REPORT OF THE STATE ENTOMOLOGIST igi2 Arf 



1888 Lintner, J. A. N. Y. State Mus. Bui. 6, p. 11 



1890 Webster, F. M. U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 22, p. 46-47 

 1893 Mally, F. W. U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 29, p. 30 

 1893 Smith, J. B. U. S. Nat. Mus. No. 44, p. 168 



1895 Weed, H. E. Miss. Agric. Exp't Sta. Bui. 36, p. 152-53 



1896 Smith, J. B. Econ. Ent., p. 297-98 



1897 Quaintance, A. L. Fla. Agric. Exp't Sta. Bui. 40, p. 507-12 



1898 Lugger, Otto. Minn. Agric. Exp't Sta. Bui. 61, p. 218 



1899 Gillette, C. P. Country Gentleman, 64:833 



1900 Forbes, S. A. Ins. 111., 21st Rep't, p. 149-50 

 1900 Agric. Exp't Sta. Bui. 60, p. 497-98 



1900 Chittenden, F. H. U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 22, n. s., 



P. 56, 58 



1900 U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 23, n. s., p. 78-85 



1901 U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 2^, n. s., p. 73-74 



1901 U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 29, 11. s., p. 13-45 



1901 Marlatt, C. L. U. S. Dep't Agric, Farmers Bui. 132, p. 34 



1901 Felt, E. P. N. Y. State Mus. Bui. 36, p. 998 



1902 Sanderson, E. D. Ins. Inj. to Staple Crops, p. 84-89 



1902 Beutenmueller, William. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., i6:_!2i-22 



1903 Chittenden, F. H. U. S. Dep't Agric, Div. Ent., Bui. 40, n. s., p. 113 

 1903 Year Book, U. S. Dep't Agric, p. 729 



1903 Holland, W. J. Moth Book, p. 174-75 

 1905 Forbes, S. A. Ins. 111., 23d Rep't, p. 81^83 



1907 Smith, R. I. U. S. Dep't Agric, Bur. Ent., Bui. 67, p. 102-3 

 1912 Pierce, W. D., & Holloway, T. E. Econom. Entomol. Jour., 5 1427, 

 428 



1912 Wilson, James. U. S. Dep't Agric, Cir. 40, Revised, p. 1-4 

 1912 Sanderson, E. D. Insect Pests, Farm, Garden & Orchard, p. 118-20 

 1912 & Jackson, C. F. Elementary Entomology, p. 212 



ELM LEAF BEETLE 

 Galenicella luteola Mull. 

 The season of 191 1 was marked by exceptionally severe and 

 widespread devastation by the elm leaf beetle. The damage was 

 so serious that elm-shaded communities were most easily recognized 

 in midsummer by the brown, dead foliage. The same condition 

 prevailed in many roadside groups of trees. Numerous elms, un- 

 able to produce a second crop of leaves, had no opportunity to 

 recuperate before the rigors of winter still further reduced their 

 vitality. Some died while many others put forth a feeble leafage 

 in 191 2 only to have that nearly destroyed by midsummer. These 

 trees are now in an extremely weakened condition and many may 

 succumb during the winter. The tall elms with few branches and 

 deficient foliage are the first to show the effects of elm leaf beetle 

 attack. Moreover, they were not so easily protected by spraying 



