945 
 9 C5 
 py 2 
 
 NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 BULLETIN No. 891 
 
 ContribntioR from the Bureau of Entomology 
 L. O, HOWARD, Chief 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 PROFESSIONAL PAPER 
 
 July 28, 1922 
 
 THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE 
 
 By 
 
 F. H. CHITTENDEN, Entomologist in Charge, and 
 
 D. E. FINK, Entomological Assistant, Truck 
 
 Crop Insect Investigations 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Introduction 
 
 Classification 
 
 Descriptive 
 
 Technical Description 
 
 Distribation and InJHiieus Occarrence 
 Nature of Injury 
 
 Page 
 1 
 2 
 3 
 4 
 7 
 8 
 
 Page 
 
 Life History and Habits 17 
 
 History and Literature 28 
 
 Control by Natural Agencies 81 
 
 Methods of Control 37 
 
 General SBmmary 48 
 
 Literature Cited 49 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 
 1922 
 
 Worm.*;- , . I 
 
OCT 1814^2 
 
 ■> II nil)——— nimww niirfi 
 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 ^"U^^\^t. 
 
 BULLETIN No. 891 
 
 Contribution from the Bureau of Entomology 
 L. O. HOWARD, Chief 
 
 yu^'^«-ru 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 PROFESSIONAL PAPER 
 
 July 28, 1922 
 
 THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE.' 
 
 By F. H. Chittenden, Entomologist in Charye, and D. E. Fink, Entomological 
 Assistant. True]: (^rnp Insect Inrestigntions.' 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Introduction 
 
 Classification 
 
 Descriptive 
 
 Technical description 
 
 Distribution and injurious occur- 
 rence 
 
 Nature of injury 
 
 Page. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Life history and habits 17 
 
 History and literature 28 
 
 Control by natural agencies .31 
 
 Methods of control 37 
 
 General summary 48 
 
 Literature cited 49 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The green June beetle is one of the best known of Southern 
 insects and is quite common in the Eastern States from New Jersey 
 and southern Illinois southward. It occurs also somewhat commonly 
 on Long Island, in southern Connecticut, and in the neighborhood 
 of New York City. Injuries by this insect were at one time errone- 
 ously believed to be practically confined to the beetle, since the larva? 
 feed normally and largely on humus or mold, or soil rich in decaying 
 vegetable matter, and in stable and lot manure. 
 
 The beetles injure fruits of various kinds, including grapes, 
 peaches, raspberry, blacld^erry, apple, pear, quince, plum, prune, 
 apricot, and nectarine, and. frequently obtain nourishment as well on 
 the sap of oak, maple, and other trees, and on the growing ears of 
 
 ^ Cotinis niiida L. (formerly known as AUorhin<i nitida) ; family Scarabaeidae, order 
 Coleoptera. 
 
 - Investigations of the life history and habits have been conducted by the junior author 
 in tidewater Virginia, and by the senior author in the District of Columbia and near-by 
 points in northern Virginia. Similar investigations have been conducted by Mr. J. J. 
 Davis, Bureau of Entomology, at Louisville, Ky., La Fayette, Ind., and elsewhere, and by 
 Mr. Philip Luginbill, Cereal and Forage Insect Investigations, at Columbia, S. C. Many 
 of the notes on injuries and habits made by these obse-vers have been used in the prepa- 
 ration of this publication. 
 
 186606° — 22— Bull. SOI 1 
 
2 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTtTRE, 
 
 corn. The beetle has been observed also eating a fungus on quince 
 trees. 
 
 Indirectly the larvae or grubs are responsible for considerable in- 
 jury on the grounds of golf clubs and on lawns. They injure also 
 corn, oats, sorghum, and alfalfa. Vegetables of many kinds are fre- 
 quently attacked and injuries have been reported to celery, parsley, 
 beets, turnip, lettuce, endive, strawberry, eggplant, jjotato, beans, 
 carrot, parsnip, collards, peas, and other plants. Among ornamental 
 plants, dahlia, rose, violet, geranium, hyacinth, and privet are at- 
 tacked. The larva; attack other forms of plants with comparatively 
 succulent herbaceous stalks, and such crops as melons, tomato, and 
 young sweet corn. The natural food plants are undoubtedly different 
 varieties of grasses, cultivated forms, including bluegrass. evidently 
 being more affected than those wiiich are allowed to groAv wild and 
 become weedy. 
 
