sphinges, Sphingidae, iv, 6; v,6;
72; vii, 163,269,270; x,99.

Heart worm. (See Stalk Borer.)

Hedgehog Caterpillar, Isabella Tiger Moth,
Pyrrharctia (Arctia) isabella, vii, 182, 278,
279,280,281; ix,53; x, 115, 169; xi,60.

Heilipus, v,139.
lielianthi. Aphis, viii, 194.

Heliophila harveyi, vii, 223.
phragmitidicola, vii, 224.
unipuncta, vii, 101, 224, 278, 280, 283. (See
Army Worm.)

Heliothis, vii, 272.

armigera, vii, 4, 102,231,278,279; x,150; xi,
5,82. (See Corn Worm.)
exprimens, vii, 233, 282.
phloxiphagus, vii, 230.

Helluomorpha, v,44,45.

Helmintha, ix,58.

Helophorus, v, 54.

Helopides, v,122.

Helops, v, 122,123.
helxines, Crepidodera, v, 173.

Haltica, iii, 137; v, 171.

Hemaris diffinis, vii, 163.

Hemerobiidae, vi, 71.

Hemiptera, iv, 7, 8. 12, 14, 15, 24, 32; v, 7, 8, 12, 14,
15,24,32; vi, 68, 69,72,76; viii, 9,11; ix, 60,75;
x, 60; xii. 114, 115. (See Bugs.)

hemipterum, Aeridium, ix, 93.
Hemirhipis fascicularis, v, 97.
henriei, Arsilonche, x, 171.
hepaticum, Distoma, ix, 67.
hepaticus. Elater, vii, 28.

Hepialidae, vi, 34. 42.
herbivagus, Harpalus, xii, 112.
Herbivora, v, 79.

lamellicornia, v, 37,83.
tetramera, v, 127.160.
herilis, Agrotis, vii, 90,204,205,278; x, 133.
heros, Dacne. v, 181.
herricki, Platygaster, x, 213.
herse, Apatura, x, 89.

Hesperidas, vii, 159, 269,270.

Hessian fly, Cecidomyia destructor, i,
iv, 21; v, 21; vi, 75; viii, 6, ix, 3; v, 60; x
48. 55, 187; xi, 7,29,74; xii, 6.

Heteraspis, v. 166,168.

Heterocera, vii. 163, 269, 270.

Heterocerus, v, 52.

Heteromera, iv, 32,33; v, 32,33, 110, 113; vii
125.

corticicola, v, 118.
fungicola, v, 124.
parasitica, v, 111.
terricola, v, 120.

Heteromerous Bark beetles, v, 118.
Fungus beetles, v, 124.

Ground beetles, Melasoma. v, 120,168

Heteroptera, iv, 25; v, 25; vi, 69,72; viii, 9

12.

Heteropus ventrieosus, xii, 150.
heucherae, Siphonophora, viii, 66.
Hibernia, vii, 241.

tiliaria, x, 149: xi, 25,31,34,54.

Hickory Bark-borer. Hickory Bark-mii
Scolytus 4-spinosus, v, 146, 147, 148; vi,
38,43,85.145, pp. ii, iii.

Blight, Schizoneura caryae, viii, 141.
-gall Aphis, Pemphigus caryaecaulis
160.

Leaf-witherer, Phylloxera caryaefo
viii, 161,164.

Plant-louse, Lachnus caryae, viii, 11
-tree Borer, Dicerca lurida, v, 95; vi
43,113, p. ii.

Shagbark (See Shagbark Hickc
tree Borer).

-trunk Borer, Chion cinctus, v, 154; vi
43,149, p. ii.

-vein Gall-louse, Phylloxera caryae ve
viii, 162.

hieroglyphicus, Corymbetes, v, 100; vi, i
hilaiis, Pandeleteius, vi, 38,43,132, pp. iii
Hippiscus, ix, 85.

corallipes, var. rugosus, ix, 89,95,115.
discoideus, ix, 89,95, 116.
neglectus, ix, 89,95,114.
phcenicopterus, ix, 85,89,95,117,131.
rugosus, ix, 95.

Hippoboscidae, vi, 73,76; ix, 61,64.
Hippodamia, v, 184; xii, 117.

convergens, ii, 64; v, 184; vi, 162,163,
viii, 173,174; xii, 41,117.

INSECT INDEX.

81

lippodamia glacialis, vi, 162, 163, 173; viii,174;
xii. 41,117;

maculata, ii, 64; iii. 162; v, 184: vi,162, 163,

173; vii, 60; viii, 173,174; xii, 41, 117.
3-punctata, ii, 64; vi, 162,163,173; viii,
173,174; xii, 41.
flippopsis, v. 158.
lirta, Lagria, v, 113.
airticula, Lachnosterna, v, 87.

Phyllophaga, v, 87.

Hispa. v, 141,162,174.

Hispides, v, 127,162,163,174.

Hispinas, vi, 157.

Hister, v, 58,59.

Histerinae, iv, 36; v, 36,56,58; vi, 70,80,81.

histeroides, Cerylon. v, 66.

histrionica, Murgantia, v, 59, p. ii; ix, 7.
hobomok, Atrytone, x, 97.
hochenwarthi, Plusia, ix, 44.

Hockeria perpulchra, x, 39.

Hololepta, v, 59.

Homalota, v, 73.

Homely Geopinus, Geopinus incrassatus,
v. 49; vii, 218.

Homoptera, iv,24, 25; v, 24 , 25; vi, 69, 72; vn,

74; viii, 9, 10, 11, 33.

Honey-locust Borer, Eburia quadrigemi-
nata, v,154; vi,36, 38, 43, 149, p. ii.

Hop Aphis, Phorodon humuli, viii, 45, <0,72,

x,48. .

Plusia, Plusia balluca, vii, 228, 280; ix,44,

45,50.

-vine Moth, Hypena humuli, vii, 245, 280.
Thecla, Tliecla humuli, vii, 157, 277,
279,280,282; x,92.

IHoplia, v, 84, 85, 86.
modesta, v,86.
trifasciata, v, 86.

Hoplocephala, v, 125.
bicornis, v,125.
viridipennis, v, 125.
hordei, Aphis, viii, 51.

Isosoma, xi, 75, 76, 79, 81.

Horia, v,115.

sanguinipennis, v,115.

Horiides, v, 112.

Hormaphis, i, 22.

hamamelidis, i.22.

spinosus, viii, 206.

Horn-bugs. (See Stag Beetles.)

tails. Thorn-tails, Urocendae, vi, 35, 3b,

41,71,77; x, 62, 63, 70. .

Hornbeam Psylla, Psylla carpmi, vm,18.

Hornets, ix, 60. . .

Horse Bot-fly, Gastrophilus equi. ix,bl.
Flies, Tabanidae, i, 32; ix, 12; v,12; vi,<3,
ix, 59, 60, 61.

Itch-mite. (See Scab Mite.)

Ticks. (See Forest Flies.)
hortensis. Aphis, viii, 88.

House Flies, Flesh Flies, Bloe-bott e flies,
&c.. Muscidie, iv,8,9,12; v, 8, 9, 12, 54, . •

Fly, Musca domestica, i, 32, 34, 55; ix,60;
xii, 47, 53.

humeralis, Ptinus, v, 102.

Humming-bird Moths. (See Hawk Moths.)
humuli, Aphis, viii, 42, 87.

Hypena, vii, 245, 280.

Phorodon, viii, 70, 72.

Thecla, vii, 157, 277, 279, 280, 282; x,92.

var. mahaleb, Phorodon, viii. 72.
huntera, Pyrameis, vii, 153, 278, 280, 281, ^82;

x,86, 153.

Hunter’s Butterfly, Pyrameis huntera, vii,
153,278,280,281,282; x, 86, 153.
huron, Pamphila, vii, 159.

Huron Skipper, Pamphila huron, vii, 159.
hyalinus, Callipterus, viii, 196,198.
Hyalopterus, viii, 34, 36, 40, 42, 82, 110.
aquilegiae, viii, 83.
pruni, viii, 82.

Hydaticus, v,51.

Hydatid of the Brain, Many-headed Hyda¬
tid of the Brain, Coenurus cerebralis, ix,

69.

Hydatis polycephalus cerebralis, ix,69.
hydni, Diaperis, v,125.

Hydnocera, v,109.

pallipennis, xii, 104.

Hydrachnidae, ix,65.

Hydradephaga, iv, 36; v,36, 50.

Hydrobius, v,54.

Hydrometridae, vi.73, viii, 12.

Hydronomides, v,140.

Hydrophilidae, iv.36; v, 36, 52, 53; vi, 70, 81.
Hydrophilus, iv,10; v, 10, 53, 54.
piceus, v.53.
triangularis, v,53.

Hydroporus, v,51.

Hylastes, v,146.

Hylesinus, v, 146, 147.

aculeatus, v, 147.

Hylobiides. v. 134. 139.

Hylobius, v,139.

pales, vi, 38, 43, 133, p. iii.

Hylotrupes, v,154.
bajulus, v,154.

Hylurgus, v. 146, 147. .

dentatus, v,147; vi, 38, 43, 146, pp. n, m.
terebrans, v,146; vi,38, 43, 146, p. iii.
Hymenoptera, Characters, iv, 25; v, 25; vi,

68,77; ix,60. ^

Classification, iv,25; v,2o: vi,bs,7i.

Families, vi,71.

Habits, iii, 128; iv.32: v,32; x,63.

Injurious families. x,63.

Larvae, vi.77; x,62,63.

Metamorphosis, iv,8; v, 8.

Name. v,68.

Ovipositor, iv, 9; v, 9.

Parasitic species. v,112; xii, 120.

Preyed upon by a mite, xii, 150.

predaceous ground beetles, xii, 114.

Preying upon locust eggs, ix,136.

plant-lice, viii, 172.

Sexes distinguished, iv,9; v,9.
Structure, iv,9,13; v,9,13.

Hypena, vii, 272.

32

INSECT INDEX

Hypena, evanidalis, x,148.
humuli, vii. 245, 280.
scabra, x,148.

Hypera, v,128.

Hyperaspis, v, 184.
punctata, i. 61 .
signata, vii, 128.

Hyperchiria, vii, 271.

io, vii. 195, 278, 279, 282; x, 127, 169.
hyperici, Aphis, viii, 193.

Myzocallis, xiii,43, 108.

Hyperides. v,134.

Hyphantria, vii, 271.

textor, ii, 18; vii, 107, 111, 185, 277, 278, 279,
280,281,282,283; x, 116, 154.

Hypocyptus, v,74.

Hypoderma bovis, ix,61.

Hypodermse, ix,65.

tarandi, ix, 61.

Hypolainpis, v, 171,172.

pilosa, v,172.

Hypopophloeus, v, 124.
hypophyllum, Theridion, ix,21.

Hypopinas, ix, 65.

Hypropepia fuoosa, x,184.

Hypulus trifasciatus, v, 120.

I

iberidis, Pieris, ix, 27.

Ichneumon flies, Ichneumonidse, i, 17, 34;
iii, 122: iv, 14,182; v. 14; vi, 42, 71, 74; viii, 54;

ix, 20, 53, 54, 60.

Ichneumon suturalis, x,41.

Ichneumonidae, vi, 71 ; viii, 54.

Icy Lady-bag or Lady-bird. Hippodamia
glacialis, vi, 162, 163, 173; viii, 174; xii,41,117.
idalia, Argynnis, vii, 149, 282; x, 81, 162,

Idalia Butterfly, Argynnis idalia, vii, 149, 282,

x, 81, 162.

identidem, Pristiphora, x, 64, 65, 69.
ignea, Plusia, ix,44.
ilicis, Lachnosterna, v, 87.

Phyllophaga, v,87.
illepida, Clirysopa, viii, 178,
illustrata, Plusia, ix,44.
imberbis, Uloma, v,124.

Imbricated Snout-beetle, Epicaerus imbri-
catus, vi,131, pp. i, ii; xii,104.
imbricator, Schizoneura, viii, 139.
imbricatus, Epicasrus, vi, 131, pp. i, ii; xii,
104.

imbricornis, Prionus, v, 152; vi, 38, 43, 148, p. ii.
imbutus, Pteromalus, ix,19.
impatientis. Aphis, viii, 98.

Imperial Moth, Eacles imperialis, vii, 196;
x,121.

imperialis, Eacles, vii, 196; x,121.

Imported Cabbage worm. (See European
Cabbage worm.)

Currant worm, Nematus ventricosus,
vi,61; x.65,68; xi,5,24,46.
impressa, Uloma, v, 124.

impressicollis, Adelocera, vii, 27.
impressus, lulus, xi,44.
impuncticollis, Amara, xii, 110.
inaequalis, Ceutorhynchus, i, 16.
Coeliodes, i, 13; vi,142, p. ii.

Silpha, v,57,58.
incertus, Melanotus, vii, 29.
inconstans, Molobrus, i, 19.

Sciara, i, 19.

incrassatus, Geopinus. v,49; vii, 218.
incurvus, Tachys, xii, 27.
inda, Cetonia, ii, 56.

Euryomia, v, 91; vi, 108, pp. i, iii.
indigator, Perilitus, xi, 14.

Indian Cetonian, Euryomia inda, v, 91;
108, pp. i, iii.

inermis, Agrotis, vii, 211.
infuscator, Locusta, ix, 93.

Tragocepliala, ix, 93.
infuscatus, Gomphocerus, ix, 93.

Orthostethus, vi, 25,117; vii, 27.
inornata, Tiphia, vi, 98,100.
inquisitor, Pimpla, vii, 120; xi, 13.

Insecta, iv, 1; v, 1; ix, 58.

Insects, iv, 1; v, 1; vi, 8,65; ix, 58.
insidiosus, Anthocoris, xii, 43.

Insidious Flower-bug, Anthocoris insidi
sus, xii, 43.

interrogations, Grapta, vii, 151, 277, 279, 2t
x, 84, 164.

Plusia, ix, 50.

interrupta, Plagiodera, v, 168.
interrupto-fasciata, Eupithecia, xi, 6,23.
interrupto-marginata, Callimorpha, vii. It
interstitialis, Amphasia, xii, 112.
io, Hyperchiria, vii, 195, 278, 279, 282; x, 127, b
Io Moth, Hyperchiria io, vii, 195, 278, 279, 2t
x, 127, 169.

iota, Plusia, ix, 43,50.

Ips, v, 59.

fasciatus, v, 60; vi, 91.

4-signatus, vi, 91. pp. i, iii.
iricolor, Serica, v, 88.

Ironweed Aphis, Aphis vernoniae, viii, 97.

irus, Thecla, x, 94.

isabella, Arctia, ix, 53; x, 115,169.

Pyrrharctia, vii, 182,278,279,280,281;
169; xi, 60.

Isabella Tiger Moth. (See Hedge-h.og Ca
erpillar.)

Ischyrus, v, 181.

4-punctatus, v, 181.
isocrates, Thecla, ii, 95.

Isosoma, xi, 79.
allynii, xi, 73.
elymi. xi, 81.
hordei, xi, 75,76,79,81.
italicus, Caloptenus, ix, 132.

Itch-mite, Horse or Sheep. (See Sea
Mite.)

of man, Sarcoptes scabiei, ix, 65,66.
Itch Mites and Louse Mites, Sarcoptina
ix, 65.

Ithycerides, v, 133, 136.

;hycerus noveboraeensis, v, 136; vi, 130,
pp. i, ii, iii.

ulus impressus, xi, 44.
xodidae, ix, 65.

accse, Siphonophora, viii, 190.
aculifera, Agrotis, vii, 206.

-album, Grapta, x, 85.

anthinana, Semasia, i, 81.

anus, Galerita, v, 44; xi, 63; xii, 108.

Janus Ground-beetle, Galerita janus, v, 44;
xi, 63; xii, 108.

jasminearum, Diludia, x, 103.

Joint worm, Isosoma hordei, xi, 75,76,79,81.
juglandis, Acrobasis, vii, 250; xi, 14.
Callipterus, viii, 113.

Cressonia, vii, 167.

Phycita, iii, 117,119,123; iv, 188; v. 100;

vii, 250,280,283.

Selandria, x, 64,65,67.

Smerinthus, vii, 167.279, 2S0, 283.

Jumping jacks. (See Wire worms.)

Jumping Plant-lice, Psyllidae, Psylia.vii, 72;
viii, 12,19,211.

Characters, vii. 73; viii, 10,11,12,13.
Classification, vi, 72; viii, 10,11,33,212.
Compared with Aphididas, vii, 73; viii,
13,26,47.

Cottony secretion, viii, 15.

Description of family, viii, 12.

. genus, viii, 15.

Eggs, viii, 15.

Figure, vii, 73; viii, 13.

Habits, vi, 72; viii, 13, 15.

Hibernation, viii, 16.

Larvae, viii. 13, 15.

Name, viii, 13.

Oviposition, viii, 15.

Pupae, viii, 15.

[ Reproduction, viii, 16.

Synopsis of genera, viii, 212.

Jumping Plant-louse of the Pear-tree. (See
Pear Flea-louse.)

J Plant louse, Vernal Diraphia, Dira-
pliia vernalis, viii, 14.

K

f Sumach beetle, Blepharida rhois, v, 172;
vi, 167, p. iv.

juncta, Chrysomela, v, 165.

Doryphora, v, 167; vi, 161.

June bug. Allorhina vGymnetis) nitida, \,
89,90; vi, 107.

Junonia, vii, 270.

lavinia, vii, 154; x. 87.
juvenalis, Nisoniades, x, 97.
i Thanaos, vii, 162.

Juvenal’s Skipper, Thanaos juvenalis, vii,

162.

kalmise, Sphinx, x, 104.

Katydids. Grasshoppers, and Vv ingless
Crickets, Locustidse, v, 7; vi, 70; ix, 7<>,
75,82.

labiatum, Omophron, v, 42.

Labidomera, v, 166,167.

trimaculata, v, 167.
labrosa, Plusia. ix, 44.
laburni, Aphis, viii, 88.

Laecophilus, v, 51.

Lace-winged Flies, Lace-wings, Golden¬
eyes, Hemerobiidas, Chrysopa, i, 62; iii,
145; vi, 71,74,140; vii, 60,129,253; viii, 55,177;
ix, 60; xii, 43,56, 143.

Lachniden, viii, 35.

Lachninas, viii, 36, 45, 114,195.

Lachnini, viii, 39, 41, 42, 45, 83, 109, 110, 114.
Lachnopus, v, 137.

Lachnosterna, v, 87.

fusca, v, 85,87; vi, 97; vii, 33.
georgicana, v, 87.

hirticula, v, 87. *

ilicis, v, 87.

lanceolata, v, 87.

longitarsis, v,87.

pilosicollis, v, 87.

quereina, i, 16; v,85; vi, 97.

tristis. v, 87.

Lachnus, iii, 139; iv. 198; viii, 22,33,34,35,37,
38,41,43,109,115,120,
abietis, viii, 117.
alnifoliae, viii, 118.
caryse, viii, 116.
dentatus, iii, 138; viii, 115,116.
lanigera, viii, 31.
laricifex, viii, 117.
longistigma, viii, 119.
pini, viii, 117.
populi, viii, 119.
quercifolise, viii, 108,118.
salicelis, iii. 139; viii, 119.
salicieola, viii, 43,105,115,119.
strobi, viii, 117.
ulmi, viii, 119.

Lachnus, Alder- leaf. (See Alder -leaf Lach¬
nus.)

Oak-leaf. (See Oak-leaf Lachnus.)
Spruce-tree. (See Spruce-tree Lach¬
nus.)

White-pine. (See White-pine Lachnus.)
Lackey Moth, American. (See Apple-tree
Tent Caterpillar.)

Forest. (See Tent Caterpillar of the
Forest.)

lactuese, Aphis, viii, 61.

Rhizobius, viii, 43, 165.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 61.

Siphonophora. viii, 60.
lactucaphis, Aphidius, viii, 175.

— 8

34

INSECT INDEX.

Lady-bird, Convergent. (See Convergent
Lady-bird.)

Fifteen-spotted. (See Fifteen-spotted
Lady-bird.)

Icy. (See Icy Lady-bug.)

Nine-spotted. (See Nine-spotted Lady¬
bird.)

Pointed. (See Pointed Ladv-bird.)
Spotted. (See Spotted Lady-bird.)
Thirteen- spotted. (See Thirteen-spotted
Lady-bird.)

Trim. (See Trim Lady-bird.)

Twice - stabbed. (See Twice - stabbed
Lady-bird.)

Lady-birds. (See Lady-bugs.)

Lady-bug, Many-spotted or Spotted. (See
Spotted Lady-bird.)

Nine-spotted. (See Nine-spotted Lady¬
bird.)

Trim. (See Trim Lady-bird.)
Lady-bugs, Lady-birds. Plant-louse Bee¬
tles, Coccinellidse, vi,12,70; xii, 7.
Antennae, iv, 30; v,30.

Classification, iv, 34; v, 35, 178; vi, 81,84.
of genera, v, 184.

Description, v, 182, 183; vi, 15,172; xii,116.
Family, v, 183; vi, 172.

Feet, iv, 30; v, 30.

Figure of antenna, v, 183.
maxillary palpus, v, 183.
tarsus, v, 183.

Food, xii, 7, 116.

insect eggs, v, 183.

insects, ii, 35, 65, 93; iii, 145, 183; vii, 118;

viii, 54; xii, 106, 116, 117, 118, 119.
plants, v, 83; xii, 23, 115, 116, 119, 120.
Habits, v. 183.

Hibernation, vi, 15.

Larvae, v, 183; vi, 85; xii, 116.

Preying on bark-lice, v, 183; xii, 116.
chinch-bugs, iii, 145; xii, 40,42,56.
Colorado potato-beetle, ii, 65.
corn aphis, xii, 116.
melon plant-louse, xii, 90.
oyster-shell bark-louse, ii, 35,93.
white-pine leaf-louse, ii, 93.
plant-lice, v, 183; vii, 118; viii, 54; xii,
106,116,117,118, 119.

Rupee, v, 183.

Tribe, v, 182.

Laemophloeus, v, 65,66.
leevigatus, Metonius, v,96.

Pachyscelus, v, 96.
laevis, Canthon, v. 80.

Lagria aenea, v, 113.

hirta, v, 113.

Lagriidae, v, 112,113.

Lamelticorn Dung-beetles, Dung-beetles,
Saprophaga, iv, 36; v, 37,79,80; vi, 70,82.
Leaf-beetles (See Leaf Chafers).
Lamellicornes, iv, 34, 36; v, 35, 37, 77, 79; vi,
87.

Lamia, v, 156.

Lamiides, v, 148,149,150,152,153.156; vi, 35,37.

Lamiinae, vi, 83,84, 152.

Lampyridas, v, 1,26,37,92,93,104; vi. 70,80,85
Lampyrides, v, 105.

Lampyris, v, 179.
noctiluca, v, 106.
plumosa, v, 107.

Lance Rustic. (See Greasy Cutworm.)
lanceolata, Lachnosterna, v, 87.
Phyllophaga, v, 87.

Land Scavenger-beetles, iv, 36, 54; vi, 78, <
lanigera, Cotalpa, v, 89.

Lachnus, viii, 34,

Languria, v, 178,180,181.
bicolor, v, 181.
mozardi, v, 181.
lanternaria, Fulgora, v, 106.

Laphygma frugiperda, vii, 97,219,278, x,l
laportei, Cimbex, x, 64,65.

Lappet Mcth.Yalleda. (See Valleda Lapp
Moth.)

Larch Chermes, Chermes laricifoliee, vi

156.

lardarius, Dermestes, v. 60; vi, 92; pp. i, i
Large Black Bear. (See Great Leopa
Moth.)

Gray Plant-bug, Brochimena annula
ii, 61.

laricifex, Lachnus, viii, 117.
laricifoliae, Chermes, viii, 156.
laricis, Adelges, viii, 34.

Chermes, vii, 74; viii, 155.

Larinus, v, 138,

Larridae, vi, 71.

larvarum, Physogaster, xii, 150.

Lasius flavus, xii, 43,111.
laterale, Acridium, ix, 96.
lateralis, Agrilus, vi, 37,43,114.

Oxyporus, v,70.

Tettigidea, ix, 96.

Lathridiidae, iv, 33,36; v, 33,36,56,66.
Lathrobium, v, 70,71.

grande, v, 71.
lathyri, Aphis, viii. 64.
laticinerea, Lithophane, vii, 227.
laticlavia, Anomoea, v,169.

Limacodes, vii, 187; x, 117.

Plusia, ix,44.

laticollis. Prionus, v,151; vi, 36, 38,43, 147, i
i, ii, iii.

iaticornis, Lucidota. v,106.
latipennis, Locusta, ix,95.
ffidipoda, ix,95.

Lavinia Butterfly, Junonia lavinia, vii, 1
x,87.

lavinia, Junonia, vii, 154; x,87,
lazarus, Bolbocerus, v, 82.

Leaf-beetles. Lamellieorn. (See L*
Chafers.)

-chafer, Evening Silky. (See Eveni
Silky Leaf-chafer.)

Silky. (See Silky Leaf-chafer.)

Chafers, Chafers, Lamellieorn Le
beetles, Thalerophaga, iv, 31,36; v,
37,79,83; vi, 70, 82, 84, 97.

INSECT INDEX.

35

,eaf-chafers, Silky. (See SilkyLeaf-chafers.)
-crumpler. (See lApple Leaf-crumpler.)

Walnut. (See Walnut Leaf-crumpler.)
-folder. Grape. (See Grape Leaf-folder.)
Lesser Apple. (See Lesser Apple-
leaf Folder.)

-hopper. Culprit. (See Culprit Leaf-
hopper.)

-hoppers. (See Tree-hoppers.)

-lice. (See Plant-lice.)

-louse, White pine. (See Pine-leaf Scale-
insect.)

-roller, Greater or Oblique-banded. (See
Greater Leaf-roller.)

(Strawberry. (See Strawberry Leaf-
roller.)

-rollers, Tortricidae. vi, 72: vii, 115, 254,
269, 273.

cyer, Green Apple. (See Green Apple-
leaf Tyer.)

witherer, Hickory. (See Hickory Leaf-
witherer.)

Lebia, v, 44,45,49.119; xii, 115.

grandis, ii.64; v,45; vi,90, 162.

Lecanides, vii, 127.
lecanii, Platygaster, vii, 129.

Lecanium, i, 38.

acericola, vii, 5,108,109,120,278,281.

acericorticis, vii, 121,281.

maclurae, vii, 120,121.281.

pyri, vii, 120.

quercitronis, vii, 129.

vitls. vii, 120.

lecontei, Callimorpha, ii, 6, 47,49; vii, 181; x,

114.

Galerita, xi,63.

Odontota, v, 175.

var. fulvicosta, Callimorpha, ii, 47 ; vii,
181: x, 114.

Legged Maple-borer. (See Maple JEgerian.)
leguminicola, Cecidomyia, x,201.

Leiopus, v, 158, 159.

Leistotrophus, v, 69.

cingulatus, v,69.

Lema, v, 165.

trilineata, v, 164, 165; vi, 158, 165, p. iii.
Lemosacides, v,135.

Lepidoptera, i, 79: iv, 1,2, 8, 12, 13,14,25,30; v,l,
2,8,12, 13, 14,25,3#; vi, 68,69,71,74, 75,77; vii,
79; ix,60; x, 61, 62, 72, 145; xii, 114, 115. (See
Butterflies.)

Leptops, v, 137.

Leptopsides, v, 133, 136.

Leptostylus, v, 158, 159.

aculiferus, v, 159.

Leptotrachelus, v. 44, 45.

Leptura, v, 155, 156, 162.

Lepturidae, v. 111.

Lepturides, v, 149, 150, 155, 157, 163.

Lepturinae. vi,83.

lepusculina, Acronycta, vii, 201, 279.

Apatela, vii, 201; x, 130.

Lepyrus, v, 139.

Lesser Apple-leaf Folder, Tortrix malivo-
rana, ii, 6, 20; iii, 159; vi, 11; vii, 254, 277.

Lesser Locust, Caloptenus atlantis, vii, 35.
Characters, ix, 92.

Classification, ix, 92,96.

Description, vii, 38; ix, 124.
Distinguished from C. femur-rubrum,

vii, 38, 39; ix. 124, 125.

C. spretus, vii, 36, 38, 39; ix, 122, 124, 125.
Injuries, ix, 124.

Larvae, ix, 132.

Length, vii, 38; ix, 124.

Life-history, ix, 131.

Occurrence, ix, 131.

Ovipositor, ix. 131.

Relationship with C. femur-rubrum, vi,
45; vii, 40; ix, 126.

C. spretus, vi, 45; vii, 38, 40; ix, 124,
126.

Lesteva, v, 75.

lesueuri, Chrysobothris, vi, 111.

Lethia gordius, x, 105,

Lettuce Earth-louse, Rhizobius lactucae,
viii, 43,165.

-louse Aphidius, Aphidius lactucaphis,

viii, 175.

Leucania vi, 11; vii, 272; x, 19.
extranea, x, 9, 19.
harveyi, vii, 223; x,' 186; xii, 8.
phragmitidicola, vii, 224; x, 186; xi, 57.
pseudargyria, x, 139.

unipuncta, vi,56, pp. ii, iii. iv; vii, 33, 81, 98,
101,119,224,278,280,283; x, 5; xi,8,49; xii,
102. (See Army worm.)
leucaniae, Exorista, x,37; xi,53,63.

Nemoraea, x,36.

Leucarctia, vii, 271.

acraea, vii, 79, 183, 278, 280; x, 170.
leucocera, Syrbula, ix,93, 102.
leucodice, Pieris, ix, 27,28.
leucopterus. Blissus, vii, 15,40,278,283; xi, 6;
xii, 32. (See Chinch bug.)

Micropus, ii, 61; iii, 142; vii, 107, 283. (See
Chinch bug.)

Lygaeus, vii, 40.

var. albivenosus, Blissus, vii, 56.
basilis, Blissus, vii, 56.
dimidiatus, Blissus. vii, 56.
femoratus, Blissus, vii, 56.
fulvivenosus, Blissus, vii, 56.
immarginatus. Blissus, vii, 56.
melanosus, Blissus, vii. 57.
nigricornis, Blissus, vii, 56.
opterus, Blissus, vii, 56.
rufipedes, Blissus, vii, 56.
leucostigma, Orgyia, ii. 13, 86; vii, 185, 277, 279,
281,282,283; x, 117, 166; xii, 100.
leucostoma, Locusta, ix,96.
libatrix, Scoliopteryx, vii, 227.

Libellula, i, 61.

Libellulidae, vi, 71.

Libythea, vii, 270.

bachmanni, vii, 157; x,90.

Lice, Pediculi, iv,l,24.

36

INSECT INDEX

Lichnanthe, v, 85, 86.
lupina, v,86.
vulpina, v, 86.

Lightning-beetle. (See Fire-fly.)
Light-loving Yine-chafer. (See American
Yine chafer.)
ligniperda. Cossus, v,5.

Lignivora aberrantia, v, 37, 101.
brevicornia, v. 127, 145.
longicornia, v, 127, 148.
serricornia, v,37,93.
ligustri, Sphinx, iv,5; v, 5.

Ligyrus, v,84.

gibbosus, vi.98.
relietus, v,84.

Lilac Borer, iEgeria syringse, vii, 174,281; x,
106,109.

Limacodes, vii, 271.

laticlavia, vii, 187; x,117.
limbatus, Platynus, xii,109.
limbipennella. Plutella, ix, 52.
limbirena, Plusia, ix,5Q.

Limenitis, vii, 270.
arthemis, x,88.
disippus, vii, 154; x, 88, 162.

Ursula, vii; 154, 279, 280, 281, 283; x, 87, 162.
limidiatus, Perilitus, xi, 14.

Limonius, v,99.

armus.v, 100; vi,25.
griseus, vii, 30.

Linden Saw-fly, Selandria tiliae, x, 64, 65,67.
linearis, Capsus, ii, 62, 65,66.

Diehelonyeha, v,86.
lineata, Arcyptera, ix,93.

Deiiephila, vii, 164,277,280,281,282,283; x,
100,159.

Lycoperdina, v, 182.

Stetheophyma, ix, 92, 93, 104.
lineatelia, Anarsia, xii, 76.

Prodenia, x, 139.
lineatum, Rhagium, v, 156.
lineatus, Blechrus, xii, 27.

Lined Plant-bug. (See Tarnished Plant-
bug.)

lineella, Catocala, x,182.
lineolaris, Lygus, xii, 104.
linteus. E later, v, 100; vi,25; vii, 27, 28.
liriodendri, Siphonophora, viii, 189.

Lisa Butterfly, Terias lisa, vii, 148; x, 79.
lisa, Eurema, ix, 32.

Terias. vii, 148; x, 79.

Listroderes, v, 137.

Lithocharis, v, 71.

Lithophane cinerea, vii. 227,277,279.

laticinerea, vii, 227.

Little Turk. (See Plum Curculio.)
littorarius, Paederus, v, 72.

Liver Fluke, Distoma hepaticum, ix, 67.

Li via, viii. 13,14,15.33.212.

lividus, Monoerepidius, vi, 25,118; vii, 28.

Livilla, viii, 212.

Li x ides, v, 134,138.

Lixus, v, 138.

lobatus, Monoerepidius, vi, 118.

Locust, American. (See American Locust.)

Locust Borer, Locust-tree Borer. Cyllei
(Clytus) robiniae, v, 149, 151; vi, 36,38,44, )
84,151, p. ii. (See Locust-tree Oarpent
Moth.)

Carolina. (See Carolina Locust.)
Dusky. (See Dusky Locust.)

Eastern. (See Eastern Locust.)
Emarginate. (See Emarginate Locu;
Green-striped. (See Green-striped I
oust.)

Lesser. (See Lesser Locust.)

Mite. (See Grasshopper Parasite.)
Red-legged. (See Red-legged Locus
Rocky Mountain Migratory, or Weste:

(See Rocky Mountain Locust.)
Seventeen-year. (See Seventeen-yt
Locust.)

Locust-tree Carpenter Moth, Locust-ti
Caterpillar or Moth, Locust Borer, pi
leutes robiniae, vi, 34,42,44, pp. i.ii.iii;
198,277,279,181; x, 152.

Locusta aequalis, ix, 94.
apiculate, ix, 95.’

Carolina, ix, 94.
caroliniana, ix, 94.
chrysomela. ix, 93.
corallina, ix, 95.
curtipennis, ix, 93.
erythroptera, ix, 95.
infuscata, ix, 93.
latipennis, ix, 95.
leucostoma, ix, 96.
maratima, ix, 95.
nebulosa, ix, 93.
periscelidis, ix, 93.
rad i at a, ix, 93.
sulphurea, ix, 94.
tartaric a, ix, 96.
verruculata, ix, 95.
viridifasciata, ix, 93.
virginiana, ix, 93.
locustarum, Trombidium, ix, 136.
Locuslidae, vi, 70; ix, 73, 82.

Locusts, Grasshoppers, Acrididae, vii,
ix, 73.*

Birds feeding on, vii, 9.

Characters, vi, 76; ix,73.
Classification, vi,70; ix,60,80.
Climatic influences, ix,135; x, 48.
Description of species, ix,97.

Figure of external anatomy, ix, 74,76
Food plants, vii, 278.

Glossary of terms used in descril
species and genera, ix, 75.

Injuries, vi. 70; ix,133.

Insect enemies, ix,13K>.

Internal parasite, ix, 137.

Key to families, ix,82.

sub-families and genera, ix,83.
and groups, ix,83.

Larvae, 6.76.

Life history, ix,131.

List of families, ix,73.

Illinois species, ix,92.

INSECT INDEX.

87

Locusts, Metamorphosis. iv,8; v.8.
Nomenclature, vi. 70; ix,73.

Oviposition, vi,74.

Pupae, vi,76.

Remedies, ix, 137.

Stridulation, iv,7; v,7.

Synonyms of Illinois species, ix,92.
Locusts. Goathead. (See Goathead Locusts.)
Lombardy Poplar Borer, Agrilus granula-
tus, xii, 121.

Long-horned Wood-borers, Long-horned
Wood-beetles, Cerambycidse, v, 9,30,34,
127, 148, 150, 1 60 ; vi, 35, 70, 77, 81, 83, 86, 146.
-legged Gnats, Tipulidae, vi, 73.

-snouted Nut Weevil, Balaninus nasi-
cus, vi.83, 134, p. ii.

-tailed Ophion, Ophion macrurum, vii,
i94.

longicornis, Diabrotica, x,44; xi, 65; xii, 6, 10.

Patrobus, xii, 113.
longipennis, St enobothrus, ix, 93.
longipes, Eidia, v,168.

Longirostres, v, 132,133,134,138; vi, 83, 130, 132.
longistigma, Lachnus, viii, 119.
longitarsis, Lachnosterna, v,87.

Phyllophaga, v,87.

Longitarsus, v, 171, 173.
lonicera, Chaitophorus, viii, 104.

Iihopalosiphum, viii, 104.

Lophyrus abbotti, x,65, 70.
abietis, x,65, 70.

Louse Mites. (See Itch Mites.)

Loxopeza, xii, 109.

atriventris, xii, 109, 115.

Loxotaenia, vii, 273.

rosaceana, vii, 256, 277, 282; x,153; xi,10.
Lubberly Caloptenus, Caloptenus differen¬
tials, vi,44,45; ix, 91,96, 127, 131, 132. 133, 134.
lubricalis, Pseudoglossa, x, 138, 182.
lubricans, Agrotis, x, 135.

Lucanidae, v, 37, 76, 77; vi, 70,80,82,84,86,87,93.
Lucanus, v,77.

dama, v.77,78; vi,95, pp. i.ii.iv.
elaphus, v,78; vi,94,96, pp.ii.iii.
placidus, v,78.

iucicola, Anomala, ii, 54 ; v,89; vi, 105, p. ii.
Lucidota, v.106.
atra, v,106.
laticornis, v,106.
lucilius, Nisoniades, x,97.

Thanaos, vii, 161.

j lucublandus, Pterostichus, xii, 110.

Ludius, v, 98.

attenuatus, vi, 25,119; vii, 29,
brevicornis, vi, 23; vii, 21,
lumbricoides, Ascaris, ix, 70.

Luminous Snapping-beetle, Elater noctilu-
cus, v, 66.

luna, Actias, vii, 192; x, 124,178.

Luna Moth, Luna Silkworm, Actias luna,
vii, 192; x, 124,178.
lunator, Pimpla, vi, 42.
lunulatus, Trichius, v, 91.

Luperus, v, 171,172.
lupina, Lichnanthe, v, 86.
lurida, Dicerca, v, 95; vi, 37,43, 113, p. ii.
luridus, Diplodus, vii, 119.
lutescens, Aphis, viii, 191.

Lycaena, vii, 270.

comyntas, vii, 158,278,279,282; x, 95.
neglecta, x, 96.
pseudargiolus, vii, 158; x, 95.
scudderi, x. 95.

Lycsenidag, vii, 157,269,270.
lycidas, Eudamus, vii, 162.

Lycides, v, 105.

Lycoperdina, v, 182.
ferruginea, v, 182.
lineata, v, 182.
vittata, v, 182.

Lyctidas, v, 101.

Lycus, v. 105.

Lydella, iii, 124.

doryphoras, ii, 64,67; vi, 162, 163.

Lygseidae, vi, 73; viii, 12.

Lygaeus leucopterus, vii, 40.

Lygus lineolaris, xii, 104.

Lymantis, v, 145.

Lymexylon, v, 103.
nivale, v, 103.

Lymexylonidaa, iv, 37; v, 37,92,93,101,103; vi
70, 80,

Lytta, ii, 66,77; v, 110,114,115,116.
cinerea, ii, 64.66.
marginata, vi, 126.
vittata, ii, 64,66; v, 116; vi, 125.

M

maclurse, Lecanium, vii. 120,121,281.
Macrobasis unicolor, vi, 126, pp. i, ii; xii,
104.

Macrodactyla, v, 52.

Macrodactylus, v, 86,87; vi, 103.
angustatus, v, 87.
setulosus, v, 87.

subspinosus, i, 24; v, 87; vi, 103, pp. i, ii, iii,
iv; vii, 34,278.

Macrosila, vii, 270.

Carolina, vii, 168,280.281,282; x, 103,158.
cingulata, x, 104,158.

5-maculata, vii, 169,280,281,282; x, 104.
macrurum, Ophion, vii, 194.
maculalis, Desmia, vii, 248,280,
maculata, Hippodamia, ii, 64; iii, 162; v, 184,
vi, 162, 163, 173; vii, 60; viii, 173, 174; xii, 41,
117.

Megilla, vi, 173; viii, 173.

Pamphila, x, 176.

maculatus, Emphytus, vii, 108,111,282; x, 64,
65,68.

maculella, Aphis, viii, 171.
maculellus. Callipterus, viii, 171.
maculipennis, Diraphia, viii, 14.
Stenobothrus, ix, 84,88,93,102.
var. aequalis, Stenobothrus, ix, 88, 103.
maculipennis, Stenobothrus, ix, 88.

88

INSECT INDEX.

maculipennis, var. propinquans, Stenoboth-
rus, ix,88, 103.

maculosus, Staphylinus, v,69.

Madarus, v, 144.

Magdalinides, v, 134, 139.

Magdalis, v, 139.

armicollis, v,139; vi,38, 43, 132, p. ii.
barbita, vi,132.
olyra, v,139; vi, 132.

Maggot-fly, Apple. (See Apple Maggot-fly.)
Maggot, Onion. (See Onion Maggot.)
mahaleb, Aphis, viii,70,72.

Mysus, viii,72.

maia, Eucronia, vii,195,279, 281; x, 127,163.

Saturnia, 10, 127.

Maia Moth. (See Buck Moth.)
maidis, Aphis, vii, 71,75,278; viii, 31,89; xi,67;
xii,41,44.

Maize Aphis. (See Corn Plant-louse.)

Sipha (See Corn Sipha).
major, Datana, iv, 190.

Oxyporus, v,70.

Malaehius, v,108.

Malacodermi, v, 37, 93, 104.
malana, Eccopsis.xi, 16.
m-album, Thecla, x,92.
malefica, Chloroneura, i, 69.
mali, Aphis, vii, 73; viii, 23, 25, 42, 85, 86, 89, 94,
121,130; xi,9. (See Apple-tree Plant-louse.)
Coccus, viii, 126.

Eriophilus, viii, 131.

Eriosoma, viii. 126.

Molobrus, i, 19.

Myzoxylus, viii, 126.

Sciara, i, 19, 32.

malifoliae, Aphis, viii, 86.
malivorana, Tortrix, ii, 6, 20 ; iii, 159; vi, 11 ;
vii, 254, 277.

malivorella, Coleophora, 10, 156.

Mallodon, v, 152.

malvae, Siphonophora, viii, 61.

Mamestra, vii, 84,202,271. (See Cutworms.)
adjuncta, x, 136.
distincta, x, 136.

picta, vi,60; pp. i, ii, iv ; vii, 226, 280, 281, 282;

ix, 52; xii, 103.
remigera, vii. 215; x, 137.
subjuncta, vii, 214; x, 136.
manataaqua, Pamphila, vii, 160.
mancus, Agriotes, vi, 23, 24, 25, 27, 118; p. iv;
vii, 26,29.

Mandibulata, iv, 25; v, 25.

Mantidas, vi, 70; ix, 73,80,82.

Mantis, ix, 73.

Mantispidae, vi, 71.
manurus, Oryssus, x, 71.

Many-banded Robber, Harpactor cinctus,
ii, 23,64; vi, 162,163; vii, 60; xii, 43,56.
-headed Hydatid of the Brain. (See
Hydatid of the Brain.)

-spotted Lady-bug. (See Spotted Lady¬
bird.)

Maple iEgerian, Maple-tree .ZEgeria, Legg«
Maple-borer, iEgeria acerni, vi, 40, 44; p
iii, iv; vii, 173,281; x. 106, 108.

Bark - louse. Maple - tree Bark-louc
Lecanium acericola, vii, 5,108,109,1:
278,281.

-borer, Legged. (See Maple iEgerian
Moth, American. (See American Map
Moth.)

worm, Green-striped. (See Gree
striped Maple worm.)
mappa, Plusia, ix, 44.
maratima, Locusta, ix, 95.

GSdipoda, ix. 95.

Trimerotropis, ix, 90,95,113.
marginalis, Dytiscus, v, 50.

Pieris, ix, 27.
marginata, Lytta, vi, 126,

Silpha. v, 58.

marginatum. Acridium, ix. 93.
marginatus, Chauliognathus, v, 108.
Copris, v, 80.

Pasimachus, v, 43.

Margined Blister-beetle, Epicauta ciner*
vi, 126,162, 163; p. iii; xii, 104.

Spurge Aphis, Siphonophora euphorl
cola, viii, 57.

marginella, Aphis, viii, 171.
marginellus, Callipterus, viii, 171.
marginepunctella, Diplodonia, i, 79.
marginipennis, Aphis, viii, 211.

Marine Mites, Halacaridse, ix, 65.

Master Dart. (See Western Striped Ci
worm.)

mauritanica, Tenebrioides, vi, 93; p. 22.

Trogosita, iv, 182,183; v, 64; vi, 93.
mauritanicus, Tenebrio, v, 64.

May Beetle. (See Dark May-beetle.)
Hairy. (See Hairy May-beetle.)
Kindred. (See Kindred May-beetle.)
May Beetles. (See White Grubs.)

flies, Ephemeridae, vi, 71.
maydis, Sipha, viii, 122.

Meal Snout-moth, Pyralis (Asopia) farii
lis, vii, 247,278,282; x, 157.
worm, Tenebrio molitor, v, 121,123,129
worms, Tenebrio, v, 97,110,122,123,124.
Measuring worms, Span worms, Dr
worms, Geometrids, Geometers, Measi
ers, Phalaenidas (Geometridae), vi, 72; 1
236,269,272.

medicaginis. Aphis, viii, 101,192.

Megilla, v. 184.

maculata, vi, 173; viii, 173.

Megoura, viii, 40,42,73.80.

solani, viii, 42,73.

Melanactes, v, 99.
morio, vi, 25, 118.
piceus. v, 99, 100.

melancholica, Euryomia. v, 91; vi, 108; p.
Melancholy Cetonian, Euryomia mel;
"'Cholica, v, 91; vi, 108; p. i.

*s

INSECT INDEX.

39

Melandrya, v, 119, 120.
striata, v, 120.

Melandryidse, iv, 34; v, 34,118,119.
Melanophila, v, 95,96.
melanopleurus, Stenobothrus, ix, 92.
Meianopius femur-rubrum, ix, 96.

Melanotus, v, 99; vi, 119.

cinereus, v, 100; vi, 117; vii, 30.
communis, v, 1000; vi, 25,118; vii, 28,30.
depressus, vii, 29.
fissilis, v. 100; vi. 25,117,118; vii, 30.
incertus, vii, 29.
sphenoidalis, vi, 117; vii, 30.
Melanoxantbus, viii, 42.
melanura, Nacerdes, v, 118.

Melasis, v, 98.

Melasoma, v, 120,168.

Melitaea, vii, 270.
baroni, x. 163.
nycteis, x, 83.
phaeton, x, 83,84.
tharos, x. 83.

Melittia cucurbitae, vii, 173.
mellipes, Xiphidra, x, 71.

Meloe, v, 114,115; ix, 136.
angustacollis, v, 115.

Meloidae, iv, 20; v, 20,112,113,114,119; vi, 80,
83,86,125.

Melolontha, iv, 2; v, 2,85,88.
vulgaris, iv, 3; v, 3.

Melolonthidae, v, 31,37,79,84,85; vi, 70,80,82,
84, 86, 87, 97. (See White Grubs.)
Melolonthides, v, 85,90,163.

Melon Plant-louse, Melon or Cucumber
Aphis, Aphis cucumeris, xii, 6,83.
Melophagus ovinus, ix, 63.
melsheimeri, Microrhopala, v, 175.

Perophora, x, 156.

Melyridae, v, 37,93.104,108.
menapia, Pieris, ix, 27.
menthae, Siphonophora, viii, 68.

Meraeantha, v, 123.

Mermiria, ix, 83.
belfragii, ix, 92.
bivittata, ix, 87,92,97.

Mesochorus vitreus. x, 39.
messoria, Agrotis, vii, 92,209,278; x, 134.
Mestobregma, ix, 86.

cincta. ix, 90,95,113.

Metachroma, v, 166,168.
metacomet, Pamphila, vii, 161.

Metacomet Skipper, Pamphila metacomet,
vii, 161.

metallica, Plusia, ix, 44,50.

Stenispa, v, 174,

Metonius, v,95,96.
laevigatus, v, 96.
purpurea, v. 96.

Microdes carinoides, xi, 18.

Microgaster, ix, 20.
glomeratus, ix, 20.
militaris, ix, 20; x, 38; xi, 55,63.

Micropus leucopterus, ii, 61; iii, 142; vii, 107,
283. (See Chinch bug.)

