hy birds of the Coiiiiiwn Earwig (Forficula auricuLiria) 175 



pest" {Entomologist, XLVI. Feb. 1913, p. 59) reports them as 

 most effective in killing and eating Depressaria heradicwa, the 

 "parsnip web-worm." Brittain and Gooderham (Canad. Entorn., 

 London, Ont., XLVii. no. 2, Feb. 1916, p. 37) make a similar state- 

 ment. 



There is no doubt that our knowledge of the bionomics of 

 the earwig is at present very imperfect. As in the case of other 

 very common animals far too much has been taken for granted. 

 The earwig's nocturnal habit, its tendency to assemble in great 

 numbers between two closely apposed surfaces, and its "frightening 

 attitude " of flexing its abdomen dorsalwards with opened forcipes 

 all tend to give it a reputation for evil which very probably is 

 but partially deserved. We all know how the habit of entering 

 crevices is responsible for the belief that it gnaws through the 

 tympanic membrane with the result of mania or even death. 

 Perce-oreille speaks for itself. It seems fairly established that 

 its universally bad reputation among gardeners is founded on 

 tradition and want of judgment combined with neglect of the 

 increasing evidence that its presence is sometimes beneficial by its 

 destructiveness to more harmful insects than itself That it eats 

 the petals of dahlias and chrysanthemums to some extent is true, 

 but as far as my own observations go the outlay of time and 

 material devoted to the traditional protection of the flowers by 

 inverted flower pots stuffed with straw seems hardly worth while. 

 The great attraction which the flowers have for earwigs seems to 

 be the closeness and number of their petals, which provide a 

 daytime shelter whence nightly excursions for feeding are made. 

 Anyone possessing a garden may greatly add to our knowledge of 

 favourite foods; observation at night is particularly needed. As 

 regards garden varieties of roses the case against earwigs is 

 probably more severe. 



(c) Capture by birds. 



During the last decade systematic investigation of the contents 

 of the alimentary canal of British wild birds by several observers 

 has resulted in most useful information as to which should be 

 regarded as harmful and which as neutral or beneficial to agri- 

 culture. It is manifest from the laborious and painstaking work 

 now at our disposal that many of the reputations, good or evil, 

 which certain common birds have in the eyes of farmers and 

 gardeners need considerable revision, in some cases even reversal. 



As regards the capture of earwigs by birds, it appears that 

 they are not a favourite food when we bear in mind how numerous 

 they are sometimes and that they are large enough to be easily 

 seized. No doubt their nocturnal habit affords much protection 

 from capture. 



