VARIATION IN BEES A REPLY TO MR. LUTZ. 



EVERETT F. PHILLIPS. 



In the December (1903) number of this journal there appeared 

 an article entitled " Comparative Variability of Drones and 

 Workers of the Honey Bee " by Dr. D. B. Casteel and myself in 

 which we concluded that the drones show the more variability, 

 which result we attributed to the effect of the size of the cells on 

 the developing larvae and pupas. Mr. Frank E. Lutz in the 

 April (1904) number of this BULLETIN thinks it "well worth 

 while to consider a few points about the paper" and concludes 

 that we have not proven our point. I desire here to point out 

 the errors in his manner of dealing with our measurements and 

 his methods of drawing conclusions and to defend our position. 



The fact that in the consideration of abnormal veins we found 

 that " there are 206 irregular drone wings and 30 irregular 

 worker wings or almost seven times as many for drones as for 

 workers" points rather conclusively to our position in regard to 

 comparative variability. Our statements in regard to coloration 

 are also disregarded, evidently because there were no figures 

 given and therefore they were not considered worthy of mention. 

 In another paper l I have dealt with the comparative constancy 

 of the color areas of the two sexes and there offer evidence which 

 confirms the position maintained in our paper, although as there 

 used it was intended to prove an entirely different point. In 

 quoting from a letter from Mr. E. R. Root, a high authority in 

 apiculture, it was there stated : " The drones from these queens 

 (imported Italians of pure stock) varied greatly in their markings. 

 Some of their sons would have a great deal of yellow on them, 

 while others would be quite dark. . . . Bees (workers) from 

 these queens were all uniformly marked." In variation work but 

 few investigators take the trouble to study more than one char- 

 acter yet here are two which are rather conclusive and on these 

 we would be willing to rest the case. 



1<( A Review of Parthenogenesis," Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., XLIL, No. 174; 

 vide pp. 277-8. 



70 