Microrhopala, v, 174,175.
cyanea, v, 175.
excavata, v. 175.
melsheimeri, v, 175.
plicatula, v, 175.
porcata, v, 175.
vittata, v, 175.

var. lactula, v, 175.
xerens, v, 175.
middletoni, Aphis, viii, 99.

Midge, Apple. (See Apple Midge.)

Fickle. (See Fickle Midge.)

Wheat. (See Wheat Midge.)

Midges, i, 32.

migratoria, (Edipoda, vi, 46,48.

Migratory Locust. (See Rocky Mountain
Locust.)

milberti, Grapta, x. 85.

Vanessa, x, 164
militare. Distoma, ix, 67.
militaris, Callimorpha, ii, 49.

Microgaster, ix, 20; x, 38; xi, 55,63.
Senometopia, x, 37; xi, 53.

Milkweed Aphis, Siphonophora asclepiadis,
viii, 58.

Milk Weevil. (See Wheat Midge.)

Millipeds, vi, 65; ix, 58.

Mindarus, viii, 35.
minimus, Pezomachus, x, 40.
ministra. Datana, iv, 186; vii, 189; x, 119,167.
Eumetopona, iv, 186.

Phalmna, iv, 186.

Pygrera, iv, 186.
minuta, Eupsalis, v, 130,131.
minutipennis, Pezotettix, ix, 90,95,119.
minutus, Brenthus, v,131.
miscellus, Adipsophanes, x,180.

Mite, Locust. (See Grasshopper Parasite.)
Scab. (See Scab Mite.)

Verbena. (See Verbena Mite.)

Mites, Acari, Acarina, Acarus, i, 41.
Classification, i, 41 ; ix, 58, 59, 64, 65.
Distinguished from true insects, i, 41;

iv, 1; v,l.

Food, i, 44, 45.

Habits, i, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46; xii, 123, 124.
Injuries, xii, 123, 124.

Insect enemies, v, 65; xii, 110, 111,115.
Larvae, i,42,45.

distinguished from eggs of bark-
lice, i,46.

larvae of bark-lice, i,42, 46.
larvae of plant-lice, i, 42.

Number of species, i, 42.

Preying upon chrysalids of corn-worm,
xi; 102.

eggs of canker-worm, iii, 115.

oyster-shell bark-louse, i, 35, 44,
46,53; ii, 32, 33, 35, 44.

Remedies, xii. 143.

Mites, Cheese. (See Cheese Mites.)

Gall. (See Plant Mites.)

Harvest. (See Harvest Mites.)

Itch and Louse. iSee Itch Mites.)

40

INSECT INDEX.

Mites, Marine. (See Marine Mites.)

Plant, (See Plant Mites.)

Snouted Harvest. (See Snouted Har¬
vest Mites.)

Spinning. (See Spinning Mites.)

Water. (See Water Mites.)
modesta, Hoplia, v, 86.

Plusia, ix, 50.

modestus, Smerinthus, x,159.
molitor, Tenebrio, v, 121. 123, 129.

Molobrus inconstans, i, 19.

rnali, i.19.

Molytides, v,134.

Monilicornes, iv,36; v,36,6'6; vi,87.
Monocrepidius, v,99.

lividus. vi, 25, 118; vii,28.
lobatus, vi, 118.
monodon, Notoxus, v,116.

Plusia, ix,41.

Monolianimus, v, 158,159.

Monomera, viii, 10.

Mononychus, i,17;v, 143.
vulpeculus, v,143.

montezuma, Oxycoryphus, ix, 93, 102.

Syrbula, ix, 102.
monuste, Pieris, ix, 27, 29, 32, 34,
var. albusta, Pieris, ix,27,29.
cleomes, Pieris, ix,27,29.
hippomonuste, Pieris. ix, 29.
orseis, Pieris, ix,27,29.
phileta, Pieris, ix, 27. 29, 33.
suasa, Pieris, ix, 27, 29.
morbidalis, Chytolita, x, 138,182.

Mordella, iv,6,5; vi, 114.

8-punctata, v, 112, 114.

Mordellidae, iv,34; v, 34, 112, 113,117,119.
mori, Sericaria, xi,58.

Morio, v,45,46.

moria, Melanactes, vi.25, 118.

mortuorum, Plusia, ix, 44.

Mosquito-lfawks. (See Dragon-flies.)
Mosquitoes. Gnats, Culicidae, i, 32; iv, 12;

v,12; vi,73, 74; ix,59,60.

Moths. (See Butterflies and Moths.)

Owlet. (See Owlet Moths.)

Plume. (See Plume Moths.)

Mottled Tortoise-beetle, Coptocycla (Cas-
sida) guttata, v, 177; vi,172, p. iv.

Mouldy Aphis, Callipterus mucidus, viii, 172.
mozardi, Languria, v,181.
mucidus, Callipterus, viii, 172.

Mulorchus, v,156.

munda, Coceinella. vi. 173; vii, 60, 119; viii, 174;
xii, 40.

mundum, Ophion, iv. 192.

Murgantia histrionica, vi,59, p. ii; ix, 7.
musffiorum, Anthrenus, vi,93, p. iii.

Musca domestica, i, 55.

Muscidae, iv,8,9, 12; v, 8, 9, 12,54; vi,73; ix,61.
musculosus, Anthocoris, iv, 197.

Mycetaea, v, 182.

Mycetophagidae, v, 36, 56, 61, 178.
Mycetophagus, v, 61.
flexuosus, v, 61.

Mycetophagus punctatus, v, 61.
Mycetoporus, v, 74.

Myelois, vii, 272.

convolutella, vii, 251,279,280.

Mylabrus, v, 129.

pisi, vi, 127.

Myocoryna, v, 166,167.

10-lineata, vi, 160. (See Colorado Potatcj
beetle.)

Myriapod, Corn. (See Corn Myriapod.)
Myriapoda, v, 1; ix, 58; xi, 44; xii, 27.
Myriapods, Thousand-legs, Myriapodt
iv, 1; v, 1; ix, 58; xi, 44; xii, 27, 111, 114, 115.
myrina, Argynnis, x, 82,161.

Myrmeleon, i, 62.

Myrmeleonidae, vi, 71.
myron, Darapsa, vii, 166,280.

Myron Sphinx, Darapsa myron, vii, 166,28
Mysia, v, 184.

15-punctata, vi, 262.
mystic, Pamphila, x, 97.
mytilaspidis, Aphelinus, ii, 34; iv, 200.
Chalcis, iv, 200.

Mytilaspis, ii, 45; iii, 140; iv, 199.

conchiformis, ii, 24.87,89.94; iii, 159. (S(
Oyster-shell Bark-louse.)
pinifolii, ii, 30,83; iii, 161; iv, 199.
pomicorticis, vii, 122. (See Oyster-sht
Bark-louse,
pomorum, ii, 46.
salicis, iii, 140.

Myzocallis, viii, 36,40,43,105,110,111.
bella, viii, 106.
hyperici, viii, 43,108.
quercicola, viii, 106.

Myzoxylides, viii, 123.

Myzoxylus, i, 56; viii, 33.
mali, viii, 126.

Myzus, viii, 36,40.42.74,79,81,94,192.
cerasi, viii, 75.
cerasifoliae, viii, 93.
mahaleb, viii, 72.
persicae, viii, 76,102.
ribis, viii, 50,76.

N

Nacerdes melanura, v, 118.
napi. Pieris, ix, 27, 28,35,36.
var. a, Pieris, ix, 36,37.

b, Pieris, ix, 36.

c, Pieris, ix, 36.
castoria, Pieris, ix, 27.

d, Pieris, ix. 36.

e, Pieris, ix, 36.
frigida. Pieris, ix, 27.
hulda, Pieris, ix. 27.
iberidis, Pieris, ix, 27.
napae, Pieris, ix. 36

nasturtii, Pieris, ix, 27,28,29.
nasicus, Balaninus, vi, 83,134, p. ii.
Nebraska Bee-killer, Promachus apivori
ii, 64,65; vi, 162, 163.

Nebria, v, 43.

INSECT INDEX.

41

ebris, G-ortyna, vii, 100,114,222.
tebulo, Acrobasis, vii, 249; x, 157. (See
Apple Leaf-crumpler.)

Phycita, i, 34; ii. 15; iii, 104.106,117,123; iv,
188; vi, 11,18; vii, 249,251,279; xi, 13,17.
(See Apple Leaf-crumpler.)
lebulosa, Locusta, ix, 93.

^ecrobia, v, 54, 109.
rufipes, v. 110.
violacea, v, 109.
tfecrodes, v. 58.

surinamensis, v, 58.
ftecrophaga, iv, 19, 36; v, 19,36,54, 67.
tfecrophorus, v, 54, 57, 58.

americanus, v,58.
negleeta, Lyc®na, x,96.

(Edipoda, ix,95.

aeglectus, Hippiscus, ix, 89, 95, 114.
negundinis, Chaitophorus, viii, 103.
nellica, Pieris, ix,218.

Nematocampa, vii, 272.

filamentaria, vii, 242; 279; x,148.

Nematodes, v, 98.

Nematoidea, ix,59.

Nematus salicis-pisum,x,65,68.
salicis-pomum, viii, 206; x,65,68.
trilineatus,x,64,68.
ventralis.x, 64,68.

ventricosus, vi,61; x,65,68; xi,5,24,46.
Nemocera. i, 32.

Nemognathus, v,115.

Nemorasa leucani®, x,36.
nemoralis, Chlaenius, xii, 111.
nemorensis, Pissodes, vi, 134.
nemorum, Haltica. vi, 169.
nenuphar, Conotrachelus, i, 15,64; v, 132,142;
vi. 83, 85, 90, 137, 143, pp. i. ii, iii. (See Plum
Curculio.)

Neoclytus caprae, vi, 36, 38, 151.
neogama, Catocala, vii, 236, 279.

Neonympha, vii, 270.
canthus,x,91.

eurytris, vii, 156, 280; 10,90, 184.
gemma, x, 91.
sosybius, x, 91.

Nephele Butterfly. Satyrus nephele, vii, 156,
280; x, 92, 180.

nephele, Satyrus, vii, 156, 280; x, 92, 180.
Nephelodes, vii, 272.

violans, vii, 99, 220, 278; x, 139.
Nepidae,vi,72; viii, 12.
nerii, Aphis, viii, 95.

Neuroptera, i, 62; iv,25, 32; v,25,32; vi, 68,70,
77; viii, 172, 177; ix,60; xii, 114.

New York Weevil, Ithycerus novebora-
censis, v, 136; vi, 130, pp. i, ii, iii.
ni, Plusia,ix.40,43,41.

Nicippe Butterfly, Nicippus Butterfly, Ter-
ias nicippe, vii, 148,278; x,79.
nicippe, Terias, vii, 148, 278; x. 79.
nietanus, Tomonotus, ix, 89, 94, 107, 108.
nigricans, var. maizi, Agrotis, vii, 91, 107.
nigricollis, Elater, v,100; vi,25; vii, 28.
nigrifrons, Clerus, v,109.

nigripes, Cassida, v,177; vi,172.

Clerus, v,109.
nigrita, Odontota, v,175.
nimbatana, Penthina, x, 153; xi, 12.
Nine-spotted Lady-bird or Lady-bug. Coe-
cinella 9-notata, ii.64; vi, 162, 163,173; viii,
174; xii, 41, 118.
niphon, Thecla, x,94.

Nisoniades juvenalis, x,97.
lucilius, x,97.

nitela, Gortyna, iii, 141; vii, 4, 7, 81, 99, 100, 108,
112, 221, 278, 280, 283; ix, 142; x, 151; vii, 103.
(See Stalk Borer.)
nitida, Allorhina, v,89; vi,107.

Gymnetis, v, 89,90; vi,107.
nitidalis, Phacellura, vii, 251,277, 278,279,280,
281,282.

Nitidula, v, 54, 59, 75, 175.
bipustulata, v,60.

Nitidula. Twin-spotted. (See Twin-spot¬
ted Nitidula.)

Nitidulid®, iv,36; v, 36, 56, 59. 61; vi, 70, 80. 81,
86,87,91.

Nitidulides. v,59.
nivale. Lymexylon, v,103.
noctiluca, Lampyris, v, 106.
noctilucus, Elater, v, 66.

Noctuid®, vi, 72; vii. 199, 269. 271 ; x, 128.
Northern Brenthus, Northern Brenthian.

Eupsalis minuta, v, 130. 131.
notata, Odontota, v,175.

Nothrus ovivorus. iii, 115; vi,19.

Notiophilus, v,42, 43.
notochlorus, Truxalis, ix,92.

Notodonta. vii, 271; x, 129.
concinna, vii, 190; x, 119.
unicornis, vii, 191; x, 120, 181.

Notonectid®, vi,72; viii, 12.

Notoxus, v, 116.
bicolor, v, 116.
monodon, v,116.

noveboracensis, Ithycerus, v,136; vi,130,pp.
1, ii, iii.

novemnotata, Coccinella, ii, 64; vi, 162. 163,
173; viii, 174; xii, 41, 118.
nu. Plusia, ix,50.
nubeculana, Phoxopteris, x,153,
uubilipennis, Cynips, i,78.
numitor, Ancyloxypha, x,96.

Nut Weevil, Long-snouted. (See Long¬
snouted Nut Weevil.)

Weevils, Acorn Weevils, Balaninides, v,
135,140; vi,85.
nycteis, Melitsea, x.83.

Phyciodes, x,165.

Nycteribid®, ix, 61.

Nymphalid®, vii, 148,269; x,80.

Nymphalis disippus, ii, 95.

O

Oak Blight. (See Woolly Aphis of the
Oak.)

-leaf Lachnus, Lachnus quercifoli®,xm,
108,118,

42

INSECT INDEX.

Oak-leaf Phylloxera. Phylloxera rileyi, viii,
163.

Tortrix, Oak Tortrix, Argyrolepia
quercit'oliana, Tortrix trifurculana,
vii, 4, 114, 257, 279, 281; ix,142.
Twig-pruner. Elaphidion villosum, vi,
38,43,150, pp. i, iii.iv.

Oat Aphis. (See Grain Plant-louse.)

Obera, v, 158,159.

oblinita, Acronycta, vii, 201, 279, 282; x, 131.

Apatela, vii, 201; x,131.
obliquata, Penthe, v, 120.

Oblique-banded Leaf-roller. (See Greater
Leaf-roller.)
obliquus, E later, vii, 28.
oblongus, Aphodius, v, 81.
obsoletus, Bruchus, v, 129; vi,128, p. i.
obscura, Chrysobothris, vi, 111.
obscurus, Agriotes, vi,24.

Tenebrio, v, 123.
occidentalis, Apatela, x,129.

Pieris, ix, 27, 28, 29, 34.

Polyphylla, v, 86
ocellata, Buprestis, v, 106.
octomaeulata, Alypia, vii, 176,280; x, 110,172.
oetopunctata, Mordella, v, 112,114.
octoscripta, Plusia, ix, 44.
oculata, Chrysopa, viii, 177.

var. chlorophana, Chrysopa, viii, 178.
oeulatus, Alaus, v, 99; vi, 25,116, pp. i, ii; vii,
26.

Elater, v, 99.

Ocypus, v, 69.
ater, v, 69.

Odontaeus filicornes, v, 82.

Odontota, v, 174.
ariadne, v, 175,
bicolor, v, 175. 1
harrisi, v, 175.
lecontei, v, 175.
nigrita, v, 175.
notata, v, 175.
omogera, v, 175.
quadrata, v, 175.
rosea, v, 175.
rubra, v, 175.
scapularis, v, 175.
walshi, v. 175.

CEcophora pseudospretella, i, 79.

(Edemasia concinna, 7, 190.

(Edemeridas, iv, 34; v, 34,118.

(Edionychis, v, 171,172.

CEdipoda, ix, 86.

aequalis, ix, 90,94,109,112.
atrox, ix, 95.
belfragii, ix, 90,94, 111.
carinata, ix, 94.

Carolina, ix, 88,94,111,134.
cincta, ix, 95.
collaris, ix, 90,94,110.
corallina, ix, 95.
corallipes, ix, 114.

GMipoda discoidea, ix, 95.
latipennis, ix, 95.
maratima, ix, 95.
migratoria, vi, 46,48.
neglecta, ix, 95.
pellucida, ix. 95.
phoenicoptera, ix, 95.
rugosa, ix, 95, 115.
sordida, ix, 93.
sulphurea, ix, 94.

• tenebrosa, ix, 94.
virginiana, ix, 93.
xanthoptera, ix, 94.

(Edipodini, ix, 83,84,88.
ffineis, v, 184, 185.

pusilla, v, 185.

(Estridae, vi, 73; ix, 61.

(Estrus ovis, ix, 60.

Old-fashioned Potato-beetle. (See Stripi
Potato-beetle.)
oleivorns, Phytoptus, xii, 124.
olens, Goerius, v, 68.

oleracea, Pieris, vii, 143,278,280,281,282; ix,
26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34. 35; x, 77.
var. borealis, Pieris, ix, 29,30.
casta, Pieris, ix, 27,29,30.
castoria, Pieris, ix, 28,29,30.
cruciferarum, Pieris, ix, 27,29.
frigida, Pieris, ix, 28,29,30.
hulda, Pieris, ix, 29,30.
iberidis, Pieris, ix, 28,29.
pallida, Pieris, ix, 28,29.
resedas, Pieris, ix, 28,29.
virginiensis, Pieris, ix, 29,31,34,35.
Olophrum, v, 75.
olyra, Magdalis, v, 139; vi, 132.

Omahides, v, 68,75.

Omalium, v, 75.
omogera, Odontota, v, 175.

Saxinis, v, 170.

Omophron, v, 39, 42, 43, 46.

labiatum, v, 42.

Omosita colon, v,60.

Oncideres, v, 158,159.

cingulatus, v, 159; vi, 83,

Onion Fly, Onion Maggot, i, 32; vi, 77.
onobrychis, Aphis, viii, 64.
ononedis, Chaitophorus, viii. 106.
Onthophagus, v,80,81.

Oodes, v, 46, 47, 48, 49.
opaca, Silpha, v,57.
opaculus, Anisodactylus, xii, 112.
opacus, Geotrupes, v,82.

Geotrypes, v,82.

Opadia funebrana, i, 81.

Ophion, i, 17.

macrurum. vii, 194.
mundum, iv, 192.
purgatus, x,41.
sp., iv, 192.

Ophryastes, v, 136, 137.

Opsomala bivittata, ix,92.

INSECT INDEX.

43

)psomala brevipennis, ix,92
punctipennis, ix,92.

■rbitalis, Euura, x, 64, 65, 69.

)rchesia, v,12G.
jrchestes, v,141.

Irchestides, v, 135,141.

)rchestris, v, 171, 173.

vittata, vi, 168.

)reaster. Aphis, viii.211.

Drgyia, vii,271.

leucostigma, ii, 13,86; vii, 185, 277, 279, 281,
282,283; x, 117, 166; xii.100.

Hgyi®, Tachina, ii, 16.

Oribatidae, ix,65.
orichalcea, Plusia, ix,42,50.

Ormenis pruinosa, xii.104.
ornata, Tettix,ix,96.
ornatum, Acridium, ix,96.

Ornithomyia, i, 32.

Orobena rimosalis, ix,38.
orobenae, Apanteles, x ii, 104.
orseis, Pieris. ix,27,29.

Orsodacna, v, 162, 165.

Orsodacnides, v,163.

Ortalida3,vi,77.

Orthoptera, iv, 8, 25,32; v, 8, 25, 32; vi, 68, 70, 76;

ix, 60. 80, 82; x.60; xii,114.

Orthosoma, v, 151, 152.
cylindricum, v,152.

Orthostethus infuscatus, vi,25,117; vii, 27.
ortoni, Agrotis, vii, 211.

Oryssus afflnis, x,71.
hacmo-rrhoidalis, x,71.
manurus, x,71.
oryzae, Sitodrepa, ix,40.

Osmoderma, v,90,91.
eremicola, v,91.
scabra, v,91.

Osorius, v,71.

osten-sackeni.Exorista, x,37.
otho, Pamphila, vii, 160.

Otho Skipper, Pamphila otho, vii, 160.
Otidocephalides, v, 134, 138.

Otidoceplialus, v,138.

Otiorhynchides, v, 134, 137.

Otiorhynchus, v, 137.
ou, Plusia, ix, 43, 44, 47, 48.
ovata, Brachys, v,96.
ovinus, Melophagus, ix,63.
ovis, *Dermatodectes, ix,66.

(Estrus, ix,60.

ovivorus, Nothrus, iii, 115; vi,19.

Owlet moth, Clandestine. (See W-marked
Cutworm.)

Spider. (See Wheat Cutworm.)
Moths, Noctuidae, vi, 72; vii, 199,269,271;
x, 128.

Ox Bot-fly. Hypoderma bovis, ix,61.
Oxycoryphus montezuma, ix,93, 102.
oxygramma, Plusia, ix, 43, 44,49.
Oxyopthalmes, v,136.

Oxyporus, v,69,70.
femoralis, v,70.
lateralis, v,70.

Oxyporus major. v,70.

5-maculatus, v,70. •

ruflpennis, v,70.
stygicus, v,70.
vittatus, v, 70.

Oxytelides, v, 68, 70, 74.

Oxotelus, v, 70,71.

Oxyuri, x,212.

Oyster-shell Bark-louse, Apple-tree or
Apple Bark-louse. Mytilaspis (Aspidio-
tus) conchiformis=M. pomicorticis, i,34;
ii, 24,94; iii, 101; vi,16; vii, 122.

Anal sack, i, 39, 40.

Birds feeding on, ii, 35.

Broods, i, 37 ; ii, 89.

Classification, ii, 45.

Compared with Harris’ bark-louse, i, 36.
Decrease, ii, 32, 39, 44; vii, 4,5.

Eggs, ii, 89.

Female, i, 40 ; ii, 25.

Figure of antenna, ii, 24.
egg, ii, 24.
larva, active, ii, 24.
larva, fixed, ii, 24.
insect at different stages, ii,24.
parasite of bark- louse, ii,34.
scale after formation of second
plate, ii, 24.

scale fully formed, ii, 24.
scales, appearance on tree, ii, 24.
Insect enemies, i, 35, 36, 44,45; ii, 32,43,44;

iv, 21, 200, 202; v,21.

Larva, i, 37, 42, 62.

Larval scale, i,39,40.

Life history, i,37.

Male, i, 40; ii,24,87.

Medial scale, i, 39, 40.

Migrations, i, 41; ii,25.

On healthy trees, i, 53; ii, 31 .

Proboscis or beak, i,37,38; ii, 28.

Range, i, 36; ii, 25, 44.

Remedies, i, 35, 46, 53; ii, 7, 40; iii, 159.

Scale, i,35.37 ; ii,30.

Varieties of apple-tree most frequented
by, ii, 31.

Ozacna, v,46.

P

Pachnaeus, v,137.

, Pachypappa, viii,35.

Pachyscelus, v,96.
laevigatus, v,96.
purpurea, v,96.

Pachyta, v, 156.

Paederides, v, 68, 70, 71.

Paederus, v,71,72.
littorarius, v,72.

Painted Mamestra or Ceramica. (See Zebra
Caterpillar.)

Palaminus, v,71.

testaceus, v,72.
palatka, Pamphila, x, 453.

Pale Whitish-yellow Plant-louse, Gallip-
terus ulmifolii. viii, 195, 196.

44

INSECT INDEX.

pales, Hylobius, vi, 38,43,133; p. iii.

Pales Weevil, Pine Bark-miner, Bark-miner
of the Pine-tree, Hylobius pales, vi, 38,43,
133; p. iii.

palliatus, Dermocerus, v, 156.
pallida, Cassida, v, 177.

Pieris, ix, 27.

pallipennis, Hydnocera, xii, 104.
pallipes, Agonoderus, v, 49.

Palmer worm, ix, 53,54.

Palpicornes, v, 52.
paludana, Tortrix, vii, 118.

Pamphila, vii, 270.
ahaton, vii, 160.
cernes, vii, 160.
delaware. x, 96,174.
huron, vii. 159.
maculata, x, 176.
manataaaua, vii, 160.
metacomet, vii, 161.
mystic, x, 97.
otho, vii, 160.
palatka, x, 153.
peckius, vii, 160; x, 178.
phylaeus, x, 96, 176.
sassacus, vii. 159,280,282; x, 97.
pampinatrix, Chserocampa, x, 103.
Panagaeus, v, 46.
crucigerus, v, 46.
fasciatus, v, 46.

Pandeleteius, v, 137,

hilaris, vi, 38,43,132; pp. iii.iv.
pandoras, Philampelus, vii, 165, 280, 283; x,
101, 175.

panicea, Sitodrepa, vi, 122.
paniceum, Anobium, v, 101; vi, 122; p. i.
panici, Tychea, viii, 23, 35, 43, 138, 169.
panicola, Schizoneura, viii, 138.

Paniscus ge'minatus, vii, 218.

Panorpidse, vi, 71.

Panscopus, v, 136.

erinaceus, v, 136.

Paonias excaecatus, vii, 167.
papaveris, Aphis, viii, 88.

Paphia andria, vii, 156,279,280.

glycerium, x, 89.

Papilio, iv, 2; v, 2; vii, 135,269.
ajax, vii, 135,279,281; x, 74.
asterias, vii. 137,138,280,281; x, 74,173.
brassicae, iv, 3; v, 3.
cresphontes, vii, 139.279,281,282; x,75.
philenor, vii, 136,277; x, 73,164.
thoas, vii, 139.
troilus, vii, 138,279,282; x, 74.
turnus, vii, 139,277,279,282; x, 74, 173.
var. glauca, vii, 139.

Papilionidae, vi, 72; vii, 135,269; x, 73.
Paracletus, viii, 36,41,42,43.

Parallel Longhorn, Twig Borer, Elaphidion
parallelum, v, 152: vi, 36,38,44,83, 150; p. i.
parallela, Parorgyia, x, 166.
parallelum, Elaphidion, v, 152; vi, 36, 38, 44,
83,150; p. 1.

parallelus, Dorcus, v, 78.

Parandra, v, 151, 152.
brunnea, v, 152.
polita, v, 152.

Parasitic Beetles, Trachelides, iv, 33, 34;

33,35,111, 113.

Paria, v, 166,168.
parilis, Plusia, ix, 44.

Parnidae, iv, 36; v, 36,52.

Parnus, v, 52.

Parorgyia clintonis, x, 165.
parallela, x, 165.

Parsnip Plant-louse, Siphocoryne pastin
cae, viii, 84.

worm (See Asterias Butterfly).
Parynotus, v, 137.

Pasimachus, v,42,43; vi,90.

elongatus, ii, 64 ; v,43; vi, 89, 90, 162,163;
41.

marginatus, v,43.
pasiphaea, Plusia, ix, 44.

Passalides, v, 77.

Passalus, v,78.

cornutus, v, 78.
pastinacae, Aphis, viii, 84.
Bhopalosiphum, viii, 84.

Siphocoryne, viii, 84.

Patellimani, v, 45.

Patrobus, v,48,49; xii, 113.
longicornis, xii, 113.

Pea and Bean Weevils, Bruchidae, v, 35,1
128; vi, 70,81,83, 85,86,127.

Weevil, Bruchus pisi, v, 129; vi, 127, p.

Peach Borer, Peach-root Borer, Peac
tree Borer, iEgeria exitiosa, i, 24,25,
vi, 33, 34, 38, 44, 75, pp. i, iii ; vii, 169, 281 ; x, 1
107, 108.

-tree Aphis, Myzus persicae, viii, 76,1
-twig Borer. See Strawberry Cro
Miner.)

Pear Caterpillar. (See Callimorpha P<
Caterpillar.)

Flea -louse. Jumping Plant-louse
the Pear-tree, Psylla pyri, iii, 134; \
73; viii, 13, 16.

Slug. (See Cherry Slug.)

'-tree Borer, Pear-tree iEgeria, iEge
pyri, vi. 40,44, p. iii; vii, 170; x, 106,101
Weevil, Anthonomus pyri, v, 141.

Pearly Wood-nymph, Blue Caterpillar
the Vine,-Eudryas unio, vii, 176, 178, 279, 2
x, 111,173.

Pebble Moth, Cabbage-garden. (See C;

bage-garden Pebble Moth.)
peckius, Pamphila. vii, 160; x, 178.

Peck’s Skipper, Pamphila peckius, vii, 1
x, 178.

Pectinicornes, iv, 36; v, 37,76; vi, 87.
pedalis, Plusia, ix, 44.

Pedicuius, v, 1,24.

Pedilus, v, 117.

Pedipalpi, ix, 59.

Pelecyphorus, v, 123.

Pelidnota, v, 89.

(

INSECT INDEX.

45

alidnota punctata, v, 88,89; vi, 106, p. ii.
allio, Attagenus, v,60; vi, 92, p. iv.
ellionella, Tinea, vii, 265,279.
ellucida, Camnula, ix, 88,95,118.

Dryocampa, x, 121.

(Edipoda, ix, 95.

•eltis, v, 175.
empelia, vii, 273.
grossularise, vii. 251; xi, 6,23.
hammondi, vii, 252,277.

)emphigiden, viii, 35.

’emphiginae, vii, 74; viii, 35,37,38,39,41,42,
122,145,201.

’emphigiui, viii, 124, 125. 145.

Pemphigus, i, 21,56; vii, 74; viii, 33,35,37,38,
41,43.123. 146,204.
acerifolii. viii, 209.
caryaecaulis, viii, 160.
caryaevenae, viii, 162.
formicarius, viii, 150.
formicetorum, viii, 150.
fraxini, viii, 211.
fraxinifolii. viii, 146, 210.
popularia, viii, 151,153,209.
populicaulis, iv, 193; vii, 76; viii, 43, 89, 148,
149.

populi-globuli, viii, 151, 153.
po'puli-monilis, viii, 205.
populi-ramulorum, viii. 209.
populi-transversus, viii, 208, 209.
populivenae, viii, 151, 154.
pseudobyrsa. viii, 151.
pyri, i, 7,55; viii, 126,128,133, 150,152. (Sec
Woolly Aphis of the Apple-tree.)
rhois, viii, 152.
rubi. viii, 147.
ulmicola, viii, 142.
ulmifusus, viii, 153.

! vagabundus, iv, 199; viii, 146, 151.
vitifolicB, i. 21; viii, 158.
penitalis, Botis, x,154.
pennsylvaniea, Uasnonia, v, 45.

Epicauta, xii,104.

Fhotinus, v,107.

Photuris, v, 107.

pennsylvanicus, Chauliognathus, v,108.
Chlaenius, v,45.

Harpalus, v,47; vi,90, 140; x, 41; xii,U2.
Pentamera, iv,32,33,35; v,32, 34,35, 126; vi,80,

I'87-

Pentatomidae, xi,27.

Penthe, v,120.

obliquata, v.120.
pimelia, v, 120.

Penthina, vii, 273.

nimbafana, x,153; xi, 12.

■ vitivorana, vii, 257, 280.
peregrin am, Acridium, ix, 130, li3.

Peril itus indigator, xi, 14.

limidiatus, xi, 14. ^

Perillus circumcinctus, vi,162.

Periodical Cicada. (See Seventeen-year

Locust.) .. a

periscelidactylus, Pterophorus, vii, 268, .80.

periscelidis, Locusta, ix,93.

Peritymbia vitisana, viii, 158.
permundus, Pterostiehus, xii, 110.1
Perophora melsheimeri, x, 156.

Perplexing Dart, Agrotis tricosa, vii, 205,

206; x. 132.

perpulchra, Hockeria, x,39.
persicae, Aphis, viii, 42.

Myzus, viii, 76, 102.
perspicua, Datana, iv, 190; x,119.

Petrophora, vii, 272.

diversilineata, vii, 237, 280.

Pezomachus minimus, x,40.

Pezotettix, ix,86.

minutipennis, ix, 90, 95, 119.
scudderi. ix, 91, 95, 121.
unicolor, ix, 92, 95, 118.
viola, ix, 90, 95, 120.

Phacellura, vii, 272,277.

nitidalis, vii, 25 1,277, 278. 279, 280, 281, 282.
Phaedon, v, 166,168.
viride, v, 168.

phaeton, Melitaea, x, 83,84.

Phalacridae, iv, 36; v, 36,56,63.

Phalacrus, v, 63.

Phalaena ministra, iv, 186.

Phalaenidae. vi, 72; vii, 236,269,272.
Phalangium, ii, 64.
sp., vi, 162.

phalerata. Arctia, vii, 181,280; x, 115,171.
PhanaeuS carnifex, v, 81.

Phasniidae, vi, 70; ix, 73,80.82.

Phengodes. v, 106,107.

Phigalia, vii, 272.

cinctaria, vii, 241,277.
strigataria, vii, 241,282.

Philampelus, vii, 270.

achemon, vii, 165,280,283; x, 101,182.
pandorus, vii. 165.280,283; x, 101, 175.
satellitia, vii. 165.

philenor, Papilio, vii, 136,277; x, 73,164.
Philenor Swallow-tail, Papilio philenor, vii,
136,277; x, 73,164.

Philhvdrida, iv, 36; v, 36,52.

Philodice Butterfly, Colias philodice, vii,

147,278,281; x, 78.

philodice, CoBa*. vii, 147,278,281; x, /8.
Philometra, vii, 272.

serraticornis, vii, 246,280.

Philonthus, v, 69.
apicalis, v, 68,
sp., ii, 64; vi, 162.

Phloephagus, v,145.

Phloeotribus. ix,34; v,35.

Phlox Heliothis, Heliothis phloxiphagus,

vii, 230 . oa .

phloxiphagus, Heliothis, vii, 280.
phoeaicoptera, (Edipoda, ix,95.
phoenicopterum. Acridium, ix, 95.
phoenicopterus, Hippiscus, ix, So, 89, 95, 117,

131.

Pholisora. vii, 270.

catullus, vii. 162, 281; x,9S.^

Phorodon, viii, 36, 40,42,69. 74, 79.
hum’uli, xiii, 70, 72.

var. mahaleb, viii, <2.

46

INSECT INDEX

Phorodon scrophularias, viii,72.

Photinus, v, 106.
angulata, v, 107.

Pennsylvania, v, 107.
pyralis, v, 106,107.
scintillans, v, 107.

Photuris, v,107.

pennsylvanica, v,107.

Phoxopteris nubeculana. x, 153.

phragmitidicola, Heliophila, vii,224.
Leucania, vii, 224; x,186; xi, 57.

Phryganea, i, 62.

Phryganidse, vi,71.

Phyciodes harrisi.x, 162.
nycteis, x,165.
tharos, vii, 151,277; x,163.

Phycita, iii, 106 ; vii, 272.

juglandis, iii, 117, 119, 123; iv, 188; v,100;
vii, 250, 280, 283.

nebulo, i,34; ii, 15; iii, 104, 106, 117,123; iv,
188; vi, 11,18; vii, 249,279; xi,13,17. (See
Apple Leaf (Jrumpler.)

phycitas, Exorista, iii, 123.

Tachina, iii, 123.

phylceus, Pamphila, x, 96, 176.

Phyllaphiden, viii,35.

Phyllaphis, viii, 35, 37, 41, 43, 120.
fagi, viii, 120.

Phyllecthrus, v, 172

Phyllobrotica, v, 172.

Phyllophaga, v,86,87.

fraterna, vi,99, 100, 101 ; pp. I, ii, iii.
fusca, v, 85, 87 ; vi, 89, 97, 101, 102; pp. i, ii, iii,
iv; vii, 33.
hirticula, v,87.
ilieis, v,87.
lanceolata, v.87.
longitarsis, v,87.

pilosicollis, v, 87; vi,100; pp. i, ii, iii.
tristis, v, 87.
quercina, v,85.

Phylloxera, i, 22; vii, 76; viii, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38,
41, 43, 89, 124, 133, 155, 157, 204, 205.
caryaBcaulis, viii, 160.
carysefallax, viii, 164.
caryaefolias, viii, 161, 164.
caryae-globosa. viii, 163.
earyae-globuli, viii, 164.
caryffi-gummosa, viii, 164.
caryae-ren, viii, 164.
caryas-semen, viii, 163, 164.
caryas-septa, yiii,164.
caryae venae, viii. 162.
castaneae, viii, 164.
cornica, viii, 164.
depressa. viii, 164.
forcata, viii. 164.
rileyi, viii, 163.
roboris, viii, 34.
spinosa. viii, 164.
vastatrix, viii, 31, 158.
vitifoliae, iv, 198, 199; viii, 5, 31, 43, 158,163.

P hy lloxera, Grape. (See Grape Phylloxer
Oak-leaf. (See Oak-leaf Phylloxera.

Phylloxeriden, viii, 35.

Phymaphora, v, 182.

Phymatodes, v, 154.

Physocnemum, v, 154.

Pliysogaster larvarum, xii, 150.

Physonota, v, 176.

unipunctata, v, 176.

Phytobiides, v, 143. -

Phytobius, i, 17; v,143.

Phytocoris quadrivittatus, ii, 61.

Phytoecia, v,158.

Phytophaga, iv, 19,31; v, 19,31,127,128,160.

Phytoptinae, ix, 65.

Phytoptus, xii, 123.
abnormis, xii, 134.
acericola, xii, 135.
fraxini, xii, 136.
oleivorus, xii, 124.
pyri, xii, 125,134,140.
quadripes, xii; 128, 132, 133, 135.
querci, xii, 138.
salieicola, xii, 138.
sp., xii, 134, 136, 137.
thujae, xii, 138, 139.
ulmi, xii, 137.

piceus, Ceruchus, v, 78.

Hydrophilus, v, 53.

Melanactes, v, 99, 100,

Pickle worm, Phacellura nitidalis, vii, 2;

277,278,279,280,281,282.

picta, Carmonia, vi, 174.

Ceramica, vi. 60, p. iii; vii, 226,280, 2>
282; ix, 51; x, 185.

Coecinella, vi, 174.

Mamestra, vi, 60, pp. I, ii, iv; vii, 226,2'-
281,282; ix, 52; xii, 103.

pictipes, iEgeria, x, 106,109.

Pieridae, x, 76.

Pieris. vii, 146,269; ix, 26.
autodice, ix, 27,28.
beckeri, ix, 27,28.
brassicae, ix, 14,19,35.
callidice, ix, 28.
calyce, ix,27,29.
casta, ix, 27.

var. cruciferarum, ix, 27.
castoria, ix. 27.

var. resedae, ix, 27.
chloridice, ix, 27,28.

var. beckeri, ix, 27.
daplidice, ix, 28.
frigida, ix, 27.
glauconome, ix, 28.
iberidis, ix. 27.
leucodice, ix, 27,28.
marginalis, ix, 27.
menapia, ix, 27.
monuste. ix, 27,29,32,34.
var. albusta, ix, 27,29.

INSECT INDEX.

47

;eris monuste, var. cleomes, ix, 27,29.
hippomonuste, ix, 29.
orseis, ix, 27,29.
phileta, ix, 27,29,33.
suasa, ix, 27, 29.
napi, ix, 27,28,35,39.
var- a., ix, 36,37.

b. , ix, 36.

c. , ix, 36.
castoria, ix, 27.

d. , ix, 36.

e. , ix, 36.
frigida, ix, 27.
hulda, ix, 27.
iberidis, ix, 27.
nap®, ix, 36.

nasturtii, ix, 27,28,29.
nellica, ix, 28.
occidentalis, ix, 27, 28, 29, 34.
oleracea, vii, 143,278,280,281,282; ix, 9,26,
27,28,29,30,31,32,34,35; x, 77.
var. borealis, ix, 29,30.
casta, ix, 27,29,30.
castoria, ix, 28,29,30.
cruciferarum, ix, 27,29.
frigida, ix. 28,29,30.
hulda, ix, 29,30.
iberidis, ix, 28,29.
pallida, ix, 28,29.
resed®, ix, 28,29.
virgin iensis, ix, 29,31,34,35.
pallida, ix, 27.

protodice, vii, 141,278,280; ix, 7, 10,11,25, 27,
28.29,33,34,37; x, 76,178.
var. beckeri, ix. 29.33,34.
vernalis, ix, 27,28,29,33.
rap®, vii, 144,278.280; ix, 2, 8, 25,27, 29, 31,34,
35,37,39; x, 77,179; xi, 7,32,63,82; xii, 92.
(See European Cabbage worm.)
var. novangli®, ix, 27,29,32.
yreka, ix. 27,29,31.
sisymbrii, ix, 27,28,29.
tau, ix, 27.

venosa, ix, 27,28,29,32.

var. marginalis, ix, 28,29,32.
vernalis, ix, 27.
virginiensis, ix, 27.
yreka, ix, 27.

Pigeon Tremex. (See Elm-tree Borer.)
Pill-rollers. (See Tumble-bugs.)
pilosa, Aphis, viii, 211.

Hypolampis, v. 172.
pilosicollis, Lachnosterna, v, 87.

Phyllophaga, v, 87; vi, 100, pp. i.ii.iii.
pilula, Byrrhus, v, 62.
pimelia, Penthe, v, 120.

Pimpla, ix, 20.
atrata, vi, 42.
conquisitor, vii, 119.
inquisitor, vii. 120; xi, 13.
lunator. vi, 42.

Pinching Beetle, Pinching Bug, Lucanus
(lama, v, 77,78; vi, 95, pp. i.ii.iii.

Pine Bark-miner. (See Pales Weevil.)

Pine-inhabiting Aphis, Aphis pinicolens,
viii, 102.

-leaf Scale-insect, White pine Leaf-
louse, Coccus of the pine, Mytilaspis
pinifolii, Aspidiotus pinifoli®, i, 39; ii,
7,28,30,83; iii, 161; iv, 199.

-tree Blight, Schizoneura strobi, viii, 140.
Borer, Chaleophora virginiensis, v,
95; vi, 112, p. iii.
pineum, Sphinx, x, 105.
pinguinalis, Aglossa, vii, 248. 280.
pini. Lachnus, viii, 117.

Tomieus, v, 147.
pinicola, Schizoneura, viii, 137.
pinicolens. Aphis, viii, 102.
pinifoli®, Aspidiotus, i, 39.

Chermes, viii, 43,156.

pinifolii, Mytilaspis, ii, 30,83; iii, 161; iv, 199.
Pionea, Cabbage. (See Cabbage Pionea.)
Pionea forficalis, ix, 40.

rimosalis, ix, 2,37; xi, 8,36.
stramentalis, xi, 8,36.

Piophila casei. i, 32.

Pipiza radicum, viii, 131.
pisi. Aphis, viii, 64.

Bruchus, v, 129; vi, 127, p. iii.

Mylabrus, vi, 127.

Siphonophora, viii, 64.

Pissodes, v, 139.

nemorensis, vi, 134.
strobi, V, 139; vi, 38. 43. 133; pp. iii.iv.
placidus, Lucanus, v, 78.
plagiator, Ephedrus, viii, 54.

Plagiodera. v, 166,168.
interrupta. v, 168.
scripta, v, 168.
planatus, Brontes, v, 65.

Plant Beetles. Chrysomelid®. iv, 31,34; v,29,
31,34,127,128.161, 177, 178; vi, 70, 81. 83. 85, 86,
157.

Tetramerous. (See Tetramerous

Plant-beetles.)

-bug, Dotted-legged. (See Dotted-legged
Plant-bug.)

Four-striped. (See Four-striped

Plant-bug.)

Large Gray. (See Large Gray Plant-

bug.) .

Tarnished or Lined. (See Tarnished

Plant-bug.)

Plant Lice, Leaf Lice, Aphides, Aphid®,
Aphidid®, Aphidin®, i, 59, 60, 78; vii, 6,71;
viii, 5; xii, 5. 7.

Ants making use of, i, 60.

Characters, iv, 197,198; vii, 72, 73,74; viii,
8,9,26,44.

Classification, iv, 197, 199; vi,72; vii, 72, 74;
viii, 9, 33.

explanation of. viii. 6.

Climatic influences, viii, 182.183; xi,58.
Description of species, viii. 44, 18/ .
Distinguished from other insects, viii,
19.

External anatomy, viii, 20.

■■o i trb*

48

INSECT INDEX.

Plant Lice, Figures of wings, vii.73,74; viii,
25,44.

Food plants. i,23.59; iv, 197, 198; vii,72,278;

viii, 5, 8, 44, 181; xii. 84.

Gall-making, iv, 194, 198.

Habits and mode of life, iv, 197, 198, 199;

vii, 72. 73, 74; viii, 5. 6, 7, 19, 27, 44, 45, 46, 183.
Hibernation, iv, 195; vii, 75; viii, 45, 183.
Imago, viii, 20.

Injuries, viii, 6, 181, 183, 184.

Insect enemies, i, 44; v,183; vi, 86; viii, 172;

xii, 40, 42, 109, 111, 1 13, 114, 116, 117.

Larvae, viii, 19.

distinguished from larvae of mites,
i, 42.

Life history, viii, 27.

Nomenclature, viii, 6,19.

Pupa, viii, 20.

Remedies, i, 47; iv, 198; vi, 10,11,12,13;

viii. 179,182,183,184;

Reproduction, iv, 195; vi, 76; vii, 74; viii,
20,29,44; xi. 58.

Structure, vii, 72,73,74; viii, 6,7,8,20,44.
Synopsis of genera, viii, 212.

Synopsis of sub-divisions and genera of
Aphidinae, viii, 39.

Synopt cal tables of sub-families, viii, 39.
Plant Lice, Gall. (See Gall Lice.)

Jumping. (See Jumping Plant-lice.)
Twig. (See Twig Lice.)

Plant-louse. (See Plant Lice.)

Apple-root. (See Woolly Aphis of the
Apple-tree.)

Apple-tree or Apple. (See Apple-tree
Plant-louse.)

Balm of Gilead. (See Balm of Gilead
Plant-louse.)

Beetles: (See Lady-bugs.)

Cabbage. (See Cabbage Plant-louse.)
Carrot. (See Carrot Plant-louse.)
Cherry. (See Cherry-leaf Plant-louse.)
Chestnut Gay. (See Chestnut Gay
Louse.)

Corn. (See Corn Plant-louse.)

Currant. (See Currant Plant-louse.)
Grain. (See Grain Plant-louse.)

Grape. (See Grape Louse.)

Handsome. (See Handsome Plant-
louse.)

Hickory. (See Hickory Plant-louse.)
Jumping. (See Jumping Plant-louse.)
Melon. (See Melon Plant-louse.)
of the Willow. Lachnus salicicola, viii,
43.195,115, 119.

Pale Whitish- yellow. (See Pale Whitish-

yellow Plant-louse.)

Parsnip. (See Parsnip Plant-louse.)

Wheat. (See Grain Plant-louse.)

/ •

Plant Mites, G all or Bud Mites, Phytoptime,
Phytoptus, i. 42,44; iv, 198;ix,65; xii, 8, 123.
Platycerura furcilla, x, 168.

Platycerus, v, 77,78.

quercus, v, 78; vi, 95, p. iii.

Platydema, v, 125.

Platydema amerieanum, v, 125.
ellipticum, v, 126.
excavatum. v, 126.
flavipes, v, 126.

Platygaster, x.231.
error, x, 212.
herricki, x, 213.
lecanii, vii, 129.
tipulm, x, 212.

Platynus, v, 48,49; xii, 109.
deeorus, xii, 109.
limbatus, xii, 109.

Platyomus, v, 137.

Platypus, v, 146.

compositus, v, 146.

Platysamia, vii, 271.
plicata, Chlamys, v, 169.

Taenia, ix, 70.

plicatula, Microrhopala, v, 175.
plorabunda, Chrysopa, viii, 178, xii, 42.
Plum Aphis, Plum-leaf or Plum-tree Aph
Aphis pruni, viii, 72,87; xii, 6.
Caterpillar, Green Chestnut-backc
(See Green Chestnut-backed Plr
Caterpillar.)

Plum Curculio, Little Turk, Conotrachel
nenuphar, i, 64,78,79; iv, 181; vi, 137; vii
As example of genus, v, 142.

Beetle, vi, 137.

Birds feeding on, i, 70; vi, 141.

Broods, i, 67; vi, 138.

Classification, vi. 83.

Crescent cut made in fruit, i, 66,69.
Distinguished from grape curculio, i,
vi, 143.

plum gouger, i, 72,75.

Figure of beetle, v, 142; vi, 137.
larva, v, 142; vi, 137.
plum showing crescent slit.v, 142;
137.

pupa, v, 142; vi, 137.

Food plants, i, 64,65,70; vi, 138, pp. i, ii,
Habits and mode of life, i, 64.
Hibernation, i, 67,69; vi, 138.

Infesting black-knot, i, 68,78,79.

Insect enemies, i, 78; vi, 90,139.

Larva, i, 70; vi, 138.

as example of family, vi, 85.

Life history, vi, 137.

Occurrence, first, i, 64.
in 1871, vii, 4.

with plum moth, i, 78,79,80.
Oviposition, i, 66; v, 132; vi, 74,137.
Phytophagic species, i, 64,65.
Remedies, i, 71; vi, 140.

Plum Gouger, Anthonomus prunicida, i,
66.70.72,78; ii, 94; iv, 181; v, 141; vi, 136,1
p. iii.

