Goes
er

Paap haseh spienir eb tasceneghagaers cane : pack erate : : ; ;
FL RO RSS SR er See EES ANB ES SS NERA Nays egas ca) ene 33 ae E a Micaetty
RECS RISA OSA Se Ar PAARL: ; eat es Breast, AAA SH Lint es BEY

SARE SUA? Sa RGR BE palicrsteuikeconuicistS REIS EERE

CARER ES ARRAR

Raat:

a.
ae sab
saeeteany cbobentnanichy Btgeone Nabes
So es eC

RNR RT 2) ants SEAR hie SONS
ah STAN RSE Sa
= Mea Suaasmeenie

See

mee”

‘a s! bet

tengo ty
Saas

pe RAN
beeper

Rae
aeeshne
bos Nabyeoh

; seo

ke nee

SRO > > eat bee
Cael) : *. ‘ > NT he

EDS EHS
Sn ro Se enn
1 A sere or a4

nite,

AAD

Pete

a
D

oe

é

¥:

47.

int

ee eee

Peet Senior dy oe mia Nintendo ett tesye Aap wD see aera tsepere toy

Spies Srlet teers Leeas fh
eat areas et Enote oath run A Sen Lamatoeoenibeet? at eeth inte eee
~ Seth Siar Pal de Wl Na RIGS Ba ei BLT nts I hla

baie bt Sate Aare Cts

ote ea ren

pews ASA Ser

7 NSPS tee pnres Nee ethos Soyo ree:

nr re sete at shat ay ‘ : says ss ee reer st

er

Alve:
ith

Pc
arent

yee

or RD Re PORT

OF THE

UNITED STATES

ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

RELATING TO

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST, THE WESTERN CRICKET, THE ARMY
WORM, CANKER WORMS, AND THE HESSIAN FLY;

TOGETHER WITH

DESCRIPTIONS OF LARVA OF INJURIOUS FOREST INSECTS, STUDIES
ON THE EMBBYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOCUST
AND OF OTHER INSECTS, AND ON THE SYSTEMATIC
POSITION OF THE ORTHOPTERA IN RELATION

TO OTHER ORDERS OF INSECTS; 4

WITH

MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

————_—__+

"eo.
.
«

WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.

1883.

4
4
4
|
u
,
I
.
i
i
1
|
}
!
' =
{
}
|
4
‘s
\

U.

= oars
Ziaaes Sse Ga GE
| TY ae Sea Ul Vf 0
Gr Hii See
| f AR CH Nay
LV , ¢ = : %
be g | wy Oo
; > 9s “& hy be '
sete cal, Ae ee

S Entomological Comumissio7y Report 3.

WA PS Ti 3
X g 4. Y urer xy i
WELe
(3 Q
saiwantieg -S .
a Ke |
oe

Topele
Dobie ee
QRADO i x AlN SAS \

>,

or
NORTH AMERICA,
BY .
A.S.PACKARD, J# Ge R ANTI ae es ‘
ee ““S OR LEEN Vi
) AreticRealm (Grcampolar) EP |
9) Boreal (Canadian Province. ae A .
N f
I Bastan (AdantioProvince . A
Antillean Regt. ut) Ae ie
C35) Crniral Province. 4 ; ©

DSS Western (Pacitic/frovince .

8 Central American Region.

—— /sathermals(Annual)

Northern Limit of Trees (Spruce/
1

JOINT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PRINTING OF THIRTY THOUSAND COPIES OF
THE THIRD REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled, That there be printed at the Government Printing Office, with
necessary illustrations, thirty thousand copies of the Third Report of the United

tates Entomological Commission; seven thousand copies thereof for the use of the
Senate, twenty thousand nine hundred and seven for the use of the House, and two
thousand and ninety-three for the Interior Department.

Approved, February 26, 1881. -

EXTRACT FROM LAW PROVIDING FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE WORK OF THE UNITED
STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

Investigating the History of Insects Injurious to Agriculture, 1882. * * * Provided,
That to enable the Entomological Commission to complete and publish the data al-
ready obtained by them, with the investigations made, the sum of five thousand
dcllars of said sum of twenty thousand dollars is hereby appropriated, to be expended
ander the direction of said Commission; and the reports of the said Commission, and
an itemized statement of their expenditures, shall be made to the Commissioner of
Agriculture. ;

Act of March 3, 1881.

Il

Poh be OF CON DENTS.

Page.
OVE, (OSI OSSUBRLBING EG C0 VAN Dy PRESS RI ee XI

TRUER OS SRR SE ee eee eee Meal eye eee XII

PART I—IN REFERENCE TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN
LOCUST.

CHAPTER I.

ADDITIONS TO THE CHRONOLOGY OF LOCUST RAVAGES IN 1880 AND 1881....-
The locust in 1880, in Texas, 3—in Colorado, 4—in Utah, 4—in 1881, in
Texas, 6—in Utah, 7.
CHAPTER II.

THE RockY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN MONTANA IN 1880 .....-...--.------.----
The country from Saint Paul to Montana, 8—between Bismatck and Fort
Keogh, J—burning often impracticable, 9—destroying locusts by ditches
and kerosene eddies, 13—ropes dragged to drive them, 15—“‘ drifts of
hoppers,” 16—shooting against locust swarms, 16—destroying by ditches
and burning straw, 17—no more damage for three or four years, 17—
enemies of the locust in the Northwest, 17—topography of Western Da-

kota and Montana, 19. ;

CHAPTER III.

THE Rocky MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN WYOMING, MONTANA, ETC., IN 1881 ....-
Letter of submittal of report by Mr. Lawrence Bruner, 21—general report,
22—brief history of depredations, 22—the earlier ones, 23—characteristics
of the Permanent Region, 24—settlement and other checks against locusts,
2%—distribution of the Permanent Regions, 25—their physical peculiari-
ties, 28—the arid region, 29—permanent breeding grounds, 29—their loca-
tions and relations, 30—the sources of locusts, 30—interchange of swarms,
31—regular migratory routes, 31—agencies controlling migration, 32—
disadvantages of the temporary regions, 33—period of hatching, 34—pe-
riod of growth, 85—habits of the young, 36—habits at maturity, 36—
causes of occasional over-increase, 37—checks, enemies, 38—the efforts of
experts baffled, 42—tree culture, 42—climatic checks, 43—tree planting,
43—flights affected by storms, 45—number of annual broods, 46—subper-
manent region, 46—its relations, 47—locust movements therein, 48—how
to fight this insect, 49—locust probabilities, 49—recent swarms, 50.

CHAPTER IV.

NOTES ON OTHER LOCUSTS AND ON THE WESTERN CRICKET ..----..---..----
Other locusts, 53—List of North American locusts north of Mexico, 55—the
Western cricket, 61.

(III)

ee)

53

IV TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CHAPTER V.
Page.

DATA OBTAINED FROM SOLAR PHYSICS AND EARTHQUAKE COMMOTIONS AP-
PLIED TO ELUCIDATE LOCUST MULTIPLICATION AND MIGRATION. By MR.
AG EES WENTON se cicpe tay slace oor nee ee ee eee ee aie a 65

Importance of the central luminary, wide effects of variation in its poten-
tial energy, 65—on the tides, on chemical and organic activities, on the
physical forces, on epidemics, etc., 65, 66—periods of sun spots, electrical
effects of, 66—thermometric effects of, 67—volcanic effects of, 68—ento-
mological effects of, 683—a new sun-spot table, 69—statement and tabula-
tion of sun-spot dates, 69—comparison of sun-spot periods and insect
periods, 73—American locusts diminished by the spots, 73—Huropean con-
firmative examples of locusts and other insects, 74—tabulation of rare
insect captures, 79—explained, 8l—migration and distribution affected,
81—locusts again predicted in four or ten years, 83—conclusions, 84.

PART IL—THE ARMY WORM, VANKER-WORMS, AND THE
HESSIAN FLY.

CHAPTER VI.
THE UARMY. WORM oo oie te oe Sao NTC ONE cee 89

Nomenclature, 89—other army worms, aihels so called, 89—geographical
distribution, 91—injuries by, 92—past history of, 92 —-desorimtive char-.
acters of, 101—the egg, 101—the larva, 102—the pupa, 103—adults and
sexual differences, 103—habits and natural history, 105—oviposition,
105—habits when young, 108—duration of larval life, 109—traveling
habits, etc., 110—time of appearance, 112—sudden appearance and dis-
appearance, 114—food-plants, 116—-the pupa state, 117—habits of the
moth, 117—-flight, 118—position at rest, 118—number of broods yearly, —
118—hibernation, 122—natural enemies, 125—remedies, 128—burning old
grass, etc., 128—predictions, meteorological influences on the species,
129—ditching, coal tar, poisoning, 130—rolling, fencing, roping, 131—re-
port of observations by L. O. Howard, 132—extent of country injured,
133—crops injured, 133—amount of damage, 133—previous season and
crop, 134—number of broods, 134—an accompanying cut-worm, 135—
natural enemies, 135—army-worm correspondence in spring of 1882, 136—
the invasion of 1880 in New Jersey, by Rev. Samuel Lockwood, 1389—per-
formances of the worms, 139—the direction of travel, 141—origin, eggs,
etc., 143—breeding spots, 143—recapitulation, habits, and remedies, 145— .
notes from Prof. C. V. Riley, the number of broods, hibernation, seasonal
influences, 147—Bibliography, 148.

CHAPTER VII.
CANKER-WORMS (cj cicleed Susi Ie aes at Pe se eat) 157

Classification, 157—two distinct insects concerned, 158—differences be-
tween them, 159—nomenclature, 162—past history, 165—the spring cank-
er-worm, 170—range of the species, 170—characters, 171—habits and nat-
ural history, 172—appearance of the worms, 173—food-plants, 174—modes
of distribution, 175—enemies, 175—destructiveness of canker-worms,
178—the fall canker-worm, 179—range of this species, 179—its characters,
180—habits and natural history, 181—oviposition, 182—season of ap-
pearance, 182—pupation, 183—food-plants, 183—remedies and preventive
measures applicable to both species, 183—sticky substances, 183—hang-
ing tin band, 185—troughs of oil, 186—precautions and classification of
contrivances, 189—jarring and burning, 191—washes and dustings, 191—
Paris green, 192—muriate of lime, 192—sulphur plugged in trees, 193—
fall lean 193—birds and parasites, 195—different measures against
the species, 196.

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Vv

CHAPTER VIII.
Page.
THE HESSIAN FLY—ITS RAVAGES, HABITS, AND THE MEANS OF PREVENTING ITS
CTE LG SLE: SOS et An al alt LS AG a a ge ae YL ea 198
Introduction, 198—losses occasioned by the Hessian fly, 199—description
of the fly, 207—habits, 210—mode of egg-laying, 211—effects of the larva,
213—weather and seasonal influences, 215—parasites, 216—remedies, 220—
late sowing, 221—early sowing, 223—advantage of high culture, 225—
pasturing with sheep, 225—sowing hardy varieties, 227—special remedies,
229—application of lime, 229—rolling the ground, 229—close cutting,
229—burning stubble, 230—periodicity of the fly, 280—chronological
table of fly years, 232—distribution of the fly, 234—its origin in America,
234—history of its distribution in the Old World, 234—in America, 240—
summary of habits and remedies, 244—list of works and articles on the
Hessian fly, 245.

PART III.—SCIENTIFIC RESULTS.

CHAPTER IX.

DESCRIPTIONS OF LARVZ OF INJURIOUS FOREST INSECTS..---...---.---------- 251

Buprestide, 251—the flat-headed apple borer, Chrysobothris femorata, 251—
Chalcophora virginica, 252—Melanophila sp., 253—the flat-headed spruce
borer (Melanophila?), 254—the flat-headed peach and cherry borer, Dicerca
diwaricata Say, 255—buprestid under hemlock bark, 255—Cerambycide,
256—longicorn larva under hemlock bark, 256—Saperda on the willow,
256—the lesser pine borer, Asemum mastum Haldeman, 256—the oak
borer, Elaphidion parallelum Newman, 257—The common oak Clytus,

_ Xylotrechus colonus Fabr., 257—Clytus (?) larva on black birch, 259—the
ribbed Rhagium, Fh. lineatum Olivier, 259—the lesser Prionus, Orthosoma
brunneum (De Geer), 260—unknown longieorn borer from an oak log,
261—unknown longicorn borer in sycamore, 262.

CHAPTER X.

THE EMBRYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOCUST .....--------- -2---12---- 263

Formation of the blastoderm, 263—origin of the primitive amceboid cells,
264—the blastodermie disc or primitive band, 264—the germinal groove,
264— origin of the cellular or germinal layers, 264—diagrammatic view
of the origin of these layers, from Graber, 265—embryonal membranes,
265—serous membrane, 265—amnion, 265—tabular view of the eight
embryonal layers, 265—division of the embryo or primitive band into
body segments, 266—development of the appendages, 266—of the nervous
system, 266—of the alimentary canal, 266—the stomodzeum, 266—the
proctodeum, 267—the mesenteron or stomach, 267—the pyloric append-
ages of the stomach, 267—the Malpighian tubes, 267—the genital glands,
267—the trachee and salivary glands, 267—-spinning glands, 267—devel-
opment of the wings, 268—criticism of Gegenbaur’s views, 269—Fritz
Miiller’s views, 269—speculation on the primary origin of wings, 270—
correlation of metamorphosis with the acquisition of wings, and of the
latter with the ripening of the sexual organs, 271—differentiation of
mesonotum and metanotum dependent on the presence of wings, 271—
development of a pupal stage, 271—genealogy of. the orders of in-
sects, 271.

VI TABLE OF CONTENTS.

THE EMBRYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHOPTEROUS INSECTS.........---.-
Rapid development of the embryo in autumn, 272—embryology of Gryllo-
talpa vulgaris, 272—formation and contraction of the embryonal skins,
272—formation of the digestive canal, 272—functions of the mid-gut
and hind-gut, 273—origin of the Malpighian vessels, salivary glands,
trachez, and ovaries, 273—the sections of eggs studied by the author,
prepared by N. N. Mason, 273.
DEVELOPMENT OF CALOPTENUS ATLANIS .... 22-200 22-5 0-20 22 ee ee eee e ee eee
Rapidity of development in locust eggs jlaid in autumn, 273—requisites for
the observation of stages earlier than those studied, 273—method of
preparation of the eggs studied, 274—-structure of the nervous system and
eyes, 274—of the heart, 274—mode of origin of the heart, 274—contents
of the heart, 274—structure of the trachex, 275—of the digestive canal,
275—relations of the proctodzeum to the amnion, 275—structure of the
Malpighian tubes, 276—the yolk cells and yolk granules, 276.
DEVELOPMENT OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS....<-. - 225222 2-200 <2 a oe
The primitive segments, 277—the nervous system, 277—the trachez, 278—
the digestive canal, 278—details of structure in more advanced embryos,
278—structure of eyes, 278—origin of ocelli, 278—relations of antennz,
eyes, clypeus, and labrum to the procephalic lobes, 279—structure of
brain and other ganglia, 279—relations of mandibles and the two pairs
of maxillae, 279—relative development of TeBs; 279-—sections of embryo
about ready to hatch, 279.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BARK-BORING BEETLES HYLURGOPS AND XYLE-

Breeding habits of Xyleborus celatus, 230—oviposition of Hylurgus pinifex,
280—egg of the Xyleborus 24 hours after impregnation, 280—more de-
veloped egg, 280—threads connecting the amnion with the serous mem-
brane, 281—dorsal view of the embryo, 281—later stage in Hylurgops, 281—

: later stage in Xyleborus, 28i—number of pairs of spiracles, 281—structure
and habits of freshly hatched Hylurgops, 281.
THE NUMBER OF SEGMENTS IN THE HEAD OF WINGED INSECTS..-.--...----.----

Views generally entertained on this subject, 282—head composed of four
segments, 283—the procephalic lobes form the antennal segment, 284—
the clypeus and labrum are the tergal portion of this segment, 284—the
epicranium is the pleural: portion, 284—the occiput is the tergal portion
of the labial ségment, -284—the gular region probably the base of the
labium, 285.

CHAPTER XI.

THE SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE ORTHOPTERA IN RELATION TO OTHER OR-
DIRS OF INSECTS! 3c 0 Soo We Nr a Se eas 0
Review of the characteristics of the four lowest orders of winged insects,
286—probable descent of Orthoptera, Pseudoneuroptera, and Dermato-
ptera from a Thysanuran form, 286—method of the present study, 286—
characters of the Phyloptera, 287—mouth-parts, 287—thorax, 287—wings,
288—abdomen, 288—metamorphosis, 288—nomenclature of external parts

of arthropoda, 288—sequence of orders of Phyloptera, 288—characters of
Dermatoptera, 289—of Orthoptera, 289—of Pseudoneuroptera, 290—want

of uniformity in characters of Pseudoneuroptera, 290—the diagnostic
characters superficial, 290—structure of labium, 291—relative proportions

_ of head-parts, 291—subdivisions of the order, 292—characters of Platy-
ptera, 292—of Odonata, 292—of Ephemerina, 293—characters of Neuro-
ptera, 293—ligula, 293—thorax, 293—wings, 293—abdomen, 294—subdi-
visions of the order, 294—tabular view of the grand divisions of winged

273

277

280

- 282

286

TABLE OF CONTENTS. VI

Page.
THE SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE ORTHOPTERA IN RELATION TO OTHER OR-
DERS OF INSECTS—Continued.
insects, 294—diagrammatic view of the genealogy of the insects, 295—
genealogy of the Hexapoda, 295—of Thysanura, 295—of Dermatoptera,
295—of Orthoptera, 296—of Pseudoneuroptera, 296—of Hemiptera, 297—
of Neuroptera, 297—derivation of eruciform larvw, 297—of Sialidw, 297—
of thysanuriform larve, 297—diversity of Neuropterous larvex, 297—larve
of Sialidz, 297—of Hemerobiidx, 297—of Trichoptera, 298—of Panorpida,
298—significance of the abdominal legs of Panorpid larves, 299—the hyper-
metamorphosis of Mantispa a key to the origin of a complete metamor-
phosis, 299—the aspect of the Neuroptera comparatively specialized and
modern, 299—the Neuropterous labium a secondary product, 299—origin
of the Coleoptera, 299—the free, active larve of the carnivorous groups
most nearly allied to the primitive form, 300—the scavenger and phyto-
phagous laryx show increasing degradation of development, 300—the
relative form of the maxillw a good index of the general development of
the body in Coleoptera, 300—structure of maxillz in the several families,
300—close resemblance of the mouth-parts of Elaterid larve to those of
Carabid larvax, 301—the hypermetamorphosis of Meloids furnishes a clew
to the probable origin of the different types of Coleopterous larva, 301—
brief description of the metamorphoses of Meloe, 301—of Epicauta, 302—
comparison of the larval stages of Meloidz with the different types of
Coleopterous larve, 302—origin of the Diptera, Lepidoptera, and Hy-
menoptera, 303—presence of temporary abdominal appendages on each
segment of Lepidopterous, Coleopterous, and Orthopterous embryos,
304—description of the structure of Dermatoptera (Forficula), 304—Labia,
308—larva of Forficula, 308—Orthoptera, 309—Blattariz, 309—close re-
lation of Blatta and Termes, 310—structure of Mantide, 310—Blatta the
stem-form of the Orthoptera, 312—Mantis connects the Acrydii and the
Blattaria, 312—structure of Phasmida, 312—Diapheromera, 312—Priso-
pus, 313—this genus connects the Phasmida with the Acrydii, 314—struc-
ture of Acrydii, 314—Caloptenus, 314—Proscopia, 316—Conocephalus,
318—Locustaris (Anabrus), 318—Gryllidw, 319—Gryllus, 319—Gryllo-
talpa, 320—Cicanthus, 322—sequence of families of Orthoptera, 322—
structure of Pseudoneuroptera, 322—Corrodentia, 322—Perlide (Ptero-
narcys), 322—Psocide (Psocus), 325—Termitide, 326—Odonata, 329—
Ephemerina, 333—Neuroptera, 335—Planipennia, 335—Sialidw, 335—
Hemerobiidz, 338—Panorpidaw (Panorpa), 342—Trichoptera (Limnephi-
lus), 344.
CHAPTER XII.
NOTE ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST,
ILLUSTRATED WITH A COLORED ZOO-GEOGRAPHICAL MAP OF NORTH AMERICA. 346

APPENDICHS.
APPENDIX I.
EARLY REFERENCES TO THE OCCURRENCE OF THE HESSIAN FLY IN NORTH
PIE Hes) AREY". 4) Peano Ee MUR E Sin eC ML Pe Su hs a ae [3}

Karly newspaper references, [3]—in 1784~85, at Long Island and West
Chester, [3]—in 1788, in Long Island, Delaware, New Jersey, and Penn-
sylvania, [3]—the fly resisted by certain varieties of wheat, [3-5].

APPENDIX II.

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE RYE GALL-GNAT. By DR. HERMAN LOEW .......---- {6}
Views as to the original country of the Hessian fly, [6]—the rye gall-gnat
and the Hessian fly may not be the same species, [6]—description of the
rye gall-gnat, C. secalina, [7].

VIII | TABLE OF CONTENTS.

B. OBSERVATIONS ON THE NEW CROP GALL-GNAT. By DR. BALTHASAR WAGNER,
Fuupa, 1861... Translated by CarluiGissler 2229 eee eae
Literature, [8]—preliminary consideration of the subimago and imago
stages, [8]—occurrence at Fulda, [8]—breeding under nets, [9]—sea-
sonal and sexual differences, [9]—the fly short lived, [10]—description

of the adult [10]—of the male, [12]—of the female, [13]—the winter
generation, [14]—the egg, [15]—the maggot, [16]—the pupa or chry-
salis, [19]—the perfect insect, [20]—seasonal and sexual differences,
[21]—only the maggots hibernate, [22]—single and double brooded,
[23]—summer generation, [23]—the new cereal gall-gnat as compared
with Cecidomyia secalina Loew, [24]—comparison of C. secalina Loew with

C. destructor Say, [24]—views of Loew, Fitch, and Herrick discussed,

[25j—the rye gall-gnat, C. secalina and C. destructor, all of one species,
[28]—the name Hessian fly not justified, [28]—historical evidence there-
on, [28]—attempt at a new theory of the origin of the insect, [31]—of
Asiatic origin?, [31]—carried to North America from France or Spain,
[32]—parasites, [33]—remedies, [34]—the removal of the barley after-
growth, [34]—picking by hand, [35]—grazing, [35]—mowing, etc., [36]
—sowing grain as bait, [36]—plowing, burning, rolling, [37]—richness of
soil, [37]—resistive varieties of wheat, [38]—sowing late or early, [38].

APPENDIX Ii.

©
THE HESSIAN FLY IN SILESIA IN 1869. By PROFESSOR DR. FERD. COHN.....
The Hessian fly, Cecidomyia destructor, and other diptera observed destroy-
ing grain in Silesia, [39].

APPENDIX IV.

KOEPPEN’S ACCOUNT OF THE HESSIAN FLY. By F. T. KOEPPEN, ST. PETERS-
BURGAS) 2 ree nee Be Dae setlale DOE) ESN RI CISA a
The Hessian fly recently detected extensively distributed in Russia, [41 ]—
two generations each season, [41]—number of eggs at each deposition,
[41 ]—parasites, [41 ]—doubtful species of “ecidomyia, [42]—descriptions
of species, [42].
APPENDIX V.

THE HESSIAN FLY NOT IMPORTED FROM EUROPE. By Dr. H. A. HAGEN, CAM-
BREDGE,.. MASS 2: = ee sees gente oe UN TE Oe ato oe
Conclusions of the author and others as to the nativity of Cecidomyia de-
structor, [43]—not imported by the Hessian troops, [43]—probably here
before the war, [45]—not known in Germany before 1857, [46 ]—mistakes
corrected, [46]—a critical review of its history, [47]—marked difference
between C. destructor and C. secalina, [49].

APPENDIX VI. > ‘

REPORT ON THE ROCKY MouNTAIN Locust IN 1880. By JOHN MARTEN ...-

Report to Dr. Cyrus Thomas of observations, [50]—damages from locusts

and wheat flies in Minnesota, [50]—previous damages from locusts in
Dakota, [51 ]—in Montana, [52].

APPENDIX VII.

REPORT OF NOTES MADE IN 1880 BY A. J. CHIPMAN ..-.-.---22-0-02 0220 2--
No locusts in Kansas, [55]—suffering from drought, [55]—favorable cli-
matic changes, [55]—the locusts in Colorado, [56].

Page.

[3]

[39]

[41]

[50]

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

APPENDIX VIII.

Pee mMEAMHOUS MOCUST) NOLES... 2ts/ so-so bes fee ks et oe oe.
Dates and localities of locust swarms that have attained the coast of Great
Britain. Notes by A. H. Swinton, [57]—occurrence of the migratory
locust in Japan, [59]—early notices of locusts in North America, [59]—
locusts at Fort Frontenac or Cataraqui, Canada, [59]—at Puerto Se-
guro Harbor, California, [60]—the locust in California in 1880, [60]—in
Nevada, [60]—locusts and coffee trees in Guatemala, [60]—history of
locusts in other countries, [61]—locusts probably never will do so much
damage again in North America, [61]—utilization of locusts as food,
[61]—of crickets as manure, [62]—ravages of locusts in Russia in 1879
and 1880, [62]—in the Caucasus, [63]—in Elizavetopol, [63]—in the dis-
trict of Rassachs, [64]—plowing as a means of killing the locusts, [64]
—destruction of locusts in the district of Gori, [64]—locusts in China
in 1878, [65]—oil as a means of destroying them, [65]—2,000,000 catties
of eggs collected, [65]—article on the extermination of the locust in
China, [65-68]—Chinese bibliography of the subject, [65]—Chinese reg-
ulations regarding the extermination of locusts, [67]—locusts in Cape
Colony, South Africa, [68]—ravages of unfledged locusts, [68]—locusts
as food, [69]—barriers as means of warding off and capturing locusts,
{69]—egg laying and hatching, [72]—protection against flying locusts,
[72]—locusts in the Philippine Islands in 1878-79, [72]—the locust
plague in Bolivia, [72]—locusts in India, [73]—in the Ottapidaram
Taluq, [73]—in Sattur, [73]—request of the Madras Government for
information as to the movements of the locusts, [74]—locusts in Kul-
lapurum, Comaralingum, Kolumam, and in the Pulni Taluq, [74]—diffi-
culties in coping with locusts in southern India, [74]—means against
unfledged locusts, [75]—locusts driven into the sea at Tuticorin and
Trichendur, [76]—recommendation of rewards for gathering locusts,
{[76]—locusts at Peryapatty, [76]—in the Bellary district, [77]—recom-
mendation of means against locusts, [78]—locusts at Madura, [78]—
destruction of young locusts by fire at Pothanore, [78]—locusts at Ti-
roomoorthypovil, Dhully, and Jellipatty, [79]—in various parts of the
Punjab, [79 ]—means against the locusts, [79 ]—remuneration for destruc-
tion of locusts, [80]—locusts in Cuddapah district, [81].

APPENDIX IX.

K}XPERIENCE WITH THE SPRING CANKER-WORM. BY MARTIN A. HOWELL, JR-.

Means employed to save an orchard from the ravages of canker-worms,

[82]—pruning, manuring, and washing of the trees, [82]—spraying of

the leaves with soft soap and arsenite of soda in water, [83]—belting

the trees with sulphur and adhesive mixtures, [83]—endurance of the

moths, [84]—variation of color in eggs, [85]—most practical means of

relief, [85 ]—adulterations of Paris green, [85 |—good force-pumps, [85]—
distribution of canker-worms by the wind, [85].

LETTER OF SUBMITTAL.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
DIVISION OF ENTOMOLOGY, ©
Washington, D. C., July 31, 1882.

Ste: On behalf of the United States Entomological Commission and
in accordance with the act of Congress, approved March 3, 1881, which
provides that the reports of said Commission be made to the Commis-
sioner of Agriculture, I have the honor to submit this, its third report,
which was in preparation and was ordered by Congress while the Com-
mission was yet under the Interior Department.

Respectfully,
C. V. RILEY,
Chief U. 8. H. C.

Hon. Go. B. LORING,

Commissioner of Agriculture.

(xr)

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

216 NG Me BENIN wiRe (0) 4 onl oh

: 3 oe Auth be ee z i
A. 8. PACKARD, JR., Secretary,

Es AL te Aig

PREFACE.

This report was planned during the period when the Commission was
charged by Congress with the investigation, not only of the Rocky
Mountain locust, but of other insects injurious to agriculture. Hence
it is divided into three parts.

Part I embraces chapters on the Rocky Mountain locust and on other
locusts and the Western cricket. In Chapter I some additional chrono-
logical facts for the years 1880 and 1881 are given; while Chapters II
and III contain reports of observations in the northwest territories for
the years 1880 and 1881 respectively, by Mr. Lawrence Bruner. It has.
been the object of the Commission, since the completion of the work on
which our first and second reports were based, to have the breeding
grounds of the locust examined annually, as far as possible, with a
view of ascertaining the prospects of injury or immunity from its rav-
ages the ensuing year. Mr. Bruner’s work was in pursuance of this
object, and the results were given to the public at the time, ne the
delayed printing of this volume.

In Chapter IV Mr. Bruner has also given a list of the species of locusts
known in North America, and some notes on the Western cricket.

Chapter V contains some interesting data, by Mr. A. H. Swinton, on
the probable connection of locust multiplication and migration with solar
phenomena. ;

Part Il embraces three chapters, and is devoted to popular treatises
on three well-known injurious insects of national importance.

Chapter VI, by Mr. Riley, treats of the Army worm. It has been pre-
pared with a view of presenting a full and connected statement of all
that is known in reference to the insect, and will be found to contain, in
addition, a number of recent facts and observations not elsewhere re-
corded.

Chapter VII, by Mr. Riley, treats of Canker worms. It is also a gen-
eral account of these destructive insects, prepared with a view of bring-
jng together the more recent discoveries with regard to them.

Chapter VIII, by Mr. Packard, treats in a similar manner of the Hes-
sian fly, and is, in fact, a revised bes of Bulletin No. 5 on that insect.

Part IIL is devoted 4S miscellaneous subjects, and contains the more
technical matter of the report. It embraces four chapters relating to
the development, metamorphoses, and anatomy of the locust and other
insects, the result of more purely scientific studies carried on with
the more practical work of the commission.

Chapter IX, by Mr. Packard, contains a number of descriptions of the
larvee of injurious forest insects, and is accompanied by numerous figures
- by Dr. Carl F. Gissler.

(XIII)

XIV PREFACE.

In Chapter X, by Mr. Packard, there is given a partial account. of
the mode of development of the locusts (Caloptenus atlanis and spretus),
prefaced by a general, but brief, account of the embryology of insects in
general; a few concluding pages are devoted to some points in the
breeding habits and development of two bark-boring beetles destructive
to evergreen trees. This chapter also contains a discussion as to the
mode of origin of the wings of insects, with a final section on the num-
ber of segments in the head of winged insects.

In Chapter XI, also by Mr. Packard, are given the results of extended

studies on the external anatomy of insects of the order Orthoptera,
(to which the locust belongs), together with that of the allied orders.
This has led the author to propose a separation of those Neuroptera
with complete transformations (as had already been done by certain
German and English entomologists), from the Pseudoneuroptera, and to
regard these two groups, with the Orthoptera and Dermatoptera (ear-
wigs), as four orders of a category which may be regarded as a super-
order, for which the name Phyloptera is proposed. ‘The characters of
the Phyloptera are given, and those of the four above-mentioned orders, —
followed by some suggestions as to their probable genealogy; closing
with a condensed statement of the essential peculiarities of structure of
the families as represented by one or more typical genera, and illustrated
by numerous figures.

The twelfth and concluding chapter comprises a brief description of
a colored zoological map of North America, supplementary to accounts
of the geographical distribution of the Rocky Mountain locust given in
the first and second reports of the Commission.

The appendices include (I) early references to the occurrence of the
Hessian fly in North America; (II) extended articles on the Hessian
fly, translated from the German of Dr. Herman Léw and Dr. Balthasar
Wagner; (III) an account of injury to grain in 1869 by the Hessian fly
in Silesia, from the German of Dr. Ferd. Cohn; (IV) a translation of
an account of the same insect, by F. T. Képpen; and (V) Dr. H. A.
Hagen’s discussion as to the original source of the Hessian fly.

Appendices VI and VII contain brief reports, by Mr. John Marten and
by Mr. A. J. Chipman, of observations on the Rocky Mountain locust in
1880; Appendix VIII gives a number of notes on locusts, and especially
of their injuries and the means used against them in other countries;
while Appendix LX contains some interesting experience on the Spring
Canker-worm, by Mr. Martin A. Howell, jr.

The Commissioners heartily thank the varieus correspondents who
have replied to inquiries, and take pleasure in acknowledging their in-
debtedness to Mr. A. H. Swinton, of England; Rev. Samuel Lockwood,
of Freehold, N. J., and Mr. Martin A. Howell, of Greenwood, IIl., for con-
tributions ; to Mr. L. O. Howard, and Mr. B. P. Mann, of the Entomo-
logical Division, for material assistance in the presaration of Chapters
VI and VII respectively, and to Dr. Carl F. Gissler, for drawings.

a eee
w

ue
r.

\ Nae aa :
\\t 3 AI \\
\\ {uN meN

7) Te
‘ as

AW
SS ta

Lie
yy ge say ot

HH
©
a
Oo
2
5
°
Sieh|
DQ
ie)
ey ot
—
©
oO
led
‘On
of
rosB
:
ie)
pw)
-
ma
|
Y

My

LOCUST

|

HATCHED.

flight.

————
SN

Ne ed - a8 -
’ A. Hoén & Co, Lith. Baltimore -

aren

i ST

x

Sata ee

Oe retenrcy

Be eR

men

owt

a

Map L-

U.S Entomological Commission, Keport 3.

we

=~

MA ©

MIGRATIONS

ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST

IN 1880.
J AREA WHERE THE YOUNG HATCHED.

—->

Course of flight.

]})
Ml

Actleen ® Ca Eth Talionare

Map II.

U.S.Entomolo gical Commission, Report |

SS t

en RS

HATCHED.

A
AS

<r
o 6 (2
Wy
ey On Fm,
| ru ann
p SRY sane

Pe Neo. ww.
ov meee a ‘3

{MU Sere “an . aed my

ee

To ala Ol

f

bi oa : es :
a7 ie | “SS

| = ee
yf | KS S2- 4

“
PD
She 2: Sarhwtng pales pi a
oS me

Ss aT : . r ie
$s ei ! we f Mg. Z
is peel | ss

Stra

; p
ey aie

On
7)
ue Py gn Poon aie

N MY ieee
Re iy)
TP
ah
Uf,

4,
2

Lal
|

le

—~—<$—————
€

4/7

A,Hoen & Co. Lith. Baltimore.

CHAPTER Ef:

ADDITIONS TO THE CHRONOLOGY OF LOCUST RAVAGES.
THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN 1880 AND 1881.

This chapter is in continuation of a similar one in our second report.
The reader is referred to a succeeding chapter for data regarding the
locust in Montana and adjoining regions, and also for Nebraska, where
special observations were made by our assistantsin the field. As will be
seen, the locust committed only local ravages, and these in rare cases,
this year. The distribution of the scattered, thin swarms was pretty
much as in 1879.

THE LOCUST IN TEXAS IN 1880.

While no locusts were reported in this State in 1878 (see our second
report, p. 2), swarms of locusts were reported May 17, 1879, at Dallas.
In the autumn of 1880 large swarms flew into the region of Jacks-
_ boro, as will be seen by the following extract from the daily papers:

In Jacksboro, Tex., yesterday, immense swarms of grasshoppers appeared, coming
from the north, at times obscuring the sun. A farm near here is completely demolished,
even the cotton stalks being devoured.

Mr. Henry Boll, of Dallas, corroborated to us this statement, stating
that at a point 17 miles northwest of Jacksboro they flew into Lost
Valley late in September, and that the ground was literally covered with
them. He also saw them quite numerously in China Creek, Wichita
County, near Wagner’s ranch, in October. A few were also seen in the
air passing over Dallas, October 20-25, 1880. They hatch out early in
April at Dallas, ‘‘when the plover are here to feed onthem.” ‘The
Swarms usually arrive early in October, and are apt to injure the new
winter wheat.

During our trip to Texas, in the spring of 1881, we obtained the follow-
ing additional information. At a region thirty or forty miles west of
Corsicana the locusts flew in from the north, in October, 1880, and laid
eggs, but none had hatched April 3, the date of our visit. We were
told that the locusts had visited Corsicana itself twice only within
eighteen years, and then they came too late to do any harm, the young
11 the spring appearing in scattered swarms.

Into Tarrant County locusts flew the last of September, 1880, but in
small numbers.

At Eastland, the last appearance of locusts was in the autumn of

3

x \\

:
oN

WW
\

YW

IN 1881.

BY, ‘AREA WHERE THE YOUNG HATCHED.
Seale of frends lee

jo os ue dee ue soo 10 ee

—— Course of flight.

LOCUST FLIGHTS

U.S. Entomological Gormussion, Report 3.

4 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

1879, when they flew in from the north all along the line of the Texas
and Pacific ktailroad, the northwest winds bringing them in from the
“plains,” which extend eastward to within about 150 miles of Eastland.
In Indian Territory no locusts appeared in 1880. Three years ago
locusts flew in at Eufaula. .

THE LOCUST IN COLORADO IN 1880.

The locust was locally a little more injurious in Colorado this year
than in 1879, but, as will be seen by the following letter from the editor
of the Colorado Farmer, none appeared in the State until late in summer:

DENVER, COLO., September 24, 1880.

- Dear Sir: In reply would say that locusts appeared in our parks about the 1st of
August, bred there, I think, and a few swarms, very local in extent, reached the vi-
cinity of Boulder and Longmont and Denver about the 12th of August. In a few
places they were quite thick and slightly injured a few acres of grain and garden
vegetables. They have not attempted to get far from the ‘‘ foot-hills,” and have been
working in an unsettled and distracted kind of a way. Some have coupled, and
-some bored into the ground, as if to lay eggs; but I have hunted somewhat in their
holes for eggs and only found one bunch, and others whom I have requested to hunt
report finding no eggs. s
Ido not have any apprehension of locusts next season, or at least in numbers to hurt,
but I would not be surprised if they reached here in 1882 in numbers sufficient to do
damage.

Yours truly, J. S. STANGER

Prof. A. S. PACKARD, Jr.,
Providence, R. I.

P. S.—The locusts apparently came from Middle and North Park, and it was re-

ported some came over the range from the northwest.
J. Ss. Ss.

THE LOCUST IN UTAH IN 1880.

During our journey to Utah, late in July of this year, no locusts were
seen or heard of in passing over the Union Pacific Railroad through
Wyoming. None were seen or had been seen by residents this year at
Laramie, Rock Creek Station, or in Echo Canon, in Utah. On the 26th
they were seen in abundance at Lake Point, Salt Lake, but no damage
was done by them. Some were heard of below Provo, and inquiries
elicited the information given below. A few appeared in Cache Valley.
The following correspondence shows the distribution of locusts in this
Territory this year, while Map I will indicate the direction of flights:

From May 19 tothe beginning of June, grasshoppers were pretty generally present
throughout Central Utah, but not in great abundance, except in some places near the
dry benches, where the hatching went on, and young wingless hoppers visited the cul-
tivated patches, &c. But asa general thing our people know more of the habits of
these pests and take effective steps to get rid of them.

The routing them out by digging up and burning eggs appears to be the most
sinple method, as I stated to you.

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN UTAH IN 18809. 5

Memoranda for Dr. Packard.

May 21, 1880.—Beaver and surrounding places, ‘‘ abundant.”

May 31.—Young hoppers numerous on northeast of Sait Lake City.
June 11,—Plenty at Springville.

June 12.—Provo Valley.

June 16.—Cache Valley. Benches.

July 26.—Grasshoppers were reported.

Also early in July, abundant on the farm land.

MuseEuM, SALT LAKE City, UTan, July 31, 1880.

My Dear Sir: I received your postal card. Wasextremely sorry to learn that
you had been attacked with chills and fevers, the very maladies which commenced
my late serious illness. I dohopeto hear of your speedy recovery. The note I pre-
pared for youl inclose. I have, since I saw you, heard from Provo and from Juab
County (from Mona) that about three weeks ago the hoppers developed suddenly and
have done much mischiefin places. I forgot to mention to you that I have told many
of our people to write to you directly from their own homes, and I have found that some
have done so, respecting insect pests generally.

Should it be your wish, I can get you complete statistics at any time by putting a
request (to our leading men in our settlements for information) in our church papers.

Tam quite satisfied that the migratory ’hoppers secure favorable places in our side
canons, and even in well-traveled cafions, where the ground is favorable for de-
positing eggs. I have seen places where usually foliage abounds quite desolated by
the overwhelming horde of young ’hoppers, which develop in myriads at times. In
one side canon (Brigham’s Fork), in Emigration Cafion, I saw a very curious sight
in 1873. The young ’hoppers were there in great strength. They had eaten every-
thing green, except the foliage of trees growing by the side of the creek, which had
withered up by reason of the tent caterpillars having taken up a position on the up-
per branches, presenting the appearance of a vast sheet, socompletely had everything
been covered. Not many of these ’hoppers came down into the valley, but a few
weeks after the Weber Valley had a visit. Nothing was done to destroy these creat-
ures; in fact, only ‘‘ wood-hawkers” ever visit such out-of-the-way places. I wasup
there looking after a suitable building stone for parts of our temple, or probably
the singular sight I allude to would have escaped observation. Some men with me,
who work in the mountains regularly, told me such sights are very common in the
*“forks” of Red Butte, Porley’s, and other cafions of the Wasatch.

‘How the tent caterpillars got on subsequently I had no means of learning. On the
principle of “the survival of the fittest,” I think the ‘‘’hoppers” could escape the
best to other feeding places.

I remain, dear sir, yours, respectfully,
JOSEPH L. BARFOOT,
Curator of the Salt Lake Museum.
Dr. A. S. PACKARD, Jr.,
Entomplogicai Commissioner, §c.

SALT LAKE City, UTAH, August 6, 1880.

DEAR Sir: In accordance with agreement, I take pleasure in giving you such infor-
mation touching the grasshopper as I have been able to pick up in a trip to Frisco,
the end of che Utah Southern Railroad. Some six weeks since the grasshopper appeared.
jn San Pete Valley, doing alittle damage. A few have been seen about Provo, Nephi,
and contiguous regions. At present quite a swarm is devastating the district about
Mona Station, traversing a strip 1 mile wide by 5long. I saw the insects flying south-
ward to-day in that region. Their chief damage has been to oats.

6 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The war locust is being seen this season in small numbers on the mountains about.
Frisco.

Very respectfully, ;
KE. E. WOOD,

Assistant Editor Chicago Evening Journal.
Prof. A. S. PACKARD, Jr.
GRINNELL, POWESHIEK County, Iowa,

October 4, 1880.

My Dear Sir: A short time ago I received a letter, which had been delayed, from
a friend in Kanosh, Millard County, Utah. He reports as follows:

“1st. The grasshoppers have laid their eggs in this locality for two years, about the
middle of August.

2d. They have done most damage to barley and wheat.

“3d. The young seem to travel east.

“Ath. The young receive their wings about the.middle of June.

‘5th. The old onesremain and lay their eggs here. They are depositing eggs now,
August 29. .

“6th. Various plans have been tried to destroy them, but failed. We think the
best is to plow and harrow the land, and if any young hatch out, take all available
chickens to pick them. In this way a great many have been destroyed already, but
they are so numerous that many portions of the fields have been completely stripped.”

This letter was written August 29. Before leaving Salt Lake I met with a friend
who had seen the ’hoppers at Kanosh, and from his description of them I think that
they are of the same species asthose Isent you. He also stated that he met a man in
Kanosh who had lost 10 acres of grain.

_ Very respectfully,

\

OR. HOWARD.
THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN 1881.

All our information this year concerning flights and solitary appear-
ances of locusts in the Rocky Mountain region is embodied in the fol-
lowing chapter, by Mr. L. Bruner, containing a report of his observa-
tions for 1881. The two maps for 1880 and 1881 will give the main facts
in graphic form.

THE LOCUST IN TEXAS IN 1881.

We could not learn that any locusts were hatching out in the State,
except at one point, as at the time we passed through Texas, April 1-7,
the season had been remarkably cold and backward, and it was early
for them to appear. At Eastland, however, we saw a man who had
come the day before from Abilene, on the Texas and Pacific Railroad,
who informed us that the locusts were hatching out at a locality 10 to
20 miles west of Eastland, and that in one p! ace he observed them thiek
upon the ground. This Sorte indicate that a picts Swarm laid
their eggs near Eastland last autumn.

While, therefore, no damage was done in Texas in 1880 and 1881, the
locust is indigenous to the plains lying in the northwestern part of the
State, and from this region every year light scattering swarms are car-
ried eastward and southward into the inhabited lower portions of the
State. But itis only in exceptional and very infrequent seasons that
the locust will ever swarm into the State in destructive numbers.

The facts we learned and the knowledge of the State we obtained,

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN UTAH IN 1881. di

added to our experiences in Colorado and New Mexico, have taught us
that the locusts which formerly afflicted this State must have been derived
from the plains in the western part of the State, and from the valleys of
the Arkansas and Canadian Rivers, 7. ¢., from western and southern
‘Kansas and southeastern Colorado, as well as western Texas and In-
dian Territory.

On Map II we have inserted the flights and breeding grounds of 1881,
with some additional flights reported by Mr. Bruner in Chapter IIT.

THE LOCUST IN UTAH IN 1881.

As we have observed in a former report, every year since 1851, in
Utah, with two exceptions, and those perhaps are such from deficient
data, there have been at least a few locusts existing in swarms. That
some hatched out about Salt Lake City will be observed from the follow-
jng letter from Mr. Joseph L. Barfoot, curator of the Deseret Museum,
and the extract from the Salt Lake Herald appended:

SaLT LAKE City, Urau, May 12, 1881.

DEAR Sir: I received yours of May 2, respecting the larve of Clisiocampa, which
I will get for you and send in alcohol. I have put up also in spirit a few specimens
of the young ’hoppers, which I noticed in the Herald, of which I send you a cutting,
with date. I publish these things, as they reach our people, who seldom see the
longer papers. The young’hoppers were observed by meforalong time. They strug-
gled for life nobly, pushing the earth away, and, when I offered food to them, taking
a rest for a moment to refresh themselves, and then commencing again most vigor-
ously to free themselves. Then they would emerge with a leap of 2 or 3 inches, would
again rest, as though much exhausted, eat again, and very rapidly become quite capa-
ble of taking care of themselves. Dr. Heber John Richards found the creatures ‘in
a perfectly torpid condition,” to use his own words, and ‘‘in less than three minutes,
when they were in loose earth, and exposed to the influence of the sun, they became
lively.” Ihave no doubt that millions of these creatures have been destroyed by our
people in harrowing the soil after the eggs had been deposited, as well as by the or-
dinary agricultural operations.

One of our people has made a simple machine for crushing the grasshoppers. If a
photograph can be taken, I will send you one.

As soon as I get the supplies of larve, I will mail to you.

With great respect, I remain, yours, truly,
JOSEPH L. BARFOOT,
Curator.
Dr. A. S. PACKARD, Jr.,
Entomological Commission.

GRASSHOPPERS.—Dr. H. J. Richards, of this city, on Thursday, exhibited specimens
of young ’hoppers hatched from eggs of last season. They were struggling to get out
of the earth in a very lively manner. It seems that the nest had been broken up by
the spade or plow, for which reason the creatures could not get out of the nest. This
shows the advantage of breaking up the soil where the grasshoppers deposit their
eggs, as recommended in the government reports by the Entomological Commission.
These very interesting young ‘‘’hoppers” will be sent to Dr. Packard for examina-
tion.—[ Salt Lake Daily Herald.

CEA PYLE ER! IT,

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN MONTANA IN 1880.

On the 4th day of July [left Omaha, Nebr., for Saint Paul, taking the
Chicago and Northwestern Railway and the Sioux City and Saint Paul
Railway, going by way of Sioux City. At Saint Paul I obtained a pass
over the Northern Pacific, which carried me to Green River, a stage
Station about 100 miles west of Bismarck, Dak. Here I made some
collections of the various species of locusts to be found, and also of a
few data concerning their movements during previous years. From this
place the journey was continued by stage to Miles City, at the mouth of
the Tongue River, where I again halted to make collections and inquire —
into the movements of locusts during previous seasons. At Fort Keogh
I took passage on one of the Yellowstone line of steamers for Terrey’s
Landing, at mouth of Big Horn River, making collections at all wood
stations and stopping places along the route, as well as at the Landing,
where I remained about twenty hours. From this place the course taken
was up the Yellowstone River to near Bozeman. During this portion
of the trip several side journeys were made and some time spent in col-
lecting specimens.

At Bozeman, where the longest stop was made, I took quite a number
of side journeys into the surrounding country and mountains for speci-
mens; and also spent much time in conversing with persons from various
parts of the Territory in reference to the flights and habits of the locust
both for the present and past years. From Bozeman the route lay down
the Gallatin to its junction with the Madison and Jefferson Rivers, thence
across a high, dry plateau and rocky valley, and again approaching
the Missouri, which was followed until within about 25 miles of Helena.
At this place considerable information was obtained concerning the past
movements of the locust, and also numerous specimens of the native
loousts collected at various localities in the surrounding country.

From Helena I went north to Fort Shaw, where I remained one day,
and then joined a small hunting and scouting party going southeast
into the mountains bordering the Missouri. While here I met a hunter
and trapper who was on his way to Fort Benton ina small skiff. I
joined him, floating down the Missouri to Benton, thus obtaining an
excellent opportunity of studying the surrounding country and of col-
lecting specimens. From Fort Benton I took stage to Fort Shaw, re-

1 Report of investigations in Montana, by Mr. Lawrence Bruner, made under direction of Dr. Packard.

8

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN MONTANA IN 1880. 9

turning to Helena, and thence to the terminus of the Utah and Northern
Railway, thus having made a pretty thorough tour of Central Montana
and Western Dakota and through the heart of much of the “ permanent
breeding” region.

The Judith and Musselshell Valleys could not very well be reached
under the circumstances, as at the time of my passing through no stages
were running into either of them, and Sitting Bull, with his followers,
occupied a large portion of the country bordering these two basins.

At noon, July 7, while crossing the country lying along the Cheyenne
Ktiver of Dakota, locusts were seen in the‘air in small numbers, flying to
the south-southwest. A few were also seen on the ground. On inquiry,
nothing could be ascertained in reference to their place of breeding or
numbers. It was supposed that they had hatched in the Red River
country, and west on the high and dry table-lands. I have, since my
return, traced this swarm into Nebraska and Kansas, where they have
spread over about half of these States, and are so scattered that they
are hardly noticeable. No damage is recorded as having been perpe-
trated by them. From this locality west but few locusts were seen,
and I will take the notes as they occur in my note-book.

COUNTRY BETWEEN BISMARCK AND FORT KEOGH.

Hoppers—natives—numerous at Green River and Beaver stations,
1879. Locusts breeding on high, dry flat north of White Buttes. Left
in early part of July to the southwest. None this year. Could be de-
stroyed at this locality by spring fires. Was unable to ascertain from
which direction they came, but it was thought they came from the north-
east. Also at mouth of Powder River numerous eggs were deposited
by a swarm from the northeast (according to the stage-driver). These
eggs did not hatch this spring. No cause known for this, but supposed
to have been the severe winter—cold, without snow. During last winter
at Fort Keogh the thermometer reached a point 53° below zero. Snow-
birds were seen scratching out and eating the eggs at mouth of Powder
River (stage driver). I also noticed various species of birds killing the
native locusts. This list would include almost all the smaller species
of birds inhabiting this section of country. The magpie and crow are
among them.

At Fort Keogh, a private in the Army says that swarms of great ex-
tent were seen on Milk River in early August, 1877. Did not notice
whether depositing eggs or direction they came or went. At Fort
Custer, large swarms in August, 1878, from northwest—no definite infor-
mation obtainable.

July 19, 1880.—A few young locusts (larvee and pup) on river bank,
35 miles above Fort Keogh. These are principally C. spretus and C.
atlanis. Could not have been destroyed by fire—too wet in early
spring.

July 21.—Numerous C. bivittatus and other native species seen along

10 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the bottoms south of the Yellowstone River between Junction City
and Huntley’s Landing. None, or very few C. spretus—not as common
as in Nebraska.

July 22.—Hunter’s Post-Office, 16 miles east of Stillwater. A small
swarm of locusts breeding in hills north of the office in 1878. Left in
latter part of July to the southwest. One small field damaged by them.
Others flying over a week later to the south and southwest. Numerous
swarms during 1875 and 1876 from west and northwest during July
and August, and one earlier (about 1868). Nothing to damage, and no
damage done. k

Crow Agency.—No locusts breeding in vicinity of the agency since
established on the Rosebud. A few flying over in 1878 toward the
south. Came from the north and northwest. Claimed to have come

_ from the Musselshell and tributaries, where they hatched in small areas.

Every one speaks of them as coming from the north and northwest,
where they are claimed to be found almost every year, if not permanently.

July 26.—Saw a few locusts at Countryman’s Ranche, on the Yellow-
stone, a few miles above the mouth of Stillwater. Some C. spretus and
C. femur-rubrum; alsoseveral species of others, as Stenobothri, didipode,
| &e. ©

July 27.—Very few locusts of any description on road between Still-
water and Fort Ellis.

July 28.—Visited cafion southeast of Fort Ellis. A few pupe of C.
spretus and several other Calopteni were found among the rank vegeta- —
tion close to the Gallatin. Other species of Acrididw were met with
higher up the mountain sides, but they were nowhere numerous. Other
insects were also quite scarce—too dry.

July 29.—Walked into the foot-hills north of Ellis. Found numerous
young larve and pup of several species of Caloptenus, among which
were C. spretusand C.atlanis. They were confined to ravines and damp
localities where the grass was good. C. bivittatus was more evenly dis-
tributed, being equally numerous even to the mountain tops. Other
grasshoppers, perhaps Pezotettix Dodgei and allies, were quite common.

July 31.—Nothing additional in reference to locusts.

August 4.—Met a “‘cattle man” who has just come across the country
from Cheyenne, on the Union Pacific Railroad, by route to Fort Fetter-
man, thence to ort Reno, then north along the foot-hills of Big Horn
Mountains to Fort Phil. Kearney, thence down-Goose Creek and across
to Little Big Horn, down to Fort Custer, then. up to Bozeman. No
locusts and but a few natives were seen upon the entire route. This
being almost through the heart of Wyoming and the south locust area,
is quite conclusive evidence that there are but few if any locusts this
year in the country traversed by this gentleman. He also informed me
that he had made special inquiries in reference to locusts In adjoining
sections and along the route, but that there were none. This entire area,
he claims, has the appearance of being easily burnt over, and I do not

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN MONTANA IN 1880. 11

think that the same difficulties are present as in the greater portion of
Montana.

August 5.—Met and talked with some Flathead Indians about locusts
in the vicinity of Flathead Lake. They left there last fall. They re-
ported locusts as being quite plentiful, but not many of the kind that
“flies away.” Some were depositing eggs and others flying southwest.
One of them said that he saw locusts on the Judith nearly every year
he was there (since 1870). They also (reported migratory crickets as
- quite numerous in Western Montana and Idaho. I could not ascertain
anything definite in reference to dates of appearance, direction of flights,
and which way they came from, but obtained a little additional infor-
mation in reference to native species, which he said became quite nu-
merous at times. He also made a drawing of another variety of grass-
hopper, which he said was not at all numerous. Just what species he
refers to I am at a loss to imagine.

Have just called upon the editor of the Avant Courier, from whom I
obtained some information in reference to the movements of the locust
swarms of 1867, 1868, and 1869, and also those of 1874, 1875, and 1878.
These swarms visited the Gallatin Valley.

During the latter part of July and early August, 1867, immense clouds
of locusts appeared from the southwest and came into the Gallatin
Valley, alighting upon fields of grain, and remained over night doing
much damage. On entering the valley their course was slightly changed
toward the east, in which direction they disappeared, with but few ex-
ceptions, where small numbers were known to remain and leave their
eggs. Of these few nothing further seems to be known, except that in
the following spring a few small spots were partially denuded by the
young—all confined to the highlands. The major portion of the swarm
of 1867 continued its flights eastward and was soon lost sight of, at least
to the inhabitants of Montana.

Again, in the summer of 1868, large swarms came into this valley from
the same direction, but somewhat later in August. They remained and
deposited their eggs over the greater part of Gallatin County in suitable
localities, as hard, sandy hillsides. After they had deposited their eggs
they died by thousands, which fact appeared very queer to the inhab-
itants, who were ignorant of their habits, and did not know that the
locust’/s mission ended with oviposition.

The lay of this valley is rather peculiar, having once been the bed
of alake. On receiving an outlet to the north it gradually washed
away at that end, thus forming an inclined valley, with a grade of almost
00 feet per mile. Hence the north end of the valley is about two weeks
earlier than the south end. Early in the foHowing spring those on the
low lands hatched in great numbers, and took crops clean as they went,
_ while farther up the valley the weather was more backward and wet,
and the damage was much less. These, when they matured and had
wings, left in various directions, but principally to the east. From

12 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

this time until 1874 and 1875 there was no damage done in this part of
Montana, and but few locusts seen in the air. Hence, nothing like re-
liable data can be had in reference to their movements.

In the summer of 1874, during the months of July and August, great
and destructive swarms poured in from the east, where it is claimed
they hatched throughout the Yellowstone, Musselshell, and Judith ©
basins; and to this effect I have much information from various sol-
diers who spent this and the previous summers in these basins.

Some of these deposited their eggs, while the majority continued west-
ward and southward. Considerable damage was done in the spring of
1875 by the young.

From this time on nothing more was seen of the locusts in the Galla-
tin Valley until the summer of 1878; but the greater portion of the
Northwest, the Judith, Musselshell, and the Big Horn countries, were
overrun by swarms of them that were produced in these several sections
during the summers of 1873, 1874, 1875, 1876, and 1877. Of the move-
ments of these different swarms I could not obtain any definite infor-
mation by which I could trace them as I did those of 1878, but obtained —
enough to enable me to partially keep track of them. They seemed to
spread over the greater portion of the “permanent” and ‘“sub-perma-
nent” regions, aS mapped out in the report of 1878, and finally over the
entire portion known to ever receive invasions from this species of
locust, attaining the maximum in 1875-77, from which time they have
been growing less numerous and injurious until the present, when but
few small swarms remain in the entire area.

Again, in August, 1878, the Gallatin Valley was invaded by swarms
from the northeast. None, however, remained to deposit eggs. They
passed on to the south and southwest—probably the same swarms
that invaded Idaho and Utah Territories from the north-northeast, of
the same year, and which we saw during August while in these Terri-
tories. They came from the Judith and Musselshell Valleys and far-
ther north, and are identical with those seen about one week previous
near the Milk River and Missouri.

August 6.—Met a gentleman who informed me of the presence of
locusts (CO. spretus) in the vicinity of Butte, in western Montana. They
were hatched there, but up to time of writing no great amount of dam-
age has been done by them. Just how much territory they covered I
could not ascertain, but do not think it great. Have been in this vicin-
ity since and found but very few, hardly as numerous as they are in
the Missouri River region of Nebraska and Kansas in years not visited
by locust swarms. This district is drained by one of the tributaries of
Hellgate River, a branch of the Columbia, and is quite mountainous.
The entire surrounding country is a mining district, and but little farm-
ing is done. It is supposed that these few originated from the rem-
nants of swarms that were hatched in the neighborhood of Flathead
Lake and a few other isolated localities in the spring of 1879, and left

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN MONTANA IW _ 1880. jie

in a southwestern direction, depositing eggs at various localities on
their course.

In glancing over the Butte Weekly Miner of August 3, 1880, I find the
following local:

At Walla Walla, Wash., whole fields of standing grain are being sold for from $5 to
$8 per acre. Some of it has recently been attacked by grasshoppers, and some fell a prey
to the scorching heat, but such grain, if cut in time, will make excellent hay.

From this I would infer that there are some locusts in Hastern Wash-
ington Territory and Oregon.

August 7.—Have learned no new facts to-day in reference to the
Rocky Mountain locust, but have been studying the map in connection
with my notes, and find that there are three principal directions by
which swarms come into the Gallatin Valley, viz., southwest, east, and
‘northwest. Those coming in from the east and southwest I have
traced heretofore, but those coming from the north I have not; hence,
will do so now. All that country lying to the north and west of Fort
Benton to the base of the main Rockies is a suitable breeding-ground
for locusts, and at times is partially overrun by swarms. It is during
these years that, providing the wind is favorable, the Gallatin Valley is
almost sure to be visited; but this vast tract of country, like all others
in this the “ permanent” region, is only occasionally occupied by them.

In the Gallatin Valley the young begin to hatch about the middle of
May—soon after the snow is off the ground—and continue to appear
until the 1st of June, according to locality and melting of incumbering
snows. After hatching, it has been noticed that the majority of the lit-
tle “fellows” move in the same direction taken by the parent swarm (?)—
perhaps from inborn memory or instinct. With a knowledge of this
fact, the farmers construct ditches, where they do not already exist, in
their course, and turn water into them. When the little locusts come
to these they jump into them, and are washed along by the current to
places where obstructions are so placed as to form an eddy. Above
these eddies are fastened vessels filled with coal-oil, and so arranged
that a continual dropping is obtained. This oil on the surface kills the
young. Another method adopted is simply the fastening of bags, into
which the “hoppers are washed and drowned by the current. These two
methods have been so successfully used as to save the greater portion of
the crops in some localities where employed. In fact, I am informed
that the farmers do not dread the young any more than we do in the
more thickly settled portions of the States. Other means have been
tried, but with indifferent results; and since thereis seldom any necessity
of constructing other ditches than those already made for irrigating pur-
poses, the labor and cost is trifling. It is claimed that one gallon of
coal-oil, at the cost of 75 cents per gallon, will kill several bushels of
locusts. Birds, too, are becoming more numerous than formerly, and
hence the destruction of locusts (young and old) by this means is in-
creasing.

14 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The young attain their wings during July, when they leave either to
the southwest, east, or north, very seldom remaining to deposit their
eggs.

During the summers of 1874 and 1875, as well as 1878, the locusts
were so humerous at Bozeman that they entered stores and eat holes in
the various kinds of goods. They came from the northeast to east,
probably from the Judith and Musselshell basins, and north. Some
were hatched on the Judith in 1874 and left toward the west and south-
west (Goodale). Others came from the Milk River and north. One
company of troups going through this section mentions the appear-
ance of vast swarms of locusts coming from the northeast and going
southwest. They were coming and going for more than one week.
This was in August, 1878. Some of the men with whom I spoke say
that the roar of their wings was much like the sound of a tornado.

While at Fort Keogh, the post gardener told me that one time a friend
of his was up in the Big Horn Mountains and saw ‘the grasshoppers
piled up 2 feet deep on the surface of snow-drifts”; but he could give no —
dates or particulars in‘reference to size or species of locusts.

August 10.—Between Bozeman and Helena the country is mostly high
and dry, with many rocks scattered about over the surface. The val-
leys are small, but fertile. This year there are but few migratory locusts
in this section, not even as many as of the various other species. Out-
side of the genus Caloptenus, the natives are mostly frequenters of high,
dry soil, where they can do no particular damage.

August 11.—Have been out collecting locusts, but succeeded in find-
ing only two or three C. spretus. Idid, however, procure about twenty-
five species of natives, all of which are quite abundant. These are
almost all mature, but I noticed a few that had just hatched, and
_ others in various stages of growth between the newly hatched and ma-
ture pups. I also found a few of the migratory crickets.

To-day (August 12) was spent walking about among the farms in
Prickly Pear Valley, northeast of Helena. No C. spretus seen, but nu-
merous natives on the dry grounds bordering the valley. Am informed
that these never venture upon or do damage to crops. They are par-
tial to wild land, and particularly such as is high and dry.

The cou: locust has been an almost permanent resident of this
valley for the space of five years, or from 1874 until the fall of 1879;
and it has been claimed by some that early this spring quite a he
area of country was occupied by young just southeast of Helena, in the
foot-hills. This I hardly think true, simee I visited the locality and
found only natives (a few C. atlanis, C. femur-rubrum, C. bivittatus, and
several smaller species). These were confined to that portion of the
foot-hills just below timber line.

The migratory locust first appeared in this valley in July, 1874. It
came from the east in great clouds, left eggs, and for the following
years (1875, 1876, 1877, 1878, and 1879) was a permanent resident of this

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN MONTANA IN 1880. 15

section. During the summer of 1875 it was most numerous and de-
structive. Am informed that this year the crops were nearly all de-
stroyed, and even about one-half of the hay crop fell a prey to them—
i. €., the young. They were full fledged by the middle of July, and left
toward the south and southwest. This was true of every succeeding
season in which there were locusts. They dwindled down, year after
year, wntil this year there are not enough of them to procure cabinet
specimens. They kept coming in from the east and northeast every
year until 1878. This swarm originally came from the Judith and Mus-
selshell, where they were hatched in the spring of 1874, their pro-
genitors having remained in the last-named country during 1871-73
(Trapper). In the Prickly Pear Valley no decided steps were ever
taken to destroy them. Ditches were employed by a few, and portions
of crops saved, but the majority of fields were forsaken to the enemy.

An old German told me of a method he had used for several days
to keep off the winged locusts, but which he said was “no good,”
for one morning his grain was all gone. The plan was as follows: Two
men on horseback rode through the field dragging a rope between them,
thus starting the locusts flying.

In 1868, at this place (Helena) there were locusts. They came from
the east (Minnesota, as my informant remarked), and were so numerous
that, as he claims, while driving oxen he “couldn't see the front yoke.”
Some eggs deposited, but could learn nothing of them the following
season.

August 16.—Last summer, just southeast of Helena, in the foot-hills,
quite a lot were hatched from eggs left the previous fall (1878). They
covered an area about 3 miles in length and between 1 and 2 in width.
The young at first appeared quite lively, but soon became rather torpid,
the effect of much rain and snow. Large numbers of them died, and
about the time the remaining few reached the pupa stage a large flock
of curlews (Numenius longirostris) alighted on the locust area and de-
stroyed them.

A miner, in speaking of locusts in 1874, says they used to congregate
in great numbers in and about the sluice-boxes and on the gravel heaps
during the evenings. By morning they had become so benumbed by
cold that they could not move. ‘One morning,” said he, ‘I turned on
the hose, and in less than twenty minutes had succeeded in lodging, at
least calculation, twenty bushels of ’hoppers in my neighbor’s garden.”
They revived with the heat of noonday.

August 17.—No migratory locusts between Helena and Fort Shaw.

During the summer of 1866 there was an invasion at Virginia City from the south.
Considerable damage was done to those living in the valley, while those living up on
the foot-hills, closer to the mountains, escaped, the wind carrying the locusts over
them.—(John R. Drew.)

All the incoming swarms in the vicinity of Virginia City come from
the south and southeast, and all outgoing swarms either take a southerly

/

16 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

course toward the Snake River or a northeasterly course to the Galla-
tin. Mr. Drew also gave me a few additional facts in reference to the
swarm of 1868 in the vicinity of Helena, where they “‘came in from the
north,” as he states, ‘striking the buildings on the south side of thestreet,
and fell down in such large numbers as to form ‘drifts’ of *hoppers.”
They left some eggs, asin fact he claimed they do every year that they
visit any section in this part of the territory. He supposed they were
hatched in the vicinity of Flathead Lake and the eastern foot-hills of
the Rockies north of Sun River.

After this the next swarms that he noticed were those of 1874, coming
in from the east to southeast. From this on they were with them —
annually up tolast year, when they disappeared to the west and south west.
The damage during this succession of years was great in the Sun River
Valley, but the years of greatest suffering were those between 1874~78.
Says he: “In the spring of 1877 the young were so numerous that the
ground was completely hidden by them in many localities.” The pre-
vious summer, 1876, great swarms came in from the southeast, and de-
posited their eggs in quantities that could hardly be believed. The
young were hatched early in May, and left.as soon as attaining wings,
in the latter part of June and early July. They flew to the west and
south west.

Here similar methods were adopted to those mentioned heretofore
for the destruction of the young, viz., ditches, &c. Some farmers do
not put in their crops until the young are all hatched and they have —
cleaned them off by burning straw, &e., over the fields; but this plan is
not a good one, since in this country grain requires the entire summer
to mature, and if not put in early in spring is liable to be hurt by early
frosts.

At this post similar methods were employed for the destruction of the
young, and, while the incoming swarms threatened, an occasional dis-
charge of muskets and artillery seemed to produce the desired effect of
keeping them in the air. I am informed that in close preximity to the
cannons the ground was strewn with the bodies of dead locusts, proba-
bly killed by the shock occasioned by the discharging guns.

I hear that a few migratory locusts have been seen in the vicinity of
the south fork of Sun River, about 40 miles west of Shaw, but over a
very limited area. “ |

August 19.—Between Fort Shaw and the Missouri River lies a large
dry flat, on which at various times numerous locusts have bred, but
this district, like all others, appears to be entirely free from them this
season. In fact, there are fewer of C. spretus in Montana this season
than of any other species.

August 20.—During three hours’ hunt for locusts I found but three
C. spretus. Caught many for trout fishing, but with above result. No
damage mentioned in this vicinity since 1876. Came from the southeast
and east. But little farming done here, and not much grazing.

ENEMIES OF THE LOCUST IN THE NORTHWEST. 17

August 23.—A few locusts (C. spretus) on the low bottom lands 12
miles north of the Fort Shaw and Camp Baker crossing. Not numer-
erous enough to do any damage. Hatched here. No grazing or farm-
ing in the vicinity. |

August 26.—A few locusts on table-land between mouth of Sun River
and Great Falls of Missouri. Numerous Pezotettigi in cooleys branch-
ing out from caiions.

Interviews with different persons who spend the spring and summer
in the Judith and Musselshell basins all show that this year there are
no locusts except natives in the country bordering on and drained by
these two rivers and their tributaries. Several say they could scarcely
find enough ’hoppers to bait for fish. During the latter part of July
and early August, 1876, while in these two valleys, saw numerous
and large swarms moving west for three weeks. ‘They were hatched in
this country and north. Also swarms in August, 1878, moving south,
supposed to have been hatched in the British provinces, north of As-
siniboine. Also report of swarms occurring in these basins from 1873 to
1876—one year in particular, when they flew in such numbers as to ob-
scure the sun for three days (Goodale). We cannot give the dates or
direction of flights for these years.

Northwestern Wyoming was visited by swarms in August, 1878, from
the northeast and flying to the southwest. They were so ravenous as
to eat articles of clothing left lying on the ground (Soldier).

Report of a small swarm of locusts flying eastward through Wyoming
along route of Union Pacific Railway last summer, 1879. Could ascer-
tain no dates or particulars.

reports from British America claim no locusts this year in the imme-
diate vicinity of the line adjoining Montana; nor can I learn of any in
the Milk River country. But in the spring of 1878 great numbers were
known to breed both in the Milk River country and the British posses-
gions adjoining. Never saw many locusts in the mountains of British
America where he was prospecting for a number of years (Miner).

From these data it would appear that the present year finds the en-
tire Northwest comparatively free from this great pest, and probably
the entire country. Of course, as I have already mentioned, there are
a few isolated areas over which small numbers of this species still exist;
but those which I visited are so small and the locusts on them so few
that I do not think they will migrate or increase to sufficient numbers
to do damage for the next three or four years, and perhaps for a much
ereater length of time. Itis true reports have come from several locali-
ties that crops were partially destroyed by “grasshoppers,” but might
they not be other species? If they were of the migratory kind, I should
think that we should hear more of them than we do.

ENEMIES OF THE LOCUST IN THE NORTHWEST.

Some might think thatin this out-of-the-way country the locust would
be entirely free from enemies of all kinds, but such is not the case.
2EC

18 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

During my sojourn in Montana I noticed several species of Tachina flies,
wasps, ichneumons, and other insects preying upon the common species
of locusts, and I am satisfied that they must also attack the migratory
individuals. Besides these there are several varieties of small red mites
that are occasionally found attached to various species of locusts, crickéts,
katydids, and even beetles. These are the young of a class or group of
mites that, as a rule, live upon the eggs of insects, particularly those of
Orthoptera.

Birds are just as much enemies to locusts here as in the Lower Mis-
souri region, and almost every species found in these parts is known to
feed upon and destroy myriads of them during locust years. Even such
birds as the cat-bird and crow-blackbird have been known to eat many
of them. Ravens, too, and magpies are very fond of their eggs, and are
often seen during winter to dig up and eat great numbers of them.
While coming down to the terminus I noticed a magpie capturing and
eating quite a number of several species of Gidipodae. He was fully as
agile and interested in the work as a sparrow would have heen.

Besides birds and insects there are quite a number of other animals

in Montana and the Northwest that do a good work in destroying lo-
custs. I refer to skunks, badgers, chipmunks, and like animals. Chip-
munks, although animals thought to be strictly vegetarians, are great
insect-destroyers. I have at various times surprised the little striped
fellows while they were sitting on a log and gnawing away at a grass-
hopper or katydid which they had captured, no doubt to vary their vege-

table diet. At other times I have also seen them in pursuit of insects. ©

That these animals are of considerable aid in the keeping down of nox-
ious insects there can be no doubt, since in this part of the country they
are very numerous. Snakes, toads, and lizards, too, eat many insects,
and no doubt capture many locusts; while mice of different kinds assist
alittle. Then add to the work of these natural enemies that of diseases,
climatic influences, &c., and we have quite an army of enemies at work
trying—though not intentionally—to keep in check this pest.

Since I have never seen a description of the method of depositing
eges by Tachina flies on the bodies of locusts,? I will giveithere. It is
as follows: A female fly as soon as fertilized skims over the surface in
search of suitable hosts on the bodies of which to deposit her eggs, and
thus continue in them her kind. At last she spies a good healthy look-
ing locust, may be one of the migratory species, or may be only a native,
nevertheless it is just to her liking, and she silently alights upon a spear
of grass or upon the ground close by to wait until the hopper, uncon-
scious of the lurking enemy, launches into the air, when she is upon him,
and has dropped a minute egg upon his body between his wings. This,
if not destroyed, is soon hatched and the maggot eats into the locust’s
body, where it continues to eat and grow until it is fully fed and ready

2A description of the method will be found in the 7th Mo. Ent. Rep., p. 179, and in the first report
of the Commission, p. 319.

TOPOGRAPHY OF WESTERN DAKOTA AND MONTANA. 19

to change to the pupa form. By this time the locust has become ex-
hausted and dies. Frequently as many as two and even three maggots
are reared in the body of a single locust. Occasionally the fly has to try
a half dozen or more times before she succeeds in depositing her eggs,
as the locust, as soon as it is aware of her presence, closes its wings and.
drops to the ground.

I have seen these flies so numerous in some parts of Western Dakota
and Montana this past summer that for each ’hopper that flew up there
were from three to five flies to follow. Of course but a small per cent.
of the eggs of this enemy of the locust ever mature, otherwise the lo-
custs would soon disappear from the face of the earth by this insect’s
work alone. The reason the fly chooses the moment the locust is on the
wing for depositing her eggs is quite obvious. If she were to deposit
the egg upon any other portion of the body than between and under the
locust’s wings the locust would be liable to scrape it off; besides at
this spot is situated the softest portion of the body. I consider the
ravages done to the locusts by this fly one of the reasons that they mi-
grate.

Notwithstanding the great; numbers annually destroyed by natural
means, we can by no means depend wholly upon these remedies for
the extermination of this destructive plague, the migratory or Rocky
Mountain locust. We must be on the alert and do all in our power to
assist, by various means, these, our friends, in keeping within bounds
this and all other insect plagues. It is true that under favorable con-
ditions nature soon balances herself, but when unnatural conditions
appear this equality is broken. So all must unite in again restoring
this change to its original equilibrium.

TOPOGRAPHY OF WESTERN DAKOTA AND MONTANA.

The greater portion of country lying west of the Missouri River and
east of the main divide of the Rocky Mountains is composed of high
table-lands, the greater portion of which is sparingly covered by a
short growth of bunch and buffalo grasses. These grasses seldom at-
tain more than a foot in height, and always mature long before frosts,
giving a dreary, desert-like appearance to the country even before the
autumn approaches. The valleys are few and narrow, seldom having
streams of running water flowing through them; and lakes and ponds
are rare, but when present are alkaline. The entire country is fit for
nothing but grazing, save very narrow strips along the margins of the
larger streams, which can be farmed if irrigated.

A large portion of western Dakota and eastern Montana is so cut up
by cafions, and is so destitute of vegetation, that travel through it is
impossible. These are called bad-lands—a very correct name for them,
too, for in them everything has the appearance of having once been
baked and burned. The soil is variegated with all sorts of colors that
could be produced by heat. Sulphur, lime, and iron are present in their

20 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

combinations in large quantities, but I do not know exactly to what
geological period these formations belong. The rocks have the appear-
ance of those of the Fort Pierre and Dakota groups, and many of the
formations contain large quantities of gypsum and pyrites of iron, as
well as large numbers of geodes and globular concretions varying in size
from the fourth of an inch to over a foot in diameter.

All the farming land in the section west of the Missouri could be con-
tained in a State the size of Delaware. It is mostly confined to the val-
leys of the Yellowstone, Big Horn, Tongue, Judith, Gallatin, Madison,
Jefferson, Sun, Smith, Prickley Pear, Missouri between the junction of
the three forks (Madison, Jefferson, and Gallatin) and Fort Benton, and
several other smaller streams. Along these streams there are many lo-
calities where the mountains encroach so closely as to leave no bottoms,
and hence the amount of arable land is reduced. The next rise of land
is just fair for grazing, but as a rule the grasses on these places are
much like those on the table-lands and more elevated regions—short and
in clumps.

The mountain chains are numerous, and occupy about one-tenth of
the entire area of the Territory, I should judge. Among these there is
much good grazing, and now and then a small patch of tillable land.
The grazing, however, among these ranges is only good during the
warmer parts of the year, when the snows are off.

It is over the greater portion of the entire country that the locusts
deposit their eges, only avoiding the higher points and timbered por-

tions of the mountain ranges and the very lowest of the valley lands |

where it is too wet. This entire area is admirably suited for them, since,
during the summer and fall months, the country is dry and the soil hard,
offering just such conditions as are generally chosen by them under which
to deposit their eggs.

Over this vast area I am sorry to say that burning would be impossi-
ble except over a very few small districts in the extreme eastern portion
where the locusts do not often breed. From the time the snows begin to
- melt until the grass is almost fully grown, this vast district is almost daily
visited by rain and snow storms, and tbe country where level is one
vast mud-hole. The young grass, too, seems to begin to grow even be-
fore the snow melts. At any rate by the time the young locusts appear
the country is quite green and fires would not.run. This was attested
by all with whom I spoke in reference to destroying the young by prairie
fires in spring. Soit appears that other means would have to be adopted
to destroy the young in Montana.

Winds have much to do with the direction taken by swarms, but not
with their migrating. Rains cause them to alight. Mountain ranges,
river courses, and valleys also seem to slightly change their courses,
and form thoroughfares along which swarm after swarm passes year
after year. 3

CHAP TE R...LUf,

THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST IN WYOMING, MONTANA,
ETC., IN 1881.

West Point, NEBR., January 10, 1882.

Str: I have the honor to report the following in reference to my trip
through portions of the West and Northwest, as entomological agent
for the United States Department of Agriculture, in studying various
insects injurious to agriculture, and more particularly in accumulating
additional data in reference to the Rocky Mountain locust (C. spretus).

At the time of receiving my appointment, I was in Greeley, Colo., and
at once went to work by making excursions in various directions into
the surrounding country. These were made while connected with the
construction work of several new lines of railroad which were being
built by the Union Pacific Railroad Company, hence were of no expense
to the Department other than my salary. Afterwards I also accom-
panied Professors Lester F. Ward and C. A. White, of the United States
Geological Survey, in several of their drives into the country adjacent,
These short excursions took me over a considerable area of the farming
portion of Colorado, and also out into the plains lying to the eastward
down the Platte and its tributaries.

Upon receiving further instructions 1 proceeded west, working along
the line of the Union Pacific Railway, which was left from time to time
to make short excursions into the adjoining districts, where it was re-
ported the locusts had done damage to crops and vegetation generally,
and this, too, within the past few years. The principal of these was
that of following up Ham’s Fork of Green River to Hodge’s Pass, and
about 10 miles down the western slope towards Bear River. In making
this trip I succeeded in establishing some important facts in reference
to the movements of C. spretus in this part of Wyoming, and also in
adding somewhat to our knowledge of its natural history, which may
be of value in fighting it hereafter.

I then proceeded to Ogden, Utah, where I took the train north over
the Utah and Northern Railroad, into the valley of the Snake River,
where I obtained data in reference to the movements of this insect in
that part of Idaho; thence working northward and westward through
the valleys of the Big Hole, Deer Lodge, Hellgate, and Missoula Rivers,
thus taking in a large portion of Montana hitherto not visited by any
member of the Comission.

21

22 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

At Missoula many data were obtained in reference to the movements
of locusts in that portion of Montana. From here I proceeded on horse-
back down the Missoula Valley, to where Mullan’s Wagon Road crosses
the Coeur d’Aléne Mountains, and thence across the mountains through
Northern Idaho into Washington Territory. Here I obtained what data
Icould, and then worked my way southward across the Spokane Plateau
to Walla Walla, the section visited by small swarms of locusts within
the past few years. Leaving Walla Walla, my homeward journey lay
down the Columbia to Portland and Astoria, where I was obliged to
lie over for four days, waiting for the next steamer to San Francisco.
During this period I went over to Fort Canby, and spent my time in
making a collection of mosses and ferns. which I herewith send to the
- Department. I also obtained a few land shells.

In making this trip quite a number of favors were extended by the
following corporations and individuals: Union Pacific Railway (Ore-
gon short line), Gilmer & Salisbury, half rate; officers and troops at

Fort Missoula, transportation and favors; Edwin D. Dukes, hospital-_

ities; Northern Pacific Railway, pass; Oregon Railway and Naviga-
tion Company, passes; and officers at Fort Canby, hospitalities. Be-
sides these I am under great obligations to many others for aid in ac-
cumulating locust data, as well as those relating to various other in-
sects. :

Ihave also embodied, at your request, a summary of the probabili-
ties for the present year, 1882.

Respectfully
LAWRENCE BRUNER.

Professor C. V. RILEY,
United States Entomologist, Washington, D. C.

GENERAL REPORT ON THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST.

It is not my intention in this report to describe all of the facts gleaned
or to note the work done by the Commission and others in reference to
this insect. I will, however, give a condensed account of the more im-
portant points that directly treat upon the means of their diminution
and prevention in future, with a few additionaltraits noticed during the
past season. Of course it will be necessary occasionally to allude to
matters mentioned in the annual reports of the Commission, and also to
other records relating to the life-history and depredations of this and
other locusts. Before entering upon a discussion of this subject, I will
give a brief history of this insect and its depredations in various por-
tions of the country which it visits in the course of its migrations.

Up to the time of the settlement of portions of Kastern Kansas, Ne-
braska, and part of Minnesota, comparatively little was known of locust
Swarms and their magnitudein North America. At long intervals only

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 25

would a notice of the appearance of swarms of “ grasshoppers” reach
the public through some newspaper or magazine account of travels in
these wild and unsettled regions. These, as would be imagined, were
mere notices of their having been seen, without any attempt at a descrip-
tion of them or anything relating to their movements. It is but a few
years since that they even so much as had a name of their own. (Walsh
in 1866.) But, as the country in the then Territories above mentioned
began to be settled they became more and more known, as swarms made
their appearance from time to time and occasionally alighted upon and
destroyed fields of grain and gardens. It was not, however, until with-
in the past fifteen years that they began to attract much attention by
their ravages. I now refer more particularly to Kansas and Nebraska,
with adjoining portions of lowa and Missouri. Minnesota, too, was but
thinly settled in those parts frequently visited, while Dakota was but
little known. ‘True, locusts had several times been known to do damage
to vegetation in Manitoba and Minnesota as early as 1819, when they
were said to have been very numerous.

Whether swarms of locusts visited these districts as often prior to
their settlement as they have since, it is not easy to ascertain ; but that
they did so occasionally is quite certain, and that, too, in numbers
equally as great or even greater than in our time. In speaking with
an old Omaha Indian during the summer of 1876 in reference to grass-
hoppers, he said that about twenty-five years previously he had seen
them so numerous in the Hikhorn Valley and adjoining parts that they
ate nearly all the grass for many miles around. In fact, the Indians
could searcely find enough grass for their ponies. This was while they
were out on a buffalo hunt. He also stated that at other times they had
met with the locusts while out on their hunts, but never in such great
numbers as at this one particular time. He said they came from the
mountains ‘ far off,” at the same time pointing up the valley to the north-
west. Last year while in Montana I also learned from Indians that at
times, many years ago, the locusts were exceedingly numerous in the val-
Jeys of the Yellowstone River and its tributaries; and that on several oc-
casions they had been so numerous as to devour most of the vegetation,
and thereby to cause the buffalo to seek food in other parts. When asked
about their flights, one old fellow (Indian) intimated that he had seen
them fly in numbers sufficiently great to obscure the sun. It might be
questioned whether this information obtained from Indians can be relied
upon as of value. To this I will answer “ yes,” for all Indians are very
close observers and remember quite accurately all incidents that are in
any way connected with their modes of life, and particularly is this true
while out on their hunts. A few had even noticed that the locusts were
attacked by a kind of fly, which deposited its eggs between their wings.

Does the settlement of a country and the planting of new species of
vegetation ever have the effect of drawing to it insect enemies from
afar; and, if so, to what extent is this true? This is a question that

24 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

undoubtedly has presented itself to the minds of more than one ento-
mologist and tiller of the soil, and is worthy of consideration in this
connection. Before discussing it, however, let me give a short descrip-
tion of the preferences of climate, altitude, vegetation, surface configu-
ration, &c., that this particular species of locust possesses in comparison
with that chosen by others.

if we run our eyes over the map of North America and set aside all
that portion contained between the meridians 103° and 117° west of
Greenwich, and from the parallels of latitude 40° to 53°, we have the
permanent home of this insect pretty well before us. It is all consider-
ably elevated above the surrounding country, treeless over the greater
portion, and also arid, thus agreeing to some extent with the locust-in-
' habited areas of Kastern Kurope, Northern Africa, Western and South-
ern Asia, Central Australia, and porticns of Central and South America.
Now, what is there in these peculiar combinations of surface and eli-
mate and elevation that should produce the unwonted increase in num-
bers of a few particular species of widely different locusts? As we are.
already aware, all these insects become exceedingly numerous at inter-
_ vals, and at such times leave their breeding grounds, or, more properly
speaking, their native habitats, and fall upon the adjoining fertile
country, where they cause great depredation, and in many instances
even pestilence and famine. That this great increase is in some way
connected with their migratory habits we know, but just how it was
brought about in the first place we cannot say. As shown in one of —
the reports of the Commission, these invasions, ¢d est, the general inva-
sions of the entire country subject to their visits, appear to follow at in-
tervals of about eleven years.

The reports of the Commission which have already appeared have so
thoroughly described the nature and habits of this locust that I need
not dwell upon its natural history or mode of migrating. That it is thor-
oughly migratory by nature cannot be doubted; for, at almost any
point in the Permanent Region during the months of July, August, and
_ September, on fine sunshiny days, a few of these insects can be seen on
the move. Even a single family or the progeny of a single female will
move from the locality where it hatched to some other point in this
native habitat or adjacent to it.

If we reflect for a moment as to the surface configurationof the different
countries from which at times invading hordes of locusts come, we shall
notice that they are all pretty much alike, and that they are nie. as a
rule, destitute of timber and rank vegetation of any kind. They are all
more or less elevated plateaus or table-lands, partially clothed with
bunch grasses and dwarfed shrubs, which grow in clusters. The air is
dry and bracing in its nature, and the winds which sweep over them are
brisk. Taking into consideration these peculiarities of the various lo-
cust countries, it strikes us that only in a country of such a character can
swarms of locusts originate and continue to exist in uncommonly great

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 25

numbers; and if this be true, changing these characteristics would nec-
essarily result in their diminution, unless they really can continue to
exist in such immense numbers in a region the surface of which is dif-
ferent from the foregoing. Judging from experience and from the past
history of this locust,.I should say that it would not and cannot con-
tinue under such changed conditions. For, if it could breed only in
limited areas, it would of necessity become less numerous. Also, when
traveling it would become more scattered, and would then be more apt
to be kept in check by locust-feeding birds in connection with insects
and other enemies which lurk in the recesses of forests and about groves
and meadows. Always with the advance of settlement birds and in-
sect-devouring animals of a certain class make their appearance, and
do much towards keeping in check these pests. As examples of these I
have the pleasure of introducing the robin, quail, orioles, sparrows, blue-
birds, and other species that love to hang about the abodes of man—all
of which are great insect-destroyers.

Not only in the above ways, then, will advance of civilization and the
settling of this area tend to diminish the locust in numbers, but it will
also prevent their increase.

As already intimated, there is a tract of country in the West and North-
west which, by its peculiar characteristics, is especially adapted to the
modes of life of this locust; hence it has been termed the Permanent
Region by the members of the Commission heretofore referred to.

Although this insect at times visits and breeds throughout the greater
portion of the country lying west of the Mississippi River and east of
the Cascade range of mountains, it is partial to a particular portion of
this vast area that possesses peculiar climatic conditions. This region
can be bounded as follows: On the east by a line beginning on the
south, at the junction of the thirty-seventh parallel with the one hundred
and sixth meridian, and running in anortheasterly direction to the ninety-
ninth meridian on the forty-fifth parallel, whence the course changes to
the north until the boundary line is reached, where it inclines to the
northwest in a curve and strikes the fifty-third parallel at about the one
hundred and third meridian. The northern boundary is the commence-
ment of the trans-continental timber region of British America. On the
west this region is bounded by a line nearly coincident with the one
hundred and seventeenth meridian, sometimes running to the east, and
at other times to the west of it, and towards the south making an abrupt
angle to the southeast to avoid the desert regions of southern Nevada
and a portion of southwestern Utah. The features of this entire region,
or at least of those portions of it chosen by this locust as breeding-
grounds, are its comparative aridity and freedom from timber.

This region is divided as follows into several districts that differ in
surface configuration: The Mountain Region, the Plateau Region, the
Region of Plains, and the Basin Region.

The Plateau Region, whichis generally termed the Colorado Plateaus,

26 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

“extends from southern Wyoming through western Colorado and
eastern Utah far into New Mexico and Arizona. They are bounded on
the north by Wind hiver and Sweetwater Mountains, on the east by the
Park Mountains, on the south by the Desert Range Region, and on the
west by the Basin Range Region.” ‘This region 4s “chiefly drained by
the Colorado River; but a small area on the northwest is drained into
Shoshone River, another on the northeast into the Platte River, still
another on the southeast into the Rio Grande del Norte, and finally the
western margin is drained by the upper portions of the Sevier, Provo,
Ogden, Weber, and Bear Rivers. The general elevation is 7,000 feet
above the level of the sea, varying from 5,000 to 12,000 feet. The ascent
from the low desert plains on the south is very abrupt, in many places
_ by a steep and almost impassable escarpment.”

The streams which traverse the region have their sources in the Wind River Mount-
ains on the north, in the Park Mountains on the east, and a number of tributaries
come from the west. In their courses through the plateaus they run in cafons.
These cafions are profound gorges corroded by the streams themselves. The ‘‘country
rock” is composed of sedimentary beds nearly horizontal. * * * The region is also
exceedingly arid, but the mountains that stand on the rim of the basin precipitate a
- large proportion of moisture, and in this manner streams of comparatively large
volume head in the mountains, run through the plateaus, and descend rapidly to the

level of the sea, while the country through which they pass is very meagerly supplied
with moisture. ®

The Mountain Region comprises the mountainous portion of Northern
Wyoming, part of Central Colorado, all of Idaho with adjoining portions
of Nevada, Oregon, and Washington Territory, also the western half of
Montana. This region is composed chiefly of high ranges of mountains,
most of which are partially clothed with forests of coniferous trees.
There are numerous streams of considerable magnitude. These have
their sources high in the mountains where there is much rain and
melting of winter snows. Their lower courses lie along beautiful and
richly carpeted valleys that are for the most part destitute of timber,
and are bounded by low foot-hills covered with bunch grasses and
artemisias. This region in the lower portions is also quite arid. With-
in this region there are also quite a number of low basin-like valleys
that formerly were occupied by lakes. These are for tbe most part richly
clothed with grasses and other low vegetation, and are generally drained
by some mountain stream. They all lie northward in Montana, Idaho,
and Washington Territory, and are of considerable elevation, varying
from about 3,000 to 7,000 feet above the level of the sea.

Sloping eastward from the foot-hills of the Rocky Mountains towards
the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers is an extensive tract of country
known as the Plains. It is for the most part a comparatively smooth,
treeless tract covered by sparse vegetation, mostly grasses and herbs
that grow in clumps or clusters. The climate varies in temperature
as we pass from east to west, and from south to north. The region is
-s« S Maj. J. W. Powell: Preface to Geology of the High Plateausof Utahe =

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 27

arid, and has comparatively few water-courses running throughit. But
little rain falls during summer, and evaporation is great. As we proceed
northward the stunted bunch grasses become more luxuriant, and the
climate cooler. The streains that run through this region have their
fountains in ranges of forest-clad hills and mountains, and, unlike those
of the Plateau Region, wind along broad and fertile valleys that are
bounded by gently sloping hills. These valleys are also adorned in
most places by clumps of willows and other deciduous trees and shrubs;
and in many of these broad sea-like valleys are to be seen some of the
most beautiful pictures of the West.

In addition to the three regions above mentioned, there is another
section that we will call the Basin Region. This region is situated be-
tween the Wasatch Range on the east, and Sierra Nevada Range on
the west, and is drained by streams running into lakes, of which Great
Salt Lake is the chief one. This basin region is separated from the
others by ranges of mountains and high plateaus, and is one of the most
fertile portions of the entire Rocky Mountain Region. The foot-hills
and valleys lying to the eastward are decorated with beautiful flowers
and rich grasses, while to the westward it gradually shades off into the
desert regions.

All the country comprised in the above-described regions is at times
overrun by swarms of this destructive locust, and possesses such cli-
matic and other conditions as are best adapted to its life and great in-
crease.

Itis quite evident that a country the surface of which is so varied
and extensive must also possess a varied climate, and that this is partly
true we are aware, at least as far as heat and cold are concerned. But
we must take into consideration one peculiarity of all this extent of
country, viz., its aridity. Wehave arid and high plateaus, arid mount-
ain valleys, the plains are arid, and an arid interior basin. Weare also
aware that C. spretus thrives equally well in all of these districts where
the aridity is not too great, and where the annual precipitation does not
exceed 16 inches.

Maj. J. W. Powell also describes the lands of this region as those which
are irrigable, pasture lands, and timber tracts. Besides these there are
deserts, bad lands, chaparral lands, and lava beds.

Of these various regions, as determined by surface configuration, the
ifrigable and pasture lands are those chiefly chosen by this insect as breed-
ing grounds. Hence the area of the Permanent Region comprises but a
small per cent. of the arid regions of the West or of that part of the
Rocky Mountain system where the annual precipitation is less than 20
inches, and still less when we confine it to the more humid portions of
these districts as chosen in years of ordinary numbers of this insect.

Major Powell describes these regions as follows:

The irrigable lands and timber lands constitute but a small fraction of the Arid
Region. Between the lowlands on the one hand and the highlands on the other is

98 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

found a great body of valley, mesa, hill, and low mountain lands. * * * Usually
they bear a scanty growth of grasses. These grasses are nutritious and valuable both
for summer and winter pasturage. Their value depends upon peculiar climatic con-
‘ditions; the grasses grow to a great extent in scattered bunches, and mature seeds
in larger proportion perhaps than the grasses of more humid regions. In general the
winter aridity is so great that the grasses when touched by the frosts are not washed
‘down by the rains and snows to decay on the moist soil, but stand firmly on the ground
all winter long and ‘‘cure,” forming a quasi uncut hay. * * * Ina broad way,
the greater or lesser abundance of the grasses is dependent on latitude and altitude;
the higher the latitude the better the grasses, and they improve as the altitude in-
creases. In the very low altitudes and latitudes the grasses are so scant as to be of
no value; here the true deserts are found. These conditions obtain in Southern Cali-
fornia, Southern Nevada, Southern Arizona, and Southern New Mexico, where broad
reaches of land are naked of vegetation, but in ascending to the higher lands the
grass steadily improves. Northward the deserts soon disappear, and the grass be-
- eomes more and more luxuriant to our northern boundary. In addition to the desert
lands mentioned, other large deductions must be made from the area of the pasture
lands. There are many districtsin which the ‘‘country rock” is composed of incoher-
ent sands and clays; sometimes sediments of ancient Tertiary lakes; elsewhere sedi-
ments of more ancient Cretaceous seas. In these districts perennial or intermittent
streams have carved deep waterways, and the steep hills are ever washed naked by
fierce but infrequent storms, as the incoherent rocks are unable to withstand the
beating of the rain. These districts are known as the mauvaises terres, or bad lands of
the Rocky Mountain Region. In other areas the streams have carved labyrinths of
deep gorges and the waters flow at great depths below the general surface. The lands
between the streams are beset with towering cliffs, and the landscape is an expanse
of naked rock. These are the alcove lands and cafion lands of the Rocky Mountain
Region. Stillother districts have been the theater of late volcanic activity, and broad
sheets of naked lava are found; cinder cones are frequent, and scoria and ashes are
scattered over the land. These are the lava beds of the Rocky Mountain Region. In
yet other districts low broken mountains are found with rugged spurs and cragged
crests. Grasses and chaparral grow among the rocks, but such mountains are of little
value for pasturage purposes.

After making all the deductions, there yet remain vast areas of valuable pasturage
lands bearing nutritious but scanty grass. The lands along the creeks and rivers
have been relegated to that class which has been described as irrigable, hence the
lands under consideration are away from the permanent streams. No rivers sweep
over them, and no créeks meander among their hills, the only water to be found on
these lands being scattered and isolated springs and the little brooks which they
feed. These, however, never join the great rivers on their way to the sea, being able
to run but a short distance from their fountains, when they spread among the sands
to be re-evaporated.

Within the Arid Region only a small portion of the country is irrigable. These ir-
rigable tracts are low lands lying along the streams. On the mountains and high
plateaus forests are found at elevations so great that summer frosts forbid the culti-
vation of the soil.

These lands comprise buta very small per cent. of the Arid Region un-
der the present resources for obtaining the amount of water requisite
for remunerative cultivation of the soil.

Throughout this Arid Region timber of value is found growing sponta-
neously on the higher plateaus and mountains. These timber regions
are bounded above and below by lines which are very irregular, due to
local conditions. Above the upper line no timber grows because of the
rigor of the climate, and below no timber grows because of aridity.

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 29

Both the lower and upper lines descend in passing from south to north;
that is, the timber districts are found at lower altitudes in the northern
portion of the Arid or Rocky Mountain Region than in the southern por-
tion. This is due to the decrease in temperature as we pass from south
to north. The forests are chiefly of pines, spruce, cedars, and fir, but
the pines are of principal value. Below these timbered regions, on the
lower slopes of mountains, on the mesas and hills, low, scattered forests
are often found, composed chiefly of dwarfed pifion pines and scrubby
cedars.

Of course that portion of the Arid Region described as the timber-
bearing region is much larger than that actually covered ‘by forests ;
but this is to a great extent due to the destructive agency of fires that
annually destroy inconceivable quantities of timber. These regions
comprise from 20 to 25 per cent. of the Arid Region, though at least one
half has been denuded or is kept bare by the above-mentioned agency.
This region, too, is very much like the temporary region of this locust in
the annual precipitation of moisture, and hence these bare portions are
not so frequently chosen as localities for egg-depositing as are those,
lying immediately below this line, that have been described as grazing
lands. |

The area of the Arid Region the altitude of which is greater than the
forest region is comparatively small, and comprises mountain peaks and
parts of mountain ranges that extend above the line of perpetual snow
or rigorous climate. Very seldom do any of these locusts choose the
warmer portions of this region as breeding grounds, since it is too un-
certain and quite humid, although the greater portion of the moisture
that falls here is in the form of snow and hail. Neither do they fre-
quent the mawvaises terres, deserts, lava beds, or chaparral lands. Then
we have remaining the two other regions as the true home and breeding
grounds of this insect, viz., the irrigable lands and the grazing lands.
Of course great numbers of locusts are annually bred within and even
above the forest region of the Rocky Mountain system, but, as before
stated, the humidity of this area is too great, and hence it follows that
these cannot be as vigorous as those bred below and in a more arid cli-
mate. That this insect does not require nor seek a high temperature,
we are aware from the condition of the climate in those portions of
British America where it breeds in such overwhelming numbers.

This region, which is known as the permanent breeding-grounds of
the Rocky Mountain locust, as before stated, comprises all that region
west and north of the deserts where the annual rainfall is less than
20 inches, an area of about 300,000 square miles. Ofcourse they do not
breed throughout this entire region annually, nor on all the surface ;
but it is because they are always to be found in some portion of it in
greater or less numbers, and because they can continue to exist year
after year without becoming diseased, that this name has been given to.
the region.

30 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

As would be expected, a country as large as this must necessarily
vary to some extent in its surface configuration, and in its general ap-
pearance; but, as a rule, it is composed of wide stretches of prairie in-
terspersed with a few small timbered areas and snow-capped mountain
ranges. It is watered by the great water systems of the Missouri, the
Yellowstone, Platte, Colorado, and Columbia, with many minor rivers,
along the fertile valleys of which the young locusts are reared from
year to year in numbers sufficiently great always to keep the stock large
enough so that with a few favorable years this entire area with the
adjoining country can be stocked and overrun by ravishing swarms.

While the locust is capable of continuing its existence on any favor-
able portion of this Permanent Region, there are in reality but few por-
tions of it that, on account of their extent, are adapted to its greatest
increase. These are far apart, and at times are the cradles of swarms
that visit different sections of the cultivated districts adjoining them.
The largest, and by far the most important of these, is that of Central
Montana and portions of the British Possessions immediately to the
north. The boundaries of this area can be put down as follows: On
the east a line beginning near the Black Hills and running north by
the way of the mouth of the Musselshell River to the Saskatchawan
River and the northern limit of true prairie. The western boundary
is almost equivalent to the trend of the Rocky Mountain Range, coming
as far south as the Sweetwater Basin of Northern Wyoming. In other
words it passes from the Big Horn Mountains in Northern Wyoming in
an almost direct line to Fort Shaw, and thence north as far as the prati-
ries extend, taking in the valleys of the Gallatins, Jefferson, and Prickly
Pear Rivers as side shoots. The next in importance and size is that of
which the Snake River Valley is the center. This district comprises
all of Central and most of Southern Idaho, portions of Northern Utah
and a small part of Nevada and Eastern Oregon. A third area is that
of Southern Utah and portions of Northern Arizona and New Mexico,
with a part of Colorado. —

From the former come all the locust swarms that devastate Manitoba,
Dakota, Minnesota, and at times Nebraska, Iowa, and Kansas, with a
small portion of Missouri. Oregon, Nevada, and Washington Territory
receive most of their locust swarms from the second, while Utah and
Colorado, with adjoining portions of Wyoming, receive theirs from both
this and the third or that of Arizona and New Mexico. While these
are the principal courses taken by swarms in leaving these several
locust centers, they occasionally interchange swarms and then these
localities receive calls from all three sections. Montana swarms cross
over the range into the valley of the Snake River, by way of the Madi-
son, and into the northern part of Idaho and Washington Territory by
way of the Boundary Pass and Flathead Lake. Those of the Central
_ region pass northeast into Montana, both by the Madison and by way

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 31

of Northern Wyoming, while the central and southern regions inter-
change swarms directly.

While it would appear that this interchange of swarms between these
several centers was intentional, by a closer examination into the habits
of this insect and the influencing agents in its migrations, we can readily
see that such is not the fact. Nevertheless, every object is accom-
plished in this way that could be were they made from impulse or desire.
By the interchange of swarms there is cross-breeding of unrelated and
distant individuals, thus preventing the deteriorating influence of a
long-continued interbreeding. Also, by having these widely separated
regions of large area, moving swarms of great magnitude are enabled
to recuperate from the fatigues of travel and rear healthy offspring, to
return to their starting point when the favorable opportunity presents
itself.

As irregular as appear to be the movements of swarms of locusts in
the widely separated areas to one who has not given the subject a close
study, it is, nevertheless, a conceded fact that they seem to have leading
routes which they follow. So marked is this rule in certain localities
that it is difficult to learn of any exceptions. An example of this nature
is that of their movements on the Upper Bear River and in portions of
Western Wyoming, where every swarm of which I could obtain any
information came from the west and northwest and flew to the east,
northeast, or southeast. They also appear to fly in great circles in sev-
eral sections of the West. The cause of this phenomenon is the com-
bined influence of prevailing winds and surface configuration on mov-
ing swarms. For an example of this peculiar movement we will take
a swarm that leaves the great center of distribution in Montana towards
the southwest by way of the Gallatin and Madison Valleys and low
passes across to the upper waters of the Snake River. These, after en-
tering this latter valley, follow down that stream to where it makes an
abrupt bend to the west. Here the swarms generally divide, some con-
tinuing down the stream, while the remaining portion of the swarm
works on south and southeast over the low mountains to Bear River
Valley and into the great interior basin. Those which strike the valley
of Bear River mostly turn up the stream and wend their way toward
the east and southeast until the vicinity of Green River is reached, when
they again slightly change their course by swinging to the east and
northeast. From here their course is eastward to the Platte, when they
again divide, a portion following up and the other portion following
down this stream. The latter, after passing through the cafion out upon
the plains, are struck by south and southeast winds and carried to the
northeast toward the Black Hills, and from this point return to south-
ern Montana and finally to their starting point. Those that follow
up the Platte cross over the range by way of the various passes into
Eastern Colorado, and either work south through this State into New
Mexico, or drift out on the plains into Western Kansas and Nebraska,

32 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

where they become scattered and lost, except when in uncommonly large
numbers as in the year 1866, when they came as far east as the settled
portions of these States and did considerable damage.

Those that leave the northern portion of this great center and cross
over the range into Idaho and Washington Territory, work southwest
at first, then south through western Idaho and eastern Washington
Territory, when they turn to the southeast and reach the central region,
from which they return to the starting point by way of the Snake and
Madison Valleys. These movements, however, occur, and for the greater
part of their course lie, within the Permanent Region; hence they cannot
be set down as the mode of travel in all portions of the country at times —
visited by their swarms, neither can they be considered as being the
rule of their flights.

Locusts that follow down the Snake River enter eastern Oregon and
work their way northward through this State and western Idaho with
a portion of southeastern Washington Territory, and thence are car-
ried by the prevalent winds across the Cceur d’Aléne and Bitter Root
Mountains into the valleys of the upper portions of Clarke’s Fork of the
Columbia. Here they continue working eastward through western
Montana until they recross the Rocky Mountains into the great center
of Montana and British America, thereby completing the circular move-
ment. Of course these movements are only noticed in connection with
the movements of swarms in different portions of the districts embraced,
and, as just stated, for the most part are confined to the Permanent
Region. a Ne

With these facts in reference to the movements of locusts in general
before us, it will now be in order to mention some of the controlling
agencies for the various actions of moving swarms; how it happens —
that they choose these particular routes just mentioned, why at certain ©
times of the year the prevailing movements are in one direction and
just opposite at another, and why itis that a change of wind or the
advance of a storm or even a decided change of temperature from warm
to cold brings them to the ground.

When locust swarms start for a flight to some other locality they, as
a rule, follow a particular direction, which varies much in different sec-
tious of country, and at different seasons of the year. Any agency that
interferes with this particular course has a tendency to bring the entire
horde of them to the ground. They appear to have a purpose in view
when starting, which, if interfered with, will cause much uneasiness on
their part. Itis not necessary for me to give any minute description
of the general laws of flight, nor to dwell upon the influence of storms,
changes of wind, temperature, elevation, climate, and surface configura-
tion upon these. All these have been discussed at length in various
newspaper articles and other sketches of which this insect with its his-
tory formed the subject. The reports, too, of the United States HEnto-
mological Commission are exhaustive on this portion of its natural

‘continue but a few generations, and hence its great uneasiness and:

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 313)

history. Suffice it to say that any sudden change of wind or of tem-
perature will cause them to drop: to the ground, where they will re-

- main until everything is again favorable for continuing in their chosen

course. Surface configuration, too, has much to do with the direc-
tions taken by moving swarms. Valleys, as a rule, are followed either
up or down, while mountain chains of great elevation swerve them
from their course, causing them to turn either to the right or to the left,
according to the direction of the wind and the route pursued. Out-
side of the Permanent Region their movements vary somewhat from
those within this region. After the first season’s absence, all swarms

appear to direct their course back towards this region, at least this is
the case with those reared in the Temporary Region of the east. Ihave:

also noticed that in Nebraska, during the earlier part of the season, the:
prevailing direction taken by swarms is northward and westward,,
while later in the season it is toward the south. The turning-point is:

about July 15. Whether this is really the case, or whether it is due to.

arriving and departing swarms, I am not quite prepared to assert posi-

tively at present. That this is true, however, can easily be ascertained

by referring to any work giving the data of locust flights. for a succes-
' sion of years in this district. However doubtful this may appear at.
present, it is nevertheless my opinion that it all depends upon the out- .

going and incoming swarms, with perhaps an occasional exception

brought on by change of winds, &e.; perhaps also the change in the.
direction of the prevailing winds at about this time has something to.

do with the matter.

In the Permanent Region locality matters but little so far as the con--
tinuatioh of the species is concerned, but outside of this the insect can,

longing to get back to its native climes and home scenes.

While the true home of this locust is quite permanent in its leading

characteristics, the Temporary Region is one of variable character and
sudden changes, with unsettled winds. The surface of the Permanent
Region is much the same throughout, while that of the Temporary Re-
gion is variable. The true difference between these two regions, how-
ever, which seems to tell on the life of Caloptenus spretus, is the amount
of moisture present, and also the altitude. A wet or humid climate
is unfavorable, while one that is arid is favorable to its increase.

The localities chosen by this insect for the depositing of eggs are such
as are partly denuded of vegetation and where the soil is firm, as new
breakings, pastures, roadsides, south hillsides and a variety of similar
localities. Very low or wet grounds are never chosen, neither is very

loose and sandy soil that is liable to be blown away by winds. The lo-

cust possesses similar habits throughout the country at times visited

by it; yet these habits are necessarily slightly altered by variation of

climate, surface configuration, and other influencing agencies. While

in the Temporary Region the eggs are chiefly deposited in proximity to
3EC

O04 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

fields, inthe Permanent Region they are deposited throughout this region
wherever there is sufficient grass forthe young toliveupon. The grasses,
too, of these widely separated districts vary much in their nutritive prop-
erties. Those of the permanent home are the best in the eyes of this
gastronome of an insect, and stand parallel with the various grains of
the same localities during early spring. Our grasses on the contrary are
not touched when wheat fields and other cultivated plants can be ob-
tained. Hven the weeds growing in fields are more acceptable than
‘those on the prairie. When a swarm alights in this region for the pur-
pose of depositing eggs it betakes itself to the foot-hills adjoining val-
Jeys where food is plentiful, or to the mountains just below timber. Here
the locusts often accumulate in such vast numbers as to entirely cover
the ground while at their work of perpetuating their kind. In speak-
ing with a gentleman who spent the greater part of seven years in the
northern and central portions of Wyoming, I was informed that during -
the summers of 1875 and 1876 at times these locusts were so numerous
as to be piled up in windrows for miles in length and frequently six inches
in depth. These were both old and young. They hatched on the foot-
hills and ate the grasses clean. He said that ‘“‘ while the greater portion
of this Permanent Region offers favorable situations for the deposition of
their eggs, they are more partial to fertile valleys, sunny hillsides, and
grassy plats near timber line where there is always plenty of succulent
vegetation to be had.” While the humid atmosphere of the Temporary
Region is detrimental to its continued existence, the insect stillrequires —
a certain amount of moisture for its developmentin great numbers, hence
it is that that large district, lying for the most part just below timber line
on the extensive plateaus of the Northwest, is so well adapted to their
increase. These sections, too, afford vast areas suitable for the deposi-’
tion of their eggs, and afterwards for the development of the young.

Eggs are deposited at intervals during the monthsof June, July, Au-
gust, September, and October, by insects maturing in different latitudes
and at different times. The majority of them, however, are laid during
the months of August and September; otherwise, if the fall should
prove too warm and the winter late in commencing, many of them would
hatch and die from cold and starvation.

Eggs laid in June often hatch by July and the locusts become fully
developed in time to deposit before cold weather sets in too severely, while
those hatching later very seldom deposit unless the fall is very favor-
able. Some eggs, too, very likely lie over one whole year before hateh-
ing.

Whether or not locust eggs would hatch after having laid more than
a year, Iam unable to say, as personally I have seen nothing of the.
kind, nor have I ever seen a substantiated account of any such occur-
rence in works on locust literature. It is, however, averred by several
farmers living in the vicinity of Missoula, Montana, that in the fall of
1875 a great many eggs were deposited throughout the valley. Some

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. ° BS

of these hatched the following spring (1876) and the locusts from them
left without depositing; neither, it was believed, did any other swarms
deposit this year. However this may have been, in the spring of 1877
large numbers of young locusts made their appearance among the foot-
hills on the north side of Missoula River, where no eggs were known to
_have been deposited since the fall of 1875. Now, whether this was really
a case of continued vitality of a large quantity of eggs during an entire
year beyond the time when they should have hatched, as claimed by
these gentlemen, or whether in 1876 a swarm might not, unobserved by
them, have alighted in this locality, left their eggs, and then gone on, I
will not try to decide, but will let every one draw his own inference. It
would be interesting, however, to possess the facts with reference to
this alleged case of continued vitality of locust eggs in a climate where
under ordinary conditions they would have hatched in due time.

The time required for the hatching of the eggs varies greatly in dif-
ferent latitudes, at various altitudes, and at different times of the year.
The presence or absence of warm or cool rains, too, seems to make a dif-
ference. Of course it is quite necessary that a certain degree of heat be
present, as also a certain amount of moisture. Sometimes it appears
that eggs will hatch in a comparatively short time, and at others, when
there is no perceptible variation in the conditions, it requires much
longer.

Just what amount of heat and what other conditions are absolutely
necessary for the development of the eggs in the Temporary and Per-
manent Regions, or whether there is a difference in these, I cannot at
present say, with the small amount of data at my command. But that
there are certain things upon which the hatching depends can be readily
inferred from the experiments that have been conducted by Professor
C. V. Riley and others for this purpose. Nevertheless, they were in-
sufficient to establish fixed rules by which we can go.

The young, after hatching, require from forty to sixty days in which to
mature; varying, of course, according to the state of the weather, the abun-
dance of food, and also their vigor; cold and wet retarding and warmth
favoring their growth. Soon after hatching, the little fellows. begin
traveling in search of food, as they are generally hatched on grounds
partially bare. They travel in droves, thus imitating in the start the
peculiar traits of the species. These droves become scattered as from
time to time they move on in their half famished: search for food, and
in the course of their growth become so scattered and mixed up that
by the time of maturing hardly any two of a single brood are together.
This is the case of swarms in the Temporary Region, and very likely is
also true with reference to them in their native habitat.

Soon after leaving the eggs the little fellows molt or shed their skin,
which operation is repeated four more times in most cases and at least
three times in every case before arriving at maturity. The manner of
molting is quite similar to the like act with other insects. The larva

36 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

quits feeding and becomes dejected and drowsy, creeps to some sheltered
nook and there lingers for a time, when the skin of its head and thorax
cracks and it wriggles itself out a soft and tender looking ’hopper. Soon,
however, the tender limbs and body become dry and rigid, and the
“new” locust is again in. trim for its raids with thousands of comrades
that have also just undergone a like transformation. Its skin is now
Joose and flabby, and its appetite keen from its late fast. The time re-
quired for this transformation or rather molting of the skin varies from
one-half to more than one hour, according to the state of the weather and
strength of the locust; warm, sunshiny mornings, immediately after
a gentle shower, being the most favorable; at least this is my experi-
ence in reference to the last or pupal molt.

The habits of the young are quite similar to those of the mature insect
in many respects, while in others they differ to some extent. As just
mentioned they are migratory by nature and commence traveling soon
after hatching, not entirely in search of food, but also for the purpose of
satisfying that inherited longing for travel with which all little C. spretus
come into the world. They all move in the same general direction im
which their parent swarms did as they came into the district where the
eggs were deposited. On warm sunshiny days the little fellows become
somewhat scattered as they hop about in search of food; but on the .
approach of night or lowering weather they huddle together in sheltered
localities, especially in old grass, straw piles, under clumps of dirt, &c.,
where they seem to be contented. As they grow older their numbers
diminish from the loss of companions by birds, insects, disease, and the
hardships of cold and wet; but their desire to move has also increased.
They have left their hatching places and gone to the neighboring fields
if in a settled district, or to the green valleys where tender herbs and —
grasses abound if in wild and unsettled districts. The pupal or inter-
mediate stage differs but little from that of the larval save that in this
stage of their lives they are more slovenly or sluggish and less ravenous, ~
although not altogether dormant lke the corresponding stage of some
other insects. |

During storms and cool days in spring the young are often so be-
numbed that they are unable to rally with the succeeding mee. and
in such cases die of sheer exhaustion.

Having mentioned a few characteristics pertaining to the ey
history of the young, it will now be in place to mention a few additional
traits belonging to the old or winged insects. :

As soon as circumstances will permit after the advent of its change
from a wingless insect to that of one possessing wings, it leaps into the
air, unfolds its new and hitherto untried members and takes a short
flight. As soon as everything is favorable, which is on the first fine
morning with a pretty brisk breeze, with one accord numbers spring
into the air, and begin rising in a circling manner until they have at-
tained a sufficient altitude, when they permit the wind to carry them

GENERAL REPORT FOR 18381. ot

along. During flight their position is generally face to the wind and
partially elevated. At least this is the position in which I have noticed
great numbers of them while drifting. They do not fly, but float on
the breeze, and move no faster than the wind does.

While on the move their actions are.controlled to a great extent by
the atmospheric conditions which have already been noticed under the
head of “general notes.” When hungry they come down and feed, and
then are off again. This state of affairs continues until near the time
for commencing operations for the continuation of their kind. This
takes place within two or three weeks after obtaining wings. Coition
and egg depositing are then kept up alternately until cold weather sets
in or until they die of exhaustion; the number of egg deposits made
by a single female varying from one to four, each of which averages 25
egos; the interval between egg deposits being from four to eight or
more days according to the state of the weather and the vigor of the
- insect, it being much more frequent in favorable weather and with
healthy and vigorous females. After egg laying is over they die from
the effects of frosts and from the exhaustion brouglit on by the exer-
tions of reproduction.

‘‘ How does it happen that this insect becomes so exceedingly numer-
ous at times when other species remain normal?” is a question that has
frequently been submitted to me. My answer is, through its migratory
habits and the character of its native habitat. As soon as surroundings
become adverse to its increase, it has but to launch itself into the air
and be off for a locahty where these are favorable, and where there are
few or no enemies; while species not possessing this habit are obliged.
to remain and struggle on in the best way they can. While migration
does not always prove beneficial in this direction, the cases where it
<loes not are so very few that in the end they are not noticeable.

If we takeany insect that has gradually developed this habit we find
one that has become alarmingly common and destructive. The Colorado
Potato Beetle, for instance, is an example of this sort. But a very
few years ago we only heard of it as being found in moderate numbers
feeding on a wild species of solanum (Solanum rostratum)—a native of

Olorado and adjacent country. On the approach of man, however,
with his cultivated plants it found a new solanaceous plant that it pre-
ferred to its old and long-used one. The growth of the latter being
certain and not fortuitous gave this insect a basis, and in a very few
years it began to'move from field to field, establishing colonies wherever
it went, until now it las not only spread throughout all Eastern North
America, but has also succeeded in reaching Europe. Although not a
parallel case with that of C. spretus, it is a fair example of how migra-
tion favors the increase of a particular species of insect in contradis-
tinction to one that is non-migratory. The Chinch Bug and Cotton
Worm are also examples of the increase by migration or moving from
one locality to another.

38 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Of course, in the case of the locust, there are other agencies besides mi-
gration that tend to such abnormal and alarming i increase. The peculiar
climate and surface configuration of its native habitat are both of such
a nature as to favor this end. The long stretches of treeless areas, and
the comparative absence of enemies of all kinds, with the aridity of
climate, are such as to favor it in the highest degree; also the absence
of man’s destructive agency. When the numbers become excessively
great in their native habitat, their desire for moving increases to such
an extent that they are not satisfied with short journeys—in fact they
are obliged to take long ones in order to find the necessary amount of
food which so great an army of ravenous locusts requires. It being
impossible to obtain this short of a climate of such a nature as to pro-
duce an exuberant growth of vegetation, they necessarily continue to
drift with the wind until such a region isreached. Since, during these
movements, the prevailing winds are from the northwest and west, the
swarms must accordingly reach the fertile regions along the Missis-
sippi Valley, in Dakota, Minnesota, and southward. While here they
must follow their instinct of continuing their kind, and accordingly de-
posit their eggs—al ways choosing such localities for this.as most nearly
resemble the arid region from which they came. These eggs hatch with
favoring weather, and produce great nuinbers of young. Someof these
as they mature rise into the air and are returned to the arid regions of —
the West and Northwest by winds prevailing at this time of the year;
while others are destroyed by various animals, birds, and insects, and
also by moisture and heat. ‘To prevent these migrations and to destroy
both old and young while with us in the Temporary Region, and also
in the Permanent one, has been the aim of those who have taken suf-
ficient interest in the matter to make it a subject of study. Just how
nearly this object has been attained, I will not say; but that much has
been accomplished there is no denying.

Aside from man, and the numerous contrivances which he has per-
fected with which to destroy this insect in all of its stages, there are
hundreds of birds, mammals, reptiles, and insects, that spend the greater
portion of their lives in keeping this locust within bounds, and which
by their work alone would soon reduce its numbers to a normal con-
dition, if they could only follow it up, or if it could be keptin one local-
oe locality to be within the confines of the wooded portion of the
Temporary Region.

It is not my intention now to enter into a detailed account of all of
those that I have seen in the act of devouring this and other locusts.
For such au account I am pleased to be able to refer all who desire to
study this particular branch of locust literature to Prof. Samuel Augh-
ey’s admirable work, entitled “‘ Nature of the food of Nebraska Birds,”
and published in the first report of the Commission. In this essay the
author cites not less than 630 cases of dissection of at least 90 species
of birds, made by himself during a period of twelve years. These dis-

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 39

sections show how partial almost every one of these birds is to locusts
as food. Not only the wild birds of a country, but also all kinds of

poultry attack them with avidity. Even squirrels, mice, chipmunks,

weasels, skunks, and larger animals devour them in great numbers.
During my sojourn in Central Montana last summer (1880), I frequently

_ saw the little striped squirrels (of which the country is full) capturing

\

and devouring locusts, and that this is a common practice with most
rodents there is but little doubt, as we know their habit of frequently
changing their diet from vegetable to animal substances, and also
find numerous remains of locusts and other insects in the neighbor-
hood of their haunts. All reptiles and fishes at times do a great deal |
towards lessening the numbers of this as well as other injurious insects.
However great is the destruction of locusts by these animals, which we
can see, it is carried on in a much larger scale by insect parasites which
we donot notice. These are almost equally as numerous in species and
far more so in individuals. Some of them confine their attacks exclu-
sively to the eggs, others to the young, while still others only destroy
the mature locust. Others attack it in all of its stages, and in their
modes of life succeed in accompanying it throughout large tracts of
country.

The eggs of the locust are attacked by a great variety of insects,
which, as a rule, feed upon them in their larval stages. Of these the
most noticeable are several species of two-winged flies of the genus
Anthomyia, quite a number of species of what are popularly known as
‘“‘bee- flies,” and the grubs of several species of beetles that are closely
allied to the “Spanish Fly.” In addition to these quite a large number
of other species have been known to attack them.

The most beneficial of these egg parasites are those known as locust
mites. These often become very numerous, at times having been known
to destroy as high as 70 per cent. of the eggs laid in portions of Minne-
sota. They have also done much good in portions of Dakota, lowa,
Nebraska, Kansas, and Missouri, and in part helped to save many a
field of grain that would otherwise have been devoured. Native species
of locusts are also attacked by these mites, but whether these are of the
same or different species I am unable to state at present, not having
examined them with a view of determining them. I have also seen
several species of Meloide so completely covered by these little red
mites that they appeared like a moving mass of red insects, and it was
with great difficulty that they were enabled to move about.

The habits of these mites are such, too, as to aid in the furtherance
of their good work. larly in the spring |

The female lays between 300 and 400 minute, spherical, orange-red eggs in the ground.
They are usually from one to two inches beneath the surface and in slightly aggluti-
nated masses, which, however, easily become scattered upon disturbance of the soil.

From these eggs, in due time, there hatch little orange mites, which differ from the
parent in having but six legs.—(Riley.)

40 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

These minute mites are very active, and from hunger or by instinct
soon crawl upon the bodies of locusts, where they fasten themselves to
the wings and softer parts and fill themselves with the locust’s juices.
Being now aboard, when the locusts start out on their migrations, these
unwelcome and dangerous passengers are carried by them to their
new breeding grounds. As soon as the little fellows have sufficiently
gorged themselves they let go their hold and drop to the ground, where
they betake themselves to some sheltered place and continue to grow
and change their form. By this time their adopted hosts have gone to
work and deposited their eggs. They now, or early the following spring,
crawl down through the mucous substance which fills the upper portion—
of the hole in which the eggs have been deposited until they reach the
eggs, when they begin their good work by devouring them one after
another.

The bird enemies of the locust’s eggs are very numerous; and in
many instances, without the aid of the farmer, they scratch out and
devour great quantities of them. The principal mode, however, in which
they work is to follow the plow and harrow and eat the eggs after they
have been turned up and partially exposed to view. Blackbirds, crows,
and many small birds, with poultry, are the most active in this work
of destroying eggs. Mice and shrews, too, are very fond of locust eggs,
and quite frequently have I seen where they have dug up and eaten
them. In localities adjoining low, wet places instances of this kind are
quite common, and in such localities I have on several occasions sur-
prised and disturbed these smali mammals while apparently at this good
work.

The young or larve are equally and, if anything, more sought after
and devoured by these various classes of enemies. Birds will live on
them alone in preference to their ordinary food, while a great variety
of beetles, flies, wasps, &c., will eat them ravenously. In fact so greed-
ily are they sought for by these animals that it is really surprising that
a single one of them attains maturity. It is due only to their great num-
bers and to their habit of secreting themselves.

Neither are the mature locusts free from the attacks of these various
enemies, but, having increased so much in size, it requires fewer of them
to satisfy the appetites of this reducing army. Nevertheless millions
of these too have been permitted to mature only to be eaten ere they
make provision for a future generation by depositing their eggs.

Among the internal parasites of the locust are various species of
Tachina and flesh flies. These, at all times and in every part of both
the Permanentand Temporary Regions, do much towards diminishing the
otherwise large increase of this dreaded pest. As far as I am person-
ally concerned, I must confess that I have never bred more than about
a dozen of these flies from locusts. These were about equally divided
between two species, viz., Tachina anonyma Riley, and Sarcophaga
carnaria L. I have, however, seen hundreds of their maggots creeping

GENERAL REPORT FOR 18381. Al

along the ground during locust years, and have also taken a very large
number of the locusts that were infested with them. At present I can-
not recall the dates when they appeared in greatest numbers, but recol-
lect quite well their appearance in 1865, when I was assisting some
neighbor boys to keep the locusts from a cabbage patch.

I do not now remember whether I obtained any of the flesh flies
{Sarcophaga) from the bodies of the matured locust, but have taken
them on the ground soon after they left their victims. Some of these
flies infest the larvae and pupae as well as the winged insects. I have
also often seen them attacking other species of locusts besides the
migratory one, and not unfrequently have I found these grubs or mag-
gots in my drying box after having pinned large series of ‘“‘ natives.”
These undoubtedly belonged to several species and. genera, judging
from their slight differences in size and form; but as I had not the time
and facilities for rearing them, the species remain undetermined.

Until quite recently the larval habits of our various blister beetles
were but little understood. Since. the researches of the Commission,
however, the preparatory stages of many insects which had hitherto
been shrouded in mystery have been ascertained for the first time.
Among these were those of quite a number of the Meloidae. It has been
ascertained that they feed upon the eggs of locusts, and especially
those of C. spretus. This, then, accounts for the great numbers of these
insects that are found in all the leading locust areas of the West and
Northwest, especially in the latter district. Riley has shown in the
report for 1878 and 1879 the peculiar and interesting feature possessed by
the young of some of these insects of protracting development one, two,
or even more years, thereby supplying a new means for the continu-
ation of a species that is dependent upon uncertainties for its continu-
uation among the living.

I have noticed a great number of species of these insects both in Mon- |
tana and Colorado. In Montana they were mostly partial to the Legu-
minosae— Lupinus, Astragalus, &¢c.—some of which in certain localities
were covered with these beetles and denuded of their foliage, thus fur-
nishing an example of an insect that in its preparatory stages is parasitic
on another, and that after maturing lives upon a plant not eaten by the in-
sect on which it was a parasite. In this way, then, the parasitic beetle is
not only insured a chance of perpetuating its kind through its capability
of lying dormant in its imperfect stages for an indefinite time if the neces-
sary amount of food is absent, but also through its choice of food, in its
perfect state, since it lives upon that which the locust discards. In Col-
orado the food-plants of these beetles are chiefly such as belong to the
_ Compositae and Solanaceae—a few choosing the cultivated potato.

To these natural remedies add all those which have been devised by
man, and we have such a formidable array of destroying agencies at
work against the lives of these locusts in the egg, larva, pupa, and
winged states, that, were it not for their incalculable numbers, they would

42 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

soon be eradicated forever from the face of the earth and an end put to
their ravages. But, taking into consideration the vast numbers of
these insects in connection with their leading traits, we sometimes lose
all faith in our ability to ever keep them within bounds. If we could
prevent their migrations, perhaps we might hope for success; but other-
wise not. This is the conclusion arrived at by those who have not de-
voted a lifetime to the study of this and other insects of like nature.

Those, however, who have looked into its minutest traits and fol-
lowed the insect throughout the various portions of country at times
visited by its swarms, even hope to be able at some future time to check
its devastations notwithstanding its migratory nature and its habit of
withdrawing from the settlements to the vast unsettled plateaus of
the West and Northwest, where for a succession of years it goes on
with its process of multiplying without being disturbed by birds and
other natural enemies—in fact where everything appears to favor its
greatest possible increase. They hope to be able to prevent its coming
into the country known at present as its Temporary Region, or place
of periodical visits. This can only be done by preventing its abnormal
increase in its native habitat. Just how this will be accomplished, it
is difficult at present to state; but by watching carefully and noting
from time to time all the deals points in its habits that present them-
selves, I am confident that at some time in the future we shall learn the
true secret of its strength, and thereby be enabled to head it off. In
order to do this, however, we must be on the alert and continue to
study it in its native habitat—gathering all the additicnal data possi-
ble in relation to its breeding, habits, movements, enemies, and the
influence of various agencies upon all these. No other insect that has
been studied with a view to its destruction has so long baffled the
efforts of experts in their desire to discover some means of reducing its
numbers as this one has; and this has been all owing to its general
modes of life. There is hardly another one but that sooner or later has .
been compelled to succumb to man’s devices. ;

Tree culture, too, throughout the country would be one step towards
the final extermination of this insect. By planting groves of trees
throughout the prairie lands, timber-loving birds would be enticed away
from their haunts along rivers and smaller water-courses, and thus
would millions of insects be destroyed that otherwise would propagate
their kind in numbers sufficiently great to destroy everything green.
As before intimated, the absence of trees from these vast stretches of
the West is the principal reason for the development of locust swarms,
and wherever we find a country of like character we find one that pos-
-sesses its hordes of migratory locusts, and that at times sends out its
swarms into the surrounding fertile districts.

Knowing that, as a rule, every animal, whether vertebrate or inver-
tebrate, is so constructed as to be able to withstand only a certain amount
of variation in climate and diet, the question naturally arises whether

es

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 43

or not the difference in climate and vegetation between the permanent
and temporary home of this insect does not have some influence on its
growth and increase, as well as on its adaptation to these diversities.
The Permanent Region, with its comparative sameness of climate season
after season and year after year, is in unison with this insect’s mode of
life. Hence, when it chances to come into a country that has a variable
climate these influences begin to count against it. The region tem-
porarily occupied by C. spretus is one in which there is much rainfall,
and which is warmer than its permanent habitat. While the eggs do not
appear to be deposited earlier in one section than in the other, the con-
tinuation of the warm weather of autumn in the Temporary Region has a
tendency to partially hatch these, and the following cold winter weather
to destroy their vitality. In other words, after the eggs have once be-
gun hatching the alternate freezing and thawing or cessation of this
process diminishes their vitality to some extent. Consequently, young
hatched in this temporary locality are not as robust and healthy as.
those reared in the Permanent Region. A remarkable instance illus-
trating this was the spring of 1877 atter the open winter previous. In_
speaking of this Professor Samuel Aughey says:

It (the locust) cannot long endure a combination of low altitudes and moisture,
combined with extreme and sudden changes of temperature. Hence, the locust can
never become localized in Nebraska. The memorable spring of 1877 is a notable il-
lustration of this fact. In March and April immense numbers hatched out, and then
followed cold rains, with sudden alternations of extremes of temperature. Countless
millions of young locustsdied. In many spots where the ground seemed to be covered
with them, none could be found in a few days. Nothing convinced me that death
was the cause of their disappearance, until, getting down on my hands and knees
and examining the ground with a huge magnifying glass, I found their dead careasses.
The young brood just hatched out disappeared as if by magic from whole counties.
The localities where much damage was done were exceedingly few. In fact the brood
was so impaired constitutionally that it fell an easy victim to the extremes of a moist
climate in a comparatively low altitude. I also noticed, in previous locust years,
that moisture accompanied by an extremely hot or cold day, was.always fatal to many
of them.

Numerous instances of like character came under my notice in that
and other years.

The winged locusts, too, suffer from the effects of change of climate
which they must undergo in passing from the Permanent to the Tempo-
rary Region. Quite a number of instances of internal fungoid growths
have come under my notice within the past twelve years. I have also.
seen large numbers of them die from the effects of what to me ap-

‘ peared to be some kind of pestilence. When examined with a micro-

scope nothing unusual could be detected except the peculiarly flabby
and unhealthy appearance of their muscles and viscera, which were of
a yellowish color.

Locusts’ eggs are'so much affected by the warm falls of this region that
in the following spring they are found to be partially destroyed by semi-
decomposition.—(Aughey.) Many of them also become attacked by

44 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

mold. I recall very well the spring of 1873, when great numbers of the
eggs deposited the previous fall failed to hatch, and upon examination
were found to be moldy. This is caused by the warm wet weather in
fall. The lining and covering to the egg-pod partially decompose under
these conditions, and then this decomposition is imparted to the eggs,
which undergo a sort of fermentation—thus fitting them for the growth
of various molds. This condition of affairs was quite extensive in this
and adjoining counties * where I had the opportunity of examining them,
but how general in the State I am unable to state, as I made no efforts
at the time to ascertain. Sandy soil, however, appeared to be com-
paratively free from these conditions, I suppose on account of its porous-
ness and property of absorbing moisture, or of permitting it to soak in.
In those localities where the eggs were attacked by mold the species of
Anthomyia flies were also quite numerous. Hence, it appears that on
sandy soil the eggs are treest from all destructive agenties; true, such
localities are more like the permanent breeding grounds.

Naturally with the increase in the number of farms and advance of
the settlements upon the frontier the devastation by locusts will be felt

less. They will divide their ravages among more farmers, and hence

none will feel the losses nearly as much as did those who were isolated
from their neighbors during past invasions. Thinly-settled districts
suffered much more than those which were more thickly settled; and
. those lying out upon the prairie than those adjoining and interspersed
with groves. During these invasions there was no year but in which

a portion of the crops was saved and harvested by the farmers of the —

extreme eastern portion of Nebraska and other sections of country that
were comparatively thickly settled, and that were situated near some
natural timber-belt and interspersed with planted groves; while, on
the contrary, those that were far away from these natural and artificial
groves, and thinly settled, were entirely devastated by the hordes of
ravenous insects.. Hence we are compelled to acknowledge that the
settling of a country in which the settlers are tree-planters has a ten-
dency to diminish the ratio of locust injury.

Tree-planting is not only a matter of great importance to the inhab-
itants of a country like ours in supplying a much-needed material for
fuel during our severe winters, when at times it is impossible to obtain
coal—either from the failure of a sufficient supply at the mines, or
from the impracticability of reaching towns where it can be obtained—
but it is also of untold benefit as a moderator of climatic extremes.

By planting trees throughout the Temporary Region wherever they —

will grow, in time the area in which the locust is capable of con-
tinuing its existence but two or, at most, three generations, without
having recourse to the arid regions hitherto referred to as the permanent
breeding-grounds, will be increased. Aside from the greater amount
of humidity that would naturally follow tree-planting, the spread of

4Cuming County and others in Nebraska.

4 GENERAL REPORT FOR 188!. 45

locust-feeding birds would be correspondingly increased, and the amount
of good thus accomplished could hardly be estimated. As long, how-
ever, as there are no retreats or building places in which these little
feathered friends of ours can rear their little ones, we need not look for
their aid in fighting insect enemies. _

The increase in the number of settlers would also add to the number
of individuals to fight the locusts, and hence help to increase the sum
total of their dead and to diminish the swarms otherwise remaining to
do damage and to increase at the ratio of an hundred-fold.

There has been a great deal of disagreement in reference to the con-
tinuation of the flights of locust swarms during sbort and local rain-
storms, and also at night. That they do continue I think there can
be no longer any doubt, since the cases where locusts were seen in the
air immediately before and after local rains of short duration are quite
common. This summer, while near Golden, Colo., I saw a few locusts
flying very high during the progress of a rain-storm. I was at an eleva-
tion of about 8,500 feet at the time, and the locusts were seen through
small openings in the clouds. At other times also, of which I cannot
just now give the precise dates, I know of instances where thunder
showers came up, and during their progress large numbers of locusts
came down asif with therain. The first of these, of which I have any
knowledge, occurred in the month of August about fifteen years ago.
About noon, or a little later, a heavy thunder shower came up from the
northwest, and we boys, who were out with the cattle, began gathering
‘them together so that we could remain in the shelter of a tent that
we had erected during the coming of the shower. Well, just how we
succeeded I do not now remember; but after it had rained about an
hour we went out, when, to our great surprise, there were thousands of
‘‘orasshoppers” jumping about in every direction, and others were
coming down as if from the clouds. The majority had fallen during
the earlier part of the storm, however, as we noticed comparatively
few of them coming down. During the same afternoon, after the sun
came out, others were seen in the air. Those which had fallen did not.
leave until the next day. A few of them must have been killed in com-
ing down, because every now and then we found their carcasses lying
on the ground, some of which we picked up and used on our pin-hooks
for catching fishes. Other incidents, similar to this, have occurred
Since, but as they did not impress themselves as vividly upon my mind
as did this, I do not now recollect them as well, and therefore can give
no date.

Also during nights when the wind continues to blow quite briskly,
and the temperature remains unchanged or falls but little, swarms.
that are on the move sometimes continue to fly. I recollect several
instances in proof of this where locusts were known to leave a certain
locality about noon one day, and were not known to have come down
until some time during the following day. One of these occurred in

46 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION, —

1873, when a swarm left the southern part of the State, and did not
alight again until the following day, when it came down in the north-
ern part of the State, having flown about two hundred miles before
coming down to feed. Other small swarms have frequently come
during thé night and eaten fields of grain before morning. A case of
this kind occurred in 1865, near Fort Calhoun, Nebr. In the evening no
"hoppers were to be seen, but on the dawn of the following day they had
appeared and eaten the greater part of a field of corn.

The majority of cases where swarms have been known to continue
their flights into the night are confined to the Temporary Region, and
during the earlier part of the year when they are working their way
northward with south winds. The further north they proceed, and the
‘closer to the Permanent Region, the fewer are these unnatural flights.
This is undoubtedly due to the comparative coolness of the atmosphere
in these high latitudes and great altitudes, which anyone knows is a
restriction to their activity. Moonlight nights, too, are preferred for
these journeys in preference to dark and cloudy ones.

Although the general rule is for this insect to be single-brooded, it
does occasionally by its position and migrations succeed in becoming
double-brooded. Swarms reared in Texas in early spring sometimes
reach Nebraska and even Southern Dakota in early May. These gen-
erally leave eggs that hatch in about a month, thereby giving the young
the months of July and August in which to mature. These, however,
it is claimed, never amount to much, on account of the abnormal condi-
tions under ethoh they are iodine and very rarely deposit eggs.

In the mountain district of Montana and Idaho, as well as in portions
of the Temporary Region, I have noticed that after the majority of the
young were full-grown there were still others apparently just hatched.
Now, it may be that some of the instances of so-called double-brooded-
ness in this insect, if critically examined, would prove to be the hatching
of eggs that through various causes had been retarded longer than
usual. That this unevenness in hatching is of frequent if not regular
occurrence, anyone who has taken the least pains to ascertain will
know; but however common this may be, there are and have been occa-
sionally instances in which the evidence favoring double. broodedness
could not well be doubted. We may then take it for granted that un-
der certain conditions it is not only possible but actually true that
C. spretus becomes double-brooded. Yet cases of this kind are compar-
atively few.

SUB-PERMANENT REGION.

Immediately joining the Permanent Region of this locust, and lying
between it and the regions temporarily visited, is a tract of country
possessing in part the characteristics of both of these regions. This sec-
tion of country, as would naturally be supposed, is oftener visited by
swarms of locusts from the north and west than are the various portions

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. | AT

»

of the Temporary Region, since it is much more favorably situated.
This region, too, possesses the chief characteristics of the Permanent
Region, but slightly modified, and hence answers as a sort of ‘ stepping
stone” in the passage of swarms from one region to the other. Here it
is that quite frequently great numbers stop to breed in their flights from
the northwest towards the settlements of Minnesota, Nebraska, and
other portions of these Temporary Regions. Here they make provision
for a fresh start the following season—not the same locusts, but their
offspring. On their return flights also this intermediate location is used
by the stragglers and those that come from the far south as breeding
grounds. |

This region is confined to the eastern rather than to the western range
of the migratory locust—uniess we also term the entire western breed-
ing grounds, the Western Temporary Region. This, however, we would
hardly dare to do, since in these parts it is enabled to continue year af-
ter year for an indefinite length of time without showing the least signs
of disease and of dwindling. This interior basin and western mountain
region being at a greater elevation than the region lying to the east, to
which has been given the name of the Sub-permanent Region, more
closely resembles the true home or Permanent Region, and hence its not
being included under that name.

Having already noticed the partiality this insect possesses for a cool
climate, we would naturally and truly suppose that it would be boreal
in its nature. This being the case, we would expect to find it the most
humerous and enjoying the greatest immunity from all sorts of deterio-
rating influences to the northward. This, at least, is the fact. The
further north we go in the interior basin of the Mississippi and Missouri
Rivers, the more at home do we find the locust. At present, however,
it is not possible to give the exact temperature and other agencies that
are requisite for this insect’s greatest increase.

While this insect appears to be the only species that increases so
rapidly and becomes very numerous east of the Rocky Mountains, there
are several other closely allied species, or rather varieties, that at times
become quite numerous west of this range of mountains. These un-
doubtedly are but local forms of C. spretus, produced by climatic and
other influences. Of these other locusts, one in particular at times
becomes very numerous, and moves in swarms precisely like those of .
the true or migratory species, C. spretus, and possesses habits almost
identical with thoxe of that locust. This is the C. atlanis Riley, treated
of in the first Report of the Commission. It is confined to a locality
having the peculiar climatic conditions of the Permanent Region, some-
what modified by the presence of a greater amount of moisture and an
increase of temperature, also an increase in the timbered area. This
region is confined to the mountain districts of eastern Oregon, and a
portion of northern Nevada, with, perhaps, a small area in southwest-
ern Idaho. Tunis insect frequently drifts north into Washington Ter-

48 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

ritory, and thence eastward through Idaho into portions of western
Montana, where it commits depredations on crops, like the true spretus,
from which it is not considered distinct by the inhabitants. They think
it has been stunted during growth.

A few words liere as to the movements of locusts in these parts of the
West may not he amiss. All thoseswarms that come into this western
region from the north and east are composed of the genuine C. spretus,
while those that leave approach nearer to atlanis. The movements here
also differ to some extent from those east of the range, where there are
long stretches of plains uninterrupted by mountain ranges and belts of
timber as they are in the mountainous district west. Every river valley —
and mountain chain or spur has a tendency to change the course or to
retard the movements of swarms, while the winds for the greater portion
of the year are contrary, thus adding to the already numerous perplex-
ities. To understand all these movements, and the laws by which they
are regulated, will require considerable more time in which to investigate.

Other marked varieties of this insect are claimed by different farmers
to occur in isolated sections of the Northwest, and it is thought these
differences are altogether due to the variations in the climate and sur-
roundings. For my part, I will not express an opinion at present, as I
have not had sufficient opportunity to examine into the matter.

Although in the field from the middle of July to the Ist of November,
I saw comparatively few of these locusts. Nevertheless at almost every
locality where I stopped off, a few of them were seen. )

While out on the plains east of Greeley, Colo., August 6, I saw a few.
flying to thenorth. They were the most numerous at stout o'clock a.
m., but not numerous enough to cause unnecessary alarm. After this I
saw other very limited flights in the vicinity of Fort Collins, Golden,
and Denver. Others were seen on the ground with the “natives,”
but nowhere did I find them as numerous as several species of these
latter. <A “swarm” of locusts was seen on Salt River, a branch of the
Snake River, about the last of July, by W. A. Irwin, of Rawlins, Wyo.
He did not, however, notice any of them in the air, but was quite posi-
tive as to their identity. ‘‘Could not have mistaken them, as had seen
too many in Kansas.” Another swarm of this locust was reporteé as
having hatched in the vicinity of Deer Lodge, Mont., the present year.
‘6 All at once” they disappeared and were thought to have been destroyed
by birds and insect enemies, as none were seen in the air. Still another
swarm was hatched among the foot-hills about Missoula, Mont., where
they did some injury to wild grasses. They did not come down into the
valley, but upon “ getting their wings became very restless and flew about
as if not knowing which direction to take.”—(Dukes.) They finally
left, mostly towards the south, a few, however, going north. Those
going south followed up the Bitter Root and its tributaries, while those
going north drifted towards the Flat Head Lake. Other swarms of
locusts were seen at various localities on the Spokane and Snake River

GENERAL REPORT FOR 1881. 49

Plateaus, where they hatched last spring. One of these in particular
was quite extensive, though not known to have committed any injuries
to crops as far as I was able to learn. This swarm was hatched along
the line of the Northern Pacific Railway and westward, where they ate
off the grasses in many localities. I was unable to ascertain anything
definite about their movements, if any. Some individuals told me that
they did not leave, but died off towards fall, while others said they had
not noticed. Was not able to obtain any of the live insects, but gath-
ered a few of their carcasses that were lying about on the ground.
Another section where they were reported to have hatched this season
in eastern Washington Territory is between Colfax and Dayton, where,
at one place, they did much injury to several fields of grain. Others
were reported as having hatched in the vicinity of Lewiston, and farther
up the Snake River, as well as in a small portion of eastern Oregon.
Very few, however, were noticed in the air.

It therefore appears that at present the number of these insects within
the limits of the United States is comparatively small, and, if there are
no more in the British Possessions to the north, we need not be alarmed
the coming year, as there will be no probability of invading swarms.

The question now naturally arises whether or not we shall be visited
in the near future by swarms of these locusts; and, if so, how can we
ever expect to become rid of them. In answer to the former question
I will say that this depends altogether on the number of locusts in the
Permanent Region of Montana and northward from time to time; and also
upon the seasons in these regions, as well as upon the prevailing winds
while the locusts are upon the move. If there are but few locusts in this
region we can receive but few from it. Again, as long as their numbers
are few in any locality, their flights are correspondingly shorter. Should
there, however, be a succession of favorabie seasons in this region, we
may expect them to call in the Temporary Region just as they have
done in the past. Of course Dakota and Minnesota will be more in
danger than those States lying farther southward, for reasons heretofore
mentioned, and therefore the inhabitants of this section will always have
more to do in fighting them than will those who live farther from their
breeding grounds. However this may be, they are favored to some ex-
tent in the crops they raise, viz., wheat, oats, rye, and barley. Should
the locusts come into our section of country, which is quite probable,
the only thing for us to do is to take matters coolly and philosophically,
and do all in our power to prevent their offspring from returning to the
Permanent Region the following season; and not do as many farmers
did during past invasions, viz., put our hands in our trousers-pockets
and expect the Commission to destroy the locusts, and the government
to clothe us and our families until Providence gives us another crop.
There is no longer any excuse for not knowing how to fight this in-
sect in all its stages, since almost every county paper in districts vis-
ited or liable to be visited has hinted at the various means suggested

4EC

50 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

by members of the Commission and such energetic farmers as tried to
Save what they could of their crops.

Remember, also, that every effort put forth in fighting locusts is so
much towards their diminution and future immunity from their attacks.
Every locust that is destroyed before the breeding season subtracts
about forty from the possible increase the following season.

In speaking of the future in reference to the depredations by locusts
in Nebraska, Professor S. Aughey says:

When the area under cultivation is trebled, the amount of damage which they can
do will be more than one-half less. Another more potent agency against their in-
crease and destructiveness is the increasing rainfall of the State. We have already ~
seen how the wet season of 1877 destroyed the greater part of those that appeared
that spring. During each coming decade the number of similar seasons will increase. ~
The instincts of the locust will also prompt it to remain away from a region so hostile
to its existence.®

What is true of Nebraska is also true, toa great extent, of the larger
part of the Temporary Region.

For my part, [ am inclined to believe that we have experienced the
worst raids from this insect, and that if any more visitations are made
in the future, each successive one will be felt less for reasons heretofore
mentioned.

THE GENERAL OUTLOOK.

Having devoted so much space to the natural history and habits of
this locust, it would be well tu devote a little space to the probabilities _
of locust visits for 1882, and if any should appear, their extent and prob-
able whereabouts. This can only be approximately stated by using the
data of 1881 as a basis. As this insect covered but a comparatively
small area in the Permanent Region within the United States, and in
regions, too, so widely scattered, we may predict that its depredations
will not be great the coming summer.

While there were a few small flights noticed east of the main divide of
the Rocky Mountains, the majority of them were confined to the west-
ern portion of the locust area, heretofore noticed as the central region or
that of the Snake River Valley. A few small swarms were reared at
various localities in western Montana, northern Idaho, eastern Wash-
ington Territory and Oregon, as well as in Nevada and parts of Utah.
These, although I was unable to obtain sufficient data by which to sub-
stantiate this supposition, after flying away from the localities in which
they were reared, caine down and deposited their eggs, which, of course,
will hatch when the proper time arrives. These, according to custom,
will migrate, but in most instances in numbers insufficient to commit
great depredations.

The first locusts that I noticed or heard of this season were those
noticed about two o’clock in the afternoon on the 6th day of August.
They were on the wing at the time and were flying northward on a stiff

5Sketches of the Physical Geography and Geology of Nebraska, Omaha—1&80.

PROBABILITIES FOR 1882. 5l

breeze. This was in the vicinity of Greeley, Colo. I do not know
where they were hatched, but think they had not come from any great
distance. They were undoubtedly reared among the foot-hills west of
Denver, and migrated to some part of Western Nebraska or South-
western Dakota near the Black Hills. There were not enough of them,
however, to cause alarm for the coming summer, but there may and in
all probability will be a few scattered swarms emanating from these that
may visit portions of Nebraska and Dakota. Again, on the 17th of
August, a few C. spretus were noticed in the air and others on the ground,
some of the latter of which were copulating preparatory to egg deposit-
ing. These, however, were few in number, and consequently of no im-
portance. .

The next swarm of locusts heard of was at Rawlins Station, where Mr.
W. A. Irwin informed me that a swarm of locusts had been seen on Salt
_ River, a branch of Snake River, in Eastern Idaho, July 30. He did not
notice any of them in the air, but was quite positive that they were of
the “‘ migratory species,” as he had seen this insect in Kansas and Ne-
braska when they were so numerous there.

Another swarm of locusts for this year was that hatched in the vicin-
ity of Deer Lodge, Mont. Harly in May the young larve appeared in
great numbers over a small tract of country lying to the west of this
city, where they did some damage to grass and several fields of grain in
some of the smaller side valleys. They were supposed to have origi-
nated from a swarm that must have come in, left its eggs, and with-
drawn immediately after this operation, as no one could inform me of the
particulars, or even of any having been seen the previous fall. These
also disappeared as mysteriously as they came, as none were seen to fly.
It is my opinion now that this was the offspring of the small swarm that
last season was reared a few miles southeast of Helena, and that was
supposed to have been destroyed by a flock of sickle-billed curlew.

Another swarm, or rather several small swarms of locusts, were reared
in the vicinity of Missoula and Frenchtown this past spring from eggs
that were left by a swarm coming from the north and west. These did
some damage to the wild grasses up among the foot-hills, but did not
come down into the valley. As soon as they matured they became very
restless and flew about in various directions, coming and going as if un-
decided what direction to take. They finally left, most going southward;
but a few went to the north in the direction of Flat Head Lake and
Boundary Pass, where they undoubtedly crossed over the range and
entered the great Breeding Center of the North. Those going south I
was unable to trace, but suppose they came to a halt somewhere in the
Salmon River country, in which locality they will rear their young, to
continue their southward movements the coming year.

During the fall of 1880 locusts came into the valleys of eastern
Washington Territory from the northeast, did some damage to grain in
some isolated localities along the line of the Northern Pacific Railroad,

52 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

and passed on southward, leaving eggs at various points along their
line of march. One swarm seen this year (1880) on Hangman’s Creek,
about 48 miles south of Spokane Falls, was of considerable extent and
continued for two days. It was about 4 miles in width where they flew
thickest. After going as far south as the Palouse River they began
depositing eggs and continued to do so until they crossed Snake River,
after which they seem to have been lost sight of. Very likely it will
prove to be identical with the swarm that was reported to have appeared
and to have done damage to grain in the vicinity of Walla Walla dur-
ing August of this year, 1880.

From the above-mentioned swarms originated numerous small ones, —
that were observed throughout various portions of this Territory during
the present summer, 1881. These, however, were nowhere excessively
numerous, and did but little damage as far as could be ascertained, save
in a few isolated spots. Only on one occasion were any noticed in the
air that I could learn of, and this information was so vague that I did
not ascertain the direction in which they were moving. At Sprague,
on the line of the Northern Pacific Railroad, great numbers of young
were hatched, and also for some distance southward. These, however,
do not appear to have migrated, but remained and deposited their eggs,
since, on October 15, I found great numbers of their dead bodies lying
scattered over the ground. I was informed that this particular locality
is always more or less infested with this insect.

At several other points, especially along Snake River towards Lewis-
ton, I was informed that young locusts had hatched and done some dam-
age, but could not learn to what extent this occurred, nor could I ascer-
tain anything in reference to their movements after maturing. At the
crossing (Palouse Ferry) of Snake River in early spring, May, I believe,
several fields of grain were destroyed by these little locusts. So it is
impossible for me to predict anything in reference to locust probabilities
in this portion of the country for the coming season, not knowing any-
thing more definite in reference to the movements of the locusts hatched
here this season.

In the fall of 1880 great numbers of eggs were deposited in portions
of Nevada and Western Utah, which undoubtedly gave birth to some
young locusts in the spring of 1881, but not having any data whatever
from this portion of the West with which to. substantiate this, I can
give no further clew.

However free from locusts the country was in 1879, after the great
raids of 1875-77, they are again on the increase, and. soala be guarded
against on all sida Of course, there must have noe many more of these
small swarms in portions of the regions not visited by me, which, if
nothing occurs to check them, in a few years will materially increase
their numbers. Of course, at present, the movements of these swarms
are all independent of one another, but as they become larger and more |
numerous they will be more closely connected, and finally become ani-
mated with one movement.

Dig ae WY gai Mag i ata a

NOTES ON OTHER LOCUSTS, AND ON THE WESTERN
: CRICKET.§

In addition to the several species of locusts already noticed in this
report, there are at least upwards of two hundred and seventy others
that are known to inhabit the various portions of North America north
of Mexico, and which are more or less injurious to the agriculturist
and to those who are in any way dependent upon the products of the
soil for their living. True, but few of these various locusts ever become
so excessively numerous as do those concerning the history and habits
of which I have just written; neither do they ever, except on rare occa-
sions and with a few species, become imbued with a desire to migrate.

In their distribution these insects vary much. Some of them enjoy a
very wide range, and are well represented both in climatic varieties and
numbers; others are less widely scattered and are few in numbers,
while still others are local in their haunts an‘ quite few in individuals.
Others again, while local, are well represen*ed in numbers in their imme-
diate localities. So diverse are the habits of these various species of
‘‘orasshonpers” that almost every nook embraced within this entire
tract of country, where insect life is possible, possesses its one or two or
even more representatives of this group of jumping insects. Even the
‘cold and almost frigid mountain summits, as well as the parched and
desolate desert regions of Arizona and New Mexico, furnish suitable
haunts for a few hardy species that are so constructed as to be able to
withstand these extremes of climate. However numerous these insects
and diverse their haunts, it is nevertheless an undeniable fact that the
greater number by far are partial to a country, the climate of which is
moderately temperate and where the humidity is not excessive. Ne-
braska alone possesses at least 140 of them.

In the distribution of these insects we have noticed that the following
rules can be relied on toa great extent: Gidipoda and allies are more
partial to warm, sunny slopes where the ground is partially bare and
where they have a chance to flit about in the warm, open air and sun
themselves. Caloptenus and allies, as Pezotettix, Brachystola, &c., are
more partial to low and cooler localities where they can rest in the shade
and hop about among the more luxuriant and tender vegetation. <Acrt-
dium is @ lover of dense shrubbery and other luxuriant growths of vege.

6Continuation of Mr. Bruner’s report of observations under direction of Professor Riley, for 1881.

53

54 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

tation, while a few others frequent forests and their borders, where they
revel in luxury from day to day with the katydids and other shade-lov-
ing insects. Pezotettix, with but few exceptions, prefers cool and shady
localities, and hence is often found among or near rocks, on mountain
slopes, in clearings or on the outskirts of timber belts, and in meadows.
A few species, as Chrysochraon and Stenobothrus, are lovers of the cool
and damp localities along streams, and as a rule either winter as larve
or pups. These are often seen quite early in spring, and very frequently
have been the cause of unnecessary alarm among the more ignorant per-
sons, who imagined them to be forerunners of a general locust invasion.

However numerous these different varieties of locusts that are scat-_
tered throughout the various portions of the United States and north-
ward, all the others combined do not cause one-tenth so much injury as
C. spretus does. ‘True, several others at times have been known to be-
come quite numerous, and have committed much injury to crops and
vegetation in general. The chief of these are Camnula atrox, Calop-
tenus differentialis, C. femur-rubrum, and C. atlanis; and at such times
they have all exhibited to a greater or less degree the migratory nature
of the true plague of the West and Northwest.

In addition to the above-named insects of this order, I have noticed
the following locusts when their movements partook of the migratory
character, viz: Acridium americanum, Gidipoda plattei, Gi. longipennis,
aud Tropidolophus formosus ; the male only of the last exhibiting this
characteristic. They would start up without any seeming disturbance
aud fly great distances before alighting, and then repeat the action sev-
eral times, invariably going with the wind. These movements were
made independently of one another, though occasionally I have noticed
several locusts in the air at the same time. Whether or not this was
a case of true nigration on the part of these insects I will not now stop
to inguire; but confess that it not only looked so to me at the time, but
also answered every purpose that such a movement could.

