ACTING STATE ENTOMOLOGIST 
21 
itary specimens of my newly-discovered little friend, the Grape Curculio. Moreover, 
Dr. J. L. LeConte tells me that, until I supplied him with some additional specimens, he 
had but two representatives of this species in his whole collection of N. A. Beetles, 
which, so far as regards the number of species, is well known to be the most extensive 
of any in the country. 
It is, indeed, undoubtedly true that, if a vineyardist is surrounded by other grape- 
growers and all their vines are infested by this Curculio, it will be comparatively but 
little use for him to destroy the Curculio upon his own vines, unless he can also per¬ 
suade his neighbors to do the same. Eor his little black enemy has got good long black 
wings of his own, and can fly with ease from one vineyard to another, although un¬ 
doubtedly he is not by any means as strong on the wing and as fond of flying as a Bee or 
a Butterfly. Still, this only proves the absolute necessity of fruit-growers becoming 
familiar with the habits of their insect foes, and of their making war upon them system¬ 
atically and generally. For attaining these two objects, nothing can be more practically 
useful, than those organized Associations of practical and intelligent fruit-growers, 
which are now happily becoming so common in all the great fruit-growing regions of 
the United States. 
INSECTS INFESTING THE GRAPE. — On the Leaf. 
CHAPTER II.— The Grape-leaf Gall-louse. ( Dactylosphcera * vitifolice, Fitch. 
This is the insect which Dr. Fitch described long ago under the above specific 
name, though it most certainly does not belong to the genus of Plant-lice ( Pem - 
* The genus, Dactylosphsera was proposed by Dr. H. Shimer, of Mt. Carroll, Illinois, in a short Paper, 
published in Proc. Acad. Nat. Sc., Jan., 1867, pp. 1-9. I adopt this generic name, simply because the 
group of insects to which this species belongs, forms, in my opinion, a very distinct and a very anomal¬ 
ous genus of the Bark-louse ( Coccus ) Family, and there is no other name for it extant. Why this genus 
of Insects ought to be referred to the Bark-louse ( Coccus) Family, rather than to the Plant-louse {Aphis) 
Family, I long ago explained. (See Pract. JEntom. II., p. 19, and Proc. Ent. Soc. Phil. VI., pp. 283-4, 
notes.) 
To this new genus of his, Dr. Shimer refers, not only the insect which forms the subject of this chapter, 
but also a mythical and entirely imaginary species — Dact. globosa, Shimer — which he has concocted 
by taking the wingless individuals of the Bark-louse of a very small Hickory-gall {Caryse semen, Walsh 
MS., Proc. Ent. Soc. Phil., VI., p. 283,) and the winged individuals of the Plant-louse of a much larger 
and very distinct Hickory-gall {Caryse globuli, Walsh, ibid, I., p. 309,) and assuming, without a particle 
of proof, that the latter are the winged males of the species to which the wingless females of the former 
appertain. And yet, even according to his own account, (p, 2,) the galls containing these so-called males 
are “ 0.25 inch, and even more, in diameter,” while the galls containing the wingless females are 
according to him, only “ 0.09 — 0.14 inch” in diameter, and, in reality, are still smaller than he repre¬ 
sents them to be, ranging from 0.06 to 0.10 inch in diameter; and, moreover, as will be shown below, the 
two galls differ by a very remarkable structural character. It is a very suggestive fact, too, that the 
large galls, containing the so-called males, occur abundantly and commonly on the Shellbark Hickory 
and but in small numbers and rarely on the Pignut Hickory ; while the galls containing the so-called 
females of what is supposed to he the same species occur exclusively on the Pignut Hickory, and in the 
most exuberant profusion. Whereas, if these two galls appertained to the same species of insect, 
on whatever species of Hickory one of them was found, the other one would be found there also, and, 
in all probability, always in the same relative proportion. 
If any one doubts the validity of the above statement, he has but to refer to the figure of the wings 
of the so-called male Dact. vitifolise, in Dr. Shimer’s Paper (fig. d., page 1); and he will see at once that 