Moth, Semasia prunivora, i, 70,78.
Plume, Crape- vine. (See Grape-vine Plum
Moths. Pterophoridae, vi, 72; vii, 267, 2(
273.

plumosa, Lampyris, v. 107,

Plusia, vii, 272; ix, 42; xi, 43.
accentifera, ix, 43.

\

INSECT INDEX

49

asia aerea, ix, 43, 44.45. -

geroides, ix, 44,45.
alticola, ix, 44.
ampla, ix, 44.
anargyra, ix, 50.
angulum, ix, 50.
argentifera, ix, 50.
aurichalcea, ix, 42,50.
aurifera, ix, 42,50.
balluca, vii, 228,280; ix, 44, 45, 50.
biloba, vii, 229; ix, 43,44,46,47.
bimaculata, ix, 44,50.
bractea, ix, 42,44,50.

'brassicas, vii, 229,278; ix, 14,19,35,40,43,
44,47,50; x, 140; xi, 38.
cbalcites, ix, 42.
chrysites, ix, 50.
contexta, ix, 43,44,46.
diasema, ix, 44.
divergens, ix, 44.
dyaus, ix, 43,44,47,50.
spigaea, ix, 44.
feisthamelii. ix, 50.
festucas. ix, 46,50.
formosa, ix, 44.
fratella, ix, 44.
gamma, ix, 41,42,43,44,50.
hochenwarthi, ix, 44.
ignea, ix, 44.
illustrata, ix, 44.
interrogationis, ix, 50,
iota, ix, 43,50.
labrosa, ix, 44.
laticlavia, ix, 44.
limbirena, ix, 50.
mappa. ix, 44.
metallica, ix, 44,50.
modesta, ix, 50.
monodon, ix, 44.
mortuorum, ix, 44.

Li, ix, 40,43,44.
nu, ix, 50.

8-scripta, ix, 44.
ou, ix, 43,44,47,48.
oxygramma, ix, 43,44,49.
parilis, ix, 44.
pasiphaeia, ix, 44.
pedalis, ix, 44.

precationis, vii, 229,282; ix,43, 44, 47, 49; x,
148; xi, 39, 40, 41, 42.
pseudogamma, ix, 44.
purpurigera, ix, 44.
putnami, ix, 44,46, 49.
sackeni, ix, 44.
signata, ix, 50.

simplex, ix, 43,44,48,50; xi, 8,38,58.
striatella, ix, 44.
testaeea, ix, 42.
thyatiroides, ix, 44.
u-aureum,ix, 44,
u- brevis, ix, 44,50.
verruca, ix, 43,44,47,48,50.
verticulata, ix, 50.

Plusia viridisignata, ix, 44.

Plusia, Cabbage. (See Cabbage Plusia.)
Hop. (See Hop Plusia.)

Thistle. (See Thistle Plusia.)

Plutella, vii, 273.

cruciferarum, vii, 265,266,278,280,282; ix,
52.

limbipennella. ix, 52.
xylostella, vii, 266.
poas, Rhizobius, viii, 166.

Podisus spinosus, vii, 119,218.

Podura, v, 65.
poeas, Thecla, x, 93.

Poecilus, v, 48,49.
polistiforme, Trochilium, i, 26.
polistiformis, JEgeria, i, 24; vii, 171,280; x,
106, 108.

polita, Parandra, v, 152.
polycephalus cerebralis, Hydatis, ix, 69.
Polydesmus complanatus, xi, 45.
Polydrosus, v, 137.
polygonaphis, Aphidius. viii, 175.

Praon, viii, 175.

polygoni, Gastrophysa, v, 167; vi, 171, p. ii.

Siphonop’nora, viii, 62.

Polygramma 10-lineata, vi, 160.
polymorpha, Tettigidea, ix, 96.

Tettix, ix, 96.

polyphemus, Attacus, iv, 23; v, 23; x, 124; xi,
54.

Telea, v, 23; vii, 191; x, 124,176.
Polyphemus Moth, Telea (Attacus) polyphe¬
mus, iv, 23; v, 23; vii, 191; x, 124,176; xi,54.
Polyphylla, v, 85,86.
occidentalis, v, 86.
variolosa, v, 86.

pometaria, Anisopteryx, vii, 238,277,279,281;

x, 148. (See Spring Canker-worm.)
pomicorticis, Mytilaspis, vii, 122, (See
Oyster-shell Bark-louse.)
pomonella, Carpocapsa, i, 19,27,30,31,32,67,
81; iv, 167; v, 64; vii, 260,277; x, 151; xi, 19,
31. (See Codling Moth.)

Trypeta, i. 29.

pomorum, Anthonomus, v, 141.

Mytilaspis, ii, 46.

Pompilidae, vi, 71.

Poplar -bullet Gall -louse. Pemphigus
populi-globuli, viii, 151,153.

Gall-louse, Pemphigus popularia, viii,
151,153,209.

-leaf Aphis, Aphis populifoliae, viii, 102,
151.

Gall-louse, Pemphigus populicaulis,
iv,193; vii, 76; viii, 43, 89, 148,149.
-louse Aphidius, Trioxys populaphis,
viii, 176.

-vein Gall-louse, Pemphigus populive-
nae, viii, 151,154.
populaphis, Trioxys, viii, 176.
popularia, Pemphigus, viii, 151, 153, 209.
populi, Acronycta, vii, 201,279.

50

INSECT INDEX.

populi, Aphis, viii.105.

Chaitophorus, viii,119.

Lachnus, viii, 119.

populicaulis, Pemphigus, iv. 193; vii,76; viii,
43,89,148,149.

populicola, Chaitophorus, viii, 42, 102, 103, 119,
201.

populifoiim, Aphis, viii, 102, 151.
populi-globuli. Pemphigus, viii, 151,153,
populi-monilis, Pemphigus, viii, 205.
populi-ramulorum. Pemphigus, viii. 209.
populi- transversus, Pemphigus, viii, 208, 209.
populivenac, Pemphigus, viii, 151, 154.
poreata, Microrhopala. v, 175.
porcatus, Trox, v, 83.

Porizon conotracheli, vi,139.

Porphyraspis, v, 176.
porrectella, Cerostoma, ix,54.
portlandia, Debis, x,92.

Potato-beetle, Colorado. (See Colorado
Potato-beetle.)

Striped or Old-fashioned. (See
Striped Potato-beetle.)
Three-lined. (See Three-lined Po¬
tato-beetle.)

-bug, Colorado. (See Colorado Potato-
beetle.)

-stalk Weevil, Baridius trinotatus, vi,
143, p. iii.

Potherb Butterfly. (See Turnip Butterfly.)
Praon avenaphis, viii, 176.
polygonaphis, viii, 175.
viburnaphis, viii, 175.

Prasocuris, v, 166, 168.

precationis.Plusia, vii,229,282; ix,43, 44,47, 49;

x, 148; xi, 39. 40, 41, 42.

Predaceous Beetles, xii,105.

Soft-winged. (See Soft- winged Preda¬
ceous Beetles.)

Predaceous Ground-beetles, Ground Bee¬
tles, CarabidaB, v, 39. Ill, 121; vi,12; xii,7,107.
Characters, iv, 14,31; v, 14,31, 39, 40,92, 119,
121 ; vi,18; xii, 107.

Classification, iv,24,36; v, 24, 36, 38; vi,80,
81,87.

Color, v,39.

Description, v,38; vi,88.

Descriptions of species most useful in
preying on injurious insects, vi,80.
Food, v,39; vi,18; ix,136; xii, 106, 107, 119.
Genera, v,40; xii, 108.

Habits, v, 39; vi, 70, 87, 88; xii, 106, 107, 119.
Larvae, v,40; vi,88.

Numbers, v, 39; vi,88.

Preying on canker worm, vi, 18; xii, 119.

locusts, ix,136.

Sub-families, v,40.

Superiority over the parasitic Hymen-
optera, xii, f20.

Predaceous Water-beetles, Hydradephaga,
iv,3S; v, 36, 50,92; vi, 70,81.

Water-bugs, Nepidae and Notonectidae,
vi,72; viii. 12.

rionides, v, 148, 150, 151, 152, 153, 157; vi, 36.

Prioninae, vi, 83, 84, 147,148.

Prionomerides, v, 134.

Prionus, v, 148, 151, 152; vi, 37.
brevicornis, v, 152.
imbricornis, v, 152; vi,38,43, 148, p. ii.
laticollis, v,151; vi, 36, 38, 43, 147, pp. i, ii, i

Prionus, Broad- necked. (See Broad-neck'
Prionus.)

Short - horned. (See Short - horn'
Prionus.)

Tile-horned. (See Tile-horned Prionu

Pristiphora grossulariae, x, 64, 65,69.
identidem. x,64, 65,69.
rufipes, x, 65, 70.

Prociphiliden, viii, 35.

Prociphilus, viii, 35.

bumeliae, viii, 147.

Procris americanus, vii, 179.
Proctotrupidae, vi, 71.

Prodenia, vii, 272.

autumnalis, vii, 98,219.
var. fulvosa, vii, 219.
obscura, vii, 219.
commelinae, vii, 219; x,138.
daggyi, vii, 97, 219.
frugiperda, vii, 219.
lineatella, x,139.
progne, Grapta, ii, 59; x, 85.

Vanessa, ii, 59.

Promachus apivorus, ii, 64; vi, 162, 163.
Promecopides, v,134.
promethea, Attacus, x, 125.

Callosamia, vii, 193, 277, 279, 281.
Prometheus Moth, Prometheus Silkwor
Callosomia (Attacus; promethea, vii, II!
277,279,281; x, 125, 176.
propinquans. Stenobothrus, ix,93.I
Proscopinae, ix,80.
protectum, Anthobium, v,75.
proteus, Eudamus, x,184.
protodice, Pieris, vii, 141, 278, 280; ix, 7, 10,
27,28,29,33,31,37; x, 76, 178.
var. beckeri, Pieris, ix, 29, 33, 34.
vernalis, Pieris, ix, 27, 28, 29, 33.
pruinella, Anarsia, xii, 77.
pruinosa, Ormenis, xii, 104.
pruni, Aphis, viii, 42, 72, 82, 87.

Hyalopterus, viii, 82.
prunicida, Anthonomus, i, 15, 66, 72; ii, 94;

141; vi, 136, 143, p. iii.
prunifoliae, Aphis, viii, 87.
prunivora, Acronycta, ii, 53.

Semasia, i,70,78.

Pselaphidae, iv, 33,36; v,33, 36, 64, 67,76, 112.
Pselaphus, v, 76.

Psenocerus, v,158.

pseudargiolus, Lycasna, vii, 158; x, 95.
Thecla, x,94.

pseudargyria, Leucania, x, 139.
pseudobyrsa, Byrsocrypta, viii, 151.

Pemphigus, viii, 151.
pseudogamma, Plusia, ix, 44.
Pseudoglossa lubricalis, x, 138,182.
pseudographa, Chrysopa, viii, 178.

INSECT INDEX.

51

ieudomus, v, 143.
seudo-neuroptera. i, 62.
seudo-nietanus, Tomonotus, ix,94.
ieudospret^lla, (Ecophora. i, 79.
^eudothyatira cymatophoroides.x, 129.
soeidre, vi,71.
soroptes equi, ix, <14.
sychomorpha, vii, 271.

epimenis, vii, 177, 178, 280; x, 111,172.
sylla, viii, 15, 16, 33, 47, 212. (See Jumping
Plant-lioe.)
annulata, viii, 18.

.carpini, viii, 18.
ficus, viii, 10.

pyri, iii, 134; vii, 73; viii, 13, 16.
quadrilineata, viii, 18.
quadrisignata, viii, 18.
rubi, viii, 17.
sp., viii, 18.
tripunctata, viii, 18.
urticeecolens, viii, 18.

’sylla, Annulated. (See Annulated Psylla.)
Four-lined. (See Four-lined Psylla.)
Hornbeam. (See Hornbeam Psylla.)
Three - dotted. (See Three - dotted
Psylla.)

Psyllidae, vi, 72; vii, 72, 73; viii, 10, 11, 12, 19,20,
33,211. (See Jumping Plant-lice.)
Psylliodes, v, 172, 173.

punctulata, v, 173; vi.168.

Psyllobora, v, 184, 185.

20-maculata, v, 185.

Pterocallis, viii, 36, 42, 106, 110, 112.
Pterochlorus, viii, 37, 42.

Pterocolides, v,135.

Pteromalus, ix,21; xii, 151 .
calandras, xii, 151.
gelechiae, xii, 151.
imbutus, ix,19.

puparum, vii, 146; ix, 2,17,18,19,24; xi, 35.
Pterophora diversilineata, vii, 237, 280.
Pterophoridse, vi, 72: vii, 267, 269,273.
Pterophorus, vii, 213.

periscelidactylus, vii, 268, 280.
Pterostichus, v, 48, 49; xii, 110, 115.
lucublaudus, xii, 110.
permundus, xii, 110.
sayi, xii, 110.

Ptilinus, v,102.

Ptinidae, v, 37, 92,93,101; vi, 70,80,82,85,86,87,

120.

Ptinus, v,102.

brunneus, v, 101, 102; vi,122, pp. i,ii.
frontalis, vi, 122.
fur, v, 102; vi. 121,122.
humeralis, v, 102.

Ptychodes, v,159.
pubescens, Agriotes, vii, 29.

Haltica, vi, 167.
pulchella, Acmaeodera, v,96.
pulchra, Chrysomela. v, 167.

Zygogramma, v, 167.

Pulicidse, vi,73; ix,61.

Pulex, iv.l; v.l.

punctata, Callipterus, viii, 196, 198.

Hyperaspis, i, 61.

Pelidnota, v, 88, 89; vi,106, p. ii.

Synchroa, v,120.
punctatella, Aphis, viii, 171.
punctatellus, Callipterus, viii, 171.
punctatus, Mycetophagus, v,61.
punctipennella, Anorthosia, i, 70.
punctipennis, Opsomala, ix,92.

Pyrgomorpha, ix, 92.
punctipes, Euschistus, xi.27.
punctiventris, Cleonus, xii. 55.
punctulata, Haltica, vi,168, p. ii.

Psylliodes, v, 173; vi,168.

Uloma, v,124.

Punctulated Flea-beetle, Psylliodes (Hal¬
tica) punctulata, v,173; vi,168, p. ii.
puparum, Callimome, ix,18.

Pteromalus, vii, 146; ix, 2, 17, 18, 19, 24;
xi,35.

purgatus, Ophion, x,41.

Purple Cabbage-worm. (See Cabbage Pio-
nea.)

purpurata, Coptocycla, v, 177.
purpurea, Metonius, v,96.

Pachyscelus, v, 96.
purpurigera, Plusia, ix,44.
pusilla, CEneis, v,185.
pusillum, Cryptobium, v,71.
pustulatus. Trox, v,82.
putnami. Plusia. ix, 44, 46, 49.

Putrivora aquatica, iv,30; v,36,52.
brevipennata, iv,36; v,36, 66.
terrestria, iv,36; v,36,54.

Pygaera ministra, iv,186.

Pyralidae, vi,72; vii, 245, 269, 272.

Pyralis, vii, 272.

farinalis, vii, 247, 278, 282.
pyralis, Photinus, v, 106, 107.

Pyrameis, vii, 270.

atalanta, vii, 153, 281; x,86.
cardui, vii, 154,278,282: x, 87, 153.
huntera, vii, 153,278,280,281,282.; x, 86, 153.
pyramidoides, Amphipyra, ii,56; vii, 225.

Pyrophila, vii, 225, 279, 280,281,282; x,180.
Pyrgomorpha brevicornis, ix,92.

punctipennis, ix,92.

Pyrgus, vii, 270.

tesseilata, vii, 161,

pyri, iEgeria, vi, 40, 44, p. iii; vii. 170; x, 106,
107.

Anthonomus, v, 141.

Aphis, viii, 101.

Chermes, iii, 134.

Eriosoma. iv, 198; viii, 128, 136. (See
Woolly Aphis of the Apple-tree.)
Lecanium. vii, 120.

Pemphigus, i, 7, 55; viii, 126, 128, 133, 150,
152. (See Woolly Aphis of the Apple-
tree.)

Phytoptus, xii, 125, 134, 140.

Psylla, iii. 134; vii, 73; viii, 13, 16.
Typhlodromus, xii, 140.

Pyrochroa, v, 116, 117,

52

INSECT INDEX

Pyrochroa flabellata, v, 117.

Pyrochroidse, iv, 34: v, 35, 112, 113, 116.
Pyrophila, vii.272.

pyramidoides, vii, 225, 279 , 280, 281, 282;
x, 180.

Pyrrharctia isabella, vii, 182,278,279,280,281,
x,169; xi, 60.

Pyrrhia exprimens, vii, 233, 282.

Pythidee, v, 118,119.

Pytho, v,119.

Q

quadrata, Odontota, v, 175.
quadricornis, Ceratomia, vii, 167.
quadrigeminata, Eburia, v,154; vi, 36, 38, 43.
149, p. ii.

quadrigibbus. Anthonomus, i, 77 ; v, 132, 140,
141; vi, 83, 85, 135, pp. i, ii, iii.
quadri-impressa, Chrysobothris, vi, 111.
quadrilineata, Psylla, viii, 18.
quadrimaculata, Dacne, v, 181.
quadrimaculatus, Serropalpus, v,120.
quadripes, Phytoptus, xii, 128, 132, 133, 135.
quadripunctatus, Ischyrus, v,181.
quadrisignata, Psylla, viii, 18.
quadrisignatus, Ips, vi,91, pp. i, iii.
quadrispinosus. Scolytus, v, 146.147,148; vi,
35,38,43,85,145, pp. ii, iii.
quadrivittatus, Capsus, ii, 61.

Phytocoris, ii, 61.

Quedius, v,69.

querci, Phytoptus, xii, 138.

Schizoneura, viii, 139.
quercieola, Callipterus, viii, 196.199.
Chaitophorus, viii,‘/01.

Myzocallis, viii, 106.

Thelaxes, viii, 34.
quereifolise, Aphis, viii, 79.

Lachnus, viii, 108, 118.

quercifoliana, Argyrolepia, vii, 4, 114, 257,
279,281; ix,142.

quercifolii, Callipterus, viii, 43, 112.

Drepanosiphum, viii, 79.
quercina, Lachnosterna, i,16; v,85; vi,97.

Phyllophaga, v,85.
quercitronis, Lecanium, vii, 129.
quercus, Aphis, viii, 108.

Callipterus, viii, 108, 113, 196.

Platycerus, v, 78; vi, 95, p. iii.
quercus-sculpta, Cynips, i, 78, 79.

Quince curculio, Conotrachelus crataegi, vi,
141, pp. ii, iii.

quindecimpunctata, Anatis, vi, 174; vii, 128;
viii, 174; xi, 27.

Coceinella, v, 183; xii, 116.

Mysia, vi, 162.

quinqaemaculata, Macrosila, vii, 169, 280, 281,
282; x, 104.

quinquemaculatus, Oxyporus, v, 70.
quinquenotata, Coceinella, xii, 118.

R

radiata, Locusta, ix,93.

Tragocephala, ix.93.
radiatus, Gomphocerus, ix, 93.
radicis, Trama, viii, 168.
radicum, Pipiza, viii, 131.
rapae, Pieris, vii. 144, 278, 280 ; ix, 2, 8, 25, 27, :
31,34,35,37,39; x, 77,179; xi, 7,32,63,82; x
92. (See European Cabbage worm.)
var. novanglise, Pieris, ix. 27, 29, 32.
yreka, Pieris, ix, 27, 29, 31.

Rape Butterfly. (See European Cabba
worm.)

raptatorius, Reduvius, ii, 64 ; vi,162.
Rascal Leaf-crumpier. (See Apple Lei
crumpler.)

Raspberry Cane Borer, Raspberry Bor<
Agrilus ruficollis. v,94,96; vi, 35, 37,43,1
pp. i, iii.

Geometer, Synchlora rubivoraria, v
238,282.

Root-borer, JEgeria rubi, vi,40,44, pp.

iii; vii, 175, 282; x, 106, 108.

Slug, Saw-fly or Worm, Selandria rul
vi, 61, p. iii; vii, 108, 282; x, 64,65,67.
Reaping Rustic. (See Dark-sided Ci
worm.)

Red Elm Gall-louse, Pemphigus ulmifusi

viii, 153.

-humped Prominent, Trim Prominei
(Edemasia (Notodonta) concinna, v
190; x, 119.

Red-legged Locust, Red-legged Gras
hopper, Caloptenus femur-rubrum, vii,:

ix, 124.

Birds destructive to, ix, 137.
Classification, ix, 91.

Climatic influences, ix, 135.
Distinguished from C. atlanis, vii, ;
ix, 124.

C. scudderi, ix,121.

C. spretus, i, 99; vii, 36, 37,38; ix.R
123,124.

Figure of female, vii, 35; ix,86, 124.

tip of male abdomen, vii, 35; ix, 125
Food, i, 99; ix,133.*

Found in Illinois, ix, 95.

Habits, i, 99.

Injuries, i, 99, 100; ix, 133, 134, 136.

Insect enemies, iii, 158; vi, 56.

Internal parasite, ix,137.

Life history, ix, 131.

Pupa, ix,132.

Relation to C. atlanis, vii, 40; ix, 126.

C. spretus, vi,45.

Remedies, ix, 137.

Synonymy, ix, 95.

Red Spider, Tetranychus, xii. 123,124, E
142, 143.

-spotted Caterpillar Hunter. (See Fie
Ground-beetle.)

INSECT INDEX

53

ed-tailed Tachina-fly.Exorista (Nemorasa)
leucanias, x,36; xi,53,63.

Weevil. (See Wheat Midge.)
eduviidae, vi, 73; vii, 129; viii, 12.
eduvius raptatormfe,ii,64; vi,162.

Bgalis, Citheronia, vii, 195,278,279,280,281,

282,283; x, 122,162.

slictus, Ligyrus, v,84.

anigera, Mamestra, vii, 215; x, 137.

epanda, Cicindela, x, 41.

epentis, Agrotis, vii, 92,209.

eticulatum, Calopteron, v, 105.

etusa, Anthophora, xii, 150.

lhagium, v, 156.

lineatum, v, 156.
lhanis, v, 182.
thinocola. viii, 212.
thinoncus, v,143.

Ihipiceridae, v,92,93.
thipiphoridse, iv,34; v, 35, 112, 113, 117.
thizaphis vastatrix, viii, 158.

Ihizobiinas, viii, 36, 37,39, 41, 164.

Ihizobius, viii, 35, 37, 41, 43, 165.
laetucae, viii, 43,165.
poae, viii, 166.
sonchi, viii, 167.

Ihizophagus, v,59.
hodryas, Aphis, viii, 211.

•hois, Blepharida, v, 172; vi,167; p. iv.
Pemphigus, viii, 152.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 194.

Rhopalocera, vii, 135, 269.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 34, 36, 40, 42, 79, 83.

Iberberidis, viii, 81.
dianthi, viii, 80.
lactucae, viii, 61.
lonicera, viii, 104.
pastinacae, viii, 84.
rhois, viii, 194.
ribis, viii, 76, 77.
salicis, viii, 194.
tulipae, viii, 80, 188.

Rhynchites.v, 132, 142.

Rhynchitides, v, 142.

Rhynchophora, v. 126, 127, 128, 131,132. (See
Snout- beetles.)

Rhyncohphorus, v, 144.

Rhyncolus, v, 145.

Rhyparochromus devastator, vii, 41.

Ribbon- worms, ix,58.
ribearia, Abraxas, vii, 237.

Allopia, vii, 237.

Eufltehia, vii, 237,280.
ribicola. Aphis, viii. 76.

Siphonophora, viii, 76.
ribis. Aphis, i, 60; viii, 76.

Myzus, viii, 50, 76.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 76, 77.
ribis-nigri, Aphis, viii, 61.

Rice Weevil. Sitodrepa oryzas, ix, 40.
rileyana, Tortrix, vii, 256, 279, 280, 282, 283.
rileyi, Phylloxera, viii, 163.

Schizoneura, viii, 136.
rimosalis, Orobena, ix,38.

rimosalis, Pionea, ix,2,37; xi,8,36.

Robber Elies, Asilidae, iv, 20; v, 20; vi. 73;
ix, 61.

robiniae, Clytus, v, 149, 154; vi, 36,38,44,83,84,
151; p. ii.

Cossus, vi,42.

Cyllene, vi,38, 44, 151.

Xyleutes, vi, 34, 42, 44; pp. i, ii, iii; vii,
198,277,279,281; x, 152.
roboris, Aphis, viii, 34.

Phylloxera, viii, 34.

Rocky Mountain Locust, Migratory or W est-
ern Locust, Hateful Grasshopper, Calop-
tenus spretus, i, 82; vi,3,44; vii, 38.

Birds feeding on, i, 91; vi,53; ix,137.
Chronological history, i,92.

synopsis of grasshopper invasions,
i, 99.

Classification, ix,92.

Climatic influence, i, 83, 90, 91; vi,3, 45; ix,
135,140; x, 48, 55; xi,99; xii, 47.

Color, ix, 122.

Confounded with other species, i, 92, 93,
99; vi,44, 45.

Congressional commission to investi¬
gate, vi,46.

Description of female, vii, 36; ix, 121.

male, vii, 37; ix,123.

Dimensions, vii. 38; ix, 123.

Distinguished from C. atlanis, vii, 38;
ix, 124.

C. femur-rubrum, i, 99; vii, 38, 39, 40;
ix, 124.

Eggs, ix, 131.

incubation of, i, 83, 90, 96; ix,135.
Figure of eggs aiTd egg-pods, vii, 37.
external anatomy, ix,74,76.
female, vii, 35; ix, 121.

depositing eggs, vii, 37.
tip of male abdomen, vii, 35.

Food, i. 82, 90, 91, 92, 95; vi, pp. ii, iii, iv; ix,
133.

^ound in Illinois, ix,96.

Habits, i, 82, 90, 91, 92; vi,47; ix,135.
Hibernation, i,83.

Illinois not invaded by. i, 82, 100, 102; vi, 3;
vii, 6; ix, 139; x,48.

Injuries, i. 82, 90, 91, 92, 95, 98; vi, 47, 53;
ix, 133.

Insect enemies, iii, 158; vi, 56; ix, 136;
xii, 27.

Internal parasite, ix,137.

Life history, ix, 131,133.

Migrations, i, 82, 83, 90, 91, 92, 94, 101; vi, 3, 47;
ix, 139, 140.

Migratory habits, i, 89 ; vi,56.

Natural history, i,82,90.

Occurrence in 1866, i, 83.

1867, i, 81,94,97.

Oviposition, i, 82, 90, 96 ; ix, 131.

Parasitic disease, xii, 47.

Propagation, i, 83, 101,102,103; ix, 132.
Pupa, ix, 132.

Range, i,82,97; vi, 46, 56; vii, 6; ix,139.

54

INSECT INDEX.

Rocky Mountain Locust, remedies, i, 91; vi,
52; ix, 137.

Variety of C. femur-rubrum, vi,45,56.
Root-borer, Grape. (See Broad-necked
Prionus.) (See Grape Root-borer.)

Peach. (See Peach Borer.)

Raspberry. (See Raspberry Root-
borer.)

Root Lice, iv. 198; vi, 11 ; viii, 182; xii, 88.

-louse Syrphus-fly, Pipiza radicum,
viii, 131.

-worm, Corn. (See Corn Root- worm.)
-worms, Strawberry. (See Strawberry
Root- worms.)

rosaceana, Loxotsenia, vii, 256, 277, 282. x,153;
xi, 19.

rosse, Aphis, viii, 34, 42.

Selandria, ii, 79; iv,23; v,23; x, 64, 65, 66.
Siphonophora, viii. 50.

Tenthredo, iv,23, v,23.
rosarum, Siphonophora, viii, 51.

Rose Aphis, Siphonophora rosse, viii, 45,50.
-bug, Macrodactylus subspinosus, i, 24,
58; v, 87; 6,103,160, pp. i, ii.iii, iv; vii, 34,
278.

Slug, Rose fly, Selandria rosse, ii, 79; iv,
23; v, 23; x, 64, 65, 66.
rosea, Odontota, v,l75.

Rosy Dryocampa. (See Green-striped Ma¬
ple worm.)

Round-headed Apple-tree Borer, Saperda
candida=S. bivittata, vi,38.

Beetle, vi, 152, 156.

Classification, v, 158, 159; vi,83.
Destruction by woodpeckers, vi, 155.
Distinctive larval characteristics, vi,35,
84.

Example of sub-family, vi,84.

Figure of beetle, v,157; vi,152.
larva, v, 157; vi, 152.
pupa, v, 157; vi, 152.

Injuries, vi,75, 154.

Larva, vi. 35, 84, 153.

Life history, vi, 152, 153.

Plants inj ured, vi, 44, pp. i, ii, iii.
Remedies, vi, 154, 155.

Varieties of apple-trees injured, vi, 154.
Round Worm of the Intestine, Ascarislum-
bricoides, ix,70.
worms, ix, 58.

Royal Walnut JVfoth, Citheroniaregalis, vii,
195, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283; x, 122, 162.
rubecula, Aphis, viii, 211.
rubi, JEgeria, vi, 40,44, pp. i, iii; vii, 175, 282; x,
106, 108.

Pemphigus, viii, 147.

Psylia, viii, 17.

Selandria, vi, 61, p. iii; vii, 108,282; x,64,65,
67.

Siphonophora, viii, 64.
rubicunda, Dryocampa, vii, 196,279,281; x,
121.

rubifolii, Sipha, viii, 43, 121.
rubiginosum, Acridium, ix, 91, 96, 128.

rubivoraria, Synchlora, vii, 238, 282.
rubra, Odontota, v, 175.
rubricollis, Elater, v, 100; vi,25.
rubricoma, Apatela, x,132.
rudbeckiac, Siphonophora, viii, 49, 55, 57.
190.

ruficollis, Agrilus, v,9J,96; vi, 35,37,43,1
PP. i, iii.

rufipernis, Oxyporus. v, 70.
rufipes, Corvnetes, v, 110.

Diaperis, v, 125.

Necrobia, v, 109.

Pristiphora, x, 65, 70.
rufus, Catogenus, v, 66.
rugosa, Gldipoda, ix, 95, 115.
rugosus, Hippiscus, ix, 95.

Rummaging Beetle, Green-spotted Cat'
pillar Hunter, Calosoma scrutator, vi,
vii, 118; x, 41; xi, 27; xii, 108.
rumicis. Aphis, viii. 88.
rumicis, var. atriplicis, Aphis, viii, 193.
ruscarius, Elaphrus, v, 42; x, 41.

Rustic, Black- C. (See Spotted Cutwor
Checkered. (See Corn Cutworm.)
Climbing. (See Climbing Cutworm.)
Lance, (See Greasy Cutworm.)
Reaping. (See Dark-sided Cutwor
Unarmed. (See Variegated Cutwor
rusticella, Tinea, vii, 264,278.
rusticum, Acridium, ix, 96.
rusticus, Anisodactylus, xii, 112.
Rutelidfe, v, 31,37,79,84,85,88; vi, 70,82,84,
87,104.

Rutelides, v, 90.
rutilana, Dapsilia, x,153.

Rypophaga, iv, 19; v, 19.

S

sackeni, Plusia, ix, 44.

Saddle-back Moth, Empretia stimulea,
187,278,282; x, 117.

Sagra, v, 162.

salicaphis, Trioxys, viii, 176.
salicelis, Lachnus, iii, 139; viii, 119.
salicicola, Phytoptus, xii, 138.

Aphis, viii, 192.

Chaitophorus, viii, 105.

Euura, x, 64,65,69.

Lachnus, viii, 43,105,115,119.
Siphonophora, viii, 63,192.
salicipomonella, Batracbedra, i, 79.
salicis, Mytilaspis, iii, 140.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 194.
salicis-gemma, Euura, x, 65.69.
salicis-nigrae, Aspidiotus, i, 40.
salicis-ovum, Euura, x, 65. 69.
salicis-pisum, Nematus, x, 65,68.
salicis-pomum, Nematus, viii, 206; x. 67
salicti, Aphis, viii, 115.

Salpingus, v, 119.

Salt marsh Moth, Salt marsh Caterpii
Leucarctia (Arctia) acrsea, vii, 79,183,
280; ix, 53; x, 115.169,170.

INSECT INDEX.

55

,altatoria, ix. 80, 82.

;ambuci, Aphis, viii, 100.

;ambucifolisB, Aphis, viii, 100. |

iiamia, vii, 271.

ceeropia, vii, 193,277,279,281; x, 126,177,
Columbia, x, 177.
cynthia, vii, 194,277; x, 125.

Sand-fleas, ix. 58.

Wasps, vi,71.

sanguinea, Cycloneda.xii, 42,118.
sanguinaria, Aphis, ix, 94.
sanguineus. Clerus, v, 109.
sanguinipennis, Elater, v, 100; vi, 25; vii, 27,
28.

Horia, v, 115.

sanguinipes, Acridium, ix, 96.

Saperda. iv,28; v, 28, 158, 159; vi, 33.37, 152.
bivittata, v, 157; vi, 38, 84, 152. (See
Round-headed Apple-tree Borer.)
Candida, vi, 35, 38, 44, 83, 84,152, pp. i, ii, iii*
(See Round-headed Apple-tree Borer.)
tridcntata, vi, 38, 44, 156, p. ii.
vestita, vi,156, p. ii.

Saperda, Hairy. (See Hairy Saperda.)

Elm-tree. (See Three-toothed Saperda.)
Three-toothed. (Se.e Three-toothed
Saperda.)

Saprinus, v,59.

Saprophaga, iv,19,36; v, 19. 37, 80.

Sarcophaga, iv,l9; v,19.

Sarcoptes scabiei, ix,66.

Sarcoptinae, ix,65.

sassacus, Pamphila, vii, 159. 280, 282; x,97.
Sassacus Skipper, Pamphila sassacus, vii,
159,280,282; x,97.

Satellite Sphinx, Philampelus pandorus,
vii, 165, 280, 283; x, 101, 175.
satellitia, Philampelus, vii, 165.

Scopelosoma, i, 79.

Saturnia maia, x, 127.

Satyridae, x,90.

Satyrus, vii, 270.

alope, vii, 156; x,92.
nephele, vii. 156. 280; x, 92, 180.
satyrus, Xyloryctes, v, 84.
saucia, Agrotis, vii, 94, 211, 278; x,134.

Saw flies, Tenthredinidae, vi,71,77; x, 62, 63.
Saw-fly, Abbott’s. (See Abbott’s Saw-fly.)

(Currant. (See Currant Saw-fly.)
Fir-tree. (See Fir-tree Saw-fly.)

Linden. (See Linden Saw-fly.)
Raspberry. (See Raspberry Slug.)
Strawberry. (See Strawberry worm.)
Saw-horned Wood-beetles, Sternoxi, iv,37,
v, 37, 92, 93; vi,82.

Saw-horned Wood-borers, Hammer-head¬
ed Wood-borers, Saw-horned Wood-
beetles, Buprestidm, iv, 30; v,30.94.
Beetles, vi,35.

Characters, iv, 28; v.28,94; vi, 37, 77, 86.

109.

Classification, iv,37; v, 37, 92, 93; vi,37. 70,
80,82,86,87.

Saw-horned Wood-borers, Description, v,

94; vi, 109.

Distinguished from Elateridas, v,97.
Figure, vi,110.

Genera classified, v,95.

Habits, v, 94; vi,70, 109.

Injuries, v, 94; vi,84,109.

Larvae, v,94; vi,35, 70,77,82,84, 109.

Name, vi,82, 84.

Species, v,95.

Saxinis, v, 129, 169.

omogera, v,170.
sayi, Pterostichus, xii,110.

Scab Mite, Horse or Sheep Itch-mite,
Psoroptes equi, ix,64.
scabiei, Acarus. i, 44.

Sarcoptes, ix,66.
scabra, Hypena, x.148.

Osmoderma, v,91.

Scaeva, i, 62.

Scale-insect, Pine-leaf. (See Pine-leaf
Scale-insect.)

scandens, Agrotis, vii, 208; x,133.
Scaphidiidae, iv,36; v, 36, 55, 58
Scaphidium, v,58.
scapulare, Calopteron, v,105.
scapularis, Elater, v, 100; vi,25.

Odontota, v,175.

Scat abaeidae, xii,109,114.

Scarabaeus. v,79.

Scarites, v,43; xii,108.
angulata, v,43.
subterraneous, xii, 108.

Scaritides, v, 41, 43, 46.

Scavenger-beetles, Land. (See Land Scav¬
enger-beetles.

Short- winged. (See Short-winged
Scavenger beetles.)

Water. (See Water Scavenger-beetles.)
Scepsis fulvicollis, x, 171.

Schistocerca americana, ix,96.

Schizoneura, i,56; viii, 22, 25, 33, 35,37,41,43,
117, 125, 134.

americana, viii, 202, 211.
caryae. viii, ill.
compressa, viii, 138.
cornicola, viii, 141.
fagi, viii, 140.
fungicola, viii, 141, 197.

var., viii, 141.
imbricator, viii, 139.

lanigera, viii, 31,124,126. (See Woolly
Aphis of the Apple-tree.)
panicola, viii, 138.
pinicola, viii, 137.
querci, viii. 139.
rileyi, viii, 136.
strobi, viii, 140.
tessellata, viii, 139.
ulmi, viii, 119, 124, 140,204,211.
vagans, vii, 73.
venusta, viii, 139.

Schizoneuriden, viii, 35,

Schizoneurinae, vii, 74; viii, 38, 125.

56

v

INSECT INDEX

Schizoneurini. viii,124.125.

Sciara, i, 18, 19.

inconstans, i, 19.
mali, i, 19, 32.

scintillans, Photinus, v, 107.

Scolecida, ix,58,59.

Scoliadse, vi,71.

Scoliopteryx, vii,272.
libatrix, vii,227.

Scolytidse, iv, 34,35; v, 34,35,102,126,127,145.

149; vi, 35, 37, 70, 77, 81, 83, 85, 86, 144.

Scolytus, v, 145, 146,147.
caryrn, v, 146, 148; vi,145.

4-spinosus, v, 146, 147, 148; vi, 35, 38, 43, 85,
145, pp. ii, iii.

Scopelosoma satellitia, i,79.

Scorpion flies, Panorpidae, vi,71.

Scorpions, ix,58.

Scraptia, v, 120.

scribonia, Ecpantheria, vii, 184, 270,281,282,
283; x, 116.

scripta, Plagiodera, v, 168.
scrophulariae, Phorodon, viii,72.
scrutator, Calosoma, vi, 88; vii, 118; x,41; xi,
27; xii,108.

scudderi, Lycaena. x,95.

Pezotettix, ix, 91, 95, 121.

Scutelleridae, vi,73; viii, 12.

ScydmaBnidas, iv,36; v,36,56, 64, 112.

Scymnus, i, 61; v, 184, 185.

cervicalis, viii, 132.

Sea-worms, ix,58.

Selandria caryae, x, 64, 65, 66.
cerasi, x, 64, 65, 67 ; xii, 98.
juglandis, x, 64, 65, 67.
rosae, ii, 79; iv,23; v,23; x, 64, 65, 66.
rnbi, vi,61, p. iii; vii. 108, 282; x, 64, 65, 67.
tiliae, x, 64, 65, 67.
vitis, x,65, 67.

Semasia janthinana, i, 81.
prunivora, i, 70, 78.
woeberana, i, 82.

Semicolon Butterfly, Grapta interroga¬
tions, vii, 151,277,279,280; x, 84, 164.
Semiotellus destructor, x, 210, 211, 212, 231.
semisculpta, Chrysobothris, vi.lll.
senatoria, Anisota. vii, 196.

Dryocampa, vii, 196, 279, 281; x, 120,161.
Senatorial Dryocampa, Anisota (Dryocam¬
pa) senatoria, vii, 196,279,281; x, 120,161.
Senometopia militaris, x,37; xi,53.
septendecim, Cicada, iii, 124; vi,75.
septentrionalis, Arrhenodes, v, 131.

Brenthus, v,131.

septentrionis, Arrhenodes, v,131.

Brenthus, v. 131.
serialis, Gryllus, ix,96.

Serica, v,86,88; vi,102.
iricolor, v,88.
sericea, v,88; vi,102.
vespertina, v,88; vi,102, p. iv.

Sericaria mori, xi,58.
sericea, Serica, v,88; vi,102.
sericeum, Trombidium, vi,56.

sericeus, Anisodactylus, xii, 112.

Chlaenius, v,46.

serraticornis, Philometra, vii, 246, 280.
Serricornes, iv,34,37; v.35,37,91; vi,87.
serripennis, Sphenostethus, v,152.
Serropalpi, v, 119.

Serropalpus, v, 119, 120.

4-maculatus, v, 120.
serrulatus, Atheroides, viii, 34.
serval, Aphodius, v,81.

Sesia, vii, 270.

difflnis, vii, 163; x, 99, 160.
thysbe, vii, 164, 282; x,99.
tenuis, x,159.
setariae, Aphis, viii, 192.

Siphonophora, viii, 56, 192.
setulosus, Macrodactylus, v,87.
Seventeen-year Locust, Periodical Cicada
Cicada septendecim, iii, 124; vi,74, 75.
sexguttata, Cicindela, v,39; vi,88.
Shagbark Hickory-tree Borer, Bostrichi
(Sinoxylon) basilaris, v, 103; vi, 38, 43,12
pp. i, ii, iii, iv.

Sheep Bot-fly, (Estrus ovis, ix,60.
Itch-mite. (See Scab Mite.)

Tick, Melophagus ovinus, i, 41; ix,59,6<

63.

Ticks. (See Forest Elies.)
Short-horned Prionus, Prionus brevieoi
nis, v,152.

Wood-borers, Bark Miners, Shori
horned Borers, Scolytid®, iv,34,3(
v, 30,34.35,102,126,127,145,149; vi, 31
37,70.77,81,83,85,86,144.

-snouted Curculios, Short Snouts, Bre
virostres, v, 132, 133, 136; vi, 83, 130.
-winged Scavenger-beetles, Braehely
tra, Staphylinidae, iv, 30, 32. 33, 35, 36; v
30, 33. 34, 36, 66, 67, 76, 112; vi, 70, 80, 81.
Sigalphus curculionis,i,70; vi, 139.
signata, Hyperaspis, vii, 128.

Plusia, ix, 50.

Trypeta, i, 33.

Silis, v, 107, 108.

Silk- worm. Bombyx (Sericaria) lmori,iv,17
v,17; xi,58; xii, 55, 56.

Cecropia. (See Cecropia Moth.)

Luna. (See Luna Moth,)

Prometheus. (See Prometheus Moth.
Silky Leaf-chafer, Serica sericea, v,88; vi
102.

Evening. (See Evening Silky Leaf
chafer.)

Leaf-chafers, Serica, v, 86, 88; vi,102.
Silpha, v, 54, 57, 179.
americana, v,58.
caudata, v,58.
inasqualis, v,57,58.
marginata, v,58.
opaca, v,57,

Silphidae,iv,36; v, 36, 55, 57, 63; vi, 70, 80, 81.
Silvanides, v,65.

Silvanus, v,65, 66.

I

INSECT INDEX.

57

Silver-marked Moth. (See Celery Worm.)
fimilis, Chrysomela, v, 1G7.
simplex, Anabrus, vi,54.

Plusia, ix, 43, 44, 48, 50 ; xi, 8, 38, 58.

Simulidm, vi,73: ix,59.

•Sinodendron, v,78.

Sinoxylon basilare, v,103; vi,38, 43,124,pp.
i, ii, iii, iv.

Sipha, viii, 36, 41, 43, 120.
maydis, viii, 122.
rubifolii, viii, 43, 121.

Siphocoryne, viii, 36, 40, 42. 83.
capreae, viii, 84.
pastinacae, viii, 84.

Siphonophora, viii, 21, 22, 25, 34, 36, 40, 42, 46, 68,
69,73, 74,79, 81,84,191.
absinthii, viii, 69.
acerifoliaB, viii, 47, 78, 195.
achyrantes, viii, 187.
ambrosiae, viii, 50.
asclepiadifolii, viii, 58.
asclepiadis, viii, 58, 191.

var. lutescens, viii, 191.
avenae, viii, 29,51.
calendulas, viii, 190.
calendulella, viii. 188.
coreopsidis, viii, 59.
crataegi, viii, 189.
cucurbitae, viii, 67.
cyparissiae, viii, 57.
dirhoda, viii, 67.
erigeronensis, viii, 58.
euphorbiae, viii, 56.
euphorbicola, viii, 57.
fragariae, viii, 68.

var. immaculata, viii, 68,191.
gei, viii, 65.
gerardiae, viii, 65.
granaria, viii, 6, 54.
heucherae, viii, 66.
jaccae, viii, 190.
lactucae, viii, 60.
liriodendri, viii, 189.
malvae, viii, 61.
menthae, viii, 68.
pisi, viii, 64.
polygon!, viii, 62.
ribicola, viii, 76.
rosae, viii, 50.
rosarum, viii, 51.
rubi, viii, 64.

rudbeckiae, viii, 49, 55, 57, 59, 190.
salicicola, viii, 63, 192.
setariae, viii, 56, 192.
sonchella, viii, 189.
sonchi, viii, 6o, 189.
var., viii, 190.

jaccae, viii, 190.
tanaceti, viii, 68.
tiliae, viii, 188.
tulipae, viii, 188.
ulmariae, viii, 64.
verbenae, viii, 63.
viticola, viii, 55.

Siphonophorini, viii, 39, 40, 45, 46, 83, 114.
sisymbrii, Pieris, ix, 27, 28, 29.

Sitodrepa oryzae, ix,40.
panicea, vi, 122.

Sitones, v, 137. *

Sitophilus, v,144.
granarius, i.7.

Skeletonizer, Apple-leaf, Pempelia ham-
mondi, vii,252.

Skip-jacks. (See Wire worms.)

Skipper, Bathyllus. (See Bathyllus Skip¬
per.)

Cernes. (See Cernes Skipper.)

Huron. (See Huron Skipper.)

Juvenal’s. (See Juvenal’s Skipper.)
Metacomet. (See Metacomet Skipper.)
Otho. See Otho Skipper.)

Peck’s. (See Peck’s Skipper.)

Sassacus. (See Sassacus Skipper.)
Tessellated. (See Tessellated Skipper.)
Tityrus. (See Tityrus Skipper.) ,
Skippers, Hesperidae, vii, 159,269, 270.

Slug, Cherry. (See Cherry Slug.)

Pear. (See Cherry Slug.)

Raspberry. (See Raspberry Slug.)

Rose. (See Rose Slug.)

Small Bronze Flea-beetle, Crepidodera
(Haltica) helxines. iii, 137; v, 171, 173.
Smeared Dagger. Apatela (Acronycta) ob-
linita, vii, 201, 279, 282; x, 131,170.
Smerinthus, vii, 270.

excaecatus, vii, 167, 277, 282,
j uglandis, vii, 167, 279, 280, 283.
modestus, x, 159.

Smicronyx, v,140.
smilacis, Thecla, x,93.

smithiae, Chaitophorus, viii, 200.
Snap-jacks. (See Wire worms.)
Snapping-beetle, Luminous. (See Lumin¬
ous Snapping-beetle.)
beetles. (See Wire worms.)
Snout-beetle, Imbricated. (See Imbricated
Snout-beetle.)

Snout Beetles, Snout Weevils, Curculios,
Weevils, Rhynchophora, Curculionidae,
v, 119,127,131.

Characters of family, v, 131; vi, 37,77,86.
tribe, v, 126, 127.

Classification, iv, 33,34; v, 34,35,126,132;

vi, 37, 70, 81, 83, 86, 130.

Cocoons, v,29.

Curculionidae distinguished from Anth-
ribidae,v,129.

Brenthidae, v, 130.

Bruchidae, v.126.

Short-horned Wood-borers, v, 145,
146.

Descriptions, v. 128, 131; vi,129.

Food, v, 128.

Habits and modes of life, v, 128; vi,35,
85, 130.

Injuries, v, 128, 132; vi, 70, 85, 130.

Larvae, v, 128, 131; vi, 35, 85, 130.

Number of species, v, 127, 132.

58

INSECT INDEX.

Snout beetles, oviposition, v, 132; vi, 130.
Size of species, v, 128, 161.

Snout, v, 127, 131, 132; vi,129.

Snout-moth, Meal. (See Meal Snout-moth.)
Moths, Pyralidae, vi,72; vii, 245, 269, 272.
weevils. (See Snout-beetles.)

Snouted Harvest Mites, Bdellidae, ix, 65.
Snowball Aphis, Aphis viburni, viii, 96.
Snowberry Aphis, Aphis symphoricarpi,
viii, 99.

Social Wasps, i,73.
sodalis, Evarthrus, xii.110.

Soft- winged Predaceous Beetles, Malaco-
dermi, v, 37, 93, 104.
solani, Megoura, viii, 42, 73.

Soldier-bug. (See Armed Soldier-bug.)
Solenopera taslei, v,152.
solidaginis, Aphis, viii, 49.