These “natives,” as-they are termed in contradistinction to the mi-
gratory species, deposit their eggs in such localities as agree with the
habits of the different species. They are, however, generally partial
to sheltered and partly bare grounds where the soil is firm and not too
wet.

The young live where their parents do, and differ but little in their
habits. They molt from three to four times. ~

Most, if not all, of these locusts are continually harassed by insect
and other enemies. These enemies and parasites do not materially differ
from those affecting C. spretus, aud therefore require no additional de-
scription here.

The following is a list of the locusts, or ‘“‘ grasshoppers,” as they are
more commonly termed, inhabiting the United States and the adjoining
portions of British America and Canada, as nearly as I can give it at

£2

LIST OF KNOWN SPECIES OF LOCUSTS IN NORTH AMERICA. 55

present with the very limited amount of current literature upon this sub-
ject at my command. It may, however, be complete enough to enable
one to make an approximate estimate of the great numbers of locusts
inhabiting our country:

SCHNOMRwWhH

10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
1G:

jen
a)

bo bo bo ty tb ty bb lp
ADAP WNWE S

28.
29.
30.

bl.
32.

3d.
od,

NORTH ‘%{HRICAN ACRIDIDAZ NORTH OF MEXICO.

. Achurum brevipenne Thomas.—F lorida.
. Mesops wyomingensis Thomas.— W yoming.

chlorizans Thomas.—Florida.

. Mermiria alacris Scudd.—Georgia.

neomexicana Thomas.—Colorado, Nebraska, &ce.
bivittata Scudd.—Eastern and Middle United States.

. Opomala carinata Thomas.—Eastern United States.

aptera Scudd.—Pennsylvania.
brachyptera Scudd.—Massachusetts, Wyoming.
Leptysma marginicolle Stal.—Florida.
Aptenopodes sphenaroides Scudd.—Florida.
rufovittata Scudd.—Florida.
aptera Scudd.—Florida.
Pyrgomorpha brevicornis Walker.—Southern United States.
punctipennis Thomas.—Tennessee.
Oxycoryphus obscurus Thomas.—W yoming.
Chrysochraon conspersum Thomas.—Hastern States, British Amer-
ica.
punctulatum Thomas.—Connecticut.
abdominale Thomas.—Montana.
obscurum Scudd.—Florida.
deorum Scudd.—Colorado.

. Acrolophitus hirtipes Thomas.—Colorado.
. Pediocertetes nevadensis Thomas.—Nevada.
. Stenobothrus occipitalis Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho.

coloradus Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming.
tricarimatus Thomas.—Wyoming.
admirabilis Uhler.—United States east of Rocky Moun-
tains.
subconspersus Walker.—Florida.
speciosus Scudd.—Minnesota.
maculipennis Scudd.—Florida, Massachusetts, Wyo-
ming, Minnesota, Nebraska, &c.
aqualis Scudd.—Massachusetts, Maine, New York,
Minnesota, &e.
bilineatus Scudd.—Massachusetts.
propinquans Scudd.—Utah, Nebraska, &e.
curtipennis Scudd.—Nebraska, North America east of
Rocky Mountains.
clavatus Thomas.—Kansas,

56 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

36. Stenobothrus occidentalis Sauss.—Tennessee.

37. brunneus Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming.

38. quadrimaculatus Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming.

39. gracilis Seudd.—Nebraska.

40. pelidnus Thomas.—Pennsylvania.

41. Gomphocerus simplex Scudd.—Delaware.

42, virgatus Scudd.—Texas.

43, shastanus Scudd.—California.

44, clepsydra Scudd.—Colorado.

45. navicula Scudd.—Colorado.

46. clavatus Thomas.—Kansas, Nebraska, &e.

47. euterpe G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska.

48. Stetheophyma lineatum Scudd.—Massachusetts.

49, gracile Seudd.—Maine, British America.

50. platypterum Scudd.—New England States.

51. Chimarocephala pacifica Scudd.—California.

52, brevipennis Scudd.—California.

53. viridifasciata (De Geer) Scudd.—United States.

o4. obiona Thomas.—Colorado.

55. infuscata Harris.—United States east of Rocky
Mountainss,

56. Psoloessa texana Scudd.—Texas.

57. JSerruginea Scudd.—Texas.

58. maculipennis Scudd.—Texas, Colorado.

59. Arphia simplex Scudd.—Texas.

60. conspersa Scudd.—Texas.

61. luteola Scudd.—Texas.

62. ' frigida Scudd.—Montana.

63. arcta Scudd.—Colorado.

64. teporata Scudd.—Colorado, New Mexico.

65. Tomonotus sulphwreus Sauss.—United States, Vancouver’s Island.

66. xanthopterus Thomas.—Eastern United States. |

67. carinatus Thomas.—lowa, Missouri, &e.

68. tenebrosus Thomas.—Central United States.

69. zimmermannit Sauss.—F lorida.

70. Stauronotus elliott Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming, Montana.
71. Tropidolophus formosus 'Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming.
72. Spharagemon cequale Scudd.—North America east of Rocky Mount-

ains.
73. bolli Scudd.—Texas. |
74, balteatum Scudd.—Eastern United States.
75. wyominganum Scudd.— Wyoming.
76. collare Scudd.—Central United States.
Clie cristatum Scudd.—Texas.

78. Encoptolophus sordidus Scudd.—United States—eastward.
79. costalis Scudd.—Texas.

80.
Sl.

83.
S4.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.

90.
ot,
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.

99.
100.

101.

102.
103.
104.

105.

106.
107.
108.

109.

110.
111.
on:
113.

114.
115.
116.

Ey,
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.

LIST OF KNOWN SPECIES OF LOCUSTS IN NORTH AMERICA. 57

Encoptolophus parvus Scudd.—Texas.
Circotettiv carlingianus Thomas.—Nevada, Montana, and British
America.
maculatus Scudd.—California.
undulatus Thomas.—Colorado.
Trimerotropis latifasciata Scudd.—Washington Territory.
fontana Thomas.—Utah.
similis Seudd.— Washington Territory.
ceruleipes Scudd.—Oregon.
vinculata Scudd.—Washington Territory.
verruculata Scudd.—lIllinois, Nebraska, Montana, and
Dakota.
suffusa Scudd.—California, Utah.
citrina Seudd.—Colorado.
obscura Scudd.—New Mexico.
pseudofasciata Scudd.—California,.
juliana Scudd.—California.
picta Scudd.—Florida, Georgia.

Dissosteria carolina Scudd.—United States, Canada.
longipennis Scudd.—Kansas, New Mexico.
nebrascensis Bruner.—Nebraska.

Hippiscus corallipes Scudd.—Utah, Nebraska, Dakota, &e.

lineatus Scudd.—Idaho, Cunerlas.

neglectus hopes oneal New Mexico, Wyeming.
haldemannit Scudd.—Colorado.

putnamt Thomas.— Utah or New Mexico.

discoideus Stal.—Florida.

Camnula atrow Scudd.—California, Oregon, Nevada, British Amer-
ica, &c.

Aulboeende Scudd.—Maine, atts) S&C.

Aulocara decens Scudd.—Utah.

ceruleipes Seudd.—Colorado.

Psimidia wallula Seudd.—Washington Territory.

eucerata Harris.—Florida.
sulcifrons Scudd.—California.
CGidocara strangulatum Scudd.—Colorado.
Stirapleura decussata Scudd.—Colorado, Montana,
Phlybostroma parvum Scudd.—New Mexico.
pictum Scudd.—Nebraska.

Hadrotettix trifasciatus Seudd.—Colorado, Wyoming, Dakota, Mon-
tana, Nebraska, &c.

Trachyrachys aspera Scudd.—New Mexico.
coronata Scudd.—New Mexico.

Derotmema cupidineum Scudd.—New Mexico.

Aconia integra Scudd.—California.

(Edipoda venusta Stal.—California.

marmorata Ubler.—Massachusetts.

58

123.
124,
125.
126.
127,
128.
20:
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.

137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.

144,
145.
146.
147.
148.

149.
150.
151.
152.
153.
154,
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.

162

163.
164,
165.

REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Hdipoda haydenit Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming.
Senestralis Uhler.—Florida, North America.
gracilis Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming.
kiowa Thomas.-—Colorado, Nebraska, Dakota, &e.
cincta Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming, Illinois, &e. -
platte. Thomas.—Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, &e.
maritima Uller.—Massachusetts, Connecticut.
hoffmannit Thomas.—New Mexico and Arizona.
montana 'Thomas.—Montana, Idaho, &e.
paradoxa Thomas.—Utah, Idaho.
rugosa Seudd.—United States, Vancouver’s Island.
phenicoptera Germ.—United States.
parviceps Walker.—California, &e.
Chléealtis viridis Scudd.—Ilorida, Nebraska, Connecticut, Illi-
nois, &e.
brunneus Scudd.—Texas.
Amblytropidia subhyalina Scudd.—Texas.
Dociostaurus ornatus Scudd.—New Mexico.
Leprus ingens Scudd.—California.
Scyllina delicatula Seudd.—Colorado.
Boopedon nubilum Thomas.—Nebraska.
flavofasciatum Thomas.—Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming,
Montana, We. )
Phrynotettix verruculatus (Uhler MSS).—Pecos River, Texas.
Platyphyma montanum Thomas.—Montana.
Chromacris colorata Walk.—South Carolina.
Tropidacris dux Scudd.—Texas.
Brachystola magna Scudd.—Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming, and Ne-
braska.
virescens Scudd.—Texas, New Mexico.

_ELremobia magna Thos.—Arizona.

Acridium frontale: Thomas.—Kansas.
untlinealum Walker.—Indiana.
rubiginosum Harris.—Eastern United States.
alutaceum Harris.—Eastern United States.
emarginatum Uhler.—Colorado, Nebraska, and Dakota.
americanum Scudd.—Eastern and Middle United States.
ambiguum Thomas.—Illinois, Kansas, and Tennessee..
obscurum Burm.—Southern States.
shoshone Thomas.—Arizona, Nevada, Utah.
vagum Seudd.—California.
appendiculatum Uhler.—Florida.
Dictyophorus reticulatus Thunb.—Florida.
maret Burm.—Florida.
Pezotettix olivaceus Seudd.—Texas.
acutipenms Scudd.—Texas.

LIST OF KNOWN SPECIES OF LOCUSTS IN NORTH AMERICA. 59

166. Pezotettix variegatus Scudd.—Colorado, New Mexico, &ce.

167. dumicollis Scudd.—Texas.

168. nudus Scudd.—Texas.

169. lakinus Seudd.—Kansas, Colorado.

170. texanus Scudd.— Texas.

171. discolor Scudd.—Texas.

172. flabellatus Scudd.—Texas.

173. pupeformis Scudd.—Texas.

174. aridus Seudd.—Arizona.

175. aspirans Scudd.—Colorado.

176. — rotundipennis Scudd.—Florida.

vue puer Scudd.—Florida.

178. dodget Thomas.—Utah, Montana, Colorado.
Lo: tellustris Scudd.—New Mexico.

180. marshallti Thos.—New Mexico, Colorado.
181. stupefactus Scudd.—New Mexico.

182. plagosus Scudd.—New Mexico.

183. marginatus Scudd.—California.

184, vivax Scudd.—New Mexico.

185. jucundus Scudd.—California.

186. enigma Scudd.— Arizona.

187. gracilis Bruner.—Nebraska, Dakota.

188, glacialis Seudd.—New Hampshire, British America.
189. mancus Smith.—Maine.

190. borckw Stal.—California, Oregon.

191. zimmermannit Sauss.—Carolina.

ng2. longicornis Sauss.—Carolina.

193. nebrascensis Thomas.—Nebraska.

194. unicolor Thomas.—Illinois.

195. edax Sauss.—Carolina.

196. scuddert Uhler.—Maryland, Illinois.

LOT: borealis Seudder.—Minnesota.

198. septentrionalis Sauss.—Labrador.

199, pacificus Scudd.—Western United States, California.
200. occidentalis Bruner.—Nebraska.

901. albus G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska, Minnesota.
202. junius G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska.

203. autumnalis G. M. Dodge.— Nebraska, Dakota.
204. pictus Thomas.—Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, &c.
205. ee gonotes opimus Scudd.—California.

206. obesus Thomas.—Montana.

207. FE crotettin viridis Seudd.—Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, Minnesota,
Kansas, Xe.

208. Caloptenus extremus Walker.—British America.

209. areticus Walker.—British America.

210. borcalis Fieb.—British America.

60 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

211. Caloptenus bilituratus Walker.—Pacific Coast, Montana.

ho b bo bo

212. punctulatus Uhler.—Maine, Massachusetts.
2S. minor Scudd.—Mississippi Valley.
214, gracilipes Seudd.—(’*)
215. — deletor Scudd.—Texas.
216. robustus Scudd.—Texas.
217. turnbullii Thomas.—Pacifie coast.
218. floridanus Thomas.—Florida.
219. angustipennis G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska.
220. plumbum G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska.
221. differentialis Thomas.—Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Mis-
sourl, we.
22. griseus Thomas.—Ohio, Nebraska.
23. scriptus Walker.—Pacifie coast.
24, occidentalis Thomas.—Montana, Colorado, &e.
25. yarrow Thomas.—Arizona or Nevada.
226. regalis G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska, Colorado, Wyo
221. helluo Scudd.—Texas.
228. ponderosus Scudd.—Texas.
229. flavolineatus Thomas.—Florida.
230. keelert Thomas.—Florida.
231. volucris G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska.
232. clypeatus Scudd.—Georgia.
233. (Melanoplus) femur-rubrum Deg.—United States, British America.
234. collinus Scudd.— Vermont.

230. Jemoratus Seudd.—Washington ‘Territory, Maine,
South Carolina, British Columbia, &c.

236. atlanis Riley.—Northern United States and British
America.

237. rectus Seudd.—Maine.

238. luridus G. M. Dodge.—Nebraska, Dakota, &c.

239. collaris Seudd.—California.

240, devastator Scudd.—Montana.

241. cinereus Scudd.—California, Nevada, Washington Ter-
ritory, &c.

242, spretus Uhler.—Western United States and British
America.

243. packardii Scudd.—Washington Territory, Colorado,
Utah, Nebraska, Texas.

244, kennicotttt Scudd.—British America and Alaska.

245, bivittatus Scudd.—Eastern and Central United States,
British America.

246. tenebrosus £ cudd.—North Carolina.

247, arizone Scudd.—Arizona.

248, — mfantilis Scudd.—Colorado, Wyoming, British Amer-

ica, &e.

LIST OF KNOWN SPECIES OF LOCUSTS IN NORTH AMERICA, 61

249, (Melanoplus) variolosus Scudd.—Kansas, Colorado.

250. flabellifer Scudd.—Colorado.

251, fodus Scudd.—Colorado.
252. curtus Scudd.—Colorado.
253. interior Scudd.—Arizona, Utah, &c.
254, bowditchit Scudd.—Colorado.
255. flavidus Scudd.—Colorado, Nebraska.
256. nigrescens Scudd.—Georgia.
257. Paroxya atlantica Scudd.—Atlantic coast, &e.
258. recta Scudd.—Georgia, Florida.
259. Tettix ornatus Harris.—British America, New Mexico.
260. arenosus Burm.—South Carolina, Florida.
261. cucullatus Burm.—Massachusetts, Missouri, &c.
262, femoratus Scudd.—Maryland.
263. triangularis Scudd.—Massachusetts, Maine, New Hamp-

shire, We.

264. rugosus Scudd.—Florida.
265. oxycephalus Burm.—South Carolina.
266. harrisiti Packard.—Maine.
267. granulatus Scudd.—Eastern North America.
268. Tettigidea lateralis Scudd.—Florida, Eastern United States.
269. polymorpha Scudd.—Hastern United States.
270. . obesa Seudd.—Georgia.
201, prorsa Scudd.—Georgia.
272. Batrachidea cristata Scudd.—Florida, Massachusetts.
273. carinata Scudd.—Massachusetts.

This list I do not consider perfect in any respect, nor do I claim any
meri‘s for it; on the contrary it possesses many faults, both in the order
in which the names occur and in the names themselves. However this
may be, it will answer the purpose for which it is designed, viz., to
show the great numbers of this family of insects that inhabit our coun-
try. But few of these species are known to the general class even of
entomologists, and fewer to those who take no interest in the insect
life about them. By a careful study of these insects throughout the
various portions of the unexplored regions of the West and Northwest,
I am quite confident that many others will be added to this already large
list. The habits and natural history, too, of most of these locusts, are
but comparatively little understood, and there yet remains much to be

learned.
THE WESTERN CRICKET.’

(Anabrus simplex.)

In various portions of the far West are to be found different species
of large, wingless and dark-colored insects which distantly resemble

7 Compare also the account of this cricket in the Second Report of the U. S. Entomological Commis-
sion, chapter VIII, p. 163.

62 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

true crickets. These insects belong to that large and variable group or
family of Orthoptera the Locustide, or katydids and allies, but are
known as Western Crickets. Of the genus Anabrus there are at least a
half of a dozen species. One of them, however, has gained for itself'a
name that cannot soon be forgotten by the early settlers of Utah and
adjoining territories. At times this insect became so numerous that in
its marches great depredation was done to crops, and the early settlers
were entirely despoiled of their agricultural products. Wheat, oats,
and barley, as well as most garden products, were attacked with the
utmost avidity, and when once in a field or garden this insect would
not leave without having first eaten everything—the weeds even being
included among the rest, and in many cases devoured close to the
ground.

This insect is known popularly as the Cricket, the Western Cricket,
Buffalo Cricket, &c., and scientifically as Anabrus simplex. Its distribu-
tion appears to be coincident with that of C. spretus west of the main
divide of the Rocky Mountains, but it is confined to the more elevated
sage wastes and mountain valleys, as well as the open slopes bigh up
the mountain sides. In fact, as a rule, it keeps up among the mount-
ains, and only occasionally comes down into the valleys on marauding
expeditions.

The cricket, like the locust, was not known until emigrants and gold-
seekers began to cross the continent, and then only was it heard of as
having been seen in the vicinity of Great Salt Lake and along the old
Military Road. Since the locust question came up, however, its known
range has greatly increased, and now we are aware of its existence as far
north and west as Pend d’Oreille Lake and the eastern half of Washing-
ton Territory. Oregon too, occasionally, is reported as having its share
of vast herds of crickets, while Nevada is occasionally visited by them.
In Utah they oceasionally appear as far south as Mount Nebo. They
travel in droves or herds, which come marching along over the country
like an army intent upon razing to the ground everything that lies in
its line of march. These armies vary greatly in size and in their tac-
tics while on the move. As arule they collect into lines varying from
a few to hundreds of yards in width, and from a few hundred feet to a
mile or more in length. When they are ready to move, a few of them
start off in the direction in which they intend to go, and are followed
by others, and these again by still others—all taking the same route,
and thereby exhibiting the leading character in the moving or migrat-
ing of wingless insects. Ants and termites also possess this peculiar
habit, as do several species of crustaceans that at times are in the habit
of changing their abodes or of traveling in search of food.

The natural history and habits of this cricket are but little known as.
yet, since their usual haunts and breeding grounds lie far up in the
mountains and out among the sage wastes of the foot hills. Here it is
that they generally pass their lives and propagate their kind year after

HABITS OF THE WESTERN CRICKET. 63

year, devouring the wild grasses and herbs. At times, through some
unnatural increase or the scarcity of food in these localities, or, perhaps,
from the perfecting of some latent desire to roam, they make the ap.
pearance for a short time, and then are off again for the uplands, to
remain a mystery for another indefinite number of years. I was really
surprised at the ignorance displayed by many of the inhabitants of the
Western Territories, many of whom were of the opinion that they are of
the nature of the cicadas and other periodical species. As wide as the
distribution of this insect is, the locality, however, where they are the
most numerous is the lava region along the valley of the Snake River.
Here it is that we hear of them in greater or less numbers every year.

This year I heard of crickets throughout Idaho, Montana, and east-
ern Washington Territory, and was fortunate enough to meet a gentle-
man (Mr. A. Bowen, of Colfax, W. T.) who was able to give me some
information in reference to their breeding habits in the eastern portion
of Washington Territory. The following is the natural history of these
insects, as given by him:

Crickets are frequently seen in large numbers at different localities throughout
eastern Washington Territory, and at times have done considerable damage to
crops, vegetables, and grasses. That they should occasion great alarm when ap-
pearing in such vast droves is quite natural; but, in reality, they are not so danger-
ous as might be supposed, since they are very easily checked in their march by
ditches, and can be readily destroyed. If a ditch two feet wide and two and a half
deep be dug across their line of march they wiH fall into it and cannot get out. By
putting in larger pits at intervals they are doubly ‘‘corralled,” and soon begin de-
stroying one another, as they are great cannibals. Rolling the ground, too, is of con-
siderable aid toward diminishing their numbers.

When once started in a certain direction it is seldom that they turn aside for or-
dinary obstacles, but keep straight ahead until they ‘‘fetch up” in some creek,
ditch, or pit, and are lost by drowning or by being devoured by their stronger neigh-
bors and kinsfolk.

In speaking of this insect Mr. Bowen said that “the young were so
small when first hatched that they could hardly be seen,” but in a few
days they molt and become perceptibly larger. This “ shedding” is
repeated several times, until they have finally attained full size, after
which they become quite dark colored. When ready to molt they
climb up a blade of grass, weed, or some other object, to which they
cling while going through the process; after which the skin of the
cricket first cracks open on the back like a cicada, and the new insect
comes out “fresh and green,” but soft. Sometimes the shell is eaten,
but generally is left clinging where it was shed.

In early spring when they are just hatched the little fellows are found
in clusters of twenty to forty—probably the offspring of a single female,
or more likely of a single batch of eggs. These young as they increase
in size spread from time to time until they form circular droves with a
diameter of twenty or more feet, and finally the various broods become
so intermingled that they are no longer discernible.

It has often been a query with the settlers of various portions of the

64 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

“cricket area” of the West, whence do the great numbers of this in-
sect come after a series of years in which comparatively few or none have
been noticed, and some even assert that they only mature after a period
of seven years or at other definite intervals. Mr. Bowen’s idea, how-
ever, is that they are annual in their generation, and are noticed only
after a winter favorable to the preservation of their eggs, which are
mostly destroyed in other years. He thinks that small droves are an-
nually bred at isolated localities, and spread over a large area to de-
- posit their eggs. In these views I coincide, although I must confess
that I have had no personal experience with this insect.

A year when crickets were bad in Pleasant Valley, eastern Washing-
ton Territory, as well as in many other localities in this Territory. was
~ that of 1873. At that time, however, but little farming was carried on
in this district, and hence the damage occasioned by them was light.
Again, in 1877, some were seen in the neighborhood of Colfax, but these
did not appear to come in contact with many fields of grain or gardens
in their marches. Since, and prior to this, small droves have been re-.
ported as having been seen in various portions of this and adjoining
portions of Oregon and Idaho.

I could supplement this list with many more accounts of the appear-
ance of this insect, but they are all of a similar character, and hence of
no particular jatorceh here.

But few parasites are known to affect this cricket. Further investi-
gations may greatly enlarge the list, however. In the summer of 1878
large numbers of this insect were seen along the Portneuf River. A
few of these were attacked by red mites much like those infesting the
migratory and other locusts. These were clinging to them at various
points, but chiefly about the thorax and rudimentary wings. I do not
know, but suppose they are the young of some egg-eating mite—per-
haps one that attacks the eggs of this and other crickets. I have also —
been told that various ground-beetles and sand-wasps destroy some of
their young. Hair-worms (Gordius), too, are frequently found wound
about their intestines. Besides these insect enemies there are numerous
species of birds that devour great numbers of them. Fishes, too, cap-
ture large numbers as they cross streams.

This is all that I will mention at present in connection with this in-
sect, but hope some time in the future to be able to give its full history,

Respectfully yours, :
LAWRENCE BRUNER.

Prof. C. V. RILEY,

United States Entomologist,
Washington, D. O.

CHAPTER V.

DATA OBTAINED FROM SOLAR PHYSICS AND EARTH.
QUAKE COMMOTIONS APPLIED TO ELUCIDATE LOCUST
MULTIPLICATION AND MIGRATION.?®

This noble lantern of the world, the all-vivifying, pulsating heart of
the universe, in the opinion of Baron von Humboldt, was the primary
source of light and of radiating heat, and the generator of numerous
terrestrial electro-magnetic processes, as indeed of the greater part of
the organic activity upon our planet. Itis the sun-power that gives
rise to alterations on the surface of the earth, and that conjoins with
lunar attraction in producing the mounting of the spring-tide. It is the
solar rays that move the atmospheric and oceanic currents ; that evoke
the colored coruscations of the polar light; thunder and lightning, hur-
ricanes and waterspouts, speak of their action; and it is no less the
solar rays that evoke the all-silent forces of chemical attraction and
that variously determine organic life in the endosmose of cell-walls and
in the tissue of muscular and nervous fibers (Cosmos, Trans. by Otté
and Paul, p. 359). This portion of solar physies is now so generally un-
derstood that it becomes unnecessary to adduce the opinions of other
learned authors, or to refer to an endless and mundane bibliography ;
although it may not be out of place to remark, that the conception of
the sun being a great electro-magnetic globe would seem to possess no
‘small claim to be considered the predominant one; and many doubtless
are of opinion that the stellar forces of rotation, revolution, oscillation
(nutation and obliquity of the ecliptic), gravitation, and chemical affinity,
should be considered as phenomena induced by its action. (I notice an
observation on this subject in the Journal of Science for March, 1882,
e222.)

Be this inference as it may, certain is it that the scientific mind since
the days of Humboldt has become gradually reawakened to the circum-
stance that a large class of terrestrial phenomena on which mankind
depends for the future development of its resources are not only ruled
by the earth’s diurnal revolution and annual circuit round the sun, but
are likewise immediately controlled by a recurring variation in the
potent energy of the central luminary of our system itself. Terrestrial

8Prepared and communicated to the Commission by Mr. A. H. Swinton, of Binfield Home, Guild-
ford, Surrey, England, who has given much attention to insect periodicity and to whom we hereby ten
der our acknowledgements without endorsing all the author’s views.

DEC 65

66 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

magnetism, electrical activity, periodical variations in temperature,
periodicity of wind disturbance, and annual rainfall have especially
occupied attention in this respect; and their cycles following respon-
sively on the changes in the bright photosphere surrounding the sun,
have been observed, registered, and drawn up in tables. From these
indices we may now glean that as this bright atmosphere of light every
eleven years or so becomes ragged with spots and then replenishes its
Shining,’ so do cold and warm seasons, cyclones. and rainfall, disturb-
ances along the electric wire, compass oscillations, auroral displays,
and other sun symptoms in our sky and soil, follow each other in due
sequence. Medical science, too, has not been oblivious of these sun—
periods, and not a few attempts have been'made to correlate them with
seasons of famine, plague, cholera, and other epidemic visitations. (A
pestilential cycle, according to Dr. John Parkin, extended from 1600
until about 1700, and another began with the nineteenth century.
Journal of Science, August, 1881.)

In the cloud-driven and inconstant climate of northern Europe the
procession of the seasons daily chronicled in the horizontal swing and
vertical dip of the compass needle, would. appear from all accounts to
be both complex and difficult to unravel; and the same remark, I think,
applies to the tracts of northern America. Indeed, it would appear
hitherto as though the electrical storms and increasing frequency in-the
display of auroral lights, the wind commotions, and perhaps rainfall
coming on about the maximum period of sun-spots, and the heat waves
characterizing the minimum period are to be considered as the most
obvious and best established features in our solar drama. Electrical
storms were felt along the English telegraphic wires in the years 1848
and 1859, and again, Jast August (1881), we hear of the compass needle
being affected (English Mechanic, of Friday, December 9, 1881). During

9 Sir John F. W. Herschel’s description of the sun spots.

When viewed with powerful telescopes, provided with colored glasses to take off the heat, which
would otherwise injure the eyesight, the sun is observed to have frequently large and perfectly black
spots upon it, surrounded with a kind of border, less completely dark. These spots are, however, not
permanent. When watched from day to day, or even from hour to hour, they appear to enlarge or con-
tract, to change their forms, and at length to disappear altogether, or to break out anew in parts of the’
surface where none were before. In such cases the central dark spot always contracts into a point,
and vanishes before the border. Occasionally they break up or divide into two more, and in those
offer every evidence of that extreme mobility which belongs only to the fluid state, and of that exces-
sively violent agitation which seems only compatible with the atmospheric or gaseous state of mat-
ter. Their size has been computed at from 465 to 45,000 miles linear diameter, and some are said to
reach a greater extent. That part of the sun’s disk not occupied by spots is far from uniformly
bright. Its ground is finely mottled with an appearance of minute, dark spots or pores, which, when
attentively watched, are found to be in a constant state of change. There is nothing which repre-
sents so faithfully this appearance as the slow subsidence of some flocculent chemical precipitates in
a transparent fluid, when viewed perpendicularly from above. Lastly, in the neighborhood of great
spots, or extensive groups of them, large spaces of the surface are often observed to be covered with
strongly marked curved or branching streaks more luminous than the rest, and among these, if not
already existing, spots frequently break out. Only one notion among the many that have been
broached has gained acceptance in regard to the spots, namely, that they are the dark, solid body of
the sun itself, laid bare to our view by those immense fluctuations in the luminous regions of its atmo-
sphere to which it appears to be subject. The region of the spots is confined within about 30° of the
sun’s equator, and from their motion on the surface, carefully measured with micrometers, is ascer-
tained the position of the equator and period of the sun’s rotation, &c.--(A Treatise on Astronomy, by
S.r John F. W. Herschel, pp. 207-211.)

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE, 67

the year 1870, another epoch of maximum sun-spots, no such disturb-

ances, if prevalent on the continent, intruded themselves into notice in
this country; but on the nights of the 24th and 25th of October a very
fine display of crimson flashes broke over the roofs and spires of Lon-
don, showing that the earth condenser, according to M. De la Rive’s
theory, then shot its discharge currents into the higher atmosphere.
Other auroras were observed on the 5th of April, 1870, and on the 15th
of April and 13th of May, 1869, the former being noticed in America.
(There is a good chart showing the agreement of the Magnetic Diurnal
Range and Sun-Spot Curves between the years 1841 and 1877, by Mr.
Ellis, in the Philosophical Transactions for 1880.)

Turning from electricity to meteorology, a subject more immediately
affecting the present inquiry, we find that Prof. Piazzi Smyth, the As-
tronomer Royal for Scotland, as the result of observations made from
1837 to 1869, with thermometers sunk in the rock at the Royal Observ-

_ atory, Edinburgh, came to the conclusion that a great heat wave occurs

every eleven years and a fraction, its maximum slightly lagging behind
the minimum of the sun-spot cycle. Previously Professor Balfour Stew-
art had found that the winter temperature-range at Kew apparently de-
pends on the sun-spot period, being greatest at times of maximum sun-
spots, and Jeast at times of minimum sun-spots. At the epoch of maxi-
mum sun-spots wind disturbances are most frequent, aS is shown in a
wreck chart by Messrs. Jeula and Hunter, and coupling this observa-
tion with the previous, I think it may be fairly argued that we about
this time (and at the minimum epoch?) have our open winters. Accord-
ing to the observations of Schwabe and some recent mean temperature
statistics from the Times newspaper I have by me, this is a wet as well
as a windy conjuncture, and according to Herr Gustav Wex it is the
time when there is most water in tke European rivers. (The river inun-
dations, due often to local causes, do not, nevertheless, follow this law ;
take for example those of the Garonne that have occurred in 1425, 1537,
1599, 1727, 1772, 1790, 1827, 1835, and 1875.) Still, with all this instru-

‘mental work indicated or accomplished, there remain over and above, in

the experience past and present, many strongly marked features in the
climate of Europe that might repay the trouble of erudite tabulation on
the one hand and of scientific investigation on the other. Thus while
some winters have been intensely cold (those of 401, 554, 800, 821, 1116,
1213, 1234, 1432, 1433, 1434, 1579, 1683, 1708, 1716, 1739, 1753, 1762,
1766, 1776, 1784, 17956, 1797, 1813, as would seem), others have been
as inordinately warm (those of 1183, 1288, 1572, 1621, 1658, 1685, 1703,
1760, 1858, 1865, 18638, 1876, 1880, might be examined in this respect),

and late and early winters and springs are quite as much a matter of"
comment as warm (the summers of 763, 1333, 1556, 165156, 1766, 1783,

1788, 1811. are alleged to have been hot) and cold summers.
Within and towards the tropics, as has ever been the opinion, the solar
phantasmatography presents its phases with greater regularity before

68 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the eye of the observer, and in corroboration of this testimony Dr. W.
K6ppen, who has drawn up a table of the earth’s temperature in connec-
tion with the sun-spots between the years 1770 and 1870 (Zeitschrift der
osterreichischen Gesellschaft fiir Meteorologie, August und September,
1873), informs us that within the tropics the maximum warmth occurs a
full year before the year of minimum sun-spots, while in the zones be-
yond it falls two years after the minimum, and that the regularity and
magnitude of the undulations of the temperature curve is most strongly
marked within the tropics and decreases toward the poles. During this
heat which accompanies the minimum epochs, droughts may be looked
for, and likewise famines, according to Mr. W. W. Hunter’s tabulation. —

Last, not least, in addition to these sun features now detailed, seismic
phenomena, such as earthquakes, volcanic emanations and hot springs,
and entomological phenomena, such as insect multiplication and migra-
tion, are proclaimed by the voice of all antiquity to result from exces-
sive heats and dry seasons, and to be the fell accompaniments of famines
and pestilence. Even now in the picturesque language of the Arabs we
find such phraseology as the year of the drought, the year of the earth-
quake, the year of the locust, and the year of the whirlwind, showing
that an interest is still felt in the dark numbers of astronomy, and re-
vealing the sources of a science we northern nations are far too apt to
eavil at. But of this anon. On the other hand, about the maximum
sun-spot years the cyclones in the Indian Ocean and the hurricanes in
the West Indies, as has been shown by Messrs. Meldrum and Poéy, in-
crease in number, and at the same time the annual rainfall is greatest
in the East Indies and at the Cape of Good Hope. (Messrs. Norman
Lockyer and Hunter in the Nineteenth Century for November, 1877 (p.
583), furnish a digest of the more recent application of Solar Physics to
Terrestrial Phenomena, entitled ‘“‘Sun-spots and Famines”.) Indeed the
increase in wind-disturbances and rainfall would seem to be the leading
feature of the maximum period of sun-spots all over the globe, a conse-
quence which some tacitly assign to the greater energy of the sun at
this period. Should, however, this conception seem discordant with a
notion of the heat waves at the minimum period and the existence of
permanent defects in the luminous photosphere of the sun at the max-
imum, the wind and rain would quite as agreeably with the knownlaws ~
of nature be referred to the irregular action and impotent state of the
sun at this conjuncture, producing secular refrigeration, aud increasing
in this manner the aerial currents and precipitation of aqueous vapor.
Certain is it that Sir William Herschel’s comparison between the prices
of corn and complaints of poor crops in Europe, as founded on the first
hypothesis, could not be borne out by the past wretched years. (Phil.
Trans. 1801, pt. ii, pp. 310-316).

Having thus in a general way introduced my subject in its various
bearings, I will now proceed to show how solar physics influence insect
multiplication and migration in general, and locust multiplication and

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. 69

migration in particular. But since it will be necessary, before entering
on a disquisition upon these terrestrial phenomena, to have an extended
notion of the soiar phases that I hope then to show regulate their perio-
dicity, I will proceed to construct a new sun-spot table exhibiting the solar
maximaand minima of macule between the years 1880 and1500. T awoke
to a realization of this undertaking in the spring of the year, when stroll- |
ing. alone over the winter-scorched grass that covers the old earth-
quake waves on the Surrey Downs, but I have found since that the
possibility of such an enterprise would be conceived by the perusal of a
pamphlet by Prof. Carl Fuchs, entitled Die vulkanischen Erscheinung-
en der Erde, published in 1865, and also that a few unknown epochs
had already been taken out by the method which then recommended
itself to me from its accuracy by M. Poéy (Comptes Rendus, t. LX XVII, ©
pp. 51-53). The following are Dr. Fuchs’s remarks: ‘Kluge macht in
seiner Zusammenstellung der Eruptionen mehrfach auf das Zusammen-
tieffen vulkanischer Ausbriiche mit kosmischen Prozessen aufmerk-
sam. Hs ergibt sich néimlich aus der Zusammenstellung der Minimal-
und Maximaljahre der Sonnenflecken und der vulkanischen Eruptionen,
dass sonnenfleckenarme Jahre, die sich zugleich durch geringere
Grosse der magnetischer Variationen auszeichen, zu den eruptionsrei-
chen Jahren gehoren und umgekehrt. Das Jahr 1822 wurde an einer
friiheren Stelle als ein solches genannt, welches sich durch die Menge
von Hruptionen auszeichnet, die wahrend desselben stattfanden; das-
selbe Jahr zeichnet sich aber auch als Minimaljahr von Sonnenflecken
aus und in gleicher Weise die Jahre 1793, 1843, 1855. Im Jahre 1769
betrug nach R. Wolf die Relativzahl der Sonnenflecken 85.7 und kein
einziger vulkanischer Ausbruch ist in diesem Jahre bekannt. Im
Jahre 1799 betrug die Relativzahl der Sonnenflecken 99.2, im Jahre
1788 aber 90.6, und im ersteren Jahre fanden 4, im letzteren 5 Erup-
tionen statt. Dagegen wird die Relativzahl der Sonnenflecken im
Jahre 1756 zu 8.8 angegeben und die von 1798 zu 2.8, wihrend in dem.
zuerst genannten Jahre 12 und in dem andern 10 Eruptionen statt-
fanden. Im Jahre 1843 war die Relativzahl der Sonnenflecken 8.6,
die Zahl der Eruptionen betrug 32.” (Die Vulkanischen Erscheinung-
en der Erde, von Dr. C. W. C. Fuchs, Docent ander Universitat in Hei-
delberg. Leipzig und Heidelberg, 1865.) |

The following is a résumé of M. E. Kluge’s views: “M. R. Wolf
(Bern. Naturf. Gesellschaft, 1852) avait énonecé, @aprés une chronique
Zurichoise pour les années de 1000 a 1800, que les aurores boréales et
les tremblements de terre s’accumulent sur les années de taches. M.
EK. Kluge soutient, au contraire, que dans les années abondantes en
taches solaires et oti les variations magnétiques sont plus remarquables,
les éruptions voleaniques et les tremblements de terre sont aussi plus
rare.” (Ueber Synchronismus und Antagonismus von vulkanischen
Eruptionen, und die Beziehungen derselben zu den Sonnenflecken und

70 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

erdmagnetischen Variationen, von KE. Kluge. Leipzig, 1863. 102 pp.,
1 pl., 8vo.) )

Whether any one has previously taken up the question in its entirety
Ieannot say. (The lunar disturbance of gravity that excited attention at
a recent meeting of the British Association does not influence the prima
Jaciecase. H.E.H. Darwin, Rep., 1881). Councillor Schwabe, of Des-
sau, was, according to Humboldt, the first to tabulate numerically the
solar spots, and his tables, published originally in Schumacher’s Astro-
nomische Nachrichten, No. 495 (Bd. X XI, 1844), p. 235, and afterwards
more fully given in the fourth volume of Cosmos, show the fluctuations
ot the solar photosphere between the years 1826 and 1850, from actual
eye observation. Schwabe’s table has been sub-equently enlarged by
other workers, Professor Wolf carrying it back to 1750 and forward to
1860 and 1875, and pointing the maximum of spots of 1828 in Schwabe’s
table as 1829. The axiom I have employed in carrying the sun-spot
cycles farther into the past, will be seen then to be justified by a refer-
ence to M. Poéy’s table of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in the
Brazils, in the Comptes Rendus, already alluded to; it assumes that the
great periods of earthquake-commotion and volcanic activity harmon-
ize with the maxima and also with the minima periods of solar spots;
and on this assumption I have consulted various seismic tables and
checked off the periods of disturbance by the records which in their
copiousness or defect fully indicate the required discontinuity recurring |
at stated intervals. But when these perivds were found it further be-
came very evident to me that it was necessary to adopt some method
of numerical precision in order to eliminate the years of the sun-spot
cycles. To this intent, therefore, I first drew up the mean periods of
greatest commotion in Europe, Asia, and America, and placed the max-
ima and minima of sun-spots given in Wolf’s table into the breaks,
where they fell in order, I think I may say, at first sight. I then took
out the latter extreme year and the mean year for the minima years,
and the former extreme year and the mean year for the maxima years.
One or other of the numbers, which themselves rarely differed by more
than a year, should give me as I found the epochs of fewest or most
spots required.

To explain more fully, let us examine the list of earthquakes and
volcanic eruptions for any breaks in the violence and extent of the dis-
turbances and mark the periods obtained in this manner, thus (1839-
1838). We will then arrange these periods of activity taken out from
many tables, thus:

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE.

71

TABLE I.—Mean seismic (earthquake and volcanic) periods and sun-spot cycles, auroras, pro-
gressive HL. and W. deviation in the magnetic needle, and locust periods in Europe.

POVACHINOLAS Weenie a ciciawicacteieisidieiw atelscleeits clas state

Many auroras....... sonegsnosasocasanosecrbook
4

PID WR UMONAGP cialsisisic aot c anelvie’s evia mot eagieiclcs ctee

PCH ANOLAS Ho vcisic secu sac cceuanevanieinvicceaes:

'

Maximum and mini-
mum of sun-spots

Ress

s&s

RSRSES BesK8 BS BS SS BS SS RS ES ESES ES SS ESESESESESESES Ra SSS58

SS 55

_
~
2

ESE

Europe and South

mic commotion in
America.

Mean periods of seis-

( -1878)
(1875-1872)
(1871-1870)"
(1868-1865)
(1862-1858)
(1855-1851)
(1851-1846)
(1844-1841)
(1839-1836)
(1833-1831)
(1830-1828)
(1825-1820)
(1821-1816)
(1812-1809)

(1806-1801) !

(1798-1795)
(1792-1788)
(1785-1783)
(1781-1779)
(1776-1775)
(1773-1770)
(1768-1775)
(1762-1759)
(1755-1754)
(1752-1759)
(1746-1742)
(1739-1735)
(1730-1729)
(1726-1724)
(1721-1717)
(1715-1713)
(1708-1706)
(1703-1702)
(1699-1696)
(1693-1691)
(1689-1685)
(1683-1681)
(1679-1677)
(1673-1671)
(1668-1664)
(1662-1654)
(1654-1653)
(1650-1647)
(1646-1643)
(1641-1639)
(1636-1633)
(1628-1626)
(1626-1624)
(1620-1617)
(1613-1612)
(1610-1606)
(1603-1600)
(159-1596)
(1593-1586)
(1584-1581)

(1578-1576)
(1574-1571)
(1566-1563)
(1561-1558)
(1556-1553)
(1551-1548)
(1546-1542)
(1542-1536)
(1534-1528)
(1522-1519)
(1516-1513)
(1510-1509)
(1507-1503)

(1501-1495) |

| Differences.

jt : :
DOLPAMMNAMAAWSANMBSAWORWAWAWAMNIAAEPARDAAMAAMNIWAWAPOH AGBHADPHLAMINIANWAN

iy

e
DRPARADOANAIIAIWHA=I

and minimum of

Years of maximum
sun-spots.

|

Remarks.

Locusts.

Locusts.
Locusts.

: Locusts.

troousts,

} Locusts.

* Locusts.
Locusts.

Locusts.

Locusts.

; Locusts.

Locusts.
J

Locusts.

Locusts ?

Locusts.
Locusts.

Locusts.

\

72 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

M4(1839-1838) (1826-1823)
13(1838-1834) (1831) (1830-1829) (1826-1817)
2(1839-1837) (1835-1832) (1830-1828) (1825-1822)
11839-1835) (1833-1831) (1829-1827) (1825-1822)
10(1839-1835) (1833-1831) (1830-1827) (1825-1819)

Let us now mark the epochs of the sun-spot cycle m minimum or M
maximum, aS known from Wolf’s tables, to the breaks to which they —
appertain, and at the same time find the mean periods of commotion,
thus: (1839-1836) M1? (1833-1831) m? (1830-1828) M® (1825-1820) m*;
1836 es 1833 y73__ 1828 .
1837’ 13327) 1829’

where taking extremes and means M!-=

ea aes the actual years here indicated being given by Wolf as 1837,
1833, 1829, 1823. Here the position of the years is evidently correctly
found, the maximum in each case being the mean year of commotion
and the minimum the latter extreme, but, as seen by the last fraction, an
irregularity does sometimes occur. In calculating out the table, how-
ever, the latter inconvenience is almost nil, as it will be noticed that the
known maxima and minima in Wolf’s table have certain corresponding
intervals of years 6-4, 4-6, 6-7, &c.; and also a certain final digit as far
as they go, the maxima ending in a 7, 9, 6, &c., and the minima in 3, 3,
3, 0, &e.

Bley g thus correctly taken out the sun- spot numbers in cycles from
the seismic breaks between the years 1881 and 1750, we may now pro-
ceed with confidence to tread on the confines of the filiown. and com-
plete the series of maximum and minimum years back to 1500. Beyond
this point, the grand epoch when Columbus opened up for eastern civi-
lization a new continent, and when printing was commenced, the data
in the seismic tables become involved and partial, and here, at the most,
I have up to the present only been able to obtain a certain number of
probable epochs of the solar phases. Sufficient data, however, will be
found to be present in my table on which to string the more certain
records of locust multiplication and migration, as known to myself from
the exhaustive paper by Mr. Thomas in a former issue of your valuable
report, relating fully the Old World locust multiplication during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and from my own investigations
regarding their increase during the nineteenth; as also from those clear
indications afforded in Mr. Packard’s concise list of the C. spretus years
in America. But before entering on this subject I ought to mention
that some of the breaks in my table are substantiated by eye observa-
tion. Thus Flamsteed tells us that the solar spots were absent between
the years 1676 and 1684, and according to Dominique Cassini they were

10¥rom Eruptions in Iceland, by Thoroddson (Trans. Geol. Mag.).

UFrom Mons. Perrey’s Earthquakes in Greece and Syria.

2From Mons. Poéy’s Earthquakes in South America.

13From Mr. Mallet’s List of Earthquakes and Volcanic Eruptions (Brit. Assoc.).
14From works of Lyell and Humboldt.

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. 13

again absent between 1686 and 1688; other observers found them.absent
between 1695 and 1700. The means of these periods arranged by the
differences of the series check the seismic numbers correctly, but as re-
gards the maximum in 1681, it becomes evident that the observation of
Flamsteed is indefinitely given, as it makes a greater interval occur
between the minimum and maximum of the cycle than between the
maximumand minimum. In M. Poéy’s table, before alluded to, the fol-
lowing years are further given from the strength, number, and extent
of the earthquake shocks in the Brazils, namely : 1727 M, 1712 m, 1693 M,
and 1634 M. ‘These in my table stand as 1730 m, 1714 M, 1691 M, and
1635 m, the modification being due to the co-ordination of other seismic
data and the consecntive marking of the solar phases, only then ren-
dered possible. Again, it will be noticed that the cycles of sun-spots in
my table grow short about the beginning of the seventeenth century
and lengthen out at the commencement of the nineteenth. This circum-
Stance is owing, as I conclude, to the presence of a greater sun-spot cycle
stretching from 1580 to 1814 and marked by the progressive east and
west deviation of the compass needle. The years 1580 and 1814 on this
greater cycle I would consider to correspond with the maxima of the
smaller cycles, and some intermediate epoch about 1640 to correspond
with the minimum. This would also answer well to the periods of prev-
alence and scarcity of auroras in Hurope. Thus between 1574, about,
and 1635, many auroras were observed ; few were observed between 1635
and 1706; and inany were again observed between 1706 and 1842. We
are now in Hurope back again in the period of few auroras, and I con-
elude at a minimum point in the greater sun-spot cycles, when, judging
from the past, great extremes of summer and winter temperature may be
anticipated.

Having drawn up my table, now comes the second clause of the in-
quiry, namely, how and in what measure the sun phases influence the
world of insects on the surface of the old and new continents. Before
setting out on this subject, however, I think it may be inferred that
where the terrestrial phenomena follow most directly on the changeful
glare of the solar photosphere, there shall we find the various features
of insect biology marshaled in the strictest order. As before noticed,
this phenomenon is to be looked for rather towards the equator than
in the direction of the poles of the diurnal sphere, and here it is that
jnsects should be found to multiply and migrate in most immediate de-
pendence on the sun changes. Let us take that example which most con-
cerns us, the Rocky Mountain locust (Caloptenus spretus). The Perma-
nent Region, and native breeding-ground of this insect, as already ably
shown by the entomologists on the Commission, lies within the northern
temperate zone, between 37° and 53° north latitude. Though some-
what removed from the tropics, the summer isotherms would adjudge it
to be considered within tropical influence, and this even more so than
Southern Europe, which must be virtually so considered. The migra-

;

74 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

tions of the locust have been, broadly speaking, in a southerly direc-.

tion east and west of this region, and if reference be made to Mr. Pack-
ard’s analytical table given in the report of the Commission for the year
1877 (p. 113), and the year 1878~’79 (p. 111), we shall find that these
have waxed and waned, that one climax transpired between 1874 and
1876, that another transpired between 1866 and 1867, that another trans-
pired between 1855 and 1857, and there remains besides some indica-
tions of an invasion about 1842. Now by Wolf’s tables of sun-spots
1876, 1867, 1855, and 1843, severally tangential nunfbers, are the years
of fewest sun-spots as determined by observation. In this case there-
fore the season of multiplication and migration has preponderated to
the minimum period of solar spots; and conversely about 1848, 1860,
1870, and as I conclude also in 1881, the intermediate years of most
sun-spots, the decrease and restriction of this locust are equally ap-
parent.

But to fully illustrate this subject, I will turn to the insect multipli-
cation and migration of the Old World, where the data are more copious
and the subject matter more familiar. Here we know as regards the
multiplication and migration of various locusts in the cereal districts on
the southern borders of Europe and Northern Asia, from long tradition
since the earliest days, that those droughts which have been previously
attributed to the minimum epochs of the sun-spot cycle are their season
of increase. But, as I have already intimated (Journal of Science for
August, 1881), it cannot be therefore assumed that all destructive insects

on European areas have the same period of multiplication; for while -

the corn weevils (Sitophilus granarvus and oryze) of our granaries, or
certainly the more destructive sort which is imported from the marts
of the south, have shown a tendency to increase about the minimum of
spots, it would appear that the noxious European wheat flies (Diplosis),
of which there are said to be two varieties, affect in Germany a decen-
nial period recurring towards the maximum years. This phenomenon
may be either attributable to the circumstance that insects are vari-
ously adapted to various conditions of climate, and that there are cer-
tain recurring times when certain families and certain individuals find
themselves in the most congenial conditions for multiplication; or to
the circumstance that there exist fixed epochs when a general north
and west move is witnessed in the mass of the European insect fauna.
These latter times or epochs, north of about 45° north latitude, alter-
nate, as I shall proceed to show, with the extremes of solar energy, so
that the great European migrations of insects take their rise in the
years of minimum sun-spots, and continue until the expiration of the
succeeding maximum. Let us exemplify this first, in passing, by K6p-
pen’s record of the migration of locusts to Southern Russia, given by
Mr. Thomas.” Here there is a migration extending from 1756 to 1757
indicated, then a break until 1783, then another break until 1793, and

16 Report of the Entomological Commission on the Rocky Mountain Locust, for 1878-'79, p. 41.

: asi “
em ‘ a
SS

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. io

so on; each in every case, if we except the interval 1828-1836, where
two cycles of migration seem to be run together, fairly indicating the
interims between the years of solar energy as given from observation
by Schwabe, Wolf, and others.

Now, then, for the great résumé of European locust migration. In
the year 1527 locusts swept out of Turkey into Poland, and in 1536
they came from the Black Sea to Hungary, traversing Lithuania and
Poland to Schleswig. In 1541 the locusts again visit Poland, and a great
army flies through Germany into Italy, some passing forward over
Silesia and Saxony, while others turn themselves toward Austria and
Italy. The next year a swarm passes through Poland and Lithuania
into Prussia and Silesia, spreading over a great part of Europe, and
two years after there were said to be so many grasshoppers about Mis-
mia that they covered the ground about a cubit thick. 1544 I doubt-
fully take out as a minimum year of sun-spots, from Mr. Mallet’s seismic
table. In the year 1553, aiter five years’ drought, great armies of lo-
custs were noticed, no locality being precised, and in two years’ time we
hear of them at Arles, and the next year in Mailand. 1555 or 1553 works
out aS a minimum year from Mr. Mallet’s table. In 1571 and 1572 locusts
ravage to such an extent in Italy that an edict is promulgated by the Vice
Duke of Alcala regarding their destruction. Though this multiplication
(2) evidently indicates a warm solar epoch, I, with some little hesitation,
mark 1570 as a proximate maximum (2) of solar spots, the seismic data
which give the year being somewhat perplexing. In 1613 locusts are de-
structive in Provence, and:the year takes out very naturally as a mini-
mum one from the seismic data. In 1618 and 1619 Spain is afflicted by
a species of locust, but like all other records from Spain, this is yet as
wanting tome in a raison Wétre as the celebrated chateau; 1618 it may
be noticed, is a maximum year of solar spots on my table. In 1645 and
1646 there was a plague of locusts in the Ukraine, 1645 here being evi-
dently a minimum epoch of solar spots, as indicated by the seismic data.
In 1650 Lithuania and Poland are visited by locusts, an invasion I would
correlate with a minimum of sun-spots in 1654, and in 1662 we find the
province of Puglia Daunia visited by locusts, the minimum of solar
spots being found in 1667, or in 1654, if part of the former invasion. In
1684 an immense flight appears in Hungary and Austria, and the next
year a swarm is noticed at Avignoh. This multiplication forms a pre-
lude to an invasion of Northern Europe in 1689, when the locusts, now
abundant in the Ukraine, strike on the coasts of Lithuania and Poland,
reaching to Volhynia, in Russia, during the succeeding year. In 1693
they sweep in large bands through Hungary, Bohemia, and Austria, into
Germany, reaching Austria on the 3d of August, Jena on the 18th, and
Weimar on the 20th. This invasion continues to show up in Germany
until 1696. ‘The year 1688, according to my table, indicates the minimum
period of spots to which this influx would be referable.

76 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

After this marked inroad, concerning which Mr. Thomas has given so
full a bibliography, the locusts in 1708 again sweep out of Wallachia
and pass through Poland into Russia, and two years after they spread.
alarm through the army of Charles XII in Bessarabia, and in 1712 we
hear of their passing through Galicia to Germany, and of their harass-
ing Silesia. As would appear, this invasion continued for three or four
years and extended into Italy; but since the minimum epoch of sun-spots
transpired in 1708, some of the destruction committed in Italy about the
year 1716 may have been due to the local multiplication of the Calopte-
nus italicus, and should be ascribed to the next period of solar energy
culminating mm 1720. As soon as 1727 the fields of Italy are again at-
tacked by locusts, and in 1730 and 1732 they visit Germany and pene-
‘trate as far as Berlin; 1730 is here the proximate year of fewest sun-
spots. The great locust inroad of this century, starting from Turkey
in 1747, spread through Wallachia, Moldavia, Transylvania, and Hun-
gary, and from thence in 1749 passed into Austria, Bavaria, and Ger-
many, reaching Brandenburg in 1750. The Ukraine, Poland, and Silesia
were also visited, and the swarm, attaining the shores of England, is
stated to have been destructive in Norfolk, Stafford, Cheshire, and Derby-
_shire(?). The differences of the sun-spot series indicate a minimum year
of sun-spots about 1744 or 1747 to which this invasion should be referred.
In 1756 and 1757 locusts again migrate to Russia, and two years after-
wards they are observed in Italy and Germany, where they are again
noticed in 1763. The corresponding minimum year of sun-spots is in
this case evidently 1755. In 1792 locusts visit Spain, and from 1799 to
1806 they migrate to Russia, appearing in Germany in 1803; 1798 is
here the corresponding solar year.

Some notices of locusts in Europe during the seventeenth and eight-
eenth centuries seem to be apocryphal. F. Th. Koppen (Ent. Zeit. zu
Stettin, 1871, S. 183-190) thinks some of the reputed invasions refer to
troops of dragon flies.’ He adds that during the years 1623, 1659, and
1695, as far as he was aware, there were no locustsin Germany. These
migrations of dragon flies will be found tabulated in a brochure entitled
Waarnemingen over het Trekken van Insekten door A. A. van Bemmelen;
taking their origin in the variable climate of Europe, we find that while
they fairly culminate towards the minimum times of sun-spots, they may
likewise indicate the maximum epoch, as I think an analysis will show.

In the present century” we find various records of locust increase
along a line extending from Egypt to India, during the period included
between the years 1810 and 1814, and that simultaneously this tribe of
insects is destructive in France, and that a migratory species, the Pa-

161494, S. Caspar. Weinrich. Danziger Chronik., herausg. von Hirsch und Vossberg. Berlin, 1855, 4°;
1586, Ditm. Chron. ii, 303; 1623, I. B. Carpzov, Analectis fastorum Zittanjensium, Th. 2, p. 284, vgl.
Rathlef. Akridotheologie, Th. ii, 1750, pp. 60, 61; 1659, vgl. Rathlef. Akridotheologie, ib.; 1695, ib. ii,
p. 80.

i7 Wm. Denison Roebuck’s articles on locusts in Yorkshire contained in the Yorkshire Naturalist,
compared with notices in the publications of foreign entomological societies and with notices in
travelers’ journals.

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. C7

chytylus migratorius L., as would seem, visits England and the shores of
the Baltic. In the period included between 1820 and 1828 Orthoptera
again multiply, becoming destructive in the Crimea between the years
1823 and 1826. In 1825 Caloptenus ttalicus is noxious in Italy and in
Southern France, and in the autumn of 1828 a remarkable cloud of lo-
custs, most probably the Pachytylus migratorius, was noticed to pass
from Odessa over to Galicia. During this period the last-mentioned
species appears regularly in eastern and northern Germany.

We next hear of Orthoptera increasing in Kurope during the period
included between the years 1832 and 1834, when locusts were noxious
at Constantinople, in Sicily, and in the south of France; but hitherto
I have found no reliable notices of migrants being observed at this time
in northern countries. They again showed up in the period between
1842 and 1849; for in 1843 we hear of flights of locusts in northern
India, and two years after of their becoming a plague in Algeria. In
1844, P. migratorius multiplies in southern Russia, passing the same
year in bands to Switzerland and Belgium, stragglers reaching to North
Germany and the shores of the Baltic, and even penetrating into Swe-
- den. Over this area they continue to appear until 1847, and in 1846
numerous flocks of locusts are seen or recorded in the south and north
of England, in Scotland, about Aberdeen, and in the Shetland Islands,
a few examples being likewise taken on the east coast the succeeding
year. In 1848, P. migratorius continues to turn up in France and Bel-
gium, and locusts are plentiful at Herne Bay; and the next year even
we still find records of captures being made around Paris and in Bel-
gium, and one example is taken at Thrisk, in Yorkshire.

After this memorable period we hear nothing of locusts in Europe
until 1857, from which year until 1862 they continued to appear in the
central and northern countries of Europe. In the year 1857 locusts
were already noxious at Odessa and in China; and in 1860 we have
official reports of the entry of P. migratorius into Bessarabia, Podolia,
and Volkynia, on the southern boundaries of Poland, coming, as would
seem, from Galicia, which province of Austria it may have reached from
Odessa, as in 1828. However, three years previous to this it has been
taken near Paris, in Belgium, and in Holland; and at the same time it
visited the north of England and Ireland. In England it is recorded
until 1859, and near Paris and in Belgium it is found until 1862. We
likewise hear of its occurring at Malta in 1861. The next period is from
1864 until 1869. In the first-mentioned year a fresh species of locust,
Acridium peregrinum, multiplies in Algeria, and an erratic flock of the
same comes in the autumn to the coast of Cornwall. On the 2d of No-
vember of the year following, another flock of this same species boards
a vessel on her voyage from Bordeaux to New Orleans 1,200 miles from
land. In 1866 these locusts have increased to such an extent in Al-
geria that they there became a plague, and at the same time they are
noticed in Corfu. They again come to Cornwall in 1869, and the same

A

78 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

autumn another species, as is thought, invades the coast about Aber-

deen, in Scotland. During this series of years locusts multiply in Per- ~

sia and in the Punjab. The next period, occurring from 1874 until 1879,
is marked by flights of Pachytylus cinerascens Fab., a species which, as
has been ascertained, propagates in Hurope, and that even as far north
as Belgium, and which is not, therefore, truly an extraneous migrant.
his locust is reported from Cheddar, in Somersetshire, in 1874, and the
succeeding year we hear of its being destructive near the Lake of Con-
stance, while a few more examples turn up in England, this time in
Yorkshire. Caloptenus ttalicus is simultaneously destructive in France

and Spain, and during the year 1876 large masses of both locusts ap- —

pear at Eberwalde. The year succeeding, P. cinerascens again appears
in greater numbers in Yorkshire. Lastly, as late as 1879 we find that
locusts are still numerous in Southern Russia and Caucasia. These
latter periods, as the former, may severally be compared with the san-
spot cycles, and their dependence on the minimum epochs will become
manifest; they indicate a mean of about 6 years as the probable dura-
tion of the locust flights in Kurope.

That certain insects besides locusts are subject to periodical increase ~

in Europe has long ago been pointed out in the Transactions of the
Zoologisch-Botanischer Verein in Wien (1855, Bd. 5), where the writer
directs the attention of entomologists to the chronical increase of cer-
tain Lepidoptera, C. Cardwi, A. Crategi, C. Hdusa, D. Gali, 8S. Convoloult

and A. Atropos, B. Processionea, Bb. Pinivora, and Charwas Graminis ; to.

the increase of many Libellule and Hphemere among the Neuroptera,
to that of the Coccinelle among the Coleoptera, and that of the Chirono-
mi, Sciare, and Diploses® among the fly kind. This increase the writer
fancied might recur in periods of many years; but he states that at that
time sufficient evidencein most cases was wanting. He, however, in the
context, would seem to refer the phenomenon to meteorological causes,
and in this matter he has been followed by other commentators. . For
instance, Mr. Stainton, in England, remarks, in the Entomologist’s An-
nual for 1859: :

The almost unprecedented heat of last June, coming so closely on the heels of the
unusually hot summer of 1857, has had a most extraordinary effect on insect life (1858).

Many species that are usually rare have been taken in some plenty; species that are *

generally limited to a few of our southern counties have wandered far north, and
some South European species not previously added ae our lists have now rn fQuae &
place there.

Dr. Knaggs, in the Annual for 1864, draws another meteorological
parallel, and says:

If we look back we shall find that the notably severe winters which terminated the

years of 1824, 1834, 1844, 1854— those of 1794 and 1814 were also intense—were followed
by seasons remarkably good for collecting.

Three of these years follow on the minimum years of sun- spots.

18 Several distinct species of Tipula. are probably here indicated; Kirby and Spence, Intro., pp. 91-92,
Ed. 7; Stettin Ent. Zeit., S. 65-96; Trans. Ent. Soc. London, 1881, p. 605.

e

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE.

~

Soonboseon| SADece erie 5
esode agra eae Remetcis
ore (ncieiers of :

a || de
Bouacndas sleseec soocole
SoqonSSBaHIboE sacaaan|{e
pagouossedlleouqaeasunls
BAGS EOS ESS Beeson
HS COGAT SES Semone sesalta
POO ccers Seer emer a
Seis anise armoonaoeel|s
Ser ceiess| oe saese ee
Saab bOoOUS she aeeased |S
SoQoUeECdob| lee Segnpoes ||
Bee ee wate ours aspoee
Sooo onerrel See BAe
Sannbosces aor gndooce
Bere ciaiasise a|- ar semen
Seas sees cer Sascse
Scaunnanealses SS eeecile

wececeses
em ecce ence
sanscc eee
ee2e6 eeee
eeceeee es

T1103

"CLLVLIO’S B
“‘e]joqo[Nd viodorag

N vduvoo1M yO

“TLLo

PPO vdwivd019 TO

‘OL

LD] 0GZ-ET
“401 §-P

*.U0)-
PY

g
if

PLO) One ae ananassae ae
él SNES Bin ee
Reeder aioe: Senate cc naate

TVD vrydopiod

§
“1-01
“ADI-09T

LG

G

VSP SE
PIS-SéL cy
9ZE

T eprgdopiog

“CBOLULOAT

[Majoawog xurqdsg

7

“eSUupy SI[OD

‘eje A SBITOD

eoerccee=|s eee eee2ee°

“oorpr[ded Stier

Wey stuutsry

“elmo

ST

‘edolyuy VSsouv A

cA

T

QOS as oe testo tee ree ae NE
6

8

L

9

c sanoadosanpoubanc00s coos: ay
Vv

§

G

T

OS8T

6

8 eceuoansae*nanuneece ie et pene eee SALE
L

9

G

v

g ages eae cena pa ee See LE
G

sH
ee)
re

see c tent eter teem eee eerees T7

eee en nce ees en en en ee nn= ay

SANMHINOM-OADOn

[-o2p ¢ OUIZVSCTL
A[PUOW S4JStsojouozyug oy} puv ‘toouosipoyuT ATYOOM S,JSTsoTowoyuy 9y7 QsIsoj[omojug ‘ouIzesepy [VoTsopowmojyug ‘4s1d0[007 crete [eanqen jo ouzeseyy oy} wo.rq]

‘uopbury pau oy, Ww piajdopideT avo. uw}. fo aingdro ayy SO 100.48qQY VOLLaUNN—'S ATAV TL,

STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

REPORT UNITED

80

*sjo(/s-ums 1som yo suvok

Tar ‘sjods-ans ysoMoy Jo suvok ‘ww SmopsuLy pop ot] ut porvost 10 porq soroods ox} ‘paxg {savyid10yeo 10 BAIL 07 ‘Suradg ‘s fuumypny ‘vy :aqakOTIWA SNOILVIATUALY

q110}§

“BTIVLIVS &

LY} T

DFT
GI
DT

‘e][oyopng viedoreg
N vdurvo01M yO

“TLIO

PO eduvoo1Myq 9

“OLLO

LD]-PALd BL
0] 81-ZE
re)

4D] L-DEG G

v 6G
DalQ-S
Patg-syT I

Tey vpydoed

ry eprydoprog

“BOITMIOAT

‘ITMATOAWOYD XUIyds

GEE-SG

68-88

E89E-S6SE ci

9¢6-§G

i
0
6
8
L
OS a eae Ss ae ale a ee ge YD
¢
v
§
G
I

G
0&-ST T 6 [ UE (VC ca fee OS Bie Sages Se SoS Far
SOL Seg Ne ee OSB ie acinar |S a Oa 6
18 666 D9 D99 DEL 8
o-ST z (i) ice ate ae et We ses|o ee og chet SP OPS oe
OSG ia she ae ea Sere Glen ak etl pe eerie I ig aes ep 9
LOL Ar eedereed (aie: Samer VOL DG g
setae creche Boost peed sac oceans ane cen eet eneee| 7
Page Se ae ae ar eee Ic ge Vl on eae es ee
ie ees Sa lee oa ee pape ay aR see oes
Q @
S See ue 5
He —e 4 99 =|
> $ se el {qr}
na 77) a) 4 2
SI seca z, Z
e eee M =
a =a He = 3
2 ° = & sf
S

‘ponuryuo0og—wophury papritg ayp we vo)dopiday aime wptaa fo adngdva ay} f0 00.4)8q0 [VIL.KUN—'

yy

G

WIAV I,

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. Sl

My second table (Table II) is drawn up so as to illustrate this subject,
and it will show how the phenomena of multiplication and migration of
European Lepidoptera may be correlated with the sun-spot cycles. It
refers to the periodical occurrence of certain rare moths and butterflies
in the United Kingdom, which, from their persistent first appearance on
our eastern and southeastern seaboard, are very generally supposed by
entomologists to be migrants to thiscountry. It has been also surmised
that these come to us as the vanguard of a great and well-defined mi-
gration of insects that periodically sweeps over the Kuropean area, orig-
inating, as in the case of locust invasions, if we judge from the localities
of observation and description of the species, in Africa or southern Asia.
In constructing this table, I have selected a dozen of these rarities whose
fitful appearance in this kingdom has been sufficiently chronicled to
afford me certain results, and I have given a numerical abstract of the
records relating to their capture, from the Magazine of Natural History,
Zoologist, Entomological Magazine, Entomologist, the Entomologist’s
Weekly Intelligencer, and the Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine. I
have likewise found it proper to consult the Naturalist, Newman’s
British Butterflies, and other works.

The plan I have followed is in all cases to give the number of each
kind of moth or butterfly captured or seen during a particular year, but
in the instance of the commonplace Clouded Yellow (C. Hdusa), where
scarcity or frequency is alone a subject of comment with our entomolo-
gists, something more was needed, and to meet this emergency I have,
over and above, adopted an arbitrary method of placing a 5 for every
notice of the butterfly being plentiful, a 10 for every notice of its being
common, and a 20 for every notice of its being abundant. In this way
I have arrived at a series of numbers, which, if they fail in every case
to translate the exact meaning of the writer, will nevertheless to all
intents and purposes serve truly and concisely to indicate the fluctua-
tion of the species. In addition to this, it has seemed of importance to
indicate the period of the year when the captures were made, and to this
end I have affixed an s, spring, or an a, autumn, to the numbers; or, in the
case of the hawk moths, I have placed the contraction lar., and word
bred, with a numerical figure to show the number of caterpillars of a
- Species found or bred in this country in such and sucha year. The
solar cycles are indicated in the first column, the epochs of fewest sun-
spots being marked with a small m, and those of most sun-spots being
denoted by a capital M.

It will be then noticed that the periods of influx, although marked in
the table as commencing with the epoch of minimum spots, are, as in the
instance of European locust invasions, protracted until the ensuing
maximum, on the expiration of which a sudden diminution in the num-
ber of rarities noticed is manifest. As many of these, and the hawk
moths in particular, have their home on the borders of the tropics, it is

6EC

82 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

probable that in this case, likewise, the epoch of fewest spots is their
season of increase, and that during the ensuing years a tide of migration
sets in northward. Thus we read in the transactions of the French
Entomological Society that in 1834 the south wind was very violent at
Montpellier”, and brought Cherocampa Celerio and Deilephila Lineata,
alias Livornica, in great numbers from Africa; and subsequently the
first of these moths, with Cherocampa Nerii, which became common in
1835, occurred on the continent until 1839 or thereabouts. The next mi-
gration, a remarkable one, took form in Germany in 1842, and in 1846
the rare hawk moths, Convolvuli, Livornica, Celerio, and Nerit, oviposited
over the whole of western Europe, Celerio reaching as far north as
Stralsund. After this date, C. Nerw was noticed in France during the
years 1856~57, and at the same time it was likewise found in England.”
It is also to be remarked that the year 1874” brought suddenly a rare
satellite of the hawk moths, Deiopeia Pulchella, to the notice of Parisian
entomologists, and in the following two years this southern and eastern
insect occurred in France and England. .

Certain periods likewise may be considered to have brought certain
iepidopterous species to England. Thus 1846 wasa great Convolvuliyear,
1870 a great Livornica year, and 1877 a great Hdusa year. Yet, although
these rare visitants duly oviposited and often bred in this country, a
glance at the table shows that they were virtually eradicated from it
during the subsequent unfavorable years. It would appear, however,
that a temporary colony may result from these flights, as in the case of
Cherocampa Nerii, which propagated in a garden in Berlin between the
years 1829 and 1832;” that of Detlephila Euphorbie, which, discovered
at Braunton Burrows, near [fracombe, in 1806, became abundant in the
larva state in that part of Devonshire about 1819~20;”3 and that of Dei-
lephila Galti, which bred on the sand-hills at Deal, between 1855 and
1862.4

With regard to the quarter whence the arrivals of rare butterflies
come to us, and their distribution, Mr. Stainton has stated in the Ento-
mologist’s Monthly Magazine (Vol. VII, p. 105*) **that Pieris Daplidice

19Trans. Soc. Ent. de France, Tom. V, p. 365. Other works from whence the following abstract is
drawn: Stettin Ent. Zeit.; Soc. Ent. de Belgique; Wiener Ent. Monatschrift; Nederlands. Ent. Ve-
reen., Tijds. voor Ent.; Ent. Nachrichten. There is a want of field record on the continent, and Iam
afraid the prejudice has crept into this country of late years.

20 Convolvuli every where in the autumn of 1858 and 1859. Nederlands. Ent. Vereen, Tijds., voor Ent.

21 Convolvuli plentiful at Gratz, Rugen, Nassau, and Sachsen, Aug. and Sept., 1875. Ent. Nachrichten.

22 (Stettin Ent. Zeitung, viii, S.132.) Herr Bouché’s notice: Ich selbst habe sie (Nerii) in den Jahren
1829 bis 1832, jahrlich in meinem Garten theils als Raupe theils als Schmetterling gefangen. ... Frisch
war wohl der Erste in Deutschland, der ihn beschrieb. Er berichtet im VII Theile p. 5 seiner ‘‘ Besch-
reibung von allerley Insekten” es sei der Sommer von 1727, in welchem sich diese Raupenart auf den
meisten Oleanderbaiumen gefunden habe, sehr trocken gewesen. Rdésel in 3ten Theile seiner ‘‘ Insek-
tenbelustigungen” notices the occurrence of Nerii in 1740.

23 Entomological Magazine for 1834. Mr. Raddon says: No Euphorbie were obtained after 1819 until
the 3d of October, 1834, when a single chrysalis was found; they were exceedingly plentiful in 1814
(100 larve on a piece of spurge) and 1815 (20 pupe obtained).

*%Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine, Vol. I, p. 5-8.
26 Also, Trans. Ent. Soc. London, new series, Vol. V, p. 234.

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. 83

and Argynnis Lathonia seem confined to the southern counties of Eng-
land, not ranging north of Peterborough, but that Vanessa Antiopa is
most plentiful between the Humber and the Tyne.” From this the
writer would infer “that if Daplidice and Lathonia come to us from
France, Antiopa more probably comes from Norway. I believe thereis
much in this argument, and I surmise the ‘Camberwell Beauties’ may
come to us semi-torpid with deals from Norway.” It still, however,
should be noticed that twelve years out of thirty that this butterfly has
been taken the records appertain solely to the southern counties, and
that in 1873 and 1874, years succeeding a great migration, it was plen-
tiful enough in parts of France and North Germany. In 1842, a year
when Daplidice was taken near Dover, several examples were found
simultaneously in Belgium,”* a country where it generally occurs but
sinvly. Lathonia again was frequently seen in Jersey from 1870 until
1872;”' a circumstance which seems to afford a reason for connecting in
a series the captures made in this country during that period. As re-
gards distribution: in 1858, 1872~’73, and, as is stated, in 1861, Antopia
visited the east of Scotland, and in 1865, 1872, and 1875 it was taken
in Ireland. During the years 1847, 1852, 1857, 1862, and 1877 Hdusa
was taken in Scotland, and in 1844, 1865, and 1877 it was seen in Ire-
land. Generally, however, the Clouded Yellow is confined to the south-
east coast of England, where I am not sure that it occurs every year.
Hyale has been taken in Ireland, but it seems to have pushed no farther
north than Northumberland, where it was captured in 1834.

In conclusion, it may be asked, “‘Can any one say when the locusts
will again leave their breeding groundsand ravage the cultivated land ?”
To this question I think a ready answer may be given. ‘Towards the
next period of fewest sun-spots and earthquake prevalence, which will
occur, it may be four, it may be ten years hence.” Again, it may be
asked, “Tell us if the ordinance of the swn-stars in their courses is at
present for or against their increase.” To this question my data do not
enable me to directly reply. It has been said by one writer that the
locusts multiplied at the time Hurope was visited by the black death
(1333-1359), the sweating sickness (1551-1553), and the plague of Barbary
(1799-1800), which severally indicated sun periods when epidemics spread
northward. For, taking out the great cycles of east and west deviation
of the magnetic compass as uniform (1814 W.—1530 H.—1346 W.),” syn-

26 Soc. Ent. de Belgique. An., tom. 1-4.

27 Entomologist for 1872, two taken in the little island of Sark in 1872, but this is perhaps nothing
unusual; in 1876 I noticed a few near Calais.

28 Tables showing the east and west variation of the magnetic needle are given by Sir David Brewster
in his Treatise on Magnetism. The cycles are given as from 1580 maximum east deviation, to 1815
maximum west deviation at London; 1580 maximum east deviation, to 1814 maximum west deviation
at Paris; and the maximum west deviation at the Cape of Good Hope is stated to have occurred in
1791, that is, thirteen years earlier. He adds: ‘‘ Professor Hansteen has explained these progressive
changes in the variation of the needle by the motion of the four magnetic poles. Taking the varia-

tions at Paris for the northern hemisphere, he remarks that in 1580 the weak N. pole in Siberia was
about 40° E. of Greenwich, or to the N. of the White Sea; while the strong American pole was about

a

384 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

chronism may be argued in favor of the occurrence of the plague of
Barbary, the sweating sickness, and we may say of the black death.
Yet with none of these disastrous positions on the great cycle does the
present time agree. If the sun-spot cycles be examined, it will be fur-
ther seen that we have reached a time when the solar phases are short,
and that similar short phases are given by the seismic data as having
transpired about the middle of the seventeenth century, and again, as
would seem from observed sun-eycles, about the middle of the eighteenth.
Although the agreement is not exact as regards figures, we still discover
that the points are marked by the freezing of the Thames, plainly indi-
cating the passage of intensely cold winters (1670 and 1683~4), espe-
clally in the former case, where there is just previously a change indi-
cated in the frequency of auroral displays (about 1640), that is almost
synchronous with the great plague of London (1648-1665). Two great
Jocust swarms in their sweep over Europe mark the intermediate period
of time, namely, those of 1689 and 1747, but whether any exact agree-

ment may exist between the epochs of these visitations of Providence -

I cannot say. They seem to indicate fragments of climatic cycles and
attendant phenomena, following the greater sun-periods marked by the
east and west deviation of the compass needle, and corresponding to
those we have established for the minor. If we may further suppose
the changes of climate that have transpired between 1346 and 1580 to
have been similar to those that have been experienced since the year
1814, we might, in picturing to ourselves the multiplication of C. spretus
during the period 1845-1877, call up before the mind’s eye the produe-
tion of that great swarm of grasshoppers that invaded Europe about
the years 1353 and 1374. Both points of time, to say the least, must have
been pretty well identically marked by the point of the compass needle
on its circuit.
In concluding my essay, in order to assert the noble dignity of my
subject, in order ‘to free myself from all calumny from those of my
brother naturalists untrained to numerical computation, or from impu-
tation of the black art on the part of those little thinkers who might

236° W. of Greenwich, or 36° E. of Behring’s Straits. The weak pole, therefore, lay nearer Europe than
mow, and the strong one more remote. Hence the action of the former predominated, and the needle
vturned westward till 1814, in which year it reached its greatest declination, and commenced its easterly
-course.”’ The explanation is equally satisfactory in reference to the southern hemisphere, and the
“variation at the Cape, where in 1605 the weak S. pole was 763° W. of Greenwich, and the strong S. pole
-about 150° EK. of that meridian. The two northern and two southern poles are elsewhere supposed by
.Sir David Brewster to be the points of greatest cold, while a marked agreement exists between tke
smagnetic (isodynamic) and mean temperature (isothermal) lines.

-Sames Forbes (Math. and Phys. Science, p. 990) says, speaking of the charts of Halley and Hansteen:
“Tt results from these charts that the line of no variation, which in 1600 formed a remarkable arch-
ike curve, stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to near the North Cape of Norway, then descending
throngh Central Europe to the Gulf of Guinea, had, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
become gradually flattened (having passed through Paris in 1669, and through London twelve years
earlier), and at present this part of the line of no variation is confined to the American continent and
neighboring seas. Another and more complicated branch of the same line traverses the Pacific Ocean,
making a complex serpentine track through Eastern Asia and Siberia. The line of no variation may
-be expected to pass through those points of the earth’s surface towards which the needle converges.”

SOLAR PHYSICS AND LOCUST INCREASE. 85

hastily conclude that I had bound up their destinies in a sun god, with
clear conscience, I challenge academical support for the following enun-
ciation, arising out of a study of my subject: The weather is the cause
of insect multiplication; the weather in consecutive years differs alone
(virtually) on account of changes in the sun’s photosphere. Isolated
observations on temperatare, magnetic deviation, auroras, wind disturb-
ance, rainfall, water in rivers, famines, diseases, or epidemics, earth-
quakes, and other sun phenomena give erroneous results. Properly
generalized observations show almost invariably an exact concordance
between the sun changes and these effects. The conception, as the proof,
is one of numbers.

wi

Poles Hite cath a ne

iff

eo OE;

———SS

THE ARMY WORM, CANKER WORMS,

AND

itt wens sL AN WILY:

87

i ee 7.
o ul 5 rE & ;
RNR rng wae

Rig eaenie

CHAPTER VL.

THE ARMY WORM (Leucania unipuncta Havw.).
[Plates I and II.]
NOMENCLATURE.

There is perhaps on this side of the Atlantic no more familiar insect
name than thatof Army Worm. Unfortunately, however, this name is
as comprehensive as are most popular names, and, as used by different
people, in different parts of the country, may refer to entirely different
ynsects. In fact, in but few other cases is this bane of popular ento-
mology—the application of a limited number of popular names to an
almost unlimited number of insects—better exemplified than here.

Years ago some unwise individual applied the title Army Worm to the
southern Cotton Worm (Aletia rylina, Say). Glover adopted the title,
prefixing, however, the word cotton; but it has occasioned confusion
ever since. For instance, there appeared in the columns of one of our
prominent agricultural periodicals, during the disastrous Army Worm
year of 1861, an article, couched in pseudo-scientific language, stating
that the insect ravaging the New England fields was the Anomis xylina
of Say, quoting from a Louisiana paper an account of its work in the
southern cotton-fields, and following with an article from some western
periodical describing its injuries in the wheat-fields of the Northwest.

Another southern insect, the Grass Worm (Laphygma frugiperda, Sm.
& Abb.), has been dubbed “the Army Worm” by southern people, and
this name for this species was adopted by Lyman in his Cotton Culture,
and by others; hence a confusion between these two insects also has
always existed, though here the mistake is more excusable, owing to their
great resemblance in the larva state, both in appearance and habit.

The Tent caterpillar of the forest (Clisiocampa silvatica Harr.) often
appears in extraordinary numbers, especially in the Southern States,
where large stretches of oak forest are sometimes defoliated by it, and
when migrating in search of suitable places to spin up, or when seeking
further food, it has been called “the Army Worm.” Wehavepreviously
cited” its appearance near Memphis in 1872, when it frequently stopped
the trains going in and out of the city. It stripped orchards, and great
janes of bare trees marked its track through the woods.

At a meeting of the Western New York Fruit-Growers’ Association,
in 1861, there was a learned discussion of the “Army Worm” and the

28th Missouri Entomological Report, p. 23.

eg

90 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

means necessary to prevent its injuries to fruit trees. Although the
subject was discussed by a half dozen or more practical horticulturists,
no one corrected the name, and all spoke gravely of shaking them from
the tree, or of belting it with lard and sulphur or other mixture to pre-
vent the worms from climbing up. Possibly this name answered their
purpose sufficiently well, as all were evidently speaking of the same
insect—probably the Canker Worm—but think of how the discussion
was quoted in one paper and another, and think of the confusion which
the reading of such a report would create in the minds of those anxious
to learn the truth, and who had not access to reliable works!

The California newspapers have from time to time recorded the ap-
pearance of the Army Worm in that State. That the genuine Army
_ Worm is not concerned in this damage is shown by the fact that the in- |
sect, whatever it is, has manifested little disposition to injure the grain;
but garden vegetables, and even grapes, have suffered severely from
its attacks.

The larve of Sciara, which congregate together in large numbers
and move as one body, attached to one another, head and tail, are
called by our German citizens ‘the Army Worm” (Heerwurm).

In Europe several larve are known by this name, particularly the
Calocampa exoleta (Linn.).

The Army Worm proper, which we have sometimes called the North-
ern Army Worm to better distinguish it,” and which was known in the
early chronicles as ‘the Black Worm,” is the larva ef a Noctuid moth,
known as Leucania unipuncta (Haworth). :

The history of its synonymy is as tollows:. Upon the breaking up of
the collection of Dr. Francillon, in London, a specimen of this moth,
without locality label, fell into the hands of Mr. Haworth, who in 1810
described it in his Lepidoptera Britannica as Noctua unipuncta.

In 1829, Stephens, in his Illustrations of British Entomology, Haustel-
lata, III, p. 80, published a description of it, under the name of Noctua
impuncta—either a misprint or a slip of the pen—and stated that its
habitat was unknown.

In 1850 (List of the Lepidoptera in the British Museum, p. 289), the
same author corrected his previous mistake in the specific name, and
stated the insect to be North American. 1n 1852, Guenée, in the first
part of his Noctuélites, pp. 77, 78, described the species as Leucania
extranea, not having connected it with Haworth’s species. He de-
scribed it from numerous exotic specimens in Parisian collections.

30 Though the insect prevails in the South, yet in the Cotton States it rarely. if ever attracts the same
attention as in the more northern States. This is due, in our judgment, to the following facts :—

ist. The species, both in the larva and imago states, is more continuously active through the winter,
and consequently more subject to destruction by birds and other natural enemies.

2d. The area of grain and grass crops, upon which it feeds, is limited, as compared with cotton, upon
which it does not feed.

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE ARMY WORM. 91

Of late years, a few American Lepidopterists, following Mr. A. R.
Grote, have adopted Hiibner’s generic name of Heliophila in place of
Leucama. We would repeat here Mr. Riley’s reasons for rejecting this
and other of Hiibner’s “coitus” names for modern genera.

I consider that the reasons so long urged by entomologists against the adoption
of the classification of the ‘‘Tentamen” and ‘‘ Verzeichniss,” and particularly those
given by Guenée, for not following this last in his admirable work on the Noctuidae,
are good and sound. The Hiibnerian classification is essentially unreal and the
generic divisions so inadequately defined that I doubt if any one would attempt to
make use of the works in question, were it not for the references to the admirabiy
illustrated works of the same author. The introduction of his generic terms into
American Lepidopterology has so upset its nomenclature, without in the least ad-
vancing our knowledge, and the grounds for this introduction are so questionable,
that those who make these insects a specialty are apt in the future to divide into two
factions—the Hiibnerites and the anti-Hiibnerites; in which event the latter will
certainly have strong support from entomologists in general.—[8th Mo. Ent. Rep.,
p- 22.

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION.

Leucania unipuncta is a very widespread, we may say cosmopolitan,
species, though nowhere, as far as we are aware, is it particularly noted
aS an injurious insect except in the United States. On this continent
its range is great. Packard’s map (Report on Rocky Mountain Locusts,
&e.) gives its southern limit as the southernmost point of Texas; its
western limit at 102° west; north at parallel 48° in Minnesota and at
Cape Rozier in Quebec, and east at the easternmost point of Nova Scotia.
We have no data as to a wider range except that in the British Museum
catalogue of lepidoptera this species is entered as from ‘‘the west coast
of North America.” Without much doubt, however, it will be found
farther west and farther north than the limits we have mentioned, as
collections from out of the way spots become more common. ‘The re-
gions most ravaged, as taken from Packard’s map, are as follows:
Hastern Iowa, Southern and Central Wisconsin, excluding an eastern
strip; Northwestern, Southern, and Central Illinois; Kastern Kansas,
Eastern Missouri, Southwestern and Southeastern Indiana, Northern
Kentucky, the whole of Ohio, Eastern and Western Pennsylvania, East-
ern and Southern New York, Western New Jersey, the whole of New
England, except a small western strip of Massachusetts and Connecti-
cut, and the northwestern half of Vermont.

The species has not been found, so far as we know, in the West In-
dies, though we certainly think that it exists there. Both Guenée and
Walker mention it from various parts of South America—Venezuela,
United States of Colombia, and Brazil. In Hurope it has been recorded
from the Isle of Wight, and from Lewes, South England. Farther east
the moth has been captured in the Province of Nepaul, North India, in
Java, in several localities in Australia, and, to end our list, in New
Zealand.

92 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,
CAPACITY FOR INJURY.

It seems strange, indeed, that Leucania wunipuncta, widespread as it
is, Should be destructive only in the more northern of the United States;
yet such seems to be the case, so far as we havé any facts to warrant
conclusions. Here, however, the capacity for injury is very great.
Hardly a year passes by without its appearance in some part of this
area, and a resulting damage to crops of hundreds of thousands of dol-
lars. Its high rank as an injurious insect is so well known that, in the
absence of definite statistics as to losses, it seems hardly worth dwell-
ing upon. In fact the only case in which statistics have been attempted
is the estimate of damage to western Massachusetts in 1861, where
_ it was placed at half a million of dollars, and, as there were twenty
States damaged to a greater or less extent this same year, the total
loss for 1861 could not be far from $10,000,000.

The injury to crops in 1861 was, however, as we shall soon show, more
widespread than in any preceding or succeeding year; yet even in
years of local appearance the injury is sometimes very great. Last
year (1881), for instance, the amount of damage done to a single crop
(oats) in Illinois and Indiana was not far from three-quarters of a mill-
ion do!lars. The magnitude of the interests involved causes evenaslight
percentage of loss to represent a very large sum. This is readily shown
by the fact that in 1880 the value of those crops subject to the ravages
of Leucania amounted to over one billion seven hundred millions.

PAST HISTORY.

In 1854 Charles L. Flint compiled, for the report of the Secretary of
the State Board of Agriculture of Massachusetts, ‘“‘an account of the
meteorology of the New England States with reference to the years of
drought from 1623 on to the date of writing.” In this account appear
incidentally the following notices of worms, which may possibly refer to
Leucania:

1632. ‘*The worms made extensive ravages on ‘the corn.”

1646 and 1649 “were caterpillar years.”

1666. “The Indian corn eaten by the worms.”

1743. ‘Millions of devouring worms in armies, threatening to cut off
every green thing.” S

1762. “At last, when the corn was planted, millions of worms appeared
to eat it up.”

1770. “A very uncommon sort of a worm, called the Canker Worm,
ate the corn and grass all as they went above ground, which cut short
the crops in many places.” |

Of these entries that of 1743 is the only one which has been quoted
as a genuine Army Worm reference; it is indeed always mentioned as
the first Army Worm year. Butwe must not overlook the fact that while
the entries of 1632 and 1666 may refer to Heliothis armigera, those of

i

a ee

PAST HISTORY OF THE ARMY WORM. 93

1646 and 1649 to any one of many species, and that of 1762 to some cut-
worm, yet they may also, one or all, very possibly refer to Leucania.
For exact purposes, however, we may agree with Fitch and the others
who have followed him so closely, in considering 1743 as the first Army
Worm year of which we have pretty definite proof. We are also in-
clined to think that Flint’s quotation in regard to 1762 has reference to
Leucania, though not as certainly as that of 1743.

Concerning the appearance of the Army Worm in 1770 there can be
but little doubt, for, in addition to the quotation given above, we have
two graphic accounts which quite evidently point to the true Army
Worm as the author of thedamage. The firstis that given by the Rev.
Grant Powers, in his Historical Sketches of the Cods Country (New
Hampshire), published at Haverhill, N. H., in 1841:

In the summer of 1770 this whole section was visited by an extraordinary calamity,
such a one as the country never experienced before or since, beyond what I shall here
. specify. It was an army of worms, which extended from Lancaster, N. H., to North-
field, in Massachusetts. They began to appear the latter part of July, 1770, and con-
tinued their ravages until September. The inhabitants denominated them the
“‘Northern Army,” as they seemed to advance from the north or northwest and to pass
east and south, although I do not learn that they ever passed the high lands between
the-Conneeticut and Merrimack Rivers. They were altogether too innumerable for
multitude. Dr. Burton, of Thetfort, Vt., told me thathe had seen whole pastures so
covered that he could not put down his finger in a single spot without placing it upon
a worm. He said he had seen more than ten bushelsin a heap. They were unlike
anything which the present generation have ever seen! There was a stripe upon the
back like black velvet, on either side a yellow stripe from end to end, and the rest
of the body was brown. They were sometimes seen not larger than a pin, butin
their maturity they were as long asa man’s finger and proportionably large in circum-
ference. They appeared to bein great haste, except when they halted to devour their
food. ‘They filled the houses of the inhabitants, and entered their kneading-troughs,
as did the frogs in Egypt. They would go up the side ofa house, and over it, in such
a compact column that nothing of the boards or shingles could be seen! They did
not take hold of the pumpkin vine, pease, potatoes, or flax; but wheat and corn dis-
appeared before asif by magic. They would climb up stalks of wheat, eat off the
stalk just below the head, and almost as soon as the head had fallen upon the ground
it was devoured. To prevent this the men would ‘draw the rope,” as they termed
it; that is, two men would take a rope, one at each end, and pulling from each other
until it was nearly straightened, they would pass through their wheat-fields and
brush off the worms from the stalks, and by perpetual action they retarded the de-
struction of their wheat; but it was doomed, finally, to extinction.

There were fields of corn on the meadows in Haverhill and Newbury, standing so
thick, large, and tall that in some instances it was difficult to see a man standing
more than one rod in the field from the outermost row; but in ten days from the first
appearance of this Northern Army nothing remained of this corn but the bare stalks!
Every expedient was resorted to by the inhabitants to protect their fields of corn, but
allin vain. In the first place they dug trenches around their fields a foot anda
half deep, hoping this might prove a defense; but they soon filled the ditch, and the
millions that were in the rear went over on the backs of their fellows in the trench
and took possession of the interdicted food.

The inhabitants then adopted another expedient to save those fields yet standing.
They cut a trench as before; then took round and smooth sapling sticks, of 6 or 8
inches diameter and 6 or 8 feet in length, sharpened them to a point, and with these
made holes in the bottom of the ditch, once in 2 or 3 feet; and, as their meadows

94 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

were bottom lands, they experienced no difficulty in extending these holes to 2 or 3
feet in depth below the bottom of the trench. The sides of these holes were made
smooth by the bar or lever which made the holes, and as soon as the worm stepped
from the precipice he ended at the bottom, and could not ascend again; indeed, he
was soon buried by his unfortunate fellows who succeeded him in his downfall. Now
those who made these holes to entrap their invaders went around their fields and
plunged these pointed levers into the holes filled with worms, and destroyed every
one of them at a single thrust, whether it was a peck or a half bushel. By unremit-

ting effort in this way, some reserved to themselves corn enough for seed the next

year.
About the 1st of September the worms suddenly disappeared; and where they ter-

minated their earthly career is unknown, for not the carcass of a worm was seen. In _

just eleven years afterward, in 1781, the same kind of worm appeared again, and the
fears of the people were much excited; but they were comparatively few in number,
and no one of the kind has ever been seen since.

He then goes on to say that if it had not been for the pumpkins,
which thrived marvelously in the corn-fields after the grain had been
destroyed by the worms, many people would have died the ensuing
winter from the scarcity of food consequent upon the ravages of the
worms. The extraordinary abundance of wild pigeons also helped to
sustain many who otherwise would have perished.

The account which Fitch quotes from Noah Webster on Pestilential
Diseases (I, 259) may here be given, as it presents one or two points of
difference from Powers’s account, which are italicized.

In 1770 a black worm about an inch and a half tong devoured the grass and corn.
Never was a more singular phenomenon. These animals were generated suddenly in

the Northern States of America, and almost covered two or three hundred miles of

country. They all moved nearly in one direction, and when they were intercepted
by furrows in ploughed land they fell into them in such numbers as to form heaps.
They sought shelter in the grass, a hot swn being fatal to them. They disappeared suddenly
about the close of June or beginning of July.

From Powers’s description of the worm alone much doubt might ex-
ist as toits identity with Leucania. Indeed it applies much more closely
to a large sphinx larva, the Deilephila lineata, Fabr. It may, however,
have been written some years afterwards, the size of the worms having
become magnified in the memory of the writer, and the other details con-
fused. Webster, as is seen in the above quotation, gives more nearly
the correct size, and, all things considered, the worm was most prope
the true Army enh

In 1790 Webster again records their appearance, this time in Con-
necticut, as follows:

In 1790 millions of the black worms noticed in 1770 reappeared in Connecticut,
appearing at Hartford and Norwich, and disappearing in these places at the same
time. They were very destructive to the grass and corn, but their existence was
short, all dying in a few weeks.

In 1817 the worms again appeared in Massachusetts, New York, and
other parts of the country. Fitch quotes from the Albany Argus as fol-
lows: 7

Worcester, May 22.—We learn that the black worm is making. great ravages on some
farms in this town, and in many other places in this part ofthe country. Theirmarch

“a
1

PAST HISTORY OF THE ARMY WORM. 95

is a displayed column, and their progress is as distinctly marked as the course of a fire
which has overrun the herbage in a dry pasture. Not abladeof grass is left standing
in their rear. From the appearance of the worm, it is supposed to be the same which
usually infests gardens, and iscommonly called the cut-worm. We areinformed that.
about forty years ago the same kind of worm made great destruction in ploughed land,
among spring grain, but particularly in fields of flax.

The Albany Argus adds to the above as follows:

This black worm is also destroying the vegetation in the northern towns of Rensse-
laer and eastern sections of Saratoga. Many meadows and pastures have been ren-
dered by their depredations as barren asa heath. It appears to be the same species.
of worm that has created so much alarm in Worcester County, but we suspect it is.
different from the cut-worm, whose ravages appear to be confined to corn.

In 1818 or 1820 the worm appeared in large numbers in Union County,
Illinois, as Walsh was informed by one of his correspondents.

1825.—In this year the worms damaged the timothy crop in parts of
Ohio, as appears from an article by Jos. Bradshaw in the Farmer’s Re-
porter (Ohio), 1835, copied in the American Farmer’s Register of the
same year. They also appeared this year in Perry County, Illinois, ac-
cording to Walsh.

1826.—Damaged the crops in Perry County, Illinois. (Walsh.)

1830.—Did much injury in Llinois, according to the New England
Farmer of July 2, 1830.

1834.—Perry County, Illinois. (Walsb.)

1835.—According to Volume V of the Cultivator (Boston), the Army
Worm this year appeared in Missouri—nineteen years earlier than the first.
appearance in this State, given in our Highth Missouri Entomological
Report. In this instance is mentioned for the first time the good which
the worms occasionally do by stripping off the leaves affected by rust.
It also damaged the timothy crop in Ohio this year, as we learn from the
article of Jos. Bradshaw mentioned above. Italso appeared, according:
to Thomas, in Vermillion County, Illinois.

1837.—Vermillion County, Indiana. (Old agricultural newspaper.)

1838.— Union County, Illinois. (Walsh.)

1839.—Perry County, Illinois. (Walsh.)

1841.—Perry County, Illinois. (Walsh.)

1842.—This was a year of more extended appearances. According to:
Walsh it damaged the crops of Union, Perry, and some of the northern
counties of Illinois. Fitch states that it appeared this year at numerous.
points in Northern Illinois, and from an old number of the Country Gen-
tleman we learn that it did some damage in Western New York.

1845.—Northern Illinois (Walsh); numerous points in Northern Ili-
nois (Fitch).

1349.—This year it again appeared in Illinois, according to Walsh,,
and also in Southwest Michigan, according to the Michigan Horticult-
urist.

1850.—I1linois. (Walsh.)

1354.—According to the statement of Mr. M. P. Lentz, of Rocheport,.

96 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Mo., the worms abounded this year in parts of Boone County, Missouri,
as stated in our Highth Missouri Entomological Report.

1855.—This was the year in which Mr. Jobn Kirkpatrick first studied
the Army Worm. He reared the worms to the perfect state and de-
scribed the larva and the moth. Their work is described as follows:

Last season (1855), in consequence of the heavy rains in the early part of June, the
flats of the Cuyahoga (Northern Ohio) were flooded. After the subsidence of the water,
and while the grass was yet coated with the muddy deposit, myriads of small blackish
caterpillars appeared; almost every blade had its inhabitant; no animal could feed
upon it without at every bite swallowing several; if a new blade sprung up it was
immediately devoured ; but, what was more remarkable, the insects did not attempt to
remove to land a foot or two higher, but that had not been covered by the water,

1856.— Union County, Ulinois.

1857.—In 1857 the worms again appeared in Union County, Illinois,
and also in Maryland. <A writer from the latter State gives an account
of the worms in the New Jersey Farmer of that year. He describes
for the first time two of the Army Worm’s parasites—the one a Micro-
gaster (probably M. militaris Walsh), and the other a Tachinid (prob-
ably Kirkpatrick’s Nemorea leucanie).

1858.—Hlinois (Fitch); northern counties of Illinois (Walsh).

1861.—This is by far the most celebrated of the Army Worm years,
because, in the first place, the worms appeared in destructive numbers
over an immense extent of country, and, in the second place, because
this appearance called forth the elaborate articles of Fitch, Walsh,
Kirkpatrick, Thomas, Packard, and Shurtleff. Indeed, barring Kirk-
patrick’s short note in 1855, this was the first year in which the Army
Worm had been at all scientifically studied. Its distribution this year
was as follows: |

It was first noticed in numbers sufficient to cause alarm in Tennessee and Ken-
‘tucky during the month of April; and toward the close of the same month it ap-
peared in the southern counties of Illinois. By the end of June it had visited nearly
all portions of the latter State, proving more or less destructive to grass, wheat, oats,
rye, sorghum, and corn. 3

Its advent in Missouri was simultaneous with that in I/linois, and, judging from
-what facts I have accumulated, it occurred very generally over this State, thongh
recorded only in Saint Louis, Jefferson, Warren, Boone, Howard, and Pike Counties.
-No mention is made of its occurrence, at this time, in any of the States or Territories
west of Missouri, but to the east scarcely a single State escaped its ravages. In
many portions of Ohio it entirely destroyed the hay and grain crops. (Riley’s 8th Mo.
Ent. Rept.)

Along the Ohio River, in the southern part of the State, and even as
far north as Shelby County, the damage was all done prior to the mid-
dle of June, while in the northern counties, bordering on Lake Erie,
the worms were not observed until the Ist of August. They were prev-
alent in Indiana, the northern and western portions of Pennsylvania,
the southern and western portions of New York, as far north as Seneca
County; in all New Jersey, and throughout all New England, along
the sea-coast as far as the Saint Croix River, in Maine, and as far north
as Montreal, in Canada.

PAST HISTORY OF THE ARMY WORM. 97

In 1865 and. 1866 it attracted attention in restricted localities in Illi-
nois and Missouri. In 1869 it again appeared in vast numbers in many
portions of Missouri, especially in Saint Louis, Jefferson, Cooper, Calla-
way, Henry, Saint Clair, Marion, Ralls, and Lafayette Counties; also in
Illinois and Indiana. |

1870.—In this year the worms were reported to the Department from
Jefferson and Crawford Counties, Kansas; Polk and Osage, Missouri,
and Richland, Wisconsin.

1871.—Marion and Morgan Counties, Illinois (Prairie Farmer Record) ;
Linn, Louisa, Washington, Appanoose, and other counties in Iowa
(State Agricultural Report, 1871), and Warren County, New Jersey
(Monthly Report Department of Agriculture, 1871).

1872.—In 1872 it was more widespread, and I received specimens from several cor-
respondents, in Iowa more particularly. It was reported in Louisa, Van Buren, Wa-
pello, Jefferson, Muscatine, Jasper, Washington, Iowa, and Adams Counties in that
State, and very generally in Wisconsin, in Ohio, and in Kentucky. It attracted less
attention in Illinois and Missouri, though I met with it frequently in the last-named
State. It was also reported from Tioga County, New York. Graphic accounts were
likewise published of its devastations in Tennessee, and the California Farmer of July
25, 1872, reported legions of Army Worms as appearing over that State spontaneously,
and ‘‘stripping vines and potato fields.” From this last statement I infer that they
were of some species other than the one we are considering.

But the most interesting manifestation of the insect during the year 1872 was in
the vicinity of Peshtigo, in the northeastern portion of Wisconsin. It will be remem-
bered that of the memorable fires that ravaged the northwestern country in the fall
of 1871, none, after that of Chicago, attracted more attention or caused more sympa-
thy for the sufferers therefrom than that which swept through Peshtigo, destroying
the whole town and causing numerous deaths and great distress. During July of
the following year the people of Peshtigo suffered another infliction in the shape of
armies of worms that destroyed the crops and were so numerous that in many places.
they could be shoveled up by bushels, and fell into wells in such myriads as to render
the water foul and useless. This case has such an interesting bearing on the insect’s
natural history that I shall revert to it again under that head. For the present it is
only necessary to say that there can be no doubt as to the species, as specimens re-

ceived by Dr. Le Baron and by myself showed it to be the insect under considera-
tion. (Riley’s 8th Mo. Ent. Rept.)

- In addition to these localities we have the following from the ento-
mological records in the Monthly Reports of the Department of A gricult-
ure: Wabash, Monroe, Lawrence, Carroll, Ogle, and White, Illinois;
Cherokee and Labette, Kansas; Posey, Gibson, Spencer, Hancock, Mar-
ion, and Pike, Indiana, and Henry and Nahaska, Illinois. Also in a few
localities in Rhode Island and Connecticut the sod-corn and the grass
crops were taken.

1873.—This year the worms injured the grass crop in Northumber-
laud County, Virginia, in July (undoubtedly the second brood), and they
also occurred during the year in Bedford County, Tennessee, on clover;
in Posey and Dubois Counties, Indiana, on meadows; and also in Hd-
wards, Williamson, Franklin, and Perry Counties, Illinois, also on mead-
OWS.

TEC

98 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

1874.—In 1874 the worms were decidedly more injurious than in the
preceding year. In Kentucky they appeared in Logan, Adair, McLean,
Livingston, Breckinridge, Taylor, and Ohio Counties; in Tennessee, in
Knox, Chatham, and Putnam Counties, on grass, and in Dickson County,
on millet; in Missouri, in Saint Genevieve and Logan Counties, and in
Illinois, in Marion, Edmunds, Jackson, and Montgomery Counties. In
his Entomological Record for this year, Glover says that Leucania uni-
puncta in July damaged grass in Richland County, South Carolina,
Heard County, Georgia, and Macon County, Alabama; but it seems
quite likely that the insect doing the damage was the “Grass Worm”
(Laphygma frugiperda Sm. & A.), and not Leucania.

1875.—The following account of the work of the Army Worms dur-
‘Ing the year 1875 is taken from Glover’s Entomological Record, in the
Monthly Reports of the Department of Agriculture for that year, page
369, and in all probability refers to Leucania unipuncta :

GRASS ARMY WORMS (Leéucania unipuncta prob.).

This insect appeared in Lincoln, Maine, early in August, and destroyed some fields —
_of grain and other crops. In Newport, Rhode Island, they overran several fields,
eating all the grass and most of the cereals, including some cornfieids. They were
here fully as destructive as in 1&61. They also appeared in Cambria and Chester,
Pennsylvania; in Frederick, Maryland; in Craig, Grayson, and Augusta, Virginia; ~
Tucker, Randolph, and Nicholas, West Virginia. Insects called Army Worms were
destructive to oat crops in Ohio. In Fulton, where they had been previously compar-
atively unknown, they came by millions, cutting the stalks of oats and leaving the
ground covered with the grain. Hancock lost 50 per cent. of the crop, which was also
greatly injured in Henry, Van Wert, Fulton, Montgomery, Mercer, Auglaize, Crawford,
Delaware, Lucas, Union, Warren, Morrow, and Adams. In Licking the general de-
struction of oats was supplemented by serious injury to the corn. They cut oft the
leaves and heads of the oats just ready to harvest. The insect is described as resem-
bling the cut-worm, but a little lighter colored, being a light brown. In some cases
they attacked every green thing. In Monroe and Branch, Michigan, they destroyed
not only oats, but grass, corn, wheat, and rye. They are also reported in Franklin,
La Porte, Whitely, and De Kalb, Indiana, and in Alexander and Ogle, Illinois.

From the regular entries of correspondents’ reports we gather the
following additional localities for this year: Montgomery County, Vir-
ginia; Knox, Greene, and Obion Counties, Tennessee; Logan County,
Kentucky; Saint Genevieve (May 20), Boone, Perry, Howard, Gascon-
ade, Montgomery, Madison, Cape Girardeau, and Bollinger, Missouri ;
in Pike, Perry, Jersey, Randolph, Madison, Sangamon, Monroe, and
Clinton, Illinois; Logan and Medina, Chio. From Clallam County,
Washington Territory, came the following report:

Timothy attacked by Army Worms, which caused our farmers to commence hay-
making sooner than they intended.

We supplement the above and conclude the record for 1875 by the
following from our Eighth Missouri Entomological Report:

During the latter part of May, or just about the time that there was the greatest

consternation regarding the locusts, our papers contained dispatches from various
parts of Southern Illinois and Central Missouri to the effect that the Army Worm had

PAST HISTORY OF THE ARMY WORM. 99

appearedin countless millions, and was destroying the grain crops at an alarming rate.
During the last week of that month Mr. C. M. Samuels, of Clinton, Ky., brought speci-
mens to my office with the statement that they were common and doing much dam-
age allover the northwestern portion of Kentucky. It was also reported from various
parts of Delaware and of Ohio about the same time. Somewhat later it appeared in
Iowa, and I quote the following account of its advent at Fort Madison, from a letter
from Dr. A. W. Hoffmeister:

“The Army Worm was very troublesome in some localities near Fort Madison.
About the first of June immense numbers of caterpillars, one-half inch long, were ob-
served in low grounds, subject to overflow orstanding water. Their eating created a
noise which could be heard at a distance as a dull grating or sawing sound. About the
21-24 they bored into the ground and pupated, and in about two weeks after appeared
asmoths. I had caught the Leucania unipuncia in the fall of 1875 and spring of 1876
in great numbers by the process of sugaring, looking at both seasons very fresh; and
therefore it is a riddle to me whether there is another brood or whether some pup
remain dormant till fall or next spring. All my pupz2 hatched, but I did not see the
moths cohabit, nor did I find young or new larve during the summer. This fall the
moths are less numerous than last fall.”

During the latter part of July and August it attracted attention in New York, and
by the middle of the latter month was swarming on Long Island. In September and
October it was extensively reported in New England, where it did much injury to
Hungarian grass and to oats. Mr. B. P. Mann, of Cambridge, Mass., who took the
moth at sugar as late as October 27, sends me the following extracts, which will show
the time of year and the numbers in which they appeared in different parts of New
England: |

“‘Army Worms are very destructive to vegetation around Machias [Maine]. There
has been nothing like them since 1861. * * * The Army Wormshave appeared in
large numbers at Colchester [Conn. ], and are doing much damage to the crops.”—[ Bos-
ton Daily Advertiser, August 10 and 11, 1875.

“‘The Army Worm appeared in immense numbers on Sunday at Sussex, on the
government railway line, east of St. John [N. B.], and since that time the ravages
have created wide-spread alarm. Fields of grain have been destroyed. Horse rollers
run over the road where they crossed did not perceptibly lessen their numbers. A
dispatch from St. Andrews says, the Army Worm invaded that town yesterday, cov-
ering the streets, fields, and lanes in every direction, and devouring the grass and
grain in spite of every opposition. They are still advancing.”—[Jbid., August 12,
1875.

‘‘A worm has been discovered in Hollister [Mass.] in such large quantities as to
lead tothe supposition that it may be the Army Worm again. The army has invaded
Delham. They have devastated an acre of Hungarian owned by Mr. Greenwood Fuller,
a large field of grass for Mr. Luther Fisher ; also for Mr. L. Baker.”—[Jbid., August 16,
1875.

‘“‘The south shore [of Mass. ] in the vicinity of Black Rock has of late been visited
with an innumerable host of moths, commonly called millers. They took possession
of rooms, which were accessible by the windows being left open, in such numbers
that it was the work of days torid the rooms of their presence. Their origin is a
mystery ; but they entered rooms facing north in such flocks that it is a theory that
they came in from the sea. In one smallroom 800 were killed.”—[J bid., September 3,
1875.

The most noticeable feature connected with the appearance of the worm in our own
State was its harmlessness, or non-appearance in the western or locust-stricken portion.
Most of these counties are large stock-raising counties, and abound in rich prairie and
good meadows. Under ordinary circumstances, the worms would have flourished there,
but last spring, though I have records of their appearance, the locusts either destroyed
them or caused them to starve before they acquired full growth. The following list

100 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of counties in which no Army Worms were noticed or in which they were soon killed
out, is made up from reports from my correspondents, and very forcibly illustrates
the feature referred to: Andrew, Barton, Benton, Buchanan, Bates, Barry, Caldwell,
Clay, Clinton, Cass, Cedar, Davicss, Dade, Dunklin, Grundy, Gentry, Henry, Harri-
son, Hickory, Holt, Jackson, Johnson, Jasper, Lafayette, Linn, Marion, McDonald,
Macon, Newton, Oregon, Pulaski, Pettis, Putnam, Ray, Sullivan, Ecotland, Saint Clair,
Texas, Taney, and Vernon.

In nearly all of the counties not mentioned J have records of its appearance, and
often in such numbers that whole fields and meadows were cut down.

1876.—The only reports for this year come from Saline and Chase
Counties, Kansas, and the time of the reports (August) renders it prob-
able that Laphygma not Leucania was the author of the damage.

In 1877 and 1878 we have noreports whatever of damage by the worms.

1879.—In the latter part of May the worms appeared in very injuri-
ous numbers in the grass fields of Norfolk, Princess Anne, Nansemond,
and Isle of Wight Counties, Virginia, and a little later near Point Look-
out,in Saint Mary’s County, Maryland,in wheat. In July the worms
were reported from Reno County, Kansas. |

1880.—This year proved to be one of great damage to the Northwest-
ern States. As early as February the worms were reported as being
very injurious to winter wheat near Maryville, Blount County, Ten-
nessee, and in Union County, South Carolina. About the Ist of June
they were reported from Maryland, and soon after in Kent County,
Delaware. Here, after destroying the wheat, they attacked the young
corn, eating it to the ground. |

Simultaneously with their appearance in Delaware, they were found
on Long Island, New York, and in Monmouth County, New Jersey, creat-
ing great alarm, and doing much damage to the crops. The New York
dailies contained column after column of information regarding the
spread of the worms, and the injury done by them, much of it of course
of a highly sensational character and totally unworthy of credence. In_
early June they appeared in the coast counties of Connecticut, and
later in Massachusetts, appearing .in Portsmouth, N. H., July 3. In
various parts of Maine they were found during July, and August 12
appeared in destructive numbers in the vicinity of Halifax, Nova Scotia.
Meantime, in June, they were found in the southern and eastern coun-
ties of New York, on Staten Island, all through New Jersey and Hast-
ern Pennsylvania. Later there were isolated appearances of the second
brood west. August 19, the worms did some damage in the vicinity of
Indianapolis, Ind., and about the same time in Whiteside County, Ili-
nois. In late July the second brood also injured the grass in Shenan-
doah County, Virginia.

Taken altogether, 1880 seems to have been equal to 1875 as an Army
_ Worm year, and the two to have been second only to 1861.

1881.—This year the worms were reported from various parts of New
York, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa. In the first-
named State, however, the injurious worms proved to be the Bronzy Cut-

CHARACTERS OF THE ARMY WORM. 101

worm (Nephelodes violans Guenée) and a smaller Pyralid larva (Crambus
vulgivagellus) both of which are treated of in the Report of the Ento-
mologist of the Department of Agriculture for 188182. In Wisconsin
all the reports investigated proved unauthentic and referred either to
the White Grub (larva of Lachnosterna fusca) or to the Corn Worm (fe-
liothis armigera). Many of the newspaper reports from Michigan were
also unreliable, though Prof. A. J. Cook assures us that the genuine
Army Worm was destructive in several localities in that State. He
says in a private letter :

The devastations were confined to the southwestern part of the State. The coun-
ties damaged were, in order of seriousness of the attack, Saint Joseph, Kalamazoo,
Van Buren, Allegan, Berrien. The damage to the oat crop was very great in some
sections, amounting to almost a total loss. Corn was also attacked, and con-
siderable damage done to this crop. The most damage was done during the second
and third weeks of July. The seasons were the reverse of the rule generally adopted
by this insect; 1880 was a very wet year in Michigan. Last year was very dry. It
was asserted that there was a second invasion in September. Though this was re-
ported in several localities in the same region that was invaded in July, I have no
positive knowledge that the insect noticed in September was the true Army Worm.

In Iowa one account at least plainly shows that the worm indicated
by this name was the Tent Caterpillar of the forest. (Clisiocampa silva-
tica). In Illinois and Indiana, however, there was no mistake, and the
damage done in these two States, chiefly to oats, though partly to corn,
grass, and flax, was very great. The contiguous border counties of
the two States suffered most severely.

CHARACTERS; DESCRIPTIVE.

This division of the subject is intended to be purely descriptive, and
to contain no material whatever upon habits. The necessity of includ-
ing such descriptions in this chapter is clearly evident, for in 1881 other
destructive worms, some of them allied to and others bearing not even
family relation to the Army Worm, were mistaken for it.!. The minut-
est details as to the characters of the worm in its earlier stages are in
fact necessary to prevent such confusion, since without them itis almost
impossible at such early age to distinguish between related species that
may closely resemble each other and yet have very different habits.
The portions here placed within quotation marks are taken from the
Highth Missouri Entomological Report, with a few verbal or typo-
graphical changes.

THE EGG. (PL I, Fig. 3, g, h.)

The egg of the Army Worm is spherical, smooth, white, and opaque when first laid,
becoming faintly iridescent and more sordid before hatching. Its average diameter
is 0.6™™ (.023 inch), and its perfect outline is sometimes altered by the gummy sub-
stance which is exuded by the moth at the time of ovipositing.

31See American Naturalist, July, 1881.

102 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

THE LARVA. (PI, I, Fig. 5.)

First stages—‘ When newly hatched, 1.7™™ long, dull translucent white in color,
with very minute piliferous points giving rise to pale hairs. Head large and uni-
formly brown-black. ‘Two front pair of prolegs atrophied so as to necessitate looping
in motion. Drops by means of a web. In the second stage it is quite active, still
loops, and spins a web, and drops at least disturbance. Head copal yellow, with six
black ocelli (the two inferior somewhat separated from the others), the brown jaws
and brown marks on the legs conspicuous. Color of body yellowish-green, darker
anteriorly, the venter being quite pale. The lines of mature larva barely indicated
in faint rose-brown, the most conspicuous being the broad stigmatal, a narrower one
above it, and two which are medio-dorsal. In the better marked specimens, the body
above the pale substigmatal line consists of 8 dark and 7 pale lines, the middle pale
line medio-dorsal, the second dark one from it most faint and most often obsolete, and
the lower or stigmata] one broadest and most conspicuous. Black piliferous dots dis-
tinct and normally arranged, i. e.: on the middle joints 4 trapezoidally on dorsum; 2
in stigmatal dark line, one just above, the other just behind stigmata; one at lower
edge of pale substigmatal line near the middle of the joint, and several that are ven-
tral: the dorsal ones on joints 1 and 12 forming areversed trapezoid to those on mid-
dle joints; on jt. 11a square, and on jts. 2 and 3 a transverse line. In the third stage |
there is little change. The head has still a copal yellow aspect, being pale, with faint
yellowish-brown mottlings; the ocelli still conspicuous. The body is more decidedly
striped, the dark stigmatal and pale substigmatal lines more strongly relieved, and
ali the lines approach more to those of final stage. The pale hairs from piliferous dots
are still quite noticeable, especially before and behind, and the dots themselves are
generally relieved by a pale basal annulus. The looping habit is lost, but the front
prolegs are still somewhat the smallest. It now curls round, and does not spin in
dropping. In the fourth stage the aspect is quite changed, the general coJor being
dull, dark green. The head has the mottlings of a deeper brown and the character-
istic brown lines appear. The second pale line (from above) is obsolete, and the other
five are narrowed, pure white, and sharply relieved by dark shades. The prolegs are
of nearly equal size; the cervical shield better defined: in short, except in the lighter
substigmatal stripe and more greenish color, the characters of the more normal, ma-
ture larvaobtain. In the fifth and sixth stages the changes are mainly in the increasing
prevalence of the brown and ferruginous colors, and the greater relief and intensity
of the black, especially above the upper white lateral line. The front prolegs in the
last stage are, if anything, longer than the hind ones: I reproduce herewith, witha
few additions, my original description of the

Full-grown larva.— General color dingy black, appearing finely mottled and speckled
under a lens, with the piliferous spots placed in the normal position, but scarcely visi-
ble, though the soft hairs arising from them are easily seen with the lens. Four
lateral light lines, of almost equal thickness, at about equal distance from each other,
the uppermost two white, the lowermost two yellow; a much less distinct mediodorsal
white line, frequently obsolete in middle of joints, and-always most distinct at the
‘divisions; a jet-black line immediately above the upper lateral white one, the dorsum
near it thickly mottled with dull yellow, but becoming darker as it approaches the
fine dorsal white line, along each side of which it is perfectly black. Space between
lateral light lines 1 and 2, from above, dull yellow or reddish, the white lines being
relieved by a darker edge; that between lines 2 and 3 almost black, being but slightly
mottled along the middle; that between 3 and 4 yellow, mottled with pink brown,
and appearing lighter than that betweenland2. Venter greenish-glaucous, mottled
and speckled with neutral color, especially near the edge of the 4th lateralline. Legs
glossy and of same’ color as venter; those on thoracic joints with black claws; those
on abdomen with a large, shiny, black spot on the outside. Stigmata oval, black, and
placed in the 3d lateral light line. Head highly polished, pale grayish-yellow, speckled

ARMY WORM: SEXUAL DIFFERENCES. 103

with confluent fuscous dots; marked longitudinally by two dark lines that commence
at the corners of the mouth, approach each other towards the center, and again recede
behind; on each side are four minute, polished, black eyelets, placed on a light, cres-
cent-shaped ridge, and from each side of this light ridge a dark mark extends more
or less among the confluent spots above. Cervical shield polished and mottled like
the head, with the white medio-dorsal and upper lateral lines running conspicuously
through it. Anal plate obsolete.” Length, 13 inches (58™™),

“These descriptions apply to the average specimens, but there is considerable varia-

tion in all stages.”
THE PUPA. (Pl. I, Fig. 4.)

The pupa is. of a shiny mahogany-brown color, with two stiff, converging, black
thorns at its anal end, and, each side of the thorns, two fine curled hooks. It is from
18™™ to 20 ™™ (2 of an inch) in length, and is rather stout; in other respects not dif-
fering decidedly from allied species.

THE MOTH. (PII, Fig. 1, a.)

The parent moth is variable in size, the average individual measuring about 40™™
(an inch and a half) in wing expanse. The front wings are pointed at the tips, and
are of a reddish gray or fawn color, much specked with black atoms. Anterior of
the center of each wing are two rather large, indistinct spots, distinguished from the
rest of the wing by an absence of black specks, and by a clearer reddish coloring.
Immediately posterior to the outermost of these spots isa white point indistictly sur-
rounded by blackish. <A series of black points parallel with the outer margin; one
on each vein is usually perceptible. An oblique black streak starts from this line of
dots, and ascends to the apex of the wing, and, with the form of the wings, princi-
pally characterizes the species. Just inside the fringe is a serious of black dots, one
between each two veins. The hind wings are translucent, gray, with the terminal
border and the nervures blackish (in the front wings the nervures are whitish). The
sexes differ from each other but little.

The under side of the wiugs is of an opalescent yellowish white. Along the outer
margin, particularly of the hind wings, are many black specks, so nearly confluent as
to form a definitely limited dusky terminal band. On the costal margin of each fore-
wing, near the tip, is a small, distinct, black dot, and at the center of each hind-wing
is a similar dot. The body is concolorous with the wings, and the legs are light gray,
slightly tinged with reddish, and speckled with black dots.

SEXUAL DIFFERENCES.

‘As throwing light on the mode of oviposition the sexual charac-
teristics interest us. The sexes at first glance are not easily distin-
guished. There are no colorational differences, nor does the abdomen
of the one sex differ materially in size or form from that of the other.
Yet a careful examination with an ordinary lens will enable one to sep-
arate them with sufficient certainty by the smoother antenne (Plate 1,
Vig.1, e) and more pointed abdomen (lig. 1, b) of the female, compared to
the more hairy or ciliate antenne (Fig. 1, d) and blunter abdomen of the
male (Fig.1,a). The antenne of the female will generally be found quite
naked toward the base, while those of the male show two rows of stiff
hairs, about half as long as the antennal width. In both sexes the tip
of the abdomen is covered with a brush of long, pale hairs, and the mo-
ment these are brushed away the sex is at once easily ascertained.

Suppose now we pick out a male for examination! A little friction
8

104 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

with a stiff camel’s-hair brush will soon denude the tip of the abdomen
without injuring the horny parts, when we shall notice two rounded,
brown, horny lobes or clasps extending somewhat beyond the ultimate
joint (Plate 1, Fig. 2, A), the lobes some distance apart below, but con-

verging until they touch above. <A careful removal of the chitinous ex-

terior of the two terminal joints will further reveal to us that these
lobes are but parts of a somewhat complicated arrangement, admirably
adapted for seizing the female, and consisting chiefly of the two lobes
referred to, of two smaller, inferior lobes, and of two intermediate organs
starting from a knotty base, the upper one curved and ending in a sort

of beak, the lower one more straight and ending in a small cushion of —

contracted membrane above. |

‘CA still more careful examination will show that the upper valves
(Fig. 2, c) have a rather long and gradually narrowing stem, and that
they broaden irregularly, the hind border obliquing beneath and the
lower border more strongly curved than the upper; all the borders
are thickened, the outer surface is polished and dark brown, and the
ifher surface is clothed with stiff, pale, decumbent hairs, replaced to-
ward the posterior portion with brown, retrorse spines (Fig. 2,h). The
lower valves (Fig. 2, d@) have a shorter stem and are more regularly
rounded: each is composed of two corneous layers, soldered and some-
what thickened at the borders; the outer piece easily fractured and
detached, pale, and covered sparsely with very minute spines; the in-
ner one more solid, darker, and covered with a dense brush of long,
pale hairs. The upper intermediate curved organ reminds one, from
the side, of a swan’s neck and head (lig. 2, e); itis yellowish and eylin-
drical, dilated and enlarged toward the end, and terminates in a nar-
rower, darker beak; the sides of the lower behind are curled up (Fig.
2,9) and furnished with long, yellowish hairs behind, and the beak with
a brush ef shorter hairs. The lower organ, or penis (Fig. 2, f), is broader,
composed of membrane supported by two principal ribs—the upper one

curved, the lower nearly straight—and ends in a sponge-like, superior _

swelling, which in life may be considerably extended in the form of a
tube. Both those intermediate organs play on a strong horny arch,
which is generally retracted, but which can be raised and exserted and
considerably dilated as in ie a Bye

‘““If we now take a female, Sil denude the tip of her abdomen in the
same way, we shall immediately find a quite different and far more
simple structure, namely, a thin, vertical, blade-like valve, more or less
produced or elongated on the upper portion, of a brown color, but with
a broad, slightly thickened, paler border. This valve plays into two
retractile subjoints of the body, and may be hidden within the terminal
joint proper, so as to show only the upper tip, or extended as in the

32 A careful examination of the genital organs of thirteen d's of this species shows very considerable
variation in the contour and relative size of all these different parts—so much so as to convince me,
when added to my limited examinations of the same parts in other species, that nice differences in
these parts alone are of no specific value.

a eee

ARMY WORM: HABITS AND NATURAL HISTORY. 105

figure (Plate 1, Fig. 3,a). It is in reality composed of two thin layers,
closely appressed except at the upper or dorsal portion near the base,
where it swells into a somewhat angular ridge outside and js hollow
within. A more careful examination will show that the upper portion
is irregularly and obliquely striate (Fig. 3, d), the striations representing
folds of the membrane, to facilitate expansion; and that the hind bor-
der is garnished with fine hairs, which easily rub off and leave the edge
quite sharp, so that the two layers form a blade which is admirably
adapted to pressing in between narrow passages, or even to splitting
frail and hollow stalks. In life this ovipositor plays on the two sub-
joints, which may be greatly extended, and when so extended forms a
somewhat cylindrical and telescopic tube, which is rendered very firm
by a series of stout muscles within (Fig. 3, b). The valve opens from
top to bottom, and may be very considerably distended, so as to make
way for the oviduct, which is a quite complicated structure.”

HABITS AND NATURAL HISTORY.

It was not until 1855 that the first step towards ascertaining defi-
nitely the life-history of the Army Worm was made, although, as we
have already shown, it had been destructive at intervals for more than
a-hundred years before. In this year John Kirkpatrick reared the per-
fect moth from the destructive worm, and described both pupa and
adult in the Ohio Agricultural Report for the same year. Our more
extended knowledge of the subject dates, however, from the great
Army Worm year of 1861. In this year Walsh, Kirkpatrick, Thomas,
and Klippart at the West, and Fitch and Packard at the East, all im-
proved their opportunities for studying the worm. To Walsh we are
particularly indebted for a study of its parasites, though his views of
its natural history have proved singularly unfortunate. To Fitch is
due the credit of the correct scientific naming and the discovery of the
synonymy. Kirkpatrick first described the most important of all the
parasites— Nemorca leucanie—and, in the light of later developments,
he was remarkably correct in his ideas as to the number of broods and
method of hibernation.

Yet up to 1876 no definite knowledge, based on observation and ex-
- periment, existed on some of the most important points in the natural
history of the species. The eggs and the mode and place of oviposition
were unknown; the question of hibernation and of the number of an-
nual generations was still as open to discussion as when so warmly de-
bated by Walsh and others, and many minor matters remained unset-
tled. Since 1876 we have been able to replace our uncertainty in these
directions by positive knowledge, so that there are no questions having
any important practical bearing that are now mooted in respect of this
insect.

Concerning the Egg.

WHEN AND WHERE THE EGGS ARE LAID.—The favorite place to
which the Army Worm moth consigns her eggs, in wild or cultivated

e

aD

106 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGIUAL COMMISSION.

grass or in grain, is along the inner base of the terminal blades where
they are yet doubled, or between the stalk and its surrounding sheath.
They are by no means strictly confined to these situations, as is shown
by the fact that we have known the moths in breeding cages to oviposit
in crevices on the side of sward which had been cut with a knife, or
even between the roots. In our first observations, which were made
on low Blue Grass, the eggs were almost invariably found in the fold at
the base and junction of the terminal leaf with the stalk; but later they
were found thrust down between the sheath and the stalk, and ocea-
sionally in the natural curl of a green leaf or the unnatural curl at the
sides of a withered leaf. The rankest tufts of grass, caused in pastures —
by the droppings of cattle and sheep, are preferred by the moth for
oviposition, and, in these tufts, the oldest and toughest stalks; and in
grain-fields also the ranker growth, caused by an accumulation of ma-
nure at some one spot or the previous existence of some fodder-heap or
the like, is preferably chosen.

The observations of the present spring have satisfactorily proven
that early in the season the moths oviposit by preference in the cut
straw of old stacks, in hayricks, and even in old fodder-stacks of corn
stalks. Old bits of corn stalk upon the surface of the ground in past-
ures have been repeatedly found, both in the vicinity of Washington
and in Northern Alabama, with hundreds of eggs thrust under the outer
Sheath or epidermis, while the last year’s stalks of grass in the fields
around Washington have been found to contain these eggs in similar ~
positions. The evidence collected in 1875, and published in our Eighth
Missouri Report, seemed to show that where fodder stacks existed in
grain fields the worms originated from them or from their near vicinity,
and the observations just mentioned prove the correctness of the infer-
ence then made.

It has, however, been proven by this spring’s observations that, lack-
ing both stubble and fodder-stacks, the moth can and does oviposit in
the spring in young winter grain. Mr. A. Koebele found in March, in the
vicinity of Savannah, Ga., newly-hatched larvee in the center of an oat
field, the grain being one foot or more in height, and no straw stack in
the vicinity. ,

As stated in the American Entomologist (III, p. 214), the moth will
also, when exceptionally numerous, lay her eggs without concealment,
and upon plants, such as clover, which the larva does not relish. As
an instance of this, we stated in a foot-note that we had recently received
from Professor Lintner, State Entomologist of New York, what were
apparently the pressed eggs and egg shells of this moth, thickly cover-
ing clover leaves and mixed with an abundance of white gummy mat-
ter, with which the moth usually secretes them, all indicating that the
moths had in this instance (doubtless from excessive numbers) oviposited
abnormally.

ARMY WORM: MODE OF OVIPOSITION. 107

Remaining concealed during the day, unless disturbed, or except in
cloudy weather, the moth begins to fly at the approach of night, and,
so far as observations have indicated, is engaged in ovipositing most
actively during the earlier part of the night. It was at five or six in
the afternoon when the first moth in 1876 was discovered in the act of
ego-laying, but they have since been found at work most often in the
early night-hours. The time of year when the eggs are laid will be dis-
cussed under the head of “Number of Annual Generations.”

MODE OF OVIPOSITION.—We have already described the compressed,
horny ovipositor of the female, which plays with great ease upon the two
telescopic sub-joints of the abdomen. This organ, in the act of oviposi-
tion, is thrust in between the folded sides of the grass blade, and the eggs
are glued along the blade in rows of from fifteen to twenty, and covered
with a white, glistening, adhesive fluid, which not only fastens them
together, but draws the sides of the grass blade close around them, so
that nothing but a narrow, glistening streak is visible. This attempt at
concealment is always made where the eggs are deposited in the leaf;
but where they are thrust down between the sheath and the stalk, or
otherwise naturally concealed, the gummy fluid is often very sparsely
used, and sometimes not at all. :

We have stated the number of eggs in a string at from fifteen to
twenty, aud this we believe to be about the normal number; but we
have known as few as two or three to be deposited in confinement, and
large batches of nearly a hundred eggs, in from three to eight rows, have
been found in bits of corn stalk.

We have elsewhere expressed the opinion that the grass blades may
possibly be clasped by the opening hind border of the ovipositor, so as
to give the insect a firmer hold and close the leaf more firmly on the eggs,
but more recent actual observation, in the field, of the movements of the
moth during oviposition would indieate that this opinion is not well
founded. She walks or flies around in the grass, alighting every few
moments, until she finds a place that satisfies her. She then clasps the
blade, her head almost invariably upward, or in the same direction with
the blade. The front pair of legs clasp the blade, forward, the middle
pair about the middle of the abdomen, and the hind pair about the tip
of the abdomen, the wings being partly open meanwhile. The leaf is
thus folded by the middle and hind legs, while the abdomen bends, and
the ovipositor is thrust in as already described. She is thus engaged
from one to three or four minutes at a given spot, according to the
number of eggs laid, and then flies a short distance, and in a few
minutes lays another batch. As we have known 30 eggs to be laid in
two minutes, it would not require many hours to empty the ovaries, and
a given female probably lays all her stock of eggs in one or two nights,
though the time will vary with temperature and other conditions. We
have known the moth to be so fixedly engaged in supplying a piece of
old stubble with her eggs that she was unable to disengage herself when

108 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

first disturbed, and she was always so intent upon the operation as to
render observation with a “bull’s eye” sufficiently easy.

PROLIFICACY.—It is evident, when we consider the immense nuni-
bers in which the Army Worm often occurs, and when we also consider
the number and importance of its natural enemies, that the moth must
be quite prolific. The only recorded statement, however, is that in the
Kighth Missouri Report, page 34, where the number of eggs indicated
by a single dissection is stated to be upwards of 200. That this dissec-
tion, however, must have been made too early or too late is shown by
the fact that two dissections, made the present spring, showed 737 eggs
in the ovaries of one female, and 562 in those of another.

DURATION OF THE EGG STATE.—Observations made in Missouri, in
1876, indicate that the worms hatch from the eighth to the tenth day
after the eggs are deposited; while others, more recently made in Wash-
ington, make the average duration of the egg in the month of May just
one week. |

Habits and Peculiarities of the Worm.

HABITS WHEN YouNG.—When the eggs have been laid in a green
grass blade, the larvae, on hatching, feed for a time in the fold of the
leaf. Where they hatch in stubble or old stalks, they remain sheltered
therein for three or four days, issuing at night to feed, but going back
for shelter. The newly hatched worms were also found by Mr. Howard
under the frayed bark of the cedar posts around a wheat field at Hunts-
ville, Ala., in such numbers and at such an early age as to indicate that
they had hatched there. At this stage they are whitish in color, walk
like loopers, in consequence of the atrophied, or rather non-developed
first and second pairs of prolegs, and drop suspended by silken threads,
or curl up, when disturbed. As has been so often said, during the early

33Tt will be interesting and important in this connection to translate Guenée’s generalizations on the
larvee of this genus, as they may serve to help us to a more accurate judgment concerning one or two
points in the life history of wnipuncta:

“The larvee of Leucania are all closely related in appearance, and even the most expert entomologistis
often deceived by them. No European species, to my knowledge, isof a greeu color; all have a white
dorsal stripe, and are of a carneous or brownish gray, with the ordinary lines well continued, and well
marked, and between the lines a number of other lines or supernumerary bands, often resulting from
a massing together of brown or reddish atoms. These usually constitute all the markings, but often
the sub-dorsum is filled with black marks, which are not continued upon the restof the segment. The
stigmata are often wholly black or brown. These larve live exclusively upon the Graminex, and are
to be found upon those which grow with their roots almost in the water, as well as upon those growing
only upon the driest hillocks. Those which form thick tufts afford a natural shade, in the midst of
which the caterpillars pass their lives, climbing to the extremity of the leaves only in the evening or
even at night. Those which live on grasses with sparse leaves, by which they are not sufficiently
shaded, hide themselves under brush or dry leaves a littlegdistance away. : Finally, some of them,
which eat the leaves of aquatic grasses, hide themselves within the stalks the tops of which have been
cut off by the hand of man or broken off accidentally. They bury themselves until stopped by a node,
and their excrement, which partly fills these tubes, bears witness to the fact that they only leave their
dwelling to take their food. This retreat, if it is not guarded from the punctures of Ichneumons, at
least completely shelters them from the attacks of birds; but this is not its only use, for they utilize it
still more when they reach the time for metamorphosis. They do not bury themselves in theearth,
like their congeners, but content themselves with spianing, below and above them, two little partitions
mixed with frass. The Leucanias which are ready for pupation in the latter part of the season pass
through the winter in the larva state, acd only undergo the metamorphosis in the spring.”

HABITS AND PECULIARITIES OF THE ARMY WORM. 109

part of their lives the larve are very similar in their habits to the many
species of cut-worms, working upon the leaves of grass or grain during
the night or in cloudy weather, and hiding during the bright sunshine.
The fact cannot be too strongly insisted upon that the traveling of the
worms in large armies is abnormal. During nearly the whole year, in
regions subject to their incursions, the worms may be found in grass-
fields, high or low (perhaps more often in the low lands bordering
marshes, as they are here less liable to disturbance), feeding in the nor-
mal cut-worm manner. If their numbers be small, they may pass their
entire lives in. this manner, for it is only when so very abundant that
the food of the vicinity is destroyed that the worms march in search
of further supplies. Ordinarily one may pass daily through a grass
plot where they abound, and never suspect their presence until the plot
begins suddenly to look bare in patches. Thomas, in his First Illinois
Report, states that, although he was particularly looking for the worms
_ during June, 1875, he never suspected their presence in a constantly
frequented grass plot behind his house until it was made manifest in
this way, by which time the worms had disappeared, the abundance of
their excrement, however, showing well enough that they had been there.

From the fact that the marching is abnormal, it always happens that
in marching years many farmers insist that the sedentary worms ravag-
ing their fields are not the true Army Worms, but simply the “ ordinary
ecut-worms” which they have with them every year.

When young the worms mimic quite closely the plants upon which
they feed, and this, with the habit of hiding as they do, by day, and
dropping when disturbed, renders them very difficult of detection. The
lighter color of the younger worms found thus concealed has given rise
to the theory, put forth by Thomas and others, that the marching worms
belong to a distinct race of the species; but there is not a particle of
reason in such a theory, for the worms of the marching bodies possessed
the same light color originally, and indeed the variation is such that
the same color frequently persists with the full-grown worms, whether
of the marching bodies or of the normal, hidden individuals. The deep
color is largely the result of exposure, and whether the sedentary or
marching habit predominates depends entirely upon circumstances.

DURATION OF WORM LIFE.—With so wide-spread an insect as the
Army Worm it is impossible to make any general statement concerning
the duration of any one stage which will hold good. In Saint Louis, in
the vivarium, at an average temperature of 80° F., we found that cer-
tain of the worms passed through their five molts at intervals of three
days, making the entire length of the larval life fifteen or sixteen days.
The development, however, even of those hatching at the same time from
the same brood of eggs, is quite irregular and may occupy several days
longer. In northern Illinois Walsh gives the period at “from four to
five weeks,” while the shortest period of larval life that Thomas has ob-
served is twenty-eight days. Individuals reared at the Department of

110 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Agriculture indicate that in this latitude in late spring the period is
from twenty to twenty-five days. Everything depends of course upon
the temperature, the midsummer individuals passing through their
changes much more rapidly than the spring and fall broods. As we shall
show later, the Army Worm most often hibernates in the larval state,

consequently the larval life of the last brood frequently extends over a

space of four months or even more. In addition to the details published
in our Kighth and Ninth Missouri Reports, the following observations re-
corded this spring will illustrate the great variation referred to:

Some eggs of the Army Worm moth which were deposited May 4,
1882, hatched May 11. The worms passed the first molt May 17, the
second May 20, the third May 23, the fourth May 26, and the fifth May
29. On June 2 some of the larvae had entered the ground, and June 17
eight moths issued. May 28, some moths, collected during the evening
of the 27th, were placed in the vivarium with grass. June 3 many young
larvae had already hatched, and on June 20 some had entered the ground
for pupation.

TRAVELING HABITS, ETC.—When the worms of a given locality are
so numerous as to early exhaust their natural supply of food they be-
gin to travel en masse to fresh fields. Their numbers at these times are
often so enormous, and their voracity so great, that it is impossible for
one who has not been an eye-witness of one of these invasions to ap-
preciate it fully. To illustrate this point and also the habits of the
worm, while on the march, we introduce the following quotations:

The Army-worm when traveling will scarcely turn aside for anything but water,
and even shallow water-courses will not always check its progress; for the advance
columns will often continue to rush head-long into the water until they have sufii-
ciently choked it up with their dead and dying bedies, to enable the rear guard to
eross safely over. I have noticed that after crossing a bare field or bare road where
they were subjected to the sun’s rays, they would congregate in immense numbers
under the first shade they reached. In one instance I recollect their collecting and
covering the ground five or six deep all along the shady side of a fence for about a
mile, while scarcely one was seen to cross on the sunny side of the same fence.
Though they will nibble at clover, they evidently do not relish it, and almost always
pass it by untouched. They will eat any of the grasses, and are fond of oats, rye,
sorghum, corn, and wheat, though they seldom devour any other part but the suecu-
lent leaves. They often cut off the ears of wheat and oats and allow them to fall to
the ground, and they are perhaps led to perform this wanton trick by the succuleney
of the stem immediately below the ear. South of latitude 40° they generally appear
before the wheat stalks get too hard, or early enuugh to materially injure it; but north
of that line, wheat is generally too much ripened for their tastes, and is sometimes even
harvested before the fullgrown worms make their advent.

I have heard of the Army-worm sometimes passing through a wheatfield when the
wheat was nearly ripe, and doing good service by devouring all the chess and leaving
untouched the wheat; but the following item from Collinsville, Il., which appeared
in the Missouri Democrat, contains still more startling facts, and would indicate that
even a foe to the farmer as determined as this, may sometimes prove to be his friend.

‘“HARVEST AND Crops.—Notwithstanding the unfavorable weather, many farmers
haye commenced the wheat harvest, The yield in this immediate vicinity will be
superabundant. Some fields were struck with rust a few days since, but the Army

f

eS a

TRAVELING HABITS OF THE WORMS. 111

Worm making its appearance simultaneously, stripped the straw entirely bare of
blades and saved the berry from injury. These disgusting pests have saved thousands
of dollars to farmers in this neighborhood. A few fields of corn and grass have been
partially destroyed, but, by ditching around fields, the worm’s ravages have been con-
fined within comparatively narrow limits.” (Riley, 2d Mo. Ent. Report, pp. 54, 55.)

They avoid the rays of the sun; hence during the day they crawl under stones and
‘sticks, as closely as they can crowd themselves together, and under swaths of grass or
grain, or even into the ground, like the cut-worm. They rest in such places during
_ the heat of the day, and come out towards sunset, to feed and continue forward in
their mighty march. If they come toa field of grass or grain that is young and ten-
der they devour the whole of it, down to the very roots; but if it is grown up to
stalks, they eat the leaves only, and then usually crawl to the top of the stalk and
cut off the head and drop it to the ground. In corn, too, they eat off all the leaves.
except the coarse keel or mid vein. One writer noticed a worm to eat a square inch
of corn leaf in thirty minutes. It is leaves which are green and juicy that they eat ;.
the dry leaves of ripened grain they do not feed upon. * * * They all keep to-
gether like an army of soldiers, and usually advance in a particular direction, in a
straight line, not swerving from their course to avoid hills, hollows, buildings or any
other obstacle. A stream of running water, even, does not cause them to deflect from:
their line of march. We learn from Solon Robinson that, on coming to a brook they
crowd into it, although very few of them chance to be carried by its current to the
opposite side. Millions of them are drowned, their dead bodies clogging and dam-
ming up the stream in places below, producing by their decay a stench in the atmos-
phere of the whole vicinity which is most noisome and intolerable. In their march
they travel faster at some times than others, advancing at the rate of from two to
six rodsin an’hour. Thus instances have occurred in which an army of these worms,
two or three miles wide, have advanced six or seven miles, leaving the track behind
them as desolate as though fire had swept over it. (Fitch, pp. VI, pp. 117, 118.)

They usually commence marching when about half or two-thirds grown; andsofar as
I have observed, those leaving one field all march in the same direction, but not always,
as is supposed by some, with unfailing certainty, toward another field in which there
is proper food, for in the case hereafter mentioned, where, in 1875, they left a meadow
near our town, the movement was directly toward town—no field with any suitable
food being nearer than a mile in that direction. Nor is it true that they always re-
main in one place so long as sufficient food is to be found there, for in more than one:
instance I have known them to leave a field abundantly supplied with suitable food
and march into others. In one instance, where they attacked a field of oats and pene-
trated it a short distance, mowing it as they proceeded, they suddenly quit it. There
does not appear to be any uniformity in the direction the different armies, or armies
from ditferent fields, take. In 1875, the army from one field was moving directly south,.
while that from another moved directly east. While marching, they move with rapid
motions and apparently with an uneasy feeling, especially if the sun is shining. The
following statement, from the Prairie Farmer of July 4, 1861, is probably not over-
drawn:

“An army of them was observed to travel 60 yards in two hours, in an effort to get
around a ditch. They began to travel from the infested districts between two and
three o’clock, p. m.; toward sundown the tide of travel was retrograde. They did
not travel at night; they feed chiefly by night and in the forenoon. As to their num-
ber, they have been seen moving from one field to another, three tiers deep; a ditch has.
been filled with them to the depth of three inches in half an hour.” (Thomas’s Fifth
Illinois Report, p. 16.)

The Army Worm is an epicure and therefore unlike the grasshopper and locust.
When in moderate numbers they are more choice in the selection of their food than
they can be where the fields are overrun by their hordes, then they select the tender-.

112 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

est blades of some favorite grass or grain, leaving the midrib of the leaf untouched,
but when, in the ‘‘struggle for life,” each has to do the best it can for subsistence ;
nearly all grasses or grains come alike welcome, and all but the hard stems are de-
voured. In the oat field all the blades are eaten and the caterpillar ascends the stalk
to the very top, and finishes by biting off nearly all the grains and letting them fall
to the ground. As they donot eat the grain this may be looked upon as wanton de-

struction. We learn that in wheat or other grain fields, they often cut off the ears —

and Jet them fall to the ground. The only cause for this seems to be that they eat a
portion of the finer parts of the peduncle or stalk. If the grain is cut previous to the
worm leaving the field, and left out to dry, the insects will still continue feeding on the
cut grain, and thousands may be found during the heat of the day, sheltered beneath
the swath or bundles, so that it becomes necessary to remove the grain as soon as pos-

sible after cutting. The resting time of the Army Wormis during mid-day. Their—

feeding time, morning, evening and night, and at these times they also travel. Whén
resting they are usually coiled up in circle or snake fashion. When traveling they
move at a moderate pace, avoiding all steep places if possible, and preferring level
land. They can climb well enough if the ground is firm or covered with herbage, but
if loose and friable they lose their footing and fall back while endeavoring to climb
any steep ridge. (Kirkpatrick, Ohio Agricultural Report, 1860, pp. 352,333.)

In regard to numbers, we may quote the following passage from the
New York Sun of June 11, 1880, concerning the damage done in Mon-
mouth County, New Jersey, in 1880: j

A journey through a large part of Monmouth County revealed a singular state of
affairs. Trenches were seen extending for miles along the roads close to the edges of
the fields; but the crops, for the most part, were withered and lifeless, and it was

evident that the precaution had been taken too late. Very often a long trench ran
across a field of wheat, showing where a farmer had abandoned one portion of his crop

and tried to save the remainder. Occasionally a field was seen intersected by nwme--

rous trenches, indicating that the proprietor had fought manfully against his per-
secutors, and disputed the ground with them foot by foot. * * * In many places
the road was literally covered with the worms, allin motion, and all moving towards
the fields on either side. Thousands and tens of thousands were crushed beneath the
wagon wheels and under the horse’s feet; but the rest pressed on. And at intervals
‘spots were passed where an imaginary line seemed to be drawn across the road beyond
which the army worm could not pass. For a certain space beyond, sometimes for as
long a distance as two or three miles, not only the roads but the adjoining country
was free from the pest. Not a worm was to be seen, until, the clear space passed, the
wagon was again rolling over millions of them.

We have spoken in one of these quotations of the rate of travel, a
writer in the Prairie Farmer stating that an army of the worms was
observed to travel sixty yards in two hours. This would be at the rate
of one foot and a half per minute. To show that this is not overdrawn,
it may be well to state that individual worms have been timed when
moving over a smooth surface under the impelling influence of a hot sun,
and have been found to crawl at the rate of two feet and a half per
. minute. "

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—A few years agoa paragraph could have been
written under this head with the utmost ease. Within the past two
years, however, facts have been gathered which complicate matters con-
siderably. During the winter of 1879-30, worms were received at the
Department in March, February, and even January, from localities
as far north as Tennessee and South Carolina, and noted as damaging

&

THE ARMY WORM: DATES OF INJURIOUS:* BROOD. 113

winter grain during these months. The winter was unusually mild and
open and it was supposed that this fact accounted for the so-called un-
usual appearances. It has recently been proved, however, beyond all
peradventure, that, over a large portion of the country, the species hiber-
nates in the larva state, and that in favorable seasons the hibernating
_ brood may be injurious to crops. It is, however, usually the immediate
descendants of these hibernating worms which compose the injurious
brood. During the past winter (1882) young hibernating worms were
found in Washington in January. The same brood was injurious to
winter wheat in February in Alabama, and, in early March, to wheat
and oats near Savannah, Ga., and Columbia, 8S. C.

The injurious brood usually makes its appearance in Missouri and in
Virginia in May; in Illinois, southern Ohio, Delaware, New Jersey,
and Long Island, about the first of June. From the middle of June to
the first of July it is found in Connecticut, Massachusetts, southern
and central New York, Pennsylvania, northern Indiana, southern
Wisconsin, and Michigan. From the latter part of July to the middle
of August it appears in northern New York and New Hampshire, in
Maine and southern Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

Instances are not wanting also in which the immediate descendants
of this second brood have also constituted the injurious brood, and thus
occasioned very late reports of “ first appearances,” although such cases
are rare. Kirkpatrick, in his 1861 article (Ohio Agricultural Report,
1860, p. 351), mentioned the fact that in Cuyahoga County (northern
Ohio) the worms were that year not observed until the first of August,
while less than eighty miles south, in Shelby County, the injurious brood
pupated June 16. Another instance was recorded by L. O. Howard,
in the New York Semi-Weekly Tribune, August 5, 1880, in which the
worms appeared ‘for the first time” in Scott County, Virginia (one of
- the extreme southwest counties of the State), July 29, doing great
damage to corn and German millet, while the previous year the injuri-
ous brood pupated in Norfolk County about May 30. There is much
reason also for supposing that the brood just mentioned was the in-
jurious brood in the Northeastern States in 1875; vide the following
from our Kighth Missouri Report (1875):

There may, therefore, be a difference of over two months between the appearance
of the worms in southern Missouri or Kentucky and in Maine. Thus early in June
of the present year, when | left home, they were mowing down the meadows and wheat
fields in central Missouri and in southern Ilinois, Ohio, Indiana, as well as in Ken-
tucky ; while upon arriving in New York two months later, they were marching
through the oat fields of Long Island, and were reported very arate in the East-
ern States. In Maine they appeared as late as Se ptember.

This would make the injurious brood on Long Island in early August,
while in 1880, it will be remembered, they were causing great alarm in
the same locality during the first week in June; a pretty plain case.
The injurious brood of late July, 1881, in Hlinois and Indiana, may also
have been an example of the same fact.

SEC

114 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

SUDDEN APPEARANCE AND DISAPPEARANCE.—“ Among the manifes-
tations in lower animal life, few are more astonishing than the sud-
den occurrence of a species in vast numbers over large stretches of
country, and its as sudden disappearance. In a few rare instances,
as with the thirteen and seventeen year Cicadas, these manifestations
are Strictly periodical, and occur at regular intervals; but in the great
majority of instances they have no such periodicity. The numerous
natural checks which surround every animal, added to the meteorologi-
cal conditions which affect it in its struggle for existence, sufficiently
explain these phenomena to the intelligent naturalist, though it is not
always easy to point out facts in specific cases. Under the head of
‘Habits of the Worm’, I have already given the reasons why it escapes
attention in its earlier stages and in seasons when it is not excessively
abundant.” Hidden at the base of tufts of rank grass and feeding only
at night, it may live for generation after generation, while the unsus-
pecting farmer little imagines that his dreaded enemy is so near. If
there should come one or more seasons of drought, however,—weather
extremely favorable to the increase of the worms,—they begin to multiply
prodigiously, large numbers hibernate, and in the ensuing spring multi-
tudes of moths fly out over the country, each filled with her seven or
eight hundred eggs with which to stock the surrounding pastures and
grain fields. The young worms hatching from these eggs and feeding
in their normal cut-worm manner still escape the eyes of the farmer;
‘¢ but when the bulk of them have passed through the last molt, or, in other

(

words, are nearly full-grown, and have stripped the fields in which they ©

were born, they are then obliged to migrate in bodies to new pastures.
Thus assembled and exposed, they pass through grass and grain fields, de-
vouring as they go; for they are now exceedingly voracious, and, like most,
Lepidopterous larve, consume more during the last few days of worm-life
than during all the rest of their existence. The farmer whois unfamiliar
with their life- habits wonders where they come from sosuddenly, and pre-
sently, when they enter the earth to transform, he wonders again where
they go to. In these exposed numbers, also, the numerous natural ene-
miesof the worms congregate about fem and do their murderous work
far more effectively than when they have to seek individuals hidden here
and there in rank grass; so that we cease to wonder at the almost total

annihilation of the species the year following its advent in such num- —

bers.”

Dr. Fitch, in his sixth report, proposed a theory to aeeoutie for these
seemingly See sanianie appearances of the worms, which, first and last,
has caused much discussion. In his own words it is stated as follows

The spring and early summer of this year [1861] was exactly the reverse of last year
—unusualiy wet, and the water high in all our streams. Hereby the swamps have
all been overflowed, and this insect has been drowned out of them. The moths or
millers on coming out of their chrysalides, found it was impossible for them to get to
the roots of the grass there, to deposit theireggs. They were obliged to forsake their
usual haunts and scatter nenoeee out over the country, the incessant rains making

ARMY WORM: SUDDEN APPEARANCE AND DISAPPEARANCE. 115

it sufficiently wet everywhere to suit their semi-aquatic habits. Thus going forth in
companies, they alighted in particular spots, and there dropped their eggs; and the
result is sufficiently well known.

_ More briefly expressed my view is this—a dry season and dry swamps multiplies this
insect. And when it is thus multiplied, a wet season and overflowed swamps drives
it out from its lurking-place, in flocks, alighting here and there over the country. But
on being thus rusticated, it finds our arable lands too dry for it; and immediately on
maturing and getting its wings UEEEE it flies back to the swamps, whereby it happens
that we see no more of it.

Dr. Fitch starts, in the first place, with the supposition that the natural
food of the Army Worm is the coarse, wild grass of the swamps and
bogs, and that here, and here only, is it found in the interim between
‘““worm years.” Itis only necessary, in order to disprove this, to search
diligently in spring among the tufts of grass upon knolls and hill-sides
as well as along marshes, around the borders of grain fields, and even
in the grain fields themselves. Army Worms will almost certainly be
found in all these localities. The species probably does flourish to a
somewhat greater extent around swamps, but it is for the reason that
the grass in such localities isnot so apt to be grazed closely or cut. More-
over, the parent moth very probably gets more appropriate food in such
places, either in saccharine exudations, the natural “sweat” of the plants,
or in the moisture from the ground.

Moreover, an examination of the weather records shows us that while
the years preceding Army Worm years have been universally charac-
terized by drought, the years in which the worms have actually appeared
have not necessarily been wet,—a fact which in itself is a death-blow to
the theory. In support of this fact we made use of the following argu-
ments in the American Entomologist for September, 1880:

That the Army Worm appears in destructive numbers after a period of dry seasons
is a fact already recognized, and is in accordance with the experience of the present
year. The portions of our country visited by the worm this year were afflicted with
drought last summer, and the winter was remarkable for its mildness and the slight
fallof snow. Fitch’s theory of the appearance of the worm required that this spring
should be.a wet one in order to drive the moths from the swamps and cause them
to lay their eggs on the upland. But the facts are just the reverse. Farmers from
Virginia to Vermont have complained loudly of the excessive drought. Rivers in some
of the Atlantic States have not been so low for a generation, and alluvial meadows
which have been subject-to a spring flooding, have this year remained dry. These
facts clearly disprove Fitch’s theory, and we must believe that the Army Worn is most
likely to appear after dry seasons, regardless of the wetness or dryness of the season
in which it occurs. A critical examination of Fitch’s arguments in support of his
theory shows that he not only had no personal acquaintance with the worm, but also
made some false meteorological deductions, such as comparing the rainfall of India (?)
with the appearance of the worm here. With equal reason might we argue that 1879
was wet in our Atlantic States because of the excessive precipitation in the British
Islands during that year. It is evident that Fitch was hard pressed for arguments to
support the theory. That the season of 1861 was remarkably wet in the Kastern
States, Fitch gives no evidence, and while the mean rainfall, according to statistics
was greater in 1861 than in 1860, it does not follow that the spring and early summer
of 1861 were, on that account, unusually wet. From the well known connection of

116 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the presence of plant lice with dry seasons, and from the memorable depredations of
the grain aphis in that year throughout the Middle and New England States, it is
very questionable whether the summer of 1861 was wet. It is far more probable that
the season was a dry one like the present, im which also various plant lice have done
great damage.

