A STUDY OF THE BIOLOGY OF THE APPLE MAGOT iRhagoletis pomonella) TOGETHER WITH AN INVESTIGATION OF METHODS OF CONTROL. James Franklin Illingworth THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPH REPRINT OF BULLETIN 324 OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. DECEMBER, 1912 O BULLETIN 324 CORNELL UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OF THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE Department of Entomology A STUDY OF THE BIOLOGY OF THE APPLE MAGGOT (Rhagoletis pomonella), TOGETHER WITH AN INVESTIGATION OF METHODS OF CONTROL Under the direction of GLENN W. HERRICK By JAMES F. ILLINGWORTH ITHACA, N. Y. PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY SB a^5 A s^I (5 CORNELL UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Experimenting Staff LIBERTY H. BAILEY, M.S., LL.D.. Director. ALBERT R. MANN, B.S.A., Secretary and Editor. JOHN H. COMSTOCK, B.S., Entomology. HENRY H. WING, M.S. in Agr., Animal Husbandry. T. LYTTLETON LYON. Ph.D., Soil Technology. HERBERT J. WEBBER, M.A.. Ph.D., Plant-Breeding. JOHN L. STONE, B. Agr., Farm Practice and Farm Crops. JAMES E. RICE, B.S.A., Poultry Husbandry. GEORGE W. CAVANAUGH, B.S., Chemistry. HERBERT H. WHETZEL, A.B., MA., Plant Pathology. ELMER O. FIPPIN, B.S.A., Soil Technology. GEORGE F. WARREN, Ph.D., Farm Management. WILLIAM A. STOCKING, Jr., M.S.A., Dairy Industry. CHARLES S. WILSON, A.B., M.S.A., Pomology. WILFORD M. WILSON, M.D., Meteorology. WALTER MULFORD, B.S.A., F.E. , Forestry. HARRY H. LOVE, Ph.D., Plant-Breeding Investigations. ARTHUR W. GILBERT, Ph.D., Plant-Breeding. DONALD REDDICK. A.B., Ph.D., Plant Pathology. EDWARD G. MONTGOMERY, M.A., Farm Crops. WILLIAM A. RILEY, Ph.D., Entomology. MERRITT W. HARPER, M.S., Animal Husbandry. J. A. BIZZELL, Ph.D., Soil Technology. CLARENCE A. ROGERS. M.S.A.. Poultry Husbandry. GLENN W. HERRICK, B.S.A., Economic Entomology. HOWARD W. RILEY, M.E., Farm Mechanics. CYRUS R. CROSBY, A.B., Entomological Investigations. HAROLD E. ROSS, M.S.A., Dairy Industry. ELMER S. SAVAGE, M.S.A., Ph.D., Animal Husbandry. LEWIS KNUDSON, B.S.A., Ph.D., Plant Physiology. KENNETH C. LIVERMORE. B.S.in Agr., Farm Management. ALVIN C. BEAL, Ph.D., Floriculture. MORTIER F. BARRUS, A.B., Plant Pathology. GEORGE W. TAILBY, Jr., B.S.A., Superintendent of Live-Stock. EDWARD S. GUTHRIE, M.S. in Agr., Dairy Industry. PAUL WORK, B.S., A.B., Olericulture. EDWARD R. MINNS, B.S.A., Farm Practice and Farm Crops. JOHN BENTLEY, Jr., B.S., M.F., Forestry. HARVEY L. AYRES, Superintendent of Dairy Manufactures. EMMONS W. LELAND, B.S.A., Soil Technology. CHARLES T. GREGORY, B.S. in Agr., Plant Pathology. WALTER W. FISK, B.S. in Agr., Dairy Industry. R. D. ANTHONY, B.S., B.S. in Agr., Pomology. The regular bulletins of the Station are sent free to persons residing in New York State who request them. 126 AUTHOR'S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author desires to express appreciation to Professor Glenn W. Herrick, not only for first calling his attention to the problem herein con- sidered, but also for counsel and kindly assistance throughout the investi- gation. The author is indebted also for the very friendly assistance of Harry Knight in the development of the work at the insectary. 127 CONTENTS PAGE Object of the study 129 Conveniences of location 130 Methods of work 130 The name 131 History of the apple maggot Distribution and injury 132 Host plants 134 Seriousness of the pest 137 Other fruit-flies 138 Life history and habits Time of appearance of flies 139 Feeding habits 140 How the eggs are laid 142 Hatching 144 Length of larval period 145 Puparia 146 Second brood 146 Length of life of the flies 150 Technical description The female 151 Head 151 Thorax 151 Legs 152 Wings 152 Abdomen 152 Ovipositor 1 52 The male 153 Internal genitalia of female 154 The egg 154 The larva 154 The pupa 155 Methods of control Picking up windfalls 156 Burying puparia 159 Citronella oil, kerosene, and quassia 159 Cold-storage 160 Cultivation 161 Pupation without soil 161 Poisoned bait 163 Codling-moth spray 168 Conclusions 169 Summary , 170 Bibliography 172 128 A STUDY OF THE BIOLOGY OF THE APPLE MAGGOT (Rhagole- tis pomonella), TOGETHER WITH AN INVESTIGATION OF METHODS OF CONTROL* James F. Illingworth , In the census of 19 10, New York ranks first among the States in the production of apples; and when all orchard fruits are taken into consid- eration, California alone surpasses her. According tc this census there are 11,248,000 bearing apple-trees in the Empire State, with an annual production of about 25,409,000 bushels. Even with this immense crop the cash returns are comparatively small, $13,343,000 being the value of the apple crop in 1909. Neglected orchards are found on every hand; in only a few regions are careful cultural methods practiced. Orchard pests are particularly abundant in the State, the apple being subject to the attacks of over three hundred and fifty species of insects. While comparatively few of these do serious injury, a single species may sometimes become so abundant as to destroy 95 per cent of the crop in individual orchards. In certain sections where it is present, the apple maggot is one of the most serious insect pests attacking the fruit of the apple. Unlike the codling moth and many other insect enemies of the orchard, which have come to the United States from foreign countries, the apple maggot is a native of North America. Feeding at first on wild haws, or thorn apples, the species attracted but little attention until the injury to cultivated apples was noted. Although the change of feeding habits brought this insect into immediate recognition over half a century ago as a most serious pest of the fruit of the apple, no adequate control measures have been devised. The usual remedy — destroying the windfalls — is so laborious that in most cases enough larvse have escaped to continue the spread of the pest. Even when hogs were entrusted with the duty of gathering up the drops, there was often little, if any, decrease of the pest in following years. Card (1908) f records many maggots in Early Harvest apples even after hogs had the run of the orchard during the previous year. OBJECT OF THE STUDY It was, then, with a hope of discovering some more efficient method of control that a serious study of the biology of the apple maggot was under- * Also presented before the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University May 29, 1912, as a major thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. t Dates in parenthesis refer to bibliography. I29 130 Bulletin 324 taken. A careful review of the literature on fruit-flies gave the writer suggestions that were of great value in the work. In fact, the thought that there might be a second brood from the early-maturing larvae came to him from a study of those species that produce several broods in a season in warmer climates. Also, the successful spraying experiments in Italy and South Africa offered encouragement. In order that the number and time of maturity of the eggs might be clearly understood, a series of careful dissections were made of the flies. Living specimens were under almost constant observation in the field and in the laboratory, and in this way the writer was able to become familiar with the feeding habits of the adult flies. CONVENIENCES OF LOCATION In working out this problem the writer was most fortunate in having an abundance of the pest " right at the door," so to speak. The trees in the insectary yard had been badly infested with the apple maggot for ^years ; and many of the orchards near Ithaca were more or less uncared for, hence almost without exception they contained this pest. Since no time was wasted in traveling long distances after material, the work went forward rapidly and with more satisfactory results than would otherwise have been possible. The growing season of 19 10 was nearly over when the problem was started, but the entire seasons of 191 1 and 19 12 were spent in the field, watching the flies and conducting experiments. As is usually the case at the end of a season's work, there are still several ques- tions that have not been wholly cleared up. These will be mentioned in succeeding pages. METHODS OF WORK Most of the appliances used in connection with the study are described in the several sections that follow. It may be of interest to other workers on similar problems to describe here in some detail certain of these appli- ances, although they are by no means new. In order to obtain definite data on the emergence of the larvae after the fruit fell from the trees, the drops were picked up daily. At first these were placed in tight-bottomed boxes so that each morning the larvae found in the bottom of the boxes might be recorded. This process necessitated handling every apple every morning and soon became a considerable task. Shortly, a plan was hit upon which gave much relief in this work. Trays with quarter-inch-mesh screen bottoms were used to receive the fruit picked up each morning. These trays were then placed over boxes with tight bottoms, so that all maggots emerging from the fruit would fall through the screen into the lower box, from which they could easily be The Apple Maggot 131 removed and counted. The data blanks were kept attached to the indi- vidual trays. In this way it was possible to keep account expeditiously of the daily emergence from thousands of apples. Larvae that were to be permanently preserved were killed by dropping into boiling water, heat being applied until they sank to the bottom. By this treatment the larvae are fully expanded and remain white when placed in alcohol. Specimens thus treated have a most natural appearance — the head and spiracles being extended as seen when the larvae are feeding — and are in good condition for photographing. The observations of the habits of the living flies and most of the dis- sections were made under a Zeiss binocular microscope. With this instru- ment one is able to make continuous observation without the fatigue that comes from the constant use of an ordinary dissecting microscope or hand lens. The drawings were all made in outline with the camera lucida, so as to get the exact proportions, and were colored with india ink in varying dilutions in water. By applying color in this way with a brush, one can accomplish results very quickly. The lightest tone is first applied over the whole drawing; this is followed by darker and darker tones, until in some cases the pure ink is used for the solid black parts. THE NAME The family Trypetidae at first contained two genera: (1) Trypeta — five segments of abdomen before the borer; (2) Dacus — four segments of abdomen before the borer. Dr. H. Loew, in his monograph of European Trypetidae (1862), split up the genus Trypeta into a number of smaller groups, one of which was Rhagoletis. He sometimes referred to these groups as genera, but often as subgenera, as pointed out by Coquillett (1899). Rhagoletis is given as a subgenus in the Catalog of the Diptera of North America by Baron C. R. Osten Sacken (1878). Coquillett (1899) says, " By changing some of the species, however, the greater part of the groups proposed by Loew are well worthy of being considered as valid genera." Rhagoletis is now recognized universally as a valid genus — Doane (1898) and Aldrich (1909). The apple-maggot fly was described by Walsh in 1867 from six males bred from eastern apples, July 15 to 23 ; and from two males and one female bred from Illinois haws July 23 to 28. He used the specific name pomonella, which is still maintained. He evidently disregarded the newer subdivision as given above, for he used the old genus Trypeta. Subsequent writers up to the time of the paper by Doane (1898) seem to have followed this precedent, for we find the insect constantly referred to as Trypeta pomonella. 132 Bulletin 324 The common name, " apple maggot," given by Walsh, is still the one in most general use throughout the country. In New England the insect is often referred to as the " railroad worm," from the habit of the larvse of tunneling beneath the skin of the fruit. There has been considerable confusion among fruit-growers through the use of the term " worm," any larvae found in the fruit being called " apple worms." Therefore it would appear best to use the distinctive name " apple maggot." HISTORY OF THE APPLE MAGGOT Distribution and injury The work of the apple maggot was well known in orchards in various parts of the northeastern United States for years before the species was described. Walsh (1868) quotes the following paragraph, which appeared in the circular of the Oneida Community (November 12, 1866), published at Wallingford, Conn.: " Two months ago we were congratulating ourselves on a fair crop of winter apples. To all appearances they were freer from worms than we had known them in this section for years. But alas! our hopes are again blasted. Although the apple worm (the larva of the codling moth, Carpo- capsa pomonella) is not so numerous as in some seasons, the apple maggot seems to be as prolific as ever. Two weeks ago we overhauled two hundred and fifty bushels of apples that we had gathered and placed in store for winter use, and of that number we threw out fifty bushels, most of which had been rendered worthless, except for cider or hogs, by one or the other of the above-named insects; and still the work of destruction goes on. The apple worm by this time has ceased his work, or nearly so, but the depredations of the apple maggot continue up to the present time, converting the pulp of the apple into a mere honeycomb, and rendering another overhauling soon indispensable." The same author quotes also from an account of the apple maggot by W. C. Fish of East Falmouth, Mass. (December 28, 1866): " This insect is very numerous in this section of country, being much more abundant in thin-skinned summer and fall apples than in the later varieties. It seems to increase every year. Within a few rods of the house in which I am writing, stand five or six trees of the old-fashioned variety called Hightop, or Summer Sweets. On these trees the crop of apples is annually rendered worthless by this insect, which tunnels the fruit in all directions. Apples which, when taken from the tree, appear sound, would in the course of a few weeks, as soon as they became mellow, be found to be alive with these pests, sometimes to the number of six or more in each apple, although not commonly as many as that. I have The Apple Maggot 133 found that, in most cases, the fruit had been previously perforated by the larva of the codling moth 'Carpocapsa pomonella) before becoming inhabited by this insect." Doctor Trimble (1867), the State Entomologist of New Jersey, says that " this new and formidable enemy of the apple prevails generally throughout the Hudson River country, but has not yet reached New Jersey." It is evident that the apple maggot was well established in Vermont previous to the year 1865, from the statements of Calvin Ward, of that State, which were published in Practical Entomologist II, pp. 20-21. Mr. Ward complained of larvae boring his apples in all directions, and said that this pest did more injury to the fruit in the preceding few years than did all other insects combined. In 1865 it injured his apples to the extent of one half their value. Walsh received living pupa? during the winter of 1866 from Massa- chusetts, Connecticut, and Long Island, rearing the flies, which emerged in July, 1 86 7. These, he showed conclusively, were the same as flies that he had reared from Illinois haws five or six years previously. He discovered also that the species was new, and published the original description in the American Journal of Horticulture, Boston, in December, 1867. Subsequent to this date the pest has gradually increased, spreading to new sections. Riley (1872), in a published reply to a letter from J. H. Spatter, of Keene, N. H., gave the first record of the flies working in that State. The first reference from Maine is also by Riley (1876) in answer to a letter from P. M. Augur. Professor Comstock (1S82) reported the apple maggot from Ithaca, N. Y., in 1881. Professor Cook (1884) recorded the pest from Michigan and Wisconsin for the first time, stating that apples from Shiawassee county, Michigan, were entirely ruined by apple maggots, and that the insects were also common in several other counties of the State. He received specimens from Delavan, Wis., the previous year, where the pest was reported as very injurious. The first reference from New Jersey is by E. Williams (1889), who considered it the worst pest of the apple at Montclair and said that the maggots were first noticed about a dozen years before. Professor Osborn (1S91) stated that there were many reports of damage from this pest in Iowa during the previous year, the belief being that it was introduced from Missouri. The same year Pro- fessor Weed (1891) reported considerable damage to fruit in Delaware county, Ohio. Doctor Howard (1S94) gave a record which indicates the southern limit, through the discovery of larvae of the well-known apple maggot of the Northern States in an apple from Waynesville, N. C. What appears 134 Bulletin 324 to be the western limit is recorded by Professor Gillette (1896). Apples grown at Colorado Springs were found to be infested — the pest being introduced, it is supposed, through eastern apples. The first appearance in Canada was reported by Doctor Fletcher (1897), infested apples having been received August 31, 1896, from Dr. D. Young of Adolphustown, Lenox county, Ontario. By 1902, as stated by Professor Lochhead (1903), this pest had become very abundant in Prince Edward county, in some orchards more than one half of