Trypeta, i,32,33.

Solitary Caterpillar. (See Callimorpha
Pear Caterpillar.)
sonchella, Siphonophora, viii, 189.
sonchi. Aphis, viii, 60.

var., Siphonophora, viii, 190.

jaccae, Siphonophora, viii, 190.
Soothsayers. (See Devil’s Horses.)
sordida, Diplotaxis, v, 88.

(Edipoda, ix, 93.

Bhizobius, viii, 167.

Siphonophora, viii, 60, 189.

Tragocephala, ix, 88, 93, 107.
sordidum, Aeridium, ix,93.
sordidus, Aphanobius, vi, 117.

Encoptolophus, ix,94.
sosybius, Neonympha, x,91.

Southern Cabbage Butterfly, Pieris proto¬
dice, vii, 141,278,280; ix, 7,10,25,27,28,29,33,
34,37; x, 76, 178.

Spalacopsis, v,158.

Span-worm, Gooseberry. (See/ Gooseberry
Span-worm moth.)
worms. (See Measuring worms.)
Spanioneura, viii, 212.

Speckled Cutworm, Subjoined Mamestra,
Mamestra subjuncta, vii, 214; x, 136.
speciosus, Clytus, v,154; vi, 38, 44, 83, 151; pp.
iii.iv.

Glycobius, vi, 38, 44, 151.

Spectres. (See Walking-sticks.)
Sphaeridiidae, v, 52.

Sphaeridium, v, 54.

Spharangemon eequale, ix, 94.

collare,ix,94.

Sphegidae, vi,71.

sphenoidalis, Melanotus, vi, 117 ; vii, 30.
Spbenophorus, v, 144.

tredecim-punctatus, v, 144.

var. pulchellus, v, 144.
truncatus, vi, 144; vii, 34.
zem,vi,144; p. ii; vii, 34, 278.
Sphenostethus, v, 152.

serripennis, v, 152.

Sphinges. (See Hawk Moths.)

Sphingidae, vi,72; vii, 163,269,270; x,99.
Sphinx. Abbott’s. (See Abbott’s Sphinx.)
Achemon. (See Achemon Sphinx.)
Blind-eyed. (See Blind- eyed Sphinx.i
Carolina. (See Tobacco-worm Moth.)
Elm. (See Elm Sphinx.)

Five-spotted. (See Tomato-worm.)
Moths. (See Hawk Moths.;

Myron. (See Myron Sphinx.)

Satellite. (See Satellite Sphinx.)
Walnut. (See Walnut Sphinx.)
White-lined. (See White-lined Sphinx
Sphinx catalpae, x, 104.
chersis, x, 105.
coniferarum, x, 105.
drupiferarum, x, 104, 105.
harrisi.x, 105.
kalmiae, x,104.
ligustri, iv, 5; v,5.
pineum, x,105.

spiculatus, Trichocnemis, v, 152.

Spider, Cabbage. (See Cabbage Spider.)
Owlet moth. (See Wheat Cutworm.)
Underleaf. (See Underleaf Spider.)
Spiders, American, ix, 58, 59; xii,115.
Spilosoma, vii, 271.
textor, ii, 18.

virginica, iv, 188, 189 : vii, 80, 183, 277. 278, 2"
281; x, 116, 169.

Spindle-worm Moth, Achatodes zeae, v
100,222,278.

Spined Soldier-bug. (See Armed Soldie
bug.)

Spine-headed Worms, Aeanthocephale, i
59.

Spinners, Bombycidae, iv,172; vi,72; vii, 11
179,269,271; x,113.

Spinning Mites, Tetranychinae, Tetranycl
ix,65; xii,126.

spinosa, Arma, ii, 64, 66; iii, 162; iv,184; vi,l<
163.

Phylloxera, viii, 164.
spinosus, Hormaphis, viii, 206.
Hamamelistes. viii, 206.

Podisus, vii, 119, 218.

Spinous Currant Caterpillar, Grapta (Ya
essa) progne, ii, 59 ; x,85.
splendidus, Geotrupes, v,82.

Geotrypes, v,82.

Spotted Cutworm, Black C. Rustic, Agro
c-nigrum, vii, 89,202,278; x, 132, 184; xi,51.
Lady-bird, Spotted or Many-Spott
Lady-bug, Megilla (Hippodamia) m
culata, ii. 64 ; iii, 162; v, 184; vi, 162, 163,1'

vii. 60; viii, 173, 174; xii,41,117.

-spurge Aphis, Siphonophora euph<

biae, viii, 56.

Vine-chafer, Pelidnota punctata, v, 1
89; vi, 106, p. ii.

WTillow-aphis, Lachnus dentatus.iii.i:

viii, 115, 116.

-winged Diraphia, Diraphia maculipe
nis, viii, 14.

INSECT INDEX.

59

spretus, Caloptenus. i, 82; iii, 158; vi,44; pp.
ii.iii.iv; vii, 35,30,38,39,40; ix, 74, 70,92.96,121,
124,125,126,131,133,135; xii,47. (See Rocky
Mountain Locust .)

Spring beetles. (See Wire worms.)

Spring Canker-worm, Canker-worm, Ani-
sopteryx vernata=A. pometaria, iii, 99;
iv, 1; v, 1; vi,17; vii, 110,238; xi, 15,25,26,31.
Chronological history, iii, 100; vi,16.
Description, iii, 101; vi, 17; vii, 239; x,
148; xi, 27.

Eggs, vi, 16.

number and place of deposit, iii, 105;
vi, 18.

time of hatching, iii. 107.

Figure of eggs, iii, 99; vii, 110; x, 148.
female, iii, 99; vii, 110: x,148.
male, iii, 99; vii, 110; x, 148.
larva, iii, 99; vii, 110; x,148.
pupa, iii, 99; vii, 110; x, 148.

Food plants, vi, p. i; vii, 240, 277, 278, 279,
280; x, 148.

Habits, iii, 108; vi, 18,21; vii. 239; x, 148.
Insect enemies, iii, 115; vi, 18, 89, vii, 119.
Life history, iii, 102; vi, 17; vii, 239.
Migration, iii, 108.

Name, iii, 107.

Occurrence in 1875, vi, 3.
in 1876, vii, 104.
in 1877, vii, 104,110.

Record of 1871, iii, 102.

Remedies, iii, 108, 115; vi, 9, 12, 13, 16,19,21;
vii, 110,239; xi, 29.

Spring-tails, Thysanura, iv, 1,24; v, 1, 24.
Spruce-tree Lachnus, Lachnus abietis, viii,
117.

Squash Borer, Squash- vine Borer, Melit-
tia (iEgeria) cucurbit®, vi, 41,44, p. iv; vii,
173,277,279,280; x, 106,107.
bug, Coreus tristis, ii, 61; iv, 6; v, 6; vi,
74,162,163; ix, 60.

Stag Beetle, Lucanus elaphus, v, 78; vi, 94,
96, pp. ii, iii.

Beetles, Horn-bugs, Pectinicornes,
Lucanidae, iv, 36; v, 37,76,77; vi, 70,80,
82,84,86,87,93.

Stagona, viii, 35.

Stalk Borer, Heart worm, Gortyna nitela.
iii, 141; vii, 81,99,100.

Chrysalis, vii, 221; x, 151.

Figure of larva, iii, 141; ix, 142; x,151, xii,

103.

moth, iii, 141; ix, 142; x,151; xii, 103.
Food plants, iii, 141, 142; vii, 112, 113,221,
278,280,283; x, 151; xii, 103.

Fowls destructive to, vii, 113.

Habits and mode of life, iii, 142; vii, 112,

221.

Hibernation, vii, 113.

Injuries, iii, 141; vii, 4, 7,112, 113, 221, xii,

103.

Insect enemies, vii, 114.

Larva, iii, 141: vii. 221; x, 151.

Stalk Borer, life history, vii, 221.

Moth, vii, 114,222.

Occurrence in 1871, iii, 141.

1877, vii, 4.

1883, xii, 103.

Remedies, vii, 222.

Specific identity with Gortyna nebris,
vii, 114.

Staph ylinidae. iv, 30,33,35; v, 3<7,33,34,36,67,
70,74,75,76,112; vi, 70,80,81.

Staphylinides, v,68.

Staphylinus, v, 66, 67, 69.
cinnamopterus, v,69.
maculosus, v, 69.
tomentosus, v.69.
violaceus, v,69.
vulpinus, v,69.

Steel-blue Flea-beetle of the Grape-vine
(See Grape-vine Flea-beetle.)

Stelidota geminata, i, 18.

Stenaspini, v, 153, 155.

Stenaspis, v,155.

Stenelytra, v, 118.

Stenides, v, 68,72.

Stenispa. v, 174.
collaris, v, 174.
metallica, v, 174.

Stenobothrus, ix, 84,102,118.
admirabilis, ix, 93,102.
sequalis, ix, 93.
bilineatus, ix, 103.
curtipennis, ix, 88,93, 104.
longipennis, ix, 93.
maculipennis ix, 84,88,93,102.
var. sequalis, ix, 88,103.
maculipennis, ix, 88.
propinquans, ix, 88,103.
melanopleurus, ix, 92.
propinquans, ix, 93.

Stenolophus, v, 48,49.

Stenopterus, v, 156.

Stenus. v, 72.

colon, v, 72.

Stenostola, v, 158.

Sternorhynchi, viii, 33.

Sternoxi, v, 37.92.93.

Stetheophyma, ix,83,8i.

lineata, ix, 92. 93, 104.
stigma, Dryocampa, x,120.

Stilicus, v,71,72.

stimulea, Empretia, vii, 187,278,282; x, 11..
Stiretrus flmbriatus, ii, 64; vi, 162.
stramentalis, Pionea, xi, 8,36.

Strangalia, v,156.

Strawberry Aphis, Siphonophora fragariae,
viii, 68.

Crown-borer, Tyloderma (Analcis)
fragarise, v, 143; vi,38, 43,83, 85, p, iv,
xii, 6,7,64.

Miner, Peach-twig Borer, Anarsia
lineatella, xii, 76.

Geometer, Nematocampa filamentaria,
vii, 242, 279; x.148.

60

insect inde::

Strawberry Leaf-roller, Anchylopera
fragarias, vii, 108, 258, 282.
root- worms, xii,6.

Saw-fly, Strawberry worm, Emphytus
maculatus, vii, 108. Ill, 282; x, 64, 65, 68.
Streaked Thecla, Thecla strigosa, vii, 157.

279,280,281,282; x,92.
striata, Melandrya, v, 120.
striatella, Plusia, ix,44.
striatuius, Trox, v, 83.
strigataria, Phigalia, vii, 241, 282.
Strigoderma, v,89.
arboricola, v, 89.

strigosa, Thecla, vii, 157, 279, 280, 281, 282; x,92.
Striped Caloptenus, Caloptenus bivittatus,
vi, 56; ix, 90, 91, 96, 120, 126, 133, 134, 135.
Cucumber-beetle, Cucumber Beetle,
Diabrotiea (Galeruca) vittata, i, 52; ii,
77; v, 161, 170, 171. 172; vi, 83, 165, 169, pp.
ii, iii.iv; x,44; xi, 66, 69, 77; xii.ll.
Cutworm. (See Corn Cutworm.)
Flea-beetle, Cabbage Flea-beetle, Or-
chestris (Haltica) vittata, v, 161, 173; vi,
168, pp. ii, iii.

Potato-beetle. Oldfashioned Potato-
beetle, Epicauta (Lytta) vittata, ii, 64,
66; v, 116; vi, 125, 162, 163, p. iii; ix,4; xi,

7-

strobi, Lachnus, viii, 117.

Pissodes, v,139; vi, 38, 43, 133, pp. iii, iv.
Schizoneura, viii. 140.

Stroogvlium, v, 123.

tenuicolle, v,131.

Strophosomus, v,137.
stygicus, Oxyporus, v,70.

Stylopidae, v, 112, 113, 117.

Stylops, v, 118.

subangulata, Aspidoglossa, vi,89,140.
Sub-clavicornes, v,55,56.

'subgothica, Agrotis, vii, 89, 204, 205, 206, 278;
ix, 141; x, 132.

Subjoined Mamestra. (See Speckled Cut¬
worm.)

subjuncta, Mamestra, vii, 214; x, 136.
subsignaria, Eugonia, vii, 243, 277, 279.
subspinosus, Macrodactylus, i, 24; v,87; vi,
103, pp. i.iii, iv; vii, 34. 278.
subterraneus, Scarites, xii,108,
succinctus, Gryllus, ix, 96.
suffusa, Agrotis, vii, 210.

Sugar-maple Borer, Glycobius (Clytus)
speciosus, v, 154; vi,38,44, 83, 151, pp. iii,iv.
sulphurea, Arpliia, ix:94.

Locusta, ix,94.

Gidipoda, ix,94.
sulphureum, Acridium, ix, 94.
sulphureus, Gryllus, ix,94.

Tomonotus, ix, 89, 94, 107, 108.
var. carinatus, Tomonotus, ix,94,108.
sulphureus, Tomonotus, ix, 94, 107,
108.

xanthopterus, Tomonotus, ix, 94, 108.
Sumach beetle, Jumping. (See Jumping
Sumach beetle.)

Sumach Gall Plant-louse, Pemphigus rhon
viii, 152.

Sunius, v,71.

superans, Acronycta, ii, 51.

Apatela, x, 131.

surinamensis, Necrodes, v,58.
suturalis, Batyle, v, 155.

Ichneumon, x. 41.

Swallow-tail, Philenor. (See Phileno
Swallow-tail.)

-tails, Papilio, iv, 2; v, 2; vii, 135, 269.
sylvatica, Clisiocampa, vi, 89; vii, 198, 277
279, 281; x, 123.

symphoricarpi, Aphis, viii, 99.

Synchitides, v, 66.

Synchlora, vii, 272.

rubivoraria. vii, 238, 282.

Synchroa, v. 120.

punctata, v, 120.

Syneta, v, 165.

Synmerides, v, 133, 134.

Syrbula, ix, 83, 84, 102.

admirabilis, ix, 88, 93. 100.
leucocera, ix,93, 102.
montezuma, ix,102.
syringse.hEgeria, vii, 174, 281; x, 106, 109.
Syrphidae, iv,8; v,8; vi, 73; viii, 179; ix,61.
Syrphus, i,62,63; viii, 55, 178, 179.

Syrphus flies, Syrphidae, i, 32, 62; iv, 8, 197; v,
8; vi,73; viii, 178; xii,90.
fly, Root-louse. (See Root-louse Syr-
phus-fly.)

Systena, v, 171,173.
blanda, v, 173.

T

Tabanidae, vi,73; ix,59,61.

Tabanus, ix,60.

Tachina, i, 32, 34; ii, 16; iii, 121, 124; ix,20.
aletiae, xi,97.
anonyma, xi,97.
orgyiae, ii, 16.
phycitae, iii, 123.

Tachina-flies, ix,137; xi, 14, 28, 53.

-fly, Red-tailed. (See Red-tailed Tach-
ina-fly.)

Yellow-tailed. (See Yellow-tailed
Tachina-fly.)

Tachinus, v, 74.

Tachygonides, v, 135.

Tachyporides, v, 68,74.

Tachyporus, v, 74,75.

Tachys incurvus, xii,27.

Tachyusa, v,73.

Taenia plicata, ix,70.
talidiformis, Crambodes, x,180.

Tamarack Aphis, Lachnus laricifex, viii, 117.
tanaceti, Siphonophora, viii, 68.

Tansy Aphis, Siphonophora tanaceti, xii,

68.

Tanymecus, v,137.
tapetzella. Tinea, vii, 264, 278.

INSECT INDEX.

61

'ape-worm, Folded. (See Folded Tape¬
worm.)

'ape- worms, ix,58,59.
arandi, Hypoderma, ix,61.

’arnished Plant-bug. Lined Plant-bug,
Lygus lineolaris=Capsus linearis, ii, 62, 65,
66; vi, 12; xii,104.
artariea, Locusta, ix,96.
aslei, Solenopera, v, 152.
au, Pieris, ix, 27.

Tawny Emperor, Apatura clyton=A. herse,
vii. 155; x, 89.

Taxicornes, v, 124.

Telea, vii, 271.

polypbemus, v,23; vii, 191; x, 124, 176.
Telephoridae, iv, 31; v, 31,92,93,111,115; xii,
111,114.

Telephorides, v, 105, 107.

Telepnorus, v,107, 108.

Telesilla cinereola, x,180.
telifera, Agrotis, vii, 84, 210.

Ten -lined Potato-beetle. (See Colorado
Potato-beetle.)

Tenebrio, v, 97, 110, 122,123, 124.
mauritanicus, v, 64.
molitor, v, 121, 123, 129.
obscurus, v, 123.

Tenebrioides mauritanica, vi,93, p. ii.
Tenebrionidae, v, 34, 111, 113, 121, 122, 124, 130; vi,
80,83,86.

Tenebrionides, v, 122, 123.
tenebrosa, CEdipoda, ix, 94.
tenebrosus, Tomonotus,ix,94, 109.

Tent Caterpillar, American. (See Apple-
tree Tent Caterpillar.)

Apple-tree. (See Apple-tree Tent Cater-
% pillar.)

of the Forest, Forest Tent Caterpillar,
Forest Lackey Moth, Clisiocampa syl-
vatica, ii, 18; vi, 12, 13,89; vii, 107, 110, 198,
277,279.281; x,123.

of the Orchard. (See Apple-tree Tent
Caterpillar.)

Tenthredinidae, vi, 71, 77 : x, 62, 63.

ITenthredo rosaB.iv.23; v,23.
tenuicolle, Strongylium, v,131.
tenuis, Sesia, x,159.
tenuistriatum, Anobium, v, 102.
terebrans, Hylurgus, v,146; vi,38,43, 146, p. iii,
Terias, vii, 269.

lisa, vii, 148; x,79.
nicippe, vii, 148, 278; x,79
terminale, Calopteron, v,l05.
terminalis, Aphodius, v, 81.
terminans, Brachys, v, 96.

Termitidae, vi,71.
terrestris, Trox,v,83.

; tersa, Chaerocampa, x, 159.
tessellaris, Halesidota, vii, 185, 279 ;x, 116, 168.
tesselata, Agrotis, vii, 91, 206, 278; x, 133.
Pyrgus, vii, 161.

Schizoneura, viii, 139.

Tessellated Skipper, Pyrgus tessellata, vii,
161.

testacea, Plusia,ix,42.
testaceus, Cucujus, v, 65.

Palaminus v,72.

Tetracha virginica. ii, 64; vi, 162.

Tetramera, iv, 32, 33, 35; v, 32, 33, 34, 126, 131, 179;
vi, 30, 127.

Tetramerous Plant-beetles, Phytophaga,
iv, 19,31; v, 19,31,127,128,160.

Tetraneura, viii, 25,33,35,37,41,43.

ulmi, vii, 74; viii, 119,136,146.
Tetraneuriden, viii, 35.

Tetranychi, xii, 126.

TetranychinaB, ix, 65.

Tetranychus, xii, 126.

Tetraopes, v, 158,159.

Tetratoma, v, 120, 124.

Tetrops, v, 158.

Tettigidea, ix, 86.
lateralis, ix, 96.
polymorpha, ix, 96.

Tettiginae, ix, 77, 80, 81, 83, 86, 130.

Tettigonia, i, 69.

Tettix, ix, 81,86,92.
ornata, ix. 96.
polymorpha, ix. 96.
texana, Eresia, x, 164.

textor, HyphaDtria, ii, 18; vii, 107,111,185,277,
278.279,280,281,282,283; x, 116,154.

Spilosoma, ii, 18.

Thalacites, v, 137.

Thalerophaga, iv, 19,36; v, 19,37,83.

Thanaos, vii, 270.
juvenalis, vii, 162.
lucilius, vii, 161.

Tharos Butterfly, Phyciodes (Melitaea)
tharos, vii, 151,277; x, 83, 163.
tharos, Melitaea, x, 83.

Phyciodes, vii, 151,277; x, 163.

Thecabius, viii, 35.

Thecla, vii, 270.
acadica, x,93.
calanus, x, 93.
falacer, i,70.

humuli, vii. 157, 277, 279, 280, 282; x,92.

irus, x,94.

isocrates, ii, 95.

m-album, x,92.

niphon, x,94.

poeas, x,93.

pseudargiolus, x, 94.

smilacis, x,93.

strigosa, vii, 157,279,280,281,282; x,92.
titus. x, 94.
violacea, x,94.

Thecla, Hop-vine. (See Hop-vine Thecla).

Streaked. (See Streaked Thecla.)

Th el axes, viii, 34,38,42,144.

<i'iercicola, viii, 34.
ulmieola, viii, 142,144,204.

Theridion brassicae, ix,21.
hypophyllum, ix,21.

INSECT

INDEX.

62 INSECT

INDEX.

Thirteen-spotted Lady-bird, Hippodamia
13-punctata, ii, 64 ; vi, 162, 163, 173: viii. 174.
Thistle Butterfly, Pyrameis eardui, vii.154,
278,282; x, 87, 153.

Plusia, Plusia preeationis, vii, 229,282;
ix, 43, 44, 47. 49; x,148; xi, 39, 40, 41, 42.
thlaspeas, Aphis, viii, 88.

Thoas Butterfly. (See Cresphontes Butter¬
fly.)

thoas, Papilio, vii, 139.

Thoe Butterfly, Chrysophanus thoe, vii,
158,279,282; x,95.

thoe, Chrysophanus, vii, 158,279,282; x,95.
thoraeica, Cassida, v,177.

Thorn-headed worms, ix, 58.

-leaf Aphis, Aphis cratasgifoliac, viii, 101.
-tails. (See Horn-tails.)

Thousand-legs. (See Myriapods.)

Thread worms, ix,59.

Three-dotted Psylla, Psylla tripunctata, viii,
18.

-lined Potato-beetle, Lema (Crioceris)
trilineata, v, 164, 165; vi, 158, 165, p. iii.
-toothed Saperda, Elm-tree Saperda,
Saperda tridentata, vi, 38. 44, 156, p. ii.
Thripidas, vi,73.

Thrips, Thripidae, vi, 73.
thujae, Phytoptus, xii, 138, 139.
thyatiroides, Plusia, ix, 44.

Thymalus, v, 175.

Thyreus, vii, 270.

abbotti, vii, 164, 280, 283; x, 100.
Thyridopteryx, vii, 271.

ephemeraeformis, ii, 86; vii, 187; x, 118;
xii, 101. (See Bag Worm.)

Thysanura, iv, 1, 24; v, 1, 24.

Thysbe Clear Wing, Bee Moth, Sesia
(Hasmorrhagia) thysbe, vii, 164.
thysbe, Heemorrhagia, vii, 164.

Sesia, vii, 164, 282; x, 99.

Ticks, Ixodidae, ix, 58, 59, 65.

Tiger Beetles, Cicindelidae, iv, 24, 36; v, 24,
36, 38, 39, 92; vi, 80, 81, 87; ix, 136.

Moth, Arge. (See Arge Tiger Moth.)
Isabella. (See Hedgehog Caterpil¬
lar .)

Tile-horned Prionus, Prionus imbricornis,
v. 152; vi, 38, 43, 148, p. ii.
tiliae, iEgeria, x, 106, 109.

Drepanosiphum, viii, 188.

Siphonophora, viii, 188.

Selandria, x, 61,65,67.
tiliaria, Hibernia, x,149; xi, 25, 31, 34, 54.

Tillus, v, 109.

Timothy worms, xi, 8.

Tinea, iv,183; v,64; vii, 273.
biseliella, vii, 265,278,280.
dorsistrigella. vii, 262.
fiavifrontella, vii, 262,278.
granella, iv, 183; vii, 265, 280, 283.
pellionella, vii, 265,279.
rusticella, vii, 264,2)8.
tapetzella, vii, 264, 278.
vestianella, vii, 264, 278.

Tinea, Cabbage. (See Cabbage Tinea.)
Tineidfe, v, 169; vi,72; vii. 262, 269, 273.
Tineids, Tineidm, v, 169; vi, 72; vii, 262, 26!)
273.

Tingidas, viii, 12.

Tiphia inornata, vi, 98, 100.
tipulae, Platygaster, x,212.

Tipulidae, vi,73.

tipuliformis, IEgeria, vi, 39, 44, p. ii; vii, 172
279; x, 106, 107, 151.
titus, Thecla, x,94,

tityrus, Endamus. vii, 163, 277, 281; x, 98, 153.
Tityrus Skipper, Eudamus tityus, vii, 16L
277,281; x, 98. 153.

tityus, Dynastes, v,84; vi,96, p. ii.
Tobacco-worm Moth, Carolina Sphinx
Macrosila Carolina, vii, 168, 280,281,282; x
103, 158.

Tolype velleda, vii, 197; x, 166.

Tomato worm, Five-spotted Sphinx, Macro
sila 5-maculata, vii, 169,280,281,282 x,10-
(See Corn worm.)
tomentosus, Chlaenius, xii, 111.

Staphylinus, v,69.

Tomicus, v,6'5,66, 146, 147.
exesus, v, 147.
pini, v, 147.
xylographus, v,147.

Tomonotus,ix,85. ,

carinatus,ix,94.
nietanus, ix, 89, 94, 107, 108.
pseudo-nietanus, ix, 94.
sulphureus, ix, 89, 94, 107, 108.
var. carinatus, ix,94. 108.
sulphureus, ix, 94, 107, 108.
xanthopterus, ix, 94, 108.
tenebrosus, ix, 94, 109.
xanthopterus, ix, 94.

Toothed Hylurgus, Hylurgus dentatus, v
147; vi, 38. 43, 146, p. ii.iii.

Tortoise-beetle, Black-legged. (See Black
legged Tortoise-beetle.)

Golden. (See Golden Tortoise-beetle.)
Mottled. (See Mottled Tortoise-beetle
Two-striped. (See Two-striped Tor
toise-beetle.)

Tortoise Beetles, Cassididae, Cassidina
Cassidides, v, 127, 161,162,163, 175; vi,85,15?
171, p. iii.

Tortricidas, vi, 72; vii, 115, 254, 269, 273.

Tortrix, vii, 273.

Cinderella, vii, 255, 277.
fervidana, x, 154.

malivorana, ii, 6, 20; iii, 159; vi.llj vii, 251
277.

paludana, vii, 118.

rileyana, vii, 256, 279, 280, 282, 283.

trifurculana, vii, 114, 257.

Tortrix, Oak. (See Oak-leaf Tortrix.)

Walnut. (See Walnut Tortrix.)
Touch-me-not Aphis, Aphis impatiens, vii
98.

Toxares triticaphis, viii, 176.

Toxoptera, viii, 35, 36, 39, 40, 42, 45.

INSECT INDEX.

oxopteriden, viii, 35.
oxotus, v, 156.

rachelides, iv, 33, 34 ; v, 33, 35, 111 , 113.
ragocephala, ix, 85, 134.
infuscata, ix,93.
radiata,ix,93.
sordlda, ix, 88, 93, 1 07.
viridifasciata, ix, 85. 88, 93, 105.

var. Virginian a, ix. 88, 93, 105, 106, 134.
radi ata, ix, 88, 93, 106.
infuscata, ix, 88, 93, 106, 134.
Cragosoma, v, 152.
harrisi, v, 152.

Crania, viii, 33, 35, 36, 41, 42, 43, 167, 168.

radicis, viii, 168.

Cramiden, viii, 35.

ran sversata, Eutrapela, vii, 244, 280, 281, 282.
rapezina, Cosmia, i, 79.

Trechus, v,48,49.

;redecim-punctata, Hippodamia, ii, 64; vi,
162,163,173; viii, 174.

tredecim-punctatus, Sphenophorus, v, 144.

var. pulchellus, Sphenophorus, v, 144.
Tree-hoppers and Leaf-hoppers, Fulgo-
ridse and Cercopidse, vi, 11,12,72,74; viii, 11.
Trematoda, ix,59.

Tremex columba, vi, 34, 41, 44, pp. i, ii, iii, iv,
x, 7L

triangularis, Disonycha, v, 173.

Hydrophilus, v,53.
tricarinata, Camnula, ix,95.

Trichina, ix,58.

Trichius, v,90,91.
lunulatus, v,91.

Trichocnemis spiculatus, v,l52.

Trichodes, v,109.
apiarius, v,109.

Trichopterygidse. iv,33,36; v, 33, 36, 56, 63.
Trichopteryx. v, 63.
tricolor, Typophorus, v,168.
tricosa, Agrotis, vii, 205, 206; x, 132.
tridentata, Saperda, vi, 38, 44, 156, p. ii.
trifasciata, Hoplia, v,86.
trifasciatus, Hypulus, v,120.
trifurculana, Tortrix, vii, 114, 257.
trilineata, Crioceris, v,164.

Lema, v, 164,165; vi, 158, 165, p. iii.
trilineatus, Nematus,x,64,68.
trimaculata, Labidomera, v, 167.

Trimera, iv,32; v, 32. 177; vi,80.
carnivora, v, 178, 182.
fungivora, v, 178.

Trimerotropis, ix, 86.
requalis, ix,94.
maratima, ix, 90, 95, 113.

j ' verruculata, ix, 90, 95, 112.

Trim' Lady-bird or Lady-bug, Coecinella
| (Cycloneda) sanguinea=Ooccinella mun-
da, vi, 173; vii, 60, 119; viii, 174; xii,40,42,118.
Prominent. (See Red-humped Promi-
1 K nent.)

Trimerous Fungus beetles, Bolitophaga, v,
178.

trinotatus, Baridius, vi,142, p. iii.

Trioxys cerasaphis, viii, 176.
populaphis, viii, 176.
salicaphis, viii, 176.

Trioza, viii, 212.

Triplax. v, 179,181.
tripunetata, Psylla, viii, 18.
tripustulatus. Chilocorus, v, 184.

Exochomus. v,184.

tristis, Coreus, ii, 61; iv,6; v, 6; vi, 162, 163.
Lachnosterna, v, 87.

Phyllophaga, v,87.
triticaphis, Toxares, viii, 176.
tritici, Cecidomyia, i, 18.

Diplosis, x, 202, 213, 217.

Trochilium, v,26.

polistiforme, i,26.

Trogidas, v, 37, 79, 80, 82; vi, 70, 80, 82.

Trogosita, iv, 182, 183; v,64,65.
caraboides, iv, 183.
castanea, iv, 182, 183.
corticalis, iv, 182; v,64.
mauritanica, iv, 182, 183; v,64; vi,93.
Trogositidse, iv,36; v, 36, 56, 64, 178.

Troilus Butterfly, Papilio troilus, vii, 138,
279,282; x,74.

troilus, Papilio, vii, 138,279, 282; x,74.
Trombidia hexapoda, iii, 158,

Trombididm, ix,65.

Trombidiinm, ix,65.

Trombidium, viii, 108, 179.
bulbipes, viii, 108.
locustarum, ix, 136.
sericeum. vi, 56.

Tropideres, v,129.

Trox, v,82.

porcatus, v,83.
pustulatus, v,82.
striatulus, v,83.
terrestris, v,83,

Truncatipennes, v,44.

truncatus, Sphenophorus, vi, 144; vii, 34.

Truxalini, ix, 83, 87.

Truxalis, ix,83.

angusticornis, ix,92.
brevicornis, ix, 87, 92, 97, 133.
notochlorus.ix,92.
viridulus, ix,92.

Trypeta asteris, i,33.
cerasi, i.33.
cingulata. i,33.
pomonella, i, 29.
signata, i,33.
solidaginis, i,32,33.
tuberculatum, Acridium, ix,95.
tubulus, Acmseodera, v,96.
tulipse, Aphis, viii, 81, 188.

Rhopalosiphum, viii, 80, 188.
Siphonophora, viii, 188.

Tumble-bugs, Pill-rollers, Copridse, iv, 36;

v, 37, 79, 80; vi, 70, 80, 82. .

Tumble-dung Beetle, Canthon lams, v, 80
Turnip Beetle, Cleonus punctiventris, xii,
55.

64

INSECT INDEX.

Turnip Butterfly, Potherb Butterfly, Pieris
oleracea, vii, 143,278,280,281,282; ix,9,26,
27,28,29,30,31,32,34,35; x, 77.
Flea-beetle, v, 161.

Turnus Butterfly, Papilio turnus, vii, 139,
277.279,282; x, 74,173.

turnus, Papilio, vii, 139,277,279,282; x, 74, 173,
var. glauca, Papilio, vii, 139.

Tussock Moth. (See White-marked Tus¬
sock Moth.)

Checkered. (See Checkered Tussock
Moth.)

Twice-stabbed Lady-bird, Chilocorus bi-
vulnerus, ii, 93; v, 184; vi, 174; vii, 128; viii,
174.

Twig and Axil Borer, Amphicerus (Bostri-
ehus) bicaudatus, v. 102; vi, 38,43, 123, pp.
i, ii, iii.

Borer. (See Parallel Long-horn.)
Girdler, Oncideres cingulatus, v, 159; vi,
83.

Lice, Lachnus, iii, 139; iv, 198; viii, 22,33,
34. 35, 37, 38, 41, 43. 109, 1 15, 120.
pruner, Oak. (See Oak Twig-pruner.)
pruners, Elaphidion, v, 154,159.
Twin-spotted Nitidula, Stelidota geminata.
i, 18.

Two-spotted Yine-chafer, Anomala bino-
tata, vi, 105, p. ii.

-striped Tortoise-beetle, Cassida bivit-
tata, v, 175,177; vi, 172, p. iv.

-winged Flies. (See Flies.)

Tychea, viii, 35, 37, 41, 43, 165, 167,
erigeronensis, viii, 100, 168.
panici, viii, 23,43,138,169.

Tycheinae, viii, 36,37.

Tyloderes, v. 137.

Tyloderma fragarise, xii, 64.

Typhlodromus pyri, xii, 140.

Typocerus, v, 156.

Typophorus, v, 166,168.

tricolor, v, 168.

Tyroglyphinae, ix, 65.

U

u-aureum, Plusia, ix, 44.
u- brevis, Plusia. ix, 44,50.

Uliota, v, 65.
ulmariae. Aphis, viii, 64.

Siphonophora, viii, 64.
ulmi, Aphis, viii, 43, 119, 136.

Eriosoma, viii, 136.

Lachnus, viii, 119.

Phytoptus, xii, 137.

Schizoneura, viii, 119, 124, 140, 204, 211.
Tetraneura, vii, 74; viii, 119, 136, 146.
ulmicola, Byrsocrypta, viii, 43, 142, 204.
Callipterus, viii. 111.

Colopha, vii, 76; viii, 142, 144, 204.

Glyphina, viii, 89, 142, 204.

Pemphigus, viii, 142.

Thelaxes, viii, 142,114,204.
ulmifolii, Callipterus, viii, 195, 196.

ulmi-fusus, Pemphigus, viii, 153.

Uloma, v,124.

culinaris, v, 124.
imberbis, v, 124.
impressa, v, 124.
punctulata, v,124.

Ulomides, v, 122, 123, 125.
ultronia, Catocala, vii, 235, 279.
umbilica, Uropoda, vii, 28.

Unarmed Rustic. See Variegated Cut
worm.)

Underleaf Spider, Theridion hypophyllum
ix,21.

undulosa, Daremma, x,159.
unicolor. Macrobasis, vi, 126, pp. i.ii; xii
104.

Pezotettix, ix, 92, 95, 118.

Unicorn Prominent, Unicorn Apple-trei
Caterpillar, Coelodasys (Notodonta) uni
cornis, vii, 191; x, 120, 147,181.
unicornis, Coelodasys, vii, 191; x,147.

Notodonta. vii, 191; x, 120,181.
unio, Eudryas, vii, 178,279,280; x, 111, 173.
unipuncta, Heliophila, vii, 101, 224, 278, 280
283. (See Army Worm.)

Leucania,vi, 56, pp. ii.iii, iv; vii, 33, 81,98
101, 119 , 224, 278, 28®. 283; x, 5; xi, 8,49:
xii, 102, (See Army Worm.)
unipunctata, Physonota, v, 176.

Upis, v, 123.

Uroceridae, vi, 35, 36, 41, 71, 77; x, 62,63,70.
Urocerus abdominalis, x,71.

albicornis. x, 71.

Uropoda americana, vii, 218.
umbilica, vii, 28.

Ursula Butterfly, Limenitis Ursula, vii, 154
279,280,281,283: x, 87, 162.

Ursula, Limenitis, vii, 154,279,280,281,283; x,
87, 162.

urticae, Vanessa, ix, 18.
urticmcolens, Psylla, viii, 18.

Utetheisa, vii, 271.
bella, vii, 180; x,113.

V

Vacua, viii, 35.

Vacuna, viii, 33, 35, 37, 41 , 43, 142, 145.
Vacuniden, viii, 35.

Vacunini, viii, 124.

Vagabond Gall-louse, Pemphigus (Byrso
crypta) vagabundus, iv, 194,199; viii, 146,
151.

vagabundus, Byrsocrypta, iv,194; viii, 151.

Pemphigus, iv, 199; viii, 146,151.
vagans, Schizoneura, vii, 73.

Valgus, v,90,91.

Valleda Lappet Moth, Tolype (Gastropacha)
velleda, vii, 197,277; x,166.

Vanessa, vii, 270.

antiopa, vii, 153, 279, 282, 283; x, 85, 163.
milberti, x, 164.
progne, ii, 59.
urticm, ix, 18.

INSECT INDEX.

65

anillse, Agranlis, x,80.

ariable Vine-chafer, Anomala varians, ii,

54; v, 89; vi,105, pp. i, ii.

arians, Anomala, ii, 54; vi,105, pp. i, ii.

ariegated Cutworms, Unarmed Rustic,

Agrotis saucia, vii, 84, 94, 211, 278; x,134.

ariolosa, Polyphylla, v,86.

"asates. xii, 135.

astatrix, Phylloxera, viii,31,158.

Rhizaphis, viii, 158.
elleda, Gastropacha, vii, 197, 277.

Tolype, vii, 197; x, 166.
enosa, Pieris, ix, 27, 28, 29,32.

var. marginalis, Pieris, ix, 28, 29, 32.
entralis, Nematus, x,64,68.

•entricosus. Heteropus, xii,150.

Nematus, vi,61; x, 65, 68; xi,5,24,46.

•enusta, Schizoneura, viii, 139.

Verbena Aphis, Siphonophora verbense,
viii, 63.

Mite, Dendroptus sp., xii,141.
rerbenae, Siphonophora, viii, 63.

/ermes, ix,58.

Vernal Diraphia. (See Jumping Plant-
louse.)

mrnalis, Diraphia, viii, 14.

Pieris, ix, 27.

vernata, Anisopteryx, iii, 99; vi,16,89, p, i;
vii, 107,110,119,238,239,277,278,279; xi, 25,26,
29,31. (See Spring Canker-worm.)
vernoniae, Aphis, viii, 97.
verruca, Plusia, ix, 43,44,47,48,50.
verruculata, Locusta, ix, 95.

Trimerotropis, ix, 90,95.112.
verruculatum, Acridium, ix, 95.
versicolor, Darapsa, x;158.
verticolor, Aphis, viii, 211.
verticulata, Plusia, ix, 50.
vespertina, Serica, v, 88; vi, 102, p. iv.
Yespidae, vi, 71.
vestalis, Callimorpha, ii. 49.
vestianella, Tinea, vii, 264, 278.
vestita, Euryomia, vi, 108.

Saperda, vi, 156, p. ii.
vialis, Amblyscirtes, vii, 161.
viburnaphis, Aphidius, viii, 175.

Praon, viii, 175.
viburni, Aphis, viii, 96.
viciae, Aphis, viii, 88.
vigintimaculata, Psyllobora, v, 185.
villosum, Elaphidion, vi, 38, 43, 150. pp. i,

, iii, iv.

villosus, Creophilus, v, 69.
vimiualis, Chaitophorus, viii, 105, 200.
Vine-chafer, Anomala vitis, ii, 51.

American or Light-loving. (See Ameri¬
can Vine-chafer.)

Spotted. (See Spotted Vine-chafer.)
Two-spotted. (See Two-spotted Vine-
chafer.)

Variable. (See Variable Vine-chafer.) _
j -chafers, Rutelidae, v, 31, 37, 79, 84, 85, 88; vi,
70, 82, 84, 86, 87, 104.
viola, Pezotettix, ix, 90,95,120.

violacea, Necrobia, v, 109.

Thecla, x, 94.

violaceus, Staphylinus, v,69.
violans, Nephelodes, vii, 99,220,278; x, 139.
Violet Nephelodes, Nephelodes violans, vii,
99,220,278: x,139.

Virginia Ermine moth. (See Yellow Bear.)
virginiana, Locusta, ix,93.

CEdipoda, ix, 93.
virginianum, Acridium, ix, 93.
virginianus, Gryllus, ix, 93.
virginica, Ctenucha, x,170.

Spilosoma, iv, 188, 189; vii, 80, 183, 277,278,
280,281; x, 116, 169.

Tetracha, ii, 64; vi,162.
virginiensis, Chalcophora, v,95: vi, 112, p. iii.

Pieris, ix,27.
viride, Phsedon, v,168.
viridescens, Glyphe, x, 39.
viridifasciata, Locusta, ix,93.

Tragoeephala, ix, 85, 88, 93, 105.
var. infuscata, Tragoeephala, ix,88, 93,
106, 134.

radiata, Tragoeephala, ix, 88, 93, 106.
virginiana, Tragoeephala, ix, 88, 93,
105, 106, 134.

viridifasciatum, Acridium, ix,93.
viridifasciatus, Gomphocerus, ix,93.

Gryllus, ix,93.

viridipennis. Hoplocephala, v,125.
viridis, Chloealtis, ix,92,99.

Chrysochraon, ix,92,99.
viridisignata, Plusia, ix,44.
viridulus, Truxalis, ix,92.
viticida, Fidia, v,168; vi,160,pp. ii.iii.
viticola, Fidia, v, 168.

Siphonophora, viii, 55.
vitifoliag, Byrsocrypta, viii, 158.

Dactylosphmra, i. 21, 22; viii, 158.
Pemphigus, i. 21; viii, 158.

Phylloxera, iv, 198, 199; viii, 5, 31, 43. 158, 163.
vitis, Anomala, n,54.

Aphis, viii, 55.

Lecanium, vii, 120.

Selandria, x.65,07.
vitisana, Peritymbia, viii, 158.
vitivorana, Penthina, vii, 257, 280.
vitreus, Mesoehorus, x,39.
vittata. Epicauta, vi, 125, 162, 163, p. iii; ix,4,
12.104.

Lycoperdina, v, 182.

Orchestris. vi,108.

Diabrotica, i,52; ii, 77 ; v, 170, 171, 172; vi,
83, 165, 169, pp, ii, iii, iv ; x,44; xi, 66, 69,70;
xii, 11.

Galeruca, v,170; vi, 165, p. iii.

Haltiea, vi,168, pp. ii, iii, iv.
Lytta„ii,64,66; v, 116; vi, 125.
Microrliopala, v,175.
var lsetula, Microrhopala, v,175.
vittatus, Oxyporus, v,70.
vittigera, Coscinoptera, v,170.

Volucella, i, 62.
vulgaris. Cicindela, vi,88.

66

INSECT INDEX

vulgaris, Melolontha, v,3.
vulpeculus, Mononychus, v,143.
vulpina. Lichnanthe, v,86.
vulpinus, Staphylinus, v, 69.

W

Walking-sticks, Spectres, Phasmidae, vi,70;
ix, 60, 73, 80, 82.

Walnut Leaf-crumpler, Case Bearer.
Phycita (Acrobasis) juglandis, iii, 117; iv,
188; v, 100; vii, 250,280,283; xi,14.

Moth, Royal. (See Royal Walnut Moth.)
Sphinx. Cressonia (Smerinthus) juglan¬
dis, vii, 167, 279, 280,283.*=

Tortrix, Tortrix rileyana, vii, 256, 279,280,
282, 283.

walshi, Callipterus, viii, 195, 196.

Odontota. v, 175.

Wasps, v, 117; ix,60.

Sand. (See Sand Wasps.)

Social. (See Social Wasps.)

Wood. (See Wood Wasps.)
Water-beetles, Predaceous. (See Preda¬
ceous Water-beetles.)

-bugs, Predaceous. (See Predaceous
Water- bugs.)

-measurers, H ydrometridae, vi, 73; viii, 12.
Mites, Hydrachnidae, ix. 65.
Scavenger-beetles, Philhydrida, iv, 36;
v, 36, 52.

Wax Worm. (See Bee Moth.)

Web Moth, European Cabbage. (See Cab¬
bage Tinea.)

-worm, Fall. (See Fall Web-worm.)
Weeping Golden-eye, Chrysopa plora-
bunda, viii, 178; xii, 42.

Weevil, Apple. (See Apple Weevil.)

Bean. (See Bean Weevil.)
Long-snouted Nut. (See Long-snouted
Nut Weevil.)

New York. (See New York Weevil.)
Pales. (See Pales Weevil.)

Pea. (See Pea Weevil.)

Pear. (See Pear Weevil.)

Potato-stalk. (See Potato-stalk Wee¬
vil.)

Rice. (See Rice Weevil.)

White-pine. (See White-pine Weevil.)
Weevils. (See Snout-beetles.)

Nut or Acorn. (See Nut Weevils.)

Pea and Bean. (See Pea and Bean
Weevils.)

Western Locust. (See Rocky Mountain
Locust.)

Striped Cutworm, Master Dart, Agrotis
herilis, vii, 84, 90, 264,205, 278; x,133.
Wheat Cutworm, Spider Owlet-moth, Pro-
denia commelinae, vii, 219; x,138.

-head Army- worm, Heliophila (Leuca-
nia) harveyi, vii, 223; x, 186; xi,8.

-louse Aphidius, Toxares triticaphis,
viii, 176.

Wheat Midge, Red Weevil, Milk Weevil
Diplocis (Cecidomyia) tritici, i, 7, 18; ix,
60; x, 202, 213, 217.

Plant-louse. (See Grain Plant-louse.)
-straw Worm, Wheat-stalk Worm, Iso¬
soma elymi=Isosoma allyni, xi.73.
Wire-worm, Agriotes mancus, vi,23,24
25,27,118, p. iv; vii, 26, 29.

White Ants, Termitidae, vi,71.

White Grubs, May Beetles, Grub-worms
Melolonthidae, v, 85; vi,97; vii, 32,33.
Characters, v, 84, 85; vi,97.
Classification, iv,36; v,37,79; vi, 70,80,82
86, 87.

Food, iv, 31; v,31; vi,97; vii, 278, 280.
Habits and mode of life, iv, 31; v, 31; vi
84, 97.

Injuries, vi, 82, 84,97; vii, 33; xii, 12, 13.
Larva of one of the Dynastidae, v,85.
Larvae, v, 79; vi, 82,84,97; vii, 32,33.
Remedies, vi, 11, 12. 28.

Skunks feeding on, ii, 66.

Structure, iv,31; v,31.

White Grubs. (See Dark May-beetle, Hair
May-beetle, and Kindred May-beetle.)
-lined Sphinx, Deilephila lineata, vi
164, 277, 280, 281, 282, 283; x, 100, 159.
-marked Tussock Moth, White-spotte
Tussock Moth, Tussock Moth, Orgyi
leucostigma, ii, 13,86; iii, 101; iv, 1; v,
vi, 13, 17; vii, 185, 277, 279, 281, 282, 283; ?
117,166; xii, 6, 100.

-pine Lachnus, Lachnus strobi, viii, 11
Leaf-louse. (See Pine - leaf Sea!
insect.)

Weevil, Pissodes strobi, v,139; vi,3!
43,133, pp. iii, iv.
wilcoxi, Calosoma, x.41.

Willow Bark-louse, Mytilaspis salicis, ii
140.

-louse Aphidius, Trioxys salicaphi
viii, 176.

Wingless Crickets. (See Katydids.)

Wire worm, Wheat. (See Wheat Wi;
worm.)

Wire worms, Click beetles, Elaters, Jumi
ing-jacks. Skipping-jacks, Skip-jack
Snap-jacks, Snapping beetles, Snappim
jacks, Spring beetles, Elateridae, v,92; v
21; vii, 19; xii, 27.

Birds feeding on, vi,119; vii, 32.
Characters, v, 96, 97,121; vi, 22, 115; vii,2o
Chrysalis, vii, 32.

Classification, iv, 34, 37; v,34,37, 93,97, :

vi, 70, 80, 82,87.

Existence in larval state, vi,23; vii, 30.
Figure of beetle, v,96; vii, 20.
larva, v, 96; vii, 20,

Food, v, 97; vi,22, 26, pp. ii, iii, iv; vii, 2
278.

Generic and specific differences, vi, :

vii, 20, 30.

Habits and mode of life, vi,22,23; vii, 2

INSECT INDEX.

67

ire worms, injuries, v, 97; vi, 22,26, 70; vii,
22,31.

Larvae, v, 97; vi, 22, 25, 84, 116, 119; vii, 20, 21.
Luminous property, v,106.
Metamorphoses, vii, 31.

