Note on an Australian Hymenopterous Insect. There is a species of bee here that is in the practice of stopping up the key-holes with clay. We have been amused lately by seeing one of them engaged in building in a crevice of our stone chimney. It comes into the room, and goes to the fire-place, as unconcerned as though no one was present, even when we are all in the room. This has given us an opportunity to see the progress of the business. It makes a hollow tube of clay, about the size of one's forefinger, and nearly as long; one side of this adheres to the wall. When it is finished, the bee lays an egg at the end, and then fetches two small green spiders, and puts them in with the egg. It then closes them all in with some clay, allowing just room enough for the spiders and egg. Another egg is then laid, and two more spiders put in, and then clay again; and so on, till the whole tube is filled up, there being six or more partitions, with egg and spiders in each space. I have broken some of these tubes heretofore, and always found them made in this way, and with the same kind of spider, which no doubt is put there for food for the maggot of the bee. I cannot tell whether the spiders are killed or not; I rather think not, because they look so very fresh after having been some time boxed up: but that may be owing to the air being excluded.-Joseph May;* Mount Barker, South Australia. Note on Ichneumons' Egys on Caterpillars. In the Annales de la Société Entomologique de France,' December, 1843, it is recorded, that at a meeting of the Society held on the 29th of August, 1843, M. Pierret stated that M. Bruand had succeeded in rearing a caterpillar of Dicranura furcula, which had eggs of an Ichneumon inserted in the skin, he having destroyed the eggs by crushing them with very fine pincers. Some caterpillars of Notodonta tritropha similarly attacked, were operated on by cutting the eggs with a penknife, but they all perished. This is a hint that may be useful, when, as is sometimes the case, the larva of a rare moth is found "stung," as the collectors term it. — J. W. Douglas; 6, Grenville Terrace, Coburg Road, Kent Road, October 8, 1844. The following Coleop Note on the capture of Coleopterous Insects at Plumstead. tera were taken by me at Plumpstead-wood, two miles beyond Woolwich, in Kent, (a very good locality), in the summers of 1842, 3, and 4. Lamprias chlorocephalus, on broom. Throscus dermestoides, very common on the birch, in June and July, 1843. Elater balteatus. Anobium rufipes. Nedyus melanostictus, on wild mint. Acalles ptinoides, and A. Roboris (Curtis). Otiorhynchus fuscirostris (Scho.): I have taken four specimens of this pretty species, which has not been hitherto recorded as British : this insect will be described by Mr. Walton, in the Notes on British Curculionidæ, published in Taylor's Annals. Trachyphlæus Waltoni (Scho.). The last four insects I found in a gravel-pit on the common. Balaninus Betulæ, very common on one occasion on the birch, at other times rare. B. Elephas, on oak. Polydrusus confluens, on broom. Apion simile, on birch. Oxystoma fuscirostre, on broom, June and Sept. Cryptocephalus lineola, occasionally common on birch and oak. Hypulus Quercinus, a single specimen taken by sweeping in a marshy place in the centre of the wood, the 15th of last June. Aderus Boleti, a specimen beat off the oak, September, 1842.—S. Stevens; 38, King St., Covent Garden, August, 1844. Note on captures of Coleopterous Insects at Charlton. The following I have also met with at Charlton-pits. Poecilus lepidus. Rhinusa Linariæ and R. Antirrhini, both found on Antirrhinum Linaria, the former in May, the latter in July. A species * Communicated by John Beck, Esq. of Nedyus not yet described. Tychius Meliloti, T. lineatulus, Sitona Meliloti, and Apion Meliloti, all on Trifolium Melilotus in June and July. Apion filirostre.-Id. Note on the capture of Lebia Crux-minor. On the 11th of September last, while on a visit to my friend, the Rev. W. M. W. Call, I had the good fortune to capture a specimen of this rare insect, which I brushed into my net from a moist meadow in the parish of Treneglos, one of the wildest and most uncultivated spots in Cornwall. For a week I visited (often twice a day) the same locality, but could not procure a second; however, the same valley afforded me many rarities, including specimens of Chrysomela geminata, Thyamis holsatica and Nastursii, and a single specimen of the true Gymnaëtron Veronica of Germar, captured at Treglith.