 The life history of the green June beetle has not hitherto been 
 followed out. Many interesting facts liave been learned in regard 
 to its habits in its active stages, and an account of its natural enemies 
 and other data have been brought together, thus adding much to our 
 hitherto meager knowledge of its life economy. There is no longer 
 any doubt that the insect is more injurious in its larval stages than 
 as a beetle. Indeed the species does far more injury to vegetable 
 and truck crops, according to records which have been made, than 
 to fruits. 
 
 CLASSIFICATION. 
 
 The genus to which this species belongs is a member of the tribe 
 Cetoniini, of the family Scarabaeidae, in which the epimera of the 
 mesothorax are visible from above. A subtribe of the same name 
 has the elytra sinuate on the sides, and the mesosternum always 
 prominent. The mandibles are feeble, in great part meml:)ranous, 
 and the last spiracle is situated mid^vay between the anterior and 
 posterior margins of the segment. The prothorax is lobed at the 
 base, covering the scutellum. The genus Cotinis may further be 
 separated from related genera in having the clypeus armed Avith a 
 short horn, which is more prominent in the male. 
 
 According to Bates (16)^ the North American species classified 
 under the genus Allorhina are placed in the genus Cotinis of Bur- 
 meister (1842). What Bates (16, p. 345-846) says in regard to G, 
 mufabilis and ('. sohr'ma is well worth quoting in this connection as 
 bearing about equally well upon the relationship of mutahilis and 
 nitida. He writes : 
 
 After careful examination of about 250 examples I have come to the con- 
 clusion that the characters adduced by Burmelster to distinguish this species 
 
 * Figures in parentheses refer to " Literature cited," p. 49. 
 
TME (IREEN JUNE BEETLE. 6 
 
 from C. sobrina are in tlio liij:;li('sl defxrce iiiconsf aiil, and that there are no 
 means of defining the two species. All that can h(> said is that C. mutabilis is, 
 in the great majority of its Individuals, larger and broailer. The shape of 
 the olypeal horn is very variable, and its varieties do not correspond with 
 variations in size, breadth, and color, large and robust specimens of the typical 
 mutnhiUs having the horn either dilated toward the apex, parallel-sided, or 
 triangular, and the same diversities may be seen in small and slender oblong 
 examples of C. sobrina. It is the same with regard to form and color; for 
 it is far from the case that the large and broad examples (C. mutabiJis) only 
 are unicolorous ; smaller and narrower indi\ iduals exist equally unicolorous 
 and of nearly all the color-varieties displayed by the larger set. It Is true 
 that the variegated varieties described by Burmeister under C. sobrina are, 
 as a rule, smaller than the others ; but they are connected by the most finely 
 graduated series of variations, so that it is impossible to draw a distinction 
 between the two series. The case is a very difficult one to deal with. It 
 would not be satisfactory, and scarcely, practicable, to include under one 
 specific diagnosis all the numerous varieties, some of which are possibly local, 
 thus presenting an interesting study to future collectors and students ; the 
 better course seems to be to treat the more distinct separately, giving the locali- 
 ties of each. 
 
 DESCRIPTIVE. 
 
 The beetle (fig. 1) is larger and more robust than the common 
 brown May and June beetles (Phyllophaga), measuring from three- 
 fourths to a full inch or more in 
 length, and about one-half inch wide. 
 The color varies from dull brown with 
 irregular stripes of green to beautiful 
 uniform velvet green, the margins of 
 the body being usually light brown 
 varying to orange Aellow. The lower 
 surface is metallic greenish or jellow. 
 or metallic dark brown with a yellow- 
 green tinge. 
 
