THE SO-CALLED STING. 87 
There is not a particle of evidence, however, to show that such pene- 
trating is attended with the injection of any poisonous fluid, and the 
injurious consequences which follow them in rare cases are evidently 
due to unusual sensitiveness on the part of the individual, as suggested 
by Doctor Smith, or a bad condition of the blood, which would cause 
any wound to be attended with serious consequences. In this con- 
nection it is to be remembered that there are well-authenticated 
instances of most serious, if not fatal, results following the bites of 
such insects as the mosquito, and other biting flies, the result of the 
bites of which are very trivial in common experience. 
With all the reports of stings by the Cicada which have been made 
it is not to be questioned that some of them have a basis in fact. As 
suggested by Doctor Smith, and afterwards fully elaborated by 
Doctor Walsh,’ many of these reports are undoubtedly cases of wrong 
determination, and the stinging had probably no direct connection with 
the Cicada. There are, for example, severa! large digger wasps which 
provision their larval galleries with adult cicadas for the maintenance 
of their young. One of the commonest of the digger wasps is the 
species S phecius speciosus Dru., described later on under the heading of 
the enemies of the Cicada (pp. 132-134). As first suggested by Doctor 
Smith, and afterwards more fully shown by Doctor Walsh, it is not 
unlikely that this or some allied wasp, flying with its rather heavy 
burden, might strike against or alight on some human being, and upon 
being brushed off would retaliate by stinging the offender and then 
flying away, leaving the Cicada behind. In the absence of the wasp 
the Cicada would very naturally be accused of the offense. The usual 
prey of this wasp, which appears rather too late in the season to 
account for all the cases of stinging reported, is the later appearing 
annual cicadas. 
The rare cases of stinging by the Cicada that have any basis in fact 
may be accounted for, as already suggested, by a thrust either of the 
ovipositor or the sucking beak. 
From the structure of the ovipositor, as already described, it will at 
once be perceived that there is nothing impossible in a wound being 
made by this instrument. The objections to this suggestion are that 
the ovipositor when not in use in placing eggs in twigs is concealed in 
a sheath in the insect’s abdomen, and also that the piercing of a twig 
or other substance by the ovipositor is a slow and laborious process, 
and therefore would not account for the quick sting usually described. 
In no ease has an egg been found im the flesh, and in fact it is improb- 
able that an insect would be allowed to rest long enough on the flesh 
to accomplish the insertion of an egg. Furthermore, tests were made 
and reported by Doctor Walsh? and later by Professor Riley, showing 
a American Entomologist, I, pp. 7, 8; September, 1868. b Loe. cit. 