the fruit having been destroyed. The rapid spread of the insect in Canada and the record of infestation at Como, Quebec, in 1903, were given by Doctor Fletcher (1905); and later (1907) the still wider range and the severe outbreak at Woodstock, New Brunswick. Professor Washburn (1903) included the apple maggot among the apple insects of Minnesota. Referring to the bibliography, it will be noted that the multiplication of references indicates that the pest has gradually increased and spread from the several localities named above, especially those in the northern regions. It is interesting to note that, although the flies were first described from Illinois haws, only the single record by Cordley (1889) shows an attack on cultivated apples in that State. Host plants Only two other published records have been found, of flies being reared from haws: Professor Comstock (1882) bred them from a species of Crataegus growing on the agricultural grounds at Washington; and Pro- fessor Cook (1884) reported them as well known in the thorn apples of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Professor Harvey, in his extended study of the flies in Maine, found none breeding in haws. Although careful observations have been made for two seasons at this station, no flies were discovered on haws here. The Bureau of Entomology of the United States Department of Agriculture has for several years collected fruit of the various species of Crataegus from many parts of the country, but in no instance has that bureau found an infestation of the apple maggot. It would therefore appear that this insect has abandoned its native food -plant. Several of the earlier reports of the larvae feeding on wild crab-apples seem not to have been based on observations. The only authentic records that the writer has been able to find are by Riley (1872) and Fletcher (1906). Fletcher states that crab-apples are badly infested, but that the fruit does not fall from the tree. Professor Harvey thought it improbable that this fruit would be used by the insect, for the reason that it is rather green and hard during the period of flight and oviposition of the flies. It is now known that the period of the flies in the field is much longer The Apple Maggot i35 than Harvey supposed, extending even up to the time of heavy frosts; therefore the relative immunity of crab -apples can be explained only by the abundance of softer, sweeter varieties of apples, for which the flies show a decided preference. Harvey (1893) records rearing the flies from Vermont pears and states that the apple maggot is known to work in pears in Maine. Doctor Britton (1906) records the apple maggot working in huckleberries in Connecticut during August, 1904, the flies being reared. Doctor Smith (19 10) also records the infestation of this fruit, the flies having been bred from larvae found on huckleberries growing in southeastern New Jersey. The three published records of this species infesting plums and cherries in northern Michigan are doubtful, since the flies were not reared and it is very probable that the larvae observed were those of the closely allied species R. cingulata Loew, now commonly known as the cherry fruit-fly. Professor Cook (1889), in a brief discussion of the apple maggot, con- cludes with the following paragraph: " This year I have received plums and late cherries from Northern Michigan attacked by this same insect. So far as I know, this insect has not been previously reported as infesting either of these fruits." Professor Cordley (1889) and Professor Davis (1889) evidently recorded the same observation, noting that only the larvae and pupae were seen. The injury to cultivated apples has become widespread and leads to the principal economic consideration of this pest. Practically all varieties grown in infested localities are affected, although there is considerable difference in the relative amount of infestation. Sweet summer and autumn varieties are attacked to the greatest extent; yet the hard, acid, winter sorts are not immune and are often rendered unmarketable. Pro- fessor Harvey (1889) prepared a long list of varieties showing their relative infestation in Maine. Such a list, made as complete as possible from the literature and brought up to date, is believed to be of importance and is given below. The varieties that have actually been used in experiments at this station are marked with an asterisk. Varieties of Apples, with Relative Infestation by the Apple Maggot Flavor Time of maturity Variety Sweet Sub- acid Acid Remarks Alexander Bailey Sweet *Baldwin + + + Autumn Autumn Winter Autumn Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested 136 Bulletin 324 Varieties of Apples, with Relative Infestation by the Apple Maggot (cont.) Variety Flavor Sweet Sub- acid Acid Time of maturity Remarks •Bough Bullock Calvert , Canada Baldwin. Catshead , *Chenango Danvers Dayton Derby ♦Detroit Red Diana •Dyer *Early Harvest. . . Esopus Fall Jenneting •Fall Pippin Fameuse Franklin Sweet. . . Garden Royal. . . . Golden Ball Golden Russet Golden Sweet. . . . *Gravenstein Grimes Haley •Henderson Hightop Sweet. . . Hurlbut Irish Peach Jersey Sweet Jewett Red •King King Pippin Lady Sweet •Maiden Blush Mexico Mother •Munson New York Sweet . •Northern Spy •Oldenburg Paradise Sweet . . . Porter •Pound Sweet •Primate Pumpkin Sweet . . Ramsdell •Red Astrachan . . . •Rhode Island Ribston Rolfe Russell Shiawassee + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Summer Autumn Autumn Winter Autumn Autumn Winter Winter Winter Autumn Autumn Autumn Autumn Winter Autumn Autumn Autumn Autumn Autumn Winter Winter Autumn Autumn Winter Winter Autumn Summer Autumn Autumn Autumn Winter Winter Summer Winter Autumn Autumn Winter Autumn Summer Winter Autumn Autumn Autumn Winter Summer Autumn Winter Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Winter Badly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested, Vermont. Per- kins (1893) Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested, Fletcher (1896) Sparingly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested, Como, Que. Fletcher (1 903-1 904) The Apple Maggot 137 Varieties of Apples, with Relative Infestation by the Apple Maggot (concl.) Flavor Time of maturity Variety Sweet Sub- acid Acid Remarks Somerset Sops of Wine *Swaar + + + '.+ ' + + + + + + + : - Autumn Summer Winter Winter Summer Winter Winter Autumn Winter Autumn Autumn Summer Winter Autumn Autumn Sparingly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested *Sweet Russet Tetof ski *Tolman Tompkins King .... *Twenty Ounce .... *Wagner Wealthy ♦Westfield *Williams Winesap Winthrop Greening. Yellow Bellflower. . + + Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested Badly infested Badly infested Sparingly infested Sparingly infested Badly infested, Canada. Fletcher (1896) Badly infested, Canada. Fletcher (1896) Badly infested, Canada. Fletcher (1896) Of course the relative infestation of varieties may vary somewhat in different parts of the country, but it has been found to agree very closely in New York State with Professor Harvey's observations, referred to above. The writer has found no 'variety that is known to be immune, although the hard winter sorts soften so little before cold weather comes on that probably most of the larvae fail to develop. Even in many of the Baldwins that were cut open during December, the old, partly-healed, brownish channels of the larvae were found, but there was no further sign that the maggots were .still in the apples and the fruit showed no exit holes. SERIOUSNESS OF THE PEST To estimate the total damage done by an insect pest of this kind is a difficult matter, but some idea of its seriousness may be obtained from the statements of leading writers on the subject. As far back as 1884, as indicated above, Professor Cook reported some varieties of Michigan apples entirely ruined. In 1896 Professor Perkins stated that the apple maggot was one of the most troublesome pests of Vermont. Professor Card (1900) said that it was one of the most serious pests of the apple in Rhode Island. Professor Lochhead (1903) reports more than half of the fruit as injured in some of the orchards of Ontario. The increasing destructiveness in New Hampshire orchards is clearly shown by Professor Sanderson (1907), who states that the apple maggot is a pest almost equal 138 Bulletin 324 to the codling moth, making apple production almost impossible in many sections. Professor O'Kane (1910) reports ninety-five per cent of the orchards of the State more or less infested. L. Caesar, of Ontario Agricultural College, states in a letter to the writer dated October, 191 1, that the insect is found over a large part of the province but is much worse in towns and villages. The same is true of conditions in New York State so far as the writer's observations have gone, the entire crop often being a total loss due to infestation of the apple maggot when the trees are partially neglected and unsprayed. On the other hand, 'almost no complaints have been heard of the pest in well- cared-for orchards. OTHER FRUIT-FLIES The family Trypetidas contains a considerable number of fruit-infesting species. Since their life history, methods of attack, and means of control are similar, it is important that some of them be considered briefly. Exotic species have been most destructive, and it is desirable to guard against their introduction here as well as to learn something of methods that have been used in successfully combating them. According to Froggatt (1908), the olive fly (Dacus oleae) has been such a serious pest in southern Europe that the Italian government offered a reward of 6,000 lire (nearly $1,200) for a remedy. The same authority (1909) states that the loss to the olive crop of Italy for 1908 alone was $5,000,000. Professor Berlese (1905) met with great success in the use of poisoned bait against this pest. The Mediterranean fruit-fly (Ceratitis capitata) is widely scattered over the earth and it is very fortunate that it has not yet been introduced into the United States. This is the pest that is doing so much damage, not only in the Mediterranean countries but also in Australia, South Africa, Hawaii, Bermuda, and other places. This species is a very general feeder, attacking almost every variety of fruit available, even to the fruit of the wild cactus, solanum berries, and the like. C. W. Mally (1909) reports almost complete control of this species by the use of poisoned bait. Mexico has an orange worm (Anastrepha [Trypeta] ludens) which is a serious pest in several localities of that country. Although California has placed an embargo on the importation of Mexican fruit, the infested oranges are received into the eastern markets. On November 16, 1911, some of these were included in a purchase at a store in this locality; the larvae were fully developed, so that they pupated within a day or so in soil in a flowerpot in which they were placed. No effective remedy seems to have been used against this pest. In the United States there are several other fruit-flies doing more or less damage. The cherry is attacked by two species, Rhagoletis cingulata The Apple Maggot 139 Loew in some parts of the Eastern States, and R. fausta O. S., first recorded from the Northwest by Aldrich (1909). Two species are also known to attack currants and gooseberries — Epochra canadensis Loew, and the new species, R. ribicola, described by Doane (1899) from the Northwest. LIFE HISTORY AND HABITS Time of appearance of flies Recognizing the importance of knowing just when the flies begin to emerge in the spring, several experiments were started in order that their results might be compared with observations in the field. The ground in the insectary yard was smoothed off and two large out-of-door cages were set up on September 28, 19 10. In the first cage three hundred Tolman Sweet apples, and in the second cage one hundred Northern Spy apples, were placed on the ground. Both varieties were badly infested with the maggots. These apples were exposed to all the conditions natural to the orchard, except that the cages were not placed under the trees and the grass had been removed from the place where the cages stood. Although observations were continued daily, beginning June 1, 191 1, no flies appeared until July 27, when a male emerged in the first cage; on July 29, a male and a female emerged. These three flies were the only results from the experiments. It is difficult to account for the hundreds of larva? that went into the soil and did not emerge. It is known that these apples contained many maggots at the time that they were put into the cages, for some apples of the same dropping were placed in boxes in the insectary and from these an average of over three larvag per apple emerged. Professor Card reported a similar difficulty in rearing the flies in outdoor cages in Rhode Island. If such a large proportion were normally destroyed under orchard conditions, it would appear that the pest would soon be naturally controlled. The suggestion arises that possibly the grass in the orchards offers considerable protection to the pupa? in the soil, since the pest appears to do most damage where the trees are standing in sod. Beginning with the season of 191 1, the first flies observed were on West Hill, Ithaca, N. Y., in the Hook orchard. Although these were not found until July 4 they must have emerged some time previously, for they were already ovipositing in Bough and Red Astrachan apples. The fruit was about one and one half to two inches in diameter and the ground was already scattered with windfalls, due largely to the infested condition of the fruit. On cutting the Boughs, many of the eggs were located and some of the tiny channels of the larvae already showed plainly. It was easy to find the egg punctures (Fig. 19) on this white-skinned fruit, and by carefully raising a bit of the peel the eggs were usually found; where they had hatched, the empty shell still remaining. It would appear, 140 Bulletin 324 then, that some of the eggs were deposited at least a week before and that the flies probably emerged about the middle of June. As has been shown by dissections, the eggs are two or three weeks in developing in the ovaries after the flies have emerged. Observations were continued daily on the later varieties of apples. The flies did not begin to appear on the Maiden Blush tree in the insectary yard until July 2 1 and they were found ovipositing the next day. It was of much interest to find the first flies of the season for the Tolman Sweet tree appearing on July 27 — the very day that the first fly emerged from these apples in the breeding-cages in the insectary yard, as noted above. This observation is in accord with results reached by several other inves- tigators, who have found that the flies seem to adapt the time of their emergence to the proper stage in the development of the particular fruit in which their maggots fed. The writer's observations have not been carried far enough along this line to come to any definite conclusions, but the fact that the flies emerged so much later from the Tolman Sweet apples than from the earlier sorts mentioned above seems to be a very good 'indication of such an adaptability. On the 28th of July the flies were found very abundant on the fruit of the late varieties — Twenty Ounce, Baldwin, Fall Pippin, Detroit Red, Rhode Island, and Swaar. Hence, the indication is that the flies emerge, in the vicinty of Ithaca, from the middle of June up to August 1. Later observations bring out the fact that there are second-brood flies which begin emerging soon after the latter date, so that there is an almost continuous new supply of flies from June up to the time of heavy frosts. Feeding habits The flies on the Bough apples were observed for several hours each day in order to enable the writer to become familiar with their habits. Dozens of them were placed in inverted jelly-glasses, which were found to make the most satisfactory cages. The flies require a constant, although moderate, supply of water, and by this means of confinement nearly the correct humidity is secured. The flies were fed daily with fresh slices of apple, which they ate with avidity. The glasses were cleaned often in order to keep any bacterial or fungous growth from developing in them. When a drop of water was placed inside, the flies quickly gathered around and drank greedily. In cages where this moisture was not furnished the flies died in a few days, even though they were supplied with food. The flies are very tame, and even in the orchard they will permit one to observe them with the lens while they are feeding or ovipositing. Both males and females were seen to feed rather constantly from the surface of the fruit. As they walk about they extend the proboscis, applying the broad surfaces of the labella directly to the fruit as if tasting here The Apple Maggot 141 and there. Now and then the head is raised, the mouth-parts are extended, and a large drop of saliva is forced out between the lobes of the labella and applied at once to the surface gum of the fruit. This liquid is evi- dently used as a •solvent for the substances on the surface of the apple, for it is spread ovpr the waxy coat and sipped off again, the process being repeated from time to time. The surface gum is apparently the only food taken when the flies are in the orchard, for when they go to the leaves it appears to be for rest and for shelter from the weather. The mouth-parts of the apple-maggot fly seem to be very similar in structure to those of the common house-fly; and the excellent descrip- tion of the mouth-parts and feeding habits of the latter insect, appearing in Doctor Howard's new book " The