 The full-grown larva is illustrated 
 in figure 2 and Plate II. When com- 
 pared with that of Phyllophaga (fig. 
 3). it will be noticed that the former 
 is stouter with shorter legs. 
 
 The pupa, which is also stouter, is 
 shown alone and Avithin its pupal case 
 or cocoon in Plate III, A, B. The 
 pupa of Phyllophaga (PI. Ill, C) differs from the pupa of Cotinis 
 in that the pupa of the former is not encased in a regular cocoon. 
 
 Fig. 1. — Adult of green June beetle 
 {Cotinis nitida) of a type show- 
 ing narrow margin about elytra 
 and narrow margin on anterior 
 half of thorax. One-third enlarged. 
 
 HABITS DIFFERENT FROM THOSE OF WHITE GRUBS. 
 
 The green June beetle differs from the May beetles in habits, be- 
 ing strictly diurnal and most active in the heat of the day, whereas 
 
'4 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 the typical winged Phyllophaga is nocturnal. There is a still more 
 striking difference in that the larva of the green June beetle travels 
 on its back, whereas that of Phyllophaga either progresses on its 
 side or, where possible, on the abdomen with the aid of the legs. 
 
 The larva (fig. 2), particularly when mature, differs from the com- 
 mon white grub of the genus Phyllophaga in being larger, and pro- 
 
 Fir,. 2. — Full-grown larva of green .Tune beetle in natural position crawling on it.s back. 
 
 Twice natural size. 
 
 portionately so, as regards the size of the adults. It is also more 
 robust and more nearly cylindrical ; its legs are considerably shorter 
 and its mandibles and other mouth parts smaller. It differs also in 
 the possession of stiff ambulatory bristles, which more or less closely 
 cover the dorsum and enable the insect to crawl, not on its side, as is 
 the case with the Phyllophaga larva, but upon its back. This is ac- 
 complished by alternate contraction 
 and expansion of the segments of the 
 body, the stiff dorsal hairs materially 
 assisting progress. The speed is prob- 
 ably more rapid than that of any other 
 known genus of the Scarabaeidae oc- 
 curring in the United States. Indeed, 
 it progresses on its back at about the 
 same rate as the hairy caterpillars do 
 on their legs and prolegs, and in a simi- 
 lar manner. 
 
 Fig. 3. — Time white grub {Phyl- 
 lophaga sp.) which does not crawl 
 on its back. Enlarged. Compare 
 with figure 2. 
 
 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION. 
 
 THE, BEETLE. 
 
 The beetle of Cotinw nitida is re- 
 lated, although rather distantly, to the 
 brown May or June beetles of the North, belonging to a different 
 group of the Scarabaeidae — the Cetoniini. The appearance is quite 
 different. It is variable as to color, but is usually a beautiful velvety 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate I. 
 
 Green June Beetle. 
 
 Eggs, highly magnified. 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate II. 
 
 Green June Beetle. 
 
 Full-grown larvce of green June beetle {Cotinis 7H7?(fa), actual size. 
 
Bui. 891. U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate III. 
 
 B 
 
 Green June Beetle. 
 
 A, pupal cell opened to show pujia within; B, pupa 
 removed from coll, showing more details of structure. 
 C, pupa of a white grub {Phyllopliaqa sp.). 
 
Bui. 891. U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 PLATE IV. 
 
 
 .1 
 
 Green June Beetle. 
 
 A, Pupal cells; B, same showing exit holes of beetle. About natural size. 
 
THK GREEN ,TTT"N"E BEETLE. 5 
 
 green on the dorsal surface, with the niar<i;ins orange yeUow, this 
 latter color fre<iiiently extending to other portions of the elytra or 
 wing-covers. The ventral or lower surface is shining green and 
 orange yellow. The thorax is subtriangular and the head is armed 
 with a horn-like i)rocess or clypeal horn which is more prominent in 
 the male. The shape and size of this clypeal horn vary. The length 
 of the beetle is from three- fourths of an inch to one inch in the 
 larger individuals. 
 