Names, v,96,97.

Occurrence in 1870, vi,23.

1875, vi, 3, 22.

1877, vii, 31.

Remedies, vi, 11,27,119; vii, 22, 23, 31, 32.
Species, vi,116; vii, 26.

Structure, iv,28; v,28.

7-marked Cutworm, Clandestine Owlet
moth, Agrotis clandestina, vii, 95, 213, 278;

x, 135.

yoeberana, Semasia,i,82.

7olf Moth, Grain Moth, Tinea granella, iv,
183; vii, 265, 280, 283.

Vood-beetles, Aberrant. (See Aberrant
Wood-beetles.)

Long-horned. (SeeLong-horned Wood-
borers.;

Saw-horned. (See Saw-horned Wood-
. beetles.)

Vood-borers, Long-horned. (See Long¬
horned Wood-borers.)

Saw-horned or Hammer-headed. (See
Saw-horned Wood-borers.)

Short - horned. (See Short - horned
Wood-borers.)

Vood-nymph, Beautiful. (See Beautiful
Wood-nymph.)

Pearly. (See Pearly Wood-nymph.)
Wood Wasps, Crabronidae, vi,71.

Yoolly Aphis of the Apple-tree, Apple-
root Plant-louse, Schizoneura(Eriosoma,
Aphis) lanigera and Pemphigus pyri, i, 55,
viii, 126, 150.

American and European species, viii,
127, 128.

Chronological history, viii, 126. \
Compared with Schizoneura rileyi, viii,
136.

Cottony secretion, i, 61 ; viii, 123, 130, 135.
Eggs, viii, 130, 135.

Figure of antenna of larva, viii, 126.
antenna of winged insect, viii, 126.
beak, viii, 126.
insect enemy, viii, 131.
larva, viii, 126.

leg of perfect insect, viii, 126.
root infested by apple-root plant-
louse. viii, 126.
winged insect, viii, 126.

Food, viii, 133.

Habits and mode of life, viii. 28, 31, 129,
130,131,1&4.

Hibernation, viii, 124,131,134.
Importation, i, 56; viii, 126, 127, 128, 129,133.
Injuries, viii, 129, 130.

Insect enemies, i, 62; viii, 131.

Larva, i, 60; viii, 129.

Nomenclature, i,7, 8: viii, 126.
Propagation, viii, 130.

Woolly Aphis of the Apple-tree, range, i, 55,

56, 58, 59; iv. 198, ; viii, 126, 127, 128.

Remedies, i, 63; iv,198; vi,10,33; viii, 132..
Root and trunk forms, comparison and
differences, i, 55, 56, 57; viii, 128, 129, 133.
Root forms, habits and mode of life,
i, 56, 58, 59; viii, 128.
history, viii, 128.
injuries, i,57; iv, 198; viii, 129.
remedies, iv, 198.

Synonyms, viii, 126.

Trunk form, viii, 129.

remedies, viii, 135.

Type of genus, viii, 43.

Venation of wings, i, 56; viii, 128.

Winged female, i, 60; viii, 134, 135.

Winged individuals, viii, 127, 129.

Wingless female, i, 60 ; viii, 134, 135.
Wingless or apterous individuals, viii,
127.

Woolly Aphis of the Elm-tree, Schizoneura
rileyi, viii, 136.

of the Oak, Oak Blight, Schizoneura
querci, viii, 139.

Woolly Bear. (See Yellow Bear.)

Worms, Vermes, ix,58.

X

xanthelis, Aphis, viii, 211.

Xantholinus, v, 69, 70, 72.

Xanthonia, v, 166, 168.
xanthoptera, Arphia, ix, 94.

(Edipoda, ix,94.

xanthopterum. Acridium,ix,94.
xanthopterus, Tomonotus. ix,94.

Xenos, v,118.

xerene, Microrhopala, v,175.

Xerophylla, i, 22,

Xiphidra albicornis, x,71.

meliipes, x,7l.

Xyleutes, vi,36; vii, 271.

robini®, vi, 34, 42, 44, pp. i, ii, iii; vii, 198,
277,279,281; x,152.

Xylina, vii, 272.

Cinera, vii, 227, 277, 279, 280, 282.
xylina. Anomis, vii, 228.
xylographus, Tomicus, v, 147.

Xylophaga, v, 19, 127, 128, 145.

Xylophilus, v,116.

Xyloryctes satyrus, v,84.
xylostella, vii, 266.

Xylota, i, 62.

Xylotrogi, v,93.

Y

Yellow Ant, Formica aphidicola, i, 61; viii,
150.

Bear, Woolly Bear, Virginia Ermine
moth, Spilosoma virginica, iv. 188, 189;
vii. 80, 183, 277, 278, 280, 281 ; x, 116, 169.
Canker-worm, Hibernia tilaria, x, 149;
xi, 15, 25, 34, 54.

68

INSECT INDEX.

Yellow-headed Cut-worm, Amputating

Brocade Moth, Hadena arctica, vii,96,

217, 278; x, 137.

Golden-eye, Chrysopa chlorophana,
viii, 178.

-necked Apple-tree Caterpillar, Hand¬
maid Moth, Datana ministra, iv, 186;
vii, 189; x, 119,167.

-tailed Tachina-fly, Exorista flavicauda
x,37.

variety of American Locust. (See
American Locust, Yellow variety.)
ypsilon, Agrotis, vii, 93, 210, 278; ix, 141; x,134.
yreka, Pieris, ix,27.

Z

Zabrus, v,39.

zem, Achatodes, vii, 100, 222, 278.

zeas, Gortyna, iii, 141.

Sphenophorus, vi, 144, jj. ii; vii, 34, 278.
Zebra Caterpillar, Painted Mamestra or
Ceramica, Ceramica (Mamestra) picta,
vi, 60, pp. i, ii, iii, iv; vii, 226, 280, 281, 282; id
51; x, 185; xii, 103.

Zeugophora, v,165.

Zopherus, v, 123.

Zygrnna, x,110.

Zygeenidm, vi,72; vii, 176, 269, 270: x,110.
Zygogramma, v, 166,167.
conjuneta, v, 167.
exclamationis, v,167.
pulchra, v, 167.

Zygopides, v,135.

PLANT INDEX.

69

g

I'

['

. GENERAL INDEX TO FOOD PLANTS,*

A

letinoineris helianthoides.

Phyciodes (Meliteea) nycteis.
tharos, Tbaros Butterfly,
ictinomeris sauarrosa.

Eresia texana.

Phyciodes (Meliteea) nycteis.

Vilanthus.

Sarnia cynthia, Ailanthus Silkworm.

Alder.

Coelodasys unicornis, Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Graptodera chalybea. Grape-vine Flea-
beetle.

Lachnus alnifolise, Alder-leaf Lachnus.
Schizoneura tessellata, Alder Blight.
Almond.

Aphis amygdali, Almond Aphis.
Alum-root, Heuchera hispida.

Siphonophora heucherae.

Amaranth Family, Amarantaceee.

Siphonophora achyrantes.

Amarantus retroflexus. (See Pig weed.)
American Ivy.

Philampelis achemon, Achemon Sphinx.
American Linden. (See Bass-wood.)
American Tamarack. (See Larch.)

Anise.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly.
Antirrhinum canadense.

Junonia lavinia, Lavinia Butterfly.
Apios. (See Ground Nut.)

Apple.

Agrotis scandens, Climbing Cutworm,
ypsilon, Greasy Cutworm,
saucia, Yariegated Cutworm.

Alaus oculatus, Snapping Beetle.
Amphicerus bicaudatus, Twig and Axil
Borer.

Anisopteryx autumnata, Fall Canker-
worm.

vernata. Spring Canker-worm.
Anomala varians, Variable Yine-chafer.
Anthonomus pomarum, Apple Weevil,
quadrigibbus, Apple Curculio.

Apple.

Apatela oblinita, Smeared Dagger,
occidentalis.

Aphis mali, Apple-tree Plant-louse.

malifolise, Apple-leaf Aphis.
Aspidiotus harrisi, Harris’ Bark-louse.
Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Bostrichus basilaris, Shag-bark Hick¬
ory-tree Borer.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling Moth.
Catocala grynea.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat - headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Cicada septendecim, Seventeen - year
Locust. /

Clisiocampa americana, Apple - tree
Tent Caterpillar.

sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar of the
Forest.

Coelodasys unicornis. Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Coleophora malivorella.

Conotraehelus nenuphar, Plum Curcu¬
lio.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar,

Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Eccopsis malana, Apple-bud Worm.
Elaphidion parallelum, Parallel Long¬
horn.

villosum, Oak Twig-pruner.
Epicserus imbricatus, Imbricated Snout-
beetle.

Eugonia subsignaria.

Euryomia inda, Indian Cetonian.

melancholica, Melancholy Cetonian.
Gastropacha americana.

Haltica helxines, Small Bronze Flea-
beetle.

Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow Canker-worm.
Hispides.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Hyphantria textor. Fall Web-worm.

Ips 4-signatus.

70

PLANT INDEX.

Apple.

Ithycerus noveboracensis. New York
Weevil.

Lachnosterna fraterna, Kindred May-
beetle.

fusca. Dark May-beetle.

pilosicollis, Hairy May-beetle.

Lachnus dentatus, Spotted Willow-
aphis.

Lathia gordius.

Limenitis disippus, Disippus Butterfly.

Lithophane cinerea, Ash-gray pinion.

Loxotsenia rosaeeana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Lucanus dama, Pinching-beetle.

Macrodaetylus subspinosus, Rose bug.

Melolonthidas, White Grubs.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster- shell
Bark-louse.

GMemasia eoneinna. Red-humped
Prominent. ,

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked
Tussock Moth.

Papilio turnus, Turnus Butterfly.

Parorgyia paralleia.

Pempelia hammondi, Apple-leaf Skele-
tonizer.

Phigalia cinctaria.

Phoxopteris nubeculana.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler.

Prionus laticollis, Broad-necked Pri-
onus.

Saperda Candida, Round-headed Apple-
tree Borer.

Saturnia maia, Buck Moth.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis of
the Apple-tree.

Sciara mali, Apple Midge.

Smerinthus excaecatus, Blind-eyed
Sphinx.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Tolype velleda, Lappet Moth.

Tortrix Cinderella, Green Apple Leaf-
tyer.

malivorana, Lesser Apple-leaf
Folder.

Tremex columba, Elm-tree Borer.

Trypeta pomonella, Apple Maggot-fly.

Xyleutes robiniae, Locust-tree Car¬
penter Moth.

Apple of Peru. (See Thorn Apple.)

Apricot.

iEgeria exitiosa, Peach-borer.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur-
culio.

Arbor vitae.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Phytoptus thujae.

Archangel, Archangelica.

Plusia iota.

Aristolochia serpentaria. (See Virginia
Snakeroot.)

A. sipho. (See Dutchman’s Pipe.)

A. tomentosa.

Papilio philenor, Philenor Swallow-tai
Ash.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheui
Siikworm.

Clisiocampa sylvatica. Tent Caterpilla
of the Forest.

Daremma brontes.

Diludia jasminearum.

Halesidota caryae.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth. ,

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Neoclytus caprae, Ash-tree Borer.
Pemphigus fraxinifolii.

Xyloryctes satyrus.

Ash, Black or Water.

Pemphigus fraxinifolii.

Ash, Blue.

Pemphigus fraxinifolii.

Ash, Green.

Phytoptus fraxini.

Ash, White or American.

Pemphigus fraxinifolii.

Phytoptus, sp.

Asparagus.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Crioceris asparagi, Asparagus Beetle. |
Elateridae, Wire worms.

Aspen.

Limenitis arthemis.

Aspen, American, Populus tremuloides.
Cossus centerensis.

Pemphigus populicaulis, Poplar-le;f
Gall-louse.

Aspen, Large-toothed, Populus grand j
dentata.

Aphis populifoliae, Poplar-leaf Aphis. |
Aster.

A.phis middletoni.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Phyciodes harrisi.
nycteis.

tharos, Tharos Butterfly.

Saturnia maia. Buck Moth.

Aster, Double-bristled. Diplopappij
umbellatus.

Phyciodes harrisi.

Aster, Wild,

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.
Azalea.

Callosamia promethea, Promethei
Silk-worm.

B

Balm of Gilead.
iEgeria tiliae.

Chaitopliorus candicans, Balm of Gile;

Plant-louse.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Prionus laticollis, Broad-necked Prio
nus.

PLANT INDEX.

71

Balm of Gilead.

Xyleutes robinise, Locust-tree Carpen¬
ter Moth.

Balsam.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Barberry.

Attacus cecropia. Cecropia Silkworm.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Rhopalosiphum berberidis.

Barley.

Agrotis saucia, Variegated Cutworm.
Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Cecidomyia destructor, Hessian fly.
Elateridas, Wire worms.

Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth.

Siphonophora avense, Grain Plant-
louse.

Basswood, Lime-tree, American Linden.
Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Grapta interrogationis, Semicolon
Butterfly.

Hibernia tilaria, Yellow Canker-worm.
Limenitis arthemis.

Phytoptus abnormis.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Bayberry, Myrica.

Callosamia promethea. Promethus
Silkworm.

Bean. , , „

Agrotis clandestina, W-marked Cut¬
worm.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Bruchus granarius, Grain Bruchus.

obsoletus, Bean Weevil.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Elateridas, Wire-worms.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.
Macrobasis unicolor, Ash-gray Blister-
beetle.

Spilosoma vlrginica, Yellow Bear.
Thecla humuli, Hop-vine Thecla.

Bean, Wild, Phaseolus perennis.

Eudamus proteus.

Lycsena comyntas, Comyntas Butterfly.
Bedstraw, Galium aparine.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Bedstraw, Galium circsezans.

Aphis circsezandis.

S OOCtl •

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.
Chrysobothris femorata, Elat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Dicerca divaricata, Cherry-tree Borei.
Phyllaphis fagi, Beech Aphis.
Schizoneura fagi, Beech Blight,
imbricator. Beech-tree Blight.

Beet.

Elateridse, Wire worms.

Beet.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.

Silpha opaca.

Spilosoma virginica. Yellow Bear.

Bidens chrysanthemoides. (See Bur-mari¬
gold.)

Bilberry.

Thecla irus.

Birch.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.

Callipterus betulrn.
betulascolens.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Birthwort. (See Aristolochia tomentosa.)
Bitter-sweet.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Blackberry.

iEgeria rubi, Raspberry Root-borer.
Agrilus ruficollis, Raspberry Cane
Borer.

Anomala binotata. Two-spotted Vine-
chafer.

Psylla rubi, Blackberry Flea-louse.
Serica vespertina, Evening Silky Leaf-
chafer.

Sipha rubifolii.

Siphonophora rubi.

Blackberry, Wild.

Loxotmnia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller

Black Snakeroot, Cimicifuga racemosa.
Lycsena pseudargiolus, Azure - blue
Butterfly.

Blueberry.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Thecla irus.

Box-elder. (See Maple, Ash-leaved.)

Box-thorn. , _ , .

Doryphora lo-linoata, Colorado Potato-

beetle.

Brassica.

Pieris virginiensis.

Brassica napus.

Pieris napi.

Broccoli.

Pieris virginiensis.

Broom, Sarothamnus scoparius.
Siphonophora menthfe.
rubi.

Broom-corn.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Buckeye.

Orgyia leucostigma, White - marked
Tussock Moth.

72

PLANT INDEX

Buckwheat.

Agrotis clandestina, W-marked Cut¬
worm.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
Gastrophysa polygoni. •

Bulrush, Typha latifolia.

Plusia festucse.

Burdock.

Ceramica pieta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Loxotsenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Plusia chrysites.
iota.

precationis, Thistle Plusia.
simplex, Celery worm.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly.

huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.
Pyrrharctia isabella, Hedgehog Cater¬
pillar.

Bur-marigold, Bidens chrysanthemoides.

Siphonophora rudbeckise.

Burning bush, Euonymus atropurpureus.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Bush Clover, Lespedeza.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Lycasna comyntas, Comyntas Butterfly.
Butterfly Pea, Clitoria mariana.

Eudamus proteus.

Butternut, White Walnut.

Citheronia regalis. Royal Walnut Moth.
Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Selandria juglandis.

Spilosoma virginiea, lellow Bear.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Button- bush, Cephalanthus.

Aphis cephalanthi, Button-bush Aphis.

C

Cabbage.

Agrotis annexa, Cabbage Cutworm,
clandestina, W-marked Cutworm,
c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm,
messoria, Dark-sided Cutworm,
saucia, Variegated Cutworm.

Aphis brassicse, Cabbage Plant-louse.
Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Elateridae, Wire worms.

Hadena devastatrix, Glassy Cutworm.
Ludius brevicornis. Wire worm.
Mamestra subjuncta. Speckled Cut¬
worm.

Murgantia histrionica. Harlequin Cab¬
bage bug.

Orchestris vittata. Striped Flea-beetle.
Orobena rimosalis, Cabbage Pionea.
Pieris brassic®.
napi.

oleracea, Turnip Butterfly.

Cabbage.

Pieris protodice. Southern Cabbage But
terfly.

rapae, European Cabbage worm,
virginiensis.

Pionea forflcalis, Cabbage-garden Peb
ble Moth.

stramentalis, Black - headed Cab
bage worm.

Plusia brassicae. Cabbage Plusia.
Plutella cruciferarum, European Cab
bage Web Moth.

Spilosoma virginiea. Yellow Bear.
Canada Thistle. (See Thistle, Canada.)
Capsicum.

Sitodrepa panicea.

Caraway.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly.
Carnation.

Elateridae, Wire worms.
Rhopalosiphum dianthi.

Carrot.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly.
Cassia.

Callidryas eubule, Danewort Butterfly
Terias nicippe, Nicippus Butterfly.
Castor-oil Plant. Castor Bean.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Catalpa.

Sphinx catalpae.

Cauliflower.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Pieris rapae. European Cabbage-worm
virginiensis.

Cedar.

Thyridopteryx ephemeraeformis, Bag
worm.

Cedar, Red.

Hylurgus dentatus, Toothed Hylurgus
Thecla smilacis.

Celery.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly.
Plusia simplex, Celery worm.
Cephalanthus.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheu-
Silkworm.

Checkerberry.

Coelodasys unicornis, Unicorn Apple
tree Caterpillar.

Chenopodium. (See Pigweed.)

Cherry.

vEgeria exitiosa, Peach Borer.

Agrotis saucia, Variegated Cutworm.
Anisopteryx autumnata. Fall Canker
worm.

vernata, Spring Canker-worm.
Apatela occidentalis.

Aphis cerasifolice, Cherry-leaf Plant-
louse.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-heade'’
Apple-tree Borer.

Clisioeampa americana. Apple-tree
Tent Caterpillar.

PLANT INDEX.

78

Aisiocampa sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar of
the Forest.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, PlumlCurculio.
Datana ministra, Yellow-neckecl Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Dicerca divaricata, Cherry-tree Borer.
Epicferus imbricatus. Imbricated Snout-
beetle.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Ithycerus noveboracensis. New York
Weevil.

Lachnosterna fraterna, Kindred May-
beetle.

fusca, Dark May-beetle,
pilosicollis, Hairy May-beetle.
Limenitis Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.
Loxotsenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.'

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rosebug.
Myzus cerasi, Cherry-tree Aphis.
(Edemasia concinna, Red-humped
Prominent.

Papilio turnus, Turnus Butterfly.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler.
Selandria cerasi, Cherry Slug.

Tortrix fervidana.

Cherry, Black.

Clisiocampa americana, Apple-tree
Tent Caterpillar.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web- worm.
Cherry, Wild.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Papilio turnus, Turnus Butterfly.
Theclatitus.

Cherry, Wild Black.

Abia cerasi, Cherry Abia.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web- worm.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Lycsena eomyntas, Comyntas Butterfly.
Chestnut.

Apatela americana, American Maple
Moth.

i. . hamamelis.

Callipterus castaneae. Chestnut Gay-
Louse.

Choke Cherry.

Aphis cerasifoli®, Cherry-leaf Plant-
[ louse.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.

(Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Tortrix fervidana.

Jimicifuga racemosa. (See Black Snake-
root.)

Cineraria, Senecio cineraria.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly,
huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.

Citrus.

Papilio cresphontes, Cresphontes But¬
terfly.

Cladosporium.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Clover.

Callidryas eubule, Danewort Butterfly.
Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

Cecidomyia leguminicola.

Ceramica picta. Zebra Caterpillar.
Colaspis brunnea.

Colias cassonia.

eurytheme, Eurytheme Butterfly,
philodice, Philodice Butterfly.
Cutworms.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Drasteria erechtea, Clover Drasteria.
Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Hypena scabra.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Leucania unipuncta, Army-worm Moth.
Lycsena comyntas, Comyntas Butterfly.
Pyralis farinalis, Meal Snout Moth.
Pyrrharctia isabella, Hedge-hog Cater¬
pillar.

Terias lisa, Lisa Butterfly.

nicippe, Nicippus Butterfly.

Clover. Red.

Diabrotica 12- punctata.

Epicaerus imbricatus. Imbricated Snout-
beetle.

Clover hay.

Asopia costalis, Clover-hay worm.
Pyralis farinalis, Meal Snout Moth.
Columbine, Aquilegia canadensis.

Nisoniades lucilius.

Columbine, Aquilegia.

Hyalopterus aquilegi®.

Composite Family, Composite.
Coceinellid®, Lady-bugs.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Harpalus.

Megilla maculata, Spotted Lady-bug.
Cone-flower, Rudbeckia laciniata.

Siphonophora rudbecki®.

Convolvulus.

Spilosoma virginica. Yellow Bear.
Convolvulus Family. Convolvulace®.

Cassidabivittaf a, Two-striped Tortoise-

beetle.

nigripes, Black-legged Tortoise-
beetle.

Cassidin®, Tortoise Beetles.

Coptocycla aurichalcea. Golden Tor¬
toise-beetle. i

guttata, Mottled Tortoise-beetle.

Coreopsis.

Acm®odera pulchella.
tubulus.

Coreopsis aristosa.

Siphonophora coreopsidis. Aphis of the
Spanish Needle.

74

PLANT INDEX.

Corn.

Achatodes ze®, Spindle worm.

Agrotis ypsilon, Greasy Cutworm.
Apatela oblinita, Smeared Dagger.
Aphid®, Plant-lice.

Aphis maidis, Corn Plant-louse.

Arctia arge, Arge Tiger Moth.

phalerata, Harnessed Moth.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust.
Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Diabrotica 12-punctata.

longicornis, Corn Root- worm.
Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Empretia stimulea, Saddle-back Moth.
Epicauta pennsylvanica.

vittata, Striped Potato-beetle.
Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth.

Gortyna nitela, 8talk Borer,
ze®.

Hadena arctica, Yellow-headed Cut¬
worm.

devastatrix. Glassy Cutworm.
Heliothis armigera. Corn worm.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth,
lulus impressus. Corn Myriapod.
Lachnosterna fraterna. White Grub or
Kindred May-beetle,
fusca, White Grub or Dark May-
beetle.

pilosicollis, White Grub or Hairy
May-beetle.

Laphygm a frugiperda, Fall Army- worm.
Leucania unipuncta, Army-worm.
Leucarctia acrsea, Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

Lygus lineolaris, Tarnished Plant-bug.
Macrodactylus subspinosus. Rose bug.
Melolonthid®, White Grubs.

Nephelodes violans, Smooth Cutworm.
Omophron.

Prodenia commelin®, Corn Cutworm.
Pyralis farinalis, Meal Snout Moth.
Sipha maydis, Corn Sipha.
Sphenophorus ze®, Corn Curculio,
Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Zabrus.

Corn, Sweet.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Euryomia inda, Indian Cetonian.
Heliothis armigera. Corn worm.
Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.

Cornel, Panicled, Cornus paniculata.

Aphis cornifoli®.

Cotton.

Aletia argillacea, Cotton worm.
Heliothis armigera, Boll worm.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Thecla poeas.

Cottonwood.

iEgeria asilipennis.

Apatela americana, American Map
Moth.

lepusculina. Cotton-wood Dagger.
Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-lei
Tortrix.

Chaitophorus populicola.

Pemphigus populicaulis, Poplar-les
Gall-louse,
populi-transversus.
pseudobyrsa.

vagabundus, Vagabond Gall-louse
Cotton-wood, Narrow-leaved, Popuk
balsamifera, var. angustifolia.
Pemphigus populi-monilis.
Crab-apple.

Aspidiotus harrisi, Harris’s Bark-lousi
Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling Moth.
Hyphantria textor. Fall Web-worm.
Loxot®nia rosaceana. Greater Lea
roller.

Parorgyia parallela.

Phycita nebulo. Apple Leaf-crumplej
Xyleutes robini®, Locust-tree Carpeij
ter Moth.

Crab-apple, Siberian.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling Moth
Limenitis Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.

Loxot®nia rosaceana, Greater Lea)

■

roller.

Crab-apple, Transcendent.

Eccopsis malana, Apple-bud worm.
Crab-apple. Wild.

Anthonomus 4-gibbus, Apple Curculh
Cranberry.

Pristiphora identidem.

Thecla irus.

Cranberry-tree, Viburnum opulus.

Aphis viburni, Snowball Aphis.

Croton capitatum.

Paphia andria, Goatweed Butterfly,
glycerium.

Crucifer®.

Flea beetles.

Orchestris vittata, Striped Flea-beetl<
Cucumber.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon plant-louse.
Diabrotica 12-punctata.

longicornis, Corn Root- worm,
vittata, Striped Cucumber-beetle.
Epitrix cucumeris, Cucumber Fie;,
beetle.

Melittia cucurbit®, Squash Borer.
Phacellura nitidalis, Pickle-worm.
Polydesmus complanatus, Flattene
Centipede.

Psylliodes punctulata, Punctulate
Flea-beetle.

Cucumber, Wild.

Aphis, Plant-louse.

Cucurbitace®. (See Gourd family.)
Cud-weed, Gnaphalium.

Pyrameis huntera. Hunter’s Butterfly

PLANT INDEX.

75

Cup-plant, Silphium integrifolium.

Siphonophora rudbeckim.

Currant.

iEgeria tipuliformis, Currant Borer.
Agrotis clandestina, W-marked Cut¬
worm.

Angerona crocataria.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

Capsus quadrivittatus, Four - striped
Plant-bug.

Cutworms.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Eufitchia ribearia, Gooseberry Span-
worm.

Eupithecia interrupto-fasciata, Currant
Fruit- worm.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Grapta progne, Spinous Currant Cater¬
pillar.

Hyperchiriaio, Io Moth.

Myelois convolutella, Gooseberry-
worm.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-shell
Bark-louse.

Nematocampa fllamentaria, Strawberry
Geometer.

Nematus ventricosus, Imported Cur¬
rant worm.

Pristiphora grossularise.
ruflpes.

Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Currant, Black.

jEgeria caudata, Black-currant Borer,
tipuliformis, Currant Borer.

Currant, Red.

iEgeria tipuliformis, Currant Borer.
Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Eupithecia interrupto-fasciata, Currant
Fruit-worm.

Myzus ribis.

Currant, Wild.

Grapta progne. Spinous Currant Cater¬
pillar.

Currant, Wild Black.

iEgeria caudata, Black-currant Borer.

Cypress Vine.

Agrotis ypsilon, Greasy Cutworm.

Decayed Wood.

Dendroides canadensis.

Dynastes tityus.

Lucanus dama, Pinching bug.
elaphus, Stag Beetle.

Decaying Vegetation.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Myriapoda, Myriapods, Thousand-legs.
Dictamnus fraxinella.

Papilio cresphontes, Cresphontes But¬
terfly.

Dill.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly.
Diplopappus. (See Aster. Double-bristled.)
Dock.

Aphis rumicis. Bean Aphis.

Dock, Yellow.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Exartema fascianatum.

Dogbane, Apocynum.

Aphis apocyni.

Dogbane, Spreading. (Apocynum andro-
ssemifolium.)

Chrysochus auratus, Golden Chrys-
chus.

Danais archippus, Archippus Butterfly.
Euchaetes collaris.

Dog-fennel. (See May-weed.)

Dogwood, Cornus.

Aphis cornifoliae, Dogwood-leaf Aphis.
Coelodasys unicornis, Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

(Edemasia concinna, Red-humped
Prominent.

Lycfena pseudargiolus, Azure-blue
Butterfly.

Dogwood. Cornus paniculata.

Loxotamia rosaceana. Greater Leaf-
Roller,

Dogwood, Flowering, Cornus florida.

Aphis cornifoliae.

Dogwood, Red-osier.

Schizoneura cornicola.

Drummond Phlox.

Heliothis phloxiphagus, Phlox Helio-
this.

Dutchman’s Pipe, Aristolochia sipho.

Papilio philenor, Philenor Swallow-tail.
Dyer’s Broom, Genista.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Dandelion.

Pyrrarctia isabella, Hedgehog Cater¬
pillar.

Decayed Oak wood.

Mordella 8-punctata.

Decayed Wood.

Alaus oculatus, Snapping Beetle.

Egg Plant.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato
beetle.

Elder.

Aphis sambuci, Elder Aphis.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Hyphantria textor, Fall Web- worm.
Macrodaetylus subspinosus, Rose bug.

76

PLANT INDEX.

Elm.

Anisopteryx autumnata, Fall Canker-
worm.

vernata. Spring Canker-worm.
Apatela americana, American Maple
Moth.

Arctia phalerata, Harnessed Moth.
Callipterus ulmicola.

Ceratomia amyntor, Elm Sphinx.
Cimbex laportei.

Eugonia subsignaria.

Glyphina ulmicola, Aphis of the Elm-
leaf Cockscomb Gall.

Grapta comma, Comma Butterfly.

interrogationis, Semicolon Butter¬
fly.

progne. Spinous Currant Caterpillar.
Halesidota caryse.

Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow Canker-worm.
Hyperchiria io, io Moth.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lachnosterna fraterna. Kindred May-
beetle.

fusca, Dark May-beetle,
pilosicollis. Hairy May-beetle.
Magdalis armicollis, Elm-tree Curculio.
Mytilaspis conchilormis, Oyster-shell
Bark-louse.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked
Tussock Moth.

Phigalia strigataria.

Saperda tridentata, Three - toothed
Saperda.

Schizoneura americana.

rileyi, Woolly Aphis of the Elm-tree,
ulmi, Elm-leaf Aphis.

Semasia prunivora. Plum Moth.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Tolype velleda, Velleda Lappet Moth.
Tremex columba, Pigeon Tremex.
Yanessa antiopa, Antiopa Butterfly.
Elm, American or White.

Callipterus ulmifolii.

Ceratomia amyntor, Elm Sphinx.
Grapta interrogationis, Semicolon
Butterfly.

progne, Spinous Currant Caterpillar.
Phytoptus ulmi.

Elm, Red or Slippery.

Pemphigus ulmifusus. (Red-elm Gall-
louse.)

Endive, Cichorium endivia.

Tychea erigeronensis.

Euonymus atropurpureus. (See Burning
bush.)

Eupatorium.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

F

False Indigc, Amorpha and Baptisia.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

False Nettle, Boehmeria cylindrica.

Grapta comma, Comma Butterfly.
Pyrameis atalanta, Atalanta Butterfly.
False Sycamore, Acer pseudo-platanus.

Drepanosiphum acerina.

Feverwort, Triosteum perfoliatum.

Sesia difflnis, Clear Wing.

Field CroDs.

Agrotis clandestina, W-marked Cut¬
worm.

messoria. Dark-sided Cutworm,
saucia, Variegated Cutworm.
Elateridae, Wire worms.

Figwort, Scrophularia nodosa.

Phorodon scrophulariae.

Fir.

Hylotrupes bajalus.

Lophyrus abietis, Fir-tree Saw-fly.
Flax.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.
Fleabane, Canada, Erigeron canadense.
Siphonophora erigeronensis, Aphis o|
the Canada Fleabane.

Flowers.

Cistelidaa.

Eupithecia interrupto-fasciata, Curran,
Fruit-worm.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Mordellidas.

Rhipiphoridse.

Trachelides.

Flowers, Garden.

Agrotis messoria, Dark-sided Cutworm
Caloptenus bivittatus, Striped Calop
tenus.

Elateridac, Wire worms.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Leucarctia acraea, Salt-marsh Cater )
pillar.

Mamestra renigera, White Bristly Cut¬
worm.

Forest Trees.

Anisopteryx autumnata, Fall Canker-
worm.

vernata, Spring Canker-worm.
Apatela americana, American Maple
Moth.

lepusculina, Cottonwood Dagger,
oblinita. Smeared Dagger.

Apatura celtis, Eyed Emperor.

clyton, Tawny Emperor.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-lea
Tortrix.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Bostrichus.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Catocala amatrix.
cara.

desperata.

neogama.

ultronia.

Ceratomia amyntor, Elm Sphinx.
Chrysophanus thoe, Thoe Butterfly.

PLANT INDEX.

■

1

77

orest Trees.

Citheronia regalis, Royal Walnut Moth.
Clisiocampa americana, Apple-tree
Tent Caterpillar.

sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar of the
Forest.

Cressonia juglandis, Walnut Sphinx.
Dryocampa rubicunda. Green-striped
Maple Worm.

senatoria, Senatorial Dryocampa.
Ecpantlieria scribonia, Large Black
Bear.

Endropia bilinearia.

Eucronia maia, Buck Moth.

Eugonia subsignaria.

Grapta comma. Comma Butterfly.

interrogations, Semicolon Butter¬

fly.

Halesidota tessellaris. Checkered Tus¬
sock Moth.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web- worm.
Limenitis Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.
Lithophane cinerea, Ash-gray Pinion.
Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
Orgyia leucostigma, White - marked
Tussock Moth.

Papilio ajax, Ajax Butterfly.

cresphontes, Philenor Swallow-tail,
troilus, Troilus Butterfly,
turnus, Turnus Butterfly.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler.
Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Fringe tree, Virginia, Ohionanthus.

Sphinx kalmi®.

Fruit.

Euryomia inda, Indian Cetonian.

Fruit trees.

JEgeria exitiosa, Peach Borer.

Agrotis, Cutworms.

messoria, Dark-sided Cut-worm.
Aphidse, Plant Lice.

Borers.

Shagbarlc Hickory-tree
pomonella, Codling

Bostrichus.
basilaris,

Borer.

Carpocapsa
Moth.

Cercopid® and Fulgorid®, Tree-
hoppers and leaf-hoppers.
Chrysobothris femorata. Flat-head¬
ed Apple-tree Borer.

Clisiocampa americana, Apple-tree
Tent Caterpillar.

Coccid®, Bark Lice.

Elaterid®, Wire-worms.

Empretia stimulea, Saddle-back Moth.
Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lachnosterna, May-beetles.

fraterna, Kindred May-beetle,
fusca, Dark May- beetle,
pilosieollis, Hairy May-beetle.
Leucania unipuncta, Army-worm.

Fruit trees.

Limenitis Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.
Lygus lineolaris, Tarnished Plant-bug.
Orgyia leucostigma, White - marked
Tussock Moth.

Pempelia hammondi, Apple-leaf Skele-
tonizer.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler.
Psylla rubi, Blackberry Flea-louse.
Psyllid®, Jumping Plant-lice.

Saperda Candida, Round-headed Apple-
tree Borer.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis of
the Apple-tree.

Thyridopteryx ephemer®formis, Bag-
worm.

Tortrix malivorana, Lesser Apple-leaf
Folder.

Fungus.

Agonoderus.

Amara.

Carabid®, Predaceous Ground-beetles.
Chl®nius.

Coccinella 9-notata, Nine-spotted Lady-
bug.

5-notata.

Coccinellid®, Lady bugs.

Cycloneda sanguinea Trim Lady-bug.
Evarthrus colossus.

Harpalus.

Hippodamia convergens, Convergent
Lady-bird.

glacialis, Icy Lady-bug.

Megilla maculata, Spotted Lady-bug.
Myriapoda, Myriapods, Thousand-legs.
Pterostichus.

Schizoneura fungicola.

G

Galium. (See Bedstraw.) *

Gerardia tenuifolia.

Junonia lavinia, Lavinia Butterfly.
Siphonophora gerardi®.

German Ivy.

Rliopalosiphum dianthi.

Gladiolus.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.

Glycine. (See Grount Ant.

Golden Rod.

Chauliognathus.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Euryomia inda, Indian Cetonian.
Siphonophora rudbecki®.

Golden-rod, Solidago rigida.

Siphonophora rudbecki®.

Golden-rod, Solidago serotina.

Siphonophora rudbecki®.

Gooseberry.

iEgeria tipuliformis, Currant Borer.
Agrotis clandestina, W- marked Cut¬
worm.

78

PLANT INDEX.

Gooseberry.

Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

Cutworms.

Epicasrus imbricatus, Imbricated Snout-
beetle.

Eufitchia ribearia, Gooseberry Span-
worm.

Grapta faunus.

Limenitis Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.
Myelois convolutella, Gooseberry
worm.

Myzus ribis.

Nematus ventricosus, Imported Currant
worm.

Pristiphora grossulariac.
ruflpes.

Siphonophora lactucac.

Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Gooseberry, Wild.

Grapta progne, Spinous Currant Cater¬
pillar.

Goosefoot Family, Chenopodiaceae.

Aphis atriplicis.

Gourd family, Cucurbitaeeas.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant-louse.
Grain.

Alucita, Grain Moths.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Bruchus granarius. Grain Bruchus.
Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth.

Gortyna nitela. Stalk Borer.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.
Leucarctia acrasa. Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
Philometra serraticornis.

Tenebrio, Meal worms.

Tenebrioides mauritanica.

Tinea granella, Wolf Moth.

Grape.

Acoloithus americana, American Pro-
cris.

falsarius.

iEgeria polistiformis, Grape Root-
borer.

Agrotis cupida.

saucia, Variegated Cutworm,
scandens, Climbing Cutworm,
ypsilon, Greasy Cutworm.

Alypia octomaculata, Eight -spotted
Forester.

Amphicerus bicaudatus, Twig and Axil
Borer.

Amphipyra pyramidoides. Green
Cream-spotted Grape worm.

Anomala binotata, Two-spotted Vine-
ehafer.

. lucicola, American Vine-chafer,
varians, Variable Vine-chafer,
vitis, Vine-chafer.

Apatela oblinita, Smeared Dagger.
Arctia phalerata, Harnessed Moth.

Grape.

Bostrichus basilaris, Shagbark Hickory-
tree Borer.

Callidium amcenum.

Choerocampa pampinatrix.

Coeliodes inmaualis. Grape Curculio.
Colaspis flavida, Grape-vine Colaspis.
Dactylosphaera vitifoliae, Grape- leaf
Gall-louse.

Darapsa myron, Hog Caterpillar of the
Vine.

Daremma unculosa.

Deilephila chamsenerii.

lineata, White-lined Sphinx.

Desmia maculata, Grape Leaf-folder.
Dyspteris abortivaria.

Elateridac, Wire worms.

Eudryas grapta, Beautiful WTood-
nymph.

unio. Pearly Wood-nymph.

Fidia viticida. Grape-vine Fidia.
Gall-making[Aphides.

Graptodera chalybea, Grape-vine Flea-
beetle.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lecanium vitis.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose-bug.
Mamestraldistincta.

Pelidnota punctata, Spotted Vine-
chafer.

Penthina vitivorana, Grape -berry

Sloth.

Petrophora diversilineata.

Philampelus achemon, Achemon
Sphinx.

pandorus, Satellite Sphinx.
Philometra serraticornis.

Phylloxera vitifolias, Grape Phylloxera.
Prionus imbricornis, Tile-horned Prio-
nus.

laticollis, Broad-necked Prionus.
Psychomorpha epimenis. Grape-vin^
Epimenis.

Pterophorus periscelidactylus, Grape¬
vine Plume.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Rutelidac, Vine Chafers.

Sciara inconstans, Fickle Midge.
Selandria vitis.

Siphonophora viticola. Grape Louse.
Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Thyreus abbotti, Abbott’s Sphinx.
Grass.

Acridium americanum, American Lo¬
cust.

var. ambiguum, American Lo¬
cust, yellow var.

Agonoderus.

Agrotis, Cutworms.

c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworms,
saucia, Variegated Cutworm,
tessellata. Corn Cutworm.

PLANT INDEX.

79

rass.

Amara.

Anisodactylus.

Arctia phalerata. Harnessed Moth.
Atrytone hobomok.

Blissus leueopterus, Chinch bug.
Byrrhus pilula.

Calathus gregarius.

Caloptenus bivittatus, Striped Calop-
tenus.

differentialis, Lubberly Caloptenus.
femur-rubrum, Red-legged Locust,
spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust.
Carabidae, Predaceous Ground-beetles.
Chytolita morbidalis.

Coccinellidse, Lady bugs.

Ctenucha virginica.

Debis portlandia.

Drasteria erechtea.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Galerita janus, Janus Ground-beetle.
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.
a Hadena devastatrix. Glassy Cutworm.
Harpalus.

Heliophila phragmitidicola.

Isosoma ely mi, Wheat-straw Worm.
Lachnosterna fraterna, White Grub or
Kindred May-beetle,
fusca. White Grub or Dark May-
beetle.

pilosicollis, White Grub or Hairy

May-beetle.

Laphygma frugiperda, Fall Army-
Worm.

Leucania pseudargyia.

unipuncta, Army worm.

Leucarctia acraea, Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
Megilla maculata, Spotted Lady-bug.
Melolonthidse, Whrte Grubs.
Neonympha canthus.

eurytris, Eurytris Butterfly.

9

gemma.

sosybius.

Nephelodes violans, Smooth Cutworm.

Pamphila mystic.

peckius. Peck’s Skipper,
phylaeus.

sassacus, Sassacus Skipper.
Patrobus longicornis.

i Philometra serraticornis.

Platynus limbatus.

Plusia simplex, Celery worm.
Pseudoglossa lubricalis.

Pterostichus.

Satyrus alope, Alope Butterfly.

nephele, Nephele Butterfly.

Scepsis fulvicollis.

Sehizoneura panicola.

Grass, Blue. .

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain

Locust.

Loxopeza atriventris.

Grass, Bottle. (See Grass, Foxtail.)

Grass, Crab, Panicum sanguinale.

Blissus leueopterus, Chinch bug.

Grass, Eragrostis poaeoides, var. megas-
tachya.

Glyphina eragrostidis.

Grass, Foxtail, Setaria.

Blissus leueopterus.

Grass, Foxtail, Bottle-grass, Setaria glauca.

Siphonophora setarise.

Grass. Gymnostichum hystrix.

Isosoma hordei, Joint worm.

Grass, Herd’s. (SeeJGrass, Timothy.)

Grass, Hungarian.

Agrotis e-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm.
Blissus leueopterus, Chinch bug.
Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.

Grass, Lyme, Wild Rye, Elyraus canadensis.

Isosoma hordei, Joint-worm.

Grass, Panicum.

Glyphina eragrostidis.

Siphonophora setariae, Bottle-grass
Aphis.

Grass, Panicum glabrum.

Sehizoneura panicola.

Tycheapanici.

Grass, Poa annua.

Rhizobius poae.

Grass, Ray or Rye.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Grass, Timothy, Herd’s grass.

Blissus leueopterus, Chinch bug.
Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Cut worms.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Leucania unipuncta. Army worm.
Timothy Worms.

Grass, Woolly Beard, Erianthus alopecur-
oides.

Pamphila delaware.

Grasses, perennial.

Agrotis, Cutworms.

Elateridae. Wire worms.

Lachnosterna, White Grubs.
Leaf-hoppers.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.
Grasses, Wild.

Blissus leueopterus. Chinch bug.
Ground Cherry, Physalis.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-

beetle.

Ground Cherry, Physalis pubescens.

Macrosila Carolina, Tobacco worm.
Ground nut, Apios Glycine.

Eudamus bathyllus, Bathyllus Skipper.
Niscniades juvenalis.

H

Hackberry, Celtis.

Apatela rubricoma.

Apatura celtis, Eyed Emperor.

clyton, Tawny Emperor.

Libythea bachmanni.

PLANT INDEX.

80

Hackberry, Celtis oeeidentalis.

Sphinx drupiferarum.

Haw.

Conotrachelus crateegi, Quince Curculio.
Hawthorn. (See Thorn.)

Hay.

Blissus leueopterus. Chinch bug.

Hazel.

Apatela oblinita, Smeared Dagger.
Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-leaf
Torlrix.

Balaninus nasicus, Long-snouted Nut-
weevil.

Chytolita morbidalis.

Coelodasys unicornis, Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Datana ministra. Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Halesidota tessellaris, Checkered Tus¬
sock Moth.

Hibernia tiliara, Yellow Canker-worm.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Loxotaenia rosaceana. Greater Leaf-
roller.

Nematocampa filamentaria, Strawberry
Geometer.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Hedysarum.

Eudamus bathyllus, Bathyllus Skipper.
Helminthosporium.

Carabidae, Predaceous Ground-beetles.
Coccinella 9-notata, Nine-spotted Lady-
bug.

5-notata.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Hemlock.

Hylotrupes bajulus.

Hemlock Lumber.

Callidium sp.

Hemp.

Acridium emarginatum, Emarginate
Locust.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.

Plusia aurichalcea.

Henbane.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Heuchera. (See Alum-root.)

Hibiscus.

Eudryas unio, Pearly Wood-nymph.
Hibiscus grandiflorus.

Amphalocera.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.
Hickory.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.
Amphicerus bicaudatus, Twig and Axil
Borer.

Aphis caryella.

Bostrichus basilaris, Shagbark Hickory-
tree Borer.

Callipterus caryae.

Chion cinctus, Hickory Trunk Borer.

Hickory.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Citheronia regalis, Royal Walnut Moth.

Clisiocampa sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar
of the Forest.

Cressonia juglandis, Walnut Sphinx.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Dicerca lurida.

Halesidota caryae.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.

Lacbnus, Twig Lice.

caryae, Hickory Plant-louse.

Lithophane cinerea, Ash-gray Pinion.

Nematocampa filamentaria, Strawberry
Geometer.

Phycita juglandis, Walnut Leaf-crump^
ler.

Phylloxera caryaecaulis. Hickory
Gall-aphis,
caryae-globosa.

caryaevenae, Hickory - vein Gall-|
louse.

Ptinidae.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Schizoneura caryae, Hickory Blight.

Scolytus 4-spinosus, Hickory Bark-
borer.

Selandria caryae.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Thecla calanus.

Tortrix rileyana, Walnut Tortrix.

Hickory, Bitter-nut.

Scolytus 4-spinosus, Hickory Bark-
borer.

Hickory, Pignut.

Hyphantria textor. Fall Web- worm.

Ithycerus noveboracensis, Now York
Weevil.

Lachnus caryae. Hickory Plant-louse.

Scolytus 4-spinosus, Hickory Bark-
borer.

Hickory, Shagbark or Shell-bark.

Bostrichus basilaris, Shagbark Hick¬
ory-tree Borer.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.

Phylloxera caryaefoliae, Hickory Leaf-
witherer.

Scolytus 4-spinosus, Hickory Bark-
borer.

Holly.

Thecla strigosa, Streaked Thecla.

Hollyhock.

Plusia precationis, Thistle Plusia.

Pyrameis cardui. Thistle Butterfly,
huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.

Honey-locust.

Eburia quadrigeminata, Honey-locust
Borer.

Macrobasis unicolor, Ash-gray Blister-
I beetle.

PLANT INDEX.

81

Honey-locust.

Teiea polyphemus. Polyphemus Silk-

n

worm.

Honeysuckle.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Chaitophorus lonieera.

Honeysuckle, Bush.

Sesia diffinis, Clear Wing.

Honeysuckle, Fly, Lonieera eiliata.

Melitaea phaeton.

Honeysuckle, Tartarian.

Abia caprifolii.

Sesia diffinis, Clear Wing.

Hop.

Elateridae, Wire-worms.

Grapta comma, Comma Butterfly.

in'terrogationis, Semicolon Butter¬
fly.

Hypena evanidalis.

humuli, Hop-vine Moth.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Phorodon humuli, Hop Aphis.

Plusia balluca, Hop Plusia.

Pyrameis atalanta, Atalanta Butterfly.
Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Thecla humuli, Hop-vine Thecla.

Hop Tree, Ptelea trifoliata.

Papilio cresphontes, Cresphontes But¬
terfly.

Hornbeam, Carpinus.

Psylla carpini.

Horse-chestnut.

Loxoteenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Orgyia leucostigma, White- marked
Tussock Moth.

Parorgyia parallela.

Horsemint, Monarda.

Pholisora eatullus.

Horse Nettle.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle,
juncta.

Horseradish.

Caloptenus bivittatus, Striped Calopte-
nus.

Loxoteenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Pieris oleracea, Turnip Butterfly.

I rapae, European Cabbage worm,

virginiensis.

Indian Hemp, Apoeynum cannabinum.
Botis penitalis.

Euchaetes collaris.

Indian Plantain, Cacalia suaveolens.

Siphonophora rudbeckiae.

Iris.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Ironweed, Yernonia fasciculata.

Aphis middletoni.

vernoniae, Ironweed Aphis.

Ironweed, Yernonia noveboracensis.

