December, '17] HOWARD: MOSQUITO CONTROL 517 



during the late spring in the mountain plantations, by the entomoge- 

 nous fungus, Acrostolagnius alhus. 



With a few exceptions noted, all of the insects discussed in the above 

 paragraphs were determined by specialists in the Bureau of Ento- 

 mology. 



In addition to the above, there are two species of Maybeetles which 

 attack coffee in the larval stages. The descriptions of these beetles 

 which are probably new and distinct species of Phyllophaga have been 

 drawn up by Mr. E. G. Smyth of Rio Piedras, but have not as yet 

 been published. The larvae of these beetles are primarily pests of cane, 

 but are also commonly reported as injurious to coffee, particularly to 

 young seedling plants. Two Tachinids have been reared from Phyl- 

 lophaga adults; one, Cryptomeigenia aurifacies Walton, is fairly com- 

 mon; the other, Eidrixoides jonesii W^alton, is comparatively rare. No 

 other enemies of adults or larvae have been noted in coffee plantations. 



A DEMONSTRATION IN MOSQUITO CONTROL 



By C. W. Howard, Unwersity of Minnesota 



Minnesota has always been famous for its mosquitos, and no less 

 in the vicinity of the Twin Cities than in other parts. Screened win- 

 dows and porches are an absolute necessity for comfort in the summer. 

 Some time ago the president of the Minneapolis Real Estate Board 

 was in New Jersey and in one of the small towns of that state noticed 

 that there were no screens on the windows or porches. Inquiry re- 

 vealed the fact that mosquitos had been eliminated from the town. 

 He returned to Minneapohs and at once began to plan for an anti- 

 mosquito campaign to be carried out under the supervision of the 

 Real Estate Board until such time as the City Health Department 

 could assume control. The writer was asked by the board to conduct 

 the field work and carry out the campaign except in the matter of 

 publicity and the raising of funds, the University of Minnesota loan- 

 ing his services for the purpose. 



We have no malaria or other mosquito-borne disease in Minnesota, 

 although Anopheles, both A. maculipennis and A. punctipennis, 

 are present, the latter in considerable numbers in some parts. The 

 campaign was undertaken, therefore, entirely from the standpoint of 

 reducing a troublesome pest. 



There are five mosquitos common in the vicinity of the Twin Cities; 

 Aedes canadensis, Aedes sijlvestris, Cidex pipiens, Culex restuans, and 

 Culex tarsalis. Several other species occur such as Mansonia per- 