 The average size is much smaller than that of the related species, 
 Cotmis mutahilis Gory,* and there are other points of difference, the 
 most striking being the uniform metallic green color of the lower 
 surface of the latter and the larger clypeal horn. 
 
 THE EGG. 
 
 The Qo;,^ (PI. I) when first deposited is gray or dull white, oval 
 in outline, and measures about 1.5 millimeters. Within a da}" or 
 two after deposition the egg becomes perfectly spherical and larger 
 in size, measuring nearly 3 millimeters in diameter. This enlarge- 
 ment of the egg, as has been observed in other related scarabaeid 
 genera, e. g., in Euphoria, is obviously due to the development of 
 the embryo within by the absorption of moisture from the soil. 
 
 The Qgg, is perfectly smooth and reliounds or bounces like a rub- 
 ber ball when struck on a hard surface. Several days after deposi- 
 tion the embryonic outline of the larva begins to take definite shape, 
 as viewed through the thin, transparent eggshell. Finally, when 
 the larva is-hatched, what remains of the original eggshell is a mere 
 vestige of thin, transparent tissue. 
 
 Mr. J. E, L. Lauderdale, while employed on truck crop insect in- 
 vestigations at Baton Rouge, La., in August, 1916, observed that each 
 Qgg was inclosed in a small ball of dirt about one- fourth inch in 
 diameter, and that some of these balls, as many as 15 or 20, occurred 
 together. All of the eggs had been placed by the female in the dirt 
 in the bottom of the cage in which they were confined. 
 
 THE LARVA. 
 
 First Stage. 
 
 The larva when first hatched measiu-es 6 to 6.5 mm. in length and 2 mm. iu 
 width. The body is cream white and of uniform width; the head is yellowish 
 white, soon turning to light brown, later becoming dark brown at its widest 
 part, measuring 1.18 mm. The dorsal surface of the body is clothed with 
 
 •* A large series of specimens of these two species from many localities show such varia- 
 tion as to lead to the belief that mutahilis Gory might be merely a race of nitida L., but 
 careful study has convinced the senior writer that they are distinct. 
 
6 BULLETIN 891, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 miuute stiff "hairs in transverse rows, beconiiug elongated toward the caudal 
 extremity. 
 
 Second Stage. 
 
 After the tirst molt the larva measures 15 to 17 mm. (J inch) long, and 4 
 to 5 mm. wide, or nearly three times the size of the newly-hatched larva. The 
 color has changed slightly, to light grayish, but apparently there is no other 
 change in general appearance. The head measures across the widest part 
 2.21 mm. 
 
 Third Stage. 
 
 After the second molt the larva measures 28 mm. (over a full inch) in 
 length, and 6 to 7 mm. { {h inch) wide. The hairs on the dorsal surface 
 of the body are mo:e j)romineut and bristle-like. 
 
 The Full-Geown Larva. 
 
 The larva, when full grown, measures from 4.5 to 48 mm. (2 inches) long 
 and 11 to 12 mm. (i inch) wide. Before transforming to the pupa the head 
 measures 4.14 mm. 
 
