;e |)ee-j\eepeps' |Ae\?ie6). 



A MONTHLY JOURNAL 



Devoted to tl^e Interests of Hoiqey Producers. 



$L00 A YFAR. 



W. Z, HDTCHiNSON, Editor and Praprletor, 



VOL. Xil. 



FLINT. MICHIGAN, MAY 10, 1899, 



NO 5 



HONEY DEW. 

 \ Scieniilic Explanation of its Source. 



R. M'KNIGHT. 



HN article on 

 honey dew 

 appeared in the 

 American Bee 

 Jonrnal, of the 

 I 2th of January, 

 from the pen of 

 Prof. Cook, in 

 which he quotes 

 an extract from 

 the British Bee 

 Journal wherein 

 it is said: "Honey dew isa saccharine sub- 

 stance or sweet juice, which, at times, 

 and under certain atmospheric conditions, 

 exudes from the leaves of trees and 

 plants." The Prof, is not a believer in 

 this theory of the source of honey dew. 

 He admits, however, that, "the cultured 

 editor is a recognized authority on all 

 such subjects," and expresses the belief 

 that Mr. Cowan never saw this article, 

 else he would not allow such an erron- 

 eous statement to appear in his Journal. 

 I was interested in the Professor's ar- 

 ticle; because I always believed honey 

 dew to be what it is allej^ed to oe in the 



paragraph quoted — a sweet exudation 

 from the leaves of trees and plants; and, 

 because, if honey dew be what Prof. Cook 

 says it is, "a secretion of plant-lice, scab- 

 insects etc. " ( I omit the techanical terms ) 

 then the nectar ( ? ) thus produced has 

 something revolting in its associations. 

 If the Prof, had given us a convincing 

 reason of the faith that is in him, or, 

 better still, a scientific explanation of how 

 this ambrosial secretion is produced, I 

 might still retain the respect I have had 

 for a good article of honey dew; but he 

 has done neither done one nor the other. 

 The Professor has given what may appear 

 to him to be satisfactory reasons (two of 

 them) for the conclusion he has arrived 

 at. After careful examination, for years, 

 he .says he has always found "plant-lice, 

 scab-insects, or else larva; of insects, often 

 working in scores where honey dew was 

 present;" hence he concludes "these to 

 be the source of the nectar." Their pres- 

 ence in thousands under such conditions 

 is no proof that "they are the source of 

 the nectar" on which they delight to rev- 

 el. Bees, ants and wasps, are also found 

 where this so called secretion abounds, 

 but no one believes them to be its source. 

 He tells us, too, that, in connnon with 

 other observers, he has found honey dew 

 in quantity on the leaves of the lower 

 branches of trees, "where noa])hides were 