Siphonophora rudbeckiae.

Ironweed, Yernonia lindheimeriana.

Siphonophora rudbeckiae.

Ivy, American. (See American Ivy.)
German. (See German Ivy.)

K

Knotweed.

Chrysophanus thoe, Thoe Butterfly.
Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Gastrophysa polygoni.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.
Siphonophora polygoni. Knotweed
Aphis.

L

Lamb’s-quarters. Chenopodium album.
Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Larch.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked
Tussock Moth.

Larch, American, Tamarack.

Chermes laricifoliae, Larch Chermes.
Lachnus laricifex, Tamarack Aphis.
Sarnia Columbia.

Laurel, Kalmia.

Sphinx kalmiae.

Leguminosse. (See Pulse Family.)

Lemon.

Papilio cresphontes, Cresphontes But¬
terfly.

Lettuce.

Agrotis c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm.
Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Plusia simplex. Celery worm.

Rhizobius lactucae, Lettuce Earth-
louse.

Siphonophora lactucae.

Lichen.

Coccinella 9-notata, N ine-spotted Lady-
bug.

5-notata.

sanguinea. Trim Lady-bug.
Coccinellidae, Lady bugs.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Hippodamia convergens, Convergent
Lady-bug.

glaeialis, Icy Lady-bug.

Megilla maculata, Spotted Lady-bug.
Lilac.

iEgeria syringae, Lilac Borer.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

82

PLANT INDEX

Lilac.

Daremma undulosa.

Loxotsenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
Roller.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-shell
Bark-louse.

Papilio troilus, Troilus Butterfly.
Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Sphinx chersis.

Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.

Lily.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Lime-tree. (See Basswood.)

Linden.

Apatela americana, American Maple
Moth.

Drepanosiphum tilise.

Lachnus longistigma.

Phytoptus.

Selandria tilise. Linden Saw-fly.

Linden, American. (See Basswood.)
Linden, European.

Saperda vestita, Hairy Saperda.
Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Lindera. (See Spice-bush.)

Liquid ambar. (See Sweet-gum Tree.)
Lobelia.

Elateridce, Wire worms.

Locust.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Cyllene robinise, Locust Borer.
Eudamus titvrus, Tityrus Skipper.
Hispides.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Xyleutes robiniae, Locust-tree Carpen¬
ter Moth.

Locust, Black.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Ecpantheria scribonia, Large Black
Bear.

Eudamus tityrus, Tityrus Skipper.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Xyleutes robiniae, Locust-tree Carpen¬
ter Moth.

Locust, Viscid.

Eudamus tityrus, Tityrus Skipper.

Logs. (See Stumps and Logs.)

Lucerne, Medicago sativa.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.

Lupine.

Callidryas eubule, Danewort Butterfly.
Colias eurytheme, Eurytheme Butter¬
fly.

philodice, Philodice Butterfly.
Lycaena scudderi.

Lupine, Blue.

Utetheisa bella.

M

Maize.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

Mallow Family, Malvaceae.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly,
huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.
Mandrake. (See May-apple.)

Mangel Wurtzel, Beta vulgaris, var.

Silpha opaca.

Maple.

iEgeria acerni, Maple JEgerian.

Agrotis c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm.
Apatela americana, American Maple
Moth.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus I
Silkworm.

Eacles imperialis, Imperial Moth.
Elaphidion, Twig-pruners.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lachnosterna fraterna. Kindred May- j
beetle.

Lecanium acericola, Maple Bark-louse. |
acericorticis.

Limacodes laticlavia.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked l
Tussock Moth.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Maple, Ash-leaved, Box-elder, Negundo.
iEgeria acerni, Maple JEgerian.
Chaitophorus negundinis.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Lecanium acericola, Maple-tree Bark-
louse.

Phytoptus sp.

Maple, Norway, Pseudoplatanus.

Drepanosiphum acerina.

Maple, Red.

Drvocampa rubicunda, Green-striped]
Maple-worm.

Maple, Silver, White or Soft.

iEgeria acerni, Maple iEgerian.

Agrotis c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm.
Chrysobothris femorata. Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Dryocampa rubicunda, Green-stripeel
Maple-worm.

Lecanium acericola, Maple-tree Bark l
louse.

Pemphigus acerifolii.

Phytoptus quadripes.

Siphonophora acerifolias.

Maple, Sugar.

Glycobius speciosus, Sugar - map hi
Borer.

Phytoptus acericola.

Psylla annulata, Annulated Psylla.
Marigold, Pot, Calendula mierantha.
Siphonophora calendulae.
calendulella.

May-apple, Mandrake.

Euptoieta claudia.

May-weed, Dog-fennel.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

PLANT INDEX.

83

Meadow Grass.

Elateridee, Wire worms.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.
Lachnosterna fraterna, White Grub of
Kindred May-beetle,
fusca, White Grub of Dark May-
beetle.

pilosicollis, White Grub of Hairy
May-beetle.

Meadow-rue, Thalictrum.

Calpe canadensis.
i Meadow-sweet, Spiraea ulmaria.

Siphonopliora pisi, Green Dolphin.
Melon, Cantaleup.

Phacellura nitidalis, Pickle worm.
Melon', Musk.

Aphis cucumeris. Melon Plant-louse.
Melon, Nutmeg.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant-louse.
Phacellura nitidalis, Pickle worm.
Melon. (See Watermelon.)

Melons.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant-louse,
cucurbitae.

Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
Diabrotica 12-punctata.

vittata, Striped Cucumber-beetle.
Phacellura nitidalis. Pickle-worm.
Mignonette.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Pieris protodice, Southern Cabbage
Butterfly.

rapae, European Cabbage Worm.
Milkweed. Silkweed, Asclepias.

Danais archippus, Archippus Butterfly.
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Milkweed, Silkweed, Asclepias cornuti.
Callipterus asclepiadis.

Siphonophora asclepiadis, Milkweed
Aphis.

Milkweed, Silkweed, Asclepias obtusifolia.
Callipterus asclepiadis.

1 Milkweed, Silkweed, Asclepias syriaca.
Aphis lutescens.

f Mint. Spearmint, Mentha viridis.
Siphonophora menthae.

Morning-glory.

Cassida bivittata, Two-striped Tortoise-
beetle.

nigripes, Black-legged Tortoise-
• beetle.

, Cassidinae, Tortoise-beetles.

Coptocycla aurichalcea, Golden Tor-

Mountain Ash.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Saperda Candida, Round-headed Apple-
tree Borer.

Selandria cerasi. Cherry Slug.

Mountain Mint, Monarda.

Pholisora catullus.

Mulberry, White.

Agrotis saucia, Variegated Cutworm.
Mustard.

Orchestris vittata, Striped Flea-beetle.
Pieris napi.

oleracea, Turnip Butterfly,
protodice, Southern Cabbage But¬
terfly.

rapae, European Cabbage worm.
Plusia brassicae, Cabbage Plusia.
Mustard, Hedge, Sisymbrium officinale.
Doryphora 10- lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Myrica. (See Bayberry.)

N

Nasturtium.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage worm,
virginiensis.

Nectarine.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur-
culio.

Nettle.

Grapta comma, Comma Butterfly.

interrogationis, Semicolon Butter¬

fly.

Plusia chrysites.
iota.

simplex, Celery worm.

Psylla urticaecolens.

Pyrameis atalanta, Atalanta Butterfly,
huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly,
cardui. Thistle Butterfly.

Vanessa milberti.

Nettle, Great Stinging, Urtica dioica.

Pyrameis atalanta, Atalanta Butterfly.
Siphonophora pisi, Green Dolphin.
Nettle, Small Stinging, Urtica urens.

Plusia interrogationis.

Nightshade.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Nursery Stock.

Lachnosterna fusca. White Grub or
Dark May-beetle.

! toise-beetle.

guttata, Mottled Tortoise-beetle.
Maerosila cingulata.

Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Moss.

Byrrhus pilula.

Moss, on Oaks.

Hypropepia fucosa.

Mountain Ash.

Apatela occidentalis.

Acridium rubiginosum.

Anisota senatoria, Senatorial Dryo-
campa.

Anorthosia punctipennella.

Apatela occidentalis.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-leaf
Tortrix.

84

PLANT INDEX.

Oak.

Brenthus septentrionalis. Northern
Brenthus.

Callipterus quercicola.

Catocala lineella.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Clisiocampa sylvatiea, Tent Caterpillar
of the Forest.

Datanaministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Drepanosiphum (?) quercifolii.
Dryocampa pellucida.

rubicunda, Rosy Dryocampa.
stigma.

Eacles imperialis, Imperial Moth.
Edema albifrons.

Elaphidion, Twig-pruners.

parallelum, Parallel Longhorn.
Endropia bilinearia.

Halesidota tessellaris. Checkered Tus¬
sock Moth.

Hispides.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lachnosterna fraterna, Kindred May-
beetle.

fusca, Dark May-beetle,
pilosicollis, Hairy May-beetle.
Limenitis disippus, Disippus Butterfly.
■ Lucanus dama. Pinching bug.

elaphus. Stag Beetle.

Magdalis olyra.

Myzocallis bella.

Nisoniades juvenalis.

Orgyia leucostigma. White-marked
Tussock Moth.

Parorgyia clintonis.
parallela.

Perophora melsheimeri.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Saturnia maia, Buck Moth.

Schizoneura fungicola.

querci, Woolly Aphis of the Oak.
Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Thecla calanus.
m-album.

strigosa, Streaked Thecla.
titus.

Tolype velleda, Yelleda Lappet Moth.
Tortrix fervidana.
paludana.

Tremex columba, Pigeon Tremex.
Xyleutes robiniae, Locust-tree Car¬
penter Moth.

Oak-apple.

Lithophane cinerea. Ash-gray Pinion.
Oak, Black.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-leaf
Tortrix.

Elaphidion villosum, Oak Twig-borer.
Oak, Black-jack.

Oak.

Cicada septendecim, Seventeen-year
Locust.

Oak, Burr.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-leaf
Tortrix.

Ithycerus noveboracensis, New York
Weevil.

Loxotacnia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Myzocallis bella.

Phytoptus querci.

Thecla strigosa, Streaked Thecla.

Oak, Iron.

Phylloxera rileyi, Oak-leaf Phylloxera-
Oak, Laurel or Shingle.

Callipterus hyalinus.

Oak, Pin.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak-leaf
Tortrix.

Oak, Post.

Agrilus lateralis.

Oak, Red.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana. Oak-leaf
Tortrix.

Callipterus quercifolii.
walshi.

Semasia prunivora, Plum Moth.
Xyleutes robiniae, Locust-tree Car¬
penter Moth. .

Oak, Scrub.

Limenitis Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.

Oak, Swamp Chestnut.

Chaitophorus quercicola.

Oak, Swamp White.

Callipterus discolor,
punctata.

Phylloxera rileyi, Oak-leaf Phylloxera-
Oak, White.

Agrilus lateralis.

Argyrolepia quercifoliana, Oak - leaf
Tortrix.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree borer.

Elaphidion villosum, Oak Twig-borer-
Lachnus quercifoliae, Oak-leaf Lachnus-
Pandeleteius hilaris, Gray-sided Curcu-
lio.

Phylloxera rileyi, Oak-leaf Phylloxera.
Oak wood, Decayed. (See Decayed Oak
wood.)

Oats.

Agrotis saucia, Variagated Cutworm.
Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Elateridae, Wire-worms.

Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth.

PLANT INDEX.

85

-

Oats.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Leucania unipnncta, Army worm.
Siphonophora avenge, Grain Plant-
louse.

Oleander.

Aphis nerii.

Onion.

Acridium americanum, American Lo¬
cust.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Elateridge, Wire worms.

Orache, Garden, Atriplex.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Orange.

Papilio cresphontes, Cresphontes But¬
terfly.

Phytoptus oleivorus.

Osage Orange.

Flata conica.

Hydnocera pallipennis.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lecanium maclurge.

Ormenis pruinosa.

Ox-eye Daisy.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.

p

Papaw.

Papilio ajax. Ajax Butterfly.

Parsley Family. UmbelliferaB.

Papilio asterias, Parsnip worm.

Parsley.

Papilio asterias, Parsnip worm.
Parsnip.

Papilio asterias, Parsnip worm.
Siphocoryne pastinacge.

Passion Flower.

Euptoieta claudia.

Passion Flower, Blue.

Agraulis vanillge.

Passion Flower, Scarlet.

Agraulis vanillge.

. Pea.

Bruchidae, Pea and Bean Weevils.
Bruchus granarius, Grain Bruchus. ^
pisi, Pea Weevil.

Callidryas eubule, Danewort Butterfly.

• Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Colias eurytheme, Eurytheme Butter¬
fly.

philodiee, Philodfee Butterfly.
Heliothis arruigera, Corn .worm. _
Siphonophora pisi, Green Dolphin.
Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Peach.

iEgeria exitiosa, Peach Borer.

Agrotis c-nigrom, Spotted Cutworm.

saucia, Variegated Cutworm.
Amphieerus bicaudatus, Twig and Axil
Borer.

Anarsia lineatella, Peach-twig Borer.

Peach.

Anisopteryx antumnata, Fall Canker-
worm.

vernata, Spring Canker-worm.

Aphis amygdali, Almond Aphis.

Arctia phalerata, Harnessed Moth.
Bostrichus basilaris, Shagbark Hick¬
ory-tree Borer.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Clisiocampa sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar
of the Forest.

Conotrachelus nemaphar, Plum Cur-
culio.

Dicerca divaricata, Cherry-tree Borer.
Euryomia inda, Indian Cetonian.
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Ithycerus noveboracensis, New York
Weevil,

Lithophane picta.

Melanactes piceus, Wire-worm.

Myzus persicas, Peach-tree Aphis.
Prodenia lineatella.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Saturnia maia. Buck Moth.

Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Pear.

iEgeria pyri, Pear-tree Borer.

Agrotis e-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm.
Amphieerus bicaudatus, Twig and Axil
Borer.

Anthonomus pyri. Pear Weevil.

4-gibbus, Apple Curculio.

Aspidiotus harrisi, Harris’s Bark-louse.
Callimorpha lecontei, Callimorpha Pear
Caterpillar.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling Moth.
Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Cicada septendeeirr, Seventeen-year
Locust.

Conotrachelus crataegi, Quince Cur¬
culio.

nenuphar. Plum Curculio.

Haltica helxines. Small Bronze Flea-

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.

Ips quadrisignatus.

Ithycerus noveboracensis, New York
Weevil.

Lecanium pyri.

(Edemasia concinna, Red -humped
Prominent.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-maiked
Tussock-Moth.

Phytoptus pyri.

Platycerus quereus.

Prionus laticollis, Broad-necked Prio-
nus.

Psylla pyri, Pear Flea-louse.

86

PLANT INDEX.

Pear.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Selandria eerasi. Cherry Slug.
Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Tremex columba, Pigeon Tremex.
Pecan.

Callipterus caryse.

Scolytus 4-spinosus, Hickory Bark
Borer.

Pepper.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.

Pepper. Cayenne.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Pepper grass, Lepidium virginicum.

Arctia phalerata. Harnessed Moth.
Eutrapela transversata, Span worm.
Peronospora.

Diabrotica longicornis. Corn Root-
worm.

Persimmon.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.

Aphis diospyri.

Citheronia regalis. Royal Walnut Moth.
Psylla sp.

Phaseolus perennis. (See Bean, Wild.)
Phlox.

Heliothis phloxiphagus. Phlox worm.
Phoma.

Loxopeza atriventris.

Picotee.

Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Pignut. (See Hickory, Pignut.)

Pigweed, Amarantus retroflexus.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Pigweed. Chenopodium.

Aphis rumicis. Bean Aphis.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Pine.

Aphis pinicolens. Pine-inhabiting
Aphis.

Callidium amoenum.

Callosamia promethae. Prometheus
Silkworm.

Chalcophora virginiensis.

Chermes pinifolise.

Coccinellidse, Lady bugs.

Curculionidse, Snout Beetles,

Diraphia femoralis, Black-legged Dira-
phia.

vernalis, Jumping Plant-louse.
Eacles imperialis, Imperial Moth.
Hylobius pales, Pales Weevil.

Hylurgus terebrans. Boring Hylurgus.
Lachnus strobi, White-pine Lachnus.
Lophyrus abietis, Fir-tree Saw-fly.
Pissodes strobi. White-pine Weevil.
Platycerura furcilla.

Sphinx coniferarum.

Thecla humuli, Hop-vine Thecla.

Pine

Thecla niphon.

Urocerus albieornis.

Pine Lumber.

Callidium sp.

Pine, Pinus palustris.

Sphinx coniferarum.

Pine, Scotch.

Mytilaspis pinifolii, Pine-leaf Scale-in-
sect.

Pine, White.

Lachnus strobi. White-pine Lachnus.
Lophyrus abbotti, Abbott’s Saw-fly.
Mytilaspis pinifolii. Pine-leaf Scale-in-

sect.

Pissodes strobi. White-pine Weevil.
Platycerura furcilla.

Schizoneura pinicola.

strobi, Pine-tree Blight.

Sphinx harrisi, Hawk Moth.

pineum. Hawk Moth.

Urocerus abdominalis.

Pink.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Plantain.

Arctia arge, Arge Tiger Moth,

isabella, Hedgehog Caterpillar,
phalerata, Harnessed Moth.
Ecpantheria scribonia, Large Black
Bear.

Melitsea phaeton.

Plusia precationis, Thistle Plusia.

simplex, Celery worm.

Pyrrharctia isabella, Hedgehog Cater¬
pillar.

Spilosoma virginica. Yellow Bear.
Plantain, Plantago lanceolata.

Junonia lavinia, Lavinia Butterfly.
Plum.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.
iEgeria exitiosa, Peach Borer,
pictipes.

Anthonomus prunicida, Plum Gouger..
Apatela occidentalis.

superans, Green Chestnut-backed
Caterpillar.

Aphis pruni. Plum Aphis.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Chrysobothris femorata. Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer.

Clisiocampa americana, Apple-tree
Tent Caterpillar.

sylvatica. Tent Caterpillar of the
' Forest.

Coelodasys unicornis. Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum CurculiO-
Haltica helxines, Small Bronze Flea-
beetle.

Hyalopterus pruni.

Ithycerus noveboracensis, New York
WTeevil.

PLANT INDEX.

87

i

Plum.

Limenitis disippus, Disippus Butterfly.
Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
(Edemasia concinna, Red-humped
Prominent.

Orgyialeucostigma, White-marked Tus¬
sock Moth.

Parorgyia parallela.

Phorodon humuli, var. mahaleb.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler.
Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green-spot¬
ted Grape- worm,

Sarnia cynthia, Ailanthus Silkworm.
Semasia prunivora. Plum Moth.

Sphinx drupiferarum.

Plum, Sloe.

Phorodon humuli, var. mahaleb.

Poison Ivy.

Phytoptus sp.

Pollen.

Coccinella.

sanguinea, Trim Lady-bird.
Coccinellid®, Lady bugs.

Harpalus.

Hippodamia convergens, Convergent
Lady-bird.

glacialis, Icy Lady-bug.

Megilla maculata, Spotted Lady-bird.
Polygonum.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.
Pomegranate.

Thecla isocrates.

Poplar.

Apatela americana, American Maple
Moth.

Callosamia promethea, Promethus Silk¬
worm.

Clisiocampa sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar
of the Forest.

Gastropacha americana.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Limenitis disippus, Disippus Butterfly.

Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.

Lithophane cinerea, Ash-gray Pinion.
Loxotaenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Lucanus eleplias, Stag Beetle.

Prionus laticollis. Broad-necked Prio-
nus.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Smerinthus modestus.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Vanessa antiopa, Antiopa Butterfly.
Poplar, Balsam.

Pemphigus popularia, Poplar Gall-
louse.

populi - globuli, Poplar Bullet
Gall-louse,
populi-ramulorum.
populi-transversus.
populi-ven®, Poplar-vein Gall-
louse.

Poplar, Balsam.

vagabundus, Vagabond Gall-louse.
Poplar, Lombardy.

Agrilus granulatus, Lombardy Poplar
Borer.

Lachnosterna fraterna, Kindred May-
beetle.

Prionus laticollis, Broad-necked Prio¬
nus.

Poppy.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Potato.

Agrotis messoria, Dark-sided Cutworm.
Baridius trinotatus, Potato-stalk Wee¬
vil.

Blister Beetles.

Caloptenus femur-rubrum. Red-legged
Locust.

spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust.
Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Drasteria erechtea, Clover Drasteria.
Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Epicauta cinerea, Margined Blister-
beetle.

vittata, Striped Potato beetle.

Epitrix cucumeris. Cucumber Flea-
beetle.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Lema trilineata. Three-lined Potato-
beetle.

Lygus lineolaris, Tarnished Plant-bug.
Macrobasis unicolor, Ash-gray Blister-
beetle.

Macrosila Carolina, Tobacco worm.
5-maculata, Tobacco worm.

Prickly Ash.

Chrysophanus thoe, Thoe Butterfly.
Papilio cresphontes, Cresphontes But¬
terfly.

troilus, Troilus Butterfly.

Prickly Ash, Northern, Toothache-tree,
Zanthoxylum americanum.

Chrysophanus thoe, Thoe Butterfly.

Privet. Ligustrum.

Daremma undulosa.

Pulmonaria angustifolia.

Plusia modesta.

Pulse Family, Leguminos®.

Agrotis annexa, Cabbage Cutworm.
Aphis medicaginis.

Terias lisa, Lisa Butterfly.

Pumpkin.

Agrotis clandestina, W-marked cut¬
worm.

Diabrotica vittata, Striped Cucumber-
beetle.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.
Melittia cucurbit®, Squash Borer.

Purslane.

Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
Diabrotica longicornis. Corn Root -
worm.

88

PLANT INDEX.

Q

Quince.

Conotrachelus crataegi, Quince Curcu-
iio.

nenuphar. Plum Curculio.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler.
Saperda Candida, Round-headed Apple-
tree Borer.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

R

Radish.

Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
Orchestris vittata, Striped Flea-beetle.
Pieris napi.

oleracea, Turnip Butterfly,
rapae, European Cabbage worm,
virginiensis.

Plusia brassicae. Cabbage Plusia.
Ragweed, Ambrosia.

Megilla maculata, Spotted Lady-bug.
Ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiaefolia.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Leucarctia acraea, Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

Loxotaenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Telesilla einereola.

Ragweed, Ambrosia psilostaehya.

Siphonophora ambrosias.

Ragweed, Ambrosia trifida.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Gortyna nebris, Stalk Borer.
Siphonophora rudbeckiae.

Raphanus.

Pieris virginiensis.

Raspberry.

iEgeria rubi, Raspberry Root-borer.
Agrilus ruficollis, Raspberry Cane-
borer.

Anatis 15 -punctata, Fifteen - spotted
Lady-bug.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Eupithecia interrupto-fasciata, Currant
Fruit- worm.

Loxotaenia rozaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Pemphigus rubi.

Prodenia iineatella.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Selandria rubi, Raspberry Slug.
Siphonophora rubi.

Synchlora rubivoraria, Raspberry Geo¬
meter.

Raspberry, Wild.

Loxotaenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Rattle-box, Crotalaria.

Utetheisa bella.

Ray-grass. (See Grass, Ray- or Rye-.)
Red-bud.

Fidia viticida, Grape-vine Fidia.
Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Red Root.

Lycaena eomyntas, Comyntas Butterfly.
Rhubarb.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Gortyna nitela. Stalk Borer.

Rocket.

Cerostoma porrectella.

Rosaceas. (See Rose Family.)

Rose.

Clisiocampa sylvatica, Tent Caterpillar
of the Forest.

Empretia stimulea, Saddle-back Moth.
Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Loxotaenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
(Edemasia concinna, Red-humped
Prominent.

Orgyia leueostigma, White-marked
Tussock Moth.

Phigalia strigataria.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Pyrrhia exprimens.

Selandria rosae, Rose Slug.
Siphonophora, rosae, Rose Aphis,
rosarum.

Smerinthus excaecatus. Blind-eyed
Sphinx.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Tetranyehus, Red Spider.

Rose, Wild, Rosa blanda.

Penthina nimbatana.

Rose Family, Rosaceas.

Pseudothyatira cymatophoroides.
Serica vespertina, Evening Silky Leaf-
chafer.

Rosin-plant, Silphium integrifolium.

Siphonophora rudbeckiae.

Rye.

Agrotis saucia, Variegated Cutworm.
Blissus leucopterus. Chinch bug.
Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Elateridae, Wire worms.

Isosoma hordei. Joint Worm.
Laphygma frugiperda, Fall Army-
worm.

Leucania unipuncta, Army-worm.
Siphonophora avenae. Grain Plant-
louse.

Rye-grass. (See Grass, Ray- or Ray-.)

PLANT INDEX.

89

s

It. John’s-wort, Hypericum kalmianum.
Aphis hyperici.

it. John’s-wort, Hypericum prolificum.

Myzocallis hyperici.
falsify. *

Prodenia lineatella.

Salt Marsh Grass.

Leucarctia acraea, Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

Salvia.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Sassafras.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silk-worm.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Papilio Troilus, troilus Butterfly.
Saw-grass, Saur-grass, Cladium effusum.

Pamphila palatka.

Scrub Grass.

Pamphila sassacus, Sassacus Skipper.
Sedge.

Satyrus alope, Alope Butterfly,
nephele, Nephele Butterfly.

Senecio cineraria. (See Cineraria.)

Senna.

Terias nicippe, Nicippe Butterfly.
Septoria.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Shad Bush. (See June Berry.)

Shag-bark Hickory. (See Hickory, Shag-
bark or Shell-bark.)

Shell-bark Hickory. (See Hickory, Shag-
bark or Shell-bark.)

Shell-flower. (See Turtle-head.)
Shepherd’s Purse.

Aphis rumicis. Bean Aphis.
Siphonophora pisi, Green Dolphin.
Shrubs.

Agrotis messoria, Dark-sided Cutworm.

scandens, Climbing Cutworm.
Anomala binotata, Two-spotted Vine-
chafer.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow Canker-worm.
Leucania uDipuncta, Army worm.
Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Silkweed. (See Milkweed.)

Smartweed.

Apatela oblinita, Smeared Dagger.
Arctia phalerata, Harnessed Moth.
Arsilonche henrici.

Ceramica picta. Zebra Caterpillar.
Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Loxotaenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear,
b Smilax.

Thecla smilacis.

Smoke Tree, YTenetian Sumach.

Blepharida rhois, Jumping Sumach-
beetle.

Snakeroot, Black, Cimicifuga racemosa.
Lycaena comyntas, Comyntas Butterfly,
pseudargiolus.

Snakeroot, Virginia. (See Virginia Snake-
root.)

Snowball, Viburnum opulus, var. roseum.

Aphis viburni, Snowball Aphis.
Snowberry, Symphoricarpus.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Sesia thysbe, Thysbe Clear Wing,
tenuis.

Snowberry, Symphoricarpus vulgaris.
Aphis symphoricarpi, Snowberry Aphis.
Tortrix rileyana, Walnut Tortrix.
Snowdrop-tree, Halesia.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Soapwort, Bouncing Bet, Saponaria offi¬
cinalis.

Leucania unipuncta, Army-worm Moth.
Sorghum.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.

Sipha maidis, Corn Aphis.

Sorrel.

Chrysophanus americana, American
Copper Butterfly.

Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Sorrel, Field, Rumex acetosella.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Sow-thistle, Sonchus oleraceus.
Siphonophora lactueae.
sonchi.

Spearmint. (See Mint.)

Spice-bash, Benzoin, Lindera.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Papilio troilus, Troilus Butterfly.

Spider Flower.

Pieris monuste.

Spinach.

Agrotis c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm.
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Spiraea.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Saturnia maia, Buck Moth.

Spruce.

Chermes abieticolens, Adelges of the
Spruce.

Hylotrupes bajalus.

Lophyrus abietis, Fir-tree Saw-fly.
Orgyia leucostigma, White -marked
Tussock Moth.

Spruce, Black.

Lachnus abietis, Spruce-tree Lachnus.
Spruce lumber.

Callidium sp.

90

PLANT INDEX.

Spurge, Euphorbia marginata.

Siphonophora euphorbicoia, Margined
spurge Aphis.

Spurge, Spotted, Euphorbia maoulata.

Siphonophora euphorbi®, Spotted-
spurge Aphis.

Squash.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant-louse.
Diabrotica 12-punctata.

longicornis, Corn Root- worm,
vittata, Striped Cucumber-beetle.
Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Melittia cucurbit®, Squash Borer.
Phacellura nitidalis. Pickle worm.
Siphonophora cucurbit®.

Squash, Hubbard.

Melittia cucurbit®, Squash Borer.

Stock, Ten Weeks’.

Orchestris vittata, Striped Flea-beetle.
Stock, Virginia.

Orchestris vittata, Striped Flea-beetle.
Stonecrop, Sedum.

Euptoieta claudia.

Straw.

Pyralis farinalis, Meal Snout-moth.
Strawberry.

Allorhina nitida.

Anarsia lineatella, Strawberry Crown
Miner.

Anchylopera fragari® , Strawberry Leaf-
roller.

Angerona crocataria.

Colaspis flavida, Grape-vine Colaspis.
Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Emphytus maculatus, Strawberry Saw-
fly.

Lachnosterna fusca, White Grub or
Dark May-beetle.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.

Loxot®nia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Melolonthid®, White Grubs.
Nematocampa filamentaria, Strawberry
Geometer.

Siphonophora fragari®, Strawberry
Aphis.

Tyloderma fragari®, Strawberry Crown-
borer.

Strawberry, Wild.

Anarsia lineatella, Strawberry Crown
Miner.

Loxot®nia rosaceana, Greater Leaf
roller.

Stumps and Logs.

Bolitophagus cornutus.

Sumach.

Blepharida rhois. Jumping Sumach-
beetle.

Citheronia regalis, Royal Walnut Moth.
Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar,
perspicua.

Loxot®nia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Pemphigus rhois, Sumach Gall Plant-
louse.

Sumach, Venetian. (See Smoke Tree.)
Sunflower, Helianthus.

Aphis helianthi.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
worm.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly.

huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.
Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Sunflower, Helianthus decapetalus.

Ecpantheria scriboniaj? Large Black
Bear.

Sunflower, Wild.

Ecpantheria scribonia, Large Black
Bear.

Sunflower, Wild, Helianthus grosse-ser-
ratus.

Gelechia flavoeostella.

Loxot®nia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Sweet Briar.

Serica Respertina, Evening Silky Leaf-
chafer.

Sweet Fennel.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly.
Sweet Fern.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Sweet Flag, Acorus calamus.

Diraphia calamorum, Calamus Diraphia.
maculipennis. Spotted- winged Dira¬
phia.

Sweet-gum Tree, Liquidambar.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Eacles imperialis, Imperial Moth.
Sweet-pea.

Siphonophora pisi. Green Dolphin.
Sweet Potato.

Cassida bivittata, Two-striped Tortoise-
beetle.

nigripes, Black-legged Tortoise-
beetle.

Cassidid®, Tortoise Beetles.
Coptocycla aurichalcea, Golden Tor¬
toise-beetle.

guttata. Mottled Tortoise-beetle.
Macrosila cingulata.

Sweet William.

Elaterid®, Wire worms.

Sycamore.

Eacles imperialis, Imperial Moth.
Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk
worm.

Tremex columba, Pigeon Tremex.

Tamarack. (See Larch, American.)
Tansy, Tanacetum vulgare.

Siphonophora tanaceti, Tansy Aphis.

asr

PLANT INDEX.

91

irtarian Honeysuckle. (See Honeysuckle,

Tartarian.)

histle.

Aphis carduella.

Diabrotica longicornis.Corn Root-worm.
Gortyna cataphracta.

Plusia chrysites.

preeationis. Thistle Plusia.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly,
huntera. Hunter’s Butterfly,
histle, Blessed, Cnicus.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly,
huntera. Hunter’s Butterfly.

'histle, Canada.

Siphonopora rudbecki®.

'histle, Cirsium lanceolatum.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Loxotaenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

'histle, Cotton, Onopordon acanthium.
Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly,
huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.

Phistle, Plumeless, Carduus.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly,
huntera, Hunter’s Butterfly.

Thistle, Spear.

Pyrameis cardui, Thistle Butterfly.

Thorn, Hawthorn, Crataegus.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar,
perspicua.

Gortyna cataphracta.

(Edemasia concinna, Red - humped
Prominent.

Papilio turnus, Turnus Butterfly.
Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape-worm.

Saperda Candida, Round-headed Apple-
tree Borer.

Sesia thysbe, Thysbe Clear Wing.

Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Thecla humuli, Hop-vine Thecla.
strigosa. Streaked Thecla.

Thorn, Crataegus punctata.

Aphis crataegifoliae, Thorn-leaf Aphis.
Thorn, Scarlet-fruited or White, Crataegus
coccinea.

< Lagria hirta.

Siphonophora crataegi. .

Thorn Apple, Apple of Peru.

Doryphora lO-linoata, Colorado Potato-

beetle.

: Tick-trefoil, Dosmodium.

Lycaena comyntas, Comyntas Butterfly.
Tick-trefoil, Desmodium dillenii.

Eudamus bathyllus, Bathyllus Skipper.
Tick-trefoil, Desmodium marilandicum.
Lycaena comyntas, Comyntas Butterfly,
i Tobacco.

Agrotis ypsilon, Greasy Cutworm.
Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

Tobacco.

spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust.
Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Heliothis armigera. Corn worm.

Macrosila Carolina, Tobacco worm.
5-maculata, Tomato worm.

Tomato.

Agrotis ypsilon, Greasy Cutworm.
Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
beetle.

Epicauta cinerea. Margined Blister
beetle.

vittata, Striped Potato-beetle.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Heliothis armigera, Corn worm.

Macrosila Carolina, Tobacco worm.

5-maculata, Tomato worm.

Megoura solani.

Toothache-tree. (See Prickly Ash, North¬
ern.)

Touch-me-not, Wild, Impatiens fulva.

Aphis impatiens. Touch-me-not Aphis.
Trees.

Agrotis clandestina, W-marked Cut¬
worm.

messoria, Dark-sided Cutworm,
scandens, Climbing Cutworm.
Anisopteryx autumnata, Pall Canker-
worm.

Buprestid®, Saw-horned Wood-borers.
Byrrhus pilula.

Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow Canker-worm.
Lachnosterna fratern$, Kindred May-
beetle.

fusca, Dark May-beetle,
pilosicollis, Hairy May- beetle.
Lachnus, Twig Lice.

Leucania unipuncta. Army worm.
Macrodactylus subspinosus. Rose bug.
Melanotus fissilis.

Tetranychus, Red Spider.

Trees, Deciduous.

Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

Cicada septendecim, Seventeen-year
Locust.

Lachnosterna fraterna. Kindred May-
beetle.

fusca. Dark May-beetle,
pilosicollis, Hairy May-beetle.

Trees, Soft-wooded.

Xiphidra albicornis.

Trumpet Creeper, Tecoma radicans.

Psychomorpha epimenls, Grape*vino
Epimenis.

Tulip.

Aphis tulip®.

Rhopalosiphum tulip®.

Siphonophora tulip®.

Tulip-tree.

Callosamia promethea, Prometheus
Silkworm.

92

PLANT INDEX.

Tulip-tree.

Lucanus elaphus. Stag Beetle.
Siphonopkora liriodendri.

Turnip.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
Elateridae, Wire worms.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.
Orchestris vittata, Striped Flea-beetle.
Pieris oleracea, Turnip Butterfly,
rapse European Cabbage wotm.
virginiensis.

Pionea rimosalis, Cabbage Pionea.
Plusia brassicae, Cabbage Plusia.
Plutella cruciferarum, European Cab¬
bage Web Moth.

Turnip, Rutabaga.

Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Pieris rapae, European Cabbage worm.
Turtle-head, Snake head, Shell-flower,
Chelone glabra.

Melitaea phaeton.

U

Lmbelliferae. (See Parsley Family.)

Credo.

Diabrotica longicornis. Corn Root-
worm.

Cstilago.

Coecinella 9-notata, Nine-spotted Lady-
bug.

5-notata.

Diabrotica longicornis. Corn Root -
worm.

V

Vegetables, Garden.

Agrotis clandestina, W-marked Cut¬
worm.

c-nigrum, Spotted Cutworm,
herilis, Western Striped Cutworm,
lubricans.

saucia, Variegated Cutworm,
subgothica, Dingy Cutworm,
ypsilon. Greasy Cutworm.
Caloptenus bivittatus, Striped Calop¬
tenus.

femur-rubrum. Red-legged Locust,
spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust.
Ceramica picta, Zebra Caterpillar.
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Hadena devastatrix, Glassy Cut- worm.
Leucarctia acraea, Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose bug.
Mamestra subjuncta, Speckled Cut¬
worm.

Melolonthidae, White Grubs.

Pionea forflcialis. Cabbage-garden Peb¬
ble Moth.

Vegetables, Garden.

Plutella cruciferai'um, European Cab¬
bage Web Moth.

Psylliodes punctulata, Punctulated
Flea-beetle.

Pyrrharctia arge, Arge Tiger Moth,
Verbena.

Dendroptus sp., Verbena Mite.
Siphonophora verbenae, Verbena, Aphis.
Spilosoma virginica, Yellow Bear.
Vervain, Blue, Verbena hastata.
Adipsophanes miscellus.

Crambodes talidiformis.

Loxotmnia rosaceana, Greater Leaf-
roller.

Vetch, Tufted, Vieia cracca.

Aphis rumicis, Bean Aphis.

Vetchling, Everlasting Pea, Lathyrus.

Nisoniades juvenalis.

Violet.

Argynnis alcestis.

aphrodite Aphrodite Butterfly.

atlantis.

bellona.

cybele.

egleis.

diana, Diana butterfly,
idalia, Idalia butterfly,
myrina.

Euptoieta claudia.

Virginia Creeper.

Acoloithus americana, American Pro-
cris.

falsarius.

Citheronia regalis, Royal Walnut Moth.
Eudryas grata, Beautiful Wood-nymph.
Pelidnota punctata, Spotted Vine-
chafer.

Philampelus achemon, Achemon Sphinx.

pandorus. Satellite Sphinx.

Thyreus abbotti, Abbott’s Sphinx.

Virginia Snakeroot, Aristolochia serpen-
taria.

Papili. philenor, Philenor Swallow-tail.

W

Walnut.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.

Callipterus caryae.

Citheronia regalis, Royal Walnut Moth.
Clisiocampa sylvatica. Tent Caterpillar
of the Forest.

Cressonia juglandis, Walnut Sphinx.
Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Orgyial’eucostigma, White-marked Tus¬
sock Moth.

Phycita juglandis, Walnut Leaf-crump-
ler.

Schizoneura caryae, Hickory Blight.
Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

PLANT INDEX.

98

walnut, Black.

Datana ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Melanotus communis, Wire worm,
fissilis, Wire worm.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked Tus¬
sock Moth.

Bhycita juglandis, Walnut Leaf-crump-
ler.

Tortrix rileyana, Walnut Tortrix.
ralnut, White. (See Butternut.)

Watermelon.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant-louse.
Deilephila lineata, White-lined Sphinx.
(Weeds.

Acridium americanum, American Lo¬
cust.

var. ambiguum, American Lo¬
cust, Yellow var.

emarginatum, Emarginate Locust.
Agrotis saucia, Variegated Cutworm,
subgothica, Dingy Cutworm,
tessellata, Striped Cutworm.

Anomala binotata, Two-spotted Vine-
chafer.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.
Caloptenus bivittatus. Striped Calopte-
nus.

differentials, Lubberly Caloptenus.;
Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Leucarctia acraea, Salt-marsh Cater¬
pillar.

(Edipoda Carolina, Carolina Locust.
Phi'ometra serraticornis.

Tragocephala, Goathead Locusts.

viridifasciata, var. infuscata, Dusky
Locust.

var. virginianana, Green-striped
Locust.

Wheat.

Acridium americanum, American Lo¬
cust.

Agriotes mancus, Wheat Wire worm.

saucia. Variegated Cutworm.

Blissus leucoptenus Chinch bug.
Caloptenus femur-rubrum, Red-legged
Locust.

spretus. Rocky Mountain Locust.

• Cecidomyia destructor, Hessian Fly.
Diplosis tritici, Wheat Midge.

Elateridm, Wire-worms.

Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer.

Heliophila harveyi, Wheat-head Army-
worm.

Isosoma elymi, Wheat-straw Worm.

hordei, Joint Worm.

Lachnosterna fusca, White Grub of
Dark May-beetle.

Laphygma frugiperda, Fall Army-
worm.

Leucania unipuncta, Army worm.

Wheat.

Prodenia commelinm, Wheat Cutworm.
Siphonophora avenee, Grain Plant-
louse.

Tinea granella, Wolf Moth.

Wheat, Winter.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug.

Wild Liquorice, Galium circaezans.

Aphis circsezandis.

Wild Rye. (See Grass, Lyme-.)

Willow.

Actias luna, Luna Silkworm.

Egeria anthracipennis.

Apatela oblinita, Smeared Dagger.
Attacus cecropia, Cecropia Silkworm.
Batrachedra salici-pomonella.

Cimbex laportei.

Chaitophorus salicicola.

viminalis.

Dolerus arvensis.

Ecpantheria scribnia, Large Black Bear.
Gelechia gallmgenitella.

Grapta faunus,
j-album.

Halesidota carym.

Hyperchiria io, Io Moth.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm.
Lachnus salicelis.

salicicola. Plant-louse of the Willow.
Limenitis arthemis.

disippus, Disippus Butterfly.

Ursula, Ursula Butterfly.

Lucanus dama, Pinching Bug.

Nematus salicis-pisum.
salicis-pomum.
ventralis.

Nymphalis disippus, Disippus Butter¬
fly.

Oryssus afflnis.

hsemorrhoidalis.

manurus.

Saturnia maia, Buck Moth.
Siphonophora salicicola, Willow Aphis.
Telea polyphemus, Polyphemus Silk¬
worm.

Thecla acadica.

Vanessa antiopa, Antiopa Butterfly.
Willow, Black.

Aspidiotus salicis-nigr®, Black-willow
Bark-louse.

Rhopalosiphum salicis.

Willow, Gray.

Lachnus dentatus. Spotted Willow
Aphis.

Mytilaspis salicis, Willow Bark-louse.
Willow, Heart-leaved.

Euura salicis-ovum.

Phytoptus salicicola.

Phytoptus sp.

Willow, Low-bush, Salix humilis.

Euura orbitalis.
salicis-gemma.

Willow, Shining.

Chaitophorus viminalis.
Rhopalosiphum salicis.

94 PLANT

Willow, Weeping.

Chaitophorus viminalis.

Nematus trilineatus.

Rhopalosiphum salicis.

Willow, White.

Chaitophorus smithim.

Euura salicicola.

Nematus ventralis.

Willow-herb, Epilobium.

Eudryas grata, Beautiful Wood-nymph.
Willow-herb, Epilobium angustifolium.
Daremma undulosa.

Deilephila chammnerii.

INDEX.

Willow-herb, Epilobium coloratum.

Eudryas unio, Pearly Wood-nymph.
Winterberry, Ilex.

Coelodasys unicornis, Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Wintergreen.

Coelodasys unicornis. Unicorn Apple-
tree Caterpillar.

Witch-hazel.

Hormaphis spinosus.

Wormwood, Artemisia absinthium.
Siphonophora absinthii.

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

95

%

GENERAL INDEX TO REMEDIES, NATURAL AND

ARTIFICIAL,

A

Acids for Plant Lice, viii.179,182.

Acrid insecticides for Pieris rapse, Euro¬
pean Cabbage Butterfly, ix,15.

Alkalies for Aspidiotus conchiformis, Oys¬
ter-shell Bark-louse, i,46, 48; ii, 40.

Bark Lice, vi,13.

Elateridse, Wire Worms, vi,28.
Lachnosterna quercina. May Beetle,
vi,99.

Plant Lice, viii, 182.

Aloes for Aspidiotus conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 35.

Diabrotica vittata, Striped Cucumber
Beetle, vi,166.

American Cuckoo preying upon Datana
ministra, Yellow-necked Apple-tree Cat¬
erpillar, iv, 192.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked
Tussock Moth, ii, 17.

Ammonia, carbonate of, solution, for Plant
Lice, viii. 180.

Ammonia for Aspidiotus conchiformis,
Oyster-shell Bark-louse, i. 35.

Apparatus for application of insecticides to
Plant Lice, viii, 181.

Kerosene emulsions, xii, 63.
destruction of Doryphora 10-lineata,
Colorado Potato Beetle, iii, 164.

I fumigating Plant Lice, viii, 184.

Arsenical ointment for Psoroptes equi,
Scab Mite, ix, 66.

poisons for Selandria cerasi, Cherry
Slug or Pear Slug, xii.lOO.
Thyridopteryx ephemermformis,
Bag Worm, xii, 101.

solutions for Melophagus ovinus, Sheep
Tick, ix. 64.

Psoroptes equi, Scab Mite, ix,66.

i Arsenic as an insecticide, ii, 78.

Ashes as an insecticide, ii,7; vi,9.

for iEgeria exitiosa, Peach-tree Borer,

vi,39.

Ashes for Aspidiotus conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i,35.

ElateridaB, Wire Worms, vii, 24.

Grapta (Vanessa) progne, Spinous
Currant Caterpillar, ii, 61.

Murgantia histrionica, Harlequin
Cabbage Bug, vi,60.

Mytilaspis pinifolii, Pine-leaf Scale
Insect, ii, 91.

Pieris rapm, European Cabbage
Butterfly, ix,22.

Pionea rimosalis, Cabbage Pionea,
ix,39.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis
of the Apple-tree, i,63; viii, 132.

Selandria cerasi, Cherry Slug or
Pear Slug, xii, 99, 100.

Tortrix malivorana. Lesser Apple
Leaf-folder, ii, 23,

Axle grease for Chrysobothris femorata.
Flat-headed Apple-tree Borer, vi.lll.

%

B

Bacteria, parasitic, artificial cultivation of,
from Blissus leucopterus. Chinch Bug,
xii, 51, 54.

Bacterium (Micrococcus insectorum) in¬
festing Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug,
xii, 56.

Bait of vegetables for Elateridse, Wire
Worms, vi,28,119.

Baltimore Oriole preying upon Conotra-
chelus nenuphar, Plum Curculio,i,70.

Bandages as traps for Carpocapsa pomo-
nella, Codling Moth, xi.20.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Curcu-

lio, vi,140.

Bands of cloth or felt for trapping Amsop-
teryx vernata. Spring Canker Worm, iii,
108,115,116; vi, 19; vii, 240.
of tin, for trapping Anisopteryx vernata,

Spring Canker Worm, iii, 104, 105, 116;

vii, 240.

96

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Bands of tin for Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow
Canker Worm, xi, 30.

Barium, sulpko-carbonate of, for Phyllox¬
era vitifolim, Grape Phylloxera, viii, 159.

Barricades against Blissus leucopterus,
Chinch Bug. vii, 64.

Barrier to progress of Tylodermafragariae,
Strawberry Crown Borer, xii, 74.

Benzine as an insecticide, i, 52.
effect on plants, i, 52.
for Mytilaspis cdnchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 51.

Birds, insectivorous, protection of, vi,9, 15.

rearing and nesting, to destroy
Conotrachelus nenuphar. Plum
Curculio, vi, 141.

preying upon Acrididae, Locusts, ix,137.

Agrotis, Cutworms, vii,218.

Army worm, vi,57; x, 41.

. Blissim leucopterus, Chinch Bug,
vii,54; xii, 44, 56.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust, vi,53,54.

Carpocapsa pomonella. Codling
Moth, vii,261.

Chrysopa pseudographa, Counter¬
feit Golden-eye, viii, 179.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root
Worm, xi,71; xii, 27.

Elateridas, Wire Worms, vi,32,119;
vii,32.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web-worm,
ii, 19.

Lachnosterna quercina, May Beetle,
vi, 98.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose
Bug, vi, 104.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark- louse, ii, 35.

Nocturnal caterpillars, ii, 19.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf Crump-
ler, iii, 121.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage
Butterfly, ix,21.

Tortrix malivorana, Lesser Apple
Leaf-folder, ii, 22.

Bisulphide of carbon for Aphis cucumeris,
Melon Plant-louse, xii, 89.

Phylloxera vitifoliae, Grape Phylloxera,
viii, 159.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage Worm,
xii, 95.

Blackbird, Yellow-headed (Xanthocepha-
lus icterocephalus) preying upon Acridi-
dae, Locusts, ix, 137.

“Blue stone” (sulphate of copper) for Ela-
teridas, Wire Worms, vi,31.

Boards or bricks under trees for Conotra¬
chelus nenuphar, Plum Curculio, vi,141.

Bobolink preying upon Leucania uni-
puncta, Army Worm, x,41.

Boxes, gauze-covered, for Diabrotica
vittata, Striped Cucumber Beetle, vi, 166,

Brine for Mytilaspis conchiformis. Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 35.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage Butter¬
fly, ix, 22.