House Fly — Disease Carrier " (page 27), would apply equally to the pest under consideration. Since the feeding of the flies is considered of so much importance in control measures, it is interesting to quote from the above-mentioned description: " The mouth parts are very complicated, but form in the main a proboscis which is not fitted for piercing but for sucking This organ can be retracted and expanded to a certain extent. It is some- what complicated in structure and consists of an upper and a lower portion, the upper portion bearing two curved bristly lobes. The lower portion or true haustellum expands at the tip into two lobes which are called the oral lobes. On their under surface they have transverse chitinous bars which are called false tracheae (pseudotracheas) . The presence of these hard ridges under the oral lobes fit it to a certain extent for rasping solid food. The orifice to the haustellum occurs between the lobes. "In feeding upon fluid or semi-fluid substances, the oral lobes are simply applied to the surface and the fluid is sucked up. When, how- ever, they feed upon soluble solids the process is somewhat different. Doctor Graham-Smith has carefully watched them feeding upon crystals of brown sugar, and has done this through the Zeiss binocular micro- scope. He states that the oral lobes of the proboscis are very widely opened and closely applied to the sugar. Fluid (saliva) seems to be first deposited on the sugar and then strong sucking movements are made. Doctor Graham-Smith watched a fly sucking an apparently quite dry layer of sputum. It put out large quantities of saliva from its proboscis and seemed to suck the fluid in and out until a fairly large area of the dry layer of sputum was quite moist; then as much as possible was sucked up and the fly moved away to another spot. The same observer noticed that flies which had the opportunity of feeding either on fluid or partly dried milk often chose the drier portions, and states that under natural conditions they can often be seen sucking the dried remains near the top of a milk jug. They constantly apply their mouth parts to the surface over which they are walking, attempting to suck up some nutrition, and 142 Bulletin 324 under certain conditions the imprints of their oral lobes can afterwards be made out under the lens." This habit of the flies of tasting the surface of everything was shown whenever they were collected in the field. They at once applied the expanded labella to the glass and walked about as if feeding from the inner surface, although the collecting vials were supposed to be clean. Also, when the flies were kept in the jelly-glasses they spent considerable time in sipping the moisture that had been deposited on the inside of the glass. Inclosing the flies in thin vials made it possible to place them under the Zeiss binocular microscope and to observe in detail the working of the mouth-parts. How the eggs are laid Ovipositing was observed many times in the field. Since the flies are so tame, one can watch this interesting process at close range with the lens. Just before ovipositing, the female often turns around and around, apparently searching over the surface of the fruit. Sometimes she side- steps several times, then extending the ovipositor she places the tip of it on the fruit, and, rising high on her legs, she gradually probes to the desired depth. The puncture is made at an angle of about forty-five degrees with the surface, as is shown in the magnified section of the apple with the egg in situ. (Fig. 23.) About a minute is required to cut the opening and lay the egg. During the last half of the minute, the fly stands almost motionless. While the egg is passing downward it can be observed with a lens as it passes the clear space on the side of the sheath where there are no tubercles. Finally, when the egg is in place in the fruit, the ovipositor is quickly withdrawn and the fly walks about feeding from the surface, often turning and eating the bit of juice that flows from the puncture. Several minutes pass before another egg is deposited. One fly, observed on a warm morning, deposited six eggs in half an hour and several other flies were seen to oviposit a second time three or four minutes after an egg was laid. The punctures when first made are very difficult to see with the naked eye, but in a short time the wound darkens and shows as a small brown speck, easily seen on light-colored apples although a lens is required to distinguish it from the many other specks on the epidermis. The punc- ture appears rather round when magnified, the margin somewhat corky; usually there remains a distinct opening, although this may be filled up in some cases by the corky plug. The punctures are located in all sides of the fruit; there are seldom any punctures at the ends near the stem or the calyx. In the Bough apples it was easy to count the punc- tures and an average was taken of twenty specimens. These showed eleven to thirty-six punctures each, mostly located on the light-colored side although there were always some punctures on the exposed side. The Apple Maggot 143 Another apple was found later with forty-four punctures, some of them not more than one sixteenth of an inch apart. This specimen was photo- graphed (Fig. 19) with the live fly on it. In order that the number of eggs produced during the lifetime of a single individual might be shown with some degree of exactness, careful dis- sections were made of the ovaries of mature females. As shown in Fig. 32, masses of tracheae and connective tissue surround these organs, making it rather difficult to separate and extend the egg-tubes so that they can be studied under the microscope. The great number of egg-tubes was at once apparent, there being twenty-four in each ovary. As in flies generally, the nurse cells are contained within the so-called egg, and the egg-tube is composed merely of a terminal filament, a germarium, and a series of eggs gradually increasing in size up to the fully developed form. (Fig. 33.) Surrounding each series is a delicate membrane, so fragile that it is a difficult task to separate the egg-tubes from the entangling tracheae and connective tissue without dislodging the fully developed eggs; only occasionally is an entire series, with the terminal, mature egg, separated. Usually, after the tracheae are removed the ripe eggs are seen scattered about and free from the inclosing membrane of the egg-tube. The maximum number of eggs observed in an egg-tube was six, although oftener there were only four or five besides the germarium. Professor Harvey (1889) figures six or seven in the series. However, the total number of eggs produced is in no way dependent on the number found in the ovaries at any one time, even though a large figure is obtained if five to seven be taken as an estimate for each of the forty-eight egg- tubes. As was discovered in later dissections, the germaria are constantly pro- ducing new eggs as long as the flies are active. Again, none of the dis- sections of flies that had been ovipositing for some time showed shorter egg-tubes, except when the flies were in poor condition through confine- ment. Hence, the writer would conclude that the flies are able to con- tinue ovipositing during the remainder of their activity after they once begin, three or four hundred eggs being a moderate estimate for each female. In order to learn what period must elapse after the flies emerge before the eggs are mature and ready for ovipositing, two methods were used: (1) Flies of known ages were confined in breeding-cages and careful obser- vations made to determine when the first eggs were laid; (2) daily dis- sections of flies were made from the time that they emerged until ripe eggs were found in the ovaries. In both cases, the flies were those that emerged as a second brood in the outdoor cages. The flies in the first series of experiments were observed copulating, when eight to ten days old and ovipositing on the twenty-fourth day. It was with more difficulty that the second part of these experiments was worked out. At first some trouble was experienced in finding the 144 Bulletin 324 egg-tubes in the ovaries of the newly emerged flies, but after using the Zeiss binocular microscope in conjunction with the compound microscope the surprising discovery was made that there were really no developing eggs until after the fourth day. Instead, a tiny transparent mass was found in each ovary, which, when placed in a drop of water and pressed down under a cover glass, was seen by the aid of the compound microscope to consist of the twenty-four germaria and terminal filaments. Each germarium showed a distinct, slender thread extending from the distal end. (Fig. 34.) Similar dissections were then performed from day to day and a series of drawings made of the important changes in the development of the egg- tubes. It was found that about four days were required for any marked change to take place, so drawings were made of each of these stages. About the eighth day the first egg began to pinch off from the end of the germarium, the twelfth day another, the sixteenth day a third, and so on until the complete egg-tube, with the mature egg at the end, was covered in twenty to twenty-four days. During these observations it was noted also that the development of the eggs was hastened when the flies were kept warm, and hindered when the flies became cold on cool days. Hence, in very warm weather in early summer the development of the eggs may take place in two weeks after emergence. Hatching In order to determine the time required for the eggs to hatch, newly- made egg punctures were marked and the fresh eggs removed and placed in a bit of apple pulp. This was placed in a hollow slide, covered with a cover glass, and kept in a moist chamber, so that the eggs could be observed from time to time under the microscope. In this way the young larvae were seen to emerge in two to six days, according to the temperature. For some time before hatching, the chitinous hooks can be seen through the eggshell at the pointed end. When the larva is ready to emerge from the egg, the shell is torn open in an irregular manner and the larva works its way out, using its hooks vigorously. The larva at once begins feeding in the characteristic manner, rasping off the pulp and absorbing the juice and fine particles of the fruit, which are sucked into the mouth. Although the larvae of the flies have no real opposable jaws, the strong chitinous hooks (Figs. 30 and 31), attached as they are to a supporting skeleton in the head and well supplied with muscles, are exceedingly effective. They cut their way here and there through the pulp, often working just beneath the skin of the fruit, in which case the outline of the burrow can be clearly seen (Fig. 20) on the surface of light-colored vari- eties. These brown markings on the skin gave origin to the name " railroad worms." The Apple Maggot U5 If the apples are actively growing when the larvae begin their work in them, the burrows are very difficult to find for they heal as fast as made. The young larvae, being just the color of the pulp, are hard to locate, hence they are seldom found in apples just picked from the tree. A little later the healing burrows are shown as corky threads extending here and there through the pulp; a condition often observed in green apples on the market. If these are packed away for a while, they are soon discovered to be badly mined and worthless. (Figs. 21 and 22.) As the apples soften a little the larvae grow very rapidly, and in a week or so they are able to entirely break down the pulp, even working into the core. Length of larval period A number of varieties of apples were used in determining the length of the larval period. A single specimen was selected in each case, in which a newly hatched maggot was found by raising a bit of the peel just around the puncture. If an apple is taken which shows the puncture just beginning to turn brown, it is easy to locate the young larva at about the time that it escapes from the egg. When difficulty was found in obtaining an apple with a single maggot or egg in it, the newly hatched larva was transferred to a fresh apple. These apples were then placed in separate boxes and examined daily to note the time of emergence, which is shown in the following table: Length of Larval Period Variety Date of hatching Date of emerging Larval period (days) Bough July 4 July 14 July 16 July 30 12 16 Maiden Blush July 26 July 26 Aug. 9 Aug. 13 14 18 Twenty Ounce July 27 Aug. 14 18 Northern Spy July 22 Aug. 10 19 Fall Pippin July 27 Aug. 20 24 Pound Sweet Aug. 30 Sept. 24 25 Oldenburg Aug. 25 Sept. 19 25 Tolman : July 27 Aug. 22 26 Baldwin Aug. 31 Oct. 2 32 Rhode Island Aug. 14 Aug. 24 Oct. 2 Nov. 20 49 88 146 Bulletin 324 It will be seen from the above table that the growth of the larva varies greatly. Under the most favorable conditions, a ripening fruit and warm weather, the larva may be fully developed and emerge within two weeks from the time that the egg hatches; while if the fruit is very hard and green or the weather cold, growth slows down and the time of emergence is put off for months. Lintner (1885) gives a note from Doctor Goding, of Ancona, Mich., which states that he had larvas leaving the apples in January and that others which were kept in a cooler room did not change to pupas until March. In only one case has the writer found that the larvae leave the fruit while it is hanging on the tree. That was with a Chenango apple, which was supported more or less by the branches. It had two exit holes. Usually the presence of the larvae in the fruit hastens the ripening, and the fruit drops prematurely. The exit holes left by the larvae (Fig. 21) have very irregular, ragged outlines — a fact which is especially true in fruit that contains several larvae. When an apple contains a single larva, the pulp is not greatly broken down and the maggot escapes by cutting a fairly round opening about two millimeters in diameter. If the apples are attacked by any of the rot fungi the decay may destroy the fruit before the larvae have finished feeding, in which case they may not try to escape to the soil but may shorten up to form the puparia inside the decomposed pulp. This is particularly true in the case of a black-rot that leaves the fruit a dry, hardened mass — twenty-eight puparia having been taken from a single specimen. Puparia The larvae normally go into the soil to pupate if they are where they can do so, and pass the winter in this dormant state. In the fall of 19 10, the soil under a number of badly infested trees was carefully examined and many puparia were found. From these observations it is evident that the depth to which the larvae enter the soil depends largely on its character; in heavy clay the puparia are usually found directly beneath the fruit, while in sandy soil they are frequently found at a depth of two inches. Larvae placed in a tumbler of loose soil, three inches deep, burrowed to the bottom of it before changing to puparia. The larvae emerging from the apples in the boxes, after crawling around for an hour or so, shortened up, forming puparia in the bottom. In this way the writer was able to get hundreds of larvae and pupae while making his records from drops. Second brood Since it was found from the literature that closely related fruit-flies in warmer countries produced several broods during the growing season, The Apple Maggot 147 it was thought best to start a series of experiments in order to learn whether there might possibly be a second brood of flies from the apple maggot. In these experiments larvas from the experiments noted above were used. Since all the experiments were so successful, they will be given in as much detail as their importance seems to warrant. First experiment. — July 21, 191 1. A cylinder jar with cloth cover was placed on clean soil at the base of the plum tree near the insectary door. About sixty larvae that had emerged from Primate apples were placed on the soil inside. Sept. 1, 191 1. One female fly emerged. 7, One female fly emerged. 9, One female fly emerged. 11, Two female flies emerged. 15, One female fly emerged. Oct. 25, One female fly emerged. July 2, 191 2. One female fly emerged. 5, One male and three female flies emerged. 6, Three female flies emerged. 8, Five female flies emerged. 9, Five female and two male flies emerged. 10, Three female and two male flies emerged. 11, Three females and one male emerged. 13, Two females and one male emerged. 15, One female and two male flies emerged. 17, One male fly emerged. 18, One male fly emerged. 20, One male fly emerged. 22, One male fly emerged. Second experiment. — July 21, 191 1. About two dozen larvas from Red Astrachan apples were put into a flowerpot filled with moist soil, in the insectary, and covered with a cylinder jar. The soil became dry, and water was applied on September 2, 191 1. In about half an hour a female fly was seen to emerge from the surface of the soil ; she was very light-colored, and the wings were mere buds; the ptilinum was still extended, pushing the antennae forward and downward. The fly worked for about an hour getting the wings expanded, all the while rubbing them length- wise with her feet while they grew larger and darker. It was about two hours before she developed the normal black color of the adults. When placed on a slice of apple, she began feeding at once with avidity. Sept. 4, 191 1. Six flies emerged — four females and two males. 5, One female emerged. 148 Bulletin 324 Sept. 7, 191 1. One female emerged. 11, Two females emerged. 15, One female and two males emerged. 19, One female emerged. 22, One male emerged. 