1885 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



708 



with their wings— attenuating- is over— we cut them 

 off. We see this is not against nature; and he who | 

 reasons that such queens are not just as acceptable I 

 to the bees, opposes both reason and experience. ' 



These plant-lice are tlask-shaped, and often ova- 

 viviparous; that is, the eggs hatch within the par- j 

 cut, not outside (oviparous), and these young, when i 

 hatched, are born at ouce, and are not nourished ' 

 for a time by material from the blood of the mother 1 

 'viviparous), as are the highest mammals. .V little 

 watching in the summer, or on house-plants in win- 

 ter, will demonstrate this statement. The young 

 lice will be seen at the moment of birth. Outdoors, 

 the last females of the season lay eggs (ovipai-ous), 

 which pass the winter in some crevice, and hatch as 

 the warmth of spring excites development. These 

 l>lant-lico are also agamic, or illustrate the law of 

 parthenogenesis. Thus they are specially interest- 

 ing to I)e(f-keepers, who witness the same law in the 

 development of drone-bees. All the summer broods 

 of plant-lice, and there are several, are cotnpose<l 

 wholly of fenniles. If any of these are captured at 

 birth, and placed at once singly on a plant suitable 

 to their growth aud development, each one will ma- 

 ture and produce, or give birth, to many lice. In- 

 deed, our secluding them is quite immaterial, as the 

 closest scrutiny will find no males till fall, when 

 males and the oviparous females appeal- and mate, 

 antecedent to egg-laying. I'lant-lice work almost 

 wholly on the leaves or gr(!en tend«'r twigs. 



Mr. Keed speaks of the lea\es curling up. This is 

 not uneonunon. In many cases the leaves retain 

 their shaj)*', but seem to become enfeebled, and the 

 (ilant dies. In some cases— Indeed, (|uite frequent- 

 ly -the leaves curl up and die. In a few eases, as 

 (111 the elm and poplar, galls are formed. The curl- 

 ed leaves and galls must ser\e as both food and 

 iiousc for the lice. Thus such plants obey literall.\ 

 the beautiful comniandmcnt, " If tiiine enemy hun- 

 g(U-, feed him," for such plants bestow both shelter 

 and food ui)on their most hurtful enemies. Nearly 

 all of these i)laiit-lii'e secrete nectar, some from two 

 tubes (nectaries) which protrude obliquely up and 

 hack from the abilomeu; others, and perhaps iill, 

 from the general surface of the body. This is a se- 

 cretion; and if experieiu-e proves it to he always 

 wholcstnue, it should not be denounced or regarded [ 

 with disfavor any more than milk, which is wholly 

 analogous in its origin. This nectar serves the lice 

 in attracting bees, ants, and wasps, which act as 

 sentinels to keep birds and predaceous and parasit- 

 ic insects from destroying the lice. At the same 

 time, the nectar s(m\cs the liecs and oiirschcs as ' 

 luod. 



I have oricii chIIimI atteiilion to ihc dinerrncc be- 

 Iwcen this idant-louse (Aiihiilcf!) nectar, and that 

 from the bark-lice. While the former is pleasant 

 and wholesome in all <;ases, so far as I ha>e exam- , 

 ined, the latter (which comes from the Hat, scale- i 

 like, motionless bark-lice) is bitter, strong, dark, and 

 unwholesome. It is certainly unfit for table use, 

 and I should not deem it fit food for bees. 



As to Mr. Keed's query, I should have no fear in | 

 using this honey for winter stores, even with the 

 bees in the cellar. Should they die with this honey, 

 I think they would die with any other. I should not j 

 be as willing to have my hives stocked with this 

 bark - louse nectar, such as was so eommon a year ^ 

 ago; yet several used it in cellar wintering, even j 

 last winter, with entire success. It may be, that if I 

 every thing else is all right, such fopd would ans- 1 



wer; yet I should be afraid of it. I dislike to feed 

 my bees what I would not eat myself. 



I hope, Mr. Editor, we shall call these substances 

 plant-louse nectar, or secretion, and bark-louse nec- 

 tar, or secretion— not " bug-juice." The latter term 

 has neither science, accuracj', nor euphony, to rec- 

 ommend it. A. J. Cook. 



AfTicultural CoHege, Mich. 



Friend ("ook, we thank ytui for makius 

 this distinction ; but it seen'is to me that the 

 name you suggest is jjot much of an im- 

 provement — that is, so far as pleasant sug- 

 gestions are concerned. I do not like the 

 word louse or lice, aud 1 never use it if I can 

 avoid it. although I have placed it at the head 

 of this article. Can you not suggest a name 

 that does not have any such unpleasant 

 term about it, especially when speaking of 

 honey to those who know comparatively lit- 

 tle about such matters? 1 do not like to see 

 my friends turn up their noses when 1 am 

 explaining the wonders of the bee-hive or 

 the forest. \\'hy not say. bark-aphis nectar 

 and plant-aphis nectarV that is, if we must 

 use the word nectar, when nectar seems 

 such a misnomer for the greater pavi of 

 these products, lloney-dew is not the word, 

 for two reasons : it is iu)t dew nor is it hon- 

 ey. Now. before we settle down upon a 

 luime.caiit we have one less objectionable? 

 For my part 1 would have it Latin, rather 

 than to awaken disgust when trying hard to 

 doijuite tiie contrary, lam very glad of 

 the important facts you give in this wonder- 

 ful matter of tliese secretions from insects. 



HMKM> Mil, 



DRY FAECES. 



cavKs rs soMK rKKTT 



TS IN n-HE M.\TTK.H. 



POPITIVK 



Hol. n )( "K lias mentioned m.> nami> as send- 

 ing specimens vi dry fa'ces of bees. I merely 

 forwarded to him specimens sent me by Mr. 

 S. Corneil, of Lindsay, Out., which were put 

 up so nicely, and withal were such good spec- 

 imens, that 1 felt sure Prol. took would be interest- 

 ed in seeing theiu. 1 am not interested in the dis- 

 j.'ussion about dry fa-ces- perhaps not as much as I 

 ought to be, for 1 confess that I am ignorant of fh<^ 

 exact bearing it has upon beekeeping. Perhaps 

 Prof. Cook or Mr. Coriieil will inform us on this 

 poinl. The most 1 know about it is, that Mr. (^(u-- 

 iieil, with his usual painstaking character, has been 

 trj iiig to show that bees can and do void ficces dry, 

 and that Prof. Cook has been for years just as 

 strongly opposing, only latterly admitting that they 

 may exceptionally do so. 1 don't know that I can? 

 two cents which theory is coi-rect, and winild hardly 

 enter the lists with any less noble foe than Prof. 

 Cook, whom, with all iny respect for him as an au- 

 thor and scientist, I hold in still higher esteem as a 

 friend aud brother. And I now enter the lists only 

 so far as to state what has come, without seeking, 

 directly under my own observation among my 

 own bees. If Prof. Cook had been here when my 

 liees took their Hight last spring I am not sure liut 

 he might have said that dry was the normal, and 

 liquid the exception. I am not mistaken, I think, 

 as to what 1 saw, for I have often seen the bees in 

 the act of \oiding, both tUjs aud other years, and 

 have gcen thousanrjs of speciiueiig such as Mr- Cor' 



