45 



leaf-beetle at Albany the present season, and described the circum- 

 stances attending its appearance. In this instance the second brood 

 of larvae appeared on the trees which had not been attacked by the 

 first brood. 



Mr. Smith said that he had found, the present season, no trace of a 

 second brood at New Brunswick, N. J., although everything was 

 favorable for the appearance of a second brood, in view of the presence 

 of many trees in good foliage. The trees on the grounds of the college 

 campus were this year in exceptionally superior condition. He referred 

 also to the discovery of larva' and pupa' under the bark of other trees 

 than elm, and supported Mr. Howard in his conclusions. There was 

 abundant opportunity for the appearance of a second brood, but, in 

 point of fact, the beetles had already practically disappeared into their 

 hibernating retreats. 



Mr. Howard, in answer to Mr. Lintners criticism, stated that he saw 

 larvae descending the horse-chestnut from a point above the main crotch, 

 and further stated that the intervening ground space between the elms 

 and the horse-chestnut was covered with close, short grass, so that it 

 was out of the question for the larvae to have reached it in any way 

 except by falling on it from the overhanging elm branches. No other 

 explanation was possible. He referred also to the case reported by 

 Mr. J. W. Clark at the last meeting, where the branches of an elm 

 extended over a house, which had also no other possible explanation 

 than that the larva' fell directly from the branches to the ground. 



Mr. Johnson stated that at the Maryland Experiment Station, by order 

 of the chemist, Mr. Patterson, bands of dendrolene had been put about 

 the truuks of elms in the station yard to keep the larvae from ascend- 

 ing. Mr. Patterson stated that he had observed larvae ascending the 

 trees, but, after the application of this lime, they accumulated about it 

 or would fall back to the ground and could then be easily destroyed. 



Mr. Howard stated that the second brood of the elm leaf-beetle was 

 very small this year in Washington. His explanation of this fact was 

 that the first brood had not been large and there had been comparatively 

 little damage to foliage, so that when the second brood arrived there 

 was no second crop of new tender leaves to induce them to oviposit, the 

 results in this respect being entirely different from last year, when 

 the first generation was large and entirely defoliated many trees, and the 

 consequent throwing out of a second crop of leaves induced the beetles 

 to oviposit it for a second generation. With regard to the distribution 

 of this insect, Mr. Howard said that he had found it abundant at Troy, 

 and the farthest northern limit so far discovered for them was Mechan- 

 icsville in the Hudson Eiver valley. 



Mr. Fernald said that they were not increasing at Amherst, and were 

 no more abundant this year than last at that point. 