-T. Vernon Wollaston ; Jesus Coll. Cambridge, Oct. 12, 1844. Note on the capture of Cordulia alpestris, a species of Dragonfly new to Britain. I had the good fortune to capture a single male specimen of Cordulia alpestris, in the Black forest, Perthshire, in July last. This insect, unique as British, is now in the cabinet of Mr. Dale. - Richard Weaver; 63, Pershore Street, Birmingham, September 18, 1844. Note on Halisarca Dujardinii. Dujardin has described a sponge in the Annales des Sciences Naturelles,' No. 8, which he has made the type of a new genus, and designated Halisarca, from its fleshy character and the supposed absence of spicula; and Dr. Johnston, in his excellent history of the British Sponges, has adopted the genus, which is thus described. "Substance fleshy or rather gelatinous, semitransparent, unorganized, forming an irregular crust on the object to which it adheres." In the spring of 1843, I had the good fortune to find this curious species of sponge on the coast near Scarborough, coating the under surface of a small detached mass of sandstone; and upon examining a small fragment of it with a microscopic power of 300 linear, I found that instead of being destitute of spicula, they were in abundance, but exceedingly minute. They are imbedded in all parts of the fleshy matter, without any definite mode of arrangement. They are exceedingly long in proportion to their diameter, nearly uniform in thickness throughout the whole of their length, and terminate hemispherically. The surface of the sponge is thickly studded with oscula, which are nearly of a uniform diameter. From these circumstances it would appear that the new genus, Halisarca, is in fact but one of the various forms of Halichondria. J. S. Bowerbank; 45, Park St., Islington, October, 1844. Note on the Habits of the Hedgehog. The habits of the hedgehog are generally I strictly nocturnal; but on the 27th of last June, about 3 o'clock P.M., whilst walking with my children in a wood, thinly planted with forest trees, but abounding in low bushes, they called my attention to what they fancied was a large rat coming towards us. I at once saw that it was a hedgehog, proceeding at a moderately fast pace. secured it, and as it was a female, I regret that I did not examine a bush, thickly matted with grass, towards which it was tending, and into which there was a well padded hole; as it would probably have appeared that family cares had forced it to roam. Wm. Turner; Uppingham, Rutland, October 16, 1844. Remarks on Mr. Waterton's Essay on the Oil-gland. ON the receipt of 'The Zoologist' for this month, (September,) I eagerly turned to the table of contents on the fly-leaf, and was much gratified to read 'Notice of Waterton's Essays, second series.' I had heard that the promised volume was out, but had not as yet been able to procure it; I seized my paper-cutter with a degree of avidity, suspending even the operations of the breakfast table, so greedy was I to ascertain what pleasure and instruction I was likely to receive from a second series of Essays from the pen that so pleased and instructed me in the first. I perused your opening remarks with full acquiescence; I admired the generosity of the author in presenting his volume to Mrs. Loudon; I read your various quotations with much interest; when lo! on reaching the last passage selected from the autobiography, I stumbled on my own name. I felt flattered that what I had contributed to your pages should have attracted the attention, and received the approbation of so distinguished a naturalist. But, if I had been startled at the sight of my own name previously, how was my surprise increased when, on turning the next leaf, I found (Zool. 674) an entire Essay on "The Windhover Hawk, and the Oil-gland," based on the contribution to 'The Zoologist' alluded to above. So unexpected was the compliment that I confess it cost me my breakfast. The epithets Mr. Waterton has been pleased to apply to me and my observations are indeed sufficiently flattering; and if he can feel himself under obligation because I have mentioned his name with respect and my pen would have belied my feelings had it written the name of Waterton other than respectfully-how much more deeply indebted should I feel for the honour he has done me in treating with so much courtesy the name and writings of an obscure individual. I, therefore, tender my best thanks to Mr. Waterton; and beg to assure him that, if, as it so chances, I am in "dispute" with him, that dispute shall not be "hot." I am under no temptation to wound his feelings by so much as a hasty expression, or a disrespectful word: and in venturing to differ from a much greater proficient in ornithological science than I either am, or am likely to become, I am only faithfully following the convictions of my own mind; and, in recording those convictions, my sole object is to elicit the truth on an interesting, if not a very important topic. If I shall chance to induce Mr. Waterton to resume his pen, and adorn the pages of 'The Zoologist' with more Essays on this, or any kindred topic, I shall merit and obtain the full approbation of its readers, without one single exception. That I should not manfully state my own opinions, and deal plainly with his arguments, Mr. Waterton would be the last to wish; but if I write as I feel, I shall do so not less courteously than plainly. I shall commence by