135 
my own observations mentioned above. I have also to add that dur¬ 
ing the present winter (1878-9), while preparing this paper, I made an 
examination of some apple-trees this species was known to infest, as 
late as January, after one of the coldest spells we have experienced 
for a number of years. I found them on the trunk in little scattered 
colonies, in the breaks and injured spots, covered with an unusually 
heavy coating of cottony substance. Although apparently lileless, most 
of them revived on being brought into a warm room. In each o*. 
these colonies were from one to five apparently mature indi¬ 
viduals, the rest being larvae; the former were all dead, the latter 
nearly all living. From these facts we might infer that these little 
colonies were formed in the latter part of summer, or in the fall, by 
wingless viviparous females, possibly the dead individuals observed. 
Butf be this as it may, it is evident that they do hibernate otherwise 
than in the egg state, and so far we have no positive evidence tnat 
they pass the winter ns eggs, unless the statement copied by Dr. Har¬ 
ris from Knapp and Hausmann, be taken as such, i his is as follows: 
“The eg^s of the wooiy apple-tree louse are so small as not to be 
distinguished without a microscope, and are enveloped in a cotton-like 
substance furnished by the body of the insect. They are deposited 
in the crotches of the branches and in the chinks of the bark, at or 
near the surface of the ground, especially if there are suckers spring¬ 
ing from the same place. The young, when first natcued, are coveied 
with a very short, fine down, and appear in the spring of the year 
like specks of mould on the trees/' I have so far fai<ed to find * j ggs 
during the winter in this cottony substance, although searching cuie- 
fullv for them with a magnifier. But, the statement quoted, corres¬ 
ponds with the idea that the oviparous female is apterous, as the eggs 
are “enveloped in a cotton-like substance, wliereas, the winged ^feuiHe 
as Prof. Veri-ill states correctly, has but little down on the body, in fact, 
is almost naked. An additional fact must also be borne in mind, that 
neither Knapp or Hausmann were so fortunate as to discover a winged 
specimen, and so marked was the absence of this form that they con¬ 
cluded they never acquired wings. 
Taking all these facts into consideration, I am forced to the con¬ 
clusion, that the theory advanced by Prof. Vcrrill and repeated by 
Mr. Mann, in his communication to the Rural New Jorker, that they 
spread by the oviparous female flying from tree to tree and deposit¬ 
ing eggs, is incorrect. 
While it is possible that a portion of the broods pass the winter in 
the egg state, I am of the opinion this is not their normal method. 
The Winged individuals are undoubtedly chiefly females, and most 
likely viviparous and very likely do aid in spreading the species by 
passing to other trees, and depositing living young in favorable locali¬ 
ties, but it is not likely that a female wanders much after she com¬ 
mences giving birth to young aphides. 
Blot, Hausmann and other early writers on this snbject, supposed 
the species spread, by being blown about by the wind, the cottony 
substance aiding. 
The chief remedies have already been mentioned; and so far as those 
insects infesting the trunk are concerned, will prove eflectal if carefully 
and properly applied. 