The sudden disappearance of the worms, which Fitch accounts for i.
the supposed fact that the insect “finds our arable lands too dry for it;
and immediately on maturing and getting its wings again, it flies
back to the swamps,” is much more easily and naturally accounted for
in view of known facts, as we have accounted for it above, by the in-
creased effectiveness of its very numerous natural enemies, and by the
enormous numbers destroyed by the hand of man. ~

FooD-PLANTS.—The normal food-plants of the Army Worm are found
- among the grasses and grains, not a single species of either, so far as
known, coming amiss. Wheat and oats seem to be their favorites among
the small grains, though rye and barley are also taken with less relish.
German millet, corn and sorghum are eaten by the worms, particularly
- when young and tender. They were found last year feeding toa greater —
or less extent on flax in Illinois, although this is mentioned by Fitch
as one of the crops which the worms will not touch. They have also
been known to eat onions, peas, beans, and other vegetables, though
probably only when pressed with hunger. As stated in our Eighth |
Missouri Report, upon the reliable authority of Mr. B. F. Mills, of Ma-
kanda, IIl., they have also been known to eat the leaves of fruit trees.
Ordinarily clover is disregarded by the worms, though they occasionally
nibble at it. A timothy field is often eaten to the ground, leaving the
clover scattered through it standing. In 1880, in Monmouth County,
New Jersey, occurred remarkable exceptions. We quote from Rev.
Samuel Lockwood: * .

I had supposed the aliment of these insects to be restricted to the Gramineae, that
is, the grasses proper and the grains and Indian corn. Hence, surprised at the thor-
oughness with which they had eaten up that field of clover, on the spot I took it for
an original observation of an exceptional habit; but, upon looking into the Riley re-
ports, I found similar facts on record. I soon ceased to regard this habit as at all ex-
ceptional; for, so far as Monmouth was concerned in 1880, clover-eating by the Army
Worm was the rule and not the exception. Infact, I could not learn of one instance
of their presence in which the clover escaped. The following from a letter by, a
teacher is to the point:

‘‘On the farm of Charles Allgor, at New Bedford, in passing from his wheat-field to
his oat-field, the worms had to cross a strip of sward composed of timothy and red
clover of three or four years’ standing. They took every thing clean. They also ate
the young clover in the bottom of the wheat-field, killing it entirely. In a mixed
sward of Geo. Newman’s, the teacher, they ate the clover as well as the grasses, leay-
ing nothing but the stalks. They also ate the clover on the farm of Albert King, at
Green Grove. They did not make a specialty of clover, but they ate it without being
starved to it. They ate both the clover and timothy in a mixed sward of James

Allgor’s. They ate Mr. Allen’s oat-field, then went over to his sward of grass and
clover, and finished that off, too.”

34Sce Mr. Lockwood’s Report, further on.

THE ARMY WORM: FOOD-PLANTS. 117

In this connection it may be well to state that on the Department
grounds at Washington the newly-hatched worms have been found in
a folded clover leaf, feeding thus protected, and under such circum-
stances as rendered it probable that they had hatched there. We have
already given instances of egg-laying on clover.

Mr. Lockwood also states in his report, that even the common rag-
weed (Ambrosia artemisiefolia) was eaten clean by the worms, and also,
that the worms in passing through a strawberry patch devoured both
the leaves of the plant and the unripe fruit.

In June, 1882, specimens of the worms were received from Mr. Chas.
G. Rockwood, Hammonton, Atlantic Co., N. J., with the statement that
they had done great damage to his cranberry crop.

Experiments made at the Department during June, 1882, showed that
the worms in confinement will live, thrive, and undergo their metamor-
phoses when fed exclusively upon any of the following plants: garden
poppy, beet, lettuce, cabbage, raspberry, onion, parsnip, radish, car-
rot, and pea. They refused to feed, however, on bean, cotton, grape
and hemlock, while on strawberry they fed slightly, but all died. It
will be noticed that eight botanical families are represented among the
plants on which they thrived, viz.: Papaveracew, Chenopodiacece, Com-
posite, Cruciferae, Rosacew, Liliacee, Umbellifere, and Leguminose.

It may also be well to state, finally, that, like its southern prototype,
the Grass Worm (Laphygma frugiperda), the Army Worm when on
the march does not hesitate at cannibalism to satisfy its hunger, and
many individuals are killed and devoured by their stronger fellows.

Duration of the Pupa State.

Upon reaching its full growth the Army Worm ordinarily burrows
for an inch or nore below the surface of the ground, and there trans-
forms to the pupa which has been previously described. Often, how-
ever, when occurring in great numbers, this precaution is not taken, and
the worms pupate under stones, boards, logs, or other rubbish, without
entering the ground. More or less silk is spun around the body at
such times and particles of dirt attached to it. The duration of the
pupa state varies of course with the climate and season. Ordinarily
northern writers place it at from two to three weeks. Mr. D. W.
Coquillett, in raising the worms in northern Illinois, found the length
in July to vary from nine to sixteen days through the intervening
times of ten, eleven, thirteen, and fourteen days. The moths issued
most abundantly after thirteen and fourteen days. In our breeding
cages both at St. Louis and Washington the average period in midsum-
mer has been about thirteen days.

Habits of the Moth.

Foop.—Few actual observations have been made upon the food of
the moths. They undoubtedly feed upon the nectar of various flowers.
Mr. D. W. Coyuillett has taken them in the evening upon the blossoms

118 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of clover, and also upon the common soap-wort (Saponaria officinalis).
Our assistant, Mr. Koebele, has also taken the moths feeding on blossoms
of apple, honeysuckle and yucca. It is moreover probable that one
of the reasons for the more frequent appearance of the worms on low-
lands is that the parent moth gets more appropriate food at such places,
either in saccharine exudations—the natural ‘‘sweat” of the plants
(“* Honigausschwitzung” of the Germans)—or in the moisture from the
ground. The microscopic examination of the tongue shows it to be
strongly armed, like those of so many allied genera, and it is highly
probable that, like the Cotton Worm moth, Leucania not only feeds upon
cracked or decayed fruit, but that it will also upon occasion pierce sound —
fruit and suck its juice. Of this, however, we have only presumptive
evidence.

The eggs develop rather slowly in the ovaries of the moth, and even
with the midsummer brood at the South a week or more elapses be-
tween the issuance from the pupa and the commencement of oviposition.
Dissections made at Saint Louis in 1875 showed that the moth lives
without doubt for several weeks in autumn ; hence the necessity for con-
siderable food.

FLiGHT.—The flight of the Army Worm seth begins toward the lat-
ter part of the afternoon. It is low and is characterized by a quick,
darting motion, accompanied by a slight humming noise, similar to but
less intense than that made by hawk moths. Professor Thomas says:

They began to leave the ground of an evening about sunset, but appeared in great- ;
est abundance about the time it became fully dark. Their flight is strong, irregular
and plunging; darting from side to side for a short distance, they dive suddenly into
the grass with a force which would seem to be sufficient to tear their wings to pieces.
They fly low, seldom rising more than a few feet from the ground; at least none en-
tered the window of my bed-chamber, which is on the second floor, and opens di-
rectly opposite and almost over the spot from which the greatest number came. But
they do not appear to be as readily attracted by light as many other moths.

Exceptionally, however, the moths fly higher. One of the Depart-
ment agents, last summer, at Savannah, Ga., captured several which
had been attracted by the light in his room in the second story of the
Marshall House, and we have repeatedly taken them in the third story
of our own dwelling.

POSITION WHEN AT REST.—During the day the moth remains, ordi-
narily, hidden in grass, weeds, or other rubbish. ~When at rest its wings
are either held flat upon its back, opening slightly and showing the edge
of the hind wings, or more sloping (see positions, Pl. II, Rep. Ent. Dept.
Agr., 1881-2). Upon first alighting the wings are kept in motion with
arapid quivering, but this movement soon ceases and they sink into the
position described, with the tips resting often upon the supporting object
or surface.

NUMBER OF ANNUAL GENERATIONS.

‘From the time Fitch wrote so fully on the species in 1861, until the

record of our observations in 1875 and 1876, it was the prevailing belief

THE ARMY WORM: NUMBER OF ANNUAL BROODS. 119

among entomologists that there was but one annual brood of the species,
especially in the Northern States, no absolute evidence of a second brood
having been obtained.”

It is true that Professor Thomas, in the Prairie Farmer of June 20,
1861, expressed his belief in two broods, and in the same periodical,
August 22, 1861, made the following statement :

A few years back when the Army Worm appeared in this county, after disappear-
ing, they were again seen on some farms, late in the fall, in considerable numbers.
In one place they were in such numbers that they cut all the grass in a corn-field and
even attacked the hard leaves of the ripening corn.

This is evidently from hearsay, and cannot be considered a well-
authenticated instance, because such accounts in the fall generally re-
fer to Laphygma frugiperda; yet in 1880 Thomas says (10th Il. Ent.
Rep., p. 27):

In fact I brought forward absolute evidence of the correctness of this opinion by show-
ing at least one well-attested case of both the spring and fall broods of the worms ap-
pearing in this county the same year in large and injurious numbers.

Kirkpatrick had also expressed his belief that there were two broods,
but with these exceptions entomologists considered the insect one-
brooded; indeed, Thomas, later, gave up his belief, as he says, and sided
on this point with Walsh (Prairie Farmer, October 31, 1861, p. 293). In
1880 we wrote:

Our experiments in 1876 proved conclusively that there were always two and some-
times three generations in the latitude of Saint Louis. The facts that we also re-
corded as to the remarkably rapid development of the worm, i. e. that it can reach
full growth within a fortnight after hatching, lent favor to the idea, in our mind,
that there might be even more generations. Subsequent experience, and especially
that of the present year, has convinced us that there is usually one other generation
there, and it is but natural to suppose that there are still more in more southern lati-
tudes. The moths are to be found laying their eggs as soon as vegetation starts in
the spring, and there is a succession of broods from that time till winter sets in; the
number differing according to latitude and the length of the growing season. Thus,
Professor Comstock reports it as having been received at the Department of Agricult-
ure, in the larva state, during every month of the winter of 1879-’80 from the South-
ern States, where, during the mild weather, it was active and injurious to oats and
other grain. (American Entomologist, v. 3, pp. 184, 185.)

The winter of 1880~81 was so severe all over the country that the
worms were not noticed; but in the winter of 1881-’82 they again made
their appearance.

Sod was taken from the Department grounds at Washington and
placed in breeding cages as food for other larve shortly before Christmas.
January 3 anumber of young Army Worms, which had evidently been
hibernating at the roots, were found feeding upon the grass leaves. Jan-
uary 12 an active larva one-third grown was taken, out of doors. Jan-
uary 15 another larva which had passed through its second molt was
found under similar circumstances. The first moth from these larvee
made its appearance March 3. January 23 the worms were received
from Ashland, Clay County, Alabama, with the report that they were

120 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

destroying the wheat crop and causing a great deal of excitement in the
county.

In March, again, they were working injury to winter grains in Georgia
and South Carolina, and Mr. Koebele, as already stated, found worms of
all sizes at work at Savannah and Columbia. Again, in the first week
in May, they appeared in enormous numbers in northern Alabama and
southern Tennessee, and there is presumptive evidence that, counting
the liberating worms as the first brood, these worms represented the
third brood for these localities. |

There is no doubt that the prevailing theory of its single-broodedness
was a result merely of the fact that it is observed in excessive numbers
only once during the year, and usually when wheat is just about ripen-
ing. But, as we showed in our Missouri Reports (Highth and Ninth),
the worm is always to be found both earlier and later in the season, but
attracts no attention because living in its normal cut-worm condition.

In his report for 1880, Professor Thomas has a lengthy discussion as
to the number of broods—the most extended discussion, in fact, yet
published. Although he has drawn his data industriously from all pub-
lished sources, they are still very insufficient, and he has committed the
ereat mistake of massing together statements in regard to the length of
life of the insect in its different states, from Missouri and southern IIl-
inois to Massachusetts, taking as the minimum length for each state the
life of the insect in that state when reared in the breeding cage. His
conclusions seem to be, although it is difficult to get at them, that, while
in the South there may be more than two broods, in Illinois and the
Eastern States, as far north as central New York, there are two, and two
only. One of his concluding statements is: ‘“‘ From these facts, we be-
lieve we are justified in concluding that it is impossible for a third brood
of worms to be produced, which shall pass the winter, in this State [Ilh-
nois], as Prof. Riley assumes, in his articles of 1880.”

The matter of hibernation we shall consider farther on; but the error
in his conclusion as to the impossibility of a third brood in Illinois is
easily shown by actual observation.

In 1881 the injurious brood in Dlinois, according to the observations
of Mr. Howard, pupated in Iroquois County from July 18 to 30, the first
moths appearing August 1. Taking into consideration the fact that in
former years the injurious brood has pupated during the first or second
week in June, and calling the hibernating brood the first, this injurious
brood would already represent the third. But this is not necessary to
our purpose. Mr. Coquillett, working for the Entomological Commission,
began his observations July 14, in McHenry County, northern Hlinois.
He found an injurious brood which pupated July 19, and gave forth the
first moth August1. August 3 a number of moths were captured, and
from this time on for several nights several were captured each night, after
which no more were seen. August 18 a young Army Worm was found ;
August 22 another, and August 26 still another. The first week in Sep-

THE ARMY WORM: NUMBER OF ANNUAL BROODS. 121

tember two worms were found. September 23 anearly full-grown worm
was found feeding upon a head of timothy, and the same day three more
were found hiding beneath a board; one of them tachinized. Of the
worms found early in September, one pupated September 22, and issued
as a moth some time before the 15th of October; the exact date of issue
is not known. Of the worms found September 23, one pupated a week
later and issued as a moth October 22; the rest died. October 29a
worm measuring one-half inch in length, or less than half grown, was
found. November i four more were found, one seven-eighths of an inch
in length, and the rest three-fourths of an inch long. November 4 an-
other was found three-eighths of an inch long, and on the 5th one more
measuring one-half inch. These last worms were all found, according to
Mr. Coquillett, under or in shocks of corn, and we think would evidently
have hibernated in these localities.

Thus, even admitting the injurious brood of July to have been only
the second (hibernating worms constituting the first), we have three
broods im northern Illinois plainly demonstrated, the worms of August
and September constituting the third brood and the offspring of the
October moths the hibernating brood or the first of the present season.
The case is made all the stronger when we consider that a half-grown
worm was found August 23, which, had it been reared to the perfect
state, would probably have given forth the moth before the first of Oc-
tober. |

We have already shown that the injurious brood is usually the second,
but have also given instances which indicate that it is occasionally the
third. We haveevery reason to suppose that Thomas’s estimated average
length of life of the individual—seventy-seven days—is too long, even for
the more northern portions of the country. The experience of every ento-
mologist will show that in summer an insect will occupy a longer time
in undergoing its transformations within the breeding cage than in the
field under natural conditions, and yet Thomas has taken the vivarium
life as the minimum.*® We have shown by experiment that indoors

35Mr. Lintner’s paper on a somewhat similar subject, viz., the life duration in Heterocera, gave a
long series of careful notes of collectings, from which he concluded that the average duration of moths
is from two to three weeks in summer. The paper gave rise to some extended remarks from Messrs.
Thomas, Mann, Riley, and others. Mr. Thomas thought that the knowledge of the term of life in the
imago was of less value, from an economic standpoint, than that of the individual in all its states. In
endeavoring to ascertain this duration in Leucania unipuncta, he had come to the conclusion that it
was about seventy-seven days. This conclusion, based on calculations from recorded appearances of
the insect, was in opposition to the only actual experiments which are on record, viz., those by Mr.
Riley in the Eighth and Ninth Reports on the Insects of Missouri, which show that the term of life in
summer barely extends over half as many days. In fact, all our experience as to the summer duration
of life in this species shows that the states of egg, larva, chrysalis, and imago average forty days.
Mr. Thomas argued that insects in confinement develop more rapidly thanin freedom. Mr. Riley gave
his experience as opposed to the statement: insects reared in confinement during the summer are likely
to develop more slowly than in freedom, for the obvious reason that those in freedom get more sun-
light and constantly have a supply of fresh food at hand, and this will hold equally true with the
changes that take place underground, for the mean temperature of the soil, during summer, is evidently
greater outdoors than indoors. Experience shows, moreover, that in this question everything depends
on the time of year, the character of the weather and other surrounding conditions, there being a wide
tauge in the duration of life in the same species.—(Adapted from Amer. Naturalist, Nov., 1881, p. 912).

122 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the round of the insect’s life may be completed, under favorable cir-
eumstances, in less than forty days. It would be difficult to give any
exact number of broods for the southern parts of the country, for, as we
have already shown, with mild winters a succession of generations is
maintained during the whole year without any so-called dormant or
hibernating period. In other years the hibernating period varies with
the length of the severe winter weather, and of course the number of gen-
erations is influenced thereby. Moreover the confusion of generations is
so great that it will always be difficult to ascertain positively the num-
ber of broods in a given year. :

At the North the same facts hold, though in a lesser degree, and we
believe that the same number of broods which we have proven for north-
ern Illinois will hold for all points between the Ohio River and the Great
Lakes and north to central New York, namely, normally three and pos-
sibly or exceptionally four. *

HIBERNATION.

In the course of the discussion of the habits and natural history of
the Army Worm, extending over the last twenty years, hibernation in
each one of the four stages has had its strong advocates. Walsh, in his
many articles, upheld most emphatically the probability of hibernation
in the egg state, bringing what seemed to be strong arguments to its
support. Thomas, French, Kirkpatrick, Klippart, and others have as
strongly supported pupal hibernation, while in the Missouri Reports we
have given reasons for supposing that the species may hibernate both
as larve and as adults. Comstock, in his 1879 report, upheld the
hibernation of the moth as the only proved method. The discussion
of this point from our HKighth Missouri Report (1875) will bear rep-
etition: .

Accepting as facts that the eggs are laid both in fall and spring, the following ques-
tions are to be considered: ist, whether the eggs laid in autumn hibernate as such,
or whether the larve first hatch and hibernate while small; 2d, whether those laid
in spring are by moths which issued at that season, after hibernating as chrysalides,
or by such as issued the preceding fall and hibernated as moths.

As bearing on the first question it is interesting to note that the European species
_ of the genus, so far as their habits are known, hibernate in the larva state. Thus
Leucania lithargyria Esper, and LZ. turca (Linn.) hibernate as young larve, while L.

<, /

36 The delay in the printing of this report permits us to add, in this connection. that the experience
of 1882 renders it probable that at Washington there are at least five annual generations and possibly
asixth. As already indicated above, we found hibernating worms during all the mild weather of late
winter and early spring, and obtained the first moths therefrom (doubtless hastened somewhat by in-
door temperature) early in March. Calling this the first generation of moths, sugaring at night from
the beginning of May till the end of October, by Mr. Koebele, and experiments in the vivaria, showed
quite plainly that a second generation of moths prevailed the latter part of April and into May. The
third generation occurred about the middle of June, the fourth from the middle to the end of July, the
fifth during the latter part of August and through September. Moths were captured abundantly all
through September and October and even early in November, and while we believe that the larvz pro-
duced therefrom mostly hibernate, yet it is extremely probable that many produced imagos which
would form the sixth and hibernating generation of moths.

-

THE ARMY WORM: HIBERNATION. | 123

comma (Linn.) winters as a full grown larva, according to Speyer. Quite a large
proportion of our closely allied cut-worms are, also, known to thus hibernate. It
would seem, therefore that, in default of direct observation, we have no good reason
for assuming that the eggs laid in autumn necessarily hibernate as such. But while
‘these analogies make it probable that the insect may winter in the larva state, all |
the other facts point to the conclusion that the proportion that so winter, if any, is
very small. Instead of abounding ina wet spring when their favorite haunts are
overflowed, they would be well nigh drowned out, on the hypothesis that they had
been wintering there as larve. As bearing on the second question we have certain
facts which indicate that some of the pups hibernate, the proportion doubtless increas-
ing as we gonorth. I have myself never had any of the worms remain in chrysalis
through June, but Professor Thomas records that less than half of the pups which
he caged hatched out, and that ‘‘only a part are transformed to moths during the
season of their larva state.”5’ Unfortunately he has left no record of rearing the
moths from those chrysalides the following spring, and we do not know to how large
a degree the non-issuance of the moths was owing to unfavorable conditions in the
breeding cage, which so often affect insects reared in confinement, and which every
rearer of insects is so familiar with. But Mr. Otto Meske, of Albany, N. Y., informs
me that he once found a chrysalis about the middle of May which in a few days gave
him the genuine wnipuncta, and the earliness of the date precludes the possibility of
the worm having been hatched the same spring in that latitude, and renders it almost
certain that the pupa hibernated. Of more value still is the earliness of appearance
and freshness of most of the moths captured in spring—indicating that they have
just come from the ground. These facts might, itis true, be explained by the larva
hibernating partly grown, but the Peshtigo experience is valuable here and renders
the other conclusion much the most plausible. In fact the hibernation of a certain
proportion of the pupz finds its parallel in numerous other instances in the lives of
moths that might be mentioned. Every experienced entomologist is aware that with
lots of species the imagos from the same batch of larve often issue partly in fall,
partly in spring; while I have given instances in previous reports of still greater ir-
regularity. The worms that attract such attention, about the time our wheat is
ripening by marching from field to field are mostly full grown. These would natu-
rally soon turn to moths; but it must not be forgotten that they are the earliest
developed and that the younger and weaker ones have mostly been obliged to suc-
cumb in the struggle for individual mastery, which must have preceded the forced
abandonment from sheer hunger, of the original fields where they were born; and
that, further, in fields and rank places where the worms are not so numerous as to
be obliged to travel, there are individuals maturing for several weeks after the more
noticeable hordes have vanished out of sight. As to the hibernation of the moth,
having shown that the larger proportion of the moths captured in autumn have the
ovaries yet quite immature, it is pretty evident that the insect hibernates in this
state, and I learn from Mr. Strecker, that he has in fact, found the moth in February,
hibernating under clap-boards at Reading, Pa., while Mr. B. P. Mann, of Cambridge,
Mass., has also found it hibernating. It would be unreasonable to.assume that such
large numbers of the moths as occur in autumn are destined to perish without issue.
Moreover, a large number of closely allied moths are known to hibernate, and this
mode of hibernation will explain more of the known facts in the insect’s economy
than any other.

From the foregoing considerations I think we may safely conclude that—taking
our whole country with its varied climate—there is no one state in which the Army
Worm can be said to solely pass the winter; that, according to latitude and the char-

acter of the seasons, there is nothing to preclude its hibernating in any one of the
four states in which it exists; that in the same latitude and under the same condi-

87 Illinois Farmer, September, 1861, pp. 271, 272.

124 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

tions it will even hibernate in different states; and that, finally, the great bulk of
them hibernate in the pupa and moth states, the proportion of the former increasing
northward.

With our present light upon this subject, and especially with the
experience of the past two years, we can revise this opinion, for it now
appears that, as in the ease of other species of the genus Leucania, and
of so many of our ordinary cut-worms, by far the more common mode
of hibernating is in the larva state. That the insect does hibernate in
the larva state is fully established by the facts already given and by the
following summary: ¢

First:—The experience noted by Professor Comstock in the annual
report of this Department for 1879, p. 188, viz, the receipt of worms from
Tennessee and South Carolina during the months of December, Jan-
uary and February.

Second :—The finding of young worms upon the Department grounds
at Washington during the months of December, 1881, and January,
1882—already referred to above.

Third :—The receipt of the worms at this Department in January, 1882,
from Clay County, Alabama; the first week in March, 1882, from Lafay-
ette County, Mississippi, Chatham County, Georgia, and Richland
County, South Carolina; and the middle of March from Washingtom
County, Missouri.

Fourth :—The finding of a partly-grown Army Worm in the stomach
of a blue-bird at Normal, Ills., March 9, 1880, by Professor 8S. A. Forbes,
as detailed in the American Entomologist, vol. III (1880), p. 204.

Fifth:—The observations cf Mr. Coquillett, already mentioned,—the
finding of six partly-grown Army Worms after November 1, under or
in shocks of corn in McHenry County, Llinois.

Instances might be multiplied, but our point is sufficiently estab-
lished. The only argument of any weight heretofore brought to bear
upon pupal hibernation, namely, the finding of fresh moths in the spring,
has equal weight in favor of larval hibernation. In fact, the instance
cited from Mr. Meske, of the finding of the chrysalis and the breeding
of the moth at Albany, N. Y., about the middle of May, really confirms
this view of larval hibernation, as in case of pupal hibernation the moth
would undoubtedly have been disclosed at an earlier period.

The evidence in favor of the hibernation of the moth is, as we have
shown, conclusive. In addition to the proof cited we may mention
that the receipt of the moth from the Southern States during the win-
ter months has been of very frequent occurrence since the commence-
ment of the Cotton Insect investigation, observers mistaking Leucania
for Aletia.

_ Up to the present time there is no evidence whatsoever of hiberna-
tion in either the egg or the chrysalis state, though the evidence may
yet be forthcoming.

SS a oa en ee

THE ARMY WORM: NATURAL ENEMIES. 125.
NATURAL ENEMIES.

Hogs, chickens and turkeys revel in the juicy carcasses of the worms,
and sometimes to such an extent that, as I have been informed by Mr.
T. R. Allen, of Allentown, Mo., the former occasionally die in conse-
quence, and the latter have been known to lay eggs in which the parts
naturally white would be green when cooked. The turning of swine
and flocks of poultry upon an advancing army of the worms is an old
and frequently successful method of riddance. All of the insectivorous
birds feed upon the worms. Prominent among them is the Rice Bunt-
ing or Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus). So common have the flocks of
this bird become in southern Illinois during Army Worm years, that,
according to Thomas, it has received the popular name of “ Army Worm
bird.” Toads and frogs come in for their share of this dainty food, while
the worms themselves, when hard pushed, will even devour each other.

A large number of predaceous beetles gather about an infested field
and greedily feed upon the worms, killing thousands of them. The
following list of ten species was published in our Eighth Missouri Re-
port:

Cicindela repanda Dej. Calosoma wilcoaxt Lec.
Hlaphrus ruscarius Say. Pasimachus clongatus Lee.
Calosoma externum Say. Amara angustata Say.
Calosoma scrutator (Fabr.) Harpalus caliginosus (Fabr.)
Calosoma calidum (Fabr.) Harpalus pennsylvanicus (Deg.)

To this list we may add the following four species collected while
feeding upon the worms the present year at Huntsville, Ala., by Mr.
Howard :

Pterostichus sculptus Lec. Cratacanthus dubius (Beauv.)
Anisodactylus rusticus Dej. Selenophorus pedicularius (Dej.)

The larve of Calosoma externum were also found in remarkable
abundance in this locality, under stones and logs, devouring the worms
which had crept there for shelter during the middle of the day. Some
of the most abundant of these predaceous beetles are shown at Plate
I, Fig. 8; Plate II, Figs. 1, 2, 4.

The Thick-thighed Metapodius (Acanthocephala | Metapodius] femorata,
Fabr.), a large half-winged bug, common in the South, and well-known
as an enemy of the Cotton Worm, has also been observed in large num-
- bers the present season in the wheat fields of northern Alabama, feed-
ing upon the Army Worms.*

Of true parasites the Army Worm has an unusually large number,
and they are by far the most destructive of its natural enemies.

The worms never abound or travel from one field to another but they
are accompanied by a number of two-winged flies, which are often so
numerous that their buzzing reminds one of that of a swarm of bees.

38See note by L. O. Howard in American Naturalist, July, 1882.

x

126 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.
]

The Red-tailed Tachina fly (Nemorwa leucan[ije, Kirkpatrick, Plate
I, Fig. 7) and the Yellow-tailed Tachina fly (Hxorista flavicauda Riley,
Plate I, Fig. 6) are known to infest it. Seizing the first opportunity
to attach their eggs behind the heads of the Army Worms, these flies
are as persistent in their work of destruction as the worms are rest-
less under attack. As many as eighteen eggs of the Red-tailed Tachina
are sometimes deposited upon a single worm, but the average is about
five. These eggs are almost without exception placed upon the head
or thorax of the worm, so that the latter cannot reach them with its
jaws. Occasionally, however, they are placed upon the first abdo-
minal segment, and one worm, now in the collection of the Department,
carries one Tachina egg upon the third abdominal segment and one
upon the eighth. From eight per cent. upwards of the worms in an
infested field have frequently been noticed to carry the eggs of these
Tachina flies, which, though rendering the most efficient service to the
farmer, are not unfrequently supposed by him to be the parent and
cause of the worm.” .

We have observed, since the publication of our Bulletin No. 3 of the
United States Entomological Commission, in the case of the Cotton
Worm, that, contrary to the former belief, the presence of these eggs on
the back of a worm does not necessarily indicate a sure death, although |
in the vast majority of cases it undoubtedly does. Mr. Coquillett ex-
perimented upon this point with the following result: Of sixty-six
Army Worms, each bearing from one to five eggs of the Tachina, four
transformed to pup, from three of which the moths issued. The re-
maining sixty-two were killed, and from them issued one hundred and
four Tachina larvee, sixty-one of which successfully transformed to
flies. *

Next, perhaps, in importanceto the Tachina flies comethe Microgas-
ters, minute four-winged flies, of which there are several species parasitic
upon the Army Worm. Their larve live within the body of the host,
and, issuing, spin small, oval, silken cocoons attached by loose silk to
some neighboring object.

Walsh described the most abundant of these species in 1861 under
the name of Microgaster (Apanteles) militaris. (Pl. II, Fig. 6.) This spe-
cies is found wherever the Army Worms are abundant, and its white
cocoons, attached to the grass or to the under side of stones and sticks
about the field, are sometimes so numerous as to make the ground look
whitish in ee These cocoons are invariably found in small masses
surrounded by more or less loose silk. The adult fly is black, with
rufous legs. It was the cocoons of this insect which gave the founda-

89 ‘Tn 1875 no less than four of our correspondents expressed a belief that, in the language of one of |
them, the worms came from a dark-colored buzzing fly about the size of a blow-fly, Which is noticed
around old stack-yards just before the worms come; und when plentiful, the Army Worm is sure to
follow.”

40¥or descriptions of these flies see Prairie Farmer, vol. VIII; Second Missouri Entomological Re-
port, and Eighth Missouri Entomological Report.

THE ARMY WORM: NATURAL ENEMIES. 127

tion for the oft-quoted story of the finding of the eggs of the Army
Worm covered by a mass of loose silk, originally published by Shurtleff,

‘in the Proceedings of the Essex Institute, July 2, 1862. One of our
correspondents, Mr. M. B. Kerr, of Aurora, Ind., has made many dis-
sections of Army Worms in search of the Military Microgaster, and
where he has found the parasites their numbers varied from sixty-two
to ninety-six to an individual host. From the cocoons of the Military
Microgaster there often issue individuals of a minute seccndary para-
site—a Chalcid, called by Walsh Glyphe viridascens, but which probably
belongs to the genus Tridymus. |

In our Highth Missouri Report, p. 54, we mentioned the rearing of an-
other Microgaster from the Army Worm, which differed from militaris
in always having the three basal joints of the abdomen rufous. This
we have recently shown“ to be a variety of Apanteles congregatus Say—
a Microgaster which is parasitic upon many Sphinges, Bombycids, and

_ Noctuids, and perhaps other Lepidoptera. This speciesis also parasitized
by the Glyphe viridascens mentioned above. This latter, by the way, is
identical with the Pteromalus tabacum of Fitch, who bred it from Apan-
teles congregatus when parasitic upon the tobacco worm (Macrosila quin-
quemaculata).

Another Microgaster which is probably parasitic upon the Army
Worm is the Apanteles limenitidis Riley,” form flaviconche, as its bright

' lemon-yellow cocoons are found associated with those of the Military
Microgaster in fields infested with the Army Worm.

Finally, we have bred a fourth Microgaster from the Army Worm,
belonging to the genus Microplitis. It differs from the other species
mentioned in being solitary, only a single larva deriving nourishment
from the partially grown Leucania larva. This species was also col-
lected this spring at Huntsville, Ala., by Mr. Howard.

A small Ichneumonid parasite, called by Walsh ‘the Glassy Meso-
chorus (Mesocherus vitreus, Plate II, Fig. 8), was supposed by him to be a
true parasite upon the Army Worm, but we have recently shown*® that
it is a parasite upon the Microgasters above mentioned, and it is prob-
able that it cannot be called a true Army Worm parasite.

In the Prairie Farmer (Vol. VIII, p. 258) Walsh described another
parasite under the name of Hockeria perpulchra, which he considered as
parasitic upon one of the Microgasters. Only 18 per cent. of the true
Army Worm parasites, according to Walsh, perish by secondary para-
sites.

The Diminished Pezomachus (Pezomachus minimus Walsh, Plate II,
Fig. 9) is a small, wingless parasite, which, like the Microgaster, spins
cocoons in cottony floss on the back of the worm, but places them
close together in symmetrical order. This in its turn is preyed upon

by a little Chalcid fly (Smiera albifrons, Walsh).

‘In addition to these small parasites there are a few larger Ich-

41 Trans. Acad. Sci. Saint Louis, Vol. IV, No. 2 (1881).
4 See Third Missouri Entomological Report.
@Trans. Acad. Sci. Saint Louis, ibid.

128 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

neumon-flies that infest the worm. One, the Purged Ophion (Ophion
purgatus Say, Plate II, Fig. 5), is a honey-yellow, slender-bodied, wasp-

ish insect, with a short ovipositor, the female of which, according to

Dr. Packard, attaches her egg, which is bean-shaped, by a pedicel to
the skin of the worm; and the footless grub which hatches therefrom
_does not entirely leave the egg-shell, but the last joints of the body
remain attached thereto, while the larva reaches over and gnaws into
the side of the worm. I have bred this same species from various cut-
worms, and it spins a tough, brown, silken, oblong-oval cocoon.”

Another species, a true Ichneumon, which may be called the Army
Worm Ichneumon-fly (Ichneumon leucanic Fitch), was reared from the
worm by Dr. Fitch; it is a half of an inch in length and is of a bright
rust-red color, with smoky wings, a black breast and back, with a
bright sulphur-yellow spot in the middle of its back. This insect Fitch
Says may prove to be a variety of the Ichnewmon suturalis of Say, and.
we believe Mr. Cresson so considers it.

In the article on the Army Worm in the appendix to Harris’s Insects
Injurious to Vegetation, are figured two parasites—Ichneumonid—but, as
there is no accompanying description, it is impossible to determine
them.

July 6, 1880, two specimens of a striking looking parasite were bred _

at this department from Army Worms collected on Long Island by
Professor Comstock. The Ichneumon flavizonatus of Cresson, for such
is the species, is about 15 millimeters in length, black in color, with yel-
lowish legs and face, and the abdomen is striped transversely with

four yellow bands.
: REMEDIES.

BURNING OLD GRASS, ETC.—That fields which have been burned over
in the winter are free from the destructive presence of the worm is a
fact in the history of its visitations. But opinion has varied as to the
precise effect produced by burning over. Walsh, as we have already
shown, always urged this remedy of burning over, thinking that it de-
stroyed the eggs. The next phase was that suggested in our Highth
Missouri Report, where, after showing that the eggs are preferably laid
in old grass-stalks or stubble, the inference was plain that the appropri-
ate nidus would be destroyed by the burning.

Now that larval hibernation is established, however, we can sania

see that the fires would destroy these hibernating larve and prevent —

the appearance of the moths and of a second destructive brood from
them. But we must not suppose that the burning over would prevent
all appearance of the worm; it merely prevents its appearance in de-
structive numbers. The moth will, when exceptionally numerous, lay
her eggs without concealment and upon plants, such as clover, which
the larva does not relish. In such cases of exceptional abundance we
may well suppose that the moth will fly into fields which have been
burned over and supply them with eggs; but the instances in which
this would result in material damage to the crop would be very rare.

THE ARMY WORM: REMEDIES, PREDICTIONS. (2S

“As the Army Worm appears in vast numbers during ¢ertain years
only, and at irregular intervals, and as this appearance is rather sudden,
and seldom, if ever, anticipated by the farmer, burning as a remedy
loses much of its importance, except where it is practiced annually; and
in view of the benefit of such burning in destroying chinch-bugs and
other insects it is to be regretted that the practice of winter burning of
fields, prairies, straw-piles, weeds, and other litter and rubbish does not
more generally prevail; the destruction of injurious insects by such a
system would far outweigh the ben fit derived from plowing these stalks
and weeds under or leaving them to gradually decay.”—[8th Mo. Ent.
fep., p. 55.

PREDICTIONS; METEOROLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON THE SPECIES.—
What we still need to know, in order to make the burning over of much
avail, is some method of actually predicting the coming of the worms.
That meterological changes have much to do with disastrous years is
indubitable, yet it is evident from facts we have given that Fitch’s
theory will not hold. We have shown that he had no practical knowl-
edge of the subject, and that his theory was not well considered. We
are also not inclined to admit the truth of Professor Thomas’s weather
arguments in the case of the Army Worm. We can only say, after a
careful review of past years, that all or nearly all of the years of Army
Worm abundance have followed dry years, the nature of the year in which
such abundance actually occurred having little todo with it. This, how-
ever, helps us only so far as to enable us to say that after a year of ex-
ceptional drought the worms may appear in injurious numbers. Weare
still very far from saying that after such a year the Army Worm isa
necessary consequence, so that for practical purposes we are almost as
far in the dark as formerly.

In short, however interesting it may be to speculate as to the weather,
no well-informed person will pretend to a sufficient sibylline insight into
the future to enable him to act with absolute confidence-as to resulis.
The pretensions of a Tice or a Vennor must be classed, in the light of
whatever there is of science in meteorology, among the utterances of
charlatans and quacks, and whatever the tendency may be for history
to repeat itself, so far as weather and season are concerned, the records
sufficiently show that there is no absolutely relying upon the weather of
thefuture. Insect probabilities, in connection with meteorological spec-
ulation, offer a most inviting field for theory and speculation for those
who have few facts to lean upon, but it can never be safe to anticipate
for more than two or three months ahead atthe most. Itis quite possible,
from the observed facts during the winter and early spring, to form
pretty accurate conclusions as to what may happen the ensuing summer
so far as the Army Worm is concerned, and this is especially true when
the preceding summer and autumn have been exceptionally dry. This
may be illustrated by the following opinion, quoted from an article which

9 H.C

130 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.
t]

we published in the Rural New- Yorker of May 27, which subsequent
events have fully justified:

Anent the Army Worm I have obtained many interesting facts during the past winter
and present spring, which all go to confirm the correctness of my previous conclusions
and inferences, especially those of 1830, as presented to the American Association for
the Advancement of Science, viz., that it hibernates principally in the worm or larva
state. From the fact that the worm of all sizes has been found throughout the past
winter not only around Washington but in various parts of the South, whenever it
has been looked for carefully, and from the further fact that the moths have lately
been very numerous and active in laying their eggs in this immediate vicinity, I drew
the inference, some weeks since, that we should have in most parts of the country
serious attacks of the insect during the present year, and sent an item containing this
inference to the American Naturalist for publication. In confirmation of the correct-
ness of that inference the Department of Agriculture has just received accounts of
alarming injury tosmall grain in northern Alabama and Georgia as well as in Arkan-
sas. If the spring and early summer prove in any way wet (as is likely in the country
which suffered so much from drought last year) the precise conditions will recur that
have in the past marked all great Army Worm years.

Observations which I have recently been making with one of my assistants, Mr. A.
Koebele, fully establish the fact which I inferred to be the case in 1877—that the moth
secretes her eggs by preference in old grass and stubble and even in corn-stalks; and
this explains two facts that have long since been recognized by practical men, viz.,”
that the worms in destructive numbers are apt to originate from old stacks or piles of
corn-stalks, or coarse manure, to which the early moths are attracted for purposes of

Oviposition. In short, a field will be free from the worm in proportion as it is kept-

clean of old stubble and straw, and in proportion as it is distant from such, or from
nezlected pasturage, or low, rank grass inaccessible to cattle.

Believing, therefore, that serious injury now threatens meadows and grain fields
from this insect, and that we shall hear of it farther and farther north with the head-
ing out of wheat, and knowing, from experience, that an ounce of prevention is worth
a pound of cure, I recommend that farmers generally take the precaution to burn up
or plow under at once, wherever it is possible to do so, any neglected meadows, old
grass or straw upon their farms; further, to roll the grain in the vicinity of old stacks
where these may not be burned. Let me add, further, that one must not be deceived
by appearances. The worms may not be visible to an ordinary observer, or even toa
careful one, aud may yet abound in myriads, for they secrete themselves within old
stalks, or folded leaves, when very young, and hide under matted grass or grain when
larger. Yet a field that shows none now may in a fortnight be overrun with full-
grown worns, so rapidly do they grow.

While, therefore, annual burning in the fall or winter is to be recom-
mended as a haphazard way of reducing Army Worm injury, burning
as late as possible in the spring is much more strongly to be recom-
mended, especially during certain years, and following exceptionally
dry seasons and special observations that have been made during the
preceding winter. :

DITCHING; COAL TAR; POISONING.—“‘ The worms may be prevented,
as a general thing, from passing from one field to another by judicious
ditching. It is important, however, that the ditch should be made so
that the side toward the field to be protected be dug under. About
every three or four rods a deep hole in the ditch should be made, in
which the worms will collect, so that they can be killed by covering
them with earth and pressing it down. They may also be destroyed by

-

a :

a

THE ARMY WORM: REMEDIES. 131

burning’ straw over them—the fire not only killing the worms but ren-
dering the ditch friable aud more efficient in preventing their ascent. I
have also. used coal oil to good advantage, and the worms have a great
antipathy to pass a streak of it. Many of my correspondents success-
fully headed them off by a plowed furrow 6 or 8 inches deep, and kept
friable by dragging brush in it. Along the ditch or furrow on the side
of the tield to be protected, a space of from 3 to 5 feet might be thor-
oughly dusted (when the dew is on) with a mixture of Paris green and
plaster, or flour, so that every worm which succeeds in crossing the ditch
will be killed by feeding upon plants so treated. This mixture should
’ be in the proportion of one part of pure Paris green to twenty-five or
thirty parts of the other niaterials named. If used in liquid form, one
tablespoonful of Paris green to a bucket of water, kept well stirred, will
answer the same purpose, as also will London purple, which has the
merit of being cheaper. These substances should,.of course, be only
used where there is no danger of poisoning stock, poultry, or other ani-
mals. Logs or fences over running streams, or irrigation ditches, should
be removed, otherwise the worms will cross on them.

‘rom experiments which I have made I am Satisfied that where fence-
lumber can be easily obtained it may be used to advantage as a substi-
tute for the ditch or trench by being secured on edge and then smeared
with kerosene or coal tar (the latter being more particularly useful)
along the upper edge. By means of laths and a few nails the boards
may be so secured that they will slightly slope away from the field to be
protected. Such a barrier will prove effectual where the worms are not
too persistent or numerous. When they are excessively abundant
they will need to be watched and occasionally dosed with kerosene to
prevent their piling up even with the top of the board and thus bridg-
ing the barrier. The lumber is not injured for other purposes subse-
“quently.” *

ROLLING; FENCING; ROPING.—Where the crop of a field has been
completely destroyed by the worms, the plan of killing them by heavy
rollers has been tried. This, however, is an expensive remedy and is
not as satisfactory as might be supposed. Experiments on Long Isl-
and in 1880 proved tbat even where the ground was level the rollers
soon became iregularly covered with mud composed of earth and of
the juices of the crushed worms, so that the effect was much the same
as if the ground had been uneven, and many worms escaped in conse-
quence. c

The remedy of ‘‘drawing the rope,” as it may be termed, was prac-
ticed as long ago as 1770, and is described, under the head of “ Past
History,” in the quotation from Rev. Grant Powers. Although this
remedy has been practiced from time to time since then, we are not
aware that any other account has been published. This spring it has
been tried with good effects at Huntsville, Ala., and by Mr. J. W. Sparks,

44 Quoted fromeprevious articles by the author.

132 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of Murfreesberough, Tenn. We quote from a letter from this gentleman
describing his method:

The Army Worm is making such inroads upon the wheat crop and other crops here,
in middle Tennessee, I thought I would write you and give the process I have for
ridding the wheat of these vagabonds. I take a rope about 60 feet long and cause
two men to walk through the wheat field, dragging the rope over the wheat. By
this means you can go over a large field of wheat in a fewhours. The rope, dragging
over the wheat, shakes the worms off on the ground, and they curl up and lie there
half an hour or more— seem to be mad about it—and then begin to move about hunt-
ing something to eat; but the larger ones are unable to climb the wheat stalks with
all the blades off, so that you get rid of the larger ones the first time going over, and
the smaller ones can be shaken off so often that they cannot hurt the wheat. If you~
willmake known this simple plan to the sections where the worm is at work the peo-
ple can yet save their wheat. Iam satisfied I will save mine. Iam going over my
whole crop twice a day. My wheat is looking splendid, and if I succeed in whipping
the worms I will make a large yield. You shall have full reports at the proper time.

In regard to this remedy it may be well to say that while tolerably
efficacious when the worms are not present in overwhelming numbers,
or when the crop is far advanced and the stalks are large and tough,
under opposite circumstances it will be of little avail, and it will always
be a question whether the portion of the crop saved by this means will
be worth the great expenditure of time and labor which this remedy
calls for.

As a fitting sequence to this general statement of the more interesting
practical facts connected with the Army Worm, we introduce such letters
and extracts from correspondence as are of sufficient interest for pub-
lication, and also, as intimated at the outset, a valuable account of the
insect in New Jersey in 1880, by one of our esteemed correspondents,
Rev. Samuel Lockwood.

REPORT OF OBSERVATIONS UPON THE ARMY WORM, 1881.

WASHING ON, D. C., August 7, 1881.

Sir: In necomimce with your verbal iene Horne and the written or-
der of the Commissioner of Agriculture given me July 23, I started on
the morning of the 24th for Chicago, Hl. Arriving there on the morn-
ing of the 25th, I spent the afternoon in interviewing the editors of
the Farmers’ Review and Prairie Farmer with regard to the extent of
country over which the worms had made _their appearance, and in
ascertaining the most profitable spot in the State to visit. I started on
the morning of the 26th for Raub, Ind., a small station on the Kankakee
line. Arriving at Sheldon, Iroquois County, [llinois, however, I was in-
duced to stop by the accounts given by men at the station as to the
abundance of the worms. I spent the whole of the 26th at Sheldon, and
on the 27th went over to Kentland, Newton County, Indiana, where great,
damage was reported, and where I spent the morning in the field. On
the evening of the 27th I returned to Chicago, where I found a letter
from Prof. W. A. Henry, of Wisconsin University, in answer to a tele-
gram I had sent him on the 25th asking about the northernmost appear-

THE ARMY WORM: REPORT FOR 1881. 133

ance of the worms. His reply was that they were reported near Mad-
ison, and that the northernmost point from which they had been reported
was Waupun. Onthe morning of the 28th I started for Madison, reach-
ing there in theevening. Thenext morning I ascertained that the Army
Worm rumor in that locality was a false alarm. Heliothis armigera in
Sweet corn had been taken for Leucania, and the work of Lachnosterna
in a few meadows had been supposed to be the work of the Army Worm.
Learning from Professor Henry and the editor of the Democrat that the
only points from which there had been newspaper reports of the worm
in Wisconsin were Oshkosh, Whitewater, and Waupun, I obtained the
address of a well-informed man in each place—one who would certainly
have heard of the Army Worms had they made their appearance—and
telegraphed to each for absolute information as to whether the worms
had been seen in his locality, and the answer was in every case contrary
to our expectations. Feeling quite certain, therefore, that the worms
were not to be found in any number in the State of Wisconsin, I took
the night train back to Chicago on the evening of the 29th, occasionally
getting off at a station aud making inquiries about the worms. I learned
on my return to Chicago that the worms had been reported as doing
a great deal of damage at Kalamazoo, Mich., so I bought my return
ticket via Michigan Central and spent a night at Kalamazoo. The
most diligent inquiry, however, on the spot failed to find me a man
who knew of their presence.

EXTENT OF COUNTRY INJURED.—I failed, therefore, to find the worms
in any other locality than in northeastern Illinois, and across the border
line in Indiana, and I am strongly inclined to believe that, outside of a
belt embracing portions of Lasalle, Kendall, Grundy, Will, Kankakee,
Iroquois, Livingston, and Ford Counties, Lilinois, and Newton, Benton,
Jasper, Warren, and Tippecanoe, Indiana, the damage was not very
great, although the reports from central and western Illinois were quite
alarming. From what I could learn of the reported appearance in lowa,
I believe that some other worm has been mistaken for the Army Worm
in that State.

CROPS INJURED.—The oat crop seems to be the only one which has
been appreciably injured. Some little damage has been done to corn,
especially young sweet corn, and in some cases slight damage has been
done to flax and millet. The timothy on pasture lands has also been
somewhat eaten.

AMOUNT OF DAMAGE.—The damage to oats has in many cases been
very severe. I saw fields of several acres which were not considered
worth harvesting. At one place, seeing a steam thresher at work, I
made inquiries, and found that they were averaging about two bushels
to the load, when the proper amount should have been fifteen bushels.
Dr. Bush, of Sheldon, states that, to the best of his judgment, the crop
in Iroquois County has been damaged not to exceed ten percent. This
was indorsed by most of the men I met who were not farmers, the latter

131 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

placing the damage at from 25 to 50 per cent. The total amount of oats
in that part of the State will not fall behind the crop of last year, owing
to a much greater acreage. Many farmers have put in oats on account
of the failure of winter wheat. In the southern part of Newton County,
Indiana, the damage done was very great. Mr. Kent, of Kentland, who
owns several farms, says that while his individual crops should have
been 50,000 bushels, he would be happy to realize 10,000. Hesays that
the loss in Kentland township will easily be 75 per cent. of the crop;
but at the same time realizes that this is local, and says that the erop of
the State as a whole will be immense. ?

THE PREVIOUS SEASON.—The persons interviewed seemed to beunan-
imous in the opinion that the last season was very wet during the early
part, and that this was followed by a very dry late summer and fall.
Last winter was, as all over the country, a very severe one, while the win-

ter before was remarkably open. The present season has been a very
favorable one, the spring, however, being rather dry.

THE PREVIOUS CROP.—In fields which were worst injured I Nes
took pains to inquire concerning the previous crop, and found consid-
erable diversity. In two cases it had been corn, in two oats, in one flax,
in one barley, and inone prairie land. In several cases also it was win-
ter wheat which had been plowed up in April. The damage in all these -
fields this year was equally great.

METHOD OF WORK.—The method of work in oats is the same as in
timothy and wheat, as described. The fruit-stalk is stripped of its leaves,
and the head is cut off and falls to the ground, where it is usually eaten
to a greater or less extent. Some farmers have taken advantage of this
fact, and have turned in their swine to feed upon the fallen grain, and
atthe same time they undoubtedly destroy many worms and pupe.

No marching whatever has been noticed. The worms appeared sim-
ultaneously all through the fields, and having plenty of food there was
no occasion for going: farther. This fact has given rise to an opinion
among many farmers that this is not the Army Worm but a cut-worm
that is always present in the fields. This fact also puts an effectual
estoppel upon the use of the old remedies, and there seems to be no
way to destroy the worms in the fields without a sacrifice of the crop.

FACTS BEARING ON NUMBER OF BROODS.—-That the brood damag-
ing oats this year was at least the second, and, in case of larval hiber-
nation, the third, seems most probable. The injurious brood in Illinois
has been usually in June, the worms pupating about the middle of the
month, and the moths appearing from the 20th to the 30th of the month.
In the places visited this year the worms were first noticed from the
12th to the loth of July, 0) at that time most of them were of the size
of a “small straw.”

In one instance several empty egg-shells of Leucania were found in
the vicinity of alast winter’s fodder stack. They werein the fold of one
of the basal leaves of the stalk. These, from their position, may have

THE ARMY WORM: REPORT FOR 18381. 135

been laid by the first brood of moths, though from the known ovipositing
habits they may equally as well have been deposited by the second
moths. é

In the same locality I found, by digging, the remains of two empty
pup, undoubtedly Leucania, which certainly belonged to a previous
brood.

AN ACCOMPANYING CUT-wWOoRM.—In the fields, among the Army
Worms, were large numbers of an accompanying cut-worm, in the evi-
dent proportion of about one of the cut-worms to five Army Worms.
The size of the former was about that of the latter, and the color a
nearly uniform dusky brown, with transverse lateral stripes of a darker
color. . They transformed to slender pup, light brown with dorso-
lateral longitudinal, pinkish stripes.*

NATURAL ENEMIES.—Several larve of a ground beetle (probably
_ Calosoma scrutator), large, black, horny, and active, were found destroy-
ing the worms at a great rate. I have been unable to breed them, the
only pupa obtained dying in the box. In order to ascertain the amount
ot good which these larve do, I placed my largest specimen in a box
with 15 full-grown Army Worms, after starving him for a day. In two
hours I opened the box and found that he had killed every one of the
worms, but had sucked dry but two.

The small, white cocoons of an Ichneumonid* were found in enormous
numbers, attached to the oat stalks, in the axils of the corn leaves, upon
the surface of the ground, and under clods of earth. Often upon lifting
a clod of earth the black loam appeared light gray from the abundance
of these cocoons. They were usually found in small masses, attached
side by side, with a little loose silk around the mass. I saw large num-
bers of a large reddish-brown ant tearing these cocoons open and feeding
upon the pupe.

A secondary parasite was bred from these cocoons, which seems to
be the Mesochorus vitreus, of Walsh.

In one instance, in a corn-field belonging to Mr. Corlett, of Sheldon,
the worms were observed to be extensively infested by a Tachinid from
the eggs upon the thoracic segments. Not a single worm was found in
this field which did not bear one or more eggs. I have since bred from
one of these larvze a small specimen of what appears to be the common
Nemorea leucanie, of Kirkpatrick. I also observed in the act of ov1-
positing an Ichneumonid about 15 millimeters in length, rufous in color,
with white-banded antenne, and wings not extending to the tip of the
abdomen; but I was unable to capture it.

Respectfully submitted,
L. O. HOWARD.
Prof. C. V. RILEY,

Entomologist, United States Department of Agriculture.

45 This proved to be Agrotis c-nigrum.—C. V. R.
46 Apanteles congregatus.—C. V. R.

136 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

CORRESPONDENCE ANENT THE ARMY WORM—SPRING OF 1882.

IT send you the inclosed communication from the Huntsville corre-
spondent of the Chattanooga Times in relation to an invasion of the
wheat crop in this vicinity by the Army Worm. I reconnoitered the
invaders yesterday, and witnessed with feelings of much sadness the
devastations already wrought by them on Stevens’ farm. I captured
and examined some of them. Itis the Army Worm described in the
Agricultural Report for 1879, page 187, and the same I think that ap-
peared here in 1861. * * * The insects are of different ages, andit
is to be apprehended that there will be successive crops of them.
* * * Upon examining an oat-field yesterday, in company with Mr.
White, I found multitudes of very small worms concealed under the
oats sown this spring. It was about half past 3 p. m., and the sun
shining. They will doubtless destroy it. Mr. Bedermann’s oat patch,
near Stevens’ wheat-field, has been completely destroyed. Some of the
larger worms in Stevens’ field show that the Tachina parasite has been
operating upon them. I never saw a more promising wheat crop than
Stevens’ before this invasion. White said to me that in the beginning
of last week he would not have taken $2,000 for his own wheat crop;
that he does not now expect to reap anything from it. J] hear of this —
insect in the neighborhood of New Market and Whitesbury.—[S. D.
Cabaniss, Huntsville, Ala., May 2, 1882.

An interesting feature of the appearance of the worm in Alabama in
May is contained in the following letter to Mr. Howard upon his return
from the investigation made at Huntsville. The insect confounded with
the Army Worm is the clover-hay worm (Asopia costalis) :

Sir: While you were here a few days since, investigating the phenomena of the
worm in wheat, I had the pleasure of an introduction and a brief conversation with
you, and take, therefore, the liberty of stating to you a curious phase of the worm.
Mr. J. G. Baker, living here in 1881, produced clover hay—about two tons per acre—
on rich land near the corporate limits of Huntsville. The hay was cut, cured, and
placed in the mow—about eight tons. He used down to about two tons, and a few
days ago, on taking out and delivering a load of hay, after taking it off the wagon,
discovered on the floor of the wagon innumerable worms about one-half inch long,
dark or greenish-brown in color. He then returned and found on examination of the
hay-mow countless numbers of these worms—also what seems to be a kind of web spun
in the débris at bottom, which had multitudes of eggs half the size of a mustard seed
and black in color. This was about the first of May, and the worms have now disap-
peared. It seems to be a theory that these worms are bred in clover-fields, and this
finding them in clover-hay would seem to establish their habit of depositing their
eggs on the clover-stalk in the field, in this case carrying them over to the next year
and hatching then. This hay was cut about June 1, 1881, and taken out about May
1, 1882. This theory struck me as possibly inconsequential, but of enough curiosity
to write you.—[L. W. Day, Huntsville, Ala., May 13, 1882.

The Army Worm is making severe inroads upon the wheat crop and
other crops here in middle Tennessee.—[J. W. Sparks, Murfreesborough,
Tenn., May 20.

THE ARMY WORM: REPORTS FOR 1882. 137

The Army Worm has commenced work. Is it safe to use London
purple?—[Saint Louis, Mo., May 24, 1882.

I send you by this day’s mail, specimens of a caterpillar which is do-
ing great damage to the wheat in this locality. I have been unable to
find out how far-spread it is, but hear of it in the northern parts of this
county and also in Nelson County. It attacks and eats the blade of
the wheat (so far I do not see that they have hurt the heads), and I
find many stalks broken off.—[H. A. K. Murray, Warren, Albemarle
County, Virginia, June 8, 1882.

Doing considerable damage to oats near Uniontown, D. C.—[L. J.
Barber, June 15, 1882. 7

The Army Worm is playing great havoc in this section of the State.
All the late wheat is being destroyed by them wherever ’they have ap-
peared. Many fields of grass that were most luxuriant a week ago,
_ look now as if a fire had swept over them. Cornfields, wherever they
have touched, have been entirely destroyed—too late now to plant over.
Clover alone seems distasteful to them. Oats, corn, orchard-grass, timo-
thy and wheat they delight in. We have never had them before, and
don’t know what may be their duration. They appeared about a week
ago and are increasing in numbers most rapidly.—[ Robert Beverly, The
Plains, Fauquier County, Virginia, June 19, 1882.

Inclosed find tube containing specimens of Army Worm, which has
occasionally infested this country ever since its first settlement. The
first serious injury was done in June, 1825, when it appeared in some
wheat-fields and meadows, and after eating the heads and blades of the
timothy, and partially stripping the wheat and rye of their blades and
beards, with little injury to the grain, it moved disastrously upon
the green corn and oats, eating down the corn and completely behead-
ing the oats. * * * This year they appeared in the barley about
the 10th of June, and have done great damage by eating off the straw
just below the head, and a few days later appeared in the wheat and
timothy all over the country to a very alarming extent; but just as they
had got fairly to work, onthenight of the 14th, the whole country between
Somerville and Indianapolis was visited by very disastrous storms and
floods, which seem to have caused them to suspend operations, though
not to entirely disappear.—|M. B. Kerr, Aurora, Dearborn County, In-
diana, June 19, 1882.

My observation of the locality of the Army Worms laying their eggs
has been this: In the early spring the moth has not the activity it has
later in the season, and the greater part of the eggs are laid in the splits
of broken straw and in the foldings of the leaf-sheaths, mostly covered
or secréted; but in the layings of early spring I have found the eggs
most abundant in the angle made by the leaf-sheath when torn from
the straw at the joints of same, and not secreted. Ido not think the
hibernated moth would show its specific characteristics as much as

138 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

those that have undergone their changes and lay their eggs in a higher
temperature. I have noticed that a high temperature has a good deal
to do with the activity of the moth of the Army Worm.

The migration of the worms is not always in quest of food, though at
this period, like all worms of this class, they are ravenous. There has
been a migration into a field in this vicinity which I have closely
watched. Before leaving a wheat-field, where there was an abundance
of food, the worms showed an uneasiness similar to that shown by the —
silk worm before spinning its cocoon (moving the head from right to
left). ‘The first move was into the blue grass (Poa pratensis), and then
across a traveled road into a field of corn partly plowed over with the
rows in the same direction the worms were going. They ate for 10 to
15 rows every bit of corn on the plowed ground and but little on the un-
plowed. As they advanced the destruction was less and less, nearly
stripping the leaves of the 30th and 40th rows, and entirely leaving the
unplowed ground. These worms were of a very uniform size—full
grown. | : | |

To-day I examined a few hills of corn on the boundary of their eating
as they were congregating around the hills of corn in their migration.
I looked there first, and at a singie hill found 18 chrysalides under one
small clod. Ithink this horde of worms left this wheat-field because it-
was unfit for the change from larva to chrysalis, not offering any shelter,
as the ground in the wheat-field was smoothly beaten down by rain
and was very hard. Where food’ is abundant and shelter can be found
for the larvee to undergo their changes, they will not migrate, but from
either a shortness of food or unfavorable locality for chrysalides they
will move. If the worms are full grown the damage will be but little
compared with the migration from a shortness of food by the worms of
a small size.

In the shape of the ditch, to defend a field against their incursions,
there has been in this locality quite an improvement over the old un-
dercut ditch. It is made by dragging along the ditch a ditching-gouge,
such as is used in laying 3-ineh tile in the angle of the ditch.

The cutting is on the side you wish to defend, this half-round cut
being made by a horizontal motion, leaving a smoother surface on the
half-round than can be done by undercutting with a spade, and I have
never seen a worm pass the upper angle in this pattern of ditch.—{J.
C. Andras, Manchester, Scott County, Llinois, June 22, 1882.

My brother, Aifred R. Swann, who resides on his farm in Jefferson
County, Tennessee, writes me that Army Worms have appeared in vast
numbers and are now destroying his grain and grass crops. The same
thing occurred last season, and as this farm is a very valuable one—
nearly one thousand acres, a large part of which isriver-bottom lands— —
the loss involved will amount to several thousand dollars. ([tis known
as the Kagle Bend Farm.)—[James Swann, New York, June 30, 1882.

THE ARMY WORM IN NEW JERSEY IN 1880. «(a9

ACCOUNT OF THE INVASION OF 1880 IN NEW JERSEY.
By Rev. SaMUEL Lockwoop, Pu. D.

‘*Caterpillars, and that without number.”—Dible.

It was the first day of summer, 1880. A long, parching drought had
prevailed, and one felt like choking in the hot and dusty air. Although
Flora’s brightest month, “when June’s red roses blow,” the bees were
almost starving in their hives, so few and poor were the flowers. The
stage, on its way to the station, several miles off, picked me up ata
farm-house. A strange being, hatless and shoeless, was leaning against
a fence on the road side.

‘““That’s poor Daft!” whispered the driver, in a compassionate way,
as we drew near. The man seemed about thirty-five, and had a harm-
less, half-dazed look. Having taken a step or two into the road, he ac-
costed us in a solemn manner, causing a momentary halt.

Darr. Have you seen the Army Worm?

_ JEWU. Nary a worm, Dafiie!

Darr. Oh, but he’s come! He’s down the road about half a mile,
and’s committing desolation most promiscuously. There wasn’t one
there yesterday. But this morning, lo! a great multitude which no man
can number! It’s all very mysterious, the palmer worm and canker
worm. His great army! Maybe that’s why nobody can tell us where
they come from and what becomes of them. Id like to know if it és all
past finding out.

JEHU. That’s too deep for me, Daffie. G’e’long, ponies.

Having started his horses again, the driver told me that came
feeble-minded elsewise, Daft was real powerful on Seripter.”

I had that morning at an early hour been watching the conduct of an
army of Leucania unipuncta, the very one to which Daffie referred so
mysteriously. In truth, actuated by the vastness of this invasion of the
Army Worm, I was then on a season’s observations, which it is proposed
to give with some fulness of detail; and perhaps we may thus true an-
swer make to the wise questions of that innocent.

_ The army above mentioned had just made complete havoc of a clover-
field. They were bred from eggs laid in a low-lying, last year’s rye-
field adjoining. After but partially eating the grass in this old field, it
was abandoned for the more succulent and tender clover and grass in
the next field. The very unusual heat and drought had been too much
for the young worms, having rendered too tough the grass in the field
where they were hatched.

In the new field the clover and the grass in its shade were much more
comestible. This field was completely devoured—not a spear of grass
or leaf of clover escaped theinvaders. Nothing but naked clover-stalks
with empty heads remained—even the headlands were thoroughly
cleaned up. <A low but distinct and unpleasant crinkling sound accom-

140 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

panied the feeding. Asif actuated by one impulse the whole army
made straight for a wheat field across the highway. The plowing of a
trench on the far side of the road intercepted their march. Two men
with spades cut a clean, perpendicular face on the side of the furrow
next the wheat and a series of little pit-falls in the trench at intervals
of about 50 feet. This completed the trap. The caterpillars, wearied
with useless efforts to climb the straight side of the trench, would crawl
along until they fell into the little pits. Myriads of ants beset them,
sucking out their juices, which, with the heat of the sun, soon destroyed
them. They cannot endure direct sunlight but are essentially night-
feeders. | ‘n

if uninterrupted, their march to the new feeding grounds would have
been accomplished ere the sun was well up.

The time in which the Army Worm did its chief mischief in Monmouth
County, New Jersey, was from about the close of May to about the 20th
of June. The first observation of real mischief being done was May 28.

During the above time my duties led me to ride over the entire coun-
try on official business with the teachers and school-officers. Thus
opportunities were afforded for observation and inquiry such as a natur-
alist could not afford to neglect. I had supposed the aliment of these
insects to be restricted to the Gramineae, that is, the grasses proper and
the grains and Indian corn. Hence, surprised at the thoroughness with
which they had eaten up that field of clover, on the spot I took it for
an original observation of an exceptional habit; but, upon looking into
the Riley reports, I found similar facts on record. I soon ceased to re-
gard this habit as at all exceptional; for, so far as Monmouth was con-
cerned in 1880, clover-eating by the Army Worm was the rule and not
the exception. In fact, I could not learn of one instance of their presence
in which the clover escaped. The following from a letter by a teacher
is to the point:

On the farm of Charles Allgor, at New Bedford, in passing from his wheat-field to
his oat-field, the worms had to cross a strip of sward composed of timothy and red
clover, of three or four years’ standing. They took everything clean. They also ate
the young clover in the bottom of the wheat-field, killing it entirely. In a mixed
sward of George Newman’s, the teacher, they ate the clover as well as the grasses,
leaving nothing but the stalks. They also ate the clover on the farm of Albert King,
at Green Grove. They did not make a specialty of clover, but they ate it without
being starved to it. They ate both the clover and timothy in a mixed sward of James
Allgor’s. They ate Mr. Allen’s oat-field, then went over to his sward of grass and
clover and finished that off, too.

Other correspondence might be cited to the same effect, but I have
none which states the facts so concisely as the above. Some of the farms
here mentioned are miles apart. But it will appear further on that,
when forced into straits for food, this Army Worm is almost omnivorous.

With no special call to examine his young grass-fields, the farmer
sometimes got his first alarm at sight of the disappearing clover. In
fact, wherever the worms appeared in force, the grasses, clover, and

t

®
THE ARMY WORM IN NEW JERSEY IN 1880. 141

Indian corn were completely destroyed. °A friend lost forty acres of
newly-sown grass, with alarge part of the old meadows; a very serious
score here for one man, as with us ‘‘ Hay is King.” Let me instance a
forty-acre wheat-field of his of which the worms took possession. The
wheat when harvested proved a good yield, for it had got out of milk
when the army made its inroad. The straw was not hurt, although
the worms had climbed every stem up to the head; but straw and ear
were nearly ripe. It was different, however, with the low and late-grown
stools. These they crept up, and ate through the thin, green neck of
the plant, cutting off the nubbin-ears, which fell and thickly covered the
ground. If the outside of the straw was not too hard, the worm would
then literally skin it, eating downwards. They would eat these nubbin-
heads occasionally before cutting them off; but this was only when -
they proved to be soft; that is, those ears whose growth had been back-

ward.

In this wheat-field the young grass and clover were all eaten up and
the headlands cleared off. Every weed, too, was cleaned up. Even
that bitter nuisance, the Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisicfolia), was all
devoured. With us after harvest the Ragweed takes possession of the
soil; but as this weed makes its appearance in summer, the spring
timothy and clover get the start and keep this weed under. The falk
succeeding the harvest above presented the singular spectacle of a
- stubble-field without a weed. It was sheer nakedness itself. On
another farm, having consumed the grass, the worms took possession —
of a strawberry-field, eating both leaves and the unripe fruit. Riley
gives an instance in which, when driven into straits, these caterpillars
ate an onion patch. We must then conclude that the larva of Leucania
unipuncta is well-nigh omnivorous. Doubtless when its food is tender
and in no stint, like the Lord Mayor’s fool, it knows what is good and
iS much more dainty.

The number of worms in that forty-acre field was simply fearful. In
the parlance of the spectators there were “‘ millions and millions.” The
squirming mass and the crinkling sound of their feeding were especially
repulsive. But few dared to enter the field. In truth, strong men
turned pale from nausea, so loathsome was the sight. [t really seemed
that nature was smitten with a plague of crawling vermin.

What governs the direction of travel of these worms? Do they smell
the new food from a distance? I think they do, for they cross naked
roads with unerring directness to the object sought. The great army
in that wheat-field, having finished their havoc, divided into two parts:
the one left on one side and entered a timothy-field—the other left the
foraged Jand and marched straight across the road and took possession
of acorn-field. Having ruined the timothy and the corn, the great army
disappeared, as was remarked, ‘as if by magic!” But the trick was
very simple; they had entered the ground to assume the pupa state.
The notion prevails that the worms move for a certain point of the

142 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

compass. Here the phrase vas “They moved towards the sea,” that is,
south ; but in another part of the county the movement seemed north.

Many years ago I saw an army moving west, but the Greeley precept
was rife at that time. I attach no importance to the above, my belief
being that the insect, attracted by scent, in which perhaps the wind
plays a part, moves simply in the direction of food. A point of greater
consequence is the time of the first movement. From a number of ob-
servations I believe the time is about seven days after the hatching.“
When first hatched they are so small that the damage they effect is
slow, and their feeding is restricted to the tender parts of the grass.
After this comes the first march when they are ravenous enough to clean
up as they go.

That was a triumph of painstaking patience and admirable skill when |
hiley cleared up the mystery of the origin ofthe Army Worm. Nor can
I forget my own delight when, in his laboratory at Saint Louis, in: June,
1876, he showed me the live insects which he had raised from the larve;
nay, more, right before my eyes was the mother Leucania unipuncta
laying her eggs in the axils of dry stubble and green grass. For sci-
ence that was a grand discovery. Still more’s the pity how few farmers
make of it “a coigne of vantage.” Nay, to some good husbandmen do
we not seem in these searchings to tamper profanely :

And take upon ’s the mystery of things,
As if we were God’s spies.

These appearings are regarded as almost miraculous. Says the per-
plexed rustic: “They come in great armies—and all of a sudden—and
as suddenly disappear.” Or, as Dafiie said, ‘‘ There wasn’t one there
yesterday, but this morning, lo! a great multitude which no man can
number.” Friends, this is a delusion. They were there yesterday and
several days. They do not come suddenly. You do not observe their
coming, you only see them when they are on you in great numbers.
Watched from the.eggs their life-career is that of other caterpillars.
The following should enable one to observe them at their starting point
and to stamp them out at the beginning:

First. It is important to know when to look for the laying of the eggs.
Of course much depends on the nature of the season. With us it is
usually the first week in June, but in 1880, for reasons already men-
tioned, the laying was not later than the 20th of May.

Second. Where should we look for them? Thanks to Riley, we know
how the eggs look and the part of the plant where they are laid. The
farmer, however, needs, if possible, to know just where on his farm he
should look for the infested plants. I think generally the grain-fields
are preferred by the moth when seeking a nesting place for her eggs.

- But if the weather be favorable, and the young clover and grass in the

best condition, she will also be found laying in the young grass of last
fall’s stubble-field and in old meadows. In this case we should look for

47 Tt is in reality generally somewhat later.—C. V. R.

THE ARMY WORM IN NEW JERSEY IN 1880. 143

_ the highest or closest grass—that growing in moist places, and notably
those little hummocks or tussocks caused by the droppings of cattle.
If heat or dryness affect their food they will select the grain-fields as
affording more succulent food, besides better shelter and shade. Let
me instance some careful observations made on four farms, three of
which were near together, but the last one to be mentioned was about
two miles away. On one was a wheat-field, which covered the site from
which certain stables had been moved the year before. Another part
of the field lay low, and received the “‘ wash” of the higher ground. On
these places the wheat grew thick and high; in fact, too luxuriantly,
for it became badly “lodged.” These two spots were shagly, and the
food was sweet and tender. There were no other such spots in the field,
and these, and only these, were chosen by the moths in which to lay
their eggs.

Doubtless very many moths selected these spots, for here the worms
' were bred in great numbers. These spots were soon eaten off clean—
clover, and grass, and wheat leaves, and heads—for in these places the
wheat ears were still green and tender. From these nesting spots they
spread, a voracious army, over the whole field, clearing up everything
that had not become too hard to eat.

On another farm close by was a field of wheat which had received

peculiar tillage. It belonged to a Mr. Bodee, a very intelligent amateur
farmer, whose clear observations have been of substantial service to me.
He holds that wheat should not be crowded, and should be worked
with a cultivator, much as we do corn; that room and encouragement
Should be given each plant to enlarge itself by stoles; that one well
stoloned plant is better than several plants forced to occupy the same
surface of ground. In sowing, the field was drilled only one way, and
every third drill was left seedless; and in cultivating, some of the teeth
of the implement were taken out, so that it could siraddle the double
rows. In this way the field was gone over, both in the autumn and in
the spring. There were but three little spots where the wheat had
lodged, all of which were breeding-places for the worms, from which,
after eating them off, they spread over the field, but seemed to be com-
paratively harmless; for the tillage mentioned let in the sunlight and
quickened the ripening of the grain. It was noticed here that the birds,
having more wing-room, were quite busy feeding on and carrying off
the worms, a fact not observed by us in any other wheat-field. Per-
haps the cultivator had mellowed the ground, for the worms, during the
hot sunshine, buried themselves in the cultivated space and were easily
unearthed by the birds.
* Ina field on another farm the wheat was somewhat thin; but on a
Spot where a compost had lain, the wheat was rank and thick. There
the worms bred, and, after devouring their nesting place, they spread
over the field.

The fourth field of which the particular facts must be given, is that

144 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

forty-acre wheat-field already instanced. The sowing took at least
twice aS much seed per acre as was used by Mr. Bodee’s method. It
was drilled in one direction, and then drilled across at right angles.
This secured a crowded growth. During the summer preceding the au-
tumn- sowing, the field had been used by a horse dealer to pasture a
large drove of horses. Of course their ordure fell everywhere; but in
many places where the animals had stood in groups the droppings had
fallen in quantity. Here I must recall an acquaintance once had with
a farmer’s boy, named Ned. He had a way at time of wheat-sowing of
putting a shovelful of manure and an extra dropping of seed in a few

spots in the field to make what he was pleased to call “ King hills.”

And it was easy telling where the lad and his shovel had been, for Ned’s
‘King hills” always outranked the rest of the field. And it was simi-
larly with that big wheat-field. It was a splendid sight, the close, dense
growth, and high over all, in many places, those stately “King hills”
were conspicuous. Now comes the notable fact; every one of these
spots was chosen as the nesting place of myriads of the mother moths,
for the number of eggs laid in them was enormous. These spots were
to the Army Worms shelter, shade, and food, but so crowded was each
of these larval communities that they soon ate themselves out of house
and home. Then came an immense dispersion. From every ‘“ King
hill” went forth a hungry band into that grand foraging ground. The
wheat, standing so close, had by its shade kept the undergrowth pro-
tected from the drought; and now it sheltered these marauders from
the sun. lt was but a few days before that these foraging bands, by
their spreading, had all met and made up a vast famished army, which,
driven into straits, must now devour every comestible thing or starve.
The observed occupancy of the field was seven days; that is, from the
time of the dispersion of the foraging army to the time when it left. It
was quite common to hear it said that a certain field was eaten up in a
day. But such people ‘‘take no note of time.”

Leucania, the parent of the Army Worm, ranks very respectably
among the Lepidoptera. She is one of the owlet moths, and her owlish
capacity for natural selection impresses me profoundly.

Nature is fine in love: and where it’s fine
It sends some precious instance of itseif
After the thing it loves.

I find so much precision in insect wisdom, such a knowing method,
even in the propagation frenzy. And I think Leucania’s conduct is in
point. True, there is no bird-like brooding over her trust. Let us get
out of the laboratory and watch her where, not hampered by the inquisi-

torial restrictions of the breeding-cage, she has Nature’s airy freedom,

and
The world is all before them, whence to choose
Their nesting place.
And this maternal moth shows such good mothering in her choice.
The knowledge of this nicety of her selection of a nidus is of great eco-

La

THE ARMY WORM IN NEW JERSEY IN 1880. 145

nomical value. Compare her restriction with the flitting habit of her
queenly relative, the Hawk-moth—Macrosila quinquemaculata—parent
. of the great potato worm. Almost with a shudder one remembers that
terrible invasion of Monmouth, when the potato-fields were ruined as if
by fire, and the wagon wheels reeked with green dripping gore as they —
entered our villages. This moth deposits her eggs on the under side of
the potato leaf, but only one or two, or at most avery few, on each
plant; hence the distribution is pretty uniform over the entire field.

Though it may seem above that the parent of the Army Worm has

fair intelligence, we may not think so well of her larval offspring. That
beautiful lawn of Hollywood, at Long Branch, was invaded by them.
The emerald sward was swept as if burnt. When any of the worms
came against a tree they went up it, passed over the crotch, then de-
scended at the other side. Twelve or thirteen years ago a corner of
our country was visited by the Army Worm in large nuinbers. Having
stripped one field they marched for the next, but were intercepted by a
small running stream. There is no “ turn back ” to this singular worm.
On came this great automatic army—no halt—until, crowded forward,
a compacted mass was urged on to the water to serve as a living pon-
toon, over which the army passed and took possession of the new for-
aging ground. This crossing of running water has been noticed by Mr..
Riley.
Monmouth is an old county, and the farms generally have been much
reduced in size by frequent divisions. Grain and grass fields run from
ten acres to forty, but the latter figure is very high. As we have de-
seribed, each field from afew nesting spots would originate an army.
Some of these infested fields were miles apart, the intervening territory
beingexempt. I gotreturns of twenty of these armies in one township.
There surely could not be less than one hundred in the county. They
seemed to have a penchant for the best farms.

e

LET US RECAPITULATE.

1. We can localize the breeding places. The mother moth selects the
thickand shady spots in the grain fields and meadows as the right places
in which to lay her eggs, thus securing for the larve shelter and tender
food.

2. An army is made up of bands, each band having its own breeding
spot, and these spots are centers of dissemination. When these nesting
spots are eaten off the bands spread, traveling in the direction of food,
thus uniting, when, so to speak, the clan relation is lost. They now
form one hungry and marauding army, set in one course and impelled
by one impulse. It is at this point of theif career that they are gener-
ally first noticed, and the averment is made, ‘They have come all of a
sudden.” .

3. A thin tillage is adverse to the worms. It makes the conditions

1OEC

146 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of life harder for them, less shade, more heat, earlier ripening, and
quicker toughening of grass and grain, and greater freedom for the

birds.
WHAT SHOULD BE DONE.

4, Till uniformly, and not too close. You may get less wheat, but roy
will get better, and the worms will fare worse.

5. Try to find out where the caterpillar originates. Beginning early
in May, watch the thick spots and the damp places in meadow and grain.
- This inspection is especially called for if the winter has been mild and
the spring is warm. As described by Riley, the eggs are very small
and round when first laid, of a glistening white, but becoming yellowish.
They are laid in stringy groups containing from five to twenty eggs.
They should be looked for in and near the axils of the leaves; that is,
in the spout-shaped parts of the blade, near the stem. In this hollow
of the leaf the eggs are glued, and sometimes the two edges of the leaf
are so drawn together that the eggs look like a white streak. Should
you find the eggs, if in quantity, it might not be practicable to attempt
collecting them, but you have found a breeding spot, and it is now pos-
sible, and Louth injury to the grain or grass at this early stage, to ex-
tinguish the worm with a weak solution of London purple or Paris green.
If the spots are small they could be cut out with a sickle and fed to stock.
If the eggs are hatched the crinkling sound made when feeding, which is:
in the early evening and just before the morning an will toa good ear
betray the presence of the larve

Our Army Worm is Leucania Ameo for there are other cater pil-
lars which are wrongly so called. The moth is 45™™ or about 13 inches
in expanse of wing, and 24™™ or about { inch in length of body. The
color is very plain, being a reddish-brown or cinnamon, with a double
white spot or blotch on each front wing. |

The insect is avith us the whole year. In the pupa state, in the ground,
or under stones and other bodies, they pass a large part of the year, in-
cluding the winter, while many perfect moths hibernate under the shelter
of some doneeatine object. In the spring the mother moth devotes her-
self to egg-laying; which done, a day or two suffices at most, when she
dies of sheer exhaustion. The appearance of the one epeten Leucania
in large armies, as a rule, can only occur after intervals of several years.
The weather conditions which caused their appearance in New Jersey
in 1880 in such amazing numbers were very remarkable. ‘The winter
had been so exceptionally mild that the moths came safely through
hibernation and in large numbers. A rainless May, and unusually
warm, brought in, in effect, a premature summer. LHarly potatoes failed;
corn had to be replanted; rye was in ear in April; wheat began head-
ing by the 12th of May, and such was the heat that the filling of the
ears and the getting out of milk followed fast. Wheat-cutting began
June 18, and at the end of the month the harvest generally was over,

THE ARMY WORM IN NEW JERSEY IN 1880. 147

nearly three weeks earlier than usual. And not only was Leucania wnt-
puncta affected by the weather conditions of that remarkable year, but
the insect tribe generally.

NOTES.

‘1. Since the foregoing was written I have seen. “abstract” of a paper
on Leucania unipuncta, read by Prof. C. V. Riley at the Boston meeting
of the A. A. A. S., August, 1880. He says: ‘ In the latitude of Saint
Louis there are two, sometimes three, generations in a year, and, per-
haps, even four; and farther south a succession of generations, scarcely
interrupted during mild winters. Probably in New England there are
two generations, the second one being ‘ usually unnoticed,’ and existing
through the autumn, winter, and early spring months.

‘¢Tt is an established fact that the species hibernates both as larva
and as moth, with strong circumstantial evidence that it also hibernates,
particularly northward, as a chrysalis; but we have no evidence that it
can hibernate in the egg.

“‘ Wxcessive injury may result from natural local increase, or from
moths fiying in great numbers from other localities, and concentrating
in particular fields. Dry seasons are favorable to the multiplication of
the insect.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Acker- und Gartenbau-Zeitung.—‘“‘ Die Heerraupe oder der ‘Army Worm.’” July
1, 1880.
[A short account of the natural history of Leucania unipuncta. |
Allen, I. ©.—‘“ Further of the Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series,
1861), p. 386.
Allen,——.‘‘ Ravages of the Army Worm.” American Agriculturisc, Aug., 1849, vol. 8,
No. 8, p. 261. de
[Army Worm very destructive in South Ilinois and in Missouri.]
American Agriculturist.—“ The Army Worm—its habits.” July 18, 1880.
[Figures larva, pupa and adult, and considers the insect under the fol!owing headings:
The insect described; how does it pass the winter; whatit feeds upon; methods of de-
stroying the worm. ] c
American Monthly Magazine and Critical Review. June, 1817, voi. i, No. 2, p.
148-154.
{Inciudes notice of damage done by cut-worms, evidently Leucania unipvuncta, in Massa-
chusetts. } ;
B., H. P.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Valley Farmer, xiv [1862], p. 194.
, [Speaks of the Army Worm parasites.] ~~
Barnard, W. S.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Ithaca (N. Y.) Journal, July 8, 18380.
[A letter proving that from the abundance of parasites the worms need not be feared im
1881.]
Bartlett, Dr.—‘‘ More about the Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series
1861), p. 3. ;
Bethune, C. J. S.—Annual Address Pres. Ent. Soc. Ont., 1875. Canadian Entomolo-
gist, viii (1876), p. 3.
Boston Daily Advertiser.—‘‘The Army Worm in Essex County.” June 28, 1880.
{Ravages and movements of larve of Leucania unipuncta in Essex County, Massachusetts;
_ futile efforts to destroy the pests. ]
Bradshaw, Jos.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Farmers’ Register (Va.), 1835 (from Farmers’
Reporter, Ohio).
[Account of the Army Worms in Ohio in 1825 and 1835. ]
Bragshaw, Joseph.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Union Agriculturist, ii, p. 4; 1842.
{ History, habits, and modes of prevention. |
Breed, Daniel.—‘‘ Recent Inventions for Insect Destruction.” Department of Agri-
culture Report, 1876, p. 323-324.
[Describes a trap-lantern, and a*boat-shaped drag for use in ditches filled with marching
Army Worms.] f
Colman’s Rural World.—‘‘The Army Worm and why so named.” July 8, 1830.
[How to stay and destroy them; their development; precaution to be adopted; hahits
ofthe Army Worm; how to destroy the moth; the Army Worm described; its enemies. ]
Comstock, J. H.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Cincinnati Grange Bulletin, July 15, 1880, and
other agricultural periodicals of like date.
[A report made to the Commissioner of Agriculture on the Delaware invasion of 1880.]
Comstock, J. H.—‘‘The Army Worm.” N. Y. Herald, June 14, 1830.
[Report to the Commissioner of Agriculture on investigations in Kent County, Delaware,
in June, 1880. ]
Comstock, J. H.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Department of Agriculture Report, 1879, pp.
187-191.
[A condensed résumé of what had hitherto been published, with results of the investiga-
tious of the spring of 1880. ]
148

THE ARMY WORM: BIBLIOGRAPHY, BY AUTHORS. 149

Cook, A. J.—Canadian Entomologist, xiii (1881), 215.
[Im report of meeting of Entomological Club, A. A. A. S., Professor Cook remarks on the
appearance of Leucania in Michigan, in 1881—a dry year followinga wet one. Discussed by
Wm. Saunders and Cyrus Thomas. ]
Cresson, &. T.—Canadian Entomologist, iv, 23, 1872.
[Describes Mesochorus vitreus, Walsh—a parasite on the Army Worm. ]
Cultivater, The.—‘‘ Army worm.” Aug., 1839, vol. 6, No. 6, p. 102.
[Ravages of Leucania unipuncta.)} /
Dodge, Robert.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Am. Rural Home, June 19, 1880.
[A rather lengihy compiled account. |
Borman, S.—“ Army Worm; new facts.” Prairie Farmer, Feb. 1, 1862.
[Larvee of Leucania unipuncta not always starting from vicinity of tame meadows; an
army moved from southwest to northeast. ]
Ferrill, Geo. W.—‘“‘ More about the Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new ser-
ies, 1861), p. 417.
[States that the eggs are laid in wheat in the fall or spring.]
Fitch, Asa.—‘‘The Army Worm Moth.” Cultivator and Country Gentleman, 1861
(written July 17).
[Describes moth and gives synonymy. }
Fitch, Asa.—‘‘The Army Worm’s Parasite.” Boston Cultivator, Aug., 1861.
[Describes [chneumon leucanie.]
Fitch, Asa.—“‘The Army Worm.” Trans. N. Y. State Agric. Soc., 1860, vol. xx.
[Past history; habits; nomenclature; theory of appearances; description of moth; Ich-
neumon leucaniee. |
Fitch, Asa.—‘‘The Army Worm Moth.” Boston Cultivator, Sept., 1861, pp.-278-279.
(Clears up synonymy and describes the moth.]
Flint, C. l..—Second Agricultural Report, Massachusetts (1854).
[In this report is an historical account of the weather from 1660 on, in which the Army
W orm is several times mentioned. ]
Flint, Chas. L.—Appendix to new edition of Harris’s Insects Injurious to Vegetation
(1862).
[Quotes descriptions from Fitch, and remedies from Kirkpatrick. Figures of larvex, pupa
and adult, and also two parasites. ]
French, G. H.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Seventh Report of the State Entomologist,
Illinois, 1877, p. 101-102.

Frenen, G. H.—‘“‘ Leucania (Heliophila) unipuncta Haw.” Seventh Report of the State
Entomologist, Dlinois, 1877, p. 224-225.
[A brief review of the natural history, giving the number of broods in Ilinois as two;
in the southern part three. |
Glover, Townend.—Department of Agriculture Report, 1868, p. 79.
{A short account of the great number of Army Worms destroyed by the larva of Calosoma
calidum (Fabr.)]
Glover, T.—‘“‘The Grass or Army Worm.” Department of Agriculture Report, 1870,
p. 83-84.
[A short compilation with poor original figures of larva and adult. ]
Gould, John Stanton.—‘“‘Leucania unipuncta.” Trans. N. Y. State Agric. Soc.,
1872~76, p. 47-50—in article entitled ‘‘On Forage Crops.”
[A short article compiled from Harris, Kirkpatrick, Riley, and Fitch.]
Guenée, A.—“Leucania extranea.” Lepidoptéres—Noctuélites 1 (Tome 5, 1852), p.
77-78.
[Description of the moth with geographical distribution. ]
Harper’s Weekly.—‘‘The Army Worm.” July 3, 1880.
[A short editorial accompanied by an artistic illustration by Daniel Beard of all stages of
the insect and its methed of work. ]
Haworth, A. H.—‘‘Noctua unipuncta.” Lepidoptera Britannica, ii (1810), p. 177,

[ The original description of the moth, from one specimen found in the collection of Mr. Fran-
cillon.]

150 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Heath, Dr. A. S.—‘‘ How to compensate for the Ravages of the Army Worm.” Ameri-
can Rural Home, July 10, 1880; also Practical Farmer, July 31, 1880.
{Advises plowing and harrowing devastated fields, afterwards planting corn and potatoes. }
Herald, New York.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” June 11, 1880.
[Reporter’s description of the progress of Leucania unipuncta in New J ersey and the reme
dies tried.]
Hicks, Hdw’d.—‘‘The worm on Long Island in 1880.” Cultivator and Country Gen-
tleman, June 9, 1881.

Howard, L. O.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Moore’s Rural Life (N. Y.), July, 1879.

[Figures larva, pupa and adult; gives experience in Southern Virginia in 1879, and gives. -
descriptions and usual remedies. }

Howard, L. O.—N. Y. Semi-Weekly Tribune, Aug. 5, 1880.
[A short statement of an injurious brood of the Army Worm in Virginia the last weck im
July, proving that the first brood is not always the injurions one. ] .
Howard, L. O.—‘“ The Army Worm.” Huntsville Demecrat (Ala.), May 10, 1882.
[A brief résumé of the life history of Leucania with notes on the 1882 appearance at
Huntsville. ]

Howard, L. O.—“‘ The Army Worm.” Chattanooga, Tenn., Times, May 12, 1882.
[Corrects local opinions in reference to the Army Worm. ]
Howard, L. O.—‘‘ Strange Habit of Metapodius femoratus, Fabr.” American Natu-
ralist, July, 1882. (Published in June. )
[Deseribes habit of Metapodius in hanging up the empty skins of Heacny: atter sucking.
their juices, in crotches of May weed (Maruta cotula).]
Howard, Sanford.— Boston Cultivator, xxiii, 276 (1861).
[A notice of the parasite afterwards described by Fitch as Ichnewmon leucanie. }
Indiana Farmer.—‘‘The Army Worm.” September 18, 1880.
[A compiled editorial article. ]
Indiana Farmer.—‘‘The Army Worm abroad.” July 3, 1881.
[An extended account of the appearance of the worm in Indiana and Iowa in 1881, with a
short review of its natural history. ]
Indiana Farmer.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Aug. 6, 1881.
{An account of the ravages of the worms in Eastern Indiana in 1828.}
June Isle.—‘‘Sir Thomas vs. Sir W alsh. ” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series, 1861),
pp. 373, 408.
[A humorous criticism of the Walsh-Thomas Army Worm controversy.]
King, J. C.—‘“‘ Army Worm: Hungarian Grass.” Prairie Farmer, after 27 May, 1861.
[Occurrence of Leucania unipuncta “by the millions” in Warren Co., Mo.; their ravages. }
Kirkpatrick, Jno.—“ Notes on a few of the insects of Northern Ohio, injurious to the
farmer or horticulturist.” Tenth Annual Report Board of Agriculture of Ohio,
1855, p. 246.
[Gives on this page ashort description, without name, of Leucania unipuncta, in allits
stages except egg, and an account of its work on the Cuyahoga Flats in 1855. |

«

Kirkpatrick, Jno.—‘“‘The Army Worm ( Leucania extranea).” Fifteenth Annual Re-
port State Board of Agriculture of Ohio, 1860, pp. 350-358.
[Extended descriptions of larva, pupa and adult ; advises ditching, rolling, and burning;
also swine and poultry; mentions five parasites and describes Hxorista leucaniw and Hz,
. osten-sackenit. |
Klippart, J. H.—‘The Army Worm Question.” Field Notes, 1861, p.—( November.)
[A controversial answer to one of Walsh’s Prairie Farmer articles, in which the writer
urges that the worms are viviparous. ]
Klippart, J. H.—‘‘The Army Worm Question again.” Field Notes, December 7,
1861. |
[Cautradicts Walsh’s ‘‘hibernation of the egg”’ theory, and also denies the existence of
secondary parasites; also ridicules other minor statements of Walsh's. ]
Klippart, J. H.—“Army Worm; Mr. Klippart’s Rejoinder.” Field Notes, December,
1861.

[Controversial answer to Walsh’s article of December 14.]

THE ARMY WORM: BIBLIOGRAPHY, BY AUTHORS. 151

Klippart J. H.—“The Locusts which ate up King Pharaoh.” Ohio Farmer, January
3, 1863. |
[In the course of this article he replies to Walsh’s challenge to produce a larva which
could bear young (referring to Klippart’s theory that the Army Worms were viviparous) by
citing Westwood on Stylopide. ]
Lintner, J. A.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Cultivator and Country Gentleman, July 3,
1879,

[Answer to letter from ‘‘A. H. L.,” Portsmouth, Va., giving the known history of the
worm. }

Lintner, J. A.—‘‘ The Insects of the Clover Plant.” Annual Rept. N. Y. State Agr.

Soc., 1880.
[Mentions Leucania unipuncta among the insects injurious to the clover plant. ]
Lintner, J. A—‘‘New Insects—not the Northern Army Worm.” Cultivator and
Country Gentleman, June 9, 1881.
{Describes work of Nephelgdes violans Guen., which had been mistaken in New York for
the true Army Worm.]
“M.”—“The Army Worm.” American Agriculturist, February, 1847, vol. 6, No. 2,
p. 50.
| [Review. American Agricuturist, July, 1847, vol. 6, No. 7, p. 209. ]
McBryde, Jno. M.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Experimental work of the Agricultural
Department, University of Tennessee, 1879-80, pp. 76-84.
[A good account of the visitation from the Army Worm, in East Tennessee, in May and
June, 1880. ] !
McBryde, Jno. M.—“The Army Worm.” Experimental work of the Agricultural
Department, University of Tennessee, 1851, pp. 200-203.
[An account of a second invasion the ensuing year (1881) of the same localities ravaged
in 1880.]
Mirror and Farmer.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” July 3, 1880.
[A lengthy article, quoting from different New England papers to show the progress of
the pest. ]
Muse, Joseph E.—‘‘ Entomology.” American Farmer, July 16, 1819, vol. 1, no. 16,
ed. 3, pp. 124-125.

[Describes transformations of the “grub worm” (Hlater?), which destroys corn plants
in the field, of the fruit curculio (Conotrachelus), and of army worms (Leucania); means
against these insects. ]

New England Farmer.—‘‘The Army Worm.” July 2, 1830, p. 397. (Quotes from
Illinois Gazette.)

[A short account of the appearance of the worms in Illinois in 1830.]

New England Farmer.—Vol. liv (new series, vol. xxx); Nos.31 and 34, Ravages

of Leucania unipuncta in R, I. and Mass.; No. 33, in Long Island; No. 35, in N.
H. (1880).

New Jersey Farmer.—The Army Worm,” IIT (1857), p. 10.

[Describes ravages in Maryland in 1857, and describes Microgaster and Tachina pa:asites. ]

New Jersey Farmer.—‘‘The Army Worm.” YI, 366 (1851) (from the Maine Farmer).
[A most astonishing jumble. Confounds Leucania with Aletia xylina.]

Ohio Farmer.—July 1, 1876. s
[An editorial account of the discovery of the eggs of the Army Worm Moth by Professor
Riley.]

“Pp, x.”—“The Army Worm.” Cultivator and Country Gentleman, June 9, 1881.
{A compiled account, reproducing Riley’s figures of larva, pupa and moth.]
Pacific Rural Press.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Julv 16, 1881.
[An account of an insect damaging vineyards, fodder fields, and gardens. The old eastern
remedies for Army Worm are given. ]
Packard, A. S., jr.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Sixth Report Secretary Maine Boaré of
Agriculture, 1861, pp. 130-142.

[An extended account, quoting freely from Walsh and adopting his views; describing larva,
pupa, adult and all of Walsh’s parasites.]

152 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Packard, A. S., jr.—Guide to the Study of Insects, p. 305, 1869
[Figures on Plate 8, figs. 2 and 2 a, larva and adult. A brief review of natural history
and remedies. }
Packard, A.S., jr.—‘'The Northern Army Worm.” Ninth Annual Rept. U.S. Geo-
logical and Geographical Survey of the Territories, 1875, pp. 699-709.
fAn excellent compilation of previous articles. ]
Parsons, Col.—‘‘Grasshoppers and the Palmer Worm.” Papers; * * * Massa-
chusetts Society for Promoting Agriculture, 1807, pp. 32, 33.
| Account of an invasion of locusts in 1792 and 1793, and of palmer worms [Leucania?] in
1861 [?] and 1807 [7], in eastern Massachusetts [?]. Means against the latter insects. ]
Payne, A. H.-—‘‘Singular Facts.” Cultivator, v, 192 (1838).
{In 1835 the Army Worm stripped leaves of wheat and averted rust.]
Periam, Jonathan.—‘‘ The Army UE ” American Encyclopedia of Agriculture,
Chicago, 1881.
[Figures larva and adult, and gives a short account from Riley.] ;
Pleasant, J. A. W.—‘‘ Grain Worm, Chinck Bug, Dutton Corn.” Cultivator * * *
Buel, May, 1836, vol. 3, ed. 2, pp. 41,42.
[Attacks of caterpillars [Leucania?] upon wheat, in 1789 and 1807; habits and ravages of
Blissus leucopterus. The *‘ grain worm” or ‘‘ wheat worm” appears to be Cecidomyia tritici. }
Prairie Parmer.—‘‘The Army Worm.” July 8, 1865.
[Figures larva, pupa and adult, and gives the old remedies.]
Prairie Farmer.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” April 26, 1879.
[An editorial account taken chiefly from Thomas and Riley. ]
Porter, J. R..—‘ The Army Worm.” Cultivator * * * Buel, September, 1837, vol.
4, No. 7, pp. 116,117. -
[Ravages of Leucania unipuncta. |
Powers, Rev. Grant.—“ Eietonoal Sketches of the Coés @ounte” ” Haverhill, N. H.,
1841, pp. 105-108. i
[Gives an account of the 1770 outbreak of the Army Worm in New England, which has
been since so extensively quoted by Fitch and others. ]
Rathvon, S. S.—Notes on the Army Worm. Lancaster Farmer, July, 1880.
[Experiences of different persons in the matter of remedies. ]
Rathvon, S. S.—‘‘A Supplement to the Army Worm.” Lancaster Farmer, Aug.,
1880, p. 114.
[Variations ; two broods; hibernation in moth state. ]
Riley, C. V.—‘‘Army Worm and Canker Worm Wisdom.” Prairie Farmer, vol. xviii
(new series; 1866), p. 38. ae ;
[Corrects mistake made at Western N. Y. Fruit Growers’ Association, as to identity of
Army Worm with some tree caterpillar.]
Riley, C. V.—Second Annual Report of State Entomologist of Missouri, 1870, pp.
37-00.
(Other insects known as Army Worms; past history; sudden appearance and disappear-
ance; natural history; parasites; habits and suggestions for its destruction, &c.}

Riley, C. V.—“ What are Army Worms?” N. Y. Semi-Weekly Tribune, February 6,
1875 :
[Gives difference between Laphygma frugiperda and Leucania unipuncta.]
Riley, C. V.—‘‘The Army Worm: An important fact yet to ascertain in its natural
history.” N. Y. Semi-Weekly Tribune, November 16, 1875.
[Figures larva, pupa, and adult; also four parasites; gives probable locality and appear-
ance of eggs.]
Riley, C. V.—Highth Annual Report of State Entomologist of Missouri, pp. 22-56
(1876).

{Term Army Worm applied to various insects; past history; sexual differences; natural
history; description of egg; where the eggs are laid; when the eggs are laid; in what state
does the insect hibernate; habits of worm; time of appearance; number of broods. Fall
Army Worm; food plants; suddev appearance and disappearance; natural enemies; reme-
dies; summary.}

THE ARMY WORM: BIBLIOGRAPHY, BY AUTHORS. 153

Riley, ©. V.—‘“‘ The Army Worm: Additional Notes on the Mode, Place, and Time of
Oviposition.” Eighth Annual Report of State Entomologist of Missouri (1876),
pp. 182-185.
j [First announcement of the discovery of the eggs. ]
Riley, C. V.—‘‘ Biological Notes on the Army Worm.” Proceedings of American Asso-
ciation for the Advancement of Science, xxv, pp. 279-283 (1876).
[Figures larva, pupa, and adult; describes eggs and all other stages; hibernation of
moths; two broods at Saint Louis. ]
Riley, C. V.—‘‘The Army Worm: Its Natural History Complete.” Scientific Amer-
icau, XXxv, p. 372, December 9, 1876.
[Ihe paper read before the A. A. A.S., 1876, popularized and condensed. Figures and
describes all stages of Leucania unipuncta.]
Riley, C. V.—“ Oviposition of Leucania unipuncia.” American Naturalist, vol. x, (1876),
pp. 502-509.

Riley, C. ¥V.—‘‘The Army Worm: Further Notes and Experiments thereon.” Ninth
Annual Report of Entomclogist of Missouri, 1877, pp. 47-50.
| Number of annual generations; summary of natural history. ]
Riley, C. V.—‘‘ Complete Life History of the Army Worm (Zeucania wnipuncta) and its
parasites.” Massachusetts Agricultural Report, 1872.
[WalkerPrize Essay. Largely taken from the 8th and 9th Missouri Entomological Reports: ]
Riley, C. 7¥V.—‘‘The Northern Army Worm.” American Entomologist, iii, 170 (1880.)
[Characters ; natural history; remedies; summary from 9th Missouri Rept. ; figures of eggs,
genitalia, larva, pupa, adult. ]
Riley, C. V.—“ Further Notes and Observations on the Army Worm.” American En-
tomologist, ili, 184, and continued on p. 214 (1880).
{Number of annual generations; bow the insect hibernates, the destructive generation
probably not the first of the season; how far burning over is a preventive; connection of
wet and dry seasons with Army Worm increase. ]
| Riley, C. ¥V.—‘‘The Genuine Army Worm in the West.” American Naturalist, Sep-
tember, 1881, p. 750.

[A short notice of the appearance of the Army Worm in Illinois and Indiana.]

Riley, C. V.—‘‘The Army Worm vs. The Clover Hay Worm.” Rural New Yorker,
June 10, 1882.

{An account of the appearance of the worms in Tennessee and Alabama, and of the mis-
taken views of planters concerning the originating of the worms in old clover lands, arising
from aconfusion of the Army Worm with the Clover Hay Worm.]

Rural New Yorker.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” June 12, 1880.
[Leucaniaunipuncta appears on Long Island, N. Y., in vast numbers, and is very destructive
to crops. ]
Rural World.—“The Army Worm.” Aug. 4, 1881.
{An account of the damage done in Illinois in late July by the worms, principally to oats. ]
Saunders, Wm.—‘ Annual Address of the President of the Entomological Society
of Ontario.” Canadian Entomologist, xiii, 197 (1881).
[On pp. 198 and 199, speaks of the Army Worm as double brooded, and probably hiber-
nating in the larva state; and predicts comparative exemption in 1882 in Ontario.]
Scientific American.—‘‘The Army Worm.” June 16, 1880.
[A short account of the ravages on Long Island. ]
Scientific American.—'‘The Army Worm.” June 16, 1880.
[A lengthy illustrated account compiled from Riley.]
Scudder, S. H.—Canadian Entomologist, vii (1875), pp. 178-179.

[A report of a meeting of the Entomological Club, A. A. A.S., in which Mr. Seudder re-
marked on the abundance of the Army Worm in Massachusetts. }

Scudder, S. H.—‘‘Recent Progress of Entomology in N. A. First annual address
of the President of the Cambridge Entomological Club.” Psyche, ii (1878), p. 97.

(On p. 113, in reviewing Thomas’s Illinois Report, especially mentions his conclusions that
Leucania is normally a eut-worm, and calls attention to the fact that it has no scientific
basis. ]

154 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Shurtleff, C. A.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Proceedings Essex Institute, iii, 193-200
(July 2, 1862).

[Quotes extensively from Fitch, Kirkpatrick, and Walsh; describes Microgaster cocoons.

as Leucania eggs. | f
Snow, F. H.—‘‘ Not the Army Worm.” Lawrence (Kansas) Journal, July. 28, 1880.

[An account of the. EHurycreon rantalis of Guenée, mistaken in Kansas for the Army
W orm. }

Springfield Republican.—‘‘Agricultural Department’s View of the Army Worm.”
June 16, 1880.
[Notes on authority of J. H. Comstock in regard to Leucania unipuncta, and modes of de-
stroying it. ]
Stainton, H. T.—‘‘Leucania extranea.” Entomologist’s Annual, 1860, pp. 129, 130.
| Notes of the capture of this moth at the Isle of Wight and at Lewes. ] ee i
Stephens, J. F.—‘‘ Noctua impuneta.” Systematic Catalogue of British Insects,
1829, ii, p. 101, No. 6350. ;
Stephens, J. F.—‘‘Noctua impuncta.” Illustrations of British Entomology, Haus-
tellata, 111 (1829), p. 80.

[Describes the specimen. found in Haworth’s collection, by mistake, as impuncta instead.
of unipuncta. } :

Stephens, J. F.—‘‘ Noctua unipuncta.” List of the Lepidopterain the British Museum.
1850, p. 289.
Sun, N. Y.—Sunday, June 20, 1880.

[A lengthy article, principally aninterview with Professor Riley, containing a good sum-

mary of present knowledge of the Army Worm. ]
Templin, L. J.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Ohio Farmer, Sept. 23, 1876. : i
Thomas, C.—‘‘ Further from the Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series,
1861), p. 100.
[Facts concerning the worms’in Jackson Co., Il., 1861.]-
Thomas, C.—*‘The Army Worm.” Illinois Farmer, September, 1861.

[Describes larva, pupa, and adult; and advises plowing under the grass while the worms

are yet small. ] ®
Thomas, C.—‘‘The Army Worm Question.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series, 1°61),
p. 293.

[Controversial answer to Walsh’s theory of egg hibernation: believes his ‘‘first notion as.
to a double brood ” incorrect. |]

Thomas, C.—‘‘Army Worm Question Continued.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new se-
ries, 1861), pp. 306-307 (34 columns).

[Brings up many arguments against egg hibernation, and in favor of pupal hibernation. ]

Thomas, Cyrus.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vil (new series, 1501), p.
363.

Thomas, Cyrus.—‘The Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 7 (new series, 1861), pp.
393,400.

[Figures larva and pupa, with descriptions, advises as remedy to plow under the infested
crop and sow with corn, turnips, or buckwheat. ] ie

Thomas, Cyrus.—‘‘ Army Worm.” Sixth Report of the State Entomologist of Ili-
nois, 1876, pp. 56-59.

[Calls the species normally a cut-worm, and states that the marching habit is abnormal;
brings up observations to prove this. ] ;

Thomas, Cyrus.—‘ The Army Worm.” Tenth Report of the State Entomologist of
Illinois (1880), pp. 5-43.

[Past history; Natural history, and description; Eggs; Larva; Pupa; Moth; Terms of
life; Dates of captures of the moth; Notices of the larva; Number of broods and biberna-
tion; Proper home of the species and character of seasons favorable for its development;
Remedial agencies. }

Thomas, Cyrus.—Canadian Entomologist, xiii, 181 (1881).

[Remarks before the Entomological Club of the A. A. A. S., as to the duration of life of the

Army Worm. Conclusions disputed by Prof. Riley and Mr. Mann.]

THE ARMY WORM: BIBLIOGRAPHY, BY AUTHORS. 155

Thomas, Cyrus.—“ Insects injuring field crops, and forecasts in reference thereto
‘for next year.” Farmers’ Review, Nov. 24, 1881.
[Predicts the appearance of the Army Worm in a moist season following a dry one. ]
Wait, Wm. S.—'‘ The Army Worm.” Missouri Reporter, 1842.
[ History, habits, and modes of prevention. ]
Reimpr.—Union Agriculturist, ii, p. 53, 1842.
Walker, F'.—‘‘Leucania extranea.” List of the Lepidoptera in the collection of the
British Museum, part 9, species 32, under Leucania.
Walsh, B. D.—“ Army Worm and its enemies.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series,
1861), p. 4. (One column and a half.)

[A popular account of some of the parasites of the Army Worm. ]

Walsh, B.D.—‘‘ The Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series, 1861), p. 257-
208.

(Holds that eggs hibernate, and that spring burning is an effectual remedy; describes.
Hockeria perpuleira, and gives notes on other parasites. ]

Walsh, B. D.—‘‘ The Army Worm Question.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series,
1861), pp. 370,377. (6 columns).

[Reply of Benj. D. Walsh to Cyrus Thomas on the question ef hibernation.]

Walsh, B. D.—Valley Farmer, xiv (1862), p. 161.

(Corrects mistakes of EK. 8. Washington and remarks on the economy of the Army Worm
parasites. ]

Walsh, B. D.—“ From Benjamin D. Walsh.” TLlinois Farmer, October, 1861.

[Corrects Thomas for stating that he (Walsh) believed in the hibernation of the pupa of
Leucania. ]

Waish, B. D.—‘‘The Army Worm Question—Mr. Walsh’s Reply.” Field Notes, Dec.
14, 1861.

[Controversial answer to Klippart’s article of Nov. 30.]

Walsh, B. D.—‘‘The Army Worm and its insect foes. The remedy.” Transactions.
Illinois State Agricultural Society, iv (1861), pp. 349-372.

[This is part of the essay entitled ‘‘ Insects injurious to Vegetation in Illinois.” Figures.
larva, pupa, adult, and parasites. Describes Senometopia militaris, Pezomachus miniinus,
Microgaster militaris, Chalets albifrons, and Glyphe viridascens. Advises, as remedy, burning
tame grass in dead of year.]

Walsh, B. D.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Premium essay on insects injurious to vegeta-
tion in Illinois. Transactions Ill]. State Agr. Soc., v. 186164, p. 470; P.S. 501.

[Figures larva, pupa, adult, Senometopia militaris, Pezomachus minimus, Chalcis albifrons,
Mesochorus vitreus, Microgaster militaris, and Glyphe viridascens. Principally controversial,
upholding egg hibernation. |

Walsh, B. D.—‘‘Popular names for insects.” Practical Entomologist, i, 97 (1866).

[The text for this article is the announcement in the Sacramento Bee of the appearance of
the ‘‘fly’”’ of the Army Worm. ]

Waish, B. D.—-The three so-called Army Worms.” Practical Entomologist, ii, p.
111 (1867).

Walsh, B. D.—‘‘The Army Worm and its insect foes.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new
series, 1861), pp. 322-323, 337-339, 354-350.

[Figures larva, pupa, and adult; also Hxorista leucanie, Pezomachus, Hockeria, Microgas-
ter, Glyphe; gives facts in favor of egg hibernation; describes very carefully moth and larva,
and gives habits, &c.]

Walsh and Riley.—‘‘The true Army Worm.” American Entomologist, i, pp. 214, 217
(1869).

[Figures larva, pupa, adult, and Hxorista militaris, Walsh. Habits; remedies; para-
sites; single brooded; may sometimes be a friend by devouring chess, or by stripping off
blades affected with rust. ]

Washington, HB. S.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Valley Farmer, xiv (1862), p. 161.

[States that the worm is viviparous, having mistaken parasitic larve for young Army

Worms.!|

156 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

/
Webster, F. M.—‘‘Observations on the Army Worm.” Our Home and Science Gos-
sip, January, 1882 (continued in the February, 1882, number).
{Observations in Illinois, during 1881, on character of infested fields, number of broods and’
parasites. ]
Webster, Noah.—Pestilential Diseases, i, 259.
[Quoted by Fitch concerning the worms in 1770.]
Wiley, Benj. F.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Prairie Farmer, vol. 8 (new series, 1861),
atoie E
{Character of infested fields; length of life; clover eaten.] °
Wrislizenus, Dr. A.—‘‘The Army Worm.” Journal and Proceedings Saint Lonis
Academy Sciences, li, pp. 159, 160.
(Gives a fair life-history of the insect, but wrongly identifies it as the European Bombyx
graminis.} ne

CHAPTER VItI.

CANKER WORMS.

The term CANKER WoRm has formed the heading of so many articles
in the various agricultural and horticultural journals and magazines,
and State and other reports, during the last twenty or twenty-five
years, and the natural history of these insects has been in many par-
ticulars so fully given in standard works, that one almost wonders where
_ there can be a reading farmer who does not know how properly to cope
with them; yet information is constantly sought on the subj ect, and as
it is only of late years that some essential facts have been fully under-
Stood, we propose to bring together here whatever is necessary to a
complete understanding of these pests.

To obviate misunderstandings in the outset it should be stated that
two quite distinct insects have been recognized as properly bearing the
name of “‘Canker Worm,” while this name is frequently applied improp-
erly to numerous other insects.

The true Canker Worms of this country are native species, and are
confined to North America. One of them, however, Anisopteryx pom-
etaria, is closely related to an European species, Anisopteryx cescularia,
and resembles the latter so closely, in its adult state, that the two may
easily be confounded by the inexperienced observer; more easily,
‘indeed, than our two native species with each other. The distinctive
characters of the American and the European Anisopteryx, even in the
adult stage, are sufficient, however, for ready discrimination by the
trained observer, and those in the immature stages are still more evident,
as will be shown hereafter.

One of the characters which all species of Canker Worm moths have
in common is the possession of ample wings by the male and the lack of
wings in the female. It is upon this peculiarity of the female that most
of the propositions of remedies are based. The females generally be-
ing able to move about, or make their way into the trees to deposit
their eggs, only by crawling, any efficient means of preventing them
from ascending upon the trunk to the branches of the trees will
largely aid in protecting these from damage by the worms, and, if ac-
companied by such measures as will prevent the newly hatched worms
from ascending, will prove a perfect preventive.

CLASSIFICATION.
Canker Worms are distinguished from most other caterpillars which

attack the apple-tree, by having a less number of fleshy supporting legs
157

158 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. —

under the hinder part of the body. The normal number of such so-
called prolegs in caterpillars is ten, while the Canker Worms have but
either four or six. The lack of the foremost prolegs obliges them to
span or loop in walking, from which habit the characteristic names of
Span Worms, Measuring Worms, and Geometridw, have been given
to them as well as to the other members of the family to which they
belong.

The generic name Geometra, from which is derived the family name
Geometride (meaning ‘of the Geometra family” ) signifies a geometer or
measurer of the earth.

The name of Geometride is by many authors at the mi day « con-
sidered to apply only to arestricted group in the larger family of the
Phalenide, while by other authors the same name is applied to the -
larger family.

In either case this larger family is differently sub-divided by different
authors; thus, Harris places the Canker Worms in the family Hyberniade,
Guenée in the family Hybernide, and Packard ® in the subfamily Boar-
MIN.

This family, Geometride or Phalenide, forms one of the main sub-divi-
sions of the order Lepidoptera.

Without describing in detail the structural characters of the orderor
the family, which would be inappropriate in this special work (although,
of course, the Canker Worms must partake of these characters), we will
mention here certain particulars wherein the Canker Worms are peculiar
or specially characterized.

Dr. Packard says that “ although it is stated that the Phalenider
have no ocelli,” he has “found that they generally occur in our species;
though, compared with those of the Noctuidae, they are small, and easily
overlooked. They are situated very near the eyes, usually on the su-
ture between the epicranium and occiput. * * * ‘They are present
or absent in different species of the same genus. * * * It is aques-
tion whether they are ever of use to the insect, as, in most cases, they
appear as if partially aborted, and their presence and absence in different
species of the same genus show that they are not very essential to the
life of the insect.”

TWO DISTINCT INSECTS CONCERNED.

There are two distinct species working on our elm and apple-trees as
well as on some few other shade and fruit trees. The two have very
generally been confounded, and it is very important that their differ-
ences should be understood and kept in mind.

In our Seventh Annual Report on the Insects of Missouri, we illus-
trated and explained the differences in habit and structure between the
two, and gave a detailed comparative description of these two insects
in their different stages, the descriptions of the moths being but s slightly

48 Monograph of the Geometr id Moths, p. 397.
49Guenée, Uranides et Phalénites, v.1; Généralités, p. 21.

CANKER WORMS: TWO DISTINCT SPECIES. 159

altered from those originally drawn up by Mr. Mann, to whom we were
under obligations for specimens of pometaria in all stages, and for the
use of his notes.

Further investigations, during 1875, enabled us to complete still more
fully the comparisons previously instituted, and showed that the struc-
tural differences were greater than we had at first supposed, in conse-
quence of which we were led to separate the insects generically in a
paper, read October 14, 1875, before the Academy of Science of Saint
Louis, erecting the new genus, Paleacrita, for vernata, and retaining pome-
taria in the genus Anisopteryx, to which it alone of the two species can
be referred. The following table of differences is taken from a reprint
of the above-mentioned paper, which appearea in our Highth Missouri
Report, with only such changes as are necessitated by the proper ref-

erences to the figures and by subsequent observations.

Paleacrita vernata.

Anisopteryx pometaria.

EGG.

Elliptic-ovoid, the shell of delicate tex-
ture and quite yielding; generally ap-
pearing shagreened or irregularly im-
pressed ; nacreous, and laid in irregular
masses in secreted places. (Pl. III, Fig. 1,0.)

Squarely docked at top, with a central
puncture and a brown circle near the bor-
der; of firm texture, and laid side by side
in regular rows and compact batches, and
generally exposed. (Pl. III, Fig. 5, a, b, e.)

LARVA.

No prolegs on joint 8. (PI. III, Fig. 1, a.)

Head distinctly mottled and spotted,
the top pale, and two pale transverse lines
in front.

Body with eight superior, narrow, pale,
longitudinal lines barely discernible, the
two lowermost much farther apart than
the others.

Dorsum pale, with median black spots;
subdorsal region dark; stigmatal region
quite pale.

Piliferous spots quite visible and large
on joint 11, where the pale lines generally
enlarge into white spots immediately in
front of them.

When newly hatched dark olive-green
or brown, with black shiny head and cer-
vical shield.

With a pair of short but distinct pro-
legs on joint 8. (Pl. III, Fig. 5, f.) .

Head very indistinctly spotted, and
dark on top.

Only six superior, broad, and very dis-
tinct pale lines, those each side equidis-

tant.

Dorsum dark, without ornament; sub-
dorsal region pale, stigmatal region dark.

Piliferous spots subobsolete.

When newly hatched pale olive-green,
with very pale head and cervical shield.

CHRYSALIS.

Formed in a simple earthen cell, the
earth compressed, and lined with very
few silken threads so as to form a fragile
cocoon, which easily breaks to pieces.

MALr—Sparsely and shallowly pitted.
Pale grayish-brown, with a greenish tint
on the wing-sheaths, which extend to the

Formed in a perfect cocoon of fine,
densely spun silk of a buff color, inter-
woven on the outside with particles of
earth; never breaking open except by
force or purpose.

MALE—Punctation very faint, more or
less obsolete. Darker brown than vernata ;
the wing sheaths, as in vernata, reaching

160 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Paleacrita vernata.

posterior edge of the 5th abdominal joint;
abdomen with the spine at tip generally
simple, and only occasionally slightly bi-
furcate.

FEMALE—With wing-sheaths, but com-
pared with those of the male, thinner and
extending only to the posterior edge of
the 4th abdominal joint: much more ro-
bust and more arched dorsally, with the
mesothoracic joint shorter, and much re-

Anisopteryx pometaria.

to the 6th abdominal joint; the anusmore
blunt and with the spine more dorsal, de-
curved, and always bifurcate, the prongs
spreading and often long and fine. (P!. IIT,
Pic.3. a.)

FEMALE—Ditfers from the male in the
same way as vernaia, but is relatively
stouter and* more arched dorsally: a
broad, dusky, dorsal stripe often visible
toward the time of issuing—all the mere
remarkable that there is no such stripe

duced in size. Pitted likethe male. (Pl. on the imago, whereas in vernata, where
III, Fig. 4.) the imago has such a stripe, it is not indi-
cated inthe chrysalis, (Pl ILI, Fig. 3, 0.)

IMAGO.

Abdomen with the first seven joints
bearing each two transverse dorsal rows
of stiff, reddish spines, pointing posteri-
orily.

MaLe—Palpi very short, but distinctly
2-jointed.

Antenne with not quite 40 joints, the
longest more than twice as long as wide,
each with two pairs of hair fascicles,
springing from very slight, lateral eleva-
tions, the longest hair about thrice the
diameter of joint. Looking from above,
with ordinary lens-power, these hairs give
the appearance of fine, ciliate pectinations.
(Pl. III, Fig. 2, c.)

Wings delicate, silky, semi-transparent,
transversely striate, the scales short and
very loosely attached.’

Front-wings with costal and sub-costal
veins well united, with the discal cross-
vein partially open, and but twoshort cos-
tal branches, the superior veins straight.%
CP, Bie, a.)

Upper surface brownish-gray.

Crossed by three jagged, dark lines,
sometimes obsolete except on the subme-
dian and median veins, and on the costa

Abdomen without spines.

Mare—Palpi rudimentary with joints
indistinguishable.

Antenne with over 50 joints, the longest
not twice as long as wide, each with one
pair of fascicles of slightly curled hairs,
the longest about thrice as long as the di-
ameter of the joint, and all springing
from a prominent, dark hump which occu-
pies the basal half of the joint beneath, -
and gives a somewhat serrate appear-
ance from the side. The same appear-
ance of ciliate pectinations lookiny froin
above: > (Pl... IE, Fig, 6,-e, di.)

Wings less transparent, more glossy,
not striate, the scales on an average
longer and more firmly attached.

Front-wings with costal and sub-costalk
less closely united, with the discal cross-
vein well closed, and with three costak
branches. All the veins 7-11 are more
distinctly separated and the superiors
more curved, veins 9 and 10 forming an
open areolet near the disc: the apex more
produced. (Pl. III, Fig. 6, a.)

Upper surface also brownish-gray, but
somewhat darker, with a purplish retlec-
tion.

Crossed by two less jagged, whitish
bands, the outermost suddenly bending in-
ward near costa, at about three-fourthsthe

50 A microscopic examination shows the venation in vernata to be on the same plan as that in pome-

taria.

The difference is that in vernata the costal vein is feeble and generally obsolete at its termina.

tion, and all the veins 7-12 are more closely united with the costai than in pometaria.

CANKER WORMS: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM.

where they are always distinct and divide
the wing into four subequal parts. No
white costal spot. (Pl. III, Fig. 3, a.)

A pale, jagged, subterminal band, cor-
responding in some degree to the outer-
most band in pometaria, but running out
to apex, where it is always sharply re-
lieved posteriorly by a dark mark, and
often the whole length by dusky shad-
ings.

Hind-wings with the costal vein bifur-
cating at, or but little beyond, the discal,
and with the independent or vein 5 faint.
(Pl. III, Fig. 2, 6.) .

Color pale-ash or very light gray, with
a dusky discal dot.

No white band, and rarely any margin-
al dots.

Under surface with a more or less dis-
tinct dusky spot on each wing, the front
wing having in addition a dusky line
along median vein and spot on costa to-
ward apex. No pale bands,

FEMALE—Antenne generally with but
few more than 30 joints, the longest about
thrice as long as wide, faintly constricted
in middle, and pubescent. (P1.III, Fig. 3,¢.)

Body and legs pubescent, clothed with
whitish and brown, or black, dentate
scales or hairs; general coloration not
uniform. Crest of prothorax and meso-
thorax black. A black stripe along the
middle of the back of the abdomen, often
interrupted on the second to seventh
joints, with a whitish patch each side of
its front end. (Pl. III, Fig. 3, b, d.)

Abdomen tapering rather acutely be-
hind, and with an exsertile, two-jointed,
conspicuous ovipositor. (Pl. —, Fig. 9, e.)

Two rows of spines on back of the first
seven joints more prominent than in the
male, and often giving the dorsum a red-
dish aspect. (Pl. III, Fig. 3, d.)

Of arathersmaller size than pometaria,
the wings of the male expanding from
0.86-1.30 inches, and the female measur-
ing 0.20-0.35 inch in length.

1LEC

161

distance from base to apex, where it forms
a pale, quadrate spot, relieved by a darker
shading of the wing around it: the bands
sometimes so obsolete as to leave only
this pale spot; but more often relieved on
the sides toward each other by a dark
shade, most persistent on the veins. (PI.
III, Fig. 7, a.)
No such band.

Hind-wings with the costal vein bifur-
cating considerably beyond the discal,
which is strongly elbowed ; vein 5 quite
strong. (PI. III, Fig. 6, 0.)

Grayish-brown, with a faint blackish
discal dot.

In most specimens a curved white band
runs across the wing, and the veins inside
this band and on hind border are gen-
erally dotted.

Under surface with a dusky discal spot
on each wing, and with the outer pale
band on upper surface of front-wings as
well as that of the hind-wings showing
distinctly, the former relieved by a dusky
spot inside at costa.

FEMALE—Antenne with over 50 joints,
the longest hardly longer than broad;
uniform in diameter: without pubescence.
(Pl, IIL, Fig..'7,, ¢.)

Body and legs smooth, clothed with glis-
tening brown and white truncate scales
intermixed, giving it an appearance of
uniform, shiny, dark ash-gray: somewhat
paler beneath. (Pl. III, Fig. 7, b. d.)

Abdomen tapering rather bluntly be-
hind, without exsertile ovipositor.

No spines on abdomen,

The wings of the male expand from
1.05-1.35 inches; and the female meas-
ures 0,.25-0.40 inch.

162 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

We thus have two distinct species of Canker Worms, differing not
only in habit, but differing so much structurally in all states that they
may at once be distinguished from each other. In contrast with the
soft, delicate, ovoid eggs secreted in irregular masses, the 10-legged
larva, and the spined and hairy moths of vernata, we have the tough,
flower-pot-shaped eggs, laid in exposed, regular masses, the 12-legged
larva, and the spineless, smooth moths of pometaria; and the specific
structural differences are still apparent when we come to examine the
genital armature of the males. It is really remarkable that these differ-
ences remained so long unnoticed, especially in those parts of the coun-
try where pometaria abounds. i

The distinctions between these two insects, so long confoynded, forci-
bly illustrate the practical importance of minute discriminations in
economic entomology. 7

Pometaria agrees with the European species of Anisopterysx in the
principal pterogostic characters, obsolete tongue, and rudimentary
palpi; and is, indeed, the analogue of the well-known escularia.

Yet, in the antennal characters of the male, and especially in the basal
hump on each joint, it [pometaria] agrees more nearly with the typical
species of the genus Hybernia as characterized by Guenée [than with
ascularia]. So far as we now know, also, it differs from the European

~species of Anisopteryx in the more distinct areolet in the front wing.

The genus Paleacrita approaches much nearer Hybernia, from which
it is, however, readily distinguished by the double pair of hair fascicles
to each é antennal joint; the pubescent hairs that. cover the female;
the two-jointed, horny, exsertile ovipositor; but, more especially, by
the dorsal abdominal spines in both sexes—all characters unmentioned
in existing diagnoses of the genus.

NOMENCLATURE.

From the time when William Dandridge Peck published (in 1795) his
essay on the Canker Worm, which received a prize from the Massachu-
setts Society for Promoting Agriculture, up to the year 1873, all writers
on the subject spoke of The Canker Worm, under the impression that
all Canker Worms were of one species. Until that time no other dis-
tinctive name appears to have been borne by them. In that year Mr.
Peck described one of the species in such a way that it could be recog-
nized, and gave to it the name of Phalena vernata. No further pro-
gress in naming the insects was made until 1841, when Dr. Thaddeus
William Harris presented A Report on the Insects of Massachusetts, In-
jurious to Vegetation, to the Commissioners on the Zoological and Bot-
anical Survey of Massachusetts, which report was published in the same

year. In this, on page 332, speaking of the Geometra, he says:

Those kinds, whereof the females are wingless, or have only very short, scale-like

wings, and naked antenna, while the males have large, entire wings, and feathered
or downy antenna, seem to form a distinct group, which may be named Hybernians

CANKER WORMS: NOMENCLATURE. 163

(IIYBERNIADZ), from the principal genus [ Hybernia] included therein. The cater-
pillars have only ten legs, six before and four behind; and they undergo their trans-
formations in the ground. The insects called canker-worms, in this country, are of
this kind. The moths, from which they are produced, belong to the genus Aniso-
pteryx,°! so named because in some species the wings in the two sexes are very unequal
in size, and in others the females are wingless. In the late Professor Peck’s ‘‘ Natural
History of the Canker-worm,” which was published among the papers of ‘‘the Mas-
sachusetts Society for Promoting Agriculture,” and obtained a prize from the Society,
this insect is called Phalena vernata, on account of its common appearance in the
spring, and also to distinguish it from the winter moth (Phalena or Cheimatobia bru-
mata) of Europe.

Harris then describes ‘‘the male canker-worm moth,” and continues:

This is the usual appearance of the male, in its most perfect condition; by which it
will be seen that it closely resembles the Anisopteryx Aiscularia of Europe.

After comparing these two males, he says:

Specimens, of a rather smaller size, are sometimes found, resembling the figure and
description given by Professor Peck, in which the whitish bands and spot are want-
ing, and there are three interrupted dusky lines across the fore-wings, with an
oblique blackish dash near the tip. Perhaps they constitute a different species from
that of the true canker-worm moth.** Should this be the case, the latter® may be called
Anisopteryx pometaria, or the Anisopteryx of the orchard, while the former should re-
tain the name originally given to it by Professor Peck. The female is wingless, and
its antenne are short, slender, and naked. Its body approaches to an oval form, but
tapers and is turned up behind. It is dark ash-colored above, and gray beneath.

This is the first intimation that we have of the existence of more
than one species of Canker Worm, and this relates cnly to the differ-
ences to be observed in the males, no differences in the females being
indicated. It will be noticed here, moreover, that Harris applies the
designation, ‘‘true canker-worm moth,” not to the species first called
the Canker Worm by Peck, but to the larger species (pometaria) now
described for the first time. This use of the name is very apt to mis-
lead, for we should expect to find the term “ true Canker Worm moth”
applied to the species described as such by Professor Peck, and not, as
Harris here applies it, to the other species. Indeed, most subsequent
writers, including Fitch,” Packard,** Mann,” and Riley,® were misled
by the language, and took it for granted that the name pometaria
was proposed for the smaller form, while even Dr. Harris himself was
so little convinced of the distinctness of the two species that, as Mr.
Mann has shown,” he did not separate the specimens in his collection,
and still applied the name vernata to both the forms.

So long as the male moths only were carelessly compared, there
would always be a question as to whether the differences were varietal |

51 Literally unequal wing.

52'The italics are our own.—C. V. R.

533d Rept. Ins. N. Y., § 38.

54 Guide to study of Ins., 3d ed., p. 324.

55 Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., v. 15, p. 382.
566th Rept. Ins. Mo., p. 29.

§7Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., v. 16, p. 208.

164 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

or specific—Ist, because the general resemblance is strong; 2d, because
each species varies considerably both in size and ornamentation; 3d,
because the wing-scales, especially of one species, easily rub off, and
perfect specimens, captured at large, are uncommon.

It was not until the year 1873 that the distinctness of the two species
was clearly established. More careful comparisons made at that time
by Mr. B. P. Mann showed essential and very striking differences be-
tween the two species in both sexes, but the previously universal con-
fusion regarding the application of the respective scientific names was
not noticed until Mr. H. K. Morrison, having consulted Professor Peck’s
original paper, with Mr. Mann’s discriminations in view, called atten-
tion to it. Asa consequence of this confusion no reliance can be
placed upon the use of any name previous to 1874, as a means of dis-
criminating between these species.

In his “* Monograph of the Geometrid Moths,” published in 1876 under
the auspices of Dr. Hayden’s Geological Survey of the Territories, Dr.
Packard commits the same error that we had committed in our Sixth
Missouri Report in concluding that Harris’s pometaria is Peck’s vernata,
although the misleading nature of Dr. Harris’s language regarding the
two species had been pointed out in the meanwhile.*® Under this
misapprehension he has substituted the name of autwmnata for pome-
taria, though it is evident that the former name cannot obtain,® and,
in fact, in the introduction (pp. 8, 23, 39) to the Monograph the names
pometaria (not autumnata) and vernata are used.

In his first paper on this subject®! Mr. Mann gave reasons for be-
lieving that vernata, true to its name, is purely vernal in habit, and
does not issue in the fall, while pometaria issues, for the most part, in
the fall of the year. In general this seems to be true, although during
mild winters, in the western and southwestern parts of the country,
some adult individuals of vernata do appear in the fall of the year in
which they have attained their growth as larve. In consequence of
the general truth of these distinctions, however, we proposed, in 1875,
for Paleacrita vernata the vernacular name of the Spring Canker Worm,
and for Anisopteryx pometaria that of the Fall Canker Worm, and shall
presently treat of each separately under these names.

The following synonymy of the combined genera is given by Pack-
ard : ® yan

Erannis Hiibn. (in part), Verz., 320, 1818.

Alsophila Hiibn. (in part), Verz., 320, 1818.

Fidonia Treits. (in part), Schm. Eur., vi (i), 262, 1827.
Hibernia Dup. (in part), Lep. France, vii (iv), 301, 1829.

68Can. Entom., v. 6, pp. 29-32. ;

59Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., v. 16, p. 207; Trans. Acad. Sci. Saint Louis, v. 3, p. 273.
6 Trans. Acad. Sci. Saint Louis, v. 3, p. 575.

£1Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., v. 15, pp. 381-384.

6° Monograph of the Geometrid Moths, pp. 398-399.

CANKER WORMS: PAST HISTORY. 165

Anisopteryx Steph., Nomencl. Br. Ins., 43, 1829,
Steph., ‘‘Cat., ii, 116, 1829.”
Steph., Ill., iii, 151, 1831.
Boisd., Gen. Ind., 193, 1840.

Anysopteryx Dup., Cat., 235, 1844.

Alsophila Steph., Cat. eae Lep., 160, 1850.

Anisopteryx Lederer, Verh. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien, 177, 1853.

Guenée, Phal., ii, 254, 1857.
Walk., List Lep. Het. Br. Mus., xxiv, 1162, 1862.

Paieacrita Riley, Trans. Acad. Sc. St. Louis, iii, 273, 1875.

In 1860, Francis Walker described in the Canadian Naturalist, v. 5, p.
263, a moth, which he called Anisopteryx restitwens, and which had been
received from Canada. He repeated the description in his List of the
Specimens of Lepidopterous Insects in the Collection of the British
Museum, pt. 26, p.1696, The following is the English of the latter de-
scription:

Male. Dark cinereous. Antenne very slightly pectinated. Abdomen with a yellow-
ish tinge. Wings cinereous, with aslight blackish discal mark, and with black mar-
ginal points. Fore wings with two indistinct, undulating, dark cinereous whitish-
bordered lines; costa dark cinereous. Length of the body, 5 lines; of the wings, 14
lines. Canada. In Mr. D’Urban’s collection.

Dr. Packard says that this is probably Anisopteryx vernata; but we
see no reason to doubt that it is pometaria.

In 1862, Francis Walker described in his List of the Specimens of Lepi-
dopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum (pt. 26, p.
1697), a moth which he called Anisopteryx sericeiferata, the English of
which description is as follows:

Male. Dingy cinerous. Palpiextremely short. Antenns# minutely setulose and pub-
escent. Hind tibiz with four moderately long spurs. Wings elongate, silky; fringe
long, full. Fore wings somewhat rounded at the tips, minutely speckled with black,
with four diffuse oblique more or less interrupted and indistinct brownish lines; an
oblique apical blackish streak; discal ringlet brownish, indistinct, sometimes obsolete ;
exterior border slightly convex, rather oblique. Hind wings without markings.
Length of the body 5 lines; of the wings 16 lines. a-e. United States. Presented by
E, Doubleday, Esq.

Dr. Packard says that this is undoubtedly A. vernata, and we agree
with him.

PAST HISTORY.

There are many insects, of which the Canker Worms are examples,
which ordinarily occur in about the same numbers for a series of years,
and then, in a particular season and in a particular locality, seem to be
all at once swept from off the face of the earth. These phenomena are
due to several different causes, but principally to the variations and
irregularity in the action of cannibal and parasitic insects.

Owing to the confusion which has existed in regard to the two species,
it is well-nigh, if not quite, impossible to separate their histories.

From Samuel Dean’s “The New England Farmer; [ete.],” published
at Worcester, Mass., in 1790, we learn that “it is not less than about
fifty years since this insect [the Canker Worm] began its depredations

166 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

in New England, in parts which had been the longest cultivated.” Hence,
we may infer that the Canker Worms, of one species or the other, have
been a scourge in this country since 1740, if not from an earlier date.

Mr. Peck says that ‘The Canker Worm is said to have been observed
first in the Southern States, where itis probably a native. It is certain
it must be spread by some means independent of itself, since the female,
. by the privation of wings, is forbidden to range. It may have been in-
troduced into New England by the importation of trees from the South-
ern States, on which the eggs were deposited; or disseminated in the
larva State, in all populous parts of the United States, by falling from
trees upon carriages and travelers passing under them. This conjecture
is rendered probable by its being found in all places which have inter-
course with such parts as are infected with it, and by its being unknown
in new settlements.” But no authority is given for the assertion that
the insects came from the South, and as they seem never to have oc-
curred in the region which Peck intended by that word—i. e., the South-
ern Atlantic States—the assertion must be discredited. Mr. Peck made
his observations on vernata in Kittery, Me., probably in 1793 and 1794,
or not long previous to those years, for it was first in 1793 that a prize
was offered for the natural history of the Canker Worm, and he states ®
that on the 17th of May, 1794, the night was so cold as to produce ice
one-third of an inch thick; at that time a great part of the Canker
Worms were hatched; to these the frost was so fatal, at Kittery, Me.,
where he lived, that very few were seen in 1795. He paid diligent at-
tention at the season of their rising, but found not one female, and saw
but one male by accident, on the 6th of April. He says he earnestly
wishes that this check, seconded by the endeavors of man, may extirpate
this destructive insect.

Although he refers to the appearance of some imagos in November, it
is not probable on any other grounds that he met with pometaria, as we
might have expected him, if he had collected both species, to notice the
differences between them when he was drawing up his original descrip-
tions.

Mr. Mann suggests® that the vernata was crippled by this disaster
of 1794, and did not afterwards, at least for many years, recover its former
Pe Mdeaniianey, its place being taken, when Canker Worms again ap-
peared, by pometaria.

Assuming for the time [he says] that whenever any fall imagos are mentioned
that A. pometaria is referred to, we find that A. pometaria was comparatively rare when
Peck was making his observations, while A. vernata was’ “one of the most obvious
and destructive of the insects that inhabit the apple-tree.” The Massachusetts Society
for Promoting Agriculture offered a large premium in 1793 for a satisfactory natural
history of the Canker Worm, and another for a method of destroying the Canker

Worm. The former premium was quickly secured by Mr. Peck, and a lesser one by Mr.
Atwater, but the latter offer remained open and unsatisfied, from year to year, till

63 Mass. Mag., v. 7.
& Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., v. 16, pp. 206-207.

CANKER WORMS: PAST HISTORY. 167

1813, when it was abandoned. The frost of 1794 seems to have been very effective, for
it is not till 1801 that we find in the ‘‘Papers on Agriculture ” of the Massachusetts
Society for Promoting Agriculture, 1801, p. 4: ‘‘ The Canker Worm has in some places
nade its appearance again,” and in the ‘‘Papers” of the same society, 1807, p. 12,
* Orchards have muchimproved oflate [at Newbury, Mass., ] (since the year 1802), owing
partly to the disappearance of the Canker Worm, and in the “ Massachusetts Agricul-
tural Repository and Journal,” June, 1815, p. 316: ‘‘ After having been freed for nearly
twenty years from the ravages of the Canker Worm [at Roxbury, Mass. ], our orchards
are again overrun with them, and some of the most valuable trees of our country are
threatened with destruction.” Mr. J. Lowell, the author of the last quotation, says,
l. ¢., p. 317, “the insects rise in the fall.”

Have we spanned the interval [Mr. Mann continues] within which the relative
importance of A. rernata sank, and that of A. pometaria arose? In the journal last
cited, January, 1816, Vol. IV, p. 89, Peck says: ‘‘Itis certainly true that the canker
moths rise in the autumn and deposit their eggs.” But, he says, p. 90, ‘‘Those which
rise in November are not very numerous, compared with those that rise in the spring.”
This certainly argues against my suggestion, if it is supposed to have been founded
upon new observations, but not if it is merely a renewal of the statements made in
1795.”

This suggestion by Mr. Mann seems, however, not to be condirmed
by further investigation, for Mr. Morrison tells us, in 1874, that vernata
is much the commoner species [in eastern Massachusetts] and, he pre-
Sumes, the most destructive. It seems to be evident, however, that
pometaria was not an especially destructive species at the time of Mr.
Peck’s studies.

Dr. Wm. Le Baron, writing in 1871, says that the Canker Worm
“was very abundant in Massachusetts seventy years ago,” which would
place the time of this abundance in 1801, though some allowance may
be made for the generality of the statement, and it appears from what
he says immediately afterward that he may be referring to the years
about 1793 and 1794; for ‘“‘subsequently,” he continues, “it became almost
unknown in that State for many years. It is said to have disappeared
after a very heavy frost in the month of June, which killed the cater-
pillars. But this is hardly probable of so hardy an insect as the Canker
Worm.” ,

Mr. Cyrus Thomas gives evidence, in 1876, by published extracts
from a letter to the Western Rural, of the Canker Worms having been
very destructive insects in Connecticut about seventy years previously,
in some seasons entirely divesting the trees of their foliage. This date
may be doubtfully set down as occurring about 1806.

Dr. T. W. Harris, in a report on diseases and insects affecting fruit
trees, published in 1854, states that the insects prevailed in the vicinity
of Bosten, Mass., from 1831 to 1840, increasing yearly in numbers till
the last date, but almost entirely disappeared from 1841 to 1847. They
committed great devastations, however, in Dorchester, near Boston,

6 Canadian Entomologist, vol. 6, pp. 29-32.

66 Second Rept. Ins. IIl., p. 101. °
§7 Sixth Rept. Ins. IL, p. 21.

68 Proc. Am. Pom. Soc., 3d sess., p. 210-218,

168 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Mass., in or about 15844, when ‘they were so numerous that they could
be heard traveling through the grass.?”®°

In 1847, Harris continues, they reappeared, becoming more numerous
every year until 1854 (the date of the report), when their ravages were
very severe in Cambridge and adjoining towns, though they had not
then reached the height attained in 1839. .

There seems to be no evidence of the occurrence of Canker Worms in
the so-called Western, or more properly Northern Central States, pre-
vious to 1852.

Mr. James Tucker states(”)that Canker Worms began attacking his
orchard, in Warren County, Illinois, about 1852-1854, and their ravages
continued till 1860, in which year they ceased; his trees “ fruited well
that year, and have ever since [till 1866] * * *; the worms hatched
out as before, but died without doing injury.” Mr. Tucker attributes

the immunity from injury, which his trees enjoyed from 1860 to 1866,
to the impregnation of the leaves with sulphur, which he inserted in
the stem of the tree; but as this cannot be, some other reason needs to
be assigned.

. The occurrence of “the measuring-worm,” which may or may not be

a Canker Worm, at Edgerton, Williams County, Ohio, in 1860, is inci-
dentally mentioned by H. A. F., in the Prairie Farmer, under date of
July 24, 1860. ;

Mr. N. L. Hoover states” that Canker Worms destroyed the leaves
and fruit of his apple trees, in Macoupin County, Illinois, every vex
from 1858 to 1861, inclusive.

N.G. C. states 2 that Canker Worms played sad havoc on the orchards
in Monroe County, Iowa, in 1861, in some instances destroying both foli-
age and fruit.

According to Mr. Sanford Howard, secretary of the Michigan State
Board of Agriculture, * the Canker Worm first appeared in the neigh-
borhood of Marshall, Calhoun County, Michigan, in 1862, on two or three
trees, in the orchard of Mr. Edwin Wilson, of Marengo. In 1866, these
trees were dead, while several others, some of the largest and best
in the orchard, were nearly dead, and the vitality of all the trees was so
weakened that, though on many of them there were not worms enough
in 1866 to do much injury to the foliage, they would bear no fruit. The
ravages of the insect were obvious in 1866 in at least six different or-
chards in that neighborhood, and were spreading year by year. Where
they prevailed in the greatest numbers in 1864 and 1865 they were less
numerous in 1866. The cause of their diminution in their old haunts
was obscure. Mr. Howard thought that perhaps the foliage was not suf-
ficient in quantity in 1865 to carry to maturity all the worms that fed

69 Trans. Mass. Hort. Soc., for 1874, p. 22.

70 Prairie Farmer, [v. 33], n. s., v. 17, p. 211.
71 Prairie Farmer, v. 23, n. 8., Vv. 7, p. 332.
72 Prairie Farmer, v. 23, n.s., v. 7, p. 401.
73 Pract. Entom., v. 2, pp. 6-7.

CANKER WORMS: PAST HISTORY. 169

upon the trees, and that many of the starved larve died before they
reached the perfect state, though, he says, it may be that the frosts and
unusually cold weather which occurred in the spring of 1866, soon after
the insects hatched, destroyed many of them. Means either of destruc-
tion or of fe cntion had not been much used. Mr. Howard says that,
according to information published by Mr. Lyon, of Plymouth, in the
Western Rural, the insect had appeared, in 1866 (?), in other localities
in Michigan. They were very injurious in the Grand Traverse region
of Michigan, in 1865 especially, and about the same time in other parts
of that State.

Mr. J. W. Robson, of Tremont, Ill.,™ says, in 1871, that the Canker
Worm is not yet very common in the locality where he resides; that he
discovered it in his orchard in 1865, and has seen it in other orchards
in the same vicinity since then.

From statements by Mr. Wm. P. Lippincott, of Vernon, Van Buren
County, Iowa, they occurred in that county in and previous to the year
1866.”

Bethune states” that the Canker Worm is related, in the Canada
Farmer for May 1, 1867, to have been taken at Grimsby, Ontario, in
the previous November (1866) by Mr. Johnson Pettit. Previous to
this time it had not been included in the list of Canadian lepidoptera.

Mr. J. D. Dopf informs us that Canker Worms were exceedingly
troublesome to the elms at Rockport, Atchison County, Missouri, in
1866.7 In that year, according to Mr. B. D. Walsh, it had not yet
reached the vicinity of Rock Island, Rock Island County, Dlinois.®

R. P., of Mexico, Audrain County, Missouri, found it very injurious
(in his county) in the spring of 1868.”

“A gentleman from Genesee,” N. Y., is said in 1874, to have become
so discouraged in a six-years’ contest with the Canker Worm that he
finally cut down his orchard the previous spring [18732].

EK. F. Curtis, of Rockford, Winnebago County, Illinois, writing in
1872,*! says that “the Canker or Measuring Worm, which made its
appearance in this part of the country but a few years since, has been
spreading rapidly, and now may be seen in almost every township in
the Northwest.”

Le Baron reports” serious damage by them from Clinton, Rock County,
Wisconsin, and Duquoin, Perry County, southern Ilinois, as well as
from several intermediate places, in 1871.° Reports of their injuries
were communicated to the Department of Agriculture, at Washington,

74 Western Farmer, May 13, 1871.

75 Pract. Entom., v. 1, p. 96.

7%6Can. Entom., v. 1, pp. 88-89.

77 Second Rept. Ins. Mo., p. 98.
7%8Pract. Entom., v. 1, p. 77.
7Second Rept. Ins. Mo., p. 97.

80 New York Tribune, April 15, 1874.
81lowa Homestead, Sept. 6, 1872.
82Second Rept. Ins. LL, p. 101.

170 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

in May and June, 1871, from Norfolk County, Massachusetts, and from
Jefferson County, Iowa.* Reports of the ravages of “black measuring
worms,” which may have been Canker Worms, on apple and fruit trees,
were also sent to the United States Department of Agriculture, at the
same time, from several counties in Ohio.

They are reported to have infested a few orchards in Plymotth, Mass.,
in 1874.*

HK. Ware Sylvester states, in 1874, that Anisopteryx pometaria has
nearly disappeared from his heMenver [locality unknown], * * *
the very general failure to put in an appearance being due to some
cause not human. :

Dr. Packard, referring presumably to the years about 1860 Aa pre-
viously, says fiat during several years’ observations he had never ob-
served vernata in Brunswick, Me., but in 1875 it was said to be for
the first time injurious in veeeraen in that town.”

Prof. A. J. Cook said, in 1875, that “this insect [vernata] has a
curious history in Michigan; for though it has made its appearance
Several times, once in Calhoun County, again in Genesee County and in
other places, for the past two or three years near Commerce, Oakland
County, and just now near Pontiac of the same county, still it has never
seemed to hold on; for, after destroying a few orchards, it seems to suc- .
cumb to its retell enemies or unpropitious circumstances, and ceases
to cause even anxiety.”

THE SPRING CANKER WORM. .
(Paleacrita vernata, Peck.)

The true Canker Worm, described as Phalena vernata by W. D. Peck,
in 1795, may be known, as already indicated (p. 164), by the popular
name given above, from the circumstance that the great bulk of moths
issue from the:ground in early spring.

This is undoubtedly the species generally mentioned in thea ericultural
journals of the country, and is the one treated of in our Second report on
the insects of Missouri as So injuriously affecting the apple orchards of
Missouri and the States to the north and east of it.

RANGE OF THE SPECIES.

Formerly most abundant in New England, this Canker Worm is now
found in many portions of the country, and of late years has been particu-
larly injurious in the Northern Central States. Its range may be said to
extend from Maine to New Jersey and westward to Wisconsin and south-
ward in the Mississippi Valley to Texas. It is in fact the species best
known in the Mississippi Valley, if not the only species which occurs

83 Monthly Repts. [U. S.] Dept. Agric., for 1871, pp. 194-195.
& Monthly Repis. [U. 8.] Dept. Agric., for 1874, p. 329.

8 Packard, Monogr. of Geom. Moths, p. 404.

& Prairie Farmer, July 3, 1875.

THE SPRING CANKER WORM: ITS RANGE. 171

there. We have specimens obtained by the late Jacob Boll near Dallas,
Tex., which is the southernmost reiiable limit in the West, while its
northernmost recorded limit, west of Lake Michigan, is in Rock County,
Wis. In Michigan it had in 1870 nearly reached the northern extremity
of the southern peninsula. It does not seem to trouble the orchardists
in the Atlantic States south of New Jersey, since it is not reported there-
from. Dr. Packard says:*" “It is probable that it is indigenous to all
parts of the country east of the Mississippi, but is abundant only locally
originally along the coast of northeastern Massachusetts, and of late
years in Illinois and Missouri”; but the evidence seems to show a pro-
gressive dispersion of the insect westward, doubtless by man’s aid.

As might be expected from the wingless character of the females,
their distribution is very unequal, and apparently arbitrary, a common
road sometimes serving for years as a barrier between a free and an in-
fested orchard. The evidence is conclusive as to the common occur-
rence of this particular species in Maine, Massachusetts, New York,
Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, lowa, Missouri, and Texas,
but it is not so certain as to which of the two species the accounts from
Canada, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New
Jersey, Ohio, and Indiana refer to, though vernata in many instances
is presumably the kind.

CHARACTERS.

ImAGo.—The Spring Canker Worm is distinguished in the perfect state
by the first seven joints of the abdomen bearing each two transverse
rows of stiff reddish spines, pointing posteriorly, more prominent in the
female than in the male, and often giving the abdomen a reddish ap-
pearance. It is rather smaller in size thanthe Fall species, the male
measuring from tip to tip of wings when expanded from about five-sixths
of aninch [21™™] to over an inch and a quarter [32™"], and the female
from a fifth to a little over a third of an inch [5-9™™] in length.

Mate.—The wings of the male are silky and delicate, the front ones
marked with three transverse, jagged, dark lines, sometimes wanting,
except on the front edge of the wing, where they are always more dis-
tinct, dividing this portion of the wing into four very nearly equal parts;
they have also a somewhat jagged, pale, submarginal line. The upper
surface is brownish-gray in color, while the hind wings are pale ash or
very light gray, with rarely any dots or markings. Some specimens have
no dots whatever, even when fresh from the chrysalis; and captured speci-
mens, owing to the looseness of the scales, always have the marks more or
less efiaced. Indeed, the ornamentation of the wings is extremely vari-
able. In many specimens the middle portion of the front wings, within the
three dusky lines, is quite pale and mottled with grayish-green, while the
basal and terminal portions are marked with brown, thus making the
contrast greater. :

FEMALE.—The body, legs, and antenne of the female are clothed
ene yk. & Monograph of the Geomettid' Moths 1976, p.4ee—t—t—“‘éi‘C;(‘S3Ot;*#

172 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

with whitish and brown or black hairs, and along the middle of the
back of the abdomen there is a black stripe, of which, sometimes, how-
ever, all but the ends is more or less obsolete. The color of the female
is rabbit-gray, or speckled black and white. The abdomen is acutely
tapering and ends in a two-jointed ovipositor.

Heae.—The eggs somewhat resemble in form hens’ eggs, but are more
elongated. They are very delicate in texture, yellowish, reflecting pris-
matic colors, and are smooth, though often appearing roughened by
transverse and longitudinal irregular depressions.

LARVA.—The larva has but four prolegs, in addition tothe usual three
pairs of thoracic legs on the anterior portion of the body, these prolegs
being situated on the 9th and the last joints of the body. (It may thus
be distinguished from the larva of the Fall species, which has an addi-
tional short pair of prolegs on the 8th joint.)

ie young larva is dark olive-green, or brown, with a black, shiny
head. The full-grown worm varies greatly in the intens-
ity of its markings, ash-gray, green and yellow ones oc-
curring in the same brood. The most constant char-
acter by which it may be distinguished from other span-
=A wormsof the same size, is the pattern of the head, which,

Fic.1.—Enlerread D0 matter what the general hue of the body may be, is
Se of usually shaded and marked as shown at Fig. 1.

Another distinguishing character is the occurrence of two pale, nar-
row lines on the middle of the back, the space between them usually be-
ing dark and occupied, on the anterior edge and on the middle of joints
5, 6, 7 and 11, by black marks somewhat in the form of X; these marks
being represented by dots on the other joints, There are two rather
prominent tubercles on top of the eleventh joint, preceded by two white
spots.

The full-grown larve measure from seven to nine-tenths of an inch
{18-23™™] in length.

CHRYSALIS.—Pale grayish-brown, with a dark green tinge on the
wing-sheaths. Remarkable for its robustness and for the large size
and prominence of the palpi. A single bifurcate thorn at extremity.
Length 0.35 inch [9™™]; diameter across thorax 0.12 inch [3™™]. Both
sexes in the chrysalis state have wing-sheaths, those of the female
being thinner than those of the male, and shorter, extending only to
the posterior edge of the fourth joint of the abdomen, while in the male
the wing-sheaths are one joint longer. The ones eal of the male is
more slender than that of the female.

The cocoons are simple earthen cells, slightly ‘lined with silken
threads, which are easily broken to pieces.

HABITS AND NATURAL HISTORY.

ISSUANCE OF THE MOTHS.—The moths or perfect insects rise from
the ground, for the most part, early in the spring—generally from the

THE SPRING CANKER WORM: ITS HABITS. 173

beginning of March to the middle of April, in the latitude of Missouri ;

two weeks later in Massachusetts—rarely coming out during the first.
mild weather that succeeds the first frosts in November; and on warm

days during the winter when the ground is thawed. Many which we

bred in the winter of 1869-70 issued during the warm weather of
January.

Dr. Le Baron observed them in Illinois fom March 7 to April 7, 1871.

Dr. Packard says that in 1875 none had appeared in his gen in
Salem, Mass., before the 10th and 11th of April, the season having been
a very backward one. During these two days, which were warm and
fine, he counted about one thousand males and two hundred females,
mostly stuck to the inked bands on fourteen apple and three elm trees.
This is in the proportion of one female to five males. He says that he
suspects that the males fly about one or two days before the appearance,
above ground of the females.

Mr. Mann says that of 16 dated specimens of fig male, 1 was taken
in March and 15 in April; of nine females, all were taken in April. He
presents negative evidence, also, that the species does not appear in |
the fall or the winter in eastern Massachusetts, where his observations
were made.

The moths are crepuscular in habit; that is to say, most active in
the evening soon after dark. During the day they usually rest quietly
and concealed, the front wings of the male, when at rest, being turned
_ back, so as to entirely cover the hind wings, and overlap on their inner
edges.

At the height of the pairing and egg-laying season, the females may
be seen, in multitudes, making their way up the trunks of the trees,
alone or attended by one or more of the males, hardly pausing for the
caresses of their attendants, but pressing onward to fulfil the one purpose
of their existence. The female, by means of her horny and extensile
ovipositor, thrusts her eggs, to the number of from fifteen to one hundred
and fifty, singly or in irregular masses, and with only enough of a glutin-
ous fluid to attach them slightly to each other and to their surround-
ings, within some sheltered or secret place, usually near, sometimes even
between the leaflets of the expanding buds, sometimes even close to
the ground, on the trunk of the tree, oftenest under loose scales of bark.
Sometimes the eggs are deposited in cracks in the wood, or in holes
made by borers, and frequently in places where the young larve can.
not possibly get anything to eat when hatched. They have been found
in dried apples which adhered to the trees through the winter, and the
female is very fond of availing herself of the empty cases of the Rascal
Leaf-crumpler, Acrobasis nebulo.®

APPEARANCE OF THE WORMS.—The eggs hatch at about the time
when the young leaves of the apple tree begin to push from the bud,

[Figured in our Fourth Mo. Rept., p. 38, fig. 18.]

174 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

which is about the time the red currant is in blossom, and the larve
acquire their full size in from three to four weeks thereafter.

Dr. LeBaron found a few young larve on the trees in Kane County,
Illinois, about April 20, 1871, but he says they were evidently prema-
ture stragglers, as the foliage had then scarcely begun to open.. But
on April 27, the red currant being in pretty full bloom, and the leaves ©
on some of the apple trees being half expanded, he found almost every
tuft of leaves which he examined occupied by two or three minute Can-
ker Worms. In the latitude of Saint Louis the worms have generally
descended the trees and entered the ground by the middle of May,
though some remain till about the first of June. About Lancaster,
Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, they attain their full size in May, and
go into the ground by the first of June. In New York they are said
(if the species which occurs there is vernata) to commit their ravages
during the last of May and first of June, so that they probably complete
their growth toward the middle of June.

We amply proved during the summers of 1868 and 1869 that there
is but one brood each year in Missouri, just as there is but one brood
in Maine, and at whatever time the worms enter the ground they re-
main there as chrysalids all through the summer and fall months, and
the great majority of them till the following spring. Some, indeed,
Dr. Harris says, remain in the ground for a year longer than the bulk -
of the brood. <A frost seems to be necessary to their proper develop-
ment.

HABITS OF THE WORMS.—The little Canker Worms, on making
their escape from the egg, cluster upon and consume the tender leaves,
and on the approach of cold or wet weather creep for shelter into the
bosom of the expanding bud or into the opening flowers.

They feed and migrate by day, remaining stationary during the ni ra
Like most other span-worms they have the habit of resting in a stiff,
straight posture, either at an angle of about 45° from or flat and par-
allel with the ‘twig which they occupy, and in these positions. easily
elude detection. They are seldom ever noticed upon our trees till the
riddled and seared appearance of the foliage tells of their presence.
The leaves first attacked will be found pierced with small holes, which
become larger and more irregular when the Canker Worms increase in
size; and, at last, the latter eat nearly all the pulpy parts of the leaves,
leaving little more than the midrib and veins.