admitting, what Mr. Waterton has shown, that I did not carry my observations far enough to render them conclusive. I confess, not that I "ought to have seen the expressed matter," for it would have been within the bill, not on its "sides;" but, that I ought to have noticed whether the tuft of down on the extremity of the nipple was or was not moistened by the matter. This I omitted to do; thereby betraying a want of sagacity which I have abundant cause to regret. This tuft is much longer in some birds than in others; and in very small birds, if it exist at all, it is not discernable by the naked eye. I have this day (Sept. 13), examined the state of the oil-gland in four recently killed birds: in two partridges the tuft, though small, was sufficiently large to show that it was saturated with an unctuous matter: in a knot, shot by myself, in the act of preening its feathers, the tuft was nearly half an inch long; and when examined, three hours after death, was completely saturated; while the surrounding feathers were unaffected. The fourth bird was the little willowwarbler, which had been very recently killed: it had no tuft; but very slight pressure, scarcely more than the mere movement of the nipple with a small instrument, sufficed to produce matter from the orifice. Now I cannot help feeling that here is evidence enough, not only of the existence of an unctuous fluid, and of an orifice by which it may be expressed-this, I think, Mr. Waterton does not question-but that this matter does readily flow from the orifice, and moisten the tuft on the apex of the nipple: and may I not fairly ask Mr. Waterton how the kestrel could take the nipple between its mandibles in the manner I witnessed, and not express matter therefrom? I think the movements of the bird were too deliberate, and the act too frequently repeated, to admit of the interpretation Mr. Waterton would give. The cessation in the process of preening; then the erection of the feathers surrounding the gland by the muscular action of the skin, exposing the nipple to view, as well as to ready access by the bill; then again the deliberate seizure of the nipple, and the three or four nibbles, for so I may call them, though differing from the rapid movement of the mandibles when the bird clears itself of parasites, followed by immediate application to the feathers, too quickly indeed to allow of my seeing whether matter was actually rubbed on them; considering also the comparatively small quantity that would be expressed at each application of the bill to the gland; all this tended to convince me the bird was really doing that which I had previously believed birds did not do. The whole process was exactly that which might have been expected, supposing it to be a fact that birds do lubricate their feathers with matter from the oilgland. Mr. Waterton considers that the tuft must prove an "insurmountable obstacle to the transfer of matter from the gland through the medium of the bill." Doctors of ornithology (I am one only by the courtesy of your readers), as of other sciences, must and will differ: for I, for my part, can conceive even an use for the tuft, in distributing the expressed matter over the interior of the bill and the surface of the tongue, in order to its more equal and readier application to the feathers and therefore, it may be, the tuft is larger in the aquatic birds, because their bill is broader. I could wish Mr. Waterton would tell us what he thinks is the use of the oil-gland; and what was the intention of the Creator in imparting it. To suppose that such an organ should have been given but for a specific purpose, would, I think, be impugning the wisdom of the Creator: its existence without an object would be an anomaly among his works. Satisfied from analogy that where such a gland existed for converting blood into a different substance, its use was not less certain than its existence; I once thought it might possibly be in some way connected with the growth of the plumage: and that the fluid might be conveyed to the roots of the feathers by means of minute vessels traversing the skin: in short, that it might be the matter of which the feather is composed. The size of the gland would lead us to suppose that considerable quantities of the matter were formed; and so would seem to favour this notion: but the difficulty met me, what then is the use of the nipple; and of an orifice on the extremity of that nipple? But this is not a subject to be decided by theoretic argument. If settled at all, it must be settled by observation of facts. The liability of the most plausible arguments to be overthrown by plain facts, nobody has better shown than Mr. Waterton himself. Reasoning, unless founded on facts, will not decide this, or any other disputed point in natural history: further observation is therefore necessary. I have not yet succeeded, as has Mr. Hussey (Zool. 648), in observing this lubricating process gone through by many birds; |