-156- 



A communication made to Science (May 28, 1886, vii, pp. 481 — 3) 

 b)- R. I. Jackson, records a New Museum Pest in Lepisvui domestica. 

 It had been discovered as very injurious to labels; and it is further be- 

 lieved to be the author of the injury often reported, to muslin curtains, 

 silks, etc., commonly charged upon the carpet beetle, Anthrenus scro- 

 phularicB, as such injuries are known to have resulted from species of 

 Lepisina in other countries, as well as to books, maps, papers, etc. 



The Spirit of the Farm, of Nashville, Tenn.. is publishing a series 

 of entomological articles, by the entomological editor. Prof. E. W. Doran. 



The Pacific Rural Press keeps its readers well informed of the act- 

 ive entomological work being prosecuted in California, in the struggle 

 for the preservation of the fruits of the State from the onslaught of thus 

 far an invincible army of scale-insects. 



TYit New England Homestead, of Springfield, Mass., encourages the 

 observation of insect habits and injury in diffusing much valuable infor- 

 mation in this direction. 



'Y\i& Country Genlleman oi k\\)2SV)\ N. Y., receives many inquiries 

 of insect attacks, which are answered, often at considerable length, by 

 the State Entomologist of New York. 



In addition to the preceding notice of the publications of our ento- 

 mologists, may I be permitted to refer to some studies of particular 

 interest which have been giving us during the year outside of our country 

 to which general attention may not have been drawn. 



Recent studies of Forel, Kraepelin, Hauser and others, had placed 

 almost beyond question, the location of the sense of smell in insects, in 

 the antennas. Later the study has again been taken up by Prof. V. 

 Graber, of the University of Czernowitz, Austria, with results that serve 

 to re-open the question, and invite to further investigation. 



In a late number of the Comptes-Rendus of the Societe Entomo- 

 logique de Belgique, his conclusion are summed up as follows: 



1. The perception of odors is not confined to the antennae, for ants 

 and Lucilia Ccesar deprived of their antennae, retained the perception. 



2. The antennae are perhaps more sensitive to odors than other 

 parts of the body. Silpha thoracica deprived of its antennae, was affected 

 by some odors but not by some weaker ones. 



3. The palpi may be more sensitive to odors than the antenna;, 

 as will appears from some experiments made with Gryllotalpa vulgaris. 



4. In a large series of experiments with a Lucanus which followed 

 the odorous material employed, sometimes the palpi and sometimes the 

 antennae, were the more rapidly excited, 



5. The perception of odors may also lie in tlie anal stylets, as shown 