Pionea rimosalis, Cabbage Pionea, ix,
39.

Plusia brassicae. Cabbage Plusia, vii,
230.

Plutella crueiferarum, European Cab¬
bage Web Moth, vii, 267.

Brushing into liquid and killing Macro- j
basis unicolor, Ash-gray Blister Beetle,!
vi, 126.

Buhach for Pieris rapae, Imported Cabbage
Worm, ix,32.

Burning branches for Elaphidion villosum.
Oak-twig Pruner, vi, 150.
buds for Eccopsis malana, Apple Bud
Worm, xi,18.

cornstalks, straw and rubbish for Blis¬
sus leucopterus, Chinch Bug, vii, 61,
65, 68.

grass for Army Worm, vi,59.

Laphygma frugiperda. Fall Army
Worm, vii, 98,219.

Leucania (Heliophila) unipuncta.
Army Worm Moth, vii, 225.
infested fields for Anchylopera fra-
gariae, Strawberry Leaf Roller, vii, 259.
Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm,
x, 42, 43.

leaves for P enthina vitivorana, Grape-
berry Moth, vii, 257.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug, iii,
154.

meadows and fields for Nephelodes
violans, Violet Nephelodes, vii, 100.
prairies for Caloptenus spretus, Rocky
Mountain Locust vi,52.
rubbish for Elateridag, Wire Worms, vii,
32.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch bug, iii.
148.

shoots for Pissodes strobi, White Pine
Weevil, vi,134.

sod for Elateridae, Wire Worms, vi. 30.
straw and stubble for Isosoma allyni.
Wheat Straw Worm; xi, 80.
stubble for Achatodes zeae, Spindle-
worm Moth, vii, 223.

Blissus leucopterus. Chinch Bug,
vii, 51.

Gortyna nitela. Stalk-borer Moth,
vii, 222.

Hessian Fly, x, 223, 224.
stubble or weeds for Agrotis, Cutworms,
vii, 87.

twigs for Anarsia lineatella, Strawberry
Crown Miner, xii, 76.
twigs and leaves for Phytoptus pyri,
xii. 141, 143.

vines for iEgeria cucurbitae, Squash
Borer, vii, 173.

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

£7

Burning vines for Aphis cucumeris, Melon
Plant Louse, xii, 89.

Baridius trinotatus, Potato-Stalk
Weevil, vi, 142.

webs of Datana ministra, Hand-maid
Moth, vii, 190.

Hyphantria textor. Fall Web Worm,
vii. 11 1,18.').

woodlands for Blissus leueopterus,
Chinch Bug, vii, 5-5.

Camphor for Aphides, Plant Lice, viii, 182.
Bruchus pi-^i. Pea Weevil, vi, 128.

Tinea biseliella, Hair Moth, vii. 265,

dorsistrigella, Clothes Moth, vii, 263.
pellionella, Fur Moth, vii, 265.
rusticella, vii, 264.
tapetzella, Carpet Moth, vii, 264.
Capturing with net iEgeria polistiformis,

; Grape-root Borer, i, 27.

Pieris oleracea, Turnip Butterfly, vii, 144.
protodice, Southern Cabbage But¬
terfly, vii, 142.

rapae, Rape or European Cabbage
Butterfly, vii, 146; ix,21,22.

Carbolic acid as an insecticide, ii, 81.

diluted with lime water for Pieris rapae,
European Cabbage Butterfly, ix,24.
for Moths, vii, 264.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage But¬
terfly, ix,22.

Psoroptes equi, Scab Mite, ix, 66.
Selandria pyri, Pear Slug, ii, 81.
Selandria rosae, Rose Slug, ii, 81.
Carbon, bisulphide of. for Aphis cucumeris,
Melon Plant Louse, xii,89.

Phylloxera vitifoliae, Grape Phylloxera,
viii, 159.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage Worm,
xii, 95.

Care of soil, vi, 12.

Castor bean crop for Elateridae, Wire
Worms. vi,30.

Caustic potash for Apple Root Louse, vi,9.
Chinch Bug trap, vii.52.

Chip traps for Alypiaoctomaculata, Eight-
spotted Forester. vii. 177.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Curculio,
\ • vi, 141.

Eudryas grata, Beautiful Wood Nymph,
vii, 179.

Eudryas unio, Pearly Wood Nymph, vii,
[i 178.

Psychomorpha epimenis, Grape-vine
Epimenis, vii, 177.

Cinders around trees for Borers, vi,39.
Clean culture for Diabrotiea longicornis, x,
'f. 45; xi, 72; xii. 30.

Cleaning the trees, vi,13.
up rubbish, vi,9.

for Saperda Candida, Round-head¬
ed Apple-tree Borer, vi, 155.
Climatic influences, effect on Acrididse,
Locusts, ix, 132, 133, 135, 140.

—7

Climatic, influences, effect on Agrotis,
Cutworms, vii, 85,89; x,55. .

Anisopteryx autumnata. Fall Canker
Worm, vii, 239.

vernata, Canker Worm, vi, 16, 21.

Aphides. Plant Lice, x, 55.

Blissus leueopterus, Chinch Bug, vii,
50,51,55,58,61; x, 3, 48, 50, 51, 54, 55; xi, 98;
xii, 5. 33, 31, 35. 36, 38. 39, 46, 47. 56.

Caloptenus differentialis, vi,45.

femur-rubrum, Red-legged Grass¬
hopper, vi,45.

spretus,' Rocky Mountain Locust, vi,
45.

Diabrotiea longicornis, Corn Root
Worm, xii. 6, 22, 27, 28,31.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vii, 32.

Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth, xii, 148, 149.

Heliothis armigera, Armed Heliothis,
vii, 232; xi, 87. 88, 96, 98.

Hessian Fly, x, 48, 55, 199, 209, 225.

Hibernia tiliaria. Yellow Canker Worm,
xi,26.

insect development, x, 47, 48; xii, 6.

Isosoma allyni, Wheat Straw Worm,
xi, 81.

Leaf-lice, iv, 197.

Leucania (Heliophila) unipuncta. Army
Worm Moth, vi, 57; vii, 224; x, 15, 32, 33,
34. 35, 4i, 48, 56; xi. 57,58, 59.

Locusts, x, 55.

Micropus leueopterus, Chinch Bug, iii
155.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-shell
Bark- louse, i, 52.

Myzus cerasi, Cherry-tree Aphis, viii, 76.

Phytopti, Mites, xii, 143.

Phorodon humuli, Hop Aphis, viii, 71;
x, 48.

Pieris beckeri, ix,28.

protodice, Southern Cabbage Butterfly,
ix,28.

rapae, European Cabbage Butterfly, ix,
15, 16.

Plant Lice, viii, 182, 183.

Plutella eruciferarum, Cabbage Tinea,
ix, 55.

Root Lice, viii, 182.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis of
Apple-tree, viii, 131.

Siphonophora avenae, Grain Aphis, viii,
53, 55.

Coal oil. (See kerosene.)

tar for Blissus leueopterus, Chinch Bug.
iii, 146.

Chrysobothris femorata. Flat-head¬
ed Apple-tree Borer, vi, 111.

Conotrachelus nenuphar. Plum
Curculio, i.72.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vi,32.

Concentrated lye for Mytilaspis conchifor¬
mis, Oyster-shell Bark-louse, i, 48.

98

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Concussion to destroy eggs and larva of
Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth, xii, 154.

Co-operation for extermination of Anisop-
teryx vernata, Canker Worm, vi,20.
in burning stubble for Isosoma allyni,
Wheat Straw Worm, xi, 80.

Copperas for Elateridm, Wire Worms, vi,
31; vii. 22, 23, 25.

Corrosive sublimate for Moths, vii, 264.

Cuckoo, American. (See American Cuckoo.)

Cultivating tall varieties of corn for Helio-
this armigera, Corn Worm or Boll Worm,
xi, 101.

Cultivation, effect on Mytilaspis conchifor-
mis, Oyster-shell Bark-louse, i, 53.

Curculio catcher, Dr. Hull’s, vi, 140.

Cutting Grain close to ground for Hes¬
sian Fly, x, 224.

and feeding corn stalks infested with
Achatodes zem, Spindle Worm Moth,
vii, 100.

out and burning canes infested with
Agrilus ruficollis, Raspberry Borer,
vi, 115.

borers, vi, 13,

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-head¬
ed Apple-tree Borer, vi, 111.

D

Destroying by hand Algeria curcurbitm,
Squash Yine Borer, vi, 41.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug, vii.
52.

Plusia brassicse, Cabbage Plusia,

vii, 230.

crumpled leaves for Desmia maculalis.
Grape Leaf-folder, vii, 249.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crump-
ler, vii, 250.

Psylla rubi, Blackberry Flea-louse,

viii, 18.

Tortrix malivorana. Lesser Apple
Leaf Folder, vii, 255.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust, vi,52,53.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling Moth,
iv, 173.

cucumbers, melons, or squashes that
contain Phacellura nitidalis, Pickle
Worm, vii, 252.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato
Beetle, apparatus for, iii,164.
eggs and larvae of Orgyia leucostigma.
White-marked Tussock Moth, vii, 186;
xii, 101.

eggs of Anisopteryx autumnata, Fall
Canker Worm, vii, 239.

Gortyna nitela, Stalk Borer, vii, 114.
injured fruit, vi,9.

leaves infested with Plant Lice, viii, 180,
183.

Destroying Notodonta concinna, Trim
Prominent, vii, 190.

old trees and planting anew to extermi¬
nate Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum
Curculio, vi, 141.

plums for Anthonomus prunicida, Plum
Gouger, i,77.

vines attacked by iEgeria cucurbitae,
Squash Yine Borer. vi,41.
wild and seedling plants to prevent
breeding of Anarsia lineatella, Straw¬
berry Crown Miner, xii, 81.
with scissors Pieris rapse, European
Cabbage Butterfly, ix,22,23.

Digging about roots, vi,9.

and picking out Elateridae, Wire Worms,
vi,28.

or plowing in winter to expose Maero-
dactylus subspinosus, Rose Bug, vi, j
104.

out and burning roots infested by i
iEgeria rubi. Raspberry Root Borer,
vi,40.

up and destroying larvae and cocoons
of iEgeria polistiformis, Grape-root
Borer, i, 27.

Ditching against Caloptenus spretus, Rocky
Mountain Locust, vi,54,55.

Heliophila unipuncta, Army Worm,
vii, 102; x,42.

Laphygma frugiperda, Fall Army
Worm, vii, 98.

Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm
Moth, vii, 102,225.

and dragging heavy logs for Blissus
leucopterus, Chinch Bug, vii, 52,53.
Draining land for Agrotis, Cutworms, vii, 84
Drenching with water for Aphis mali, Apple
Plant Louse, xi, 9.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug, vii, 62
xii, 39.

Phytopti, Mites, xii, 142.

Plutella cruciferarum, Cabbage Tinea,
ix,56.

Driving into traps Caloptenus spretus,
Rocky Mountain Locust, vi,55.

windrows of hay or straw and burn¬
ing Macrobasis unicolor. Ash-
gray Blister Beetle, vi,127.
off Epicauta vittata, 'Old-fashionec
Potato Beetle, ix, 4.

Dust for Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plan
Louse, xii, 89, 91.

Selandria cerasi, Cherry Slug or Pea
Slug, xii, 99.

E

Early planting for Heliothis armigera, Cor
Worm or Boll Worm, vii, 104, 232; xi, 100.
Elder leaves, infusion of for Diabrotica vit
tata. Striped Cucumber Beetle, vi,166.
English Sparrow as an insect eater, ix, 13

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

99

Fall plowing, vi, 9, 20.

for Agrotis, Cutworms, vii, 83, 85, 86, 218
Anisopteryx vernata, Canker Worm,
pup® of, iii, 116; vi,9,19, vii, 210.
Elaterid®. Wire Worms, vii, 25,
Heliothis armigera, Corn Worm or
Boll Worm, vii, 105; xi,94,102.
phloxiphagus, Phlox Heliothis, vii,
231.

Leucania harveyi. Wheat - head
Army-worm Moth, v 5. t i 4 .

Fats for Mytilaspis eonchiformis. Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 46, 50.

Fertilizers as measure against Diabrotica
longicornis. Corn Root-Worm, xii,29,31.
Hessian Fly, x, 218, 221.

I Eish brine for Mytilaspis eonchiformis,
Oyster-shell Bark-louse, i,35; ii, 42.
Mytilaspis pinifolii, Pine-leaf Scale
Insect, ii, 91.

Fluids, as insecticides, i, 53.

Folding oxen and sheep in spring for Ela¬
terid®, Wire Worms, vii, 32.

Friction with stiff brush for Mytilaspis con-
chiformis, Oyster-shell Bark-louse, 1, 35,
47,52.

Frogs preying upon Blissus leucopterus,
Chinch Bug, vii, 54, 60.

Fumigating Plant-lice, viii, 183.

apparatus for, viii, 184.

Fungus destroying Blissus leucopterus,
Chinch Bug, xii, 47, 53,54.

remedy for Pieris rap®. European Cab¬
bage Butterfly, ix,23.

a

G

. Gas-lime for Elaterida?, Wire Worms, vi, 29.
rarfor Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum
Curculio,i,71: vi,140.

Gathering and destroying fruit infested
with Anthonomus quadiigibbus, Apple
Curculio.vi, 135.

Pelidnota punctata, Spotted Vine
Chafer, vi, 107.

apples infested with Carpocapsa pomo-
nella. Codling Moth, iv, 173.
by hand, vi,9.

Gauze or netting inclosure to protect trees
from Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur-
culio, vi,141,

Glauber salts for Diabrotica vittata, Striped
Cucumber beetle, vi, 166.

Gopher, Common Striped, preying upon
Leucania unipuncta. Army7 Worm, xi, 63.
Grafting for .ZEgeria polistiformis, Grape-
root Borer, i, 27; vii, 171.

Granaries, cleaned thoroughly, to prevent
ravages of Tinea granella. Wolf or Grain
Moth, vii, 266.

Grease, as an insecticide, i, 52.
effect on plants, i. 52.

Guano for Elaterid®, Wire Worms, vi,29,

120.

Sphenophorus ze®,Corn Curculio.vi, 144.
Gypsum for Hessian Fly, x, 219.

H

Hair Worm, Gordius, as parasite of Locusts,
ix, 137.

Hand picking for Anchylopera fragari®,
Strawberry Leaf Roller, vii, 259.

Callimorpha lecontei, Callimorpha Pear
Caterpillar, ii, 50.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato
Beetle, ii, 68,75; vi, 163; ix,4.

Elaterid®, Wire Worms, vi,27.

Grapta interrogationis, Semicolon But¬
terfly, vii. 152.

Heliothis armigera, Corn Worm or Boll
Worm, xi, 103.

phloxiphagus. Phlox Heliothis, vii,
231.

Leucarctia acr®a, Salt Marsh Moth, vii.
80,183.

Lozot®nia rosaceana, vii, 256.
Maerodactylus subspinosus, Rose Bug,

vi, 104.

Macrosila Carolina, Carolina Sphinx or
Tobacco-worm Moth, vii, 168.
5-maculata, Five-Spotted Sphinx or
Tomato-worm Moth, vii, 169.
Murgantia histrionica, Harlequin Cab¬
bage Bug, vi, 60.

Papilio asterias, Asterias Butterfly, vii,
138.

philenor, Philenor’s Swallow-tail,
vii, 137.

Pempelia hammondi, Apple Leaf Skele-
tonizer, vii, 253.

Philampelus achemon, Achemon Sphinx,

vii, 166.

pandoras, Satellite Sphinx, vii, 165.
Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf crumpler,
i, 34; iii, 121.

Phytoptus pyri, xii, 141.

Pieris protodice. Southern Cabbage
Butterfly, vii. 142.

rap®, European Cabbage Butterfly
ix, 21.

Pionea forftcalis. Pebble Moth, ix. 40.
Plutella cruciferarum, European Cab¬
bage Web Moth, vii, 267.

Pterophorus periscelidactylus. Grape
Vine Plume, v ii, 268.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green Cream-
spotted Grape Worm or Copper Un¬
derwing, ii, 58; vii, 226.

Sarnia eecropia, Cecropia Moth, vii, 194.
Spilosoma virginica, Virginia Ermine
Moth, vii, 181, 184.

Tortrix malivorana, Lesser Apple Leaf-
folder, ii, 23.

Hanging-bird. (See Baltimore Oriole.)

100

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Harrowing for Elaterid®, Wire Worms, vii,
32.

Hay rope, for trapping Anisoptervx ver-
nata, Spring Canker-worm, iii, 104,105.
Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling Moth,
i, 29.

Heating beans or peas to destroy Bruchus
granarius, Grain Bruchus of Europe, vi,
129.

grain for Geleehia cereal ella, Angou-
mois Grain Moth, xii, 152.

Hellebore, white, for Currant Worm, ix, 15.
Diabrotica vittata, vi, 166.

Emphytus maculatus, Strawberry
Slug vii, 112.

Eufitchia ribearia, Gooseberry Span-
worm Moth, vii, 237.

Eupithecia interrupto-fasciata, Currant
Fruit Worm, xi, 24.

Hypena humuli. Hop-vine Moth, vii, 246.
Lecanium acericola. Maple-tree Bark-
louse, vii, 13 1.

Nematus ventricosus. Gooseberry Saw-
fly, vi,6l.

Pempelia hammondi, Apple Leaf Skele- I
tonizer, vii, 253.

Pieris rap®, European Cabbage Butter¬
fly, ix, 15, 21.
saw-fly larvae, ix, 15,

Selandria cerasi. Cherry Slug or Pear
Slug, xii. 100.

rubi, Raspberry Sing, vi,6l.

Hogs and sheep in orchards, vi,9.

for destruction of Anisopteryx vernata, j
Canker-worm, iii, 100, 116; vi, 16, 20.
Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Moun¬
tain Locust, vi,55.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, xi, 20.

Conotrachelus nenuphar. Plum Cur-
culio, vi, 141.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vi,32.
Lachnosterna quercina, May Beetle,
vi,9S.

Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm,
x,41.

Hot air for Geleehia cerealella, Angoumois
Grain Moth, vii, 266.
water around roots for Borers, ii, 39.
effect on plants, i,63.
for iEgeria exitiosa, Peach-tree
Borer, vii, 170,

pyri, Pear-tree Borer, vii, 171.
Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug*
xii, 58.

Bruchus pisi, Pea Weevil, vi,128.
Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, vii, 261; xi, 20.

Pieris rap®, European Cabbage
Butterfly, ix, 22, 24; xi,33; xii, 93.
Saperda Candida, Round-headed
Apple-tree Borer, vi, 155.

Hot water for Schizoneuralanigera, Woolly
Aphis of the Appie-tree, i, 63; viii, 132, 133.
Yerbena Mite, xii, 142.

I

Infusion of Alder for Pieris rap®, Euro¬
pean Cabbage Butterfly, ix, 22.
cayenne pepper and Smartweed for
Pieris rap®, ix, 24.

Dog-fennel for Pieris rap®, Euro¬
pean Cabbage Butterfly, ix, 22.
Knotweed for Pieris rap®, Euro¬
pean Cabbage Butterfly, ix, 22.

Injection of insecticides into burrows of
Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer, vi, 111.

Saperda Candida, Round-headed
Apple-tree Borer, vi. 155.

“Insect Mills” for Geleehia cerealella, An¬
goumois Grain Moth, vii, 266; xii, 153.

Insect powder. ^See pyrethrum.)
Insecticides, apparatus for application of,
to Plant Lice, viii, 181.
for Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark Louse, ii, 40.

pinifolii. Pine-leaf Scale Insect,
ii, 89, 92.

Seiandria ros®, Rose slug, ii, 80.
Tortrix malivorana. Lesser Apple
Leaf-folder, ii, 22,23.
part of tree to which to apply, ii, 7.
time of day for applying, ii, 7.
time of year for applying, ii, 7,23.
Irrigation for Blissus leucopterus, Chinch
Bug, vii, 61.

to destroy eggs of Caloptenus spretus.
Rocky Mountain Locust, vi, 52.

J

Jarring, vi, 9.

off and destroying Anisopteryx vernata, |
Spring Canker worm, iii, 116; vi, 19;
vii, 240.

Anomalabinotata, Two-spotted Vine
Chafer, vi, 106.

lucicola, American Vine Chafer, ii, 56.
Anthonomius prunicida, Plum
Gouger, i, 77; vi, 137.

Blepharida rhois, Jumping Sumach
Beetle, vi, 167.

Callimorpha lecontei, Callimorpha
Pear Caterpillar, ii, 50.

Capsus quadrivittatus. Four-striped
Plant Bug, ii, 62.

Coeliodes in®qualis, Grape Curculio,
i, 20; vi, 143.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur¬
culio, i, 77; vi, 140.

Grapta progne. Spinous Currant
Caterpillar, ii, 61.

Hypena humuli, vii, 246.

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

101

Jarring off and destroying Lachnosterna
quercina. May Beetle, vi, 99.

Macrodactyl us subspinosus. Rose
Bug. i. 24 ; vi, 104.

Orgyia leucostigma. White-marked
Tussock Moth, larva of, ii. 15.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf Grump¬
ier, ii, 15.

Pyrophila pyramidoides, Green
Cream-spotted Grape-worm, ii, 58.

Selandria cerasi, Cherry Slug or
Pear Slug, xii, 1O0.

Jimson weed (Datura), poisoned for Mac-
rosila Carolina, Carolina Sphinx' or To-
j bacco-worm Moth, vii, 168.

Macrosila 5-maculata. Five-
spotted Sphinx or Tomato-
worm Moth, vii, 169.

i K

Kerosene as an insecticide, i.52.
effect on plants, i, 51, 52.
emulsion, apparatus for application of,
xii, 63.

comparative* efficiency of diluents
of, xii. 61, 63.

for Aphis cucumeris. Melon Plant
Louse, xii, 89, 90, 91.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug,
xii, 58.

Verbena Mite, xii, 142.
method of preparing, xii, 58.
strengths and composition of, xii, 59.
for iEgeria acerni, Maple borer, vii, 174.
Anisopteryx vernata. Canker worm,
eggs of, iii, 116; vi, 14, 19.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug,
iii, 146.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat-head¬
ed Apple-tree Borer, vi.lll.
Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur-
culio, i, 51 ; vi.140.

Diabrotica vittata. Striped Cucum¬
ber Beetle, i,52.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vii, 25.
Haltica, Flea beetles, i, 51.
Melophagus ovinus, Sheep Tick, ix,
64.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse. i, 46,50,51,53; iii,
160.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage But¬
terfly, ix,24; xii, 96.

Plant Lice, viii, 182.

Psylla pyri, Jumping Plant Louse of
Pear-tree, viii, 17.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis
of the Apple-tree, viii, 132, 133.
Tinea granella, Wolf or Grain Moth,
vii, 266.

Knocking off and destroying Doryphora
10-lineata. Colorado Potato-beetle, ii, 69.

Lard and coal oil as an insecticide, i, 52.

Lard for Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 50, 51 ; iii, 160.

Late planting for Agrotis, Cutworms, vii,
83, 85, 86.

Lead trough filled with oil for trapping
Anisopteryx vernata, Spring Canker-
Worm, iii, 108.

Legislation to protect insectivorous birds,
vi, 54,

Lettuce as bait for Elateridse, Wire Worms,
vi, 27.

Lime as an insecticide, ii, 7, 15; vi,9.

chloride of, for Aphis granarise, Grain
Plant Louse, viii, 181.

Elateridm, Wire Worms, vii, 23.
for Anomala binotata, Two-spotted Vine
Chafer, vi, 106.

Anomala lucicola, American Vine
chafer, ii, 55. 56.

Blissus leucopterus, iii, 155.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, iv, 185; vi, 13, 14.

Bark Lice, vi, 13, 14.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur-
cuiio, i, 71 .

Elateridie, Wire Worms, vi, 28, 119, 120;
vii, 24,31,32.

Eupitheela interrupto-fasciata, Cur¬
rant Fruit Worm, xi,24.

Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois
Grain Moth, xii, 154.

Grapta progne. ) Spinous Currant
Caterpillar, ii, 61.

Haltica helxines, Small Bronze Flea
Beetle, iii, 137.

Haltica vittata, Striped Flea Beetle,
vi,169.

Hessian Fly, x. 217, 223, 224.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web Worm,
ii. 20.

Loxotacnia rosaceana, vii, 256.

Murgantia bistrionica, Harlequin
Cabbage Bug, vi.60.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i,35.

Mytilaspis pinifolii, Pine Leaf Scale
Insect, ii, 92.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked
Tussock Moth, larva of, ii, 15.

Pempelia hammondi, Apple Leaf
Skeletonizer, vii, 253,

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crump-
ler ii. 15; iii, 121.

Pieris rap®, European Cabbage But-
teifly, ix, 15,22; xii, 97.

Pionea rimosalis, Cabbage Tinea,
ix, 39.

Plant Lice, vi, 13.14; vii, 180.

Psylla pyri, Jumping Plant Louse
of the Pear tree, viii, 17.

102

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Lime for Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly
Aphis of the Apple-tree, viii, 132.
Selandria rubi, Raspberry Slug, vi,
61.

Sphenophorus zese, Corn Cureulio,
vi,144.

Tortrix malivorana, Lesser Apple
Leaf-folder, ii,23.

(sulphuret) and soap, mixture of for
Phytopti, Miles, xii, 143.

Linseed oil for Mytilaspis conchiformis.

Oyster-shell Bark-louse, i, 50; iii, 160.
London purple and road dust, mixture of,
for Pieris rapee, Imported CabbagelWorm,
xi, 34.

for Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, xi,21,30.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root-
Worm, xii, 30.

Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow Canker-
Worm, xi,30.

Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm.x,
42.

Loxotsenia rosaceana, Greater Leaf
Roller, xi, 15.

Orgyia leueostigma, White-marked
Tussock Caterpillar, xii, 101.

Pieris rapm. Imported Cabbage
Worm, xi, 35.

Tyloderma fragariae, Strawberry
Crown Borer, xii, 74.

Luring with artificial lights Heliothis
armigera, Corn Worm or Boll Worm, xi,
104.

Tinea granella, Wolf or Grain Moth, vii,
266.

Lye for Capsus quadrivittatus, Four-striped
Plant Bug, ii, 62.

Pieris rapse, European Cabbage Butter¬
fly, ix. 22.

Pionea rimosalis, Cabbage Pionea, ix, 39.
Plant Lice, viii, 180.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis of
the Apple-tree, viii, 133.

M

Manure for Diabrotica longicornis, Corn
Root Worm, xii, 31.

Hessian fly, x, 219.

hog, for Elatendse, Wire Worms, vi, 29.
Matting or paper on base of trunk fur
Borers, vi,39.

Mercurial ointment for Melophagus ovinus.
Sheep Tick, ix, 64.

Psoroptes equi, Scab Mite, ix, 66.
Methods of Culture, vi, 8, 10, 11.

as affecting species, viii, 15.
as protection against Acrididse,
Locusts, ix, 139.

Alypia octomaculata, Eight-
spotted Forester, vii, 176.
Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug,
vii, 51.

Methods of Culture as protection against
Chrysobothis lemorata. Flat-headed
Apple-tree Borer, vi, 111.

Crioceris asparagi, Asparagus
Beetle, vi,158.

Elateridse, Wire Worms, vi, 120;
vii, 32.

Hessian Fly , x, 218, 220, 221, 222, 223.
Pieris rapte, European Cabbage
Butterfly, ix, 23.

Schizoneura lanigera. Woolly
. Aphis of the Apple-tree, viii,
133,184.

to exterminate Diabrotica longicor¬
nis, x,42.

Phylloxera vitifoliae, Grape Phyl¬
loxera, viii, 160.

for protection against Bruchus pisi,
Pea Weevil. vi,128.

of putting on tin and rope bands, vi,20.
Mortar collar for Borers, vi,39.

Mounding for iEgeria exitiosa, Peach-tree
Borer, vii, 170.

iEgeria pyri, Pear-tree Borer, viii, 171.
Borers, vi,39.

Mulching, vi, 12.

N

Narcotic washes forlMytilaspis conchifor¬
mis, Oyster-shell Bark-louse, ii, 40.

Nitre for Elateridse, Wire Worms, vii, 24.

O

Oil, effect on plants, i, 51, 52.

for Anisopteryx vernata, Canker Worm,
iii, 108; vi,21.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 46, 50, 51, 53; ii, 41.
Plant Lice, viii, 182.

P

Packing furs and fabrics, method of, to
secure against Tinea dorsistrigella,
Clothes Moth, vii, 263.

Parasite of Blissus leucopterus. Chinch
Bug, artificial multiplication of, xii, 57.

Hessian Fly, artificial multiplication of,
x, 225.

Phorodon humuli. Hop Aphis, artificial
multiplication of. viii, 72.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crumpler,
preservation of, iii, 121; vii, 250.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage Butter¬
fly, preservation of, ix,21,24.

Parasitic bacteria, artificial cultivation of, J
from Blissus leucopterus. Chinch Bug, j
xii, 51, 54.

species, rearing and transportation of.
iv,201; vi. 9.

INDEX OF REMEDIES.

108

Paris green and road dust, mixture of, for
Pir, is rap a?, ( imported Cabbage Worra.xi,

34.

as an insecticide, ii, 76,78.
for Agrotis annexa, Cabbage Cutworm,
xii, 103.

Anchylopera fragari®, Strawberry
Leaf Roller, vii,259.

Anisopteryx vernata, Spring Canker
Worm, iii, 116 ; vi,19; vii,240.

Anomis (Aletia) argillacea, Cotton-
worm Moth, vii,228.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, xi, 21.

Diabrotica longicornis. Corn Root
Worm, xii, 30.

Diabrotica vittata. Striped Cucum¬
ber Beetle, ii, 77.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Po¬
tato-beetle, ii, 69. 72, 73, 75, 77; iii, 164,
166; vi,163; ix,4.

Foliage-eating insects, ii, 76, 77.
Haltica \ittata, vi,169.

Heliothis phloxiphagus, Phlox Heli-
othis, vii, 231.

Hibernia tiliaria, Yellow Canker
Worm, xi, 30.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web Worm,
ii, 20.

Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm,
x, 42.

Loxotsenia rosaceana. Greater Leaf
Roller, xi 15.

Lytt®, Blister Beetles, ii, 77 .
Murgantia histrionica. Harlequin
Cabbage Bug, vi, 60.

Orgyia leucostigma, White-marked
Tussock Caterpillar, xii. 101.
Pempelia hammondi, Apple Leaf
Skeletonizer, vii. 253.

Phycita nebuio, Apple Leaf-crump-
ler, iii, 121.

Pieris rap®, Imported Cabbage
Worm, xi, 35.

Selandria cerasi, Cherry Slug or
Pear Slug, xii, 100.

Thyridopteryx epbemeraeformis,
Bag Worm, xii, 101.

Tyloderma fragarise, Strawberry
Crown Borer, xii, 74.

Pasturing for Hessian Fly, x, 219,220,221.

< Elaterid®. Wire Worms, vii, 32.

Pepper for Pieris rap®, European Cabbage
Butterfly, ix. 22,23,24.

Tinea biseliella, Hair Moth, vn, 265.
dorsistrigella, vii, 264.
pellionella, Fur Moth, vii, ‘265.
rusticella, vii, 264.
tapetzella, Carpet Moth, vii, 264.
Petroleum for Mytilaspis conchiformis.
Oyster-shell Bark-louse, i,46,51.

Plaster of Paris for Diabrotica vittata.
Striped Cucumber Beetle, vi,166.

i

.

Plowing deep for Hessian Fly, x,223.
grass under for Army Worm, vi 59,

Laphygmafrugiperda, Fail Army
Worm, vii, 98.

infested fields for Anchylopera fragari®,
Strawberry Leaf Roller, vii, 259.
in June for Anisopteryx vernata. Can¬
ker Worm, vi, 21.

late in fall for Elaterid®, Wire Worms,'
vi, 120.

Lachnosterna quercina, May
Beetle, vi, 99.

soon after fruit harvest for Tyloderma
fragari®, Strawberry Crown Borer,
xii, 74.

to prevent migration of Blissus leucop-
terus. Chinch Bug, vii, 50; xii, 57.
up vines to destroy Emphytus macula-
tus. Strawberry Worm, vii, 108.
under larv® and pup® of Caloptenus
spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust, vi,
53,54.

Plugging burrows with camphor for Chry-
sobothrus femorata, Flat-headed Apple-
tree Borer, vi, 111.

mortar for Algeria acerni, Maple
Borer, vii, 174.

Poisons for Heliothis armigera, Corn W orm
or Boll worm, xi, 103.

Penthina vitivorana, Grape-berry
Moth, vii, 258.

Potash for Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oys¬
ter-shell Bark-louse, i, 35, 48.

Potassium, sulpho-carbonate of, for Phyl¬
loxera vitifoli®, Grape Phylloxera, viii,
159.

Poultry for Acridid®, Locusts, ix, 138.
Agrotis, Cutworms, vii, 218.

Anisopteryx vernata, Canker M orm, vi,

20.

Army Worm. vi,57; x,41.

Caloptenus spretus, Rocky Mountain
Locust, vi, 53, 54.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Curcu-
lio, vi, 141.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato
Beetle, ii, 67.

Elaterid®, Wire Worms, vi, 32: vii, 32.

• Fidia viticida. Grape-vine Fidia, vi, 160.
Heliothis phloxiphagus, Phlox Helio¬
this, vii, 231.

Lachnosterna quercina, May Beetle, vi,
98,99.

Macrodactylus subspinosus, Rose Bug,
vi, 104.

Pieris oieracea, Turnip Butterfly, vn,
143.

Pieris protodice. Southern Cabbage
Butterfly, vii, 142.

Pieris rap®, European Cabbage Butter¬
fly, ix, 21.

Pionea rimosalis, Cabbage Pionea, ix,
40.

104

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Poultry for Plusia brassieae, Cabbage Plu-
sia, vii, 230; ix,43.

Powders as insecticides for Plant -lice, yiii,
182.

Prairie chickens for Blissus Jeucopterus,
Chinch Bug, xii,44.

Pruning, vi, 12.

for JEgeria tipuliformis Currant Borer,
vi. 40.

Py ret brum for Aphis cucumeris, Melon
Plant Louse, xii, 89, 91.

Eupitliecia interrupto-fasciata. Currant
Fruit Worm, xi,24.

Pieris rapas, Imported Cabbage Worm,
xi, 32; xii, 93.

a

Quails preying upon Blissus leucopterus,
Chinch Bug, vii,60.

Acrididae, Locusts, ix, 137.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug, xii,
44.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf Crump-
ler, iii, 121.

Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 35, 47.

Quassia water and soapsuds, mixture of,
for Phytopti, Mites, xii, 142.

R

Raccoon preying upon Lachnosterna quer-
cina, May Beetle, vi, 98,

Rainfall, effect on Blissus leucopterus,
Chinch Bug, x,50,51.

Rape-cake for Elateridae. Wire Worms, vi,
29.

Remedies for Blissus leucopterus, Chinch
Bug, vii,70.

Couotrachelus crataegi, Quince Curcu-
lio, vi, 142.

Lema trilineata, Three-lined Potato
Beetle, vi, 159.

Remedies, general discussion of, vi, 8.

Removing nests of Apple Leaf-crumpler,
for Anisopteryx vernata. Canker Worm,
eggs of, iii, 106.

Hyphantria textor, Fall Web
Worm, ii, 20.

webs or leaves containing Datana min-
istra, Yellow-necked Apple-tree Cat¬
erpillar, iv, 192.

Orgyia leucostigma, White -
marked Tussock Moth, ii, 15.

Phycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-
crumpler. ii, 15.

Resin and fish oil, mixture of, for Schizo-
neura lanigera, Woolly Aphis of the Ap¬
ple-tree, viii, 132.

Ridging or hilling up plants for Tyloderma
fragariae, Strawberry Crown Borer, xii, 75.

Rolling for Anchylopera fragariae, Straw¬
berry Leaf Roller, vii,259.

Rolling for Caloptenus spretus, Rocky
Mountain Locust, vi,51.

Elateridas. Wire Worms, vi, 29.

Hessian Fly, x 219,223,224
Leucania unipuncta. Army Worm, x,42.
Rope bands for trapping Anisopteryx ver¬
nata, Canker-worm, iii, 104; vi, 13,19; vii.
llo.

Rotation of crops, vi,8.

for Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant
Louse, xii, 89.

Blissus leucopterus. Chinch Bug,
iii, 151. 154; vii, 68.

Diabrotica longicornis, x,45; xi,
67,72; xii, 2', 30, 31.

Ehveridae, Wire Worms, vi,29.
Heliothis armigera, Corn Worm
or Boll Worm, xi,104.

Hessian Fly, x,218.

Tyloderma fragariae, Strawberry
Crown Borer, xii, 74.

Rubbing leaves to destroy Phorodon lium-
uli, Hop Aphis, viii, 72.

Russia leather, shavings, for Moths, vii, 264.

S

Saleratus. (See Soda.)

Salt for Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant
Louse, xii, 89, 90.

Asopia eostalis, Clover-hay Worm, vii,
248.

Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug, iii, 155.
Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Curcu-
lio, vi, 141.

Gelechia cerealella, Angoumois Grain
Moth, xii, 154.

Hessian Fiy, x, 219, 221, 223.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vi, 28, 29, 119, 120;
vii, 22.

Lachnosterna quercina, May Beetle,
vi,99.

Murgantia histrionica. Harlequin Cab¬
bage Bug, vi,60.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage Butter¬
fly, ix,22.

Pionearimosalis, Cabbage Pionea, ix,39.
Tinea granella, Wolf or Grain Moth, vii,
266.

Saltpeter and Salt, dilution of, for Pieris
rapae, Imported Cabbage Worm, xi, 32;
xii, 96.

for Eiateridae, Wire Worms, vii, 22.

Sand for Selandria cerasi, Cherry Siug or
Pear Slug, xii, 99, 100.

Scalding corn stalks for Blissus leucopter¬
us, Chinch Bug, vii, 52.

Scraping and brushing bark to destroy
Borers, vi, 113.

general treatment of trees for Schiz-
oneura lanigera. Woolly A phis of
the Apple-tree, viii, 132.
rubbing for Bark Lice, vi,9.

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

105

Scraping bark for Anisopteryx vernata.
Spring Canker worm, iii, lu7, lib; vi,i8,19.
Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i, 47, 52; ii, 41.
Saperda Candida, Round-headed
Apple-tree Borer, vi. 154.

Searching roots for and destroying Prio-
nus imbricornis, Tile-horned Prionus,
vi, 148.

Selection of plants, vi.10, 11.

site of orchard vi,10.

Sheep and hogs in orchards, vi,9.

Situation, change of, to prevent attack of
Melophagus ovinus, Sheep Tick, ix,64.
CEstrus ovis. Sheep BotFly, ix,63.
Skunk, preying upon Doryphora 10-lineata,
Colorado Potato Beetle, ii, 6b.

Laclmosternaquercina, May Beetle,

vi, 98.

Sneezing, artificial, to remove larva of
iEstrus ovis, Sheep Bot Fly, ix,63.

Snuff for Diabrotica vittata, Striped Cu¬
cumber Beetle, vi,166.

Soap and flour of sulphur for Psylla pyri,
Jumping Plant Louse of the Pear-tree,
viii,17.

sulphur, dilution of, for Phytopti,
Mites, xii, 142.
as an insecticide, ii, 7.
cresvlic, for Hypena humuli, Hop-vine
Moth, vii, 246.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage But¬
terfly. ix.22.

Plusia brassicae, Cabbage Plusia,

vii, 230.

Schizoneura rileyi. Woolly Aphis of
the Elm-tree, viii,136.
for Aphides. Root Lice, iv,198.

Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant Louse,
xii, 89,

maidis, Corn Aphis, vii,78.
Borers, vi, 9, 113.

Capsus quadrivittatus, Four-striped
Plant Bug, ii, 62.

Chrysobothris femorata, Flat¬
headed Apple-tree Borer, vi, 111.
Hypena humuli, Hop-vine Moth, vii,
246

Mytilaspis conchiformis. Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i,35, 46, 48,50,51,53;

! ii. 7,40,41.

pinifolii, Pine-leaf Scale Insect, ii, 91.
Pliycita nebulo, Apple Leaf-crump-
ler, iii, 121.

Plant Lice, viii, 180, 183.

Plutella cruciferarum. European
Cabbage Web Moth, vii, 267.

Psylla pyri, Jumping Plant Louse of
the Pear-tree, viii, 17.
root insects, vi, 8.

Saperda Candida, Round-headed
Apple-tree Borer, ii, 7 ; vi,155.
Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis
of the Apple-tree, i, 63; viii, 132, 133.

Soap for Tortrix malivorana, Lesser Apple
Leaf-folder, ii, 23.

Xyleutes robiniae. Locust-tree Cat¬
erpillar, vii, 199.

whale oil, for CEgeria acerni, Maple
Borer, vii, 174.

Anisopteryx vernata, Canker worm,
iii, 116; vi,19.

Anomala lucicola, American Vine-
chafer, ii,56.

Haltica helxines, Small Bronze Flea
Beetle, iii, 137.

Hypena humuli, Hop-vine Moth, vii,
246.

Mytilaspis pinifolii, Pine-leaf Scale
Insect, ii, 92.

Psylla pyri, Jumping Plant Louse of
the Pear-tree, viii. 17.

Selandria rosae, Rose Slug, ii, 81.
sulphur and lime solution for Cono-
trachelus nenuphar, Plum Curculio,
vi, 140.

Soda for Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i,35, 47.

Sodium, sulpho-carbonate of, for Phyl¬
loxera vitifoliae, Grape Phylloxera, viii,
159.

Soot as an insecticide, xi,71.

ashes, and plaster, mixture of, for Dia¬
brotica vittata, Striped Cucumber
Beetle, vi. 166.

Elateridae. Wire Worms, vi,28.
Hessian Fly, x,223.

Sowing clover with wheat for Blissus leu-
copterus. Chinch Bug. xi, 6.
early for Blissus leucopterus, Chinch
Bug, iii, 145; vii, 63.

Hessian Fly, x, 217, 218.

Wheat Midge, x, 215, 217.
late for Hessian Fly, x, 199, 213, 214, 216,
218,220,223.

Sprinkling wheat fields for Blissus leucop¬
terus, Chinch bug, iii, 154.

Starvation for Army Worm, vi, 99.

Chinch Bug, vi, 99.

Doryphora 10-lineata, Colorado Potato-
Beetle, ii, 70,71.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vi, 30,99,120;
vii, 31.

Lachnosterna quercina, May Beetle, vi,
99.

Stock in orchards for Carpocapsa pomo-
nelia. Codling Moth, vii, 261.

Storing hay in clean mows to prevent
ravages of Asopia costalis, Clover-hay
Worm, vii, 248.

Sulpho-carbonate of barium for Phylloxera
vitifoliae, Grape Phylloxera, viii, 159.

potassium for Phylloxera vitifoliae,
Grape Phylloxera, viii, 159.
sodium for Phylloxera vitifoliae.
Grape Phylloxera, viii, 159.
Sulpho-carbonates for Phylloxera vitifoliae,
Grape Phyloxera, viii, 159.

106

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Sulphur for Aphis rnaidis, Corn Aphis, vii,

7 1.

Diabrotica vittata. Striped Cucumber
Beetle, vi,166.

Moths, vii, 264.

Mytilaspis conehiformis, Oyster-shell
Bark-louse, i, 35. •

Phytopti, Mites, xii,142, 143.

Pieris rap®, European Cabbage Worm,
xii, 95.

Plant Lice, viii, 182.

Tinea granella, Wolf or Grain Moth,
vii. 266.

Summary of measures against Caloptenus
spretus, Rocky Mountain Locust, vi, 55,
56.

Summer fallow for Elaterid®, Wire Worms,
vii, 32.

Sun-burning for Doryphora 10-lineata, Colo¬
rado Potato-Beetle, ii, 69.

Superphosphate (slush acid), carbolic pow¬
der, and unslaked lime for Pieris rapae.
European Cabbage Butterfly, ix, 24.
Superphosphates for Hessian Fly, x. 219.
Swallows as *'fly catchers,” xi, 15.

T

Tanners’ oil, effect on plants, i, 51.

Tansy around trees for Borers, vi, 39.

Tar for Anisopteryx vernata, Canker Worm,
vi, 21.

Elateridae, Wire Worms, vii, 24.
Mytilaspis conehiformis, Oyster-
shell Bark-louse, i,35, 50.

Pieris rapae, European Cabbage
Worm, xii, 97.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis
of the Apple-tree, viii, 132.
spirits of, for Elateridae, Wire Worms,

vi, 29.

use of, for Oestrus ovis, Sheep Bot-fly,
ix, 63.

Tarred boards as barrier to Blissus leucop-
terus. Chinch Bug. xii, 57.

Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm,
x, 42.

paper bands for Hibernia tiliaria. Yel¬
low Canker Worm, xi, 29.
saw-dust for Blissus leucopterus,
Chinch Bug, iii, 155.

seed corn for Elateridae, Wire Worms,

vii, 23.

Tobacco and soap solution for Lecanium
acericola, Maple-tree Bark-louse, vii, 130.
as an insecticide, ii, 7.
crop for Elateridae, Wire Worms, vi, 30.
Tobacco for Anchylopera fragariae, Straw¬
berry Leaf Roller, vii, 259.

Anomala lucicola, American Vine-
chafer, ii, 56.

Aphides, Plant Lice, iv,198; viii, 180, 182.
Aphis cucumeris, Melon Plant Louse,
xii, 89, 90, 91. ,

dauci. Carrot Plant Louse, viii, 181.
rnaidis, Corn Aphis, vii, 77,

Tobacco for Diabrotica vittata, Striped Cu¬
cumber Beetle, vi, 166.

Melophagus ovinus, Sheep Tick, ix, 64.
Mytilaspis conehiformis. Oyster-shell
Bark-louse, i, 35, 46, 47.

Phorodon humuli. Hop Aphis, viii, 72.
Pieris rapae, European Cabbage Worm,
xii, 95.

Psoroptes equi. Scab Mite, ix, 66.
Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis of
the Apple-tree, i, 63.

Tinea biseliella, Hair Moth, vii, 265.

dorsistrigella. Clothes Moth, vii, 263.
pellionella, Fur Moth, vii, 265.
rusticella, vii, 264.
tapetzella, Carpet Moth, vii, 264.
soap, and sulphur, solution of, for Plant
Lice, viii, 180.

Topical applications, ix, 4; x,3; xii, 57.

for Blissus leucopterus, Chinch Bug,
xii, 57.

Diabrotica longicornis, Corn Root
Worm, xii, 29.

Leucania unipuncta, Army Worm,
x, 42.

Phylloxera vitifoliae. Grape Phyl¬
loxera, viii, 160.

Fieris rapae, European Cabbage
Butterfly, ix,22,23.

Plant Lice, viii, 183.

Schizoneura lanigera, Woolly Aphis
of the Apple-tree, viii, 132.

Topping Corn for Heliothis armigera, Corn
Worm or Boll Worm, vii, 105; xi, 101.
cotton for Heliothis armigera, Corn
Worm or Boll Worm, xi, 103.

Torches among vines for Diabrotica vit¬
tata, Striped Cucumber Beetle, vi,166.
Training trees low for Saperda and Bupres-
tis, vi, 155.

Transportation of Chalcis mytilaspidis,
parasite of Oyster-shell Bark-louse,
iv, 200.

Traps, board, on ground, vi, 9.
for Agrotis, Cutworms, vii, 219.

Anisopteryx autumnata, Fall Can¬
ker Worm, vii, 239.

Anisopteryx vernata, Spring Canker
Worm, iii, 110,111.

Carpocapsa pomonella. Codling
Moth, iv, 177,180; vii, 261.

Galleria cereana, Bee Moth, vii, 254.
Heliothis armigera, Corn Worm or
Boll Worm, xi,104.

Pieris rap®, Rape or European Cab¬
bage Butterfly, vii, 145; ix, 21, 22, 24.
oleracea, Turnip Butterfly, vii,
144.

Trepanning skull to remove larva of CEstrus
ovis, Sheep Bot Fly, ix,63.

Trimming affected branches, vi,9.
Turpentine for Pieris rapse, European Cab¬
bage Butterfly, ix,24.

INDEX TO REMEDIES.

Turpentine for Schizoneura lanigera,
Woo'ly Aphis of the Apple-tree, viii, 132.
h I iselielia, Hal Md h, vii, 265.
(;orsistrigella. Clothes Moth, vii, 264.
pellionella, Fur Moth, vii, 265.
rusticella, vii, 264.
tapetzella, vii,264.

W

Walnut leaves, infusion of, for Diabrotica
vittata, Striped Cucumber Beetle, vi,lC6.

Warblers preying upon Mytilaspis concbi-
formis, Oyster-shell Bark-louse, ii, 35.

Washes for Mytilaspis conchiformis, Oys¬
ter-shell Bark-louse, ii,42.

Water, cold, for Plusia simplex, Celery
Worm, xi,43.
hot. (See hot water).

