ORIGIN OF AN ANTS’ NEST. 31 
up the larvee by acting as mother and nurse at the same 
time.’ 
This, however, is not a correct version of what 
Huber says. His words are :—‘ I enclosed several females 
in a vessel full of light humid earth, with which they 
constructed lodges, where they resided, some singly, 
othersincommon. They laid their eggs and took great 
care of them ; and notwithstanding the inconvenience 
of not being able to vary the temperature of their habi- 
tation, they reared some, which became larve of a 
tolerable size, but which soon perished from the effect 
of my own negligence.’ ! 
It will be observed that it was the eggs, not the 
larvee, which, according to Huber, these isolated females 
reared. It is true that he attributes the early and uni- 
form death of the larve to his own negligence, but the 
fact remains that in none of his observations did an 
isolated female bring her offspring to maturity. 
Other entomologists, especially Forel and Ebrard, 
have repeated the same observations with similar results; 
and as yet in no single case had an isolated female been 
known to bring her young to maturity. Forel even 
thought himself justified in concluding, from his ob- 
servations and from those of Ebrard, that such a fact 
could not occur. 
Lepeletier de St. Fargeau ? was of opinion that ants' 
nests originate in the second mode indicated above, and 
' Natural History of Ants, Huber, p. 121. 
2 Hist. Nat. des Ins. Hyménoptéres, vol. i. p. 143. 
