June, 1901] 
Landacre — Wing of Honey Bee 
121 
reversion occurred on three separate wings, in No. 2 one hook on 
each wing being straight. 
As to the relation between the number of hooks and the width 
of the wing the averages are very definite. Taking hives number 
one and two from the same apiary, it will be seen that the increase 
in number of hooks goes with the increase in width of wing. The 
same relation is shown by hives numbers three and four from an- 
other apiary in the case of the posterior portion of the right wing 
and in both anterior and posterior portions of left wing. 
The results are not conclusive as to the relative efficiency of dif- 
ferent hives because there are so many conditions entering into the 
production of large quantities of honey. The number of bees, the 
care during the winter, the age of the queen, the number of swarms 
produced, and several other factors would have to be taken into 
consideration. 
The differences in the right and left wings in the bees of the 
same hive is marked. The right wing has the larger number 
of hooks, but the left wing is the broader. In hive number one the 
average number of hooks in the right wing is 21.3, left 20.9; but the 
anterior wing on the right side is 4.21 mm. , while the left anterior 
wing is 4.28; that is, there is a compensation for the reduced number 
of hooks in the increased width of the wing. This is true of the first 
three hives. In the fourth hive there is a slight advantage in favor 
of the right wing. 
The following general conclusions may be drawn from these 
measurements : 
(а) There is a variation in the number of hooks in a given hive 
ranging between 17 and 23. 
(б) The difference in the number of hooks in the right and left 
wing is compensated for in a given hive by the increased size of the 
wing. The right and left wings are in physiological equilibrium. 
(c) In different hives the increase in the number of hooks is 
accompanied by an increase in width of wing; that is, the variation 
is emphasized so that selection would work much more effectively; 
while in the individual, where — if selection operated on account of 
this variation — it would have to be between different wings of the 
same bee, the variation is eliminated. 
TWELVE PLANTS ADDITIONAL TO THE OHIO LIST. 
W. A. Kelleeman. 
The species named below have not heretofore been recorded as a 
part of the Ohio flora. The first collector and locality are given for 
each of the listed species. The serial number prefixed to each name 
indicates where in the Fourth State Catalogue the species should be 
inserted. 
