706 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXII. No. 570. 



allowance to be made for its fluctuation. It 

 is well known that thermoelements deteriorate 

 at high temperatures. This results in an in- 

 correct reading and the error depends on the 

 distribution of temperature in the furnace 

 and, therefore, on the amount and nature of 

 the charge which is being examined, etc. 

 Trouble from this source was largely removed 

 by comparing the working elements with 

 standards which were used for so short a time 

 as to -hold their values practically unchanged 

 for several months. The comparison must be 

 made under exactly the conditions for which 

 the temperature reading is intended. Thus 

 for best results in the determination of melt- 

 ing points, comparison must be made during 

 the melting. The relative error of a tempera- 

 ture measurement below 1,550° can in this 

 way be brought within half a degree. 



One conclusion from the work is that the 

 temperature of lavas where wollastonite is 

 found can not have exceeded 1,163°. 



Charles K. Wead, 



Secretary. 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE. 

 DR. O. F cook's ' SOCIAL ORGANIZATION AND BREED- 

 ING HABITS OF THE COTTON-PROTECTING 

 KELEP OF GUATEMALA.' 



Some of the results of the continued work 

 of the United States Department of Agricul- 

 ture on the ponerine ant, Ectatomma tubercu- 

 latum Olivier, introduced into Texas for the 

 purpose of aiding in the extermination of the 

 cotton boll weevil, are given in this paper of 

 fifty-five pages in advance of an illustrated 

 bulletin or report on the same subject. Dr. 

 Cook's paper can hardly be passed over with- 

 out comment, since it displays so many mis- 

 statements of fact, such inadequate knowledge 

 of the work that has been done on other species 

 of ants, and such a wilderness of unkempt 

 argument and specvilation as to entitle it to 

 high rank as an example of what a scientific 

 essay should not be. 



The burden or ' Leitmotiv ' of the whole 

 paper is properly sounded in the introduction, 

 which is well worth quoting in its entirety: 



In preceding reports treating of the kelep as an 

 enemy of the cotton boll weevil the distinctness of 



its behavior from that of the true ants has been 

 noted. To avoid in some measure the misappre- 

 hension likely to be caused by calling it an ant it 

 seemed desirable to introduce with the insect its 

 distinctive Indian name, kelep. In the minds of the 

 natives of Guatemala, the kelep is not a kind of 

 ant, but an independent animal not to be asso- 

 ciated with ants. The more we learn about it the 

 more this aboriginal opinion appears justified, not 

 alone because the kelep is a beneficial insect, but 

 because it has a different mode of existence and 

 a different place in the economy of nature. 



The popular classification of the social hymenop- 

 tera recognizes three types — the ants, the bees and 

 the wasps, the ants being distinguished from the 

 others by the absence of wings. The kelep falls, 

 however, into none of these groups. To call it 

 a wasp or a bee would not misrepresent the prac- 

 tical facts more than to call it an ant. In reality 

 the kelep represents a fourth category of social 

 hymenoptera, as distinct from the other three 

 as they are from each other. Authorities on the 

 classification of the hymenoptera have admitted 

 a rather close affinity between the wasps and the 

 ants, but the kelep differs from both of these 

 groups and approaches the bees in important re- 

 spects, and especially in those which affect the 

 question of its domestication and utilization in 

 agriculture. 



It was naturally supposed at first that the kelep 

 would have the same habits as the true ants 

 which have been associated with it as members 

 of the same family or subfamily, but the differ- 

 ences were greatly underestimated. If the hy- 

 menoptera were classified by a taxonomic system 

 consistent with that applied to the higher animals, 

 the kelep would need to be recognized as the type 

 of a new and distinct family. It is, moreover, the 

 first member of its family of which the habits 

 have become known. Under such circumstances 

 it was quite impossible, obviously, to determine in 

 advance whether its habits and instincts would 

 permit its colonization in the United States and 

 its use in agriculture. 



The fundamental difference between the ants 

 and the kelep, and that in which the latter re- 

 sembles the honey bee, lies in the methods of 

 swarming. Among the bees and the keleps 

 swarming results directly in the formation of new 

 colonies, but the swarming of the ants is a dis- 

 tinct biological phenomenon having for its object 

 cross-fertilization. The kelep is completely so- 

 cialized, like the honey bee, while the ant is not. 

 The keleps and the honey bees live only in com- 

 munities, while the ants at one stage of their life 



