20 SECOND REPORT OF THE STATE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



in his Report on Homoptera contained in the Report of the Commissioner 

 of Agriculture for the year 1876, pp. 24-46. It is this: 



Colonel Wilkins, of Riverside, near Chestertown, Md., a very exten- 

 sive peach grower, last spring wrote to the Department of Agriculture 

 that an aphis or plant-louse similar to those infesting his peach-tree 

 leaves was at work on the roots also, and was killing them by hundreds. 

 Professor P. R. Uhler, of the Peabody library in Baltimore, to whom 

 Colonel Wilkins applied, visited the infested peach orchards, and found 

 the statement to be perfectly correct, and that an underground aphis or 

 plant-louse, not differing from those on the leaves, was doing immense 

 injury to the young trees by sucking out the sap. Professor Uhler also 

 stated that both insects are different from the Aphis persicce above men- 

 tioned, and probably is a new species, closely allied to, if not identical 

 with, the Aphis chrysaiitheini of Europe. The insects on both roots and 

 leaves were about 0.08 of an inch in length, with the contour of a broad 

 Florence flask, of a blackish-brown color, and the two varieties could 

 not be distinguished from each other when placed side by side. 



Dr. J. C. Neal, in his Report to the Entomologist of the Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture at Washington, of insect injuries observed by him 

 in Florida, in 1882, mentions the occurrence of "lice on roots of the 

 •peach," which may also have been identical with the above {Bulletin 

 No. I, U. S. Dept. Agricul. — Divis. of EiitomoL, 1883, p. 36). 



In some correspondence Avith Prof. Riley in relation to this species, 

 he pronounces it identical with forms that he had received in past years 

 from others, and especially in April, 1875, from E. Wilkins, of Chester- 

 town, Md. It had been very destructive for years on the Atlantic sea- 

 board, and in notices of it published and in replies to correspondents, 

 he had generally referred it, with doubt, to A. {Myzus) pcrsica; Sulzer; 

 but in consideration of the differences in the descriptions of this species 

 by Boyer, Sulzer and Kaltenbach, and the general characters being so 

 near to Myzus cerasi (Fabr.), he had recently referred it rather to this 

 latter species. 



Only the wingless form was sent to me by Mr. Blodget. I was in- 

 formed that. the winged form was observed by him to be quite abund- 

 ant during some warm weather in the latter part of November, but he 

 was unable to comply with my request for some examples, as a severe 

 gale, followed by extreme cold weather, had driven them all away or 

 destroyed them. 



Whether this should be regarded as a distinct species, or whether it 

 shall prove to be only the root-inhabiting form of Myzus pcrsicce, can 

 only be determined with ample material at hand for study, and careful 

 comparison with the various descriptions of the allied species. The lat- 

 ter view is apparently held by Professor Uhler, who in his late very 

 valuable contribution to the Standard Natural History, published by 

 Cassino & Co., has written: 



