14 



Citj, on the shores of Atchafahiya River, Berwick, Olivier, St. 

 James, Donaldsoiiville, Lafayette, New Iberia, and St. Charles in 

 Louisiana, and at Beaumont in Texas. The percentage of cane beetles 

 coming to light was extremely small when compared with Chale^nf-s 

 trachypygus^ the rice beetle. In the fields in the spring practically no 

 rice beetles occurred, while at lights fully 90 per cent of the beetles 

 belonged to this species. The remaining percentage was divided 

 among Hydrophilidse, Lachnosterna, and- the sugar-cane beetle. Ligy- 

 Tus gihhosus was rarely seen at lights, and not over 3 per cent of the 

 beetles were L. rugicefs. 



OTPIER SPECIES OCCURRING IX FIELDS. 



Of the other white grub larva? occurring in the cane fields in early 

 spring and summer, the most common appears to be that" of Cyclo- 

 cephala immaciiJata 01. The adult of this species is a much smaller 

 beetle, pale in color, and with dark markings. Xearly full-groAvn 



larvae were found not 

 uncommonly in the 

 fields in April and 

 May. They occur 

 at the bases of the 

 stubble cane and be- 



neath 



roots 



Fig. 5. — Chalepus trachrjpygus: o, beetle; 6, laiTa. natural size 

 c, under side of head in detail, enlarged (after Comstock). 



along the margins of 



the fields. It may 

 be this species that 

 is reported as cutting suckers of the cane late in the summer. The in- 

 jury is reported to be of nearl}^ the same character as that of the cane 

 beetle, but the holes are smaller. Adults appeared in our breeding 

 cages in AVashington early in July and laid their eggs freely in rich 

 soils. The eggs hatched from six to fifteen days after deposition, the 

 white grubs at once forming tiny cells in the soil and within twelve 

 hours beginning to show traces of soil in their intestinal tracts. 



It is quite probable that the eggs in nature are laid in the same gen- 

 eral way as those of Ligyrus rugicejys, but since the species appears 

 so late in the year there will rarely be sufficient damage to cause rem- 

 edies to be sought for other than those later on recommended for the 

 sugar-cane beetle. 



It is probable that the rice beetle does some damage to the cane 

 fields, especially in the rice regions, where it occurs in enormous 

 numbers. Very rarely was it found in the spring, in the soil around 

 the cane, or cutting cane, as was the cane beetle. Eggs Avere twice 

 found that apparenth^ belonged to this species, but they could not in 

 the field be distinguished from those of the Lig^^rus. Attempts to 



