150 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 
NOTES ON PRONUBA AND YUCCA POLLINATION.* 
BY PKOF. C. V. RILEY. 
Partly because of more pressing duties, partly because of a desire to make 
some special experiments, but chiefly in the hope that (after the fruiting 
season of the dehiscent Yuccas was over, and Mr. Hulst had been able to 
make more careful observations) he would himself gracefully amend his 
opinions to accord with the facts, I have deferred answering till now the 
remarks by Mr. Hulst on pp. 236-238 of vol. ii, Ent. Amer. The matter 
is too important to drop, and I have too much regard for my critic person- 
ally, and hope for his future entomologically, not to do what little I can to 
check an unfortunate tendency to hasty work and conclusion, noticeable in 
this as in some other of his late writings. 
Mr. Hulst "confesses the corn" in reference to my first complaint, and 
is inclined to blame the report for his misrepresentations an inclination 
which would have more of my sympathy were he not editor of the paper. 
It is, however, far more important, from the scientific side, that he con- 
fess to the justness of my second indictment, and it is to this end that I 
return to the subject. 
Mr. Hulst adheres to his belief " that there must be very extensive fer- 
tilization of the dehiscent species of Yucca by the agencies of bees and 
other insects." He does not bring forth a single definite fact or observa- 
tion of actual pollination to prove or sustain the belief, but rests it on the 
following grounds : 
ist. That Meehan found that the mere application of pollen to the papil- 
lose apex of the stigma is sufficient for fertilization. 
2d. That he (Hulst) has seen honey-bees within the open as well as the 
partly open flowers, as also other insects, Aphides and Coccinellidce being 
particularly mentioned. 
3d. That not one in ten of the capsules subsequently examined by him 
showed the larva. 
4th. That he is informed that dehiscent species of Yucca do ripen seeds 
in Europe. 
Such are the negative arguments upon which he rests his belief in the face 
of all ttiz facts I have put on record. Let us consider the former briefly 
in their order. 
i st. My good friend Meehan has written much on the fertilization of 
* In explanation of the controversial nature of this communication, it 
becomes necessary to refer to a dispute on this subject between the Rev. 
G. D. Hulst and myself in the columns of Entomologica Americana dur- 
ing the summer of 1887. The communication is a reply to Mr. Hulst's last 
publication on the subject, and is presented verbatim et literatim as writ- 
ten on my way to Europe in August of that year, and as mailed to him 
from England. Mr. Hulst is editor of the aforesaid journal, and exercised 
his editorial prerogative in declining to publish the communication. I have, 
therefore, concluded to present the paper to the Society, since it discusses 
matters of considerable scientific interest. 
