96 
PLUM. 
minutely, on about a hundred pieces of stem from his infested apple- 
trees, one of which he split almost day by day (to watch gradual 
progress of development), especially notes that he does not think such 
is the case. 
It appears also to me to be impossible that it should be so in the 
case of our Shot-borers, because if each larva started a tunnel of its 
own, we should in that case, instead of only about, say four to six 
tunnels all of the full width of a beetle, find as we do in other cases 
with many wood-boring beetles a great number of side-tunnels, possibly 
short and of one width throughout, possibly increasing in width to 
accommodate the growth of the maggot. 
I have not found any signs of side-borings in any of the pieces of 
wood which I have split, or in which I have carefully dissected out the 
various tunnels; in all these there have only been the borings 
previously described, and in the report on this beetle given in 1887, by 
Mr. J. Fletcher, Dominion Entomologist, Canada,* I do not find any 
•mention of side tunnels formed by the maggots. 
The point we need to make out, as it might help us very much to 
get rid of the attack, is,— What do the maggots feed on? In some of the 
tunnels of Plum-wood sent me from near Kidderminster, I found a 
white material, which proved on skilled examination kindly made for 
me, to be partly of mycelium of a fungus, and partly apparently of an 
animal nature; but there was so little then present that we had not 
enough to test thoroughly, and also, as beetles only were then present, 
it would not have been a certain guide as to what the maggots fed on; 
but in the coming season this is one of the points which needs inves¬ 
tigation, and I should be very glad of specimens to make sure 
precisely from what the maggot-food may be. 
The amount of harm that is caused by the attack is shown in the 
following communication, which I received from Mr. Samuel Wright, 
of Greenhill Farm, near Kidderminster. 
The first was sent me on the 10th of December, as follows :— 
* See paper on “ Shot-borer,” “Pin-borer” ( Xyleborus dispar, Fab.; Xyleborus 
pyri, Peck.), of American authors, pp. 26—28 of Keport of the ‘ Entomologist,’ 
Central Experimental Farm, Department of Agriculture, Canada, 1887. From this 
I also quote the following extract, which is of much interest in shewing that the 
difference of appearance of the male and female beetle caused them for a time to 
be considered as distinct species. Mr. Fletcher writes :—“ Mr. J. B. Smith, of 
Washington, who kindly confirmed the identification of the specimens, writes to 
me, ‘The Xyleborus is pyri, i. e., the female is; the male is obesa. This proves 
what Mr. Schwarz has long claimed, that obesa was but the male of pyri. Both of 
these are equal to the European dispar, Fab. Obesa is extremely rare, only two or 
three specimens being known so far.’ ” Mr. Fletcher was kind enough also to send 
me specimens of the male and female X. pyri, to give me the opportunity of 
comparing them with the same species which we know now as X. dispar. 
