AGEICLLTURAI. EXPERIMENT STATION. 135 



If you have seen what Henderson calls the ^'■Verbena, mite" and 

 know it to be the same species as you sent me, that certainly is a 

 clincher. Henderson's figure certainly is nothing like the mite in 

 question. His figure is pointed in front while the mite we are 

 considering is broadly oblong and rounded in front. Henderson's 

 figure is 20 m m. (.8 in.) in length and he says it is magnified four 

 hundred times. This would make the mite only .05 m m. (.002 in.), 

 a very minute microscopic form. The mite we are considering is fully 

 .5 m m. or .02 in. a.ud plainly visible to the naked eye. Perhaps 

 Henderson made a mistake and his drawing was only forty times 

 magnified. VTe could believe this if he did not state that the Ver- 

 bena mite "is so small that it cannot be seen by the naked eye." 

 Henderson says it has the power of imbedding itself in the leaf, 

 a habit which certainly does not apply to the species in question. 

 Certainly Henderson has made a good many mistakes in his 

 description or the species he examined was a different species. 

 Vi'e believe it is best for entomologists to entirely ignore such 

 loose, vague descriptions of insects as they are of no technical 

 importance and only add confusion in defining species. 



In the absence of any known technical description of this 

 species, we concluded it would be better to describe it under the 

 name Tetranyc?tus 2-macidatus, n. sp., and have something definite 

 than to leave the form without a name. Should it subsequently 

 be shown that it has been described then our name drops and no 

 harm is done. We wUl be most grateful for any evidence that 

 this species has been described or named for we have no ambition 

 to multiply synonyms. 



Prof. BaUey responded : "I am aware that neither Henderson's 

 description nor figures are applicable to the mite in question, and 

 yet I think that he meant it, for I have known for some time that 

 he has been troubled with the same species we have. Of course 

 the reference, even if proved to apply to the mite, is of no scien- 

 tific use, and I only referred you to it that you might perhaps gain 

 a wider knowledge of its hosts and distribution. No doubt 

 Alfred Henderson could send yon specimens for determination." 



Prof. Bailey kindly introduced us to Mr. Henderson and we 

 requested specimens of the Verbena m,ite which proved to be the 

 same species found at Ithaca and Orono. 



Parties about Orono having stated positively that roses obtained 

 from Dingee & Conard Co., West Grove, Pa., were infested by 

 this mite, and we having seen the mite on rose bushes from that 

 firm at one house and not on any other plants, and the mite having 