24, One male emerged. Oct. 2, One male emerged. Third experiment. — July 21, 191 1. Twelve larvae from Primate apples were placed in a flowerpot filled with moist sandy-loam soil, and covered with a cylinder jar. The soil was moistened when it became dry. Sept. 4,1911. One male emerged. 24, One female emerged. Fourth experiment. — July 21, 191 1. A large field cage was placed under the Primate tree and the soil inside was covered with the infested fruit from the tree. Four females emerged. Eight females and one male emerged. Two females emerged. One male and two females emerged. One male and one female emerged. Two females emerged. (There had been several very heavy frosts.) One male fly emerged. One male and one female fly emerged. One female fly emerged. One male and two female flies emerged. Three males and one female emerged . Two males and one female emerged. One male fly emerged. Fifth experiment. — July 21, 191 1. A small field cage was placed under the cherry tree in the insectary and a bucketful of badly infested Red Astrachan apples was put into the cage. Sept. 11, 191 1. Two females and two males emerged. 12, One male emerged. (Cold and rainy.) 13, One female emerged. (Cold and rainy.) 16, Two females and two males emerged. 17, Two females and one male emerged. 19, One male emerged. Sept. 20, 22, 23. 24, 25. 1911 Oct. 16, July 5. 10, 11, i3» 15. 16, 20, 1912 The Apple Maggot 149 Sept. 22, 191 1. One male emerged. 23, Two females emerged. (Cold night.) 24, Three females emerged. 25, One female and one male emerged. 30, Two females emerged. July 10,1912. One female emerged. 1 1 , Four females and three males emerged. 13, Twelve females and seven males emerged. 15, Twelve females and twelve males emerged. 16, Six females and ten males emerged. 1 7 , Ten females and seven males emerged. 18, Three females and six males emerged. 19, None. (Cool and rainy.) 20, Seven females and three males emerged. 22, One female and four males emerged. 24, One female emerged. 28, Two males emerged. 30, One male emerged. Aug. 1 , One male emerged. 5, One female emerged. 15, One male emerged. 19, One male emerged. 24, One male emerged. Sixth experiment. — Aug. 1, 191 1. A number of larvas were placed in a flowerpot filled with moist sandy-loam soil, in the insectary, and covered with a cylinder jar. The soil was moistened when it became dry. Sept . 12, 1 9 1 1 . One male emerged . 13, One female emerged. (Cold day.) 16, Thirteen females and one male emerged. 1 7 , Six females and two males emerged. 19, Five females and five males emerged. 20, Three males emerged. 22, Two females and four males emerged. 24, Three females emerged. 25, One male emerged. Oct. 2, One male emerged. Further experiments. — Several other experiments, which will be men- tioned in another place, produced second-brood flies but the above will serve to show the general results. All the experiments except the fourth were located away from the infested trees, so that there was no possibility 150 Bulletin 324 of the flies' being late in developing from the first brood. In the first, second, third, and sixth experiments, larvse were put on soil, and the flies that emerged could have come only from these. The writer wishes to emphasize these points because doubt has been expressed that these were second-brood flies. It is to be noted from these experiments, however, that only about thirty per cent of the larvse which entered the soil emerged as second- brood flies, the others passing the winter in the soil. Those in flowerpots evidently became too dry or too cold, for the flies failed to appear during the season of 191 2. It is interesting to note that the flies emerged a little more quickly in the first experiment, which was under perfectly natural conditions, than from the soil in flowerpots. This is probably due to the fact that in the latter case the soil dried out several times. Length of life of the flies A series of experiments were conducted to determine how long the flies live. First-brood flies that were ovipositing in the orchard were collected and confined in inverted jelly-glasses on the writer's desk. The glasses were kept well cleaned and fresh paper was put under them from time to time. It was soon learned that the flies preferred having sliced apple to sucking the gum from the outside, so they were given fresh pieces every morning. It was also found neces- sary to supply them with water from time to time, although the moisture from the fruit sometimes condensed on the inside of the glass and the flies were often observed sipping it. The females continued ovipositing, putting the eggs into the section of apple, and in one case an egg was laid on the paper; this egg proved to be fertile, being hatched out in a bit of apple pulp on a hollow slide. The males lived about five weeks and the females six, after confining them; it is not known, of course, how old they were when captured. It is very likely that they live longer in nature. All the flies that emerged from the experiments noted above as second brood were confined in a similar way, each day's result being kept in a separate glass. These flies began copulating when eight days old. This process was observed with some care, which was made possible by the flies being so closely confined. The male springs on the back of the female, placing his fore feet on the front of her abdomen and his second pair out on her wings. He waits until she extends the ovipositor before the penis is drawn out of its pocket, where it lies coiled away under the fifth abdominal tergite. The writer was unable to observe just how he managed to bring the coiled and spring-like penis into position and enter the opening of the ovipositor, as this was so quickly done. When once The Apple Maggot 151 united, the tip of the ovipositor seemed pressed into the cavity between the tiny appendages of the last abdominal segment of the male. They were able to fly about freely, and remained attached in this way for twenty to thirty minutes. When they separated the ovipositor and penis were quickly retracted, and the flies went about feeding as usual. The flies first began ovipositing in apples, which were provided for them in the glasses, at twenty to twenty-four days of age, as is noted above; therefore this length of time was required for the eggs to mature in the ovaries after the flies emerged.* The flies of the second brood began dying after a confinement of thirty days, the nights being cold (October 15) ; the last lived fifty days and died on November 6. TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION The female General color shiny black, marked with white; length, maximum 6.5 mm., minimum 5 mm., average 6.25 mm. ; spread of wings, average 12 mm. Head. — Light brown above, blending into pale lemon-yellow on lower face; sides of face and hind margin of eyes white. Eyes bright green, with rich brown and sometimes steel-blue reflections, in life; but dull, dark green, with purplish reflections, in pinned specimens. Antennas orange, .5 mm. long. Prominent black hairs border the distal front margin of the first segment, and cover the inner face and outer distal margin of the second; the third segment is flattened on its inner face and rounded without, pubescent; arista dark brown, two-jointed, slender, with fine pubescence. The usual frontal bristles present; all black except a small, yellowish white, erect pair (postvertical) located behind the ocelli. Mouth large, broad; proboscis and palpi lemon-yellow, both covered with a yellowish pubescence; palpi short, not extending outside the anterior edge of the mouth. Thorax. — Shiny black ; a white stripe extending along each side from the humeral callus to the base of the wing and the white alula. The dorsum marked with four silvery gray longitudinal stripes, arranged in pairs, confluent in front and very slightly divergent posteriorly; the pairs separated by a median broad space that shows the shiny black of the rest of the thorax; the two stripes of each pair separated posteriorly by a very narrow, similar, black interval, in which is a prominent black bristle near the posterior end of the inner stripe, which is consider- ably shorter than the outer one ; the silver-gray appearance of the stripes is due to a snow-white pile, this making a sharp contrast with the rest of the thorax, which is black. The scutellum prominent, raised, bearing 152 Bulletin 324 the usual two pairs of black bristles ; top flattened and pearly white, sides and base black. Legs. — Middle pair longest, about 4.5 mm.; femora and tibiae about equal, 1.5 mm.; tarsi somewhat shorter, 1.3 mm. Front pair shortest, about 3.8 mm. Femora black with lighter ends, the front pair often lighter; tibia? and proximal segments of tarsi, straw color; distal segments covered with black hairs, giving the feet a black appearance. Wings. — Length 4.5 to 5.5 mm.; width 2 to 2.5 mm.; the smaller sizes being from wings of males and dwarfed females. Four irregular dark bands cross the hyaline membrane of the wing : the first lies near the base of the wing and joins the second near the posterior margin; the last three are connected near the middle of the anterior margin of the wing and diverge widely toward the posterior margin. Professor Harvey has suggested that these markings resemble the picture of a turkey: the end nearest the body representing the head, with a clear spot usually present for the eye, the second band the body, the third the legs, and the fourth the tail, which reaches nearly to the tip of the wing. (Fig. 17.) The entire wing is covered with a very fine pubescence, which is white in the hyaline parts and black in the bands. The entire margin of the wing, and the vein Ri on the upper surface, are armed with small black bristles, as is characteristic of the genus. Abdomen. — Shiny black; four rather uniform white bands bordering the posterior margins of the second, third, fourth, and fifth tergites; the scattered pile of the first of these bands is white, that of the rest black as on other parts. The abdomen without the ovipositor is a little longer than broad ; it is composed of seven segments ; the tergites of the first and second are so closely fused in this family that they were formerly con- sidered as a single segment (Loew, 1873), although the sternites are clearly defined. The first two segments rapidly widen to the third, which is the broadest; the fourth, fifth, and sixth narrow abruptly to the seventh, which is in the form of a truncate cone, with no indication of the union between the teYgite and the sternite, the two being so closely fused as to form a solid, chitinous protection for the ovipositor, and also to act as a firm attachment for the several sets of muscles which manipulate this organ and support the egg-tube within. At first this seventh segment was thought to be the ovipositor (Loew, 1873), which is described as " very broad but short " and having a black pubescence; the real ovipositor being observed and described later (Harvey, 1889). Ovipositor. — This organ (Figs. 26 and 2 7) is very slender and terminates in a sharp point. When not in use it is entirely retracted within the last abdominal segment. The general structure is horn-like, hard, and chi- tinous, with a groove on the lower surface which is covered by two chi- The Apple Maggot 153 tinous rods or flaps extending from the sheath about halfway to the tip. These flaps are attached at the sides to the main body of the ovipositor by thin, transparent membranes, their function being to guide the egg in its passage downward. The sheath is a thin membrane that attaches the ovipositor to the last abdominal segment. It bears many triangular, chitinous projections on its surface; these are arranged in definite rows that extend backward each way from a median line, above and below, the lower surface being the more beautiful. There is a triangular space on each side, at the base of the sheath, with no tubercles. When the ovipositor is retracted it carries the sheath with it, as in pushing in the end of the finger of a glove — the whole sheath and ovipositor being finally concealed within the seventh abdominal segment. The male As shown in Fig. 16, the male has the same general appearance as the female but is considerably smaller. Length, 4 to 5 mm.; the principal difference in length is in size of abdomen, which shows only five of the seven segments, the sixth and seventh (Figs. 28 and 29) being retracted beneath the fifth, and white bands terminating only the second, third, and fourth tergites. Harvey states that there are only five segments in the male, but he evidently overlooked the two terminal segments. The sixth segment is usually entirely covered by the fifth, and the seventh tergite can barely be seen extending behind the caudal margin of the fifth. The sixth ter- gite is very unsymmetrical, on the left side extending downward and meeting the sternite, while on the right there is only a small, triangular part at the top, chitinized, due to the position of the coiled penis which rests against that side. The seventh segment bears a pair of chitinous appendages, which aid in copulation. Extending from the caudal end of the seventh segment is the rectum, which is covered with stiff hairs and remains outside the body at all times ; it can be seen as a noticeable light- colored speck in even the living flies. Within the sixth and seventh seg- ments is a chitinous framework which supports the very long, chitinous penis — an organ which extends in almost a complete circle around the caudal end of the body, to the back, when partly uncoiled (Fig. 29). Ordinarily the penis remains in a tight coil in a pocket under the fifth tergite, just to the right of the median line (Fig. 28). The spiral, chitinous rod in the penis makes it difficult to straighten out when the fly is dead, and causes the soft margin on the inner part of the circle to pucker, form- ing overlapping folds. Near the end is a rectangular part with a chitinous center, and terminating the penis is a spiral brush with numerous, some- what stiff hairs. The other markings are as in the female. 154 Bulletin 324 Internal genitalia of female Careful dissections were made of the reproductive system, in order to determine the time of development and the number of eggs. The ovaries are spherical masses made up of numerous egg-tubes (Fig. 32), as is com- mon among flies. The egg-tubes are surrounded by connective tissue and are tied together by closely anastomosing trachea?; the oviducts are short and lead into the vagina, which also receives the ducts from the three spermathecae and the pair of accessory organs on the dorsal surface (Fig. 32). The vagina has a cluster of tiny papillas also on the dorsal surface, the function of which the writer has been unable to determine. Two sets of muscles extend from the sides of the vagina to the chitinous walls of the seventh abdominal segment, which entirely surrounds this organ and holds it firmly in place. Another set of muscles, similarly attached, controls the movements of the ovipositor. The vagina grad- ually narrows and seems to unite with the intestine just before it passes into the chitinous covering of the ovipositor. Whether these two tubes actually unite or are only fastened together very closely with the con- necting tissue, the writer is unable to state from the dissections made. This condition does not exist in other flies ; although the two organs often open to the outside very near together, they have separate openings in all cases known to the writer. The egg The mature egg (Figs. 23 and 40) is pearly white when taken from the ovary, but shows a distinct cream color after being in the fruit for a short time. The shape is fusiform, almost four times as long as wide; the pedicellate end being gently rounded, the other end more pointed. The pedicel is short, not much, if any, longer than wide. The eggshell around the pedicel is covered with reticulate markings having the appearance of cells, with raised papilla? extending from their margins giving a spinose appearance. The markings and papillas are distinctly darker near the pedicel and extend for only about one fourth of the total length of the egg, where they are gradually lost in the smooth surface of the remainder of the shell. Measurements of a large series show the following sizes: length, . 8 to 1 mm. ; width, . 