Upon completing their growth, they either crawl down the tree or
let themselves down by means of a silken thread, and burrow into the
ground. Here, at a depth of from two to five:inches, and usually
within a radius of from four to eight feet from the roots of the tree,
they form their cocoons, within two or three days after completing —
which they become chrysalids.

FooD-PLANTS.—Packard thinks that the native food-plant of this

THE SPRING CANKER WORM: DISTRIIBUTION. 175

species is the elm, and, according to Mr. John Sears, of Danvers, Mass.,
the black ash [Fraxinus sambucifolia], both in deep woods and in the
open meadow, as he has found the females ascending the trees; but it
is usually more destructive to the apple, and at times to the cherry.

It is no proof, however, that the black ash is a food-plant, above all
the native food-plant, that the females ascend the trees, for they will
ascend sticks, fences, or any other object upon which they can climb.

Apple-trees seem to be their principal food-plant; for though, in Mis-
souril, we have found the worms on plum and elm, we have never known
them there to do as great injury to these trees as to apple.

MODES OF DISTRIBUTION.

Although the females are wingless, and can, in consequence, only crawl
from place to place, the insect is able to spread rapidly, in localities
where it appears in numbers, for the larve can pass from tree to tree
without much difficulty. When full grown or nearly so, and dropping
by their silken threads to the ground, the suspended worms are caught
up by the winds and wafted to other trees, many of them swinging off
upon their threads to considerable distances. While hanging from
limbs above the traveled roads, moreover, they are often swept off by
passing carriages, and are thus conveyed to other places.

Le Baron says, in his second Illinois report (p. 108) :

I saw some to-day [May 24, 1871] floating 30 feet from the tree. As the web by
which they are suspended is scarcely visible, the worms often have the appearance
of flying in the air. At the same time I could find very few worms on the trunk,

showing that their normal way of migrating is not by crawling down the tree, but
by floating off on threads.

The observations of Mr. Howell only confirm the previous statements
as to the manner in which these pests are diffused over large tracts of
country, particularly in the West, when high winds prevail. He says:

Caught up by the gales while suspended upon their gossamer web, I have seen mul-
titudes carried far away, flying, thus supported, for long distances.

ENEMIES.

Like most of our noxious insects, Canker Worms are subject to the
attacks of cannibal and parasitic insects. They are also devoured by
very many different birds, some of which for a time subsist almost wholly
upon these pests. Hogs are very efficient in rooting up and devouring
the chrysalids during the summer months.

Nothrus ovivorus, Pack. (Fig. 2), devours the eggs, probably of the
Fall species. ‘

The most common parasite which we found in Missouri infesting the
larva of the Spring Canker Worm is a small, four-winged fly (Micro-
gaster paleacrite Riley). After issuing from its victim the Microgaster
larva spins its pale, greenish-white cocoon alone, and not in company.

8 Notes on N. A. Microgasters. Trans. Acad. Sci., Saint Louis, vol. 4, p. 311.

176 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTUMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The flies issue in May, and we have bred the same species from cocoons
from Canker-Worm larve (doubtless vernata), received from Mr. J.
Pettit, of Grimsby, Canada. About 10 per cent. of the worms which we
have endeavored to breed have been destroyed by
this parasite. Harris mentions the larva of another

on the fatty substance of the Canker Worm, and
weakens it so much that it,is unable to go through
its future transformations, and that of a two-winged
fly belonging to the genus Tachina, which also
infests the worms, destroying about one-third of
Aa cee eee eS them in Massachusetts. He says he has seen the

(after Packard). former of these flies sting several Canker Worms in
succession, and swarms of them may be observed around the tree as
long as the Canker Worms remain. Their services, therefore, are doubt-
less very considerable, but it is impossible to say, from present informa-
tion, upon which species they prey, or whether upon both. We also
received from Mr. Pettit, in addition to the Microgaster paleacrite which

he found upon Canker Worms, at Grimsby, some net-work cocoons,

inclosing each of them a parasitic larva, which had preyed upon the
Canker Worm. Each dead Canker Worm was secured to the leaf
upon which it rested by one of these cocoons, which seemed at first
sight to be a cluster of eggs attached to the body of the Canker Worm.”
From subsequent experience with the genus we have little doubt but
that these were larve of Huplectrus.

The maggots of the Zachina parasite, mentioned by Harris, live singly
within the bodies of the Canker Worms, till the latter die from weak-

ness; after which they undergo a change, and finally come out of the

bodies of their victims in their perfect form.

There is also a very minute and undescribed species of Platygaster
(so called), first discovered by Mr. E. C. Herrick, of New Haven, Conn.,
which pierces the egg of the Fall species, and saps one of her own eggs
into it, from which in due time the perfect fly develops. Sometimes
every (ante Worm egg in a cluster will be found to have been thus

punctured and seeded for a future harvest of the Platygaster. The

young of this Platygaster is an exceedingly minute maggot, hatched
-‘'“thin the Canker Worm egg, the shell of which, though only one-
WieVILeth ‘of an inch long, serves for its habitepian, and the contents
aa od, till it is fully grown; after which it becomes a chrysalis
for ae sae ame shell, and in due time comes out a Platygaster fly, like
withiD a his last transformation Mr. Herrick found to take place
its ae bite end of June, from eggs laid in November of the year before;
ee thinks that the flies continue alive through the summer, till the
and eae of tht Canker Worm moths in the autumn affords them the
Peta of layng their eggs for another brood. As these little

% Amer. Entomologist, v. 1, p. 246.

four-winged fly (probably Microgaster), which preys —

eS

ENEMIES OF CANKER WORMS. 177

parasites prevent the hatching of the eggs wherein they are bred, and
as they seem to be very abundant, they must be of great use in prevent-
ing the incréase of the Canker Worm. Without doubt such wisely-
appointed means as these were once enough to keep within due bounds
these noxious insects; but, since our forests, their natural food, and
our birds, their greatest enemies, have disappeared before the woodman’s
ax and the sportsman’s gun, we are left to our own ingenuity, perse-
verance, and united efforts, to contrive and carry into effect other means
for checking their ravages.

Among the cannibal insects may be mentioned the Ground-beetles, two
of which we have found preying upon the Spring species, namely, the
Rummaging Ground-beetle (Calosoma scrutator, Fabr., Pl. 2, Fig. 4), a
large and beautiful insect with golden-green wing-covers, and having
the rest of the body marked with violet-blue, gold, green, and copper;
and the Fiery Ground-beetle (Calosoma calidum, Fabr., Pl. 1, Fig. 8), a
black species, of almost equal size, with copper-colored spots on the wing-
covers. These beetles do not pursue their prey by flight, although they
can fly, but they are very active, and run over the ground in search of
soft-bodied worms, and will even mount upon the trunks of trees for the
same purpose. Mr. Charles R. Dodge informs us that he was able to find
either of these beetles, almost at any time during the Canker Worm sea-
son, upon the elm trees in New Haven, Conn., just below the tin bands:
with which the trees were protected. The 15-spotted Lady-bird (Mysia.
quindecimpunctata), he states, was also, met with in the same sitnation,
earlier in the season.

“The Fraternal Potter-wasp (Humenes fraterna, Say), is stated by-
Harris tostore her cells with Canker Worms, often gathering eighteen or -
twenty of them for a single cell.
This wasp (Fig. 3 a) is quite com-
mon in Saint Louis County, Mis- jm
souri, and uses other species be- &'m","¢
sides Canker Worms as food for its 3
young. Its clay nest (Fig. 3 b, en-
tire; c, the same cut open shortly
after it was built, showing the %
manner in which it is compactly
crowded with green worms) may
often be found attached to the Fic. 3.—Humenes fraterna: a, wasp; b, cell;
stems of the Goldenrod and of Gegeltontiopen, «(after Riley.)
other plants in the open air, or cemented under the loose bark of
some tree. It has even been found attached to the leaves of a decidu-
ous plant, where it must necessarily fall to the ground in winter and
lie there till the perfect insect issues in the following summer.””

The earliest record that we have of any bird being an enemy to Canker
Worms is in Samuel Deane’s dictionary,” where the name of the bird is
ca oe Lut Uae, Tiamat Rea ane earn ee aaa a

91 2d Rept. Ins. Mo., p. 103.
% New Engl. Farmer; or Georgical Dictionary: verbum Canker Worm.

WEC

178 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

not given. Probably this is the Cedar-bird (Ampelis cedrorum), which
Professor Peck mentions in his prize essay as Ampelis garrulus.

Mr. J. W. Robson, in the Western Farmer for May, 1871, gave the fol-
lowing testimony as to the birds which destroy this worm:

The Blue-bird destroys large numbers, not of larve alone, but of fully developed
‘moths in the fall, and again in the spring thes return just in time to devour the in-
-gect as it emerges from the soil.

The Cedar-bird is another enemy. This little bird is a gross feeder, and when the
“Canker Worms appear in great numbers, as they sometimes do, it will come in large

flocks and feed upon them day after day till the pest is subdued.

The Butcher-bird also feeds its young largely upon the larvf2. We wellrememberit ,

“clearing two trees literally covered with this caterpillar, and so well did that pair of
Shrikes do their work, that these same trees have not been troubled with the insect
since.

In the American Naturalist (v. 8, p. 271), Dr. Packard quotes Mr. C. J.
Maynard, of Ipswich, Mass., who has examined the stomachs of some
three thousand birds, as giving the following formidable list of species
which devour the Canker Worm: *

In answer to your questions relative to birds eating Canker Worms and the larvezs
-of other injurious insects, I would say that upon examining my notes, I find that I
have taken Canker Worms from the stomachs of the following species:

Red-eyed Vireo ( Vireo olivaceus), Song-sparrow (Melospiza melodia), Chickadee (Parus
atricapillus), Scarlet Tanager (Pyranga rubra), Robin ( Turdus migratorius), Black-billed
‘Cuckoo ( Coccyzus erythrophthalmus), Wood Pewee (Contopus virens), Least Pewee (Hmpi-
donax minimus), Wilson’s Thrush ( Turdus fuscescens), Black and White Creepers (Mnio-
tilia varia), Blue Yeilow-backed Warbler (Parula americana), Maryiand Yellow-throat
(Geothlypis trichas), Nashville Warbler (Helminthophaga ruficapilla), Golden-crowned
Thrush (Seiurus aurocapillus), Chestuut-sided Warbler (Dendroica pennsylvanica), Yel-

low Warbler (D. estiva), Black-and-yellow Warbler (D. maculosa), Prairie Warbler ~

(D. discolor), Black-polled Warbler (D. striata), Canada Warbler (Myiodioctes canaden-
sis), Red-start (Setophaga ruticilla), Cedar-bird (Ampelis cedrorum), Cat-bird (Mimus
carolinensis), Purple Finch (Carpodacus purpureus), White-winged Cross-bill (Curviros-
tra leucoptera), Chipping Sparrow (Spizella socialis), Indigo-bird (Cyanospiza cyanea),
Red-winged Black-bird (Agelaius pheniceus), Cow Black-bird (Molothrus pecoris), Bob-
o-link (Dolichonyx.oryzivorus), Baltimore Oriole (Icterus baltimore).

Other correspondents mention the King-bird, Purple Grakle, House
Pigeon, all the Vireos, Downy Woodpecker, Summer Yellow-bird, Blue-
bird, Goilden-winged Woodpecker, Golden Robin, and Yellow-billed
Cuckoo. With such a formidable array of feathered enemies, the sud-
den disappearance of the Canker Worm, for a term of years, from or-
clards where it was wont to play havoe, is no longer to be wondered at.

DESTRUCTIVENESS OF CANKER WORMS.

The apple and the elm trees have, perhaps, no enemies that cause a
more effective and uniy ersal blight than the Canker Worms. Dr. Le
Baron names the Spring species as one of the five enemies of the apple
tree which hold a bad pre-eminence, and says that whilst looking at the
a} ple trees blasted by these insects he was struck with the appropri-

% The determination of the species of the worms is, however, subject to much doubt.

ee ee

THE FALL CANKER WORM. 179

ateness of their popular name, for in their earlier periods, by eating nu-
merous irregular holes through the leaves, they reduce them to a skele-
tonized condition and interrupt the flow of sap, and the leaf becoming
withered and brown before it is wholly eaten gives the tree the appear-
ance of having been scorched with fire. Harris says it reduces the foli-
age of our fruit trees and of our noble elms to withered and lifeless
shreds, and causes whole orchards to look as if they had been suddenly
scorched with fire. Rathvon says that when the Canker Worms have
overrun an apple tree, the leaves which they have not devoured will
present the dry and browned appearance of a rose-bush that has been
devastated by rose-slugs.

Mr. John Tinker, of Clinton, Rock County, Wisconsin, states™ that
apple trees will perish after having been defoliated three years in suc-
cession, aud Dr. LeBaron says that in the fifth year in which the Canker
Worms had appeared in the orchard in which he made his observations,
some of the trees were dead and others were in a dying condition.

We know of few more discouraging sights than an orchard which has
been badly injured by these pests, presenting as it does, in midsummer,
the seared and blasted aspect that follows fire.

Where they have become established and are neglected, their rava-
ges soon become very great, but our own experience, in Missouri and
Illinois, would indicate that old orchards suffer most.

THE FALL CANKER WORM.
(Antsopteryx pometaria Harr.)
RANGEH OF THE SPECIES.

There is no evidence that pometaria occurs at all anywhere in the
Mississippi Valley, since an examination of the specimens of Canker
Worms in Dr. LeBaron’s cabinet, and in our own, proves them all to
be the true or Spring species. Indeed, until we received specimens of
pometaria from Mr. H. K. Morrison and Mr. Mann, we had never seen
the species, the male Specimens which we mistook for it in former years
being in reality specimens of vernata, which approach it in the markings
of the front wings.

As Canker Worms are not very injurious in Canada, and occur, when
at all, generally in October and November, our Canadian neighbors are
doubtless afflicted with the Fall species.

The Fall species may be said to range from the eastern shore and the
northern boundary of Massachusetts to the western extremity of the
Canadian peninsula, between Lakes Ontario and Erie and the southern
shore of Connecticut and Rhode {sland. Probably its range is wider,
but we only have reliable reports from about Salem, Boston, and Cam-
bridge, Mass., and New Haven, Conn.

% LeBaron, 2d Rept. Ins. Il. p. 109.

180 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Morrison and Packard both say that it is much less common than ver-
nata [in Massachusetts}. Bethune,” probably referring to this species,
says that it is not often met with in Canada, the only native specimens
he had seen having been found, by Mr. Johnson Pettit, at Grimsby,
Ontario, during November, 1866, and the following winter.“ Referring,
evidently, to the same species, Saunders says, in 1875," that the Can-
ker Worms “are now becoming plentiful in portions of Ontario, par-
ticularly in some parts of the Niagara district.”

CHARACTERS.

Under critical examination the Fall Canker Worm is readily distin- -
guished from the Spring species. On the average the imago is some-
what larger and more glossy; the fore wings are a little more elongated

toward the apex, making the outer edge a little longer and more ob-
lique; they are of a peculiar ochreous-brown tint, as in the European
escularia ; they have a distinct white spot on the front edge, and are
crossed by two pale, jagged bands, along the sides of which are several
blackish dots.

The hind wings have a more or less distinet, pale, curved line across
their middle. The female is uniformly dark ash-gray above, paler be-
neath, and with naked antennz; her legs and abdomen are smooth
and glistening, and she has no extensile ovipositor.

Thus these imagos lack the characteristic dorsal spines of vernata,
the dusky marks across the front wings of the male, and the pubes-
cence in the female; and there are many other minor differences, which
are mentioned in detail in the tabular and comparative description al-
ready given of the two insects.

We give the following detailed descriptions from the Seventh En-
tomological Report of Missouri.

ANISOPTERYX POMETARIA Harris—Egg—Length, 0.025 inch; average diameter
two-thirds the length; flattened at top where it is somewhat larger than at base.
Color of crown purplish-gray, the surface slightly corrugated, with a central dimple
and a brown circle just within the border; sides smooth and more silvery, and gener-
ally somewhat compressed by pressure of adjacent eggs. Laid in exposed situations,
in patches or strips, attached in regular rows, and fastened to the bark in a slightly
slanting position so that one edge of the crown is a little abeve, the other a little
below the general level.

Larva—Color pale-brownish, marked with dark brown and yellow as follows: The
dorsum uniformly dark brown; the sides with three pale narrow lines, more or less
irregular and mottled, but always well relieved, the two superior ones white, the
lowermost yellowish ; the subdorsal space between the upper two of these lines, pale;
the stigmatal between the lower two darker, especially in middle of the joint around
stigmata; the thoracic joints dark with the pale lines somewhat narrower and run-
ning up to the head. On joint 11 these lines are constricted or entirely broken, so as
to leave a dark band across the middle of the joint. The head is dark brown above
and at sides, but paler in front. Cervical shield also dark with the yellow lines run-

% Canada Farmer, v. 4, p. 133.
% Rept. Fruit Grower’s Assoc. Ontar., for 1870, p. 86.
97 Sixth Ann. Rept. Entom. Soc. Untar., for 1875, p. 27.

THE FALL CANKER WORM—HABITS OF. 181

ming through it. Venter olivaceous, the legs more reddish, there being three pairs of
prolegs, the pair on joint 8 only haif as long as those on 9, but with perfect hooklets;
the thoracic legs quite hirsute and terminating generally in two thorns. Piliferous
spots obsolete and with a very few scarcely distinguishable pale hairs, except on anal
shield and legs, where they are stouter. Anal shield and legs with brown piliferous
dots. The larva when first hatched is yellowish-white, with the black eyelets show-
ine distinctly on the pale head. It soon deepens to pale olive green, with a large pale-
yellowish head and pale legs. The light lines of the mature larva are, at this early
stage, faintly indicated and the piliferous spots give forth short, fleshy, pale hairs.
The third pair of prolegs is distinctly visible, but is not used in locomotion. After
the first molt the head and thoracic legs become somewhat browner, and the olivace-
ous green more bluish. After the second molt, the dark colors show much more dis-
tinctly. /

Described from numerous full-grown specimens received from Mr. B. P. Mann, others
received from Dr. A. 8. Packard, jr., and a large number of all ages reared by myself
from the egg.

It varies somewhat in intensity of color, and in some the light and dark browns
are not so sharply separated, but the dorsum is generally uniform and the three lat-
eral yellow lines distinct. Up to the second or last molt, the general color is, with
rare exceptions, greenish; but in the last stage, the dark-brown or black predomi-
nates, and is sometimes so general that there is but the faintest trace of the superior
yellow lines. Occasional specimens, even when young, show in the subdorsal dark
space one, and in the dorsal dark space two, very fine and faint pale lines. Differs
entirely from vernata in lacking most of the characteristic spots in front of the head
of that species, and the two pale transverse marks; in having the dorsum darker in-
stead of lighter than the rest of the body; in lacking the medio-dorsal pale lines and
the characteristic x-like marks; in the broader, more conspicuous pale lateral lines,
and in the subdorsal space being darker than the stigmatal; and lastly in the addi-
tional, though atrophied, abdominal prolegs. It is a smoother larva.

Chrysalis—Color light brown, with the wing-sheaths, a medio-dorsal shade, sutures
and stigmata darker. Length 0.30-0.35 inch; stout, with the wing-sheaths and
their veins distinct in the female; a dorsal, bifid, decurved tubercle near the tip of
anal joint.

HABITS AND NATURAL HISTORY.

In many particulars the habits of this species and those of the Spring
species are similar. We will mention here more particularly those hab-
its wherein the [all species differs from the other:

ISSUANCE OF THE MOTH.—The moths rise from the ground, for the
most part, late in the fall of the year—generally beginning about the
middle or latter part of October—although a considerable number come
out of the earth in the winter during warm weather and in spring.

Of twenty-seven chrysalides from which we obtained moths in 1875,
a portion of the cocoons being placed in a covered flower-pot outdoors
so that they might be submitted to the influence of frost, and another
portion being retained in breeding cages indoors, so as not to be affected
by frost, the former began to issue first, and a larger percentage of
moths were obtained from that portion than from those kept indoors—
which would indicate that a low, freezing temperature, followed by a
thaw, assists development, though by no means essential. These moths,
two of which were males, and twenty-five females, issued almost daily
from November 8 to December 9.

182 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Mann says:* Of sixteen dated specimens of the male, twelve
were taken in October or November, and four in March or April. Of
several hundred females, four were taken in April and the rest in No-
vember. Again, he says that he has captured imagos during every
week from the last week of October to the middle of January, inclusive,
in the last week of March, and in the second, third, and fourth weeks of
April.

Under conditions of confinement we have observed that two males
mated with five females; whether the males are polygamous in a state
of nature we cannot say. It would seem, however, from the circum-
stance, that out of fifty-eight chrysalides, fifty-six were females, that
such was the case to an eminent degree.

OviPostrioN.—In depositing her eggs, the mother-moth does not hide
them away under the loose scales of bark, or elsewhere, as is the habit
with the female of the spring species, but lays them in the forks of the
small branches, or close to the young twigs and buds, or on the bark
of the trunks of the trees, in regular, compact batches of from 60 to 200
eggs, placed in a single layer upon their ends, side by side, firmly fast-
ened together and to the bark by a strong glue, and coated with a gray-
ish, water-proof varnish. From five impregnated females, which we
raised in confinement in 1875, we obtained the full complement of eggs,
which were laid, by four females in single batches of 224, 230, 241, and
243, respectively, and by one female in two batches of 142 and 63, re-
spectively. The first four batches were laid on the smooth pine sticks
that supported the muslin cap of the breeding cage; the last two on the
muslin. In each instance the time occupied in oviposition was between
two and three days. None of the unimpregnated females which we
raised laid regular batches. Most of them laid a few scattered eggs,
generally singly, but also in small groups ranging from 2 to 54.

Immediately after the insects have thus provided for a succession of
their kind, they, begin to languish and soon die.

SEASON OF APPEARANCE OF THE WORMS.—Although the eggs are
laid at such different periods, during fall, winter, and spring, they do
not hatch any earlier than those of the spring species. The larvae, at
first minute and thread-like, appear as the leaves begin to form,
develop very rapidly, and with favorable weather enter the ground to
form their chrysalides within three weeks after hatching. Harris says
that the eggs are usually hatched between the first and middle of May,
and that in the vicinity of Boston the larvee do not become extremely
voracious until June. ‘In the year 1841, the red currant flowered, and
the Canker Worms appeared, on the fifteenth of May. The insects
were very abundant on the fifteenth of June, and on the seventeenth
searcely one was to be seen.”

Dr. Packard says that ‘“‘on the 9th of April, 1875, the eggs of this

%8 Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., v. 15, p. 384.

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 183

species were not devoloped unless in a very early stage of the embryo.”
Specimens of the larve were gathered by him June 15.

Mr. Mann found the larve descending from elm and apple trees on
_ the 17th of June, 1872.

It is a singular fact that the larva undergoes but two molts exclu.
sive of that which takes place underground in the transformation to
the chrysalis.

SEASON OF PUPATION.—The chrysalis is not formed till about a month
after the larva has entered the ground..

FoOoD-PLANTS.—This species is found more particularly on the elm,
and occurs also on the apple, but in our experiments upon larve kept
in confinement, in 1875, we did not perceive that the larve had any pref-
erence for one over the other of the leaves of elm, apple, and cherry,
though they evidently relished peach leaves the least, and rejected them
when the other three kinds could be had.

One or the other species—it is uncertain which—attacks the maple.

REMEDIES AND PREVENTIVE MEASURES APPLICABLE TO BOTH
SPECIES.

It may be laid down as a maxim that no injurious insect can be com-
batted successfully without a thorough knowledge of its habits and
transformations. This knowledge having been conveyed in the preced-
ing pages, we will now consider what are the proper remedies for the
ravages of these insects. The absence of wings in the female gives us
at once a power over her which is half the victory; and anything that
will prevent her ascending the trunk will, in a great measure (but, as
we Shall see presently, not entirely), preserve the tree from the ravages
of the worm.

In the following account the author’s previous writings have been
largely drawn upon, and parts in quotation marks not accredited are
taken therefrom. The remedies are appropriate for either species here
considered, though they should be applied most assiduously either in
spring or autumn, according to the species to be dealt with.

STICKY SUBSTANCKS.

Numerous indeed have been the devices—patented or unpatented—
which have at different times and in different parts of the country been
used to accomplish the desired end; and every year our agricultural
journals report individual experiments with some one or other of these
devices—some favorable and others adverse. Those most generally in
use have consisted of some application of a sticky nature to the trunk of
the tree, whereby the feet of the moth may be encumbered and from which
she may be unable to escape. Various substances have been used for
this purpose, of which I will mention tar, bird-lime, refuse sorghum mo-
lasses, printers’ ink, slow-drying varnishes, and melted india-rubber; this
last always retaining its soft viscid state, while the rest become dry and
hardened by exposure to the air.

184 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The editor of the New Hngland Farmer thinks that oil and rosin, boiled
together in certain proportions, which have to be ascertained by “the
rule of thumb,” answers a better purpose than tar, because it does not
dry up so rel on hot days, and therefore does not require ie be tes
newed every day, as tar does.

The methods of application of these substances have been as diverse
as the substances themselves. They have been applied either directly
around the body of the tree, or over a broad belt of clay-mortar, or on
strips of old canvas, on sheep-skin, on stiff paper, on the under side of
a horizontal and close-fitting collar of boards fastened around the trunk,
or on four boards nailed together, like a box without top or bottom,
around the base of the tree, to receive the application on the outside.

Whatever substance is used must be renewed as often as it becomes
dry or as the surface ceases to be sticky or becomes coated with a mass
of captured moths.

Jt cannot be denied that it requires a great deal of time, labor, and
expense to continually renew these applications on every tree in a large
orchard during so many months of the year; while the application of
tar directly to the bark is more or less injurious tothe trees. For these
reasons, refuse sorghum molasses will be found much better than tar
for the purpose, as it does not harden so rapidly, and is said not to be in-
jurious to the tree. In neighborhoods where sorghum is grown, it is
also much cheaper. It may be thickened with flour to bring it to the
right consistency for use. If tar is used, it should be entirely scraped
from the bark when the season for which it was needed is over; and if
bandages are used they should be removed at the same time. That it
will pay to do this work in orchards where the Canker Worm is known
to be numerous, there cannot be the least doubt. The old adage, “‘ What
is worth doing at allis worth doing well,” was never truer than in fight-
ing this insect.

Mr. B. D. Walsh calculates the cost and the profit in the following
way:

To head the Canker Worm, therefore, effectually, the trees must be tarred afresh
every day from the latter end of October to the middle of May, or to about the time
that the apple leaves are completely put forth, omitting to do so on cold days in the
dead of winter. Call the whole net time 150 days, to be on the safe side. A man
could certainly tar 100 trees in an hour, which would make 150 hours, or fifteen days’
work for saving the apple crop of 100 trees. Put swork as high as you please and
apples as low as you please, and the operation, viewed as a question of dollars and
cents, is most certainly a paying one.

‘Apply the remedy thoroughly during two successive years, and you
have utterly routed the enemy, and this is more especially the case
where an orchard is not in too close proximity to the timber, or to
slovenly neighbors. Fail to apply the remedy, and the enemy will,

in all probability, rout you. The reason is simple. The female being .
wingless, the insect is very local in its attacks, sometimes swarming

9 Pract. Entom., v. 2, p. 17.

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 185

in one orchard and being unknown in another which is but a mile
away. Thus, after it is once exterminated, a sudden invasion is not to
be expected, as in the case of the Tent Caterpillar and of many other
orchard pests; but when it has once obtained a footing in an orchard,
it multiplies the more rapidly, for the very reason that it does not spread
fast.”

An account is given in the Western Rural of a very good plan adopt-
ed by a Mr. Smith, of Des Moines, lowa, for applying coal-tar, molas-
Ses, or other sticky substance. He first makes a slight mound of earth
around the tree, smoothing it at top; brown wrapping-paper, to be
smeared, is then tied around the tree and turned down over the mound.
The moisture of the earth prevents too rapid drying of the tar, and the
plan proves at the same time a preventive of the Round-headed Borer.

‘‘For those who wish todo work thoroughly while they are about it,
and who believe that a little extra time and expense at the start is more
than saved in the long run, I do not know that any better contrivance
could be recommended than the hanging tin band described below. But
I would remind the reader that even so perfect an ‘estopper’ as this
may measurably fail if directed solely against the moths. The worms
that hatch below the trap, ‘and which are more difficult to manage, must
also be headed off; and I would insist, in pursuance of this object, that,
- in addition to the directions given for its use, the muslin be tied around
the tree over a layer of cotton wadding, and that the contrivance be
kept on the tree and the tin oiled at least three weeks after the tree
begins to leaf out in the spring. The eggs laid below the trap should,
of course, be destroyed as far as they can be, and such destruction in
dealing with the spring species wili be facilitated by a bandage of rags
below the trap, or by anything that will afford the moth shelter for her
eges and that can be easily removed and scalded; where no such lure
is used, an application of kerosene will prevent the eggs laid on the tree
from hatching. But some are likely to be laid where they escape the
closest scrutiny, and while the precautions I have indicated will insure
against the ascent of such, whether from the Fall or Spring species, with-
out those precautions some of the newly-hatched worms, which can pass
through a very minute crevice or over the smoothest surface, may get
into the tree ; and though they may be so few in numbers as to attract
no attention, they nevertheless perpetuate the species in the orchard.”

HANGING TIN BAND.

This hanging tin band was first described in the Cultivator and Coun-
try Gentleman for May, 1873, and afterward in the Illustrated Annual
Register of Rural Affairs, published by Luther Tucker and Son, of A1-
bany, N Y., and is very favorably spoken of by that careful horticult-
ural writer, Mr. J. J. Thomas. It has been used successfully by C. L.
Jones, of Newark, N. J., and we should advise the use of it, if kept
properly oiled, over all forms of troughs whatsoever, for they too often

186 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

get filled up with the dead bodies of the moths or with leaves, or get
bridged with spider-web; and where fastened directly around the tree
must needs be renewed as the girth of the tree increases.

Fig. 4 represents the contrivance, ‘‘which consists essentially of a
band or circle of tin, a few inches outside the trunk of the tree, and held
there by a circle of muslin, attached to the tin at its edge and drawn
with a cord at the top, so as to fit the tree closely and prevent the in-
sects from getting up without going over the tin, covered with a mixture
of castor-oil and kerosene; as soon as they
Mi nt touch this, they drop to the ground. Fig. 5.is
q li i ay : a section of the contrivance, and Fig. 6 a sece-

ii, i

wl ., th tion of the union of the tin and muslin, effected

fe é by turning over the upper
Lif) am il sil we A ed ge of aie tin before it is

(; Yy } yh ‘“\W\ bent to a circle, inserting
‘it Hii yoni {the edge of the muslin,
LL eta
ll | We gether. The tin may be
He we An iy i) about three inches wide,

and long enough to rest
three or four inches off . 5 Bae
eas ean yee ap. from the trunk, when bent worm trap.

around in the form of a hoop, and secured by rivets or small tacks.
After the tin and muslin are attached to the tree, the whole inner or
lower surface of the tin is daubed with a mixture of equal parts of kero-
sene and castor-oil. The tin and muslin entirely protect the oil from the
sun and the weather, and it will not dry for several days. It will not
run down, as the castor-oil thickens it. Of course it needs occasional
renewal, with a small brush or feather. This protector is kept on the
tree till the moths disappear.”

it a
‘i mm a

TROUGHS OF OIL.

Another remedy, calculated to prevent the moth, and the larva as
well, from ascending the tree, is the use of a trough to contain some
substance, usually of an oily nature, which kills the inseets as they
7 come in contact with it. These troughs are made of tin, lead,
rubber, iron, or other substances._ The principal objections to
their use are their cost, the difficulty of fixing and keeping them
in their places, and the injury suffered by the trees when their
contents are washed or blown out and fall on the bark. They
2 ought not to be nailed, as the nails are found to be-injurious

to the trees, but should be supported by afew wooden wedges,
driven between them and the trunks. <A stuffing of sea-weed
or fine hay, which will not absorb oil, is much better than one

Fic. 6. Of cloth, cotton, or tow. Before the troughs are fastened and
filled, the body of the tree should be well coated with clay-paint or white-

>»
Ww
se?

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 187

wash, to absorb the oil that may fall upon it. Care should be taken to
renew the oil as often as it escapes or becomes filled with the insects.
These troughs, though costing more, will be found less troublesome than
tar, and may safely be recommended and employed, if proper attention
is given to the precautions above named.

If oil-troughs are used, it will be found much safer and surer to
sink them in the ground close around the butt of the tree than to wind
them around the trunk higher up. There will then be no chance for the
young worms to get up between the trough and the tree, and all danger
of hurting the tree with oil or tar is entirely avoided.

The following description of a trough of this kind is taken from the
report of a committee chosen to award a premium of $100, offered in
1871 (?) by the Essex (Mass.) Agricultural Society, for a ‘new, cheap
and effectual remedy against the ravages of the Canker Worm”:

The protector used by Mr. Sawyer is simply a trough or gutter laid upon the ground
around the tree, and filled with coal-tar from the gas-works. The troughs used by
Mr. Sawyer are made of two-by-three joists, sawn from two-inch plank. A channel
an inch or more deep and an inch and a half wide is grooved out, and the stock is
then sawed off in a miter-box at suitable lengths for different sized trees, and the
pieces nailed together, one side slightly, so that it can be easily removed when placed
around the tree. A square box or trough is thus made which is laid level on the
ground around the tree. The space between trough and tree trunk is filled with dirt,
the trough itself filled with coal-tar from the gas-works, and the work is done.

The tar has rosin oil mixed with it, and is stirred up or replenished
three or four times in autumn, and the same in spring.

‘¢On plowed land it is easy to level up the earth around the tree, but
on grass-ground it may be necessary to carry sand or dirt on which to
place the trough. The troughs first used by Mr. Sawyer had a cover
of boards to prevent the rain and leaves from getting into the tar. But
he finds the plain troughs just as effective at less than half the expense,
although they require a little more care. He states that he made his
troughs himself, and that they cost from twelve to seventeen cents per
tree. Of course they can be made from the cheapest, coarsest plank,
and after they are laid down the tar will help to preserve them many
years. ;

“The cost of the coal-tar is said to be small. Mr. Sawyer states that
he found it necessary to stir the tar but two or three times in the spring
or fall, and that few troughs required refilling. At the time of holding
the annual fair in Gloucester, he told us that by stirring the tar, then
in the troughs, many of them would effectually bar the passage of the
grub. These statements seem to show that the trees will require but
little labor or expense for several years after the troughs are put down.
The testimony of other parties who have used these troughs is unani-

mous as to their effectiveness when properly used.
_ «The troughs used by Mr. Leach differ from those of Mr. Sawyer
only in having a triangular channel, which Mr. Sawyer admits to be an
improvement. Mr. Leach thinks his troughs can be furnished ready

188 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

‘for the trees at 25 cents each, as orchards average. Of course the ex-
pense will depend largely on the quality of the lumber used.”
Another contrivance is an old one that has been employed for nearly
forty years in Massachusetts, and lately used with satisfaction by Mr.
John G. Barker (when gardener to Mr. G. G. Hubbard), of Cambridge.

Fig. 7 is a section of the whole contrivance—a a being the zine roof over the oil |

troughs, 6 b; dd, the surface of the earth; cc, the tar or lime which is used to fill the
box around the tree.

Fig. 8 is a smaller view of the same. The box is square, large enough to leave
about four inches of space around the tree; is sunk some four inches in the ground,
and rises about ten inches above the surface. The trough
is in shape like the letter V, two inches deep, and is made Nf

Fic. 7.—Canker-worm trap. Fia. 8. 1 Gnas worm trap—
section.

by a tinman before aerltne on the box; it is tacked on two inches below the upper
edge of the box, and then the roof is piandd’s in position and secured by a single screw
into the upper edge of each side or board. It must, of course, be placed in a level
position, to hold the oil. This is done by means of a spade used in setting the box in
the earth. The box and roof are nearly completed in the tinshop, but the corner of
both must be left open till placed around the tree, when the parts are soldered to-
gether. The roof is about four and a half inches wide, with the outside turned under
about the fourth of an inch, to keep it stiff and in shape. In order to examine the oil,
and to see that all is right, it is necessary to loosen one of the screws. The box will
vary somewhat in size with the magnitude of the tree; with a trunk six inches in
diameter, the box should be about fourteen inches square and fourteen inches high;
for a trunk a foot in diameter, it should be about twenty inches square; but a vari-
ation of two or three inches would not be of great importance. <A few inches of tan-
bark or lime placed within, is for the purpose of preventing the moths from ascending
inside. One pint of crude petroleum (costing 3 cents per tree, at 24 cents per gallon)
is enough for each tree.

With a little care in making a close connection between the V-shaped
trough and the box, the above contrivance must work to perfection, as
indeed Mr. Barker found it to do. Yeton account of the greater labor
and expense of making and using it, and of the greater difficulty of ex-
amining beneath it, the hanging tin band, described as used by Mr.
Jones, is preferable. |

Belts of cotton wool have been used to entangle the feet of the moths,
and collars’ of tin plate, fastened around the trees and sloping down-
wards like an inverted funnel, have been proposed, upon the supposi-
tion that the moths would not be able to creep in an inverted position
beneath the smooth and sloping surface.

100 From a newspaper cutting.

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 189
CLASSIFICATION OF CONTRIVANCES AND PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY.»

‘¢ Now, all these appliances, of whatsoever character, are divisible into
two classes: First, those which prevent the ascension of the moth by
entangling her feet, and trapping her fast, or by drowning her; and,
second, those which accomplish the same end by preventing her from
getting a foothold, and thus causing her repeatedly to fall to the ground.
until she becomes exhausted and dies.

‘¢ The remedies of the first class are thoroughly effectual when applied
understandingly and persistently. And by this I mean, that the or.
chardist must know that many of the moths of vernata and most of
those of pometaria issue in the fall of the year, and that the applications
must, in consequence, be made at least as early as the latter part of
October, and that they must be keptin effective condition, through all but
freezing weather, till the leaves have well put out in the following
spring, and that if, at any season, the, parents or the worms are run-
ning in great numbers, they may bridge over the obstacles with their
dead bodies, over which the later individuals can pass, in which case a
renewed application must be made. Furthermore, he must know that
many of the moths—frustrated in their efforts to climb the tree—will
deposit their eggs near the ground or anywhere below the application,
and that the young worms hatching from them are able to pass behind.
the slightest crevice or over the finest straw. Thus, if troughs are used.
around the trunk, they must be fitted over a bandage of cotton wool,
cloth, hay, or seaweed, so that when the trough is drawn tightly around
the tree, it will do no injury, and at the same time all the inequalities.
of the bark will be filled up; ‘the joint must likewise be kept smeared.
either with tar or molasses, and then the worms will not be able to pass.
In the neglect to thus fasten them, lies the secret of failure which many
report who use such troughs.

*¢ Contrivances of the second class are of no avai! whatever, for although
the moth is unable to travel over a very smooth surface, I know from
experience that the young worms can march over the smoothest glass.
by aid of the glutinous silken thread which they are able to spin from
the very moment they are born. For these reasons, even the ‘ Merritt’s
Patent Tree-Protector,’ which was so well advertised by Mr. Howard
in his otherwise excellent article on the Canker Worm, in the Michigan
Agricultural Report for 1865, must be classed with the worthless pat-
ents. This ‘Protector’ consists of a ring of glass grooved below and.
hung from the tree by a tent of canvas, to which it is fastened by an.
iron clamp.”

The first year that tar, ink, or any substance which kills the moth is.
used, there is constant danger that the moths will appear in such num-
bers as to “bridge over,” and thus enable some to cross on the dead bodies
of their comrades. But after an orchard has been well protected, there
is little danger that the moths will next year go up in sufficient numbers
to do this.

190 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

LE BARon’s TRAP.—Dr. William Le Baron found, in 1871, that by
attaching a band of polished tin closely around the trunk of the tree,
so that the female moths could not ascend the tree without crossing this
band, the moths were to a large extent checked in their ascent, not from
inability to cross the band, but from being baffled in their instincts.
This preventive, however, was not thorough; but by fastening the tin
band over a ring of rope with which the trunk of the tree was encir-
cled, so that both the upper and lower edges of the band might stand
out free from the trunk, the moths were completely baffled, and, if they —
reached the upper edge of the band, would not descend inside so as to
reach the trunk again.

Mr. R. M. Milliken experimented with this tin and rope trap in 1873
on a small orchard of 39 trees, and gave the following, in the Prairie
Farmer, as his experience:

In 1873 I applied the rope and tin in this way: I nailed a rope tight around the
tree, took tin five inches wide and nailed it on the rope, half the tin above the rope
and half below it. I putit on with three-penny nails. After I put the tin on, I took
lime and sand and made a thin mortar and poured it in on the rope to stop any holes
that might be left. When the tin gets full below, they will get on the tin, but won’t
go down above to get on the tree. I saw them on the tin (that is, the moth), but
did not see one above it. I have known some to try it on a few trees, and condemn
it because it was not successful. If the trees don’t stand more than two rods apart the
wind will carry plenty of the worms from one tree to another to strip it. My trees
stand fully two rods apart, and in 1872 they were one complete mass of webs, made
by the wind carrying the worms from one tree to another. My trees measure from
two to four feet in circumference, and it did not cost me twelve cents for each tree.

“Ifthe trunk is kept clean below the trap, and an application of
kerosene made to the eggs from time to time, there will be no neces-
sity for plastering the upper part of the trap. It is more difficult to
check the ascent of the young worms than their parents, because of
their minute size and power to travel over the smoothest surfaces.
The best way to do it is by greasing the eggs and thus preventing their
hatching. If the tin is smeared with a mixture of equal pats of kero-
sene and castor oil, it will prove still more effectual.”

Dr. Le Baron says further:!”

There is a period of about three weeks between the time of the laying and that of
the hatching of the eggs, when the whole generation of the spring Canker Worms is
safely ensconced under the scales of bark on the trunk and larger branches; no matter
whether they are deposited in the fall, the winter, or the spring, they are all there
now, and just to the extent that we can destroy these eggs we shall exterminate the
Canker Worms. It follows, therefore, that if we scrape off the scales and burn them
we shall prevent the hatching of a considerable proportion of the worms. Yet many
will remain; probably the greater part of them will adhere to small scales, which our
scraping will not remove. But by removing the larger scales the remainder will be
more or less exposed, and the application of any wash that we may desire to make
will be rendered easier and more efficacious. Having scraped off the larger scales,

‘therefore, the next thing will be to apply some substance which will destroy the eggs
without injuring the tree. Is any such substance known? We have applied soft

101 Prairie Farmer, March, 1873 or 1874.

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 191

soap and a solution of Paris green to the eggs of the Canker Worm moth without
destroying their vitality, but the least touch of kerosene oil is fatal to them. Can
this substance be applied safely to the trunks and branches of trees? Some half
dozen experiments performed by myself, and recorded in my second annual report,
go to showthat it can. Still, itis so powerful an article that we have never ventured
to advise its use, indiscriminately. We need further experiments and on a larger
scale. We would advise its use the first year on only a part of the trees, and those
the least vaiuable. At any rate, the worms will destroy your trees in a few years,
and a desperate disease sometimes requires a desperate remedy.

It may be asked whether some less powerful wash will not answer the purpose.
None is known with certainty. We have heard of common lye from wood ashes being
used effectually, but the statement was too indefinite to have much weight. If the
lye were pretty strong, and especially if it could be applied hot, it appears to us that
it would be as likely to prove effectual as any wash we can think of less potent than
the kerosene. It would be interesting to experiment with lye of different degrees of
strength; and if, as we have intimated, it could be served out hot from a large kettle
set in the orchard, it would undoubtedly be more effectual, and would require the
lye to be of less strength.

We have stated that this treatment must be limited to about three weeks in the
year, being the time- between the laying and the hatching of the eggs. The reader
may ask how he can definitely determine this time. No fixed time can be stated in
advance. It may vary nearly amonth, according to season and latitude. The only
way to determine it is to examine the trees from time to time, in the edge of the
evening when the moths are most active, and observe when they have stopt run-
ning for the season; give a week longer to make sure that they have al] gone up, and
_ then scrape the trees and apply the wash between this time and the hatching of the
eggs, which takes place about the time the apple leaves are beginning to expand,
and the red currant to blossom.

JARRING AND BURNING.—‘ Vigilance is the price of reward, and as #t
is always easier to prevent than to cure, it were well for the owners of
young orchards, in neighborhoods where the Canker Worm is known
to exist, to keep a sharp lookout for it, so that upon its first appear-
ance the evil may be nipped in the bud. Inthe same manner that it is
exterminated in the individual orchard, in like manner, it may, by con-
cert of action, be exterminated from any given locality.

‘¢'The worms should not be allowed to reach the leaves, but where they
have thus been allowed it is best to strew the ground lightly with straw
on a calm day, give the tree a good jarring, which will suspend all the
worms in mid-air, cut loose the suspended worms by swinging a pole
above them, which breaks their silken threads and causes them to fall
to the ground, and then set fire to the straw. A Canker Worm holo-
caust will be the result and if this is done on a calm, clear day, with a
jittle care the tree need not be injured. Even if the fire is not made,
the worms may be prevented from returning to the tree by the same
means which were employed to keep off the perfect females.”

WASHES AND DUSTINGS.—Itis said than some persons have saved their
trees from these insects by freely dusting air-slacked lime over them
while the leaves were wet with dew. Showering the trees with mix-
tures that are found useful to destroy other insects has been tried by a
few, and although attended with a good deal of trouble and expense, it

192 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. ~

may be worth our while to apply such remedies upon small and choice ,

trees.

Dr. Harris tells us (p. 339)’” that Mr. David Haggerston, of Water-
town, Mass., has used for this purpose a mixture of water and oil-soap
(an article to be procured from the manufactories where whale-oil is
purified), in the porportion of one pound of the soap to seven gallons of
water; and he states that this liquor, when thrown on the trees with a
garden engine, will destroy the Canker Worm and many other insects
without injuring the foliage or the fruit.

PARIS GREEN.—Mr. EH. F’. Curtis, of Rockford, Ill., described, in 1874,
the successful use by him of Paris green in water, as had been sug-
gested by Dr. Le Baron. He applied this mixture—a table-spoonful of
Paris green to a dozen quarts of water—with a large syringe, to destroy
the worms on the leaves. He says: ‘When the worms are all hatched,
as near[ly] as can be judged, give the trees a good wetting down, and
if afterward it is discovered that they were not all killed, put on more,
but usually one wetting will answer. I know orchards that in 1872
were covered with this worm, the foliage and fruit crop completely
destroyed, that were treated as above last year [1873] with perfect suc-
cess—the worms killed, and the orchards produced fine crops of apples.
This liquid will not only destroy the Canker Worm, but the myriads of
insects that are to[o] small to be seen upon the foliage of the trees.
One party says that after using it last year ijn his orchard the foliage
made such a luxuriant growth and so dark a green that it was almost
black.’% It can be used just as safely in the flower-garden, destroying
the insects that infest the shrubbery, as in the orchard.”

MURIATE OF LIME.—“ As for muriate of lime (7. e., burnt oyster-shells
and salt, to be strewn upon the ground), which has been so earnestly
recommended as a preventive, by interested parties, here is what Mr.
Sanford Howard says of it in the Western Rural of August 18, 1866,
and Mr. Joseph Breck, editor of the old American Journal of Horticult-
ure; G. C. Brackett; correspondent of the Maine Farmer, and severak
other persons with whom I am acquainted, all testify, after having
thoroughly tried it, to its utter worthlessness for this purpose:

‘The editor of the Farmer says, there are statements to the effect
that a substance called Gould’s muriate of lime, applied to the soil in
autumn, had entirely prevented the subsequent appearance of Canker
Worms on trees standing on the ground, although the trees had pre-
viously been much damaged by the insect. It is also stated that on

other trees, not ten rods distant, where none of the so-called muriate of .

lime was applied, the worms were very destructive.
“T cannot think that this amounts to any proof that the substance
applied destroyed the worms, or had any effect on them. The non-

102 Report on insects.
103 This blackness was probably caused by the injury which the poison did to the leaves.]

eZ

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 193

appearance of the insect in the case alluded to, was probably due to
other causes. If this substance will kill or injure the insect in any of
its stages, it would be easy to prove it by a direct application to soil
containing insects, in a box. Several years ago, I took pains to make
a particular experiment with this so-called muriate of lime, the result
of which was that the Canker Worm underwent its transformations
naturally, and to all appearance healthfully, in a soil composed, of
nearly fifty per cent. of the articles of which it was said a small propor-

tion only was necessary to totally destroy them. If the substance is _

the same in composition now that it was then, it 1s reasonable to sup-
pose that the result of its application would be the same.”

PLUGGING SULPHUR IN THE TREE.—The often repeated recommen-
dation to bore holes in the trunk of the tree with an auger, fill the hole
with sulphur, and close the orifice tightly with a plug, which originated,
some years since, in the inventive brain of some Prairie Farmer corre-
_spondent, is altogether too absurd to need consideration; for it is well
known to entomologists that many caterpillars will thrive exceedingly
well on leaves that have been thickly sprinkled with sulphur, so that
the impregnation of the leaves with the sulphur, if it took place, would
be of no avail; and, moreover, it is also known that the sulphur thus
introduced will remain unchanged and unabsorbed in the tree for years,
- having no effect upon the leaves whatever. The same may be said of
the use of quicksilver in the same way. The practice of driving nails
into the tree for the same purpose is equally absurd.

FALL PLOWING.—‘ A good deal has been said both for and against
fall plowing, and the following discussion, which took place at the No-
vember (1863) meeting of the Alton (IIL) Horticultural Society, will
afford a sample of the different opinions held by individuals:

‘Dr. Long took the ground that fall plowing was one of the best and
surest means of eradicating those insects which stay in the ground over
winter. He said, some five or six years ago my orchard was badly in-
fested with the Canker Worm; by late cultivation, I almost, i not en-
tirely, got rid of them.

“Dr. HULL. I do not believe that fall plowing will destroy the lar-
ve of insects to any extent. I have dug up frozen lumps containing
larve that were not affected by freezing. I think the Canker Worm
will not spread here as in New England.

“J. HuGeins. I have been led to believe—contrary to Dr. Hull’s
statement—that they will spread, and feel that there is great danger
of their spreading. I believe fall plowing a great aid in the extermi-

~

nation of them. Cites a case where they have been almost entirely

dest: oyed by late plowing, in an orchard that was nearly ruined by them.
“Dr, HULL. If it be true that they will spread, why is it that none of
Dr. Long’s neighbors have them? He says he was badly overrun with
them, and the fact that his neighbors were not, I think confirmation of
my statement that they will not spread.
| 13) Ole

194 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

‘¢Dr. Lone. My brother’s orchard, adjoining mine, had double as many
asmy own. He fall plowed, and bas very few left. He also cites the
case of an old orchard, in this section, that was almost destroyed by
them, but fall plowing has almost, if not entirely, destroyed them.”

The following item, from the New York Weekly Tribune of February
26, 1869, also bears on this point:

CANKER WORMS DESTROYED BY PLOWING.—Mr. McNeil Witherton, in answer to
W. V. Monroe’s request: ‘‘I will state that I think that the Canker Worm can be de-
stroyed by plowing the ground where they are late in the fall. The 28th of Novem-
ber, 1867, I was at my son David’s, in Wisconsin. He told me that the Canker Worms
were in his orchard, and had injured his apple trees very much the past season; that
a mali who owns a nursery and keeps apple trees for sale, went into the orchard and
examined the trees and worms, and said it was the Canker Worm that was injuring
his orchard. I told him that about fifty years ago they had been in my father’s or-
chard some six years, and killed a large number of the trees; that we plowed it late
in the fall, and have never seen the Canker Worm there since. I advised him to
plow his orchard immediately. The next day he plowed it asgfar as the worms had
been in it. I received a letter from him a few weeks ago, stating that the Canker
Worms were not in his orchard this year, and those trees that were injured and not
killed last year revived some this year.” :

Mr. Cyrus Thomas reprints, in the Sixth Illinois Report, 1876, p.
21, an extract from the Western Rural, in which the writer states that
in the last of June, after the worms had left the trees and burrowed in
the ground, he plowed or summer fallowed one of his orchards which
had been eaten; he afterwards cross-piowed it and sowed it with rye.
The next year he caught no moths in this orchard, the foliage was not
eaten at all, and he had a good crop of apples on it, while all of his
other orchards, though tarred, were badly eaten, and he had no crop of
apples on them. ;

‘¢ Now there is no doubt but late fall plowing will produce somewhat
different effects, according to the character of the soil, the depth of the
plowing, and especially the species of the insect to be dealt with, but
that it is more‘ generally beneficial than otherwise as a means against
the spring species I am perfectly convineed, and as for the assertion of
Mr. William P. Lippineott, of Vernon, Iowa, made some time ago, in the
lowa Homestead, namely, that it left the ground full of harbors for the
next year’s breeding, it suffices to say that the insect does not breed in
the ground, and, holes or no holes, the worms will penetrate the soil
whenever the time arrives to change to chrysalis. After the summer
months the insect invariably lies in the chrysalis state snugly entombed
in a little earthen cell very thinly lined with silk, from two to six inches
- below the surface. This cell, though frail, is a sufficient protection, so
long as it is whole, from any excess of moisture, and at the same time
prevents too much evaporation in case of summer drought or dry winter
freezing. Here the distinction between the two species, in the manner
in which the cocoon is constructed, is particularly important, from the

practical standpoint.

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORMS. 195

“The Spring Canker Worm, with iis chrysalis formed in asimple earthen
eavity, will be very materially affected by late fall plowing of ‘the soil,
especially if the soil be of such nature as to crumble easily; for I have
proved by experiment that whenever this fragile cocoon is disturbed or
broken open in cold weather, as it very readily is by disturbance of the
soil, at that season the chrysalis has not the power to penetrate the
ground again or to form a second cavity, and in the great majority of
instances either rots, dries out, becomes moldy, or, if on the surface, is
destroyed by birds.

“Hiven summer plowing,.if performed after the first of July would
work beneficially; and it is for this reason, that clean, well-cultivated
orchards are more free from the attacks of this insect, than slovenly
and neglected ones. The only advantage of late fall plowing, lies in the
faets, that the chrysalis is at that time too benumbed to work itself into
the ground and form another cell, and that birds are then harder pushed
for food, and more watchful for any such dainty morceau.

“As to the efficiency of hogs, in rooting up and devouring the chrys-
alids, during the summer months, abundant favorable testimony might
be cited; but the facts are too obvious to need argument.

““ With the Fall Canker Worm, on the contrary, these measures will
avail little, if anything; for the cocoon, composed of a thick layer of
yielding silk strengthened by the interweaving of particles of earth, can-
not be broken open by any such processes, and a dozen plowings would
not expose a single chrysalis. Without doubt we have in these facts a
yalid explanation of the contradictory experience as to the value of fall
plowing or the use of hogs in an orchard as canker-worm checks.

‘Phat the breaking open of the chrysalis of the Fall species would be
equally injurious to that species seems to be shown by the result of
experiments which I made in 1875, in trying to raise the perfect insects
from cocoons which I had cut open in order to examine the chrysalids.
From 58 chrysalids, two of which were males and the rest females, I
obtained only 2 male and 25 female imagos; the remainder all perished
by rot, induced doubtless by this premature opening of the cocoons.”

Dr. Harris says™ that Mr. 8. P. Fowler and Mr. John Kenrick, of
Newton, Mass., advise us to remove the soil to the distance of four or
five feet from the trunk of the trees, and to the depth of six inches, to
eart it away, and replace it with an equal quantity of compost or rich
earth. In this way many of the insects will be removed also; but unless
the earth thus carried away is thrown into some pond-hole, and left
covered with water, many of the insects contained in it will undergo
their transformations and come out alive next year.

ENCOURAGEMENT OF BIRDS—BREEDING OF PARASITES.

It is well known that in Philadelphia, as in many other eastern cities,
the Canker Worm was formerly a great nuisance, not only because of the

104 Report on Insects of Massachusetts, pp. 339-340.

196 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

injury it did to the elms and other shade trees, but because it was con-
tinually spinning down on persons who pempeneay to be passing under-
neath the infested trees.

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT RESULT FROM THE DIFFERENCES
IN THE TWO SPECIES.—The illustration of the differences between the
two species of Canker Worms may seem unimportant and trivial to the
horticulturist, however much they may interest the entomologist. Yet
it is of much practical importance to know how to make the distinc-
tion. From present knowledge of the subject, it is highly probable
that, just as the moths of the one species appear mostly in early spring,
and of the other mostly late in the fall, so each is, in a general sense,
confined to particular plants (though eel exclusively so), the Spring
_ Species preferring our fruit trees, and the Fall species preferring the
elm. Thus the time to put forth our efforts to catch and destroy the
wingless moths will vary according to the nature of the tree to be pro-
tected and the insect to be dealt with...

‘In the case of the Spring species, the eggs being secreted, for the
most part, under loose bark, the scraping of the tree and otherwise
cleansing it of dead leaves, cocoons, larva-cases, &c., a short time before
the hatching of the worms, or before the buds of the tree commence to
open, will prove an effectual preventive measure; as thereby many of
the eggs will be destroyed. Moreover, a tree kept clean of loose bark
will be less subject to its attacks. The same argument will not apply
to the Fall species, which attaches its eggs in any exposed position. It
would seem, also, that the mode of trapping the moths will have to be
somewhat modified, according to the species to be dealt with; for while
Dr. LeBaron found the tin and rope trap described above so effectual
with the Spring Canker Worm, it does not appear to afford a complete.
barrier to the Fall species, judging from the following notes, kindly fur-
nished by Mr. Mann. It will be noticed that Mr. Mann used zine instead
of tin, from its less liability to rust.

Noy. 8, 1873. Warm last night, with rain, which still continues. Found 259 and
one f pometaria. Found 4 of the 9 above the LeBaron zine band.

Nov. 9. Found 2 4, 37 2 pometaria ; 29 above the zinc band.

Noy. 12. Snow last night, followed by cold sleet. Found 99 pometaria, 1 above
the zine.

Nov. 15. Only 69 pometaria; none above the band. Last three days freezing cold,
but not stormy. kK

Noy. 18. Several days of rain and snow. 19 pometaria.

Nov. 22. 69,2 gpometaria.

Dec. 4. Yesterday thawing; to-day also. The weather since Nov. 22 has been cold,
with occasional snow, and the ground has been frozen, and I have failed to find any
Anisopteryx pometaria; but to-day I caught 11¢,1029,2Q above the zinc band. Ihave
no doubt that the smallness of the number of 9 found above the bands of zinc is due
to my promptness and diligence in detecting and destroying them before they have
had time to mount the tree; because, according to the theory on which the experiment.
was tried, the 9? ought to be found on the outside of the strips, if their ascent has been.
prevented by them; while in fact (excluding those found on the house or fence, &c.),.
the majority of the 9 have been caught before they reached the bands; further, be-

REMEDIES AGAINST CANKER WORM. AGT

cause I tried the experiment with 3 or 49, and found that as soon as they reached the
top of the band, they climbed: over it, and began to ascend the tree. Being satisfied
by this positive evidence, which would outweigh any amount of negative evidence
from those who have not seen it, I put printers’ ink on the outside of the zine strips.
41 found that the ink was more quickly chilled or dried by being on the zine, so last
winter I pulled it off and inked paper bands applied closely to the trunk.)

Dec. 5. Colder, 253,719 pometaria. The greater proportion of the f than formerly
is explained by considering that most of them were stuck to the ink, whereas formerly
they could hide away byday. It is to be noticed that although some imagos appeared
before the frost, they only swarm after it, justifying the farmers’ saying that you
must have a frost to bring the canker-grubs out.

‘‘ Jn brief, all the more important measures to be pursued in our war-
fare against the Spring Canker Worm—such as the use of hindrances
to the ascensions of the moths in spring; the removal of all loose bark,
and keeping the trunk and limbs as smooth and clean as possible; the
employment of hogs, and fall plowing—are, in the main, useless as directed
against the Fall Canker Worm, which must be fought principally by traps
or barriers applied to the tree in the fall to prevent the climbing of the
moths, which mostly issue at that season. Important points like these
cannot be too often insisted on, because I find that our horticultural
writers yet very generally speak of THE Canker Worm as though there
were only one species in the country, and give general directions which
of course are more or less misleading. I find, too, that even where the
differences pointed out have been recognized, they have not always
been properly apprehended, as has been shown; so that in the report of
a lecture before the lowa Agricultural College it is erroneously stated
that the eggs of the Fall Canker Worm hatch in the fall of the year,
whereas, while the moths rise and lay their eggs at that season, these
eggs do not hatch any earlier than do those of the Spring species.”

The undeniable difficulties in coping with these insects, arising from
@ natural disinclination of men to fix their attention and perseverance so
long upon one object, although the means are so simple, have discouraged
many orchardists; and the editor of the New England Farmer, in answer
to a correspondent, advises the felling and burning of all infested
trees from one end of the State to the other, by virtue of a special law
to be passed for that purpose, “even if it takes all summer and every
militia man in the State to execute the order.” }

Mr. B. D. Walsh, in commenting on this advice™ says:—“Instead |
of advising the Michigan legislature to pass a law for cutting down
and destroying all trees infested by the Canker Worm, why not advise
them to pass a law compelling the owners of infested trees to tar
them as above specified? Or, better still, because more certain to be
effectual, to pass a law organizing a paid corps of men in the infested
distriets to do the work? There would then be no occasion to call out the
militia. A man might shoulder his rifle, if he saw the sheriff and his
posse coming, ax in hand, to cut down his orchard; but he would only
laugh when he saw them charging, double-quick, upon his apple-trees,
with presented tar-brushes.”

™Pract. Entom., v. 2, p. 16-17.

CHAP ar Rove 1

THE HESSIAN FLY—ITS RAVAGES, HABITS, AND THE
MEANS OF PREVENTING ITS INCREASE.

ENTER OGD UCLTLOX .

Next to the Rocky Mountain Locust, the Cotton Worm, and Chinch

Bug, the Hessian Fly is at present the most destructive of our noxious

insects. It attacks wheat, our most important agricultural product, and

at times has been so abundant as to cause farmers to abandon the cult-

ure of this grain over large sections of the Union. While the fly has

been well known and destructive for about a century, the vast extension

within a decade of years of the wheat-growing area of the West, and the

corresponding prevalence of the fly in the Northern Central States, to-

gether with its wide-spread destructiveness, have given fresh interest

and importance to this pest. Moreover, the cultivation of wheat in the

New England States, where about twenty years ago it was abandoned |
on account of the ravages of this fly and the Wheat Midge, has been re-

Sumed in part, so that the dissemination over the wheat area of the

United States of the known facts in regard to its habits and mode of
doing injury scems necessary. This area, as Seen in part by the map”
appended to this chapter, which has been compiled from Walker’s Sta-
tistical Atlas, embraces all of the United States north of the 35th par-
allel of latitude and east of the 93d meridian, with the addition of tracts
in Dakota, Montana, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah, as well as in
California, Oregon, and Washington Territory. These last-named wheat
areas were not mapped by General Walker, and have been omitted on
the present map, since the Hessian Fly is no known to exist west of
eastern Kansas.

Though the habits of the Hessian Fly are tolerably well known, much
additional knowledge is desirable regarding its distribution, its breeding
habits, and its parasites, while, in order to properly apply the best pre-
ventive remedies, to stamp out the pest as it appears in new wheat sec-
tions, we need the results of a larger number of experiments as to the
effects of early and late sowing, what varieties of wheat to sow, and as
to the value of manures and artificial fertilizers in promoting the rapid
and healthy growth of the young wheat, by which it may outgrow the
weakening effects of the worm and ripen its grain.

106 Reprinted, with some alterations and additions, from Bulletin No.4 of the U. S. Entomological
Commission.
107 This map is based on the one which appeared in Bulletin No. 7, put with corrections aa additions.

1938

REPORT 3,U.S.ENTOMOL

1,

a 09
Hae SYA
9 XY)

(ai
Re

\

AN ;

i
UP RRRES |
RON RNR |

Yee mt ks “ry 7, kK
7 hs 2; ays 4 ‘ YX)
Pi Lnfy “Ve AREA RE
| 5 207, NOON Morar We
Brag se shin Kine

yee)
wile jae

ene
Ree

: Zi
QDR!

Ape

J KEXS iil

Lo is
IM gN ce

X We if

\

pa
ey
y
a

| y; ey \eHatteres
YU
Te

MAP
SHOWING APPROXIMATE DISTRIBUTION
of the ;
HESSIAN FLY
BY A.S.PACKARD JR.
Prepared forthe Department of Agriculture
Y meee Limit of Wheat Cultivation.
east of RockyMountains.-
MOR Distribution of Hessian Fly.
Scale of Statcte Miles.

25

I - EN}
A
i ((
SpA
GE
LiF a
Vm

SS

To — If
I /
FY

S

50 100 150 200 250 306 350 400

eR
(i

mati

V7

Hetiotjpe Printing Co. Boston

40

REPORT 3,U.S.ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

(ps

/ 4645,
/ Peace &

(

nb

— =U m3
z, : ; I : | i Say; , Wy sian
Zig fy Oli ZN E u Bey Of bu PA AVG Hl i . ck x Ah Ny aN
leg, i ga Five De us
: ae tb, Ri é BOI FANN EN ye y a \
; @ fe i . SHRI TNE hase RY AEMNINNSS RN Wa
Sa : ~ ROE

,
NE
x 9,
mm
rea AE Sa SR Gian he
x ° RS y
ARENDS EAN
AY a he f
VN9,

Aine
VOY
SHUN ns
Honey SAN Manns
Ny TB ae
OOo i WANG
A? RR Seah
KX
NES Ne BH
OOF Ay Ae AR
Mati NY

WARIO HH %
x ANY s AY
PORE Oh NyiNe ANN
UR RUE 0) Poe Ne
ANON Risk ROR “ SH) f
CNC AAO NUN COMUNE Ny ae
TR 2 ROO y
ee A RRR
aN i as BY AY Ms

}

ie
Wee
SONY BAY Rh eee?
” < AXA OAK
ANON RATTAN en an
RR 3 wa As .
Ne ASN oy
ee RDS ee a
RYE
DOO:
Mh

,
Ay
ONIN
RORY

XY
He Ny a
BO { q ;
atest) Y MAP
a Le eae, SHOWING APPROXIMATE DISTRIBUTION” |
NN Wy of the
Nas (( Uh
RO me oe | HESSIAN FLY
aa \\ j BY A.S. PACKARD JR.
\\ | Prepared forthe Department of Agriculture
\ | —-—-= [mit of Wheat Cultivation| .
east of RockyMountains-
(RM Distribution of Hessian Ely.
fiche Mie

Li"

Helictine Printing CooBostorn

LOSSES OCCASIONED BY THE HESSIAN FLY. 199

Although this chapter has been prepared by but one member of the
Commission,:the writer is indebted to Prof. C. V. Riley for drawings,
specimens, and data; to Professor Thomas for facts and suggestions; and
he would also acknowledge aid received from Prof. A. J. Cook, of the
State Agricultural College, Lansing, Mich., whose address on the Hes-
sian Fly has been of much service and liberally quoted, and also from

the correspondents and agricultural papers mentioned here and there in
the following pages.

LOSSES OCCASIONED BY THE HESSIAN FLY.

This fly first became a serious pest in the country in the year 1779,
although, as will be seen further on in the section on the distribution
of the insect, it probably began its work of destruction on Staten Island
and Long Island in 1776. According to Fitch, 1779 was probably the
date when its ravages actually began. ‘‘The crops of wheat were severely |
injured or wholly destroyed by it in King and Richmond Counties dur-
' ing several of the following years, and each succeeding generation regu-
larly enlarged the sphere of its devastations in every direction.”

In 1781 the fly almost totally destroyed the wheat crop in eastern
Long Island, and in 1786 the crops were either totally or partially de-
stroyed in New Jersey in and about Prospect, an area situated forty
. miles southwest of Staten Island. In 1786 and 1787 the ravages of this
pest attracted much attention in New York and Pennsylvania; the
wheat crop on eastern Long Island having been “cut off almost uni-
versally.” About Trenton, N. J., in 1788, the wheat crop was in many
cases a total failure. As wheat in large quantities was at this period
exported to Great Britain, ‘‘ accounts of the appalling havoe that this
insect was making excited the attention of the government there and
aroused their fears lest so dreadful a scourge should be introduced into
that country by means of the American grain.” (Fitch.) <As a result,
the exportation of grain from America was prohibited until the English
Government was assured that the fly with eggs could not be introduced
in the grain. As long since as 1800, Dr. 8. L. Mitchell, of New York,
atfirmed that “the insect is more formidable to us than would be an
army of twenty thousand Hessians.” (Herrick.)

Between 1789 and 1803 severe losses ensued from its attacks i in Sara-
toga and Washington Counties, New York; “on two or three occasions
many of the fields in Saratoga were entirely destroyed.”

In 1804 President Dwight, of Yale College, remarked that. “ this in-
sect is feeble and helpless in the extreme, defenseless against the least
enemy, and crushed by the most delicate touch; yet for many years it
has taxed this country annually more, perhaps, than a million of dol-
lars.” (Herrick.)

In 1803 and 1804, in the neighborhood of Richmond, Va., “ they swept
whole fields.” In 1817 it “renewed its ravages in various sections of

200 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the country; was unusually abundant,” and “in parts of Maryland and
Virginia it was perhaps more destructive than it had ever been before.”

At what year the Hessian Fly first occurred in the New England
States is uncertain; so far as we can ascertain it was first noticed at
New Haven, Conn., in 1833, by Mr. Herrick, a careful entomologist, but
without doubt it was introduced from New York early in the century.

In Lower Canada it was, according to Hind,’® between 1805 and 1816,
‘prevalent and destr uctive in some nae but in 1830~36 it cee
peared in Lower Canada.

The fly first appeared in 1837 at Paw Paw, Mich., in ae second crop
sown in Van Buren County; none had been raised at a point nearer
than twelve miles. . (D. Woodman.)

The Hessian Fly has been known in Person County, North Carolina,
for fifty years; and another correspondent ues us from Goldsborough,
N. C., that— |
ples to the period, say 1840, our farmers had been accustomed to sow wheat as
early as September, but a fly, called by them the “‘ Hessian Fly,” so depredated that
they deferred sowing to the latter part of November, and now, generally, to “ between

the Christmases” (new and old Christmas); their crop is now unmolested by the Hes-
sian or any other fly.

The losses in Pennsylvania i in 1842 were Nee the wheat crop of the
State being estimated at 20 per cent. less than in the preceding year,
the fly being the principal cause of the loss. At this year Ohio was
visited by it, when “it appeared to be increasing so much that serious
Forme cucions were beginning to be felt respecting its future ravages. u
(Fitch.) !

Great havoc in many fields i in Maryland and Virginia was committed
by it.in 1843. In the following year it did much injury in northern
Indiana and Illinois and the contiguous parts of Michigan and Wiscon-
sin, in many places occasioning “almost a total failure of the crops.”
In Michigan the wheat crop was almost an entire failure. On Long Isl-
and, at Rochester, N. Y., and throughout Pennsylvania the losses this
year were severe; the following year it did more or less injury all over
- the State of Illinois, while in the central parts of Maryland the crops, in
many instances, were rendered totally worthless. ‘In Georgia, more-
over, its ravages in the counties around Milledgeville are said to have
been dreadful; whole fields were totally destroyed, and others yielded
not more than a fourth of an ordinary crop.” ~— 3

In 1846, in the upper counties of Georgia, it was said ‘the fly has
committed such ravages upon the wheat as scarcely to leave enough
seed for another year.” Throughout the State of New York it was de-
structive this year; in the western section the loss from this insect was
estimated at not less than 500,000 bushels. In Maryland this same year
(1846), as recorded by Fitch, ‘so great ravages have not been commit-
ted by the Hessian Fly since 1817. On some of the best land wheat has

108 Essay on Insects and Diseases injurious to the Wheat Crops, by H. Y. Hind, Toronto, Canada,
1857, 8°, p. 139.

LOSSES OCCASIONED BY THE HESSIAN FLY. 201

been plowed up, and other portions are so much injured that they will
not be worth harvesting. At least one-half of the crop of Talbot County
has been destroyed.” And in the upper counties of Georgia it is said
“the fly has committed such ravages upon the wheat as scarcely to leave ©
enough seed for another year.”

In 1847 the losses were generally widespread but light, while in 1849
it was destructive in some of the counties in New York, and especially
in Ohio. From this date until 1853 it was not destructive, but this year
it “‘committed great ravages in some parts of Pennsylvania.” In 1854
it was destructive in Aroostook County, Maine, as well as in Michigan.

From 1855 to 1860 the Hessian Fly attracted little attention from the
agricultural community. In 1860 the fly ‘‘had reached as far west as
Iowa and Minnesota, and in 1863 the wheat-fields along the Detroit and
Milwaukee Railroad promised nothing because of the ravages of this
pest.” (Professor Cook.) In 1866 it is reported to have occurred in
Maryland, Delaware, and Ohio, and in 1868, according to a writer in the
_ American Entomologist, about Fond du Lac, Wis., “much of the wheat
crop was damaged by it.”

In 1871 it was generally prevalent throughout the Middle States from
South and North Carolina and Virginia to Missouri northward; also oc-
eurring in Kansas, Georgia, and Minnesota, and in 1872 and 1873 was
destructive and widespread in Maryland, Ohio, Indiana, [linois, and
eastern as well as western Virginia, as well as in Michigan, ‘as also in
the States south and west” of the last-named commonwealth.

In 1874 it was widespread, but much less destructive; in 1875 and
1876 it was especially destructive in Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Vir-
ginia. In 1876 “it appeared in force in many of the southern counties
of Michigan, reaching as far north as Mason, in Ingham County, caus-
ing much destruction.” (Professor Cook.)

In 1877 the losses again became heavy over a large part of the wheat
area. At Lawrence, Kans., the early-sown wheat ‘suffered a good deal
from the ravages of the Hessian Fly.” At Gardner, Kans., all early-
sown wheat “ was full” of the “flaxseed” of the Hessian Fly. At Saint
Genevieve, Mo., the fly was ‘much worse than for years past.” At In-
dependence, Mo., the crop in some fields was nearly a failure. In Hen-
derson County, Kentucky, while prevalent, only one wheat-field was
“badly damaged”; while in Vanderburgh County, Indiana, ‘‘ many fields
were infected.” In central Illinois a correspondent of the Cultivator
and Country Gentleman states that ‘‘the Hessian Fly has been present
in the lower portion of the winter-wheat region for several years,” and
in 1877 “it appears that the Hessian Fly is generally present in greater
or less numbers over the whole winter-wheat region; that in almost every
case it has attacked and done more or less damage to early-sown wheat-
fields.” 7
" 109Tn his seventh report, written apparently in 1862, Dr. Fitch remarks: ‘ We hear of it at the present

time as very destructive in Illinois and some of the contiguous States, the crop in many wheat-fields
being totally ruined by it.”

202. REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

In Michigan the fly, while troublesome in 1876, was also very generally
so in the succeeding year, as stated by Professor Cook, as follows:

This year, 1877, we hear of it as more broadly distributed in our State, while com-
plaints come to our ears from Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, New York, and Pennsyivania.
Since writing the above, I have passed through our State and also the State of Ohio,
on two of the different trunk lines of railroads, and I find that all through southern
Michigan and all of Ohio, at least north of the latitude of Columbus and Dayton, this
insect abounds in force.?!°

The following extracts from Michigan papers show the situation in
that State this year:

Farmers are complaining of the ravages of the “fly” in their wheat-fields. Much
damage is reported.—Jonesville Independent.

Mr. James Taylor showed some wheat-stalks from his farm to-day which had over
forty insects in one stalk.—Kalamazoo Gazette.

Wheat heading out ten days to two weeks earlier than usual this year, and doubt-
less much of it will be ready to cut in June.—Portland Observer.

The ‘‘fly” or ‘‘insect,” as called by the farmers, is playing sad havoc with the
wheat cropin this county. Not over half acrop will be realized.—Kalamazoo Gazette.

The fly is very seriously injuring the wheat in Porter. One of the largest farmers
in that township yesterday told us that a few weeks ago he would not have taken 3,000
bushels for his crop, but now he would gladly take 1,000.—Pan Pam Ceurier.

Much complaint is now heard from all sides in regard to the work of the insects in
early-sown wheat. The dry weather has so far retarded the growth as to give the
pests the power to destroy. There is little question that early-sown wheat is suf-
fering greatly.—Marshall Expounder.

Farmers from all over the county come to town looking doleful enough. The wheat
crop promises to be almost a total failure. Two weeks ago everybody was happy over

the prospects of an abundant harvest, but now flies, worms, and drought seem to

have ruined the crop and blighted every home.—WMarshall Statesman.

Farmers from all the adjoining towns complain that their growing wheat crops are
badly injured by the insects. Wheat-fields which promised a heavy yield two weeks
ago, it is thought, will not produce over a half a crop, and many fields are reported as
already nearly destroyed. Naturally some allowance should be made for the appre-
hensions of those whose fields are thus ravaged; but there is no doubt that the crop
through this section is materially damaged by these destructive pests.—Batile Creek
Journal.

Mr. T. F. Miller, of Richland, brought into our office Monday morning a handful of
wheat (taken from a farm on the prairie) that is literally alive with the insect. He
says that in his opinion nearly every field in Richland is so badly affected that there
cannot be half or even a third of acrop. The dry weather has stopped the growth,
and the wheat is more affected on that account. We hear thesame report from other
parts of the county. Grain is also suffering for want of rain.—Kalamazoo Gazette.

The following extract from the Albany Cultivator and Country Gentle-
man will give the condition of affairs in West Virginia:

Since reading your article making known Mr. A. S. Packard’s request, in the issue
of November 15, I have had occasion to make a business trip through Hardy, Hamp-
shire, Mineral, and Grant Counties, and find upon examination that there is not a
single field which is not more or less damaged by the fly. The early-sown wheat, hay-
ing luxuriant growth, does not seem to be entirely destroyed, but has the appearance
of mixed yellow and green. I find, upon close examination, it is filled with the fly.

10The Hessian Fly. <A lecture by Prof. A. J. Cook, of the Michigan State Agricultural College, de-
livered at Farmer’s Institute held at Paw Paw and Climax, Mich. 1878, 8vo., p. 14.

vr ee ee se eee eee

LOSSES OCCASIONED BY THE HESSIAN FLY. 203

Other fields, sown after corn-cutting, show a greater amount of damage; one in par-
ticular, a limestone upland, was scarcely tinted with green, the fly having already
consumed nearly the whole of it. My course from this point was north and west. I
find that the farther north I travel the more damaged is the wheat. In this (Hardy)
county the damage, so far, appears not to be material. Some crops of early-sown
wheat were considerably shortened last year, the first year in many that we have felt
the -effects of the fly. One farmer, whose wheat seemed already a failure, asked me
what he should do. I advised when the land was dry, or hard frozen, to put all the
sheep he could get upon it, and keep them there until they had eaten it off as close as
a sheep could nip, as the only remedy. -I thought that the sheep could do no worse
than what must be eventually done by the fly, and it might save the crop. He asked
me if I thought the insect would be ‘‘ wholesome for the sheep.” This I could not
answer, and refer the query to you.—R. M. W., Moorfield, W. Va.

A correspondent of the same paper thus records the injury done by
this insect about Syracuse, N. Y.:

Wheat sown early, from the Ist to the 20th of September, has made an extraordinary
growth. The fine weather was favorable; besides more care has been paid to good
culture than before. The seed also has been selected, cleaned, and graded with greater
care, showing much progress. From apperances now, it will result ina loss. Whole
fields, and parts of others, are turning yellow, showing the ravages of the fly to a
larger extent than I ever before witnessed. It began to turn yellow on knolls, or where
the plaster rock came near the surface, and was thought only the etfect of dry weather,
but now it has extended all over early-sown fields. Should the warm weather con-
tinue, great injury will result to the entire crop, as it has been sown much earlier than

usual and haslooked remarkably fair. Latersowing, with a greater breadth of spring
“wheat, is the only remedy now offered. Will other parties in different sections make
an examination and send notes?—C., Syracuse, N. Y.

While, so far as we have been able to iearn, no serious damage, if any,
has been done to wheat in New England by this pest since 1854, in
western Canada it again became abundant in 1874, but most injurious
in 1876 and1877. In 1876 it appeared in great force in the townships of
Anabel, North Bruce, Grey, and Kippel.

In 1878, the losses were still heavy in southern and central Mich-
igan, but in 1879 the insect seemed to be moving northward, the great-
est amount of injury being sustained in the northern part of the Pile,
the fly being scarce in the middle of the State.

As regards its abundance in southeastern Michigan in 1878 and 1879,
Mr. F.S. Sleeper, of Galesburg, near Kalamazoo, writes me as follows

In February, 1878, I noticed what was to mesomething new. The month was very
warm and spring-like. For nearly three weeks the temperature did not reach the
freezing point. About the middle of the month I nsticed many flies flying over the
wheat and depositing their eggs, but, so far as I could see, none reached the “ flax-
seed” state. Ihave several times noticed the fly depositing her eggs as late in the
autumn as October 26.

Since the summer of 1877 no very serious damage was done until last spring (1879).
Then the fly put in an appearance. On the 26th of May, above one field of wheat the
air was almost black with them. I never saw such a sight before. I had fears that
the fall-sown wheat would be badly damaged, but it is not so, as none but early-sown
_ wheat is damaged in the least. I presume it isowing to the fact that September was.
cold, so that probably the sudden atmospheric changes destroyed all that had not
reached the pupa state.

204 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

In 1878 it did great damage in Dickson County, Tennessee. In Mary-
land, the winter wheat in the neighborhood of Baltimore, Md., was, in
1879 and the spring of 1880, seriously affected. In central New York,
in Seneca and Tompkins Counties, considerable damage was done in
1878 and 1879. About Watertown, N. Y., some injury was done in 1879,
one field of wheat being ruined.

In 1879 apprehensions that injury would be caused by Ube fly were
felt in Lowell, N. C.

More or less damage was done to winter wheat in the fall of 1879 in
the following localities : Northampton County, Pennsylvania; Baltimore
and Frederick, Maryland; l’rince William, Green, Culpeper, Orange,
King William, Craig, Rockingham, and Amelia, Virginia; Henry and
Davidson, Tennessee; Morgan, Pleasants, Putnam, Wetzel, and Mason,
West Virginia; Bourbon, Carroll, Fayette, Lyon, McCracken, McLean,
Nicholas, Russel, Scott, Shelby, Fleming, Jessamine, Jefferson, and Ma-
son, Kentucky; Adams, Meigs, Portage, Union, Vinton, Mercer, and
Scioto, Ohio; Gratiot, Michigan; Decatur and Switzerland, Indiana;
Coles, Johnson, Livingston, Lawrence, Moultrie, Perry, and Union, LIl-
inois; Davis and Lee, lowa; Crawford, Washington, Perry, Sullivan,
Gasconade, Lincoln, and Saint Charles, Missouri; and Doniphan County,
Kansas.

In 1880 all of the South Aulante States suffered to a greater or less
extent, and the following localities are definitely mentioned in the crop
reports of that year: Brooks and Jackson Counties, Georgia; Collin,
Texas; Ballinger, Missouri; Nicholas, Kentucky; Pike, Ohio; Berry
and Saint Clair, Michigan; Marshall, Indiana; Dodge and Door, Wis-
¢onsin.

According to Professor Riley, in 1881 it was prevalent in Illinois ane
Missouri:

In many parts of central and southern Illinois and in Missouri this insect has been
reported as doing considerable damage, many farmers having to plow up their win-
ter wheat in consequence. Mr. Thomas H. B. Moulder, of Cane Pump, Camden
County, Missouri, sent the insect in the flax-seed state, the latter part of June, with
the statement that he had forty acres of wheat which all fell or broke down about
two weeks before ripening, from the insect’s injuries. The western agricultural
papers have had abundant notices of the Hessian Fly this season, but as our eastern
entomologists, as a rule, do not see those journals, it is more than probable that this
year would be put down by them as one in which the species was not heard of or
known. The present year is, however, not exceptional, and more or less injury has
been done by this insect in the West every year since we have given any attention
to entomology.—C. V. Riley, in American Naturalist, September, 1881, p. 750.

The counties reporting injury by the Hessian fly in 1881 are as fol-
lows: Tioga, New York; Hunterdon, New Jersey; Bucks, Cumberland,
Lebanon, Columbia, Northumberland, Pennsylvania; Anderson, and
Sumner, Tennessee; Harrison and Park, Indiana; Edwards, Wabash,
Lawrence, Fulton, Madison, Christian, Effingham, Clark, Edgar, Cum-
berland, Gallatin, Jasper and Shelby, Ulinois; Knox, Morrow, Allen
and Auglaize, Ohio; Lawrence, Madison, and Perry, Missouri.

RAVAGES OF THE HESSIAN FLY. 205

The following complete account of the appearances in 1882 is from
Special Report No. 42 of the United States Agricultural Department
(published April, 1882) :

In a large portion of the wheat area there has been absolute freedom
from the presence of this pest of former times. It has been reported
far more frequently in the eastern portion of the Ohio Valley than in
the western and beyond the Mississippi. A few districts on the Atlan-
tic coast have suffered from its visitations; the area sown in August
and very early in September receiving its exclusive attention. A care-
ful analysis of the extent of local injuries is given in the following par-
agraphs:

No injury is reported in New England, except a little in Litchfield
County, Connecticut, confined to sandy ground. In Wyoming County,
New York, fields commenced to turn yellow in spots early in the fall,
and the loss from the insect is estimated at 10 per cent. Very slight
damage is reported in Genesee, Ontario, Niagara, Columbia, Yates,
Monroe, and Herkimer. Scarcely appreciable loss is indicated in a few
districts in New Jersey, mainly in Salem, Warren, Mercer, aud Camden.

Pennsylvania has been comparatively exempt from insect injury. In
Tiuntingdon, a loss of 20 per cent. is reported ; in Lancaster, one-sixth,
from tooearly seeding. Onsome farms in Franklin large losses occurred.
. Very slight injury is reported in Lawrence. Westmoreland, Susque-
hanna, Clinton, Franklin, Bradford, and Dauphin are among the coun-
ties where the presence of the fly has been observed, though the dam-
age is small.

Maryland wheat has suffered very slight loss by the fly, in most cases
scarecly worth mentioning. It is avoided by late seeding.

In Wisconsin the loss is estimated at 10 per cent. Considerable in-
jury was caused in Dorchester by a worm one-fourth inch long working
under ground.

In Virginia, the only counties mentioning the appearance of the pest.
are Caroline, Westmoreland, Greenville, King and Queen, and Fairfax;
iN no instance amounting to an appreciable infliction. A large number
of North Carolina counties are declared exempt, Chatham, Montgomery,
and Yancey being the only exceptions. In Fairfield County, South
Carolina, a few fields were damaged 25 per cent. Elsewhere the insect
Was scarcely known.

Greater losses occurred farther south in the early planted areas,
especially in Georgia. The loss in Worth County is assumed to be 30
per cent. ; in Quitman, 25; in Talbot and Meriwether, 10; in Putnam, 5.
The appearance of the fly is also noted in Walker, Wilkes, Randolph,
Marion, Dawson, Crawford, Campbell, Bibb, Heard, Polk, McDuffie,
Clark, and Catoosa. Alabama has been comparatively exempt; though
in parts of Randolph County the injury was severe. In Saint Clair the
loss amounted to 10 per cent.; and slight damage occurred in Lee, Mar-

206 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.,

ion, Franklin, and Etowah. In the southwest little complaint has been
made of insect depredations of any kind. The fly is mentioned in Clay,
Delta, and Rockwell. The army worm injured early wheat in several
counties. A mention of the fly in early wheat fields is made in cor-
respondence from Carroll, Howard, Newton, Scott, and Sevier, in Ar-
kansas.

Tennessee reports slight injury from Anderson, Hancock, Knox, Stew-
art, and Union. Doddridge, Jackson, Jefferson, Nicholas, Pleasants,
Ritchie, and Upshur are the only counties*in West Virginia in which ~
the insect has made an appearance to any noticeable extent; while no
injury of a character at all serious is reported in Kentucky. The fly is
mentioned in Graves, Hancock, Hardin, Harlan, Marion, Marshall, Muh-
lenburgh, Todd, and Trigg.

In Ohio our Hancock correspondent reports 50 per cent. of the early
wheat eaten by the fly. The damage in Logan was greater than for
many years, estimated at 15 per cent. for the crop. Some fields “two-
thirds destroyed” is the report from Allen. From 1st to 15th of Septem-
ber whole fields of early sown were destroyed in Henry, with loss of 10
per cent. Most of that sown before September 15th in Clarke is injured;
50 per cent. of early sown eaten in Hancock; “badly damaged” in some
localities in Knox; in Carroll and Seneca 8 to 10 per cent. of early sow-
ing, later seeding untouched; badly damaged by the fly in Champaign;
injured 15 per cent. in Marion; in Auglaize at least 33 per cent.; high,
rolling, and thin land, nearly all destroyed; in Union all sown before
September 23 badly damaged; all sown before September 20 injured in
Erie; at least 25 per cent. of injury in Wyandot, and 40 per cent. in Van
Wert. Some loss is reported in several other counties.

Very few indications of the fly were apparent in Michigan. Oakland
County reported a loss of 10 per cent. and Ottawa of 5 per cent.

Half of the counties of Indiana mention the presence of the insect; in
most the damage is not material; in a few it amounts to 5 or ten per
cent. In Wayne it is estimated at 50 per cent.; in Lagrange, 40; in
Adams and Pulaski, 20; in Jay there are some fields badly injured; in
Carroll and Bartholomew the early sown suffered considerably.

Illinois is represented to be substantially exempt from injuries by the
fly. ‘‘None” and ‘‘very little” are almost universal answers to the in-
quiry. Coles County estimates a damage of 5 per cent.,and a few others
still less. Missouri and Kansas have been equally free from its vis-
itation. |

In this year also it was reported by Mr. William Saunders to have
been generally destructive in the Province of Ontario, Canada.

A meeting of the Ontario Entomological Society was held recently in Montreal,
during the session of the A. A. A.S. After the transaction of the routine business,
- the president, Mr. William Saunders, of London, Ontario, delivered his annual

address, in which he referred to the general prevalence of the Hessian Fly in the
Province of Ontario during the past season, inflicting a loss on the agricultural com-

DESCRIPTION OF THE HESSIAN FLY. 207

munity estimated at several hundred thousand dollars, and called attention also to
the relative abundance of parasites among the insects now maturing.—American Nat-
uralist, December, 1882. |

These facts indicate that the losses from the Hessian Fly are greatest
in the grain-raising areas of the Central States, and adjoining regions
of Canada,.and that the New England States have been comparatively
free from their attacks, though this is perhaps mainly due to the fact
that so little wheat is cultivated there. No statisties as to the losses
have been collected until of late, either by the State or national govern-
ments, but they have been sufficient to occasion much consternation and
alarm at certain years. By reference to the chapter on the supposed
periodicity in its attacks or years of maximum abundance, the reader
may learn approximately by the history of the past how often its more
serious attacks may be probably renewed.

DESCRIPTION OF THE HESSIAN FLY.

This insect belongs to the Diptera or two-winged insects, of which
the common house-fly is the best-known type. It belongs to the family
Cecidomyide, a large group of minute flies, resembling the crane flies or
daddy-long-legs (Tipulide), but of diminutive form. They are nearly all
gall-flies, the females laying their eggs by means of the soft extensible

,end of the body which slides back and forth like the joints of a tele-
scope. The irritation caused by the egg results in the swelling of the
stems of plants, or the formation of tumors or galls on the leaves and
buds. The Hessian Fly, as we shall see farther on, does not produce
true galls in this way, but the presence of the insect in the flaxseed
state, between the leaf and the stalk, causes the stem to swell, and the
leaves to wither and die. The scientific name is Cecidomyia destructor
of Say. ;

The female (Plate lV, f; V, A).—The body is rather slender, uniformly
dark brown, the head isround, but somewhat flattened, the eyes are black,
the wings uniformly dullsmoky brown, while the legs are paler brown than
the rest of the upper side of the body. The body, wings, and legs are
provided with fine hair-like scales(Plate V, A,c), those on the wings being
in many cases quite broad and ribbed, somewhat like the seales on the
wings of a butterfly or moth. The pale brown antenne are about half
as long as the body, the joints are very distinct, like a string of beads,
each one being oval-cylindrical. There are seventeen joints, the two
basal ones being large, nearly globular, flattened lengthwise, and nearly
half as long as thick, and each of nearly equal size; joints 3-5 are longer
than the remaining ones, and are slightly contracted in the middle;
the remaining 6-17 gradually decrease in length, each joint being pro-
vided with about ten hairs, arranged in a rude whorl; the terminal joint
(Plate V, A, a’) is long and conical. The legs are of the same color as
the under side of the body, being a little paler than the back. The ab-
domen is rather full, with nine well-marked rings or segments, the

208 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

paler small ovipositor forming the tenth. The latter is one-halfas thick
as the ninth segment, and about two-thirds or quite as long; is slightly
sinuous, and a little smaller at the end than atthe base. The wings are
dusky, with a fine fringe around the edge, ana there are three veins.
The subcostal vein ends near the outer third of the wing; the median
vein arises from near the base of the submedian vein and runs nearly
parallel to the subcostal vein, while a branch (its base disconnected with

the main vein) extends along the middle of the wing; the submedian vein

is well developed, at the base throwing off the median vein at a little

distance from the base of the wing, and losing itself before turning down

to the edge of the wing. The length of the fly is 2.5 millimeters, or about

one line, 7%. é., 5 of an inch.

The male.—The male is rather smaller than the female, being distin-
guished by the long, slender abdomen, and the longer and more hairy
antenne. Thejoints of the latter (Plate V, Fig. A, a’’, a’’’) are twenty in
number, oval, the terminal one conical, and all provided with a few hairs,
much longer than in the female, and arranged in a decidedly verticillate
manner. ‘The abdomen in the living specimen is black or brownish
black, with bands at the sutures both above and beneath, of a brick red,
tawny yellow, or grayish color, varying in their width as this part of the
body is more or less distended.” (Fitch.) The claspers at the end of
the body are stout, much more so than in Cecidomyia leguminicola of the
clover.

The egg (Plate IV, a, enlarged) is very minute, about a fiftieth of an
inch long, cul nario: pointed at each end, the shell shining and trans-
parent, the egg being of a pale red color lien the embryo is nearly de-
veloped. |

The larva.—After remaining about four days in the egg state, the larva
or maggot of the Hessian Fly hatches, and is of the form represented
by Plate IV, Fig. b, and Plate V, Fig. B, Ba, Bb, Be.

The body is soft, smooth, shining, oval-cylindrical, beneath a little
flattened, and consists of twelve segments besides the head, the latter
soft, fleshy, and but slightly separated from the body, with very rudi-
mentary mouth-parts (jaws, &ec.). The rings or segments are moderately
convex and tolerably distinct from one another; the sutures between
the segments in the living larva being indicated by faint transverse
lines of a greenish-brown hue, according to Fitch, who also states that
the mature worm, freshly taken from the roots of the wheat, measures
about 0.15 of an inch in length by 0.06 inch in width. Mr. Riley informs
us that there are nine pairs of minute spiracles, which ee as yellow-
ish, rounded tubercles.

The puparium or flaxseed state (Plate IV, Fig. ¢, ae V, Fig. ‘Dis
When fully grown the larva is ready to roca into the third or pupa
stage of its transformations. The body turns brown, and finally-of a
bright chestnut color, while the skin looses all appearance of sutures, and
assumes a rude, spindle-shaped form, somewhat larger than the larva.

. TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE HESSIAN FLY. 209

This brown case protects the growing pupa within the skin of the latter,
finally separating from the cast larval skin, called the pupa-case or
puparium, and which serves as a sort of cocoon to protect the pale, soft-
bodied pupa within. While many two-winged gall-flies are protected by
the galls within which they live, others, like the larval wheat and clover-
seed midge and the pitch-pine midge, spin true cocoons of silk; and the
Hessian Fly is the only species of the genus or family, so far as we know,
which assumes this puparium state, which is characteristic of the house
fiy and other species of Muscide and allied families, in which the pupa
is said to be coarctate, 7. e., protected by the cast dried brown skin of
the maggot or larva.

From the decided resemblance to a flaxseed the insect, when at this
stage of its transformations, is said to be in the “flaxseed” state. Itis, .
however, rather flatter than a flaxseed, being pinched, as it were, at the
head-end of the body. I have taken the semi-pupa or incompletely-

formed pupa from the flaxseed December 1. In this flaxseed state the
partly-formed pupa resides during the five winter months of the year.

In early spring, during warm weather in April, the semi-pupa rapidly
transforms into the complete pupal or chrysalis state.

The pupa (Plate V, C).—As we have not personally observed the mode
in whick the fly issues from the pupa and its case, we extract the follow-
ing account from Fitch. By the time the insect reaches the pupa state

‘the flaxseed case has become quite brittle, breaking asunder trans-
versely if rudely handled, one of its ends slipping off from the insect
within, like a thimble from the end of the finger.

The time for its last transformation having arrived, the pupa, by writhing and bend-
ing its body, breaks open its puparium or flaxseed case, crawls from it, and works its
way upward within the sheath of the leaf until it comes to some cleft in the now
dead, brittle, and elastic straw. Through this cleft it crowdsits body until all except
the tip of the abdomen is protruded into the air, the elasticity of the straw causing
it to close together upon the tip of the abdomen sufficiently to hold the pupa in this
situation secure from falling to the ground; and, as if to preserve the body in a hor-
izontal position, the feet are slightly separated from the abdomen and directed obliquely
downwards, with their tips pressed against the side of the straw, thus curiously serv-
ing, like the brace to a beam or to the arm of a signpost, to support the body from
inclining downwards. Thus securely fixed and now freely exposed to the drying in-
fluence of the atmosphere, the outer membrane of the pupa exhales its moisture, and,
as it becomes dried, cracks apart upon the back or upper side of the thorax. Out of
this opening the inciosed fly protrudes its head and thorax, more and more, as it grad-
ually withdraws its several members—the antennez, wings and legs—from the sheaths
‘In which they are respectively enveloped—a process analogous to that of withdrawing
the hand and its several fingers from a tight glove—until at length, entirely freed
from its pupa-skin, the fly, now perfect in all its parts, usually walks a few steps
farther up the straw, where it pauses for its body and members to acquire more firm-
ness and strength by the further evaporation of their moisture, after which it is ready
to spread its wings and mount into the air.

The Hessian Fly is easily distinguishable in all its stages from the
wheat midge, which belongs to a different genus, Diplosis (D. tritict of
Kirby). The wheat midge is orange-colored, has a stouter body, with

14E 0

210 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

clear, transparent, and much broader wings, and pale-yellow legs, while
the larve are orange-colored, and live crowded around the wheat-grains
at the top of the plant; they spina silken, round, genuine cocoon, smaller
than a mustard seed, which remains in the ground just beneath the sur-
face. So it will be seen that the form and habits of the two insects are
very dissimilar, and that they need not be confounded. :

HABITS OF THE HESSIAN FLY.

Having become acquainted with the appearance of this two-winged
gall-fly in its different stages, we are now prepared to study its habits;
for an intimate knowledge of how it comports itself as an egg, larva,
_ “flaxseed,” and perfect winged fly is absolutely essential to the farmer
who would endeavor intelligently to combat this pest.

Number of broods.—The Hessian Fly is double brooded, the “ flax-
seeds ” or puparia being found on the winter wheat from late in the au-
tumn, through the winter, until the early part or middle of April. The
‘ flaxseeds” of this brood, from one to about twenty in number, are situ-
ated between the stalk and sheathing base of the leaf, at the roots of
the young grain, slightly beneath the surface of the ground.

The “ flaxseeds” of the second generation affect the wheat in the late
spring and summer; but are situated higher up, an inch or two above the
surface of the ground, at the lower joints of the straw.

In the ordinary course of nature, therefore [says Fitch], our crops of winter wheat
are liable to two attacks of the Hessian Fly, one generation reared at its roots produc-
ing another, which occupies the lower joints of the stocks. Thus the larve and pupe
are present in it almost continually from the time the tender young blades appear
above the ground in autumn till the grain ripens and is harvested the next summer,
Our spring wheat, on the other hand, can rear but one brood of these insects; they
consequently resort to it but little, if at all. Nor can the Hessian Fly sustain itself

except in districts where winter wheat is cultivated in which for it to nestle during
the autumn and winter.

As a general rule, then, there are two broods of the fly, the first lay-
ing their eggs late in April and in May, and the second brood of flies
ovipositing’™ in August, during September, and perhaps a few early in
October. Sometimes the flies appear earlier, as Professor Cook, who ob-
served the insect in Michigan, says that “in July and August the flies
again issue forth, and the cycle of changes for the year is complete.
Thus we see that the flies are ready for work in the fall, much before
the wheat is ready for them, and may attack a volunteer crop long be-
fore the usual crop is above ground or even sown.”

A third brood may sometimes appear, asshown by Mr. B. Hulick, of Mich-
igan. According to Professor Cook, Mr. Hulick found the empty “flax-
seeds” on volunteer wheatin September. On Professor Cook’s expressing

111 Mr, F. S. Sleeper writes us that he has on one occasion seen the Hessian Flies laying their eggs as
late as October 26. In February, 1878, during very mild weather, he.observed them laying their eggs
in February. See his statements, farther on.

MODE OF EGG-LAYING. 212

some doubt whether the fly had issued, suggesting that it might be the
parasite that had eaten the fly and come forth, as the time appeared to
him too short, Mr. Hulick at once planted some of the volunteer wheat,
still containing the “flaxseed,” in close jars, and—

Saw many of the flies issue; and, more, had eggs laid by these flies on the same
wheat in October. Mr. Hulick showed these flies and their eggs to several of his
neighbors. In this case the eggs were deposited in July, the flaxseed state assumed
in September, from which came a third brood of flies in October. This is certainly a
very important matter, as it shows that three broods are possibie under favorable con-
ditions. That while the fall flies may, nay generally must, wait till September to
deposit eggs, they only want opportunity to breed their mischief much earlier, even
in July or August, and thus propagate a late brood of flies which will be in readiness
for even the latest sown wheat. No doubt, too, as in the case of all insects, varying
degrees of heat or cold will accelerate or retard the various transformations. (Lec-
ture, &c., p.-9.)

Mode of egg laying (see Plate IV, e, the fly of its natural size engaged
in laying its eggs on the leaf of wheat).—The mode of oviposition has
_ thus been described by Mr. Herrick:

The eggs are laid in the long creases or furrows of the upper surface of the leaves
(i. e., the blade or strap-shaped part) of the young wheat plant. While depositing
her eges the insect stands with her head towards the point or extremity of the leaf,
and at various distances between the point and where the leaf joins and surrounds
the stalk. The number found on a single leaf varies from a single egg up to thirty,
or even more.

Professor Cook says that—

The fly very rarely lays more than three eggs at one time without change of posi-
tion. She more frequently lays two, and generally but one. In case she lays but one
it takes iess than a quarter of a minute, and less than half a minute to lay three,
when they are all laid without a change of position on the part of the fly. After
laying she seems to draw in her ovipositor soon to extend it again, at the same time
crowding into it the one, two, or three eggs that are next to be laid. She then flies
to another leaf, alighting usually, not always, with head towards the end of the leaf.
She then appears to wipe the eggs off the jointed ovipositor. She really crowds the
egg till the end touches the leaf, when by friction of the leaf and adhesion of the egy
the latter is held fast while the egg-tube is withdrawn. If the second and third are
to be laid she repeats the operation, after which she retracts her ovipositor, restocks.
it, and in a trice is depositing the fatal germs on another leaf. I say usually on the
upper surface, for occasionally eggs are laid on the stalk, and sometimes on the under
side of a leaf. I have observed that the fly often makes many unsuccessful efforts to
cause the egg to adhere on the outer face of the leaf before she succeeds. I have seem
a fly work thus for two minutes before success crowned her efforts. The fly may thus
learn by experience that it is easier to Ceposit on the inner or upper face of the
blade, and so generally choose that surface. We shall see, too, in the sequel, that it
is better for the prospective maggot that the egg be placed on the upper surface. Imn-
four to ten days, more or less, as the weather is cool or warm, the eggs hatch. (Lec-
bure, p. 7.)

Mr. ©. V. Riley describes as follows the process in the New York
Tribune: |

I have very carefully studied the oviposition of the Hessian Fly, closely observing
_the female in the act on several occasions ; and as accurate observations on this point
are not easily made, I herewith transcribe my notes of several years ago: i

212 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Eggs deposited in irregular rows in the longitudinal cavities and depressions of
wheat stalks between the stalk and sheath when this is loose, or on the leaves between
the natural ridges or carinz of the upper surface, this last being the more common
habit. Ordinarily there are from five to ten in a row, but sometimes more. Each egg
.02 inch long, cylindrical, rounded at each end, soft, translucent, and pale orange-red
in color. Before hatching, the pale sides of the inclosed larva show through the shell.
Larva hatched in four days; crawls down leaf to base of sheath, which on young
grain is at crown of root. The orange-red color is soon lost, and the larva becomes
pale, translucent, and plump, sinking more or less into the stalk by the depleting
process kept up. ; :

In an article in a Saint Louis paper I described, last June, the process of oviposition
on the leaves, and my own observations in Missouri accord entirely with those of E.
Tilghman recorded in 1820, and of E. C. Herrick in 1844, and quoted by Fitch in his
essay on the Hessian Fly (Albany, 1846), with the exception that they do not mention
the exceptional habit of pushing the eggs between the sheath and the stalk, owing
doubtless to the fact that their observations were made solely on the autumn brood
of flies ovipositing on the young plants, the habit being more common in the early
summer brood when the plants are larger.

Mr. William Strong, of Kalamazoo County, Michigan, thus describes
the process, adding some particulars of interest:

I have seen the wheat plant with many of the maggots at work before there was
any stalk for the fly to Jay its eggs on, by introducing its extensile abdominal tip under
the leaf sheath. Even this fall I have seen this very thing when there was as yet but
one shoot from the kernel, having but three leaves, the wheat having been sowed not
more than three weeks, I haveseen these maggots when too small to be seen without
the aid of a glass, so low down towards the kernel, which was sowed with a drill, that
if the fly had deposited the eggs under the leaf on the stalk, if there had been one
there, she would have been obliged to use a spade to dig to get achance. I am not
the only one who believes that the egg is laid on the leaf and hatches there, when the
small maggot works its way down inside of the leaf as low as possible. If there shonld
be fifteen or twenty on one leaf (not a large number to find the past year under one
leaf), of course as they took their places they would be somewhat in rows, but they,
of course, are not the ‘‘eggs placed in the longitudinal grooves of the stalk.”

In Solon Robinson’s ‘‘Facts-for Farmers,” page 214, we read: ‘‘The female deposits
her eggs soon after the wheat begins to grow, * * * in the cavities between the
little ridges of the blades. In from four to fifteen days the eggs hatch and the dimin-
utive maggots werk down into the leaf-sheath and there spend the winter.” In the
Kalamazoo Trlegraph for November 7, this year, are a few lines upon the Hessian Fly
by M. B. Bateham, of Ohio. He is too well known to need an introduction at this
time. He says: “In the spring, with the first warm weather, the fly will come forth
and deposit its eggs upon the leaf, which will then soon hatch, when the worms,
crawling down the leaf, feed upon the stalk, injuring its growth, often causing it to
die.” A reason given by some why the fly does not injure red wheat as muchas white
is because the leaf of the red grows so long and slants down from the shoot so that
when the egg hatches the maggot works down the wrong way, falls to the ground,
and so many fail to harm the wheat.

A writer in the Country Gentleman, Mr. Caleb’S. Fuller, of Jackson
County, Michigan, says:

The fly commences as soon as the wheat is up an inch high. I placed ina glass
fruit jar some stools of wheat which was sown on the 31st of August, and about the
15th of October the fly hatched out of the brown eggs [puparia] which were in the
wheat in large numbers, and was a lively little black fellow about one-eighth of an
inch long. Now, if the eggs were deposited about the 8th of September, as that is as
soon as the wheat would be large enough for them, it would give them about 37,days

'

EFFECT OF THE LARVA ON WHEAT. 913

to mature so as to fly again, though they might hatch a little sooner or later in the
open field. I cannot say asto that; have no certain means of knowing.

The flies of the second brood are, in southern Michigan, ready to de-
posit their eggs late in April or early in May ‘oun spring wheat or barley
which is sufficiently advanced, in lieu of which they deposit on the wheat
again, not on the basal or radical leaves, but on the leaves which will
be above the first or second, rarely the third, joints.” (Cook.)

Habits of the larva.—As soon as the footless larva or maggot hatches,
it makes its way down the leaf to the base of the sheath, bitneaes in the
young winter wheat, is at the crown of the root.

Here [says Herrick] it fastens, lengthwise, and head downwards, to the tender stalk,
and lives upon the sap. It does not gnaw the stalk, nor does it enter the central cav-
ity thereof; but, as the larva increases in size, it gradually becomes imbedded in the
substance of the stalk. After taking its station, the larva moves no more, gradually
loses its reddish color and wrinkled appearance, becomes plump and torpid, is at first
semi-translucent, and then more and more clouded with intestinal white spots; and
when near maturity, the middle of the intestinal parts is of a greenish color. In five

- or six weeks (varying with the season) the larva begins to turn brown, and soon be-

comes of a bright chestnut color, bearing some resemblance to a flaxseed.
EFFECT OF THE WORM OR LARVA ON THE WHEAT.

As has been stated, the worm in autumn lies at the sheathing base of
the leaves just above the roots, at or near the surface of the soil. Itis
easy to detect the flaxseed from its large size and chestnut-brown color,
by separating the leaf from the stalk of the young wheat in October
aud November, when the worm has stopped feeding and is incased in
its brown sack. Scattered shoots will be found, withered and changed
to alight yellow color, and, as Fitch observes, strongly contrasting with —
the rich green of the vigorous uninjured plants. (See Plate LV, represent-
ing a healthy stalk on the right and a dwarfed plant on the left, con-
taining three flaxseeds, with the leaves partly withered.) The worms,
before assuming the flaxseed state, rest between the leaves and the
stalk; their soft, fleshy, undeveloped mouth-parts do not enable them to
gnaw the surface of the plant, but the sap is supposed to be absorbed
directly through the walls of the body, and thus they are said to feed by
imbibition; this weakens the plant and causes it to become unhealthy
and turn yellow and die; moreover, although this point is disputed by
Dr. Fitch, the presence of the worms causes the formation of a gall-like
swelling or enlargement of the stalk, an abnormal growth of the plant
being caused by the shght interruption to the flow of the sap. Of course
when six or a dozen of these comparatively large flaxseeds are lodged
under the base of the leaves the plant turns yellow and dies, as if the
roots had been affected. ‘

How a field of winter wheat may be attacked and affected by the Hes-
sian Fly may be seen by reading the following aceount in the Cultivator
and Country Gentleman:

Last fall the appearance of the wheat plant on different fields and locations was
very different. On strong and level lands, little injury was shown. Hilly fields, or

214 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

where there was a ridge or worn point, or where the rock cropped nearer the surface,
the wheat appeared injured or dead, as also when sown after spring grain, particu-
larly oats. That the fly either enters the ground or remains in the dry stubble till
the size of the wheat affords a lodgment, appears true. As an instance, I note the
following facts: An acre of potato ground of 1876 was sown to oats in 1877. It was
in fair condition, and a heavy crop was secured. Surrounding this piece of cats on
three sides was a meadow, the highway bordering the other side. A good crop of
hay was taken in June, and the field was all plowed in July. The after cultivation
was the same, putting the field in an excellent condition for the crop. Seeding was
through early in September, and in a few days the whole field was nearly covered
with the growing wheat, and was very much admired, both for its beautiful green
and its superior culture. All at once the wheat on the oat stubble was turning very
yellow, in strong contrast to the deep green on the surrounding meadow. In the
hollows, on the accumulated wash of ages, the wheat was very large and kept green
and growing; while on the sharp points of knolls and hard clay ridges, it was nearly
gone. Ona piece of new land near by, where never a kernel of grain was grown be- —
fore, no fly or injury could be seen.

The appearatice of the fly was general, as soon as one or two leaves gave them a
Jodgment. Owing to the superior warmth and moisture of the entire fall months,
wheat sowed on strong land tillered largely.. The insects took the first tiller and
stuck to it, while two and even four others came out and covered the ground. On
poorer parts of the field the plant could not tiller so much, and here the injury showed
anest. Up to this date the crop has wintered well, a deep layer of snow now keeps
insects and wheat alike. About the Ist of May this entire brood will be ready to ce-

pesit their eggs, and they will number millions.

That a field of wheat may recuperate after a favorable winter, and
how such a field looks early in the following June, is well brought out
by the following extract from the Prairie Farmer:

The early sown wheat that was badly eaten by the Hessian Fly last fall, but which.
has been apparently entirely recuperated by the remarkably favorable winter and
#pring just passed, is more seriously damaged by the insect than many farmers are
probably aware of. I visited to-day a thirty-acre field, sowed on the 5th, 6th, and 7th
days of September. Early in October it looked very badly—was yellow and showed
bare ground in many places, and the plants for a long time seemed to be dwindling
and growing smaller. The fine spring, however, brought it out apparently all right.
It now stands five feet four to six inches high, very well headed, and seemingly good
for from thirty to thirty-five bushels tothe acre. I examined the field carefully in ten
places, taking twenty wheat stalks as they stood in the drill row at each place, with
this result: Number of stalks examined, 200; number of stalks containing the fly,
134, or two-thirds of the whole. Many of the stalks, however, had only one larva, and
these will probably not be much affected. The insects are all of fullsize, of a chest-
mut color, and plainly visible in the lowest joint and the one next above—about twice
as many were found in the lower joint as inthe upper one. This, I suppose, indicates
a loss to the crop of from 30 to 50 per cent.

We had heavy rains on the 8th, 9th, and 10th of Sontenniie r, 1 think, which sus-
pended the operation of seeding till the 12th or after. This seems to be the dividing
line, separating the fields badly damaged from those that escaped with little injury.
In a part of the same field (potato ground) sowed, near the last of September, with
the same kind of wheat, the number of plants examined was 100; affected with fly,
_ 42. In other fields the rate was four to six to the hundred.

Many fields of Mediterranean are lodging. The Clawson stands well, and by

{NELUENCE OF WEATHER ON THE HESSIAN FDY. 215

reason of its stiff straw and vigorous growth promises to withstand ihe ravages of the
fly better than the more feebiy-growing and weaker-strawed sorts.
ARVINE C. WALES.
Stark Country, Onto, June 7.

Another extract from the Cultivator and Country Gentleman bears di-
rectly on this important point.

There is a dispute among good farmers whether wheat injured by the Hessian Fly
is irreparably damaged. Mr. F. C. Root thinks it is, as he says when thé centralstalk
is eaten out the plant is either dead, or able to make onlya feeble growth. If it
makes a head, it will perfect only one or two seeds to a plant. Mr. Jesse Dewey quali-
fies this statement thus: Jf the land is rich enough, though the central stalk be injured,
the wheat plant will stool, and from its side roots sends up stalks and perfect a fair
erop. I have no doubt that both of these excellent farmers are right. On the great
majority of fields, the injury to the wheat plant in the fall means the destruction of
the crop. When the central plant has been injured, the side shoots have not enough
vitality to perfect much seed. Yet there may be land rich enough to make a crop from
the second growth, provided the Hessian Fly next spring is not numerous enough to
do serious damage. Very much now depends on the character of the coming winter.
A season which, under ordinary circumstances, would be favorable, may also save
myriads of Hessian Flies. There was much more “crinkled” wheat last suinmer than
usual, and I have little doubt that the cause is to be found in the heavy mantle of
snow, which preserved a greater number than usual of the Hessian Flies through the
winter. The wheat crop this fall would have suffered more than usual in any event,
_but the evil has been greatly aggravated by the warm and generally dry weather after
wheat-sowing. We had no killing frost until near November, nor frost of any kind
until the middle of October. With frosts in their usual season, and not sowing too
late, there need be little danger from the Hessian Fly. But it is the poorness of the
soil which leads farmers, year by year, to sow their wheat earlier in order to get a
larger growth. Making the soilricher removes the difficulty by removing its original
and principal cause.—W. J. F., Monroe County, N. Y.

INFLUENCE OF THE WEATHER AND FAVORABLE AND UNFAVORABLE
SEASONS.

To properly discuss this very important subject would require an inti-
mate knowledge of the meteorological conditions and the relative abun-
dance or rarity of the Hessian Fly during each year since its first ap-
pearance in this country in 1776. All that we can say with our present
exceedingly imperfect knowledge bears but slightly on this point and
must be considered as simply provisional. We may here quote from
the Cultivator and Country Gentleman what has been stated by Mr. Riley
in speaking of the condition of the Hessian Fly in 1877:

The Hessian Fly is rather an insect of moist climates and mild latitudes; and there-
fore, unlike the chinch-bug, its multiplication has been favored by the cool and wet
summers and autumns of the last three years. While the rainy period which as a gen-
eral statement may be said to have commenced in May, 1875, and continued to the
present date, and during which time there have neither been severe droughts nor con-
tinued summer heats, tbe chinch-bug has so nearly disappeared that its depredations
have been scarcely noticed, the Hessian Fly has developed and thrived, and to the
extent that if the weather favors—that is, if from now to harvest it should con-
tinue cool and moist or warm and wet—the damage likely to be done to the incoming

216 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

and the following crop can scarcely be estimated. Butif dry weather prevails from
this time to harvest, the damage done can hardly.be considerable—and if it should
turn very dry and hot, all danger from serious depredations from it may be cast out
of the account, in measuring the outcome of the crop—since a certain amount of
moisture is absolutely necessary for the successful development of the several stages
in the growth and progress of this insect scourge. But then Professor Riley warned
me against drawing final conclusions on insufficient data, it being quite possible that
other forces and causes appearing might bring about a quite different and unexpected
result. Nevertheless, there are many reasons for expecting a dry spring, a warm
harvest, and a hot summer, and comparatively trifling damage to be done by the fly
on the wheat harvest of 1878.—W. J. F.

_ The effects of drought on the Hessian fly has been noticed by Profes-
sor Riley, in the American Naturalist for November 1881, as follows:

It has long been known that the Hessian Fly flourishes most when the Chinch Bug
flourishes least; in other words, that wet weather favors it. Moisture seems essen-
tial to the well-being of the larva. The prejudicial effect of drought has not hitherto
been observed, that we are aware of, but was very noticeable the present year in
parts of Ohio, where the puparia literally dried up. Our attention was first called to
the fact of the general death of the insect in the “flaxseed” state by Mr. E. W. Clay-
pole, of Yellow Springs, Ohio, and our observations subsequently confirmed his experi-
ence. The intense heat had not only desiccated the Cecidomyia, but, what is still
more remarkable, in most cases the parasites also. We should like to hear from Pro-
. fessor Cook, of Michigan, and others, whether a like result followed the severe heat
and drought in other parts of the West. The presumption is that the mortality was
general and that farmers may expect immunity from injury for some years to come.

That this fly flourishes best in a rather warm and moist season is
shown by its habits. The flies hover in the spring and autumn over the
wheat-fields in countless numbers, especially at morning and evening,
avoiding the direct heat of the sun.

PARASITES OF THE HESSIAN FLY.

How useful, nay indispensable, parasitic insects may prove in keeping
the noxious ones within due limits is well illustrated by the case of this
fly, for whenever it suddenly disappears from a given locality, this is
usually due to the attacks of its parasites, and especially one Chalcid
fly, the Semiotellus |Homoporus| destructor, first described by Say.

This is a hymenopterous insect, having four wings and belonging to
the same order of insects as the saw-flies, four-winged gall-flies(Cynips),
the larger ichneumons, and the wasps and bees. It is a member of the
family Chalcidide. As stated in our Guide to-the Study of Insects, this is
a group of great extent, the species being of small size; they are often
of shiny colors, as the name of the principal genus implies, being either

bronze or metallic. They also have elbowed antenne with from six to —

fourteen joints, and the wings are often deficient in veins. The abdomen
is usually smaller, and composed ordinarily of seven rings in the male,
and of six in the female, the latter often having a short but visible ovi-
positor, a horny tube consisting of three pairs of stout bristles closely

a

PARASITES OF THE HESSIAN FLY. re

united and forming a quite solid tube. Some species are wingless.
_ There are 1,200 species of the family known in Europe, and there are, in
all probability, at least 1,000 in the United States. Jew of them are over
a line m length.

- Semiotellus destructor, male. (PlatelV, Fig. 7, much enlarged.) The
head is transversely oblong, or rather cubical, being rather wider than
long, and slightly broader than the thorax when seen from above, being
full, somewhat rounded in front, and hollowed out behind next to the
thorax. The eycs are dull red, reaching, when seen above, behind the
middle of the head. The antenne are elbowed, and when bent back
reach to about the middle of the thorax; they are yellow on the basal
half, black beyond. In the male they are 10-jointed; the scape (joints
1-3) is pale, and free from hairs, while the flagellum (or joints 4-10) is
blackish and clothed with dense, stiff hairs as long as the joint is thick.
The fourth joint has at base a minute, indistinct, constricted portion;
joints 5 to 9 are of equal length and shorter than the 4th joint; the 10th
(terminal) joint is long and acute at the tip, and nearly twice as long as
the 9th: it is subdivided, when seen under a 4-inch objective, into five
sub-joints, the 5th ee and acutely conical.

The thorax is about twice as long as broad, and widest at the inser-

tion of the fore-wings; like the head, the crust is coarsely punctured.
The fore-wings are broad, triangular, well rounded externally; the sub-
costal vein is very thick, being strongly marked, and after joining the
costal or front edge of the wing for a short distance, just beyond the
middle of the wing, is bent in towards the middle of the wing, ending
in a knob-like expansion with a slight point extending towards the cos-
tal edge of the wing. Fitch represents a slightly marked vein extend-
ing to the outer edge of the wing, but this is absent in our specimens.
There is an incomplete median and submedian vein, only perceptible
under strong magnifying powers, the base of the median being quite
disconnected from the submedian. In most of my specimens there was
no vein extending from the subcostal knob to the end of the wing.
_ The legs are pale straw-yellow, the fore shank-joints (tibize) and toe-
joints (tarsi) brownish ; the third hip-joints (femora) are dusky on the ba-
_ sal half, while the hind terminal tarsal joints are brown. The abdomen is.
small, black, while the head and thorax are bright metallic green, some-
times blue. The abdomen is also smooth and polished, much flattened,
oval, not so wide as the thorax, broad at the end and suddenly pointed
(mucronate) at the tip. It has a large yellowish patch on the upper
and under side of the second segment. Length of the body 2-2.6 milli-
meters (0.08-0.11 inch). |

The female differs in her greater size and rather slenderer body, and
the more club-shaped antenne, the terminal joint being twice as long as
thick. Between the 3d and 4th joints are two distinct, minute subjoints,
the 2d shorter but wider than the 1st; joints 4-9 are shorter and less

218 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

hairy than in the male, while the 10th (terminal) joint is acute at tip,
and subdivided into four subjeints. The abdomen is as long and as
wide as the thorax, ending in a long, sharp point, the short but distinet
ovipositor extending slightly beyond the tip of the body. There is a
slightly marked pale spot above on the second segment. Length 2.4-3
millimeters (0.10-0.12 inch). |

This parasite was first described by Say, his specimens occurring at or
near Philadelphia; it was observed by Herrick in 1833, in Connecticut,
and in 1877 we bred it from puparia of the Hessian Fly received from
Ohio; and, as stated by Professor Cook, it is sufficientiy abundant in
Michigan to destroy the Hessian Fly in great numbers, and is prob-
ably distributed throughout the Hessian Fly area.

So destructive are this and other parasites to the Hessian Fly that as
early as 1841 Herrick claimed that in Connecticut ‘‘a very large propor-
tion, probably more than nine-tenths, of every generation of the Hessian
Fly is destroyed by parasites.” This work is mainly, we doubt not, done
by the chalcid parasite under consideration. It is to this insect more
than to any other means in nature that we owe the-general immunity in
certain years from the attacks of the Hessian Fly in most wheat regions,
and to this cause that during certain years the fly is kept wholly within:
bounds. Few people, even naturalists, have any adequate idea of the
good done by these minute parasites. What was the fact in Connecticut
in 1841, and the few years preceding, has been the case in Michigan,
according to Mr. I. 8. Sleeper, of Galesburg, Mich., who writes us that
the Hessian Fly was nearly exterminated in Kalamazoo County by
Semiotellus destructor, nearly all the “‘flaxseeds” in the crop of 1877
having been destroyed by this friendly parasite. He writes us that m
the autumn of 1877 he found these parasites in the wheat-fields in count-
less numbers, and that the perfect Hessian Fly was difficult to find.

No one since ‘Herrick recorded his chservations has made very care-
ful observations on the habits of these parasites. He states that:

It pierces the sheath of the stalk Qnaking a hole too small] to be detected by a pow-
erful microscope), and deposits an egg in the pupa within. This is done chiefly in

June. The perfect insect is evolved in the summer and autumn succeeding, eating
its way through the puparium and the sheath of the leaf.

Herrick also states that a second parasite, very similar to the Semio-
tellus destructor, ‘‘ but with mererudiments of wings, is sometimes evolved
from the pupe of the Hessian Fly. I amin doubt whether it should be
considered a distinct species or only a variety.”

A third parasite was reared by Herrick in Connecticut. It is an in-
sect of the tribe Chalcidic, whose genus he did not determine. Its habits
were like those of Semiotellus, and wingless females of this species were
also found. ;

A fourth parasite, noticed by Herrick, belongs to Latreille’s tribe
Oxyuri, but the genus was not determined. In habits it agreed with

PARASITES OF THE HESSIAN FLY. 219

the foregoing parasites, but it was, evolved later in the-year. Her-
‘rick adds that all the parasites mentioned “are likewise evolved in the
spring from the Hessian Fly pupz of the summer previous.”

The fifth parasite has quite different habits. It was said by Herrick
to deposit its eggs in those of the Hessian Fly. Herrick, its first dis-

_coverer, thus speaks of it:

The insect is abundant in the autumn. I first saw it September 23, 1833, in the act
‘of depositing its eggs in the eggs of the Hessian Fly. From subsequent observations
it appears that four or five eggs are laid in a single egg of the Hessian Fly. -The lat-
ter egg hatches, and the animal advances to the pupa state as usual, but from the
puparium no Hessian Fly ever comes forth. This parasite forms within the puparium
a silky cocoon of a brownish color.

It is probable that it is the species first discovered by Herrick in Con-
necticut which Professor Cook has detected ovipositing in the eggs of
the Hessian Fly.

It is black and looks not unlike a tiny gnat. The female feels for the egg with her
antenne, and when found intrudes the fatal egg, which, I find, takes three-fourths of
a minute; full three times as long as it takes the Hessian Fly. The little parasite is
much longer, too, in finding the eggs thanis the flyin laying them. I findthat each
ege receives one, two, or three of the parasite’s eggs. The eggs of these latter are
tardy in hatching, so that the larva of the parasite may feed on the maggot of the

Hessian Fly, not her eggs. These pupate in the puparium of the fly.

Platygaster error Fitch ?—Having received one of these egg-parasites
from Professor Cook, I find it to be so much like the Platygaster error

42 Our attention has been called by Mr. Howard to the fact that as a rule to which
there is no known exception, egg-parasites issue as adults from the eges of their host;
and on reficction it seems to us that the Platygaster in question is entirely too large
to be regarded as a true egg parasite, those known to be such being of minute size.
Fresh and very careful observations are therefore needed on this point, and it is pos-
sible that both Herrick and Cook bave been in error, and that the eggs were in-
serted in freshly hatched larvee when little larger than the eggs. We append Mr.
Howard’s criticism:

““Fitch’s description of Platygaster error (which name you apply to the so-called ‘ege-
parasite’ in Bulletin 4) is so general that it will apply to almost any species of the
genus. And now a word as to the egg-parasite. So contrary is it to all analogy in
the whole group of parasitic Hymenoptera, to say nothing of the well-known habits of
the genus Platygaster, that a parasitic egg.should be deposited within the egg of a
host and not hatch until the larva of the latter has issued, that I look upon the re-
ported observations of Herrick, and especially of Cook, as in the highest degree im-
probable.

‘1. No other case is on record, to my knowledge, where an egg-parasite does not
issue as an adult from the egg of its host.

‘2. European species of Platygaster are known to lay their eggs in larve of Ceci-
domyide only,

“3. The difficulties in the way of making such an observation as Cook records are
practically insurmountable.

“The second point alone would, in my judgment, settle the matter, as the generic
habits of parasites are very uniform.”

Respectfully, yours,
L. 0. HOWARD.

220 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of Fitch (Fig. 9) that I refer it to that species, though with a doubt.
This is probably also the parasite referred to by Mr. Herrick.

It is shining black; the head is finely punctured, rounded, and slightly
broader than long, being about as wide as the thorax. The antennze
are aboutaslongas the head and thorax ; they
are Slender, but apparently a little stouter
than in P. error, the penultimate joints being
, a little broader and squarer than he repre-
€ sents (and they are very different from Platy-
gaster tipule), these joints not being “twice
as long as thick,” but only 4 to 4 longer, much
as represented by Fitcb in his figure 5!” the
Fia. 9.—Platygaster of the Hessian terminal joint is long, oval, not so wide as

Bee those just behind it, Se it tapers to a
rounded point. The thorax is rounded ovate, aa little longer than
broad, black, with the scutellum high, rounded and pitted. The abdo-
men is flattened, oval, twice as long as wide, being a little longer than
the thorax, but not quite so wide. The Ha: are pitchy black on the
femora; the tibize dull reddish-brown, darkertowards the end; the tarsi
are 5-jointed, dark brown, hairy, with the basal joint reddish at the base.
(itch says the legs of P. error are pitchy black; but in the specimen
before me they have a decided reddish tinge.) The wings are veinless,
clear transparent, irised. Length 1.8 millimeters, being a little larger
than Fitch’s P. error, which was 0.05 inch long. I am disposed to refer
this specimen to Fitch’s species, but should it be found to be quite dis-
tinct, it may receive the name Platygaster herrickit. It seems to be a
genuine Platygaster.

Fitch states that Platygaster error is seen in company with the wheat
midge (Diplosis tritict) on the wheat ears in New York, andis very numer-
ous some years, but he thinks it doubtful whether it preys upon the
midge.

REMEDIES, PREVENTIVE AND GENERAL.

Having become familiar with the habits of this insect, which can be
readily observed by farmers, it is not difficult to apply such remedies as
the experience of wheat raisers of the past century in different parts of
the wheat region of the United States has nearly universally found.
serviceable. Remembering that the first brood of flies appears in
August and continues to hover over the fields until late in September, as
if waitin ¢ for the fall-sown wheat to appear, it is evident that by delay-
ing the date of sowing until after a frost cold enough to kill the flies,
they may be circumvented; for if the wheat is sown later than the
20th of September in nearly all the Middle and Northern States, the
early frosts will destroy these delicate insects. Late sowing, then, is the
most ge neral, important, and easily applied prev entive remedy.

112} ‘Sixth R eport on the Noxious and other Insects of the Sti ate of New York, by Asa Fitch, Mi Dea
1, fig.4,a,b. The figure is from Packard’s Guide to the Study of Insects.

’

REMEDIES, PREVENTIVE AND GENERAL. 221

Late sowing of most of the wheat-seed.— All writers, both entomological
and agricultural, concur in recommending? this easily-applied remedy :
that at least a part of the wheat should not be sown until after the 20th of
September in the Northern States. The writingsof Fitch, Harris, and of
Cook concur in recommending this course in a district ridden by these
pests, even though the wheat is in danger of being injured by the cold
autumnal or the winter weather. As the year 1877 was a bad fly year,
we quote the following explicit testimony from Professor Cook’s pam-
phiet: .

In all the century’s experience in our country with this insect, this has been the
most certain and satisfactory method to prevent its ravages.. Even more than thirty
years ago this measure is spoken of as unanimously sanctioned and the most efficient
of remedies. During the past season [1877] I have reliable reports from the following
counties :, Ottawa, Van Buren, Cass, Kalamazoo, Hillsdale, Saint Joseph, and Lapeer,
and with few exceptions it is stated that early-sown wheat was injured badly, while
all sown after September 20 nearly escaped. In traveling through Ohio and south-
ern Michigan, I found I could often tell the early from the late sown wheat for long
_ distances, the former looking like oat-plants after a hard frost, the latter appearing
green and healthy. Often in the same field the line of demarkation was very distinct.

The following newspaper extracts bear upon this subject:

Perhaps the most effectual remedy, or rather preventive, is late sowing. No wheat
should be sown in localities where they have already appeared, or in districts adjoin-
‘ing until September 15, and if it is deferred until the 20th it would be all the better.
Repeated rolling is said to destroy some of the larve, and burning the stubble, where
practicable, would certainly destroy many and thus prevent so great devastation of
the succeeding crop. The great objection to either rolling or burning is that it de-
stroys both friend and foe alike.

Great care should always be used in destroying all noxious insects lest we also de-
stroy the beneficial ones; the chief of which are the Ichneumon and Chalcis flies. In
the counties of Yates, Seneca, Tompkins, and Cayuga, where the Hessian Flies have
already made their appearance, 4t would appear wiser to fit the ground perfectly,
apply extra fertilizers, and sow late, rather than run any risk or trust to any methods
of destruction. If all infested and contiguous districts would sow late enough so that
the wheat would not appear above ground before September 25, I_-believe the fly
could be effectually starved out.—[I. P. Roberts, professor of agriculture, Cornell
University, in the Rural New Yorker, September 8, 1877.

By the attacks of this (the second or spring) brood of worms, the lower joints of
the wheat are weakened, and as soon as the head is formed, and the growth is heavy,
the weakened joints give way and the wheat falls over, or, as it is commonly ex-
pressed, it ‘‘crinkles.” If but few larve are at work, there will be some kernels of
grain in the heads thus affected, but they will be more or lessishrunken. If the insects
are plenty, the head seldom “fills,” and the field looks as if cattle or something else
had passed though it, tangling up and throwing down the straw in every direction.

There are thus two generations of the Hessian Fly each year, one of which subsistsand
may be always found at the crown of the roots, and the other at some joint above, and
neverattheroot. Ifthe wheat could be fed off by sheep in the fall, between the time that
the eggs are laid and the time of their hatching, thisremedy would be perfect. Unfor-
tunately, the wheat is then young, and farmers do not like to risk thus feeding 1t off.
The only remedy left, therefore, is to sow so late that the wheat will not appear above
ground before October 1. In this case there is the added risk of winter-killing,
because the plants have not time enough to get well rooted before winter. On well-
drained, rich land, this danger is greatly prevented, and therefore late sowing and
thorough farming seem to be the enly available means yet discovered to avoid great

222 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

losses from the ravages of the Hessian Fly. Fortunately the parasitic enemies of the
fly increase rapidly, and after a year or two of great losses from this insect its numbers
are reduced so much as scarcely to be noticed for some years.—[ Chicago Tribune.

I find in several counties of northern Ohio, where I have traveled of late, a good
deal of injury is done to the young wheat by the fly—more than has occurred before
for quite anumber of years, Thisis no doubt owing to the general practice of sowing
wheat early, and the fact that it made a remarkably fine growth during September,
when the warm weather was also very favorable for the propagation of the flies. The
worms have now gone into the pupa or “flaxseed” state, and if the winter is not
too wet or cold for them, it is likely the new brood next spring will Date quite mis-
chievous.—[B., Cultivator and Country Gentleman.

Pennsylvania German farmers have a claim to be considered good zoologists by their
knowledge of animals, from the noble horse down to the insect tribe, that so beset —
them with labor and loss. The German farmers have been apt and successful in con-
testing the insect enemies of all crops. The wheat midge, which came in upon us.
twenty years ago in vast numbers the last of June and the first of July, made his
home in the wheat-heads, and nurtured his progeny in the cell prepared for the ex-
pectant berry, and appropriated the element nature designed for the perfection of the
seed to his own use. This insect for a time literally destroyed the wheat product.
- Whether it was a scientific discovery that taught the farmers of Lancaster County
how to get rid of this destructive insect or not, I have neverlearned. But I do know
that I purchased and carried to my farm Lancaster red wheat which I wasit structed
to sow in August, and in doing so freed my farm of this pest. Continued early sowing
proved successful up to the present season, when this practice brought the Hessian Fly,
who begins at the root of the wheat plant. If the mother fly can get an opportunity
to deposit its eggs in the fall season, the larva will stand the winter imbedded in a
stalk of wheat (which is a well-tillered plant), and brings forth enough Hessian Flies.
to destroy the wheat before harvest time. The habit of this Hessian Fly isto bury in
the ground with the first frost of the fall season. A Lancaster farmer said to me not
long since, we must sow our wheat late this fall if we would avoid the fly. Early-
sown wheat was a failure in Pennsylvania to anextent, inmy estimation, thatreduces
this cereal 30 per cent. below our general average. Thecorn crop over the entire State
is not an average one. The oat crop isabove the average. The buckwheat crop, gen-
erally relied upon in the northern and western portions of our State as one of the pay-
ing bread grains, has been very extensively injured by the grasshopper, and cannot be
expected to yield more than one-half the usual amount.—[V. E. Piollet’s address before
the Berks County Agricultural Society, at Reading.

The letter below from W. B. Billings to the Elmira (N. Y.) Farmers’
Club, elicited the appended discussion, as reported in the Husbandman:

I have perused your club reports with much interest, especially those relating to the
Hessian Fly. In an experience of fifteen years of wheat raising I have had about four
acres of wheat destroyed by this pest. Eight years ago I sowed a field of ten acres to:
wheat, four acres of which were gravel, the remaining six acres being of sandy loam,
in places so wet that I had to under-drain it. Wheat put in in good condition; land
new—had been in cultivation only the two previous years. Now for the results:
During the fall the wheat on the gravelly part started quicker, and when winterset in
looked better, the fly doing no appreciable damage to any part of the field; Lbutin the
spring when the wheat had apparently reached about six inches in height, that on the
gravel commenced turning yellow about the roots, and from that time forward grew
thinner and most beautifully less until harvest, when I cut it with amower and raked
it with a wheel-rake, getting about as much straw as farmers generally get from raking
a like amount of ordinary wheat stubble. On the remaining part of the field the
wheat was good, no noticeable damage being done by the fly. A few years previous.
to this I knew of a field of spring wheat that was almost entirely destroyed by the

REMEDIES, PREVENTIVE AND GENERAL. ~ 225)

Hessian Fly, less wheat being harvested than was sown. Itis generally conceded
that there are two crops, or hatchings, of the flyduring the growth of the wheat: the
first in the fall and working until frost comes; the second in the spring, and continu-
ing its depredations until harvest. Late sowing is generally recommended as a pre-
ventive. Why should it beso? How do you account for the fly working in wheat
growing on warm gravelly land, while that on the moist soil escaped harm? UH, as.
above assumed, there are two crops of insects hatched per year, how does late sowing
prevent their depredations? And how can you account for the loss of the spring
wheat crop mentioned? Where was the first or small crop hatched, and where did the
flies remain until spring? Fresh lime is recommended as preventing the ravages of
this pest; can you tell me at what particular time, spring or fall, the lime should be
sown to cause the greatest destruction of the fly? Any information from the club on
the subject will be thankfully received.

J.S. Van Duzer. It must not be assumed that the flies which damaged the spring.
wheat were hatched in that field. The parent flies may have come from a distant
field. ;

President HorrMAN. To my mind the case is easily explained, so far as the spring
wheat is concerned. The fly is migratory. We are told by those who have studied
its habits that it flies over districts as much as twenty miles in breadth in the course

of the year.

The writer furnishes the explanation of the greater damage done by the fly on his
gravelly land. There the wheat came earlier, and was therefore in condition to re-
ceive the deposit of eggs, while the more backward wheat was not. It accords with
the theory that late sowing is a measure of prevention against the ravages of the fly.
I had last fall an illustration of the’ protection atforded by late sowing. Ona small
piece I wanted to sow wheat after wheat. Before plowing the stubble the volunteer
crop had made a growth of perhaps six inches. In examining one of the plants I
found twenty-five of the larve. In many others there were a dozen or more. I de-
stroyed this growth by thorough cultivation, and, after proper fitting, sowed the seed.
In the plants that came from that late sowing there were very few larve. They came
too late to receive the eggs. It is well known that the fly deposits the eggs on the
leaves of the wheat, and that its work ceases after some frostscome. The late sowing
brings the growth too late for the fly. The fly which does the mischief in the spring
is not hatched in the fall—or at least is not fully developed. It comes out in the
spring, lays a new crop of eggs on the leaves of the growing plants, and the insects.
which hatch from these eggs are those which do the realinjury tothe wheat. If the
time can be ascertained when the eggs are depesited on the leaves, then is the time
to sow lime. I do not know that it will prevent the eggs from hatching. My observa-
tion of the work done by the fly has taught me one lesson. It isthatno wheat should
besown except on rich land, where the plants will be strong and therefore able to re-
sist the ravages of the insects.—[ Western Farmer’s Journal, March 29, 1878.

It should, however, be borne in mind that late sowing exposes the
wheat to the attacks of the wheat-midge (Diplosis tritici) and also to the
rust, while also by late sowing the plants are less advanced and less
fitted to withstand the rigors of the winter.

Early sowing as a remedy.—Still there are some who adhere to early
sowing, as on the whole the best thing to do. We insert the following
testimony in favor of this procedure:

In your paper of December 6, 1877, there are three or four articles respecting the
Hessian Fly, and they are so different from my observation of the wheat insect, as we ’
call it here, that I send you a few lines respecting the damage done to wheat here.

. The last harvest was very much injured in some localities in this State; in the west
part of Calhoun County on sandy land some pieces were not harvested, and others.

9224 - REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

yielded from five to ten bushels per acre. In this part of Jackson County wheat did
not suffer so much; some fields on bur-oak soil yielded as high as 35 bushels per acre
of the Clawson variety.

The fly commences as soon as the wheat isup an inchhigh. Iplacedin a glass fruit
jar some stools of wheat which were sown on the 31st of August, and about the 15th
of October the fly hatched out of the brown eggs which were in the wheat in large
numbers, and was a lively little black fellow about one-eighth of an inch long. Now,
if the eggs were deposited about the eighth of September, as that is as soon as the
wheat would be large enough for them, it would give them about 37 days to mature so
as to fly again, though they might hatch a little sooner or later in the open field. I
cannot say as to that, having no certain means of knowing. Now if we wait till the
first of October to seed we will be just in time for the first brood that comes out in
the fall to deposit their eggs in the late sowing, which was the case hereabouts. Fields
sown on the 25th of September, 1876, suffered more than that sowed on the 25th of .
August the same year, not three miles apart; the latter giving a good crop, and the
former a very light one.

Now, my observation as well as practice is, that the earliest seeding is the best every
time. There are a few farmers in the country who invariably sow early—say as early
as the 25th,of August—and they hardly ever failof a good crop. There may be a dif-
ference in varieties in resisting the ravages of the fly, and I presume there is, The
Tappahannock suffered very much more than the Clawson in adjoining fields, on the
same farms, and sowed about thesametime. I venture the suggestion that we allsow
our wheat earlier—say on the 20th of August, or soon after—as farmers used to do 50
years ago, so that our wheat will get a strong root and a large top to go into the
winter with. I hope this suggestion will stir up some scientific man, like Professor
Riley of Missouri, to investigate the habits of the fly as thoroughly as he has the locust
or the Colorado potato beetle, for I think the country has suffered quite as much from
the Hessian Fly as from all other pests put together. If this brings out the desired
information, I shall be well paid for this my first contribution to your valuable paper,
which I have read with great pleasure for the last ten years.

CALEB T. FULLER. |
JACKSON COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

_ In reply to your request for information in regard to the Hessian Fly, I willstate that
only a few of the earliest sown pieces are affected in this and the adjoining county
of Trimble. Wheat in general looks remarkably well, has tillered finely, and there is
at least 15 per cent. more than an average acreage sown.

S. E. HAMPTON.
CARROLL COUNTY, KENTUCKY.
[Cultivator and Country Gentleman.

We may, then, conclude that, on the whole, late sowing is the best gen-
eral remedy, but still a part of the wheat should be sown early as a decoy
to draw off the flies and induce them to lay their eggs in the early-sown
grain, that the later-sown portion may escape their attacks, and then
farmers should plow under and resow the fields of early grain. Hence
we indorse the following excellent advice, which was first suggested by
Dr. Fitch, and reiterated by Professor Cook, as follows:

Let all, without exception, sow a narrow strip about each field, to be sown early in
September, or even in August. From the fact that the flies are already in waiting,
that the outer edge of a field is almost always the most injured, except that the field
grew wheat that nourished flies the preceding year, and that such fields suffer most,
one may expect this early-sown narrow rim to receive nearly all the eggs. Leave the

balance of the field till we feel it is dangerous to wait longer, at least till after the
middle of September, then sow it, after which plow deeply under the early-sown strip,

ADVANTAGE OF HIGH CULTURE. 225

that is if it is stocked with insects, which may be easily determined by examination,
and resow it. We should thus kill two birds with one stone—save our crops, and de-
stroy the pest.

Advantage of high culture—Many farmers advocate high culture, sow-
ing a less breadth of wheat, and cultivating the ground, using fertilizers.
This is all-important, as the stronger and more luxuriant the growth of
the young wheat, the better able will it be to withstand the weakening
effects of the maggots; while high culture will carry a partly infested
field of wheat through, when the same grain grown on a poorer soil
would succumb. The value, then, of good farming, conducted on scien-
tific principles, the forcing of the plant by fertilizers, and the rotation
of crops, is so self-evident that we need devote no more space to this sub-
ject, except to add the following remarks by practical farmers:

Ii is claimed by some that certain varieties of wheat are less liable to the attacks
of the Hessian Fly, and entire exemption has been claimed for some. I am satisfied
from experience that these claims are partially fallacious. There is no wheat which
_the fly will not injure under favorable conditions for its working. The supposed ex-
emption is due to the fact, that when a weak-growing and strong-growing variety are
sown side by side, the fly leaves the latter for the former. Whatever makes the wheat
plant vigorous, helps to repel the attacks of all insect enemies. If the red sorts are
less liable to injury, it is because their thicker and ranker leaves keep the plant too
moist for the eggs and larve. Ihave seen the same result from the use of superphos-
phate, gypsum, salt, and in fact any manure which causes vigorous growth, with
. dampness. Coarse manure sometimes seems to favor the insect, but only, I imagine,
when the weather is so dry that its coarse strawy substance is really more dry than
the ground. Wherever the soil is moist, and wheat makes a rapid growth, the fly
will do least damage. I shall take advantage of this fact, this fall, in fertilizing my
wheat more liberally than ever before, using two hundred, or perhaps more pounds, of
phosphate per acre, besides gypsum and salt to dilute it. If I can get a vigorous
growth of wheat from the start, there will be less to fear from the fly. This liberal
manuring will alsoenable me to defer sowing till later than would otherwise be safe.

Rolling and compacting the ground is very important as a means of keeping it
moist. I shall not roll immediately after sowing, but wait until the wheat is up,
when, if there is a dry time, with no frosts to keep back the fly, I shall roll the ground
_ with the hope that the roller will destroy at least some of the eggs which the fly may
have laid. W. J. F.

MONROE CounTy, NEW YORK.

[Cultivator and Country Gentleman.

In the rapidly increasing practice of extra manuring and cultivation of wheat, as
by drilling and hoeing, it is found in very many cases that the Hessian Fly and other
insects are far less troublesome than on the wheat fields where only ordinary cultiva-
tion is practiced. It frequently occurs, too, that superior cultivation permits of earlier
sowing in the fall; the extra growth more than offsetting the damage done by the in-
sects, to avoid which most farmers now are obliged to resort to late planting. Several
examples are cited where drilled and cultivated fields, grown beside ordinary broad-
cast-sown and lightly-manured fields, with results wholly in favor of the former, the
Hessian Fly greatly damaging if not totally destroying the latter, while the cultivated
fields escaped almost unharmed.—[ Cultivator and Country Gentleman.

Pasturing with sheep.—Many farmers practice pasturing wheat-fields
with sheep or cattle; for itis claimed that if the wheat is strong enough
by the middle or end of November to bear it, enough of the larva or
flaxseeds may thus be destroyed to save the wheat and prevent the ne-

15EO °

226 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

cessity of plowing it in. This is a rather rude, uncertain remedy, but
can be carried on with more or less success in the Middle States. We
give the opinions of those who have found pasturing successful.

From Mr. BK. A. Hickman, of Independence, Mo., we obtain the follow-
ing information:

In reply to your inquiry on the subject of the Hessian Fly, I will state that I have
made some inquiry of our best wheat-raisers, and they report as follows: First, the
wheat-midge is not found in our State, hence is not further alluded to. A.L. H. Cren-
shaw, now an old wheat-raiser, and quite successful, says he breaks up his ground in
July and lets it lie till September, then harrows it into good planting condition, and
lets it remain until after a killing frost, which is usually from the 25th September to
the 5th of October; then he puts in the seed by drilling. He has never lost a crop or
had one injured by the fly.

G. W. Compton is asuccessful raiser; he breaks up in July, and by the 1st of Septem-
ber sows his wheat immediately, and as soon as the wheat is up and of sufficient
height he turns sheep and other stock on it to keep it eaten down so that the fly can-
not shelter under its leaves. This has protected his crop until the fall of 1877, when
the rains favored the breaking up of the ground and the planting and growing of the
wheat to such an extent that the stock could not grazeit down. Its rankness pro-
tected the fly and its abundance nearly destroyed his crops. He attributes his failure
to the fact that his crop was not grazed sufficiently close.

Mr. James Lobb sowed early in September, 1878, a fine growing season; brought up
a luxuriant and vigorous stand; no pasturing was applied either in fall or spring, and
the crop only yielded about four bushels per acre, the balance being destroyed by the
fly. This was adjoining a field that produced a fine crop, but cultivated to thwart
the fly. :

Two other successful men say they have followed the advice of an old settler, who
told them to have everything ready, but never sow until after a killing frost; and they
never suffer from that enemy.

Mr. Robert McNeilly, of Charlotte, Dickson County, Tennessee, writes
us that “‘the best preventive found here is to pasture the wheat close
in the winter with sheep.” :

We also reprint the following newspaper articles:

Another error is that pasturing will do no good. If sheep enough are turned in to
eat the wheat down close before the eggs hatch, after being laid, very much good will
result. ‘This is an old remedy, and has proved very effectual in many instances. It
is now too late to employ it, as the eggs are mostly hatched. During the fine weather
of this fall, so far, very few days only were required to hatch the eggs, after which
nothing could be done. ‘Very few eggs are placed too close to the, ground to escape
the teeth of sheep, and if enough of these animals could be turned on to eat the wheat
off within three days after the flies appeared, very little damage would result. Frost
now will not do much good except with fields that have been sown late, where the
blades have not grown large enough to attract the fly. The destruction of the entire
crop does not follow the appearance of the fly always. Unless very badly infested,
if the soil is rich and the season favorable, a fair crop may result in spite of the fly.
Of course, the crop is always injured to some extent. The best remedy, after the
larve have hatched and found security in the crown of the plant, is to stimulate the
ground as much as possible by the application of fertilizers.

We mentioned in last week’s issue that the Hessian Fly appeared in Pennsylvania

as well asin Canada and other sectionslast year. It appears that the practice of
early sowing has lately increased so much in Pennsylvania as to furnish everywhere
the young winter wheat at exactly the time when the Hessian Fly is laying its eggs.
This probably has a good deal to do with the.trouble in Canada also. And yet the

Se

?

CHOICE OF FLY-PROOF WHEAT. | 2274

evils of late sowing are so great that most farmers would prefer to risk the Hessians.
A correspondent of the Germantown Telegraph, speaking from experience—for he says
that he has never known his system to fail both to destroy the fly and to greatly
benefit the crop—gives a useful hint. He says that if the land is strong, the eggs of
the fly may all be destreyed and the crop greatly benefited in this manner: After
frosts cease in the spring, and the grain is beginning to grow rapidly, and the ground
has become so dry that tramping will not injure the crop, pasture off the grain down
to the crown of the plants with sheep. This will remove all the eggs, and it will
cause the plants to tiller profusely, often five to seven to one, and all starting together
will each enjoy equal facilities for growth and maturity, and the crop will be greatly
improved and increased. If the soil lacks fertility, it is well to apply a proper amount
of a proper fertilizer when the sheep are removed. If no salt has been applied to the
land, no application will be more likely to pay so well as this, at the rate of twelve
to twenty bushels per acre. This is well worth trying.—[ Canada Farmer.

Sowing of hardy varieties of wheat.—When the stalks and leaves of
certain varieties of wheat are tough and hard, the stems coarse and
silicious, and the plants “tiller” or throw out secondary shoots ina
vigorous way, such varieties are naturally the most fly-proof and should
be selected for sowing as winter wheat, while the less hardy and vigor-

ous kinds should be sown when the attacks of the Hessian Fly are not

to be expected.

Of the different varieties of “ fly-proof” wheat, the Underhill variety
has for nearly a century been highly recommended. As Fitch remarks,
its fly-proof qualities were supposed by many to be due to the hardness
or solidity of its straw. The fly laid its eggs freely upon the leaves,
but it was seldom if ever materially injured by it.- It is a bearded white
chaff, with a plump yellow berry, requiring to be thoroughly dried be-
fore grinding, and then producing flour in quantity and quality equal
to the best of the other varieties.

The Mediterranean wheat is, in the Middle States, in high repute for
its fly-proof and hardy nature, recovering better than other varieties
from the attacks of the fly. A correspondent in Charlotte, Tenn., writes
us that “the Mediterranean, Red Chaff, and Red May are less liable to
be damaged by the fly than any we have tried.” Fitch says the Med-
iterranean wheat is a slight red chaff, having a long stiff beard, a long,
red, and very flinty berry, and ripens about ten days earlier than
other varieties. In central New York the Lancaster, a red variety, is
strongly urged.

In Michigan the Clawson is apparently the favorite wheat, on account
of its ‘‘fly-proof” qualities. As stated by Professor Cook—

The fact that last summer (1876), as well as this, when Diehl and Clawson were
sown side by side, Clawson was comparatively free from insects, and, as stated by
Mr. Rowe, did not break down in summer, seems to show that it is more exempt from
attack. It would seem that the insects have a preference, but will accept plain fare
rather than starve or fail to produce. It also seems clear that Clawson, Lancaster,

and the red varieties will stand attack with far less damage, owing to their vigor and
greater tendency to sprout.

He then gives the following advice:

Jf wheat must be sown early, so long as the Hessian Fly remains a pest, by all
means sow Fultz or other varieties of red wheat, or, better still, Clawson. But if we

2928 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

act more wisely still, and set the trap of an early-sown strip, let this be sown to Diehl,
the better to attract the flies, and then, when we sow the balance of our field, two or
three weeks later, sow Clawson or other rapid, vigorous growing varieties, which not
only resist attacks better, but survive better when attacked. Lastly, if the early
sown area is harboring the pests, convert it into an insect cemetery, using the insects
_to fertilize a still further crop of Clawson.

Mr. W. L. Devereaux, of Clyde, N. Y., gives us his experience with the
fly and the best varieties to sow:

Now, concerning the fly: It is the least to be feared of all the injurious insects of the
United States. Iam situated in or just north of the starting point of the Cecidomyia
destructor in this last crusade on wheat, which is Seneca and Tompkins Counties, New
York, between Cayuga and Seneca Lakes. This section is also where the Clawson
wheat originated, and I hold that the Clawson has been the propagator of the fly in
this last spread. Perhaps the Soules helped the spread prior to this.

To my knowledge, there isn’t a single instance of a field of Lancaster being injured
by the larve of the fly. Indeed, I never could find a single larva or pupa in a field of
Lancaster. It is the kind which farmers have sown almost entirely throughout this
section this year. It does well, and, although a red wheat, itnow commands as high
if not higher price than Clawson.

I would particularly impress upon you the fact that we think the fly cannot be found
on Lancaster wheat, It is a variety which is extremely tough and hardy, having that
green color which farmers call ‘‘ black,” while the Clawson and similar'wheats have
a green color which is very often yellow. The Lancaster—to strongly indicate its
toughness—is said to grow readily under water or on a rock. I have no personal
motives in writing thus of the Lancaster wheat; I only want to indicate that it is too
tough fibre for the Hessian Fly to live on. It is nearly like or is the Blue-stem wheat.

Professor Cook ranks the. Clawson as being less injured by the fly than the Lancas-
ter, but I think the latter is absolutely free from the fiy, while the Clawson is liter-
ally eaten up alive by the fly. ;

Mr. Devereaux afterwards wrote as follows, under date of October 29,
1879:

The Hessian Fly has not destroyed wheat to any great extent this year. However,
all white wheat suffered from the attacks of the fly, but still not to the extent it did
last year. Red wheat has never been attacked (vide my article in Rural New Yorker,
June 15, 1878). The principal bearded red wheat sown in this locality is called the
Lancaster. An amber wheat called Fultz (a bald wheat) seems to be proof against
the fly. Mold’s red wheat (bald) is also not attacked. But the Clawson (white), so
extensively sown here and elsewhere, was most severely attacked in 1877, very badly
in 1878, and this year it was thought to be free from the fly, but when harvest came
it was noticeably short, many heads unfilled, many stunted in their height. At this
date of writing every piece of Clawson sown this fall is being ravaged (however, there
are only a few pieces of Clawson for miles around here), the Lancaster, as heretofore,
remaining uninjured. ;

I notice after harvest long stubbles and straws of wheat in field and barn-yard which
have many little pin-holes from which the imago Cecidomyia escaped. Barley was
damaged to an enormous extent last year, whole fields having nearly every straw so
badly damaged that they would break off readily by passing through with the horse-
rake, throwing it into winrows. This year barley was not hurt much.

Now, wasn’t the great spread of the Hessian Fly, which occurred many years ago,
brought about at that time by that extensively sown wheat, the Soules, which was a
very similar wheat to the Clawson, which brought the fly this time? Or, rather, each
kind of these wheats, by their tender foliage and loose culms, allowed the rapid prop-
agation of the fly, being their favorite variety of wheat; we may also add the fact that
these wheats were popular among the farmers everywhere; thus whole wheat district
were sown entirely to this wheat, bringing forth countless numbers of the Hessian Fly

HESSIAN FLY: SPECIAL REMEDIES. 229

to every acre. In the former spread of the fly, farmers entirely desisted from raising
wheat, or resorted to red or Mediterranean wheat, and so the pests can be driven back
now to their less prosperous plants by the sowing of Lancaster and similar wheats.

In conclusion, we may urge that whatever kind of wheat is used, much
more depends on a rich soil, a vigorous growth, and careful cultivation,
all of which tend to make the stalk stouter, and the growth a few days
earlier, than the choice of particular varieties.

SPECIAL REMEDIES.

Under this head belong the use of lime, dusted on the young wheat,
rolling, deep plowing, burning the stubble after harvest, &c. Such
special remedies as theseare of little use as compared with careful prepa-
ration of the ground and late sowing, and some of them actually do more
harm than good, as we shall see further on.

Application of lime to kill the maggot or larve.—It has been frequently
recommended to spread fine lime, soot, or salt upon the young wheat so
as to kill the young larve. As asample of such treatment, which at
Jeast can do no harm, we extract the following statement from the Kansas
Farmer :

The farmer who recommends the remedy is a Virginian, and he writes to a local
paper as follows:

‘‘T hear there is much ‘fly’ in the wheat that was sown early this fall. To correct
this.evil I offer the following remedy, which I and others have successfully tested for
a good many seasons: Sow of air-slacked or water-slacked lime one or two bushels
per acre broadcast over the wheat in the early morning on the dew, or over night on
a clear evening, when there is reason to expect dew or frost. As it dissolves it will
form a lye which will follow the leaf towards the root and destroy the chrysalis of the
fly near that point.