 Full grown larva. — Length, 40 millimeters, somewhat largest posteriorly, 
 subcylindrical, broader at thorax and eighth and ninth abdominal segments, 
 which are materially swollen. More flattened ventrally, with a distinct 
 swollen lateral ridge just below the stigmata, which rather increases the 
 flattened aspect of the venter. General color, glassy yellowish white, inclin- 
 ing to green or blue toward the extremity. Head, rather small, flattened, well 
 inserted into the prothoracic segment, chestnut brown in color. Dorsal sur- 
 face of the body strongly transversel.v corrugate or wrinkled, each of the 
 chief segments having three distinct ridges, the whole body studded with short, 
 thick yellowish bristles, which are most dense on the dorsal ridges and more 
 sparse, but longer, on the ventral and anal segments. Dorsally these stiiT 
 hairs are directed posteriorly and materially assist in the dorsal locomotion. 
 The legs are honey yellow, covered with similar stiff bristles without definite 
 tarsal claw. They are short compared with the larvae of Lachnosterna gen- 
 erally. Pi-othoracic segment with a honey yellow horny plate in front of the 
 K])iracle, which, as usual, is rather larger than the abdominal spiracles. 
 Mandibles short, stout, dark brown, with the left (looking from the dorsum) 
 4-dentate and the right 3-dentate. Antennae short, 4-jointe(.l, joints subequal 
 in length, diminishing in width, from 1 to 4, maxillary palpi, 3-jointed, joints 
 subequal in length, terminal narrowest at tip. Labial palpi, 2-jointed, joint 1 
 longest, somewhat swollen at tip and bearing a short pointed joint 2, on the 
 inner side of its tip. Labium covered with short stout bristles. Maxillsp with 
 long, stiff bristles on the innei- surface and with two long, sharp, black teeth 
 near the tip. 
 
 The description of the fiill-ofrown hirva is taken from Riley (20). 
 
 THE PUPAL CELL. 
 
 When the Larva has attained full orrow^th it transforms to the next 
 or pupal stag^e in a substantial oval cocoon or cell (PI. Ill, A ; PI. IV) 
 constructed of earth composed of particles fastened together by a 
 viscid fluid excreted by the larva. At this time the larva loses consid- 
 erable size by the excretion of the fluid, a habit common to many 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. / 
 
 forms of beetles. While the outer surface of this cocoon-like cell 
 is rough, the interior is smootli and suggestive of a bird's egg. 
 There is a protuberant area on one side, presumably on the lower 
 surface, which may be due to the excess of fluid voided by the larva 
 while constructing its cell. 
 
 This cell measures about I inch or 10 nun. in lengtli and ^ inch 
 or 12 mm. in width. 
 
 THE PUPA. 
 
 The pupa bears some resemblance to the adult or beetle and is 
 white when first formed, changing to light or yellowish brown, 
 afterwards becoming gradually darker, and just before emergence it 
 takes on some of the metallic green and brownish tints of the adult. 
 
 Fig. 4. — Distribution of green .Tune lioetle in the United States. 
 
 It measures about 1 inch in length and half an inch in width. Other 
 characters are shown in Plate III, B. 
 
 DISTRIBUTION AND INJURIOUS OCCURRENCE. 
 
 The green June beetle {Cotinis jntida) has a wide distribution 
 in the eastern portion of the United States. (Fig. 4.) On the 
 Atlantic coast it ranges from the southern portion of New York State 
 to Florida and Texas in the South, and it is found also in the southern 
 portions of Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinoi-s. 
 The species continues southward through Missouri, Kentucky, and 
 Oklahoma, and probably the remaining southern States, from which 
 source, however, there are few records available.^ There is a single 
 
 5 The nearest relntod siecies, C. 
 arid regions of the Southwest. 
 
 lutaWis Gory, occurs abundantly in the arid and semi- 
 
8 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUEE. 
 
 record of the identification of the hu-va from Holyoke, Mass., a lo- 
 cality not shown in the map. 
 
 Although the green June beetle has a considerable range, its natural 
 preference for a rich soil, either sandy or loam, renders it important 
 economically in the southern trucking regions. The sandy coast 
 region affords ample opportunity for the increase of this s])ecies in 
 trucking regions, and for the same reason it has been able to obtain a 
 foothold in the vegetable-growing sections of Long Island. Indeed, it 
 is evident that the cutting down of forest growth for the settlement 
 and cultivation of the trucking regions of tidewater Virginia and 
 Long Island has been the means of affording tlie green June beetle 
 ideal conditions for its multiplication. The accumulation of humus 
 following the destruction of the forests and the abundant manuring 
 of these tracts furnish the requisite amount of food for the develop- 
 ment of the insect. 
 
 NATURE OF INJURY. 
 