2 to .3 mm. ; the shorter eggs usually having the greater width. The developing larva can be clearly seen within the egg; the black rasping apparatus, or head, being in the pointed end of the egg, the posterior part toward the pedicel. The larva The larva (Fig. 24) is white or cream-colored unless it is feeding on green pulp from near the skin of the fruit, in which case the food shows The Apple Maggot 155 through the skin of the larva, giving a greenish cast. The body is made up of fourteen segments; the ninth, tenth, and eleventh are thickest, those from the ninth to the first rapidly tapering to the small, pointed head. From the eleventh segment the body decreases very gradually to the last segment; this has the dorsal half cut off, leaving a sloping surface on which is located the pair of caudal spiracles. Below the sloping part the body ends squarely, giving it the appearance of being cut off. On each side of the dorsal surface, at the union of the third and fourth segments, is a conspicuous outgrowth. By the aid of the microscope this structure is seen to be made up of a double row of about twenty papillae extending from the margin of a funnel-shaped structure that is attached to a bulb-like enlargement at the base. These structures are the cephalic spiracles, which open into the pair of longitudinal tracheae extending caudad to the last segment of the body, where they end in the caudal spiracles mentioned above. Only two branches connect this pair of longitudinal tracheae, the first at the junction of the fourth and fifth segments and the other just in front of the last segment. When the head is fully extended, the black hooks are clearly seen protruding from the lower surface of the front segment. These hooks are attached to a black or brown framework inside the second, third, and fourth segments. This structure (Figs. 30 and 31) can be clearly seen through the skin by transmitted light, especially when the larva is young. The first three segments of the body are usually withdrawn into the fourth whenever the larva is disturbed; in this condition the cephalic spiracles appear to be at the anterior end of the body and the rasping apparatus cannot be seen. This is the condition seen normally in the anterior part of the puparium. There are two pairs of sensory papillae on the front of the first segment. Length of larva, 7 to 8.5 mm.; width, 1.75 to 2 mm. The pupa As in most flies, the pupal stage is passed within the larval skin, the maggot shortening up and becoming inactive. The shape (Fig. 25) is a long oval, a little more than twice as long as wide and tapering about equally at the two ends. The head segments being retracted, the cephalic spiracles protrude from the front margin. The posterior end is slightly contracted but not enough to cover the caudal spiracles, which remain exposed. The color, at first light yellow as in the larva, changes in a few hours to a yellowish brown, becoming darker with age. Within two days the real pupa formed inside the larval skin, in all cases observed. Fletcher (1905) states that the pupa forms inside the puparium only a few days before the perfect insect appears the next summer. The pupa, when removed from the puparium, is pure white; the legs and wing buds 156 Bulletin 324 closely folded toward the ventral side; the head also tipped ventrally so as to economize space. Length of puparia, 4 to 5 mm. ; width, 2 to 2 . 5 mm. METHODS OF CONTROL Picking up windfalls Since the larvae usually remain in the fruit for some time after it falls from the tree, the standard remedy for years has been to destroy the drops. In the control of a pest it is customary to look for the point of least resistance in the life cycle, at which to make the attack. Hence, it is most natural that this remedy should be applied; for if all the fallen fruit is destroyed before the larvae emerge from it and go to the soil to pupate, there will be none left to continue the pest. In practice, however, there has always been the difficulty that some of the fruit was left on the ground too long, and some of the maggots escaped. Keeping the fruit picked up became a very burdensome task, and, in the case of large orchards, so expensive that few carried it out. An added difficulty also arose from the fact that there are usually many scrubby apple trees in near-by neglected fields, in this part of the country. The fruit of these trees, being invariably infested with the apple maggots and left to decay on the ground, offers a continual source for renewing the pest in well- cared-for orchards. Early in this work it became evident that the larvas remained much longer in the hard winter fruit after it dropped, than they did in the softer summer varieties. Thinking, as the writer did then, that picking up the drops was the only adequate method of control, the importance was at once recognized of a more definite knowledge as to just how long the larvae remained in the fruit after it had fallen from the tree. In other words, how often is it necessary to pick up the fallen fruit for a given variety, in order to keep any of the larvae from escaping to the soil? With a view to obtaining comprehensive results, individual trees of sixteen of the common varieties of apples were used. These were all badly neglected and were known to have been thoroughly infested with apple maggots in previous years. As indicated in the table on page 158, the varieties selected gave all gradations from those of early summer to those of late fall and winter. As to the methods of work, all the drops were picked up daily, those from each tree being placed in separate boxes or in screen-bottom trays. Data blanks were kept in the boxes with the fruit, and on these the number of larvae that had emerged were recorded each morning. Sometimes the fruit became decayed before all the larvae were matured and the writer had some difficulty in getting a complete record of infestation, for the Fig. 16. — Rhagoletis pomonella, male Fig. 17. — Wing of Rhagoletis pomonella Fig. 18. — Rhagoletis pomonella, female. Natural size and enlarged Fig. 19. — ■ Female fly on apple, slightly enlarged Fig. 20. — Tunnels of larva showing through skin of Early Harvest apples, FlG. 2 1 . — Exit holes of larvce in Primate apples Fig. 22. — The same apples, cut open Fig. 23. — Egg in situ, greatly enlarg Fig. 24. — Maggots, lateral and dorsal views, enlarged Fig. 25. — Puparium, natural size and enlarged Fig. 26. — Ovipositor of female, side view Fig 27. — Ovipositor of female, ventral view Fig. 28. — End of abdomen of male, slightly distended. Greatly enlarged Fig. 29. — End of abdomen of male, with genital organs uncoiled Fig. 30. — Cephalic part of maggot, showing arrangement of chitinous hooks. Dorsal view ^_~— ~^ -^-r-""*" ~~—-v/ ^x^ S* *^** s ««fcl **** /? / '■•• 1 '■ IP Fig. 31. — Cephalic part of maggot, lateral view - rj- 10 ex co 11 83 > V-i J3 *4-4 O t^ 04 04 M 0) no n iflH O 04 VO IO li"J V~i 04 on M-t on no no 10 00 -tf-oo 00 04 t^ OvOiO N 04 NO 00 00 N m IO N© Tj- W W "* VO »D CO itjnO CM IO M M 04 ON M Num- ber of drops O00 M N Tj-^O t» IO IO00 CO 1- N 'tN (Oh mCON^ 1 IOnO C vO CO a 1-1 •a *o aj a Q 1 P [ ! < 4 P 3 4- 1 U i s X 6 0": > 4- 3 U t ~ £ t M > 4- x t !< ■5v£ > 4- 3 U £ b J : J< > r- > 4- V 5 ( s 1< -a 4- : £ b •: < c 4- £ b < NC 4- O £ b < > > 4- i 6 !< £ b ~ 1-' 4- t/ z c b < E — a c - £ 4- £ b < M M O III U 04 4) > num of la per app < fi°P NO <+ O §15 O >H CO 00 NO 04 IO t^ 04 Tj- O 04 M-t CO O 04 04 ON 04 M ON .a 04 O 04 O ON O 00 o« ^4 ►M MM t^ O > 43 M* VO NO CD ^3 a IO 00 MN Tj- 04 bfl lH 01 cu u MH MH CO 04 CO 04 O fa 0) MM CO HH ON "o MH ■* O CO T3 MM MM l-c 0) Ph ON 04 00 04 r^ ON CO NO O 04 IC **■ -* 04 CO ■si- CO 04 00 CO O MM O Num ber drop 00 CO ex O ^ O Q) 4-> CO c3 04 Q 4-3 tr. 3 < 1 1 68 Bulletin 324 On July 20, 1912, the flies began to appear on the Maiden Blush apples. This was just one day ahead of the previous year's record. Referring to the table of the Maiden Blush experiment of 191 1, it will be seen that all the drops were picked up daily; therefore these flies must have come from some of the other trees, which are some distance away. Evi- dently, picking up the drops was not effective in this case, when other infested trees were near by. On August 5, 19 12, the Red Astrachan apples were ripening and showed no trace of the maggots, and none of the flies were then to be found on the tree. Hence it would appear that the period of emergence was past for the early fruit and the trees had escaped an infestation. The writer has found the most practical method of applying the bait to be by means of a hand syringe (Figs. 43 and 44). This is a common brass garden-syringe of English make, and is the same kind that Mally used in his experiments in South Africa. It can be purchased from most of the large seedsmen. This syringe holds just a pint, which is enough for a tree of moderate size. The process is very simple and even a small orchard of fifty trees may be treated without further expense for apparatus. Slight difficulty was experienced in controlling the flies on a seedling variety of sweet apples. Showers came up nearly every afternoon during the period that the poisoned bait was being applied to the tree, and this may account for the fact that a few of the flies came to maturity and were able to oviposit in the fruit. Even in this case, however, the fruit was vastly improved over former years. If the conditions are such that the flies do not succumb readily to this treatment, the use of the soluble potassium arsenate is advisable as previously described. Codling-moth spray More recent observations in the commercial orchards led to the belief that even the codling-moth spray of arsenate of lead would control the apple maggot, if thoroughly applied as is commonly done for the second spray — say the latter part of June, this being just the time to reach the newly emerging flies in this locality. As has been noted above, the flies must feed for two or three weeks before they are ready to oviposit. All this time they have in which to eat poison, so that even a very slowly- work- ing dose would destroy them before they could do any damage. In order to test this, small twigs of apples were sprayed with arsenate of lead, 2-50, just as is used for codling moth, and these sprayed fruits were enclosed in cages with flies, other cages being used for checks. Daily, and in some cases several times a day, the foliage and fruit were given a mist spray of water to represent dew and to supply the necessary moisture Fig. 43. — Method of applying poisoned bait Fig. 44. — The brass garden-syringe used in the experiments The Apple Maggot 169 for the flies. The writer thinks, also, that the natural moisture on the sprayed fruit in the field makes it easier for the flies to get the effect of the poison. As noted in the life history, the flies are able to dissolve most substances on the surface by using the saliva that they force out of their mouths from time to time while feeding. The results were most satisfactory, for in the poison cages half of the flies were dead after two days and in three and a half days the last one had succumbed, while all were alive in the check cages. This experiment was repeated several times without any material change in the results. Although a laboratory test can never be conclusive, these results are very encouraging for further trials in the field. Professor L. H. Bailey states that his orchard near Willow Creek was infested with the apple maggot before the trees were sprayed by a power machine for codling moth. The writer visited the orchard early in September, 191 1, and the manager, Mr. Higgins, stated that the worthless fruit was usually left under the trees, as only sound fruit was disposed of. Mr. Higgins also said that he had never seen a trace of the pest since they had used the power sprayer and covered the whole orchard. After cutting dozens of fallen apples of the varieties most susceptible, only one larva was found and that was in a Sweet Russet. In a neglected orchard in the neighborhood, every variety was found to be badly infested, even the Kings, Greenings, and Baldwins. Subsequent observations in other sprayed orchards confirm the above. No reports of this pest ever come from the Lake Ontario region, where orchards are generally well cared for and sprayed. L. Caesar, of the Canadian Agricultural Experiment Station at Guelph, Ontario, wrote on October 16, 191 1, that this pest was found in Ontario over a large part of the province but that in no county, so far as was known at that time, was there any appreciable amount of damage done to commercial orchards, and that the insect was far worse in towns and villages than in the open country. CONCLUSIONS The writer's results and observations would indicate that the thorough- going orchardist will possibly have but little to fear from this insect, for it appears very probable that in spraying and caring for his orchard, as he must do in order to avoid other pests, he will incidentally destroy this one. In towns or cities where there is, here and there, a tree badly infested, the most practicable remedy would appear to be the poisoned bait; using only a small amount, which maybe applied with an inexpensive hand-spray. For early varieties the first application should be made about July 1 ; for later apples it should be made toward the end of July, or when the flies appear. 170 Bulletin 324 SUMMARY Distribution The principally infested districts extend from New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario, south to Pennsylvania, with a single record from North Carolina; westward to Iowa and Wisconsin, with brief mention in Minnesota, South Dakota, and Colorado. Host plants Haws and wild crab-apples appear to have been the original foods. Subsequent records show cultivated fruits to be attacked, principally apples, although pears, cultivated crab-apples, and huckleberries are also included. Seriousness of the pest The pest is generally distributed in unsprayed, neglected orchards throughout its range. Damage is often reported of half, sometimes the whole, crop. From New Hampshire, ninety-five per cent of the orchards are reported as infested. Other fruit-flies Related species have done serious damage to the fruit industry of other countries. Methods used in the control of these exotic species are likely to prove of value here. Life history The flies begin to emerge the latter half of June and continue up to August 1. They feed by constantly sipping the surface gum of the fruit, often moistening the surface, if dry, with a drop of saliva. The eggs are laid singly in punctures made in the skin of the fruit by means of the very slender ovipositor. The eggs hatch in two to six days, depending on the temperature. The larvae feed in the pulp of the fruit for two weeks to two months or more, depending on the hardness of the fruit and on the temperature. The pupa stage is usually spent in the ground, one or two inches beneath the surface, although puparia are often found within decayed fruit. The pupal period may last for only about a month for the early-emerging larvae, but it continues over the winter in late varieties. Second-brood flies. — Flies emerged, from the first to the last of Sep- tember, from larvae which went into the ground in July. Only about one third of these early pupae developed second-brood flies ; the others remained dormant dining the winter and began emerging July 2, 19 12. Length of life of the flies. — Although the flies lived in confinement for thirty to fifty days, they probably last much longer under natural condi- tions. The Apple Maggot 171 Reproductive system. — Three or four hundred eggs are produced during the lifetime of the fly; these develop in succession and are deposited as soon as mature. Methods of control Picking up windfalls may rid the orchard of the pest if consistently followed up, but it is a laborious process. Even the destruction of drops by hogs is sometimes ineffective. Several experiments have shown that the flies are able to emerge when buried deeply in the soil, hence plowing in the fall or spring cannot be counted on for a remedy; and covering the infested fruit in pits is not recommended. Citronella oil, kerosene, and quassia are apparently worthless with these flies. Cold-storage stops the development of the larvae and may kill them if long continued. Larvae failed to pupate in dry soil, their bodies shriveling and dying within the puparium; hence cultivation may prove of value by keeping a dust mulch in the surface. There is little to fear from larvae that go to the bottoms of boxes and bins, as they were found drying in all cases observed and none were found emerging. Poisoned bait. — Sweetened arsenate of lead proved effective but was rather slow, so that in the writer's early experiments soluble potassium arsenate was tried. This killed the flies in thirty minutes. Subsequent observations indicate that the arsenate of lead alone may control this pest if applied thoroughly to the fruit, as is done for the codling moth. Experiments during the season of 19 12 showed gratifying results from the use of the following mixture: Cheapest molasses 1 pound Arsenate of lead. 3 ounces Water 4 gallons This should be applied when the flies first emerge and repeated every ten days while the flies are in the field; and it must be renewed after each rain. The writer has not had an opportunity to try arsenate of lead, without sweetening, on a block of infested trees; but in the case of a commercial orchard that was affected, he would place considerable confidence in the effectiveness of this remedy. The main object in any case, however, is to keep poison on the trees during the time of principal emergence of the flies, so that they can get it before the eggs are mature and ready to be laid. 172 Bulletin 324 bibliography There have been but two extended papers published on the apple maggot — Comstock (1882) and Harvey (1S90). Although practically every State and every experiment station in the region of infestation has published something on the subject, most of these writings are based on the above papers. Some of the brief notices, in which nothing is added, have been omitted. A number of papers on exotic species have been included because of the value of the suggestions that they contain on habits and methods of control. 1866. Ward, C. — Pract. Ent., vol. 2, pp. 20-21. Mr. Ward writes from Vermont that a small legless worm, about one quarter inch long, bored his apples very badly in 1865; fully one half their value was destroyed. 1867. Glover, T. — Trypeta pomonella. Rept. Ent., Rept. U. S. Dept. Agr., 1867, pp. 72-73. Brief notes on habits. *i867. Trimble, I. P. — New York Semi-Weekly Tribune, July 19. States that this new and formidable enemy of the apple, the apple maggot, prevails generally throughout the Hudson River country, but has not yet reached New Jersey. 