“The sower must always sow with the wind, else the lime will be blown back in
his face and eyes and on his clothes. And he must grease his hands, face, and nostrils
with lard, which renders contact with the lime innocuous. If two or more sow they

should sow en echelon, at such a distance that the rear shall cast no lime on the front.

A very good but not indispensable plan is to use tea scoops—diminutive sygar scoops
—that will hold a double handfull. It enables one better to take up and measure
the quantity to be applied. This is an application so simple and cheap as to discredit
it with the many who are often looking to be told ‘some great thing.’ Ican only say
that I know it to be effectual as a remedy, and that in no case can it do harm.”

It is evident that such remedies as these should be applied before the
insect transforms into the flaxseed state, as the hard, dense pupa case
is impervious to ordinary appliances such as would kill the maggots.

Rolling the ground to kill the larve and flaxseeds.—Practical men advise
rolling the ground both to,.keep it moist and in order to destroy the
eggs, larve, and some of the flaxseeds. This may be in some cases
worth trying, but we should think that full as much injury would be
dene to the wheat plants as to the minute larve and eggs upon them.

Cutting the grain close to the ground.—This has been sometimes prac-
ticed. A writer in the Ohio Farmer makes the following statement in
favor of this plan:

EK. C. Green, Medina County, Ohio, writes: ‘‘The Hessian Fly appeared in this vi-
cinity, but has done but little damage. The wheat commenced to fall over before it

230 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

was cut, and the eggs or larvee were found above the first or second joint. The dam-
age on five acres of wheat was probably five or six bushels. By reaping low and
raking the stubble was all saved.”

A serious objection to reaping lowis that many insects of the summer
brood in the flaxseed state are, as Mr. 8. S. Rathvon claims, carried to the
barn or stack, beyond the reach of remedy. From the straw thus har-
vested the fly would emerge before it was threshed, ‘and might even
pass through a machine without injury.” In this manner the fly has
possibly been distributed through different sections of the country.

Burning the stubble—Although this remedy has been advocated, it
will be seen to be worse than useless when we reflect that after all the
artificial means taken to reduce the number of the Hessian Fly, nature’s
method of checking its undue increase is far more important and
thorough-going; we refer to the diffusion and multiplication of the
insect-parasites. As previously stated, most probably nine-tenths of
the young Hessian Flies are destroyed in the larva or pupa state by
the parasites already described. For the most part these parasites
live in the flaxseeds contained in the straw, and appear in spring. Now,
to burn the stubble in the attumn or early spring is simply to destroy
these useful parasites, the best friends of the farmer. We do not hesi-
tate to urge that the straw be untouched. On the contrary, the para-
sites should be gathered and bred in numbers; and we believe that
practical entomologists should bend all their energies towards clearing
up the subject of rearing and multiplying these insect hosts. Much
knowledge and practical skill is needed in this direction, as occasionally
by disseminating the parasites their noxious hosts may increase and be
distributed; but knowing, as we do, how many more of the parasites
are in many cases bred than the insects on which they prey, it seems
safe and reasonable to advise not only not burning the stubble, but
letting it stand, so that the parasites may finish their transformations,
become fledged, and ready, when the eggs and larvee of the ied Fly
are upon or in the young wheat, to destroy them.

It is a matter of fact that in years when the Hessian Fly is specially
abundant and destructive, similar seasons are highly favorable to the
corresponding increase in the number of their insect or ichneumon para-
sites; they do their work so effectively that the few following years the
numbers of Hessian Flies are greatly reduced. It is, then, to these
parasites that we are indebted for the yearsof immunity from the at
tacks of the Hessian Fly, as much as to favorable or unfavorable
weather, and this leads us to consider the apparent periodicity in the
years of abundance and scarcity of the Hessian Fly.

PERIODICITY IN THE ABUNDANCE AND SCARCITY OF THE HESSIAN
FLY.
The following tabular view, though constructed from very scanty and
often misleading data, may throw some light on this subject.
The table has been drawn up from the reports of Fitch, Hind, Cook,

REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. 231

and of the Agricultural Department at Washington, and from different
newspapers, as well as from private correspondence. The record, as
therein presented, is very imperfect, but still is sufficient to show the
periodicity in the return of periods when the Hessian Fly has been suffi-
ciently abundant to ravage wheat-tields and excite apprehension and
alarm. Without much doubt, in the different States mentioned, espe-
cially in the Middle States, the insect is tolerably abundant nearly every
year, but few seasons occurring when after a careful search by experts
the fly would not be found.

As the recorded facts indicate, within about ninety years there have
been, in the Atlantic and Middle States, six periods of unusual abun-
dance, namely, centering about the years 1790, 1817, 184445, 1871~72,
and 187678. These dates, which generally are inserted in larger type
in the table, mark the time of culmination in the degree of abundance
and extent of ravages committed, and were preceded by from one to
Several years of less or greater abundance. After the culmination, or
year of greatest abundance, the fly often suddenly disappears. This
sudden disappearance is, without doubt, due tothe great increase in the
number of parasites, while the original increase is probably due to a suc-
cession of warm, damp seasons, favorable to the multiplication of the
flies. These seasons, when we look at the later Hessian Fly years, such
as 184445, 1871~72, and 1876~78, when the insect had become wide- -
spread over the western portion of the wheat area, were evidently areas of
similar climatic features common to the Atlantic and Mississippi Valley
States. Whether these seasons were warm and moist or not, we have
not the means at hand to enable us to form an opinion.

As stated to us by Mr. Thomas, in 1817 the rainfall from Maine to
Maryland was slightly above the average, 1.01 per cent. of the mean.

The winter of 1843~44 was the most severe in the West that had been
experienced for twenty years; the spring was cold and late; 1844 was
very wet over the West, in fact the wettest season known since its set-
tlement, or at least since 1811. This was the year of the great flood in
the Mississippi. It was also wet in parts of Virginia and Maryland.
But along the sea-coast, from Maine to Florida, the amount of rainfall
was only about .90 per cent. of the mean. In 1845 it was not very wet
in any section where wheat was cultivated, the amount along the sea-
coast being placed at .95, and this was about the same in the Middle
and Northwestern States, varying from .83 to .91 per cent. of the mean.

We thus see that the Hessian Fly years, 1817 and 1844, were wet
years, periods of more than the average rainfall. Of 1871 we have no
records at hand; the spring and summer of 1877 were damp and wet,
and also appear to have been warmer than the previous year. There
thus appears to be a correlation between the seasons of greatest abun-
dance of Hessian Flies and a greater degree of moisture, if not of heat.

232 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Chronotogical table of Hessian-

ere ot Miele pula
: a ate Jere) Neth elu lates
a) : = = S
| EN he Ista Eas Ae We Cae :
ST va els: Soda re) Mall keene ope Pe
=| = a om ~ qi a Eo a las} 2) ’ =|
5 e 8 3 E ay Si ey ene |e hee 3 = 4
om (oo) “=
7; Zi Ay a = cs Sen hares) Gull Mylo iS iS = =
LFTB al hikes ocho seal Ces ceed Peel ca Seca Re eels eect litera retell et ore a Ts (|
DTT Seco Se Soh eee lobe cee | Aeiters eters] = Fave cisal| seis eieiell stale eecell ama atetell sta ciate oll manerere ome || a rere S| eee
USO | chest Eos wen eee RN. CSS RC Se ER eS ere Cs ere cle spent eer
dA 61 Gang (eae Pa Vy sere esr |e is (PR pera] (RO eens eaten a Oe ee we olla oe ES
NSO [aia NS ORNS ee a Ne UI Te Be TUN SNE Sie ios} 0 west crcray| oie Mee teee nga eR a
A7SS5 ee eae SS Car ee a TS Se Sallie Sean ee ae 2. eee ee |
TSE ee el a eae he StS re ee BLU Nee eretlictcic cre alli clee 2) ae a) eee |e |
5 Yo (Ee a (eae ea ed Wau aa meee see LU ea) he Sees (Bie Oe | ee sel Seek te ee Hn
W7SE oAG86" |) WISE, Ve. So ee We eae eee Re Se aR esl ne ta
LIST A| AST POTS T# a Ae ON Cie RTE SETA Uae Bra ie ile orice Maen Bee Pe Pe
TSSE MW TTSS | OLTBS MOSS Shs Ne aE Dy SOS Seva oa acca oh Naat 2 uenee 0 em | Coma en
iso. eae 178Oe eee Rena (ogee etme nt rs pani Sr tee ciel MME HE AC LIM et
1790 | 1790 1790 £790. VIGO ees Sa] soe eel ace eee are ce Pe ce fee | ee eee |e
TOL eee oe ieee gir 01s 1G eemeeeineereee Dane ie ny Rata Hetil arms (nied MeN RUA Jil ious A a
WTO eh ees Ale ats sa ee BOS 5) ooo be ee eo See seca el oeSeee eee sce laomecemies aoe eee eee
2 17° i lah eee CleRipegee NEL Webern fees Joye (eapearg Ine ceinc ae eed US a Ol mas
D794 Nas eee See clee Eee Te ee. RBS ra atis oie liek eal Se creck seeming eae | a
F795 Visccke| ote Recdan coe be cnee cle Ne, Sie tae ee eS aM cei eee srarel| ctere te a ster enya | ee
7A? Si RS eae ees Dope nee | aero are (ee ne RN Ieee al roel nD RO ee el seaca alee ac ae
Te ae ees TO Re cesta Sauer EO REG 2 RR A 2 pala #LTOF foc se carla eee
1 (72) ieee te pee Or geigl eee en CURE, | ities eh tiered pe Name ee Ae No emo ao 2 ae
WF O9) ees al[E ole Peed Se OM ee CNR SRG Bee Gece I rates 8 eee | et | RO BN hear
1800 Fe Sal Rea Lee ese Sl Be Esc Ens Pay Leas 1d ted eats a ane ee Fa Bae
Tet) eng S| OSE ie oa alegre pil bee ar el TSOU eee ee 2S Se DS TSE ee |
SOD See eee ne eals ee eee ee PSOE sie sella coy eletete aioe Scher ctaul he tetahen at atal| aieaterhettehes lle vate tere temetl ferete mtetote!
SOS Peers al eevee creel take atale ceeval ter epetstarete TSO s [ocie Se besten Sree cane aE essa Pee ate ea |
Fee eee nw: eh Ree here mie ay Sena VS04E eee SPE Ue OE ee eal ee eee
ASU ay rE ES NN ae SN US TE ras are ere este a AAs mim) Se tcl ny ar be de lh Soe Seite
PS Uae essa O lteas Br falleoeaaces fore Fs ee ee S| a ei oe hres en eganet | aa BP Ma esheets
TSSOr SE Ss Se PSI ew PLE S20 es See er CE De Sa eg Noose 88 SUN te ee Oe ee | eee | af:
TECHS) ail pete Oe | tae sie eae Ta PAG Ae fails Cad nity eo ME el Pade ebb E ko I eee
BENE TO 31 Beak NCSA A yh Fag pm | dts ie Hey BE Nn 1-13 3h | oe ELA SMI |e Ber fle BS tt
1835 | 1835 USSHC a wssrerstee 1835 h 1:25 15 Tal aaa aap (eer Pees etal Imei SE Se no adao6
1836 | 1886 | 1836 |<....-.. 18360 | ASB ao ES et ee eee |e
2 a ea 1S40° ee 1840" 11640 *|-2 25." ip TSH: | Sees 1840). 22. ieee eee
FIESU Ti | Favors aki 124” RL | OR la TSA eS eee See ea eis 18417 Pees ae eee
B42 ee SADE tas eee 1842 S42 [ee reveal Src el Nee ewe ee wig eee elf cra eveme tell Sees
Thor a ae 13435) a(R, TOTS ASA S ot e R S 1G MeO TSM Sy Tits Serene | ne eae 1843
1844!...... S44 Ss Oey eA A mee ee LL ears Sy Meret a 1s44 1844 |1844!11844
1845]...... US 25 eeeee 8 A Ehcs 1-9 Jn fate ee PR Ur ad Cr Fae Sa Reta a Ua fey ay A eh a 1845 1845
1816)...... TS4G oes. US VS AN US4G seas eee are eee a PBS es We S84G |....-..
TSE QS eas ap dr co FN RS TUS PL MMU IC Ue ae el ate ale (HTN 1847 | 1847 | 1847
Pb sures | berms Sb S| Utes tas RTO Pate |e 28 Bek all aie an ae ee ee kee EAE obs 8 al Ne sco 1848
sLESSeE call se: BR sul te gts aaa een MPN WINE Ne yA OL lh Nyse Ce Bare | ga ee 1849 TGS 1849
eae ei Vie 1850 1850 | 1850 |.......| 1850
eee ve io oe 1851 velanfee | Ca Sede boctse nate | ML SBla ues el ees
AN CTIR | aera t iS53 ssetiwel decal tice teen as teen eee | oe
1S eee ges 1854 a ae ane SPOR ay ANE Se We a ERED aa eR RS eee ee 1854
LS NUR Aral ete [De Me Pec dE ato Cl Pe TS5%e Vc a eer
AEP en REGIE | Da es edn geet Ole NM 0 LUNE IE A WRB Ua Le HE Bk 186% 2) 1861.4 lee
DER Resp PME | pL ANN ia Nan neice cd ata A MO iE oS Le Sp elec 0 Haat eee [ta ee 1862
RAE NEE SUS VOU NO Fah Re a [A ConA SEO 2 A) ae | oe | 1863
re A ih Sa De Os 1966 0}. cooe Soles a eee
ZS ye ela Eo 0: Seth ga cena penile ea aera be theca lhe na elecmedl co ha ML 1870226 eee
1871 | 1871} 1871 1871 |1871/1871/1871
ea 1872 | 1872 1872 |1872|1872 1872
S aecee TOTS yee wee “he wept re LIEN cae Sse SINS Sal A Ze ees es
cs arate | tenes 1874 1874 Ceo eh ae aT el
Sete SER ee ane lends || ae oC SU a ie a at [ers (| Oars 18750 eee ee :
feet | Mee poet TSTGalbeocse AST: | SIS eee OSs oe eS Tet eee leo helene 1876
1 tote (7 Ale 7 hate ae fall gee ee al ere Acme a Ae SSSR te eds 5k sf BN ai UTA eee ee 1S77 1877 1877
ois Hie Peay re ina a OCHO eT LS a EE Pat VOU luc seeaeen ak hf ee LSU Sh lees .| 1878 | 1878
TUS eee 1879 1879 ASTON ISTO PESTON eee TS79h| Te eet 4879 | 1879 | 1879
ASSO TASH ASSO Mae SoYSY a ean ae HAC ae Ae al Pt 1880) |e eh gs0 ol aeeo
AE eS 1980 Wi S8T eh CEMENT eR Soe PU ey ra AC Onl es alee Da Seite en gene Ged. sean
TSSA i PA GSOy SSO ete teres ee ASSO ietese ieeamee 1Sgo"! tesoT es eSZe lL deeey eco cee 1882

* Appeared west of

PERIODICITY OF THE HESSIAN FLY. 233

Fly years, so far as recorded.

n
$
A § $ be a ca 3 5 :
2 Z s y cs 5 Slay eel tes Sa A=W da
S é o on o 5 5S =| 3 3S oO a oO =)
S 8 a HH S| = RD pe g 5 3 m2 =| A os
a E A= = D ae H a BS) | co 5 @ |.8
= RS a 3 dH i a teh Se] Poe = a eta
we tee ceca scl soel yell lca etl RR oC PS Ut a TZ ee Fi
= sn cia tin sec ee Sl Sosa ieeseeas afl pul at oe i Me a gl
ca kine a 2 RG SOR ET alae mae Talat ae Lom ape
agente nen 2 TEE C2 | sie a i PCa Pee EA JEN
© sve ciel aevaeress|| oe ti ou SCE ead eps a a WER SIRI LS bOI POM Rta
on dese ceiellene cemeetel |S Eee epg ia eg MeN Sli pee Ra Ae: MaRS em MRERLT ROGET
re eB eE it e [51 io eseetle be sccaleoee Ac cones s[caest.| 1829 1888 |e 00.
vase clamsecrll 5 scieheo sel -esese tl lela eat nS GA ON CTL SO VE ec Nails FANG V7 1,9 Pe
ene eee eh ae ry hon a Ne ee
3 iodine iee| eee TUES a Pilea A IY Waar VE Dk Wa sc Deg ce BM Ob SU a A De NC UN
S46 | 1846. |.-...--. IS 4 Gees eestor eel rns papearen | cea aca Uta yal a eae Stencils stayed Avra Mc peeua ts ee epee a eve rhe ye 1846
Wee eco solle dee ees Be teeaet eae | yee reeset Pie a af St 9 et Faves Mee ears ailteiecen eh Mitral ice, [ia ena BUA nip Ge ol ley 7
sie nce Jone onal se ccenear laiete esl esis d ght faege ie [aes uci Palla a DN aa ee a #7 y ne ani Fd
er a ee Io laese | aepaie 2
ut A Rin suse til ai Se Rye RR eee GRRE peter ale) 2. wd Mi el ly CIN eet AU el Mie | A eh lag BP eae
Sonics med Hue EE Ws i2 A OBS eA TOs rosea | SRP NT az a eNO a Eon 1854]...
COE Cees 1860 HIE GOO sees teye eis econ etter shell aCe aes ea oven elena sie oye aes vered cyevarahes| | cucbore ce eillces cece syerel ene ars pra reiere lees ou
«jon il ed ee IE Sg Se AE an AEN EF On SADE RC Be ictal Nei Ll oes ee
Te cone cee a RR Fa ae tt a cee a i ne WN Tc
meee eee ealince: sacslowsssese DESL ERS HIN i SS tT aS aN SM Le a He oa 8 NS S| eS gO ICA RN Wh Hh
Sosdesnolleeccod 4 Seesess Aaa SGOT eee SOOM Ree aleeser sr LSE) iseece abl esoeonllsagosloono-|lacdn
etete eve tni ors esaSese tS Bae 1870 TRSSAD AIT TESSIACO) so Reyes, colts Oe oh ess Nee oa Tene a a a (EV peak a Pes YE 2
Ripieteteint cial (toievaier 1871 1871 1871 aspen te Lees he At A tesecees -_1/P 0 YT Lid an Un ean vale) pete ge ene WR
oo ssoeSs|e5ueo 4 Seaeatee Bae aees MS lee reen miles (rer Plies realm rn ei GiGea Re ete aera oill2 Sim aie che sisters Ilan otatarell eens
acdc ecehellessescl Reo peees eae aes (Bie eens 1873 LGW |S Stoic ion 6a Ges Gok See ea | ieee ep i ett Ee L783
cece dena SESSA Se aeEene nasnree DUS O Mi cesrs Sail MAUSEM Fase pe oD at Sty AT ere et Lae eral ey Nee eee a
sors +e sols ees Gee STS ale preveioe | evel be tic Paer nell emcees balay og ol | OE SOR ale
1876 | 1876 | 1876 | 1876 | 1876 |...... 1876 | 1876) 1876) 1876, 1876 | #8S7G).....|-....|....
cool onde lodeees| SSeeBeHe Sas HST Mince exe Ssesitcs| Wind 37 Ae Aig SSS ah ie Al a el oa ed a et egal al A a
a lereicle (leila ci cclS ol mean ere H REI Reo) s [A aeseaenc || val les ite oeetl sicoesseged tes esos 1S lls ea aes acer | yey Te Le a | eo
mae ions Solas aisle aoliieis antersss|e lar. 1879 2s SEB SS cllind Kote ie locate oa totel Ere Tal ere ae eiriciees| eolat
TSG)” lab Sah eee [ein a ea 1820 1880 TSSONss estate eevetlstectee!: PESO ower sees cvetalll=pereee cleverness
a eeste' 1881 1881 1881 VWfoterd Liaw ls; Sys a poled ote Heya ee ta etary Pal ot Ll a Sn TAR ee a I
LUV) oll a a 1882 Te Aa NE ec Gol echcicist uel ea SEN Tae ec eet eh eee LE ree | nea Pe et era 1882

s

Alleghany Mountains.

234 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE HESSIAN FLY.

There seems to be good reasons for believing that this insect was
introduced from southern and southeastern Europe. It was detected
there in the spring of 1834, by Prof. J. D. Dana, who found the larvee
and pup, and reared the flies from wheat growing on the island of
Minorea. He sent several pup and flies from Mahon to Mr. Herrick,
who identified them as the Hessian Fly.!

With Herrick, Fitch, and others, when we prepared our Bulletin on
this insect, we were disposed to credit the prevalent belief of Colonel
Morgan, that this fly was introduced into America in the straw sup- é
posed to have been used for packing, brought by the Hessian troops
during the Revolutionary War,in August, 1776. It was supposed that
the starting point from which the fly originated was the western end of
Long Island, and that it spread from that point over different parts of
the country.

Our republication of the view that this fly was introduced by the Hes-
sians led to the publication of an article by Dr. H. A. Hagen in the Cana-
dian Entomologist for October, 1880, wherein he states that Dr. B.
Wagner, of Fulda, Hesse Cassel, had some years since disproved the
theory that the Hessian troops could have introduced the insect from
Germany. This-led us to obtain Wagner’s publication, a translation
of which, with Dr. Hagen’s paper, and other articles by Loew, Cohn,
and Koéppen, we reproduce wholly or in part in the appendices to this
report in order that the reader may have all the known facts regarding
the appearance and distribution of the Hessian Fly in Europe.

From Dr. H. Loew’s paper, published in 1859, it appears that a new
enemy of the rye, called the New Corn Worm or Rye Maggot, made its
appearance in certain districts of the provinces of Silesia, Posen, and
Prussia, in 1857 and 1858. This insect he called Cecidomyia secalina,
supposing it, from want of specimens for comparison, to be different from
C. destructor. Jt was afterwards shown by Dr. Wagner and Professor
Cohn to be the same as the so-called Hessian Fly.

Dr. B. Wagner, whose essay is carefully prepared and evidently re-

113 Mr. Herrick, in his valuable article in Silliman’s Journal (vol. xii, p. 154), informs us that Mr. J. D.
Dana, who had been much associated with him in making a thorough investigation of the habits of the
Hessian Fly and its parasites, being on a voyage in the Mediterranean, ‘‘on the 13th of March, 1834, and
subsequently, collected several larve and pups from wheat plants growing in a field on the island of
Minorca. From these pupe were evolved, on the 16th of March,1834, two individuals of an insect, which
his recollections (aided by a drawing of the Hessian Fly with which he was provided) enabled him to
pronounce to be the Cecidomyia destructor. More of the perfect insects were evolved in the course of
the month, one of which deposited eggs like those of the Hessian Fly. In letters dated Mahon, April
8 and 21, Mr. D. sent me five of the insects and several of the pupe. They arrived in safety, and, after
a careful examination, I saw no good reason to doubt the identity of this insect with the Hessian Fly.
The Mahonese asserted that the insect had been there from time immemorial, and often did great dam-
age both there and in Spain.” And further, ‘‘on the 28th of April, 1834, Mr. D. collected from a wheat-
field just without the walls of Toulon, in France, several pupz and one larva like those before obtained.
‘On the 4th of June, 1834, he obtained similar pupx from a wheat-field near Naples.” We doubt whether
there were living at that day, two persons better qualified to determine the identity of these insects

with the Hessian Fly than Messrs. Herrick and Dana. Testimony from such a source needs no com-
ment. ‘‘The Hessian Fly.”” By Asa Fitch, pp. 5, 6.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN EUROPE. 235

liable, effectually disproves the theory that the Hessian troops could
have carried the fly to America.

In the first place Wagner shows that the habits and characters of
Loew’s Rye Maggot agree “even in the most minute details” with his

observations on C. destructor, which occurred at Fulda, in Hesse Cassel, *

in the spring of 1860. Then, after referring to Dana’s observations of
the msect on the Mediterranean coast, he confidently expresses the opin-
jon that Loew’s Rye Gall-Fly is identical with the Hessian Fly, with
which the species from Southern Europe agrees—i. ¢., the German,
southern Huropean and North American species are altogether nothing
but Cecidomyia destructor. Wagner then discusses from historical data
the question as to the introduction of the insect into America by Hessian
troops, and the historical facts seem to warrant his opinion, that the
packing straw used by the Hessians was grown the year previous, and
from the long time occupied in the passage of the English transports,
which left Germany in March and April, not arriving until August, the
flies must have all emerged from the wheat before the end of the spring
and have perished long before the troops reached America. Moreover,
Wagener shows that Cecidomyia destructor was not known in any part of
Kurhesse before 1857, records running back for eighty years containing
no notice of the occurrence of such an insect. Hence he claims that
. this insect was not originally a Hessian Fly; that this name should be
dropped, and the name “wheat destroyer” should be substituted for it.

Having denied that this fly is indigenous in Hesse (and for that.
matter in Germany), he suggests that it was, like some other insects, in-
troduced into Germany from southern Europe, and that as wheat was
‘distributed from the Orient over southern Europe,” Cecidomyia de-
structor may have been of eastern origin. He then quotes Loew’s state-
ment “that a Cecidomyia, which in its manner of life and metamor-
phosis cannot be distinguished from C. destructor, does great injury to.
the wheat crops on the south shore of Asia Minor,” and adds that this
fact favors the assumption of its eastern origin.

Wagner then remarks:

When and from what shore the insect came to America can never be accurately
determined. Probably it was introduced several times and at different times.
That it happened from the shore of an European state previously possessing colo-
nies in North America must be accepted. It cannot have occurred from England,
when Banks reported its non-occurrence in all parts of Europe; this may apply to Eng-
Jand. Holland and Belgium we may justly omit. On the other hand, not only the
long existing occurrence of the insect in southern France speaks for the introduction
from the French coast to the once so extended possessions of the French in North

America, but also the comparatively short distance, which facilitated the introduction
of infected straw, thus enabling the insect to issue aiter arriving.

Wagner then quotes the statement made by Fitch, which we will

quote direct from Fitch himself, as follows:

We have nowhere met with but one statement, which goes directly to prove that.
_ the insect is indigenous to this country, or existed here anterior to the arrival of the

a

236 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Hessian troops. The late Judge Hickock, of Lansingburgh, N. Y.,!!4in a communication
to the Board of Agriculture in the year 1823, and published in their Memoirs (vol. ii,
p. 169), says, ‘‘A respectable and observing farmer of this town, Col. James Brook-
ings, has informed me, that on his first hearing of the alarm on Long Island, in the
year 1786 (doubtless 1776 is intended), and many years before its ravages were com-
plained of in this part of the country, he detected the same insect, upon examining
the wheat growing on his farm in this town.

Wagner then adds that he will not deny the possibility that, as Fitch
presumes, the insect observed by Colonel Brookings was not the Hes-
sian Fly, but he adds that the attacks of the latter are highly character-
istic, and in their consequences so conspicuous, that a mistake concern-
ing the insect could happen only during its first appearance in a locality.
*¢In our country [ Hesse-Cassel], for instance, after but one year’s experi-
ence, every farmer knows the pseudo-pupe of this enemy; he knows
exactly how they look, when they occur on the stalk, &e.”

It may also here be stated that Dr. Mitchell, in his article-in the
Encyclopedia Britannica, says, ‘It was first discovered in the year 1776.”
Dr. Hagen’s statement would leave the reader to infer that Dr. Mitchell
had stated that the fly had appeared in 1776, “before the arrival of the
troops,” but the words in quotation marks are simply Dr. Hagen’s own
words. We have not seen the edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica
containing Mitchell’s article. What Mitchell did say in substance was
that the Hessian Fly appeared in 1776. Whether before or after the
landing of the Hessian troops he does not say. So the evidence of Dr.
Mitchell is not of much value, while that of Colonel Brookings is quite
explicit, and may be used as proof of the appearance of the Hessian Fly
in 1776 in Lansingburgh, N. Y., and that the Hessian troops had noth-
ing to do with its importation.

Dr. Hagen, who adopts Wagner’s opinion that the Hessian Fly was
not imported by the Hessians, and whose article is based mainly on
Wagner’s publication, which we may here say was unknown to us until
he called attention to it, also confirms Wagner’s statement that the
Hessian Fly was unknown in Prussia, and indeed in Germany, until
1857. He states also that “in 1859 the same insect was very obnoxious
to the rye in Kastern Prussia, and was studied by myself. In 1860 it
had advanced westward to Augsburg, where it was studied by Professor
Rosenhauer, and to Fulda, Hesse. Everywhere it was considered to
‘be an entirely new pest, never seen or observed before. * * * In
the following years the calamity subsided, and was soon nearly forgotten.
Extensive destructions in Hungary in 1864 are reported by Messrs.
Haberlandt and Kuenstler, and in 1879 in Russia. I find no statements
of injury done by the fly in Germany after 1860, and the reports for

Bohemia for 1872 and 1879 state directly that the fly was not observed.

Dr. Schiner, in Vienna, had till 1864 seen no specimen; the best proof
that it had not been obnoxious in Austria.” |

ll4Near Troy, in Rensselaer County.

¢

THE HESSIAN FLY IN GERMANY. Pol

On the same page of this article Dr. Hagen remarks as follows:

Mr. V. von Motschulsky describes in 1852 a fly very obnoxious to the wheat in the
governments of Saraton and Simbirek, in Rusland [Russia], as C. funesia, together
with its parasites. I may add that von Motschulsky, after his return from America,
and having received typical specimens of the Hessian fly and its parasites from Dr.
A. Fitch, has assured me that C. funesta and C. destructor are the same species. This.
is also accepted in von Osten Sacken’s catalogue.

In the appendix we present a translation of Professor Cohn’s re-
searches on the injuries committed by the Hessian Fly in the summer of
1869 in Silesia.

Desirous of obtaining specimens of and information concerning the
European insect, we wrote to several entomologists in Germany and
Austria. From Prof. Ferdinand Cohn, of the University of Breslau, we
received the following obliging letter, which throws much light upon the
subject. The specimens he sent us were duly received. On comparing
the ten German puparia with numerous specimens from the Middle States
we can find absolutely no varietal difference between them, either in the
form of the segments or in the form of the puparium at eitherend. We
have not up to the time of reading proofs of these pages again heard
from Professor Cohn; and careful comparisons between the European
and American examples of the larva, pupa, and imago of the Cecidomyia
destructor have yet to be made.

_ The following is a copy verbatim of Professor Cohn’s letter which was
written in English:
BRESLAU, February 28, 1882.

DEaR Sir: I regret that I am not more in the possession of specimens of the Ceci-
domyia which I did mention in my Untersuchungen tiber Insektenschaden in 1869. If
my memory does not deceive me, I sent the fly to Professor Loew, with whom I was
corresponding in that time about the matter. The only specimen of an injured wheat-
stalk I can find in my collections contains also a puparium, and I beg to send it to
you in the accompanying parcel. In the same box I inclose the only remains of the
female fly which I still possess,!!5 the rest being destroyed by Psocus.° In 1880 I had

opportunity to study asecond time the damages of thisfly. A seed-merchant in a dis-
trict not far from Breslau (Jrebnitzer Kreis) had sold to the farmers seed of English
wheat (Wechselweizen) which is believed to grow with equal ease as summer or as
winter corn. The farmers had sown the seed in autumn, 1879, but in the following
spring the wheat had grown sick and did not produce ears. April, 1880, from the
15th to the 23d, had been extraordinarily warm; on the 24th April the thermometer
began to fall; the end of April to the midst of May were cool; from 14th to 16th May
few mild and sunny days; then a series of very rough and unusually cold days fol-
lowed (17th-25th of May); on the 20th frost, which did injure the fields in whole
Silesia. Summer wheat had not been injured by this weather; I found the fields of
that variety in the first days of August in the finest growth. Butthe English Wech-
selweizen sown in autumn, 1879, had shown the most manifest sickness, the shoots being
very numerous, but low, yellow, and without or very rarely producing ears. Nearly
in all the shoots I found on the bottom of the stalks the Jarve of the pups or that.
Cecidomyia which I believe to be C. destructor or Hessian fly; larve were found still
in the beginning of August.

The enormous damage in that country is due, I believe, to the Hessian fly, the eggs

of which had been deposited in autumn, 1879, upon the young crop. The first gener-
ation of flies had swarmed out, I suppose, in the second half of April, favored by the

16Jg not practicable. [This was therefore not sent.—A.S. P., jr.]

238 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

extraordinary warmth of that period; the cold May had retarded the growth of the
crop, so that the larve of the second generation growing in the young stalks did
totally destroy the germs of the ears; had the spring been warmer, the shoots would
have grown out the damages of the fly ; now most part of the sprouts had been killed.
Thaé at least is the explanation I may give to the facts.

I collected some pupz in the wheat field on 3d of August, which I put in a small
glass; but none crept out, some being killed by fungi and some by Pteromaline.1'6
Nevertheless, I send you the glass. I fear the communication I send you to-day will
not suffice for the determination of the species; next summer [I shall attend to the
matter, and I hope to be able to send you fresh specimens, which may suffice to decide
the question.

Meanwhile I remain, yours very respectfully,
FERDINAND COHN.

It will also be seen by the translation of K6ppen’s article (see ap-
pendix) that in 1879 and 1880 Cecidomyia destructor was ‘distributed
over a great part of middle and Southern Russia,” and it seems proba-
ble from his statement that as early as 1852 it was abundant in the dis-
trict of Charkow.

From all the information we have before us, and in the light of Wag-
ner’s investigations, we are strongly disposed to believe:

1. That the Hessian Fly had appeared in the eastern United States
before the Revolutionary war, and that it could not have been intro-
duced by the Hessians.

2. That the Hessian Fly has never been known to inhabit En eae
or northern HKurope.

3. That it was not known in Germany before 1857.

4, That it has “from time immemorial” been an inhabitant of wheat
fields on the shores of the Mediterranean, in Spain, at Toulon in France,
at Naples, in Minorca, and Asia Minor. )

_ 5, That it probably originated in this region or farther east, the prob-
able original habitat of the wheat and other cereals.

6. That it was introduced from southern Hurope, either southern
France or other Mediterranean regions, perhaps Asia Minor, before
the Revolutionary war.

That the Cecidomyia destructor originated in southern Europe and
western Asia, 7. ¢., about the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, seems
most probable from the statements of Herrick and Dana which we have
quoted. From this region it has possibly spread into Germany; and
from Asia Minor and perhaps southern Russia it has probably spread
into central Russia. a

We are, then, disposed to adhere to Wagner’s conclusions that the
insect could not possibly have been indigenous in Germany; and we
are therefore unable to agree with Dr. Hagen that the Hessian Fly is
“an indigenous American insect,” and that it ‘‘ was indigenous here as
well as in the Old World.”

- 116Professor Riley has submitted specimens to Mr. L. O. Howard, who writes us as follows: ‘‘The
European Hessian fly parasite received from Professor Cohn is a Platygaster, put as this genus has not
been worked up systematically in Europe, and as there are scores of isolated descriptions, it is practi-
cally impossible to determine it specifically.”

2

HESSIAN FLY: NOT INDIGENOUS IN AMERICA. 239

Tt seems to us that the fact that the fly has never been known to oc-
cur in England, Scandinavia, Holland or Belgium, and the fact that it
most probably was introduced into Germany and central Russia from
the southward, i. €., the Mediterranean region, shows that the fly was
not originally a member of the entomological fauna of northern and
central Europe. Had the Hessian Fly been indigenous to the Middle
and New England States, and been at all prevalent before the Revolu-
tionary war, it would undoubtedly have been carried in loads of wheat
to England. A search through the files of old Philadelphia papers in
the National Library at Washington, while it failed to reveal any data
regarding the presence of the Hessian Fly in the colonies before 1776,
and no articles were found other than those already cited by Dr. Fitch,’
yet elicited one interesting fact, 7%. e., that wheat was raised in Canada
and the American colonies and exported to England, especially the port
of London. Grain vessels loaded at Quebec, and also from New Eng-
land, for London”® and other ports.

Now if the Hessian Fly had been indigenous many years before 1776,
in the wheat-fields of this country, some at least would probably have
been carried in loads of grain to England. On the other hand if the
Hessian Fly had been indigenous in England and northern Europe, it
would doubtless have been brought over to this country some years
before the American Revolution. On the other hand it may have been
imported into the French colonies in Canada from southern France, by
immigrants. Whether there ever was much of a trade between the Med-
iterranean ports and Canada before the Revolutionary war we cannot
say. But it would seem most probable that the Hessian Fly was an in-
habitant originally of a warm and dry country, like that of the Med-
iterranean region. We know that the Cecidomyia destructor does not
inhabit England or Scandinavia. In New England, north of Connecti-
cut, it is not common, and has only occasionally been locally destructive.
Its ravages have been confined to the Middle and Western States, and
western Canada. A comparison of the history of the Hessian Fly with
that of the Wheat Midge, Diplosis tritici, which as everybody knows
is common in England and throughout northern Europe, and was un-
doubtedly imported into this country, will throw light on this subject.

17 The writer has made an attempt to find some mention of the Hessian Fly in old colonial newspapers
published before 1779, but the files of the Philadelphia Packet and of the Mercury in the National
Library, which are imperfect, disclosed nothing that Fitch does not quote. There are no full files of
colonial papers in the Boston and Cambridge libraries, and it is probable that unless in the State
Library of New York, at Albany, there can no records be found of the Hessian Fly, other than those
referred to by Dr. Fitch.

n8‘*On Friday last arrived in the river [London] from Quebec, the Active, Trampton, witha cargo of
wheat, being the first vessel that ever came to London from that port with grain. London, October
18.”—From the Pennsylvania Packet, December 27, 1778.

In the Philadelphia Mercury, for October 7, 1775, it is stated that ‘‘ great quantities of wheat were
raised at Genoa, Leghorn, and on the Mediterranean. * * * This year there was one of the most
plentiful harvests in Italy ever known.”

The ports of London, Bristol, and Liverpool, as well as every other port in England, have received
immense supplies [of wheat] from America, much more than their consumption can take care of.—
Extracts from a letter dated October 7, 1775, from an eminent house in Lisbon.—Philadelphia Mercury,
December 22, 1775.

240 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

As stated by Drs. Harris and Fitch, the Wheat Midge was abundant
and widespread in England several years previous to 1771; it was com-
mon in Scotland and Ireland, and according to Herpin it abounded in
France. It is undoubtedly a native of northern Europe, and adapted —
to a cool and moist climate. There is every reason to suppose that the
Diplosis tritici was not a native of thiscountry, but was imported in the
beginning of this century from Great Britain into either Canada or New
England. Harris states that it first appeared in this country in west-
ern Vermont, in 1820; by 1828, it had attracted notice in northern Ver-
mont, and on the borders of Lower Canada; from these places it over-
ran New England, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia, also extending
west. It has from the year 1834 been the chief wheat pest in the cooler
portions of Maine, flourishing where the Hessian Fly is comparatively
or wholly unknown.

It seems to us that the history of the two insects shows quite conclu-
sively that both are European importations; the Wheat Midge from
northern Europe, and the Hessian Fly an earlier importation from the
Mediterranean wheat fields, and which flourishes therefore better in the
warmer regions of the United States than the Wheat Midge, a native
of northern Europe.

ITS DISTRIBUTION IN NORTH AMERICA.

Introduced, then, by causes unknown, into New York and Long
Island, the Hessian Fly gradually spread over the wheat area of the
colonies, and afterwards of the United States, enlarging its limits of
distribution with the corresponding increase in the extent of the wheat
area of our country.

It spread more rapidly at first towards the eastward, nearly to the
end of Long Island and to Shelter Island. As Havens remarks, “It was
first perceived a little before harvest, and appeared to have come from
the west end of Long Island in a gradual progress of between twenty
and thirty miles a year.” |

In ten years after its first recorded appearance in America it reached
Prospect, N. J., about forty miles southwest of Staten Island, and in
1788 it was noticed at Trenton, N. J., and in Pennsylvania. Undoubt-
edly, had there been railroads at that time, with the rapid transit of
grain-cars and bales of hay and straw, it would have spread at. least
with three times the rapidity of its recorded-rate of diffusion.

In 1789 the fly first reached Saratoga, a point situated 200 miles north
of its original point of departure. ‘The insect reached here by a reg-
ular progress from the south, coming nearer and nearer each successive
year.”

It appeared west of the Alleghanies in 1797, though in what State we
are unable to learn; while Virginia was invaded in 1801, and North
Carolina about the year 1840. Westward its progress brought it to
Ohio in 1840, and three years later it was detected in Michigan. In

HESSIAN FLY: DISTRIBUTION IN NEW ENGLAND. 241

1844 it was destructive in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin,
and the eastern border of Iowa; while it was common in the Middle At-
lantic States, and became destructive in northern Georgia in 1845.
Meanwhile it had reached western Canada in 1805. North of Connec-
ticut it seems to have existed only sporadically, and to have maintained

- only a temporary foothold in Vermont and Maine in 1850-52, and has
_ never been noticed by authors in New Hampshire or in Massachusetts.”

Minnesota was visited in 1860, and probably earlier. In Beverly, Mass.,
it was common in wheat fields in 1877.

1t must have reached Missouri, Arkansas, and Texas long previous
to the date given in our table, but probably the year it entered eastern
Kansas (187172) is not much posterior toits arrival there, at present
its westernmost limit.

The following facts regarding the occurrence and distribution of the
Hessian Fly have been obtained since the publication of the original
Bulletin. The map appended to this report will show its present range

in the United States and Canada:

THE HESSIAN FLY IN MAINE.

The only authentic information we have been able to gather as to
the occurrence of this insect in Maine is what we learned from Mr.
William Alexander, of North Harpswell, Me., who told us that on his
farm (then his father’s) between forty and fifty years ago, in one spring
the spring wheat sown from the 10th to the 15th of April was affected
by a maggot between the leaf and the stalk, which caused the young
wheat to turn yellow.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN MASSACHUSETTS.

Neither Dr. Harris nor any other entomologist has noticed in print
the occurrence of C. destructor in this State. It has probably occurred
there in limited numbers since 1859, when it was observed in Danvers,
by Rey. John L. Russel, who pointed it out to Mr. John Lears in June,
1859. Mr. Lears has seen it in wheat occasionally since then. In or
about the year 1877, specimens of wheat, at least a foot high and con-
taining the puparia, were brought tome, June 10, from Beverly, Mass.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN VERMONT.
The Vermont Chronicle for 1829 records the occurrence of this insect.
THE HESSIAN FLY IN NEW YORK.

It appeared in Washington County in 1830.—[ Salem (N. Y.) Post.

119 Sir Joseph Banks drew up a report on this insect for the Privy Council, dated March 12,1789. He
states that ‘‘since its first appearance in Long Island it has advanced at the rate of fifteen or twenty
miles a year, and neither waters nor mountains have impeded its progress. Itwas seen crossing the
Delaware likea cloud from the Falls Township to Wakefield; had reached Saratoga, 200 miles from its
first appearance, infesting the counties of Middlesex, Somerset, Huntington, Morris, Sussex, the neigh-
borhood of Philadelphia, all the wheat counties of Connecticut, &c., committing the most dreadful rav-
ages, attacking wheat, rye, barley, and timothy grass. The Americans who have suffered by this insect
speak of it in terms of the greatest horror.”—Dobson’s Encyclopedia, viii, art. Hessian Fly.

16ECO

242 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN MARYLAND.
It appeared in Maryland in 1830.—[Haston Gazette.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN NORTH CAROLINA,

The Hessian Fly occasionally does considerable damage in Burke "i

County.—|[H. K. Morrison.

Prof. F. W.Simonds, University of North Carolina, writes us (January
12, 1881) that he cannot learn that the Hessian Fly is in the neighbor-
hood of Chapel Hill.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN MICHIGAN.

GALESBURG, MicH., December 1, 1880.

DEAR SiR: Your note of the 24th of November is just at hand. I have a few larve
and pupe of the Hessian Fly in alcohol, taken last year, which I will send. Will send
living ones in the plant as soon as occasion offers. At present the ground is covered
with afoot of snow. During the past season the fly has done no appreciable damage
in this portion of the State. Hardly any of the larve and pupe were to be found in
the wheat sown this fall, though in fields where the ground had been plowed to stubble
in wheat, and wheat had come up in August, I found some of the larve, but not in abun-
dance. I have neither seen the parasite Semiotellus destructor nor any indication of its
presence in the larve of the fly. During the summer I have discovered a new—to
me—insect at work in the wheat, which is nearly allied to the Hessian Fly. Owing to
its being a very busy season I did not even rear the insect to the perfect imago, and
only observed it in the larva and pupa state. Have regretted that I did not take
more time to attend toit. I should judge that the fly deposited the eggs near the
base of the stem, and that the insect, on hatching, worked into the stem to the center
of the plant, and then upward through the third or fourth joint, living upon the juices
in its progress, and when almost fully grown eating through the stem just above the
jvint; then fixing itself in the sheath, as does the Hessian Fly, to the lower joint, it
undergoes gradually the change to the chrysalis. These are of a deep chestnut color
about three-fourths the size of those of the Hessian Fly, and not more than three of the
insects were found by me in one stalk. The stem of the plant, being weakened by the
insect, breaks off just above the joint, and below the spot where the pupa is, just before
the heads mature, usually, though some heads were partly filled with small, defective
kernels. The insect seems to confine its operations to red wheat, and the Fultz va-
riety was this season damaged the most. I did not find a single one on the Clawson
wheat, while some fields of Fultz wheat had about one-fourth of the stalks damaged.

Very truly yours
F. §. SLEEPER.
A. S. PackaRD, Jr.

The fly has made sad havoc in the wheat-fields of southwestern Michigan. Fields
that looked fine a few weeks ago are fully one-half destroyed.—[ Providence Journal,

December 6, 1881.
GALESBURG, MIcH., December 20, 1881.

DEAR Sir: Your note of the 20th of September was duly received, requesting me
to collect the eggs of the Hessian Fly, with a view to obtaining egg parasites of the
fly. Ihave been very busy this fall, and could not give it the time when it ought to
have been given. Yet on several occasions I have spent. some time, and, with the
most diligent search, have seen the fly only on one afternoon, and then in few num-
bers, and have failed to find any of the pupa or flaxseed. What is the reason for the
scarcity I do not know. We have had a very unusual season, long droughts alter-
nating with excessive rainfalls. Will try in the future to comply with your request.

Truly yours,
os FRANK 8S. SLEEPER.

A. S. PAcKARD, JR.

—

THE HESSIAN FLY IN NEBRASKA. 243

THE HESSIAN FLY IN TENNESSEE.

CHARLOTTE, TENN., November 1, 1879.

DEAR SiR: The following are the answers, as far as I am able to give them, to the
questions in your circular No. 8, United States Entomological Commission:

Question No. 1. Don’t know; have no information.

Question No. 2. The fly appears in October and November in the fall, and in April
and May in spring.

Question No. 3. The fly has been known here for a long time; in 1878 it did great
damage; don’t know how it was introduced.

Question No. 4. Don’t know how many broods or generations are observed annually.
The plants are dwarfed in the fall, and fail to produce grain at harvest.

Question No. 5. The Mediterranean, Red Chaff, Red May are less liable to be dam-
aged by the ily than any we have tried; don’t know in what other cereals or grasses
the insect is known to develop.

Question No. 6. Warm, dry fall favors its injuries. Seasonable weather in the fall
and a vigorous growth prevent the fly.

Question No. 7. I know nothing as to this question; the last crop was clear of the fly.
Have made no experiments. Z

Question No. 8. I have no data by which to answer this question.

Question No. 9. The best preventive found here is to pasture the wheat close in the
winter with sheep. Burning the débris on the ground in the fall is also resorted to,
and does good. I have no specimens of wheat affected by the maggots.

Respectfully,
ROBERT McNEILLY,
Charlotte, Dickson County, Tennessee.
A. S. PACKARD, JR.

1. In April and May.

2. In early autumn, at and before seeding and warm weather; in winter and early
spring.

3. About 55 or 60 years since was heard of in New England before appearance here,
and is supposed to come from that direction.

4, Eggs are deposited soon after wheat is up, and thereafter as the weather is mild
and not wet. Damage not strikingly manifest until spring and early after.

5. It is not clear that any variety is less likely to suffer injury than others. No
other cereals or any grasses are known to be subjects of its depredations.

6. Dry, warm weather favors its injuries; frosts (before which it is not safe to sow)
check the egg deposits, and heavy freezes retard their development.

7. None troubled my crop this season, and I could make no examinations.

8. I hear of neighborhoods where the loss from fly is estimated at 25 per cent. Their
attacks are not at all general, and some years not any whatever. Their injuries are
less frequent of late years, and not so all-pervading as they were many years in the
past.

9. Some contend that grazing with sheep destroys the eggs, but the fancy is not
as convincing as that the wheat receives a greater injury. Sowing at or near frosts
is the only preventive that has general acceptation.

_ Very respectfully,
EPH’M LINK,
Greenville, Greene County, Tennessee.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN NEBRASKA.

WeEsT POINT, NEBR., February 23, 1881.
I will now send you what data I have thus far been able to gather relative to the
Hessian Fly (Cecidomyia destructor) in Nebraska.
Individually I have seen but few of the fly.

244 REPOR' UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The greater number of notices of their existence in the State are based on Pro-
fessor Aughey’s notes of specimens received for identification from time to time.

Prior to 1867 the Hessian Fly seems to have been absent from Nebraska, but during
this year specimens were received from Cass and Otoe Counties, where they were no-
ticed in wheat-fields doing some damage to some of the stalks. They were few in
number and only in isolated spots in some fields. The following year they had be-
come more general in these two counties, but not in sufficient numbers to cause un-
easiness. In 1869 they had spread into Sarpy and Douglas Counties. 1872 extended
their range into Lancaster, Seward, and Saunders Counties. They were also sent
from York County this year, where they were taken in a field of winter wheat. Both
eggs and larve were sent.

During 1873 they did not seem to spread to any great extent; but in 1874 they
made their appearance in Pawnee, Gage, and Richardson Counties. In 1876 they
were received from various counties in southeastern Nebraska, where they did some
damage in isolated localities, but not of sufficient note to cause alarm. Since that
time they have been regularly received each year from various portions of eastern
Nebraska, Of these no notes have been kept, but it is known that they have been
spreading, and if not soon checked will cause not a little uneasiness among grain-

growers.
LAWRENCE BRUNER.

May 23, 1881.

Some time ago you requested me tocontinue my investigations with reference to
the Hessian Fly and report. Well, I have been over a considerable portion of the
country bordering the Missouri River north of the Platte since grain is up, and have
also made inquiries with reference to various sections south. Thus far but few of
the flies are reported—the only substantial record being near Lincoln by Professor
Aughey. He was out collecting a few Coleoptera and saw several dozenstalks of wheat
suffering from its attacks. No other locality, as far as I am aware at present, has
been visited this season. Of course it can hardly be doubted but that a few of last
year’s stock of flies withstood the rigors of the past winter; and it is my opinion
that by careful search a few might be found throughout the entire area ravaged by
them last season. (I do not mean by this that this insect was at all destructive the
past year, but that it was present and did some damage.) But to make this sort of
observations would require some little time and cause some expense; hence, no par-
ticular person desires to take it upon himself to do so.

I have interviewed Professor Aughey in reference to causes of its seeming scarcity,
and he thinks that the ice and snow which remained on the ground the entire win-
ter have had something to do with it.

LAWRENCE BRUNER.

SUMMARY OF THE HABITS OF AND REMEDIES AGAINST THE HESSIAN
FLY.

1. There are two broods of the fly, the first laying their eggs on the
leaves of the young wheat from early April till the end of May, the time
varying with the latitude and weather; the second brood appearing dur-
ing August and the early part of September, and laying about thirty
eggs on the leaves of the young winter wheat. :

2. The eggs hatch in about four days after they are laid. Several of
the maggots or larve make their way down to the sheathing base of the
leaf, and remain between the base of the leaves and the stem near the
roots, causing the stalk to swell and the plant to turn yellow and die.
By the end of November, or from thirty to forty days after the wheat is

HESSIAN FLY: SUMMARY OF REMEDIES. 245

sown, they assume the “flaxseed” state, and may, on removing the
lower leaves, be found as little brown, oval, cylindrical, smooth bodies,
a little smaller than grains of rice. They remain in the wheat until dur-
ing warm weather; in April the larva rapidly transforms into the pupa
within its flaxseed skin, the fly emerging from the flaxseed case about
the end of April. The eggs laid by this first or spring brood of flies
soon hatch; the second brood of maggots live but a few weeks, the flax-
seed state is soon undergone, and the autumn or second brood of flies
appear in August. (In some cases there may be two autumn broods,
the earliest August brood giving rise to a third set of flies in September.)

3. There are several destructive ichneumon parasites of the Hessian
Fly, whose combined attacks are supposed at times to destroy about
nine-tenths of all the flies hatched. Of these, the most important is the
Chalcid four-winged fly (Semiotellus destructor, Plate LV, fig. i, much en-
larged), which infests the flaxseed; aud and the small parasite (Platy-

gaster, Fig. 9, p. 219, ante).
_ 4, By sowing a part of the wheat early, and, if affected by the fly,
plowing and sowing the rest after September 20, the wheat crop may
in most cases be saved. It should be remembered that the jirst brood
should be thus circumvented or destroyed in order that a second, or
spring, brood may not appear.

5. If the wheat be only partially affected, it may be saved by fertilizers
and careful cultivation ; or a badly-damaged field of winter wheat may
thus be recuperated in the spring.

6. Pasturing with sheep, and consequent close cropping of the winter
wheat in November and early December, may cause many of the eggs,
larvee, and flaxseeds to be destroyed; also, rolling the ground may have
nearly the same effect.

7. Sowing hardy varieties. The Underhill Mediterranean wheat, and
especially the Lancaster variety, which tillers vigorously, should be sown
in preference to the slighter, less vigorous kinds in a region much in-
fested by the fly. ‘The early (August) sown wheat might be Diehl; the
late sown, Lancaster or Clawson.

8. Of special remedies, the use of lime, soot, or salt may be recom-
mended, also raking off thestubble; but too close cutting of the wheat
and burning the stubble are of doubtful use, as this destroys the useful
parasites as well as the flies.

LIST OF WORKS AND ARTICLES RELATING TO THE HESSIAN FLY.

The following list embraces the most important writings relating to
the Hessian Fly. The titles of many of them are taken from Iitch’s re-
port and the bibliographical list in Bergenstamm and Loew’s Synopsis
Cecidomyidarum :

DuHAMEL. Eléments d’Agriculture. Par Duhamel du Monceau. Paris, 1771, i, p.

229.

MORGAN, GEORGE. Pennsylvania Mercury, June 8, Sept. 14, 1787.
CLaRK, THomas. Pennsylvania Mercury, Sept. 14, 1787.

246 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

VAUX and Jacobs. Philadelphia Packet, Aug. 21, 1788.

HAVENS. Observations on the Hessian Fly. By Jonathan N. Havens. Transactions
of the New York Society for the Promotion of Agriculture, Arts, and Manufactures,
1792. Second edition, 1801, pp. 71-86.

CHAPMAN, Dr. ISAAC. Menieirs of the Philadelphia Society for Promoting SSE CRs
v, 1797.

ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, viii. Article Hessian Fly, pp. 489-495, 1797.

DoBson. Encyclopedia; or a Dictionary of Arts and Sciences and Miscellaneous Liter-
ature. Article Hessian Fly. Published by Thomas Dobson. 21 vols. Philadelphia,
1798-1803, viii, pp. 489-495, 1798.

MITCHELL. Encyclopedia Britannica. Address in Transactions of the New York
Society of Agriculture, i, p. 32. Article in Medical Repository, vii, p. 97, 1803.

ANONYMOUS. Carey’s American Museum, Phila., i, pp. 143, 324-326, 1786 ; iv, p. 47,
1788 ; xi, pp. 285, 301, 1792.

MCLELLAN. Article in American Farmer, by H. McLellan, ii, p. 234, 1804.

KirRByY and SPENCE. An introduction to Entomology, by W. Kirby and W. Spence.
1815~26, i, p. 50.

Bosc. Quelques appergus sur Vinsecte connu sous le nom de Mouche Hessoise, et sur
un insecte parasite qui s’en nourrit. Par L. A. G. Bose d’Antic. Annales de PAg-
ricult., France. Tom. 70, pp. 277-303, 1817.

SAY. Some account of the insect known by the name of Hessian Fly, and of a para-
sitic insect that feeds on it. By Thomas Say. Journal of the Academy of Natural
Sciences, i, pp. 45-48, with a plate, 1817. See also Magazine of Natural History,
vol. i (Kirby). S

ACKERLY. An account of the wheat insect of America, or the Tipula vaginalis tritici,
commonly called the Hessian Fly. By Samuel Ackerly. American Monthly Maga-
zine and Critical Review, New York, i, pp. 275-279, August, 1817.

Cocks. Address by John H. Cocke to Albemarle Agricultural Society of Virginia,
1817.

MERRIWEATHER. Articles, by Dr. Merriweather and others, in the Richmond Inquirer,
National Intelligencer, and American Farmer, 1817 et seq.

GARNETT. Article by James M. Garnett in the American Farmer, ii, p. 174, 1820.

TILGHMAN. Article by Edward Tilghman in the American Farmer, il, p. 235, 1820.
Also in Cultivator, viii, p. 82, May, 1841.

WortTu. Article by James Worth in American Farmer, ii, p. 180, 1820.

Hickok. Essay by Judge Hickok in Memoirs of the New York Board of Agriculture,
pp. 169-171, 1823.

Birniz. On the éfficacy of certain steps to preserve wheat from the fly and s:nut (Hes-
sian Fly). By C. Birnie. New England Farmer, iii, p. 171, 1824.

BuEL. Paper by Judge Buel in the Memoirs of the New York Board of Agriculture,
lii, pp. 326-338, 1826.

WEstTwoop. Article Cecidomyia, by J. O. Westwood, in British Cyclopedia of Natural
History.

Kouiar. Naturgeschichte der schiidlichen Insecten in Bezug auf Landwirthschaft
und Forstkultur. Wien, 1837. English translation by J. and M. Loudon, with
notes by J. O. Westwood. London, 1840, pp. 118-123.

Morris. On the Cecidomyia destructor, or Hessian Fly. By Margaretta H. Morris. Pro-
ceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, i, pp. 66-68 1841 ; iii,
p. 238, 1847; iv, p. 194, 1849. Transactions of the American Phil. Society of Phila-
delphia, ser. 2, viii, pp. 49-51, 1843.

Coates. Remarks on the Present State of the Evidence in regard to the Hessian Fly.
By Benjamin H. Coates, M. D., 1841.

. Note on the natural alliances of the genus Cecidomyia, intended to facilitate

identification. By B.H. Coates. Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., i, pp. 191-192,

1842,

HESSIAN FLY: BIBLIOGRAPHY. 247

CoaTrEs. On some larvez in wheat stalks. By B. H. Coates. Proceedings Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., i, pp. 45, 54-57, 1842.

BERGEN. Remarks on the Hessian Fly. By Garret Bergen. Cultivator, viii, Albany,
Aug., 1841.

Herrick. A brief preliminary account of the Hessian Fly and its parasites. By Ed-
ward C. Herrick. American Journal of Science and Arts, xli, New Haven, pp. 153-158,
Oct., 1841.

. Observations on the Hessian Fly. By E.C. Herrick. Report of the Commis-
sioner of Patents for 1844, Washington, 1845, Appendix, pp. 161-167. See also letters
to Dr. T. W. Harris in Entomological Correspondence of T. W. Harris, and the Con-
necticut Farmers’ Gazette, No. 40.

Harris. A Report on the Insects of Massachusetts Injurious to Vegetation. By Thad-
deus W. Harris. Cambridge, 1841, pp. 421-433. Reprint, 1842. Second edition,
Boston, 1852. Third edition, with illustrations, 1862.

. Article by T. W. Harris in New England Farmer, xx, pp. 409-410, 1842.

—. Entomological Correspondence of Thaddeus William Harris, M.D. Edited
by Samuel H.€cudder. Occasional Papers of the Boston Society of Natural History,
i, Boston, 1869, 8°, pp. 181-207.

CurRTIS. Observations, &c., including a saw fly, the Hessian Fly, the wheat midge,
and the barley midge. By John Curtis. Journalof the Royal Agricultural Society
of England, vi, pp. 131-156, pl. 1, 1845. Separately printed, London, 1845, 8°, pp. 28,
pl. 1.

. Farm Insects. By John Curtis. London, 1860, p. 258.

WESTWOOD. Article on the Hessian Fly. By John O. Westwood. Gardeners’ Chron-
icle, London, p. 604, 1847.

Yuxus. Notice by J. D. Yukes. Patent Office Report, Washington, 1850.

Fircu. The Hessian Fly ; its histery, character, transformations, and habits. By Asa
Fitch, M. D. [originally published in the American Journal of Agriculture and
Science, iv, v, 1845, and now revised by the author]. Transactions of the New York
State Agricultural Society, vi, 1846; Albany, 1847, 8°, pp. 316-373, with a plate.
Printed separately, Albany, 1846, 8°, pp. 63, with a plate; and also Albany, 1847, 8°,
pp. 60, with a plate.

. Seventh report on the noxious and other insects of the State of New York. By
Asa Fitch, M. D. Pp. 133-144, with a plate, 1962.

MotTscHuusky. Article by Victor Motschulsky in Journal du Ministére de l’Intérieur,
1852.

HIND. Essay on the Insects and Diseases Injurious to the Wheat Crops. By H. Y. Hind,
Toronto, 1857, pp. 38-74.

SICHEL. Article by Jules Sichel in Annales de la Société Entomologique de France,
iv, Bulletin, p. 8, 1856.

HILL, Rev. GEORGE S. J. Essay on the Hessian Fly, Wheat Midge, and other Insects.
Injurious to the Wheat Crops. Toronto, Canada, 1858; 8°, pp. 52, illustrated.

. Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, Vol. iii, pp. 25-72,
1858~59.

LoEw. Ueber die den Roggen in den Proy. Schlesien und Posen verwiistende Fliegen-
made. By H. Loew, in Zeitschrift Entomol. schles. Verein fiir Insektenkunde, 1858,
mA,

. Die neue Kornmade und die Mittel, welche gegen sie anzuwenden sind. Ziilli-
chau. Sporleder, 1859, 8°, p. 29. ;

Kuippart, J. H. The Wheat Plait. * * * Cincinnati, 1860. 12. Pages 608-614 de-
voted to Hessian Fly, with illustration.

WAGNER. Untersuchungen itiber die neue Getreidegallmiicke. Von Dr. Balthasar
Wagner. Fulda und Hersfeld, 1861, 4°, pp. 41, with a plate.

OSTEN SACKEN. Article by R. von Osten Sacken in Stettiner entomologische Zeitung,
1862, p. 80.

248 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

HABERLANDT. Article by Haberlandt. Verhandlungen zool.-botan. Gesellschaft, Wien,
1864, p. 401.

KUNSTLER. Article by Kiinstler. Verhandlungen zool.-botan. Gesellschaft, Wien,
1864, pp. 407, 779; 1871, p. 15.

WatsH. Brief notices by B.D. Walsh, editor of the Practical Entomologist, 1867, pp.
10, 37.

STIERLIN. Article by Stierlin in Mittheilungen der Schweiz. entomol. Gesellschaft,
1868, ii, p. 157.

Coun. Untersuchun gen tiber Insectenschaden auf den schlesischen Getreidefeldern im
Sommer 1869, 1869, p. 12.

KALTENBACH. Die Pflanzenfeinde aus der Klasse der Insekten. Stutigart, 1874, pp.
734, 738, 741.

Rupow. Die Pflanzengallen Norddeutschlands und ihre Erzeuge. 1875, p. 84.

BERGENSTAMM and Lorw. Synopsis Cecidomyidarum. Von J. E. von Bergenstamm
und Paul Loew. Aus den Verhandlungen der K. K. zoologisch-botanischen Gesell-
schaft in Wien, 1876, 8°, p. 104.

PACKARD. Guide to the Study of Insects. By A. S. Packard, jr., M. D. 8°, first
edition, 1868~69, pp. 374-375, Salem, Mass. Second edition, 1870. Third edition,
1872. Fourth edition, 1874. Fifth edition, 1876. Sixth edition, New York, 1878.
Seventh edition, New York, 1880.

. Our Common Insects. Salem and Boston, 1873, 12°, pp. 79, 196.

——. Half Hours with Insects. Boston, 1877, 12°, pp. 212-215.

——. Report on the Recky Mountain Locust and other Insects now injuring or
likely to Injure Field and Garden Crops in the Western States and Territories. By
A. S. Packard, jr., M.D. (Published in Report of the United States Geological Sur-
vey of the Territories, F. V. Hayden in charge, 1875.) Washington, 1877, pp. 695—
697. Fifty extra copies with a separate title page: The Injurious Insects of the
West. Salem, S. £. Cassino, 1877, 8°, pp. 589-815, this being the original pagination,
with a map showing the distribution of the Hessian Fly.

——. The Hessian Fly, its ravages, habits, enemies, and means of preventing its
increase. By A.S. Packard, jr. Bulletin No. 4, United States Entomological Com-
mission, Washington, May 20, 1880, 8°, pp. 43.

Cook. The Hessian Fly. A lecture by Prof. A. J. Cook. Michigan, 1878, 8°, p. 14.

RiteEyY. Report of the Entomologist, Charles V. Riley, M. A., Ph. D., Angust 22, 1879.
(Author’s edition, from the Annual Report of the Department of Agriculture for the
year 1878.) Washington, 1879.

. Hessian Fly and Wheat Rust. New York Weekly Tribune, Dec. 19, 1877.

———. Fighting the Hessian Fly. New York Weekly Tribune, Sept. 12, 1877.

———. The Hessian Fly. Saint Louis Illustrated Journal of Agriculture, June 14,
1877,

HaGEn. The probable Parthenogenesis of Cecidomyia destructor. By Dr. H. A. Hagen,
North American Entomologist, vol. 1, No. 9, p. 65, 66, March, 1880. (Noticed in
American Entomologist, iii, p. 127, May, 1880.)

. The Hessian Fly not imported from Europe. By Dr. H. A. Hagen, Canadian

Entomologist, 197-207, Oct., 1880. ~

dma oe) ie tae Be Be

DESCRIPTIONS OF LARV OF INJURIOUS FOREST INSECTS.
THE EMBRYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOCUST. (Caloptenus.)

THE SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE ORTHOPTERA IN RELATION TO
OTHER ORDERS OF INSECTS.

NOTE ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL SUSI ENTO OF THE LOCUST AND
OTHER INSECTS (MAP IY).

249

redth 2 HE
otha ie

¥

CHAr Een TX.

DESCRIPTIONS OF THE LARVA OF INJURIOUS FOREST
INSECTS.

(Plates VI-XV.)

The following descriptions were drawn up after the publication of
our Builetin No. 7, on Forest Insects; and it is believed that these
notes, and especially the accompanying illustrations, will have considera-
- ble practical interest. The drawings have all been made by Dr. C. F.
Gissler, under the author’s direction, and acknowledgment should be ~
made of the care and pains taken by Dr. Gissler in representing these
difficult subjects for illustration. Full references to the figures are
given in the explanations of the plates.

Family BUPRESTIDA.
THE FLAT-HEADED APPLE BORER.
Chrysobothris femorata (Fabricius).

The following description has been drawn up from fresh alcoholic spec-
imens, from the localities mentioned in Bulletin 7, p. 16.

Prothorax very broad, being broader and flatter and the abdominal
segments smaller in proportion than any other borer of this family known
tous. Head retracted within the prothorax. The disk finely shagreened
with raised dots. A narrow inverted V-shaped smooth impressed line
in the middle of the disk, the apex becoming prolonged towards but
finally becoming obsolete at the front edge of the disk; the arms of the
V behind not reaching very near the posterior edge of the disk. Beneath,
is a similar roughened disk, but more regularly rounded-oval than above,
and with a single straight median swollen impressed line, which is a
little over one-half as long as the disk, but which reaches a little nearer
the front than the hind edge.

2d thoracic (mesothoracic) segment very short, considerably shorter
and wider than the 3d, with an oval slightly rough area on each side of
the median line, the similar area on the 3d thoracic segment being
larger and united over the median line.

The ten abdominal segments of uniform width, being a little shorter

than broad, except the small 10th segment, which is about two-thirds
, 251

252 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

as wide as the 9th. A pair of irregular rather long patches on each
abdominal segment above, and a pair of curvilinear impressed lines

' beneath.

One pair of mesothoracic and eight pairs of abdominal spiracles.

Head a little narrower than the thoracic disk. Clypeus corneous,
Square in front, very short and broad. Labrum square, a little longer
than wide, front edge moderately rounded, densely hirsute. Antenne
d-jointed; Ist joint short, membranous, 2d considerably narrower, 3d
minute, rounded at tip, considerably slenderer than 2d. Mandibles
entirely black. Maxillary lobe” short, projecting slightly beyond the
edge of labium. Maxillary palpus 2-jointed, 2d joint not so long as the
Ist is wide, one-third as thick, and extending a little beyond the max-
illary lobe. Labium entire, the front edge not being excavated.

Length, 22™™; breadth of prothoracic segment, 7™™; length, 4™™; width
of 6th abdominal segment, 3™™.

Pupa. Body flattened, and of the general shape of the imago. The
antenne seen from above extend to a little behind the outer hinder an-
gle of the prothorax. The elytra reach to the middle of the 4th ab-
dominal segment. The wings extend as far as the hinder edge of the
same segment. The 3d pair of tarsi reach to near the middle of the
6th abdominal segment. Six pairs of abdominal spiracles. Length,
ho red bis qa:

In transforming, the eyes, the front of the head, the prothorax, the
femora and tibia and portions of the sternum and under side of the
abdominal segments, turn dark first. ;

CHALCOPHORA, probably C. vircinica. PI. VI, fig. 1.

Compared with Dicerca the head is much larger and better developed,
while the prothorax is of the same size, and the abdomen is fully as
thick, but rather longer. Prothorax and the V-shaped mark one-haif
narrower than in Chrysobothris femorata, and with no markings around
the apex, as in Dicerca. The prothoracic disk has very large, coarse,
transverse, raised linear chitinous points, which are more or less con-
fluent, forming irregular transverse wavy ridges. The disk on the
under side has similar markings, and a single narrow deeply impressed
median line, which extends from the front to the hinder edge.

No roughened area on the succeeding segments, but on the mesotho-
racic are two remote converging curved lines, and on the metathoracic
segment are similar lines, which extend nearer the front edge; the
curved lines inclose a subtrapezoidal space.

Antenne large and well developed, compared with those of Dicerca
and Chrysobothris ; 3-jointed; the basal joint membranous, 3d joint
nearly as long as the 2d, and blunt at tip. Labrum rounded on the
edge, fuller than in Dicerca. Maxilla large and well developed; maxil-

120 What is here called maxillarylobe corresponds to the mala interior of Schiddte, De Metamorphosi
Eleutheratorum Observationes. Naturhistorisk Tidsskrift, 3d ser., vol. 1.

LARV# OF INJURIOUS FOREST INSECTS. ” 253

lary lobe smaller in proportion to the base of the maxilla than in Dicerca
or Chrysobothris. Palpus 2-jointed; basal joint much larger than the
maxillary lobe (in Dicerea and Chrysobothris it is much smaller); 2d
joint one-fourth as large as 1st, being proportionally much smaller than
in the above-mentioned genera. Labium much as in the said genera,
being rounded in front.

Total length of body, 41™™; length of prothorax, 5"; breadth, 8™™;
length of the three thoracic segments together, 8™™; breadth of 4th
abdominal segment, 4™™.

The hairs on the body are much coarser than in the other genera
mentioned.

This larva may be distinguished by the large head, the well-devel-
oped antenne, the large maxilla, with the lower joint of maxillary
palpus small; by the very coarse and linear markings on the prothoracic
disk above and beneath; by the absence of roughened areas or callosi-
ties on the meso: and metathoracic segments, and by the long, thick
abdomen.

The mesothoracic segment is shorter and the metathoracic is as long
as in Dicerca.

Compared with Loew’s figure of the larva of Chalcophora (Ent. Zei-
tung, Stettin, 2ter Jahrgang, 1841, Tab. I, figs. 1-8) our species differs
_mainly in the larger chitinous prothoracic disk, though the V-shaped
mark is the same. In the shape of the body, in the form of the meso-
thoracic and metathoracic segments, and the end of the abdomen, our
larva appears to be a Chalecophora. The ist abdominal ring is longer
and narrower than in Loew’s figure. Thelabrum is peculiar in this
genus, on account of the lateral lobes; in this respect it resembles the
figure of Loew; while the antenne, maxille, and labium are nearly as
he figuresthem. Under these circumstances we think there is no reason-
able doubt but that this larva is a Chalcophora, and probably, from its
large size, C. virginica, which, according to Harris, bores in the pine.

The two specimens described were taken from under the bark of the
pitch pine, May 26, Providence, R. I.

MELANOPHILA sp. Pl. V1, fig. 4; XII, fig. 1.

Head of moderate size. Antenne very short, 3-jointed; 2d joint
much shorter than long, 3d very short and blunt, much more so than the
unknown (spruce) genus, or in Chrysobothris or Dicerca. Labrum much
asin the other genera mentioned, rather narrow, and moderately full on
the front edge. Maxillary lobe well developed, with a spine pointing
inwards; maxillary palpi with the 2d joint as long as the Ist. Labium
slightly indented in the middle, but so slightly so that it cannot be repre-
sented in a figure. Mandibles tridentate.

Prothorax unusually short, about half as long as broad, the sides
well rounded; the roughened chitinous disk is very small, not much
over one-third as wide as the entire segment; it is round, slightly longer
than broad, inclosing a narrow inverted VY, which extends the whole

254 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

length of the disk. On the under side the disk is subtrapezoidal, widen.
ing at base, the sides hollowed out, and narrower than long. The meso-
and metathoracic segments unusually long, and of the same size, being
about two-thirds as wide as the prothorax.

1st abdominal a little shorter than the 2d abdominal segment; seg-
ments 2 and 8 of the same size, and very full and rounded on the sides.
The 9th segment somewhat narrower than the 8th, and the 10th is one-
third to one-half as wide as the 9th. Length 12-19™™; in one 12™™ long
the prothorax is 1™™ long and 2.5"™ broad; the 8th abdominal segment
about 1.5™™ broad.

This is evidently a species of Melanophila, and differs from the other
genera mentioned in the short and wide prothoracic segment, in the ©
very small disk inclosing a narrow V, and being trapezoidal beneath,
while the abdominal segments are very convex, and broad in propor-
tion to the prothorax. It may also be identified by the very slightly
bilobed labium and well-developed maxillez.

This is No. 2 “unknown Buprestid larva,” on the spruce, p. 228 of
Bulletin 7, and No. 4, p. 241, on the hemlock.

FLAT-HEADED SPRUCE BORER. (Melanophila?)

In the form and size of the head, prothorax, and body, including the
10th segment, closely like Dicerea, but the sculpturing is decidedly dif-
ferent. The description of the proportions of the prothorax and succeed-
ing segments of the body in Dicerca will apply to this species. The
prothoracic disk is, however, very different; it is transversely rounded-
oval, very regular in shape, and smaller than the disk of Dicerca; it is.
considerably wider than long, and the sides are well rounded; the sur-
face of the disk is slightly convex and covered with short linear chiti-

nous raised markings, which do not, however, form curvilinear lines,
except in a slight degree on the hinder edge, especially in the inverted
V. The V-shaped mark is much asin Chrysobothris. The raised mark-
ings on the disk differ decidedly from those of Chrysobothris in not
being round dots, but transversely linearinform. The apex ofthe V is.
not inclosed in a square area, as in Dicerca, and the Vis much nar-
rower. The disk on the under side of the prothoracic segment is much
as on the upper, the V being represented by a simple median line. A
pair of mesothoracic stigmata, and eight abdominal pairs. Head of the
same size as in Dicerca. Labrum much rounded on the front edge, and
much more contracted at the insertion in the fleshy clypeus than in Chry-.
sobothris. Antenne with the 2d joint a little longer than in Dicerca,.
the 3d joint about one-third as long as the 2d joint, tomentose and
rounded at tip. Labium longer, fuller, more rounded on the front edge,.
and a little narrower than in Dicerca, the edge not being notched. It is.
more contracted at base than in Dicerca, and the rudimentary palpi are
more distinct than in Chrysobothris or Dicerca. Maxille a little slenderer
than in Dicerca and Chrysobothris, 3-jointed; maxillary lobe much

A LARVZ OF INJURIOUS FOREST INSECTS. 255

narrower, one-third less so than in Dicerea, but not reaching beyond the
distal end of the 2d palpal joint. The two palpal joints are a little
longer and slenderer than in Dicerca; 1st joint much narrower than in
Dicerca, the 2d joint conical at tip, and as long as the 1st is thick.

Entire length, 20 ™™; length of prothorax, 8™; breadth, 5™™; breadth
of 8th abdominal segment, 2.5™™.

This is not an Ancylocheira nor Anthaxia, according to Perris’ figures,
but is related to Melanophila. Unlike the larve of this genus, however,
ithas no “unguiform spine,” but three equal radiating spines on the tip
of the lobe, while the ligulais entire. Itcannot be a Buprestis (B. macu-
liventris) as it differs from Buprestis (Ancylocheira) as described by
Perris, in the entire labium and the much longer labrum as well as the
much shorter lobe of the maxilla and in the marking of the prothorax.

It occurred on the spruce at the Glen, White Mts., N. H., and under
the bark of spruce, at Brunswick, Me., August 27.

THE FLAT-HEADED PEACH AND CHERRY BORER.
Dicerca divaricata Say. Pl. VI, fig. 2.

In addition to the description given on p. 108 of Bulletin 7, the fol-
lowing characters may be given. The mouth-parts are as described in
Chrysobothris femorata, and a drawing could not well show the generic
or specific differences between Chrysobothris femorata and D. divaricata
as regards these parts. Theyare as described in C. femorata; the labium
is the same, but with the front edge perhaps a little less full and rounded.
The maxille are perhaps a little fuller. Antenne the same, the 3d
joint minute and rounded. On the whole, the antenne and maxille are
a little stouter, and slightly more developed than in C. femorata. The
labrum is, however, less full and rounded on the front edge. On the
mesothoracic segment is a transverse narrow chitinous area, while that
on the metathoracic segment is of a double lunoid shape. The 1st
abdominal segment has a short, narrow dorsal area, shorter than the
one on the preceding segment. The lateral linear crescent-shaped im-
pressed lines are well marked.

This larva differs from that of Chrysobothris femorata in being con-
siderably larger, the abdominal segments being thicker in proportion
to the prothorax, and also in the style of sculpturing on the prothorax.
The apex of the V is surrounded by a square, deeper-colored area; the
disk on the under side is divided by a double line, which widens sud-
denly in front into halves.

BUPRESTID UNDER BARK OF HEMLOCK. PI. VI, Fig. 5.

The accompanying figure represents a Buprestid larva, mentioned in
Bulletin 7, p. 241 (No. 4).

It is 20™™ in length, and Dr. Gissler’s figures so well represent the
larva, that a longer description will not at this time be needed.

256 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,
Family CERAMBYCIDZ,
LONGICORN LARVA UNDER BARK OF THE HEMLOCK,

Plate XII, Fig. 5, represents the Longicorn larva mentioned on p
241 of Bulletin 7 (No. 2), as found in abundance under the bark of
the hemlock at the Glen, N. H., July 22.

It is 19™™ in length; width of the prothoracic segment, 4.5™™.

LONGICORN LARVA UNDER BARK OF HEMLOCK.

Plate XII, Fig. 6, represents a Longicorn larva found under the bark
of the hemlock, and mentioned on p. 241, Bulletin 7 (No. 3), as having
occurred at Bath, Me., July 30.

The bedy is remarkably short and thick; as wide near the end as
across the prothoracic segment. It is 20™™ in length. Mandibles
rounded; antenne long and slender, 4-jointed; maxille with the lobe
long, extending as far as the end of the 4-jointed palpi. Labium narrow.
palpi, large, 3-jointed. Labrum small and narrow.

SAPERDA ON THE WILLOW.

Plate XI, Fig. 4; XII, fig. 4, represents a larva found by Dr. Watson,
in the willow.

It is 16™™ in length; prothoracic segment 3™™ wide. A pair of protho-
racic spiracles, and the usual eight pairs of abdominal ones. Anten-
ne 4-jointed; labrum as long as broad; maxille with the lobe very
large, extending far beyond the palpi, which are small and 3-jointed.
Labium broad and short; palpi short, 3-jointed. Mandibles rounded at
tip.

THE LESSER PINE BORER.

Asemum moestum Haldeman. Pl. IX, Fig. 1.

Prothorax inclined downwards towards the head; quite long and not
very wide, being no wider than the mesothoracic and metathoracic seg-
ments, the squarish area being very long, naked on the basal third, the
front margin pale brown, chitinous. Mesothoracic and metathoracic seg-
ments as wide as the prothoracic; the metathoracie slightly longer and
fully as broad as the mesothoracic segment. Abdominal segments rather
broad, the 2d the shortest, and the 7th the longest; the 8th two-thirds
as long as the 7th and considerably narrower;. the 9th one-quarter as
long as the 8th and three-fourths as wide; the 10th only seen from be-
neath, and about two-thirds as wide as the 9th, and bilobed at the end.
On the two hinder thoracic and the Ist abdominal segment are trans-
verse regular oblong areas bounded by impressed lines; on segments
2-4 the callosities are narrower, and the anterior side is pointed; on the
6th and 7th they are a litle longer than broad and contracted posteri-
orly. Beneath are similar callosities, but the anterior edge is feebly in-

LARVZ OF INJURIOUS FOREST INSECTS. 257

dicated, the sides being most distinct. Thoracic feet minute, 3-jointed,
small and rather short; 3d joint one-half as thick as the 2d.

Head: clypeus very small, membranous; labrum small, narrow, though
longer than wide, and well rounded in front; mandibles solid, thick,
rounded at tip; antenne 4-jointed, rather slender; 2d joint about one-
half as long as the 1st and about one-quarter shorter than the 3d; the
4th minute, slender, about two-thirds as long as the 3d is wide. Maxillee
with the lobe rather broad, not very hairy, extending as far as the end
of the maxillary and labial palpi; maxillary palpus 4-jointed; 1st joint
much shorter than long, flattened, spherical; 2d subspherical; 3d one-
half as long as the 2nd; 4th longer than 3d, but only about one-half as
thick. Mentum narrow, about one-third as long as wide; ligula long
and narrow; labial palpi 3-jointed; 1st joint a little longer than thick;
2d very short, spheroidal, a little less than one-third as long as Ist; 3d
conical, considerably longer than the 2d and one-half as thick.

Length, 12™™; length of prothoracic segment, 2™™; breadth, 3™™;
breadth of 8th abdominal segment, 2.5™™. :

THE OAK BORER.
Elaphidion parallelum Newman. Pl. VII, Fig. 1.

The body very closely resembles X. colonus, but is larger and broader,
especially on segments 7-9, but in general appearance is closely similar.
-Prothoracie segment scarcely wider than the mesothoracic, but not so
much swollen asin Xylotrechus. The disk is regularly transversely ob-.
long, the sides not convex but straight, the edges in front and on the
sides brown. The disk is one-half as long as broad; posterior half free
from hairs, not so distinctly marked as in X. colonus, but the longitudi-
nal irregular pale streaks are present. The mesothoracic and metatho-
racic segments are as wide as the prothoracic, but the mesothoracic is a
little shorter than the metathoracic. The mesothoracic segment is di-
vided into two lateral portions by a scutel-like, very short and broad
eallosity which is narrow, lanceolate-oval. The metathoracic segment
has a similar callosity, but a transverse fleshy ridge is present, not
found on the mesothoracic segment. Beneath, a callous brown spot in-
cised in the middle, longer and narrower than those on the six succeed-
ing segments. That on the prothoracic is much shorter and narrower
than on the mesothoracic, the latter not divided mesially, where those
on the metathoracic and three succeeding segments are partly divided
by the median line of the body, forming two irregular oval patches
touching the median line of the body, and with the outer, hinder edge
produced a little posteriorly. On the 1st abdominal segment is a trans-
verse, short but very wide crescent-shaped callosity with swollen margins;
on the succeeding segments these become longer and narrower, until
on the 4th segment they become one-half as long as broad; on the
hinder segments (5-7) they become still longer and transversely oblong-

Iino

258 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.
;

oval, with irregular broad thickened patches. Beneath, on the segments
behind the 4th the callosities disappear, but there are raised smooth
oval areas. A pair of thoracic feet on each of the three segments;
they are 3-jointed, basal joint membranous; 2d joint about three-fourths
as long as wide; 3d joint about two-thirds as wide as the 2d, and slightly
longer. The 9th abdominal segment but little narrower than the
Sth; the 10th about one-third as wide as the 9th. A pair of meso-
thoracic spiracles, and eight abdominal pairs. |

Head not quite so large in proportion as in X. colonus. Labrum small,
not quite so broad as in X. colonus, convex and well rounded in front,
and very hairy. Mandibles blaek. )

Antenne 4-jointed, lst joint apparently divided into two subseg-
ments; 3d a little longer and narrower than the 2d; the 4th minute,
obtuse, one-half as long as the 3d is wide. Maxille with the lobe
rather small, reaching to near the end of the 3d joint of the palpus.
Maxillary palpi 4-jointed, 2d joint slightly shorter and narrower than
the 1st; 4th half as thick as the 3d, and pointed at the tip. Labium
with the mentum nearly square, narrower than the submentum. The
ligula, which is very small in X. colonus, is here entirely wanting.
Labial palpi 3-jointed; 2d joint not so long as wide; 3d very long and
slender, a little longer than the 2d and about one-half as thick; they
reach as far as the end of the 3d maxillary palpal joint.

Length, 17™™; breadth of prothoracic segment, 5™™; length, 2™™;
breadth of 8th abdominal segment, 3.5™™.

This larva may be recognized by the stout, thick thoracic feet, by the
rather small prothoracic segment compared with the two hinder ones,
by the absence of the ligula, by the large well-developed palpi and
antenne, and by the shape of the callosities.

THE COMMON OAK CLYTUS.

Aylotrechus colonus (Fabr.). Pl. XII, Figs. 2, 2a.

Body of the usual shape, near that of Phymatodes. Prothorax less
than one-half as long as wide; disk exactly one-half as long as wide;
the disk is smooth on the posterior half, irregular on the front edge,
with a broad irregular median lobe in front; the front edge of this
smooth space is often tinged with dark. In front of this smooth:area
is a clear, pale, hairy space, and still beyond (anteriorly) are two irregu-
larly oval spaces which are hairy and irregularly spotted, and often
tinted dark. The under side of the prothoracic segment is quite hairy,
with minute oval patches among the hairs, and with two conspicuous
small dark diverging patches on the middle of the segment, but situated §
rather far apart. Mesothoracic segment a little narrower than the
prothoracic and shorter than the metathoracic segment, the latter a
little shorter and but very slightly wider than the mesothoracic seg-
ment.

DESCRIPTIONS OF WOOD-BORING LARVZ. 259

Body contracted on the 6th abdominal segment, which is consider-
ably narrower than the succeeding part of the abdomen, the 7th
abdominal segment being wider than the 6th, and of the same width
as the 8th; the 9th much shorter and two-thirds as wide as the 8th.
The 10th segment small, one-half as wide but nearly as long as the
9th. Abdominal Pancha 2-7 with transversely oval raised smooth
callosities, those on the 6th and 7th being round instead of onaks be-
neath are similar callosities.

Head a little over one-half as wide as the prothoracic segment; an-
tenn 3-jointed; 2d joint one-half to two-thirds as long as the 1st and
one-half as thick; 3d minute, about ‘one-third as long as the 2d joint
is thick. Maxilla with the lobe as wide as the basal joint of the
palpus, and reaching to the end of the 2d palpal joint; the maxillary
palpi 4-jointed, the 2d joint one-half as wide as the 1st; the 3d just two-
thirds as wide as the 2d; the 4th as long but one-half as thick as the 3d.

Labium with the ligula small and rounded, not more than one-third
wider than the basal joint of the labial palpus, the latter 2-jointed,
the 2d joint nearly as long and about two-thirds as thick as the 1st.
Mentum deeply cleft, one-half as long as the submentum.

Labrum small, rounded, not so long as round, surface convex, with
dense hairs. Mandibles obtuse, rounded, not toothed.

_ Length of body, 17™™; width of prothoracic segment, 4.5™™; length,

2mm; width of 7th abdominal segment, 3™™. Thoracic spiracles in the
middle of the mesothoracic segment, with the usual eight pairs of ab-
dominal ones.

Pupa as described in Bulletin?. The end of the body terminates
in a pair of incurved hooks on each side, the inner pair a little smaller
than the outer. Six large recurved spines on the penultimate abdomi-
nal segment, the other abdominal segment with about two irregular
rows of minute stout spines adapted for progression.

CLYTUS? LARVA ON THE BLACK BIRCH.

Plate XII, Fig. 3, represents the mouth-parts of a Clytus nearly
allied to if not istitical with X. colonus.

THE RIBBED RHAGIUM.
Rhagium lineatum Olivier. Pl. XI, Figs. 1, 2.

The following description gives the characters more fully than in Bul-
letin 7, p. 162:
Body long and narrow, head remarkably large, as wide and as large
as the prothoracic segment.
Head behind with a triangular incision; the apex of the incision is
_ mnet by a curved line passing back from the outside of the antenne,
dividing the epicranium into two areas. Clypeus more solid than usual.
Labrum about twice as wide as long, and moderately rounded in front.

260. REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Antenne minute, very short, 2-jointed, the joints much shorter than
broad (when retracted), and the 2d joint blunt at tip. Mandibles
large, with three teeth on the cutting edge. Maxiile composed of —
two broad segments, and a third narrower one bearing the maxillary
lobe and palpus; the lobe long and narrow, curved inward, reaching
to the middle of the 3d palpal joint; palpus 3-jointed, the basal joint
Somewhat swollen at the end; 2d as long as the Ist, tapering toward
the distal end; 3d small, conical, as long as the 2d is thick. Mentum
wider than long, square; ligula square, but slightly convex on front
edge; labial palpi 3-jointed, 2d joint a little slenderer than Ist, but of
the same length; 3d joint slender and as long as the 2d is thick.

Prothoracic segment not so much wider than the rest of the body as
in the Longicorn larve in general; sides straight, retreating posteriorly ;
surface flat and chitinous; meso- and metathoracic segments as wide as
the prothoracic, but a little more than one-half as long as the 1st ab-
dominal segment. Thoracic feet long and slender, 4-jointed, the 4th
joint minute, corneous, 2d and 3d joints of the same length, the 3d two-
thirds as thick as the 2d.

Abdominal segments increasing very slightly in length to ee: 8th,
which is slightly longer than the preceding ones, but a little narrower
than the 7th; the 9th shorter and nearly one-quarter narrower than
the 8th; the 10th scarcely visible from above, one-quarter to one-fifth
as wide as the 9th, and deeply cleft posteriorly. Callosities very large,
soft, not well defined, being elongate, transversely-oval areas, bounded
laterally by curvilinear impressed lines. Beneath, the callosities are
a little more distinctly marked, with a transverse deeply-impressed
straight, median line into which short curved lines pass, the whole area
being oval-cylindrical, compressed in the middle. The hairs on the body |
‘rather long.

Length of the body, 26-30™™; in one 30™™ in length the head is 3-4™
long and 6™™ broad; prothorax 2.3™™ long and 6™™ broad; breadth of
Sth abdominal sounnatis om.

This larva is very common under the bark of pines which es been
‘cut down for a year or more, so that the larva evidently gets its growth
in a year. It may be easily recognized by its large size, the broad,
flattened head and body, the latter not narrowing behind; the pro-
thorax is small in proportion to the head, while the antenne are minute,
2-jointed. The form of the body, and especially of the hard, corneous
head, admirably adapts it for its work of loosening the bark, and thus-
forwarding the decay of stumps and fallen trees.

THE LESSER PRIONUS.
Orthosoma brunneum (DeGeer). Pl. X, Fig. 1.

In addition to the description on p. 161 of Bulletin 7, the following
characters may be noted:
Head about one-half as wide as the prothorax. -I'ront edge of epicra-

DESCRIPTIONS OF WOOD-BORING LARVZ. 261:

nium rough, black, and with a spine on each side below, projecting
over the clypeus (‘‘epistoma” of Perris); upper edge overhanging and
irregularly denticulated. Clypeus subchitinous. Labrum much broader
than long, well rounded in front, with numerous stiff bristles. Antenne
3jointed; basal joint partly covered by a projection from the epicra-
nium; 2d joint one-half as long and about three-fourths as thick as the
Ist; 3d joint nearly three times as long as the 2d, somewhat barrel-
shaped, being contracted at base and obtusely conical at the distal end.
Maxille with the lobe well developed, the lobe not being very broad,
abundantly bristled, and extending as far as the end of the 3d palpal
joint. Maxillary palpus 4-jointed; 3d joint but slightly longer than the
2d, the 4th as long as the 3d, but one-half as thick, conical, pointed at
the end, and extending well beyond the closed mandibles.

Labium: mentum short and very broad; ligula nearly as long as
broad, front edge well rounded. Palpi 2-jointed; basal joint thick and
short, globose, 2d joint conical, contracted in the middle .as if sub-
segmented. Mandibles acute, slightly bidentate.

Feet moderately stout, 3-jointed, the two basal joints nearly alike,
the 3d conical, and pene a single claw.

Length of thie specimen, 75™™; width of prothorax, 11.5™™; of protho-
racic disc, 10™™; length of neoihanr 8mm; length from hee of head
to tip of labrum, 4mm; width of head, 6™™; renee of antenna, 0.8™™; of
leg, 0.6™™; width of mesothoracic Gann 12.5™™; of 1st LpdOminel
segment, 11.5™™; of 4th abdominai segment, 10™™; length of 8th ab-
dominal segment, 4™™; of 9th, 8™™.

UNKNOWN LONGICORN BORER FROM AN OAK LOG. PI. XI, Fig. 3.

Body of large size, gradually tapering to the penultimate segment,
with three pairs of thoracic legs of moderate size.

Head small and much rounded. Labrum small and-unusually narrow,
well rounded on the front edge. Antenne conspicuous, unusually long;
2d joint very long and slender, longer than the basal one is thick; 3d
joint minute and acute at tip. Labium very small, squarish; submen-
- tum and mentum both rectangular, broader than long; the ligula nar-
raw, much rounded in front; labial palpi 3-jointed; 3d joint obtuse, as
long as the 2d. Maxillary lobe very broad and rather short, not
reaching beyond the end.of the 2d palpal joint. Maxillary palpi 3-
jointed; 1st joint very short and broad; 2d one-half as thick as the Ist,
the 3d slender and alittle longer than the 2d. Mandibles much rounded
and entire at tip. ,

The callosities on the segments, as figured in the cut, are prominent,
more or less rounded tubercles with the surface divided irregularly by
impressed. lines.

Length, 35"™; width of prothoracic segment, 8™™; length, 3™™; length
of a leg with terminal claw, 0.4™™; length from base of labrum to pos-
terior edge of metathoracic segment, 5™™; length of 1st-and 2d abdomi-

/

262 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

nal segment, each, 2™™; length from base of 3d abdominal segment
to end of body, 28™™; width of each of segments 2-6, 6™™; the 7th and
8th segments are slightly wider.

Found in an oak log at Providence, R. I., May 20, 1881.

UNKNOWN LONGICORN LARVA IN THE SYCAMORE. PI. X, Fig. 2.

Body rather flattened, broader behind than usual, the penultimate
_ segment being much wider than usual. Head large and prominent,
square and flat, somewhat as in Monohammus, being one-half as wide as
the prothoracic segment. Mandibles acute, unequally 2-toothed, the ter-
minal tooth much the larger. Antenne very short and thick, 2-jointed;
2nd joint extremely small, with two outer spines on the Ist joint. Near
the antennee on the head are five long bristles. Labrum much rounded
in front, as long as broad. Labium broad, with 2-jointed palpi; 2d
joint acute, as long as the 1st is thick. Maxillary lobe narrow, reaching
to the end of 2d joint; 3d joint about as long as 2d, rather blunt. No
thoracic feet. Prothoracic segment about one-third as long as broad,
with a roughened spur on the posterior half; the front edge quite hirsute.
The markings or callosities on the back are difficult to describe, but are
as figured by Dr. Gissler. ,

Length, 15™™ ; width of prothoracic segment, 4™™; length, 1.6™™; aver-
age width of the body, 3.8™™; length from tips of mandibles to base of
head, 1.6™™,

Larva found under bark of sycamore tree in Brooklyn, N. Y. Received
from Dr. ©. F. Gissler.

Pupa.—Plate XIV, Fig. 8, represents a Longicorn echrysalis, taken
‘from under the bark of the same sycamore tree as the larva above de-
scribed, and which may possibly belong to the same species.

Notrt.—A number of. other larve, including those of certain Scolytide, are figured
on Plates XII-XV. See explanations of those plates.

Cert A Pei nx:

THE EMBRYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOCUST.
Plates X VI-XXI.

In order that the reader may understand the following statements re-
garding the embryology of the locust, which are more or less fragmentary
in their nature, we preface our account with a brief description of the de-
velopmental history of winged insects in general so far as it is now known.

Formation of the blastoderm.—The changes which take place in the
ege immediately after fertilization are not known beyond the fact that
segmentation of the yolk is partial, being confined to the periphery. The
only observations yet published are those of Bobretsky ™' on a butterfly
(Pieris crategi) and a moth (Porthesia chrysorrhea). After fertilization
there first.appear scattered through the yolk a few (the smallest number
4) cell-like, minute, amceboid masses of protoplasm, each with a distinet
nucleus. A few (one at least) of these bodies gradually pass out of the
center of the yolk to the surface of the egg (Fig 10 A, 1), these becoming
larger and rounder, and from one or two of these nuclei (Fig. 10 B, dD ¢)
the so-called blastoderm originates (Fig. 10 C, bl). Those nuclei remain-

-ing in the yolk increase in number and afterwards become the nuclei of
rounded masses of yolk-granules, forming the so-called yolk-spheres
which Bobretsky regards as true cells.

@ 5 Saar.
.
Ts)
°

Vea one io

iP)
2
2
°
©
Tes
‘|

Yin o
© ce
vb Pes 68,9 ©
o8

e
0 ar, Vou Ooo,

Fic. 10.

To the few blastoderm cells situated on the upper end of the egg are
added others which continue to pass from the yolk to the periphery,

121 Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Zoologie, Band xxxi, 195. 1878. Pl. xiv. The mode of origin,
observed by Bobretsky in the Lepidoptera does not apparently agree in the later stages with what
Weismann has observed in the Diptera, and I have observed in the flea, as there is present a blastem
(Weismann) or clear homogeneous layer between the polar cells and the yolk, and afterwards the
blastoderm appears, the polar cells still persisting. See Pl. 2, fig. 1-3, Packard’s Embryol. Studies on
Hexapodous Insects. Memoirs Peabody Academy of Science, 1872. See also Weismann’s Entwick-
elung der Dipteren, Taf. 1, fig. 3.

263

264 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

and then the blastoderm spreads out farther and farther from the upper
end of the egg until finally it covers or envelops the whole yolk. This
layer of cells is called the blastoderm.’

As to the origin of the -primitive amoeboid cells, Bobretsky is in
doubt, but is disposed to think that they are the result of the subdivis-
ion of the germinative vesicle or nucleus of the ovarian egg-cell. In
this connection may be quoted the observations of Graber, who states
that an examination of the ovarian cell at an early period has revealed
the presence, in the center of the yolk, of a number of amceboid cells,
which appear to have been formed by the division of the germinal yesi-
cle. These “primary embryonic cells” have a relatively large nucleus and
a number of nucleoli. Several may be seen to unite with one another by
means of their pseudopodia, and they may also be observed to undergo
division.

The blastodermic disc or primitive band.—After the blastoderm arises,
its cells become flat on the dorsal side of the egg, but on a portion of
the ventral side become crowded and columnar, i. ¢., long and somewhat
prismatic; this forms what appears to the eye as an oval, or long,
narrow, elliptical disk, which is called the primitive band or blastodermic
disk. This is the germ of the future embryo, and from its outer surface
the appendages of the future insect arise. At the posterior end of this
whitish, riband-like, long-oval disk, ‘‘ ventral plate,” or “ primitive band,”
as it is variously called, appear two folds, with a furrow between them.
This is the “germinal groove.” The two folds on each side gradually
approach, according to Kowalevsky’s observations on the development
of a beetle (Hydrophilus), and form in the middie and hinder parts of
the primitive band a cavity or canal. This invagination-cavity corre- —
sponds to the primitive invagination-cavity or primitive hind intestine,
or gastrula mouth of the worms and crustacea, as well as vertebrates
and other animals.

Origin of the cellular or germinal layers.—This cavity disappears, but the
cells forming itS walls subdivide, and as the result a new layer of cells
is formed beneath the outer original cell-layer or blastoderm. ‘This is
called by some authors the mesoderm, by others the endoderm. (The
mode of origin of these two layers is in dispute.) At any rate, the prim-
itive band finaliy splits or subdivides into two and afterwards three
layers, which become the ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm of the
adult animal. In their embryonic stage these layers are called:

1. Ectoblast (or epiblast). ,

2. Mesoblast.

3. Endoblast (or hypoblast). :

According to Graber the blastoderm subdivides in insects into two
layers only, the outer and the inner, while the middle layer (mesoblast)
appearing later, always owes its origin to the endoblast.

122 Archiv fur Mikr. Anatomie, xv, 1878, 630. (See also abstract in Quart. Jour. Royal Mier. Society,
vol. ii, 1879, p. 413.)

EMBRYONAL MEMBRANES OF INSECTS. 265

The following diagrammatic view, copied from Graber, will render

clearer these statements:
Germinal vesicle.

Germinal cells.

Outer germinal cells Inner germinal cells
(blastoderm). (primary).

7

ve

Ectoderm. Endoderm (endoblast).

a

Mesoderm. Inner germinal cells
(secondary).

Embryonal membranes.—A fter the primitive band is formed, the blasto-
derm twice molts or casts off alayer of cells. The first molt is before the
limbs bud out, and is called the outer or serous membrane. (PI. XXII,
Fig. 2, ser.) It is at first cellular, the nuclei finally disappearing as it
stretches and covers the growing embryo. The inner, called the amnion
(Pl. XXII, Fig. 2, am), is more closely connected with the embryo; origin-
ally connected with the serous membrane, it splits off from the primi-
tive band about the time the appendages begin to bud out, and continues
to closely envelop the body and appendages, as seen in Pl. X XII, Fig. 2.
Both of these membranes are, at the time of hatching, cast off with the
egg-shell or chorion,’” and the exochorion or polygonal outer crust which
envelops the shell or chorion proper, and which is so well developed in
the egg of the locust. Hence we have eight layers in the insect during

embryonic life:

. Exochorion. (Remains of the epithelium of the ovarian follicle.)

. Chorion. (Egg-shell or cuticle secreted in the ovarian follicle.)

. Vitelline membrane.(Primary egg-mémbrane. Yolk-skin )

. Serous or outer germ- ‘membrane, (Blastodermic }
molt.) | ,

. Amnion. Inner germ-membrane. Cast from | Derived from
the primitive band. the _ blasto-

moh ke

OU

6. Eetoderm. derm.
7. Mesoderm. cranes |
8. Endoderm. \ \

123 For an account of the egg and its outer crust or exochorion, and the mode of hatching, see 1st Re-
port of the Commission, pp. 277, 278.

266 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Division of the embryo or primitive band into body-segments.—Mean-
while the primitive band grows at the expense of the yolk, spreading
out more and more over its surface, until (see Pl. X XII, Figs. 1, 2) it lies
like a broad riband over the yolk, each end nearly meeting. By this
time it becomes divided by transverse impressed lines into segments,
which correspond to those of the larvaand adult. The first of these seg-
ments is divided into two broad and flaring flaps, which are called the
procephalic lobes. It becomes the antennal segment; behind this are
16 segments, making 17 in all, or, as in many insects (locust, &c.), which
have 11 abdominal segments, there are 18 body-segments, 4 for the head,
3 for the thorax, and 11 for the abdomen.

Development of the appendages.—Nearly if not quite simultaneously all
the limbs bud out from each side of the median line of the primitive
band. There are never more than one pair to each segment; in some
insects there are, as in the Lepidoptera, a pair on each abdominal seg-
ment. The three pairs of rhabdites or elements of the ovipositor in
bees, grasshoppers, &c., arise in the same manner as limbs. It will
be noticed, as seen in Pl. XVII, Figs, 1, 1a, that the antenne, jaws and
maxille, as well as legs, are alike at first. They acquire their definitive

form just before the embryo hatches from the egg.
In some insects, as the flea, the embryo is provided with a temporary
knife-shaped process on top of the head, called the egg-shell cutter, for
the purpose of splitting open the tough egg-shell that the embryo may
escape. |

Turning now to the internal changes during the development of the
embryo, we have to trace the formation of the digestive cavity, the
nervous system, heart, &c. Of the different viscera, the first to appear
after the formation of the blastodermic disk or primitive band is the

Nervous system.—This develops in the ectoblast or outer germinal cell-
layer. It arisesastwocellularstrings or cords which split off from the skin.
They lieone on each side of the median line of the body. They areenlarged
at intervals corresponding to the segments of the body, forming a series
of large ganglia, which lie next to each other, and are connected by
short strands or commissures. As seen in Pl. XVII, Fig. 2, there are in
the locust 15 ganglia, or one to each segment of the body except the
mandibular and maxillary segments in the head. The nervous system
may be divided into two parts, one the brain, which is preeoral, situated
in the upper part of the head, while the rest of the system is postoral
and lies on the ventral side of the body. In section each ganglion con-
sists at first of nucleated cells, those in the center pee more close and
dense than those on the outside.

The alimentary canal.—This does not arise at once, the middle portion
not being developed until just before the embryo hatches. The aliment-
ary canal in embryo insects is divided into three primary portions. The
anterior, called the stomodeum, becomes differentiated into the pharynx,
csophagus, crop (ingluvies), and proventriculus of the adult; the pos-

ee ee a

ee —

DEVELOPMENT OF THE DIGESTIVE CANAL. 267

terior, called the proctodewm, becomes the anus and rectum. The mid-
dle portion of the tract includes the stomach, ending just in front of
the urinary tubes, which open into the anterior end of the proctodeum.

Pl. XVI, Fig. 1, shows the embryo of the locust with the stomodeum
and proctodeum well developed, the middle portion not being yet de-
veloped from the yolk. The fore and hind intestine originally arise by
inpushings or invaginations of the ectoblast, and they are distinguished
by being lined with chitine.

The stomach or mesenteron is at first a closed sac independent of
the fore and hind divisions of the alimentary tract. It finally touches
the opposing ends of the stomodeum and proctodzeum; the cellular walls
are absorbed, disappear, and just before hatching the digestive canal
becomes a continuous hollow tube open from mouth to vent. The exact
origin of the mesenteron is not known beyond the fact that the stomach
is lined with the endoblast. According to Kowalevsky, in Hydrophilus
the mesoblast is concerned in the formation of the stomach. At any rate, —
the yolk-cells appear to give rise to the endoblastic walls of the stomach
(mesenteron ).

The coecal or pyloric appendages of the stomach have thé same ori-
gin as the latter; while the Malpighian orarinary tubes arise, as Dohrn
first observed in the embryo mole cricket, and as we shall see in the
locust (Pl. X XI, Fig.6, ut), as outgrowths of the ectoblast of the anterior
end of the proctod zum.

The origin of the genital glands has not been clearly made out. The
polar cells which appear in Diptera before any other cells of the blasto-
derm, those referred to in the note on p. 263, are supposed to give origin
to the ovaries or testes. Dohrn states that in the mole cricket the veni-
tal glands arise from the proctodeum. As Balfour states in his ‘‘Com-
parative Embryology,” it appears to be fairly clear that the genital
glands of both sexes have an identical origin.

The trachece and salary glands.—As may be seen in Pl. XVI, Fig. 1,
these arise nearly simultaneously. The traches and stigmata arise as
invaginations of the ectoblast; the stigmata are the original or primi-
tive cavities caused by the ingrowth of the walls of the primitive band,
and there is a pair to each segment, the head-segments (except the an-
tennal) perhaps not excepted. The three thoracic and first eight ab-
dominal segments are provided each with a pair of stigmata. The
blind ends of the tubes unite in the locust to form on each side a dor-
sal and ventral longitudinal main trachea.

The salivary glands (Pl. XVI, Fig. 1, sal), are said to be ectoblastic
invaginations, and to be formed in the same general manner as the
trachee ; they are not invaginations of the stomodeum, but, as Balfour
states, arise from the primitive band behind the mouth on the inner side
of the mandibles.

The spinning glands of caterpillars and of bee larvee (Apis) arise in
the same way, but are situated on the inner side of the first maxille.

268 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

Development of the wings.—As has been shown by Weismann, the wings
of flies are indicated late in larval life. They arise from minute masses
of indifferent cells called *“‘invaginal disks,” these being microscopic in-
ternal bodies attached to some nerve or tracheal branch.

The mode of origin of the wings may, however, be best understood: by
observing the early stages of those insects, such as the Hemiptera, Ortho-
ptera, and Pseudoneuroptera, which have an incomplete metamorphosis.
Tf the student will examine Plates I-III of the First Report of the
United States Entomological Commission, particularly Figs. 1, 2, 3, he
will see that the wings in the locust arise as simple expansions down-
ward and backward of the lateral edges of the meso- and metanotum.
In the second larval stage this change begins to take place, but it does
not become marked until the first pupal stage, when the indications of
veins begin to appear, and the lobe-like expansion of the notum is plainly
enough a rudimentary wing. This mode of development of the wings
in Orthoptera has been shown and well illustrated by Graber, who first
drew attention to this mode of development of the wings, and showed
that it is common to all Orthoptera. Ignorant of his paper, we had
arrived at the same result, after an examination of the early pupal stages’
of the cockroach, as well as the locusts, of Termites and various Hemi-
ptera. In all these forms itis plainly to be seen that the wings are simply
expansions, either horizontal or partly vertical (when as in locusts, &c.,
the body is compressed, and the meso- and metanota are rounded down-
wards), of the hinder and outer edge of the meso- and metanotum. As
will be seen by reference to Plates I-II of our First Report, and by the.
accompanying figures, the wings are notal (tergal) outgrowths from the
dorsal arch of the two hinder segments of the thorax. At first, as seen
in the young pupal cockroach (PI. LXIi, Fig. 1) and locust, the rudiments
of the wings are continuous with the notum. Latein pupal life a suture
and a hinge-joint appear at the base of the wing, and thus there is some
movement of the wing upon the notum; finally, the trachez are well
developed in the wings, and numerous small sclerites are differentiated
at the base of the wing, to which the special muscles of flight are at-
tached, and thus the wings, after the last pupal molt, have the power
of flapping, and of sustaining the insect in the air; they thus become
true organs of flight.

It is to be observed, then, that the wings in all ametabolous and hemi-
metabolous insects are outgrowths from the notum, and not from the
flanks or pleurum of the thorax. There is, then, no structure in any
other part of the body with which they are homologous.

The same may be said of the true Neuroptera, the Coleoptera, and tie
Diptera, Lepidoptera, and Hymenoptera. As we have observed in the
house fly,” the wings are evidently outgrowths of the meso- and meta-

124Zur Entwickelungsgeschichte und Reproductionsfihigkeit der Orthopteren. Von Vitus Graber.
Sitzungsberichte d. math.-naturw. Classe der Akad. d. Wissensch., Wien. Bd.ly, Abth. i, 1867.

125On the Transformations of the Common House Fly, by A. 8. Packard, jr. Proceedings Boston So-
ciety of Natural History, vol. xvi, 1874. See Pl. 3, Figs. 12a, 120. :

.

ORIGIN OF THE WINGS OF INSECTS. 269

notum; we have also observed this to be most probably the case in the
Lepidoptera, from observations on a Tortrix in different stages of meta-
morphosis.” It is also the case with the Hymenoptera, as we have
observed in bees and wasps;'” and in these forms, and probably all Hy-
menoptera, the wings are outgrowths of the scutal region of the notum.

With these facts before us we may speculate as to the probable origin
of the wings of insects. The views more generally proposed are those
of Gegenbaur, also adopted by Lubbock” and originally by myself.”
According to Gegenbaur:

The wings must be regarded as homologous with the lamellar tracheal gills, for
they do not only agree with them in origin, but aiso in their connection with the
body, and in structure. In being limited to the second and third thoracic segments
they point to a reduction in the number of the tracheal gills. It is quite clear that
we must suppose that the wings did not arise as such, but were developed from organs
which had another function, such as the tracheal gills; I mean to say that such a
supposition is necessary, for we cannot imagine that the wings functioned as such in
the lower stages of their development, and that they could have been developed by
having such a function.

The foregoing statements are, however, inexact. If we examine the
tracheal gills of the smaller dragon-fly (Agrion), or the May flies, or
Sialide, or Perlidw, or Phryganeide, we see that they are developed
in avery arbitrary way, either at the end of the abdomen, or on the
sternum, or from the pleurum; moreover, in structure they invariably
have but a single trachea, from which minute twigs branch out; in the
wings there are five or six main trachev (Fig. 3), which give rise to the
veins. Thus, in themselves, irrespective of their position, they are not
the homologues of the gills. The latter are only developed in the aquatic
representatives of the Neuroptera and Pseudoneuroptera, and are evi-
dently adaptive, secondary, temporary organs, and are in no sense ances-
tral, primitive structures from which the wings were developed. There
is no good reason to suppose that the aquatic Pseudoneuroptera or Neu-
roptera were not descendants of terrestrial forms.

To these results we had arrived by a review of the above-mentioned
facts, before meeting with Iritz Miiller’s opinions, derived from a study
of the development of the wings of Calotermes. Miiller'’ states that
“(1) The wings of insects have not originated from ‘tracheal gills’, The
wing-shaped continuations of the youngest larve are indeed the only
parts in which air tubes are completely wanting, while trachee are richly
developed in all other parts of the body. (2) The wings of insects have

126 Compare also the work of H. Landois on the origin of the wings in Lepidoptera. In the rudiment-
ary minute wings there are at first six tracheal branches coriesponding to the six primary veins of
the wing. See Siebold and Kolliker’s Zeitschrift, Bd. xxi, Pl. xxiii, 1871.

127 See our Guide to the Study of Insects, p. 66, figs. 65, 66.

128 Origin and Metamorphoses of Insects, 1874, p. 73.

1229 Our Common Insects, 1873, p. 171.

130 Hlements of Comparative Anatomy, English translation, p. 247.

131 Compare the observations of Palmén, Gersticker, Vayssiére and others.

132 Beitrige zur Kenntnissder Termiten. Jenaische Zeitschrift fiir Naturwissenchaft, Bd. ix, Heft 2,
p. 253, 1875. Compare, however, Palmén’s Zur Morphologie des Tracheensystems, Helsingfors, 1877,
wherein he opposes Miiller’s view and adopts Gengenbaur’s. See p. 8, foot note.

270 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

arisen from lateral continuations of the dorsal plates of the body-seg-
ments with which they are connected.”

Now, speculating on the primary origin of wings, we need not sup-
pose that they originated in any aquatic form, but in some ancestral
land insect related to existing cockroaches and Termes. We may imag-
ine that the tergites (or notum) of the two hinder segments of the
thorax grew out laterally in some leaping and running insect; that the
expansion became of use in aiding to support the body in its longer
leaps, somewhat as the lateral expansions of the body aid the flying
squirrel or certain lizards in supporting the body during their leaps.
By natural selection these structures would be transmitted in an im-
proved condition until they became flexible, i. ¢., attached by a rude hinge-
joint to the tergal plates of the meso- and metathorax. Then by contin-
ued use and attempts at flight they would grow larger, until they would
become permanent organs, though still rudimentary, as in many existing
Orthoptera, such as certain Blattariz and Pezotettix. By this time a

fold or hinge having been established, small chitinous pieces inclosed —

in nembrane would appear, until we should have a hinge flexible enough
to allow the wing to be folded on the back, and also to have a flap-
ping motion. <A stray tracheal twig would naturally press or grow into
the base of the new structure. After the trachea running towards the
base of the wing had begun to send off branches into the rudiment-
ary structure, the number and direction of the future veins would be-
come determined on simple mechanical principles. The rudimentary
structures beating the air would need to be strengthened on the front
or costal edge. Here, then, would be developed the larger number of
main veins, two or three close together, and parallel. These would be
the costal, subcostal, and median veins. They would throw out branches
to strengthen the costal edge, while the branches sent out to the outer
and hinder edges of the wings might be less numerous and farther
apart. The net-veined wings of Orthoptera and Pseudoneuroptera, as
compared with the wings of Hymenoptera, show that the wings of net-
veined insects were largely used for respiration as well as for flight,
while in beetles and bees the leading function is flight, that of respi-
ration being quite subordinate. The blood would then supply the parts,
and thus respiration or aération of the blood would be demanded. As.
soon as such expansions would be of even slight use to the insect as.
breathing organs, the question as to their permanency would be settled.
Organs so useful both for flight and aération of the blood would be still
further developed, until they would become permanent structures, genu-
ine wings. They would thus be readily transmitted, and being of more
use in adult life during the season of reproduction, they would be still
further developed, and thus those insects which could fly the best, 7. e.,
which had the largest wings, would be most successful in the struggle
for existencé. Thus also, not being so much needed in larval life before
the reproductive organs are developed, they would not be transmitted

EMBRYOLOGY OF ORTHOPTEROUS INSECTS. 271

except in a very rudimentary way, as perhaps masses of internal in-
different cells (imaginal disks), to the larva, being the rather destined
to develop late in larval and in pupal life. Thus the development of the
wings and of the generative organs would go hand in hand, and become
organs of adult life.

It is not improbable that the metamorphoses in insects were primarily
due to the acquisition of wings, and that the latter were likewise pri-
marily due to the ripening of the sexual organs. We see that in Or-
thoptera, Blatta especially, the larve only differ from the adult in
wanting wings and in having undeveloped genital organs. Metamer-
phosis, then, in insects, is correlated most intimatély with the presence
or absence of wings. Moreover, the differentiation of the meso- and
metanotum is closely dependent on the presence of wings. Wherever
the wings are wanting the scutum, scutellum, &c., are not differentiated.

The next step above the Orthoptera are the Pseudoneuroptera, such
as Perlide, Psocide, and Termitide; and finally the Odonata and Ephe-
meridz. In all these forms the metamorphosis is incomplete, the chief
difference between the larva and adult being the presence of wings and
of ripe ovaries and testes. So itis with the Hemiptera.

When we ascend to the true Neuroptera we see a greater difference
between the larva and the imago, and a third, 1. e., quiescent pupal
stage. Here adaptive characters come in. The cee worms, possi-
bly derived from Sialid forms, and constructing tubular cases, acquired
cylindrical instead of flattened bodies; rapidly feeding up, they, by
some means, acquired the habit of resting in closed cases, and dur-
ing this quiescent period the wings and genital organs would become
prematurely developed, until, as soon as the pupal sleep was ended, the
sexual powers being ripe, the wings would suddenly attain their full
development, and the insect, the caddis fly, for example, would both
sexually and as regards powers of flight become highly active.

Given a few cases of complete metamorphosis in the Neuroptera, es-
pecially Phryganeide and Sialidz, we can explain the origin of a meta-
morphosis in the higher orders. As the Coleoptera have probably de-
scended from lost forms resembling the Sialid Neuroptera, and the
Lepidoptera and Trichoptera from a common stock, the Diptera and
Hymenoptera being also probable offshoots from the primitive Lepi-
dopterous stock, it is easy to see how the majority of insects which be-
long to the metabolous orders should all have a complete metamorphosis,
this being secondary and adaptive in its nature.

THE EMBRYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHOPTEROUS INSECTS.

_ In order to elucidate the earliest steps in the development of the
locust, so as to complete far as possible our knowledge of the nat-
ural history of the locust, as well as to examine the embryology of a
typical orthopterous insect, the following researches were under-
taken. The results are imperfect and fragmentary, as it was not easy

272 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

to obtain full series of eggs laid from the time of oviposition to that of
hatching. Our examination of eggs confirms what Mr. Riley had pre-
viously stated, that the young develop in the autumn, though most of
them delay hatching until the spring. From our observations, it ap-
pears that the embryo locust begins to develop as soon as the eggs are
impregnated, this act taking place, as well known, during oviposition
in the soil. The embryo, probably, passes through the earlier and
indeed nearly all the embryonic stages before winter sets in; the em-
bryo being nearly or quite ready to hatch probably within a month
after the eggs are laid. Itis therefore not surprising that a few un-
usually warm days in November or early December may cause an ac-
celeration in the development of the embryo, and that young locusts

should then hatch, while the majority of young do not hatch until the
following spring.

The only observations, so far as we are aware, on the embryology of
any orthopterous insect, are those of Dr. Anton Dohrn, on some stages in
the development of the Kuropean mole cricket, published in Siebold and
Kolliker’s Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Zoologie, xxvi, 1876 (with
no illustrations).

In this paper Dr. Dohrn showed that in Gryllotalpa, or the mole cricket,
the primitive streak incloses the yolk. On the sides and at each end the
primitive band is continued into a membrane, which passes around it
and envelops the embryo; this is the amnfton. The serdus membrane is
likewise present and seems to be united with the amnion into one mem-
brane.

The position of the embryo at this time is such that the head begins
at the middle point of the back part of the egg, the mouth appendages
on the anterior pole, the ventral segments on the ventral side, and the
anus now is situated on the hinder pole of the egg.

In this position and when the appendages have already reached a
considerable size, Dohrn noticed the first appearance of motion in the
embryo. This consists ‘of slight contractions of a thin membrane.

Dr. Dohrn observed how both leaves of the embryonal skins are
united before the head, how their cells undergo a fatty degeneration,
how the skin becomes thinner and more transparent, and how in other
parts of the membrane a kind of streak-formation sets in, while the cells
seem arranged in rows. At the same time the whole membrane, which
until now has laid directly against theinner egg-membrane, is seen tocon.
tinuously contract, so that, finally, the entire interspace which separated
it from the embryo, especially on the fore body, disappeared, while the
appendages which extended out free into this space were, by the pres-
sure of the embryonal skins, pressed into the primitive band, so that they
were not to be seen. Shortly the whole embryo lay like a ball within
the egg-skins.

The digestive canal of insect-embryos consists of three portions: fore,
middle, and hind gut. ‘The formation of these three parts does not take

| DEVELOPMENT OF CALOPTENUS ATLANIS. 273

place at the same time and in the same way, the fore and hind gut
forming first and simultaneously, by an invagination of the outer germ-
layer (ectoderm or ectoblast) while the cells of the mid-gut, as Dohrn
states, arise directly from the yolk. The resorption of the food goes
on in the mid-gut, the results of digestion passing through the walls
of this part of the intestinal tract to mix with the circulatory fluid
or blood. On the other hand, the function of the hind gut is that of an
urinary bladder, since the Malpighian vessels open into it. Dohrn con-
firms Biitschli’s observations made on the embryo of the honey bee, that
the urinary or Malpighian vessels arise from the outer germ-layer. Like
the Malpighian tubes, the salivary glands and the trachee are offshoots
of the ectoblast, as shown by Biitschli. Likewise, as shown by Ganin,
Dohrn claims that the ovaries arise from the hind gut, which it will be
remembered is an invaginated portion of the ectoblast.

For the cutting and mounting of the sections of locust eggs which I

studied, [am indebted to Mr. Norman N. Mason, of Providence, R. I.

I. Development of Caloptenus atlanis.

The earliest stage observed was in a mass of eggs of Caloptenus atlanis
Riley, which were sent me from Missouri by Prof. C. V. Riley, with the
_ label “eggs of C. atlanis, laid 10 days.” These eggs were laid in the
autumn, and the embryos, as seen by the following account, were already
far advanced, the body-segments and appendages having appeared, the
eyes being indicated, the brain and nervous cord being well formed, and
the csophagus and crop (stomodzeum) and hind gut (proctodzum) being
indicated, so that the embryos had probably nearly reached the stage
represented by Pl. XVI, Fig, 1, of C. spretus.

This shows that development in theeggs of thoselocusts which deposit
their eggs in the autumn goes on rapidly, and that the embryo is nearly
perfectly formed and about ready to hatch in the early autumn. As is
well known, some locusts (C. spretus) do hatch in the late autumn in mild
weather, while the rule is that the young hatch out in March and April.
At all events, it is proved by finding the embryos so far advanced ten
days after oviposition, that development begins as soon as the eggs are
deposited, and that the embryo is nearly perfected and about ready to
hatch, until the approach of winter arrests the final stages of develop-
ment of the embryo, a few warm days in spring enabling it to complete
its growth and to hatch. 3

The drawings on Plates XX and XXI represent the earliest observed
stages of Caloptenus atlanis; it having been impossible to obtain the
freshly-laid eggs of Caloptenus spretus within the last two or three years,
owing to the general scarcity of the locust and of local observers who
could collect them. To observe any earlier stages than those figured
it would be necessary to secure the eggs as soon as laid, and then to
place examples of them in alcohol or in hardening fluid, according to

18 EO

274 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Bobretsky’s method, at intervals of a day until, say, the expiration of
ten days.

The specimens were preserved in alcohol of ordinary strength, not
having been hardened by any reagent, such as chromic acid, and the sec-
tions were cut by Mr. N. N. Mason, of Providence, who, after having
hardened the eggs in absolute alcohol, then placed them in dissolved
gum arabic, having previous to cutting stained the eggs in picro-
carmine.

The embryo was cut into thirty-four sections, some of them passing
through the limbs (see Pl. XX, Fig. 1), which shows that the procephalic
lobes, the mouth parts and legs had been indicated, and that the embryo
was nearly as far advanced as that represented on Pl. XVI, Fig. 1.

Nervous system and eyes.—At this time the nervous system is well
developed, the brain being now nearly as large in proportion to the head
and to the succeeding segments as in the nearly mature larve figured in
the chapter on the brain of the locust in the Second Report of the United
States Entomological Commission, Plate XII. At this time, as seen in
Pl. XX, Fig. 1, the two hemispheres of the brain (br) are indicated, but

there are as yet no signs of a differentiation of the brain into the cere- ,

bral lobes and antennal lobes of the advanced embryo figured on Pl. XII
of our Second Report.

The optic ganglia (Fig. 1, op. g.) are large, and, like the brain, com-
posed of minute ganglion-cells. The subcesophageal ganglion is now
about twice as large as those of the ventral cord. A section of one of
the thoracic ganglia is represented on Pl. XIX, Fig. 3. ;

The eyes are now clearly indicated and of comparatively large size
(Pl. XX, Fig.1). The rows of cells radiating outward from the periphery
of the optic ganglion are well indicated, showing that at this date and
probably at an earlier period the separate divisions, or those correspond-
ing to the simple eyes, are indicated. The eyes of the embryo of C.
spretus at a later date are represented at Pl. XVI, Fig. 4, when the
cones and rods are clearly developed.

The heart is now well developed (Pl. XX, Figs. 3 and 4), and from
what we have seen, as indicated in Fig. 4, the mode of origin is as
claimed by Dohrn. As seen by the section represented by Fig. 4, the
walls of the heart at this time are formed of a continuation of the am-
nion which merges into the walls of the heart. The membrane form-
ing the heart is formed beneath and above of a single row of epithelial
cells, which on the sides become double, or, as seen on the right side
of the figure, about four rows deep. From this it would appear that
the view of Dohrn that the heart originates as a loop of the ectoblast,
which becomes constricted and finally forms a separate tube, is a more
correct one than the opinion of Kowalevsky that it is formed by the
union of what were originally independent mesoblast-cells. The con-
tents of the heart are very finely granular, the granules as a rule not
much if any larger than those in the small cells forming the amnion or

DEVELOPMENT OF CALOPTENUS ATLANIS. 275

the cellular wall of the heart itself. No nuclei could be detected among
these granules.

The trachece.—The tracheal system at this period could not with cer-
tainty be made out in our sections, although, as will be seen, the urinary
or Malpighian tubes are clearly indicated. Only two or three sections
(Fig. 3 tr) show clearly what, judging from Hatschek’s figures, we sup-
pose to be a section of a main tracheal tube. This section is evidently
through one of the anterior segments of the thorax as it passes through a
pair of legs (1). But in the sections posterior to this, especially the ab-
dominal one, the organ which we judge to be the trachea does not reap-
pear, nor are there any indications of sections of smaller tracheal tubes
to be found, unless the circle of cells in the section of the leg (Fig. 3, tr ?)
be such, though the preparations are good enough to show them if they
were present. The body or organ which I provisionally regard as the
first indication of the main lateral trachea (Fig. 3 tr and 3 a) lies out-
side of the yolk, and is clearly the result of an invagination of the ecto-
blast. Itis situated directly above the insertion of the limb (J), at the
place where we should naturally look for the first indications of the
trachea. Its structure at this period, as seen in Fig. 3a, is nearly the
same as in the Lepidoptera (compare Hatschek’s Taf. II, Fig. 3 tr), there
being an outer layer of cylindrical epithelium, with often large nuclei,
‘while the cylindrical cells are replaced by an inner mass of polygonal
cells.

The digestive canal.—At this period the two extremities of the digest-
ive canal have been formed by the infolding or invagination of the ecto-
blast (epiblast). It will be remembered that the first section of the canal,
which becomes in the adult the mouth, cesophagus and crop, is in the
embryo called the stomodeum; and the third section, corresponding to
the rectum and intestine, is called the proctodeum. In the first section
through the brain and eyes the microtome passed through a portion of
the stomodeum. It is seen to be composed of the usual two sub-layers,
the inner or glandular (Darmdriisenlage) and the outer (Darmfaserlage)
or fibrous layer.

Turning now to the proctodeum (compare Pl. XX, Fig. 8, 8a), showing
the first and third sections of the digestive tract at a little later stage,
while the middle section or future stomach (mesenteron) is undeveloped),
Figs. 6-9 represent different sections through the proctodzum, whichis a
short thick tube, with the glandular and fibrous layer already developed.
Fig. 6 passes through the anterior end, and Fig. 8 through the rectum and
anus. Fig. 8 shows clearly the primitive opening into the rectum, the
ectoblast having grown or pushed in from the hinder end of the blasto-
derm, the ends of which are cut through, as seen in Figs. 7, 8, 8a, 9 bl.
The glandular layer, composed of columnar epithelium, is seen to be
completely formed, while the polygona! cells of the fibrous layer are seen
to be splitting off or separating from the original ectodermal layer. The
latter is seen to be continuous with the amnion (am); the double rows of

\

276 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the glandular layer finally becoming a single row of amniotic cells which
pass up dorsally towards and finally appear to surround a cavity (do?)
which may possibly be the remnants of the ‘dorsal plate” of Kowa-
levsky and Dohrn (see Balfour’s Comparative Embryology, i, p. 335, Fig.
185. Our sections are here imperfect, leaving a doubt in my. mind
whether the organ (do?) is not formed by a growing up of the ectoblast,
as Dohrn states, towards the dorsal region, forming a provisional tube.

It is doubtful whether at this stage the heart reaches as far back as the ©

proctodeum; and the sections in front (Figs. 3, 4, 5) show the heart very
clearly, with a thick, definite wall, and situated next to the serous mem-
brane. On the other hand, the tube-like organ (do?) is less glandular,
with much thinner walls than indicated by Kowalevsky’s figures.

The urinary tubes.—At this stage the urinary or Malpighian tubes
are clearly indicated (Fig. 6 ut) as arising from the anterior end of the
incipient intestine or proctodeum. In the section represented by Fig.
6, the microtome passed through the end of the proctodzeum, in which
the two sub-layers, the inner or glandular (gl) and the outer or fibrous
(fl), are clearly indicated, the origins of at least eight, and possibly
ten, of these tubes were observed. It will be remembered that the
primitive numberof urinary tubes isfour. According tothe observations
of Dohrn, these tubes develop from two primitive pairs of tubes from
the proctodeum. Hatschek, Taf. III, Fig. 7, shows the mode of origin
by budding of the secondary tubes from the primary ones. The urinary
tubes are plainly seen to be hollow; they are now quite long, as long
pieces are seen cut off and lying about in different places in the section,
and the microtome also passed through them in section, as seen at ut’.
Their origin from the glandular layer of the primitive intestine is not
clearly seen at this stage, as, judging by one section, there is not seen
to be any close connection at this period with the inner or glandular
sub-layer of the proctodzum.

No traces of the sexual glands, that I could discover, appear at this
stage.

The yolk cells.—At the period represented by Figs. 3 and 5 (Pl. XX),
there is seen to be a very fine net-work of irregular, angular, very min-
ute, masses of protoplasm, which spread through the yolk-mass. In
some of the triangular masses a minute nucleus-like body not much
larger than the granules is to be seen.

In close relation with this singular net-work of protoplasm inclosing
the colossal yolk celis, and which stains a delicate red with picro-car-
mine, are large, usually rounded masses of protoplasm. ‘They are not,
however, well-developed cells, but may rather be compared with the
nuclei of cells. Some of them appear to possess a minute nucleolus. We
regard these as nuclei of the yolk cells, each yolk cell containing from
about six to eight of them.

Figure 5a represents a portion of a yolk-ball with its protoplasmic wall,

:
|
|
|
!
:
j
2

“DEVELOPMENT OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS. 277

enlarging into amcebiform or triangular masses at the corners between
the polygonal yolk-balls. From these thin walls fibers are sent off to
the rounded nuclei within, with which are also associated scattered an-
gular masses (an). We judge from these two sets of bodies, the rounded
and the amebiform, that the nuclei of the yolk cells are in an active
state of proliferation.

A peculiarity in the relation of the yolk granules to one another we
have never seen mentioned. They appear to be attached to the yolk-cell-
wall by very slender pedicels or fibers, sometimes as many as five or six
such fine strings or fibers holding the larger granules in place; while
those granules in the interior of the yolk cell are attached to each other
by slender fibers. The granules are more numerous in the center of
the yolk cell than near the periphery. These fibers, like the granules
themselves, are not stained by picro-carmine; the yolk granules are also
colorless, not receiving a stain, being filled with a clear fluid, and are
not sufficiently numerous to be crowded together, hence they retain
their original spherical form.

We were unable in our sections of C. atlanis to detect any entoblas-
tic or mesoblastic cells, either free in the yolk or in layers.

II. Development of Caloptenus spretus.

I received in the winter of 1881 a mass of eggs taken from the earth
at Nephi, Utah, January 7, which had been deposited the previous
autumn. They were kept in a sunny room heated from 60° to 70° F.

Plate XVII, Fig. 1, 1 a represents the earliest stage (observed January
26, 1881). At this time the embryo lay on one side of the yolk, but not
immersed in it, the primitive segments decreasing in size from the pro-
cephalic lobes to the end of the abdomen. The embryonal membranes
are not indicated in the figures. The procephalic lobes are nearly as
long as deep, and the eyes are already indicated. The head is seen to
be composed of two regions, the procephalic lobes, and the tergal por-
tion of a second segment. This segment we are disposed to regard
as the fourth (second maxillary or labial), and it may be compared with
the very distinct fourth cephalic arthromere of Diplax,™ a dragon fly. Of
the three thoracic segments the last is rather longer than the others.

Plate XVI, Fig. 1 (observed January 28), represents a more advanced
embryo, which had been removed from the egg and slipped out upon the
surface of a live-box. The nervous system, consisting of the brain and
succeeding ganglia, is now clearly indicated, as are also the tracheal sys-
tem and spiracles. .

As regards the nervous system, the brain and optic ganglia are indi-
cated; the eyes begin to show areddish tint. The ganglia of the ventral
chain are 14 or 15 in all, including the brain, as better seen in Pl. X VII,
Tig. 2, than in the present figure. Thus there are two ganglia in the

133 Hmbryological Studies on Diplax, Perithemis, and the Thysanurous genus Isotoma. By A.S.
Packard, jr. Memoirs Peabody Academy of Science, 1871. Pl. 2, Fig. 9,4.

278 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

head: one in each thoracic segment, and one in each of the ten abdomi-
nal segments.

There are two main tracheal stems indicated at this date, the trachee
at this time consisting of masses of yolk globules. In nearly each segment
are smaller connecting branches, while small branches pass outward from
the outer tracheal stem (tr’) to the stigmata. No branches were traced
into the head, and the two main trunks appeared to be united in the
fourth cephalic segment, where they expand, and at the end of the abdo-
men they unitein the ninth segment. The stigmata were small, with a
central depression, the area of invagination.

The most interesting feature at this stage is the primitive mouth or
cesophagus and fore-stomach or stomodewum (st). This is seen to bea
sac, the result of invagination, and it has adouble wall, with the square
mouth opening at the anterior end. The notch behind the mouth may
possibly be the point where the rudimentary proventriculus begins. The
primitive intestine or proctodeum (pr), has the same structure appar-
ently as the stomodwum. There was no appearance at this stage of a
mid-gut or mesenteron. At the back part of the head was a mass of
yolk cells extending from near the posterior part of the stomodzum
outwards towards the outer edge of the mandibular segment. This mass
of cells (Fig. 1, sal) I am disposed to regard as the first indications of
the salivary glands.

Pl. XVIII, Fig. 3, represents the fore-head or pre-oral part of the head
of another embryo, with the eyes a little more advanced, and showing
the anterior ocellus (oc) and the esophageal part of the stomodzum.

Pl. XVI, Fig. 2, shows the structure of the body walls, being the epithe-
lium forming the integument of the side of a segment, formed by a
single row of oval epithelial cells. Fig. 3 represents the structure of
the inner embryonal membrane or “amnion,” some of the blastoderm
cells being distinctly nucleated.

February 2. A more advanced embryo was observed in prcecess of
turning. Pl. XVIII, Fig. 2, represents the head and thorax at this time.
The eyes are now reddish and far advanced. ‘The three ganglia suc-
ceeding the brain are also to be seen.

In an embryo observed February 5,—perhaps, however, not so far
advanced as the preceding,—the structure of the eyes could be observed.
Pl. XVI, Fig. 4, is a natural section through the eye as seen in the living
embryo. The cones are seen to be oval-oblong cells, with a distinct
nucleus; each cone is succeeded by the rod, and: ata short distance
from the cone is the indication of the retina (ret), a reddish mass not
continuously extended from rod to rod, each mass with a dark distinct
nucleus.

The origin of the ocelliis now to be seen. Pl. XVI, Fig. 5e, represents
_@ vertical view of the procephalic lobes, with the indications of the three

ocelli. Each ocellus is seen to be formed of several (6 or 7) reddish pig-
ment cells. Pl. XVIII, Fig. 4, shows clearly the relations of the antenna

DEVELOPMENT OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS. 279

to the procephalic lobe, which is plainly seen to form the pleura of the
first or antennal segment (arthromere), the antenna being developed
from the sternal side, and the eye developed on the tergal side. This
preparation shows clearly (1) that the procephalic lobes are the pleural
portion of the first cephalic or antennal segment; (2) that the antenna
is an appendage or outgrowth of the procephalic lobes; (3) that the eyes
are a specialized group of epidermal cells of the upper part of the pro-
cephalic lobes, and are not homologues of the antenne or of the append-
ages in general; and (4) it seems to follow from a study of the relations
and mode of development of the clypeus and labrum, that they arise
between the procephalic lobes, and probably represent the tergal part of
the antennal or first cephalic segment, forming the roof of the mouth,
2. é., closing in from above the pharynx.

The form of the brain and ganglionic chain is well seen in an embryo
observed February 22 (Pl. XVI, Fig.1). All the ganglia, from the brain
to the last pair, are seen to have a group of ganglion-cells in the center,
the periphery being free from them; the origin of the main nerves for
each ganglion, and also the relations of the ganglia to the body-seg-
meuts, were clearly seen in this embryo in life. It appears that there
are 15 pairs of ganglia, including the brain; 2. e., two pairs for the head,
one for each thoracic and abdominal segment.

_ PLXVUZ, Fig. 1, drawn from an embryo observed February 23, shows

the relations of the mandibles, first maxille, and second maxiliz or
labium. The mandibles remain single-lobed; but in the maxilla, which
were, aS seen in P]. XVII, Fig. 1, 1a, single-lobed, two if not three lobes
appear, the outer being considerably the larger. The second maxille
also have subdivided into two lobes, the outer or labial palpi also the
larger. It thus appears that the peripheral or terminal parts, ligula,
palpiger, and palpus, are formed before the submentum and mentum;
these being the result of the consolidation of the second maxille; this
takes place only shortly before hatching.

The relations of the cephalic appendages were best seen in the em-
bryo represented on PI. XVII, Fig. 3, and drawn February 15. In this
specimen the first maxilla is seen to be divided into three equal lobes, and
situated on the outer side of the mandible, while the unequally bilobed
second maxilla is situated just external to the end of the antenna.

At this time also the hind limbs are decidedly larger than the two
anterior pairs, and the hind femora are now large and thick, while the
three main divisions of the legs are clearly indicated.

In the oldest embryo, observed March 12, the limbs are in about the
same state of development, and the trachez are but slightly more de-
veloped than when first observed.

Sections of embryo about ready to hatch.—P|. XIX, Figs. 1-4, represents
sections of the same embryo as in part figured in our Second Report,
Plate XII, the sections of the head only being there represented.

280 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Ill THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BARK-BORING BEETLES HYLURGOPS
AND XYLEBORUS.

Two Scolytid or bark-boring beetles were observed in abundance, May
30, 1882, near Providence, under the bark of white pines (Pinus strobus),
engaged in reproduction and egg-laying. The larger of these was Hy-
lurgops pinifex Fitch; the smaller Xyleborus cvlatus Hich.™ Bringing
specimens to my house, the next day I was able to observe their habits
more closely. The following notes refer entirely to X. celatus. The
female was in her hole, the end of her abdomen extending straight up
out of the perpendicular hole or ‘‘mine;” a male approached her and
rubbed the end of her body with his fore pair of feet, the female appar-
ently responding by moving back and forth in her mine. After a moment
or two the male visited another female in her hole, and caressed her in
the same manner, then returned to the first female and inserted his intro-
mittent organ in the female, the end of whose body was depressed, so as
to leave a space between it and the end of the elytra. Union continued
for six minutes, during which time the hindermost pair of feet of the
male kept stroking the end of the abdomen of its mate, while its anten-
ne were vigorously moving. At the endof this time it immediately
withdrew and disappeared down another hole, the female descending
her mine. From these facts we infer that the male of this species is
polygamous.

While boring, at least in confinement, the borings or dust is thrown
out around the mouth of the mine ina heap. The mine or tunnel is
from an inch to an inch and a quarter long; at close intervals on one
side there are lateral, deep notches in which two to three or four eggs
are irregularly laid; or the eggs are carefully deposited side by side;
the lateral notches are then ‘filled with borings or dust by the move-
ments of the female in her main tunnel, the eggs being enclosed in the
mass of borings.

Hylurgops does not make lateral notches, but places her eggs side
by side in a single recess on one side of the mine.

Pl. XXII, Fig. 1, represents the egg of the Xyleborus 24 hours after
impregnation. The primitive band (pb) has completely formed, as well
as the serous membrane; the primitive band lies outside of the yolk
and at this time the segments are not indicated.

Fig. 2 represents another egg observed June Ist. The segments are
now clearly indicated, and those of the head (a!—a‘) are as clearly indi-
cated as those of the future thorax (a°-a’) or those of the abdomen
(1-8). The dotted portion represents the blastoderm, while the clear
lobe-like portions are the appendages, 1-4 the four pairs of appendages
of the head, and I-III the three pairs of legs. The amnion (am) or in-
ner membrane is now entirely formed; the cells much smaller than those
of the outer or serous membrane (ser).

1347 am indebted to the kindness of Dr. G. H. Horn for the identification of this species.

— a oh el

DEVELOPMENT OF THE BARK BEETLES. 281

A feature we have observed in these eggs, which are very transpa-
rent, is the protoplasmic threads (th) which connect the cells of the
amnion with one or two of those of the serous membrane. These are
also seen in Fig. 2a. They appear usually to be forked after originating
from the amniotic cells. Ihave never seen these threads before, nor
have they been noticed by embryologists, so far as I am aware.

Fig. 3is a dorsal view of the embryo, representing the procephalic
lobes, or two sides of the epicranium or head; the clypeus in Fig. 2 (cl)
is Seen to be a lobe projecting over the antenne (ant).

(Fig. 4, drawn by Dr. Gissler, represents a farther advanced stage, in
Hylurgops, the end of the abdomen (ab) having retreated from the back
of the head.) |

ig. 5 represents an embryo Xyleborus, observed June 3d. The head
is now distinctly differentiated from the rest of the body; the indica-
tions of the head-segments have disappeared, the four pairs of append-
ages (1-4) being clearly indicated, as well as the clypeus (ely). In this
embryo the indications of eleven pairs of spiracles were observed (sp!—
sp"), and it is interesting to note that in each thoracic segment there is
at first a pair of spiracles, though the prothoracic pair is the largest and
best developed. The spiracles are superficially composed of a circle of
ectodermal cells, which surround a depression of tubes, resalting from
. a local inpushing or invagination of the ectoblast. Whether the double
series of granules (tr), which appear to originate from the stigmata, are
the germs of the trachez or not, we were unable to definitely state, but
I am inclined to think that they are. :

The presence at first of three pairs of thoracic embryonic stigmata is a
matter of great interest, because, as seen in Figs. 8 and 9, the late embryo
or freshly hatched larva has but a single pair of stigmata, 7. e., those sit-
uated in the prothorax. Now it is difficult to explain the presence of
these temporary, embryonic, mesothoracic and metathoracic stigmata,
unless the ancestors of these and other insects had them in each segment
of the thorax. In this connection we may refer the reader to our article
on the primitive number of spiracles in, winged insects, published in the
American Naturalist, vol. 8, Sept. 1874, in which we took the ground
that the normal, primitive number of pairs of spiracles is eleven, and
that probably the larve of the different groups of winged insects had
originally a pair ou each thoracic segment.

The remaining figures were drawn by Dr. C. F. Gissler, and represent
the later stages of the embryo Hylurgops. In Fig. 7 the mouth-parts
are elaborated, the labial and maxillary palpi being differentiated.

- Fig. 8 represents a freshly hatched Hylurgops, which is 1.5 ™™ in length.
The head is very large, while the spiracles are distinct, and the stomach
(st), intestines (7), and rectum (r) are distinctly visible. It will be seen that
the rudimentary feet of the early embryo have disappeared. When the
Jarve hatch, as soon as they are free from the shell, according to Dr.
Gissler’s observations, they attach themselves to the surface of the bark

282 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

in the manner seen at Fig. a, and turn around for half an hour before
beginning to feed. Fig. 9 b represents one of these larve at this time.
Fig. 10 was drawn by Dr. Gissler to represent the end of the body of
one of these larve, to show the form of the infra-anal sucker-like ex-

tremity of the last abdominal segment, which is produced and soft at the -

end, with perhaps temporary dermal glands to secrete an adhesive fluid.
The anus is seen to project above and beyond this sucker, r representing
the rectum, 7 the intestine, and s¢ the pyloric end of the stomach.

The general mode of development of these two Scolytid beetles exactly
agrees with that of the Curculionide or true weevils, as described and
figured in the author’s note on the development of Attelabus rhois in his
Embryclogical Studies on Hexapodous Insects.”

IV. THE NUMBER OF SEGMENTS IN THE HEAD OF WINGED INSECTS.

By a study of the structure of the head of adult insects it is very diffi-
cult, if not impossible, to determine the number of segments in the head
of winged insects. The number as given by different authors is very
variable, while it is popularly supposed that the head corresponds to a
Single segment, and that the different pieces are simply “subsegments.”
We will quote from Newport, article Insecta, in Todd’s Cyclopedia of
Anatomy and Physiology, the views generally entertained on this sub-
ject.

‘‘According to the investigations of the most careful observers, Sa-
vigny, Audouin, Macleay, Kirby, Carus, Strauss-Durckheim, Newman,
and others, every segment of the perfect insect is made up of distinct
parts, not always separable from each other or developed to the same
extent, but existing primarily in all. It is also believed that the head
itself is formed of two or more segments, but the exact number which
enter into its composition is yet a question. So uncertain are tie opin-
ions held upon this subject, that while Burmeister recognizes only two
segments, Carus and Audouin believe there are three, Macleay and New-
man four, and Strauss-Durckheim, even so many as seven. These dif-
ferent conclusions of the most able investigators appear to have arisen
chiefly from too exclusive examinations of the head in perfect insects,
without reference to the corresponding parts in larve. It is only by
comparing the distinctly indicated parts of the head in the perfect insect
with similar ones in the larva that we can hope to ascertain the exact
number of segments of which itis composed. In the head of the perfect
insect there ought to be found some traces of all the segments which
exist in the larve of the same species, and in that of the more perfectly.
developed larve that undergo a true metamorphosis there ought in like
manner to be found the rudiments of all the segments in the least
perfectly developed. Now, the common larva of the Dipterous insect,

135 Memoirs of the Peabody Academy of Science, Salem, Mass., 1872. Pl. 11.

LOE

—E—

on eg a

NUMBER OF HEAD-SEGMENTS IN INSECTS. 283

the maggot of the flesh fly, is one of the lowest forms we have yet exam-
ined, and we have already seen that its head appears to be formed of
four nd perhaps even of five segments. This is the greatest number
yet noticed in the head of the larva of any species. If, therefore, we can
trace the like number in the head of a perfect insect, we may fairly con-
clude that this is the normal number of segments throughout the class.
The head of the great water-beetle, Hydréus piceus, is remarkably well-
fitted for exemplifying the number of segments of which the head is
originally composed, the remains of four of the segments being distinctly
marked; and it also affords us a proof of the correctness of the opinions
advanced by Savigny and others, that the organs of manducation are
the proper articulated members of distinct segments, and are perfectly
analogous to the proper organs of locomotion.

‘We shall first describe the parts of which the head is composed, and
then endeavor to explain the manner in which these parts have been
developed from several segments to form the perfect cranium and its
. appendages. It has hitherto been customary with naturalists to desig-
nate the head the first segment of the body, and as every change in the
nomenclature of a distinct part ought always to be avoided, unless pos-
itively required, through fear of creating confusion, we shall not deviate
on the present occasion from the established mode; but when speaking
of it as a whole shall consider it the first segment, while the aggregation
of segments of which it is composed we shall designate individually sub-
segments, distinguishing them numerically in the order in which they
appear to exist in the earliest condition of the fuetal larva.”

If we apply the law enunciated by Savigny, and which holds good as
a rule throughout the Hexapod Insects, 7. ¢., that each segment of the
body of insects bears but a single pair of jointed appendages, we find
that as the head of insects is provided with four pairs of appendages,
viz., the antennee, mandibles, first maxillz, and labium (or second max-
illz), there must be four corresponding segments.

While the subject becomes clearer when, with Newport, we examine
an insect in the larva state, the fact that the head of insects 1s really
composed of but four segments becomes readily demonstrated when we
examine the embryo at an early stage of its existence. In our embryo-
logical studies on the Thysauurous insects (Isotoma), on Neuropterous
insects (Diplax), on the beetles and the flea and Hymenoptera (Nematus
ventricosus), our attention was specially directed to this point, and it
appeared very plain and easily demonstrable that the head of winged
insects of all orders consists of four segments (arthromeres) and no
more.'*

An inspection of the figures published by the different writers on the
embryology of insects appears to confirm this view, and in our ‘** Guide

186 Side Embryological Studies on Diplax, Perithemis, and the Thysanurous genus Isotoma, by A. S.
Packard, jr.; Memoirs Peab. Acad. Sc., Salem, 1871, p. 21; also Second Memoir, 1872. This view was
stated in the author’s~‘ Guide to the Study of Insects,” second edition. Graber (Die Insekten, Miin-
chen, 1879, p. 430) also states that the head is composed of four segments.

284 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

to the Study of Insects” (p. 20) we have given a tabular view of the four
segments of the head and the appendages they bear. This view is fully
confirmed by our studies on the embryology of the locust. Ifthe reader
will turn to Plate X VIII, Fig. 2, he will see the order of succession of the
antenne and mouth-parts. It will be seen that the antennz and mouth-
parts are outgrowths budding out from the four primitive segments of
the head; that the antenne grow out (compare also Pl. XVIII, Fig. 4)
from the under side of the procephalic lobes, and that these should there-
fore receive the name of antennal lobes. In like manner the mandibles
and first and second maxille arise respectively from the three succeeding
segments. The figures by Kowalevsky and Bobretsky and by other
observers, as well as those of the earliest stages of Diplax, Pulex, and
Attelabus which we have published, show that the cephalic segments
are first indicated, and that subsequently the appendages bud out from
the under side at a point situated on each side of the sternal or median
line of the body. It appears that the appendages arise between the
sternal and pleural portions of the segment.

There, however, remains a portion of the head in front of the procephalice
or antennal lobes, which afterwards becomes the clypeus and labrum
or upper lip. Do these parts belong to the antennal segment, or are
they rudimentary portions of a segment situated in front of our first
segment? This lobe or outgrowth is evidently a single unpaired lobe
which grows out in front of the antennal lobes, and is seen to form the
front or upper wall of the mouth. We regard it as the tergal portion

of the antennal segment, and the procephalic lobes as probably forming

the pleural portion of the segment. The procephalic lobes, then, bear-
ing the antennz below, and higher up on the sides the eyes and ocelli,
become the epicranium of the larval and adult insect. It follows, there-
fore, that the head of larval and adult insects is made up mostly of the
first or antennal segment, and that the epicranium is the pleural portion
of this segment, and the clypeus, and its offshoot the labrum, is the
dorsal or tergal portion of this segment.

The only other portion of the head of certain adult insects which
remains to be accounted for is the so-called “occiput.” This forms the
base of the head of Corydalis, a Neuropterous insect, which, however, is
more distinct in the larva. In most other insects the occiput is either
obsolete or soldered to the hind part of the epicranium, We have traced
the history of this piece (sclerite) in Diplax, a dragon fly, and have found
that it represents the tergal portion of the fourth or labial segment. In
our memoir on the development of this dragon fly, Pl. 2, Fig. 9 (com-
pare also Fig. — in text), the head of the embryo is:seen to be divided
into two regions, the anterior, formed of the first three segments, and
the posterior, formed of the fourth or labial segment. ‘This postoral
segment at first appears to be one of the thoracic segments, but is often
added to the head. A. Brandt's figure of Calopteryx virgo, Pl. II, Fig. 19,
represents an embryo of a stage similar: to ours, where the postoral or

NUMBER OF HEAD-SEGMENTS IN INSECTS. 285

fourth (labial) segment is quite separate from the rest of the head.
Fig. 11 (in text), copied from our Memoir, also md ne

shows in a saw fly larva (Nematus ventricosus) the 2
relations of the labial or fourth segment to the
rest of the head. The suture between the labial
segment and the pre-oral part of the head disap-
pears in adult life. From this sketch it would \\ Lu
seem that the back part of the head, i.e. of the “ayy
epicranium, may be made up in part of the tergite
or pleurites of the mandibular segment, since the yg 14 Head of embryo
mandibular muscles are inserted on the roof of the Nematus, showing the labial

segment, occ, forming the occi-

head behind the eyes. It is this segment which Dirt col, ely pens: 1p, Aalaat

, mandible; mdm, muscle of

in Corydalis evidently forms the occiput, and ofsame; ma, maxilla; ma’, 2d
c % x 2 . maxilla (labium); oes, oesopha-

which in most other insects there is no trace in gus.

larval or adult life.

It appears, then, that the epicranium, or that piece (sclerite) bearing
the eyes, ocelli, and antenne, and in front the clypeus and labrum, is
formed from the original procephalic lobes, and, represents the first or
antennal segment, and is pleural, the clypeus and labrum being the ter-
gal portion of the segment; while the remainder of the original or primi-
tive segments are obsolete, except in those insects which retain traces
of an occiput or fourth cephalic tergite. All of the gular region of the
head probably represents the base of the primitive second maxille.

CHARTER, X1.

THE SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE ORTHOPTERA IN RELATION TO
OTHER ORDERS. OF INSECTS.

It may not be out of place, considering the amount of space given in
the reports of the Commission to matters of a practical nature, and also
taking into account the fact that these reports are widely sent to ento-
mologists, as well as to farmers and planters, to give the scientific reader
a brief sketch or abstract of the results of an examination of the ex-
ternal anatomy of the Orthoptera in general, of which the locust is a
type. This we have attempted to do, but in undertaking this task we
have been led perforce to examine those insects allied to the Ortho-
ptera, 7. ¢., the Pseudoneuroptera and Neuroptera. This has led us to
review the characteristics of the four lowest orders of winged insects.
The results of this review we here present forthe consideration of zool-
ogists. Itis believed that so detailed a survey of the external anatomy,
especially of the thorax, of so many forms has not been made before,
although much more thorough and exhaustive studies on a few insects
have been made by Audouin, MacLeay, Newport, Strauss-Durckheim,

Hammond, and others. The results have led us to quite different con-.

clusions respecting the classification of the Neuro ptera and Orthoptera,
as originally limited by Linnzeus, from those which we have heretofore
held. Our work is based on the researches of Audouin, Macleay, and
Newport, and the terms here used will be found explained in their orig-
inal works, as well as in the author’s “‘Guide to the Study of Insects.”
The reader is also referred to our account of the external anatomy of
the locust in the Second Report of this Commission.

Any one who has examined a cockroach and a white ant, bie seen
how closely they resemble each other, must have felt that so far from
representing two distinct orders, they appear rather to be types of two
allied families of the same order. Again, while the Jarval cockroach
or larval Forficula closely resemble the Thysanurous Lepisma, on the
other hand a larval Perla also nearly approximates to a Lepisma. The
explanation of these facts is to be sought in the probable genealogical
history of the Orthoptera, which, with the Pseudoneuroptera and Der-
matoptera, are evidently descendants from an ancestral form like Le-
pisma, their larve closely resembling this Thysanuran. We have there-
fore indicated in this chapter the probable lines of descent from the
primitive hypothetical Thysanuran.

In making these studies we have, in order to be unbiased, disre-
garded the works of others, and gone over the field anew, as if nothite

286

DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYLOPTERA. 287

had been done upon this subject. We have examined the fundamenta
characters of the head, thorax, and abdomen, points neglected by most
systematic writers, not spending much time on the peripheral, i. ¢., the
superficial adaptive characters of the mouth-parts, wings, and legs,
which have been elaborated by systematic entomologists; believing that
by this method perhaps more thorough and better grounded views might
result. The outcome has been to lead us to separate the Neuroptera, as
defined farther on, from the Pseudoneuroptera, and to regard these two
groups, with the Orthoptera and Dermatoptera, as four orders of a cate-
gory which may be regarded as a superorder, for which the name Phy-
loptera is proposed, as these four orders are probably closely allied to,
if not in some cases identical with, the stem or ancestral groups from
which probably all the higher orders—the Hemiptera, Coleoptera, Di-
ptera, Lepidoptera, and Hymenoptera—have originated.

We will first briefly summarize the characters as we understand them
of the Phyloptera as a whole; then the distinguishing marks of the four
orders, then briefly discuss their probable genealogy, closing with a more
extended though very condensed account of the essential peculiarities
of structure of the families, as represented by one or more of the typical
genera.

Superorder PHYLOPTERA.™

The mouth-parts are free, adapted invariably for biting; the mandi-
bles being toothed and adapted for chewing; the first maxillz separate,
with three divisions, the outer bearing usually five-jointed palpi; the
second maxilla united to form a labium, divided into a submentum,
mentum, and ligula, the latter varying much, being either cleft (Pseudo-
neuroptera) or entire (Neuroptera), and bearing usually a three-jointed
palpus. This is the primitive, elementary condition of the mouth-parts,
and such as obtains in Coleopterous larve. The head is notable from
the great development of the epicranium. The clypeus is often divided
into two portions, a posterior (post-clypeus) and anterior (ante-clypeus);
in the other and higher orders the clypeus is entire.