 For upward of a half century the green June beetle has been 
 known to entomologists of this country, and its economic status has 
 frequently been discussed. From the literature on this subject it is 
 evident that the majority of our entomologists concede it to be an 
 occasional pest, and that locally, at least, it becomes seriously in- 
 jurious. None, however, had given this insect very careful study, 
 ^particularly in regard to the feeding habits of the larva, until the 
 past few years. Since about four-fifths of the life cycle of the insect 
 is passed in the larval form, it is in this stage that the most serious 
 injury is accomplished. Frequent mention is made of this insect 
 as injurious in the parent or adult form, but it has received com- 
 paratively little notice as being injurious in the larval state. Recent 
 reports and observations indicate a reversal of conditions, since it 
 has been reported more frequently injurious in the larval or grub 
 stage. Indeed, many such reports are received by the Department 
 of Agi'iculture every year. 
 
 Its habit of breeding in rich loam or rich, more or less sandy soil 
 renders it, at least locally, a serious pest to trucking industries not 
 only of the southern States but also in the East and westward to the 
 Mississippi Valley. 
 
 In tidewater Virginia the larva of this insect has done consid- 
 erable damage intermittently for a number of years. With a view 
 to determining a method for its control in that region a study of its 
 life history and habits was begun there in the fall of 1913. 
 
 While the larvse feed normally and largely on soil rich in humus 
 or organic matter and on manures, rootlets of succulent plants and 
 other vegetable mattei- on the surface of the ground doubtless formed 
 a part of the insect's natural food before it had acquired the habit of 
 
Bui. 891. U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate V. 
 
 y^ 
 
 >B 
 
 CucuMEER Plants Showing Root and Stem 
 Injury by Larv/e of Green June Beetle. 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate VI. 
 
 Views of Parsley Field Injured by Larvae of Green June Beetle. 
 
 The upper field was re-sown twice, tile lower field three limes. 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 PLATE VII. 
 
 Work of Larv/e of Green June Beetle on Lawn at Norfolk, Va. 
 
THE (iEEEN JUNE BEETLE. 9 
 
 injurin*^ vegetable aiul other crops. The female beetles are strongly 
 attracted to humus, decaying plants, and manure for the deposition 
 of their eggs, but the larvse or grubs are often dii-ectly injurious to 
 plant life by chewing tender seedlings, stems, and rootlets, e. g., as 
 shown in Plate V, which illustrates injury to the root and stem of 
 cucumber. This chewing may be continued until the roots or tender 
 stalks become partially, if not completely, severed. The principal 
 injury, however, is due to the work of the grubs in the soil, where 
 they cause around the growing plants an upheaval, which disturbs 
 the root system mainly by depriving it of necessary moisture. Their 
 constant burrowing and tunneling under the earth in fields and gar- 
 dens also loosens the surface soil, causing it to dry out and become 
 porous, and retards the groAvth of shallow-rooted plants in much the 
 same manner. Where larvae as well as beetles are unusually abundant, 
 a similar effect is produced by the perforations which they make 
 in emerging and again in reentering the soil, (PI. VI.) Many in- 
 stances of this nature are known and are here cited. 
 
 An extreme form of injury recorded by Riley (20) is to the effect 
 that in the case of injury to celery the heart of the plant liecame 
 choked with soil thrown up by the larvae, and the acid excrement of 
 the larvae induced rot. 
 
 Injury to lawns and putting greens is due, in the main, to the little 
 mounds of earth which the grubs leave on the surface of the soil, and 
 on the grass itself. These mounds not only disfigure the lawns and 
 greens but, in the case of the latter, which should be kept smooth, 
 they often deflect the golf ball. Here, also, the burrowing and tun- 
 neling, as in the case of attack to cultivated fields, cause the grass 
 to suffer from lack of moisture. Plate VII illustrates how lawns 
 may be disfigured by these mounds, which show plainly on the grass. 
 
 INJURY BY THE GRUBS TO LAWNS AND CEREAL AND FORAGE CROPS. 
 
