26 SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF 



described in January, 1865,* as the Illinois Lacewing (Chrysopa Illi- 

 noiensis). The description was republished, together with the sub- 

 stance of Mr. Shimer's observations in the Prairie Farmer, of Chicago, 

 111., accompanied with a non-characteristic wood-cut of the larva, 

 cocoon and imago. At this time Mr. Shimer favored me with two 

 specimens of the perfect insect, and he likewise furnished Mr. Walsh 

 with additional specimens. From these specimens, it is evident that 

 the species is the same as that described long before, by Dr. Filch, 

 as the Weeping Lacewing {Chrysopa p>lorahunda). In 1868, I found 

 the same species quite numerous in a wheat field belonging to Mr. 

 T. R. Allen, of Allenton, where its larvae were perhaps feeding on the 

 Chinch Bugs, as they were found to do in North Illinois, by Dr. Shimer. 

 £ Fl s- 5 -l The Lacewing flies all bear a striking resemblance 



to one another, both in size, shape and color ; and to 

 ^convey a correct idea of their appearance, it i6 

 ^/only necessary to repeat the annexed drawing 

 (Fig 5.) from my First Report, where a sketch of 

 their natural history will be found (pp. 57-S).f They 

 almost all of them, in the fly state, have a charac- 

 teristic and disagreeable odor, resembling nothing so much as human 

 ordure. 



According to Dr. Shimer, the Weeping Lacewing-fly was not 

 quite as abundant as the Spotted Ladybird among the fodder-corn, 

 but still there were so many of them, that he thought that " there was 

 one or more of them for every stalk of that thickly sown corn." 

 " Every stroke of the cutter," he adds, "would raise three or four 

 dozen of them, presenting quite an interesting spectacle as they 

 staggered along in their awkward, unsteady flight." And he not only 

 actually observed the larvae preying very voraciously on the Chinch 

 Bugs in the field, but he reared great numbers of them to the mature 

 Fly by feeding them upon Chinch Bugs. His account of the opera- 

 tions of the larva when in captivity is so interesting that I quote it in 

 full: 



I placed one of the larvae in a vial, after having captured it in the 

 field in the very act of devouring Chinch Bugs of all sizes, and sub- 

 sequently introduced into the vial a number of Chinch Bugs. They 

 had hardly reached the bottom before it seized one of the largest 

 ones, pierced it with its long jaws, held it almost motionless for about 

 a minute while it was sucking the juices from the body of its victim, 

 and then threw down the lifeless shell. In this way, I saw it destroy 

 in quick succession, about a dozen bugs. Towards the last, as its 

 appetite was becoming satiated, it spent live or more minutes in suck- 

 ing the juices from the body of one bug. After this bountiful repast, 

 it remained motionless for an hour or more, as if asleep. Never for 



*Proc. Ent. Soc. Phil., IV, pp. 208-12. 



fin that account I stated as a fact which, so far as I was aware, had not been recorded by 

 any previous writer, that the insect issues from the small cocoon in an active sub-imago state, 

 from which, after a few hours, the winged fly emerges, leaving behind it a fine silvery-white trans- 

 parent skin. I have since found that Dr. Shimer, in the scientific paper already referred to, had 

 previously recorded the very same fact. 