1867. Walsh, B. D. — The apple-worm and the apple-maggot. Amer. Journ. Hort., vol. 2, pp. 338-343, illus. This is the original description. A careful comparison is drawn between the codling moth and the apple maggot. In 1866 the apple maggot was well known in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, also probably the same insect recorded from Vermont, 1865, as doing serious damage to apples; one half their value lost. 1868. Walsh, B. D. — The apple-maggot fly. First annual report on the noxious insects of the State of Illinois, 1868, pp. 29-33. See also second edition, 1903. Flies reared from Illinois haws, five or six years previously. Larvae from winter apples received from Wallingford, Conn., November, 1866; July, 1867, flies emerged. December 28, 1866, a further supply of maggots from East Falmouth, Mass.; July, 1867. flies emerged. During the same winter pupae were received from North Hemp- stead, Long Island; July, 1867, flies emerged. Apple maggot compared with codling moth. " The eggs inserted by the ovipositors of these flies into the flesh of the apple." Description of fly, from six males bred from eastern apples July 15 to 23, two fnales and one female bred from Illinois haws July 23 to 28. 1868. Walsh, B. D., and Riley, C. V. — Noxious insects named. Amer. Ent., vol. 1, p. 59. Small worms living in the pulp of apples at Franklin, N. Y., are thought to be larvae of the apple maggot; hence it is believed that this pest is gradually working westward. 1869. Packard, A. S. — Guide to the study of insects, p. 415. Brief reference to record of Trypeta pomonella by Walsh, as destructive to stored apples. 1872. Riley, C. V. — The apple-maggot fly. American Agriculturist, vol. 31, pp. 263-264, illus. In answer to a letter from J. H. Spatter, Keene, N. H. (first record from this State). Comparative description of apple- worm moth and apple-maggot fly, with figures show- ing work of each insect and the several stages. Remedies suggested: Cover the ground entirely with flagstones or brick. Cover the ground with salt, ashes, or lime. Destruc- tion of infested fruit. Cultivation in spring. *Original not seen. The Apple Maggot 173 1873. Loew, H. — T. pomonella. Monograph of the Diptera of North America, Part III, pp. 265-268. Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Excellent description of the fly, made from a single specimen. Places this species in the subgenus Rhagoletis, which he had formed for European specimens in 1862 — Monograph of European Trypetidae. 1874. Glover, T. — Manuscript notes from my journal, Diptera, p. 58, pi. ix, fig. 14. Brief reference to authorities on Trypela pomonella. *i876. Riley, C. V. — Apple maggot. New York Semi-Weekly Tribune, December 15. Answer to letter of P. M. Augur; description of larva and adult; ravages, food plants, habits, and means of control; literature of the subject. 1878. Osten Sacken, C. R — Cat. Dip. N. A., 2d ed., p. 191. Smith- sonian Institution, Washington. Brief statement giving authorities. In this work Rhagoletis is considered as a subgenus of the old genus Trypeta. 1880. Riley, C. V. — Amer. Ent., vol. 3, p. 160. A brief note regarding change in feeding habit of the apple maggot, from haws to cultivated apples. 1882. Comstock, J. H. — The apple maggot. Rept. U. S. Comm. Agr., 1881-1882, pp. 195-198, 1 pi. See same in author's edition, pp. 3-6. A discussion of the importance, as compared with codling moth; description of larva, pupa, and adult. Remedies: Destroy drops, and use sweet varieties as traps, destroy- ing all fruit from these trees. 1882. Treat, M. — The apple maggot. Injurious insects of the farm and garden, p. 164, illus. Brief account of insects and their work. 1883. Harlow, S. C. — Trans. Maine Pom. Soc, 1882, p. 108. Work of the apple maggot increasing. Works on Golden and Hightop Sweet, Danver's Winter Sweet, Gravenstein, Jenneting, and Porter. *i883. Lintner, J. A.— The apple maggot. Bui. LXXV, N. Y. (Geneva) Agr. Exp. Sta. Also, 2d Ann. Rept. N. Y. St. Ent., 1885, pp. 1 17-125. General notes on life history and distribution. 1883. Riley, C. V. — The apple maggot cr railroad- worm. Stoddart's Encyclopaedia Americana, vol. 1, p. 135. Brief description, habits, and remedy by destroying infested fruit. 1883. Saunders, W. — The apple maggot. Insects injurious to fruits, pp. 135-136, illus. See also second and third editions. Brief description, habits, and life history. 1883. Anonymous. — The apple maggot. 26th Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1882, pp. 409-412. Also, Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, 1882, p. 101. Extracts from paper by Professor Comstock in Rept. U. S. Dept. Agr., 1882. 1884. Cook, A. J. — The apple maggot. Country Gentleman, vol. 49, p. 857. A half-barrel of apples from Shiawassee county, Michigan, entirely ruined, also common in apples about Lansing. In 1883 apples from Delavan, Wis., infested. Inseot well known in thorn apples in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois, for years; but this is the first time that it is known to have attacked Michigan apples. The apples infested ripen early and fall. These should be quickly destroyed. 1884. Cutting, H. A.— The apple maggot. 8th Rept. Vt. St. Bd. Agr., 1883-1884, pp. 259-263, illus. Reprint of Comstock's paper, 1881. *Original not seen. 174 Bulletin 324 1884. Gardiner, R. H. — 27th Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1883, p. 332. Also, Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, 1883, p. 30. Reports the apple maggot very destructive to Talman Sweet, Red Astrachan, and Mother apples, but not to other trees. 1884. Gilbert, Z. A.— 27th Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1883, pp. 363-364. Also, Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc., 1883, p. 61. Discusses apple maggot as a new and serious enemy. Reports damage to tart apples, such as Benoni, as well as sweet. No remedy known. 1884. McLellan, T. S — 27th Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1883, p. 345. Also, Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc., 1883, p. 43. Reports another destructive insect, a new " worm " which appeared five or six years ago in Maine apples. Three years ago the early sweet apples were affected. Haley, Hurlbut, Nodhead, Primate, and Porter more or less infested. 1885. Blossom, L. H — 28th Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1884, p. 368. Also, Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, 1884, p. 70. Reports the apple maggot as a newcomer; in sweet apples, both fall and winter. Remedy: Gather and cook infested apples and feed to hogs. 1885. Cook, A. J. — The apple maggot. Rural New Yorker, vol. 44, pp. 86-87, illus. This pest doing considerable damage in Michigan. Brief notes on life history, with figures from Comstock. Remedy: Allow stock to feed on drops. 1885. Cook, A. J.— The apple maggot. 14th Ann. Rept. Mich. St. Hort. Soc, 1884, pp. 200-203, illus. This pest was destructive to apples in Wisconsin in 1883, and generally distributed in Michigan in 1884; at least six counties heard from. Brief notes on life history and comparison with codling moth. Remedy: Poisons placed on fruit of no value for this pest. Sheep or hogs in orchard to destroy drops. 1885. Lintner, J. A. — The apple maggot. 2d Ann. Rept. N. Y. St. Ent., pp. 1 17-124, illus. General notes on life history and distribution. Dr. F. W. Goding, of Ancona, Mich., states that he has seen the larvas eating the fruit of Michigan apples in January, but that soon after they entered the earth and changed into pupse. Some that were kept in a cooler room did not change until March. From the earliest pupas, flies were obtained about February 1. (Fruit Growers Journal, Cobden, 111., April 30, 1885.) Other species of similar habits: 1. The apple fly (Drosophila sp.?) matures in August and there is another genera- tion. Packard's Guide to the Study of Insects, p. 414; Saunders' Insects Injurious to Fruits, p. 137. 2. Apple midge (Molobrus mali), pupa distinct, remains within the apple. 1888. Augur, P. M. — The apple maggot. Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, pp. 101-102. Also bound with 31st Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1887-1888. Reports serious trouble with this pest; some varieties of apples ruined. States that after thorough spraying with arsenicals the pest practically disappeared. The following quotation is interesting: " To our surprise, those varieties which had hitherto been badly affected by the maggot, last fall we found almost completely exempt as they were for codling moth. We found occasionally a specimen, enough to show that we still had it, but not enough to interfere with the marketing the fruit I would not say but our exemp- tion from the maggot may be due to some circumstance that we do not understand. It is not proved yet that it is owir>g wholly to the application of poison to our trees, but we are strongly inclined to think that that had a considerable influence. If we know just how the insect feeds and the season of its appearance and disappearance, it will be of great benefit to us. . . . I should say without hesitation that I have so much confidence that the insecticide had an effect in ridding us of the maggot that if the codling moth was entirely gone, I should still use the poison for the apple maggot. It seems, as far as our experience is concerned, that we had nearly escaped it." The Apple Maggot 175 1888. Braun, C. — Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, pp. 84-85. Also bound with 31st Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 188 7-1 888. Gives brief outline of habits of the apple maggot. 1888. Knowlton, D. H. — -Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc., pp. 9-10. Also bound with 31st Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1887-1888. Reports the apple maggot increasing rapidly in the State. Some of the fruit-growers advocate spraying the trees with arsenates; others, feeding the infested fruit to stock. 18S9. Cook, A. J. — The apple maggot. 2d Ann. Rept. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. pp. 96-97. See same in Rept. Mich. St. Bd. Agr., 1888-1889. This pest troublesome for several years in Michigan. The remedy of feeding affected fruit to stock proved successful. Plums and late cherries from northern Michigan said to show attack of this same insect. 1889. Cordley, A. B. — The apple maggot. Orchard and Garden, vol. II, p. 192, illus. Comparison with codling moth. Records apples infested in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Also abundant on hawthorn everywhere in Michigan. Notes larvae and pupae found in plums and cherries from northern Michigan. 1889. Davis, G. C. — A new departure by the apple-maggot. Ohio Farmer, November, p. 2c, 1. Records occurrence in plums and cherries in Michigan. Only larva? and pupae seen. 1889. Harvey, F. L. — The apple maggot. Bui. 2, s. s., Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 1-5. Brief notes on life history. Control — Useless methods: 1. Spraying. 2. Feeding with poisoned sweets. 3. Sticky fly-papers. Preventive measures: 1. Keep in grass and burn grass in fall. 2. Plowing in spring. 3. Avoid sandy soil and sheltered locations for orchards. 4. Prevent by law the importation of fruit from infested districts. Direct methods: 1. Catch flies. 2. Destroy windfalls, also infested fruit, (a) in market, (b) stored. 3. Burning or feeding infested fruit. 4. A radical method: Destroy the entire crop for one season. Let the fruit almost mature, and then destroy by feeding to stock. 1889. Harvey, F. L. — The apple maggot. Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1888, p. 175. Also bound with 32d Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1888-1889, p. 139. Description of fly. Newly hatched larvae observed August I, apples one inch in diameter. Remedies: Plowing, destruction of windfalls. Spraying does no good. 1889. Maynard, S. T. — Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, p. 56. Also bound with 3 2d Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1 888-1 889. Brief notes on habits of the apple maggot, with remedy by destroying infested fruit. 1889. Perkins, G. H. — Trypeta pomonella Walsh. 2d Ann. Rept. Vt. Agr. Exp. Sta., 188S, pp. 135-138. This pest not long known in Vermont. History and description of insect. Eggs deposited on the fruit at the end of summer. In most sections chiefly in early apples, although not true in Vermont, where the late fall and winter varieties suffered most. This insect more abundant in New England but also reported from Mississippi Valley and over most of the Northern States. In some cases entire crop destroyed. 1889. Pope, C. S. — Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, p. 26. Also bound with 32d Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1888-1889. Reports the apple maggot as widespread; working in sheltered places and around buildings. 1889. Williams, E. — Trypeta pomonella in New Jersey. Garden and Forest, October 30, p. 527. Records the apple maggot at Montclair, N. J., infesting trees of Jersey Sweet and Golden Sweeting. Considers it the worst pest of the apple. " First noticed about a dozen years ago." 176 Bulletin 324 1889. Committee. — Trans. Maine St. Pom. Soc, p. 117. Also bound with 32d Rept. Maine Bd. Agr., 1888-1889. The apple maggot distributed over a large part of the State in sheltered areas, not generally injurious to fruit in large orchards. 1890. Harvey, F. L. — The apple maggot. Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1889, pp. 190-241, pi. i-iv. Reprint of monograph on this insect. 1890. Anonymous. — A peach pest in Bermuda. Ins. Life, vol. 3, pp. 5-8, illus. Brief history of Ceratitis capitata. This species has infested the peaches of Bermuda for twenty-five years. Larvas that entered the soil on April 23 emerged as flies on May 9. 1891. Osborn, H. — The apple maggot. Bui. 13, Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 109-113, illus. Many reports of damage from this pest in the State during the past year. Con- densed statement and figures from Harvey's account. It is thought that the pest was introduced from Missouri. 1891. Riley, C. V. — Professor Harvey's bulletin on the apple maggot. Ins. Life, vol. 3, pp. 253-255, illus. A review with figures from Professor Harvey's report on the apple maggot. 1891. Weed, C. M. — The insect record for 1890. 9th Ann. Rept. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta., p. lxiv. The apple maggot reported as doing damage in Delaware county. 1 89 1. Anonymous. — Some of the most common fungi and insects, with preventives. Bui. 35, N. Y. (Geneva) Agr. Exp. Sta., p. 623. Brief note on habits of the apple maggot. 1892. Osborn, H. — Insects of the season in Iowa. Bui. 26, Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 62. Reports indicate that the apple maggot was common in some parts of the State during the year 1890, but not reported in 189 1. This leads to the supposition that it may not thrive under Iowa conditions. 1892. Saunders, W.' — Insects injurious to fruits, second edition, pp. 135-136, illus. See also third edition. Brief description of the apple maggot and its habits. 1893. Chambliss, C. E. — Some injurious insects of the apple. Bui. Tenn. Agr. Exp. Sta., vol. vi, no. 1, p. 26. The apple maggot mentioned as injurious to the apple. 1893. Harvey, F. L. — Rept. Maine Agr. Exr Sta., 1892, p. 99. Records work of apple maggots in Vermont pears; also known to work in pears in Maine. 1893. Osborn, H. — The apple maggot. Rept. Iowa St. Hort. Soc, 1892, pp. 1 1 2-1 13, illus. Occasional reports of damage by the insect, from various parts of Iowa. Brief notes on habits; illustrated from Harvey. Remedy: Destroy infested fruit by feeding to swine, or cover with a foot or more of earth. 1893. Weed, C. M. — The apple maggot or railroad worm. 3d and 4th Ann. Repts. N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 254-255. Brief notes on life history and comparison with codling moth. Remedy: Destruc- tion of infested fruit. 1894. Harvey, F. L. — Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1893, p. 148. Brief note on the apple maggot. Still doing much damage to the apples of Maine and adjoining States. The Apple Maggot 177 1894. Howard, L. 0.— The apple-maggot in North Carolina. Ins. Life, vol. 7, p. 279- Apples from Waynesville, N. C, contained larvae of T. pomonella. Recorded for a new locality. 1894. Perkins, G. H. — The apple maggot. 7th Ann. Rept. Vt. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1893, pp. 130-135. Description of life history and figures from Harvey's report. "The larvae may change to pupae in fruit." 1S94. Snow, W. A. — Descriptions of North American Trypetidae, with notes. Kans. Univ. Quart., vol. 2, pp. 159-174, 2 pi. R. pomonella is briefly noted on page 164. The next species that is here described as similar to the above, R. zephyria, is probably only a variation of R. pomonella, as pointed out by Doane (1898K Described from three males from southern California. Smaller than R. pomonella. The fourth band fills out to the tip of the wing to a greater extent; the hyaline space between the second and third bands reaches the fourth vein, while in pomonella it ends some distance below. Length, 2.5 to 3 mm. Two other males from the same locality show varietal differences in wing. 1S96. Gillette, C. P. — 9th Ann. Rept. Colo. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1S96, p. 145. The apple maggot taken at Colorado Springs. This pest doubtless introduced in infested apples from the East. 1896. Harvey, F. L. — Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1895, Part II, p. 93. The apple maggot continues to be a great pest. Spreading. Several report holding the pest in check by destroying windfalls. 1S96. Perkins, G. H. — Apple maggot. 9th Ann. Rept. Vt. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1895, p. 118. One of the most troublesome pests of the State. No very satisfactory remedy dis- covered. Destroy windfalls by feeding to swine. Spraying not effective. 