The prothorax is usually very large and square, but in a few fami-
lies, as the Phryganeid, Panorpidz, Psocide, Libellulide, and Ephe.
meridz, it is small and collar-like. There is a marked equality in size
and form of the meso- and metathorax; in most Orthoptera and some
Pseudoneuroptera and Neuroptera the metathorax is often even larger
than the mesothorax; in this respect the Phyloptera differ from any of
the higher Hexapoda. In both of the two hinder segments of the thorax
thefour tergal sclerites, viz: the preescutum, scutum, scutellum, and post-
scutellum, are each well developed, aud more equably so than in the
higher orders. The scutum is deeply excavated in front to receive the
often large subtriangular or cordate prescutum; and in some genera

137 From ¢gvAor, gens, nation; mregov, wing.

\

288 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the scutum is, so to speak, cleft in two by the meeting of the prescutum
and scutellum in the median line. The flanks of the thorax, or pleurites,
are often very large, and the episternum and epimerum are broad, oblong, -
or squarish, and these sclerites are sometimes subdivided into an upper
and lower division (supra- and infra- epimerum or episternum). The
sternum is often large, flat, and broad; it is sometimes divided into a
sternum and presternum.

The wings are usually net-veined, often with numerous longitudinal
veins, the branches of the subcostal, median, and submedian veins being
either very long and parallel with the longitudinal axis of the wing, or
numerous and small (especially in the hind wings of Orthoptera).

The hind wings are often (Orthoptera and O sonata) broader and
larger than the anterior pair, the metathorax in such cases being a little
larger than the mesothorax. —

The abdomen has in this group, including representatives of the
Neuroptera, Orthoptera, Dermatoptera and Pseudoneuroptera, besides
a tenth, nearly complete segment, the rudiments of an eleventh uro-
mere,!* represented by a tergite forming the supra-anal triangular plate.
Well developed jointed cercopoda occur in the Orthoptera and Pseudo-
neuroptera, while the forceps of Forficula (Dermatoptera) are un-
doubtedly modified cercopoda. An ovipositor occurs in the Neuroptera
(Panorpide) and Orthoptera. :

The metamorphosis is incomplete in all the orders of Phyloptera ex-
cept the more recent and higher order, 7?.e., the Neuroptera (in Erichson’s
sense), in which the transformations are complete, the pupa being qui-
escent and wholly unlike the larva. |

The relative standing of the four orders of Phyloptera is shown in
the table or genealogical tree of the winged insects on page 295.

The sequence of the orders, such as we are compelled to adopt in
writing or speaking of them, is difficult to decide upon. Beginning with
what on the whole may be regarded as the lowest order, we might first
take up the Dermatoptera, which are in most respects the most general-
ized forms, and stand nearest to the Thysanura (Japyx).

138 NOMENCLATURE OF EXTERNAL PARTS OF ARTHROPODA.—The following terms have been devised
for convenience in anatomical and systematic work on the Arthropoda, and are submitted for the judg-
ment of naturalists. We have adopted most of them in a monograph of N. A. Phyllopoda, published
in Hayden’s Twelfth Annual Report U. 8. Geol. Surv. Terr., 1883.

The term arthromere, originally employed in the author’s ‘‘Guide to the Study of Insects,” in 1869,
is now restricted to the body-segments of Arthropods, the term zonite or somite being used for the
body-segments of worms, etc., as well as Arthropods. The ‘‘head,” ‘‘thorax” and ‘‘abdomen” may be
termed respectively cephalosome, beenosome (Gr. baino, to walk, locomotion), and wrosome. The head-
segments are termed cephalomeres, the thoracic segments benomeres, and the abdominal wromeres.
For the antennz the term @sthopoda, and for the mandibles and maxillz the previously used term
gnathopoda is adopted.

The thoracic legs are termed benopoda, and Westwood’s term uropoda, applied by him to the terminal
pairs of feet of the Tetradecapoda, is extended to all the abdominal feet of Arthropods. The basal
abdominal teet of male Decapoda, modified as accessory reproductive organs, are termed, for conveni-

ence in descriptive carcinology, gonopoda, and the jointed anal cerci of certain insects and of Apus
are termed cercopoda (xépkos, tail; mwovs, modds, foot). The elememts of the ovipositor or sting are three
pairs of blade-like appendages which are homologues of the legs; they may therefore be designated as
odpoda, as they are chiefly concerned in egg-laying.

:

DESCRIPTION OF THE DERMATOPTERA. 289

The following is the succession of orders, placing the lowest upper-

- most:

Dermatoptera Burm.

Orthoptera Linn.

Pseudoneuroptera Krichson.

Neuroptera Linn., restricted by Erichson.

Before discussing the relative standing of these orders, we will briefly
indicate the more salient and generally applicable differential charac-
ters, especially what we regard as the more fundamental ones, but

slightly touching upon the mouth-parts and wings, these being peri-
_ pheral and more adaptive characters and liable to greatest variation,

and being of less value in characterizing the orders of Phyloptera.

ORDER 1. DERMATOPTERA.

_Forficula presents so many features separating it from the Ortho-
ptera, and is so composite a form, that it should be regarded as the type
of a distinct order, in which it was originally placed by Leach, Kirby,
Burmeister, and Westwood. Its composite nature is seen both in the
elytra and the hind wings, which anticipate the Coleopterous type of
wings. On the other hand the larva resembles Japyx, the Thysanuran,
with its anal forceps, and in most respects Forficula is the lowest,

-most decided stem-form of the Phyloptera.

The Dermatoptera are characterized by the flatness of the body, and
the large terminal forceps. The head is flat, horizontal in position,
while the presence of the V-shaped epicranial suture is a sign of inferi-
ority, as it is characteristic of Thysanura and Platypteran larve as well
as Coleopterous larve. The remarkable thoracic structure, which is
described farther on, as well as the curious overlapping of the abdom-
inal tergites, forbid our uniting the Dermatoptera with the Orthoptera.
The small, short elytra, and the very large, rounded, longitudinally and
once-cross-folded hind wings, which remind us rather of the Coleoptera
than Orthoptera, are also important diagnostic features. Finally, the
metamorphosis of the Dermatoptera is even less complete than that of
the Orthoptera. :

The ligula (Pl. X XIII, Fig. 6) is bifid, being divided into a pair of two-
jointed paraglosse. The labium is thus similar to that of the Ortho-
ptera, though scarcely more like them than like Terines.

ORDER 2. ORTHOPTERA.

The head is more or less vertical in position; the front is very large,
broad, and long, the epicranial region very large and often hypertrophied.
The clypeus is large and subdivided as in Pseundoneuroptera. In the
Orthoptera, as a rule, the deeply-cleft ligula is indistinctly four-lobed,
the outer pair of paraglosse very well developed, while the inner pair
is minute or undeveloped, as in the Acrydii, especially Caloptenus;

19 EC

290 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL~ COMMISSION.

but in the Locustariz the ligula is four-lobed, and in the Gryllidx
decidedly so. In the Mantide and Blattarie the ligulais plainly four-
lobed, nearly as much so as in the Termitide. In the Phasmide the
ligula is intermediate in form between the Mantide and Locustaria.

The prothorax is usually remarkably large, particularly the notum.
The meso- and metanotum exactly repeat each other, and the metanotum
is usually (Acrydii and Locustariz) longer and larger than the mesono-
tum, the hind wings being almost uniformly much larger than the anterior
pair. The pleurites are very large and square as well as high, the epi-
sterna and epimera being large and oblong and equally developed. The
sternites arevery large and broad. The coxe are sometimes (Blatta) very
large; the hind legs in the Acrydii are much larger than the anterior
pairs. The fore wings are narrower than the hinder pair, and show a
slight tendency to become subelytriform; on the other hand the hind
wings are very large and broad, distinctly net-veined, with numerous
longitudinal veins, and they fold up longitudinally.

The abdomen has eleven uromeres, the eleventh forming a triangular
tergite. The cercopoda are often (Blatta, Mantis, &c.) multi-articulate
and well developed, while the ovipositor is often large and perfect. The
metamorphosis is more incomplete than in the Pseudoneuroptera.

With the exclusion of the Forficulariz, the Orthoptera, as here re-
stricted, are a tolerably well circumscribed group; and though there
are great structural differences between the families, yet the connection
or sequence of the families from the Blattariz through the Phasmidz
and Mantidz and Acrydii to the Locustariz, and, finally, the highest
family, the Gryllide, is one which can be distinctly perceived. There
is no occasion for a subdivision of the order into groups higher than
fainilies, as the Blattarie are but a family removed from the Mantide.

Order 3. PSPEUDONEUROPTERA Erichson.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to satisfactorily characterize by a
sharp-cut definition this very elastic order. As regards the thorax,
there is no uniformity in the structure that we have been able to dis-
cover, nor is there in the structure of the wings, nor more than a gen-
eral resemblance in the mouth-parts.

The definition of the Pseudoneuroptera in Hagen’s Synopsis of the Neu-
roptera of North America, as given in the analytical table, which is stated
jn a foot-note to have been prepared at the request of the Smithsonian In-
stitution by Baron Osten Sacken, gives no fundamental characters based
on a study of the trunk. Those mentioned are what we have called peri-
pheral characters, 7. e., those drawn from the mouth-parts, wings, and ap-
pendages. So far as we know, no satisfactory definition of the Pseudo-
neuroptera has ever been given. In Hagen’s Synopsis, among the
other superficial characters given, are these: ‘‘ Lower lip mostly cleft”;
“antenne either subulate and thin, the tarsi three- to five- articulate; or
setiform, or filiform, in which case the tarsi are two- to four- articulate.”

DESCRIPTION OF THE PSEUDONEUROPTERA. 291

These characters, though superficial, are the most important yet pre-
sented, perhaps (disregarding the metamorphosis), for separating the
Pseudoneuroptera from the genuine Neuroptera. But the cleft iabium
is also to be found in Orthoptera; and among the Orthoptera, which
usually have five-jointed tarsi, the Mantide have four tarsal joints. The
Perlidz, Odonata, and Ephemerina have been, by Gerstiicker (Peters
and Carus’ Zoologie), associated with the Orthoptera under the name
Orthoptera amphibiotica, but such an alliance does not seem to us to be
entirely a natural or convenient one; it is simply transferring a mass
of heterogeneous forms to what, as now limited, is a natural and well
“ircumscribed category, and yet we confess that it is difficult to give
diagnostic adult characters separating the Pseudoneuroptera from the
Orthoptera, though the general facies of the Orthoptera is quite unlike
that of the the Pseudoneuroptera.

In the Pseudoneuroptera, beginning with the more generalized forms,
the Perlidz and Termitide, the labium (second maxille) is deeply cleft,
the cleft not, however, in these or any other insects, extending to the
mentum, or even clear through the palpiger. Hach lobe is also cleft,
so that the ligula is really four-lobed; the outer lobes are called by
Gersticker’® the “lamina externa,” and the inner the “lamina interna.”
These finger-shaped, non-articulated, fleshy lobes appear to be homolo-
gous with, or at least suggest the outer pair of, paraglosse of the Cole-
optera and Hymenoptera. In the Perlide (Pl. XL, fig. 6) the four
lobes of the ligula are well developed, and the lobes of the inner pair
are broader than the outer. In the Termitidse (Pl. XLI, figs. 2, 3) the
lobes are well developed, but the inner pair of lobes is either one-half
or not quite so wide as the outer paraglosse; the palpiger is cleft. In
the Embide, according to Savigny’s figures, the ligula is four-lobed, but
the inner pair is narrow and rudimentary.

In the Odonata, according to Gerstiicker’s excellent drawings, the
ligula varies much. In Gomphus it is entire; in some of the higher
Libellulinz only two-lobed; but in Aischna it is four-lobed, the outer
lobe slender, but separate from the palpus. In Calopteryx the ligula is
widely cleft, the two inner lobes are wide apart, while the outer pair
is consolidated with the labial palpi. Owing to the specialized nature
of the labial palpi, the mouth-parts of the Odonata are sufficiently sua
generis and distinctive to prevent their being placed among the Ortho-
ptera, even if the thorax were not so dissimilar. In the aborted labium
and other mouth-parts of the Ephemerina we also have strongly-marked
characteristics forbidding their being placed in the Orthoptera; were it
not for the strong resemblance of the Termitidse to the Orthoptera
(Blattariz,) probably no one would have thought of carrying the Pseudo-
neuroptera over into the Orthoptera.

The relative proportion of the head and sclerites varies greatly; no

1399 Zur Morphologie der Orthoptera amphibiotica. Aus der Festschrift zur Gesellsch. Natur
forsch. Freunde, 1873.

292 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

general rule can be laid down as to the relative proportions of the epi-
cranium and of the clypeus, or of the gular region.

On this account I had at one time decided to split the group into two,
and to restrict Erichson’s Pseudoneuroptera to the Platyptera,“ and to
adopt Latreille’s term Subulicornia for the Odonata and Ephemerina |
(Subulicornes of Latreille).- It may, however, be best, for the sake of
clearness, to retain Erichson’s order Pseudoneuroptera as he indicated
it, and to dismember it into what may be regarded, provision at
least, as three suborders :

1. Platyptera (Termitidea, Embide, Psocide, and Perlide:=Corroden-
tia and Orthoptera amphibiotica in part).

2. Odonata (Libellulide).

3. Hphemerina (Ephemeride). |

It is comparatively easy to give well-grounded differential characters
for these three suborders. They are so distinct that they may perhaps

hereafter be regarded as entitled to the rank of orders, or the Pseudo-
- neuroptera may be dismembered into the Pseudoneuroptera and Subuli-
cornia (Odonata and Ephemerina).

1. Platyptera.—The body is flattened ; the head horizontal. The pro-
notum is large, broad, and square. The meso- and metanotum are re-
markable on account of the imperfect differentiation of the scutum and
scutellum ; the latter is indefinite in outline, but very large. The flanks
(pleurites) are, when long, oblique, or are short. The sternites are usu-
ally very large and broad. There are often eleven uromeres.

2. Odonata.—W hile the Odonata and Ephemerina are somewhat alike
as regards the form and venation of the fore wings, in their mouth-parts
and thorax they are entirely unlike. The Odonata are remarkable for
the great dorsal (tergal) development of the mesepisterna and the enor-
mous development of the meso- and metapleurites in general, while
the notum of the meso- and metathorax, though of the same type as the
Orthoptera, is minute in size. ‘The prothorax is very small, both dor-
sally and on thé sides, forming a collar.

The wings are as markedly net-veined as in the Orthoptera, though
the hinder pair are not folded longitudinally as in that order. The
Odonata literally live on the wing, and thus the shape of the sclerites
of the notum of the wing-bearing segments approaches that of the
Orthoptera, although the prothorax is remarkably small compared with
‘that of the Orthoptera, and forbids their union with this order, as was
done by Gersticker and other German entomologists. The head of the
Odonata is remarkable for the enormous size of the eyes and the con-
sequent great reduction in size of the epicranium, as compared with
the large epicranium of the Orthoptera. The mouth-parts are like
those of the Orthoptera, except that the second maxille form a re-
40 This name mAatvs, flat, mrepov, wing, in allusion to the wings which in the majority (the Psocidz

folding their wings rather roof-like) fold their wings flat on the back. The Isontera of Brullé comprise
the Termitidz alone.

DESCRIPTION OF THE NEUROPTERA. 293

markable, mask-like labium. The abdomen is very long, slender and
cylindrical; there are eleven uromeres, the eleventh being well repre-
sented, while the cercopoda are not jointed, but in the form of claspers.

3. Hphemerina.—In the small epicranium, and the large male eyes, the
Ephemerina resemble the Odonata, though the rudimentary mouth-
parts are in plan entirely unlike them. So, also, the prothorax is small
and annular, but the subspherical, concentrated thorax is remarkable for
the large mesothorax and the small metathorax, Hence the hind wings
are small and sometimes obsolete. The long, slender abdomen has ten
_ uromeres, and bears, besides the two long, filamental multiarticulate
cercopoda, a third median one.

The larve of the lower Odonata and of the Ephemeride closely ap-
proach in form those of the Perlide, showing that the three suborders
here mentioned probably had a common ancestry, which can be theo-
retically traced to a form not remote from Campodea. By reason of the
general resemblance of the larval forms of these three suborders it would
‘be inadvisable to separate the Odonata and Ephemerina from the Pla-
typtera, although, when we consider the adult forms alone, there would
appear to be some grounds for such a division.

Order 4. NEUROPTERA.

The head is horizontal and somewhat flattened, except in the Trich-
optera and Panorpid, where it is subspherical and vertical. The body
shows a tendency to be round or cylindrical, the thorax being more or
less spherical, but there is great diversity in form from the Sialide to
the Trichoptera. The mouth-parts are free and the mandibles well de-
veloped, except in the Trichoptera, where the mandibles are nearly
obsolete in form, and functionless, thus suggesting or anticipating the
Lepidoptera.

In the Neuroptera the ligula is entirely unlike any of the foregoing
and lower groups. It is entire, forming a broad, flat, large, rounded
lobe; it is largest in Myrmeleon, Ascalaphus, and Mantispa, but smaller
in Corydalis, where it is also narrower, and indented on the front edge.

In Panorpa the ligula is minute, rudimentary (Pl. LIX, fig. 7). In
the Trichoptera it is also minute and rudimentary (Pl. LIX, :fig. 5).

The prothorax is usually (Planipennia) large, broad, and square, but
is ring- or collar-like in the Trichoptera, being short and small, much
asin Lepidoptera. HExceptin the Trichoptera, the meso- and metanotuim
are characterized by the large, cordate prescutum, and in the Hemero-
bina the metascutum is partially or (in Ascalaphus) wholly cleft, the
prescutum and scutellum meeting on the median line of the thorax.

In the Hemerobina and Sialide the metathorax is as large, or nearly
as large, as the mesothorax, and the hind wings are as large as the
anterior pair. The wings are not net-veined, the type of venation being
entirely unlike that of the Orthoptera and Pseudoneuroptera. The

294 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

costal space is wide and well marked, and the transverse veinlets are
few and far apart, compared with the two orders just mentioned.

The abdomen is cylindrical, and there are 9-10 uromeres. The ovi-
positor is only developed in Raphidia, while the cercopoda are not
developed. The metamorphosis is complete, as in the Lepidoptera, ete.,

the pupa being entirely unlike the larva, and quiescent, often protected —

by a cocoon or ease. The order may be divided into two suborders:
1. Planipennia (Sialide, Hemerobiide, Panorpide).
Trichoptera (Phryganeide).

The following tabular view and diagram will in a degree express our
views as to the classification of the orders of the Hexapodous or winged
insects, with especial reference to the Pseudoneuroptera, the order per-
haps the most difficult to bring in relation with the other Phyloptera.
The diagram will also serve to express our conceptions of the genealogy
of the Hexapodous orders.

View of the grand divisions of winged insects (Hexapoda),

Superorders. Orders. Suborders.
O | |
( Hymenoptera ....2..... | |
Mu clossatale eee eae ee J Wepidepteray.+: 22. sa sse | :
| ( Diptera (genuina).
{ Dipteraac 22s oa Aphaniptera. |
Pupipara.
Ehytrophoras ees eece. Susu. Coleoptera: ecb oe. 8s Strepsipter (genuing) ia
Homoptera.
Barivym chota sii cae sece tet-t=- Hemiptera -aae. peeere es H ue
[ Mallophaga.
i ¢ Trichoptera.
( Neuroptera ...... nena 2 Planipennia.
| Odonata.
Phylopteray casecczsciesescek ase 4 Pseudoneuroptera .-...- ) Ephonetina
J Platyptera.
| Orthopberayt 4 veces
‘ ( Dermatoptera.........--
P
” 3 Cinura.
Symaptena ee eee eae: WAY SAMUPA |. Jo cmallenlae oe Symphyla.
Collemboia,

_ 14) We propose the name Euglossata for the highest insects, comprising those orders which, besides
having the mouth parts (either the first or second maxilla, or both) moditied so as to sip, suck or lap
up liquid food, also have the body cylindrical, and the thorax more or less spherical and concentrated.
~12'This term is proposed for the Coleoptera, ‘which are nearly equivalent to the other superorders,
being a remarkably circumscribed group.

48 This term is proposed for the Hemiptera, in all of which, except the Mallophaga and Physapoda
(Thrips), the mouth parts are united to form a sucking beak. S

144 'This term is proposed for the Thysanuran apterous Hexapods which are perhaps nearly the mor-
phological equivalents of either of the four other superorders.

pe —

GENEALOGY OF INSECTS.

295

GENEALOGY OF THE INSECTS (HEXAPODA).

X. HYMENOPTERA.

YX. LEPIDOPTERA.

~

VIII. DIPTERA.

VII. COLEOPTERA.

Trichoptera.
Panorpids.

Hemerobiida.
/

fae

VI. NEUROPTERA.

1. Platyptera.
|
Termitidz.

|

V. HEMIPTERA. Embide.
» Hphemerina.
Pgocides.

Perlina,

2. Odonata.

|

a LY. PSEUDONEUROPTERA.
IZ. ORTHOPTERA. /

8

TD. DERMATOPTERA.

Seabee

VaR TOE
Metabola.

Nea

iy
4
I. THYSANURA.
(Campodea.)

GENEALOGY OF THE HEXAPODA.

I. Thysanura.—This order once comprised some lost types nearly re-
sembling Lepisma, Campodea, and Japyx, and more especially Scolopen-
drella, the probable stem-form of the Hexapoda. In other words, from a
hypothetical form resembling Campodea or Scolopendrella, it is not diffi-
cult to suppose that all or at least the majority of Hexapoda took their
origin. It is possible that by a few intermediate steps now lost, Forfi-
cula may have descended from the Thysanuran J apyx; this is suggested
by the form of the body, the head with its V-shaped suture, and the ab-
domen with its forceps, so like that of Japyx. The genus Lepisma is a
rather more specialized form than Campodea, and Machilis is still more
so, as proved by its mouth parts and the presence of compound eyes.
Scolopendrella, with its abdominal true legs, comes nearer to our hypo-
thetical form than even Campodea. The group of Poduride (Collem-
bola) is most probably a series of degradational forms, originally sprung
from a higher, more generalized, Campodea-like ancestor.

Il. Dermatoptera.—This order, represented by but one family, differs,
as already stated, from the Orthoptera, with which it is usually classi-

296 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

fied, much more than the Termitide. It stands alone, and, as observed,
its ee closely resemble the Thysanuran Japyx.

Itt. Orthoptera.—After the elimination of the Forficulide from the
Orthoptera, we have a natural and easily circumscribed group. Begin-
ning with decidedly the most generalized and at the same time lowest
family, the Blattariz, followed by the Mantide, which have a number of
characters which recall the Blattariz, we pass up through the Phasmidee
to the typical family, the Acrydii; then succeed the Locustaria, and
finally the Gryllidx, which on the whole are farthest removed from the
stem-forms of the order, the Cockroaches. The close resemblance of a
larval Cockroach to Lepisma indicates the direct descent of the Ortho-
ptera from the Cinurous Thysanura.

IV. Pseudoneuroptera.—This is the most heterogeneous order or as-
semblage of insects. While it is comparatively easy to cireumscribe
the Neuroptera (taken in Hrichson’s sense). and the Orthoptera as here
restricted, the group Pseudoneuroptera is remarkably heterogeneous and
elastic. We have failed to satisfactorily diagnose the order as a whole.
The Termitide connect the Orthoptera ahd Pseudoneuroptera so closely
that, excepting in the wings and other peripheral char acters, they seem
but a family removed from the Blattariz. For example, the Termitidee
resemble the Blattariz in the form of the epicranium, in the clypeus,
which is but partially differentiated at the base from the epicranium, in
the form of the labrum, and the small eyes as well as the mouth-parts.

In the thorax the Termitide approach the Blattariz in the undiffer-
entiated scuta of the meso- and metathorax; while the pleurites are
also very oblique and the femora are flattened and ovate in form, as in
Blatta. In the abdomen, as regards the form of the tergites, as weil as
the urites and pleurites, besides the form of the end of the abdomen and
of the cercopoda, the Termitide closely approach the Blattariz. The
degree of metamorphosis is also the same.

On the other hand, the close relationship of the Termitide to the
Embide, as well as i the Psocidz and also the Perlidz, and the close
resemblance of the Perlid larve to those of Odonata and Ephemerina,
forbid our removing the Platyptera from the Pseudoneuroptera.

We conclude, then, that the Ephemerina, Odonata, Platyptera, as
well as Orthoptera and Dermatoptera have had a common origin from
some Thysanuran stock. It is possible that these five groups are nearly
equivalent and should take the rank of orders, but the classification we
have given in the tabular view on p. 294 may better express their rela-
tions.

The Odonata and Ephemerina are, as regards the wings and meta-
morphosis, a good deal alike. The Ephemerina, while having a highly
concentrated thorax, are, as regards the mouth-parts and hind wings,
degradational forms, the result of probable degeneration from a primi-
tive, lost form. From what group the Ephemerina may , have originated
it seems to us impossible to conjecture.

GENEALOGY OF INSECTS. 297

VY. Hemiptera.—The only clew to the origin of this well circumscribed
- order is the fact that in the Physapoda (Thrips) and the Mallophaga
the mandibles are free and adapted for biting. This would indicate that
the entire group was derived from ancestors allied possibly to the Phy-
loptera. The Mallophaga are by different authors referred to the Or-
thoptera and Neuroptera, but the development of the bird-lice as worked
out by Melnikow fully proves that in the form of the egg, the mode of de-
velopment, and general form of the embryo, the Parasita and Mallophaga
travel along the same developmental path until just before hatching,
when in Mallophaga the jaws remain free, while in the Parasita they be-
come farther modified and form a sucking beak.

There is a possibility that the Hemiptera may have descended from in-
sectsremotely allied to the Pseudoneuroptera: perhaps forms resembling
the Psocidee; at least this family, the wingless forms of which superfi-
cially resemble the Mallophaga, gives hints which may throw light on
the origin of the Hemiptera. They are evidently the offshoot of a stock
_ which had an incomplete metamorphosis, or they may have descended
directly from a modified Campodea-like ancestral form.

VI. Neuroptera.—The members of this order are, excepting perhaps
the Hemiptera, the most modern and least composite or synthetic forms
that we have yet met with in our ascent up the insect series from the
Thysanura. Moreover, in them for the first time do we meet with worm-
like, cylindrical-bodied larvee, or what we have called eruciform larve.'”
These larve are secondary forms, derived, as Fritz Miller has in a gen-
eral way suggested, from those Jarve which have an incomplete metamor-
phosis. By what line of descent, however, the lowest group of Neuro-
ptera, viz., the Sialide, arose, it would be difficult to say. The earliest —
_ winged insects were probably terrestrial; the aquatic larval forms of the
Sialide are evidently derivations from Campodea-like terrestrial larve.
But how the perfect metamorphosis with the quiescent pupa of the Neu-
roptera was brought about, isindeed a problem. Itis evident, however.
that the eruciform larva is a derivation from a Thysanuriform'* type,
first stated by Fritz Miiller.

It seems to us that a consideration of the diverse larval forms which
occur in the present order, throws some light on the origin of a com-
plete metamorphosis in insectsin general. Inthe Sialide, as the larva
of Corydalus, or Semblis, we have a Campodea-form provided with gills,
and with the mouth-parts adapted for seizing and biting its prey. The
terrestrial larve of the Hemerobiidz are evidently modifications of the
Sialid larval form; the differences of structure in them, such as the long,

146 See ‘‘Our Common Insects,”’ p. 175, 1873. Also the American Naturalist, vol. V, Sept. 1871.

146 We have in the writings just quoted called the second class of larve Leptiform, but the term
Thysanuriform, or Brauer’s expression Campodea-form, is preferable. The Campodea or primitive
Hexapodous form is evidently a derivative form, which points back to a common six-footed ancestor of
all Tracheata, to which the term Leptiform may be applied.

298 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

slender mandibles and maxille and the short abdomen, being the result
of their carnivorous habits, and their being obliged to climb up the stems -
of plants or to walk over the leaves after smaller insects. Under such —
circumstances the body would become shorter and more concentrated, and
the legs well developed. In the Trichoptera, whose larve live in cylin-
drical cases, the body is seen to be essentially Campodea-like; the head
is fundamentally like that of Corydalis; the differences are adaptive.

But when we regard the larva of the Panorpide, we are dealing with
a new type; it is caterpillar-like, eruciform; its body is slender and cy-
lindrical, the head small, and feet short and small. Notice also its
habits. The larva of Panorpa communis of Europe, as described by
Brauer,” is remarkably caterpillar-like or eruciform. The head is small,
well rounded, and the antenne and mouth-parts are small and rudimen-
tary, compared with those of other Neuroptera, net excepting the Trich-
optera.. Moreover, they are constructed on nearly the same type as
those of caterpillars; for example, the mandibles are short, toothed, of
the same form as in Lepidopterous larvee; the maxille are short, and |
whether more than two-lobed Brauer does not state, though his figure
indicates apparently a rudimentary third lobe; the palpi are four-jointed,
while the labium is small with small three-jointed palpi.

The form of the body is thick and stout, like that of a Bombycid
(Arctian) larva. The short, four-jointed thoracic feet are in length and
thickness like those of caterpillars. But the most striking resemblance
to caterpillars and saw-fly larve is seen in the eight pairs of abdomi-
nal feet, which Brauer describes as conical or pin-shaped (kegelfor-
mig), while on the last (ninth or tenth ?) segment are four finger-shaped,
equal processes. Not only the form of the body, but also the arrange-
ment and shape of the button-like setiferous warts on the body are:
strikingly like those of some Arctian caterpillars. The pupa has free
limbs and wings as in other Neuroptera. The larva of Panorpa bores
an inch deep into moss-covered, not wet soil.

The larve of Bittacus (B. italicus and hagenii), as also described and
figured by Brauer," have a rounded head, with small mouth-parts; the
mandibles are, however, rather long, compared with those of Panorpa;
while the maxilla have apparently two inner short lobes, and a four-
jointed, short maxillary palpus; the labium is rudimentary, with a pair
of short, minute, two-jointed palpi. The body is not so thick as in Pa-
norpa; it is cylindrical and adorned with long, scattered, dorsal spines,
which bear one or two branches near the base, while there is a lateral
row of slender filaments, and a row of ventral verticillate hairs. It thus
bears a resemblance to the larvee of some butterflies, as Vanessa antiopa,
and especially the young Polyommatus (Heodes hypophleas) or the Bom-
bycid larve of Anisota stigma or Platysamia, as well as Selandria

147 Sitzungsberichte math.-naturw. Classe k. Akad. Wiss., Wien, 1851. Tafel 1.
148 Verhandlungen k. k. zool.-bot. Gesellschaft in Wien, 1871.

ORIGIN OF A METAMORPHOSIS IN INSECTS. . Z99

larve. Brauer’s figures show a pair of abdominal, two-jointed feet to
each of the nine abdominal segments, while just as in Lepidopterous
larvee and in that of Panorpa there is a pair of prothoracic spiracles,
none on the mesothoracic or metathoracic segments, and there are nine
pairs of abdominal spiracles according to Brauer’s figure, or one more
pair than in Lepidopterous larve.

The fact that there arein the larval Panorpide collectively a pair of feet
to each abdominal segment (the terminal segment in Panorpa bearing
what are evidently homologues of the anal proplegs of caterpillars) is
of much significance when we bear in mind that while no caterpillars are
known to have more than five pairs of abdominal or proplegs, some of
the segments bearing none, yet the embryos, as shown by Kowalevsky,
have temporary embryonic indications of legs, a pair to each segment
(uromere); it is a significant fact that the eruciform larve of the Panor-
pide actually have two-jointed legs to each abdominal segment, the
penultimate segment in Bittacus bearing such legs, and the terminal seg-
ment bearing leg-like processes in Panorpa. The origin of the Lepi-
doptera from the same stem-form as the Panorpide thus seems a rea-
sonable hypothesis.

In the metamorphosis of Mantispa, as Brauer has shown, there is a
hypermetamorphosis, 7. ¢., two larval stages. The first stage is Campodea-
form ; but the second is sub-eruciform. The transformations of Mantispa
appear to give us the key to the mode in which a metamorphosis was:
brought about. The larva, borna Campodea-like form, active, with large,
long, four-jointed feet, living a sedentary life in the egg-sac of a spider, be-
fore the first molt loses the use of its feet, while the antenne are partly
aborted. The fully grown larva is round-bodied, with small, caterpillar-
like feet and a small, round head. Its external appendages retrograding
and retarded, acceleration of growth goes on within, and thus the pupal
form is perfected while the larva is full-fed and quiescent; hence as a
result the pupal stage became a quiescent one, and by inheritance it grad-
ually became a permanent habit characteristic of Neuroptera, all of which
have a complete metamorphosis, and hence inherited by all the orders of
metabolic insects which probably originated from Neuroptera-like forms,
and the imago represents a highly accelerated stage.

When we consider the imagos or adult Neuroptera: the small, collar-
like prothorax, the spherical, concentrated thorax as a whole, and the
cylindrical abdomen, are features which give them a comparatively spe-
cialized and modern aspect. Without doubt the Neuropterous labium
(Plate LIIL) isa secondary product compared with that of the Orthoptera
or the Platyptera, where it is deeply cleft (Plate XX VII.) It will be re-
membered that in the embryo of all insects the labium or second maxill
originates like the first pair.

Origin of the Coleoptera.—Although the beetles are a remarkably
homogeneous and well circumscribed order, there are certain larval
forms and life-histories which point out with a tolerable degree of cer-

300 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

tainty the line of development of this extensive order from the Cam-
podea type. There are two series of facts which seem to us to throw
light on the subject.

First, the form of the free, active larve of pe carnivorous groups of
beetles. The larveof the Carabide, Dytiscide and Staphylinide appear
tous to beon the whole more nearly allied to what was probably the primi-
tive form of Coleopterous larva than those of any other families. This
ancestral Coleopterous larva was probably directly related to the Campo-
dea-form ancestor of the Hexapoda... The general form of the body, the
homonomous segments, the free, biting, toothed mandibles, the well-de-
veloped one- or two-lobed maxille with their three-jointed palpi, and the
well-developed second maxille (labium), also the four-jointed antenne,
and the presence of ocelli, while showing that the existing carnivorous
larve are the most specialized ‘and highly developed, also show that
they have undergone the least modification from the primitive type of
Coleopterous larva. In thescavenger larval forms, as the Silphidz, Der-
mestide and allied families, the mouth-parts begin to be modified and
less developed, and the form of the body undergoes a change, becoming
thicker and with less developed feet.

In the Elaterids and Scarabeidz, which in selena are phytopha-
gous,we see a still more decided change; the body becoming cylindrical
and the mouth-parts more aberrant.

In the wood-boring Buprestide and Cerambycide, and in the leaf-
eating Chrysomelid larve, we witness a decided departure from the
carnivorous type; the mouth-parts show a tendency to become more or

less aborted, the legs are frequently wanting and the body more or less

magegot-like. Finally, the tendency to agradual degradation and atrophy
of the head, mouth-parts and legs culminates in the grubs of the weevils
(Curculionide and Scolytide), placing them at the foot of the Cole-
opterous series, and shows that they have undergone the greatest modi-
fication of form, and have become adapted to conditions the most unlike
those which constituted the environment of the primitive Coleopterous
larva.

The relative form of the maxille appears to be a good index as to the
general development of the body in the different groups of Coleoptera,
especially those standing above the wood-boring families. The facts
may, for convenience, be arranged in the following form:

Cicindelide.—Maxilla with a maxillary lobe or mala proper quai in
a 2-jointed appendage which is longer than the 3-jointed palpus. (An-
tenn 4-jointed ; 3 ocelli.) |

Carabide.—Maxilla with the mala 2-jointed; maxillary palpus 4-_

jointed. (Antenne 4-jointed, bifurcate; ocelli often present.)
Dytiscide (and Hydradephaga in general). —Maxilla with the mala
absent; the palpi 4-jointed.
The seals in the aquatic forms of the Carabid type is only a modi-
fication of the Geodephagous maxilla; the terminal palpal joint being
- acute and raptorial.

ORIGIN OF THE COLEOPTERA. 301

Staphylinide.—Maxilla with a 1-jointed inner lobe (Xantholinus), or
the mala broad and setose as in the succeeding families (Platystethus
and especially Bledius); maxillary palpi 3- and 4-jointed.

The Staphylinid type of maxilla is simply a modification of the Cara-
bid, with a tendency to degeneration in the lower genera (Bledius, etc).
ae larvee in this family are carnivorous.

Hlateride.—Maxilla with a 2-jointed lobe or mala; the maxillary
palpus 4-jointed. Antenne 4-jointed, bifurcate as in Carabid larve;
mandibles toothed. The maxille of HJater and Athous are free. While
generally supposed to be vegetable-eaters (as Agriotes), those larve
which live under the bark of trees in mines made by Longicorn and
other borers have been shown by Ratzeburg, Dufour and Perris to be in
part carnivorous, living on Dipterous and Longicorn larve, as well as on
the excrementitious vegetable matter filling the burrows. Perris (Insectes
du Pin maritime, p. 199) has pointed out the close resemblance of the
mouth-parts of this family to those of the larval Carabide.

In the Scarabeide, Buprestide, and all the lower families of Coleo-
ptera, the maxillz are of a rather simpler type than in the foregoing fam-
ilies; the maxillary lobe, or mala, being simple and more or less fringed
with stiff hairs. In the Scarabeide (Osmoderma), and in Pyrochroa,
which is carnivorous, the mouth-parts are as complicated as in any;
but in the Buprestide and Chrysomelide they are less developed,
' while they are most rudimentary in form and size in the wood-boring
weevils and Scolytids; the antenne and second maxille and legs also
share in the degradation of structure consequent on the burrowing lig-
nivorous habits of the larve.

But it is in the so-called hypermetamorphosis. of the Meloide, that of
the blister beetle (Epicauta) as well as Hornia having been fully de-
seribed and illustrated by Professor Riley in the First Report of the
United States Entomological Commission (p. 297-302, Pl. IV), that we
have a clew to the probable origin of the different types of Coleopterous
larve. The metamorphosis of the oil beetle (Meloé) originally dis-
- eovered by Siebold and Newport and also Fabre, is described in
different entomological manuals.’ In brief, the larve of Meloé when
hatched are very minute, active, six-legged, slender-bodied creatures,
parasitic on wild bees; as the legs end in three class the insects in this
stage are called “‘triungulins.” These larve attached to the bees are thus
carried into the nests of the latter, where they feed on the bee-larve and
bee-bread. On becoming fully fed, instead of transforming directly into
_ the pupa state, they assume a second (coarctate) larval form, entirely ©
unlike the first, the body being cylindrical and motionless, with long
legs; they then attain a third larval stage, the head small and the body
thick, cylindrical and footless; after this they assume a true pupa stage,
and finally become beetles.

Professor Riley has traced the hypermetamorphosis of the blister
489 See the writer’s ‘‘ Guide to the Study of Insects,” pp. 477-479, figs. asi ae

302 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

beetle (Epicauta), which passes through three larval stages before
transforming to a pupa. He divides the life-history of this beetle into
the following stages: (1) Triungulin; (2) second larva (a, Carabidoid ;
b, ultimate or Scarabeeidoid stage); (3) pseudo-pupa, or coarctate larva;
(4) third larva (closely resembling the Scarabeidoid stage of second);
(5) true pupa; (6) beetle. (The reader should examine the figures in PI.
IV of the First Report; otherwise he cannot understand the following
remarks.)

It appears, then, that the first larva, or triungulin, in form resembles
the Campodea-like primitive larval form of Coleoptera; the Epicauta
triungulin closely resembles a Carabid larva, the head, antenne, and
mouth-parts, as well as the legs and form of the body in general, being
on the primitive, Carabid type (somewhat like Casnonia (?), Galerita
and Harpalus); the second larva, a, Carabidoid stage, though quite
different as regards the mouth-parts, and with a smaller head, thicker
body and much shorter legs, still adheres to the higher Carabid form
(Carabus and allies). During the Scarabeidoid stage the second larva
rests nearly motionless in the egg of the locust, and is like the curved,
clumsy larve of the cockchafer or June beetle and other Lamellicorn
larve, which also have the similar habits of lying still in their bur-

rows and feeding on the roots of grass, or, as in the case of Osmo- |

derma, lying nearly motionless in their cells in rotten wood. This sort.
of life going on, the larval blister beetle after six or seven days assumes.
the ultimate stage of the second larva, and now, from apparent con-
tinued disuse, the mouth-parts and legs become more aborted than
before, and the insect in this stage may be compared to some Lon--
gicorn larve, with a general resemblance in the curved, cylindrical body
to the Ptinid and Chrysomelid, and it even approximates in general shape.

Curculionid larve. In the pseudo-pupa or coarctate larva this process of

disuse and obsolescence of parts culminates in the immobile stage pre-

ceding (with the intervention of third larva) the pupal condition. We

thus see that in the life-history of a single species of beetle, change in
habits or environment, as well as in the food, induces change in the form
of the body; and this series of changes in the Meloide typifies the suc-

_ cessive steps in the degradation of form which characterize the series of

Coleopterous larve from the Carabidze down to the Curculionide and
Scolytide. At first all larve were carnivorous and active in their habits,.
with large mandibles and well developed accessory jaws and legs; cer-.
tain forms then becoming scavengers, their appendages became, from:
_ disuse, less developed; then others, becoming-phytophagous, became in:
some cases still less developed, the jaws shorter and toothless, with cor--
responding modifications in the other mouth-parts, the antenne and the-
legs, while the body became thick, fat and cylindrical; until in the wood-.
boring and seed- or nut-inhabiting weevils the antennz and maxille be-

came rudimentary, almost disappearing, while the legs utterly vanished. |
Change of habits and surroundings, with corresponding changes in the-

ORIGIN OF THE COLEOPTERA, ETC. 303

form of the body and its appendages, both explain the metamorphosis of
insects in general and also the differences between the larval forms of
the different orders.

The following view will convey an idea of the larve of the Coleo-
pterous families which in a general way correspond to the different larval
stages of the Meloide; it being understood that the resemblances are

suggestive and ak and not to be accepted in a too literal sense.

In Meloé more like Copnuatae than
in Epicauta.

eloide.

Stylopide.

Cicindelide.
Carabide, Dytiscide, Hydrophilidee.
Silphide, Nitidulariz, Dermestide,
Coccinellide, ete.
Elateride, Lam pyride, Telephorida,
i Cleridz, Pyrochroide.

Histeride.

if. Primitive triungulin stage. < M

2. Carabidoid stage.

Scarabeide.
Ptinide.
\ Cerambycide.

4, Coarctate stage, more or less d Lane ARE

cylindrical and apodous.

3. Scarabeidoid stage.

| Curculionide.
: . Scolytidz.

From the facts and considerations which have been presented, we
are disposed to believe, subject, of course, to future correction, that the
primitive Coleoptera were carnivorous forms, and that the scavenger
and phytophagous forms have been derived from them, and are there-
fore secondary products, and as a whole of more recent origin.

The primitive form of beetle was probably a Staphylinus-like form,
with a long, narrow body and rudimentary elytra, and carnivorous in
habits. This has been suggested by Brauer,’ though it occurred to us
before meeting with his views.

Though the earliest beetle known is a Carboniferous weevil-like form,
yet we imagine the Coleopterous type became established in Devonian
or Silurian times, when there may have existed the prototypes of the ear-
wigs and beetles; for the two types may have branched off from some
Thysanuran form. On the other hand, the primitive Coleopterous larva
may have sprung from some metabolous Neuropterous form. The larva
of Gyrinus has a striking resemblance to that of Corydalus and other
Sialide, so much so that a terrestrial Carabidous form most probably |
was of Neuropterous origin, as indicated in our diagram.

Origin of the Diptera, Lepidoptera, and Hymenoptera.—The Euglossata
probably had a common origin in the first place from the metabolic

169So wird uns der Staphylinus als eine der altesten Kéferformen gelten, etc. Betra h tungen iiber die
Verwandlung der Insekten im Sinne der Descendenz-Theorie, von F. Brauer, Verh. k. k. zool.-bot.
Ges., Wien, 1869, p: 313.

304 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Neuroptera. The Lepidoptera probably originated from the same group
from which the Panorpide and Trichoptera branched off, and we agree
with the opinion of H. Miiller,’° who maintains that the Lepidoptera
and Trichoptera ‘‘ proceed from a common stock,” though we should stip-
pose that the Panorpide in their larval stage represented forms like the
ancestral caterpillar.

The adult structure and larval forms of the Diptera show that nay
originated from nearly the same stock as the moths. The most perfectly
developed Dipterous larve are those of the Culicide and Tipulide;
these were probably the primitive forms; the other Dipterous larve,
notably the larval Muscide or maggots, are degradational forms, and
the lower Diptera appear to have been degraded or degenerate forms.

The case is different with the Hymenoptera. The saw-fly larve rep-

resent apparently the primitive larval form; and from their resem- —

blance to caterpillars and Panorpid larve, show that the Hymenoptera
and Lepidoptera may have had a common origin. The footless larve
of the parasitic Hymenoptera are correlated with their parasitic mode
of life, and the similar forms of the larval wasps and bees show that
from disuse their mouth-parts and legs became aborted, and the immo-
bile larvee became short and thick-bodied. Hence such larve should
be regarded as secondary, adaptive larval types. The high degree of
specialization of the bees’ mouth-parts, their concentrated bodies and
4-segmented thorax, with other characters, show that they are the
highest, most specialized and modern of all insects. |

Norr.—It should be borne in mind that the embryo bee has a ie

of temporary abdominal appendages on each segment (uromere); Sv
also has the Lepidopterous, Coleopterous, and Orthopterous embryo,
which points back to a common, Scolopendrella-like type; this also pos-
sibly indicating a still earlier, worm-like, Peripatus-like ancestor for
Myriopoda and Hexapoda at least, if not Arachnida. For previous dis-
cussions as to the origin of insects the reader is referred to the writings
of Fritz Miller, Brauer, Lubbock, and the author.

Order II. DERMATOPTERA.
FoRFICULID®. Plates XXIII, XXIV.

THE HEAD.

SS

Forficula teniata Dohrn. (Pl. XXIII, figs. 1-3). The head is horizon-
tal in position, broad and flat, squarish, the sides being parallel. There
is a V-shaped epicranial suture, which is more distinct in the larve of
this genus and in Labia. The epicranium is otherwise simple; no ocelli.
The clypeus is simple, being no wider and not much larger than the lab-
rum. The genal ridge prominent; a broad gular region. Behind the

159 American Naturalist, v, July, 1871, 288. See also the same magazine, Noy., 1871, p. 707-713.

»

DERMATOPTERA. 305

short, broad submentum (and in front of the prosternum) is a free sclerite,
with a transverse, median impressed line. (This sclerite may be called
the postguia, and it may correspond to the presternal sclerite in Blatta,
except that no pleural sclerite is attached to it as in Blatta.) The men-
tum is very large and flat, as long as broad.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

Pronotum. (Fig.7.) Large, flat, square, a little longer than broad,
and rounded behind. |

Mesonotum. (Vig. 8.) Somewhat as in Termes, being almost entirely
concealed by the pronotum, which rides over it. It is very short—
indeed, remarkably so—no other insects approaching this group in this
respect, while the metanotum is remarkably developed. Neither the
meso- nor metanotum are so wide as the thorax, a broad margin of mem-
brane bordering the sides.

The mesoscutum forms a very short, transversely sublinear sclerite,
with the front edge full and curved, but linear (in a transverse sense)
on the sides; behind, it receives the minute, diamond-shaped scutellum,
which forms a posterior, spine like projection, which rubs or plays upon
the medially chitinous front edge of the metanotum. On each side of
- the scutellum is a transverse, long, lanceolate-oval, chitinous sclerite,
which we are disposed to regard as the divided postseutellum. There
is no praescutum, and in front of and behind the mesonotum the thorax
is soft and membranous.

Metanotum. (Vig. 8.) There is no prescutum. The scutum is very
large, nearly as broad as long, broad in front, narrowing behind, sinuous
on the front edge, slightly rounded behind, the surface generally flat-
tened, a little convex, with two parallel, slightly converging median
ridges; behind these two ridges is the narrow, longitudinally some-
what oblong scutelium. It is not defined by suture, and I could not
decide what it was until I had examined Labia, in which it is more dis-
tinctly separated from the scutum; it is thick, dark, with a spine-like
projection in front.

The large, long and broad, more or less flat area between the scutum
and first uromere we are disposed to regard as, without much doubt,
an enormously developed postscutellum, especially as it is much shorter
and more like the postscutellum of Labia. Its surface is broken up
into areas; from behind the metascutellum two widely diverging ridges
pass backward and outward to support the base of the wings.

Pleurum.

The pleurites are remarkable for being extended horizontally, and
for the unusual form and relations of the epimera, in these respects
suggesting the Coleoptera, and perhaps the Staphylinide. The legs

20 EO

306 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

are inserted at the posterior end on the side of each segment (beeno-
mere), as the cox are widely separated by the very large and broad
sternites.

Propleurites. (Pl. XXIV, fig. 1.) These are well developed. The
episternum is horizontal, flat, subtriangular, narrow, reduced to a
point before reaching the coxa. A wedge-shaped, triangular sclerite is
wedged in between it and the sternite (this may be regarded as the sub-
episternum, though possibly the trochantine, as the coxa is apparently
entire, and there is otherwise no trochantine to be found).

The epimerum forms the upper part of the pleurum, and is scale-like,
oblong-oval; in front it is narrow, and ends at the anterior margin of
the notum. The posterior or upper end of the epimerum is free, rounded,
scale-like, as it covers the prothoracic stigma.

The coxa is cyiindrical, shorter than broad. I can perceive no suture
in it, and think the trochantine is obsolete.

Mesopleurites. (Fig. 2.) These sclerites repeat the form of the pro-
pleurites. The segment (bzenomere) is not so long, and the sclerites
are a little more horizontal. The epimerum is more regularly oblong-
oval, with a deep crease or fold below the middle, which extends ob-
liquely from near the coxa to the front edge of the epimerum.

The episternum is in this segment, as in the preceding one, divided
into two pieces; the sur-episternum is very small and situated in the
same plane as and on the side of the anterior end of the sternum. The
triangular sub-episternum is more oblique than in the propleurum. The
coxa is Smaller than in the prothorax.

Metapleurites. (Fig. 3.) The structure of this region is very remark-
able, as compared with that of other Phyloptera. The episternum is
simple, not subdivided as in the pro- and mesopleurum, but represented
_ by an acutely triangular sclerite, the base of which lies next to the
coxa, the acute apex reaching only two-thirds the way to the front of
the sternum. This reduction in the size of the episternal elements is due
to the increase in size of the sternum below and the epimerum above.

The epimerum is enormously developed, extending from the insertion
of the hind wings (which is very near that of the anterior pair) back
nearly to the middle of the second abdominal segment; it thus forms
the side of about half the entire thorax; in situation it is horizontal,
its sides vertical, but in front next to the mesocoxe and sternum it
rounds down and under, becoming ventral.. (This is a most-novel mod-
ification of the met-episternum, and as unique as the modification of the
mes-episternum in the Odonata.)

Coxe longer than in the mesothorax, and soldered to the sternum.

Sternum.

The sternal elements are in Forficulide remarkably large and broad,
the species being essentially runners.
The prosternum is subdivided into a single, large intercoxal plate,

re
A

DERMATOPTERA. 307

which is oblong, widening in front, and with the surface slightly con-
vex, and a presternal area which is again subdivided into a median
rounded area (Figs. 10-12, p st) flanked posteriorly by two small tri-
angular sclerites (p/ st).

The mesosternum is scutellate in shape, nearly as long as broad, wide
in front, narrow and well rounded béhind the coxe.

The metasternwm is entire, very large, broad and rather full on the
surface; itis as broad as long, encroaching on the pleurites, and behind
is faintly separated by suture from the first urite.

THE ABDOMEN.

There are ten uromeres with ten urosternites (Pl. XXIV, figs. 7-9);
the 8th very large, being four timés as long as the 7th; the 9th and 10th
each forming a pair of lateral scales, at base of each blade of the forceps,
being separated by the median sclerites forming the genital armature.
The genitals, forming a median, interforcipate, spine-like sclerite, and
- present above and below, may represent the 11th uromere. The for-
-ceps we are inclined to regard as homologues of the cercopoda in other
Phyloptera.

In regarding as the first uromere the tergite immediately succeeding
what we have described as the meta-postscutellum, we differ from what
seems to be Professor Westwood’s opinion as to the nature of the
thorax. He apparently regards this segment or tergite and pleurite (as
the sternal portion is not developed) as a part of the metathorax. This
segment is a large, broad sclerite closely connected with the metatho-
rax, being slightly excavated next to the metathorax, and rounded be-
hind. On each side it is separated by suture from a narrow pleurite
bearing the large, somewhat kidney-shaped first abdominal stigma. The
first pair of abdominal stigmata is large and simple, the chitinous
edge forming a plain ridge without any projecting teeth. The second
pair of abdominal stigmata is visible; the others are not easily detected,
as they are minute, but judging by Westwood’s figures there are the
usual number, 7. ¢., eight pairs. Westwood states tbat there are three
pairs of thoracic spiracles and seven pairs of abdominal ones. Should
it be proved that Forficula has a pair of stigmata to each thoracic seg-
ment, it will be a remarkable fact, as there is no insect known (Campo-
dea not excepted) which has a pair on each thoracic segment. But we
are inclined to think that Westwood has considered our first abdominal
uromere with its large spiracles as a part of the metathorax, and thus
he considers the number of pairs of thoracic stigmata as three, and of
abdominal ones as seven. We have found a large prothoracic spiracle
over the coxa on the posterior end under. the posterior corner of the
pronotum, and concealed on the side by the lateral, scale-like epimerum.
We have detected a pair of mesothoracic spiracles, but none on the
metathorax. 7

The result of our examination of Forficulide is that they constitute

308 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

an ordinal group of Phyloptera, equivalent to the Orthoptera. The larval -

Forficula is very close to Japyx in the form of the head, the thoracic
homonomous segments, in having ten uromeres, in the nature of the for-
ceps, and in the eleventh rudimentary segment. So close is the resem-
blance that we are somewhat inclined to regard Japyx as a degraded
Forficula. When we consider the nature of the head, the elytra-like fore
wings, the singular hind wings, which are not net-veined, and the for-
ceps, we see how much unlike the Orthoptera Forficula is. It does not
approach Blatta nor Termes. In the character of the wings and the
thorax, especially the pleurites, Forficula is suggestive of the Coleo-
ptera, though differing from them in being ametabolous.

In Labia the head is as in Forficula. The body being much shorter
and thicker than in Forficula, there are some relative differences from
whai has been described in Forficula.

Notum.

The pronctum is shorter and broader, but still covers the mesonotum ;

the latter is as in Forficula, the scutellum being similarly spine-like.

The metanotum is as in Forficula, with no important differences; the
scutellum is rather more distinct, however, but the postscutellum is
much shorter, and has similar, lateral, submembranous folds in front.

The first uromere, with its spiracle, is much as in Forficula, while the
succeeding uromeres are much shorter.

Pleurum.

The prothoracic pleurites (episternum and epimerum) are as in For-
ficula, but shorter and broader.

In the mesothorax the epimerum is much rounded, being, with the
episternum, rather shorter than in Forficula.

The mesothoracic pleurites are as in Forficula, but much shorter and

wider in proportion. .
Sternum.

The sternites are not essentially different from those of Forficula, but
are rather shorter and broader.

THE LARVA OF FORFICULA (Pl. XXIV).

The notum of each segment is. as in all Orthopterous larve, simple,
not being differentiated into scutum, scutellum, ete. On the other hand,
the sternites and pleurites are as in the adult, and this proves that the
tergites are concerned in and modified by the development of the wings.
The episterna are subdivided as in the adult.

In the abdomen there are eleven uromeres, but the first tergite is
wanting, the urosternite being present, while the eleventh tergite is
sinall and rudimentary.

s

a i I i

a

ORTHOPTERA. 309
j Order III. ORTHOPTERA. Plates XXV-XXXVIII.
BLATTARIA.
THE HEAD.

Blatita americana?. The head is held vertically. The epicranium is
broad and smooth; the ocelli are absent or obsolete. The clypeus is
broad and short, no suture separating it from the epicranium. The
gene are large, a genal ridge separating the gene from the orbits.
The gula is broad and short. 2 |

THE THORAX. (Plate X XVI.)
Notum.

The pronotum (Pl. XXVIII) is broad and flat, as long as broad.

The mesonotum (Pl. X XX) is remarkably broad and flat, two-thirds as
long as broad. The prescutum is wanting (unless represented by a
transverse strip in front?). The scutum is flat, consisting of two square
sclerites separated slightly by the rudimentary scutellum, which latter
is lanceolate, narrow, triangular, and divided into two portions, 7. e., the
posterior or scutellum proper, which is subquadrate, broader than long,
and a narrow, long continuation which reaches to the front edge of the
‘scutum, between its two sclerites.

The postscutellum is represented by a well-marked transverse band
behind the scutellum, but not separated from the scutellum by a well-
marked suture.

The metanotum (Pl. XXX) is like the mesonotum, but with no traces
of a prescutum; while the scutellum is much more distinct, diamond-
shaped, with distinct sutures, the acute apex not quite reaching the
front edge of the scutum; behind clearly demarked from the postscu-
tellum, which forms a definite transverse band.

Pleurun.

The pleurites are very hard to make out, owing to the flatness of the
body.

Propleurum. (Pl. XXIX). The episternum is divided into three
pieces, the anterior a ridge extending from the sternum to the roof of
the scutum; the hinder two a lower piece resting on the trochantine,
and an upper, larger and completely chitinous piece extended to the
suture. The epimerum is a very irregular, oblong region, partly mem-
branous.

Mesopleurum. (Pl. XX XI.) The episternum in this arthromere is also
subdivided into three pieces: the anterior (1) broad and resting on the
sternum and reaching around tothe epimerum; and (2) a narrow, lance-
olate-oval piece not visible from the side; the third sclerite (3) is a broad,
triangular piece (which may be the epimerum, but is probably not). A

310 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

deep fissure seems to separate the episternal from the epimeral area,
and the epimerum rests above the trochantine, being minute, rudiment-
ary, and triangular in outline. The coxa is very large, broad, enor-
mous compared with other Orthoptera; it is much flattened. The tro-
chantine is long and narrow, the suture being on a thin, prominent
ridge.

Metapleurum. (Pl. XXXI.) Exactly repeats the mesopleurum in
form, but is a little larger, and the coxe are somewhat larger.

Owing to the much depressed, flattened body, which is correlated to
the habit of living under the bark & trees and in cracks, the episterna
are only seen from beneath, on each side of the sternum, and the epi-
mera are reduced nearly to a minimum, while the coxe are enormous,
but still flattened, as the Blattarize are active runners rather than

leapers.
Sternum.

The prosternum (Pl. XX XT) is well developed, but one-half as broad as
long, and submembranous.

The mesosternum (Pl. XXXII) is about as broad as long, rounded
behind, with a median angular depression.

The metasternum (Pl. XX XII) is broader than long, deeply cleft, with
a median fold or gore. Owing to this deep, angular depression both the
meso- and metasternites can be flexed together, thus allowing the sides
of the body to approach each other somewhat.

THE ABDOMEN.

There are in the 2 eight abdominal tergites, the eighth tergite being
deeply cleft, and seven urosternites. The cercopoda are short and 13-15-
jointed. ;

NotE.—tThe close relation to Termes and the Termitide in general,
(a point in which, among other respects, Blatta connects the Orthoptera
and Pseudoneuroptera), is seen in the nearly identical form of the epi-
sternal and epimeral regions; the latter being dorsal and small, the
-episternal more developed and sternal in position. The sternal region
is much the same in Blatta as in Termes, and judging by the form of
the head, thorax and abdomen, these two genera might belong to even
the same family. They seem certainly only one family removed, the
principal differences being in the wings. If there were, so to speak, no
other Orthoptera in existence, the Blattariz would certainly be associ-
ated with the Pseudoneuroptera. Hence we have been almost led to
think that it is am artificial classification which places them in separate
orders.

MANTID A.

THE HEAD.

Mantis carolina. The position of the head is vertical; the front is
broad, triangular. The orbits are very large and broad. The epicra-

ORTHOPTERA. | 311

* nium is divided into an occipito-vertical, square area extending from
_ the occipital foramen and bending over to the ocelli, with a transverse
straight suture or impressed line in front extending to the orbits. The
clypeus is very distinctly divided into a post- and anteclypeus, the
former wider than the anterior division. The labrum is as long as broad
and somewhat pointed in front. The genz are broad, with a marked
genal ridge. No gular region in front of the foramen. ‘There is no sub-
mentum; the mentum is square, the ligula small and narrow.

THE THORAX.

The thorax, as well as the rest of the body in general, approaches
that of Blatta, with, of course, important modifications; in some respects

it approaches the Acrydii.
Notum.

The pronotum (Pl. XX XIII, figs. 1-3) is remarkably long, forming the
_tergal and lateral portions of the area. On the anterior fourth is a
transverse, impressed line, not, however, quite reaching the sides of the
notum; this is situated directly over the insertion of the first pair of
legs.

Mesonotum. (Vig. 4,5.) Thisis very long, being about twice as long
as broad; along the middle extends a sclerite from the anterior to the —
~ posterior margin; it is triangular in front and behind; the anterior end
we would regard as the prescutum, and the posterior portion as the
scutellum, the two uniting on the anterior part of the notum. ‘There is
no postscutellum.developed. (This union of the prescutum and scutel-
lum is unique in Phyloptera and Neuroptera, but there is an approach
to it in Blatta.) ;

On each side of the front of the notum, and in front of the insertion
of the wings, is a distinct, triangular sclerite, the nature of which is un-
certain.

The scutum is separated into two long halves.

Metanotum. (Fig. 4,5.) This is a little longer and slightly narrower
posteriorly than the mesonotum, as the hind wings are nearly twice as
wide as the anterior pair.

The prescutum is very distinct, narrow, triangular, truncate at the
apex. The scutellum is very long and narrow, ending in a long, very
acute point before reaching the prescutum; thus the scutum is divided
into two long halves, connected by a very narrow bridge, situated be-
tween the preescutum and scutellum, while the mesoscutum is entirely
divided. The postscutellum is obsoiete.

Pleurum.

Propleurites. (Fig. 1-3.) The episternum and epimerum are very
small, short, rudimentary, and situated on the anterior fourth of the
prothorax.

312 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The mesopleurites (Fig. —) are very oblique. The episternum is di-
vided into two sclerites, the upper one-third as long as the lower and
seale-like; the lower oblong, narrow, very long, and on the sternal
margin bent down next to the sternite. The epimerum is divided into
a long, narrow, linear, chitinous portion next to the episternum, the
posterior portion lying in front of the metathorax.

Between the lower end of the episternum and coxa is a small, trian-
gular sclerite which I suppose is the trochantine. The coxa is very
large, long and quadrangular.

_ Metapleurites as the mesopleurites, but the sub-episternum is a little
wider, and the sur-episternum is longer, while the epimerum is almost
wholly membranous. ‘The trochantine? is more distinct than in the
mesothorax. The coxa is of the same form as in mesothorax, but a
little thicker.
Sternum. .

The prosternum (Figs. 1-3) is divided into a pre- and poststernite, the
latter remarkably long. |

The mesosternum is narrow, triangular, flat; the apex bordered on each
side with a lateral sternal fold of the integument.

Metasternum. - A large part of the sternal surface is occupied by the
sternal pcertions of the episterna, which are bent beneath the body.
The sternal area is broader and longer than in the mesosternum, but the
limits of the sternite itself are less definite; it appears to be a long,
narrow, lanceolate-oval area (but this part needs further comparative
study, with more material in species than we possess)..

THE ABDOMEN.

There are ten segments or uromeres, with ten tergites. The cerco-
poda arise from the tenth segment. They are stout, many-jointed, and
much as in Blatta, only longer. There are but six urosternites. The
eight pairs of stigmata are situated on the membranous pleurites.

Remarks. Mantis is a genuine Orthopter in venation as well as in
the fundamental structure of the body, and is truly intermediate in its
structure between the Acrydii and the Blattariz, approximating the
latter in the structure of the head, mouth-parts, prothorax, the shape
of the abdomen, anf its appendages. Blatta, in part, may be regarded
as the ancestral or stem form of the Orthoptera, from which all the
other Orthoptera may have descended; and this accords in the main
with the geological succession of the different Orthopterous families so

far as we know it.
PHASMIDA.

THE HEAD.

- Diapheromera femoratum. Pupa. The head (Pl. XXV, XXVI) is
small, narrow, nearly horizontal, subcylindrical. The epicranium is

ORTHOPTERA. 313

much developed posteriorly towards the occipital region, being reduced
to a minimum in front of the antenne. The clypeus is very short, undi-
vided, and the labrum is deeply cleft. There is no genal ridge. The
gula is rather broad. The submentum and mentum are rather small

and narrow.
THE THORAX.

Notum.

The pronotum (Pl. XXVIII) is oblong, quadrangular, about twice as
long as broad. |

The mesonotum (Pl. XXX) and metanotum are remarkably long and
slender, the mesothorax being a little longer than the metathorax, and
not differentiated, owing to the want of wings.

Pleurum.

The propleurum. (Pl. X XIX.) There are three sclerites on the sides—
minute, short, and rudimentary; the anterior is the episternum; the
middle the epimerum ; and the third and hindermost is the peritreme,
bearing the first thoracic stigma; the second pair of stigmata being at
the end of the mesopleurum. The coxa is large, cylindrical (a vertical
suture along the outer side shows that it is made up of the coxa and
trochantine ?).

The mesopleurum (P1. XX XI) is as in the propleurum, but the epister-
num, as we are disposed to regard it, is larger and exteuds along, form-
ing a long, very narrow lateral strip, reaching to the prothorax.

The metapleurum (Pl. XX XT) exactly repeats the form of the mesopleu-
rum, the episternum in front beiug somewhat narrower and ending at
the mesostigma.

Sternum.

The prosternum (Pl. XX XI) is subseutellate, rapidly narrowing in
front of the insertion of the legs.

The mesosternum (PI. XX XII) is very long, with a separate piece which
we may call the presternite, and which is narrow and crescent-shaped.

The metasternum (Pl. XX XII) is as in the mesosternum, but the pre-

sternite is much smaller.
THE ABDOMEN.

There are ten tergites and a rudimentary eleventh. There are nine
urosternites. The pleurites are more developed in the 2 thanin the ¢.

THE HEAD.

Prisopus.”' (Plate XX XIII, figs. 6-9.) The head is as in Diaphero-
mera; the epicranium and clypeus are as described under that genus,
but the labrum is less deeply cleft.

151 A common Brazilian species.

314 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

The pronotum (Pl. XX XIII, fig. 6) is one-third longer than wide.

The mesonotum (Fig. 7) is very long, though shorter than in Diaphero-
mera. Itis entire, with no signs of subdivision into the scutum, scutel-
lum, &c. The presence of the small, net-veined, rudimentary fore wings
has not affected or produced a differentiation of the notum, the insertion
of the wings being very slightly marked.

In the metanotum, owing to the long, large hind wings, with well
developed muscular attachments, the notum is differentiated into two
lateral swellings, which correspond to two halves of a scutum; while
the scutellum is represented by a long, moderately broad area, rounded
in front, and at the posterior end narrowed, and with a flattened, boss-
like swelling. The scutellum is about one-half as wide as the entire
notum, and on the sides it is not definitely separated from the sides of
the notum. The hind edge of the notum is emarginate, forming a dis-
tinct, rather full ridge extending across the notum. This may repre-
sent the postscutellum; but most probably the next sclerite, which I at
first took to be the first abdominal segment, is the postscutellum, as the
next sclerite bears the first pair of spiracles. ©

Pleurum. A

The pleurites are very much as described in Diapheromera, but the
large, long episterna are shorter and broader than in Diapheromera,
‘corresponding with the shorter and thicker proportions of the thorax.

Sternum.

The prosternum consists of two sclerites, as in Diapheromera. The
mesosternum is shorter and broader, but otherwise exactly as in Diaphe-
romera. The metasternum is much wider than in Diapheromera, with
@ narrow, intercoxal oblong area, as in Acrydii.

THE ABDOMEN.

The abdomen repeats that of Diapheromera; counting out the very
large meta-postscutellum, there are eleven tergites and eight uroster-
nites. The cercopoda are jointed, short, much as in Mantis. ;

NotE.—This genus connects the Phasmida with the Acrydii, Prosco-
pia being the connecting link in the latter family.

Family ACRYDII.
THE HEAD.

Caloptenus spretus. The head, as in the other genera of Acrydii, is
compressed so that the front is high and narrow. No signs of an occip-
ital sclerite. In the epicranium the vertex, gene, and clypeus are well
developed. The epicranium extends below the middle of the front, but

ORTHOPTERA. 315

not so far down as usual in the other Orthopterous families, though in
Tettix it does extend down much farther than in Caloptenus. The
clypeus is well marked, one-third as long as broad. The gene are not
very broad; the gula is short and broad.

THE THORAX.

Notum.

The pronotum (Pl. XXVIII) is very large, extending to the hinder
edge of the mesonotum, and down on the sides as far as the insertion of
the legs. | ;

The mesonotum. (Pl. XXX.) This and the metanotum, except in the
absence of the prescutum, closely resemble the same parts in the Per-
lide. The scutum is short and broad, excavated in front, one-half as
long in the middle as on the sides, each side swollen in the middle area,
the hind edge deeply excavated to receive the scutellum, which is
shorter than wide, obtuse, rounded in front, and behind is a little more
pointed. ‘The postscutellum is represented by a narrow, transverse ridge
expanding on the sides.

The metanotum (Pl. XXX) is as the mesonotum, but a little longer, as
the hind wings are larger than the fore pair. The scutellum, with the
sutures separating it in front from the scutum, is more distinct; the scu-
tum is a little longer on the median line; the scutellum is rather more
acute, triangular in front, and longer and larger than the mesoscutel-
lum. The postscutellum is represented by a simple ridge as in the

mesothorax.
Pleurum.

The propleurum. (Pl. XXIX.) The episternum is rudimentary,
minute, shorter than broad, and triangular. The epimerum is almost
obsolete, being represented by a short, ridge-like sclerite. The tro-
chantine is rudimentary, minute, with alargespine. The coxa is alittle
larger and more swollen sclerite than the trochantine, and is full be-
hind.’” |

The mesopleurum. (Pl. XXXI.) The episternum is entire, very large
and full, narrowing towards the insertion of the wings, and extending
below to beneath the insertion of the legs. The epimerum is of even
width, being quite regularly oblong, and only extending to the insertion
of the legsabove. The meta-spiracle is situated on the posterior, lower
angle of the epimerum, while the meso-spiracle is placed on the anterior
and upper edge of the episternum. The trochantine and coxa are much
as in the fore legs. |

The metapleurum. (Pl. XX XI). Much as in the mesopleurum, but
more oblique, and on the whole slightly larger, as the hind wings are
larger. The episternum is narrower below, and much more definitely

182 Jn Fig. 13, p. 259 of the 1st Report of the Commission, those parts are wrongly named; the tro.
chantine is the anterior and the coxa is the posterior piece.

316 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

separated by an oblique suture from the sternum. The epimerum is—

less regular in shape than in the mesopleurum, and is more oblique and a
little curved. The trochantines are large and longer than those of the
two anterior pair of limbs. The coxe are but slightly developed. The
trochanter is oblong, though longer than thick.

In the Orthoptera genuina, Blatta excepted, the trochantines and cox
are very small, owing to the large pleura and sterna.

Slernum.

The prosternum (Pl. XX XI) is short in front, small, broad, triangular,
with a scutellate expansion between the coxe, and a cou long, acute
conical tubercle; behind, the sternum expands on each ane behind the
legs, and is on the same plane as the mesosternum, but separated from
it by a well-defined suture; it extends far up on each side of the thorax.

The mesosternum (Pl. XXXII) is not so long as broad, but is large, not
extending up above the insertion of the middle pair of legs; the surface
is a little convex; the hinder edge is excavated, a square portion of the
metasternum being dovetailed into it.

The metasternum (Pl. XXXII) is wider and longer than the mesoster- -

num, the sides extending up the thorax. The sternum is divided into
four parts by sutures; the anterior part has just been described, the pos-
terior is a piece nearly as long and a little wider than the first urosternite,
and sends a square portion corresponding to, but smaller than, the one
on the mesosternum into the latter sclerite; the two lateral narrow parts
lie next to the coxe.

THT: ABDOMEN.

There are ten uromeres (P]. XX XIV-XXXVIIJ), eae by ten
tergites, and seven urosternites; no pleurites are developed, the eight
pairs of spiracles opening on the lower edge of the tergites. The tenth
tergite is telson-like, with a triangular pleurite, on each side bearing the
cercopoda, which are not jointed. The tenth tergite extends beyond the
base of the upper pair of rhabdites.

PROSCOPIA.
THE HEAD.

The high, vertical prolongation of the head in this remarkable insect
is a development of the epicranium; the occipital region of the epicran-

ium is also greatly produced, carrying the eyes and insertion of the anten- -

nee much beyond the middle of the head; the space between the eyes is
very narrow. The singular, four-angled process projecting above the in-
sertion of the antenne arises from the vertical rather than from the
frontal region of the epicranium, as there is a long space between the
insertion of the antenne and eyes and the clypeus. The latter is very
Short and divided into post, and anteclypeus, though the two divisions
are not separated by a distinct suture. The labrum is deeply hollowed
out in front.

ORTHOPTERA. 317

THE THORAX.
Notum.

Pronotum. (PJ). XXVIII.) The prothorax is remarkably long, cylin-
drical,and fullinthe middle. Itis very singular for having no sternum as
distinguished from the tergum, but the segment is perfectly cylindrical,
with only a fine, lateral, straight suture, which is obsolete behind the
legs; while along the sternal region behind the legs there is a median,
fine suture. The episternum is present, but no epimerum is differ-
entiated from the tergum. The anterior spiracles are situated on the
front edge of the mesothorax, and these are really the usual prothoracic
ones, while there is another pair on the hind edge of the mesothorax on
the rudimentary mesepimerun.

The mesonotum (Pl. XXX) consists of a single oblong sclerite, one
third ionger than broad, very slightly separated from the pleurum; the
surface is rounded and rough like the rest of the segment.

The metanotum (Pl. XXX) consists of two portions which have no re-
‘semblance to a scutum and scutellum, but which are separated on the
side by a diverging ridge extending down the sides into the epimerum ;
the anterior area is short, transversely broad, while the posterior area
is not separated by suture from the anterior, but is as long as broad,
and rounded in front. It is interesting to notice the extreme modifica-
tion of the meso- and metanotum, owing to the absence of wings, and
also those characteristics due to the cylindrical form of the body. Pros-
copia is a link between the Acrydii and the Phasmida.

Pleurum.

The mesopleurites (P1. XX XT) are well marked sclerites, but are still
subordinated in form and relation to the cylindrical form of the body.
They are oblique, separated by a fine suture from the tergum. The epi-
sternum is large and broad, irregular in shape, while the epimerum is
much shorter, aud not much longer than wide. The pro-peritremes,
bearing the prostigmata, are separated by suture from the prothorax,
and the meso-peritreme is consolidated with the posterior edge of the
mesepimerum.

The metapleurites (Pl. XX XT) are much as in the mesothorax, but shor-
ter. The episternum is straight-edged; though oblique in its general
position, it is as wide as in the mesothorax, while the epimerum is less
than half as wide as the mesepimerum, and the upper portion is reduced
to amere ridge, which extends upon thenotum. The metacoxe are as in
Diapheromera, being twice as large as those of the mesothoracic segment,
while the procoxve are a little smaller than those of the metathorax.

Sternum.

The sternites (D1. XX XTI) are broad pieces, the meso- and metaster-
nites not separated by suture. The external openings of the mes-eute-

318 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

thorax and met-entothorax are conspicuous and situated between the
second and third pair of legs.

Conocephalus. In the head of this genus the entire epicranium is pro-
duced tergally into along cone, with no suture above. Beneath, there is
a deep inter-antennal fossa dividing the cone from the face, which is
longer than broad. There are no ocelli. There is no suture between
the clypeus and epicranium, except on the sides.

Family LOCUSTARLA.
THE HEAD.

Anabrus. (Pl. XXV-XXVI). The epicranium is very large, and di-
vided into two portions, post- and ante-antennal, which are separated by
a short interantennal suture. The front of the head is very broad, and
the eyes are small. There is an occipital ridge on the hinder edge,
separating the gene from the ocular region. The clypeus is trapezoidal,
about one-half as long as wide, with an accessory, rounded, anterior ex-

pansion on the base of the labrum; the latter rounded, as ieee as broad.

The gene are broad and flat; the ale moderately broad.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

The pronotum (Pl. XX VIII) is very large, extending down to the in-
sertion of the fore legs and backward to the base of the abdomen.

Mesonotum. (Pl. XXX.) The scutum and scutellum are only partially
differentiated, the scutal area being represented by two lateral, flattened,
slightly-marked bosses on each side of the segment in front, and not
separated by suture from the scutellum, whose apex is distinct and acute.
There is no prescutum or postscutellum.

The metanotum (Pl. XXX) repeats+the general features of the meso-
notum, but the segment is a little shorter, the scutal bosses smaller, while
the scutellum is indicated by a circular, flattened eminence, with no apex
behind. The postscutellum is not indicated.

Pleurwum.

The propleurites (Pl. X XIX) are small and short. There are two epi-
sternal sclerites, an upper and lower, of irregular form. The epimerum
jS undivided; it is no longer than broad, and below laterally flares out-
ward, forming a horizontally-projecting scale. The prostigmata are very
nee and the edges are armed within by thick-set spines.

The mesopleurites and metapleurites are much alike and peculiar i in
forin, being large and high, owing to the small wings. The episternum
is eae and narrow, and vertical in position ; it is undivided, and a little
narrower above than near the sternum, the middle being produced into
a Sharp ridge. The epimerum is as in the episternum, but flatter and
only ridged near the sternum. —

The metapleurites are more oblique than the mesopleurites, and are

ORTHOPTERA. 319

a little longer and larger, the entire segment being a little larger than
the mesothorax. The coxe are stout and thick; those of the prothorax
spined.

Sternum.

The sternites (Pl. XX XI, XXXII) are peculiar in this genus and family.
The prosternum is very ations and broad; the coxe are situated rather
far apart. The mesosternum is divided inte two portions; the anterior
(preesternite) is divided by a median sinus into two lateral swollen areas,
while behind, at the base of each coxa, is a stout, triangular spine.

In the metasternum the anterior sternal portion or preesternite merely
forms a transverse, curvilinear ridge, from each side of which arises a
stouter posterior spine than in the mesosternum.

THE ABDOMEN.

There are ten and perhaps eleven uromeres; nine large square ter-
gites and a tenth narrower one, the tenth segment bearing the small
unjointed cercopoda. The supra-anal plate probably represents the
eleventh tergite, but it is not separated very distinctly by suture from
the tenth uromere. The pleurites are broad but membranous. There
are eight pairs of abdominal stigmata, which are situated on the pleurum.
Of the sternites, the first seven are small and narrow, surrounded by
membrane; the eighth is large and square. The ovipositog is enormous.
(The proportion of parts in Phaneroptera is seen in Plates XXXIV-—

XX XVIIL)
Family GRYLLIDZ.

THE HEAD.

Gryllus neglectus. The head is rounded, full, vertical in position,
smooth, with no areas, although the three ocelli are present. The clypeus
is separated by suture from the epicranium; it is divided into two parts,
the post-clypeus being short and very broad, and separated on the
sides by a well-marked suture from the ante-clypeus, which is consid-
erably shorter and not so wide as the labrum, the latter being one-half
as long as broad. The genal ridges are remote and posterior to the
orbits. The gular region is unusually broad; the mentum is much
shorter and smaller than the submentum.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

Pronotum is broad and flat, square, nearly as long as broad, and bent.
over the sides, so that the Waernatos are very short; posteriorly it over-
laps the mesonotum.

Mesonotum is very simple in structure. It is very short, being one-
third as long as the pronotum and also one-third as long as the meta-
notum; the scutum is very short, consisting of two lateral raised areas,
nearly separated by the large, broad, swollen scutellum, the latter
transversely lozenge-shaped, being rounded in front and a little more
angular behind.

3820 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Metanotum. On the same plan as the mesonotum, but about three
times as long; the scutum is very short and slightly depressed in the
middle, enlarging and swollen on the sides. The scutellum is of the
same shape as in the mesonotum, but much larger; behind it is a mod-
erately broad, flat band, representing the postscutellum.

Pleurum.

Propleurum. In the prothorax the episternum is represented by two
small sclerites, one forming a spine. The epimerum is minute, rudi-
mentary, submembranous. The coxa and trochantine are consolidated
into a single, large, thick coxal joint. The prostigmata are rather large
and situated on a distinct peritreme.

Mesopleurum. The episternum is divided into three sclerites, the upper
. much larger than the two lower sclerites, and triangular, with the apex
produced towards the insertion of the wings, but not extending up so
high as theepimerum. Of the two other sclerites one is supracoxal, and
the other is next to the sternum. The epimerum is a large, lancevlate-
oval, scale-like, single sclerite, with the posterior edge free, below which
is me mesostigma.

Metapleurum. This is much larger than the pleurum of the meso-
thorax. The episternum is large, oblique, narrow triangular, with the
apex extendimg as far as the upper end of the epimerum; the latter is
quite wide, narrowing below; the hind margin is not, however, free.

Sternum.

Prosternum. Thisisin part rudimentary, and consists of a transverse —
row of three small sclerites surrounded by membrane, behind which
are two larger sclerites, and above, oneach side, is a subtriangular piece.
Between the coxe, which are wide apart, is a small, triangular sternite,
which sends off long, chitinous angles towards the episternal spines.’
Behind this is a narrow, long, scutel-like sclerite.

Meso- and metasternum. These are both large, broad, solid sclerites, as
. long as broad, angulated obtusely on the sides, and pitt in the mid-
dle of the Agiena margin, especially on the metathorax.

THE ABDOMEN.

There are eleven uromeres: eleven tergites, the 11th being the supra-
anal plate; the 10th is narrower than the 9th, and situated between the
cercopoda, which are large and long and obscurely jointed. The 11th
tergite is separated by a faint suture from the 10th tergite. The pleural
region is rather broad, bearing the eight pairs of stigmata. There are
eight well-developed urosternites; the 7th is twice as loug as the basal
seven. The 8th is small and rounded behind.

THE HEAD.

Gryllotalpa borealis. The head and prothorax are admirably adapted
to the fossorial habits of this insect. The head is long, aud rounded

ORTHOPTERA. : a2k

above. The clypeus is very short, the postclypeus less than one-haif as
- leng as the anteclypeus. The labrum is long and narrow. The gular
region is broad, the gene small. |

THE THORAX.
Notun.

Pronotum. This part is immensely developed, being equal in bulk to
the rest of the thorax. ,

Mesonotum. Thisis remarkably short, not quite so long as broad, and
about one-half as long asthemetanotum. There is no prescutum. The
scutum is, along the median line, shorter than the scutellum, and is
excavated behind in the middle to receive the scutellum, which is rather
large and broader than long. There is no postscutellum.

‘Metanotum. More than twice as long as the mesonotum. The scutum
is as long as broad, with a boss on each side above, and a posterior,
rather flat area, succeeded by the scutellum, which is broader than
jong.

Pleurum.

Propleurum. This is represented by an irregularly triangular scle-
rite, whose apex below bears a stout, downward-projecting spine. The
coxa is very thick and rather large, and excavated in front to receive
- the posterior prolongation of the base of the femur, which is remarkably
short, thick, large, and broad, as is the tibia, this and the tarsi being de-
seribed by other authors.

_ Mesopleurum. The episternum and epimerum are moderate in width,
and oblong; the episternum is broader than the epimerum, and the
sclerites are placed vertically and not obliquely.

Metapleurum. The sclerites are large and broad, the sides of this
segment being square and vertical, though the sclerites themselves are
obliquely situated. The episternum is one large piece resting below on
the sternum; the epimerum is as long as the episternum, but uarrower,
The hinder coxe are less spherical and swollen than the mesocoxe.

3

Sternum.

The prosternum is obsolete, being reduced to a narrow membrane
situated between the coxe, which closely meet.

The mesosternum is very large and broad, with a curvilinear impressed
line between the coxe. .

THE ABDOMEN. -

There are ten uromeres; ten tergites, the tenth rudimentary, triangular,
short. There are nine urosternites. The pleural ridge is well developed.
The cercopoda are long and filamental, thick at base, multiarticulate.

There are no prothoracic stigmata, but the first pair is situated on the
back of the mesothorax behind the coxz; and the second pair on the
metathorax behind the epimera and above the coxe. I can discover
only seven pairs of abdominal spiracles.

21 ECO

322 REPORT UNITED STATES ENVOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.
THE HEAD.

Gcanthus niveus 2 .—The head is long and narrow. The suture be-
tween the post- and anteclypeus is obsolete in the middle. The occip-
ital and gular regions are much developed, while the genz.are narrow.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

The pronotum is long and narrow.

The mesonotum is very short; the scutum almost wanting, very short,
while the scutellum is about one-third as long as wide.

The metanotum is a little longer than wide; the scutum is shorter than
broad, slightly swollen on each side; the scutellum is one-half as long
as the scutum, unusually broad, regularly convex, very obtusely angu-
lar behind, succeeded by a thin, transverse ridge, which is perhaps the

postscutellum.
Pleurum.

The propleurum is minute and rudimentary.

The mesopleurwm is very short and oblique; the episternum is a long
oblong sclerite which is moderately broad, while the epimerum is very
narrow, but as long as the episternum.

The metapleurum is also very oblique, but the two sclerites are of the
same width, and both are somewhat broader and larger than the mes-

episterna.
Sternum.

All the sternites are broad and full, as indicated in Fig. , so that the

cox are wide apart.
THE ABDOMEN.

There are eleven uromeres; eleven tergites, and cight urosternites.

The cercopoda‘are long, multiarticulate, while the ovipositor is large, -

long, and well developed.

Remarks.—This family is evidently closely allied to the Locustarie,
while the Acrydii and Phasmida are closely allied, the Mantide standing
below next to the lowest group, the Blattariz.

Order IV. PSEUDONEUROPTERA.
Suborder 1. CORRODENTIA.
PERLIDZ. Plates XL, XLIV, LVII.
THE HEAD.

Pteronarcys californica. (Pl. XL, figs. 1-2.) No occiput. Epicranium
divided into three regions; vertex large and well marked, about one-

ne -_

PSEUDONEUROPTERA. S20

fourth as long as broad; eyes on each side; no orbits; the ocellar area
~ separated from the nee by a well-marked suture, mined somewhat V-
shaped. Separated from the third area in front by a deeply’ impressed
line.

Clypeus narrow, one-half as long as wide, with a narrow projection
in front. Labrum small, narrow, short, and partly fleshy. Genz of
moderate extent. Gula but slightly developed; mentum short, distinct

from the submentum.
THE THORAX.

Notum.

Pronotum (Pteronarcys californica). (Pl. LVI, fig. 1.) Broad and
square, nearly as long as broad.

Mesonotum (Pteronarcys californica). (Fig. 2.) Prescutum sub-cor-
date, rhomboidal, with the posterior half triangular, divided by a deep
mesial impressed line; anterior half smooth and swollen. Patagia (?)
large and broad.

Scutum very peculiar. It is broader than long, with two large lateral
bosses in front, apparently corresponding to the two halves of the scu-
tum in the Neuroptera metamorphotica, and between them is a broad,
slightly convex area, which might be regarded as the anterior part of
the scutellum, but judging by the limits of the metascutellum it is not.

Scutellum short and broad, well marked behind, but in front insen-
sibly merging into the central flat area of the scutum, with no indica-
tions of a suture.

Postscutellum, forming a transverse linear ridge of even width
throughout, with very slight indications of an impressed line along the
middle of the body.

Metanotum. (Fig. 3.) Exactly repeats the form of the mesonotum,
and is, if anything, a little longer than the mesonotum (the hind wings
being considerably larger). Only the posterior half of the prescutum
in the mesonotum is represented in the metanotum, 7. e., the cordate,
roughened portion, with the mesial suture. The lateral bosses of the
seutum are as far asunder as in the mesonotum. Scutellum crescent-
shaped; the suture in front is distinct, whereas in the mesonotum it is
obsolete.’

Postscutellum a little larger behind tlie scutellum than in the meso-
notum.

Behind the metapostscutellum is a long, transverse, rather broad mem-
brane which connects the metanotum with the abdomen. It is not the ©

first abdominal segment,
| Pleurum.

Propleurum (Pteronarcys californica). (Pl. XIV, Fig.1.) Episternum
and epimerum both nearly equally developed; the former subtriangular,
the latter subquadrate, and each in part semi-membranous.

153In Acroneuria abnormis the meso- and metascutellum are not separated by suture from the
scutum.

324 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Mesopleurum. (Fig. 2.) The flanks are obliquely inclined. The epi-
sternum is divided into a supra-episternite and an infra-episternite; the
latter is trapezoidal, a little longer than broad, with a broad projection
extending round in front, resting upon the mesosternum. The supra-
episternite is sub-diamond-shaped, the lower edge triangular, fitting into
the infra episternite.

The epimerum is divided into two pieces; the infra- epimerite is nearly
as broad as long; the sub-epimerite is long, oblique, irregular in form,
with three large projections from the surface.

Trochantine broad and short. Coxa small compared with the troch-
antine, being about one-third as large.

Metapleurum. (Vig. 3.) Exactly repeats the structure of the meso-
pleurum, except that it is a little longer, as the hind wings are larger
than the anterior pair. Coxa and trochantine the same as in the meso-
therax.

2 Sternum.

Prosternum (Pteronarcys californica). (Fig. 4.) Represented only by
a Swollen fold in front of the insertions of the legs, and by a gill-bearing
qembranous swelling behind. In Acroneuria abnormis there is a broad,
large, scutellate chitinous piece.

Mesosternum (Pt. californica). (Fig.5.) This sternite consists of two
portions, (1) a raised, rounded sclerite (preesternite) longer than broad,
and situated on the front of the sternal area, between the two anterior
gills; (2) behind is the true sternum, which is a very broad, trans-
versely-oblong sclerite, square. on the sides, and about one-fourth as
long as broad, and somewhat curvilinear. In Acroneuria abnormis the
mesosternum is divided into (1) a large preesternite, which is broad and
triangular; and (2) a large trapezoidal sternite.

Metasternum. (Fig. 6.) The same as in the mesothorax, but slightly
larger. Behind the sternite, on both meso- and metathorax, are in each
segment two deep fosse, extending probably into the entothorax (medi-
and postfurea). In Acronewria the metasternum is the same in form as
the mesosternum, but the presternite is shorter and broader.

THE UROSOME (ABDOMEN).

In Pteronarcys californica (Pl. XLIV, figs. 7-9) there are ten abdominal
segments (uromeres). The tergites are ten in number, the first broad
and well developed, the tenth small and very short, with a median tri-
angular projection (supraanal plate); the segment is entire but very
short sternally. There are no pleurites, except nearly obsolete mem-
branous folds on the first and second uromeres, on which the first and
second pair of spiracles are situated; on the other uromeres the remain-
ing six pair are situated on the lower edge of the tergites. From the
hinder edge of the eighth urosternite two short, stout spines project

PSEUDONEUROPTERA. 325

backwards. From the tenth urosome apair of long, multiarticulate cer-
copoda arise from broad basal joints or flaps, forming lateral anal plates.

Psocipz. Plate XX XIX, XLIII.

THE HEAD.

Psocus nove-scotic.* (Pl. XX XIX, figs. 6-8.) The head is in its
structure allied to that of the Perlide. Epicranium horizontal, nearly
as long as broad, beiag square on the sides. Ocelli situated close to-
gether between the eyes. Clypeus very large and swollen, situated be-
tween the antenne; in front is a semi-membranous division, which may
be the ante-clypeus; this sclerite is not quite so wide as the large, broad
labrum. The gular region and mentum are broad.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

Pronotum (Psocus nove-scotie Walk). Very small, depressed, over-
lapped by the heade, bing much reduced in size compared with the
Perlide.

Mesonotum (Pl. XUITI, fig. 10) very high and convex; seen from above,
much rounded in front. Prescutum large, prominent, high and rounded,
subcordate, but with no median impressed line.

Scutum very short and broad, deeply excavated in front for the
reception of the prescutum; each side is much swollen, the swollen
areas being separated by the broad median impressed line.

Scutellum small and short, three or four times as wide as long, with
a median acute angle in front, and angulJated on each side, anteriorly;
while from each posterior angle a high narrow ridge diverges to the
hinder part of the insertion of thefore wing. No postscutellum is
visible.

Metanotwm (Fig. 11) small, one-half as long as the mesonotum. The
prescutum is very small, subtriangular, broad and short, depressed.
Scutum one-quarter as long as broad, consisting of two inflated halves,
with a median impressed line.

Scutellum minute, rudimentary, somewhat rounded.

Pleurum. .

Propleurum. The episternum and epimerum rudimentary, though
rather long; while the coxa and trochantine are large and long, being
well developed.

_Mesopleurum. (Fig. 12.) Episternum and epimerum long and narrow;
not oblique, but vertical; the episternum a little thicker than the epi-
merum.

154A large species of Psocus inhabiting coniferous trees in Maine; kindly identified by Dr. Hagen.

826 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Metapleurum. (Fig. 12.) Episternum much as in mesothorax, but the
epimerum is narrow, triangular, and reduced to a point next to the
trochantine.. Coxa and trochantine well developed, rather long and
large; the coxa considerably narrower than the trochantine.

Sternum.

Prosternum. Very small, rudimentary. :

Mesosternum very small, triangular; the coxe nearly meeting on the
median line of the body.

Metasternum small.

TERMITIDA. Plates XX XIX, figs. 1-5; XL, figs. 3,4, 8; XLI, XLII, ©
XLII, figs. 1-9.

THE HEAD.

Termopsis angusticollis. (Pl. XX XIX, figs. 1-3.) The head is broad
and flat, oblong-oval in shape. The epicranial region is remarkably
simple, not subdivided, with no V-shaped suture, and the eyes are very
smail. The clypeus is very simple, very short and broad; and only an
impressed line, no suture, separates it from the epicranium. The labrum
is large, one-half as long as broad, and much longer than the clypeus. The
gene are separated from the upper portion of the epicranium by a sharp,
lateral, conspicuous ridge. The gular region is small, membranous.
The labium is not differentiated into a submentum and mentum.

In Termes flavipes (figs. 4, 5) the head is oblong, with faint traces of a
V-shaped suture; the clypeus is subdivided into an anterior and pos-
terior portion, the two subequal and well marked.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

Pronotum (Termopsis). (Pl. XLIII, fig.1.) Somewhat crescent-shaped,
being excavated in front and rounded behind.

Mesonotum. (Fig.2.) Remarkably square, as long as broad, with the
elements but partly differentiated, an approach to that of Pteronarcys,
the slight partial anterior attachment of the wings being correlated
with the undeveloped nature of the tergal sclerites. The prescutum
is not visible. |

The scutellum is not differentiated from the scutum; the latter
forming a somewhat swollen flattened boss on each side, but in the
middle of the notum contracted, becoming narrow, the region where
the seutellum usually is being about a quarter less wide than the scutal
region. Postscutellum wanting.

Metanotum. (Fig. 3.) Considerably smaller than the mesonotum,
hour-glass shaped, being much contracted in the middle, forming an

PSEUDONEUROPTERA. ByAr

anterior or scutal and a posterior or scutellar region. Hach side of the
scutal region is swollen in front, but the scutellum is not indicated by
. sutures. Posteriorly the scutellar region spreads out laterally. The
wings on both segments are only attached by feeble, local, restricted
areas to the front part of the scutum.

In Termes flavipes (Pl. XLII, figs. 1-3) there are important differences
from Termopsis.

The pronotum is one-half as long as the head, well rounded behind,
and one-fourth shorter than broad.

In the mesonotum the scutum and scutellum are differentiated; the
scutum is broad and short, one-half as long as broad, and rounded be-
hind. The scutellum is quite free from it, and is larger than the scutum,
being longer, with the sides prolonged toward the posterior insertion of
the wings.

In the metanotum (Fig. 3) the scutum is very broad and short, shorter
than the mesoscutum, and only two-thirds as long as the metascutel-
lum; the latter is large and broad, being a little shorter than broad.
No pre- or postscutellum in either segment.

The meso- and metanotum are considerably narrower than the thorax
itself, and are margined with membrane, the insertion of the wings
being tergal and very weak.

Pleurum.

_ Propleurum (Termopsis angusticollis). (Fig.4.) The sides of the pro-

thorax are much flattened, as if (seen from above) the body had been
Squeezed and the flanks pressed out, so that they present a rather wide
lateral area on each side of the tergites. The episternum forms a nar-
row (vertically) linear piece. The epimerum is membranous, narrow,
but wider than the episternum. The coxa and trochantine are consol-
idated in one large oval-oblong sclerite.

Mesopleurum. (Fig. 5.) Episternum forming one large, irregular
piece, expanding above the middle, anteriorly forming a triangle. The
epimerum is much smaller and semi-membranous. The trochantine is
large and long, being oblong-ovate; coxa as long as the trochantine, but
narrower, and pressed up (so to speak) beyond it.

Metapleurum. (Fig.6.) Much shorter than that of the mesothorax.
Episternum much narrower, while the trochantine is broader and much
shorter in proportion; otherwise much as in the preceding segment.

In Termes flavipes (Fig. 4) the pro-episternum is represented by a
narrow sclerite situated in front of and below the pronotum, and sep-
arated from the sternites by asuture. The epimerum is a minute, trian-
gular sclerite situated over the coxa. The trochantine is large and
long, and the coxa is of the same length.

Mesopleurum. (Fig. 5.) The episternum is well developed, narrow,
curved, triangular. The epimerum is much smaller, and both pieces are |
Situated obliquely. The trochantine and coxa are of the same size and

328 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

length, and are unusually free from each other, the two sclerites to gether
forming a very broad and thick portion for the attachment of the legs.

Metapleurum. (Fig. 6.) Much as in the mesopleurum, with the coxa
pointed at the lower and posterior end; both the meso- and metapleurites
are more oblique than the propleurites, while the meta- are fully as large
as. the mesopleurites.

Sternum.

Termopsis. (Fig. 7.) The prosternum is triangular, about as long as
broad. :

The mesosternum is about three times as large as the prosternum, and
also equilaterally triangular, with the posterior apex acute. Metaster-
num ?

Termes flavipes. (Figs. 7-9.) The prosternum is rudimentary, consist-
ing of four sclerites; two large ones next to the episternum in front, and
two minute triangular ones behind. The meso- and metasterna are
entire, broadly triangular, and rather large, with a pair of accessory
sclerites in front of the coxe. The coxe seen from beneath are divided
by a deeply-impressed longitudinal line. .

THE ABDOMEN. _

The abdomen of Termopsis is much as in Blatta; it is very flat, broad,
oval-oblong; ten uromeres, the first tergite broad and long; the tenth

Fic. 12.—Abdomen of Termopsis angusticollis. D, dorsal; V, ventral; L, lateral view. Enlarged.
Gissler, del.

short, triangular, small, only extending between the short five-jointed
cercopoda. There are nine urosternites. The pleurites of the abdomen

e

ODONATA. 329

(uropleurites) are only seen from beneath, but are well developed. The
abdomen of Termes flavipes is substantially as in Termopsis.

Fic. 13.—Abdomen of Termes flavipes. Lettering as in fig. 12. Enlarged.

Suborder 2. OpDoONATA. Plates XLVII-L.
THE HEAD. |

Agrion verticale Say. (PI. XLVII, figs. 4-6.) The structure of the
head of Agrion and Calopteryx is more easily understood than that of
Aischna and Libellula, as their eyes are much smaller, and the develop-
ment of the epicranium is more equable and normal. The head is unusu-
ally short and wide; the orbits very wide; eyes spherical. The epicra-
nium, exclusive of the orbits, is about as long as broad, with a decided
ocellar area, the ocelli being large and closely contiguous. In front of
the ocelli is a deep impressed line parallel to the clypeus.

The clypeus is moderately large, about one-half as long as broad,
with a high, sharp, shelf-like side; it is divided into a clypeus posterior
and anterior; the post-clypeus being horizontal like a shelf, and the
anteclypeus forming a vertical wall.

The labrum is large and broad, well rounded in front. The gene are
very large and broad, smooth, and continuous with the orbits. The
gula is membranous.

In Calopteryx maculata the head is much as in Agrion, but the clypeus
is more clearly defined and separate from the epicranium than in Agrion.
The epicranium is wider and larger than in Agrion; a transverse im-
pressed line separates it into a posterior and anterior area.

In #Wschna heros (P1. XLVII, figs. 1-3) there is no definite trace of the
occiput, unless a postorbital ridge between the gula and orbits marks
its limits. This ridge becomes obsolete towards the median line near the

330 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

vertex. As the eyes are enormous and meet on the median line of the
head, the epicranium is divided by them into three portions: 1, a nar-
row orbito-gular area, not seen from above; 2, an ocello-antennal, very
small, subtriangular area; and 3, a pre-antennal, large area, correspond-
ing to the small ante-antennal area in Agrion. This area, with the
clypeus, forms the peculiar shelf-like projection of the frout of the head.
The area is divided into a horizontal broad area and a transverse cres-
cent-shaped subarea, separated from the horizontal portion by a sharp
ridge. The clypeus is very large and full, reaching from eye to eye,
and nearly as long as broad. It is separated from the epicranium by a
well-marked curvilinear suture. In front it incloses the ante-clypeus,
which is a crescent-shaped sclerite no wider than the labrum, and sep-
arated by a distinct suture from the clypeus proper.
The labrum is large and broad, very distinct from the clypeus.

THE THORAX.

Notum.

The Odonata are characterized by the unusual development of the
- pleurites, the meso-episternum forming the larger part of the dorsum
of the thorax, the meso- and metanotum being greatly reduced in size,
owing to the great and long-sustained powers of flight possessed by
these insects.

In Agrion the pronotum (Pl. XLVII, fig. 10) is well developed com-
pared with the meso- and metanotum; somewhat broader than long,
divided into three areas, being emarginate in front and behind, with the
edges turned up, while the large central area has two lateral, slightly -
swollen areas.

Mesonotum. (Fig. 11.) The przescutum not visible; scutum entire,
minute, not much longer than wide. The scutellum is a much swollen
rounded knob, with the base subtriangular, not much smaller than the
scutum. The post-scutellum appears to be a moderately broad, even,
two-ridged, transverse band.

The metanotum (Fig. 11) repeats the general appearance of the meso-
notum and is of the same size, the wings being alike. The przescutum
is not visible. The scutum is deeply divided into two halves, each
half minute and much swollen. The scutellum as in mesonotum, but
considerably larger. The post-scutellum is very distinct, forming a
transversely-oblong piece no wider than the scutellum. _

Calopteryx (Pl. XLVIII, figs. 5-6) is substantially as in Agrion, as
regards the notum. .

In Aschna heros the pronotum is small and narrow, and nearly con- —
cealed from above by the head. It is about two-thirds as long as broad,
divided into a short transverse ridge and a posterior, longer portion
subtriangular behind, by a deep constriction or impressed line.

Mesonotum. (Pl. XLVILII, fig.3.) The prescutum obsolete, not visi-

ODONATA. 331

ble from above. Scutum subtrapezoidal, longer than broad; acute
_ behind, with an appendicular area between the conical end and the scu-
tellum, consisting of two diverging tubercles, from which a narrow ridge
falls away on each side, forming the origin of the 5th vein of the wings
on each side. (Fig. 3, v. 5.)

The scutellum is swollen, triangular, as broad as long, the apex
directed backwards and wedged in between the separate halves of the
post-scutellum, which is represented by two triangular bosses, the apices
separated by the pointed end of the scutellum, the bases connected by a
ridge concealed by the end of the scutellum.

Metanotum. (Fig. 4.) There is a pair of patagia, one in front of the
base of each hind wing. No prescutum. The scutum is much larger
than the mesoscutum, a little longer than broad; each side raised into
an oblong-oval boss, with a narrow, acute, triangular, depressed, flat
area between, and bounded behind by a converging ridge, which is suc-
ceeded by a peculiar diverging ridge (v. 5), like that in the mesonotum,
- which is the origin of the 5th vein of the second pair of wings.

The scutellum is much larger than in the mesonotum, nearly square,
smooth and flat; the posterior one-half vertical, thin, and more or less
elastic and membranous, moving upon the abdomen. (This posterior
portion may represent the post-scutellum, which is otherwise absent, but
. there are no signs of a suture.) Post-scutellum absent (?) See Fig. 4,
p. sel.’’”, for what may prove to be the post-scutellum.

Pleurum.

In Agrion (Fig. 7) the pro-episternum and epimerum of each side are
minute, rudimentary, and submembranous, and in position are vertical,

Mesopleurum. The episternum in the Odonata differs remarkably
from all other Pseudoneuroptera and indeed from all other insects, only
the Acrydii approaching them in the enormously long and large epi-
sterna, which meet in front to form a large, dorsal, convex area, that usu-
ally occupied in other insects by the scutum. The epimerum is a similar
piece, and nearly as large as the lateral portion of the episternum; it
is in Agrion consolidated with the meta-episternum. In Calopteryx,
however (Fig. 6), where the thorax is broader and higher, the two scle-
rites are separate.

The coxe are small, conical; the trochantine is small, triangular, and
situated directly over the small conical coxa.

Metapleurum. (Fig. 8.) The episternum repeats the form of that of
the mesopleurum, but is consolidated with the meso-episternum. The
episternum, seen laterally, is regularly oblong, and three times as long
as broad.

The trochantine is a triangular piece, situated directly over the small
subconical coxa.

In Calopteryx (Fig. 6) the meso-episternum and epimerum are much

,

332 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

as in Agrion; those of the metapleurum are much as in the meso-, but

a well-marked suture separates the meso-epimerum from the meta-epi-
sternum, and the latter is much wider towards the insertion of the wing
than next to the coxa.

In the prothorax of Aschna the episternum is very small, and sub-
divided into several pieces; the epimerum is larger and not divided; it
is about as long as broad, and posteriorly submembranous.

The coxa is very large, being much enlarged within, meeting the
opposite coxa on the median line.

Mesopleurum (Fig. 1) enormous, and forming a large part of the dor-
sal region of the thorax. The episternum is enormous, forming with
its fellow on the opposite side a large proportion of the front and meso-
notum; the foramen leading into the prothorax is situated very low,
the mesostigmata being situated on the upper side of the opening.
The two meso-episterna unite to form the front of the mesothorax and
also the anterior fourth or third of the dorsal region of the entire thorax.
Dorsally there is on the united episterna a high median ridge becom-
ing forked behind, with two lateral diverging transverse ridges. The
ridge originates in front from the hinder border of a transverse cres-
cent-shaped area directly above the foramen leading into the pro-
thorax. A straight, distinct suture separates the episternum from the
epimerum. Between the episternum and the trochantine is a sclerite, the
nature of which is uncertain; by its close relation to the sternum it may
be the infra-episternum and probably not the coxa, the latter appearing
to be obsolete.

The epimerum is large, broad, oblique, and below in front of the meta-
stigma separated by suture from the meta-episternum, but above there
is no suture, only a broad, valley-like depression.

Metapleurum. The episternum is about one-half as wide as the large,
swollen, smooth epimerum, which composes the posterior third of the
pleurum of the thorax. Below the metastigma is a square sclerite,
directly over thé trochantine, which is probably the infra-episternum,
there apparently being no coxa; the trochantine as in the prothorax.

Sternum.

In Agrion the prosternum is small, triangular, longer than broad,
with the apex acute. ~

Mesosternum a little larger and broader than the prosternum, but
still small. : |

Metasternum. What Iam disposed to regard as this sclerite is a very
large, elongated, polygonal area, which is semi-membranous and flat.

In Calopteryx the sternites are as in Agrion, but the metasternum is
broader and shorter, with an anterior deeply impressed median line.

In Aischna the mesosternum is small, broad, irregular; while the
metasternum is much smaller, nearly obsolete in front of the legs,

-

i a a

ers

EPHEMERINA. 333

and behind is a broad, sternal, large area, broader and shorter than in
Agrion.
It should be observed that in Odonata the middle and hind legs are
close together.
THE ABDOMEN.

In Agrion (Pl. L, figs. 4-6) there are ten uromeres. The first tergite is
well-developed, the second one-half as long asthe five succeeding tergites.
No pleurites, the tergites overlapping the urosternites, which are very
narrow. ‘The tenth urosome shorter than broad. The claspers possibly
represent an eleventh urosome, as such a segment is developed in the
embryo, but in the adult the claspers appear to be appendages (cer-
copoda) of the tenth urosome. Calopteryx closely resembles Agrion as
to its abdomen.

In Aischna (Pl. XLIX, L. figs. 1-3) there are ten uromeres; and the
rudiments of an eleventh urosternite; the cercopoda (c) are long and

spatulate.

Suborder 3 EPHEMERINA. Plates XLV, XLVI.

THE HEAD.

Ephemera.—lit has been ditficult with the material at my command to
' properly describe the external anatomy of any member of this group.
The species examined was our commonest Ephemera in Rhode Island,
identified by Dr. Hagen as probably H. cupida (Leptophlebia) Walk.,
and also aspecies of Palingenia. There is a great deal of variation in
the form of the thorax and head in the genera of this suborder, which
is aS much specialized in its way as the Odonata is in its.

In examining the under side of the head of an alcoholic Ephemera,
the subject of the drawing made by Dr. Gissler (Fig. 2), there is a cav-
ernous area, at the bottom of which I can discover what appear to be
the rudiments of the maxille and labium. ‘There are certainly no rudi-
ments of the mandibles. The gular region and the mentum can be dis-
tinguished, and I think I can detect the labial palpi and lingua; con-
cerning the maxille I am less certain. The drawing was made by Dr.
Gissler from but one specimen, and while correct in most respects he
regards the sketch of the mouth-parts as provisional. The general
relations of the under side of the head are as he drew them, with one or
two corrections made by the writer.

In an alcoholic specimen of Palingenia bilineata (perhaps a subimago)
I can discover no certain rudiments of any of the mouth-parts. The
under side of the head forms a deep hollow, and the mouth region is a
deep pit, bounded by a high, thin wall in front—the lower edge of the
clypeus. This pit is open to the roof of the mouth or clypeus. It is
impossible to distinguish the rudiments of any of the mouth parts, and
Peay they appear to be wholly obsolete.

334 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

THE THORAX. i
Notum.

This region of the body is more highly concentrated than in any other
Phyloptera, not excepting the Trichoptera. The prothorax is a rather
wide collar, longer and broader than in the Trichoptera, but the meso-
thorax is spherical and very large in proportion to the metathorax,
which is rudimentary and but slightly developed; owing therefore to
the large mesothorax and the small pro- and metathorax, the entire
thorax is oval-elliptical, and much consolidated, thus approaching in its
general appearance the general shape of the Tipulid thorax, or that of
the lower Lepidoptera.

Pronotum. This forms a broad collar extending backwards on each
side, the hinder edge being excavated in the middle.

Mesonotum. This is long and well developed, not so wide as the body,

the flanks extending out, when seen from above, beyond the sides of

the notum. The prescutum is well developed, forming a round, con-
vex, swollen sclerite as long as broad, with a median suture-like im-
pression. The scutum is very large and long, oval, about one- third
longer than broad, slightly broader behind than in font:

The scutellum is large and well developed, irregularly scutellate in
outline, with two bosses in front; the posterior end is narrow, truncate
at the end, with the surface at the end somewhat swollen.

Metanotum. The metathoracic segment is small, very short, and the
notum and sternum, as also the pleurites, are somewhat rudimentary.
The surface of the notum is somewhat depressed below the level of the
mesoscutellum. It is difficult to describe the sclerites. which are rep-
resented in Fig. 1. The entire segment is about one-third as long as
broad. The scutum is not well differentiated, being represented by a
, median irregular area (Fig. 1 sc’’) about half as long as broad. No scu-
tellum and postscutellum can be distinguished with certainty.

Pleurwum.

The sclerites of the flanks are difficult to distinguish. In their de-
velopment and arrangement the Ephemerina differ from all other Phy-
loptera.

Mesopleurum. Though there are a number of sclerites in the meso-
thorax it is difficult to distinguish what are properly episterna and epi-
mera. The region of the mesepisternum is indicated in Fig. 2 epis”,
and is much larger than the epimeral, which is the region situated over
the insertion of the middle pair of legs. |

The first pair of spiracles is situated on the mesothorax under and
in front of the insertion of the first pair of wings; the second pair is
situated on the metathorax directly under the insertion of the second
pair of wings.

In the metapleurum the episternal region is quite limited and minute
compared with the large mesepisternal region; what I am inclined to

a

EPHEMERINA. 335

regard as the epimerum appears to be the sclerite em” (Fig. 2), which
in the sketch is situated directly under the metanotum.

Sternum.

Prosternum. This is a small triangular area situated between the
insertion of the legs.

Mesosternum. This is a very large region divided into a presternite
and sternite. The former is narrow, as long as broad, the surface con-
vex. The sternite is divided into two large, long, oval portions extend-
ing far back of the insertion of the legs.

Metasternum. ‘This sclerite is very short, small and rudimentary.

THE ABDOMEN.

There are ten abdominal segments. The first tergite is wanting, the
tenth is a supra-anal plate. There are nine urosternites; the basal is
large and long, with a pair of spiracles. The 11th uromere may be repre-
sented by the median articulated appendage situated between the two
very long multi-articulated cercopoda. The 10th urite is represented
by two long, oval, paraliel plates.

A remarkable feature of the male Ephemerina is the two pairs of
jointed appendages rising from beneath the cercopoda. These may
be regarded as homologues of two pairs of the rhabdites composing the
ovipositor of the female of other insects. The lower pair (Fig. 1 rh)
is 3-jointed (perhaps 4-jointed), while the upper pair (rh’) is 2-jointed.
We know of no other insects which have two pairs of jointed claspers.
These singular organs may be called rhabdopoda. They appear to be
homologues of the abdominal feet of Myriapods, the abdominal legs of
Tenthredinid and Lepidopterous larve, and the spinnerets of spiders.

The adult Ephemerina, then, in the lack of mouth-parts, in the con-
centrated thorax, and the possession of two pairs of abdominal jointed
appendages, differ remarkably from the Odonata and other Phyloptera,
so that we are nearly justified in regarding the group as entitled to rank
as a suborder.

Order NEUROPTERA (as restricted by Erichson).
Suborder 1, PLANIPENNIA.
Family SALIDA.
THE HEAD.

Corydalus cornutus. (Pl: LI, figs.1-3.) Head very broad and flat; ver-
tex remarkably large, broad, long, and flat, forming the bulk of the epi-
cranium. Ocelli three, large, but the ocellar area is small, with no suture;
the ante-antennal (orbital) fosse large and conspicuous, transversely
oval above, beneath curvilinear. No suture between the clypeus and

336 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

epicranium, the very broad clypeus being indefinitely bounded behind,
the front edge projecting over and concealing the short, broad labrum,
and the edge thickened and tridentate. Mandibles of male enormous,
their base partly covered by the clypeus. The gene are very large and
broad, bounded (in part) in front by the ante-antennal] curvilinear fosse.
The gula is solid, long, and narrow, extending from the occipital suture
to the mentum, there being no submental suture; lateral sutures sepa-
rate the mentum plainly from the gule; submentum very broad. The
occiput is present, appearing as a short and broad area, with a median,
transversely-oblong sternite forming the base of the gula. (See larva.)

Raphidia oblita.* (Pl. LI, fig. 5-7.) Head as in Corydalus, but the
vertex is longer in proportion and the clypeus, being smooth, is better
limited. The ocelli are either present or absent, and there is no distinct
area. The labrum is large, the clypeus not concealing it. There are no
fosse. The gene are very large, meeting over the gula, which is obso-
lete, except in front, Where it is broad and triangular, and forms a sub- .
mental region. The occiput is apparently well marked, forming the
neck, and with a suture in front.

THE THORAX.
Notum.

eae ee Pronotum (Corydalus). Large and square, about
as long as broad; full in front and sinuous behind;
somewhat hollowed in the middle.

Raphidia. (Pl. LIV, fig. 10.) Long and narrow,
rectangular, very dee excavated in front, and
pointed behind. -

Mesonotum (Corydalus. (Fig. 12). Prescutum

Pronotum of ‘Coryaaiaa, WEOAdly subiriangular, shorter than in Raphidia,

enlarged. _ but more distinct. Scutum completely cleft, the
prescutum and scutellum touching; each division of the scutum sub-
quadrate. Postscutellum large and long, very wide, and well devel-
oped.

Raphidia. (Pl. LIV, fig. 11.) Prescutum well developed, larger,
but otherwise as in Corydalus. Scutum completely cleft, so that the
prescutum meets the scutellum; the latter shorter than broad, obtuse
at the apex in front, being subtriangular. Postscutellum well developed,
wide, and of nearly the same length throughout, but incised in the middle
to receive the scutellum.

Metanotum (Corydalus). Prescutum much as ‘in Raphidia, but
smaller; scutum not entirely divided; scutellum triangular, less acute
in front than in Polystcechotes, but more so than in Raphidia. Post-
scutellum well developed, transversely linear.

154 Raphidia oblita Hagen, from California.

NEUROPTERA. Bot

Raphidia. (Pl. LIV, fig. 12.) Prescutum present, but obscurely
marked, being almost obsolete, but the outline is seen to be triangular.
The scutum is large, only half divided by the scutellum, which is much
shorter than broad, but triangular in form. Postscutellum forms a nar-
row, transverse band, which is shorter than in the mesonotum.

Pleurwn.

Corydalus. In the propleurum (Pl. LXIV, fig. 1) the episternum and
epimerum are minute, rudimentary, and not well defined; owing to the
great size of the sternite no trochantine is visible. The coxa is large
and thick, about twice as large as the succeeding coxe.

Raphidia. (Pl. LIV, fig.13). Much asin Corydalus; the episternum
and epimerum are minute and rudimentary, the relative form of these
selerites not being easily made out. The coxe, however, are long and
thick, and much larger than those of the meso- and metathorax.

In Corydalus (Fig. 2) the meso-flanks are rather short and thick; the

supra-sternite square. The episternum is a little longer than broad;
the suture between it and the sternite is obsolete. The epimerum is
moderately long, widening considerably towards the insertion of the
wings. The coxa is very short and thick. The trochantine is very
small; one-half'as large as the coxa.

Raphidia. (Pl. LIV, fig. 14.) The mesopleurites are just as in Cory-
dalus, but longer and slenderer, and the suture of the sternum is well
marked. The epimerum is longer and narrower above than in Cory-
dalus, and the trochantine is small; coxa moderately large.

Metapleurum (Corydalus). (Fig. 12.) The flanks of the metathorax
are longer, i. ¢., thicker, than in the mesothorax; being also shorter
vertically. The episternites are shorter vertically, but thicker, and the
coxe are shorter and thicker. The epimerum is undivided, not so wide
above (next to the insertion of the wings) as in the mesothorax. The
‘trochantine is a little smaller than in the mesothorax. |

Raphidia. (PI. LIV, fig.15.) As in Corydalus, the metapleurites are
decidedly thicker and longer than the pleurites of the mesothorax. The
episterna are both larger and thicker than in the mesothorax. The epi-
merum is not divided, narrower below, and wider towards the insertion
of the wing than in the mesothorax. The coxa is nearly twice as large
as in the mesothorax.

Sternum.

Corydalus. The prosternum (Fig. 4) is remarkably large, square, with
an anterior, short, separate piece, or preesternite.

The mesosternum (Fig. 5) is large and very broad, transversely sub-
oblong, the suture between it and the infra-sternite only partial.

The metasternum is as in the mesothorax, but a little larger (Fig. 6).

Raphidia. The prosternum (Pl. LIV, fig. 16) is very large, long, and
narrow oblong antero-posteriorly, and is covered by the bent-down

22 EO

338 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

tergite. The mesosternum (fig. 17) is large, each half subrhomboidal and
passing laterally, forming a ridge between the sur- and infra-episternites.
The metasternum (fig. 18) is much as in the mesosternum, there being no
special difference in form or size, since the meso- and metathorax are of

the same size.
THE ABDOMEN.

Corydalus. The é abdomen (Pl. LVILI, figs. 4-5; Pl. LVIII, fig. 1) is not
very long, but broad and thick; ten uromeres; ten tergites, the tenth
rudimentary and conical, concealed by the large ninth tergite, which is
cleft, and bears two pairs of large, long claspers, which are jointed to
the tergite. The pleurites are narrow, membranous. There are eight
urosternites, the eighth cleft along the entire length.

haphidia. The 2 abdomen is moderately long, broad, spindle-shaped.
There are ten uromeres; ten tergites, the tenth small. The pleurites
are well developed, but narrow, bearing the spiracles. Of the urostern- .
ites, seven are well developed, and the ovipositor is remarkably well de-
veloped, more so than in any other Neuroptera (Pl. LVILII, fig. 5-7).

HEMEROBIID A.

THE HEAD.

Ascalaphus.’* (Pl. LI, figs. 3-4.) The head is held vertically; it is
broad and short; the eyes are very large, approaching the Odonata in
this respect, and are double. The epicranium is small and narrow on the
vertex, owing to the large eyes, which nearly meet above. The orbits
are very wide in front of the eyes; the clypeus broad, double, being di-
vided into an anterior and posterior clypeus; the latter is smooth and
flat, transversely oblong, limited on the sides by two deep linear fosse;
the anteclypeus narrows in front and is broadly trapezoidal, but is con-
siderably shorter than the postclypeus. The labrum is broad and very
short, the front edge a little excavated. The gene are large, full, and *
Swollen. The gular region is depressed, moderately wide.

Myrmeleon diversum Hag. (PI. LI, figs. 1,2). The head is short and
moderately broad; the vertex is full and swollen on each side of the
median furrow. No ocelli, and no ocellar area, the latter’ region being
sunken and obsolete. There are two deep, ante-antennal, linear, orbital
fosse in front at the baseof the clypeus. There is no well-marked clypeal
suture. The clypeus is a little shorter than broad, the posterior and
anterior divisions being slightly indicated by a ridge. The labrum is
short and broad. The gula is broad and membranous.

Polystechotes nebulosus. (P1. LI, figs. 8-10.) The head is of the same
shape as in Myrmeleon, but the vertex is entire, full, and convex. Ocelli
wanting, but the ocellar area is full, raised, though not well defined.

1554, longicornis ? from New Jersey. |

156 The specimens examined were from Colorado. I am indebted to Dr. H. Hagen for the identification
of the species.

NEUROPTERA. 339

The orbits are large. The orbital fossz are round, but not so distinct
as in Myrmeleon. The clypeus is as long as broad, the sutures more
distinct than in Myrmeleon; the median transverse ridge is more distinct
thanin Myrmeleon. The post- and anteclypeus are nearly equal in size.
Labrum as in Myrmeleon. The gula is broad, membranons.

Mantispa." (Pl. LII, figs. 4-6.) The head is held vertically, and is as
broad as Jong. The epicranium is broader than long, rather flat, with no
V-shaped suture or ocellar area. The clypeus is large, very distinct,
nearly as broad as long, square at the base, but constricted in the middle.
. The labrum is large, broader than long, much rounded and produced in
front. The gene are broad, and the gular region is rather narrow, but
moderately so compared with Corydalus. The submentum (?) is large,
and nearly as long as broad. The ligula is very large and long, spatu-
late, not divided, and very simple compared with Corydalus.

THE THORAX.

Notum.

In Ascalaphus the pronotum (Pl. LVI, fig. 1) is short and small,
divided into two halves by a deep median suture. In its shape it
approaches that of the Odonata more than any other true Neuroptera.

Myrmeleon. (PI. LIV, fig. 1.) Itis square, much excavated behind
and full in front, a little narrower than long.

Polystechotes. (Pl. LVII, fig.8.) Itis one-half as long as broad, and
is alittle excavated in front and behind.

Mantispa. It is very long, being twice as long as its greatest breadth,
subpyriform in outline, nearly twice as broad in front (full on the front
edge) as behind. It is excavated behind (PI. LV, fig. 1).

The mesonotum. Ascalaphus. (Pl. LVI, fig. 2.) The przscutum is
large with the central portion subcordate, larger than in Myrmeleon.
The scutum is almost entirely divided. Scutellum large and swollen,
apex very obtuse; the postscutellum forms a transverse, flat ridge.

Myrmeleon (Pl. LIV, fig.2.) Rectangular in outline. The prescutum
is very large, as long as broad, and much as in Polysteechotes. The
scutum is not deeply cleft, the median third being entire. ‘The scutel-
lum is small, subtriangular, broad, and with the apex obtuse, while the
side sclerites are large, as in the metanotum. Postscutellum?

Polystechotes. (Pl. LVI, fig. 9). The prescutum is very large, being
nearly as large and wide as the scutum, and divided by a median furrow ;
each half full and rounded in front. The scutum is completely cleft, the
preescutum and scutellum touching ; each side of the scutum is squarish.
The scutellum is broader than long, very acute, being produced in front,
forming a long point. The postscutellum is rather large and very mile,
being divided by a median suture.

Mantispa. (PI. LV, fig. 2.) Prascutum minute, nearly obsolete, not

157 Mantispa brunnea Say, from Utah; identified by Dr. Hagen.

340 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

visible from above. The scutum is, however, much larger than in any
other genera of Neuroptera (restricted), being only cleft on the posterior
one-fifth. The scutellum is very short and broad; one-fourth as long as
broad, with a linear, depressed, acute apex. The postscutellum is not
visible from above, and is only seen by examining the posterior aspect
of the segment in dissected specimens.

The metanotum (Ascalaphus). (Pl. LVI, fig. 3.) Much smaller than the
mesonotum. The prescutum is unusually large, with a swollen cordate
portion. The scutum is entirely divided, the two halves widely sepa-
rated, the prescutum and scutellum meeting, the point of juncture being
very wide.

Myrmeleon. (Pl. LIV, fig. 3.) The preescutum is large, excavated in
front, though not so large as in Polystoechotes; it is wider than the
scutellum. The scutum is entirely divided into halves, so that the pre-
scutum and scutellum touch each other. The scutellum is very full and
rounded behind, as Jong as broad, not being triangular; the side pieces
are large, seen from above.

Polystechotes. (Pl. LVI, fig. 10.) Prescutum? The scutum is com-
pletely divided by the scutellum, which is acutely triangular. Postscu-
tellum ? Oo i

Mantispa. (Pl. LV, fig. 3.) The prescutum obsolete, not visible from
above. The scutum is larger than usual, but only cleft on the posterior
fourth of its length; the scutellum is short, acutely triangular in front,
but very broad, and the sides in front are sinuous; it is smaller and nar-
rower thanin the mesonotum. The postscutellum is not visible unless the
specimen is dissected, when it is seen to form the back of the segment.

Pleurum.

Propleurum (Ascalaphus). The pleurum is hard to describe from a
single specimen, but the sclerites are much rounded, full, and swollen;
the mesothorax jis nearly one-third longer and thicker than the meta-
thorax, while the thorax as a whole is spherical and much consolidated.

Myrmeleon. (PI. LIV, fig.7.) The episternum is nearly twice as large —
as the epimerum. The coxe are very large and long.

Polystaechotes. The episternum is not so much larger than the epime-
rum as in Myrmeleon, but the coxe are longer and slenderer.

Mantispa. The pleurites are very small; the episternum is very
small, irregularly oblong; the epimerum is subdivided, small, narrow,
but a little more regular and larger than the episternum. Cox very
large and long; the trochantine submembranous.

Mesopleurum (Ascalaphus ?).

Myrmeleon. (Pl. LIV, fig. 8.) The flanks are very broad and short,
as a whole. The suprasternite present, very short and broad, equilat-
erally triangular in outline. The episternum is remarkably short and
broad, triangular, being two-thirds shorter than in Polysteechotes. The

NEUROPTERA. 341

coxa is large, much broader than long, subrhomboidal. The mesostig-
mata or their peritremes are situated each on the front and upper angle
of the supra-sternite directly in front of the fore wings.

Polystechotes. (Pl. LVI, figs. 8-15). The pleurites are not so broad
and short as in Myrmeleon. The supra-sternite is considerably longer
than broad, the apex toward the wings being conical. The episternum
is vertically oblong, quite regular, being considerably longer than broad.
The epimerum is moderately broad, square below. The coxa is moder-
ately long, longer than broad; the trochantine regularly conical.

Mantispa. (Pl. LV, fig. 8.) The flanks of the meso- and metathorax
are of the same size and general appearance. The episternum and epi-
merum are each subdivided more or less regularly into two sclerites.
The epimerum as a whole is not so wide as the episternum. The coxa
is large, full, conical; the trochantine is minute, short, triangular.

Metapleurum (Ascalaphus?).

Myrmeleon. (Pl. LIV, fig. 9.) Although the meta- are not much

_ shorter than the mesopleurites, the episternum (which is subdivided into

an upper and lower sclerite) is smaller but nearly of the same shape as
in the mesopleurites, but the coxe are larger and broader in proportion.
The supra-gpimerite is very different, being as broad as long, not
widening above, and it is solid, with no membranous area; while the
infra-epimerite is a linear, antero-posterior ridge becoming triangular
behind. The coxa‘is considerably larger than in the mesothorax. The
trochantine is one-half smaller than that of the mesothorax.

Polystechotes. (Pl. LVI, fig.15.) The meta- are about one-third shorter
than the mesopleurites. The episternum is as in the mesothorax, but the
supra-sternite is fuller, more rounded next to the wings. The epimerum
is divided intoasupra- and infra-epimerite. The cox are more rounded
and globose than in the mesothorax, while the trochantine is — and
not so wide in proportion.

There is a great difference between the thorax of Polystcechotes and
Myrmeleon, that of the latter being about twice as long as in the former;
in both, however, the metathorax is shorter than the mesothorax.

Mantispa. 'The metapleurites are a little stouter and thicker than the
mesopleurites, but have the same structure, though the coxe are consid-
erably shorter.

Sternum.

Ascalaphus ?

Myrmeleon. (Pl. LIV, fig. 4.) The prosternum is rudimentary and
membranous. 7

The mesosternum (PI. LIV, fig. 5) is large and well developed, sub-
cordate, deeply furrowed medially; about two-thirds as long as broad.
There is no suture between it and the infra-episternite.

The metasternum (Pl. LIV, fig. 6) is much smaller than the mesoster-
num, but from lack of alcoholic specimens I can not here describe it.

Polystechotes. The prosternum is rudimentary and membranous.

342 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

The mesosternum is triangular, cordate, one-half as long as wide in
front; distinctly separated by suture from the infra-episternite, with
a deep median furrow. The meta- as the mesosternite, but one-third as
long.

Mantispa. The prosternum is very long and narrow, and is well de-
veloped. The mesosternum is large, broad, about one-third as long as
broad; not distinctly separated by suture from the episternum; in this
respect the metasternum is the same.

THE ABDOMEN.

Ascalaphus. (Pl. LVII, figs. 6,7.) The abdomen is moderately long,
spindle-shaped, with nine uromeres.

Myrmeleon. (Pl. LVI, figs. 8-10.) Very long and slender, more as
in Odonata than other Neuroptera, being slender, cylindrical. There
are seven well developed tergites; the 8th and 9th small, the 9th being
as long as broad. The pleurites are broad, well developed, membranous;
the spiracles distinct. Of the urosternites the first is obsolete, followed
by six well-developed ones; the 7th well developed, oblong. The ¢
claspers are well developed, and are much as in Odonata.

Polystechotes. (Pl. LVILI, figs. 2-4.) The abdomen is much shorter
and thicker than in ena There are ten tergites; the 2nd subdi-
vided into two subtergites, appearing as if two tergites; the 8th is one-
third as long as the 7th; the 9th one-half as long as the 8th; the 10th is
broader than long, the end being subconical. The pleurites are broad,
membranous, six pairs of spiracies visible. There are seven urosternites,
the first membranous and obsolete; the seventh longer than the sixth.
No uropods; the cercopoda radimencee!

Mantispa.—Broad and large, nine uromeres; the first tergite very
short; ninth uromere very short, with very short uropoda?

‘Family PANORPIDA. Plate LX.

THE HEAD.

Panorpa.’® (Pl. LX, figs. 1-3.) No true occiput. The epicranium is
swollen on the vertex, which is as long as broad; there is a small ocellar
area, and a small inter-antennal area. The front of the head is remark-
ably elongated, and is formed by the great development of the clypeus.
The labrum? The gene form an elongated tract, and the gula?

The submentum is a little longer than the nearer. while the lingua
is short.

The antenne are very long and many-jointed, as in moths, and the
minute mandibles are situated at the end of the snout.

168Qn sending the specimen, after dissection, to Professor Hagen, he kindly informs me that it is
‘perhaps P. debilis Westw.”’

NEUROPTERA. 343
THE THORAX.

The pronotum (Pl. LX, fig. 4) is very small and short, with a deep
transverse, impressed line; on the median lineitis excavated in front and
behind. —_

The mesonotum (Pl. LX, fig. 15) is without a prescutum; the scutum
is large, about two-thirds as long as broad, and well-rounded in front.
The scutellum is small, transversely narrow oblong. The post-scutel-
lum is moderately long, interrupted by the median line.

The metanotum (Pl. LX, fig. 6) is much shorter than the mesonotum,
but of the same general shape; the scutellum is also of the same general
shape, but a little longer. The postscutellum is asin the mesonotum.

Pleurum.

The pleurites in this family are very long and narrow, the thorax
being much compressed, its general shape approaching that of the
- Trichoptera and Lepidoptera.

The propleurum (Pl. LX, fig. 7) is rudimentary, the episterna and
epimera being membranous.

The mesopleurum (Pl. LX, fig. 9) has the episternum undivided, and
is moderately full in front. The epimerum is entire, narrow, a little
shorter than the episternum, and not so broad. The coxa is rather
slender; the trochantine long and narrow.

The metapleurum (Pl. LX, fig. 8) is as the mesopleurum, but the
episternum andepimerum are decidedly shorter, and slightly broader in
proportion. The coxe are a little larger and thicker, while the trochan-
tine is about the same.
: Sternum.

The prosternum is linear and rudimentary.

The mesosternum is short and broad,
much as in Lepidoptera.

The metasternum is much smaller
and less distinct than the mesoster-
num.

Finally, in the thorax as a whole,
and ip the form of the pleurites and
sternites, we have a striking approxi-
mation to the Lepidoptera.

THE ABDOMEN.

There are ten uromeres; ten terg-
ites, the first very short and trans-
versely linear, the sixth to tenth nar- Fea ONCTERAT See
- row; there are seven urites, very narrow, as long as broad.

>»

344 REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION, —

The pleurites are membranous, broad, having the spiracles, of which
there are eight pairs as usual, the last pair minute.

Fig. (in text) represents the end of the abdomen of the male of
Panorpa.

Suborder 2. TRICHOPTERA. Plates LIX, figs. 1-5; LXI.

Limnephilus.’? (Pl. LIX, figs. 1-5.) The head differs from all other
Phyloptera in being constructed on a plan closely approaching that of
the lepidoptera. It is short and high, and of the general proportions
of the lepidopterous head. ‘The vertex is as long as broad; the orbits
wide. The clypeus is small, narrow, and situated high up; the labrum
(Fig. 5) is small, narrow, elongate, subtriangular. (The exact differ-
ences from the Lepidopterous head are stated in the American Naturalist,
Nov. 1871, vol. v, p. 711.) The mandibles are not present in Limne-
philus, unless a slight pointed tubercle on each side of the lower part of
the orbits (Fig. —,md?) may represent them. Ifso, they are consolidated
with the epicranium, but I am inclined to think that these do not repre-
sent the mandibles at all, as rudimentary mandibles in the form of a_
movable tubercle are to be seen in Neuronia on each side of the base of
the labrum.!® 5

The maxillary palpi (Fig. 5) are long and slender, directed down-
ward; the lobe on the side (Fig. 4, lac.) hangs down. It may perhaps
be the homologue of the lacinia. The labial palpi are three-jointed (Fig.
5), while the mentum, palpiger, and an undivided rudimentary ligula
are present. | |

The gene are broad on the under side, while the gular region is nar-
row. The submentum is small and narrow; the mentum is trape
zoidal, broadest in front. )

THE THORAX.

Limnephilus. The pronotum (Pl. L-XI, flg. 1) is much as in Lepidopt-
era, being divided into two transversely oval, narrow bosses by a deep
median suture. )

Mesonotum. (Fig. 2.) The patagia are thick, solid, rounded oval;
longer than broad. The prescutum is obsolete.

The scutum is long and broad, with a prominent acute angle in the
middle on each side. Surface with a deeply-impressed median line ex-
tending to the scutellum, and with a parallel, lateral impressed line.
In general form there is a close approximation to the lepidopterous
mesoscutum. It is deeply excavated behind for the reception of the
scutellum, which is large, a little longer than broad, and subtriangular.
The postscutellum is either wanting or it may be represented by a
transverse ridge.

The metanotum (Fig. 3) is much as in the lepidopterous type. It is

159A common species, LD. pudicus Hag.; identified by Dr. Hagen.

160Tn Neuronia they appear to be nearly of the same form as represented by Savigny in Prhyganea
grandis (Mémoires sur les Animaux sans Vertébres. Pl. I, Fig.1.) In the pupa the mandibles are
much larger.

NEUROPTERA. 345

a little more than one-half as long as the mesonotum. The prescutum
is well marked, small, divided by the median line into two transversely
oblong pieces, the broad end next to the median line.

The scutum is deeply cleft behind for the reception of the triangular
scutellum, the anterior part of the latter nearly reaching the front edge
of the scutum. It is narrower than long, the lateral sutures obscure.
The postscutellum is wanting.

Pleurum.

Propleurum. (Fig. 4.). The episternum and epimerum are minute,
rudimentary.

Mesopleurum. The meso- and metapleurites are high and short; the
metapleurites a little shorter than the meso-; in this respect much as
in Lepidoptera. The episternum is not subdivided; it is square oblong,
nearly three times as long (deep) as wide. The epimerum is narrower,
but of nearly the same shape, but excavated by the wing-membrane.
_ The coxe are long, narrow, conical, as long as the episternite; the tro-
chantine one-half as wide as the coxa.

Metapleurum. (fig. 6.) The episternum is much narrower than the
mesepisternum, especially towards the wings, and the epimerum is nearly
as wide as in the mesopleurum. The coxe are fuller and thicker than
those of the mesothorax, while the trochantine is much smaller, being
~ one-half as thick and shorter than in the mesothorax.

Sternum.

The prosternum is short, but distinctly developed. The mesosternwm
is rather large, about two-thirds as long as broad, produced backward
in the middle, with a subacute apex. The metasternum is obsolete, rep-
resented by a membranous area.

THE ABDOMEN.

The abdomen (lig. 7-9) is long and siender, cylindrical, much as in the
lower Lepidoptera. ‘There are nine uromeres equally well developed, the
eighth not much smaller than the preceding one; there are eight urites,
the eighth very short. The pleural region is membranous, broad, but
obsolete on the first and eighth uromeres, with a spiracle in the middle
ot each of the first eight pleuritic areas.

It will be observed that the Trichoptera occupy a much higher sys-
tematic position than any of the foregoing groups. This is seen in the
loss of two terminal segments in the abdomen, in the small concentrated
head, and the subspherical thorax.

The Trichoptera and Panorpide differ from the other Neuroptera in
having the trochantine well developed and nearly as large. or larger
than the coxe; in this respect and in the form of the legs they closely
resemble the Lepidoptera. Brauer* has called attention to the fact
that in the Trichoptera and Panorpide the coxe are divided into two
halves.

23 EC

CHAP DER XxX TE,

NOTE ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE

ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST, ILLUSTRATED WITH A COL-,

ORED ZOO-GEOGRAPHICAL MAP OF NORTH AMERICA.

In the first report of the Commission (Chapter VI, p. 136) we traced
the geographical limits of the Rocky Mountain locust, giving its east-
ern, northern, western, and its approximate southern limits; the latter
being farther perfected and revised in Chapter VI of our second re-

port, and in the colored map accompanying the report. On page 168 —

of our second report we also showed that the geographical limits of the
western cricket (species of Anabras) ‘‘are probably nearly or quite co-
extensive with those of the Rocky Mountain locust.”

For the convenience of the general reader, as well as of naturalists,
we have, with the permission of Dr. F. V. Hayden, reproduced, with
certain minor corrections, a colored z06- geographical map of North
America. It was originally prepared to illustrate the distribution of
certain fresh-water Crustacea (Phyllopods) and appears in the Twelfth
Annual Report of the United States Geological Survey of the Terri-
tories. Upon sending a proof to Mr. J. A. Allen, who has paid special

attention to the geographical distribution of the mammals and birds, —

‘ he kindly returned it without corrections, stating that it agreed with
his views as to the limits cf the zodlogical regions and: provinces.
Another copy was sent to Prof. A. E. Verrill, who made some corrections
in the eastern province around the Bay of Fundy, and a few less im-
portant changes. Hence it is believed that the map will represent with
tolerable accuracy the zodlogical distribution not only of the insects in
general, but of nearly all the other classes of the animal kingdom, ex-
cluding the marine forms.

The range of the Rocky Mountain locust is co-equal with the light-
brown area, 1. e., the Central Province, except that it will probably not
be found south of the isothermal of 72°. This province is also the home
of the species of Anabrus or Western Crickets. These are among the
most characteristic Orthoptenus insects to be found in this province,
although there are many other species not to be found elsewhere. On
the other hand, the common red-legged locust, Caloptenus femur-rubrum,
occurs all over the Boreal or Canadian, the Eastern, the Western
(Pacific), as well as the Central Province, so that it ranges over the
whole of North America south of the limit of trees and north of Mexico
and Lower California. The distribution of a third species, Caloptenus
atlanis, is nearly co-extensive with that of C. femur-rubrum, although it

346

BLUESTONE. | 547

is rare in the Central Province, it having only been found at Reno, on
the western edge of the Central Province, and may possibly not be found
associated with C. femur-rubrum in Utah.

The Central Province is characterized also by peculiar species of |
Myripods, of Arachnida, of Pseudoneuroptera, Coleoptera, Diptera, as
well as Lepidoptera and Hymenoptera; such as are not found in the
Eastern Province or the Pacific Province.

Lge Pet : Se hay ipe sy ee fete pa Kuan ae

Soke ek a? oh, ky f nL Pe 4 RAR Cee ane ee ‘
: : J ’ . " wen feat es 7
5 ; Y ra es: cog :
- ; RX Ce y §
aes 7 = ei
Fe Boy) id aq car h
7 ? an} ‘ o 5 ’
. He Ls i eyed)
i =
ee f Rid ‘
. hs a ay th . -
+ . ie 1 > 7: ay
t 4 bn ; " \ 2
i " Festi la i 2
* - 7 ee 2 3 z
= | F
a - G5
a . oy
: § Ke clek ; p>
3 a
te as + y © i \
7 i os i he iat q _
ait ~ ch)! ay Peter REG
f 43 '
daw es, VAR Ue bu NP if 4
\ cf ae a 2, ‘=
ae ; } + $ i = \
- } Me . ve zy coe +
Vaal Sh Pe Aa
— LU f i 4 &
es - in , ae
,? c ¥ I ‘
‘ i
mars > ; = ¥ , k
; . i ee ak om n%
w = : 4 Nai ge
& s . : 2 Nets pay
1-4 . ¢ 339 41 en
SI Pues is 7 , ¥ fs Ni 5
7 5 x ¥ oa }
.
i : ahi = 3
a : . as =: : ws
4 = ; f i = By
- ) ‘ y F NP ate
: .
i <
= Aye
{ ny eB ~
< ay as ee “ i
aA S
a ae _ “
sf aT ES = rte =
3 i io # i f
= a ‘ie gan
J : u i =
i + Ss a ©
gt ee = . <
‘ L- ; -
' 00 — ;
- ‘ 3 ;
, = — .
a re
sae 3 é = Tess lead
. Ll Wg ~ F
i lL, i) 5 y , Fi ‘ s. of
2 2 ee =
wh r £ = a
== > x 3 °) i
, ‘
sf 4 ¢
‘ m’ a Hs
p aes, s ‘ =
‘ i ee
a vy if ane x =
ie A a 5
cs es yee - \
é } a 4
2 4 Sal ats Y
t \
% Nik vee as
' Rd as oF
z ‘ gr 6 ¢
R ihe
f .
= s a < - r
, z i
j if
f
} : 3 & .
m/l
' Fe
“3 ‘ a Be \ r
' + = \
. Ye F =
AS % nite pine Ay Be
- .
i hese:
- y ant, Sy Ss
i 5 i
‘
- }
: = eh bin Aae
at
; re I a
¥ - ‘
+ vhs ri % =~
ey | a. oa I
} gies -
. :
a im
4 mud
va » =
+ x
¥
i
. \ é ri
met z
4 } +
: é
nl
5 i) =
o 2 Pied
A vez
’ A j
ce ‘ Vas | -
. Ms
= anny vy 2 :
, - , ba F
ba : , 7 x + t
aa Biren 4 f
aa = 4! =

LETTERING OF THE ANATOMICAL PLATES.

THE HAD.

epic, epicranium.

ely, clypeus.

a. cly, ante-clypeus.

p. cly, post-clypeus.

lb, or lbr, labrum.

lb, labium.

gena, gena.

gula, gula.

ant, antenna.

e, eye.

oc, ocelli.

ce, occiput.

of, occipital foramen.

mx, Ist maxilla.

moe’, 2d maxilla.

p, palpus.

¢e, cardo of maxilla.

St, sti, or stip, stipes of maxilla.
lac, lacinia of maxilla.

Ss. m., submentum.

Mm, Mentum.

palpr, palpiger.

lig, ligula.

le, lamina exterior of ligula.
li, lamina interior of ligula.
md, mandible.

THE THORAX.

PRO, prothorax.

MESO, mesothorax.

META, metathorax.

n, notum of prothorax.

7m, notum of mesothorax.

nm’, notum of metathorax.

p. 8c, prescutum of prothorax.
sc, scutum of prothorax.

sel, scutellum of prothorax.

p. sel, post-scutellum of prothorax.
p. sc’ )

se!

sel!

p. sc’

tho same sclerites of mesonotum.

THE THORAX—Continued.

p. sel’

scl!

sel!’

fp. sel!’

st, sternum of prothorax.

st', sternum of mesothorax.
st’, sternum of metathorax.
epis, episternum of prothorax.
epts', episternum of mesothorax.
epis, epistornum of metathorax.
em, epimerum of prothorax.
em’, epimernm of mesothorax.
em’, epimerum of metathorax.
te, trochantine of prothorax.
te’, trochantine of mesothorax.
te’, trochantine of metathorax.
ca, coxa of prothorax.

cz’, coxa of mesothorax.

cx’, coxa of metathorax.

tr, trochanter of prothorax.
tr’, trochanter of mesothorax.
tr’, trochanter of metathorax.
8.-epis, &c., sur-episternum.
8.-em, &c., sur-epimerum.
z.-epis, &c., infra-episternum.
1.-em, &c., infra-epimerum.
pes, leg.

pt, patagia.

W!, front wing.

W?, hind wing.

the same sclerites of metanotum.

THE ABDOMEN.

A, abdomen.

c, cercopoda (cerci).

rh, rhabdite, or elements of the ovipositor, or
clasper in the male.

ur, urosternite, or sternum of an uromere.*

tg, tergal sclerite or tergite.

pen, penis.

st, stigma or spiracle.

D, dorsal view.

L, lateral view.

V, ventral view.

* Tho author has sometimes inadvertently used the term uriteinstead of urosternite ; Lacaze-Duthier’s
term urite is equivalent to our uromere.

The engraver has in some cases omitted] the accents distinguishing the parts similarly lettered on the
plates, but no confusion is likely to arise, upon careful examination of the figures and comparison with
the text.

(Ds

Fic.

FG.

Fic.

Fie.
Fic.
Fic.
Fie.

FIG.

Fic.

FIG.

Fie.

FIG.

Fic.

. Leucania unipuncta,

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE I.

. Leucania unipuncta: a, male moth; b, ab-

domen of female—natural size: c, eye,
d, antennal joints of male; e, do. of fe-
male—enlarged. (After Riley.)
genitalia of male
moth: A, end of body, denuded of
hairs, showing the upper clasps pro-
truding, and the natural position of
the hidden organs by dotted lines; B,
the organs extruded—enlarged. (After
Riley.)

. Leucania unipuncta, ovipositor of female

moth: a, end of abdomen, denuded and
showing ovipositor atr est; b, same,

with ovipositor fully extended; e, , re-
tractile subjoints; h, eggs—enlarged:
g, eggs, natural size. (After Riley.)
Fie. 4. Leucania unipuncta: pupa, natural size.
(After Riley.)
Fic. 5. Leucania unipuncta: larva, natural size.
(After Riley.)
Fie. 6. Lachina flavicauda, somewhat enlarged.
(After Riley.)
Fic. 7. Hxorista leucanie,
(After Walsh.)
Fic. 8. Oalosoma calidum: a, larva; b, beetle—
natural size. (After Riley.)

PLATE II.

. Pasimachus elongatus, natural size. (Af-
ter Riley.)

. Harpalus caliginosus, natural size. (After
Riley.)

. Metapodius femoratus, natural size. (Af-
ter Glover.)

. Calosoma scrutator, natural size. (After

Riley.)
Ophion purgatus, natural size. (After
Riley.)

Fig. 6, Apanteles congregatus, greatly enlarged.
(After Walsh.)

Fie. 7. Pezomachus minimus: cocoons, natural
size. (After Walsh.)

Fic. 8. Mesochorus vitreus, greatly enlarged. (Af-
ter Walsh.)

Fig. 9. Pezomachus minimus: male and female.
greatly enlarged. (After Walsh.)

PLATE III.

. Paleacrita vernata: a, full-grown larva,

natural size; b, eggs, natural size and
enlarged ; c, side view of an enlarged
segment of larva; d, dorsal view of
same. (After Riley.)

. Paleacrita vernata: a, venation of fore-

wing of male, natural size; b, do. of
hind-wing; c, joint of male antenna,
enlarged. (After Riley.)

. Paleacrita vernata: a, male moth, natural

size; b, female do., natural size; c,
joints of female antenns, enlarged ; d,
joint of female abdomen, enlarged; e,
ovipositor, enlarged. (After Riley.)

. Paleacrita vernata : female pupa, enlarged.

(After Riley.)

. Anisopteryx pometaria: a, b, egg, side and

top views, enlarged; c, d, side and dor-

sal views of an enlarged segment of
larva; e, egg mass, natural size; f,
larva, natural size; yg, female pupa,
natural size; h, dorsal view of anal tu-
bercle of do., enlarged. (After Riley.)

Fic. 6. Anisopteryxpometaria: a, venation of fore-

. wing of male, natural size; b, do. of
hind-wing; c, d, side and dorsal views
of joints of male antenne, enlarged.
(After Riley.)

Fie. 7. Anisopteryx pometaria: a, male moth, nat-
ural size; b, female do.; ¢, joints of
female antenn, enlarged; d, joints of
female abdomen, enlarged. (After Ri-
ley.)

Fic. 8. Anisopteryx pometaria: a, male pupa, en-
larged; b, female do. (After Riley.)

(2)

somewhat enlarged. ©

EXPLANATION

OF PLATES. ‘6

PLATE IV.

A healthy stalk of wheat on the left, the one on
the right dwarfed and the lower leaves begin-
ning to wither and turn yellow; the stem
swollen at three places, near the ground, where
the flaxseeds (hf) 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).

5, the larva, enlarged; the line by the side, in this
and other figures, showing the natural length.

¢, the flaxseed, puparium or pupa case.

d, the pupa or chrysalis

e, the Hessian Fly, natural size, laying its eggs in
the creases of the laf.

J, female Hessian Fly, much enlarged.

g, male Hessian Fly, much enlarged.

h, flaxseed between the leaves and stalk.

i, chalcid or ichneumon parasite of the Hessian
Fly: male, enlarged.

Figs. 6, drawn by Mr. Riley; d and /, by Mr.-
Burgess; a, g, and c, %, by the author; copied
on wood by L. Trouvelot.

PLATE: V.

Hic. A. Side view of the female Hessian Fly,
greatly enlarged : a, three joints taken
from the middle of the antennz of the
female; a’, the three terminal female
antennal joints ; a”, the four basal, and
a”, the two terminal male antennal
joints ; b, a maxillary palpus; c, scales
from the body and wings; d, e, sideand
vertical view of the last joint of the
foot, showing the claws, and food-pad
or pulvillus between them, and the
scales on the joint. Drawn by Mr. E.
Burgess.

Fie. B. Larva magnified, with the breast-bone in
the 2d next ring to the head: Ba, the
breast-bone highly magnified ; Bb,

head from beneath, enlarged ; Be, lar-
val spiracle and its tubercle and tra-
chea leading from the spiracle. B
drawn by Mr. Riley; Ba, Bb, Be, by
Mr. Burgess.

Fia C. Side and front view of the pupa or chrys-
alis. Drawn by Burgess. The abdo-
men of the side view of pupa is rather
long, as the insect, when drawn, was
just emerging from the semi-pupa
stage, which it assumed December Ist.

Fie. D. The flaxseed, puparium, or pupa case.
The line by the side of the complete
figures denotes the natural length of
the insect.

PLATE VI.

Wie. 1. Chalcophora virginica?: ant, antenna; lbr,
labrum; md, mandible; ma, 1st max-
illa; ma’, 2d maxilla (labium); Jp,
labial palpus; (this lettering the same
for the other figures on Plates VI-XV;
l. pal, labial palpus, enlarged; s, seta;
ch, chitinous support.

Hie. 2. Dicerca divaricata, enlarged about twice:
b, head and three thoracic segments,
seen from beneath.

Fie. 3. Unknown larva, sweet gum tree, Houston,
Texas: v, ventral view; p, prothorax;
m, mesothorax; m’, metathorax.

Fic. 5. Buprestid larva from under hemlock bark:
a, natural size; b, head and protho-
rax from above; c, the same, drawn
from below.

All the figures and details drawn by Dr. C. F. Gissler.
PLATE VII.

Fie. 1. Llaphidion parallelum: a, from above;
b, from beneath ; /, ligula-like process
situated behind and not between the
labial palpi.

Fic. 2. Unknown longicorn larva under bark of
pin oak, Houston, Tex.; v, under side.

Fic. 3. Oriocephalus agrestis: pupa, dorsal view,
enlarged 2 times.

Fic. 3a. Oriocephalus agrestis: pupa, ventral view,

Fic. 4. Melanophila, under bark of spruce: v 5,
under side of prothoracic disc. (See,
also, Pl. XII, Fig. 1.)

Gissler del.
PLATE VIII.

Fia. 1. Unknown longicorn larva, from under
‘park of pitch pine, Atlanta, Ga. x 2
times: va, head and five succeeding seg-
ments, from beneath; vb, 4th abdomi-
nal segment, from beneath; vc, 7th
abdominal segment, from beneath;
lat, lateral view of head and four suc-
ceeding segments, with prothoracic
and 1st abdominal spiracle; md, two
views of the mandibles. Length of

larva 37™™; width of prothoracic seg-
ment 10™™; length of same 4.5™™;
width of mesothoracic 9.5™™; of 1st
abdominal segment 9™™, Average
width 8.1™™,

Fic. 2. Saperda tridentata. Length 18™™; width
of prothoracic segment 5™™; v, under
side of head and five succeeding seg-
ments; lat, lateral views of the same;
md, three views of the mandibles.

All the figures enlarged, and drawn by C. F. Gissler, under the author’s directions.

(3)

® EXPLANATION

OF PLATES.

PLATE IX.

Fic. 1. Asemum mestum: v, under side of thora-
cic segments, showing the three pairs
of legs; with the three succeeding
segments; lat, lateral view of head,
three thoracic and 1st abdominal seg-
ments.

Fic. 2. Longicorn larva, under bark of oak, At-
lanta, Ga. Length 18™"; width of pro-
thoracic segment 5.2™™: ventral view
same as dorsal. Body narrowest in
the middle ; prothoracic segment short
and very broad; the elevated areas or
callosities dark and prominent; an-
tennz long, 4-jointed; 2d joint much
shorter than the 1st; 4th joint minute,

half as long as the 3d is thick; labrum
rather narrow; 3 pairs of short, acute
thoracic feet.

Fic. 3. Longicorn larva, under bark of Pinus stro-
bus, May 26. Length, 14™™; a, two
fleshy processes, with horny tips, on
the median area of tergum of 9th ab-
dominal segment.

Fic. 4. Longicorn larva, on sweet gum tree (log),
Houston, Tex. Length, 10™™; e, end
of body, showing a curved spine on the
dorsal side of the 9th abdominal seg-
ment, and on each side of the latter a
fleshy process with a terminal bristle.

C. F. Gissler del.

PLATE X.

Fic.1. Orthosoma brunneum: v, under side of

three thoracic (with feet) and first
two abdominal segments; lat, side of
head and four succeeding segments,
showing the feet; lbr, labrum and
clypeus with front edge of epicra-

Fic. 2. Longicorn larva from sycamore: v, under
side of the three thoracic and four
basal abdominal segments.

Fic. 3. Pupa of a lengicorn beetle (Oncideres ?)
found under bark of pin oak, April.
Length, 18™™,; width of prothorax,

nium. 4.4mm,
Gissler del.
PLATE XI.
Fie. 1. Rhagium lineatum, dorsal view: v, under brum; mi, mala or single lobe of the
side of head and pro- and mesothoracic maxilla; md, mandible.
segments; ums, one of the middle ven- | Fic. 3. Longicorn larva from oak log, Provi-
tral segments, magnified six times; dence, May 20. v, under side of tho-
ml, mala of the maxilla. racic segments, showing the legs; ml,
Fic. 2. Rhagiwm lineatum, vertex, top of head: ep, “mala of maxilla; mz’, labium; sm,

front of epicranium; oc, eyes; ¢ly, cly-
peus, membraneous on the edge; ch,
two chitinous supports of (/br) the la-

submentum; m, mentum; lig, ligula.
Fie. 4. Saperda larva from willow.

Gissler del.

PLATE XII.

©

Fie. 1. Melanophila: lbr, labrum and front of | Fic. 4. Details of mouth-parts of Saperda larva

head, with the antenne (ant) ; s’, pro-
thoracic stigma; s, one of the abdom-
inal stigmata.
Fie. 2. Xylotrechus colonus: lat., side view of head.
and 6 succeeding segments.
2a. Xylotrechus colonus, mouth parts: letter-
ing as in other figures.
Fig. 3. Xylotrechus colonus ?, under bark of black
birch, Providence, May 20.

Fie.

from willow trunk, represented at
Plate XI, Fig. 4.

Fic. 5. Longicorn larva found under hemlock
bark, The Glen, N. H., July 22.

Fig. 6. Longicorn larva found under bark of hem-
lock, Bath, Me., July 30. Enlarged;
md,o, outer; md,i, inner side of the

| mandible.

All the figures enlarged. Gissler del.
PLATE XIII.

Fic. 1. Unknown larva from log of sweet gum
tree, Houston, Tex.
Fie. 2. Pupa, h. Glen, N.H., July 22.
Fig. 3. Xestobium affine, mouth-parts of larva.
(See Bulletin 7, U. S. Entomological
Commission, p. 109.)

Fie. 4. Hylurgops pinifex, and mouth-parts. (See

Bulletin 7, U. S. Entomologieai Com-
mission, pp. 177, 232.)

Fig. 5. Pissodes strobi, larva (9™™ long) and mouth-
parts.

Fic. 6. Pissodes strobi, pupa: hd, frontof bead ané
peak, with antennz; ab, end of abdo-
men, with the fleshy lateral processes.

Gissler del.
(4)

”

EXPLANATION

OF PLATES.

PLATE XIV.

Vie. 1. Xyloteres bivittatus, larva.

Fia. 14. Xyloteres bivittatus, pupa.

Fic. 2. Xyleborus celatus, larva.

Fic. 2». Xyleborus celatus, mandible.

Tic. 3. Xyleborus celatus, pupa, dorsal view.

Fila. 3+. Xyleborus celatus, pupa, end of abdomen,
much enlarged.

Fia. 4. Crypturgus atomus, larva.

Fig. 5. Orypturgus atomus, larva: md, mandible;
mx’, labium.

Fig. 5°. Crypturgus atomus, larva: md, mandible.

Fic. 5°. Orypturgus atomus, maxilla.

All the figures enlarged.
PLATE XV.

