INJURIOUS INSECTS. 



Aulacomerus lutescens (Lintn.). 



The Poplar Saw-fly. 



(Ord. Hymenoptera. : Fam. TENTHREDiNiDiE.) 



Lintner: Fourth Report on the Insects of New York, 1888, pp 44-4r), 

 figs. 20-22. 



In the description of the larva, its habits, the winged insect, and 

 oviposition of this poplar saw-liy which had occurred in numbers at 

 Albany, N. Y., it was given name as a new species upon information 

 received from Mr. E. T. Cresson, to whom it had been submitted, that 

 it was probably undescribed and was referable to the genus Aulaco- 

 merus (see page 46, he. cit.). 



Examples of it were subsequently sent to Mr. John G. Jack, of the 

 Arnold Arboretum, of Harvard University, Boston. From a compari- 

 son that he was able to make with European specimens in the collec- 

 tion of the Cambridge Museum, and the examination of literature 

 consulted, it seems not improbable that this saw-lly will have to 

 assume an older European name, and add one more to our extended 

 list of insect pests introduced from the Old World. 



Mr. Jack has written to me as follows : 



The other day, in looking over some specimens of European saw- 

 flies in Dr. Hagen's Collection, I was struck by the similarity of the 

 manner of oviposition between your Aulacomerus and that of one of 

 the specimens in the cabinet. My interest was aroused to look fur- 

 ther into the matter, and after pretty careful comparisons of your 

 specimens and description with those of Gladius viminalis Fallen, of 

 Europe, I confess that I can make out but little difference, if any. 



The European description and figures as given by Vollenhoven 

 (vol. i [1858], p. 176, pi. 10, Tijdschr. v. Entomol), and by Cameron 

 {Monog. Brit. Phyt. Hymenop., vol. ii, p. 29, and vol. i, pi. v and xv), 

 seem to agree with your specimens, and I can detect no essential dif- 

 ferences between them and Brischke's specimens in the Museum Col- 

 lection. Food-plants, eggs, larvae, and imagoes all agree well. 



Upon requesting Mr. Jack to compare the nervulation of the vimi- 

 nalis and lutescens particularly in the position of the recurrent nervules, 

 he reports an exact agreement in the two. Unfortunately there is no 