1896. Weed, C. M. — The codling moth and the apple maggot. Bui. 35, N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 31-35, illus. The apple maggot compared with the codling moth. Brief notes on life history of the apple maggot. " The flies continue to emerge all summer." " Spraying does not prevent the injuries of the apple maggot." Control by destroying windfalls. 1896. Weed, C. M — Bui. 40, N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., p. 92. The crop of apples so large that the injury from maggots is not noticed. 1896. Willis, J. J. — Apple maggot. Gardeners' Chronicle, ser. 3, vol. 20, p. 331. Brief notes on habits and life history. Remedy: Destroy windfalls. 1S96. Williston, S. W. — Trypetidae. Manual of the families and genera of North American Diptera, second edition, pp. 1 19-123. See also third edition. Gives general characters of family. 1897. Fletcher, J. — Insects injurious to Ontario crops in 1896. 27th Ann. Rept. Ent. Soc. Ont., 1896, pp. 65-67. This is the first time that the apple maggot has appeared in Canada; infestation in orchard of Dr. D. Young, at Adolphustown, Ont. Notes on life history and remedies from Harvey's paper. 1897. Fletcher, J. — The apple maggot. Report of the Entomologist and Botanist. Rept. Exp. Farms Can., 1896, pp. 256-258, illus. Brief notes on life history. " The pupa state assumed only a few days before the perfect insect appears." Brief history of distribution and importance. Infested apples received from Dr. D. Young, Adolphustown, Ont., north of Lake Ontario, August 31, 1896. Remedies: Spraying with poisons useless. Destruction of windfalls. 178 Bulletin 324 1897. Harvey, F. L.— Notes on the insects of the year. 12th Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1896, p. 120. The apple maggot almost disappeared in some localities where it was very bad before. Hard winter during past two years may have destroyed pupas. Flies fragile and easily injured. 1898. Doane, R. W. — A new Trypetid of economic importance. Ent. News, vol. 9, pp. 69-72. Gives table for separating the species of the genus Rhagoletis that have been discovered since the publication of Loew's monograph. Note. — Refers to R. zephyria Snow as being indistinguishable from R. pomonella Walsh, although the description was drawn from three males from California, the only difference being in size. 1898. Fletcher, James. — The apple maggot. Report of the Entomolo- gist and Botanist. Rept. Exp. Farms Can., 1897, p. 201, illus. This pest not increased during past year. The ground under infested trees was well plowed and cultivated. Remedy: Destroy windfalls. 1898. Howard, L. 0. — Danger of importing insects. Ybk. U. S. Dept. Agr., 1897, pp. 529-552, illus. The Mexican orange-fly (T. ludens) and a peach fly (T. acidusa) discussed fully, also the Mediterranean fruit-fly (Ceratitis capitata). Brief mention of the apple maggot, page 546. 1899. Beach, S. A., Lowe, V. H., and Stewart, F. C. — Common diseases and insects injurious to fruits. Bui. 170, N. Y. (Geneva) Agr. Exp. Sta., PP- 395-396. Brief notes on habits of the apple maggot. Pest spreading in this State. Remedies: Destroy windfalls and plow in fall. 1899. Coquillett, D. W. — Notes and descriptions of Trypetidae. Journ. N. Y. Ent. Soc, vol. 7, pp. 259-268. Contains a synopsis of the genera. 1899. Doane, R. W. — Notes on Trypetidae, with descriptions of new species. Journ. N. Y. Ent. Soc., vol. 7, pp. 177-193, 2 pi. Gives the habitat of R. pomonella: Massachusetts, Colorado, South Dakota, not known to occur in Washington (State). " In Ent. News, vol. ix, no. 3, 1898, I set forth my reasons for believing that the segment usually referred to as the ovipositor in this family is really the last abdominal segment, and in drawing up the description of R. ribicola referred to it as such. Further study of the group gives additional evidence in support of this view, but in order to avoid confusion I have followed the usual custom and referred to this segment as the ovipositor." 1899. Fletcher, J. — Recent additions to the list of injurious insects of Canada. Trans. Roy. Soc. Can., 2 ser., 1899-1900, sect, iv, p. 223. Brief note on habits and distribution of the apple maggot. Control by destroying windfalls and spading soil. 1899. Froggatt, W. W. — Notes on fruit-maggot flies, with descriptions of new species. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, vol. 10, pp. 497-504, 3 pi.; also, Misc. Publication No. 303, N. S. Wales Dept. Agr. A description of the apple maggot at end of the paper. Control: Destroy infested fruit by boiling. Cultivation may help, as also will letting fowls have the run of the orchard. A trap made by placing a candle in a can and surrounding it with kerosene proved rather successful in catching the adult flies, when lighted and placed under the infested trees at night. 1899. Harvey, F. L. — Insects of the year. 14th Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1898, p. 127. " Was not as prevalent as usual, though doing considerable damage in some parts of the State." The Apple Maggot 179 1899. Lounsbury, C. P. — Fruit fly. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1898, pp. 37-40. Ceratitis capitata infests a wide range of fruits: solanum, grape, prickly pear, apple, peaches, and the like. Remedies: Covering trees with nets successful but expensive. Destruction of windfalls. Repellents valueless. Experiments proved sweetened water solutions of quassia to be of no value in destroying flies, which fed greedily on it although the taste on the fruit was lasting and disagreeable. 1900. Card, F. W., and Adams, G. E. — 13th Rept. R. I. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1899-1900, pp. 247-248. The apple maggot is one of the most serious pests of the apple in this locality. Experi- ments of plowing light, sandy soil showed a slight decrease of infestation, although untreated trees were adjoining. 1900. Harvey, F. L., and Munson, W. M. — Apple insects of Maine. 15th Rept. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., 1899, pp. 136-140, 1 pi. Also pub- lished in 1899 as Bui. 56, Maine Agr. Exp. Sta. Description of the various stages of the apple maggot, life history, and remedies. " The only chance is to destroy the larvas and pupae. This is the only reasonable and practicable treatment." 1900. Lounsbury, C. P. — The fruit fly. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1899, pp. 35-36. Extended experiments with Ceratitis capitata show no parasites. The flies are thought to live over the winter, although this has not been demonstrated. Adults lived in confinement sixteen weeks. 1900. Smith, J. B. — Rhagoletis pomonella. Insects of New Jersey, 1899, p. 687. " Montclair, the apple maggot locally injurious; but seems confined to very few varieties." 1901. Card, F. W., and Adams, G. E — 14th Rept. R. I. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1900-1901, p. 227. Further experiments in controlling the apple maggot by deep spring plowing of light, sandy soil not encouraging; fully seventy-five per cent of the fruit affected. Untreated trees near by. 1901. Fuller, C. — The fruit fly. 1st Rept. Govt. Ent., Natal Dept. Agr., pp. 70-74, 1 pi., illus. Ceratitis capitata ranks first among fruit pests of Natal. Infests a wide range of fruits — plums, peaches, apricots, nectarines, apples, oranges, mandarins, mangoes, loquats, guavas, and the like. Four to six eggs placed in a single puncture; several punctures on a single fruit. Life history similar to that of R. pomonella. Remedies: Feeding to pigs unsafe, as many maggots fall on ground and escape. Covering trees with net recommended. Flies probably pass the winter among the leaves of ever- greens, loquats, and the like. 1901. Lounsbury, C. P. — Fruit fly. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1900, pp. 47-48. Experiments being made to carry the adults over winter in outdoor cages. One fly lived over. 1901. Anonymous. — The codling moth or apple maggot. Gardeners' Chronicle, ser. 3, vol. 29, p. 32. A confusion of the apple maggot with the codling moth, which is the insect described in this article. 1902. Banks, N. — Principal insects liable to be distributed on nursery stock. Bui. 34, n. s., Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., pp. 44~45. i^us. Brief notes on life history of the apple maggot. Illustrations from Harvey. Also, brief note on cherry fly {R. cingulata). 180 Bulletin 324 1902. Card, F. W. — Improving an orchard. Bui. 83, R. I. Agr. Exp. sta., pp. 1 49-1 51. Brief account of work on the apple maggot. Control by destroying windfalls and experiments of deep plowing to bury larvae — inconclusive. 1902. Fuller, C. — The fruit fly. 2d Rept. Govt. Ent., Natal Dept. Agr., 1901, pp. 20-21, illus. Ceratitis capitata possibly has several broods extending from November to July — at least nine months of the year. Flies live thirty to forty days in confinement. Egg stage four days, larval twenty-five days, pupal seven to eleven days. Many maggots remain in fruit to pupate (guavas). Copulation when flies were six days old. 1902. Lindsay, J. — The fruit fly. Queensland Agricultural Journal, vol. ii, pp. 21-23. Best success by collecting a few oranges, which first ripened, smearing them with a preparation like " tanglefoot," and placing them on the ground under the trees in the evening. The flies were caught in large numbers, while attempting to oviposit. 1903. Lochhead, W. — Insects of the season. 33d Ann. Rept. Ent. Soc. Ont., 1902, p. 67. Brief note on the apple maggot. Very abundant; in some orchards more than half the fruit injured. 1903. Walsh, B. D. — The apple-maggot fly. First annual report on the noxious insects of the State of Illinois, second edition, pp. 36-42. " This report has long been out of print and this edition is issued because of the value of the material." 1903. Washburn, F. L. — Apple maggot. Bui. 84, Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta., p. 76. Published also as 8th Ann. Rept. St. Ent. Minn. Brief reference to remedies by destroying windfalls and spraying with arsenicals; figure of fly. 1904. Cartwright, W. — Notes on two insects. Journ. Khediv. Agr. Soc. and School, vol. 6, pp. 17-19. The larvae of Trypeta capitata were found injuring oranges by feeding on the pulp of the fruit. In controlling this pest, destroy fallen fruit and treat the soil under infested trees with ferrous sulfate and then water. 1904. Chittenden, F. H. — The principal injurious insects of 1903. Ybk. U. S. Dept. Agr., 1903, pp. 563-566. _ Reports the apple maggot as unusually injurious in Ohio and New Hampshire, and many apples injured in other regions found on sale in District of Columbia. 1904. Compere, G. — Introduction of the fruit fly parasite. Journ. Dept. Agr. West Austr., vol. 12, pp. 68-72. " The Staphylinidae beetles beyond question destroy the major part of the fruit-fly maggots in Brazil, and also destroy a great number of parasites as well, eating every maggot with which they come in contact, not discriminating between those parasitized and those that are not. ... In Brazil as in India, nature's forces controlling these destructive fruit-flies is complete." This beetle never established in Australia. 1904. Mally, C. W. — The fruit fly. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 28, pp. 647-662, 1 col. pi., illus. C. capitata bred through the year. Some have not obtained results from destruction of fallen fruit. Little to be hoped for from natural enemies. 1904. Osborn, H. — Observations on some of the insects of the season in Ohio. Bui. 46, Bur. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 88. Records fruit infested by apple maggot in the market at Columbus; may have come from outside localities. Professor Hine has observed the pest working in fruit from northwestern Ohio. The Apple Maggot 181 1904. Patch, E. M. — Apple-maggot and other insects. Bui. 109, Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 169-178, illus. Brief description of the several stages of the apple maggot, notes on life history, and the like. Control by destroying windfalls. 1905. Berlese, A. — A probably effective method of destroying Ceratitis capitata and Rhagoletis cerasi. Redia, vol. 3, pp. 386-388. The gratifying success from the use of poisoned bait against the olive fly leads the author to believe that the same treatment will be effective against other fruit-flies. 1905. Card, F. W., and Stene, A. E. — The apple maggot. 17th Rept. R. I. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1903-1904, pp. 191-201. The apple maggot one of the most troublesome pests in Rhode Island. Control by destroying windfalls is expensive. Pupa? from winter apples produce flies the following July 24 to August 15. Experiments in burying pupae proved to be of no value. Fre- quent tillage in early summer may be of some value. 1905. Fletcher, James. — The apple maggot. Report of the Entomolo- gist and Botanist. Rept. Exp. Farms Can., 1904, pp. 238-239, illus. The pest has never done much harm in Canada. Brief description of life history and work. Noticed first at Como, Quebec, by R. W. Shepherd in 1903. Brief notes on the life history and control by destroying drops. Useless to spray with arsenicals. The pupa forms inside the puparium only a few days before the perfect insect appears the next summer. 1905. Isaac. — Mexican orange worm {Trypeta ludens) in Mexico. Re- port of the Commissioner appointed to investigate the prevalence of Trypeta ludens in Mexico. Cal. St. Hort. Comm., illus. Control: Burning, burial, hand-picking, chickens under trees, spraying with sweet — an infusion of Haplophyton cimicidum sweetened with sugar, two pounds herb boiled with an equal amount of sugar. The flies eat this with avidity and soon fall to the ground. Parasite: An ichneumon fly. 1905. Lounsbury, C. P. — Natural enemies of the fruit fly. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 29, October. Sixty-five hundred dollars furnished by the several South African colonies to investi- gate the parasites of Bahia, Brazil. A staphylinid beetle said to be a complete parasite of the Mediterranean fruit-fly (C. capitata). Nearly all the fruit on the trees was found to be punctured by the flies. About thirty-eight per cent parasitized by wasp (Opiellus trimacidatus), and this is effective only on small fruits with thin pulp, such as cherry and the like. None of the beetles were found. May have been the wrong season. Fruit had to become rotten and fall to the ground before beetles could destroy maggots. Returned to Africa without getting a single effective parasite. 1906. Britton, W. E. — Apple-maggot infesting huckleberries. 5th Rept. St. Ent. Conn., 1905, p. 260. Apple maggot was found infesting huckleberries during August, 1904; flies reared. 1906. Card, F. W., and Blake, M. A. — Apple-maggot. 18th Rept. R. I. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1904-1905, pp. 197-198. Insects were partially controlled by hogs in orchard. Thoroughly cultivated orchard had many injured apples. 1906. Felt, E. P. — Apple maggot. 21st Rept. N. Y. St. Ent., p. 91. Very common and destructive pest of early apples. More abundant in sheltered hollows than on hillsides; probably affected by wind currents. 1906. Fletcher, James. — The apple maggot. Report of the Entomolo- gist and Botanist. Rept. Exp. Farms Can., 1905, pp. 184-185. The outbreak at Como, Quebec, in 1 903-1 904 has since spread to many orchards. Crab-apples badly infested; this fruit does not fall from the tree. 182 Bulletin 324 1906. Fuller, C. — Cold storage as a factor in the spread of insect pests. Natal Agricultural Journal and Mining Record, vol. 9, p. 656. The fruit-fly maggots may remain alive in peaches kept at a temperature of 39 to 40 F. for a period of one hundred and twenty-four days. 1906. Lounsbury, C. P. — Natural enemies of injurious insects. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1905, pp. 98-99. Reports expedition to Bahia, Brazil, to investigate natural enemies of fruit-flies. No parasites were obtained. 1906. Mally, C. W. — Fruit fly. Rept. Govt. Ent. for half-year ended December 31, 1904, Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., pp. 9-10. Ample evidence to show that these flies breed through the winter when there is fruit for them. The frosts seem to have no effect on adult. Indications are that none of the flies survive the winter as puparia in soil. None emerged. 1906. Patch, E. M. — Insect notes for 1906. Bui. 134, Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 221-222. Apple maggot clearly defined in order to avoid popular confusion with codling moth. 1907. Berlese, A. — New experience with the olive fly. Coltivatore, vol. 53, pp. 487-49°- After a continued test of the mixture containing sugar and an arsenical salt, the author believes that this remedy has been definitely proved to give better results than any other which has been tried. 1907. Berlese, A. — The history of certain insect pests of the olive. Redia, vol. 4, p. 180, 3 pi., illus. In combating the olive fly, excellent results obtained for a number of years from the use of a mixture containing molasses 65 parts, honey 31 parts, glycerin 2 parts, and arsenite of soda 2 parts. 1907. Bethune, C. J. S. — Insect affecting fruit trees. Bui. 158, Ont. Dept. Agr. Destruction of apple maggot by pigs or sheep in orchards; pick up drops, and so forth. 1907. Chillis, M. de. — The destruction of the olive fly. Coltivatore, vol. 53. PP- 8-11. The mixture previously recommended, while effective, is rather too expensive. The author therefore experimented with the following and obtained good results: 50 parts molasses, 48 parts grape juice, 2 parts arsenite of soda (crystals). 