*
Fic. 1. Selandria larva, common on Oarya porcina,
with details of mouth parts: leg, leg;
mex, maxilla; gal, galea (=mala ezx-
terior) ; lac, lacinia (=mala interior).
Other letters as heretofore.
Fie, 2. Deltoid larva (before last molt), on Carya
porcina and sometimes on oak, May
25, June 20th: n.s., larva of natural
size, head downward; p?, third leg;
mez and mz’, maxilla and labium (the

Fic. 5°. Orypturgus atomus, pupa, end of body.
Fic. 6. Chalcid parasite of X. ceelatus or Crypt-
urgus atomus: Ww, wing; ant, antenna.
Fia. 6%. Chalcid parasite, larva, 2™™ in length.
Fic. 7. Unknown larva, 4™™ in length, under
bark of pine, probably preying on
lignivorous scolytid larve. Maine.
Fic. 8. Pupa of longicorn larva, under bark of
sycamore tree, Brooklyn, N. Y.: p,
end of abdomen seen from above.
Fic. 9. Hylurgops pinifex, pupa.

Gissler del.

2 dotted line ends on the maxillary lobe
or mala) ; sp, spinneret at end of lin
gua; p, maxillary palpus; cly, cly-
peus; lbr, labrum ; J, fleshy lobe.

Fic. 3. Unknown larva, common under bark, prey-
ing on destructive scolytid beetles.

Fic. 4. Unknown larva, yellowish, under bark ;
8™™ jn length: ab, end of abdomen.

Fic. 5. Carabid larva, under bark of pine; length,

4mm

°

All the figures enlarged. Gissler del.
PLATE XVI.

EMBRYOLOGY OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS.

Fic. 1. Dorsal view of embryo, showing the sto-
modzum (st) and proctodeum (pr),
with the nervous system: br, brain;
g. op, optic ganglion; ng, ganglia; the
salivary glands (sal) and the two pairs
of thoracic spiracles and eight pairs
of abdominal spiracles 1-8, and indica-
tions of the trachew (tr’ tr”), perhaps
in part the fat bodies; am, amnion.

Fic. 2. Nucleated cells of the skin of the 2d seg-
ment: Xz

Fic. 3. Nucleated cells of the amnion: x} A.

Fic. 4. Portion of the eye: c, cones; rod, rods;
ret, retina.

Fig. 5. Vertical view of the head, with the out-
line of the brain and the rudiments of
the three ocelli.

- Author del.

PLATE XVII.

EMBRYOLOGY OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS.

Fic. 1. Embryo when first observed in the egg.
I-IV, antenne and mouth-parts,
V—VII, three pairs of legs.

Fic. 14, Thesame, enlarged. Amnion not drawn:
oce, occiput.

Fic. 2. More advanced embryo.

Fic. 2°. Four abdominal ganglia.

Fic. 3. Embryo, showing the three lobes of the
maxillz, and the two lobes of the labi-
um.

Fie. 4. More advanced embryo, showing the
stigmata, the fat body, and the anus.

Fic. 5. Some of thefree cells among the yolk cells.

Author del.

PLATE

XVIIL

EMBRYOLOGY OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS.

Fic. 1. Advanced embryo seen from beneath, show-
ing the brain and subcesophageal gan-
glia and the two succeeding pairs
(1-3); also the three lobes of the 1st
maxill~, and the two lobes of the 2d
maxille.

Fic. 2. Embryo in act of turning: ng,
am, amnion.

anglia ;

Fie. 3. Head from above: oc, anterior ocellus;
ocn, ocellar nerve; st, stomodzeum.

Fie. 4. One of the procephalic lobes, with the an-
tenna attached; showing the eye, the
optic ganglion, and the antenna.

Author del.
(5)

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE XIX.

EMBRYOLOGY OF CALOPTENUS SPRETUS.

Fic. 1. Section (No. 1) of head of embryo, showing
the brain and eyes: f, white or fibrous
matter; gc, outer layer of ganglion-
cells enveloping the white or fibrous
matter.

Fic. 2. Section (No. 6) through suboesophageal
ganglion, sg, and stomach (stm); y,

Fic. 3. Section (No. 8) through end of oesopha-
gus (oe), also passing through the six
stomachic cceca (cewc) and ganglion

(g) and a pair of the legs (leg). >

Fic. 4. Section (No. 11) through the stomach and
coca and ganglion.

Fic. 5. Portion of the serous layer: x 3B.

yolk. Fic. 6. Section of a trachea.
Author del.
PLATE XX.
EMBRYOLOGY OF CALOPTENUS ATLANIS. °
_ Fic. 1. Embryo 10 daysold. Section No. 35 from ganglion (g),the trachea (é),and the

end (the sections numbered from the
end of abdomen forwards), through the
brain (br) and optic ganglion (op. g)
and eyes.

Fic. 2. Ameeboid cells of the protoplasmic net-
work enclosing the yolk-balls: n, nu-
cleus.

Fie. 3. Section No. 26 through the same embryo,
passing through the heart (ht), the

legs (I).

Fic. 34. Section of the main trachea, enlarged.

Fic. 3». Section through the chorion (ch), and the
serous membrane (s.m), with the nu-
cleus (7).

Fic. 4. Section 27 through the heart.

Fic. 5. Section 20, showing the protoplasmic net-
work in the yolk.

Author del.

PLATE XXI.

EMBRYOLOGY OF CALOPTENUS ATLANIS.

Fic. 5a. Section through the yolk: n, nuclei stain-
ing red with carmine; am, protoplas-
mic threads arising from the amnion.

Fic. 6. Section 7 through the same embryo as on
Pl. XX: gl, inner or glandular layer
of intestine; jl, outer or muscular
(faser) layer; wt, urinary tubes; wi’,
the same seen in section.

¥ic. 7. Section No. 5, through the intestine; do?,
dorsal organ?; bl, blastoderm.

Fic. 8. Section No. 4from end of body, through
the proctodzum (p7).
Fic. 8a. Same section as 8, showing section of the

proctodzeum, pr: fi, faser layer; gl, -

glandular layer of the proctodeum;
am, amnion; Ol., blastoderm; much
enlarged.

Fic. 9. Section No. 3, passing through the edge of
the proctodzum: ch, chorion; do, dor-
salorgan, X 4 A.

Author del.

PLATE XXII.

EMBRYOLOGY OF XYLEBORUS AND HYLURGOPS.

Fic. 1. Xyleborus ceelatus, embryo 24 hours after
fertilization: pb, primitive band; ser,
serous membrane: pl, procephalic
lobe.

Fic. 2. Xyleborus celatus;: a)-a’, arthromeres of
head and thorax; 1-8, first eight ab-
dominal arthromeres; th, protoplasmic
threads connecting cells of amnion
with the serous membrane.

Fic. 3. Xyleborus celatus, dorsal view of erabryo:
pl, procephalic lobes.

Fic. 4. Hylurgops pinifex, embryo. Gissler del.

Fie. 5. Xyleborus celatus, embryo about fou,
days old, showing spiracles (sp!—sp?)
in each thoracic arthromere, or eleven

pairs of spiracles in all: tr, traches?
1-4, antennz and mouth parts.

Fic. 6. Xyleborus celatus, head of embryo, seen
from beneath.

Fic. 7. Hylurgops pinifex, advanced embryo.

Gissler del.

Fic. 8. Hylurgops pinifex, larva 1.5™™ long: st’,
prothoracic stigma; st, stomach; i,
intestine; 7, rectum.

Fic. 9. Hylurgops pinifex: a, three larva immedi-

ately after hatching; 0, one, enlarged.
Gissler del.
Fic. 10. Hylurgops pinifex, end of body of larva
1.5™™ in length: a, anus; as, anal
| sucker. Gissler del.

Figs. 1-3, 5 drawn by the author.
(6)

a ee ae

‘

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE XXIII.

Fie.1. Forjicala teniata Dohrn, head, upper side. | Fic.7. Forjicula teniata Dohrn, pronotum, dorsal

Fia. 2. Forjficula teniata Dohrn, head, underside, view.
lac, lacinia; Je, lamina exterior of | Fic.8. Forjicula teniata Dohrn, meso- and meta-
ligula. notum.
Fia. 3. Forficula teeniata Dohrn, head, side view. Fic. 9. Forjicula teniata Dohrn, pro-, meso-, and
Fic. 4. Forjicula teeniata Dohrn, mandible. meta-thorax, sternal view.
Fie. 5. Forficula teniata Dohrn, maxilla. Fies. 10-12. Forjicula larva, pro-, meso-, and meta-
Fic. 6. Forficula teniata Dohrn, 2d maxilla (la- notum: not, notum; pst, pre-sternum;
bium): J, ligula; le, lamina exterior; st, sternum.
p, palpus.
Allenlarged. Drawn by C. F. Gissler, under author’s direction.
PLATE XXIV.
Fic. 1. Forjficula, American species. Propleurum: | Fia. 6. Forjficula, American species. Metaster-
not, notum. num,
Fic. 2. Forjicula, American species. Mesopleu. | Fic. 7. Forjicula, American species. Abdomen,
rum: not, notum. lateral view: c, cercopoda.
Fic. 3. Forjicula, American species. Metapleu- | Fic. 8. Forjicula, American species. Abdomen,
rum: not, notum. dorsal view: c, cercopoda.
Fic. 4. Forjicula, American species. Prosternum. | Fic. 9. Forjicula, American species. Abdomen,
Fia. 5. Forjicula, American species. Mesoster- ventral view: c, cercopoda.

num.
All the figures enlarged. Gissler del., under the author’s directions.

(Pls. XX V-XX XII drawn by J.S. Kingsley.)

PLATE XXV.
Figs. 1-14. Heads (front view) of typical Orthoptera.

PLATE XXVI.

Fias. 1-13. Heads (top view) of typical Orthoptera. | Fics. 14-27. Heads (side view) of typical Ortho
| | ptera.

PLATE XXVIII.
Figs. 1-14. Labium of typical Orthoptera.

PLATE XXVIII.

Fies. 1-12. Maxilla (left) of typical Orthoptera. Fies. 13-20. Prothorax (tergal view) of typical
| Orthoptera.

PLATE XXIX.

Fies. 1-13. Prothorax (lateral view) of typical | Fics. 14-16. Prothorax (tergal view) of typical
Orthoptera. Orthopera.

PLATE XXX.

Fics. 1-13. Meso- and metathorax (tergal view) of typical Orthoptera.

PLATE XXXI.

Fics. 1-12. Meso- and metapleura of typical Ortho- | Fics. 13-21. Prosternum of typical Orthoptera.
ptera. ,

‘ PLATE XXXII.
Fics. 1-13. Meso- and metasternum of typical Orthoptera.

PLATE XXXIII.
Fiaes. 1-3. Momtis carolina. Prothorax.
Fics. 4,5. Mantis carolina. Meso- and metanotum.
Fie. 6. Prisopus (Brazil). Propleurum.

Fic. 7. Prisopus (Brazil). Meso- and metapleurum.
Fic. 8. Prisopus (Brazil). Prosternum.

Fic. 9. Prisopus (Brazil). Meso-and metasternum.
Gissler del.

‘ (7)

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE XXXIV.

Fics. 1-8, 10, 11. Abdomen (tergal view) of typical

Fic. 9. Abdomen (tergal view) of male Diaphero-
female Orthoptera.

mera.

PLATE XXXV.

Fics. 1-9. Abdomen (end, tergal view) of typical | Fics. 10-16. Abdomen (end, tergal view) of typical
female Orthoptera. | male Orthoptera.

PLATE XXXVI.

Fics. 1-9. Abdomen, side view, of typical female Orthoptera.

PLATE XXXVII.

Fics. 1-6. End of abdomen, side view, of typical Orthoptera.

PLATE XXXVIII.

Fics. 7-16. End of abdomen, side view, of typical female Orthoptera.
(Plates XXXIV-XXXVIII drawn by J. S. Kingsley.)

PLATE XXXIX.

Fic. 1. Termopsis angusticollis, head, from be- | Fic. 5. Termes flavipes, head, from side.
neath: x, hypopharyngeal chitinous | Fic. 6. Psocus sp., head, from above: v, v-shaped
support. (Gissler). suture.
Fic. 2. Termopsis angusticollis, head, from above. | Fic. 7. Psocus sp., head, from side.
Fic. 3. Termopsis angusticollis, head, from side; | Fic. 8. Pteronarcys californica, head, drawn from
the clypeus is shaded. the side.
ia. 4. Termes flavipes, head, from above: »v, epi-
cranial v-shaped suture. |

Figs. 1-5 drawn by C. F. Gissler; 6,7, 8, by William W. Griffin: all magnified.

PLATE XL.
fia. 1. Pteronarcys californica, head, upper view. | Fic. 6. Pteronarcys californica, 2d maxilla (la-
Fic. 2. Pteronarcys californica, head, under view. bium).
Hic. 3. Termopsis angusticollis, 1st maxilla: c, | Fic. 7. Pteronarcys californica, mandible.
cardo. Fig. 8. Termopsis angusticollis, labrum and part of
1a. 4. Termes flavipes, 1st maxilla. clypeus.
Fic. 5. Pteronarcys californica, 1st maxilla. Fic. 9. Termes flavipes, labrum.

Figs. 1, 2, 5-7 drawn by William W. Griffin; 3, 4, 8, 9, by Gissler: all magnified.

PLATE XLI.

Fic. 1. Termes flavipes, ‘head seen from beneath: | Fic. 6. Termopsis angusticollis, mandible, from
me, maxilla; palpr, palpiger; l, within.
lamina interior; le, lamina exterior; | Fie. 7. Termopsis angusticollis, mandible, from
, labial palpus. without.

Fic. 2. Termes flavipes, 2d maxilla (labium), seen | Fic. 8. Termopsis angusticollis, mandible, from
from beneath. without.

Fic. 3. Termopsis angusticollis, 2d maxilla (la- | Fie. 9. Termopsis angusticoliis, mandible, from
bium). within.

Fic. 4. Termes flavipes, mandible, external view. Fic. 10. Termopsis angusticollis, part seen beneath

Fic. 5. Termes flavipes, mandible, internal view. the labial palpi.

Allenlarged. Gissler del.

PLATE XLII.

Fic. 1. Termes flavipes. Pronotum. Fie. 9. Termes flavipes. Metathorax, sterna
Fic. 2. Termes flavipes. Mesonotum. view.

Fic. 3. Termes flavipes. Metanotum. Fic. 10. Termes flavipes. Abdomen, tergal view:
Fic. 4. Termes flavipes. Propleurum. 1-10, the ten tergites; c, cercopoda.
Fic. 5. Termes flavipes. Mesopleurum. Fic. 11. Termes flavipes. Abdomen, ventral view.
Fic. 6. Termes flavipes. Metapleurum. Fia. 12. Termes flavipes. Abdomen, lateral view,
Fic. 7. Termes flavipes. Prothorax, sternal view. showing the 10 tergites and 9 urites.
Fig. 8. Termes flavipes. Mesothorax, sternal view.

All magnified. Gissler del., under author’s direction.

(8)

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE XLIII.

Ric. 1. Termopsis angusticollis, pronotum. Fic. 9. Termopsis angusticollis, metathorax, ster-
Fic. 2. Termopsis angusticollis, mesonotum: w!, nal view.
‘Ist pair of wings. Fie. 10. Psocus nove-scotic, meso- and metatho-
Fic. 3. TLermopsis angusticollis, metanotum: w?, rax (notum), dorsal view: w!, w?, wings.
2d pair of wings. Fia. 11. Psocus nove-scotie, metanotum, seen
Fic. 4. Termopsis angusticollis, propleurum. more from behind.
Fie. 5. Termopsis angusticollis, mesopleurum. Fie. 12. Psocus nove-scotie, meso- and meta-
Fig. 6. Termopsis.angusticollis, metapleurum. pleura.
Fie. 7. Termopsis angusticollis, prothorax, ster- | Fic. 13. Psocus nove-scotie, mesothorax, seen
nalview: pst, presternum; not, notum. from in front.
Fie. 8. Termopsis angusticollis, mesothorax, ster- | Fic. 14. Psocus nove-scotie, mesoscutellum.

nal view. :

Allenlarged. Gissler del., under author’s direction.

PLATE XLIV.

Fic.1. Pteronarcys californica, propleurum.
Fic. 2. Pteronarcys californica, mesopleurum.
Hie. 3. Peeronarcys californica, metapleuruy
Fic. 4. Pteronarcys californica, prosternum
_ Fie. 5. Pteronarcys californica, mesosternum.
. Wie. 6. Pteronarcys californica, metasternum.
William W. Griffin del., under author’s direction. All magnified.

Fic.7. Pteronarcys californica, abdomen, dorsal
view.

Fie. 8. Pteronarcys californica, abdomen, ventral
view: rh, rhabdites.

Fig. 9. Pieronarcys californica, abdomen, lateral
view: br, branchie or gills; sp, spiracles,

PLATE XLV.

Fic. 1. Hphemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Head ; Fic. 5. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Meso-
and thorax, dorsal view: pro-n, prono- and meta-sternum: sp, spiracle.
tum; w!, w?, 1st and 2d pair of wings; | Fic. 6. Ephemera sp., larva, head seen from in
1, first abdominal segment. front: md, mandibles.

Hic. 2. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Head | Fic. 7. Ephemera sp., larva, head seen from the
seen from beneath: lb, labium; lp, la- side, the occipital region not drawn.
bial palpi; mz, maxilla; st, proster- | Fic. 8. Hphemera, pupa, head seen from in front.
num. Fic. 9. Ephemera, imago, head seen from above.

Hic. 3. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Head | Fic. 10. Ephemera, imago, head seen from above,
seen from above. different view, more in front.

.¥ie. 4. Hphemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Head
and prothorax, seen laterally.
Figs. 1-5 drawn by Dr. C. F. Gissler; 6-10, author del.
PLATE XLVI.

Fic. 1. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Male, | Fia. 3. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Side
much enlarged to show the structure view of propleurum, with side view
of the notum and abdomen: c, cerco- of notum.
poda; rh, outer 3-jointed claspers or | Fic. 4. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Abdo-
rhabdites; rh!, inner pair of 3-jointed men, ventral view, showing the 9 uro-
rhabdites. sternites.

Bie. 2. Ephemera (Leptophiebia) cupida? Side | Fic. 5. Ephemera (Leptophlebia) cupida? Abdo-

view of thorax: the lettering asin other
plates.

men, lateral view.
All the figures enlarged. Gissler del.

PLATE XLVII.

Hic. 1. Aischna heros, head, front view: cl. p, post-, | Fia. 8. Aschna heros, maxilla.

cl. a, ante-clypeus. Fie. 9. Aschna heros, mandible.
Wic. 2. Aschna heros, head, lateral view. Fie. 10. Agrion verticale?, pronotum.
Fic. 3. Aschna heros, head, under view. Fie. 11. Agrion verticale?, dorsal portion of meso-
Wic. 4. Agrion verticale?, head, vertical view. and metathorax, showing the great
Fig. 5. Agrion verticale ?, head, under view. development of the episterna (epis’)
Fic. 6. Agrion verticale?, head, lateral view. and epimera (em’). ~
Bie. 7. Alschna heros, labium: 1, 2, Ist and 2d | Fic. 12. Oalopteryx maculata, pronotum.

joint of labial palpus; le, lamina ex.
terior of ligula; W%, lamina interior.
All the parts enlarged; drawn by William W. Griffin, under author’s direction.

(9)

Fie. 13. Oalopteryx maculata, same as in Fig. 11.

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE XLVIII.

Fic. 1. Aschna heros, meso-andmetapleurum, and | Fic. 6. Calopteryx maculata, pleurum of entire tho-

two abdominal arthromeres. Tax.
Fic. 2. Aischna heros, pronotum. Fic. 7. Agrion verticale?, propleurum.
Fic. 3. A’schna heros, mesonotum. Fic. 8. Agrion verticale ?, pleurum of entire thorax,
Fie. 4. Aschna heros, metanotum. lettering as in Fig. 6: 1, 2, wromeres.
Fic. 5. Oalopteryxmaculata,meso-and metanotum.

Figs. 1, 5,and 6 drawn by C. F. Gissler; figs. 3, 4, and 7, by William W. Griffin, under author’s diree-
tion. Objects all enlarged.

PLATE XLIX.

Fie. 1. A/schna heros, abdomen, dorsal view, show- | Fic. 3. A’schna heros, abdomen, ventral view, the
ing the 11 tergites: c, cercopoda. llth tergite (11) seen from beneath:
(1-11). t, testes; ur, urosternites.

Fic. 2. Aischna heros, abdomen, lateral view.

William W. Griffin del.

PLATE L.

Fig. 1. Aschna heros, end of female abdomen, | Fic. 3. A’schna heros, the same, with the ter-
showing the ovipositor: ur, uroster- gites closed.
nite; or, outer; mr, middle; ir, inner | Fic. 4. Agrion verticale ?, abdomen of male, side
rhabdites or elements of the oviposi- view: pen, penis; ¢, cercopoda.
tor; 11, 11th tergite; c, cercopoda; 1 | Fic. 5. Agrion verticale?, abdomen of male, ven-
and 2, uromeres, showing the external tral view: ur, urosternite.
genital armature, the tergites widely | Fic. 6. Agrion verticale?, abdomen of male, end:
separated. 11, 11th tergite.

Fic. 2. A’schna heros, male: pen, penis; tg, ter-
gite; cl, clasper (basirhabdite); ur,
urosternite of 2d uromere.
Wiliiam W. Griffin del. All the parts enlarged.

PLATE LI.
Fic. 1. Myrmeleon diversum, head from above. Fie. 6. Raphidia oblita, head from beneath.
Fig. 2. Myrmeleon diversum, head from beneath. | Fic. 7. Raphidia oblita, head from side; oc, oc-
of, occipital foramen. ciput.
Fic. 3. Ascalaphus longicornis ?, head from above; | Fic. 8. Polysteechotes nebulosus, head from above.
and beneath; epic, epicranium. Fie. 9. Polysteechotes nebulosus, head from be-
Fie. 4. Ascalaphus, head from beneath. neath.
Fic. 5. Raphidia oblita, head from above. ‘Fic. 10. Polysteechotes nebulosus, head from side.

William W. Griffin del. All the figures drawn enlarged.

PLATE LII.

Fic. 1. Oorydalus cornutus, head seen from beneath. | Fic.3. Oorydalus cornutus, head seen sidewise.
Fia. 2. Oorydalus cornutus, head seen from above: | Fic.4. Mantispa brunnea, head seen sidewise.
a. cly, ante-clypeus; p. cly, post-cly- | Fic. 5. Mantispa brunnea, head seen from above.
peus. Fic. 6. Mantispa brunnea, head seen from beneath.

All enlarged. Gissler del., under author’s direction.

PLATE LILI.

Fic. 1. Mantispa brunnea, 1st maxilla: c, cardo; | Fic. 6. Ascalaphus longicornis?, 2d maxilla (la-
st, stipes; l, lacinia; g, gala; p, palpus. bium).

Fic. 2. Ascalaphus longicornis, 1st maxilla. Fic. 7. Raphidia oblita, 2d maxilla (labium).

Fic. 3. Myrmeleon diversum, 1st maxilla. Fic. 8. Myrmeleon diversum, 2d maxilla (labium).

Fic. 4. Corydalus cornutus, 1st maxilla. Fic. 9. Corydalus cornutus, 2d maxilla (labium).

Fig. 5. Mantispa brunnea, 2d maxilla (labium).

Allenlarged. William W. Griffin del., under author’s direction.

(10)

Fig. 1.
Fia. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fia. 7.
Fia. 8.
Fig. 9.

Fig. 1.
Fie. 2.
Fie@. 3.
Fie. 4.
Fig. 5.

¥Fiq@. 1.
Fic. 2.
Fie. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fie. 5.
Fia. 6.
Fie. 7.
Fie. 8.
Fie. 9.

Fie. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fiac. 3.
Fie. 4.

Fic. 5.

Fie. 1.
FiGc. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fic. 1.
Fic. 2.
Fic. 3.
‘Fie. 4.

Fie. 5.

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

PLATE LIV.
Myrmeleon diversum, pronotum. Fic. 10. Raphidia oblita, pronotum.
Myrmeleon diversum, mesonotum. Fic. 11. Raphidia oblita, mesonotum.
Myrmeleon diversum, metanotum. Fic. 12. Raphidia oblita, metanotum.
Myrmeleon diversum, prosternum. - Fic. 13. Raphidia oblita, propleurum.
Myrmeleon diversum, mesosternum. Fic. 14. Raphidia oblita, mesopleurum.
Myrmeleon diversum, metasternum. Fie. 15. Raphidia oblita, metapleurum.
Myrmeleon diversum, propleurum. Fic. 16. Raphidia oblita, prosternum.
Myrmeleon diversum, mesopleurum. ' Fic. 17. Raphidia oblita, mesosternum.
Myrmeleon diversum, metapleurum. Fic. 18. Raphidia oblita, metasternum.

All magnified. William W. Griffin del., under author’s direction.
PLATE LY.

Mantispea brunnea, pronotum. Fie. 6. Mantispa brunnea, metasternum.
Mantispa brunnea, mesonotum. Fic. 7. Mantispa brunnea, propleurum.
Mantispa brunnea, metanotum. Fic. 8. Mantispa brunnea, mesopleurum.
Mantispa brunnea, prosternum. Fic. 9. Mantispa brunnea, metapleurum.

Mantispa brunnea, mesosternum.
Allenlarged. William W. Griffin del.

PLATE LVI.

Ascalaphus longicornis?, pronotum. Fic. 10. Polysteechotes nebulosus, metanotum: w?,
Ascalaphus longicornis ?, mesonotum. 2d wings.
Ascalaphus longicornis ?, metanotum. Fig. 11. Polysteechotes nebulosus, mesosternum.
Ascalaphus longicornis?, mesopleurum. Fic. 12. Polysteechotes nebulosus, metasternum.
Ascalaphus longicornis ?, metapleurum. Fig. 13. Polysteechotes nebulosus, pronotum, seen
Ascataphus longicornis?, mesosternum. laterally.
Ascalaphus longicornis ?, metasternum. Fic. 14. Polysteechotes nebulosus, mesopleurum.
Polysteechotes nebulosus, pronotum. Fie. 15. Polysteechotes nebulosus, metapleurum.
Polystoechotes nebulosus, mesonotum: w!,

1st wings.

Allenlarged. William W. Griffin del., under author’s direction.
PLATE LYII.

Pieronarcys californica, pronotum. Fic. 6. Ascalaphus longicornis?, abdomen.
Pteronarcys californica, mesonotum. Fie. 7. Ascalaphus longicornis?, abdomen.
Pteronarcys californica, metanotum. Fie: 8. Myrmeleon diversum, abdomen of male,
Oorydaius cornutus, end of abdomen of dorsal view.

male, under side. Fie. 9. Myrmeleon diversum, abdomen of male,
Oorydalus cornutus, end of abdomen of lateral view.

male, side view: c, cercopoda; rh, | Fic. 10. Myrmeleon diversum, abdomen of male,

rhabdite. ventral view.

Allenlarged. William Griffin del.

PLATE LYVIII.

Corydalus cornutus, abdomen, dorsal view: | Fic. 4. Polysteechotes nebulosus, abdomen, lateral

c, cercopoda. view: ¢, cercopoda.
Polystechoies nebulosus, abdomen, dorsal | Fic. 5. Raphidia oblita, abdomen, dorsal view.
View : c, cercopoda. Fic. 6. Raphidia oblita, abdomen, lateral view.

Polysteechotes nebulosus, abdomen, ventral | Fic. 7. Raphidia oblita, abdomen, ventral view.
view: c, cercopoda.
Allenlarged. William W. Griffin del., under author’s direction.

PLATE LIX.
Limnephilus pudicus, head, seen from | Fic. 6. Panorpa debilis?, mouth-parts, showing
above: p, labial palpus. labrum beneath. ,
Limnephilus pudicus, head, seen from be- | Fie. 7. Panorpa debilis?, 2d maxilla (labium):
neath, palpg, palpiger; p, labial palpus.
Timnephilus pudicus, head, seen from the | Fic. 8. Panorpa debilis?, labrum.
side. Fic. 9. Panorpa debilis?, mandible.
Limnephilus pudicus : mx, 1st maxilla, lac, | Fie. 10. Panorpa debilis?, maxille and one pal.
lacinia ? pus.

Limnephilus pudicus, labrum.
All magnified. . Gissler del., under author’s direction.

(11)

EXPLANATION OF PLATES..

PLATE LX.
Fic. 1. Panorpa debitis?, head, view from above. Fic. 8. Panorpa debilis ?, mesopleurum.
Fic. 2. Panorpa debilis?, head, view frombeneath. | Fic. 9. Panorpa debilis?, metapleurum.
Fic. 3. Panorpa debilis ?, head, view from side. Fic. 10. Panorpa debilis*, end of abdomen from
Fie. 4. Panorpa debilis ?, pronotum. the side; female, somewhat com-
Fic. 5. Panorpa debilis ?, mesonotum. pressed.
Fic. 6. Panorpa debilis ?, metanotum. Fie. 11. Panorpa debilis?, end of abdomen from
Fic. 7. Panorpa debilis ?, proplenrum. above: c, jointed cercopoda.
Allenlarged. Figs. 1-9 drawn by William W. Griffin; 10 and 11, by C. F. Gissler.
PLATE LXI.
¥ie.1. Limnephilus pudicus, pronotum. Fic. 7. Limnephilus pudicus, abdomen.
Fic. 2. Limnephilus pudicus, mesonotum. Fia. 8. Limnephilus pudicus, abdomen, end ; dorsal
Fic. 3. Limnephilus pudicus, metanotum. view. :
Fic. 4. Limmephilus pudicus, propleurum. Fic. 9. Limnephilus pudicus, abdomen, end ; ven-
Fic. 5. Limnephilus pudicus, mesopleurum. tral view.

Fic. 6. Limnephilus pudicus, metapleurum.
Allenlarged. Gissler del., under author’s direction.

PLATE LXII.
Fie. 1. Wing of pupa of Blatia: ¢, costal; sc, sub- { Fic. 3. Wings of Termes flavipes, just before the
costal; m, median; sm, submedian; imago state.
int, internal view. Fia. 4. Adult Termes, enlarged.

Fia. 2. Termes flavipes: A, young pupa; a, Ist | Fic. 5. Wings of pupal Psocus.
wing; B, advanced pupa; b, wings; n, O
veins.

All enlarged. C, F. Gissler del.

Note.—Plates LXII and LXTIII illustrate pp. 268-271, on the development of the wings; the refe-
ences in the text are imperfect.

PLATE LXIII.

Fie. 1. Aphrophora permutata, pupa; ventral wing: sc, scutellum: 1 ab, 1st abdomi-

view. nal segment.
Fie. 2. Aphrophora permutata, pupa; dorsal view. | Fic. 4. Thorax of AHschna heros: 1-5, the five
Fig. 3. Aphrophora permutata, pupa, rudimentary main veins of the wing.

Allenlarged. C.F. Gissler del.

PLATE LXIV.

17

Fig. 1. Corydalus cornutus, propleuram. Fie. 5. Corydalns cornutus, mesosternum.

Fig. 2. Corydalus cornutus, mesopleurum. Fic. 6. Oorydalus cornutus, metasternum.

Fie. 3. Corydalus cornutus, metapleurum. Fie. 7. Oorydalus cornutus, mesonotum.

Fie. 4. Oorydalus cornutus, prosternum. Fia. 8. Corydalus cornutus, metanotum.
(12)

~

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission.

\

\
THE ARMY WORM AND ENEMIES.

Report III, U. 8. Entomological Commission. Plate II.

Fig. 3.

ENEMIES AND PARASITES OF THE ARMY WORM.

_ Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate ITI.

= yy
~
\

\

.

CANKER WORMS.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate IV.

ea XY S
i) XN \
AN
\. \ WA ‘ \\
WAN ui

\Y
\\t)

VV Na
\\8

(e
THE HESSIAN FLY AND ITS TRANSFORMATIONS.

Fs
, tae

Plate V.

Report II1, U. 8. Entomological Commission,

TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE HESSIAN F Ly.

Plate VI.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission.

3, 5. UNKNOWN.

2. DICERCA DIVARICATA.

1. CHALCOPHORA VIRGINICA ?

y
Ma:

cee

curt
% pale hic os
ri

-

Report III, US: Entomological Commission,

Plate VII.

1. ELAPHIDION PARALLELUM.
2. UNKNOWN. \

sey

3, 3a. CRIOCEPHALUS AGRESTIS
4, MELANOPHILA.

Saf
2

Aig aoe

(he

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate VIII.

Aah TTD WL
( (utter

L/h Ne at
si) i La 1 ea
APA i Hh
AZUSA HT IH}
i AMIN | Hl Wy {
ail
=z

mx,

iy
Cay

WY UWL
26

yor

—

at

\
1. LONGICORN LARVA, FROM PITCH PINE. 2. SAPERDA TRIDENTATA RORING IN THE ELM.

‘Report III, U. 8. Entomological Commission. pee

NAN
a ‘i ( fi)

\) nn | (

,
mx

1, ASEMUM Ma&&sTUM. 2. LARVA, LIVING IN OAK.
3. LARVA, IN WHITE PINE, 4, LARVA, IN SWEET GUM,

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. ; Plate X.

tA

ARAN {
oti

| i |
AU tl

A \)

\
1. ORTHOSOMA BRUNNEUM. 2. SYCAMORE BORER. 3. PUPA, UNDER OAK BARK,

Report II, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XI.

Ss
a if)
‘(eS

1, 2. RHAGIUM LINEATUM, IN PINE. 3. LARVA, IN OAK. 4, SAPERDA, FROM WILLOW.

Report II, U. S. Entomological Commission. ; Plate XII.

a

Ss

1. MELANOPHILA. 2, 2a, 3. XYLOTRECHUS COLONUS.
4. DETAILS OF WILLOW SAPERDA. 5, 6. HEMLOCK BORERS.

P
ro S

ea
eT: f

,

_ Report ITI, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XIII.

a
aaa

ck
Coy,

si
] ii ,

1,2. UNKNOWN. 3. XESTOBIUM AFFINE. 4, HYLURGOPS PINIFEX. 5, 6. PISSODES STROBI.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XIV.

yyy 4

.

1, la. XYLOTERES. 2-3a. KYLEBORUS. 4-5e. CRYPTURGUS ATOMUS.
6-8. MISCELLANEOUS. 9. PUPA OF HYLURGOPS PINIFEX.

e ai
iis i

Plate XV.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission.

[Lf pect LLL WF

iS
3

ary Oa,

p= =.=. =) EF = _ ==.

eer

Be

Nat

b Ef
Zwei a
(5 Nis
a)

@

~~

Y
ig

wal

SN

79
iz
wale

1 Oh

ayn iain

ahi yo f= ch rapes 2

df, bhp ($4

EY

A V7] mais hn

CONT Ly _-fA

3-5. COLEOPTEROUS LARVA, ATTACKING
PINE BARK-BORERS,

1. SELANDRIA, ON HICKORY.
2. DELTOID LARVA, ON HICKORY.

THIRD REPOR

SS

wa,

ieee EP NIOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION,

ie ie ao wee

oye ----G op:
VEN

\

i

By Sep

EMBRYOLOGY

. Heliotype Prixiz
Sr Ieee
FifoXs. Wiis Utes at ;

ngCo

Ao te
SH EvecoinOlses

ees

Bostun

Heliotypr Printing Co,

AS Pacard. del.

Ee Tbs,

=) led me

NUS

iy

CAO FP EF

OF

EMBRYOLOG

Valu

iS
eopoR

AQRC

Seay

Uj }
ey pees
Qe ry

a

(
)
.

Sed

EMB RYC IG Cio Aa Oe RN LS, > Ee a Ui:

2 aac

AS Paclsard, del.

ES 8

Plate

10n.

/

Report IIl.U.S.Entomological Commiss

Heltotype Printing Co.Beston.

AS Packard, del.

ledeqnemeiO ker

Si

GA yea iN i

\

aor

Mis Rx OO. G

E,

eport III.U.S -Entomological Commission. Plate XX’

4

LY

set

1h

>,

ssi}
(ag .
x S29 2

Mie

hae
ch + ye |

:

ie reckard del | Heliotype Printing Co. Boston.

MAS ee OL '©) SOE IGALOPTENUS_ATLANIS.

Plate XXI.

eport I11.U.S.Entomological Commission.

_Bosto

3 Co

Heliotype Printin

S.Packard. del.

iS
{ae

AU EAN IT

AO Ie 1 BANE Si.

f™
VY

EMBRYOLOGY OF :

iReport II].U.S.Entomological Commissicn. Plate XXII.

OUT

e

a)

ana

IY
ope

EMO
Deaf
K oly as

| th 22
| ae .
| Packard & Gissler, del. Heltotype Printing Co.Boston.

Rote © Baws ANS Fiat) iGO P Ss.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XXIII.

BN O7. LV oS.

1-9. FORFICULA TANIATA. 10-12. FORFICULA, LARVA.

qx
Ray

ate

Het

PLATE XXV

THIRD REPORT, U.S. ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Caloptenus. Tropidacris. Te ttix.

Phaneropte sacle

Anabrus.

-
‘

eo

canthus.

Gryllotalpa.

Grylls.

Truxvealas,

Mantis.

(

yy

SSS
SSS SS

SSS
SSS SSS

SSS OSS
Sess

d
eo
v
R :
ro
= cl
q
©
A,
re]
in” rs
Re a
gS fe)
ey ;
o
Bosco va a
2 8
fe) {4
UY : ,

Proscopia.

Heltotype Printing Cot Bostor

tey,del.

Tings

ORTHOPTERA HEAD, FRONT VIEW.

\

SSS ee

épicrancum

cl
Conocephalus.

Gryllotalpa.

Pris opus é

Phameroptera.

erin:

en

SAN

RRND,
YA xn

ART
KR
wt s
®

OK

Mice.

Proscopia.

_ ORTHOPTERA; VERTICAL AND SIDE VIEW OFH

Phaneroptera.

Diapheromera.
@2camtnarse =

XEVI.

be

ARR

ER
ORO
Rox

BEY)

(

Ke

YSr0:9
eteheate’,
Seeeies
eee
LOaerner
taint

ty
RR
PRD XX),
erie etntest
Ohi
SRO
‘

“2 *
ae)

Oy

RY

Periplaneta.

Proscopia.

Ov
A
es

Kingstey.det.

Anabrus.

a7

Periplaneta.

,

4

HIRD REPORT,U.S.ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. PLATE XXVIT.

4

7

G2canthus. .

Submentunr

Diapheromera. Phaneroptera.
’ Periplaneta.
Blatta orientalis.
| leliotype Printing Cor. Boston J.S.Hingsley, dec.

ORTHOPTERA; SECOND MAXILLA(LABIUM).

\

UATE ei Oh

e

- Gryllotalpa.

Ee 20
ie ie ee ane A

eee Proscopia.

ae

Di Eee ee

-—~ Caloptenus.

19
, eet a Vek bie:
|

-Gryllotalpa.

; Gryllus.
Gro Pela CTiS .

oe

edtotype Printing Co Boston Tingsleg,del

ORTHO PTERA | FIG,1-12, LEFT MAXILLA ; 13-20, PRONOTUM.

=

?

RD REPORT, U.S.ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. PLALE Cera

wv

hi,
|
Fy

tag)

Phaneroptera.
: -epts
Anabrus .. peas | Gryllotalpa.
Caloptenus.

Gryllus .
me Gs c anthus

14 Periplaneta. Prisopus.

LS

eS
Wr

| ; Peuxalis. mune eed otek ee |
| = |
Proscopia.

Blatta.

| SMES P77
(eys,de*

Heliotype Printing Co.. Boston JS. Hing s

ORTHOPTERA;PROTHORAX, LATERAL AND TOP VIEW.
©

Oe i as Ena

[ U.S ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. eA Fane

tai OO) ROM VTE, sPtteke’ ‘iy

-

ett

CG canthus .
wii
ree
a rae ie =
Diapheromera.

~ Periplaneta.

Prisopus.

we

unting Co» Bostor. - ; J Okingsley

ORTHOPTERA ; MESO AND METANOTUM. :

Wa ee hats. ia

ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. _

nly PW 2

fi

Caloptenus.. Gryllotalpa.

Gryllus. Diapheromera.

Heliotype Printing Co. Rosten

ORTHOPTERA | 1-12 PLEURITES ; 13-21, STERNUM.

Eel Ul

“

poe EN LOMO LOGICAL COMMISS TON. ia hoe Sy eS Cie...

Caloptenus ; Gryllotalpa.

(Eicanthus.

/
WDiaphero mera.
Ay , ta
A Mantts.
Heliatype Printing Cot Bostcr q Gisslér Gee

“ORTHOPTERA;/MESO AND METASTERNUM.

fn 4

iy

Mla PEPORT, U.S ENTIOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. | PLATE XXXIL

RAS

oc
ae
2

seas

aus

~~>-dorsal

\ventral

ee eee ee ee ee SS ee ee er TOO
= 2 x a a

MET

Proscopta.

Pris opus.
Prisopus

.HeLiotype Praiting Co, Boston.

ORTHOPTERA’ THORAX.

\

oe.
»'

THIRD REPORT,U.S.ENTOMOLOGICALCOMMISSION. = PLATE.

rf L

| Troptdacris.

Phaneroptera.

3

Caloptenus. -

10

aaa ee

Ccanthus.

Prisopus.

Proscopia.

XXXIV.

E)s

see

rc

—

1

L|
\ 9. 2a
9 '
|

10

Diaphe-|
romera. |

Heliotype Printing Co. Bestar

ORO ih Ae rire Slr OF ABD OMEN.

J S.Fingsleg, Let,

3 | |
HIRD REPORT, U.S ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. we em |
aa = |

_ Phaneroptera.
- Tropidacris.

Diapheromera.

Tropidacris.

Caloptenus.

|

Gals : ;

{

: 5 0 pastor is JS Eaingsleg i
: ORTHOPTERA ;END OF ABDOMEN. |
\ }
|

f |

THIED Peete Woe NIOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. ez Dwald bylaw. ao, Get

rm

Caloptenus. Gryllotalpa.

; 3 u
<i w 4 he) 6 7 8?

Diapheromera
7

: ee ares a peers aS ce
: aa . ° ( ° é ae
Periplaneta. sae ee 2 —

A ee

| Proscopia.

:

feltolype Printing Co Boston J. SHingsleg, del™

BORTBOPI ERAS ABDOMEN, DATERAL VIEW.

\

Pe Oe ee oo

U.S ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION, PLATE XXXVI.

Pierre Sa Fabs ics Le eras
wae | g . Pee | eae ein Ts Aas ‘ y

* Spr

Ti
Rb

jt cow lice eae

aah

_ Diapher

LS

o
Diapheromera.

|. Heliotype Printing Co Boston JS Kengsleg del,

OREO Daath Ni DNOE ABDOMEN, SLDE VIEW.

\

Ni

a a

ie

nap be =

Se

SS AEE FONT sa
I AR Se pee ar ree em oa chee

Repozt III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XXXIX.

N?P 1 poe Nee,

\
1-3, TERMOPSIS, 4,5. TERMES. 6, 7. Psocus. 8. PTERONARCYS.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commisssion. Plate XL.

el

lh

HAH

No.8

1, 2. 5-7. PTERONARCYS. 3, 8. TERMOPSIS 4, 9. TERMES.

EG eet

ee

Report IH, U.S. Entomological Commission ,

Plate XLI.

1, 2, 4, 5. TERMES. |

Le

ares eh

8, 6-10. TERMOPS1S.

Plate XLII.

‘Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission.

Ie
ily

TERMES FLAVIPES.

R

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XLITII.

ft

——$———N

|

mnie

4

Z
|

—
<—S

AZZ
ga
i / ae ogo ri f =
. See bi el \e
s cuts aero = = vow
SS ———$——— >,
x
s -

\
1-9. TERMOPSIS. 10-14. Psocus.

.

Report II, U. S. Entomological Commission, Plate XLIV.

are

PTERONARCYS CALIFORNICA.

Report III, U. 8. Entomological Commission.

EPHEMERA.

Plate XLV.

Report IIL, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XLVI.

f

\ EPHEMERA.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission.

Plate XLVII.

as

\
1-3, 7-9. ASSCHNA HEROS.

4-6, 10, 11. AGRION VERTICALE ?

12, 18. CALOPTERYX MACULATA.

Report ITI, ws. Entomological Commission. Plate XLVIII./

1-4. ANSCHNA. 5, 6. CALOPTERYX. 7, 8. AGRION.

)
=

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate XLIX.

ABDOMEN OF AXSCHNA HEROS,

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate L.

1-3. ZESCHNA. 4-6. AGRION.

Report IH, U. S. Entomological Commission. ' Plate LI.

1,2. MYRMELEON. 3, 4. ASCALAPHUS. 5-7. RAPHIDIA. 8-10 POLYsTacHOTEs.

Report III, Wiss: Entomological Commission. Plate LII.

ane
S72
N :
1S.
Cpicrareture’
—

1-3. CORYDALUS. 4-6. MANTISPA,

Report III, U. 8. Entomological Commission. i Plate LIII.

1,5, MANTISPA. 2,6. ASCALAPHUS. 3, 8. MYRMELEON. 4,9. CORYDALUS. 7. RAPHIDIA.

» Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate LIV.

|

1-9. MYRMELEON. | 10-18. RAPHIDIA.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate LV.
' J At yale a EA 2 i ee aN ES ee ——

‘e : | | |

AL) ae
Ge
‘ uy

/ |

z

a ‘

UM

€

=O

MANTISPA BRUNNEA.

Report II, U. 8. Entomological Commission. Plate LVI.

Pe: 1
|
|

| ; scl

12

1-7. THORAX OF ASCALAPHUS. 8-15. POLYST@CHOTES.

i
ra

Report III. U.S. Entomological Commission. Plate LVIL.

PRO A

1-3. PTERONARCYS. 4, 5. CORYDALUS. 6, 7. ASCALAPHUS. 8-10. MyRMELEON.

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate LVIII. ¢

ee

/
Vv

}

eee eee EA

1. CORYDALUS. 2-4, POLYSTGCHOTES. 5-7. RAPHIDIA.

Report ITI, U.S. Entomological Commission. ; Plate LIX.

7

(PEL
(ga =

FTI: L
A = és i e
i = :
‘ &

ocel

1-5. LIMNEPHILUS. 6-10. PANORPA.

BL Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. ; Plate LX.
r ee ee SO eT Te a ay eC eT TL, PP) eg pee G ae

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate LXI

| NP 4 | ° 5. !

te : N°6.
MET

LIMNEPHILUS PUDICUS.

Report III. U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate LXII.

Fig.3-

Fig. 4.

ORIGIN OF THE WINGS IN BLATTA, TERMES, AND Psocus.
\

I

| Report III, U. 8. Entomological Commission. Plate LXITI.

\

ape

ZINES,

1-3, APHROPHORA. 4, ARSCHNA.
\

Report III, U. S. Entomological Commission. Plate LXIV.

, THORAX OF CORYDALUS.

mee EWN DIC IS.

—

oe

*

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX I.

EARLY REFERENCES TO THE OCCURRENCE OF THE HES-
SIAN FLY IN NORTH AMERICA.

Hoping to find some reference to the occurrence of the Hessian Fly in
North America, we looked over the following files of newspapers in the
Congressional Library, probably the richest collection of Colonial news-
papers in the country. No reference to this insect occurred in the files
of the Pennsylvania Mercury, April 7 to December 22, 1775; April
1, 1785, to December 29, 1786; nor in the Philadelphia Packet, October
25, 17 73, to January 8, 17 76, all that were in the library, the Series be-
ing quite incomplete. We found the following note in the Pennsy]-
vania Mercury and Universal Advertiser, April 1, 1785, which shows that
the ravages of the Hessian Fly on Long Island and in West Chester
in 1784 were well known. From the context we have good reason
to infer that the insect referred to was Cecidomyia destructor.

It is said in the newspapers insects destroyed Lammas wheat last year on Long
Island and West Chester, but did not touch the bearded wheat of those places. The
farmers, there, imputed the safety of the bearded to its straw being much harder and
stronger than ‘the Lammas or plain wheat. They say, too, flour from that bearded
wheat is equal to any other among them. A farmer of Maryland asks the aid of the
lovers of agriculture for his obtaining a handful of it; to be committed to the charge
of Mr. George Mifflin, in Front street, near the coffee-house, Philadelphia; and will be
glad to gratify them in return. (Signed, X.) A

We also append two articles from the Pennsylvania Packet, written
in 1788:

[EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM FALLS TOWNSHIP, BUCKS COUNTY, MAY 20, PUBLISHED
IN THE PENNSYLVANIA PACKET AND DAILY ADVERTISER, MAY 29, 1788. ]

The little thing called the Hessian Fly, or insect, I have heard first began to make
its appearance on Long Island, and cut off most of the wheat there for several years
past, and last season did considerable damage to the wheat in many parts of East
Jersey, and near Cresswicks cut off many fields, and even appeared on the banks of
Delaware River. Near seed time last year, many persons on the Pennsylvania shore
saw the same insect so thick in the air, that they appeared like a cloud coming over
Delaware River; and on examining some of the largest flies they had many of their
young brood clinging to them, some of which could fly, others not. They have so in-
fested the wheat fields from the Falls Township to Wakefield, and many are of opin-
ion much further, that some persons discovering their numbers have pastured their
green wheat, ploughed and planted their fields with spring Dee and more are
following their example.

The 17th inst. I went into a wheat field to examine for the insect; some other
persons came on the like occasion, and on drawing up either green, dry, or dead spires
of wheat, we saw them plenty in each in a white coloured nit, seed, or worm, and
where rye grew amongst the wheat it was also full of the insect; and since that time
the owner of the wheat field has turned in his horses to pasture, and intends to plant
it with corn shortly. Iam credibly informed, that it isthe opinion of many in Amwell
and Hopewell, New Jersey, that they do not expect to save so much as their seed; many
of them have ploughed all up and planted with corn. It would be well for all con-

[3]

4

[4] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

cerned to examine their wheat fields in time, as delays may prove dangerous; and if
they discover their fields infested with the insect, it may not be too late to follow the
above example.
The insect in the spring resembles a small flaxseed, rather of a rounder shape, but
now mostly appears of a white colour, and rather longer than whenin their brown
colour. They lay mostly and may be found between the first, second and third blades
near the root, above the ground, sometimes in the middle of the spire near the root.

To THE PRINTERS OF THE PENNSYLVANIA PACKET.

As the destruction of the wheat by the Hessian Fly, as it is called, in some of the
neighbouring governments for some years past and their penetrating so far into this
State, previous to the last harvest, are alarming circumstances, and especially to the
farmers, your publishing the following remarks on that interesting subject, we flatter
ourselves, will be agreeable to many of your readers and probably convey some use-
ful information to some of them, which may conduce towards alleviating or lessening
so great a calamity ; if it should in some measure serve this good purpose, the end we
have in view will be answered.

JAMES VAUX.

JOHN JACOB.

PROVIDENCE, MONTGOMERY Co., Pa.,
Eighth Mo., 16th. 1788.

On the 7th of the present month we left home on a tour to Jersey and Long Island,
in New York government, to inquire into the effects of that destructive insect, and
what remedy had been found to prevent their baneful consequences in these parts;
likewise to make inquiry of some of the most sagacious and intelligent practical
farmers, who have declined sowing wheat, what mode of cropping they have adopted
in lieu of wheat crops, to make annual returns of cash} and in an especial manner to
ascertain the true species of bearded wheat which has been found by experience effect-
ually to withstand the attacks of the fly and to procure samples of the same. The
following remarks, in consequence of said inquiry, were noted for our own satisfaction
and now offere’. for general information. We find the fly passes itself between the
outer straw o: husk and the stalk of the wheat until it reaches near the first or lower
joint, and tuere, somewhat like a caterpillar or a twig, fixes its eggs on the stalk, in
number frum six to eight to fifty ; by the growing of them the stalk becomes so com-
pressed with the adhesion of the cluster and weakened to such a degree, as notto sup-
por its own weight, consequently falls to the ground and the crop is irremediably

ost.

We must leave to naturalists to develop and describe the history of this insect ; but
to us it appears unlikely that any means, within the bounds of human wisdom, will be
found to destroy it, or to tincture the wheat stalks with any noxious quality sufficient
to prevent the fly from preferring the common wheat stalks to deposite their eggs for
the continuance of their species. We therefore conclude, from the experience of the
most intelligent farmers and millers with whom we conversed, that none but unin-
formed or obstinate men will attempt sowing the common wheat in the neighborhood
of the fly, unless compelled ‘thereto by necessity. But this need not intimidate the
farmers in the least from proceeding in a regular course of wheat crops, as the fatherly
care of the Supreme Being in the course of His providenceeven in this instance, when
the wisdom of His dependent creatures evidently proves insufficient, has interposed
and made provisidn for man’s comfortable subsistence, without obliging him to de-
viate from his usual practice of tillage or his sustaining much loss or even disappoint-
ment, but only requires his timely application of the proffered remedy ; which seems
to consist of seed-wheat of a peculiar species and ought to be procured in due time. -

Isaac Underhill of Long Island, State of New York, had his wheat destroyed by
the fly, consequently had not any for seed; but being a miller, took some out of his
mill, which had been purchased from on board a ship at New York in the year 1780
or 1781; this he sowed and reaped therefrom upwards of 20 bushels per acre, when
few, if any of his neighbours, for some miles round had any to reap, it being destroyed
by the fly; and he, being an observing man, immediately concluded that this wheat
must possess some peculiar quality, therefore caused his whole crop to be thrashed
out and disposed of it to his neighbours in small quantities for seed. This wheat they
have now sowed for 6 or 7 years past and Isaac has never reaped less than 10 bushels —
from the acre in the most unfavorable seasons, but generally from 20 to 30 bushels.
It is a yellow, plump, full grain, with a white beard and white chaff, weighing from 59
to 63 pounds the bushel.

The millers, Isaac and Andrew Underhill, informed us that it was, in their opinion,
equal to the best red wheat; and to us, who observed it with a farmer’s eye, it appears
a perfect grain, much like the yellow Skippack wheat, so highly esteemed by our

EARLY HISTORY OF HESSIAN FLY IN N. A, [5]

millers. The fly will reside in the fields where this wheatis sown and deposite their
eggs in the straw, but hardly ever materially injure the crop. The only instance we
heard of was a widow woman procured one single bushel of this yellow bearded
wheat and sowed it in the same field with the common sort; it was a very small
quantity in proportion to the whole field; when the fly had destroyed the common,
they attacked the bearded in very great numbers, the crop was much hurt, yet
notwithstanding she reaped 5 or 6 bushels from the 1 bushel sown. A man at some
distance from the said widow’s sowed a field with the yellow bearded wheat, the fly
destroyed all the neighbouring fields of the common sort and seemed to collect in his
plentifully; from their appearance he concluded his crop would be destroyed; this
man reaped about 20 bushels per acre. We found it to be the general opinion there,
that this wheat stands the winter better and escapes the mildews more than the com-
- mon sort and that it ought not to be sowed earlier than the second, third or fourth
weeks in the next month, according to the progress the fly has made in the neighbour-
hood whenit is to be sown; for it has been found, by observation, that the fly deposite
their eggs in the fall, if the wheat is suffered to grow into stalks before the cold
weather pinches them, as the plant, even of this wheat, is then too tender to resist
the spear of the fly, if any has, or bear the compression of the eggs, or that the eggs
deposited at that early period are most likely to injure the stalk in the spring, before
it has acquired a sufficient degree of firmness. ‘The straw of this wheat appears
nearly of the same texture with that of rice and is injured by the fly neither more
nor less than it. The fly still abounds on Long Island as rife as ever, yet we do not
understand any material injury to be done by them save, to the common wheat.

Isaac Underhill lives near Flushing on Long Island, is a farmer and miller, and a
person worthy of having the fullest credit given to his opinion in the present case ;
he was the first person who discovered the peculiar benefit of sowing this kind of
yellow bearded wheat, has taken considerable pains to spread the beneficial effects
around him; and at this time his philanthropy induces him to promote the general
introduction of this invaluable grain.

Andrew Underhill lives in the city of New York, is estimed a man of veracity,
is concerned in several milis, took methods early tointroduce the bearded wheat for seed
in the neighbourhoods from which his mills had used to be supplied; the consequence
las been, he has had a full quantity for his use ever since, and his wish is, that the
public generally may be supplied with seed. We had our information from many
persons on the spot, especially from the two mentioned and from them we have the
promise of sixty bushels of seed for ourselves, the present season and are happy to in-
form our neighbours, that they have promised to procure what is in their power for any
of them, who, from inclination or apparent necessity may be induced to send for it.

We found no instance of any farmer substituting other crops in lieu of wheat and
but one, of any haying common wheat, so\as constantly to withstand the fly. The
method he pursued was, to cover it with sea-weed or straw, soon after it came up. It
appears in this case, as in all others, that there is no general rule without exception ;
some injury having been done to the bearded wheat, though so little, as not to have
the least weight with a person of reflection; as on the other hand, some spots of the
other wheat has been preserved in the neighbourhood of the fly, but this happened so
seldom that a prudent man will hardly run the risk, when he may, with great proba-
bility and at a small additional expence, propose to himself a crop equal to what kind
Providence has been pleased heretofore to bless him with.—[ From the Pennsylvania
Packet and Daily Advertiser, Thursday, August 21, 178%

APPENDIX ITI.
A.
DESCRIPTION OF THE RYE GALL-GNAT.

BY DR. HERMANN LOEW.

Extracted NE “Die neue Kornmade und ue Mittel, ueiabe gegen sie anzuwenden sind.” Von Dr.
oew.* 1859

VARIOUS VIEWS AS TO THE ORIGINAL NATIVE COUNTRY OF THE
HESSIAN FLY.

The Hessian fly became first known in America, in 1779, by the great
devastation done to wheat on Staten Island and the west end of Long
Island, and, on account of the yearly increasing rapidity of damage,
spreading over large tracts of land, was soon greatly feared, the damage
done in some cases being from one-fifth to three-fourths of the entire har-
vest. The idea that the Hessian fly was introduced with packing-straw
by Hessian troops who landed on Long Island in August, 1776, soon
became prevalent. Later, doubts arose. Some were disposed to believe
thatit was an American species, and that its immense multiplication was
only a consequence of the rapidly spreading culture of wheat; some were
convinced that the fly did not occur at all in ‘Europe. After the latter
idea had been generally current for a long series of years, and the same
was acknowledged as a fact even by scientific institutes, a Cecidomyia
was observed by Herrickt on Minorca, by Dana near Toulon and Naples,
and by myself on the coast of Asia Minor, which fly attacks the wheat
in the same manner as Cecidomyia destructor in America, and whose larva
likewise transforms into a ‘‘ pupa obtecta.” Upon these facts the idea
of the occurrence of the fly in Europe again gained ground, and it seems
as if the investigators completed the cycle by definitely regarding it as
indigenous to Europe, and declared it, as in the beginning, as only in-
troduced. Fitch in his paper strongly holds to this. He partly relies
on the authority of Herrick, who, before he made himself acquainted
with the species from southern Europe, observed the genuine Cecidomyia
destructor in America, and regarded them both as identical. Fitch also
partly forms this theory from a glance at some specimens of a Kuropean
species sent to him by Herrick, but so extremely briefly does he report
on this comparison that I cannot consent to the proof of identity of
both species. Regarding the question whether the species from south-
ern Europe be identical with our rye gall-gnat, I must desist at present,
as I neither possess specimens of the former nor a complete description,
and my reminiscences of the larye and pups observed almost sixteen
years ago have by the course of time became-rather indistinct.

WHETHER THE RYE AND THE HESSIAN FLY ARE ONE AND THE SAME
SPECIES.

Whoever specially studies the natural history of the gall- annie knows
that the closely allied species of this genus in the complete sfate differ
at most only by very delicate characters, easily escaping notice, and that
in the earlier stages they agree still more among themselves, so that
the effects on the cereal which they infest, and the structure of the

* Translated by Dr. C. F. Gissler.

tThisis a mistake. Prof. J. D. Dana found the larve and pupe, and reared the flies from wheat
growing on the island of Minorca.—A. 5. P.

[6]

a

!

LOEW ON THE RYE GALL-GNAT. [7]

malformations arising therefrom, can be much easier recognized than
those irrelevant characters. Without a very close comparison of the
‘natural specimens of the perfect insect, the identity or the difference of
species is often very difficult to prove. And yet this must be accurately
shown before it is allowed to declare two species as one and the same.
As long as there are only presumptions as to their identity, the throw-
ing together and uniting of them leads to new, increased confusion,
while the most accurate distinguishing and the most scrupulous care in ©
separating allied species, and not confusing them as one species, war-
rants and secures our knowledge.

That the whole life-history of the Hessian fly closely agrees with that
of our rye gall-gnat cannot be denied; yet it would be hasty to take this
congruity, which in closely allied species cannot at all be expected less,
for a proof of the identity of the two species. Moreover we find also
some small differences. The Cecidomyta destructor almost exclusively at-
tacks wheat only, while our rye gall-gnat has hitherto been found on rye
only. The maggots and pups of the winter generation of Cecidomyia
destructor are said to occur always only just above the upper end of the
root-stock, and those of the rye gall-gnat are usually found a little
higher. These differences are too trifling to disprove the identity of the
two species. Rye and wheat are such closely allied plants that a gall-
gnat, otherwise a very stubborn animal as regards the selection of a
certain plant, would very likely choose, according to the inclination of
the circumstances, one or the other of the two kinds of plants. Moreover
it is not yet proved whether our rye gall-gnat does not infest wheat also.

I shall now compare the insect in its different stages of development.
I could not procure any specimens of the American (Hessian) fly, nor
was I able to find any in a zoological or private museum. Therefore I
must depend upon Asa Fitch’s descriptions and illustrations. I notice
a conspicuous difference already in the shape of the brown shell sur-
rounding the pupaproper. Thisshellisless cylindrical and comparatively
broader than in our rye gall-gnat, yet much more pointed at its tapering
end, while in our species it is blunt, conical. Fitch counts in the an-
tenne of the perfect insect 16 joints, while they are 18-jointed in all
my specimens. Moreover, according to his description, the different an-
tennal joints are in the female connected by thin pedicels that are one-
third of the length of the joints, the last joint being at least one-third
longer than the penultimate joint; the intervening pedicels between
the joints of the female rye gall-gnat are so short that the joints appear
to sit one-on top of the other and the last joint is scarcely longer than
- the preceding. I therefore infer that if our species is the real Cecido-
myia destructor, the demonstration of the pupa and the female antenna
given by Mr. A. Fitch must be wrong, and that, if he correctly de-
scribes it, our rye gall-gnat must be regarded as different from Cecidoma yia
destructor. The question can only properly be answered by a compari-
son with original American specimens, which I soon expect to receive.
Without a verification we cannot suppose any inaccuracy in such a
thorough entomologist as A. Fitch. Wenow have, therefore, to regard
our rye fly as different from Cecidomyia destructor and to call it Cecid-
omyia secalina.
: | DESCRIPTION OF THE RYE GALL-GNAT.

Female rye gall-gnat (Cecidomyia secalina).—The length from the front
to the extensile ovipositor is about 14 lines. Body-color black; humerus,
region under the alar radicle, nearly the whole abdomen and the con-
necting membranes of the abdominal segments blood-red; the ovi-
positor, consisting of two parts, is more of the color of vermilion, fur-
nished at its end with two very minute, almost round, lamellule. The

[8] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

short and little noticed pilosities on vertex, back of thorax and abdomen
black. Antenne about one-half line long, black; they consist, beside
their two basal joints, also of 16 oviform flagellar joints, apparently
placed close together, beset with short black hairs. The palpi are
blackish-brown, comparatively long, each successive joint becoming
considerably longer than the one just preceding. Legs and halteres
brown-black; wings grayish-turbid, with short hairs on their surface and
with long, black, easily-rubbed hairs along their margins; they only
have three longitudinal veins and no transverse vein; the first longi-
tudinal vein is very close to the anterior margin, running just to its
middle; the second longitudinal vein is considerably far from the an-
terior margin and runs from the wing-root straight to the end of the
wing, reaching the same shortly before its extreme terminus; the third
longitudinal vein is directed diagonally toward the posterior margin,
suddenly bending toward the latter with its rather indistinct end, so
that it reaches the posterior margin just opposite the mouth of the first
longitudinal vein; we also observe that this third longitudinal vein
has also a straighter but inconspicuous anterior branch, arising from
that spot where it begins to bend toward the posterior margin, and
which branch reaches the wing margin just in the middle between the
mouth of the second and third longitudinal veins.

B. b)

OBSERVATIONS ON THE NEW CROP GALL-GNAT, BY DR.
BALTHASAR WAGNER. FULDA, 1861; WITH PLATH, 4°,

| PP, 41%

Literature.

Asa Fitcu. The Hessian Fly. Albany, 1846.

H. Lorw. Die Gallmiicken. Program of the Gymnasium at Posen. 1850.

H. Lorw. Die neue Kornmade. Ziillichau, 1859.

J. WINNERTZ. Beitraege zu einer Monographie der Gallmiicken. Linnea entomo-
logica. Vol. viii. Berlin, 1853.

Von HOHENHAUSEN. Biographie des Generals von Ochs. Cassell, 1827.

F. PFIsTER. Die Fahrt der hessischen Heeresabtheilung von Portsmouth nach N,
York. Zeitschrift des Vereins fiir hessische Geschichte und Landeskunde. Vol. ii.
Cassell, 1840.

§ 1. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE ‘‘SCHEINPUPPE” (SUB-
IMAGO STAGE) AND THE IMAGO.

I first observed the maggot of the new gall-gnat in the neighborhood
of my dwelling in the spring of 1860. Not until I perused, in July, Dr.
H. Loew’s paper (1859) did my interest become more excited in the
matter. I endeavored to secure specimens of the sub-imago Stage.
First noticed on wheat only, I soon found that they also occurred on
barley and rye. The insect occurred quite rarely on the latter; but on
the occasion of an excursion to the Rhén districts I found them as
often on rye as on wheat. Both summer rye and summer wheat were
attacked. A close examination of the pup, as well as a comparison
amongst themselves, showed no specific difference. ‘They occurred, as
is now generally known, most frequently just above the two lowest
stalk-knots, immediately below the ruptured spot, and here mostly on
the outer side; less so on the upper part of the knot itself. The num-
ber of pups occurring on a stalk varied much; sometimes I found but
one, at other times seven to nine specimens.

The preserving of the pups took place in the open air beneath covers

* Translated by Dr. C. F. Gissler.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [9]

of mosquito netting on garden-soil mixed with much sand, which was
kept moist from below. These net-cages were exposed to every change
of the weather, thus imitating the conditions of those not in captivity.
During the whole time of observation my attention was also drawn to
the metamorphoses going on in the insect in a state of nature. By com-
paring the latter with those in formation in the nets I believed that the
observations were without those mistakes which even the best con-
structed, but sometimes partially manipulated, net-cages can never
fully escape. However much certain objections may be made to rais-
ing themin captivity, yet, properly conducted, especially when keptunder
continued control with the metamorphoses going on outside, its impor-
tance is not to be contested; this medium for the determination of the
Swarming time could not have been omitted in the present case. From
the compilation of the collected notes on the hatched flies has resulted
the following table. I have to add the remark that the number of flies
obtained from the various kinds of crops does not in the least represent a
measure of the more or less frequency of the insect in the respective
graminaceous genera. For the least would such an inference be made
regarding barley. That I obtained comparatively many flies from it is
_ to be explained by the fact that the collection of pupz was locally more
convenient for me. Winter rye yielded few flies, on account of the
ereater distance of the localities where pups would have occurred in
quantities.

a hee
E eee
= Number of an-| § Ba
Kind of crop. Ee Sex. tennal joints. | £2 | a3
3 | Sune
e B= | &
A rH DR
pre Wie AeE ip alain a/nicivciela sa cc's sce ccinceimncimaein si ENGI, 2h leet BO miles ore La Shae elle at alee ce
Al NoeSe rd lM (eee rh see Pee Pay
DOs Or ela saitine Pace te veer a aun
AON (oo tseoallaaea cod) UO fa ostlendconleseoos
Ey ae Ser Ds GT Pa |B EG 0
Saya ne ane Ol ea Pais eee Re Ree IE:
iL aS Ke DSS Esa ual Celia een dia
DPS aASOMn TAT Ue Males Wi Wie oh ena es
Tu Ne es ae ema gals 1:2 18
ileal He NOT G IE ia ee eee pein
Tra ep a tecewe Cees ho oem cl 1G | or aeeca ei ees ena
HS eect eon ME ASN) ue WBA Oey Or LS Ra
Si Yate Os Wes lea UG egal Saeers Whee
Nee an a a Cee nid OY ett alam ee
HY ||). © gM eea A eee, dl peas be
BO eh Vose leowe Tei etarlll pees ia meee ie eee
Ooty MAA TOPE ase aa eee Ode [acne eet nen apna
Eau eae ONS a ceria Ua al peer ea eee, Cen A So Ns ee es
VoLUL a 1208, 2a AOE, See i eset DED ORD” Milter | AON Tee ciiniloy tes cath Real prepa eis ee wee
ilps Alera ge |e AG eoe tele mace Meta
SD Vere aches Neel fe ep erates 4
; Pal ils Pee doy isc <n ays el) eee oe A ee
Se Sian SEROUS a ns cia <)s lala wicfojmle)waieincianicigecse sicisee ote Sp at) Meee escuela 7 all Aol pace lena
LON ecm lecios eetee Sasa) an 6 1:1 2
OMICINUARL OV ic asin cance vaiee see cae aciewia acer niniain oe PALO GL eaeete a lanl vate OL ov Re eeeall id aie (ae hen se [Re ici
Sepiyasecoese es ane HAE LR ai
AG MAA COMMIT WN ole O MIDE GC yee gs.
Geese tam tise eee arm eA Ti
ASIN coil aries 15 4:5 9
PAD Eo fl cite | etal 6 oke I) leana lesosee| esose
. PEON G 1 Suis ci eel esate (ee
28) |S arOR ee RGR elev elae ae cele Zs
Oe a Be ialtaatelltactaell Secret Giclee, ae (Ma Ir ae
PAGE OUNIOTY Asie! cha ee iainia ste Nas oat aic'a Slonim oe oie msiclacieitn Ueieiceui aes 12| 21 | 3 ne TL ALS Ahetey 39.

[10] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Although this table comprises but a small number of individuals, it
nevertheless elucidates several important points, asit just answers some
questions which are of importance in the characterization of the imago.
Of the twelve males hatched, nine specimens have antenne with 16
joints, in two of them the number of joints is 15 and only in one 17.
Most females have 15, three have 14, and two have 16 joints. Hence the
normal number of joints for both sexes is not alike, but 16 for the male
and 15 for the female.

The determination of the numerical proportion of both sexes for the
time cannpt, however, be an accurate one, since chance plays an im-
portant role in the collection of. pupz, and only by a comparison of ,
several generations will a result approximating reality be obtained.
However, this proportion probably scarcely remains unchanged in the
different seasons of the year, as very likely various circumstances,
such as unequal duration of some developmental periods, extraordinary
temperature, &c., influence the sexual development. According to the
table given that proportion is 12: 21 or 4:7. Hence a prevalence of
females over males may be accepted. Also in catching the adults in
the field, I captured a larger number of females.

Those 33 developed flies distributed themselves in the various months
as follows: August 6, September 24, October 3. The swarming time
begins toward the end of August, ending i in the beginning of October.
The points of time of the beginning and ceasing of swarming essentially
depend upon the climate of the location and the meteorological con-
ditions of the year. The climate of Fulda is under the predominating
influence of two neighboring mountains—the Khon and the Vogel, whose
foot-hills approach the city, forming a climatologically important belt
toward the south. Our district rises from the surface of the Fulda
Itiver, 790 feet up to 1,300 feet above sea-level. By all this a consider-
able deviation of the physical from the mathematical climate is pro-
duced, which must influence the times of appearance of our insect, so
that they probably also correspond to the more northern districts.
That unfavorable weather produces a remarkable retardation in the
development of insects is an empirically known fact, which nowadays
entomologists cannot deny. Last year’s rainy August is still fresh in
the memory of our farmers, no day having passed up to the 26th without
at least afew hours of rain, sometimes even lasting uninterruptedly for
several consecutive days. We may therefore assume, with some cer-
tainty, that owing to the depression in temperature the development of
the insect was retarded, the swarming time, therefore, appearing in other
years earlier. w

The life of the imago is of short duration. I could not keep the flies
alive longer than six “days, most haying died already on the fourth or
fifth day.

The hatching gall-gnats were usually not caught before the day fol-
lowing hatching, and were stupefied in ether vapors and then miecro-
scopically examined.

§ 2.— DESCRIPTION OF THE ADULT INSECT (IMAGO).

In explanation, I premise the following remarks :

As to the number of segments constituting the abdomen of the San:
gnats the views of authors are at present still divided, since a certain
organ at the end of the abdomen receives various meanings. Espe-
cially in this respect do the views of those two German dipterologists dis-
agree, to whom the undeniable credit belongs, by their successive as

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [11]

well as diligent investigations of the hitherto so much neglected natural

history of the gall-gnats, of having built a solid foundation and having
produced rich material for the preparation of an extensive monograph of
this rather difficult branch of entomology. Dr. Loew, in his monograph
of the gall-enats, accepts nine abdominal segments, but does not state
_ their number in his later description of the rye gall-enat (Cecidomyia seca-
lina). J. Winnertz, on the other hand, in his paper, which closely sup-
plements and follows the one just mentioned, includes in the genitals the
organ seen by Loew as the ninth abdominal segment, deciding accord-
ingly, as previously done by Meigen, for the acceptance of but eight
abdominal segments. I consider ‘Loew's as the correct view. For the
sake of brevity I confine myself to our gall-gnat only. Concerning the
male (Fig. 17), the genital orifice lies underneath the papille subse-
-quently to be described, at the end of a thin, retractile cone, which
should be taken for the cirrus. This unpaired organ is by no means on
the clasper, but, as in all gall-gnats examined by me, at the base of the
clasper itself, from which it follows that the clasper is no appendage,
and must be taken, regardless of its small size, as an independent seg-
ment. On the abdomen of a female gall-gnat we can in all cases readily
distinguish seven abdominal segments. The part following the pygi-
dium is, in the different species, in shape and consistence of various
formation, with peculiar pilosity ; but this pygidium allows us in all

cases to distinguish two segments separated by a transverse fold. In

the female of our gall-gnat (Figs. 20, 21, 22) the foremost of these seg-
. ments is more chitinized; the posterior, yellow segment, placed some-
what transversely toward the preceding, is membranous, elastic, and
thereby capable of assuming various forms. -According as the ovipositor
is more or less protruded the membranous organ expands longitudinally
or it contracts, but it is never actually withdrawn asin theovipositor. It
therefore cannot be regarded as a genital organ. Its analogy with the
last abdominal segments of many other insects, the pygidium especially
is Seen in that it likewise serves for the reception of the ovipositor. If we
nevertheless reckon it with the genitals we should have to accept in the
Species with a very tapering, cylindrical, and throughout membranous
pygidium not eight but only seven abdominal rings. In a female which,
in expiring under the microscope, evacuated a white fiuid, I believe I
have convinced myself that the location of the anal orifice is really be-
low the posterior end of said organ. Should others make the same
observation, the term pygidium would not only agree, but the accepta-
tion of nine abdominal segments for the female ‘gall-g gnat would alto-
gether irrefutably receive its justification.
In determining the color of the various body-parts I was led by the
following thought. 'The smaliness of the object is to the naked eye very
often a hindrance in exactly determining the true color, especially when
this is not a vivid one. This case appears when we are prevented by
the deviating color of the pilosity from properly distinguishing the
parts underneath. Only with the microscope can we get over this diffi-
culty. Under it the hair-covering, previously appearing uniform, dis-
solves into single hairs, whose color we can easily distinguish from that
of the body. Our judgment as to the color of a small, pilose part of an
insect, therefore, will turn out variously, according to whether we sepa-
rate the color of the hair from that of the part itself, or whether we con-
sider the former together with the latter. This is often very important
in microscopical observations, and must especially in the present case
be contemplated. The legs of our female gall-gnat, for instance, appear
to the naked eye as blackish, or black, on account of the pilosity, while

\

[12] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

in reality their color is a dirty light-brown. The black-brown color of the
male abdomen is intermingled with the light pilosity in a peculiar man-
ner, so that the abdomen has already been called ‘‘ yellowish-gray.”

Another remark has reference to the instability of the color in the
imago. The latter manifests in this relation a true Proteus-nature dur-
ing the first few hours after hatching. Theabdomen of the just-hatched
male looks dirty—looks dirty light-yellow. Into this yellow soon a hue
of red mixes itself, and after an hour the color is already a perfect yellow-
red one. Through fire-red it passes into a dirty light-brown, and thence
into brown-red. Not before eight or ten hours is the fly completely col-
ored. Not less striking is the change of color of the female, and more so
on the ventral side. Already in the opened pupa-shell shortly before
hatching it shows a shiny brown-red color, which passes in the just-
hatched fly into a vivid crimson, thence going through several hues. —
The preserved dead female after some time scarcely allows us to distin-
guish a light hue on the joint-membranes of the abdominal segments.
I will, therefore, indicate the color in the description of the imago as it
looked to me under the microscope in the completely-colored, recently-killed
insect. ;

Male. (Fig.15.)—Length3™™. Head and thorax black; abdomen brown-
black, lighter at the sides; sutures and median line dorsally usually
tawny yellow. Alar radicles and immediate surrounding light brown-
red. Apart from the wings the hairiness of all the other body-parts is
a reddish yellow. Antenne a little longer than half the body-length,
blackish, turned upward, moniliform; hairs verticillately placed, 2+ 15- |
to 2+17-jointed, most frequently 2+16-jointed. First basal joint be-
low a little narrowed, second nearly globular, separated from the lat-
ter only by a groove; both basal joints sparsely bristled. Knots of the
flagellar joints oval, becoming globular toward the tips; style of the
flagellar joints only a third thicker but over two-thirds longer than the
knots which are scarcely contracted below the middle; last joint sometimes
shorter than the penultimate, especially when the number of flagellar
joints attains the maximum; the lower verticillar bristles a little longer,
the upper just as long as the single joints. Faceted eyes large, lunate,
meeting on the front. Ocelliand pigment eyes do not occur. Posterior
margin of the head, front, and lower face haired. The light-brown,
short-haired palpi consist of four unequally long joints; the basal joint
is the shortest; each of the following is longer than its preceding, but
also slenderer, the terminal joint as long as the second and third
together. They are usually directed downward and curved, so that
each of them represents a faint curve with a posteriorly placed concavity.
In this position they make themselves conspicuous by active vibra-
tion. In dead specimens we find the palpi frequently bent inward or
crossing each other. Between the palpi protrudes the yellow proboscis,
usually orally retracted towards the mouth ; itis blunt, ten-pin-shaped,
ef about the length and thickness of the second palpal joint. <A trans-— :
verse, in life vibrating, bead above the proboscis I take to be the upper |
lip. The dorsal part of the thorax (Brustriicken) is strongly arched lat-
erally, beset with long hairs; the whole dorsal surface is divided into
three shiny areas by two easily rubbed, longitudinal hair-beads, begin-
ning behind the reddish humeralangle. Scutellum semicircular, brown-
black, with its posterior margin sparsely haired. Metathorax naked.
Wings without an alula, rounded toward tip, wedge-shaped at base, reach-
ing far beyond the abdomen, gray-turbid; provided with plain, thin hairs
directed toward the tip. The anterior margin of the wing is beset with
appressed scale-like hairs, the posterior margin with very delicate ciliate:

4 :

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [13]

hairs, attaining on the edge of the wing their greatest length, and which,
like the hairs of the wing disk, are easily rubbed. Each wing is fur-
nished with three longitudinal veins, the first of which is near the ante-
rior marginal vein, first running parallel with the latter, uniting with it
near the middle of the anterior margin. The second longitudinal vein
_ rises straight upward, curves considerably in a posterior direction near
its last third, ending yet a little before the tip of the wing. Finally, the
third longitudinal vein, which in its lower half is more prominent than the
first two, arises from the same root as the second, but strongly diverges
fromit. Just opposite the end (Miindung) of the first longitudinal vein
it divides into two branches, of which one runs in an obtuse angle to
the posterior margin, while the other reaches the margin nearly in
the middle between the end of the preceding branch and the second
longitudinal vein. Both longitudinal veins are connected with each
other by a very pale transverse vein, which, directed from the posterior
toward the anterior and inner side, meets the first longitudinal vein at
half the distance of its end from the roots of the wing. This is the
only transverse vein in the wing, and is difficult to see. I succeeded
best in finding it by placing the insect on its back, fastening the wing-
‘tips in such a manner that they somewhat rose inwardly. The trans-
verse vein of the wing directed toward the entering light can then be
seen by reflected Jght. A magnifying power of seventy sufficed, while
a power of even four hundred did not show it when the wing was kept
in a horizontal position. A fold traversing the whole wing immedi-
ately before the third longitudinal vein and its anterior corners is very
_ characteristic. The comparatively long halteres are light brown. They
and the long, slender, more dirty light-brown legs are covered ‘with
closely appressed, scale-like hairs, the latter being very regularly paral-
lelly transversely striped. Coxa cylindrical, trochanter (Schenkelring)
_ nearly globular, both of the color of the abdomen. Terminal spurs not
present on the tibia. Of the five tarsal joints the first is the shortest;
their proportional length is approximately reached by 1: 12,5: 4, 2:2,7:
1,3. The terminal joint bears two hair-like, coal-black claws, beneath
which is but one disk-like, haired cushion. The cylindrical, sparsely
haired abdomen consists of nine segments, of which the last, very minute,
is of yellow-brown color, posteriorly bearing the dark-red clasper. The
eighth segment is smaller than the preceding, equally large segments.
Each of the two clasper-halves consists of two joints: the thicker basal
joint is not haired on its inner side; on its outer side are three shallow
transverse grooves; the longer terminal joint is strongly curved inward.
Between the claspers are two pale-brown conical papille, densely beset
with short hairs, which, as I believe I have observed, act together with
the unpaired organ mentioned above as an auxiliary copulatory organ.

Female, (Fig. 18.)—The length from the front to the end of the pro-
truded ovipositor varies between 2.5™™ and 3.5™, and is therefore less
- constant than in the male. Black is here also the predominating color
of the body, being even more intense, shiny velvet-black. Nearly the
whole abdomen, the sutures between the abdominal segments, and the
median dorsal line of theabdomen areraspberry-red; the base of antenne
and their place of insertion are often blood-red. On the ventral side of
each of the six abdominal segments we notice here, better than in the
male, a nearly quadrate velvet-black spot, which, however, soon after
death loses its distinct margin, the whole ventral then assuming the
color of the dorsal side. The pilosity of all body-parts is black; the
antenne are reddish-yellow; the latter are one-third of the body-length;

\

[14] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the number of joints is 2414 to 2416, usually 2+15. The female,
therefore, has on an average one flagellar joint less than the male.*

Of the very short-stemmed, cylindric-oval flagellar joints the lower
ones are a little longer than those toward the terminus; the last joint
is also regularly longer than the penultimate, sometimes but little, but —
the plus is often a full one-third of the length. tT fort

Of the verticillate hairs those placed toward the base attain the
length of the flagellar knots; the pilosity of the female is altogether
much shorter than in the male. The wings reach much less beyond the
abdomen than in the male. The abdomen is cylindrical, gradually taper-
ing from the sixth segment. The rose-red-colored ovipositor consists of
a cylindrical basal joint and a one-third longer, posteriorly rounded,
short haired terminal joint. The genital orifice is not at the end of the
ovipositor, but below at the hind margin of the basal joint. The very
convenient position of the terminal joint for the fertilization of eggs
while passing out of the parent leads us to suggest the presence in it of :
a ‘seminal receptacle.” The great flexibility of the last segment allows
the female fly to direct the ovipositor downward, which can best be ob-
‘served in the moment of oviposition. No trace can be found of certain
small lamelle usually occuring in gall-gnats at the abdominal end.

Loew, in his monograph, states as an artificial character of the gall-
gnats:

Body long, cylindrical. Legs slender, tibize always unarmed, claws weak, only one
claw-cushion. Wings large and broad, without appendage, with three to five longi-
tudinal and scarcely one transverse vein, which is placed between the first and second
longitudinal veins; wing-margin ciliate, with but seven sections; surface of wing all
over with long or shorter intermingled with longer pilosity.

By a glance at the above description the family character will be re-
cognized. Our insect is, therefore, really a gall-gnat. As the first tarsal
joint is the shortest and no ocelli oceur, the insect belongs to that group
of gall-gnats which comprises the two genera Cecidomyia Meig. and Lasi-
optera Meig. (excluding the species with non-abbreviated first tarsal
joint). Only the first longitudinal vein of the wings approaches more
the anterior margin; therefore the insect belongs to the genus Cecido>
myia. Winnertz subdivides this genus into eightsubgenera. The run-
ning out of the second longitudinal vein before reaching the end of the
wing and the nearly equal number of antennal joints in both sexes
allots our insect strictly to the subgenus Cecidomyia.

§ 3.—WINTER GENERATION.

The period from the egg up to the imago occurs in the life history of
this insect twice annually, 7. e., the fly appears in two generations every
year. That we besides this have to distinguish also another hitherto
overlooked case I shall demonstrate at the end of this paragraph. At.
present we will speak of that generation which is produced by the flies
hatching in the fall. We will call it, since it belongs to the cold season,
the winter generation. |

* An examination of all the raised specimens teaches us that the normal number for the antennal
joints (¢ 2+16, 2 2+15) on the average suffers in seven cases two exceptions, 7. ¢., having one more
joint or one less.

+ The small stylet connecting both terminal joints we not uncommonly find to be reduced to a mini-
mum, so that it is rather difficult to tell whether there are two or but one joint. To escape any doubt
the following remark will be of advantage: Where at least a transverse groove is indicated I decided
for two joints; where this could not be found I accepted but one joint, even if the proportional length
’ perhaps recalled the possibility of two connate joints. It often occurs that some joints may be sub-
divided by a constriction into two smaller joints. This modification, a consequence of mechanical
pressure or of having been dried up after death, will never leave the observer in doubt as to the real
number of antennal joints, when he considers their normal proportion of length and the manner in
which they are linked together.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [15]
J.—The egg. (Fig. 1, 2.)

I have observed the act of copulation in our gall-gnat several times.
On the 6th of September I brought to a female, hatched early in the
morning of the same day, a male. The female sat quietly on the wall
of the cage and soon retracted the protruding ovipositor up to near the
terminal joint. After the male had flown for a while around the female,
he alighted on her, bending his abdomen downwards, embracing the ovi-
positor with his claspers, thus reaching its orifice from below. Copula-
tion was repeated in short intervals, each lasting from one to two minutes.
After this the male was captured and a tender wheat sprout just taken
from the soil was placed to the female. After a good half hour the fly
ascended on the introduced plant and deposited eggs on the surface of
several leaves. With the head directed toward the tip of the leaf, she
slowly walked diagonally up, after each short pause depositing two
eges between the intervening spaces of two successive longitudinal leaf-
veins, so that, though the eggs were placed in a parallel position, one of
them was a little ahead ‘of the other. It could be distinctly ob-
served during the act how the egg each time was expressed by the ovi-
positor. After removal of the plant a few others were substituted,
which were likewise beset with eggs by the insect, wherein, although the
plocess was analogous, a deposition of eggs in pairs did not always oc-
eur. In all I counted 83 eggs deposited by the female.

In all cases observed the number of eggs deposited by one female
were more than 80 and less than 100. Ireached this result either by
placing sprouts under the glass globe, as long as any eggs were depos-
ited, or, instead, a whole bunch of sprouts, prepared for it in a flower-
pot, was covered with a glass globe and the fertilized female introduced.*
After the fly has attended to the care of her offspring, death follows
both sexes within a few hours.

The egg has a length of 0.3™™ and a diameter of 0.08™™; it is cylin-
drical, rounded on both ends, smooth, transparent, very faintly light
brown or furnished with several red dots, which are often confluent to

a single dot, disappearing in a few hours, permanently changing color .-

into brown red.

If we hold the leaves on which our gall-gnat has deposited eggs to the
light the latter become conspicuous by a red, silken hue; butif the
hatching of the maggots has already taken place, we notice in the small
valleys between the longitudinal nerves small excavations; the former
position of the ovules and the remaining egg-skins appear as elongate
white dots.

Owing to the very minute size of the eggs their gathering in the field
is very difficult even to an experiencedeye. An examinationof the leaves
with the magnifying glass requires much patience and endurance. I
therefore preferred, with a view of finding eggs, to examine a larger quan-
tity of sprouts of a field, in whose neighborhood the fly formerly occurred
in multitudes, and have in this case not only easily found them, but have
also found their arrangement to correspond with what has been stated
above.

As to the length of time from the deposition of the egg up to the
' hatching of the maggot I can communicate some observations. Those

*Several difficulties occur in the rearing of maggots from eggs, which lie principally partly
im the great tenderness, and therefore easy vulnerability of all the parts of our fly, partly also
in the less frequent occurrence of the male. Aside from the pilosity, each laceration of the insect

foils the experiment to produce copulation. Therefore it requires great care, in capturing espeei- ,

ally, since the legs especially thereby receiveinjury. Furthermore young females obstinately resist all
invitations of concupiscent males and the reverse. For the success of the experiment, therefore, wn-
wyjured, fully colored individuals of both sexes are the essential requirements.

{16] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

sprouts affected with the eggs of the insect of September 6 soon recov-
ered after replanting them. From 6 a. m. till 9 p. m. the temperature
was marked every three hours, and with regard to the then also nightly
mild fall weather 1° Réaumur less than the average temperature at 9
p. m. and 6 a. m. was accepted for the omitted nocturnal observations.
The hatching of the maggots took place on September 14, eight days
after oviposition. From the stated temperatures and the sum of observa-
tions (nights taken into account), the average temperature of those
eight days was 10.5° Réaumur [55.5 F.]._ How much more the develop-
ment of the maggot from the egg could be accelerated by increased tem-
perature, eggs obtained October 5 yielded a striking verification: the
maggot so rapidly developed in a warm room that they left their egg-
Skins as soon as the third day.

The freshly-hatched maggots very slowly wander downward in the
longitudinal valleys between the leaf-nerves. Their mation can only
be noticed by looking at them for a long time, especially by means of
a magnifying-glass. Several hours pass before the maggot reaches the
base of the leaf. After passing the latter the maggot disappears, and,
as we find by examining the sprout, continues to wander in the interior
down to near the root, to take from this time its permanent seat.

2. The maggot. (Fig. 3 to 13.)

The ground color of the larva is white, but-when the maggot has just
left the egg-skin it shows interiorly a flaky appearance, which in the
course of further development forms the so-called adipose body, and
which is trajected by a free-moving red liquid, by which the maggot has
now a reddish-yellow look. In the movements of the maggot this red
liquid accumulates in certain places of the body in lacunes, thereby
producing the blood-red spots which appear here and there on the body.
The maggot is now elongate-oval, head end pointed, surface bald and
finely wrinkled. Itslength an hour after hatching is 0. 11™™, three times
its width, but on the third day already 0.32™, five and a half times its
largest diameter. Of the subsequent developmental phases scarcely
anything more is to be said than that the maggot gradually acquires a
more elongate form, and that the segmentation of the body becomes
more distinct.

The maggot found in the beginning of November, in winter rye, lay
head downward, just above the base of the roots. The maggot had a
length of about 3m, It was white, laterally transparent, the adipose
body of a yellowish-white color. Faint lateral emarginations showed
fourteen body segments, of which two belong to the head, three to the
thorax, and nine tothe abdomen. On each side of the fleshy mouth pro-
truded a likewise fleshy sensory point. The extremely small stigmata
could be seen on the prothorax and the first eight abdominal segments.
The motions of the maggot were so insignificant that they could be re-
vealed only by the aid of a microscope. The retracting of the head was
spy-glass-like in two motions. All sprouts on which the maggot was
found were either decayed or visibly sick ; their yellow-brown color much
contrasted with the vivid green of their healthy neighbors.

The sowing of the winter rye begins here and in the immediate neigh-
borhood of my dwelling, especially owing to economical reasons, not
before the 20th of September; that of wheat still later. If this snffi-
ciently demonstrates why the gall-gnat used to be found in rye only —
and not also in wheat, the question, however, was significant: where

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [17]

do the flies deposit their eggs before the appearance of the winter crop?
As I looked for a long time in vain for the maggots of this hard-pressed
insect, I was about leaving the greater part of the brood pitilessly to
its fate: but [ was very soon convinced of my mistake. Asis well known,
the farmer, to his sorrow, often observes on the barley that, in harvest
time, the greater quantity of the straw breaks a little below the ear,
- which soon disseminates its contents or drops off entirely. If the soil
is loose and rich in humus, it will cover itself, especially when favored
with somerain, in a short time with young sprouts, often attaining consid-
erable growth in the late fall, and these I, as they appear after harvest-
ing, will briefly call ‘‘ barley aftergrowth.” And indeed our flies have
chosen this ‘‘aftergrowth,” being pressed to oviposition, and attacked
especially those fields in whose immediate neighborhood the maggots
previously appeared in numbers, so that not a single stalk remained.*

Owing to this interesting discovery at the end of November I gaveup
the further examination of the maggots occurring in rye, and followed all
the more diligently the development of the easy obtainable inaterial
on the so-called aftergrowth. The mild first part of December favored
me in finding the maggots. I shall now allude to the developmental
Stages of the maggots, which however appeared more near each other
than after each other.

The maggots discarded their former, more stretched, nearly cylindri-
cal form, the shape now again approaching the originally elongate egg-
form of the earliest state. This more robust look was evidently due to
the considerable development of the adipose body, which in most of the
_ Specimens was distinguishable as a snow-white mass from the remain-
der of the more transparent body. The segmentation was less distinct
than in the formerly examined maggots, as the sides scarcely showed any
emarginations. Viewed from above, the head of the maggot seemed to
have disappeared, allowing but twelve segments to be counted; on the
veutral side of the first thoracic segment the first cephalic ring was rep-
resented by a small protuberance, and the posterior segment was suf-
ficiently indicated by a shallow groove, which usually connected with.
the suture between the first iwo thoracic rings.

In the least developed maggots the yellowish-white adipose body ap-.
peared on both sides in connecting portions, so that transparent por-.
tions could be seen only in the vertical line of the longitudinal axis, in.
which portions the greenish contents of the intestine were visible. Sev-
eral times in placing such a maggot in a drop of water, tenderly strok-
ing it with a camel’s hair pencil, a number of green corpuscles soon:
Swam in the water, evidently issuing from the intestine of the maggot.
I take these corpuscles to be chlorophyll granules which the maggot
takes in with ‘the cellular juice. Experience that the green intestinal
contents of such alcoholic specimens decolorizes strengthens me in this.
belief. I did not succeed by any means in compelling the maggots re-
ferred to to protrude the invaginated head. As the maggot undoubtedly
still takes nourishment in this developmental phase, but closely ap-
proaches its full growth, it is assumed that the retraction of the head
takes place at the moment of separating it from the plant, and that in
the extremely slow maggot, when once disturbed in its life-habit, the
assumed condition is retained.

A second portion of maggots distinguishes itself by the entire want

* That the aftergrowth has such a great attraction for the flies of neighboring infested fields, aspecial
case taught me: On a field of baile) on which I previously could see no trace of the insect the mag-
gots appeared very numerous in the attergrowth.

2 AP E

[18] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of transverse grooves; the body-segments were but partially indicated
by slightly bluish transverse lines. The colored liquid concentrated in
the dorsal vessel was yellowish-green on account of the underlying in-
testine. The head was here, as in all forms, retracted. The maggot at-
tains with this stage the'maximum of its size, therefore taking no more
nourishment. All its motions and bodily modifications henceforth go
on within its integument. Therefore an important epoch in the life-his-
tory of the maggot is herewith concluded.

To this connective and transitory form belong those maggots which
produced by contraction in the direction of the longitudinal axis a par-
tial separation of the external skin, also those which were no more in
connection with this skin. The period of pseudo-pupation begins with
this moment. The dead external skin, excluded from the life- functions
of the organism, becomes now a protecting cover, within which the mag-
got undergoes the transformation into the real pupa and imago. Through
this still white cover we recognize the scarcely changed maggot, and in
the latter, especially on removing the external shell, we recognize the
reddish-yellow or red dorsal vessel and the snow-white adipose body,
which later becomes separated according to the segments into more dis-
tinct sections. In consequence of that contraction of the maggot an
empty space is produced at both ends of the shell. The shell on some
specimens has already assumed a yellow-brown color and denser con-
sistency. The anterior end of the shell plainly exhibits a curvature
and a protuberance as a remainder of the-retracted mouth, as a sign
that the mouth-parts were not excluded in the late change. I owe it to
a lucky chance to have had once the opportunity to see through the
still slightly colored shell of such a maggot, which pushed the front part
of the body back and forth, not only the head with the palpi, but also
to observe, how in each forward push the mouth-parts entered behind the
mentioned protuberance. The position of the head therefore fully cor-
responds with that of the protuberance. On the light-brown shell we
can better see the punctured transverse lines lining each body-segment
than later in the dark-brown pupa.

The rye sprouts infected by our gall-gnat and examined in November
and December have taught me that very likely none of those sprouts
have sufficient resistance to attain maturity, therefore all succumb to
this insect; further on, that, as a rule, the full growth of the maggot
coincides with the death of the sprout. The dead sprout for atime serves
as a protecting cover, but after its decay the enveloped maggot imbeds
itself in the soil. The latter supplies moisture for the preservation of
the maggot, to which the parchment like cover moreover yields special
protection against the drying-up sun-rays.

The young maggot, as arule, places itself immediately above the knot
from which the sheath of that leaf arises on which the eggs wére hatched.
On sprouts still wanting an internoded stalk, the leaf-sheaths arise from
the root-head, therefore the maggots occur right above there. On the
other hand, if the fly finds already adeveloped sprout, it never deposits
the eggs on the lowest leaves, but on biade-bearing ones. Of this I con-
vineed myself on that barley aftergrowth; the maggots were not all
the way down, but always in the neighborhood of the two lowest knots,
from which it follows that the plants at thetime of oviposition of the fly
had already developed a stalk. Therefore if the maggots occur on the
young winter sprouts near the root, we should nevertheless expect to
see a special peculiarity of the winter generation.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. ema fetes) |
3. The pupa orchrysalis.* (Fig. 14.)

During the winter we perceive no conspicuous changes in the envel-
oped maggot as taught by an examination after removing the shell.
The severe cold has reduced its life-functions to a minimum, recalling
its life as an egg, until the vivifying vernal sun penetrates even its coffin-
like prison, awakening it from the long apparent death to new activity.
The insect at the time is still in its larval state, which, however, it soon
discards, entering the pupa state, by which change the larvarium be.
comes immediately a puparium. The changes which the insect under-
goes during pupation advance rapidly and are accompanied by impor-
tant modifications. The prothoracic stigmata are substituted within a
few days by two stigmaphora, and in the antennal region we perceive two
bristled organs. Simultaneously the rudiments of the antenne, wings
and legs push forth. The color of the insect in this phase is still a
white one, but already, after a few days, the ventral surface assumes a
reddish hue, which intensifies with every successive day, gradually al-
vancing toward the dorsal side. The red veins of the future wings are
especially conspicuous. All body-parts exhibit, in the course of about
a week, a blood-red color. Finally the white pupa-shell is secreted,
through which now the more (°) or less (¢) red body can be traced.
The middle of April is the time when pupation begins, but this transition
from the larva to the pupa is not the same for all maggots, but com-
prises a termn of several weeks, a fact which should not surprise us if
we consider that the time of swarming and consequently also the time
of hatching of the young maggots in autumn lasted over a month, and
that the maggots occur in the early part of winter simultaneously in
various stages of development.

The pupa-shell is the substantially modified former larval skin; we
therefore shall recognize in it the form which the maggot possessed ;
some time after attaining the maximum of growth it separated itself from
the inclosing membrane. Its length is sometimes scarcely 3™™, but
in most cases from 4"™ to 5™™, Its form approaches that of a cylin-
der with the ventral side more convex, the posterior end blunt, conical,
and the rounded anterior end somewhat bent downward. This bending
took place simultaneously with the retraction of the head. The upper
surface is smooth; very small irregularities, seen under the microscope,
obviously originated in consequence of shrinking. The punctured trans-
verse lines limiting each body-segment are, on account of the dark chest-
nut color, seen under the microscope only. The punctures of the trans-
verse lines produce reflections in white and light brown larval shells
aiter the removal of the worm; the reflections recall the passing of light
through very minute orifices; I regard them, therefore, as real pores.
The color of the protuberance, being the remainder of the sucking
mouth of the free larva, may be brown, yellow, or white. The shell has
lost its original membranous structure, becoming so brittle as to break
under light pressure.

Now in this shell is the pupa proper, which itself is again enveloped
by a white, membranous skin. Its average length is 3™™. As in
the Coleoptera and Hymenoptera its antenne, wings, and legs are
also enveloped in separate sheaths, and so ingeniously placed that a
glance at such a mummy excites in a mind susceptible to the beautiful
not mortal fright, but admiration and pleasure. The wings, folded back-

*This would be the proper place to point out the manner of pupation occuring in diptera in gen-
eral, and especially in gall-gnats. Loew’s paper mentioned above demonstrates this very intelligently ;
therefore I highly recommend his paper to those finding special interest in the present matter.

[20] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

ward, resemble coat-tails, and are placed under the distinctly seemented
body. The antennal sheaths pass down on the inner margin of the wings,
coming from the vertex. Between the antenne are the parallelly
placed, ventrally appressed leg-sheaths, innermost those of the anterior,
outermost those of the posterior legs, the tips of which reach about
to the sixth abdominal segment. On each side of the thorax protrudes
a slightly curved, small horn—the breathing tubes characteristic of the
gall-gnats.* _

Immediately behind each antenna a short bristle arises from a small,
round protuberance. The chitinous structure of the nose-shaped pro-
cess between the bases of the antennz seems to be of some Service in
hatching.

The mode of hatching I never observed in the field, but shall state
here my observations made at home. As soon as the pupa has matured
it turns around, head downward, and fills out with its abdomen the
hitherto empty part of the pupa-case. Thus propped, it raises the out-
wardly placed dorsal side of the abdomen and cracks the shell; a trans-
verseslit has formed usually through theeighth and ninth segment. The
various body-parts are yet so soft and flexible that they can thus be
bent. Now, as the insect props the chitinous frontal process against the
shell and presses the body toward the formed slit, the latter widens and
allows the anterior part of the insect to pass through. After a short
recreation from the great work, a few stretchings and jerks suffice to
break the thorax of the shell longitudinally. Again comes a short
pause: head and thorax become free; whereupon the insect pulls forth
the antenne, wings, and legs out of their sheaths, freeing itself entirely.
The young fly now creeps to the light and moves its soft, stick-like
looking wings along toward each other with great rapidity until after
Some five minutes they are fully stretched. After the free access of air
has brought its drying and solidifying influence upon the external mem-
branes, the fly finally submits to the bearing capacity of its tender
Wings.

To remove any objections, as if the narrow space between the stalk
and the blade would not allow any motions of the fly, I add that, at the
time of hatching, the connection between the lower. blades and the stalk
is already sufficiently loosened so that there is no want of space for the
escape of the fly. In this, perhaps, is the reason why the female sup-
plies the lower leaves only with eggs.

The process cannot essentially differ from the above in pupe lying
‘free on the soil; but as the shell is freely movable, the hatching re-
quires less force by the insect.

4. The perfect insect.

From the 17th of December till January 29 the soil was covered with
snow; the out-of-door observations, therefore, had to be discontinued for
a long time. The subsequent alternation of sunshine and dew (during
the day) and frost (at night) proved to be bad for our crops; in some
districts over half of the sprouts were killed within a few days. The
sprouts infested with larve, formerly easily-recognizable (owing to
their discolored look), could not be distinguished, after the snow had
melted away, from those killed by frost, or if already decayed, no
pseudo-chrysalids were found. This was quite inopportune, as I did not
collect any maggots in the fore-winter, expecting to obtain in spring ac-

*On the empty pupa shell two long, bristled organs, usually spirally wonnd above, which appear
to connect with the tracheal tubes by acanal, arise out of the thorax-slit, a little before the tracheal
tubes. I cannot see for what use they are.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. faa]

curate results as tothe determination of the swarming time. With the
consciousness of having previously obtained certainty as to the actual
occurrence of the fly on winter rye I became contented to make use of
the occurrence on barley aftergrowth. On fields with young clover the
straw of this aftergrowth preserved for a rather long period the pseudo-

-ehrysalids I vathered About the middle of March. The result is tabled
as below:

eb uy 210,
[o) (=)
= ee
= Number of an- gs Ee
7 “sa mM Seal |
Kind of crops. A Sex jenna cinta: ep ae
(=) ~
iB £3 |
A AY mM
After-growth of self-sown summer barley ........- April a gh esellesen|fs ann SUT |\ntessatatete lteter
PPA Noten tata eee DEES Tal ane RR Te on
ile ee MON ATS hese AMI ry RANE aay ae
PADS ASE IEE WF COD TIN TE SSH LE el mel NNR Meee a eas
SAME Ouray ols allt ni A wel ergs
CN SOs MR seal RA ik al aes dag
PSN Us oC) al Rd Meru ae I
PDN o th tects ol Asal sees LGU ei eet eis eee eae
Fe ue Ts eae oe HR Le
Osa LEN ee Me aoe a teats eM a
Obese eeclleaee Tsetse cer ei le
WER Bile seu\) Qs a SS ere peste Sissel Is ees tah ele
Bal On MAAN MOG be an ea Stair
Dual aresvllisareseill eke ste GS hes aes ee ea levee
Del ieoua lero eee ESA Rb ee UNMET ee haa
Tah (0 GMINA, EN alata
QO rch tal ieeetelnaisc DCPS ALT kh Pu PS
AON (CRP IORN Ey He gi5e ily Mh eats te ale VB
TOs ees OU eae eer et i es EM a SIN aed
FUGp aa ea pt ABN DS eile ON ip
Oy EMO | CNG P aaeMOe GE SMI Tas a
HOY Gate era Merle Ti alabey ta ea nee arcs len
TOT Ie Ga IAM rec Oe Be | Gane, lence ar MI
TE MeO ota ins Ee al nec a Seago
IM aiotat Saale se UNO i ease aera | leek, oh a
tees TSG late aes a ree OE A
PAN TOC OT MOTE eee aes wate eiricinia wale Gaace aaelcee cet sore liam meine By BUS ee aed Ih a 1:2 27

An explanation of the table is scarcely necessary. We again notice
a preponderance of females over the males; 12 femaies have 2+15, four
females 2+ 14, and only two 2+16jointed antenne. Of the nine maies
five specimens have 2415 joints, only three 2416, one 2+15-jointed
antenne. In regard to the former table, comprising more individuals,
the formula 2+-16 must be held as the normal number of the male an-
tennal joints.

Before answering the question as to the duration of the spring swarm-
ing time, I draw the attention of the reader to a discovery mentioned at
the beginning of this paragraph. I visited on March 23 a field with
young clover, which had been sown between winter wheat of last year,
of which, therefore, only the stubble was left. On the latter I discovered,
with no little surprise, pseudo-pupz of our insect, which on closer in-
Spection proved to be alive. Investigations during several successive
days always only revealed such covered maggots. On April 2 I found
also some pup proper on the same field; two days afterwards pup
only. That the insects so rapidly transformed into pupe I principally
ascribed to the sudden warm weather. Of the pups preserved in the
manner previously stated, the first fly hatched on April 13, so that the
duration of spring pupation would be twelve to fourteen days. Up to
May 12 the pupe yielded altogether ten flies, 7. ¢., three males and seven
females.

[22] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Some important inferences can'be drawn from these facts. Themag-
gots occurring in the stubble in spring cannot possibly belong to the
winter generation, that is, from eggs laid in fall; such an acceptation
would not accord with the manner of nourishment of the ma ggot. We
therefore inter that some individuals of the summer generation, perhaps
owing to very cold nights which occurred a little after October 1, hiber-
nated and then developed intotheimago. Themanner of the oceurr ence
of the imago verified this The scy the was, on account of the clover,
kept high, usually cutting off above the dw ellings of the maggots, and
the upper ‘part of the bent stubble or the blade remaining after the de-
cay of the stubble became a protecting cover for the hibernating insect.
Occasionally one or several maggots occurred amongst empty pupa cases,
whose former occupants, therefore, had been in sisterly relation to them.
These and several other observations remind one so closely of even the
most detailed circumstances of the occurrence of the maggots during
the previous summer, as not at all to suggest a winter generation.

Since at the time when the disturbing external cause appeared, many
of the insects certainly lived not in the larval but in the pupal state,
and yet no pup were found in March; it follows that only the maggots
hibernated.

We still lack any special knowledge as to the temperature required
for each of the four life-periods when no cessation of development
should occur. This temperature is evidently in many cases so unequal
that each successive state requires a gradually increased temperature.
The looked-for opportunity is seldom offered that a larva in its earlier
stages continues to develop at a certain temperature, while another
more advanced one is arrested in its growth only to resume growth again
at more favorable weather. Of this we have in our fly a conspicuous ex-
ample. The maggots examined at the end of March from the stubbles
allowed us to see nothing from which to infer that they approached the
pupa state more than those examined the previous September; the latter,
therefore, were already full-grown, having ceased to grow for the length
of half a year. Notsothe maggots of the winter generation; after they
had previously undergoue the first phases of their larval state, they de-
veloped during the warm days between December 4 and 16 so rapidly
that they overtook those on stubble, and then began their hibernation,
enduring in it till March. From this it follows that the time of swarm-
ing of those hrbernating on stubbles for the greater part corresponds
with the actual winter generation. But if that extremely favorable De-
cember weather had not set in the same could have happened, since, as
just demonstrated, the two kinds of maggots do not always conduct them-
selves alike toward the temperature of the air; the maggots of the winter
generation would in this case have made up in spring what the winter
made them unable to accomplish before the maggots on the stubble had
awakened from theirlong slumber. As we hold to the present facts, we
see in the hibernation on stubble the cause of a partial prolongation
of the swarming time, which will certainly be transferred also to the
snmmer generation. Therefore we can, as is assumed, if we adjudge
the rye-hibernating insects a somewhat later swarming time, consider
the second halfof April and the tirst two-thirds of May as the duration
of the spring swarming.

The hibernation of the insect on stubble gives us a key to a jndgment
of the very probable behavior in variously differing latitudes. Since
the theory may be considered valid, that the required time for the de-
velopment of an insect remains the same only under the same external.
couditions, but a change of the latter must necessarily be accompanied

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. ai,

either by an accelerating or retarding influence upon the duration of
development, our fly will show certain deviations under different lati-
tudes. The following holds for the district of Fulda (504° North
Latitude): The eggs out of which the maggots hibernating on stubbles
are produced are deposited in May; the perfect insects appear the fol-

lowibg year in April and May; the metamorphosis of these flies therefore
requires a whole year. On the other hand, the flies issuing just before
the beginning of winter undergo two generations in one year. So we
have a single and a double veneration, which will probably also hold
for the greater part of northern Germany. Further on toward the
north, owing to the earlier appearance of winter, the hibernation of the
summer generation becomes more and more frequent; finally, near the
polar districts of eur cereals, the coming out in fall becomes impossible,
so that there will occur but one single generation. On the other hand,
in the south there might be observed but one double generation long be-
fore reaching the equatorial limits of our cereals.

That the maggots also hibernate on stubble of the other cereals har-
boring our insect nobody will question. For gathering maggots in
spring it is well to choose fields with young clover, because the stubble,
under the protection of the wild mustard is then longer preserved ;
furthermore, as it is well known that wheat straw has more resistance
against the weather than the straw of rye, and especially barley, wheat
stubbles again deserve attention.

§ 4. SUMMER GENERATION.

The metamorphoses of the summer generation take, favored by the
Warm season, arapid course. The flies issuing in April and May find
plenty of the food-plants for their offspring. Those of them which passed
through the earlier stages on winter cereals oviposit again on the same
kind of crop which had already raised a brood; but as the basal leaves be-
gin to decay, the female now chooses stalked ones for her eggs; but those
flies which hibernate as maggots on barley aftergrowth or on stubbles are
compelled to seek new breeding localities, in which desire they strongly
incline to winter wheat. Only when the latter is wanting in the neigh-
borlhood do they content themselves with spring cereals, which for
the purpose of the fly are sufficiently advanced in May. The hatching
young maggots, as in fall, creep to the base of the blade, where they
find all the requirements for fur ther development. According to the, at
this time, more or less advanced plant, the maggots afterwards occur
- on the lower stalk nodules, or immediately above the root stock. The
spring cereals usually overcome the attacks of the worms by a luxuri-
ant, rapid growth, as they, in spite of the worms, advance on fertile
soil. Toward the 20th of June the majority of the maggots are full
grown, some of them being then already in the pseudo-pupal state.

As the maggot lives on the juice of the plant, remaining in its first
chosen dwelling, this spot becomes so much loosened by extraction of
juices that it shrivels, and the stalk, too weak to bear the ear, bends
over at the first wind.

It happens, when a strong stalk, that one or several maggots imbed
themselves, on account of their sedentary habits, in the soft, yielding
substance deeply into the cavity of the stalk; if the spot then heals,
i. é., makes it possible by luxuriant growth, that the wound regenerates
by new cell-formation, externally all traces of the wound afterwards dis-
appear. Whoever follows this process in nature will not wonder, when
he finds the pseudo-pupe in the interior of the stalk, close to the upper

\

[24] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

end of the respective knot. The hatched fly in such a ease may be
puzzled, when the upper space of the stubble is shut off by the next
knot, and no other outlet exists for its escape.

The pupa shells sticking to the stalks usually differ in form and
sculpture from those occurring on young sprouts in the neighborhood
of the root. Those show a flattening below and above; on the surtace
oecur faint wrinkles and tender longitudinal lines. These and similar
deviations from the typical cylinder-form originate by sinking together
and drying up of the originally entirely membranous shell.

Peculiar malformations, such as are usually produced by the attacks
of gall-gnat maggots on vascular plants, I did not observe, at least.
on wheat and rye, but on barley aftergrowth the spot where the mag-
got of our fly rested, occasionally exhibited a knotty, swelling.

§ 5. THE NEW CEREAL GALL-GNAT AS COMPARED WITH CECIDOMYIA
SECALINA LOEW.

The examinations of our gall-gnat hitherto conducted compel us to
a comparison with the rye. gall-gnat (Cecidomyia secalina) described
by Dr. Loew, as for the former we have not yet found a new scientific
name. Loew, in the preface of his paper “ Die neue Kornmade” [The
new Corn-maggot], states it as his principal purpose, to give his observa-
tions on the rye gall-gnat such a direction that the hitherto frequent
confounding of the maggot with other larve shall be avoided, and
that, on the other hand, a full knowledge of the developmental his-
tory and biology of the insect shall be obtained, as necessary to ener-
getically fight against this enemy of the crops. It is evident that the
paper does not pretend to be a complete monograph of the rye gall-
gnat. The want of illustrations of his described insect shows this
likewise. The few observations known about the fly at the time of
writing the paper the author utilized for his description, throughout
showing a good authority on gall-gnats.

What Loew states on the biology and the characters of his rye-gnat
agrees even in the most minute details with my experiences on the
above described gall-gnat, so that it is not necessary for me to give proof
of the unity of his with our species. I arrived at a diverse result
only in regard to a few rather irrelevant points. Thus, for instance,
Loew ealls the color whitish in middle of October; at that time I only
found the external surface to be so, the inner reddish-yellow. Other
differences relate almost exclusively to the coloration of some parts of
the body of the female (the male was unknown to Loew). Not too much
stress should, I think, be put on those latter differences, as the judg-
ment of color depends nowadays upon subjective conceptions and on
diverse causes.

I have yet to add that the pupz of his Cecidomyia secalina sent to me
by Loew perfectly agree with those of our gall-gnat, whichis again an-
other proof of the identity of his species with ours.

§ 6. Vs OF CECIDOMYIA SECALINA LOEW WITH CECIDO-
MYI1A DESTRUCTOR SAY.

In moststandard zoological books we finda gall-gnat Hienuoncal usually
under the name of Hessian fly (Cecidomyia destructor Say), which for a
long time has caused great devastations in wheat in North America.
The devastations were in some districts of the United States at times
so great that the thought of giving up wheat culture was entertained.*

*As was the case in Ohio, 1857; John Klippart, Jahresbericht tiber die Verhandlungen der Acker-
baugesellschaften in Ohio, 1858, ‘Ausl and,” No. 14, 1860.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [25]

Dr. Asa Fitch has thoroughly revised what has been stated on the
Hessian fly in various warks and journals, has connected the most im-
portant facts with personal observations, and has worked up the entire
material known about this insect in his paper, ‘‘ The Hessian fly; its his-
tory, character, transformations, and habits,” in the American Journal
of Agriculture and Science, vols. LV and V, Albany, 1846. After sev-
eral vain endeavors to obtain this paper, which is rare in Germany,
from a bookseller, I finally received it from Dr. Dohrn, in Stettin.

Loew compared his rye gall-gnat with Fitch’s Hessian fly, and found
differences partly due either to manner of life or to a knowledge of dif-
ferent states of development in both flies, and therefore regarded them
as different species. My examinations of our gall-gnat, whose identity
with Loew’s C. secalina I stated in the preceding paragraph, enable me
to scrutinize the specitic differences of the author of ‘‘ Die neue Korn-
made.” |

Loew says: “That the whole life-history of the Hessian fly closely
agrees with that of ourrye gall-gnatis obvious; but it would be hasty to
see in this accordance, which in so closely allied species cannot be ex-
pected otherwise, a proof of the identity of the two species. Moreover,
we find some trifling differences. Cecidomyia destructor almost exclu-
Sively attacks wheat only; our rye gall-gnat has hitherto been found on
rye only.”

In § 3, 2, I stated that, according to ny observations, the winter gen-
eration in our districts, too, besides its occurrence on barley after-
growth, could be found on rye only. This is explained by the circum-
stance that, as previously mentioned, the sowing of winter wheat in our
districts is done when the swarming ‘time of the insect is almost past.
If our farmers gave up the hitherto practised late sowing of winter
wheat, the fly without doubt would principally choose wheat for its
domicil, such being actually the case in the neighboring districts of the
Khon Mountains, where wheat is only protected against the cold by
earlier sowing. In America wheat is attacked by the insect mainly in
the fall; by the general practice of early sowing, the attacks of the
wheat-midge (Cecidomyia tritici, Kirby) are avoided. The fact that the
insect infests mainly wheat everywhere under the same conditions, evi-
dently shows a certain fondness of the fly for this cereal, on account of
which wheat must be considered as the best adapted food- plant for the
maggot. What Loew states regarding the occurrence and life-history
of the summer generation, he infers by analogy with the Hessian fly
and other gall-gnats known to him, hence it follows that at that time he
was not yet acquainted with this ’sec ond generation. I am therefore
inclined to believe that later observations led him to the conviction
that the sole occurrence in rye, purely due to external causes, cannot
in the least be a characteristic point by which the formation of a new
species would be justified.

Further on Loew says: “ The maggots and pupe of the winter gen-
eration of 0. destructor are said to occur always only just above the up-
per end of the root-stock ; those of the rye gall-gnat are usually some-
what higher up.”

From what has been said above about the domicil of the maggots and,
the resting-place of the pup in general, this alleged ditference loses,
as a matter of course, all meaning.

Concerning the imago, Loew says:

Of the American (Hessian) fly, I have not yet seen any specimens; they are wanting

in any of our entomological museum collections, nor could I find any in private col-
lections. Asto any differences between ourrye gall-enat and the Hessian fly, I must,

[26] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

therefore, adhere to the illustrations and descriptions given by Asa Fitch. Here I
. find already a conspicuous difference in the shape of the brown shell surrounding the
pupa proper; its case is less cylindrical and comparatively broader than in ourrye gall-
gnat, also more pointed on the tapering end, while in our species it is blunt, conical.

Special reference was made to the description and illustration of the
Hessian fly, and I take the opportunity to tender Dr. Fitch my thanks
for his meritorious work. TF itch’s paper on the Hessian fly is indisput-
ably a highly important one, being intelligent and attractive, exhib-
iting great learning and accuracy in this matter. Everybody, in
perusing the same, must assent to this judgment regarding the disser-
tation asawhole. Entering into the details, however, we are not always
so fully satisfied. I may instance but one point: In our maggot, as in
all gall-gnats, especially in the earlier stages, we can very plainly distin-
guish 14 body-segments. Whoever follows thedevelopment of the mag-
got pace by pace through all phases will always find 14 segments, and
will even see in the pupa shell in the punctured transverse lines the
formerly distinetly separated segments. Fitch counts on the maggot
before attaining full growth but 12, and in its later stages even only 9
body-segmnents. IJ cannot understand how he obtained this result, even
if he had but a closely allied form to study. Let us now return to our
theme.

Fitch calls the insect in that period during which it is encased (mag-
¢ot and pupa) shortly “flaxseed.” This term should doubtlessly remind
us of a similarity with this well-known seed.» This results from a cita-
tion by Herrick, concluding: ‘ In five or six weeks (varying with the
season) the larva begins to turn brown, and soon becomes of a bright
chestnut color, bearing some resemblance to a flax seed.” In another
place the author’s own words are: *‘ Though much less flat than a flax
seed, its resemblance in color, siz, and form, to that familiar object, is so
striking as at once to be remarked by every one.” ‘To what in the Amer-
ican species does the whole similarity of the pupa case with the flax —
seed relate? It relates only to color and size, fitch meaning perhaps
only its length; the restriction of the definition “form” by the words
‘¢ much less flat” perfectly neutralizes and nullifiesit. If wenow apply
the comparison to the shell of our gall-gnat, we must acknowledge that it
does not agree either, since the similarity of the shell to a flax seed
relates only to color and perhaps also to length. That difference is
greater: the shell is scarcely half as broad as a flax seed, never on
either side so flattened as that, the pointed posterior end in no case
beaked like that end of the flax seed out of which the radicle comes
forth in germination. From this we see that the shell of our insect has
neither a greater nor a lesser similarity to a flax seed, as attributed to
_ the American species by the above-mentioned two authors.

Fitch, in the beginning of his paper, puts the expression flax seed
always in inverted commas. Might he not by this have indicated a
popular term, which he retained for the sake of easier comprehension, as
a concession to his countrymen in his paper? Finally we will also com-
pare the illustrations o and n given with this description. How little do
they agree with it, or even with flax seed! One might think the fruits
ot Carex vesicaria L. were pasted to the wheat stalk.

Dr. Loew says, further on:

Tn the description of the perfect insect the antenne are said by Fitch to be sixteen-
jointed, while in all my specimens (9 ) of the rye gall-gnat they are eighteen-jointed.

The description of the female given by Fitch, says in refereuce to the
antennal joints: ‘“*The antenne (Fig. e) are about half as long as the
body, and composed of 16 joints, each of a cylindric-oval form.” But

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [27]

soon afterwards it strikes us: ‘“‘ The two basal joints of each antenna
are globular.” The demonstration in these two points is evidently inac-
curate, allowing however scarcely a doubt as to the true meaning of
the author. If Fitch, in the first sentence, had included among the 16
joints of cylindrie- oval form, the basal joints, he would not have called
them globular, else we should substitute an absurdity, which would not
be justifiable in the case of so excellent an entomologist. But if we un-
derstand by the 16 joints only the flagellar joints, every scruple passes.
I must besides recall that the number of flagellar joints in the females
varies between 14 or 16; therefore had Fitch really only decided upon
14 flagellar joints, even this could not yet really make a specific difter-
ence.
Loew says further on, in relation to differences:

According to his description the joints of the antennx of the female are connected
by thin pedicels, which are one-third of the length of the joits, the last joint being
at least one-third longer than the penultimate joint; in the female rye gall-enat
the pedicels connecting the separate antennal joints are so short that the joints ay-
pear to sit immediately one upon the other, and the last joint is scarcely longer
than the penultimate.

A difference is here maintained due to a mistake in translating. It
Says in the description (Fitch’s): ‘The joints are separated from each
other by very short translucent filaments, having a diameter about a
third as great as the joints themselves. The word ‘‘ diameter” was
wrongly translated by Dr. Loew as “length.” Ifound the last in all
my examined specimens also longer than the penultimate; but I take
Fitch’s statement relating to the proportion of length of the last two
joints in the given successive meaning as an exaggeration.

I believe now that I have sufficiently demonstrated the untenability
of the differences put forth by Loew between his rye gall-gnat and the
Hessian fly. Thatin reality our cereal gall-gnat is identical with the Hes-
sian fly everybody can convince himself who is not afraid to make the
study of natural history of the insect for a long time a special matter of
inguiry, and who will compare the results obtained by thorough and ex-
tensive observations and examinations, which, as I sincerely expect, will
deviate only in irrelevant points from those stated in this brief disserta-
tion regarding the manner of life and the characters of the American
species in its various stages of growth.

In concluding this paragraph I will not neglect to dwell upon the very
closely related question whether the Hessian fly has been already earlier
observed in Europe.

Herrick published in Silliman’s Journal (vol. XII, p. 154), that Dana,
‘who, in company with him, made a thorough examination of the pecu-
hiarities of the Hessian fly,” collected in 1834, in a field of wheat, on the
island of Minorca, larvae and pupe, from which latter insects ‘issued,
which he, assisted by a drawing of the Hessian fly, declared to be Ce:
cidomyia destructor. ‘In the same year Dana found the same insect also
at Mahon, near Toulon and Naples. Dana forwarded specimens of the
imago and pup from Mahon to Herrick in America, about which the
latter says: ‘‘ They arrived in safety, and after a careful examination I

‘saw no good reason to doubt the identity of this insect with the Hes-
sian fly.” It seems tu us that Herrick’s (not Fitch’s) judgment on the
insect received from Europe is not expressed in so “extremely uncer-
tain” a way as Loew thinks. Acquainted with the always inevitable,
often indistinguishable modifications of the insect post mortem, and the
otten considerable differences of the pupa-shell of the typical form, a

_ more determined formulation Mm judgment could scarcely appear admis-

[28] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL. COMMISSION.

sible; hence this circumspection well authenticates the well-educated
thorough entomologist.

The result of the examination conducted through the last two para-
graphs is thus realized: our gall-gnatis none other than Loew’s rye gall-
gnat. This is identical with the Hessian fly, with which the species from
southern Kurope agrees; 72. ¢., the German, South European, and North
American species are all together nothing but Cecidomyia destructor Say.

§ 7. IS THE NAME HESSIAN FLY JUSTIFIED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
OF SCIENCE?

In the various reports on the Hessian fly the year 1778 or 1779 is
usually mentioned as the first time the flies began their devastations in
eastern North America. Asa few divisions of Hessian troops in En-
glish service (at the time of the American War of Independence) had
arrived during the last few years previous to 1778 on Long Island, the
opinion that the new wheat enemy was introduced with packing straw
of those troops, was soon circulated, and accordingly the insect was com-
monly called ‘¢ Hessian fly.” The annually recurring tidings of the
more and more widely extending devastations of the Hessian fly, as
narrated by Fitch, caused Sir Joseph Banks to make investigations on
the insect in Europe, the result of which, as reported by him, was
‘that no such insect could be found to exist in Germany or any other
part of Kurope.” Upon this the idea that the insect was introduced by
Hessian troops was abandoned in America, it being held exclusively to
_ bean American species. But when, in 1834, as mentioned in the preced-
ing paragraph, Dana’s discovery of the Hessian fly on the Huropean
shore of the Mediterranean, as well as some reports from various parts of
Middle Europe, as to similar destructions of wheat in America, were
made known, the original idea as to the origin of the Hessian fly started
up anew and found especially in Dr. Fitch : avery ardentadvocate. He
especially holds to the assertion of Colonel Morgan, who Sir John.
Temple assures us subjected the insect to close inspection, and says:

The Hessian fly was first introduced into America by means of some straw, made
use of in package, or otherwise, lauded on Long Island, at an early period of the late

war; and its first appearance was in the neighborhood of Sir William Howe’s debark-
ation, and at Flatbush.

Fitch adds:

So many circumstances concur to evince the truth of the account here given by
Col. Morgan, to its very letter, that we think no one will hereafter hesitate to give
it full evidence [credence].

But continues after this audacious decision ;

We have searched in vain for the date of the embarkation of the Hessian troops, or
the number of days occupied by them in crossing the ocean. It is possible they may
all have left Europe anterior to the harvest. But in Germany, as in this country, as
is shown by M. Kollar’s statement, the infested straw becomes broken and tangled
and turns yellow, early in June [!]. Had a company of soldiers needed straw for
package, no objections would have been made to their going into a field of this kind,
ae with a scythe, gathering what they required, weeks before the usual time of

arvest.

Aside from the very odd perception of Hessian military aieeantane! it
is evident that Dr. Fitch lacked knowledge of just those historical
facts which at all events he ought to have | utilized as premises of his
argument. Let us, therefore, look back into the history of the war
of that time for reliable reports’ on the voyage at sea of the Hes-
Sian troops. As the introduction of the insect, according to Fitch, has
expressly been brought in relation with that of the Hessian soldiers

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. _ [29]

who landed on Long Island in August, 1776, we, in the examination,
could satisfy ourselves solely as to this transport of troops; however,
providing the case, that the introduction of the insect was, perhaps, ac-
cording to other American authors, in 1777, we will also include the
-two other transports. The desired explanation as to these transports
we find in the ** Biographie des Generals von Ochs, herausgegeben von
Leopold Freiherrn von Hohenhausen. Cassel, 1827.” Major Pfister,
in the second volume (page 380) of the “ Zeitschrift des hessischen Ge-
schichts-Vereins in 1776. Cassel, 18140,” gives a better account of the first
transport of troops. We borrow the following from the two sources:
The 20,000 mercenary soldiers engaged by the English ministry con-
sisted of Hessians, Hanoverians, Brunswigians, Anspachians, and
Waldeckians. The Hessian corps alone amounted to 12,000 men, in
two sections. One part of the first Hessian division marched from
Cassel, in March, 1776, and was embarked at Ritzebiittel; cast anchor
on the 6th of May before Portsmouth; landed on July 7 at Halifax,
and at Utrecht, L. I., on August 12, at a time when the English Gen-
eral Howe was ’ restricted to the possession of Staten and Long Islands
only. According to an autographical memorandum the other part of
this troop-division left Bremen on April 17, arriving on Long Island at
the same time with the others. The second Hessian division left
Cassel in May, 1776, and landed at La Rochelle October 22. The four
Yager battalions sent after were embarked on the Fulda, May 18, 1777;
they landed at Sandy Hook September 27. The still later military
transports, about one of which Seume, in his biography, has left us a
humorous representation, do’ not concern us in this matter. On the
average it took each of the above-mentioned troop-divisions about four
months to cross, although the vessels landed nowhere, anchored per-
haps for a few days at Portsmouth, the meeting place of the auxiliary
troops.

With these facts we will argue the growth of the insect with special
reference to its food-plants, to see how Fitch’s and his followers’ state-
ments agree.

Our wheat here sprouts at about Saint John’s day, and a little later
we notice a bending of some stalks due to the attacks of the worm,
which increases with every successive day. At this time all maggots
of our gall-gnat with few exceptions have already entered the pseudo-
pupa state; the feeding has just ceased. If we now collect some of
the infected straw and preserve it in a proper place, the growth of the
maggots goes on in the interior of the shell; but if this gathering hap-
pens before the maggots have entered their resting State, ?. e., about
two weeks previous, when they still feed, they soon ‘die, From this in-
disputably follows that, if those Hessian troops had really used for
packing straw infected with pseudo-pupz of our insect it could not
have been mowed before the end of June. Ina dry summer the wheat
harvest begins here in the beginning of August; rye usually ripens a
week before wheat does. Winter cereals mowed before harvest would,
however, require a previous drying to be used for packing. But how,
if already in middle of May, not to say March, when both cereals are
Still in a green grassy condition, could such an occurrence have hap-
pened? And where could the pseudo-pupe have come from, from which
the flies issued, which, as alleged, settled them on Long Island?

We see that Fitch has, to support his theory, made assumptions which
not only disagree with the developmental history of the insect, but which
also appear to one acquainted with the agriculture of our country as ridic-
ulous and absurd. The difference in climate and agriculture between

\

[30] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. |

Hungary (Kollar!) and Kurhessen is far greater than we should expect
from the geographical latitude of the two countries. The non-consid-
eration of this very important condition necessarily led the American
author to wrong inferences.

We will also briefly speak of the hitherto overlooked occurrence of
barley aftergrowth. This aftergrowth sometimes attains, late in fall,
such a luxuriant growth and such a rapid development that we could
fairly believe the fine, overgrown field of ears would yet mature if the cold
were only delayed for a few weeks. The dangerous frost, however, sud-
denly takes away this hope; a few cold nights, and the lately so vividly
greening barley is killed, lying flat on the soil. Under the influence of
the spring sun it becomes brittle early in March, so that it, in pulling
out, crumbles, and much care is needed to obtain a few entire stalks.
it would not have been possible to use this straw for the above purpose.

All reasonable arguments therefore hold that the packing-straw used
by the Hessian troops was grown the year previous. Would it be pos-
sible that the alleged introduction of the insect was thus effected? We
are enabled to answer this question by the experiences obtained as to the
metamorphosis of the insect. The swarming time of the summer genera-
tion resting above the lowest stalk-knots lasts in Hessen from the end of
August* till the beginning of Octeber, therefore not appearing until the
wheat harvest is almost over. After cutting, the brood for the greater
part remains inthe stubbles; the number of pupe takenalong with them
is much less. In threshing, usually taking place soon after harvesting,
many pupz may drop off, but certainly as many remain on the straw, a
good number of which may develop. Wehavenow to consider theremark-
able circumstance of many maggots hibernating in the stubbles. This
phenomenon I have demonstrated in sections 3 and 4 by the appearance
of frost, since such a low temperature checks the life-power of the mag-

gots, killing that of the pupz; but that also for those remaining on —

straw, in closed spaces, or at least roofed maggots, a transition to hiber-
nation happens I doubt; the external force would, however, appear
for them much later, probably always so late that all favored ones still
mature before the appearance of winter. Presuming that some mag-
gots nevertheless hibernate in a barn, and behave during the winter
like those on the stubbles, what else could be expected but that the
imago would come forth as in those in April or May? Applied to the
packing-straw of those Hessian troops, we ought to allow that under
the made provisions the military corps which left in March or April could
have used such infected straw; but the flies however would have

emerged already before the end of the spring swarming time, therefore
months before the landing in America, and would have perished, partly
ou account of their short life, partly on account of the disfavor of their
place of birth. I will not tire the reader by still further arguing this
matter, else if would necessitate postulations which would, even to Dr.

Hitch, appear too venturous. He may have thought that his theory is
not applicable to the winter generation, trying it therefore with the
summer generation; but it can scarcely be understood how he was led
to such an attempt.

I have mentioned in the preceding, through the developmental his-
tory of the insect, all given cases which could serve as proper judg-
ment of the view taken by Fitch on the origin of the Hessian fly.
His view finds support in none of the mentioned points, being even

* On account of the extremely wet and cool weather for six weeks in July and August last year the
swarming time in other years will probably begin a week earlier.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [31]

- contradictory to them. That every support is now fully removed from
his theory of the alleged introduction of the insect by Hessian soldiers
is proved by the following circumstance: None of the earlier publica-
tions give tidings of the occurrence of the fly in any part of Kurhes-
sen; a devastation of cereals is still less known which could in any
way be compared with the late catastrophe. Such devastation ought
to have happened occasionally, at least, in some districts during a space
of more than eighty years. The appearance of the fly in later years is
therefore an entirely new phenomenon.

We have arrived at the following result: The Hessian fly was orig-
inally not a Hessian fly, and therefure we must answer the question
put on this paragraph, whether the name “Hessian fly” is justified
before the tribunal of science, in the negative. I now return to our gall-
gnat the fully justified original name given to it by the first author,
henceforth calling it wheat-destroyer (destructor).

It would not be without interest, to see from the wording of the state-
ments published in America in the first years of the distribution of
Cecidomyta destructor, whether the term Hessian fly was in the begin-
ning really used without any secondary signification.

§8.—ATTEMPT AT A NEW THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF THE INSECT.

Having definitely denied that the wheat-destroyer is indigenous in
Kurhessen, I draw the reader’s attention to certain facts, which may per-
haps throw some light on the origin of the insect. We know the inti-
mate connection of several phytophagous insects with their food-plants.
It is certain, for instance, that Sphinx nerit, which even in our climate
transforms out of doors, was acclimatized in Germany bv the introduc-
tion of Neriwm splendens from southern Europe. Termes flavicollis Fabri-
clus became distributed over southern Europe and southern France,
having been introduced with tropical plants. Coccus adonidum and C.
nervi immigrated in a similar manner into our hot-houses. In plants,
which already i in prehistoric times took possession of many districts of
the earth favorable to them, the connection between gradual distribu-
tion of the food-plant and of its harboring insect can either not at all
or only indirectly be proved. ‘The difficulty increases when the insect
is not restricted to one or several food plants, but, according to cli-
mate and season, or in its separate stages of growth, changes with dif-
ferent plants. The wheat worm was hitherto ‘found only on wheat, rye,
and barley; its history is inseparable from that of its natural "food
plants and their original home must a priort be also its home. Where
is the original home of our cereals? Their culture is as old as the history
of civilized nations; since all over the area where civilization has taken
root the population utilized the cereals. All results obtained by numer-
ous archeological and natural historical inquiries point back in ac-
cordance with the Bible and the traditions of ancient peoples to Asia
as the cradle of mankind, wherefrom all culture, especially that of the
cereals, came forth. There, in the deserts of Persia,on the shores of the
Euphrates, &c., is where, according to authentic sources nowadays,
wheat and barley still grow under conditions which would not accord with
their artificial introduction. In those original localities of our cereals we
may also still at the present time be able to find the wheat worm. Loew’s
own experience, “that a Cecidomyia which in its manner of life and
metamorphosis cannot be distinguished from C. destructor does great
injury to the wheat erops on the south shore of Asia Minor”* favors

* Loew, in his Monograph on gall-gnats.

\

y
[32] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

this assumption. The wheat-worm, by the way, offers perhaps the only
anomaly among all Cecidomyide of pupating in the larval envelope.*
AS we are not aware of any other Cecidomyia which destroys cereals
in a manner similar to that of the wheat-worm, Loew’s reputation not
allowing the least doubt as to the correctness of that discovery, the
assumption that the Asiatic species is identical with our wheat-worm
gains probability.

When Dana discovered the flyt at Mahon the natives said that “the
insect had been there from time immemorial, and often did great damage
both there and in Spain”{!]. This statement clearly proves that the.
wheat-worm was distributed from the Orient over southern Europe.

When and from what shore the insect came to America can never
be accurately determined. Probably it was introduced several times
and at different times. That it happened from the shore of a European
state previously possessing colonies in North America must be ac-
cepted. It cannot have occurred from England; when Banks reported
its non-oceurrence in all parts of Europe this may apply to England.
Holland and Belgium we may justly omit. On the other hand, not only
the long-existing occurrence of the insect in southern France speaks
for the introduction from the French coast to the once so extended pos-
sessions of the French in North America, but also the comparatively
short distance, which facilitated the introduction of infected straw, thus
enabling the insect to issue after arriving.

In view of the lively traffic of our continent, existing already centu-
ries before the American War of Independence, with the European colo-
nies on the west, we ought to wonder, indeed, that the insect had been
introduced so late. We are quasi compelled to assume that the insect
existed already some time before that war in America, and there, as
elsewhere, had only been overlooked. The immensely numerous appear- -
ance of the insect in 1779 can only be explained by this. For a proof.
as to the presence of our insect in America long before the arrival of
those Hessian troops we lack, however, all points of consideration..
In Fitch we nevertheless meet with a citation which nearly equals
the distrust which he himself displays in his preceding demonstration.
It oddly sounds thus: The late Judge Hickock, of Lansingburgh, N. Y.,
in a Communication to the Board of Agriculture in the year 1823, and
published in the Memoirs (vol. ii, p. 169), says:

A respectable and observing farmer of this town, Col. James Brookins, has informed
me, that on his first hearing of the alarm on Long ‘Tsland, in the year 1786, (doubtless,
1776 is intended, ) and many years before its ravages were complained of in this part
of the country, he detected the same insect, upon examining the wheat growing on his
farm in this town.

Fitch presumes that the insect found by Colonel Brookins was some
other one, and we will not deny the possibility of such an error. But
we have to consider that the attacks of the insect upon the crops in
summer are not only highly characteristic, but in their consequences so
conspicuous that a mistake concerning the insect could happen only in
the beginning of its first appearance in a locality. In our country, for
instance, after but one year’s experience, every farmer knows the
pseudo-pupe of this enemy; he knows exactly how they look, where
they occur on the stalk, and so forth. When Colonel Brookins put
forth the assertion, scarcely attributable to his patriotism, the evil
was already so distributed in America that the “respectable, observing

fe Aiunertz mentions Oecidomyia graminicola in his monograph, as likewise issuing from a pupa
obtecta
{ Fitch, l.o.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [33]

farmer” has certainly not passed the bent wheat stalks without taking
a good look at the enemy and comparing it with the one long before
observed! 7

Fitch puts much stress on certain statements of observed devasta-
tions of wheat and other cereals made a long time ago in Middle Hurope.
Scearcely one of these citations has with certainty special reference to the
wheat-worm. Baron Meininger’s report on destructions by insects oc-
curring in the fields near Weikendorf, in Saxe-Coburg, do not point to
the wheat-worm, because the reporter calls the maggot “ light-green,”
which recalls the character of Chlorops. All reports from Middle and
North Germany published in later years on the wheat-worm agree in
this, that the appearance of the insect is an entirely new one. In many
districts of North Germany excellent entomologists have not even thus
far been able to discover a trace of the insect. A gradual progress of the
insect showed itself toward the north: within the few later years, suffi-
ciently pointing to their southern origin. Therefore we can infer: the
distribution of the wheat-worm can be traced back to the Orient; thenec
the insect just settled on the islands and along the South European
coast, and then was partly introduced to North America, partly and
successively progressed in a northward direction.

§ 9. PARASITES.

The wheat-worm harbors a considerable number of hymenopterous
parasites, selected by nature to check its extreme multiplication. An
. accurate knowledge of the natural history of these parasites, belonging
to the two groups Chalcidide and Proctotrupide, is certainly necessary
if we wish, in choosing antidotes, to be free of errors.*

Fitch states in his paper, published fifteen years ago, his intention to
study ‘‘the history of these and other parasites of the Cecidomyide, and
to prepare a special memoir.”. Whether such a memoir afterwards ap-
peared Idonotknow. From asketch copied by him from Herrick’s paper
there are at least four species of parasites destroying the wheat-worm.
One of them, a species of Platygaster, pierces the eggs of the fly; of the
three other species which presumably pierce the maggot only Ceraphron
destructor Say is mentioned, and it is asserted that the piercing is done
through the leaf-sheath, which I, however, in view of the short ovipositor,
doubt. Herrick does not seem to have used special names for the dif-
ferent species ; but Ceraphron destructor Say became also doubtful, since,
as proved by Dr. Foerster in his Hymenopterological Studies (page 98),
a great misconception as to the genus Ceraphron Jurine was caused by
Latreille and later by Nees.

At the time I sent to Dr. Foerster, in Aachen, a sufficient number of
the raised parasites, with the request to study them scientifically.

The little that I learned about these parasites I will here communi-
cate. Scarcely a day passed from beginning of August till end of Septem-
ber without receiving some parasites hatched. According to a super-

* The law unmistakably applied all through the animal kingdom as to the regulation of the number
of obnoxious animals by such as persecute them, and thereby reproduce the eventually disturbed
equilibrium, nowhere strikes our admiration more than in insects. There is a considerable number
among those which in various ways, by continued practice of their work of destruction, become true
benefactors to mankind. But this isnotenough. Before ina certain case of devastation the number
of parasites gains the upper hand over the devastators, as a rule a number of years pass, often for us
accompanied by great losses. Shall we then fold our hands in our laps, surrender the work of destruc-
tion solely to our brave friends, carelessly awaiting the catastrophe? Never; this would be wrong
and unjustifiable. Man,as the dominator of the earth, was given the faculty of scrutinizing nature
and of finding remedies against various hindrances opposed to his endeavors to render the earth in-
habitable. The more we progress in the knowledge of insects, the more we study their biology and
other peculiarities, the less shall we err in choosing remedies to destroy the enemy.

3 AP E -

[34] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

ficial examination they belong to five species, amongst which are three -
in which always but one insect issues; in the other two species, compris-
ing the smallest species, there are always from three to five specimens
in one shell. Those obtained from wheat stubble issued in the time
between April 18 and May 30. Two of these are identical with those
that had already come forthin autumn. The third species, which I several
times found in such immense numbers in April and May on a field of
clover with stubble, so that one within a short time could have easily
gathered several hundred specimens, is characterized by its deep black
color. From these three, too, but one specimen comes forth from one
Cecidomyia maggot. Where those parasites issuing in fall hibernate
I could not accurately find out; scarcely in the stubble, because there
I never found one of the ichneumons; they may hibernate in the soil.
To what the attacks of the parasites are directed, whether on eggs or
maggots, or probably on both, requires to be investigated. That at
least one or several species pierce the egg is presumed, as I repeatedly
found pupz of the parasites already in the beginning of July in the
gall-gnat maggots. Dissections made in the fall on numerous pseudo-
pupz showed that 60 to 70 per cent. of the insects contained parasites.

Though the great frequency of the parasites on the sammer genera-
tion was striking, it was not less so that the pup gathered from barley
aftergrowth yielded nota single parasite; from which I infer an entire
exemption of the actual winter generation (not to be mistaken for those
hibernating on stubble) from parasites. Fitch received from young in-
fested plants gathered in April only gall-gnats, thus corroborating my
idea that the parasites attack only the summer generation.

§10.—REMEDIES.

The most effective remedy in checking the excessive multiplication of
the wheat-worm has been provided by nature herself in the aid received
from the parasites just mentioned. To spare them is a very important
thing. All considerations and restrictions offered relative to the mode
of life of the parasites apply to the choice of the means of destroying
the summer generation rather than the winter generation, as the latter
does not, as far as is known, harbor any parasites.

Loew, in his memoir, has dwelt at length on the principles regarding
the choice of remedies, mentioning first the direct and then the indirect
remedies. I will also begin with the direct remedies.

1. Removal of the barley aftergrowth.

I mentioned in § 3, 2 the aftergrowth produced from self-sown
barley, and showed what an important rdle it plays in the natural
history of our insect. Unequal maturation of the ears, wind, and pour-
ing rain favor the falling out of the seeds, making its appearance in
certain years almost general, while it eccurs less frequently in dry, quiet
summers; butit will never be missed in any year. On fields with young
clover, where the barley-drop is protected from seed-eating (sperm-
ophagous) animals (birds, sheep), and soon germinates, on account of the |
more persistent moisture in the soil, the aftergrowth is most striking. :
It is this young barley growth which our fly visits for the purpose
of ovipositing before the appearance of rye and wheat. The consider- |
able number of maggots, as found by me, is explained by the circum-
stance that the swarming of the fly occurs at a time when the fields
lack any other green crops. We find here the enemy on a soil which

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [35]

greatly facilitates its attack. This fighting the fly may be done by
grazing, pulling out, mowing off, and replowing. The latter may be
preferred. To complete the victory our farmers ought not to sow any
clover in summer barley or ought to clean such clover fields from barley
aftergrowth between October 10 and April 15.

Gy io Picking of the sprouts killed by the maggots.

Dr. Loew expressly recommends this remedy, as he himself witnessed
its favorable results upon Chlorops attacking winter wheat. I can
also add my experience. If wecollect in the fore part of the winter the
discolored, diseased sprouts, we find on examination that not the gall-
gnat maggot alone was the enemy, but often more frequently larve of
Chlorops and other insects. By picking them out of the diseased sprouts
we get rid of a good number of other enemies of our crops. Viewed
theoretically this remedy certainly promises good results; whether itis
practical will have to be considered. Toattain our purpose the picking
should not be done until when the infected sprouts can be recognized,
therefore not before the middle of October; but it should not be done
when frost has already set in, as the infected ones cannot then be dis-
tinguished from the frozen ones. The work falls into atime which little
favors such an out-of-door manipulation on account of the disagreeable
weather. The application of this remedy is especially restricted, so that
one can hardly proceed on the wet sod or on frozen soil. However, I
am convinced that a strict surveillance would pay the expenses incurred.

3. The grazing of winter crops by sheep.

To realize the value of this remedy we will first recall the condition of the
young cereal sprout, and for this purpose look at a sprout with but two
leaves. One of the latter rises vertically; the other, formed earlier, pro-
jects off at an acute angle—that is, somewhat rolled up below—showing
here the upper part of a third leaf arising from the lip of the previously
formed stalk. On the non-bristled end of the cotyledon, which is di-
rected downward, arises the primitive leaf, which is about one-half inch
long, as a spatule closing in the base of the two first-named leaves. In
unfolding this spatule we recognize usually one or several buds side by
side, according to the fertility of the soil. Out of them the secondary
stalks develop. The protection of the primitive stalk and the stalk-bud
must especially be considered, as their destruction renders the growth
of the stalk impossible. As long as the stalk-buds are still covered by
the soil frost can do little harm, taking the precaution to previously
feed the sheep, and while grazing to continually drive them about.

The flies hibernating as maggots in stubble deposit their eggs, as cb-
served by me, in April and May; also on spring crops when near by.
However, such attacked crops should not be grazed, because the sheep
would pull out many sprouts.

The value of grazing of winter crops in spring can be demonstrated on
a wheat sprout which we may examine in beginning of May. The stalk-
buds have in the previous fall pierced the soil, and have formed stalks.
In dissecting one we find the inner leaves rolled up, within which is a
. pale elongate body, the point of the heart. By continual cell formation
in the heart the prolongation of the stalk is effected ; more and more
leaves grow out of this heart, and finally the ear. It is a well-known
fact that the growth of the plant is conditioned by the exchange of air
through the leaves, and a partial removal of the latter will interfere with

[36] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

the growth of the plant. To purposely check the growth of the plant
may, under certain circumstances, be for the interest of the farmer. If
in spring, owing to rich soil and favorable weather, the crops assume
an extraordinary growth, possibly causing them to lie down, the evil

can be prevented by partial removal of their leaves in order to check
the growth of the plants to some degree. If this procedure is followed
by favorable weather the plants will soon revive, harvest being then
usually fair. But lesion of the heart of the plant i is followed by worse
consequences; the destruction of that part of the plant so deeply affects
the life of the plant that the deformed stalk loses the necessary power
to fully develop the ear. We still more approach our purpose if we see
to what the sheep which we drive into the winter crops in spring direct
their attacks. , If we have once witnessed this we have observed that
sheep do not content themselves only with the outer leaves of: the
plants, but that they especially go after the more tender inner leaves.
On this account grazing in spring must be i injurious the more the crops
have advanced. In the present case, meaning to destroy a great enemy,
it may be advisable nevertheless in some years to incur this trifling
damage to prevent a greater one. Thus we arrived at the following con-
clusions: Pasturing with sheep is of use at the time of spring swarm-
ing, provided the above-mentioned regulations are observed, and only
on fertile soil.

4. Cutting off the tops of the young wheat cropping (Cropping).

This means the clipping off of the upper leaves with the scythe. Care
is to be taken not to injure the heart of the plants. This operation is
connected with the same conditions as the pasturing. Rich soil is here
also required. As the scythe passes over the heart of the plants, but

the maggots are in spring near the base of the leaves, cropping will only

destroy the eggs. As suchit is preferred to grazing, not oniy on account
of its greater success, but also because the operation can be better regu-
lated, not being subject to the choice of the sheep.

5. Bait.

As demonstrated, the majority of pupz remain in the stubble after
harvest. It is, therefore, proposed to sow, right after cutting, some fur-
rows with wheat or rye, so that the issuing flies may oviposit on the
young sprouts, facilitating afterwards their destruction. .There can be
no doubt as to the efficiency of such bait. If we, fer instance, imagine
such bait sown around an infested farm, perhaps also surrounded with
woods, the flies issuing during the fall’ swarming would find bait_all
around in the stubble; nothing would be more presumable than that
in the late fall a number of maggots would occur. Their destruction

would be of greater gain for the next harvest, since the non-ichneu-

monized winter generation would be concerned in their destruction.
To bring this into effect in districts with small farms is, however, diffi-
cult. To make this remedy very effective it would have to be done in
concert by all farmers belonging to the district. "Wherever summer

barley is raised we shall hardly miss natural baits, and those are, as -

we know, just that self-sown barley. Whether this is also the case
with rye and wheat remains to be established. For various reasons
we may adjudge artificial baits to be of secondary importance.

WAGNER ON THE HESSIAN FLY. [37]

\

6. Plowing under, burning, rolling of the stubbles.

Fitch is very much opposed to these remedies of destruction. . Loew
partly recommends them. The destruction of the pupe hidden in stub-
bles appears to him in years of great frequency of their parasites as
a remedy of doubtful value, while he advocates it in years when the
latter are less numerous. All reports from America agree in that the
fly visits a certain district only for a number of years; then disappears,
to reappear after a longer or shorter time. The devastations caused by
the insect in its first year of appearance are but little, gradually reach-
ing their point of culmination after three or four year’s increase. At
the same time the parasites multiply also, not in the same degree, but in
a ratio of geometrical progression, so that in the very same year in
which the flies are extremely numerous they become overwhelmed by
the parasites; hence but few flies appear in the following year. That
we in Germany may make the same observations with the fly and its
parasites cannot be doubted. Certain practical inferences will be that in
a given year we may always know whether to bring the one or the other
remedy into application or not. It requires but little consideration to
see that already, with 50 per cent. of parasites, the plowing under, burn-
ing, or rolling over the stubbles will cause a prolongation of the feeding
cycle, therefore doing damage. We can assume with certainty in all
cases that but few parasites occur at the beginning of a feeding cycle.
The above-mentioned remedies therefore should be applied.

Rolling of the crops has been done successfully in America. That in
this way many eggs and maggots are destroyed I doubt, since the
’ eggs in the furrows of the leaves are protected against the pressure of
the roller and the maggots are situated very deep in the young sprouts.
A good effect could only be obtained by a very heavy roller, and such
would also damage the crops.

For the destruction of the spring brood Fitch proposes mowing of the
wheat, stating an experiment made with wheat two feet high, and where-
from it resulted that the wheat at this stage can be cut without loss
of productiveness. I have had similar experience on rich soil, the root-
stock soon producing new stalks not at all diminished in strength. But
this occurs exceptionally; the ears never attain the full size, remaining
_ Smaller, and in continual drought the experiment is altogether a fail-
ure. We therefore consider mowing off too risky for recommendation.
Several people have reported that whole “swarms” of our gall-gnat had
alighted on cereals for oviposition. Last fall and again this spring I
often went on much-infested fields during swarming time at different
hours of the day and have gathered flies here as well as on neighboring
fields, but never found them gregariously accumulated ; onthe contrary,
they appeared singly. I therefore altogether doubt that it is peculiar
to the insect to collectin swarms. Thoseobservations onthe gregarious
appearances of our fly are either exaggerations or illusions. If our in-
sects had really social habits it would be not out of place to catch them
with a net. According to my own observations the catching with a net
amounts to nothing at all. :

I will now dwell on indirect remedies. To those belongs every remedy
which gives the plants greater resistance against their attacks, whereby
the flies are more or less restricted.

7. Rich sort.

The importance of this remedy we have already recognized when
speaking of pasturing; it becomes still more evident if we recall the de-

\

~~

[38] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

structive effect which the maggot has on the young plant. Each plant
that has to nourish one or more maggots above the root-stock, as a rule,
perishes. But if on rich soil, the stalk-buds will rapidly sprout stalks,
and these will, because swarming has then usually passed, cease to be
attacked by the same generation. But on sterile soil, where the root-
stocks are lacking buds, cereals will produce no more stalks. All the
more so with the summer generation. Plants grown into stout stalks on
rich soil render such a considerable resistance against the attacks of
the maggots that most of them will mature their ears. The sparsely
nourished stalks of a field are easily bent, especially in rain and wind,
whereby also the majority of the plants spared in fall submit to the
enemy, so that harvesting is very much reduced.

8. Kinds of wheat yielding a siliceous straw.

We have cultivated in this district for several years a variety of wheat
under the name of “ black wheat,” which is of robust look, with a some-
what rough stalk. Though it is not spared by the attacks of the wheat-
worm, it nevertheless exhibits, as I believe I have observed, more resist-
ance than our other varieties of wheat. The considerable hardness and
stability of its straw I ascribe to a greater amount of silicic acid (quartz)
in the epidermis. Experiment ought to be made in regard to the power
of resistance in various varieties of cultivated wheat.

9. Late sowing.

If we compare the circumstance that the swarming of the summer
generation ends in the first third of October, with the fact that the
maggots occur only on sprouts of early sowed fields, we at once infer
that we can restrict the attacks of the flies by late sowing. We may
expect with certainty, if a field is not sowed before St. Michael’s Day,
the sparing by the insect of the crop in fall. How far this practical
regulation bears on farming interests the peculiarity of climate and
culture of various districts have to decide. Those districts will be less
inclined to early sowing where this must be done, because the less deeply
rooting sprouts become regularly drawn up by frost, thus perishing by
the cold of the-winter. The remedy can conveniently be applied to sum-
mer barley; at least we can fully protect the common barley (Hordeum
vulgare) against the attacks of the insect; since its period of growth |
lasts but nine or ten weeks, the sowing even in the middle of June is
stillearlyenough. We wil! fully reach the purpose in districts threatened
by the invasion of the fly, or where the catastrophe has already ap-
peared, if sowing is done within the next three weeks after the spring
swarming. The first two of the above-mentioned remedies are calcu-
lated for the winter, the two subsequent ones for the summer genera-
tion. The value of the latter is considerably reduced by the fact that
the spring swarming comprises a space of five weeks. So if pastur-
ing or cropping is done in the first week of swarming comparatively
few eggs are deposited, but if done later a part of the maggots have
already left the egg membranes, placing themselves at the base of the
leaf-sheath; the purpose is only partly reached by both remedies.

Remedy No. 5 will scarcely ever be introduced, but is recommended to

owners of larger farms; little has been decided as to No. 6, still less as
to No.8; Nos. 1,7, and 9 are regarded as the most recommendable rem-
edies.

APPENDIX III.

THE HESSIAN FLY IN SILESIA IN 1869,

{Extract from Untersuchungen ueber Insectenschaden auf den schlesischen Getreidefeldern 1m
Sommer 1869, von Prof. Dr. Ferd. Cohn.*]

THE HESSIAN FLY.—Cecidomyia destructor.

An examination of the diseased stalks fully verified the presumption
of Mr. Moritz-Eichhorn that it was not frost but insects that attacked
them. All stalks with almost no exceptions were infested with dipter-
ous insects; and though several species were engaged in the work of
destruction, yet the Hessian fly devastated the most. Its traces could
be seen on numerous dead stalks, which remained span high (12 to 15
centimeters), turned yellow-brown, and dried up. Other stalks de-
veloped the two lowest knots, and grew two or three spans high; the
upper part of the stalk was withered and shriveled, and surrounded
by the likewise dried-up and blackish-yellow leaf-sheaths. Externally
on the lower stalk-joints spots could be seen of the shape of a button-
hole, 2™™ to 3™ broad and 15™™ to 20™™ long, of straw-color, bounded
by a black margin, which latter more or less distributed over the one-
half of the stalk-joint, the black coloration sometimes penetrating to
the pith ; at times two such button-hole-like spots occurred above each
other. No trace of an animal could be found on many of the affected
stalks; in others the spot was hollowed out, and there were, closely
appressed to the stalk, covered by the likewise black leaf-sheath, from
one to four smooth, shiny, blackish-brown pupe, by their flaxseed-like
shape easily recognized as those of the Hessian Fly (Cecidomyia de-
structor). Again, in other stalks, the pup were higher, at the base of
the decayed stalk-point, above the non-attacked, 2 to 3 inches long, low-
est stalk-joints, covered by leaf-sheaths. The flies raised by me came
out from the middle of June till July 22. It happened that I still found
in wheat from Hundsfeld, July 19, besides the brown flaxseed-like pup,
also white live maggots, together with such just transforming into pseudo-
pupe, the skin having turned yellowish already. The latter, asis known,
forms a parchment-like skin within which the maggot becomes a pupa
and then a perfect fly, with blackish wings, dark back, and blood-red
abdomen; the fly, therefore, leaves the empty brown shell together with
the colorless pupa shell, pulled out of the latter. Already, June 15, I
observed near Lissa, in company with Mr. Haendler, a field of wheat,
a broad streak of which near its boundary, toward winter rye, was sim-
ilarly attacked as just described at Hundsfeld; here, too, the Hessian
fly was the devastator. The same was the case on wheat fields at Ro-
gelwitz, near Mangschiitz (district Brieg), where the loss was estimated
as five-sixths of the whole amount. From asketch made by Lieutenant

* Translated by Dr. C. F. Gissler.

