39th YEAR. 



CHICAGO, ILL., JANUARY 12, 1899, 



No. 2, 



Honey-Dew — Its Orig-in and Uses. 



BY PROF. A. J. COOK. 



followiiiiJ- refrardintr the 







N pag-e 581 (1898) occurs the 

 orig-in of honey-dew : 



" Hoiiey-dew, on the cnMtrar\-. is a saccharine substance or swein 

 juice, which at times, and under certain atmospheric conditions, exudes 

 from the surface oi the leaves of trees and plants/' 



This occtirs, we are told, as an editorial in the British 

 Bee Journal, from which it was copied. We all know what 

 a reliable journal that is. and that its editor. Mr. Cowan — 

 tho very likely he never saw this article at all — is a justly 

 recog-ni2ed authority on all such subjects. Yet I g-reatlv 

 doubt if this assertion is true. I kno\\- that all the dic- 

 tionaries g-ive a similar definition. They all assert that 

 honey-dew is a product of both insects and plants. Even 

 the very correct, and scientifically accurate Gentury, copies 

 in substance the old definition, which, however, is cor- 

 rected in part in a note from " Science." 



That this definition should gain a place in our diction- 

 aries, and might even have come from a scientist of hig-li 

 repute and recog-nized ability and accuracy, is undoubted] \ 

 true. 



It is no uncommon thing that aphides — the source of 

 very much of the so-called honey-dew — are located on cer- 

 tain branches of a tree — may be the topmost limbs. Yet 

 their honeyed secretion is scattered and falls to lower 

 branches, which are very likely the only part of the trer 

 which comes under the observation of the pedestrian natur- 

 alist. He notes the nectar, and carefully searches for in- 

 sects, which, of course, unless he climbs the tree, he fails t.i 

 find. He concludes that this is a secretion — "exudation "' 

 — from the leaves. He so states in a scientific journal of 

 known repute, and his conclusion, tho wrong, becomes a dic- 

 tionary definition, to be copied for years. An error, once 

 in the dictionary, is very difficult to overtake and correct. 



I once rode under some willows in Sacramento county 

 in the '60's, the lower branches of which were sticky witii 

 honey-dew. I was on horseback, and carefully sought in the 

 thick foliag-e for the aphides which I suppo.sed were the pro- 

 ducers of the nectar. I failed to find them on branches ac- 

 cessible tho I was on horseback and sought as far as I could 

 from the horse's back. I concluded that the honey-dew 

 was secreted by the willow leaves. I now have no "doubt 

 that if I had climbed the tree and examined all the branches 

 I would have found plant-lice. I think this because I have 

 often seetr just such cases since. 



Every summer since coming to California, in 1893, I 

 have seen willow plant-lice located on a single limb, and 



that often high up in the tree. I have often noticed the 

 same thing- in Michigan. 



I have no doubt that most observing bee-keepers who 

 read the American Bee Journal have frequentlv observed 

 the same fact. We thus easily explain the origin of the 

 dictionary definition. We likewise understand how difficult 

 it is to correct any such error when once given circulation 

 in what we all suppose to be only the repository of thor- 

 oug-hly authenticated facts. 



I will now give my reasons for doubting- tlie plant ori- 

 gin of honey-dew : 



1. I have now carefully examined this secretion for 

 years, whenever seen, and have always found either aphides 

 — plant-lice; coccids — scab insects: other Hemipterous — 

 bugs; or else larva; of insects (these are reported to me) 

 often working in scores — to be the source of this nectar. 

 This gives strong presumption that such is ahva3-,s; the 

 source of honey-dew. 



2. We have reason to believe, in theeconomv of Nature, 

 that energy is never expended by plant or animal that does 



r 



.-J Single " Ideal " Super of Tall Srclioiis. 

 'See Mr. Kepler's Article— jjatre I'X; 



not in some way benefit by such outgo. We are easily able 

 to see how the insects profit by the secretion of this nectar. 

 They thus lure bees, ants, wasps, etc., to their immediate 

 presence, and these in turn repel the birds which else would 

 feed on and destroy the insects. 



I once noticed an exhibit of this function iii Michigan, 

 so palpably displayed that to doubt it was impossible. The 

 Lecanium tilis— a large bark-louse— was thick on a linden 

 tree close beside my study v.indow. In early spring the 

 beautiful song-sparrow commenced to feed on the voun."' 