1907. Compere, G. — Kerosene remedy and the fruit fly. Journ. Dept. Agr. West Austr., vol. 15, pp. 244-245, 1 pi. A self -feeding kerosene trap has been devised, which seems to have been fairly effec- tive in catching the fruit fly. The odor of kerosene attracts the fly. 1907. Cuboni, G. — Results obtained by Berlese and Silvestri in com- bating the olive fly. Bol. Quind. Soc. Agr. Ital., vol. 12, pp. 226-232. Successfully combated by the use of a mixture containing 65 parts molasses, 31 parts honey, 2 parts glycerin, and 2 parts arsenate of soda. Before using, this stock mixture is diluted with 10 parts water. 1907. Dreyer, T. F. — Poison bait for the fruit fly. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 31, pp. 192-194. Gives a good translated description of Berlese's experiments. It is believed that the following formula will be best for South Africa: 1 pound arsenate of lead 5 gallons sirup 25 gallons water Notes the use of this first by Mally in 1 903-1 904. The Apple Maggot 183 1907. Felt, E. P. — Apple maggot or railroad-worm. Country Gentle- man, vol. 72, p. 640. A brief general account, with special reference to control by destroying drops and by other methods. Use of sweet variety for trap, and entire destruction of the fruit before it is ripe. 1907. Fletcher, J. — Apple maggot. Evidences of the Entomologist and Botanist before the Select Standing Committee on Agriculture and Colonization, 1906-1907, pp. 134-135. Ottawa, Canada, 1907. The apple maggot has done more harm during the past year than at any previous time. Distributed in Quebec, New Brunswick, and Ontario. This pest first appeared in Canada in 1878, in the Bay of Quinte district. 1907. Fletcher, James. — The apple maggot. Report of the Entomolo- gist and Botanist. Rept. Exp. Farms Can., 1906, p. 219. This pest becoming more abundant and rapidly spreading to new localities. Severe outbreak at Woodstock, New Brunswick. 1907. Hood, C. E. — The apple - maggot or railroad worm. Cir. 3, Mass. Agr. Exp. Sta., illus. Distribution from Maine to North Carolina and west to Minnesota and Wisconsin. Brief description of life history and control by destroying windfalls. 1907. Hooper, T. — Cool storage and fruit fly. Journ. Dept. Agr. West Austr., vol. 15, pp. 252-253. The maggots lived in previous experiments resisting temperature of 38 to 44 F. In the present experiment a temperature of 33 to 35 F. was tried. The eggs appeared fresh when taken out, but failed to hatch. Fifteen days was found to be the limit at which the maggots or eggs lived, so the infested fruit was left in for three weeks in order to insure safety. 1907. Lounsbury, C. P. — Fruit fly. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1906, pp. 83-85. The season of 1906 was the worst for fruit-flies. The adults are thought to survive the winter. Peaches, plums, grapes, nectarines, apples, pears, quinces, oranges, pome- granates, loquats, prickly pears, and other fruits infested. Cold-storage appears to be fatal to maggots. A temperature of 38 to 40 F. killed all maggots in three weeks. Experiments with sweetened sprays proved encouraging. 1907. Lounsbury,. C. P. — The fruit fly. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 31, pp. 186-187. The pest can be controlled by spraying the trees with the following: 1 pound arsenate of lead 2 gallons molasses 25 gallons water The maggots of the fruit-fly are killed by a temperature of 38 to 40 F. for three weeks. 1907. Marchal, P. — Combating the olive fly. Bui. Mens. Off. Renseig. Agr. [Paris], vol. 6, pp. 927-931. Two methods have been proposed for controlling Dacus oleae: (1) Spraying with a mixture of molasses, honey, glycerin, and arsenate of soda. (2) Improved cultural operations. Unimproved olive trees should be destroyed. 1907. Quinn, G. — Fruit maggot fly pests. Journ. Dept. Agr. So. Austr., vol. 10, pp. 701-710, illus. Mention is made of the habits of the apple maggot, among other fruit-flies (page 701). The remedies not very satisfactory. A poisoned bait used in Italy has given fairly good results. ' ' Kerosene appears to attract the flies and may be used to trap them. 1907. Sanderson, E. D. — Report of the Department of Entomology. Bui. 129, N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., p. 264. The apple maggot is almost equal to the codling moth, making apple production well-nigh impossible in many sections. 184 Bulletin 324 1907. Slingerland, M. V. — The more urgent problems of insect control. Bui. 196, Office Exp. Stas., U. S. Dept. Agr., pp. 104-109. Real original research can be done on a study of life history and remedial measures of the apple maggot, and so forth (page 107). 1908. Card, F. W. — 20th Rept. R. I. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1906-1907, pp. 21 1-212. Records many maggots in Early Harvest apples even after hogs had the run of the orchard the previous year. Experiments in burying apples and spading failed for some reason to show results. 1908. Felt, E. P. — Apple maggot or railroad-worm. 23d Rept. St. Ent., 1907. Bui. 124, N. Y. St. Mus., pp. 33-34. This pest becoming more apparent each year, worse on sweet apples; presence of maggots hastens ripening. Breeding continues until late fall. Winter varieties show corky trails. A spray to control the pest wished for. Remedy: Destroy windfalls. Pest worst in sheltered hollows. Use sweet variety for trap. 1908. Froggatt, W. W. — Progress report. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, vol. 19, pp. 663-672. Six thousand lire (1 lira = 19.3 cents) offered by the Italian government as a reward for the discovery of a remedy for the olive fly (Dacus oleae). Berlese used a sweetened bait with marked success, but it is expensive and washes off. He is now trying jars with bundles of cotton threads trailing down to draw out the sirup and serve as a resting- place for the feeding flies. Berlese's mixture (Dacacide) : 40 parts molasses 40 parts honey 2 parts arsenic 18 parts water 1908. Garman, H. — Other insects attacking apple. Bui. 133, Ky. Agr. Exp. Sta., p. 62. Brief notes. Not found in Kentucky except in fruit on the market. 1908. Gurney, W. B. — Gosford-Narara fruit fly and codling-moth control experiments. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, vol. 19, pp. 581-584. Flies not susceptible to spraying or fumigating. Control by destroying windfalls, scalding empty packing-cases. Life' history of the Mediterranean fly (C. capitata). Four to fourteen eggs in a single puncture; hatch in a few days, feed two to six weeks, pupate in ground. Sometimes drop from hanging fruit. Flies emerge in one to two weeks. Flies were reared from pupse buried 6, 8, 10, and 12 inches deep. Two hundred adult flies captured in a single saucer of kerosene exposed in the trees. 1908. Lounsbury, C. P. — The fruit fly. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1907, p. 56. In experiments with the fruit-fly {Ceratitis capitata) in which boxes were kept at a temperature of 38 to 40 F. for twenty-one days, all of two hundred and sixty-six maggots were found to be dead when examined, and two pupa? discovered failed to develop. 1908. Mally, C. W. — The fruit fly — paraffin remedy vs. poisoned bait. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 32, pp. 609-611. The flies were not attracted to paraffin oil so much as to pineapple juice and molasses. Bees were attracted to honey when sprayed on a hedge near a hive, but paid no attention to other sweets. Poisoned bait affords greater protection than does the exposure of vessels of paraffin oil. 1908. Quaintance, A. L. — The apple maggot or railroad worm. Cir. 101, Bur. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., ill us. One of the chief insect enemies of the apple. A native American species. Natural food, Crataegus. Spread is slow. One generation annually. New locality, Dyberry, Pa. Remedies: Destroy windfalls and cultivate. The Apple Maggot 185 1908. Stene, A. E.— The apple maggot. Rept. R. I. St. Nursery Inspector, pp. 30-31, illus. Also bound with 23d Rept. R. I. St. Bd. Agr., 1907. Brief description of habits and life history. Remedy: Destroy infested fruit. 1908. _ Williston, S. W. — Manual of North American Diptera, third edition, pp. 282-287, illus. A brief description of the family Trypetidae, with key to genera. 1909. Aldrich, J. M. — The fruit infesting forms of the dipterous genus Rhagoletis, _ with one new species. Canadian Entomologist, vol. 41, pp. 69-73, illus. Notes on the distinguishing characters of the genus Rhagoletis, with a table of species and a plate showing wing characters. Agrees with Doane (1898) that R. zephyria Snow is indistinguishable from R. pomonella Walsh. Aldrich has specimens of R. pomonella collected in Colorado. " The typical forms of Rhagoletis in N. America are distinguished by their black color, the scutellum conspicuously white or yellow and bearing four bristles, the wings with cross bands, which may be somewhat oblique and curved; the anterior cross-vein is situated about the middle of the discal cell; first vein bristly along its whole length, the third vein only at base. " R. intrudens n. sp. described from one female that emerged at Ottawa, 19, VI, 1907, from pupa sent from Victoria, B. C, works on sour cherries — may be the same that works in Idaho cherries, but not bred out yet." Note. — This is a synonym for R. fausta O. S. 1909. Bethune, C. J. S. — The apple maggot, ,34th Ann. Rept. Ont. Agr. Coll. and Exp. Farm, 1908, p. 31. This pest doing considerable damage in Prince Edward county. Found in other districts, but does not seem to spread rapidly. Destruction of fallen fruit will doubtless control the pest. 1909. Froggatt, W. W. — New South Wales report on parasite and inju- rious insects. 1907-1908. Sydney, N. S. Wales. This reports the various fruit-flies investigated during an extended trip around the world. Citronella oil very attractive to two species of fruit-flies (genus Dacus) in India. Brief description of apple maggot on page 74. Irrigation destructive to fruit-flies, when the ground is flooded about the trees. It was discovered in 1907 that a dish of kerosene placed in the orchard was very attractive to the Mediterranean fruit-fly. Thousands were taken in a few days. Wherever this was tried it had the same results. The oil had no charms for the Queensland fruit-fly. Five million dollars loss to olive crop in 1908 in Italy due to the fruit-fly {Dacus oleae) . General account of the family Trypetidae, page 77. Page 78, destructive genera: I. Dacus. 2. Ceratitis. 3. Trypeta. 4. Carpomyia (melon fly). 5. Anastrepha (Brazil fruit pest). 6. Rhagoletis. Page 103, Bermuda: Destruction of all fallen fruit shows good results. Page 112: Mexican fruit-fly (/. hideus). Page 114: Apple maggot, brief description. 1909. Froggatt, W. W. — Fruit flies. Farmers' Bui. 24, N. S. Wales Dept. Agr., illus. The material in this bulletin is largely taken from the author's report on parasitic and injurious insects, 1907-1908. A summary is here given of the various fruit-flies of the family Trypetidae. The apple maggot is referred to on pages 4 and 5 and described on pages 55 and 56. 1909. Mally, C. W.— Poisoned bait for fruit fly. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 34, pp. 620-633, 1 COL pl-> illus. A practical test of the poisoned-bait method of destroying the fruit-fly, conducted from January to April, 1909, in continuation of work conducted during 1903-1904, 186 Bulletin 324 indicated that the pest can be almost completely controlled under orchard conditions by means of a very light sprinkling of a poisoned bait over the trees. In experiments reported, the following formula was used: Sugar, 2 pounds; arsenate of lead, 4 ounces; cold water, 4 gallons. This was applied with a common brass garden-syringe, throw- ing the liquid in small drops over the trees, 1 to 15 pint for each ten-years-old tree. The bait was applied every ten days, and after each rain. This work was done on stone fruits, but the same fly infests the apple later in the season. House-flies are also largely destroyed with this bait. 1909. Anonymous. — The Mally fruit fly remedy. Agr. Journ. Cape Good Hope, vol. 34, pp. 578-581, 1 col. pi., illus. Sugar or cheap molasses, 25 pounds Paste arsenate of lead, 2 pounds Water, 40 gallons One pint applied, with a hand sprayer, to each tree. 1910. Lounsbury, C. P. — Fruit fly remedy. Rept. Govt. Ent., Cape Good Hope Dept. Agr., 1909, pp. 88-89. Records gratifying success in using poisoned bait as follows: Arsenate of lead, 2 pounds Sugar, 25 pounds Water, 40 gallons 1910. O'Kane, W. C. — The apple maggot. Bui. 151, N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 42-44. Ninety-five per cent of the apple orchards of the State infested. One or two varieties practically immune. Seventy-one varieties of apples investigated. Eggs laid from July 2, extending probably into September. Baldwin apples badly infested, gathered during October, failed to mature a single maggot. Spraying experiments, using arsenic, molasses, and water. Spraying in several orchards. In most results negative. Infested trees, untreated, near by. Also, spray not applied so often as it should have been. In one instance the infested tree stood alone (August Sweet) and the fruit had been worthless for years. After treatment the tree yielded practically perfect fruit. Possibly more than one species of this fly in the orchards. 1910. Patch, E. M., and Johannsen, 0. A. — Apple-tree insects of Maine. Maine Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 49-5 1 , iUus. Notes on life history of the apple maggot, methods of control by feeding windfalls to stock, also baiting in some apple orchards with a few trees of Tolman Sweet apples; these being destroyed before the larvae escape. " No use to try to destroy the pest by spraying." 1910. Smith, J. B. — The insects of New Jersey. Rept. N. J. St. Mus., 1909, p. 802, illus. Montclair: The apple maggot locally injurious but seems confined to a very few varieties. Found also in the light, sandy pine barrens of southeastern New Jersey at Weymouth and DaCosta. These flies were bred from larva? found on huckleberries, by V. A. E. Daecke, of Harrisburg, Pa. 191 1. Cook, A. J. — Three alarming insect pests. Pomona Coll. Journ. Ent., vol. 4, pp. 576-577- Mexican fruit-fly (7\ ludens) and Mediterranean fruit-fly (C. capitata) mentioned as enemies to be carefully guarded against. 191 1. Hewitt, C. G. — The apple maggot. Report of the Dominion Entomologist. Rept. Exp. Farms Can., 1910, pp. 238-240. Brief comparative notes on other flies of the family Trypetidae. Notes on work of apple maggot and control by destroying drops. The destruction of fruit-flies by means of poisoned bait by Berlese in Italy and Mally in South Africa noted. Maggots killed if fruit is kept in cold-storage for a number of weeks. The Apple Maggot 187 191 1. O'Kane, W. C. — The apple maggot or railroad worm. Cir. 14, N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., illus. Cannot be poisoned by sprays as used for codling moth. Control by picking up drops: early varieties twice a week, fall varieties once a week, winter varieties once in two weeks. May use hogs or sheep to clean up drops. There is some possibility that a few of the worms may stay in the ground for two years. 191 1. O'Kane, W. C. — Control of the apple maggot by picking up drops. Journ. Econ. Ent., vol. 4, pp. 173-179, diagram. Early varieties, by picking up drops twice a week 97.6 per cent maggots destroyed. Fall varieties, by picking up drops once a week 99.6 per cent maggots destroyed. Late fall and winter varieties, by picking up drops once in two weeks 98.2 per cent maggots destroyed. CORNELL UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION The Following Bulletins and Circulars are Available for Distribution to Those Residents of New York State Who May Desire Them BULLETINS 219 262 265 266 272 273 283 285 291 292 293 295 297 298 302 303 Diseases of ginseng Apple orchard survey of Niagara county On certain seed-infesting chalcis-flies The black rot of the grape and its control Fire blight of pears, apples, quinces, etc. The effect of fertilizers applied to timothy on the corn crop following it The control of insect pests and plant diseases The cause of " apoplexy " in winter-fed lambs The snow-white linden moth Lime-sulfur as a summer spray The apple red bugs Cauliflower and brussels sprouts on Long Island The black rot disease of grapes An agricultural survey of Tompkins county Studies of variation in plants The packing of apples in boxes Notes from the agricultural survey in Tomp- kins county The cell content of milk 305 307 309 310 311 312 313 314 316 317 318 320 321 322 323 CIRCULARS Testing the germination of seed ccrn Some essentials in cheese-making Soil drainage and fertility The relation of lime to soil improvement The elm leaf -beetle Orange hawkweed or paint brush 14 The cause of " apoplexy " in winter-fed lambs An apple orchard survey of Ontario county The production of " hothouse " lambs Soy beans as a supplementary silage crop The fruit-tree leaf roller Germination of seed as affected by sulfuric acid treatment The production of new and improved vari- eties cf timothy Cooperative tests of corn varieties Frosts in New York Further experiments on the economic value of root crops for New York Constitutional vigor in poultry Sweet pea studies — III. Culture of the sweet pea Computing rations for farm animals The larch case-bearer A study of feeding standards for milk pro- duction The chemical analysis of soil Propagation of starter for butter-making and cheese-making Working plans of Cornell poultry houses (Department of Animal Husbandry) The formation of cow testing associations Address MAILING ROOM COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE ITHACA, N. Y. 188