THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



53 





For the American Bee Journal. 



The Dzierzon Theory. 



DK. 6. L. TINKER. 



That the questions arising out of 

 this tlieory ni.iv be generally under- 

 stood, I will preface this article with 

 a few explanations. The Dzierzon 

 theory, as now understood, is simply 

 tlie doctrine of parthenogenesis or 

 agamic reproduction applied to the 

 honey bee. Tlie IJaron of Berlepsch's 

 admirable treatise with the above 

 title embraces thirteen propositions 

 relating to the scientihe knowledge of 

 the honeybee. The eighth and nintli, 

 setting forth the doctrine of partheno- 

 genesis alone out of the thirteen re- 

 main unconfirmed. These comprise the 

 salient points of the theory and are 

 very ably discussed. Parthenogene- 

 sis is defined as "• the i)roduction of 

 young by a female without intercourse 

 with a male." Aganiogenesis, as 

 "reproduction without the union of 

 tlie whole or parts of two organisms 

 for the formation of offspring." 

 These terms are therefore nearly 

 synonymous. 



Willi many of the lower order of 

 insects {''H't'ienogenesis is an estab- 

 lished fact, since the virgin females 

 in many instances produce female as 

 well as male offspring. (Joing far- 

 ther down the scale of life and we 

 have simply dimorphism or alternate 

 generation in which the female is par- 

 ent only to the male, and tlie male 

 only to the female. But such is the 

 relation between the lower and the 

 higher forms of life that the alter- 

 nate generation may be traced as a 

 preponderating inflnence in the gen- 

 eration of the higher forms of life ; or 

 in other words, the female, ordina- 

 rily, exerts a prepotent intluence over 

 the male olfspring and the male the 

 same over the female offspring. 



Ascending in the scale of life, we 

 liiid in hymenopterous insects a well 

 delincd exeei)tioii to the complete op- 

 eration of the laws of dimorphic and 

 agamic reproduction. In the queen 

 bee, no females can be produced with- 

 out a nniou with the drone, partheno- 

 genesis is so far true that the virgin 

 queen can [iroduce drones only. The 

 only i)oint in question, therefore, is 

 whether the drone progeny of a fecun- 

 dated queen may l>e affected by the 

 mating drone. I think that it may 

 be, and deny tliat the fact a virgin 

 (iiieen may (irodnce drones is evidence 

 that the vivifying tluid of the drone 

 may not affect the ovaries of a queen 

 so as to modify her drone offspring. 



It has been said that a lilack queen 

 mated with an Italian drone produces 

 a drone inogeny that cannot be dis- 

 tinguished from the drone progeny of 

 purely mated black queens. So, too. 

 It lias been stated, that a pure Italian 

 queen mating witli a German drone 

 may produce a royal and worker pro- 

 geny that cannot be distinguished 



from that of a purely mated Italian 

 queen. In the latter case, the fact of 

 the impure mating cannot be posi- 

 tively delerminedexceptiii thesecond 

 genenition. In tlie former case, the 

 third generation W(nild be required to 

 determine perceptible effects, as fol- 

 lows: Mating a pure black queen 

 with an Italian drone, one of her 

 drones to be mated with a pure black 

 queen, the royal offspring of the lat- 

 ter to be mated with an Italian drone. 

 The drone progenvof the latter queen 

 should sliow some' of the markings of 

 the Italian drone. A better test, to 

 my mind, would be to, begin with a 

 pure Syrian queen to be mated with a 

 pure Geruian drone, etc. This would 

 be a very diliicult experiment to carry 

 out, yet'alinosl every other test must 

 be attended with negative results. For 

 instance, a .Syrian queen may be 

 mated with a (4erraan drone. The 

 prepotency of tlie queen over her 

 male offspring may obliterate all per- 

 ceptible effects of the lirst cross, as 

 with a black (pieen. Still the light 

 colors of the Italian and Syrian bees 

 are without doubt more easily affected 

 by crossing than the dark color of the 

 German bees, since the workers of a 

 black queen fecundated with an Ital- 

 ian drone are only about one-third 

 marked with one or more yellow 

 bands, while in an Italian queen 

 mated with a black drone at least one- 

 half and often two-thirds of the work- 

 ers will be without yellow bands. 



I should not regard the mating of a 

 Syrian or Cyprian queen with an Ital- 

 ian drone as affording a reliable test, 

 owing to the three races being evi- 

 dently nearly related. 