White mustard crop for Elateridse, Wire
Worms, vi,30, 120.

Whitewashing for iEgeria acerni, Maple
Borer, vi, 40; vii, 174.

Chrysobothris femorata. Flat-head¬
ed Apple-tree Borer, vi.lll.

1 07

Whitewashing for Tinea graneiia, Wolf or
Grain Moth, vii, 260.

Wr e iu burrows for Chrysobothris femo ra¬
ta, Flat-headed Apple-tree Borer, vi, 111.

Woodpeckers preying upon Saperda Can¬
dida, Round-headed Apple-tree Borer,
vi, 156.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, iv,181.

Hylobius pales, Pales Weevil, vi,133.

Wrens preying upon Mytilaspis conchifor¬
mis, Oyster-shell Bark-louse, ii,35.

Windfalls destroyed to kill Anthonomus
prunicida, Plum Gouger, i,77.

Carpocapsa pomonella, Codling
Moth, i. 29; iv,174.

Conotrachelus nenuphar, Plum Cur-
culio, i, 69; vi, 141.

Winds as affecting migration of Blissus
leucopterus. Chinch bug, vii, 53.

Y

Yeast remedy for Pieris rapm, European
Cabbage Butterfly, ix,23.

108

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT,

A

Abbott. (See Smith and Abbott.)

Acer dasycarpum, 104,109,111.

on some insect enemies of, 103-111.
aceris, Aleurodes, description, 110.
aceroides, Negundo, 72.

Acrididae in corn, 22, 23.

Acridium americanum in corn, 23.
acris, Ranunculus, food plant of Sulphur
Leaf Roller, 20.

Adialytus maidaphidis, 30,31,32.
description, 30,31.

parasite of Corn Plant Louse, habits, 31.
Agricultural entomology, contributions to,
9-74.

Agrotis c -nigrum. 93.
albopicta, Empoa, 117.

Aletia, 57.

Aleurodes aceris, description, 110.
aleurodis, Elaptus, 110.
allyni, Eupelmus, 30,37,44,50.

Ambrosia trifida, 74.

American Elm, food plant of Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

Entomological Society, Transactions,
cited. (See under Transactions.)
Entomologist, cited, 21,56,57.

Naturalist, cited, 105.
americana, Meromyza, 54.

Ulmus, 104.112.
americanum, Acridium, 23.
ampelophila, Drosophila, 83.
angulata, Pyrrhia, 89,90.

Ants, 70.

attending Corn Plant Louse, 23,24,29.
preying upon Grass Worm or Fall Army
Worm, 64.

Apatela oblinita. 117.

Aphides, method of reproduction, 26,29.
Aphis, 98.

maidis, 23-33.
mali, 98.
malifolim, 98.

Apple and pear, notes on insects injurious
to the, 95-102.

\

Apple, injuries to, by Apple Leaf Roller, 97.
Apple Leaf Skeletonizer, 97.

Riston ypsilon, 95,

Apple injuries to, by Crepidodera helxines,
98.

Cucumber flea beetle, 98,

Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 62.
Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 97.

Leaf Hopper, Green, 117.
Leaf-Roller, 97.

Lesser, 7,97.

Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.

Leaf Skeletonizer, 7,97.

Maggot, 84.

Plant Louse, 98.
armieollis, Magdalis, 112.

Army Worm, 5,58.

Fall, 3,6,55-67.

Grass, 57.

Arsenical poisons for Apple Leaf Skele¬
tonizer, 98.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 98.
Strawberry Slug, 78.
arvensis, Dolerus. 100-102.

Ash, Green, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

Ashmead, Wm. H.. on Trioza diospyri, 99.
aterrima, Paria, 81.
atlanis, Pezotettix, 23.
aureopectus, Nematus, 116.
autumnalis, Prodenia, 57,58.

B

Balm of Gilead, injuries to, by Crepidodera
helxines, 117,

Balsam flr, food plant of Lophoderus velu-
tinanus, 88.

Bark Louse, Clover, 72.

description, 73.

Soft Maple, 3,7,103,115. (See Maple
Bark Louse, Soft.)

Elm, 115.

Sorghum, 71.

bassiana, Botrytis, 7.

Bass-wood, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
louse, 104.

Bean, injuries to, by Red-banded Leaf
Roller, 21.

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

109

if

Beauvois, Palisot de, on Dolerus bicolor,

101.

bicolor, Dolerus, 100-102.

Bidens frondosa, injuries to, by Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

Bird Grasshopper, 23.

Biston ypsilon, 05-97.

description. 95-97.
bivittatus, Nemutu>, 116.

Blackberry and Raspberry, on new insect
enemies of. 87-92.

injuries to, by Lophoderus velutinanus,

88.

Oxyptilus delavaricus, 90,91.

Pyrrhia umbra, 89,90.

Leaf Miner, 87.

description of genus, 87.
of species. 87.

Black Locust, food plant of Nematus
robinim, 110.

of Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Blue Grass, injuries to, by Clover Mites,
73,74.

Boardman, Dr. E. R., on Corn Plant Louse,
24.

on Speckled Cutworm, 93.

Borer, Elm, 112-114.

Boston Society of Natural History, Pro¬
ceedings. (See under Proceedings.)

Box Elder, injuries to, by Cymatophora
crepuscularia, 72.

by Soft Maple Bark Louse, 103.
Botrytis bassiana, 7.

Boyer, D. R., on Grass Worm or Fall Army
Worm. 60.

Brassy Flea Beetle, 22.

Brief miscellaneous notes. 116-118.

notes on Sorghum insects, 70,71.

Briosi on Phytoptus vitis, European, 86.
Broom Corn, injuries to, by Corn Plant
Louse, 24.

Buckley, F. E., on Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 55, 62.

Bryobia pallida, description, 74.

pratensis, description, 73,74.

Buckwheat, injuries to, by Grass Worm or
Fall Army Worm, 62.

Bulb Worm, Wheat. 6,54.

Bidletin of the Brooklyn Entomological
Society, cited, 35.

Illinois State Laboratory of Natural
History, cited, 23.

U. S. Entomological Commission, cited,
57.

| Brooklyn Entomological Society Bulletin,
cited. (See under Bulletin.)

Burdock, food plant of Sulphur Leaf
Roller, 20.

Burning corn stubble to destroy Corn Plant
Louse, 33.

rubbish to destroy Apple Leaf Skele-
tonizer, 98.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 98.
stubble for Hessian Fly, 39, 43.

Burrill, T. J.,116.
Butler, C. W.,41.

C

Cabbage as lure for Tarnished Plant-Bug,
80.

injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall Ar¬
my Worm, 63.

Imported CabbageIWorm.6.

Speckled Cutworm, 93.

Worm, Imported, 6, 93.

Caccecia rosaceana, 74, 97, 109.
triferana,20.

Calendar. Entomological, 3.

Caloptenus differentialis,23.

Calf ha palustris,80.
canadense, Erigeron,20. 74.
canadensis. Elymus,37.

Canadian Entomologist, 36,37.

Capsidae, 111.

Capsu^s invitus. 111.

Capturing by hand, Root Web Worm. 17.

with insect net, Strawberry Slug, 78.
Carbolic acid for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
108.

carinatus, Tetrastichus,48, 49.

Caterpillar, Grass, 56,58.

Caustic soda for Soft Maple Bark Louse, 108.
Cecidomyia destructor, 38-50.

parasites, 3,38,39,44-50.
tritici. 50-54. (See Wheat Midge.)
cerasi, Selandria, 7,117.

Chaetocnema pulicaria. 22.

Chaitophorus flarus, 70.

Chariclea. 89.
exprimens,88.

Cherry, injuries to, by Cherry Slug, 7, 117.
Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Slug, 7, 117.

Wild, injuries to, by Willow Slug. 117.
Chinch Bug, contribution to life history, 4.
Chrysomitris tristis, 105.

Chrysopa sp.,33.

Cicadula nigrifrons, 22
description, 67.
food plants, 68.
quadrilineatus, 22.
description, 68.
food plants, 69.

Clemens, Dr. B., on Dichelia sulphureana,
17.

on Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 20, 21.
Climatic influences , effect of, on Corn Root
Worm, 5.

on Lasius flavus,29.
on Strawberry Slug, 77.
on Wheat Midge, 51, 54.

Clover Bark Louse, 72.
description, 73.

food plant of Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.
injuries to, by Clover mites, 73.

Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.
insects, article on some, 72-74.

110

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

Clover leaf roller, 74.
mites, 73, 74.

Red, injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf Roller,
19, 20.

White, injuries to, by Clover Bark
Louse, 72.

Hasmatopis grataria, 74.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 19.
c-nigrum, Agrotis, 93.

Coccidae, 71.

Coccinella 9-notata, 24,33.

Coccophagus lecanii, parasite of Soft Ma¬
ple Bark Louse, 105.

Coccus, 71.

trifolii, description, 72.
sorghiellus, description, 71.

Common Jumping Pear Louse, 98.

Lady Bug, 21.

Comstock, J. H., on Dichelia sulphureana,

17. 19. 20.

on Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 57.
on Vine-loving Fruit Fly, 83,84.

Report upon Cotton Insects cited, 57.
Contagious disease of Silk Worm, 7.

Forest Tent Caterpillar, 7.

Imported Cabbage Worm, 7.
contracta, Datana, 95.

Contribution to the Life History of the
Corn Plant Louse, 23-33.
to a knowledge of the life history and
parasites of the Hessian Fly, 38-50.
Contributions to agricultural entomology,
9-74.

to horticultural entomology, 75-118.
convergens, Hippodamia, 24.

Cook, A. J ., on parasites of the Hessian|Fly,
44.

Coquillet, D. W., on Dichelia sulphureana,

18.19.20.

on Pyrrhia angulata, 89.

Corn, injuries to, by Acridium america-
num, 29.

Brassy Flea Beetle, 22.

Caloptenus differentials, 23.

Chinch Bug, 5.

Cicadula nigrifrons, 68.

quadrilineatus, 69.

Common Lady Bug, 22.

Corn Plant Louse, 23.

Corn Root Worm, 5, 6.

Grasshoppers, 22.

Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm,
55.56,57,61,62.

Leaf Hoppers, 22.

Orchelimum vulgare, 23.

Red Legged Grasshoppers, 23.
Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 20,21.

Root Web Worm, 6, 12, 13.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 17, 19.
insects, article on, 11-33.

Corn Plant Louse. 23-33.
aerial form, 23.24.
ants attending, 29.
artificial remedies, 33.

Corn Plant Louse, contribution to the life
history of the, 23-33.
description, 25,26.
distribution, 30.
enemies, 24,30-33.
food plants, 24.
injuries to broom corn, 24.
corn, extent of, 24,25.
sorghum. 24.

life history and habits, 26-30.
nomenclature, 25.

parasites and predaceous insects, 24.30,
33.

preyed upon by Lady Bugs, 24,33.
relation of root and aerial forms, 29.
Corn Root Worm, 5.

Cotton, injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf Roller,

20.

Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 55,

62.

Worm, 57.

Cowslip, 80.

Crambus zeellus, 12-17. (See Root Web
Worm.)

Cranberry, injuries to, by Red-Banded Leaf
Roller, 20,21.

Crepidodera cucumeris, 98,117.
helxines, 98,117.

crepuscularia, Cymatophora, 72.

Croesia fulvoroseana, 17.
gallivorana, 17.
sulfureana, 17.
virginiana, 17.

' Crown Borer, Strawberry. 8.

Cryptides, 94.

Cucumber Flea Beetle, 98,117.

Cucumber, injuries to, by Grass Worm or
Fall Army Worm, 62.

Wild, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

cucumeris, Crepidodera, 98.

Currant, injuries to, by Eccopsis exoletum,
117.

Green Apple Leaf Hopper, 117.
Typhlocyba tricincta, 115.

Cutworm, Speckled, as a cabbage worm, 93.
description, 93, 94. »

life history, 94.

parasites, hymenopterous, 9*.
Wheat, 56,58.

Cutworms, 16.

Cyclonida sanguinea, 33.

Cymatophora crepuscularia, descriptor,
72.

D

daggyi, Prodenia, 56,58.
dasyearpum, Acer, 104,109,111.

on, some insect enemies of, 103.

Datana contracta, 95.

Davenport Academy of Sciences, Proceed¬
ings, cited. (See under Proceedings.)
Deep plowing as measure ^against Wheat
Midge, 54.

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

Ill

delavaricus, Oxyptilus, 9.0,91.

Desmodium as food plant of Pyrrhia ex¬
primens, 89,90.

Destroying screenings as measure against
Wheat Midge, 54.

trees as measure against Elm Borer,
114.

destructor, Cecidomyia, 38-50.

Semiotellus, 44-46,49.

Diabrotica longicornis, 5.

Dichelia sulphureana, 17-20,21,74.
differentialis, Caloptenus, 23.
diospyri, Trioza, 99.

Diseases due to Phytopti, treatment for, 86.
of Forest Tent Caterpillar, 7.
of Grape, 85.

of Imported Cabbage Worm, 6, 7.
of Silk Worm, 7.
diversilineata, Petrophora. 83.

Dolerus arvensis, 100-102.
description, 101.
fungous parasites of, 101.
bieolor, 100-102.

description, 101.
fungous parasites of, 101.
Drosophila ampelophila, 83.

E

Earle, F. S.. experiments upon Tarnished
Plant Bug with pyrethrum, 80.

Early plowing as measure against Grass
Worm or Fall Army Worm, 66.

Eccopsis exoletum, 117,118.
description, 117, 118,

Edwards and Elliott on Pyrrhia exprimens,
89.

Egg plant, injuries to, by Crepidodera
cucumeris, 117.

Elaptus, 110.

aleurodis, 110.

Elliot, 89. (See Edwards and Elliot.)

Elm Bark Louse, 115.

Borer, 112-114.

description, 113.
parasites, 113.

\ injuries to, by Elm Plant Louse, 114.
Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.
insects injurious to, 112-115.

Plant Louse, 114.

White, injuries to, by Elm Bark Louse,

115.

Elm Borer, 112,113,114.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.
elymi, Isosoma, 37.

Elymus canadensis, injuries to, by Isosoma
elymi, 37.

Emphytus maculatus, 77.

Empoa albopicta, 117.

Emulsion, kerosene, for Apple Leaf bkele-
tonizer, 97.

Cherry Slug, 117.

Corn Plant Louse, 33.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 97.

Emulsion, kerosene, for Red Spider, 117.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 108.
Entomological Society of Philadelphia,
Proceedings, cited. (See under Proceed¬
ings.)

Entomologist and Botanist, cited, 57,61.
Erigeron canadense, food plant of Sulphur
Leaf Roller, 20.

Tortrix pallorana, 74.
error, Platygaster, 44.

Eupelmus allyni, 37,44.
calendar, 50.
description, 37.

parasite of Isosoma hordei, 36.

of Isosoma tritici. Lesser Wheat
Straw Worm, 36.

European Grape Leaf Mite, 86.

Euschistus, 78.

Evening Primrose, food plant of Scelodon-
ta pubescens, 81,82.
exoletum, Eccopsis, 117,118.

Exorista infesta, description, 65,

parasite of Grass Worm or Fall Army
Worm, 65.

exprimens, Chariclea, 88.

Heliothis. 88.

Pyrrhia, 89.

Fall Army Worm or Grass Worm, 3, 6, 55 67.

(See Grass Worm.)
femur-rubrum, Pezotettix, 23.

Fernald, C. H., Description of Crambus
zeellus 13*

determination of Eccopsis exoletum, 118.
List of North American Tortricidoe,
cited, 18,21.

on Dichelia sulphureana, 18.
on Root Web Worm, 14.
fistulosa, Monarda, injuries to, by Sulphur
Leaf Roller, 20.

Fitch, Dr. Asa, 38.

on Aphis malifolire, 98.
on Corn Plant Louse, 23.
on Platygaster error and other parasites
of Hessian Fly, 44.
on Platygaster lecanii, 105.
on Proctotrupidae, 105.
on Semiotellus destructor, 44.
on Typhlocyba tricincta, 115.
flavus, Chaitophorus, 70.

Lasius, 24,29,70,72.

Flea Beetle, Brassy, 22.

Cucumber, 98, 117.

Forbes, S. A., 65. ,

on lady bugs, as enemies of Corn Plant

Louse, 24*

on nomenclature of Corn Plant Louse,

25. ,.

Forest Tent Caterpillar, contagious disease,

French, G. H., on Empelmus allyni, des¬
cription, parasitism, 36, 37.

French, G. H.,on Pyrrhia umbra, 89, 90.

on Strawberry Slug, 11.
frondosa, Bidens, injuries to, by Soft
Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Fruit Fly, Vine-Loving, 7,83.

Fruits, preserved, injuries to, by Vine-
loving Fruit Fly, 84.
frugiperda, Lapbygma,3, 0,55-67.

Phalmna, 56.57,58.
fulvipes, Pteromalus, 47,49.
fulvoroseana, Croesi a, 17.

Fungi, parasitic, 101.

on Dolerus arvensis, 101.
bicolor, 101.

Fungus diseases of grape leaf, sulphur for-
86.

Furrow plowed to check migration of Grass
Worm or Fall Army Worm, 67.

G-

gallivorana, Croesia 17.

Galusha, O. B., on Strawberry Slug, 77.
Garman, H., 34,36.41,68,69,86,87.

contribution to the life history of the
Corn Plant Louse, 23-33.
description of Bryobia pallida, 74.

of Bryobia pratensis, 73.
on Soft Maple Bark Louse, 105.

Gastroan, E. A., 12.

Geological and Geographical Survey of
Colorado and Adjacent Territory, Reports
of IT. S., cited. (See under Reports.)
Gilead, Balm of, injuries to, by Crepidodera
helxines, 117.

glacialis, Rippodamia, 24,33.

Glover, Townend, on Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm. 56.57,60,61.64,66.

Gooseberry, injuries to, byEccopsis exole-
tum, 118.

Green Apple Leaf Hopper, 117.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Gnaphalium polyeephalum, injuries to, by
Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21,

Goding, F. W., on Red-Legged Grass¬
hoppers and Katydids, 23.

Grain, injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, Cl.

Leaf-Hoppers, 67-69.
grande, Isosoma, 6,34-36.
grandis, Isosoma, 35.

Grape, diseases of, 85.

injuries to, by Grape Phylloxera, 7.
Grape Pomace Fly. 7.

Grape Phytoptus. 7.

Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 62.
Petrophora diversilineata, 83.
Phytoptus vitis, 84.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 103.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.

Typhlocyba tricincta, 115.

Vine Loving Fruit Fly, 84.
insects, article on a few, 83-86.

Leaf Mite, 7. 84-86.

Grape Phylloxera, 7.

Phytoptus, 7,84-86.

Pomace Fly, 7,83.

'jV Gra s Army Worm, 57.

Caterpillar, 56,58.

Blue, injuries to, by clover mites, 73, 74.
Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 57,
61,62,63-.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.

Worm or Fall Army Worm, 3,6,55-67.
character and extent of injuries to
vegetation, 61.
description, 58.
distribution, 59.
lile history, 60.
literature, 56-58.
natural enemies, 64.
nomenclature, 58.
parasite, 65.

prevention and remedy, 66.

Grasses, food plants of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

Grasshopper, Bird, 23.

Grasshoppers in corn, 22, 23.

Red-legged, 23.
grataria, Htemafopis, 74.

Greater Wheat Straw Worm, 6.

Green Apple Leaf Hopper, 117.

Ash, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

Grote, A. It., on Pyrrhia umbra, 89.

Grote and Robinson. Descriptions of Ameri¬
can Lepidoptera, cited, 88.
on Datana contracta, 95.

Guenee, Noctuelites, cited, 56.

on Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 56,
59.

I

H

Hsematopis grataria, 74.
hammondi, Pempelia, 7,97.

Harris, D. S., on Grass Worm or Fall Army
Worm, 60, 63.

Harris, Dr. T. W., 38, 111.

on Elm Borer, 113.

Hart, C. A.. 56.

hastata, Verbena, food plant of Sulphur
Leaf Roller, 20.

Heliothis experimens,88.

Hellebore for Cherry Slug, 117.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 108.

Strawberry Slug, 78.
helxines. Crepidodera. 98, 1 17.

Herbaceous plants as food for Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

Herrick, E. C., on parasites of Hessian Fly,
38. 44.

on Semiotellus destructor, 46.

Hessian Fly, calendar, 42.

contributions to a knowledge of the life
history and parasites of the, 38-50.
midsummer measures against, 43.
parasites. 3, 38, 39, 44-50.

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT

118

»[

Hippodamia convergens,24.
glacialis,24, 33.
maculaca.21,24,33.

Homoptera, 67.

Honey Locust, food plant of Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 103.
hordei, Isosoma, 36.

Horticultural entomology, contributions to,
77-118.

Howard, L. 0.,on Grass Worm or Fall Ar¬
my Worm, 66.

Hymenoptera, parasitic, 94, 105, 110.

Hypena scabra, 74.

Hyperaspis signata,33.

preying upon Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104,
105.

K

I

Ichneumonidae parasitic on Corn Plant
Louse, 24.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.

Illinois State Agricultural Society, Trans¬
actions, cited. (See under Transactions.)
State Entonr >logist, Reports, cited. (See
under Reports.)

State Horticultural Society, Transac¬
tions, cited. (See under Reports.)
State Laboratory of Natural History,
Bulletin, cited. (See under Bulletin.)
Imported Cabbage Worm, 67, 93.

diseases, 6, 7.
incertana, Tortrix,20.
infesta, Exorista,65.
inimicus, Jassus,22, 67.

innumerabilis. Pul vinaria, 3, 7, 33, 103, 109, 115.
Insect enemies of the Blackberry and Rasp¬
berry, article on new, 87-92.
of the Soft Maple, on some, 103-111.
Insecticides, arsenical poisons as, 78, 98.
carbolic acid, 108.
caustic soda, 108.

emulsion. Kerosene, 33, 97, 100, 105, 108, 117.
for Corn Plant Louse. 33.
for jumping plant-lice, 100.
hellebore, 78. 108, 117.
kerosene, 17,78.

emulsion , 33, 97, 100, 105, 108, 117.
laundry soap, 108.
lime, 97.

London purple, 98, 101.

Paris green, 17.67,98.
poisons, arsenical, 78. 98.
pyrethrum, 78,80,97, 102, 108,115,117.
soap, laundry, 108.

whale oil, 107. 108.
soda, caustic, 1<>8.
sulphur, 86.
tobacco water, 108.
whale oil soap, 107,108.

Insects, corn, new and little known, 11-33.
injurious to the apple and pear, notes
on, 95-102.

Elm, 112-115.

invitus, Capsus, 111.

Lygus, 110.
irroratus, Jassus, 66.

Isosoma elymi, 37. .

grande, 6,34-36. (See Wheat Straw
Worm, Larger.)
grandis, 35.

hordei parasitized by Eupelmus allyni,
36.

tritici, 6,35,36,37. (See Wheat Straw
Worm, Lesser.)

b parasitized by Eupelmus allyni, 36,37.

J

Jackson, Wm„ 81.

Jassus inimicus, 22,67.

irroratus. 67.

Jassidse, 22.

Jumping Pear Louse, Common, 98.

Yellow, 98-100.
description, 99.
life history, 100.
remedies, 100.

K

Kansas State Board of Agriculture, Re¬
ports, cited. (See under Reports.)
Katydids, 23.

Keen, Eugene, 65.

Kellicott, Dr., on Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.
Kerosene emulsion for Apple Leaf Skele-
tonizer, 97.

Cherry Slug, 117.

Corn Plant Louse, 33.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 97.

Red Spider. 117.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 105, 108.

Yellow Jumping Pear Louse, 100.

Root Web Worm, 17.

Strawberry Slug, 78.

King, N. S., 54.

L

Lace- Winged Fly. larva, preying upon Corn
Plant Louse, 33.

Lady Bug, Common, 21.

Plain, preying upon Corn Plant Louse,
33.

preying upon Corn Plant Louse, 24.
Smaller Two- Spotted, preying upon
Corn Plant Louse, 33.

Maple Bark Louse. 33.

Spotted, preying upon Corn Plant
Louse, 33.

lamprosana, Pandemis, 109.

Landois, on Phytoptus vitis, 84,86.

Lane, R, W., on Wheat Midge, 50.
Laphygma frugiperda, 3,6,55-67.

Lappa major, injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf
Roller, 20.

lapponica, Plagiodera, 117.

114

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

Larch, injuries to, by Red Spider, 117.
Larger Wheat Straw Worm, 34-36. (See
Wheat Straw Worm, Larger.)

Lasius flavus, 24,29,70,72.

Late sowing to prevent injury from Larger
Wheat Straw Worm, 36.

Laundry soap for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
108.

Leaf Hopper, Three-Banded, 115.

Green apple, 117.

Hoppers, 22.

Grain, 67-69.

Miner, Blackberry, 87.

description of genus, 87.
of species, 87.

Mite, Grape, 7,84-86.

Roller, Apple, 97.

Lesser Apple, 7,97.

Oblique-Banded, 109.

Red-Banded, 20.

Sulphur, 17-20. (See Sulphur Leaf
Roller.)

rollers, clover, 74.

Skeletonizer, Apple, 7,97.
lecanii, Coccophagus, parasite of Soft Ma¬
ple Bark Louse, 105.

Platygaster, 105.

Lecanium, 115.

quercitronis, 105.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 7,97.

Strawberry Plant Louse, 79.
leucostigma, Orgyia, 117.

Lime for Apple Leaf Skeletonizer, 97.
lineolaris, Lygus, 79.

Lintner, J. A., on Grass Worm or Fall Army
Worm, 58.

on Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.
on Vine-Loving Fruit Fly, 83, &4.
Lockwood, Rev. Samuel, on Vine-Loving
Fruit Fly, 84.

Locust, Black, food plant of Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

injuries to, by Nematus robinias, 116.
injuries to, by Cymatophora crepuscula-
ria, 72.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.

Locusts, Egyptian, 23.

Grass, 23.

Loew on Vine-Loving Fruit Fly, 83.
Lombardy Poplar, injuries to, by Crepido-
dera helxines, 117.

London purple for Apple Leaf Skeletonizer,
98.

Dolerus arvensis, 101.
bicolor, 101.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 98.
longicornis, Diabrotica, 5.

Lophoderus triferanus, 20.
velutinanus, 81, 88.

Luring Tarnished Plant Bug by rows of
Turnips, Cabbage, Mullein, etc, 80.

Lygus invitus, 110.

description, 111.
lineolaris, 79.

M

Mclntire, H. C., on Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 55.

Macropsis ncbilis, 22.
maculata, Hippodamia.21,24,33.

Megilla, 21,24,33.
maculatus, Emphytus, 77.

Madison, E. C., on Hessian Fly, 41.

Magdahs armicollis, 112, 113.

Maggot, Apple, 84.
maidaphidis, Adialy tus, 30, 31, 32.
maidis. Aphis, 23-33.

major. Lappa, injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf
Roller, 20.
mali, Aphis, 98.
malifoliae, Aphis, 98.
jnalivorana, Teras, 7, 97.

V' Maple Bark Louse, Soft, 3, 7, 33, 103-109, 115.
experiments, 105-109.
carbolic acid, 108.
caustic soda, 108,
hellebore, 108.
kerosene emulsion, 105, 108.
laundry soap, 108.
pyrethrum, 108.
soda, caustic. 108.
tobacco water, 108.
washing off females and egg
masses with water, 108.
whale oil soap, 107, 108.
insect enemies, 104.

V injuries to, by Aleurodes aceris, 110.
Lophoderus velutinanus, 88.

Lygus invitus, 111.

Pandemis lamprosana, 109.
Oblique-Banded Leaf Roller, 109.
Soft Maple Bark Louse, 3, 7, 103.
Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.

Soft, on some insect enemies of the, 103,
111.

Marten, John, on Hessian Fly, 40,42.
Massachusetts State Board of Agricultural
Reports, cited. (See under Reports.)
Megilla maculata, 21,24,33.

Melon, Musk, injuries to, by Cicadulanigri-
frons, 68.

Meromyza americana, 54.

^Midge, Wheat, 6,50-54. (See under Wheat
Midge.)

Mills, R. H., on Root Web Worm, 13.14,
minor, Siphonophora,79.

Missouri State Entomologist, Report, cited.

(See under Reports.)

Miscellaneous notes, brief, 116-118.

\ Mites, European Grape Leaf, 86.

Grape Leaf, 84-86.

Mites, clover, 73.

preying upon pupm of Root Web Worm,
16.

Moore, Thomas S., on Hessian Fly, 41.
Monarda fistulosa, injuries to, by Sulphur
Leaf Roller, 20.

Mullein, food plant of Tarnished Plant Bug,
79,80.

J 1 J) J • ( . ~

C-< <■ ') ru/r-l / /

As

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

115

Murtfeldt, M. E., on Red-Banded Leaf Rol¬
ler, 21.

Muscardine, 7.

Musk Melon, injuries to, by Cicadula nigri-
I irons, 68.

Mustard as food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

nebulosus, Scelodonta, 81,

Negundo aceroides, food plant of Cyma-
tophora crepusculaiia, 72.

Nematus aureopectus, 116.
bivittatus, 116.
robinise, description, 116.
ventralis, 117.

New York Agricultural Society, Report
cited. (See under Reports.)

State Entomologist, Report cited. (See
under Reports.)
nigrifrons, Cicadula, 22,67.
nobilis, Macropsis, 22.

Note on life history of the Strawberry Slug,

' 77.

on Wheat Midge, 50-54. (See Wheat
Midge.)

supplementary, on Strawberry Root
Worms, 81.

Notes, brief miscellaneous, 116,118.
brief, of sorghum insects, 70,71.
on insects injurious to the apple and
pear, 95-102.
wheat, 34-69.

novemnotata, Coccinella, 24,33.

O

Oak, injuries to, by Lophoderus velutina-
nus, 88.

Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.

Cicadula nigrifrons. 68.

Oats, injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 62,63.
oblinita, Apatela, 117.

Oblioue-Banded Leaf-Roller, 109.
(Enothera, food plant of Scelodonta nebu¬
losus and S. pubescens, 81, 82.

Onion, injuries to, by Spilosoma virginica,
116.

Ontario Entomological Society. Report
f cited. (See under Reports.)

Orange, injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf Roller,

20.

Osage, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

Orchelimum vulgare, 23.

1 Orgyia leucostigma, 117.

Osage Orange, food plant of Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

Oxyptilus delavaricus, 90,91.
description, 91.

P

Packard, Dr. A. S., Guide to the Study of
Insects, 39.

Monograph of the Phalaenidae of North
America, cited, 83.
on Dichelia sulphureana, 18,19,20.
on Hessian Ely, 39.
on Petrophora diversilineata, 83.
on Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.
on Semiotellus destructor, 44.
pallipes, Pteromalus.46,49,50.
pallorana, Tortrix, 74.
palustris, Caltha, 80.

Pandemis lamprosana, 109.
panicola, Schizoneura, 28,29.

Panicum, as food plant for Corn Plant
Louse, 24.

Papilio, cited, 18, 89.

Parasites and predaceous insects affecting
Corn Plant Louse, 30-33.
of Aleurodes aceris, 110.
of Corn Plant Louse, 24, 30-33.
of Dolerus arvensis, 101.

bicolor, 101.
of Elm Borer, 113.

of Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 65,

66.

of Hessian Fly, 3,38,39,44-50.
of Isosoma hordei, 36.

tritici, Lesser Wheat Straw Worm,
36,37.

of Speckled Cutworm, 94.
of Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.
of Wheat Bulb Worm, 54.

Parasitic Hymenoptera, 3, 20, 24,39-33,36,38,
39,44-50,94,110.

Paria aterrima, 81.

Paris green for Apple Leaf Skeletonizer, 98.
Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 67.
Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 98.

Root Web Worm, 17.

Wire Worms, 17.

Patent Office Report, cited, 56.

Pawpaw, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 103.

Peach, injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 62.

Pea, injuries to, by Grass WTorm or Fall
Army Worm, 57,63.

Pear, 100,101.

injuries to, by Common Jumping Pear
Louse, 98.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 103.

Trioza diospyri, 100.

Yellow Jumping Pear Louse, 99.

Louse, Common Jumping, 98.

Louse, Yellow Jumping, 98-100.
notes on insects injurious to the apple
and , 95-102. 1

Pempelia hammondi, 7,97.
pennsylvanicum, Polygonum, food plant of
Pyrrhia angulata, 90.

116

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

Pentatomid®, 78.

Persimmon, injuries to, byTriozadiospyri,
99.

Petrophora diversilineata, 83.

Pezotettix atlanis injuring corn. 23.

femur-rubrum injuring corn, 23.
Phalaena frugiperda, 56, 57,58.

Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences,
Proceedings, cited. (See under Proceed¬
ings.)

Phylloxera, Grape, 7.

Phytoptus,85.

European, 86.

Grape, 7,81-86.
vitis, 84-86.

Pickled-fruit Fly, 84.

Pieris rapas, 6,93.

Pine, injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.
Plagiodera lapponica, 117.

Plain Lady Bug, preying upon Corn Plant
Louse, 33.

Plantain, food plant of Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 104.

Plant Bug, Tarnished, 8, 79, 11 1.
lice, ants attending, 23,24.

preyed upon by Common Lady Bug,

22.

Louse, Apple, 98.

Corn, 23-33.

Elm, 114.

Lesser Strawberry, 79.

Yellow Sorghum, 70.

Plants, herbaceous, as food for Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

Platygaster error, 44.
lecanii, 105.

Plum, food plant of Soft Maple Bark Louse,
104.

Plume Moth, Raspberry, 91.

Poisons. (See under insecticides.)

arsenical, for Apple Leaf Skeletonizer,
98.

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 98.
Strawberry Slug, 78.

polycephalum, Gnaphalium, injuries to, by
Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.

Polygonum, food plant of Pyrrhia umbra, 90.
Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.
pennsylvanicum, food plant of Pyrrhia
angulata, 90.

Pomace Fly, Grape, 7,83.

Popenoe, E. A., on Corn Plant Louse, 24.
Poplar, Lombardy, injuries to, by Crepido-
dera helxines, 117.

Potato, injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 62.
pratensis, Bryobia, 73,74.

Preserved Fruit, injuries to, by Vine-loving
Fruit Fly, 84.

Primrose, Evening, food plant of Scelo-
donta pubescens, 81,82.

Proceedings of the Boston Society of
Natural History, cited, 111.

Proceedings of the Davenport Academy of
Sciences, cited, 105.

Entomological Society of Philadelphia,
cited, 20,23,95.

Philadelphia Academy of Natural
Sciences, cited, 17.

Proctotrupidoe, 105.

Prodenia autumnalis, 57, 58.
var. fulvosa, 57.
var. obscura, 57.
daggyi, 56,58.

pseudacacia, Robinia, 116.

Psylla pyri, 98, 100.

Pteromalus fulvipes, calendar, 49.
description, 47.
parasite of Hessian Fly, 48.
pallipes, calendar, 49.
description, 46.

parasite of Hessian Fly, 47,50.
Pterostichus sayi. 16.
pubescens, Scelodonta, 81.
pulicaria, Chaetocnema, 22.

Pulvinaria innumerabilis, 3,7,33,103-109,115,
(See Maple Bark Louse, Soft.)

Putnam, J. Duncan, article on Pulvinaria
innumerabilis, cited, 105.
on Cocophagus lecanii, 105.
on Platygaster lecanii, 105.

Pyrethrum for Cherry Slug, 117.

Dolerus arvensis, 102.

bicolor, 102.

Elm Plant Louse, 115,

Lesser Apple Leaf Roller, 97.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 108.

Strawberry Slug, 78.

Tarnished Plant Bug, 80.
pyri, Psylla, 98,100.
pyrifoliae, Trioza, 98-100.

Pyrrhia, 89.

angulata, 89,90.
exprimens, 89.
umbra, 88-90.

description, 89.

distribution and life history, 90.
injuries to vegetation, 90.
literature, 88.

Q

quadrilineatus, Cicadula, 22,68.
quercitronis, Lecanium, 105.

R

Ragweed, food plant of Tortrix pallorana,
74.

Ranunculus acris, food plant of Sulphur
Leaf Roller, 20.
rapae, Pieris, 6,93.

Raspberry and blackberry, on new insect
enemies of, 87-92.
injuries to, by Paria aterrima, 81.
Typhlocyba tricincta, 115.

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

117

Raspberry Plume Moth, 91.

Slug, 91.

Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 20.
food plants, 21.

-legged Grasshoppers in corn, 23.

Spider, 117.

Remedies and preventives for insect
depredations, arsenical poisons, 78,98.
burning rubbish, 98.

stubble, 33,39,43.
capturing by hand, 17.

with insect net, 78.
carbolic acid, 108.
caustic soda, 108.
deep plowing, 54.
destroying screenings, 54.

trees, 114.
early plowing, 66.

emulsion, kerosene, 33, 97,100,105,108,117.
furrow plowed to check migration, 67.
hellebore, 78,108,117.
kerosene, 17, 78.

emulsion, 33, 97, 100, 105, 108, 117.
late sowing, 36.
laundry soap, 108.
lime, 97.

London purple, 98,101.
luring with succulent vegetables, 80.
paper bags, enclosing grapes in, 84.
Paris green, 17,67,98.
plowing deep, 54.
early, 66.

poisons, arsenical, 78.98.
pyrethrum, 78, 80, 97, 102, 108, 115, 117.
rolling, 66.

rotation of crops, 33,54.
soap, laundry, 108.

whale oil, 107, 108.
soda, caustic, 108.
sulphur, 86.
tobacco water, 100.
washing off with water, 108.
whale oil soap, 107, 108.

Report upon Cotton Insects, J. H. Com¬
stock, cited, 57.

Reports Illinois State Entomologist, cited,
24,57,58, 77,81,89,98,99.

Kansas State Board of Agriculture,
cited, 24.

Massachusetts State Board of Agricul¬
ture, cited, 21.

Missouri State Entomologist, cited, 56,
57,59, 77.

New York Agricultural Society, cited, 21.
State Entomologist, cited, 23,58,83,
105,115.

Ontario Entomological Society, cited, 77.
Patent Office, cited, 56.

•U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture,
cited, 66.

Department of Agriculture, cited,
17,34,84,57,58.

Reports U. S. Geological and Geographical
Survey of Colorado and Adjacent Ter¬
ritory, cited, 21.

Rhizobius.71,72.

Rice, injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 60, 63.

Upland, injuries to, by Grass Worm or
Fall Army Worm, 61.

Riley, Dr. C. V.. 56,58,60. See Walsh and
Riley.

on Eupelmus allyni, 44.
on Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 56,
57,58, 59, 60,61.62, 63.

op parasite of Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 65.

on Larger Wheat Straw Worm, 35.
on Strawberry Slug, 77.
rileyi, Schizoneura, 114.

Robinia pseudacacia, food plant of Nema-
tus robiniae, 116.
robiniae, Nematus, 116.

Robinson, Coleman T., 88. (See Grote and
Robinson.)

on Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.
on Sulphur Leaf Roller, 17.

Rolling heavy, as measure against Grass
Worm or Fall Army Worm, 66.

Root Web Worm, 6,12-17.

artificial remedies, 16.
description, 14.
distribution, 16.
life history, 16.
natural enemies, 16.

Worm, Corn, 5.

Strawberry, 8,

Worms, Strawberry, supplementary
note on, 81.

rosaceana, Cacoecia, 74,97,109.

Rose, injuries to, by Cymatophora cre-
puscularia, 72.

Pyrrhia umbra, 90.

Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.
Rotation of crops, to destroy corn, as
measure against Corn Plant Louse, 33.
Wheat Midge, 54. Ju .
rubi, Selandria,91.

Rye, injuries to, by Chinch Bug, 5.

Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 62.
Wheat Bulb Worm, 6, 54.

S

sanguinea, Cycloneda, 33.

Saperda tridentata, 112-114.

Saunders, Wm.A., on Strawberry Slug, 77.
Saw Flies, Willow, 100-102.

Say, Thomas, 67.

on Capsus invitus.lll.
on Dolerus arvensis, 101.
on Semiotellus destructor, 44.
sayi, Pterostichus,16.
scabra, Hypena,74.

118

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT

Scelodonta nebulosus,81.
pubescens, 81.

Schizoneura panicola.28,29.

rileyi, 114.

Schlaffsucht,66.

Selandria cerasi, 7, 117.
rubi,9l.

Semiotellus destructor, calendar, 49.
description, 45.
life history, 46.
parasite of Hessian Fly, 44.
signata, Hyperaspis, 33, 104, 105.

Signoret, Annales de la Societe Entomo-
logique de France, cited, 71.

SilkWorm, contagious disease, 7.
Siphonophora minor, 79.

Slug, Cherry, 7, 117.

Raspberry, 91.

Strawberry, note on life history of, 77.
Willow, 117.

Smaller Two-spotted Lady Bug, preying
upon Corn Plant Louse, 33.

Maple Bark Louse, 33.

Smartweed, food plant of Pyrrhia umbra,
90.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Smith and Abbott, 57.

on Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 56.
Rarer Lepidopterous Insects of Georgia,
cited, 56.

Smith, Emily A., on Coccophagus lecanii,
105.

on Strawberry Slug, 77.

Smith, J. B., on Pyrrhia angulata and P.
umbra, 89.

Soap, laundry, for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
108.

whale oil, for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
107, 108.

Soda, caustic, for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
108.

Sot Maple Bark Louse, 3, 7, 33, 103-109, 115.
(See Maple Bark Louse, Soft.)
injuries to, by Soft Maple Bark Louse,
103.

on some insect enemies of the, 103-111.
sorghiellus. Coccus, description, 71.
Sorghum Bark Louse, 71.

injuries to, by Cicadula quadrilineatus,
69.

Corn Plant Louse, 24.

Sorghum Bark Louse, 71.

Yellow Sorghum Plant Louse, 70.
insects, brief notes on, 70,71.

Plant Louse, Yellow, 70.

Speckled Cutworm as a Cabbage worm, 93,
94.

Spider, Red, 117.

Spilosoma virginica, 116.

Spotted Lady Bug preying upon Corn Plant
Louse, 33.

Straw Worm, Larger Wheat, 6, 34-36. (See
Wheat Straw Worm, Larger.)

Lesser Wheat, 6,35,36,37.

Straw Worm, Wheat, 6.

Strawberry Crown Borer, 8.

injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall Army-
Worm, 63.

Lesser Strawberry Plant Louse, 79.
Lophoderus velutinanus, 81.

Paria aterrima, 81.

Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 21.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.

Tarnished Plant Bug, 8,79.
insects, article on new and imperfectly-
known, 77-82.

Plant Louse, Lesser, 79.

Root Worm, 8.

Worms, supplementary note on, 81.
Slug, note on life history of, 77.
Sugarcane, injuries to, by Grass Worm or
Fall Army Worm, 61.
sulfureana, Croesia, 17.

Sulphur for fungus diseases of grape, 86.
plant diseases due to Phytopti, 86.
Leaf Roller, 17-20.
description, 18.

hymenopterous parasites of, 20.
injuries to vegetation, 17,19.
life history, 19.
literature, 17.

sulphureana, Dichelia, 17-20,21,74.

Syrphus fly, lar.va, description, 32.

preying upon Corn Plant Louse, 24, 32.

T

Tachina parasite of Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 65,66,

Tarnished Plant Bug, 8,79,111.

description of egg, 79.
telarius, Tetranychus, 117.

Tent Caterpillar, Forest, contagious dis¬
ease, 7.

Teras malivorana, 7,97.

Tetranychus telarius, 117.

Tetrastiehus carinatus, calendar, 49.
description, 48.
parasite of Hessian Fly, 49.

Thomas, Dr. Cyrus, on Aphis mali and A.
malifoliaB, 98,

on Common Jumping Plant Louse, 99.
on Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 57.
List of the Plant Lice of the United
States, 23.

Three-Banded Leaf Hopper, 115.

Tobacco water for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
108.

Tomato, injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 62.

Tomlinson, D. C., 13.

Tortrix incertana, 20.
pallorana, 74.

Transactions of American Entomological
Society, cited, 17,21,88,89.

Illinois State Agricultural Society, 23.
Illinois State Horticultural Society, 771

inde:: to fourteenth report

119

i

i

i

■I

tricincta, Typhlocyba, 115.
tridentata, Saperda, 112-114.
triferana. Cacoecia, 20.
triferanus, Lophoderus, 20.
triflda, Ambrosia, 74,
trifolii. Coccus, 72.

Trioza, 99.

diospyri,99.
pyrifoliae, 98-100.
tristis, Chrysomitris, 105.
tritici, Cecidomyia, 50-54.

Isosoma, 6,85.36,37. '

Turnip as lure for Tarnished Plant Bug, 80.
injuries to, by Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 62.

Two- Spotted Lady Bug, Smaller, preying
upon Corn Plant Louse, 33.

Maple Bark Louse, 33.

Typhlocyba tricincta, 115.

U

Uhler, P. R., Notes on the Heteroptera,
cited. 111.

on Lygus invitus.lll.

Ulmus amoricana, 104, 112.
umbra, Pyrrhia, 88-90.

U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, Report,
cited. (See under Reports.)

Department of Agriculture, Reports,
cited. (See under Reports.)
Entomological Commission, Bulletin,
cited. tSee under Bulletin.)
Entomologist, Reports, cited. (See un¬
der Reports.)

Geological and Geographical Survey of
Colorado and Adjacent Territory,
cited. (See under Reports.)

Upland rice, injuries to by Grass Worm or
Fall Army Worm, 61.

urticifolia, Yerbena, injuries to, by Sul¬
phur Leaf Roller, 20.

V

velutinanus, Lophoderus. 81, 88.
ventralis, Nematus, 117.

Yerbena hastata. food plant of Sulphur Leaf
Roller, 20.

urticifolia. injuries to, by Sulphur Leaf
Roller, 20.

Vine-Loving Fruit-Fly, 7, 83.
virginiana, Croesia, 17.
virginica, Spilosoma, 116.
vitis, Phytoptus, 84-86.
vulgare, Orclielimum,23.

W

Walker on Red-Banded Leaf Roller, 20.
Walnut, injuries to, by Soft Maple Bark
Louse, 103.

Walsh and Riley, on Grass Worm or Fall
Army Worm, 56, 58,60.

Walsh, B. D., on Corn Plant Louse, 23.

Sulphur Leaf Roller. 20.

Walton, Alice B., on Strawberry Slug, 77.
Washing off females and egg masses to de¬
stroy Soft Maple Bark Louse, 108.

Web Worm, Root, 6, 12. (See Root Web
Worm.)

Webster, F. M., 12, 79, 112.

on Larger Wheat Straw Worm, 34, 35.
Western Rural, on the Willow Saw Flies,
100.

Whale oil soap, for Soft Maple Bark Louse,
107,108.

Wheat Bulb Worm, 6,54.

injuries to rye, 6,54.
late sowing as measure against,
parasite of, 54.

Cutworm, 56,58.

injuries to, by Cicadula nigrifrons, 68.

C. quadrilineatus, 69.

Grass Worm or Fall Army Worm, 6,
55,56, 62,63.

Larger Wheat Straw Worm, 6,34.
Lesser Wheat Straw Worm, 6,36.
Wheat Midge, 6,51,54.

Midge, 6, 50-54.
description, 51.
injuries to grain, 54.
life history, 53.
remedies, 54.

Notes on insects injurious to, 34-69.
Straw Worm, 6.

Larger, 6,34-36.
description, 35.

life history and distribution, 35.
Lesser, 6,35,36.

parasitized by Eupelmus allyni,
36, 37.

White Clover, injuries to, by Clover Bark
Louse, 72.

Hcematopis grataria, 74.

Elm, injuries to, by Elm Bark Louse, 115.
Elm Borer, 112,113,114.

Soft Maple Bark Louse, 104.

Wild Cherry, injuries to, by Willow Slug,117.
Cucumber, food plant of Soft Maple
Bark Louse, 104.

Williams, A., on Vine-Loving Fruit Fly, 83.
Williston, Dr. S. W., description of Exorista
infesta, 65.

120

INDEX TO FOURTEENTH REPORT.

Willow, injuries to, by Apatela oblinita, 117.
Crepidodera helxines, 117.

Dolerus arvensis, 100,101.
bieolor, 100.

Orgyia leucostigma, 117.

Plagiodera lapponica, 117.

Sulphur Leaf Roller, 20.

Saw Flies, 100-102.

Slug, 117.

Wire Worms in corn, remedies, 17.

Y

Yellow .Tumping Pear Louse, 98-100.

Sorghum Plant Louse, 70.
ypsilon, Piston, 95-97.
description, 95-97.

Z

zeellus, Crambus, 12-17.

"■ . . . ^ —

<... ■• : • •*

.’. >♦»■•*• V ¥ ■' • •» * • » ♦*•) • * ' » * * ** •' ,'*

• t ■» •' »' ♦ •* >* * • “ 1 */ '

, . .»• t ! 4 ‘ ' #>*..•# 4 * t • « >».*>.».*■»» /Z**V*i* ...

•*-**.» , •• 4 »* » 1 4 1* » '* fl-l* .• f t • » *-»•