June, 1901] Landacre — Wing of Honey Bee l21 



reversion occurred on three separate wings, in No. 2 one hook on 

 each wing being straight. 



As to the relation between the number of hooks and the width 

 of the wing the averages are very definite. Taking hives number 

 one and two from the same apiary, it will be seen that the increase 

 in number of hooks goes with the increase in width of wing. The 

 same relation is shown by hives numbers three and four from an- 

 other apiary in the case of the posterior portion of the right wing 

 and in both anterior and posterior portions of left wing. 



The results are not conclusive as to the relative efficiency of dif- 

 ferent hives because there are so many conditions entering into the 

 production of large quantities of honey. The number of bees, the 

 care during the winter, the age of the queen, the number of swarms 

 produced, and several other factors would have to be taken into 

 consideration. 



The differences in the right and left wings in the bees of the 

 same hive is marked. The right wing has the larger number 

 of hooks, but the left wing is the broader. In hive number one the 

 average number of hooks in tlie right wing is 21.3, left 20.9; but the 

 anterior wing on the right side is 4.21 mm., while the left anterior 

 wing is 4.28; that is, there is a compensation for the reduced number 

 of hooks in the increased width of the wing. This is true of the first 

 three hives. In the fourth hive there is a slight advantage in favor 

 of the right wing. 



The following general conclusions may be drawn from these 

 measurements : 



(a) There is a variation in the number of hooks in a given hive 

 ranging between 17 and 23. 



(6) The difference in the number of hooks in the right and left 

 wing is compensated for in a given hive by the increased size of the 

 wing. The right and left wings are in physiological equilibrium. 



(c) In different hives the increase in the number of hooks is 

 accompanied by an increase in width of wing; that is, the variation 

 is emphasized so that selection would work much more effectively; 

 while in the individual, where — if selection operated on account of 

 this variation — it would have to be between different wings of the 

 same bee, the variation is eliminated. 



TWELVE PLANTS ADDITIONAL TO THE OHIO LIST. 



W. A. Kellerman. 



The species named below have not heretofore been recorded as a 

 part of the Ohio flora. Tlie first collector and locality are given for 

 each of the listed species. The serial number prefixed to each name 

 indicates where in the Fourth State Catalogue the species should be 

 inserted. 



