362 



1902, Eckart, C. F. — Report on precautions to be observ( 

 with regard to cane importations. Haw. Sugar Plantei 

 Assn., p. 8. 



A barrel of seed-eane imported from Demerara was foui 

 to be badly infested with borers, and the empty channels of tli 

 beetles w-ere alive with our common ant (Pheidole megac'' 

 pliala). Upon opening the sticks, traces w'ere found of bo1 

 larvae and pupae of the borers, which had been destroyed I 

 the ants, but only a single beetle was found, alive, in the coi 

 signment, having escaped because of its perfect cocoon, wliic 

 is difficult for the ants to enter. | 



1003. Perkins, E. C. L. — The leaf-liopper of sugar can! 

 Bd, Comm. Agric. and Forestry, Bui. 1, 23. ( 



Pheidole ruegacephala w^as noted, as one of the species o| 

 ants preying upon the young leaf-hoppers. I 



1905. Perkins, E. C. L. — Entomological and other notef' 

 on a trip to Australia. Proc. Haw. Ent. Soc. I, 9. \ 



At Cairns Pheidole niegacephala swarmed everywhere, an<| 

 no lady-bird or its larva could get at the scales on nuiny badlj 

 affected trees. 



1906. Wheeler, W. M. — On certain tropical ants intrdii 

 duced into the United States. Ent. T\"ews, XVII, 24. j 



]^otes, the supplanting of Pheidole megacephala by the Ar 

 gentine ant (Iridomyrmex hinnilis Mayr), in Madeira. TI 

 author quotes from Prof. Heer's description of the formei 

 species. 



1909. Swezey, O. H. — Xotes on the budmoth of sugail 

 cane, etc. Haw. Planters' Record, I, 133. 



The author states that P. tnegacephala is always abundant 

 in cane, often having its nests beneath the leaf sheaths. It 

 destroys not only the young bud worms but also other cane- 

 feeding caterpillars. 



1910. Wheeler, W. M.— Ants, p. 154-155. 



The author quotes, from Professor Heer's account of P. 

 megacephala, and states that this ant is very common in Ber- 

 muda and West Indies and will probably be found in Florida. 

 He savs that there can be little doubt that wherever it o-ains a 



let 



