FLORIDA STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
87 
ing two species of whitefiy seriously 
affecting citrus. Professor Morgan gives 
the name of the whitefiy observed by 
him in Louisiana (bulletin cited) as Aley- 
rodes citrifolii giving for his authority 
Riley (unpublished manuscript). This 
is presumably the manuscript which was 
later published in Insect Life (previously 
cited), the name of the insect in the 
meantime being changed to Aleyrodes 
citri. The description in the article in 
Insect Life clearly refers to the species 
with smooth eggs, since it is expressly 
stated that the eggs are perfectly smooth, 
although sometimes pruinose, while the 
description of the larvae of the first stage 
also agrees with the character of the lar¬ 
vae which hatch from the smooth eggs, 
and not with those hatched from the 
reticulated eggs. At first it was thought 
that either Aleyrodes aurantii Masked, A. 
Marlatti Quaintance, or A. spinifera 
Quaintance, reported on citrus from the 
N. W. Himalaya Mountains, Japan, and 
Java, respectively, might be the species 
in question. However, a careful compar¬ 
ison with the descriptions of these species 
has ruled them out, as well as many 
other species. The writer is therefore 
quite satisfied that the citrus whitefiy of 
Florida with the reticulated egg is a new 
species, distinct from the citrus whitefiy 
of Florida with the smooth egg ( Aley¬ 
rodes citri ) ; the differences in the eggs 
alone are considered sufficient to make 
the distinction. Careful comparisons 
have also revealed distinct differences be¬ 
tween the pupae and perhaps also be¬ 
tween the adults of the two species as 
well as between their eggs and newly- 
hatched larvae. 
What is the significance of this dis¬ 
covery? The species with the reticulated 
egg is found at Clearwater, Largo and 
Sutherland on the West Coast, and at 
Mims, Titusville and Geneva on the East 
Coast. It also occurs at Orlando and 
probably in other localities. The species 
with smooth eggs is at present known to 
occur at St. Petersburg, Largo, DeLand, 
New Smyrna, Gainesville, Manatee 
County, Apopka, Chipley, Leesburg, Bay 
Ridge, Daytona, Jacksonville and other 
places. One conclusion immediately fol¬ 
lows : that there have been at least two 
separate introductions of the whitefiy 
into Florida; assuming, which is proba¬ 
ble, that the whitefiy of Florida is not 
a native here. It indicates, also, that the 
whitefiy in the upper part of the Sub¬ 
peninsula is not altogether an introduc¬ 
tion from St. Petersburg as is generally 
believed, but has had its origin in part 
elsewhere, probably over at Safety Har¬ 
bor. Whence came the “fly” at Safety 
Harbor cannot at present be told, but it 
is believed to have infested citrus trees 
there for many years. On the other 
hand, the whitefiy at St. Petersburg, in 
all probability, has been brought from the 
Manatee Country. Further research may 
determine many important points of dif¬ 
ference in the life history, effectiveness 
of the fungus and other parasites, spray¬ 
ing or fumigation in the control of each 
species. 
[This paper was followed by a dem¬ 
onstration with stereopticon views illus¬ 
trating the eggs and first stage larvae of 
the two species of wMiite fly discussed, to¬ 
g-ether with views of the fungus, para¬ 
sites, lacewinged flies, and excretion of 
honeydew. ] 
DISCUSSION. 
Dr. Inman—I would like to ask how 
U'-h dama^e w e are likely to do this 
fungus by spraying with insecticides. 
Dr. Berger—That would depend 
