INTRODUCTION. 



The following observations are submitted after fifteen years' study, and are further to 

 be used for a General Biology of the Honey-bee; but this larger work can not be completed 

 until later, because of the heavy demands on my time at present. It seems desirable to 

 publish this much of the investigation now, however, and I wish specially to consider the 

 most vigorously debated question of the day, that of the psychical faculties of social insects, 

 because of Bethe 's * interesting study of this question with regard to ants and bees. I shall 

 take up bees only, as there are many scientific observations on ants 2 and as especially the 

 great myrmicologists Aug. Forel 3 and Wasmann 2 have already overthrown many of Bethe 's 

 conclusions. 



That I do not accept Wasmann *s definition of Instinct will be apparent from what 

 follows. I refer to the discussion of instincts in my " Stammesgeschichtlichen Entstehung 

 der Bienenstaates, Leipzig, 1903, as well as to Forel 'a excellent paper, "Gehirn und Seele, " 

 5. u. 6. Aufl., Bonn, 1899, pp. 34 and following. 



As early as 1872, Dohrn 4 recognized that it would benefit science if more biological 5 

 investigation were carried on, and the results made useful practically. It seems to me that 

 the biological knowledge concerning Apis mellifica 6 which has been gained by practical 

 bee-keeping has scarcely entered scientific literature, and, strangely enough, the results 

 are little regarded; it has not passed over into the flesh and blood of science. In proof 



1 Albrecht Bethe, Durfen wir Ameisen und Bienen psychische Qualitaten zuschreiben ? Arch. f. die 

 ges. Physiologie, Bd. 79, 1898. (Also appears as a separate with other paging.) 



2 Wasmann, Die psychischen Fahigkeiten der Ameisen. Stuttgart, Erwin Negele, 1899. 



3 Forel, Fourmis de la Suisse. Nouveaux memoires; de la societe Helvetique. Zurich, 1874. Expe- 

 riences et remarques critiques sur les sensations des Insectes. Rivista di Scienze Biologiche. Como, 

 1900, 1901. The Psychical Faculties of Ants and some Other Insects. Smithsonian Report for 1903, 

 pp. 587-599. Washington, 1904, etc. 



Lubbock. Ants, Bees, and Wasps. International Scientific Series. New York, 1883 ; German trans- 

 lation, Leipzig, 1883. 



Janet. Etudes sur les Fourmis, les Guepes, et les Abeilles. Limoges, 1897, etc. 



Emery. Die Entstehung und Ausbildung des Arbeiterstandes bei den Ameisen, Ueber Entstehung 

 des Soziallebens bei Hymenopteren. Biol. Centralbl., Bd. XVI., 1894. Le Polymorphisme des Fourmis 

 et 1' alimentaire. Compt. rend. III. Congr. internat. d. Zoo>l. Leyden, 1896, etc. 



Wm. Morton Wheeler. The Compound and Mixe4 Nests of American Ants. American Naturalist, 

 Vol. XXXV., 1901. Some Remarks on Temporary Social Parasitism and the Phylogeny of Slavery among 

 Ants. Biolog. Centralbl., 1905. Ethological Observations on an American Ant. Journal fur Psychologie 

 und Neurologic Leipzig, 1903, etc. K. Escherich. Die Ameise. Braunschweig, 1906. 



Bethe, 1. c. «. 



4 A. Dohrn. Der gegenwartige Stand der Zoologie, etc.: XXX. Bd. Preuss. Jahrb., 1872. 



5 The German word Bioldgie refers particularly to the study of life-history and habits rather than to 

 all phases of animal and plant life — the sense in which it is used in English. — E. F. P. 



c Apis mellifica L., or Apis mellifera L. ? As is well known, the rule of priority begins as far back 

 as the tenth edition of Linnaeus' "Systema Naturae," in 1758. In that year we find the honey-bee 

 desigated by Linnaeus as Apis mellifer^. Three years later he named it Apis mellifica, probably because 

 he recognized that the name first given was erroneous, for the bee does not carry in honey but nectar, 

 making the honey in the hive. It is, therefore, not a carrier of honey (mellifera) , but a maker of 

 honey (mellifica) . Be that as it may, the first author himself undertook the correction after a fhort time. 

 Then developed an overwhelmingly rich literature concerning Apis mellifica (not meUifera), which is now 

 inexhaustible, even to the specialists, if the non-scientific literature on bees be included. The bibliography 

 of the late Mr. Edward Drory, of Berlin, relative to the. honey-bee alone, embraces, for example, more 

 than 2500 works. In the catalogue "Elenchus Librorum de Apium Cultura," Bibliographia Universale de 

 Apicultura raccolta per Augusto Keller, 2300 works on mellifica are cited. 



Under the circumstances Friese (as writer on Apidae for the Tierreich), and I have thought that, 

 in spite of the rule of priority, we would not be justified in re-establishing the name "melMfera*," which was 

 recognized as incorrect, and shortly rejected by the first author. This is the result of manure delibera- 

 tion at various times during many years. Not only were the reasons just mentioned arguments for 

 retaining the name adopted 150 years ago, but also the knowledge that its establishment proves how 

 powerless the regulations of the priority rule itself are in definite cases. They are powerless in spite 

 of the rules for the "Tierreich," in spite of Delia-Torre's "Catalogue Hymenopterorum," and even in 

 spite of Friese and othera of the originators of the priority rules for each case. For example, for the 

 genus of solitary bees "Anthrophora," the name "Podalirius" was introduced, or at least according to 

 the new system an attempt was made to introduce it. But here the case was like that of melUfica — the 

 first author himself, for certain valid reasons, changed the name after a short time from. "Podalirius" 

 to "Anthrophora." Thus the name Podalirius did not prevail. It has not succeeded in becoming estab- 

 lished in the lapse of years, and there is not the slightest probability that it will change in the future. 

 I qxiote this discussion from my work which has just appeared, "Apistica. Beitrage zur Systematik Biologie, 

 sowie zur geschichtlichen "und geographischen Verbreitung der Honigbiene (Apis meUifica L.), ihrer 

 Varietaten und der ubrigen Apis-Arten." Mitth. d. Kgl. Zoolog. Museums in Berlin, 1906. 



