134 



Root Galls of Australia.— Since the preceding notice was written we 

 have received Part 2, Vol. 1, of the Agricultural Gazette of New South 

 Wales (August, 1890) and are pleased to notice that it is devoted en- 

 tirely to the consideration of an Auguillulid which damages potatoes, 

 parsnips, mangels, and the roots of the peach. The subject is treated 

 in a masterly manner by Dr. N. A. Cobb, the pathologist of the De- 

 partment of Agriculture of New South Wales. A most careful study 

 of the life history of the species involved is given and an analytical key 

 to the species of the genus Tylenchus follows. Descriptions of the 

 different species are then given and the final section of the paper con* 

 siders the question of remedies. Dr. Cobb identifies the species with 

 the one treated by Dr. Iseal in Bulletin 20 of this Division and adopts 

 Dr. Neal's provisional name of Tylenchus arenarius. He is unfamiliar 

 with the paper by Prof. G. F. Atkinson published as No. 1, Vol. 1, of 

 the " Science Contributions from the Agricultural Experiment Siation, 

 Alabama Polytechnic Institute" (reviewed in Insect Life for March, 

 1890, page 263), in which this form is determined as identical with the 

 European Heterodera radicicola, although Doctor (.Jobb admits that the 

 species may be this latter, his uncertainty arising from the insufificieucy 

 of the description and from lack of literature. Doctor Cobb gives the 

 results of no experiments of his own with remedies, but publishes a 

 very concise and admirable summary of the recommendations of others, 

 giving the greatest prominence to the trapping remedy proposed by 

 Professor Kuhn on the basis of Strubell's investigations. He also de- 

 votes considerable space to the different means by which the disease 

 may pass from one piece of land to another and in this connection the 

 influence of a good system of surface drainage is brought out. 



We congratulate the Director of Agriculture upon the publication of 

 such an admirable paper. 



Notes upon Ephestia interpunctella — We publish in this number a 

 note under the above heading by Mr. W. H. Pattou, in which he arrives 

 at the conclusion that Ephestia interpunctella, E. Mihniella, and E. zece 

 are all synonyms. We publish the note in deference to Mr. Patton's 

 well known reputation as an entomologist, but can not do so without 

 entering our strong dissent from his conclusions. We have long since 

 adopted zem as a synonym of interpunctella, but fully believe in the dis- 

 tinctness of kUhniella, though originally inclined to believe that they 

 might prove synonymous. Full study confirmed us in the opposite 

 view, and, while we do not attach great generic value to the differences, 

 the fact that Mr. Hulst in his recent monograph of the Phycitidse of 

 North America has placed them in two different genera {kUhniella be- 

 longing to Ephestia proper while interpunctella is placed in Guen^e's 

 genus Plodia, is certainly corroborative of their specific distinctness. 

 The main difference between the two genera, as indicated by Mr. Hulst, 