[39]

[40]: REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Loew, June 15, it showed that a diagonal vein of attacked cereal ran
longitudinally through the field.

On July 12 I visited the property of Mr. Josephy, near’ Striegau,
where the English wheat was supposed to have been attacked in this
Spring by wintering. The wheat, being on very rich soil, though show-
ing a luxuriant growth, was nevertheless recognized as being attacked

by frost, since it showed black spots, shriveled stalks which easily broke —

off from the root-stock, and also agreat numberof pupze. The wheat
was sowed last fall between October 15 and 20. Director Fellinger, at
Schwieben, had also communicated to me the fact that the fly did con-
siderable damage near Tost, but more in rye than in wheat.

APPENDIX IV.

KOEPPEN’S ACUOUNT OF THE HESSIAN FLY.
_ [Extract from Die schaedlicken Insekten Russlands, von F.T.K6ppen. St. Petersburg, 1880.*}
V.-—DIPTERA.

a. DIPTERA HAVING A SO-CALLED PUPA OBTECTA.

CECIDOMYIA DESTRUCTOR Say.

Until but lately we had no authentic knowledge as to the presence
and injurious habits of the Hessian fly within the limits of Russia, even
if several reports have reference to this or allied species. Not until the
summer of 1879 were its ravages in the departments of Poltawa and
Tola verified by Professor Lindemann in a paper in the Russian lan-
guage. From this we infer that Cecidomyia destructor is distributed
over a great part of central and southern Russia.

In certain districts of the department of Poltawa Lindemann found
the stalks of the wheat bent and lying down; at the bending occurred,
protected by a dried-up leaf, from three to five cocoons of the Hessian
fly. The greatest damage was done on summer wheat. Beside wheat
Lindemann mentions also rye as its food-plant, but principally mentions
wheat. The amount of damage done could not be exactly stated; it
was considerable, however. Lindemann himself cultivated an area of
55 dessiatines with winter wheat, examined it, and found that two-thirds
of the harvest was destroyed by the Hessian fly. As elsewhere, Ce-
_cidomyia destructor produces also two generations in one year. The
perfect insects appear in the first generation in the beginning of April
from hibernated pup. ‘The fertilized females, according to Lindemann,
deposit up to 200 eggs. This number is certainly too high, and does not
agree with reports from elsewhere, according to which the number of eggs
deposited is at the most 80. According to Professor Haberlandtt a female
deposits only 40 to 50 eggs. The larve coming out of the latter live
on the lower part of the stalk, covered by the lowest leaf-sheath; they
pupate toward the end of May or beginning of June, the imago issuing
in the second half of August. The larve of the second generation pu-
pate at the end of September and hibernate as such. Lindemann suc-
ceeded in obtaining from the pupe of Cecidomyia destructor from the
districts of Poltawa and Tola the parasite Ceraphron destructor, Say.t
I leave it to Lindemann as to the correct determination of the name of
the parasite. As far as I know Ceraphron attacks the larve of the Hes-
sian fly, while a Platygaster lives in its pupa.

REMARK.—The reports in Russia concerning the gall-gnats allied to
Cecidomyia destructor are for the greater part soinaccurate that the name
of the respective species can be determined only at the outset. How

* Translated by Dr. C. F. Gissler.

t Hispaper on Cecidomyia destructor in Verhandlungen der zool.-bot. Ges. in Wien, 1864, pp. 401-406.
t Figured in A.S. Packard’s Guide to the Study of Insects, p. 375.
[41}

‘

[42] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

far the Cecidomyia secalina Low* differs from the Hessian fly a good
deal can be discussed. Nordlinger, Taschenberg, and Kaltenbach fol-
low Wagner,} saying that Cecidomyia secalina is identical with Cecidomyia
destructor. I neither have Low’s nor Wagner's paper, so that I am not
in position to verify this view, but should judge from the positive state-
ment of Haberlandt that Cecidomyia destructor, at least in Hungary,
occurs on wheat only, and that the gall-gnat living on rye must belong to
another species. Von Bergenstamm and P. Léw question{ whether
Cecidomyia funesta, described by Motschulsky, be not identical with Ceci-
domyia secalina Loew. Itis again contradicted by the circumstance that
Cecidomyia funesta Motsch. occurs on wheat and noton rye. Very likely
this species belongs to the subgenus Diplosis, for the following reasons:
Motschulsky says that his Cecidomyia funesta very much resembles C.
verna Curtis, the latter being a Diplosis. This is also verified by the
illustration of the gall-gnat given by him, since the second longitudinal
vein of the wing terminates below its apex (while this in Cecidomyia
~ occurs above the apex; the difference in the number of antennal joints
in both sexes was not questioned, as the single male specimen from
which the description was made was without antennz). The descrip-
tion given by Motschulsky is so insufficient that we accordingly cannot
even determine to which subgenus that species belongs. Specimens of
the genus Cecidomyia, as is well known, soon change after death, losing
especially their characteristic colors. Not much meaning, therefore,
has the following description by Motschulsky :, “ Body of blackish-gray
color; head and thorax a little darker; legs pale yellowish; wings
slightly smoke-colored, turbid, and not transparent, but unicolorous,
beset with short hairs at the inner margin. Length, 1 English line;
wings spread 24 English lines.” The pupa of reddish-yellow color, 14
lines long. Motschulsky describes and figures an ichneumonid parasitic
on his C. funesta. It is the Platygaster funestus Motsch. The larve of |
this gall-gnat are reported to attack the wheat in the districts of Saratow
and Simbirsk in the same manner as C. destructor.

From within the Russian frontiers there are yet several other re-
ports of devastations of cereal gall-gnats. A Cecidomyia was observed
during several years (C. secalina Loew ?) by Zeckert in the district of
Mohilef attacking rye. He also observed ichneumonids parasitizing
them. According to Czernay, in the fall of 1852 great numbers of
maggots came out of Cecidomyia eggs deposited on young leaves of
winter rye in August in the district of Charkof. The maggots were so
destructive that everything green withered. In October they trans-
formed into brown pups, five or more specimens of which could be found
at the base of the leaf-sheaths. Headds that Cecidomyia occurs twice a
year—in spring and fall. Professor Czernay gives the following insuf-
ficient description: ‘‘ Body blackish-gray ; head and thorax a little
darker; wings grayish, brown at the base, beset with short marginal
hairs; legs long, blackish, 1 line long. Larva of a reddish color.
Pupa brown, elongate, length about 14 lines. The female deposits some
20 or 30 eggs on the upper side of young rye leaves. The larve hatch
on the fifteenth day. The pupa hibernates either in the soil or be-
tween the leaf-sheaths.” |

*H. Low, in the Zeitschrift d. Entom. d. schles. Ver., 1858. a

t Untersuchungen ueber d. neue Getreidegallmiicke, Fulda, 1861.
t ‘‘Synopsis Cecidomyidarum”’ in Verhandl. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, 1876, p. 73.

APPENDIX V.

THE HESSIAN FLY NOT IMPORTED FROM EUROPE.

By Dr. H. A. HAGEN, CAMBRIDGE, MASsS.*

The official publication of Bulletin 4, “The Hessian Fly,” by Dr. A.
S. Packard, for the N. A. [U. S.] Entom. Commission, has induced me
to study again the question of the importation of this insect by Hessian
troops at an early period of the war. The excellent memoir by Dr. A.
Fitch was believed to have settled this question in a final manner;
therefore his opinion was accepted by all subsequent American writers.

The best German monograph on the Hessian fly was written and
published twenty years ago, in Hesse, by Dr. B. Wagner. He ac-
knowledges fully the merits of Dr. A. Fitch’s monograph, but he objects
to the historical part and the conclusions based upon it. As Dr. Wag-
ner’s work seemed to have settled the question so thoroughly that for
twenty years no scientist in Europe has believed in the Hessian im-
portation, I was rather astonished to find in the Bulletin a reprint of
the old story, without the slightest acknowledgment of their refutation
by Dr. Wagner.

I have tried myself to compare as much as possible the different pub-
lications quoted by Dr. A. Fitch, and arrived at these conclusions:

1. That it is impossible that the fly could have been imported by the
Hessian troops.

2. That it is very probable that the fly was here before the war.

3. That the fly was not known to exist in Germany before 1857.

It has been entirely overlooked that Dr. A. Fitch states himself that
he has been unable to fill an important desideratum, to make his proofs
conclusive ones. He says: ‘‘ We have searched in vain for the date of
the embarkation of the troops or the number of days occupied by them
in crossing the sea.” There were indeed long before published those
data, but in two works which even to-day are not to be found in any
library here.t Both these works and the official manuscript report are
used by Dr. Wagner. But there exist newer publications, all easily
accessible here, but strangely enough, appear never to have been con-
sulted.f

I.—It is impossible that the fly could have been imported by the Hessian
troops.

Dr. A. Fitch arrived, after his study of the habits of the fly, to the
conclusion ‘that there is but one mode and but one month in the year in

* Reprinted from the Canadian Entomologist, October, 1880.

+ The Biography of the General von Ochs, by L. von Hohenhausen, Cassel, 1827, and F. Pfister die
Fahrt der ersten hessischen Heeres abtheilung von Portsmouth nach N. York: Zeitschr. der Vereins
fuer hessische geschichte und Landeskunde, Tom. ii., Cassel, 1840.

+Max von Eelking: Die deutschen Huelfstruppen im Nordamerikanischen Befreiungekriege, 1776-
1783, Hannover, 1863, 2 vol.

By the same author: The biography of General Riedesel, Leipzig, 1856, 3 vol. ;

Friedrich Kapp: Der Soldatenhandel deutscher Fuersten nach Amerika, Berlin, 1864.

’ Bancroft’s History, vol. viii., ix.
[43]

: -

[44 | REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

which this insect could probably have been conveyed to this country at
that time, to wit, in straw landed upon our coast in August.” (p. 29.)

Everybody will agree that Dr. Fitch’s reasoning is acute and to the
point. As his monograph is known by every student, it is not necessary
to repeat in full his conclusions (p. 8-9). But he has forgotten in his
calculations that the pupa state of the fly has in the summer only the
duration of two months or less, and that every ship for a voyage from
Europe required on an average nearly four months; and that straw in- ©
fested with these pup, to be conveyed at this time, must have been
taken anterior to the harvest. Dr. Fitch tries to explain this in a queer
way: ‘Had a company of soldiers needed straw for package, no objec-
tion would have been made to their going in a field (infested by the fly)
and with a scythe gathering what they required weeks before the usual
time of the harvest.” Dr. Wagner is rather mortified by this funny con-
ception of the military discipline of the Hessian troops. But the sup-
position is more untenable as the sending of the treops was rather
unpopular; their passage was objected to by several parties, and they
had to make long and various circuits, and to conduct themselves in a
very cautious manner. Further, the minute official reports would have
preserved details of such entirely unusual events. The first division of
the Hessian troops was ready to depart in the middle of February, 1776.
The troops were ordered to march from Cassel through Hanover to
Bremen. As the British transport ships had not yet arrived at Bremen-
haven, the troops returned to Hesse, and started again February 29.
In passing Bremen March 10, every regiment had to be transported on
seventy wagons, because the whole country was inundated by the
rivers Weser and Wumme. ‘The small number of wagons shows that
the baggage could not have been very large. The troops arrived March
21st to 22nd at Bremenhaven, and were embarked from March 23rd to
April 15th, as the transport ships arrived only slowly. ‘The fleet started ~
April 17th, arrived in Spithead April 28th, left May 6th, and arrived
August 17th at Sandy Hook. Some ships (after Dr. Wagner’s state-
ment) seem to have reached Halifax July 7th, and Utrecht, off Long
Island, August 12th. Several transport ships left Bremenhaven April
21st, and Portsmouth May 12th, but arrived at the same time with the
others at Sandy Hook. Lo

The accommodations for the troops on the ships were all furnished by
England. ‘The bedding,” says Bancroft, ‘was infamous scanty; their
pillows 7 by 5 inches, small mattresses and woolen blankets, hardly to-
gether weighing seven pounds.” Hvery six men slept together, in a
partition 5 feet long and 6 feet broad. When the men were tired lying
on one side they had all to turn at the same time to the other side.
Now if it had been possible that the bedding contained infested straw,
everybody will agree that its use for three monthsand a half by soldiers
placed so uncomfortably is more than the most persistent Hessian fly
would be able to stand. The idea that camp straw had been conveyed
by the transport ships is of course impossible, when all necessary accom-
modations had been more than shortened.

The division was ordered, August 19th, from Staten Island to Long
Island, and arrived August 22nd at Flatbush. The official records state
that only the tents and the baggage were transported on very small and
odd looking wagons, each with only two small horses. Here again the
supposition that camp straw had been transported is entirely improbable,
the more as it is stated that ‘the troops found Long Island well pro- -
vided with evefything, even to a certain degree of comfort and luxury.”

These troops left Hesse in February, and Spithead in May, also long

/
HAGEN ON THE SOURCE OF THE HESSIAN FLY. [45]

before straw could have been made, and could not have imported the fly.
These are the very troops Dr. Asa Fitch speaks of with confidence as im-
porters of the Hessian fly.

The second division of the Hessian troops left Cassel in May, 1776,
Bremenhaven June 3rd, arrived at Spithead June 20th, sailed together
with the Waldek troops July 20th, and arrived October 21st at New
Rochelie, Long Island. The date of their arrival alone proves that the
importation of the fly by them was impossible.

All other German troops dispatched in 1776 were landed in Quebec.
The Braunschweig troops left February 22nd, arrived at Stade March
5th and at Portsmouth March 20th. The Hanau troops left March L5th,
and were embarked March 26th at Nimwegen. Both troops together
sailed from Portsmouth April 7th, and arrived June 1stat Quebec. Of
course its importation by these troops is out of the question.

During the year 1777 the following German troops were sent to
America: From Hessen Cassel, which left March 2nd, were shipped on
the Fulda May 18th, embarked May 25th at Bremenhaven, and arrived
September 27th at Sandy Hook. From Hessen Hanau, which started —
March 7th and 31st for Dordrecht; from Braunschweig, which arrived
March 12th at Stade; from Anspach Bayreuth, which left February
29th, and were embarked March 30th at Dordrecht. All left Ports-
mouth together April 7th,.and landed June 3rd at Staten Island, and
were ordered June 11th to Amboy, N. J. Comparing the dates of their
arrival, an importation of the fly by those troops is impossible.

The data for the following years are without importance, as the fly
_ appeared in fall of 1778 in New York. But it may be stated that dur-
ing 1778 the troops from Hessen and Bayreuth arrived, Sept. 25th, also
too late to import the fly.

All troops from 1779 to 1782 landed in Quebec or in Halifax. Only
in 1780 troops embarked August 15th arrived October 17th in New York. —

I think in comparing all these data, everybody will agree that the fly
could not have been imported by those troops. There. has doubtless
been too much patriotic impulse and indignation prevailing in accept-
ing without any real criticism these old traditions. Patriotic motives
are the worst guides in scientific questions.

Il. It is very probable that the fly was here before the war.

I regret that I am not acquainted withthe older American literature,
and I have no means to get atit. Therefore I know only one statement,
quoted by Dr. A. Fitch, which seemsto Dr. Wagner and myself to prove
that the Hessian fly had existed here before the arrival of the Hessian
troops. The statement (I have seen the original communication) says:
“A respectable and observing farmer of this town (Renselaer, N. Y.),
Col. James Brookins, has informed me that on his first hearing of
the alarm on Long Island in the year 1786 (Fitch says doubtless 1776 is
intended), and many years before its ravages were complained of in this
part of the country, he detected the same insect upon examining the
wheat growing in histown. These factsprove pretty satisfactorily that
the Hessian fly or wheat insect is indigenous in this country.”

Dr. Fitch rejects the testimony with some sarcastic phrases, and
adds: ‘“‘ The strong probability is that it was some other insect which
was found by Col. Brookins.” JI don’t see how such testimony can be
rejected. There is no need to doubt that a respectable and observing
farmer would recognize the devastations done by the Hessian fly.
Every one, even the most unobserving man, having seen once such a

i

[46] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

devastated field, will recognize and remember the fact. Moreover,
there has not existed, nor does there exist now in the U.S., according
to Dr, Fitch’s own writings, an insect which produces similar ravages.
Dr. Fitch makes similar objections to the statement of Mr. Mitchell
that the fly had appeared on Long Island in 1776, before the arrival of
the troops. He says the devastations were conspicuous and liable to
attract attention, and leaves us in the dark when Col. Morgan states
that in 1778 the fly made its first appearance, and directly afterthat Mr.
Clark states that the fly made its first appearance in 1779, so that at
least one of them must have been mistaken. ‘

{II. The fly was not known to exist in Germany before 1857.

The fly must have existed in Europe and in Germany before it could
have been imported with the troops. Dr. Fitch tries to settle this most
important question by the following statements :

Mr. Duhamel, in Monceau (I have compared the original), says that
‘a number of white worms have been found on the wheat near Geneva,
in 1755, which after a time turn to a chestnut color; they place them-
selves betwixt the leaves and gnaw the stalk ; they are commonly found
betwixt the first joint and the root; these animals appeared about the
middle of May.”

It is rather strange that just this passage has been quoted and always
reprinted. Mr. Duhamel says plainly, ‘‘The larva gnaws the stalk.” ~
Now Dr. A. Fitch says (p. 33), ‘ The larva of the Hessian fly lives upon >
the sap; it does not gnaw the stalk.” And Dr. Packard says (p. 15),
‘¢ Their soft and fleshy undeveloped mouth parts do not enable them to
gnaw the surface of the plant.”

The fact that the stalk was gnawed shows evidently that the insect ©
was not the Hessian fly, but a species of Oscinis; the larve of some
species of which would gnaw the stalk—or perhaps Opomyza florum.
The pupa of those species is also brown and appears above the root
between theleavesand thestalk, and the imago appears just as Duhamel
states, in the middle of May, one month later than the Hessian fly.
Prof. J. Kuehne remarks that the effects produced upon the plants by
Opomyza are similar to those of the Hessian fly.

Therefore the quotation of Duhamel is entirely out of place, and this
is, by the way, the only one by which the existence of the fly in Europe
before the war has been corroborated. I have gone through the litera-
ture from 1770 to 1804, without finding any statement of similar devasta
tions of wheat, for Germany, for France, and for Spain. There exist a
number of books where such a calamity in France would have been
noted if it had existed.

I have not been able to consult the long and detailed report of Sir
Joseph Banks to the British Government. An extract given by Kirby
and Spence shows that the tly did not exist in England in 1788, and
that nowhere on the continent its existence or similar devastations were
known.

In 1834, Prof. Kollar, of Vienna, in his treatise on injurious insects,
published an account on some devastations done by the Hessian fly—he
has first in Europe used this name for a Huropean'species—in Alten-
burg, Hungary, and in Weikendortff, 17 miles from Pressburg, an estate
belonging to the Prince of Sachsen-Coburg. Dr. A. Fitch quotes both as
‘Saxe Altenburg and Saxe Coburg, about a hundred miles distant from
Hesse Cassel.” ‘“Itis a strange geographical mistake,” says Dr. Th.
W. Harris (Corresp. p. 189), ‘‘to transport those localities to Saxe,
whereof Altenburg is 400 miles distant, and Weikendorff near the bor-
der of Hungary, about 375 miles distant.” Nevertheless Dr. Packard

HAGEN ON THE SOURCE OF THE HESSIAN FLY. [47]

reprints again the strange mistake made by Dr. A. Fitch, as the only
ae for the existence of the insect in a district not far distant from
yassel.

The carefu] study of Prof. Kollar’s report makes it very doubtful if
his insect is the Hessian fly. He describes the larva as pale green with
a small black dot above, which does not at all agree with the Hessian
- fly, but very well with the larva of a Chlorops. He states having
reared but one fly, but he describes both sexes. His description is simply
a translation of those of Th. Say, and not a correct one, as he translates
several times fulvous for golden.

I have never seen the dissertation on the same calamity by Dr. Ham-
merschmidt, Vienna. It is printed in a small number for private cir-
culation. Prof. J.C. Westwood having received specimens of the pupa
.n the sraw, doubts if it is the Hessian fly. Perhaps the strictures on
his report by Dr. A. Fitch (p. 8) are correct, as they have never been
refuted by Prof. Westwood. But it is to be remarked that C. de-
structor is not the only species of the genus having a coarctate pupa.
Dr. Fitch (p. 40) has detected one on Agrostis lateriflora, and Mr. Win-

nertz states the same for C. graminicola from Europe.

All European works on the Hessian fly published after 1857 agree
that it was then an entirely new pest, never seen before and unknown
to all prominent dipterologists— Wiedemann, Meigen, Zetterstedt, Loew,
Breimi, all monographers of this genus, and Schiner. The species was
represented in no collection, and apparently not in the Vienna Museum,
as Mr. Schiner, 1864, quotes as localities for Europe only those given
by Mr. Dana. Nevertheless I am obliged to state that thirty years
later, after Mr. Haberlandt, the Hessian fly, C. secalina, has been ob-
served in the same parts of Hungary.

The only sure statement of the existence of the Hessian fly in Europe
is its discovery by Mr. J. Dana in 1834, at Mahon, Toulon, and Naples.
The identity of this insect with the American species is to be accepted
on Th. W. Harris’s authority. There was never a better authority, and
scarcely one who has better known the insect. He has given his con-
viction of their identity in the most unequivocal terms. The statement
that the insect had been in Minorca from time immemorial, and often
done great damage both there and in Spain, is very interesting, but not
to be accepted as certain before having been corroborated by reliable
reports. Jam not able to compare the old Spanish literature, but I
think it should be done.

The existence of the fly in Asia Minor, near the shore, is probable
from the discovery made by Professor Loew of the larva and pupa on
the straw in 1842, and later recognized by him as identical with his C.
secalina.

Mr. V. von Motschulsky describes in 1852 a fly very obnoxious to the
wheat in the governments of Saraton and Simbirek, in Rusland, as C.
Junesta, together with its parasites. I may add that von Motschulsky,
after his return from America, and having received typical specimens
of the Hessian fly and its parasites from Dr. A. Fitch, has assured me
that C. funesta and C. destructor are the same species. This is also ac-
cepted in von Osten-Sacken’s catalogue. Mr. Koeppen, in his excellent
work just published “On Injarious Insects in Rusland,” states that
since that time nothing has been known about the fly in those parts of
Rusland. ‘ Before 1879,” says Koeppen, ‘“‘we had no reliable report
about the existence of the Hessian fly in Rusland, which was discov-
ered in Poltowa and Sula by Mr. Lindemann in the summer of 1879,
together with its parasites.”

In 1857 and 1858 the rye was extensively damaged in Silesia,

\

[48] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

Posen, and Prussia. Prof. Loew, at the time the leading dipterologist

studied the insect, and declared it to be very similar to the Hessian
fly, but probably 2 new species named by him C. secalina. He had
never seen the American species, and had to rely on Dr. A. Fitch’s de-
scription, which did not fully agree with C. secalina. In 1859 the same
insect was very obnoxious to ther ye in Kastern Prussia, and was studied
by myself. In 1860 it had advanced westward to Augusburg, where it

was studied by Prof. Rosenhauer, and to Fulda, Hesse. Everywhere _

it was considered to be an entirely new pest, never seen or observed
before. In Hesse the fly was studied by Dr. B. Wagner, and his mono-
graph is perhaps the most satisfactory existing in Germany, though it
seems to be entirely unknown here. The fly destroyed i in Hesse wheat,

rye, and barley. Jam not able to say whether the insect did advance
farther west. In the following years the calamity subsided, and was
soon nearly forgotten. Extensive destructions in Hungary in 1864 are
reported by Mr. Haberlandt and Kuenstler, and in 1879 in Rusland. I
find no statements of injury done by the fly in Germany after 1860, and
the reports for Bohemia for 1872 and 1879 state directly that the fly
was not observed. Dr. Schiner, in Vienna, had till 1864 seen no Speci-
men; the best proof that it had not been obnoxious i in Austria.

Dr. Wagner was the first to acknowledge the identity of C. secalina
and the Hessian fly. In observing the manner of life and the time of
swarming of the fly in Hesse, and comparing both with the time of the
- departure and the arrival of the Hessian troops, Dr. Wagner comes to
the conclusion that the importation of the fly by those troops is strictly
impossible.

If we consider the positive evidence of the existence of the Hessian
fly in Europe, we find that between 1830 and 1840 it occurred in four
localities on the northern shore of the Mediterranean. It appeared in

1850 more to the north in southern Rusland, and advanced strictly

westward through Germany till 1860 as a very obnoxious pest. After
all I think it would be hardly more difficult to accept and to prove that

the fly was introduced by the energetic trade with the Mediterranean —

from America, and became obnoxious only after acclimatization, as to ac-
cept the introduction into America from Europe. It is difficult to sup-
pose that the fly had been overlooked by such a number of prominent
entomologists as those named. Dr. Wagner accepts as a fact that the
fiy was imported from Asia to Europe and from Europe to America.
The same supposition was made long ago by T. W. Harris, because the
fly is connected with the cereal grasses, and therefore their original home
was presumed to be the same with those plants. Against this concelu-
sion I have to make two objections. J irst, the fatherland of these plants
is unknown. That they live still wild in Persia, as Dr. Wagner sup-
poses, is not proved at all. Buffon also remarks that our cereals are not
known to grow wild anywhere, and later statements have always been
proved to be unfounded. The fly is not found till now in the Orient.
Second, i is not true that such an obnoxious insect is strictly limited to
some few species of plants. The potato bug has given abundant evi-
dence that an insect not obnoxious before may become so by finding a
related plant better suited to its taste. Dr. A. Fitch (Rep. IL, p. 297)
well says, in speaking of some wheat and barley flies: ‘‘As these flies
appear to be native species, it is probable that before wheat was culti-

vated upon this continent they sustained themselves upon some of our
wild grasses. Their numbers must therefore have been very limited at
that period. But when wheat was introduced and became extensively
cultivated, it gave them such an ample supply of most palatable nour-
ishment that they have gradually increased, and are now excessively

Ses sd
oS ee ae ee

HAGEN ON THE SOURCE OF THE HESSIAN FLY. [49]

numerous, laying every wheat-field under contribution for their support.”
Is it not obvious that the same course may have happened with the Hes-
sian fly? The more so since just at the time of its appearance in Long
Island and the adjoining country the culture of wheat was prominently
advanced. Since we know that at the utmost during six weeks in the
year only is the importation of the fly possible, such an importation to
America before the discovery of steamships is almost inconceivable.
Even if purposely undertaken with all care, such an importation would
almost, surely have been a failure.

Dr. Wagner has felt the strength of those arguments, and supposes
that importation had been possible only from the nearest coast of France.
He believes that the lesser distance, as well as the frequent trade with
France, makes it more probable. But why not accept that the fly was -
indigenous here as well asin the Old World? There are Diptera identi-
cal with Huropean species which nobedy would think to have been im-
ported. I may mention the common Trichocera regelationis, which be-
longs to a related group. The species is common here, and was ob-
served by me 13 years ago. But last winter I had specimens sent
me from Maine, stating that this insect had never been seen there be-
fore, and had been extremely troublesome. I know well that many
animals—higher and lower ones—have been imported, because the facts
are well recorded; I believe that a number of others have also been im-
ported for which the facts are not recorded. But I see no reason to go
farther, and am prepared to accept that the same species in both coun-
tries may have been developed under similar conditions. I consider,

therefore, the Hessian fly to be an indigenous American insect, and not
imported by Hessian troops.

A few words more concerning the periods of unusual abundance of
the fly. I was very much interested in the study of the table given by
Dr. Packard, but I arrived at the conclusion that the table is not suffi-
cient, and indeed is considered by Dr. Packard himself as very imper-
fect. Concerning New England Dr. A. Fitch’s statement has been over-
looked, Regs., viii., p. 203, that the fly was very injurious in Berks Co.,
Mass., in 1779.

The year 1823 for Maine and 1857 for Ohio, are not marked at all in
the table, and both the records state that the farmers had ventilated
earnestly the question to give up entirely the cultivation of wheat. The
only conclusion to be made by the table would be that with an intermis-
Sion of thirty to forty years a period of superabundance follows. Per-
haps a careful study of the old records from 1748 to 1750 would give
some evidence if the fly has ever been obnoxious here before the war..
It is a curious fact that such an intermission of the @ppearance of the
Hessian fly has occurred just in that quarter of the century during
which the most ardent collector and student of the N.. American Dip-
tera—I may say the founder of the American Dipterology—was here.
In fact, Baron von Osten Sacken has never met here with this Hessian
fly, which is not represented in his collection nor in Prof. Loew’s, both
now in the Museum in Cambridge.

NotTE.—As the paper was going through the press I received two
pairs of C. destructor from Prot. J. A. Cook, the first American speci-
mens which have come to my hands. In comparing these with two

_ pairs of C. secalina from Prussia and Hesse, I was astonished to find
the American insects twice as large as the European ones, and almost
entirely black. I think they look so different that the identity is per-
haps not sure. But a larger series from both countries and a more
detailed knowledge of Diptera than are at my command would be
needed to decide the question.

4 AP EB

\

APPENDIX VI.

MR. JOHN MARTEN’S REPORT ON THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN
LOCUST IN 1880.

Dr. Cyrus THOMAS,
Of the United States Entomological Commission :

Sir: I have the honor to reporé that in obedience to your instructions
I have visited personally portions of southern Minnesota, central and
northern Dakota, and eastern Montana for the purpose of gathering
information in reference to the locusts.

My investigations under your letter of instructions were confined to
- July and August, 1880.

Leaving Carbondale, Ill., July 5, I passed up the Illinois Central Rail-
road to Chicago, and from there to Saint Paul, Minn., over the Chicago
and Northwestern Railway, where I stopped one day. ’ From Saint Paut
I went to Willmar, Minn., on the Saint Paul, Minneapolis and Manitoba
Railway, where I arrived durin g the afternoon of the 9th instant.

I could not discover by inqgufry that any damage had been done by
locusts along the line of the railroad, but lsaw a few of themat stations
where the train stopped.

At Willmar I learned that in August and September, 1876, swarms
of locusts came from the west and northwest and deposited eggs in
large quantities, preferably in sunny spots nearly or quite clear of vege-
tation, though large numbers were placed in the open prairie among
the orass. These eggs hatched during the latter part of May and in
June, 1877, the young locusts stripping the fields of almost every
green thing in some places, causing many farmers to take advantage of
the offer of seed made by the Governor of the State. In June and July
the locusts departed in swarms, going towards the south and southeast.
The crops most damaged by the young locusts were the wheat, oats,
and other small grains; gardens were also damaged very extensively.

I could learn of no damage done by locusts in this vicinity during
either the past or present years, and many averred that there were none
of the pests in the country, though I captured several specimens in fields
near the town.

In examining a field of rye, many of the stalks, perhaps one-tenth of
those on the side of the field where I was, were perforated by some in-
sect from two to four inches above the second joint from the head. The
perforations had much the appearance of those made by the subgenus
Jh lorops of thetwo-winged flies. Above the perforations the stalks were
dry and the heads only chaff.

My next stopping-place was Glyndon, Minn., where I remained only
long enough to take the first train westward. Along the railroad from
Willmar I captured several specimens of C. spretus, but could not learn
of any ravages committed by them at any time during the past year.

From Glyndon I went to Jamestown, Dak., arriving there Saturday,
July 10, having learned nothing along the route of damages committed
during the two years just past.

[50]

REPORT OF JOHN MARTEN ON CALOPTENUS. [51]

For information and assistance while in Jamestown I am indebted
principally to Mr. A. W. Kelley, the postmaster.

Locusts first visited this section, to his knowledge, in 1869, at Fort
Totten, some eighty miles north of J amestown, he having previously, in
1864, seen them at the old Yellow Medicine Agency. During every year
trom 1869 to 187 6, inclusive, locusts occurred in greater or less numbers,
and eggs were deposited at various places along the valley of the James
River. The locusts in depositing their eggs generally selected a sandy,
rather compact soil, choosing the low ground next the river rather than
the more elevated prairie, even where the higher ground was but a short
distance from the river.

Of the swarms stopping here the greater number came from the north,
some coming from the northwest. They departed towards the south,
southeast, and the southwest, though in 1876 and once previously they
were noticed flying toward the northwest.

In July, 1879, they were flying over Jamestown toward the southeast.
Among the things attacked by them were wheat and all other grains,
onions, cabbage, potatoes, &c. Tomatoes were among the last things
eaten, while pease escaped almost entirely. In 1879, June, just across
the river from Jamestown, about one acre of beans were destroyed by
young locusts that had hatched in that place. This is the onlyinstance
of note in which the young locusts have appeared in any considerable
numbers and have done damage during the past two years in this por-
tion of the James Valley. The SwarM Was SO small that it departed un-
noticed.

My collection taken here included numerous specimens of C. spretus
and other grasshoppers; lepidoptera, neuroptera, diptera and coleo-
ptera were also taken in limited numbers. The lepidoptera were abun-
dant along the river, but were comparatively poor in number of species.

While at Jamestown a rumor was in circulation that locusts had at-
tacked Steele’s farm, about 60 miles west of there, and were destroying
the wheat, but upon arrival there I found it was a false alarm, and
though the locusts were rather plentiful they were not doing damage
enough to be noticed, and none had been seen moving in Swarms.

July 13.—I arrived in Bismarck late in the evening. On the 14th I
learned that no locusts had been seen in that vicinity, and no damage
had been reported by farmers during the last and the present years.
An opportunity being offered I crossed the Missouri River to Fort A.
Lincoln, about 5 miles below Bismarck, and did some collecting in that
vicinity. On both sides of the river i found the grasshoppers, espe-
cially C. spretus, most numerous on the prairie back from the river, while
lepidoptera, neuroptera and diptera were most numerous on the low
grounds near the river.

July 15.—I took passage on a Missouri River steamboat for Fort Peck
Indian Agency, Montana. During the day we stopped at three wood-
yards, at each of which I captured a few specimens of C. spretus.

July 16.—The steamer wooded once to-day. I did not go ashore on
account of the great numbers of mosquitoes.

July 17.—I saw locusts in small numbers at two wood-yards to-day.

July 18.—Passed Fort Buford, but did not go ashore, as the boat did
not stop long enough to permit it. However, I learned that the locusts
‘were not troubling them this year.

July 19.—The steamer wooded once to-day. I did not see any locusts
at the weod-yard, probably because of the dense underbrush. Arrived
at Fort Peck Agency, or Poplar River, at 10.30 o’clock a. m.

While in conversation with Sergeant Brainard of the Second Cavalry,

[52] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

of Fort Assinniboine, Montana, he stated that they had not been troubled
since the post was located, within the past year, “but in previous years
while campaigning over that country he had found them very thick
during the months of July and August in the Bear Paw Mountains and
on the elevated plateau circling from the mountains northwestward into
Canada.

For favors received while at Fort Peck Agency I am indebted to
Major Porter, the Government agent, and Rev. G.W. Wood.

Major Porter reports no damage done by locusts between this place
and Woody Mountain, Canada, about 80 miles distant to the north. No
swarms have been seen passing over this year. At Deer Tails, 6 miles
below, on the river, the crops were in excellent condition, locusts had
not been noticed, and I found fewer of them than at the agency on
Poplar River.

At Wolf’s Point, 25 miles up the Missouri River, Mr. Smith, the sub-
agent, reported that no locusts had been there, nor had any flown over
during the past two years or since he had been stationed there.

Dr. J. Woodbridge, who has paid a great deal of attention to the nat-
ural history of the animals of this section of the country, stated that he
had ridden a distance of 30 miles into the Bad Lands, on the opposite side
of the Missouri River, without seeing any of the destructive locusts.

Mr. Harry Snell and Mr. J. Williams report having seen locusts hatch-
ing in immense numbers in 1876 and 1877 in the Yellowstone Valley, but
not many in the past two years.

The agency interpreter-stated that he had 1h equently during the past
twenty-nine years passed by what is now Fort Peck Indian Agency,
and four -vears ago he began raising crops there, and in all that time
he had not seen locusts in sufficient numbers to be troublesome there.

In 1878 they were seen flying over this place, going toward tbe south-
east. Between here and Fort Buford they have never been known to
hatch, by any person whom I have met, but they have been seen almost
every year flying over that part of the ‘territory.

Of the collection made here, the principal part was grasshoppers,
among which C. spretus was quite prominent. Lepidoptera were next.
Of this order the genera and species represented weré few, although
there was an abundance of most of the species taken. Diptera, neu-
roptera and coleoptera were taken in small numbers. Here, as in other
places visited, the orthoptera were most abundant on the higher ground
back from. the river, while the greater part of the other insects taken
were found along the Poplar River bottom.

It is only within the last two or three years that crops have been
raised at this agency. Secarcely any one was.to be found who could give
definite information concerning the locusts.

Returning from Fort Peck Agency to Bismarck, where I arrived Au-
gust 2, I learned they arrived here August 4, 1878, and remained four
days, depositing eggs over a space about 10 miles long from east to west
and from 2 to 3 miles wide from north to south. After depositing the
eggs they flew towards the southeast. About the middle of August,
1877, the locusts stopped near Bisinarck, but did not do much damage.
They were seen eating the wild sunflower, which was thought to be an
unusual article of food for them.

August 3 I was in Mandan, Dak., and am indebted to Mr. M. Lang
for information received there.

In the latter part of June, 1879, locusts were seen flying toward the
southeast. Eggs have been deposited every year from 1873 to 1879
along the lower part of the Heart River Valley in. quantities to cause

4

REPORT OF JOHN MARTEN ON CALOPTENUS. [53 |

serious apprehensions of danger had there been crops for the locusts to.
attack. The eggs were generally placed in low ground, rather compact
and sandy. The young locusts soon after hatching seemed to be more
numerous on the higher ground than on the lower, which was a fact
Mr. Lang could not account for, unless they migrated from the low
ground. In August, 1878, the wheat crop and garden of a Mr. Fox,
near Mandan, was almost entirely destroyed by old locusts. And in
the latter part of May, 1879, locusts began hatching on the farm of
Mr. Clark, 2 miles from Mandan, in the Heart River Valley, and when
their wings were fully grown they flew to the southeast. They were
not in sufficient numbers to destroy the growing crops, but injured it
severely in places.

From Mandan to the end of the Northern Pacific Railroad, C. spretus
was found at every stopping place in small numbers. No crops were
seen for them to feast upon after leaving the Heart River, some 3 or 4
miles from Mandan.

At Green River, the end of the track, I could find no one who could
give me any definite information about locusts in that vicinity. Mr.
“Gus” Plumer reported that at his ranche, 30 miles beyond the end of
the track, the locusts destroyed his garden in 1878, and in August of that
year they deposited large numbers of eggs that hatched the next May
and June (1879). But not enough of the eggs hatched to cause him any
annoyance. Mr. Plumer could not account for so many of the eggs
failing to hatch. -The locusts that flew over his ranche in 1878 were
going nearly south. :

August 7.—Left Bismarck ina wagon going overland to Huron, Dak.,
about 350 miles distant. The first two days we followed the course of
the Missouri River, occasionally going upon the edge of the Coteau of
the Missouri. About 10.30 o’clock of the morning of the 7th I saw
locusts flying a little east of south, almost following the course of the
river at that place. They were very high, but not very thick. About
3.30 p. m. the clouds obscured the sun and I saw no more locusts.

August 8.—Locusts were flying at 11 o’clock this morning, thicker than
yesterday, but at a lower elevation. They were going in the same di-
rection, east of south, with the wind, which was blowing a stiff breeze.
During the day I saw numbers of locusts rising from the Coteau and
by rapidly enlarging irregular circles or spirals join the moving swarms
above. Sometimes they rose so numerously as to strike us frequently
as we rode along. Many more locusts were seen on the Coteau than
on the low ground near the river.

August 9.—Locusts were again seen flying to-day, but more to the
east and in fewer numbers than either yesterday or the day before.

The afternoon of August 8 was spent in Fort Yates. Lieut. D. H.
Brush stated that no damage had ever been done there, within his knowl-
edge, and that locusts had not been seen flying for the last two years.
But I learned that they had been visited by locusts in 1875 and 1876,
butthedamage donewas not great. Imyself, as stated above, saw them
flying over the fort, but not so thickly as I had seen them while on the
Coteau east of the river.

Monday, August 9, the party with which I was traveling turned east-
ward from Fort Yates across the prairie to the James River, distant
nearly 200 miles. Soon after leaving the Missouri we lost the trail and
wandered about until near evening, when we struck what afterwards
proved to be the Big Beaver Creek and camped for the night. At this
place the locusts were quite abundant, as were other species of hoppers.

August 10.—We followed the course of the Big Beaver, or rather a
parallel course, at adistanceof several miles, returning to it in the even- -

\

¢

[54] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

ing in order to get water. We ‘passed several small lakes, but the
water was too strongly impregnated with alkali to be fit for use.

C. spretus and many other species of grasshoppers were taken during
the day. Occasionally as we drove into the bottom of a dry lake where
the grass was greener and more tender we found the ’hoppers more nu-
merous, and I noticed afew of them when disturbed rise to a height of
from 25 to 50 feet, in a few cases much higher, and fly toward the
northwest, with the wind, as far as we could seethem. In these flights
they made no approach to the spiral form of rising, and I think they re-
turned to the ground at no great distance from where they rose. Lepi-
doptera were scarcely seen; a few beetles were taken.

August 11.—At noon we were rejoiced at finding a trail which one of
our party recognized. There was scarcely a breeze stirring, and the
heat was oppressive. In the afternoon the horses were attacked by
great numbers of flies (Tabanus lineolus) and were tormented severely
by them. Quite a number of grasshoppers and afew moths were taken.

August 12.—The Coteau was very hilly over the portion we passed to-
day. Of the insects captured to-day C. spretus bears asmallerrelative pro-
portion than in other days. Two species of large ’hoppers, one with
coral underwings, the other with sulphur-yellow, were most noticeable.
Mosquitoes were plentiful and active in the evening.

August 13.—Descended from the Coteau to the level prairie about T1
miles from the James River. Soon afterward we crossed Elm Creek,
and about 11 o’clock we entered the railroad camp on the Chicago and
Northwestern Railway grading, about 125 miles west of: Watertown.
My collection here was mostly ’hoppers, including many C. spretus.

August 14.—Passed through Columbia, on the James fiver, but
. learned nothing of any locust invasions or flights.

In the afternoon, while crossing the river near York’s post-office, we
were, through the recklessness of the driver, carried into deep water
and treated to an unexpected bath. The valise containing my speci-
mens collected on the Coteau not being water-proof, the specimens were
wetted and more than half of them spoiled.

August 15.—Sunday was spent at Slack’s stage ranche. The rain
fell steadily all day. No locusts have visited this place either this or
last year. Mine host was a new settler, and knew nothing of the pre-
vious history of the valley.

August 16.—The rain continued falling steadily all day, and no collec-
tions were made. Stopped over night in Castleton, but learned nothing
definite of locusts.

August 17.—The rain fell steadily until nearly noon. In the after-
noon I saw a few specimens of C. spretus, but did not take any. Arrived
at Huron about 7 o’clock in the evening. I learned that there had
been a flight of locusts in the latter portion of July of the present year,
going to the south over the railroad grade 30 miles west of here, but I
could not learn of any damage done here during the last two years.
The town itself is of less than a year’s growth. |

August 18.—I took passage on the Chicago and Northwestern Rail-
way for Winona, Minn., where I arrived late in the evening. Near
Tracey, Minn., I learned there had been several flights of locusts pass-
ing south and southeast during July and August, 1879, but they were
not numerous or dense.

August 19.—Took passage on a Mississippi River steamboat for Saint
Louis, where I arrived August 24, and proceeded home the next day.

Respectfully submitted.
JOHN MARTEN.

APPENDIX VII.

———$ re

\ REPORT OF NOTES MADE BY A. J. CHIPMAN.

WASHINGTON, D. C., October 18, 1880.

Sir: Acting under your instructions as an scan: of the Entomolog-
ical Commission to make investigations as to the ¢ appearance, if any, and
the depredations, if any, of the Rocky Mountain locust in Kansas
and Colorado, I started west early in August and arrived in Topeka on
the 11th of that month. I conferred with the Secretary of the State
Board of Agriculture, Hon. J. K. Hudson, and he informed me that
he had received no intormation of the appearance of the locusts within
the limits of the State, although in frequent communication with cor-
- respondents from nearly every section. I made a personal examination

on the hills and plains adjacent to the city, but finding only the ordi-

nary grasshoppers I did not consider it important to preserve any speci-
mens. I stopped over one day at Junction City and made a search for
locusts of the destructive kind in the Kansas River Valley, but found
none.

At the time of my visit the wheat harvest had been gathered in, and
the crop in the eastern section was considered fully up to the average.
The corn crop of Eastern Kansas, judging from observations and in-
quiries made, I consider also an average yield. From Topeka west as
far as Salina, on the Kansas Pacific Railway, and west as far as New-
ton, on the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fé Railway, from information
which I deem reliable, Iam convinced that owing to the drought, which
in this locality has been severe, not more than half a crop will be
realized. In the western portion of the State, throughout what is
known as the dry district, great destitution prevails. Many of the
inhabitants in about twenty counties are suffering for the neces-
saries of life. Unless relieved by the hand of charity they must abandon
their homes or suffer untold miseries before another season. The in-
habitants of Russell and Ellis Counties are not suffering as much as
many others, but fully 20 per cent. of the population even there will
need assistance. In Ness County the condition of the people is such
that fully two-thirds of them must have help. Gove County has lost
much of its population, and of those remaining one-half must be fed
by the hand of charity. Smith and Decatur Counties are badiy off, and
-a@ majority of the people will suffer if aid is not extended to them fr eely.
Graham County has suffered by drought, but more from a severe hail-
Storm, which destroyed the most of what standing grain remained.
Rtooks County harvested considerable wheat, and will have a fair crop
of corn, but still at least 30 per cent. of the population will need assist-
anee. Of the counties I have mentioned I passed through several, and
in regard to the others I obtained such information as I considered re-
liable. That Central and Western Kansas are undergoing favorable
climatic changes there can be no doubt. The amount of rain-fall during

a given number of years is now far greater than twenty years ago.

[55]

[56] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

was myself a resident of Council Grove for three years prior to the war,
and I have now a number of acquaintances who have resided there con-
tinuously for twenty-five years. Conferring with them specially on this
subject on the occasion of my late visit, 1 found that their long experi-
ences confirmed my own observations. Various causes are assigned for
these climatic changes. One is the disappearance of the vast herds of
buftalo, thus making possible a rank growth of prairie grass, which in
turn induces a heavier dew-fall. Another is the planting of groves and
the successful cultivation of timber. Having been encouraged by State
legislation, the planting of trees has become very general. That a
greater degree of rain-fall is produced by these causes is the opinion
of those who are best informed. I reached Denver on the 18th
of August, and proceeded to Colorado Springs on the _ follow-
ing day. Dry weather had prevailed here for a number of weeks,
but on the day of my arrival a heavy rain fell, lasting several

hours. I obtained the services of an assistant for a short time,.

and made examinations for locusts on the hills east and on the plains
south of the village. I obtained specimens of the only species to be
found in the vicinity, and preserved them with care. I visited Manitou
and obtained and preserved specimens of locusts from the lower hills
adjacent to the Ute Pass. I ascended Pike’s Peak on the 22d of August
and collected specimens at various points on the way. The highest
point at which I found the locusts was above the timber-line and one
and a half miles from the summit. No locusts of any kind were found
on the summit, and I was informed by the officers of the Signal Service
stationed there that none had made an appearance there during the
summer. On my return to Denver I obtained specimens of the species
of locusts found in the fields and on the plains north of the city. I vis-
ited Georgetown and obtained specimens of locusts on the adjacent hills.

I visited Middle Park, taking the stage at Georgetown for that place

on the 26th of August. The route lay over the Berthoud Pass; highest
elevation, 11,300 feet. Locusts were taken on the summit and at various
points down the western slope as far as Hot Sulphur Springs. I re-
turned to Chicago by way of Cheyenne and Omaha, leaving Denver on
the 29th of August. The specimens of locusts collected at the various
points I have indicated were carefully preserved and transmitted to

you by express from Chicago. I returned to Washington on the 4th of —

September.

The above report is respectfully submitted. ;
A. J. CHIPMAN.
Prof. Cyrus THOMAS,

Member and Disbursing Agent of the Entomological Commission.

|

APPENDIX VIII. .

MISCELUANEOUS LOCUST NOTES.

A.—LOCUST SWARMS THAT HAVE ATTAINED THE COAST OF GREAT,
BRITAIN.

By A. H. SWINTON.
FLIGHT OF 592?

©. Walford. Journal of the Statistical Society, vol. xli, p. 499. “ Lo-
custs with drought.”

FLIGHT OF 874?

Otho Frisigensis. Liber sextus, caput iili. Locusts (ceteris locustis
majores Rad. de Diceto) attempt to cross the British Channel.

FLIGHT OF 895-97?

©. Walford. Journal of the Statistical Society, vol. xli, p. 499. ‘ Ire-
land. Invasion of locusts, and famine.”

FLIGHT OF 1031?

C. Walford. Journal of the Statistical Society, vol. xli, D- 499. ** TLo- ©
custs and floods; famine.”

FLIGHT OF 1693.

Philosophical Transactions, vol. 18. ‘“ Vast swarms of locusts at Don-
gelly in Wales and in Pembrokeshire in 1693.” (Spec. Pachytylus
migratorius.)

FLIGHT OF 1748.

Gentleman’s Magazine for 1748, vol. 18, pp. 331, 364, description. Philo-
sophical Transactions, vol. 46, p. 37. Sir Hans Sloan’s History of
Jamaica, vol. 1, p. 29, “In theneighbourhood of London.” M. Edwards,
History of Birds (plate 208). EH. Donovan, Natural History of British
Insects, vol. vii, 1798, p. 49-51, ‘‘In Sutherland.” Rev. J. Shaw, His-
tory of the Province of Moray. (Spec. Pachytylus migratorius.)

FLIGHT OF 1797 ?

Donovan, Natural History of British Insects, vol. vii, p. 49-51. “A
true migrating locust (Pachytylus migratorius) taken at Eee an
in Warwickshire, in 1797.”

FLIGHT OF 1809.

Gardener’s Chronicle for Sep. 12, 1857.
[57]

[58] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

FLIGHT oF 1842-1849,

Annals of Natural History for 1842, Z. Christit visits Leeds, Derby
and Sheffield at the beginning of September. The Zoologist for 1843,
LL. Christ visits Derby in 1842; vol. for 1848, G. migratorius in En-
gland (and Scotland ?) during 1846 and 1847 ; ; vol. for 1850, “A locust
taken at Bristol, Oct., 1849. The Naturalist, Journal of the Yorkshire
Naturalists’ Union, vol. for 18767, pp. 129- 137: Locusts in Yorkshire,
by Wm. Denison Roebuck (locusts in Yorkshire in the years 1842,
1846, 1847, 1848, 1849); also the Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine
for 1870-71: “At Spurn \Point during 1842, 1846. Life of Thomas
Edwards, by Smiles, pp. 207-209.” °¢ Locusta migratorius arrived at
Aberdeen, Banff, and Moray in the month of August, and in the
beginning of September, 1846, it penetrated to the Zetland Islands,
Unst, and the bare and isolated Skerries, becoming a pest in some of
the Western Islands.” The Entomologist’s Weekly Intelligencer for
1857, *‘ Pachytylus migratorius at Herne Bay in 1848.” (Species alluded
to Pach ytylus migratorius.)

FLIGHT oF 1852-1864.

Zoologist for 1852. L. migratoria taken at Redcar in September; vol.
for 1857, “G. migratorius taken in England, Scotland, and Ireland
during August, September, and October;” vol. for 1858, ‘¢ Locusts in
Shetland and Caithness during September; vol. for 1864, locusts in
Scotland in September, G. migratoria captured in Cornwall during
September. The Entomologist’s Weekly Intelligencer, vol. for 1858,
G. migratorius near Hull; vol. for 1859, do. Gardener’s Chronicle for
1857, locusts in London and at Great Yarmouth in September. The
Naturalist, Journal of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, Locusts in
Yorkshire, by Wm. Denison Roebuck; vol. for 1876-7, pp. 129-137,
“At Spurn Point during 1858 and 1859.” (Species alluded to Pachy-
tylus migratorvus.) ae

FLIGHT OF _1868-’69.

The Naturalist, Journal of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, pp. 129-137
Locusts in Yorkshire during 1869, Wm. Denison Roebuck. Malta, by
Andrew Leith Adams, p. 94. A live locust at Cork, in Ireland, Nov, 5
1869? The Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine, vol. "for 187576, Sev-
veral specimens of locusts taken at Exeter during the autumn of 1869.
The Entomologist, Newman, vol. 5, Locust near Halifax at the end
of August, 1869, locusts along the coast of Aberdeenshire during the
autumn of 1868. The Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine, vol. for
1870~71, A. peregrinum at Plymouth in 1869. (Species alluded to
“Aly peregrinum (?) and Pachytylus migratorius.)

FLIGHT OF 1874-1876.

The Naturalist, Journal of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, 1876~77, pp.
44, 60, 78; 145-150, Locusts in Yorkshire during 1874, 1875, and 1876,
Wm. Denison Roebuck. The Entomologist’s s Monthly Magazine vol.
1876~77, p. 216, At Spurn Point in 1876, Wm. Denison Roebuck.
Science Gossip, vol. for 187 7, Locust in Somersetshire in 1874. The
Entomologist, Newman, vol. 6, Locust taken in a balloon at Grantham

_at the end of July, 1873. The Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine,
vol. for 1875, Locust in North Devon, 25th August, 1875? (Species
alluded to Pach ytylus migratorius ?)

THE MIGRATORY LOCUST IN JAPAN. — foe.

OCCURRENCE OF THE MIGRATORY LOCUST IN JAPAN.

SAPPOW, YESSO, JAPAN.

January 30, 1883.
Pro, A. S: PACKARD, Jr.: .
_ Sre: Isend youby this mail afew specimens of the migratory locust

of this part of Japan, together with a few of the egg’pods, unfortunately
somewhat broken. I fear that the insects are not in good condition, as
they have lain in a drawer for some time; but perhaps you may be able
to identify the species, and, should you desire it, I can send you perfect
Specimens next summer. The habits of these locusts seem to be essen-
tially the same as those of the North American species, as described in
reports of the U. 8. Department of Agriculture, but I should judge that
the powers of flight are less in the Japanese species. These insects
first (within modern times) proved injurious here in the summer of 1881,
when the season was unusually dry, and they left the rather dry and
sandy district, which has since been discovered to be their ‘‘headquar-
ters,” so to speak. In one other respect the habits of this locust seem
to differ from those of the American, viz: they often deposit their eggs
in quite wet places, places where even in summer water will usually
stand in a hole only a foot in depth, and I am credibly informed that the
eggs hatch in such localities, though somewhat later.

In the American Naturalist for May, 1882, I noticed, in an extract from
a letter from Mr. Frank Calvert to the London Entomologist, mention of
a parasite (Sarcophaga lineata) preying upon the locusts in the vicinity
of the Dardanelles, and I would like to ask your opinion as to the feasi-
bility or advisability of importing and establishing that or any other par-
asite upon the locust here. The climate is essentially the Same as in
Massachusetts, but perhaps three weeks later.

Hoping that you may not deem me trespassing too much on your
valuable time, :

Very respectfully yours,
WM. P. BROOKS.

NotEe.—Professor Riley-has compared these specimens with Pachyty-
lus migratorius, and finds that they differ only in being darker and in
having blacker and somewhat more sharply defined wing-spots. K6p-
pen, in Petermann’s Mittheilungen, 1871, p. 363, records P. migratorius
from the Hast Indies, Siam, China and Japan, as well as other points
south in the Pacific and Indian Oceans.

B.—EARLY NOTICES OF LOCUSTS IN NORTH AMERICA.

Prof. A. S. PACKARD, Jr.

DEAR SiR: I send you these extracts and the translation from Father
Hennepin as contributions to ‘‘ grasshopper literature.” They may be
serviceable to you.

Yours, truly, BE. L. BERTHOUD

[EXTRACT AND TRANSLATION FROM THE FRENCH EDITION, OF 1704, OF FATHER HEN-
NEPIN’S VOYAGE AND DISCOVERY IN NORTH AMERICA OF NEW COUNTRIES AND
OF THE MISSISSIPPI (MESCHACEBE), EXTRACT, PAGE 34—DESCRIPTION OF FORT
FRONTENAC OR CATARAQUI. |

The land which surrounds this fort is very fertile; we have cultivated more than
one hundred ‘‘arpents” during the two and one-half years I resided there on a mission.
Indian corn, European wheat, leguminous plants, potherbs, pumpkins and water-

8

{60] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

melons have well succeeded there, although it is a fact that at first our wheat was
badly damaged by grasshoppers. This seems to be the usual rule whenever in Canada new
land is cleared—caused, I believe, by the extreme moisture of this country.

The first inhabitants that we attracted there fed their fowls upon them. ‘

REMARK BY TRANSLATOR.—It is singular that Hennepin should remark that new:
clearings always suffered from their devastation, and that the great moisture of the
climate of Canada was favorable to them. This is diametrically opposite what we
believe is favorable for them, viz., dryness of climate and soil.—E. L. BERTHOUD.

{FROM CAPTAIN SHELVOCKE’S VOYAGE ROUND THE WORLD (EDITION 1723) WHERE
HE DESCRIBES THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA, ETC., AND PUERTO SEGURO HARBOR. |
PAGE 412-413. ANNO DOMINI, 1721. ] ‘

Here is plenty of wood * * * but the trees when we werethere * * * wereso
eaten up and devoured by inconceivable swarms of locusts that they gave the country
the appearance of a sort of winter, which else could never be observed in this climate.
In the daytime these locusts are perpetually on the wing.

C.—THE LOCUST IN CALIFORNIA IN 1880.

LASSEN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, NOTES.

EDITORS PRESS: I have long been a reader of your valuable paper, and take a
great interest in reading it, and it seems to me that every number is better than the
last. Iam a farmer, and would almost as soon think of doing without a plow as to
do without the Rurau. I thought I would send you a few items about this part of -
the State, but as this is my first attempt, and being a poor scribe, I hope you will
judge it accordingly. a

This is a very backward spring and summer. Crops are fully one month later than
last year. I commenced haying at this date last year, but it will be nearly a month
before I can cut anything this year, for timothy has just commenced to head out. It
has been a most remarkable season; there has been so much wind that it has dried
the ground out, so that after all the rain and snow that fell last winter there will be
short crops if we do not have some rain soon. Last Friday and Saturday night we
had sharp frosts that did a good deal of damage to gardens, and some say that grain
in the upper end of Honey Lake Valley is hurt. The fall-sown grain, which was just
heading out, is hurt the most. The fruit was too far advanced to receive any harm.
There is a prospect of a large fruit crop this year; blackberries and strawberries ex-
cepted, they were injured by the severe winter weather.

I understand that the grasshoppers are Wloing a good deal of damage to crops in
Long Valley, this county. We all have our troubles in some way or other. While
the north wind in the lower counties scorches everything up, it brings to us a frost,

and perhaps this is a fact that but few are aware of, but it is nevertheless true.
' _ The loss in sheep and cattle was very great here last winter, some losing nearly all
by not having hay to feed them. Stockmen are beginning to see that it does not
pay to keep large hands of sheep and cattle and nothing to feed them on in case of a
hard winter. They may manage to winter on the range for three or four winters
without feeding, and then comes a hard winter and the owner loses half, or perhaps
all, as in some instances that I know of, and then all his labor and all that he has
invested is lost. More anon.
G. R. WALES.

JANESVILLE, Lassen Co.

The grasshoppers have appeared at Virginia City, Nevada, flying in armies.. The
farmers in Washoe Valley state that the hoppers have eaten every green thing.—[S.
F. Rural Press, July 10, 1880. ] a

D.—LOCUSTS AND COFFEE TREES IN GUATEMALA.

Mr. 8. B. O'Leary, of this city, has favored me with extracts from a letter written
by a relation of his residing on a plantation near Antigua, Guatemala, and containing
information about the locust plague, by which lately the crops of Indian corn and a
great many coffee plantations in that country have been destroyed. The insect is
called Chapulin (Gryllus miles, Drury ?), and appeared first in the department of Chi-
quimula, in the eastern part of Guatemala, close to Honduras. Thence itspread over
all the warmer parts of the republic, avoiding the higher and coolerregions. The loss
must be very considerable; one gentleman, Don Gregorio Revuelto, in the department of

LOCUSTS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES. [61}

Suchitepeque, lost in one night 70,000 trees, without there being left one single leaf... In
April a swarm supposed to be 4 leagues broad and about 300 metres long approached
the estate belonging to the writer of the letter, but fortunately could be partly driven
away with noise and smoke.

These facts are interesting, as it has not been observed hitherto that locusts, in such
a degree, attack the coffee tree.

A. ERNST.
CaRACAS, August 2.

E.—HISstTory oF LOCUSTS IN OTHER COUNTRIES.

While our own land.has been in certain years fearfully scourged by
locusts. and to such an extent as would have caused wide extended and
disastrous famine and want had the population of the Western. States

been less active, vigorous and civilized, and with less facilities for rail-

road transportation, telegraph communication, or less intimate commu-
nication in general with the populous centers of the country, it may
be safely said that in all probability, should there ever occur such wide-
spread invasions and devastation as took place in the Western States in
1867, and 18747576, there will not cecur even such local distress and
partial famine as did occur hereand there upon the frontier in those years.
We have good reason to believe that the settlement of Montana, the
great breeding ground of the Rocky Mountain locust, which is now go-
ing on so rapidly, will more than any other cause decrease the number
and extent of locust-breeding grounds, and thus lessen the number of
those which would otherwise emigratéfrom the Rocky Mountain region
across the plains. ;

As will be seen by the statements made in the first report of the Com-
mission (pp. 476-477), and by the extracts from different sources given
below, the immediate results of a locust invasion are famine, and the
diseases and epidemics or pestilences resulting from the lack of food or
from the enforced use of bad food. This is particularly the case in the
southern portions of Russia, and the semi-civilized region of India, the
Philippine Islands, and particularly northern Africa, parts of Algeria,
while itis less marked in South America and Mexico. Famine from the
invasions of swarms of locusts, on the other hand, is out of the question
in regions inhabited by savage tribes. Asis well known, the wild Arabs
and Bushmen welcome a swarm of grasshoppers or locusts as a season
of. thanksgiving, praise, and the reverse of fasting; while in the Great
Basin of Nevada and Utah, what is now a curse and tribulation to the
settlers, was formerly an entomological “rainfall” to the aboriginal Piute
and Digger Indian. So that semi-civilization feels keenly the results of
the attack of locusts, while a civilized, thickly-settled community, even
near the frontier, has within itself the resources for overcoming or so
ameliorating the results of the depredations of these insects that it suf-
fers but comparatively little in the long run. As will be seen by our
second report, the outcome of the observations and work of the Com-
mission is that the locust plague will be so much reduced in extent and
so ameliorated by the rapid settlement of the Rocky Mountain region
that we are safe in saying that the best general preventive against the
ravages of locusts, the great prophylactic against locust attacks, is the
settlement of the permanent breeding grounds of this species.

It is the increase of population in central Europe and the lessening of

_ uncultivated, partly desert areas in southern and southeastern Europe,
west of Russia, which has probably put a stop, within the past century,
to the arrival of swarms of locusts in Germany and Austria from the
southeast.

[62] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

This process of civilization and settlement of the country in north-
ern Africa, notably Algeria, is apparently thinning out the number of
Jocusts, diminishing the frequency of their migrations, and rendering
the frontier settlements less liable to devastation. This is indicated in
part by the following extract from an English paper:

The invasion of field-crickets in 1866 cost Algeria 50,000,000 francs, and caused the
famine of the next year, in which 200,000 natives died literally of hunger. A single
band of these animals, observed in the province of Algiers, contained 50,000 tons of
them. This flood of animal matter would furnish a manure containing nearly 1,000
tons of nitrogen. In view of this fact, and the possibility of future invasions, MM.
Durand and Hamel have lately devoted attention to finding a means of stopping and
burying such swarms, and it would appear they have succeeded. Their cricket-bar-
riers (which are described in a recent number of La Technologiste) are now manu-
factured and sold by M. Lambert. These barriers are formed of calico stretched on
posts; they are arranged not in a straight line, but in lines forming angles, and the
crickets advancing to the angle fall into a pit dug there. The crickets are treated in
the pit with green vitriol (with a view to the nature of the manure).

THE RAVAGES OF LOCUSTS IN RUSSIA IN 1879 AND 1880.

The following newspaper extracts from Russian correspondents of
the English press will show what direful ravages and consequent famine
and suffering went on last year and the present (1880) in southern
Russia, a region topographically and meteorologically comparable with:
the Great Plains bordering the eastern flanks of the Rocky Mountains.
The heat and drought, the vast extent of grassy ‘‘ steppes” like our west-
ern plains, the semi-civilized, scattered agricultural population, far away
from railroad centers, afford a parallel to the frontiers of the United
States, only that the people, emancipated serfs and peasants, are far
less active, intelligent, educated, and thrifty than our own population,
and thus less able to cope with sudden and widespread calamity, or to
recover when once stricken down with the terror and dismay resulting
from the sudden spoliation of their crops and tke loss of every green
thing around their homes : :

‘Turning now from the ravages of revolution to the devastations of
locusts—rather a singular transition, you must admit—lI find a daily
ery of lamentation uttered by all the press of southern Russia. AS a
very certain proof of how enormous is the damage caused to the crops
by this corn beetle, or by what other name the noxious insect may be
called, 1 may mention that in the province of Cherson alone—into the
custom-house treasury of which you may remember some days ago the
Nihilists digged their underground way and abstracted an enormous
quantity of coin—a sum of no less than 50,000 rubles* has been voted
forthe purpose of exterminating this Egyptian plague. Itis feared, how-
ever, that the preventive measure will be too late, and that the crops
must be parted with in a Christian spirit of submission. On a surface
of 300 versts at and around Zanitzin, on the Volga, there has been no
rain since the beginning of spring till now, while universal dryness and
enormous heat—Réaumur’s thermometer standing at 30 degrees in the
shade, 40 degrees in the sun—with intolerable sultriness and dust, have
destroyed all hopes of the harvest thereabout. The country-people, says ,
the Golos, are leaving their homes by hundreds in despair and wander-
ing about as beggars. From other parts of the empire, too, the ery of
distress is heard, arising from a different chord of woe. The Russo-
Polish and Lithuanian towns are swarming with such a large and mn-

*A ruble is 75 cents.

RAVAGES OF LOCUSTS IN RUSSIA. [63]

employed Jewish population that the civic authorities are no longer
able to support them, and the Government has, therefore, resolved to
found more agricultural colonies in the various provinces for the recep-.
tion of this superfluous Hebrew proletariat, those created several years
ago having of late shown signs of prosperity—a remarkable truth, I
may take the liberty to add, in view of the fact that in no country what:
soever where they settle do ‘the gifted descendants of Jacob show any-
thing but the most deep-rooted aversion from manual labor.”—([ Berlin
Corr. London Times, 1879.]

‘During April a shower of these pests fell upon the province of Cau-
casus, Russia, utterly destroying vineyards and fruit gardens. The vil-
lage streets were blockaded by them so that the shops were shut up and
all traffic closed, while the water-courses were choked by the swarming
| pests.”—[English paper. |

‘¢ The Georgian town of Jelizawetpol, near Tiflis, has suffered a plague
of locusts almost as bad as that which afflicted Egypt in the days of
Moses. On the 20th of April, the insects invaded the town in such
numbers that the merchants had to shut up their shops, and walking
about the streets was exceedingly difficult. The Russian authorities
ordered the inhabitants to make a united effort to kill the pests, but the
generous people refused, believing it a sin to destroy a locust, until the
authorities threatened to punish every householder who failed to deliver
daily a given weight of dead insects. The canals were filled with lo-
CuSts, SO ‘that water for drinking and washing could only be obtained by
straining. The houses swar med with the creatures, and many families
went a week without bread because their ovens were literally filled
with them. They tried in vain to drive the locusts away by lighting
holy candles and burning incense. The Armenian priests regarded the
plague as a Visitation of God, and brought from a neighboring town the
bones of Jacob, which they carried through the streets of the afflicted
city in procession, fairly wading through masses of dead and living
locusts as they marched along with the relies of the patriarch. The ener-
getic measures taken by the police finally abated the evil, but not until
the gardens, orchards, and vineyards had been stripped bare and, the
people had suffered for more than a week.”—[New York Tribune, 1879. |

‘‘A detachment of Russian troops, bound for General Lazaroff’s expedi-
tion against the Turcomans, met with a curious misadventure near the
Georgian town of Elizavetopol. At a few versts from the town the
soldiers encountered the wing of an army of locusts, reputed to be
twenty miles in length and broad in proportion. The officer in charge
did not like to turn back, repelled vy mere insects, and, pushing on,
soon became surrounded by the locusts. These appear to have mis-
taken the soldiers for trees and swarmed by thousands around them,
“crawling over their bodies, lodging themselves inside their helmets,
penetrating their clothes and their knapsacks, filling the barrels of their
rifles, and striving to force themselves into the unfortunate men’s ears
and noses.” The commander gave the order for the troops to push
on double-quick for Elizavetopol, but the road was so blocked with
locusts that the soldiers grew frightened, and, after wavering afew min-
utes, a regular stampede took place.

‘Led by a non-commissioned officer of keen vision, who had observed a
few huts a short distance from the road, the troops dashed across the
fields, ‘¢ slipping about over the crushed and greasy bodies of the locusts
as though they had been on ice.” The huts were soon reached, and the
officers rushed inside, but the refuge proved to be of little value, as the

\

[64] REPORI UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

premises were already in possession of the enemy. The peasants told
the correspondent of the Kavkas that for days they had been besieged
by the vermin, the insects filling the wells and tainting the water, crowd-
ing into the ovens and spoiling the bread, and preventing any food being
cooked or stored. At intervals the villagers issued from their houses .
and made onslaughts on the locusts, killing them by thousands, and
carting them away afterwards to the fields forymanure. The soldiers
were detained prisoners by the insects for forty-eight hours, and on
their march to Elizavetopol in the rear of the locust army they found
every blade of grass and green leaf destroyed and the peasants reduced
to beggary.”—[New York Tribune, 1879.]

‘HINT TO WESTERN FARMERS.—Mr. Hoffman, chargé d’affaires at
St. Petersburg, in his dispatch to the Department of State, dated Sep-
tember 16, sends copies of an official report on locusts. It appears that
the grain locust of Russia generally deposits its eggs in the wheat fields,
and that as soon as they are hatched the attack on the wheat com-
mences. The use of ropes and machines to drive the locusts from the
wheat fields is not advisable. It is better to plow the ground where the
eggs are laid, as ten minutes’ exposure to the sun kills the chrysalides.
The prevalence of locusts in southern Russia has been, by these latter
means, greatly reduced, so that good crops of wheat may be expected in
1881. Possibly some lessons may be derived from Russian experiments
and reports aifecting American grasshoppers. "

‘The losses, and consequentalarm and famine, again prevailed in 1880,
with nearly the same story of threatened consternation, huuger, and
poverty among the Russian peasantry.”

‘* LONDON, May 8.—The St. Petersburg correspondent of the Standard
says the beetle which ravaged the crops in Poltavia and Ekateri-
norslau in 1878 has been found in large numbers in a larva state, and
the peasants fear to sow spring crops. The same correspondent says
the greatest alarm prevails in Tiflis in consequence of the discovery of
locust eggs. Unless exterminated before final development, a famine
throughout the Caucasus is inevitable.”

“ST. PETERSBURG, July 8.—The Golos raises its voice, in view of the
Chinese difficulty, to point out the sad condition of the country, and
. how much worse it will become in the event of another drain upon its
already exhausted resources, and retarding the introduction of reforms.
The press for several weeks has been full of complaints of ravages
by locusts, flies, beetles, and worms, hunger and poverty among the
peasantry, a rapid increase in prices of “everything, increase of the
cattle plague, a large spread of disease, &c.” «

A recent number of the Golos contains an interesting letter from Tiflis describing
the enormous labour bestowed during the summer upon the destruction of grasshop-
pers. The work was carried on for about three months, and occupied in one district
(Gori) no less than 20,000 people per day. More than half these people had been sum-
moned from the neighbouring districtwof Achalzych, Ossetia, and Imeretia. Thanks
to the colossal efforts thus made, only 2 per cent. of the total crops of the district
were destroyed by the grasshoppers. Many million roubles worth of hay and corn
were saved by this work. On the other hand the organisation of the whole cost the
Russian Government some 200,000 roubles, and many thousand acres of fields and gar-
dens have been utterly neglected by the population to whom they belong.—[{ From
“Nature” of December 16, 1880. ]

The Russian newspapers report that much mischief is being done to.
the crops in South Russia by locusts and other insect pests. In the
district of Rassachs an area of over 400 kilometers has been devastated

\

EXTERMINATION OF LOCUSTS IN CHINA. “ P65]

in this way. Upwards of 5,000 men were daily employed in the work
of extirpation, fully 8,000 kilograms of locusts being gathered every day.
On the road from Tiflis to Poti the locusts lay so thick on tie line that
the trains were obstructed. The Vedomosti says that the steppes of the
- Don have been swept bare of all vegetation, as if a fire had passed over
the land. Fourteen companies of soldiers are employed in the Odessa
district in destroying these insect plagues. A huge swarm passed by
Moscow in the middle of June, at an elevation of from 70 to 100 feet.

LOCUSTS IN CHINA IN 1878.

While in past centuries this thickly settled country has been rav-
aged by locusts, as shown in our first report (p. 477), it appears that
they still abound, notwithstanding the dense population, though they
apparently breed in desert places and invade the more populous areas.
It appears by the following extract from a Chinese (English) newspaper
that locusts abounded in great numbers in eastern China on the lower
- Yangtsze River, and it likewise appears that the natives initiated the
use of oil on streams and likewise scattered over dry fields, and found
it to be one of the best means of killing these pests. It thus appears
that the Chinese, when hard put to it, can take up and put into practice
new remedies. From the second account of Chinese methods of exter-
minating locusts, by a foreigner, Mr. K. Scatchkow, for many years
resident in China, it appears that locusts periodically ravaged the coun-
try; though whether the same region or not, does not appear. We re-
print these interesting statements, being of very general interest:

Locusts on the lower Yangtsze.— Major Yao has received from Brigadier Fan a proc-
lan ation issued by the Viceroy Shen to the effect that last year flying locusts covered
the countryside, leaving behind innumerable grubs which soldiery and local officials.
were then instructed to search for and digup. From that time up tothe present over
two millions catties have been brought in, thus proving there has been no lack of
energy in obeying the orders given, nor any deficiency in the numbers given up. Re--
ports are now crowding in that locust grubs are springing up like ants and flies all
over the countryside, that they are big enough to hop about and will in the twink-.
ling of an eye have wings and commit unutterable harm. Mr. Brigadier Woo has.
now discovered in course of his literary researches that locusts have an instinctive
dread of oil. He has therefore instructed his braves to mix a picul of oil with water
and scatter it over locust-infested fields, whereby the insects would be killed. In
fields where the rice is just sprouting, the oil floating on the water will prevent the
descent of the locusts. Oil from the Elceococca tree, however, is injurious to the crops,
and should not be used, but every other kind of oil is equally destructive to locusts,
hemp oil being the best. The Viceroy has noticed, too, in a certain work, that lo-
custs dread oil, and that it is the best preservative for the crops. Facts like these
about oil cannot be too widely known, in order that men by their personal efforts may
second the desire of Heaven for harmony (aide toi).—[ North China Daily News. ]

THE EXTERMINATION OF THE LOCUST IN CHINA.

In one of the scientific meetings of our Entomological Society the question of the
calamities from locusts, and the different ways of exterminating this insect, have been
discussed. But I think that our entomologists do not yet know the Chinese way of
this extermination. Wishing to fill up this deficiency, I have hunted up in the large
Chinese bibliography Sy-koo-zuan-shoo-moo-Eoo nearly all the names of works con-
nected in any way with this question, but have found only three which have entered
more or less into particulars: (1) Zsu-hooan-ho-min-book about salvation from starva-
tion, written by Doon-vey at about 1100 after Christ, and soon afterwards corrected by
Van-bin. (2) Zsu-hooan-ho-min-shoo-boo-ee-book about salvation from starvation, ©
corrected and amplified; it has been written in 1442 by the learned Tjoo-soon-vey-zsy,

5 AP E

[66] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

¥
on the programme of the above-mentioned work of Doon-vey, with the exclusion of
all that is not quite connected with the subject and the addition of some new facts.
(3) Poo-hooan-kao, on the extermination of locusts, written, on the example of the
preceding work, by Tchen-van-shen, asaseparate pamphlet or in the collection Hooan-
tchen-zoon-shoe, collection of regulations against famine, published in 1690. Of these
three works I possess the second in the newer edition of 1518. Though this book is
already four centuries old, its author is still very popular, and the book is eyen now ~
a vade mecum of every official in China who has anything to do with the question. In
its twelve chapters all misfortunes from poor harvests, want or excess of rains, locusts,
and other losses which we have to encounter, the Chinese are very well informed ~
about, and they have proposed a quantity of ways to prevent these calamities.

The same ways of exterminating the locust of which Tjoo-soon-vey-zsy speaks are
at the present day used in China. Considering that his book is four centuries old,
one wonders that the Chinese should not have found something newer and better
‘since; but, on the other hand, one cannot help admiring them for obliging their

‘superstitious brothers to exterminate the locust so long ago, when even in our day
-one has so much trouble to make some Russian and West European peasants do it. I
have several times in China seen invasions of these insects, and have noticed that
every Chinese countryman now does his utmost to exterminate them, though he still
considers their coming to be a punishment sent by Heaven. The following is a trans-
lation of the ninth chapter of the above-mentioned work, as far as it speaks of the
-extermination of locusts, with some explanations:

“‘It is said that during the reign of the Tan dynasty the Emperor Tai-Tzoon (dy-
nasty Tan from 627 ante till 649 post Christum) swallowed a locust and Tao-Choon exter-
aminated locnsts. Some people laugh at that, and say that we want to be cleverer
‘than Heaven, going against its will. I don’t think so! We know that the misfor-
‘tunes which come over us are of different natures. One can take means against some
of them, while all human power is useless against some others. So you have to bear
‘patiently excess of waters, of early frosts; but you have watering engines against
dryness, and you can get rid of locusts by exterminating them. It is possible that
there should be no means against such a calamity. The local authorities must take
care of the people, and must also make them understand that they have to protect
themselves against such kind of misfortunes. Once, the governor of a district, know-
ing that locusts do not eat shoots of peas, when the locusts came gathered a quantity
of seed of field peas and persuaded the country people to seed nothing but that on
their fields; the consequence was that not only the locusts did not eat anything, but
the next spring the people had some profit. (I have to beg the reader to excuse the
author for repeating this old story. If he believed that locusts do not eat pea-shoots,
one would only have to advise never to grow anything but that on the fields visited
by locusts. The Chinese believe that in ancient times there were in everything ex-
amples of luck, order, and knowledge.) Thatis the way they acted in ancient times.
We see in the chronicles of the Emperor Shen-Tzoon’s reign (dynasty of Soon, reigned
from 1068-1025 T. D.), in 1075, he ordered that the district governors and their assist-
ants should be personally present at the places where locusts were expected to appear ;
and in case the invaded country is large, that the younger district officers should be
also ordered thither; they and the village chiefs were obliged to invite the people to
gather the locusts. For five shens (one ‘‘shen” Chinese measure contains nearly
25 cubic inches) of.larve of locusts, or for ten shens of locusts, the gatherers received
one shen of fine millet, and for one shen of locust eggs two shen of coarse millet, or
they could also get the corresponding price in money. After that the officers and vil-
lage chiefs had to burn the locusts. If any one had his crops eaten up he was freed
from taxes on the property for one year, and was rewarded, in correspondence with
his losses, with money, but not exceeding the value of a hundred moo of land (oue moo
is a Chinese square measure about 132 square Russian sageens, or about 135 square
fathoms).

‘Such was the very efficient way of exterminating the locusts during the Soon
dynasty. But, though this method may be very good, indeed, I think, however, that
one can exterminate this insect directly after its appearance. Generally villagers
get frightened at the arrival of those insects, worship them, sacrifice to them, and do
not dare to exterminate them, and therefore never can get rid of them. They never

hear of the contest of the times of the Tan dynasty, between Minister Tao-tchoon
and his colleagues, Neejo-Shoei and Loo-Hooai-Tchen. I will tell about it, and in
case locusts should appear anywhere my story should be promptly published and dis- .
tributed for public information, that the old and learned people may explain it and
teach the commoners. The fifth year of Uan-tzoon’s reign (716 T. D.) when the dis-
trict of Shooan got infested by locusts, and the inhabitants were beginning to sacri-
fice to them and gave up to them their crops—not daring to catch them, the Minister
Tao-tchoon said to the Emperor ‘to capture there those brigand insects and deliver
them to the flames,’ This expression was a quotation from an ancient poem about the
destruction of locusts. Though an officer had been sent, therefore, to the district
Tian-Djou, and was preparing to fulfil his duty, the local governor, Neejo-Shoei, told

EXTERMINATION OF LOCUSTS IN CHINA. ~ [67]

the Emperor that one should escape this celestial punishment by doing good, and re-
«minded him of Loo-tzoon, who had not succeeded in destroying the locust, and had by
that dragged his country into greater trouble. Tao-tchoon answered him reprov-
ingly: ‘ Loo-tzoon was a prince-usurper, and his virtues did not surpass his falseness ;
now baseness does not surpass the virtues; in ancient times the locust did not ap-
proach places where the commanders were good men, and now one advises to look,
without doing anything, at the destruction of the crops, and who is the man who ad-
vises this—the local chief!’ Neejo-Shoei got frightened at this speech, and took to the
destruction of the locust, and gathered 40,000 dan of it (1 dan is 100 shen). But some
men condemned the minister, and did so much as to influence Uan-tzoon, who also
began to doubt whether the minister was right. Tao-tchoon said to the Emperor,
‘One cannot change stupid scientific men nor pedantic books; though we cannot get
entirely rid of the locust and the evil they bring, it would still be better to destroy
them than to give up one’s self toruin.’ Uan-tzoon was satisfied with this answer, but
the minister’s colleague, Loo-hooai-chen answered: ‘Can human power do anything
against a celestial punishment? From the destruction of too many of these insects
the equilibrium of the elements must be injured.’ The minister answered him: ‘In
ancient times Prince Djooan-Uan swallowed an insect and was cured from an illness.
Shoe-Nao has cut a snake in two and luck never left him after that; and now with
the locust luck can also speedily return ; and if we do not do something against this
insect the crops will be destroyed. In destroying the locust we save men. All the
responsibility for this shall fall on me, and not on those who but execute my orders.’
Very soon after this distress from the locust entirely ceased.”

REGULATIONS REGARDING THE EXTERMINATION OF LOCUSTS.
(a.) Orders published under the reign of the Emperor Shen-tzoon:

1. Wherever locusts appear, and the landowners or their neighbors conceal it, and
the elders don’t take measures for its detruction, each of them will have a hundred blows
of a bamboorod. If the local chief, having been informed of the arrival of locusts,
should do nothing against them, or not be personally present at the execution of
measures of destruction, or not having destroyed all the locusts, inform wrongly the
Goyernment of having destroyed them all, he will be liable for each of those offenses
to the above said number of bamboo-rod blows and to twenty additional blows.

2. Whenever locusts leave desert places to go to populated ones the local chiefs are
obliged to hire poor people and have the eggs destroyed. If all of them should not
be destroyed and the locust therefrom reappear the next year those commanders will
be punished with 100 bamboo-rod blows.

3. In the villages where the locust passes and leaves eggs the landowners and
elders will be punished in the same way for the imperfect destruction of those eggs.

4. If the measures of the corn distributed as pay for such labor should be inten-
tionally smaller than due, the punishment would be equal to that received by officials
in villages for taking bribes, concealing Government property, or appropriation of
strange property.

5. If commanders in places overrun with locusts would appropriate to themselves
strange property they would suffer the punishment of those receiving bribes from
convicts placed under their care.

6. During the presence of locusts the local commander will always be responsible
even if he should be at the time absent on duty—as long only, however, as it will be
within the limits of his district.

(b.) Manners of destroying the locust.

1. Every morning at sunrise the locusts creep up the stems of the corn and strong
grass so asto drink the dew; at that time they are heavy and can neither fly nor jump.
At that time one must drive them with sticks into baskets and from there put them
into bags and then burn them on fire or pour. some boiling water over them or
dig a hole in the ground, make a fire inside, and throw them init. Everybody knows
that it would not be sufficient to simply bury them, as they could creep out through
the small holes in the earth.

2. Locusts don’t die easily. In knocking with a stick on a fresh larva one not
only would not killit, but would also destroy the crops. Old leather or even grass
soles would do much better. One must put the sole on it and press it with the hand
against the ground. This would keep the corn unbroken. Outof one bull’s skin one
could make many a sole, and give them to keep to the elders for case of need. One
says such method is used in Mongolia.

3. If the locusts are on an open, free place, one must dig a ditch across their way im
front of them. The larger the ditch is the better. One must cover the ditch with

é
\

[68] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

boards and make a door (double folding) in the center. <A lot of men must drive the
locusts into the hole with branches and shouts, and some others stand near and brusk

them in with brooms. If they try to get out again drive them back. Once filled

with the insects the hole must be covered up with dry grass and fire put toit. How-
ever, even after that some of them will be alive at the bottom of the ditch. For
that purpose one will have to bury the whole thing and trample on it. And do the
same the nextday. One could also make a fire in the ditch beforehand and drive the
locusts in afterwards. ;

4, Once the locust appears there is no writing to be done for excuses of absence of
chiefs, &c.—paper won’t help—the commander-in-chief must be present. The sery-
ants following the chief in those cases must not clean out whatever valuables, &c.,
they find at the elders, like silk worms, as the elders would afterwards pay them-
selves on the villagers. In that case, not seeing yet the good consequences ot the

destruction of the locusts, they would only see the evil accompanying that destruction.

One cannot admit that.

5. As soon as locusts are noticed in the neighborhood of a town, bills must be dis-
tributed describing the way to destroy them and notifying that one shen of corn
will be paid for each ten shen of locusts at sight, whoever may bring them, woman
or child. In doing so one can destroy all the locusts for miles around.

6. Five houses form a precinct. Its elders must teach its inhabitants the useful-
ness of the destruction of locusts. A great thing is that the bread in store and money
should not be spared as pay for locusts. ‘Then the destruction of locusts will find.
working areas in the neighborhood and will progress surely, if not quickly. The
exactitude of payment is indispensable, as otherwise men would abandon the work.
_ The Government corn store belongs in principle to the people. If the locusts
destroy the crops the people will suffer from hunger. Judge if it is not better to
give the bread to the poor in exchange for locusts than to have it rotten in store
or eaten up by mice or sparrows.

7. For the purpose of burning the locusts one digs a ditch of 5 feet deep ‘and\5
wide (the Chinese foot is nearly. equal to the Russian one) and twice as long. One
empties the bagsintothe fire. As soon as the locust is init, it won’t jump out. That’s
what the poetry means by ‘‘ delivering them to the flames.” Even in old times they
knew that if you bury a locust he will creep out again. Therefore the destruction
of locusts by fire, as they did in ancient times, is the best.

These methods are really not very humane, but if you avoid the destruction of
locusts you will have to forget the welfare of the people ; which do you think ought
to be thought of first? Was not therefore Tao-choon wise and good when he said,
‘‘in killing insects one saves men.” His acts proved his wisdom.

K. SCATCHKOW.

LOCUSTS IN CAPE COLONY, SOUTH AFRICA.

Nearly all the books of South African travel speak of locusts as emi-
erating in vast swarms in southern Africa. The following article shows
that of late years they have periodically invaded the settlements, and
that the people there have had nearly the same experiences as on the
the frontiers of ourcountry. The articleappeared in the Cape Monthly
Magazine for March, 1879, over the initials C. 8. O.:

‘‘For some years the locusts have not been troubling these parts of
South Africa, but probably they will make their appearance again
before long. ’ Since my arrival in South Africa in 1843, I do not, re-
member having seen any but flying locusts till 1854, when the marching
locusts (‘‘ voetgangers ”—infantry), those which have not attained to
wings, appeared in the Colesberg district of Cape Colony and the
country now known as the “Orange Free State.” The locusts then
destroyed the country before them, leaving in their rear a desolate
wilderness. They marched uninterruptedly through the village of
Colesberg, over walls and houses, and destroyed every green thing.
The plague lasted for weeks, and until the insects obtained wings, when
the winds soon wafted them away to devastate the lower count until

LOCUSTS IN CAPE COLONY. [69]

the ocean received them. Any opposition seemed so hopeless that
none was attempted. I had seen in previous years the devastation
eaused by the flying locust. Farmers then made attempts to keep the
locusts from alighting on cultivated lands by making fires to windward
of the crops, and casting on the fires damp weeds, to cause a smoke.
This mode of defense was always very feeble, and often wholly useless;
and the standing crops, it might be of eared wheat, were leveled and
devoured in spite of all that could be done. The flying locusts are a
favorite food of the natives, and, I may say, of the remainder of animal
nature, aS every creature preys upon them, from the elephant to the
ant. A flight of locusts settles down pretty closely at nightfall; and
they do not, on cold mornings, rise till the sun is well up and has
warmed them. If they settle for the night near a native village, the
population turns out early, and if branches of trees are to be obtained
the locusts are Swept together into heaps, and from thence put into
bags for conveyance homewards. Locusts are not bad toasted on hot
ashes; but the usual way of cooking is to cram them into a pot con-
taining just enough water to steam them over the fire; they are then
thrown out to dry i in the sun, and then the wings .and legs are removed
by brushing the locusts backwards and forwards with a small bush.

Locusts are esteemed the most when they are full of eggs. I have often
been offered dried locusts, either whole or in coarse powder, at native
kraals, and have often partaken of them and made a good meal.

' “Later on, in about 1863, we in the Orange Free State were terribly
taxed with the locusts, first with the flying locusts, which left eggs be-
hind them, and then, after the rains hatched the eggs, we had continued
attacks from the young. It was in about 1863 that I noticed that the
marching locust could not climb up to the top of a sheet of corrugated
iron laid on side againsta wall. Every imaginable device was brought
into play against the common enemy, but this town had to give in, and
it was more than once swept clear of all green things. The whole pop-
ulation turned out from time te time. Rows of people with flags kept
waving were employed, but to no purpose. The locusts, at first some-
what tractable, became wild and broke through our lines. I collected
some wagon loads of old thatch and took some hundred Kafirs to at-
tack the enemy in the open outside of the town, laid the thatch in a
long row in heaps, got the locusts driven on toward it, ignited the thatch
and destroyed millions, but still as many millions escaped and remained
behind to destroy. I thought some stench might cause the insect to
turn aside. I tried parafiine, by trailing long pieces of old crape soaked
in the oil in front of the invading army, but whether the paraffine was
ignited or not, it made no barrier worth speaking of. However, having
noticed that the locusts cannot climb up a sheet of corrugated iron, I
made a few experiments with tin, and found that a wall could be effect:

ually armed against all attack by locusts with a strip of tin, say 2 or 3
inches wide, nailed, say, flat against it. J thus continued to think the
matter out and to satisfy myself by a few experiments. It is plain that
if all marching locusts are killed there will remain none to get wings
and fly, and if there be no flying locusts there will be none to lay
eggs. Of course, however, while there is back country uninhabited, it
will always remain possible that there locusts may breed and come fly-
ing to us, but still much damage could be prevented by destroying the
young which appear in our midst. I fully satisfied myself that all
swarms of marching locusts could be attacked and destroyed, and hav-
ing so satisfied myself I communicated my convictions through the
newspapers to the public. Ihave continued from time to time to publish

[70] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

my convictions, but all my trouble has been of very little effect, for the
country has been repeatedly swept of all verdure by the scourge. At
one time the Queenstown people suffered much from locusts, and a
draft bill was framed there to lay before the Cape Colonial legislature.
The draft act was to enable fines to be levied upon those proprietors
of farms who shculd fail to destroy the locusts which should appear
upon their properties. In the Cape Argus I attacked the views
expressed in the draft bill, and showed how the locusts could be as-
sailed and destroyed effectively, and pointed out that the population,
as far as need be, ought -+to be called out to the assistance of those un-
fortunates upon whose properties the young locusts should appear.
The draft bill, | think, was not brought forward in the Parliament. I,
having recognized that material for assault would be needed, should
the farmers desire to test my plans, twice addressed mercantile houses
at Port Elizabeth, explaining my views and suggesting that they should
import tin plates cut into strips of 3inches breadth and 6 or 8 feet long,
in boxes, say, of one hundred sheets, for sale to the farmers. Nothing
came of this. In a subsequent year one Dutch farmer, in the district of
Fauresmith, when the marching locusts came again, went to his district
town and begged from the shopkeepers the tin linings of packing cases,
which are generally thrown away. He gota quantity, cut it into strips,

armed therewith his walls, and while every other farmer in the state —

almost lost all his crops, he saved everything. My suggestions had
probably been communicated to him. Later on still I satisfied the
member of the Volksraad for Bethalie about the effectiveness of tin arm-
ing, so that he saved his gardens. He brought the matter’ before the
Volksraad, and that body, on his motion, voted £100 to be spent in the
purchase of rolled sheet zine in Belgium, under condition that the

metal should be resold to Free State farmers at cost price, to enable
them to provide armor for the walls of their cultivated lands. I would

have advised in favor of tin instead of zinc had I been consulted, as
tin would maintain its straightness better than zinc. ‘However, the
zinc has to this day never been ordered, and the next visitation will
find no oneprepared. ‘The plans which I had brought forward included
measures for hostile attack upon young locusts from the time of first
appearance in the size of house-flies, or smaller, to final extinction. The
last appearance of young locusts found no one prepared. The district
of Rouxville was attacked. My brother-in-law, who had repeatedly
heard my explanations regarding defense and attack, lived there, and
he, from Rouxville and Smithfield, got all the tin linings of packing
cases which could be procured. His cultivated lands were open on one
side, and thus wholly exposed to attack. On this side he dug trench
of about one foot deep, and heaped up the soil thus obtained on the
inner side. He cut up the tin linings into strips of about one foot
broad, joined them together with rivets, or otherwise, and inserted the
joined strips into the heaped-up earth. Not a locust got into his land.
He next adopted offensive measures, as I had advised. He joimed a
few strips of tin together, making two long strips of, say, 30 feet each,
and with the assistance of a few natives placed these upright by lean-
ing them against some wooden pins driven into the ground, and thus
formed a funnel-shaped alley, or an alleyin the shape ofa truncated V
in front of an advancing swarm, and provided a hole in the ground
with perpendicular sides, at the narrow end of thealley. He then, with
his assistants, gently drove the swarm into the ever-narrowing alley, the
whole swarm pressing gn and taking the fatal leap into the excavation.
Thus at a distance from his cultivated lands he completely destroyed

_ LOCUSTS IN CAPE COLONY. a
%

swarm after swarm, and saved a great part of the district besides his
own crops and pasiurage. The killing of the locusts was effected, asin
Rajpootana, by covering those collected with earth and stamping the
earth down. I believe that glazed earthenware tiles would form an
effective armor for walls. To some rough walls metal could not be
affixed flat, and for that reason, and also because it would be well, as
soon as the plague is over, to remove the metal and pack it away for
future service, I suggested that blocks should at certain distances,
about 7 feet (if the tin strips should be 8 feet long), be built into the walls,
’ so that staples could be inserted into them to support a contrivance of
iron, shaped like the following diagram, B to be inserted into the staple,

A to support the ends of two strips of the 6 or 8 feet tin, the fold between
A and B to be 3 inches long. The staple and block would remain in the
wall, and the iron contrivance of support for the tin and the sheets of
tin could safely be stored away after use. The tin would thus be safe
from theft, and damage from cattle rubbing against it. I calculated that
the last swarm we had in this district of marching locusts, then pretty
large already, would have formed a column of one yard square and 20
miles high. Iam fully satisfied that a force (not at all numerous) should
be called out to attack marching locusts when they appear, and that a
very small force with a few strips of tin would destroy any invasion of
locusts.

Section of wall. A, glazed tile. Section of wall. <A, the sloping tin strip. B, the
eee ane sloping tin strip would act just as
well at 'C.

The tin being placed in a projecting position would add to the difficulty of a locust
passing over it, or rather would wholly prevent its ascent.

[72] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

‘¢ Locusts after obtaining their full-sized wings begin to pair; the male
dies early, the female flies until ready to lay or deposit her eggs. She
bores her tail into the ground till all that remains of her above ground
is her head, shoulders, and wings; her body then breaks off, the eggs
remaining in the natural sheath. The young locusts do not appear until
rain falls, rain seemingly being necessary towards hatching; but then
there must be, apparently, a favorable season also, as it is believed that
eggs remain in the ground unchanged for years, although rains fall. Boers
have told me that one rain sometimes only vivifies some of the eggs of one
individual, and that the remainder of the eggs only are affected by a later,
more penetrating rain. Where the country is open, and there are hills to
ascend to observe from, the congregated swarms of young locusts are
easily, at early morn, perceived at a distance, at first in black and after-
ward in brownish patches, as each swarm cengregates together at. night.
In marching the locusts advance with one or more points, so that it is
easy to lay a trap for them to walk into, and the less they are dis-
turbed by driving the better. Young locusts cast their skins at least
twice before they obtain wings.” ad

SMITHFIELD, January 1, 1879.

The best mode of protection against flying locusts must greatly de-
pend upon the state of the wind and the nature of the locality. When ©
chased by the different kinds of locust-birds they endeavor to evade
the birds, so it is useful to imitate birds by attaching strips of white
calico, like wings, to lines stretched between poles, and.to keep them
fluttering, either by hand or by the force of the wind.

Telescopic poles for the lines would probably be of much benefit, as
probably therewith the locusts would rise high and pass over the crops.
Numerous small kites, if there was wind to support them, or small.
balloons to support high lines, would also be useful.

The above cutting trom a late number of the Empire shows that
locusts ‘have lately been troubling Razpootana, and I see by the last
papers that the same scourge has been devastating in the Philippine
Islands.

LOCUSTS IN THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS IN 1878~79.

In our first report some account was given of the recent appearance
of locusts in these tropical moist islands. 1t appears by the following
newspaper extract that the distress was renewed in 1878 and 1879:

The Philippine Islands are experiencing a severe drouth, which is aggravated by the

ravages of locusts, and there is great suffering among the people, many of whom are
obliged to subsist on roots.—[Journal, Nov. 23, 1878.] ~

THE LOocUSsT PLAGUE IN BOLIVIA.

NEw YORK, June 26.—Panama advices of the 17th state that much
destitution exists in Bolivia owing to the destruction of crops by lo-
custs—1882,

LOCUSTS IN INDIA. [73]
LOCUSTS IN INDIA.

Next to southern Russia, India is afflicted most by the ravages of
locusts, and the matter has been investigated by Government petty
officials, though not by scientific men.

A dispatch from Calcutta reports that the Government of Madras has telegraphed
for extra famine officers immediately because of the ravages of the locusts.—[ News-
paper, 1879. ]

Locusts IN INDIA IN 1878.
[From the Revenue Report of the Government of Madras, 1878. ]

NANGUNERI, February 9, 1878.

The plague of locusts has gone on increasing and very great damage
has been done, especially to the cumbu, in the Ottapidaram Taluq, and
also further north.

The first intimation of this new disaster was from the neighborhood
of Tattaparai, a station on the railway, afew miles south of Ottapidaram
itself. They were then moving westward, accompanied by a vast army —
of a kind of reddish-brown grasshoppers, which, it has been conjectured,
are merely locusts in a preliminary stage of existence, and which at any
rate consumed every leaf of cumbu as they moved slowly along, and
probably a good deal of the grain. They progressed so very slowly that
it was many days before they reached Maniachi (a little more than a week '
ago), and now they appear to be following the line of railway to the
north, though a considerable number were reported to have been seen
nearly as far south as Gangaikundan, within 10 miles of Tinnevelly;
and reports of their arrival in scattered detachments in other parts of
the district also have been heard, but fortunately not as yet amongst
the rice crops in the Tambrapurni Valley.

No one seems to have any idea of their origin; and itis.equally dark
as to their destination, or the probable duration of their stay in the dis-
trict.

Fortunately, the bulk of the dry crop in the north had been harvested
before their arrival, and as the rice harvest bas also begun, hopes are
entertained that they will be too late to get any share of it even if they
come at all.

The most anxious question at present is whether they will eat cotton
when there is nothing else left. Sofar they appear to have left it alone,
but then there has been abundance of more nourishing food to be got,
and the owners of an unusually fine crop of cotton are naturally suffer-
ing terribly from suspense.

No one seems to have attempted to destroy or get rid of them in any
way; but a good deal of grain was hastily picked (probably before it
was quite ripe) as the plague moved on.

J. B. PENNINGTON,
Collector of Tinnevelly.

SATTUR, February 7, 1878.

Locusts appeared in swarms in the village of Sattur and in the fields
adjacent to it this morning. They have been also going towards the
western hills, and it is feared they may damage the paddy cultivations
now in a thriving condition in many of the hill villages in Sankara-
nainarkovil and Strivilliputtur.

[74] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

In a few fields on which cotton is cultivated the locusts appeared.

largely. They simply crawl on the ground and one or two fly about the »

stalk and do not appear to destroy either the leaves or blossoms. How-
ever, it remains to be seen whether they eat the cotton as they do the:

cumbu or cholum.
H. SUBBARAYER IYER,
Acting Deputy Collector of Tinnevelly..

Proceedings of the Madras Government, March 20, 1878.

The attention of the Governor in Council has been drawn to the fre-
_ quent notices of the flights of locusts in the reports of district and.
other officers, but which have been unaccompanied by any clear indica-
tion of the direction of flight or the first known gathering or resting
places of these insects. The Governor in Council desires, therefore, that.
district officers will impress upon all sub-collectors, assistants, deputy
collectors and tahsildars that the Government attach much import-
ance to accurate information as to the movements of these insects being
communicated to them; and the eare with which this information is
obtained may very materially affect the success of any measures which
may eventually be found necessary for their destruction or to check

their ravages.
CO. G. MASTER,
Secretary to the Government.
Kin
OODOOMULPETTA, March 26, 1878.

On the 21st and 22d instant, between 12 m. and 2 p. m., a swarm of
locusts made their appearance in the Kullapurum village of this taluq,

apparently having come down from the Anamallay Hills. They com- —

pletely, or nearly so, destroyed the paddy in Karoongalpathoo (one of
the divisions into which the nunjah lands of Kullapurum are divided)..
On being driven from there by the ryots, the locusts entered the nun-
jah lands of Ramakolum, belonging to Comaralingum village, and de-
stroyed the paddy crops in about 40 cawnies of land, the produce of
which was estimated at about 300 salagayas, or 24,000 pucka measures.

Leaving this they betook themselves eastward, passing through Kol-
umam village, where they also destroyed some paddy. They finally
entered the Pulni Taluq (Madura district).

The total damage done by these locusts has been ascertained to be
worth about Rs. 4,000.

The swarms were described as being about one mile in length and
three-fourths of a mile in width, and as they passed they completely
hid the sun from sight.

J. H. COOK,

= Special Assistant.

ARNI, May 10, 1878.

The following suggestions are from J. Ff’. Price, eSq., acting collector
of the Chingleput district :

When in Cuddapah I carefully considered the subject of the best way to deal with
incursions of locusts, and was unable to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion as to
how to meet the difficulty. Isuggested to the people using nets and beating.the
locusts into them, but was invariably met by the objection that this was impossible.

I consider that offering rewards for eggs would produce no results. Indeed,it has
not yet been shown that these pests breed here at all. The conditions of Enrope and
America are such that there is not much difficulty, when the energy of the European

LOCUSTS IN INDIA. [75 |

? *
race is aided by the small extent of country in which the locusts can lay their eggs
undetected, in doing something to put them down. Here, however, everything is
agaist this. ‘Patches of uncultivated country, of greater or less extent, are to be
found almost everywhere; the people want energy, and are so wedded to their owm
ideas that they will try nothing that is suggested to them.

I believe myself that with a fine mesh-net so made as to bag in the center, and put:
across the end of a field attacked by locusts, the insects might easily be beaten into:
it and destroyed; but it is hopeless to expect natives to do this kind of thing. It
must be under the superintendence of a European; and thus the crop at stake will!
cost more than it is worth.

Protecting fields with fires, or destroying locusts by this means, is a measure which
cannot be effected in southern India. The spots where I have in Cuddapah seen the
locusts doing the most damage are those where there is hardly enough fuel to be ob-
tained for cooking purposes.

J. F. PRICE,

Acting Collector, Chingleput District.

PALMANAIR, June 22, 1878.

Locusts have not, as yet, made their appearance in this district. The
accounts which have been published and circulated by the board of
revenue show very clearly that human efforts are powerless to cope:

with the calamity of a visitation of a swarm of locusts in the mature
_ state when their locomotive powers are fully developed, and that it is.
to the destruction of the young swarms that our attention must be:
specially directed.

There is little doubt that when once the people are made thoroughly
aware of the terrible loss that will be the result of apathy or indiffer-
ence on their part, they will combine to kill the insects; this may best.
be effected— ;

Ist. By bringing a number of plows together and as speedily as pos-
sible plowing up the lands where the old insects have alighted and de-
posited their eggs, while the women and children search the furrows:
and collect the bags of eggs, and for each basket so collected to pay a
reward of 2 annas.

2d. After the young locusts have emerged from the ground the swarms.
of crawling insects to be swept into heaps and burnt with straw, brush-
wood, and rubbish placed upon them or else driven into deep trenches.
to be dug for the purpose, at the bottom of which fire may be kept burn-
ing, and they can thus be destroyed in large numbers. ‘This latter will
probably be found the most efficacious remedy; or they may be buried
as the trench fills by the excavated soil that should be heaped on the
further side from the swarm.

od. By sweeping the young insects into sacks with wide mouths.

Much, of course, depends on the nature of the locality where the
locusts are found, and the possibility of collecting people in sufficient
numbers to exterminate them. In this district, where there are such
extensive tracts covered with thick jungle, it will be difficult to get at
the spots where the females deposit their eggs.

W. 8S. WHITESIDE,
Collector of North Arcot.

VEDARNILUR, June 15, 1878.

This district has hitherto been free from the scourge of locusts.

In regard to the question what step should be taken to rid the
country of this plague, it is not easy to write with certainty; much
will depend on the nature of the ground on which the insects first settle,
and the direction of the wind.

It may in some instances be possible to light fires to windward of

[76] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

them, and so destroy them either in the flames or smoke. ‘The plan
which may prove most effective will be to dig a trench and drive the
locusts into it.—[{From E. F. Webster, esq., collector of Tanjore. |

TUTICORIN, June 19, 1878.

The locusts which invaded Tuticorin have nearly all been aniven by
the strong west wind, not only to the “island” and Devil’s Point (a
tongue of land), but over these into the sea. They were all winged,
and it would not have been possible to catch them. Fire was either im-

practicable or inadmissible. They appeared on 11th up to 18th, coming

apparently from westward; but few are left at ea behind the salt-
pans where fire would be dangerous.—[From F. EH. SE esq., sub-
collector of Tinnevelly.|

TRICHENDUR, Tune 21, 1878.

A very few locusts have been driven to the coast ae Triehendan also.
J. B. PENNINGTON,
Collector.

MAy 30, 1878.

With reference to the reports I have lately sent to the Board regard-
ing the depredations by young locusts, I have the honour to ask whether
the Board contemplate sanctioning rewards for their destruction.

While holding that their extermination is a legitimate duty of the
ryot, the people are so apathetic that perhaps as a special case if. might
be advisable to offer a small reward,-say, 2 pies per measure, for all
young locusts brought to tae Taluq Cutcherry or produced before a rev-
enue inspector. This would stimulate the small boys in a village to
kill them in numbers, and once they get in the way of it the ryots would
see that the undertaking was not so hopeless, as they now consider.

As to the offer of a reward for the destruction of eggs, I think it would

be better to give rewards for the destruction of female locusts. Those
that I have recently, caught are gravid, and although there are com-
paratively few of them, and they are getting fewer every day, it would
be a good plan to get those that there are destroyed. The female
locust is easily distinguished from the male.

I would also suggest a reward of, say, 1 rupee for information as to
fields or grass lands in which locust eggs have been deposited, leaving

it to the village authorities to take measures for ploughing them up at

once.—[From A. McC. Webster, esq., collector of Coimbatore. |

[From H. Tremenheere, esq., acting head assistant collector to A. McC. Webster, esq.,
collector of Coimbatore. ]

PuLLADUM, May 22, 1878.

In the twelve intermediate miles from Oodoomalpettah to Peryapatty
very few traces of locusts were found. In oneor two places where they
were the ryots were in the fields driving them away. Their numbers did
not appear to be unmanageable.

At Peryapatty they were in great numbers. The people had tried in
every way to drive them off, but without success. I went to a cholum
field where a fine crop was being destroyed, and as an experiment or-
ganized a drive. It was interesting as showing to what extent it is
true that the ryots can do nothing to preserve their crops. This field

was about a cawny in extent, and there were eleven beaters. Driving
the insects (few only had win gs fully developed) foot by foot down into

wi he area

LOCUSTS IN INDIA, _ era

a corner, they there killed great numbers. Meantime, hardly any appre-
ciable difference could be detected in the number of insects still left
among the cholum; it was accordingly beaten again and a larger swarm
driven out. The ryots filled two large cloths with locusts, which they
- burnt.

The field was not large, and the number of men engaged in getting
rid of the insects was larger than most cultivators can employ. The
result, however, in this instance, was not discouraging, for though there
were many thousands of locusts left in the field, yet the crop was for
the time saved.

You have been previously asked to sanction a small reward for each
basketful of dead locusts brought in. If you should not think this ad-
visable as a Government measure, I hope you will bring it before the
relief committee. They will probably make grants to those whose crops
have been destroyed; the wiser plan would be to sy to prevent the
destruction.

Stricter orders have been issued to the revenue inspectors ‘o report
about locusts. I fear that the real state of matters cannot be under-

stood from the scanty information at present afforded.

The Board of Revenues have been addressed with reference to the
offer of rewards Ao destruction of locusts.
A. McC. WEBSTER, Esa.,
Collector.
COIMBATORE, June 3, 1878.
APRIL 29, 1878.

[From J. H. Masters, collector of the Bellary district, April 6, 1878. ]

Reports of large flights of locusts have been received from the west-
ern taluqs of this district. They appeared first about the 19th of March,
but the direction they took is not given.

In the Hadagalli Talug they appeared first in ‘the Hollal, on the ex-
treme western border, and took a northeasterly direction. This was
about the 22d of March. They appeared at Kudlighi on the 3d instant
from the south, and went in a northeasterly direction.

[Inclosure.]

[From J. G. Firth, esq., ex-deputy collector, Bellary division, April 3, 1878.]

At 8 a.m. this morning, hearing a great noise of people shouting im
the direction of the town of Kudlighi, and learning from a Talug peon
that locusts had just began to attack the fields, I galloped down to the
south of and close to the village where there are about 200 acres of
paddy cultivation about half-grown, and saw a large flight of locusts
about half a mile in width coming from the south. The villagers stand-
ing in the paddy fields, waving cloths and dried cocoanut branches,
shouting, firing guns, and lighting fires, succeeded in a great measure
in preventing the locusts from settling upon the paddy fields and upon
the gardens of vegetables, &c., in their vicinity. But littl damage was
done to the crops. The locusts proceeded in «northerly direction, leav-
ing few stragglers behind.

The locusts were of! a reddish-brown color, varying in length 14 to 24
inches.

J. H. GARSTIN,
Additional Secretary to Government. |

[78] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.
%

May 7, 1878.

[From Retired Surgeon-Major J. Shortt, M. D., to C. A. Galton, esq., acting secre-
tary to the Board of Revenue, dated Yerkand, March 27, 1878. ]

As locusts are said to be causing much destruction in the Tinnebelly
district, I beg to make the following suggestions for their extermina-
tion: Locusts should be destroyed by employing men, women, and
children, if available, to pick them off the infested plants, pull off their
heads, and throw them into a basket for subsequent removal to a pit
dug for the purpose, where in the course of time they will form excel-
lent manure. A search must be made for their eggs in all the districts
they have infested; these should be collected and burnt. A third ex-
ploration must be made for the young that may be hatched; these must
be destroyed like the mature insect. When locusts have invaded a
large field, a flock of sheep or goats, even cattle in large numbers, may
be driven through them so as to trample them down and destroy them.

(A true copy and extract.)

C. A. GALTON,
Acting Secretary.

MapuRA, May 25, 1878.
They (the locusts) went on increasing in size and number day by day
and progressed rapidly towards the north and west till at last they
spread over the whole division and destroyed all the flourishing crops
before them, leaving nothing that could be of any use to the ryots be-
hind, to the great disappointment and fear of the hopeful ryots. They
do not seem to have disappeared from the district yet, but are met with
here and there in small numbers, though not in swarms as before; and
nothing is known of their ultimate destination or the length of their
probable stay in the division, and all attempts hitherto made by the
ryots to destroy them or check their ravages by throwing sand, ashes,
&c., over them, or by beating drums, &e., with a view to drive them out,
have proved futile, and no means, it is reported, can possibly be de-

vised by them for their effectual destruction and annihilation.
SOORIAMOORTIA PILLAI,
Deputy Collector on General Duties.

May 23, 1878.

With reference to your telegram of the 22d instant, I beg respectfully
tv inform you that I proceeded to Pothanore as quickly as possible. The
Monegar and three or four ryots were present, but did not know where
the locusts were.

After some search in adjoining fields we came upon three swarms.

They were all young and wingless, of the same size and color, showing
that they must be of the same age and species; each group covered a
small patch of ground, say about 15 by 10 yards. The ryots say these
young insects must have immigrated from the south; that no large
flights ever alighted on their fields, though they passed over them more
than a month ago; and four or five days back they did not notice this
est. :
I got about 40 men with sufficient material this morning, caused
rolls of paddy straw and thirty torches to be prepared, got about 15 to
20 men to carry torches and sticks, and the others carried the straw and
Other materials.

LOCUSTS IN INDIA, [79 |

‘We proceeded to one of the swarms. The rollsmen threw their straw
‘rolls around an occupied tract and completely encircled it; the torchmen
immediately set fire at different points, and when the insects moved to-
~ward the center, kept pushing the burning straw with sticks slowly be-
‘hind them, killing many during the process. Some of the insects quickly
escape whenever the parts of the burning material are extinguished.

The ryots granted that our method was successful, but they betray
their shortsightedness, as they cannot see the necessity of working
about insects in a field which does not belong to themselves.

Mr. A. PINTO,
Acting Tahsildar of Coimbatore.

JELLIPATTY, May 19, 1878.

T regret to report that a very great portion of the taluq is infested
with young locusts, whose ravages are very distressing. The southern
half of the taluq appears to suffer most, and the further south we go
they are more numerous. Al]l the grass is eaten up and nearly all the
garden crops. They must have bred on the Anamallays and found
their way down, for the sides of the hills are covered with them, and,
having eaten up all the pasturage, they may be seen marching deliber-
ately down te the villages. They are also, so the forest overseer told
"me, eating the young bamboos.

‘Arrived at Dhully I rode out to the foot of the hills near Tiroomoor-
thypovil. Here the ground was literally covered withthem. I collected
‘about 100 people, and when I saw a large swarm I threw some straw
-over them end set fire to it. Some perished, but they were only a few
out of the millions and millions there. In other cases I lita fire half
around them and got the people to drive them in.

In Dhully and in the village where I am at present encamped, they are
even in the houses, and in some cases the people have been obliged to
leave their houses. The destruction done by these locusts is enormous
and distressing, when we consider that the cholum now being eaten is the
third crop the poor ryots have attempted to grow. The cholum stalks
are now calculated to feed the cattle for a year, but it is all gone; so
‘what will the cattle do, as the grass is also eaten?

J. H. COOK, Ksq.,
Special Assistant in charge of State Relief Works.

RAWALPINDI DIVISION, PUNJAB, July 29, 1863.

The young locusts have begun to be hatched at Lahore itself, where
‘there was previously no suspicion even of eggs having been laid, as
also in the Gurdaspur district, in vast numbers. The old locusts have
been laying their eggs at Sirsa, Hissar, Rohtak, Patiala, and other
parts of the Sutlej, while they are stated to be laying them broadcast in
Bikauer and other parts of Rajputana. In the Derajat and Peshawar
‘divisions, as well as in Rawalpindi, and it is to be feared throughout the
Salt Range and elsewhere in the north, the same process appears to be
going on; so it appears certain the coming crops must be devastated far
and wide—more especially the cotton crops, which have already begun
to suffer—if the most resolute efforts be not made to destroy the eggs
and young broods before they attain to maturity.

It is quite certain that the only stage at which these destroyers can
‘ "be effectively contended with is w hile the eggs are still in the ground,
vor very shortly after the young have been batched. The most effective
mode of destroying the former appears undoubtedly to be to plow up

[80] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION. ,

the field repeatedly; while the young locusts while only a few days old:

may be destroyed with wonderful facility by driving them gently into
a small ditch, previously dug for their reception, and then covered with
earth well pressed down. When they are not above a week old a trench
of 6 or S inches wide and deep, such us two men may form in a few
minutes, suffices for securing the insects, which jump into it with alacrity,
and appear wholly unable to extricate ‘themselves from it.
J. A. EK. MILLER, Esq.,
Financial Commissioner, Punjab.

LAHORE, December 10, 1869.

Assuming that there are two approved methods of destroying these
insects, viz., by digging up their eggs, and by driving the young brood
into shallow trenches dug across their course, it appears to the officiat-
ing financial commissioner that the villagers in the Punjab areas much
interested in performing these operations as they would be in endeay-
oring to extinguish a conflagration which threatened the destruction of

their houses; and that as arule no remuneration should be thought of, |

although the collection of the people must be effected by the exhibition
of authority.

In the locust visitation of 1863 it is believed that considerable sums.
were defrayed in payment for eggs, which were in several districts bought
by weight and destroyed; but even in that year the labors of the popu-
lation generally were not remunerated, nor was any remuneration ex-
pected.

During the present year, when locusts have been seen in large num-
bers, and have also laid their eggs in several districts, no application.
for any payment whatever has been made to this office, although it was
intimated that funds would be provided if necessary, and it is believed

that, with one exception, which has comeincidentally to noLice, there will -

be no application made.

There no doubt may be circumstances under which payment would
be necessary, as, for instance, when the locale of the locusts or their eggs
is far distant from any village, and the people have to be collected with
great inconvenience to themselves.

J. A. E. MILLER,
Secretary to Financial Commission, Punjab.

LAHORE, January 27, 1870.

IT am desired to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 10th of De-
cember, communicating the views of the financial commissioner in re-
gard to expenditures incurred in the destruction of locusts; and to state
that the honorable the lieutenant-governor concurs generally in these
views. Where the people themselves are engaged in the work of de-
struction in their own villages, it is certain that no outlay should be
ordinarily incurred; but exceptional cases may occur where some out-
lay willbe necessary, and amongst them are cases such as referred to in
your letter, where eggs have been laid at a distance from the villages,
and then possibly some outlay would have to be incurred, which would,
in the lieutenant-governor’s opinion, be fairly chargeable to the adjoin-
ing villages that “vould be the first to suffer if the young locusts re-
mained undestroyed.

I am also to observe that the destruction of the eggs should, in His
Honor’s opinion, be, as a rule, discouraged. It is a difficult operation

LOCUSTS IN INDIA. + [82

and by no means certainly successful, and the destruction of the young
when first hatched is an exceedingly simple operation, and certain and
effectual in its results.
T. H. THORNTON, Esq.,
Secretary to Government.

DHIMBUM, June 21, 1878.

In reply to your memorandum dated 14th instant, I have the honor
to inform you that all monegars have been directed to send immediate
reports of the appearance of locusts in their villages.

I have personally destroyed three separate swarms of locusts on these
hills, and, from all I can hear, this is evidently a regular breeding ground.
Ot course some escaped, but I believe I am not exaggerating when I say
I destroyed millions.

I lighted fires about a yard wide ina semicircular form for about 100
yards, and then with the aid of coolies drove the young locusts into the
fire; those that attempted to return were killed by the coolies, who
were armed with branches of trees. In two places I found them so nu-
merous that I set fire to the grass, as the onl y means of destroying them.
_ So great were the numbers that the smell arising frem the purnti insects
was positively offensive, and I believe that the comparatively few that
escaped were mostly too mueh hurt to live.

Nothing will induce the young insects to separate, and I found I could
have a succession of “drives,” as by giving them an hour’s rest those
that escaped invariably collected together again; so I was enabled to
continue their destruction from 8 a. m. to 5p. m.

A. C. MCGREGOR,
Deputy Collector Northern Division of Coimbatore.

MUDIVED, July 9, 1878.

[have to report the appearance of locusts in this dietrict One swarm
was first noticed by the sub-collector yesterday evening at Kandlama-
dugu, and I noticed the same swarm passing to the eastward as I rode
herethismorning. The villagers here tell me that another swarm left this
village yesterday morning and flew away to the east, but apparently tak-
ing a more northerly direction than the swarm.I saw this morning. In
this village no eggs have been found as yet. Ten acres of very young
Sazza were destroyed in this village, and the leaves of sugar-cane were
also eaten, but the crops will survive.

The villagers of Kandlamadugu drove the locusts from their fields,
and this I believe to be quite possible from the manner in which my
horse disturbed some locusts this morning.

Some ten persons trailed branches over the sugar-cane, and ae failed
to remove the locusts. If ryots would combine, they could, with the aid
of cattle, drive locusts from a dry crop and save it, if this be done im-
mediately a swarm alight.

The locusts came from the westward, and most probably from the
Mysore country, where I believe the swarms are very numerous.

W. D. HORSELY, Esq.,
Collector of Cuddapah.

APPENDIX EX.

EXPERIENCE WITH THE SPRING CANKER-WORM.
By Martin A. HOWELL, Jr., of Greenwood, Henry County, Illinois.

DEAR Sir: I take pleasure in submitting to you the details, in sub-
stance, of the means employed to save my apple crop during the year
last past, which was threatened with complete extermination by clouds
of canker worms, which have become a scourge to the orchards of a large
- portion of this part of the State. Having purchased this farm but the
year previous, being unaware of their presence in such numbers, and
preoccupied with other duties, I found no time to devote to them such
attention as the necessities of the case demanded at the late hour their
discovery was made known to me.

As a means, however, of reducing the labor of the following season
of work I procured a competent person to trim the trees of their excess-
ive central shoots and branches, in order to open up the interior and
enable us to reach more effectively our object. (This was done in June.)
In the interim the soil for some 12 feet distant from the trunk was
loosened up, a copious dressing of liquid manure turned in, and the
surface top dressed with good dry compost in order to give all possible
vigor to the trees to enable them to withstand the shock of the loss of
foliage and pruning of the present season.

The following winter of 187778, it will be remembered, was one of
unusual mildness, the spring opening early, the weather unusually fair,
and the soil in condition very favorable to insect life.

During the warm, showery weather of March, when the bark was soft
and friable, I scraped the bark of the trunks and larger branches, after
which they were washed with a preparation of lime and sulphur thick-
ened to the consistency of paste, with good alkaline soft soap, which
afforded considerable amusement to the farmers as they passed by, and
was reckoned a waste of time and money to no purpose.

A casual examination of the trees revealed the presence of other
enemies which had been left comparatively undisturbed for some years
prior to my occupation. Among these I will mention the leaf-crump-
lers in abundance, and the scale, which, in conjunction with the canker
worm, were making the life of the orchard a brief one.. A careful ex-
amination of some of the nests of the leaf-crumplers brought to light a
goodly store of eggs, which aroused my suspicion at once; these were
placed under a glass and hatched out in the sun in a few days, every
egg producing a canker worm. I called the attention of several of my
neighbors to the matter, and advised prompt and decisive measures to
destroy them early in life. No action was taken by them at the time
named, and in every case the foliage and crop were entirely destroyed.
These ‘new- fangled notions of theoretical farmers were looked upon
with much suspicion, and the plucking of the nests of these leaf-crump-
lers was postponed sine dve.

With the bursting of the leaf buds\came swarms of canker worms,

L82)

EXPERIENCE WITH THE SPRING CANKER-WORM. [83]

preying at once upon the tender leaves. Prior to active operations,
and before the increase of foliage rendered the task more difficult, we
wiped out every nest of the tent caterpillar, which began to appear in
the forks of the branches, then in the tender condition of-early existence.

I then took my garden engine, one procured for this specific purpose,
with 25 feet of rubber-hose, nozzle and fine rose sprinkler, built a tem-
porary sled of boards to carry three or four barrels of soft water, and
with tour pounds of pure arsenite of copper, a barrel of soft soap, and
a team to draw the sled from tree to tree, we commenced our foray on
these pests of civilization before the foliage could afford ascreen to the
searching spray of thesprinkler. About two pailsful of soap was placed
in each barrel of water and thoroughly dissolved. <A fine No. 80 sieve
was placed over the tank of the garden engine, which was filled with
the liquid, great care being taken that no dirt or foreign substance
passed through, in order to give a free and unobstructed discharge to
the minutely perforated sprinkler. About two tablespoonfuls of pure
arsenite of copper was then thrown in the tank and kept well agitated,
when my assistant mounted the tree, directing his attention to the wash-
ing of the upper part of the tree, and the lowermost after descending,
every part being thoroughly washed.

Heavy showers and storms of wind interrupted operations frequently,
and where any worms escaped destruction they would take advantage
of the opportunity, drop down on their thread, and swing off with the
wind to adjacent trees; and pass from tree to tree until they reached
‘that part of the orchard yet untouched by the wash, until every tree
so treated was thoroughly cleansed of the worms. These, however,
were slowly driven west as the work advanced from the opposite
direction, the wind blowing during the time from the east quite heavily ;,
many, as they swung off on their threads, being carried across the road
into the adjoining fields by the force of the wind. An interruption,
_ followed by a change of wind to the west, carried many back; which
necessitated another washing; some trees being syringed three and
four times. In many cases the more mature worms will drop on their
thread, and remain suspended in mid air for a long time, and are easily
gathered upon a rod swept quietly along through their webs, drawn
through the hand, and destroyed. Our orchard being in two parts,
the new and the old, our first attention was given to the former, as the
trees were large and laden with blossoms. Here the work was effectual;
not a worm left of the millions; and I can truly say that there were
enough worms upon any one tree to consume the foliage of the entire
orchard had'they been left to mature, as the brown-and-crisp-appearing
orchards for miles around bore ample evidence.

The work completed, the trees burst into an apparently new life, much
of the scale being destroyed by the later washings, and the resulting
heavy crop amply repaid us for our labor and trouble.

Of the trees in the old orchard, which received attention later in the
season, and upon which there was a comparatively poor promise of fruit
or future existence, many of the worms had attained sufficient size to
enable them to escape the searching agent by swinging off and reach-
ing the ground.

Here we made other tests in order to check their return to the trees.
We cleared away the surface for about twelve inches around the collar
of each tree, pressed the earth down smoothly and compactly, and placed
thereon a belt of powdered sulphur. We then coated a portion of the
bark with a plastic solution of boiled linseed oil and rosin. Above this
a belt of soft soap and sulphur, each encircling the tree about 8 inches

\

[84] REPORT UNITED STATES ENTOMOLOGICAL COMMISSION.

in breadth. The wonderful persistence and determination of this worm
was soon manifest, for while many were killed by us in their attempts
to storm the works, many succeeded during the night in wallowing
through every obstacle, and again succeeded in reaching the branches.

We are, therefore, of the opinion that for practical effect the work
must be done when the worms are just hatched out, while they are in
their age of tender existence, and as they begin to prey upon the burst-
ing foliage of early spring. Here we have every worm at our mercy,
and armed with the proper writ they will not be slow in their obedience
to the unpalatable summons.

While we write the above report, March 16, we beg leave to intro-
duce the additional means made use of to prevent the ravages of these
pests by preventing the ascent of the female insect to the trees, where
she deposits her eggs. :

The winter, it will be remembered, was marked by an unusual snow-
fall, and one of more than ordinary severity; and from about the 1st of
December, 1878, to March 10, the ground was covered. The sudden
approach of warm weather carried off the snow rapidly, and called us
to action. The drying southwest winds soon brought to life those
which had escaped into the earth the previous June; but we were
prepared to meet them. Our trees were carefully scraped about three
feet above the collar, and a tenacious and plastic coating of treacle and
boiled oil, with some rosin, mixed and heated so as to make all homo-
geneous, was then brushed on, forming a belt about twelve inches.
This we watched carefully, and as the ground became drier the num-
bers increased; the large preponderance being, males, which perished
at once on being hopelessly fixed; while the females, all heavily laden
with eggs, succeeded in wallowing a few inches, where they were found
. firmly adhered in the morning, and killed.

The prevailing strong southwesters and westerly winds, with the
‘sudden changes in temperature from 70° to 22° below the freezing
point, wrought such changes in the surface of our plastic composition
as to require frequent additions on the windward side of the trees,
glazing them over during the day to such an extent that many, with-
out doubt, passed over during the night in the old orchard; while in
the new but few were seen at all, and these all secured. The degree of
cold which these insects can endure is rather surprising when we con-
sider the sensitiveness of insect life to the changes of temperature.
After each of our warm days, when the mercury marked 60° to 70°,
frost and some ice followed; and though no apparent movement had
been made by the insects up to 8.30 p. m., with the mereury at 40°, a
complete cordon of males was found in the morning adhering to the
bands, and what few females had ventured out. On the succeeding
day we noticed the wind veering to the northwest, blowing a gale, and
at 6 p. m. again recoated the ‘trees; mercury, at 7 p. m., 45°, falling to.
10° at 6a.m. On examination we found many insects as before, twenty
males to one female; and to test the tenacity of life of the latter, we
suffered many to remain during two days of cold freezing weather,,
with the mercury varying from 10° to 20° in the sun, wind strong,
northwest, and exposed; ground again frozen, and covered with a
light fall of snow. After the second day’s exposure, with the mercury
at 10°, we carefully gathered them in, exposed them to the warm rays.
of the sun in a room; when immediate signs of life were shown. All
came through the ordeal uninjured, and in their attempts to crawl off
were placed between pieces of glass for microscopic observation. The
pressure of the glass caused large numbers of eggs to exude, every one

EXPERIENCE WITH THE SPRING CANKER-WORM. [85]

of which could be seen readily with an ordinary lens. The eggs appear
to consist of two colors, dark and light, the light predominating in the
proportion in which we find the males predominating in the perfect in-
sect; this, evidently, accounting for the variations in the color of the
worms while preying on the foliage. Of these specimens I have pre-
served a number as above prepared for future reference.

Considering, therefore, the severe climatic changes in this region,
together with the long continued gales of drying winds from the west
and southwest during the early spring months, which calls forth every
exertion to keep the plastic bands in proper condition, the tenacity
and persistence of these insects, and their endurance of the extreme
changes of temperature, the liability of the adhesive coatings to become
bridged over by floating matter carried along by the winds, we cannot
fail to conclude that the most practical means of relief lies in the de-
struction of the grub early in spring after hatching out, and that the ©
work should be prompt to be effective.

Permit me to call attention to the use of pure arsenite of copper, as
imperative to success. I use the term arsenite of copper in preference,
from the fact that long experience in the use of this poison in manufact-
uring in the East enables me to assert that the ordinary Paris green sold
in our drug stores for agricultural purposes is largely composed of sul-
phate of baryta, thespecific gravity of which misleads those unaccustomed
to its use, and is therefore not arsenite of copper, but an adulteration—
the greatly increased demand for which, since the advent of the Color-
ado beetle, by the agriculturist, increased the incentive to adulteration
by unscrupulous German Jews, who are the principal manipulators in
this country. Upon this may be laid the causes of failure of many
to accomplish the desired end, though particular to follow the details
of practice.

_ Again, the use of a good force pump is requisite. There are many

such pumps to be procured with air chambers mounted on wheels with
the capacity of a barrel, which with some twenty-five feet of hose-pipe,
nozzle, and sprinkler cost about $15. A number of our neighbors have
procured them since our trials, and where one found the burden of ex-
pense too great, two or more clubbed together in the purchase.

It is the general opinion, if I mistake not, that the canker worm is
local, in consequence of the fact that the female is wingless, and there-
fore cannot spread. This I find is an error, more particularly in this
locality so lavishly favored with high winds. Caught up by the gales,
while suspended upon their gossamer web, I have seen multitudes car-
ried far away, flying thus supported for long distances, reminding one of
the gossamer spiders which float along on a moderate breeze; using the
same means of transit comparatively. That they have spread over a
large portion of the Northwest within a few years the blackened and
seared foliage of our orchards tell—a fearful truth. And itis the settled
conviction of all our orchardists and farmers that unless the proper
means are used to destroy these pests, and before much time has passed
away, that a crop of apples will be a thing of the past, and our orchards
will give place to more remunerative purposes. At the present rate of
destruction by the canker worm and scale there is but a step from the
living to the dead.

Prof. C. V. RILEY.

INDEX.

Acridium peregrinum, 77.
Acrobasis nebulo, 1738.
pant heey characters of, 314.
4éschna, 333. ‘ ;
heros, 329, 330.
Aisthopoda, 288.
Agrion, 353. |,
verticale, 329, 330.
Agrotis, c—nigrum, 135.
Agrostis lateriflora, [47].
Aletia xylina, 89.
Anabrus, anatomy of, 318.
simplex, 61, 64.
Andras, J. C., observations on army worms,
137.
Anisopteryx zscularia, 157, 163.
, pometaria, 157, 159.
vernata, 159.
Anomis xylina, 89.
Anthomyia, 39.

Apanteles congregatus, 135.
Apple-tree borer, the flat-headed, 251.
larva described, 252.

Aridity favors locust breeding, 25,

Arizona locusts, sources of, 30.

Arthromere, 288.
. Ascalaphus, 338, 339, 340, 342.

Asemum moestum, 256.

larva described, 257.

Ash, spring canker-worm anent, 175.

Asopia costalis, 136.
-Army worm, accompanied by Agrotis c—nigrum,

135

annual number of generations, 118.
behavior of, 140, 141.
bibliography of, 148.

broods of, 134.

cannibalism of, 117.
characteristics of, 101.
destruction by ditching, 130.
destruction by fire, 128.
destruction of, by coal-tar, 130.
destruction of, by fencing, 131.

destruction of, by poisoning, 130, 131.

destruction of, by rolling, 131.
destruction of, by roping, 131, 132.
ditch traps for, 138.
egg deposition of, 105, 142, 143, 144.

duration of, 108.
eggs, 111, 134, 137.
enemies, 125, 135.
extent of injuries from, 92.
food-plants of, 116, 140, 141.
geographical distribution of, 91.
habits of, 105.

young, 108.

hibernation of, 122, 147.
Ichneumonid, 135.
in 1881, injuries by, 1382, 133.
in 1882, 136.
in New Jersey, 139.
kinds of, 89. 2
larval duration of, 109.
larva of, 102.

meteorological influences anent, 129.

moth of, 103.

flight of, 118.

food-habits of, 117.
moths, sexual differences of, 108.
number of broods of, 122, 147.
nomenclature of, 89.
past history of, 92.
position when at rest, 118.

Army worm, predictions, 129.

prolificacy of, 108.

pupa duration of, 117.

pupe, 103, 135, 138.

remedies for, 128.

résumé concerning, 146.

source of, 139, 142, 143, 144, 145.

sudden appearance and disappear-

ance of, 114.

tachinid parasite of, 135.

time of appearance of, 112.

traveling habit of, 110.

treatment of, 134, 146.

workings of, 134.
Aughey, Prof. Samuel, on birds in relation to

locusts, 38.

paaeers destroying locusts, 18.

Bad lands, 19, 20.

Benomeres, 289.

Benopoda, 288.

Bznosome, 289.

Barfoot, Mr. J. L., letters from, 5, 7.

Bee-flies, 39.

Birch, black, clytus larva on, 259.

Birds destroying locusts, 6, 9, 13, 15, 18, 25, 38.

locust eggs, 40. °

Bittacus, larva, 293.

Blackbirds destroying locust eggs, 40.

Blatta americana, 309.

Blattariz, characters of, 309.

Boll, Henry. statement of, 3.

Breeding of locusts favored by aridity, 25.

grounds of locusts in Montana, 20
the permanent, lo
cated, 9, 24.
area of, 27, 29.
British America, few locusts in mountains of, 17.
Bruner, Lawrence, locust areas explored by, 21, 22
on the Hessian fly, 244.
report for 1880, 8.
for 1881, 21.
report of flights of locusts, 7

Buprestidae, 251.

Buprestid larve, 252.

Burning locusts, impossible in their breeding.

grounds in Montana, 20.
eggs of locusts, 4.
young locusts with straw, etc., 16.
Calocampa exoleta, 90.
Caloptenus spretus (see locust), anatomy of, 314.
embryology of, 277.
femur-rubrum, 10, 14.
bivittatus, 9, 10, 14.
atlanis, 9, 10,14.
embryology of, 273.
Calopteryx maculata, 329, 330.
Calosoma, 177.
scrutator, 135.

Canker-worm, birds destroying the, 178.
classification of, 157, 158.
destructiveness of, 178, 179.
enemies, birds, and parasites, 195..
the Fall, characters of, 180.

dates of, 181.
food-plants of, 183.
habits of, 181.
larval dates of, 182, 183.
oviposition of, 182.
pupation of, 183.
range of, 179.
nomenclature of, 162.
past history of, 165.
remedies, contrivances, 189.

[87]

[88]

Canker-worm, remedies, hanging band, 185.
jarring and burning, 191.
Le Baron’s trap, 190.
muriate of lime, 192.
oil troughs, 186,
paris green, 192.
sticky substances, 183.
sulphur, 193.
washes and dustings, 193.
Sy nou yEny of, 164. ;
the Spring, 170.
characters of, 171.
date of larvexe, 173.
larval habits of, 174.
enemies of, 175.
food-plants of, 174.
habits of, 172.
modes of distribution of,
L75:
issuance of, 172.
range of, 170.

two Ae distinguished, 9, 15, 160.

Carex vesicaria, [26

Catbird eating locusts, 18.

Cecidomyia destructor (see Hessian fly).
funesta, [42, 47].
pest [32, 47].

eguminicola, 208.

secalina, [7, 11, 24, 25, 42, 47].
species compared, [24].
tritici Kirby, [25].

Cephalomere, 288.

Cephalosome, 288.

Cerambycidax, 256.

Ceraphron destructor, [41].

Cercopoda, 288.

Chalcophora virginiana (?), 252.

Cherry-borer, described, 256.

Chickens destroying locusts, 6.

Chipman, A. J., report by, [55].

Chlorops, [35, 47, 50].

Chipmunks destroying locusts, 18.

Chrysobothris femorata, larva described, 252.

Clisiocampa sylvatica, 89, 101.

Clover-worm, 136.

Clytus (?), larva, 259.

Coccus adonidum, [31].

nerii, [31].
Cohn, Prof. F., pe on Cecidomyia destructor,
(.
on the Hessian fly, [39].

Coleoptera, hypermetamorphosis of, 301.
larve, maxilla of, 300.
origin of, 299.

Colorado, chronology of ravages in, 4.

locusts, sources of, 30.
Cooke, Prof A.J., on canker-worms, 170.
on the Hessian fly, 201, 211.
specimens from, [49].

Coquillett, D. W., observations by, 117, 120.

Corn-weevils, 74. chon é

Corrodentia, 322.

Corydalus cornutus, 335.

Cotton-worm, 89.

Crambus vulgivagellus, 101.

Cricket, migratory species, 14.

the western, 61.

parasites of, 64.

Crow-blackbird eating locusts, 18.

Crows destroying locusts, 40.

Crushing-machine for destroying locusts, 7

Curlews destroying locusts, 15.

Cut-worm, 101, 135.

Dakota, locusts in, 30.

topography of western, 19.
Dana, Prof. J. D., detection of Hessian fly in N. A.,

observations on the Hessian
fly, [27].

observations by, [6].

Dermatoptera, characters of, 289, 304.

geucnuey, of, 295.

Diapheromera femoratum, 312.

Diceroa divaricata, 256.

Diplosis, 74, [42].

tritici, 209, 220, 239.
Diptera, origin of, 303:
Drew, John R., observation by, 15.

INDEX.

‘* Drifts”’ of locusts, 16.
Elaphidion parallelum, larva described, 258.
Elytrophora, 294.
Ephemerina, characters of, 293. Pay

exterual anatomy of, 333. ;
Epicauta, hyper metamorphosis of, 301.
Euglossata, 294.
Eumenes fraterna, 177.
EKuplectrus, 176.
Kurhynchota, 294. -
Fishes devouring locusts, 39.
Fitch, Dr. Asa, on the army worm, 115.

on the Hessian fly, 234, [25, 28].
Forestry, insects injurious to, 249.
larvee of, 251.
Forficula teniata, 304.
Forficulide, characters of, 304.
Genealogical tree of insects, 295.
Geographical distribution of Rocky Mountain
locust, 346.

Gissler, Dr. C. F., artist, work by, 251.

translations by, [6, 8, 39, 41].
Gnathopoda, 288. i

Gonopoda, 288.
Grass worm, 89.
Gryllotalpa borealis, 320.
embryology of, 272. ‘_
Gryllidz, characters of, 319. an
Gryllus neglectus, 319.
Hagen, Dr. H. A., on the Hessian fly, [43].
ane Dr. T. W., on canker-worms, 162, 167, 168,
174.
Harrowing, destroying locust eggs by, 6. ‘
Heliophila, 91. ®
Heliothis armigera, 92, 101, 133.
Hemiptera, genealogy of, 297, .
Hemlock, buprestid larva, 256.
longicorn larva, 257.
Herrick, on the Hessian fly, [27].
Hessian fly, the, 198.
broods of the, 210.
climatic effects on, 215.
conclusions concerning its origin in
America, 238.
damages from, 198, 199.
description of the, 207. f
distribution of, 234. :
early sowing as a remedy, 223.
effects of, described, 213.
habits of the, 210.
summary of, 244. °
in at America, early references
te, [3].
list of works on the, 245.
nativity of the, [6].
origin of, in N. A., 234.
parasites of, 216.
past history of, 199.
pasturing against, 225, [3].
periodicity of, 230.
plowing against, [3]. ;
ravages in N. Am. in 1784, ete., [2].
remedies against the, 198, 220.
summary of, 244.
remedy, burning stubble, 230.
high eulture, 225.
late sowing, 221.

lime, 229.
low cutting, 229.
. Tolling, 229.
Hordeum vulgare, [38].
Howard, Or., letter from, 6.
Howard, L. O., army worm observation, 113.

observations by, 120.
observations on army worm,
1882, 108.
1881, 132.
observation on Platygaster
sp.(?), 219.
Hybernia, 162, 163.
Hylurgops pinifex, embryology of, 280.
Hymenoptera, 303.
Ichneumonid of army worm, 135.
Ichneumons preying on locusts, 18.
Insects, development of wings of, 269.
number of segments in head of, 282.
origin of, 260.
genealogical tree of, 295.

INDEX.

Towa locusts, sources of, 30. °
Japan, the migratory locust in, [59].
Kansas, locusts in, 9, 30
Kerosene eddies for destroying locusts, 13.
Koebele, A., observations by, 106, 118, 120, 122.
Lachnosterna fusca, 10). ;
Laphygma frugiperda, 89, 98.
Larve of forest beetles, 252.
Lasioptera, [14].
Leaf crumpler, the rascal, 173.
Le Baron, on canker-worm, 167, 169, 173, 174, 175,
178,179.

Lepidoptera, origin of, 303.
Leptophilebia, 333.
Leucania comma, 123.

extranea, 90.

lithargyria, 122.

turea, 122,

unipuncta, 90, 139.
Limnephilus pudicus, external anatomy of, 344.
Lintner, J. A., observation by, on army worm
_ _ eggs, 106.

Lizards destroying locusts, 18.

\

Lockwood, Rey. Samuel, on food of army worms,
: e

GAT.
on the army worm in
N. J., 1880, 139.
Locustariz, characters of, 318. f
Locusts anent solar and terrestrial physics, 65.
area of breeding grounds, 29.
avoided by planting late, 16.
boundaries of permanent region of, 29, 30.
breeding grounds of, 22, 29.
rain fail of, 29.
cause of migration of, 38.
periodic abundance of, 87, 38.
characteristics of the adult, 36, 37.
permanent region of, 24.
the young, 35, 36.
checked by advance of civilization, 25.
eross-breeding of, 31.
damages in 1819 in Manitoba and Min-
nesota, 23. !
depositing seasons of, 34.
direction of migration of, 31, 32, 33.
directive instinct of, 13.
drifts of, 16.
duration of development of, 35.
eating clothes, 17.
eggs, deposition of, 33, 34, 35.
destroyed by birds, 40.
enemies, 17, 18, 38,39, 40, 41.
embryology of, 263.
fi.cht affected by storms, 45.
flights in Great Britain, dates of, [57].
habits of the adults, 36.
young, 36.
how to fight them, 49.
invasions, earliest accounts of, 22, 23,
manner of flight of, 37.
means of combatting, 38.
migration of, directed by ridges and val-
leys, 20.
winds, 20.
stopped by rain, 20.
miscellaneous notes on, [57].
modification of, by climate, 43.
molting of the young, 35, 36.
number of annual broods of, 46.
of North America, list of, 55.
opposed by advance of settlement, 23.
tree-culture, 42, 44.
other than C. spretus, names and _ habits
of, 53, 54.
parasites, 39.
permanent region of, characterized, 25.
probabilities for 1882, 52.
red mites on, i8.
reproductive acts of, 37.
Rocky Mountain, geographical distribu-
tion of, 346.
in 1880, (50).
scarce in the North West in 1880, 17.
subpermanent region of, 46, 47.
swarms in 1873-’78, 17.
of, ite from alighting, by shoot-
ing, 16.
roaring sound from, 14.
windrows of, 34.

[89]

Locusts, varieties of, 48.
Loew, Dr. H., on the gall-gnat 9f rye, [6].
Longicorn larve, 257, 258, 259.
Macrosila quinquemaculata, 145.
Magpies digging and eating eggs of locusts in
winter, 18.
Manitoba locusts, sources of, 30.
Mann, B. P., canker-worm, observations by, 196.
on canker-wormns, 159, 164, 166, 167,
178, 183.
Mantideax, characters of, 310.
Mantis carolina. 310.
Mantispa, hypermetamorphosis of, 299.
brunneum, 339, 340, 341, 342.
Map, z06-geographical, 346.
a Hea on the Rocky Mountain locust in
1880, [50].
Melanophila (?), larva described, 254, 255.
Meloide, 39, 41.
hypermetamorphosis of, 301,
Meske, Otto, observation by, 123.
Mesochorus vitreus, 135.
Mice destroying locusts, 18.
Microgaster militaris, 96.
paleacrite, 175, 176.
Migratory crickets, 14.
Minnesota, locust damages in, in 1819, 23.
sources of, 30.
Mites affecting locusts, natural history of, 39, 40.
Montana, locusts in, in 1880, 8, 9.
1873-78, 11.
topography of, 19.
an, Col., on introduction of the Hessian fly,

Myrmeleon diversum, 338,
Mysia quindecimpunctata, 177.
Nebraska, locusts in, 9.
sources of, 30.

Nemorzea leucaniz, 96, 105, 135.
Nephelodes violans, 101.
Nerium splendens, [31].
Neuroptera, characters of, 293.

external anatomy of, 335,

genealogy of, 297.
Nevada locusts, origin of, 30.
New Mexico locusts, sources of, 30.
Noctua unipuncta, 90.
Nothrus ovivorus, 175.
Oak-borer, 258.
Odonata, characters of, 292, 329.
Cicanthus niveus, 322. .
Cidipodide eaten by magpies, 18.
Oodpoda, 288.
Opomyza florum, [46].
Oregon locusts, sources of, 13, 30.

. Orthoptera, characters of, 289, 309.

genealogy of, 296.
systematic position of, 286.
Orthopterous insects, embryology of, 271.
Orthosoma brunneum larva, 260.
Oscinis, [46].
Pachytylus, [57].
cinerascens, 78.
migratorius, 77.
Packard, Dr. A. 8., memoranda for, 5.
on canker-worms, 158, 164, 165,
170, 171, 178, 174.
report on forest insects, 249.
report on the Hessian fly, 198.
Paleacrita, 162.
vernata, 170.
Palingenia bilineata, 333.
Panorpa debilis, 342.
Panorpide, 342.
Peach-borer, described, 256.
Peck, W. D., on canker-worms, 162, 166, 170.
Perlide, characters of, 322.
Pezotettiges, 17.
Pezotettix dodgei, 10.
Phalzna vernata, 162.
Phasmida, characters of, 312.
Phyloptera, 287, 294.
Physics, solar and terrestrial, anent locusts, 65.
Pine-borer, lesser, 256, 257.
Rhaginm, 259.
Planipennia, 293, 294, 335.
Platygaster, 245, [41].
error, 219, 220.
faunestus, [42].

~

[90]

Platygaster herrickii, 220.

of canker-worms, 176.

tipule, 220.
Platyptera, characters of, 292.
Polystechotes nebulosus, 338.
Potato beetle, the Colorado, 37.

moth, 145.
Powell, Maj. J. W., description of the mountain
regions, 26.
Prionus, lesser, larva described, 260.
Prisopus, 313.
Proscopia, 316.
Pseudoneuroptera, characters of, 290, 322.
genealogy of, 29
Psocide, characters of, 325.
Psocus nove-scotix, 325.
Pteronarcys californica, 322.
Raphidia oblita, 336, 337, 338.
Ravens eating locust eggs, 18.
Red mites destroying insect eggs, 18.
on locusts, 18.
Rhabdopoda, 335.
Rhagium lineatum, larva described, 259.
Richards, Dr. H. J., observations by, 7.
Riley, Prof. C. V., ay worm experiments of, 142.
en the Hessian fly, 204, 211, 216.

Rye, the gall-gnat of, [6].
Saperda of willow, 256, 257.
Sarcophaga carnaria, 40.

lineata, [59].
Saunders, William, on the Hessian fiy, 206.
Sciara, 90.
Semiotellus (Homoporus) destructor Say, 117, 216,

245

a
Sialide, 335.
Sitophilus granarius, 74.
oryze, 74.
Snakes destroying locusts, 18.
Solanum rostratum, 37.
Sphinx nerii, [31]. .
Spruce-borer, flat-headed, 255.
Stanger, J.S., letter from, 4.
Strecker, H., observation by, 17.
Swinton, A. H., notes by, on locust invasions, [57].
report on physical data anent lo-
custs, 65

INDEX.

Sycamore, longicorn larva of, 262.
Synoptera, 294.
Tabanus lineolus, [54].
Tachina anonyma, 40.
flies causing migration of locusts, 19.
mode of depositing eggs on locusts,
3, ey
preying on locusts, 18, 23.
of canker-worm, 176.
Tachinid parasite of army worm, 135.
Tent caterpillar, 89.
Termes flavicollis, [31].
flavipes, 327, 328, 329.
Termitidae, characters of, 326.
Termopsis ancusticollis, 326, 328.
Texas, chronology of ravages in, 3.
locusts in, 6.
Thomas, Prof. Cyrus, observations by, 118.
on canker-worms, 167.
Thysanura, genealogy of, 295.
Toads destroying locusts, 18.
Tree-culture opposes locusts, 42, 44.
Trichocera regelationis, [49].
Trichoptera, 294.
external anatomy of, 344.
Triungulin larva of beetles, 302.
Uromeres, 2&8.
Uropoda, 288.
Urosome, 288.
Utah, chronology of ravages in, 4, 7.
locusts, sources of, 30.
Wagener, Dr. B., on the Hessian fly, 234, [8].
Walsh, B. D., canker-worm remedy, 184.
Washington Territory, locusts in, 13.

sources of, 30. |

Wasps preying on locusts, 18.

W heat-flies, 74.

White grab, 101.

Willow saperda, 257.

Windrows of locusts, 34.

Wings, development of, 268.
primary origin of, 270.

Wood, H. E., letter from, 5.

Wyoming locusts, sources of, 30.

locust swarms in, in 1878, 17.
Zo6-geographical map, 346.

CORRIGENDA.

Page 241, lines 30 and 31, for Lears, read Sears.

Page 253, line 13, for lower, read basal.

Page 253, line 34, for Pl. V1, read Pl. VII.

Page 253, line 36, for long, read broad.

Page 254, line 18, omit ‘‘and No.4, p. 241, on the hemlock.”

Page 254, line 2 from bottom, for Maxillx, read Maxillary palpi.

Page 257, line 10, for long, read broad.

Page 257, line 5 trom bottom, after segment, insert above.

Page 258, line 2 from bottom, for shorter, read longer; and for wider, read narrower.

Page 259, line 20, for round, read broad.

Page 259, line 29, ‘for sezment, read segments.

Page 269, line 25, for Fig. 3, read Pl. LXIII, fig. 4.

Page 269, last line, for Gengenbaur’s, read Gegenbaur’s.

Page 271, line 4 from bottom, after complete, insert as.

Page 287, line 1, for fundamenta, read fundamental.

Page 291, line 14, after the, omit the.

Page 291, line 19, for lobes are, read lobe is.

Page 293, line 13 from bottom, for Corydalis, read Corydalus.

Page 293, line 11 from bottom, for fig. 5, read fig. 2.

Page 294, table, line 9 of last column, for Physapoda, read Physopoda.

Page 294, line 4 from bottom, for Physapoda, read Physopoda.

Page 296, line 19 from bottom, for urites, read urosternites.

Page 297, line 2, for Physapoda, read Physopoda.

Page 300, line 8 from bottom, for 3 ocelli, read 2-8 ocelli.

Page 300, line 6 from bottom, for clten present, read rarely absent.

Page 301, line 21, after any, read carnivorous forms.

Page 303, line 3 from bottom, for Betra htungen, read Betrachtungen.

Page 304, line 3, for 1°, read 15%,

Page 304, last line, for 15°, read 159,

Page 306, line 7 from bottom, for met-episternum, read met-epimerum.

Page 307, line 3, for Figs. 10-12, read Pl. X XIII, figs. 10-12.

Page 308, line 9 from bottom, omit (Pl. XXIV).

Page 322, line 5 from bottom, for CORRODENTIA read PLATYPTERA.

Page 322, line 4 from bottom, after Plates insert XX XIX.

Page 322, line 2 from bottom, before Pl. XL, insert Pl. XX XIX, fig. 8.

Page 324, line 8, for sub-epimerite, read sur-epimerite.

Page 325, line 3, for Plate, read Plates.

Page 325, line 5, for figs. 6-8, read figs. 6, 7.

Page 325, line 15, for heade, bing, read head, being.

Page 326, line 10, for figs. 3, 4, 8, read figs. 3, 4, 8, 9.

Page 327, line 23, for Fig. 4, read P]. X LITI, fig. 4.

Page 327, line 8 from bottom, for Fig. 4, read Pl. XLII, fig. 4.

Page 328, line 8, for Fig. 7, read Pl. XLILL, figs. 7-9.

Page 328, line 13, for Figs. 7-9, read Pl. XLII, figs. 7-9,

Page 328, line 18, for coxe, read trochantines.

Page 330, line 5 from bottom, after pronotum, insert (Pl. XLVIIL, fig. 2).

Page 330, last line, after fig. 3, insert Pl. LXIII, fig. 4.

Page 331, line 5, omit (Fig. 3, v. 5.).

Page 331, line 16, omit (v. 5).

Page 332, lines 22, 32, and 33, for trochantine, read coxa.

Page 332, lines 24 and 33, for coxa, read trochantine.

Page 333, line 22, for H. cupida (Leptophlebia), read EL. (Leptophlebia) cupida.

Page 334, line 9 from bottom, for epis’’, read epis’.

Page 336, line 8, for gule, read gene.

Page 336, line 11 and last line, for }54, read '4a,

Page 336, line 27, for Fig. 12, read Pl. LXIV, fig. 7.

Page 336, below figure, insert Fig. 14.—

Page 336, line 39, after (Corydalus)., insert (Pl. LXTIV, fig. 8.)

Page 337, line 10, after as large, insert in proportion.

Page 337, line 15, for Fig. 2, read Pl. LXLV, He. 2.

Page 337, line 16, for supra-sternite, read supra-episternite.

Page 337, lines 19 and 20, for short, read large; and omit the words, The trochantine is very small ;
one-half as large as the coxa.

Page 337, line 25, for Fig. 12, read Pl. LXIV, fig. 3.

Page 337, line 28, for undivided, read divided.

Page 337, lines 29 and 30, omit the words, The trochantine is a little smaller than in the mesothorax.

Page 337, line 7 from bottom, for Fig. 4, read Pl. LXIV, fig. 4.

Page 339, line 22, for Pl. LVII, fig. 8, read Pl. LVI, figs. 8, 13.

Page 340, line 9 from bottom, after Mantispa., insert (Pl. LV, fig.7.). :

Page 340, line 3 from bottom, for suprasternite, read supra-episternite.

Page 341, line 13 from bottom, after Mantispa., insert (Pl. LV, fig. 9.).

Page 342, line 1, after mesosternum, insert (Pl. LVI, fig. 11.).

Page 342, line 3, after meta-, insert (Fig. 12.).

Page 342, line 6, after mesosternwm, insert (PI. LV, fig. 5.).

Page 342, line 8, after metasternum, insert (Fig. 6.).

Page 342, line 17, for 7th, read 8th.

Page 242, line 29, for Plate LX, read Plates LIX, figs. 6-10; LX.

Page 343, line 5, for fig. 15, read fig. 5.

[91]

fo2q: | CORRIGENDA.

Page 343, line 18, for fig. 9, read fig. 8.

Page 343, line 22, for fig. 8, read fig. 9.

Page 343, below figure, insert Fig. 15.—

Page 344, line 3, for Fig. , read Fig. 15.

Page 344, line 15, for Fig. —, read Fig. 1.

Page 344, line 20, for Fig. 5, read Wig. 4.

Page 344, line 23, for 5, read 2. ,

Page 344, line 3 from bottom, for Prhyganea read Phryganea.

Page 345, line 13, for is not subdivided, read is divided. , *
Page 345, line 16, for coxe, read trochantines.

Page 345, line 16-17, for trochantine, read coxa.

Page 345, line 17, for coxa, read trochantine.

Page 345, line 20, for coxes, read trochantines. a
Page 345, line 21, for trochantine read coxa.

Page 345, line 14 from bottom, for urites, read urosternites.

Page 345, line 3 from bottom, omit the * after Brauer.

Page 346, line 11, for cricket read crickets.

Page 346, line 8 from bottom, for Orthoptenus read Orthopterous.

Page 347, folio line, for BLUESTONE, read GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST.
*

Page 347, line 5, for Myripods read Myriopods. ‘

©

fit

Revairieri ci

Norre.—Plates XXXVII and XXXVIII have been combined so that the explanations
apply to Plate XXXVII, and there is no Plate XXXVIII. .

KEM

ll ii 6589 ! dare:

"SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES