1893 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



211 



colonies, and more or less combs destroyed by- 

 moths; and it became an interesting specula- 

 tion as to how much beeswax is thus wasted in 

 California apiaries. The aggregate would as- 

 tonish even a California bee-keeper. The na- 

 ture of the country precludes it from ever being 

 thickly settled, and consequently there are 

 many lonely homes in places where the sight of 

 a human being is rare. Homes are seen perch- 



THK JOYS OF WKDDED H[.ISS. 



ed upon lofty terraces, where there is no visible 

 means of support, and where all of the water 

 used by the occupants has to be drawn up on 

 wagons, or packed up in honey-cans on horse- 

 back. Many of these places are deserted after 

 a time, the occupants evidently getting tired of 

 trying to boom the country on their own hook. 

 There are many tine honey locations all along 

 next to the Mexican border; but they are not 

 occupied, for the proximity to the pilfering 

 Mexicans would necessitate the owner's constant 

 vigilance, and a constant residence there. 

 Wherefore an apiary just on the border would 

 not accord with the habits of the Rambler. 



PARTHENOGENESIS QUESTIONED. 



A DEVELOPMENT OF THE DZIERZON THEORY; 



INVESTIGATIONS OF THE GERMANS ON 



THE SUB.TECT. 



Years ago. Dzierzon startled the bee-keei)ing 

 world by announcing that eggs were laid, and 

 from them living bees were hatched, without 

 any fertilization. Bitter was the conflict waged 

 over it; but at last Dzierzon was left master of 

 the field, and is to-day honored the world over, 

 and the Dzierzon theory respected everywhere. 



Now. however, there are signs that the ques- 

 tion is to be reopened, the demand being made 

 to relinquish the theory, or, at least, to modify 

 it. At, the great convention of German and 

 Hungarian bee-keepers at Budapest, Mr. Ed- 

 ward Metzger announced his belief that the 

 commonly accepted theory, that the spermathe- 

 ca was simply a receptacle, was incorrect. In 

 the first place, it seemed unreasonable that 

 spermatozoa by the million could exist in a re- 

 ceptacle scarcely visible to the naked eye, and 

 that they should in such a receptacle have so 

 long a life- term as four or five years. 



After microscopic investigations during the 

 year, he was ready to affirm that the sperma- 

 theca of the queen is a gland, just as much as 

 the testes of the drone, the ovary of the (|ueen, 

 or the poison-gland of the worker, each of 

 which secretes its own peculiar product. In 



the spermatheca of an unfecundated queen are 

 secreted cells without a nucleus or germ. In 

 mating, the queen receives cells with nuclei and 

 spermatozoa. The latter increase in the sper- 

 matheca. Taking a queen in the height of egg- 

 laying, and crushing the spermatheca, pieces of 

 the inner secreting membrane will be found, 

 from which the spermatozoa are developed, and 

 to which they adhere like leeches. So the sper- 

 matozoa are developed before the cells are de- 

 tached from the membrane. 



Quite different is it with a queen which has 

 ceased to lay. The spermatozoa are not so 

 numerous, and show activity only when moist- 

 ened with a weak solution of salt. In winter, 

 even the salt solution fails to excite activity. 

 This shows that the number of spermatozoa in- 

 creases and diminishes at different times — a 

 thing which could not be, on the sup[)OSition 

 that the spermatheca is simply a receptacle 

 to contain a constantly diminishing number of 

 spermatozoa. 



At a later date. Mr. C. Weygandt came to the 

 support of Mr. Metzger by saying that he had 

 examined the spermatheca of a laying worker, 

 and found cells therein. Thus Mr. Metzger as- 

 serts that there is in every queen the means 

 within herself of fecundating her eggs, so there 

 is no such thing as parthenogenesis, or life with- 

 out fecundation, the queen being a true her- 

 maphrodite. 



To put the matter in a few words, it seems to 

 be something like this: In the spermatheca, 

 before fecundation, there is material constantly 

 engendered that serves to impregnate eggs, 

 from which only drones hatch. On mating 

 with the drone, spermatozoa are introduced, 

 which serve as seed to multiply; and when eggs 

 are impregnated by these, the female progeny 

 is produced. But no egg produces a living re- 

 sult without being impregnated one way or the 

 other. 



The promulgation of this theory was received 

 with applause at the convention, and the differ- 

 ent journals have published it in full; but the 

 editors tight shy of it. The Bienen-Vater 

 comes out in strong terms against it, saying, 

 among other things, that it is only a revival of 

 the same theory advanced in 1881 by E. Pflue- 

 ger. Gravenhorst makes no comment; and Leh- 

 zen, of the Ciuitntlhlatt. refers the matter to the 

 learned Prof. Leuckardt, of Leipzig, who says 

 Mr. Metzger has given, instead of observations, 

 conjectures which float in the air," nothing but 

 false suppositions — false conclusions."' 



It seems a little strange, that, after nearly 

 half a century of investigations, the Dzierzon 

 theory all the while becoming more firmly es- 

 tablishc^d. we should be asked to make a new 

 departure. No doubt investigations will be re- 

 newed, and the truth estaljlished. The fact 

 that the new theory is opposed does not prove 

 it false, any more than it proved the Dzierzon 

 theory false. Indeed, in a certain sense the new 

 theory may be said to be a fuller development 

 of, rather than destructive to, the Dzierzon the- 

 ory. The venerable Dzierzon was present at the 

 convention, and, although conservative, and 

 prompt to oppose what he conceives to be 

 error, he expressed no disapproDation, but rath- 

 er gave his ai)proval, by quoting, from his many 

 years' experience, facts that .seemed to favor 

 the new theory. He had frequently had Italian 

 queens mated with black drones that at first 

 produced mixed workers, and afterward pure 

 Italians. 



At present the new theory seems to stand only 

 as a possibility: but time proves all things. In 

 actual practice it can hardly make a great deal 

 of difference whether it be accepted or rejected. 

 I can see where it might be of use in just one 

 little item. I had atone time a ([ueen which 