A test having some reliability is 

 where a lot of pure sister Italian 

 queens have been mated, some with 

 German, and some with Italian drones, 

 as indicated by their worker progeny. 

 The drones of the impurely mated 

 queens will show an admixture of 

 black blood in their form, size, growth 

 of hair at the end of abdomen, and 

 color, while the drones of the purely 

 mated queens will be quite similar in 

 all respects and well marked Italians. 



Having repeatedly observed these 

 results with great care, led me at 

 at length to doulit that part of the 

 Dzierzon theory relating to iiartheno- 

 geiiesis. except in so far as it applied 

 to virgin queens and laying workers. 



There are, however, other consid- 

 erations bearing against the theory 

 worthy of notice. As will be seen 

 I from the anatomy of the generative 

 organs of the cpieen bee, there are a 

 large number of ovarian tubes (ac- 

 cording to Prof. A. J. Cook not less 

 than one hundred) opening into the 

 oviduct. In the act of copulation 

 I there is nothing to prevent the sper- 

 matozoa of the drone from migrating, 

 as is there wont, through all of these 

 tubes. That their presence in a queen's 

 , ovaries could have no effect upon 

 them, seems to me quite improbable. 

 ! Indeed, we lind the abdomen of the 

 I queen to begin to enlarge at once 

 I jireparatory to the depositing of eggs, 

 demonstrating that their (the sperma- 

 tozoa) presence has had a decided 

 effect. 

 ' Again, it may be found that the in- 



gress of only one spermatozoon into 

 the micropyle of an ovum may not be 

 sufficient to alter the sex. which has 

 been shown to be constantly male in 

 the eggs of the virgin queen, but the 

 entrance of several spermatozoa into 

 an ovum, in passing by the sperma- 

 tlieca. may cause the male elements 

 to be prepotent and so change the sex 

 of the ovum. In this manner it is 

 possible to account for the variously 

 marked worker bees of an impurely 

 mated (|ueeii liy supposing some ovi 

 to be impregnated with a few, and 

 others with many spermatozoa. 



In concluding, it may be well to note, 

 that since aganiic reproduction in the 

 honey bee has been left an o)ien ques- 

 tion by so exi-ellent an authority as 

 Prof. A.,]. Cook in his •• JManual of 

 the Apiary" (see page 89), no more 

 fruitful Held for experimentation is 

 now open to the scientific bee-keeper 

 or the practical scientist. 



New Philadelphia, O. 



For tlio American Bee Journal 



Another Bee Enemy. 



E. T. FLANAGAN. 



I tind the following in the Bee-Keep- 

 ers' M((ganne for December, 1881: 

 "Mondovi, Wis., Oct. 12, 1881— Mr. 

 Editor: There has been a worm in 

 these parts, that has destroyed a good 

 share of the brood; it seems to be 

 different to the moth worm, and works 

 wholly in the bottom of the cell, and 

 kills the brood before it is ready to 

 liatcli. It does not look to be affected 

 until the bees uncap it, and it is all 

 dead. I cannot lind any way to get 

 rid of them, they eat from one cell to 

 another, and through the center of 

 the comb. The worm is not like the 

 miller moth worm, but is much smaller 

 and seems to hatch in the bottom of 

 the cells. I have found some of the 

 worms not larger than a worker egg, 

 all the way np to as large as a snnul 

 sized knitting needle, and about J^ 

 inch long. 1 lind them in every one's 

 bees that I have looked at; if they 

 continue, they will ruin all the bees. 

 Have you been troubled with any such 

 thing, and if so, is there any remedyV 

 — N. II. Fisher." 



To which Professor Ilasbrouck re- 

 sponded: "The worm you describe 

 seems to be something new, I have 

 never before heard of anything like 

 this." 



In an article in Harpers' Magazine 

 for Dec, by W. II. Gibson, entitled 

 " Among our foot prints." I find the 

 following which may throw some light 

 on the subject: 



" There is still another beetle 

 which is met with in our rambles *** 

 known as the meloe. In color the 

 meloe is of a deep indigo blue, rotund 

 in form — when touclied it exudes 

 from every Joint a yellowish liquid, 

 from which' habit it is commonly 

 known as the " oil beetle,'" oroil bug, 

 and by which it may be easily recog- 

 nized * * clumsy and unattractive as 

 this beetle is, it is nevertheless much 

 more interesting than one would im- 

 magine * * * Uriefly told, the history 

 of this common bine beetle is as 



