October, '10] REVIEWS 441 



that while several hymenopterous and dipterous parasites were bred, the insect- 

 parasition is quite low, about half a per cent. All this again may be indicative of 

 migration from some other region. 



On page 61 Mr. AinsUe states that " the first authentic history of the genus Hemi- 

 leuca in New Mexico begins about five or six years ago." This is a very extraordinary 

 statement, difficult to comprehend. Mr. Springer wrote me that the pest had been 

 noticed in Colfax County for about ten years. The original H. olivicB was described 

 from Santa Fe, New Mexico, in Psyche, Aug. 1898. Later in the same year, also 

 in Psyche (p. 298), the lar\-a was briefly described and the grass-feeding habit noticed. 

 Hemileuca artemis Packard, a Populus-ieedmg species, was described from Las 

 Cruces, New Mexico, as early as 1893 (Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc, p. 172). H. juno 

 Packard also occurs in the Mesilla Vallej-, but I think the record has not been pub- 

 lished. H. tricolor Packard, 1872, is from New Mexico. 



T.D. A. COCKERELL. 



Report of the Field Work against the Gipsy Moth and the 

 Brown Tail Moth, by D. M. Rogers and A. F. Burgess. U. S. 

 Dep't. Agric, Bur. Ent. Bui. 87, p. 1-81, 1910. 



American literature relating to these two species has increased greatly in recent 

 years. The continuous spread of the gipsy moth and the wide dissemination of the 

 brown tail moth has necessitated large appropriations in recent years, both on the 

 part of infested Commonwealths and the Federal Government. The bulletin under 

 consideration is an excellent summarized account of the work against these two 

 species, it being particularly valuable because of the description of the improved 

 methods now in vogue and the careful discussion of the problems involved in the 

 future control of these species. The authors are to be congratulated upon haA-ing 

 produced a bulletin which states the situation fairly and in a manner intelligible to 

 all. We trust that this publication will be widely distributed, since it is very 

 important that all citizens resident in the Northeastern United States, at least, 

 should have authentic information respecting the work against these two dangerous 

 insect pests. 



Plant Bugs Injurious to Cotton Bolls, by A. W. Morrill. U. S. 



Dep't. Agric, Bur. Ent. Bui. 86, p. 1-110, 1910. 



This important publication summarizes our knowledge respecting a considerable 

 number of the plant bugs affecting cotton and places on record a large amount of 

 original information. The discussion of the Conchuela, Pentatoma ligata Say, a 

 species which may destroy from 5 to even 30^ of all the bolls in a cotton field, is 

 exceptionally full and is based on Dr. ]\Iorriirs studies in northern Mexico and 

 western Texas. It is a valuable, detailed account of one of our injurious Hemiptera. 

 This bulletin is one of the incidental results of the extended investigation conducted 

 by the Federal Bureau of the cotton boll weevil and other insect enemies of this 

 staple crop. This pubUcation is illustrated by an admirable series of figures. 



The Codling Moth and How to Control it by Spraying, by 



E. DwiGHT Sanderson. N. H. Agric. Exp't. Sta. Bui. 143, p. 61-106, 

 1909. 



This is a summary account of the life history of this species, based in large measure 

 upon the author's extended investigations. It is particularly interesting to the 



