R. W. Glaser.
Forficula Auricularia in Rhode Island.
Psyche 21:157, 1914.

Full text (searchable PDF, 84K)
Durable link: http://psyche.entclub.org/21/21-157.html

The following unprocessed text is extracted from the PDF file, and is likely to be both incomplete and full of errors. Please consult the PDF file for the complete article.

19141 Gla~e~Forficula Auricdaria in Rhode Island 157 sandy post oak woods at Montopolis,near Austin, Texas. I have taken the species also at Milano in the same state. A study of comanche, subnitidus, californicus and its subspecies maricopa shows that these forms have essentially the same habits and are all very closely and peculiarly related. Without its spines the worker subnitidus would be indistinguishable from the worker californicus, and the same relation obtains between comanche and maricopa. As it seems evident that the spined species of Pogono- myrmex must be more primitive that the spineless forms, it is not improbable that subnitidus is really the parent species of californi- cus and comanche the parent species of maricopa. If further study supports this conclusion, maricopa will have to be regarded as a distinct species.
FORFICULA AURICULARIA IN RHODE ISLAND.
BY R. W. GLASER,
Bussey Institution, Harvard University.
Since all previous records of Forficula auricularia in America are very dubious, a report of the occurrence of large numbers of this species of earwig in Newport, Rhode Island, seems advisable. While in Newport in July, 1914, I heard that the estate of Mr. T. Suppern Tailer was infested with earwigs and that they were making themselves extremely disagreeable by entering the house and crawling over people at night. I went to the estate and found literally hundreds of what I then supposed to be the European earwig. Mr. James A. G. Rehn of the academy of natural sciences in Philadelphia and Mr. A. P. Morse of Wellesley, Mass., have since kindly identified the species as F. auricularia Linn. I found the insects hiding in all possible places during the day. They were abundant in the cracks of stone walls, under porches and behind vines. They were also taken from the inside of flowers in large numbers.
According to Mr. Tailer and his gardener, the earwigs were first noticed in 1912. In 1913 they increased to such an extent that suppression work by spraying was begun and at the time of writing this note (July, 1914), they seemed to have passed beyond control and have spread to adjoining estates. No one seems to be able



================================================================================