 During September, 1902, Mr. E. M. Talcott reported injury by this 
 grub on the golf links of the Washington Golf Club at Rosslyn, Va. 
 The grubs were extremely abundant in that vicinity. They crawled 
 to the surface of the ground at night, and caused injury to the grass 
 by boring short distances just beneath the surface, throwing out 
 small amounts of earth, and making little hummocks of sufficient size 
 to deflect the golf balls and thereby cause considerable annoyance. 
 
 October 1, 1903, Mr. F. W. Barclay, Haverford, Pa., sent mature 
 grubs with the statement that they did very considerable damage to 
 the greens and turf of the Merion Golf Club at that place. The 
 grubs were present in large numbers over an area of about 50 acres, 
 and seriously injured the turf, nearly ruining the putting greens. It 
 could not be noticed that the grubs ate the roots of old or growing 
 
10 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 grass, but if freshly cut grass Avere placed in piles, say 1 foot deep 
 on the soil, the grubs would come up and enter into the piles within a 
 few hours. Wasps " had learned to search for the grubs in these piles 
 of grass. The specimens sent had been caught after they had entered 
 new grass piles. This suggests that after the insects have been seen 
 to enter the piles they could be killed there by hand methods. 
 
 In 1904, Mr. Barclay sent, May 28, a photograph showing the 
 actual damage done to the golf links at Haverford. June 6, Mr. 
 Samuel P. Hinckley, Lawrence, Long Island, N. Y., stated that on 
 his tennis grounds little hills of sand, like ant hills, were thrown up 
 and that by running a hooked wire down into them the white grub 
 could be pulled out. 
 
 At Louisville, Ky., special work was conducted by Mr. J. J. Davis 
 on this species. Injuries were observed and reported by him to the 
 golf grounds of the Louisville Country Club'. Here the grubs were 
 not directly injurious to the grass, but worked in the putting greens 
 during the night, throwing up little hills of earth. If these were not 
 SAvept off early in the morning they would be trampled on by the 
 players, thus packing a thin layer of earth over the surrounding grass, 
 killing the grass in these particular spots, and roughening the green, 
 Avhich should be perfectly smooth. At no time were the grubs observed 
 actually feeding on the roots of the grass, and there was no evidence 
 of injury to the grass other than the indirect injury noted. The 
 entire golf course was plowed and seeded in 1909, and the first occur- 
 rence of the beetles was in 1911. Each year the ground was heavily 
 fertilized with animal fertilizers, principally sheep manure. 
 
 March 6, 1915, Mr. Wm. Buck, Waterloo, 111., described these 
 larvae as crawling on their backs and working after sunset and during 
 the night. He stated that they worked underground and that they 
 ate the roots of plants The grubs worked their way to the surface 
 and collected under pieces of manure, and in their movement upward 
 uprooted and exposed the roots of young alfalfa plants. Their 
 burrowing also made the soil porous and spongy, a condition which 
 accelerates evaporation and has a damaging effect on the plants. 
 Injury was confined entirely to the young plants, those with even 
 a moderately developed root system not being injured. Xo evidence 
 was found that the grubs actually gnawed the roots. 
 
 October 27, 191;"), this species was observed in abundance by Mr. 
 A. L. Chapman, Washington, D. C, who stated that grubs of this 
 June beetle had been eating the small terminal roots of grass, chiefly 
 Capitol lawn and crabgrass, practically ruining the entire lawn. Pre- 
 vious attacks had been noticed, but none as severe as this. On three 
 occasions a pint or more of the grubs was taken from the cement floor 
 
 « " Control by natural agencies," p. 31. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 11 
 
 of the areaway leading into the basement. The grubs were most nu- 
 merous and active on warm, humid nights, especially after rains. 
 The lawn was about 50 by 50 feet, raised about 4 feet from the level 
 of the street, and was kept constantly supplied with water by two 
 h^^drants. The grass presented a yellowish brown hue instead of 
 a grass green, showing lack of proper nourishment. 
 
 Other instances of injury to lawns and golf links have been re- 
 ported, but Avill receive no mention here. 
 
 In rearing cages the grubs cut oH young stalks of wheat, rye, 
 cotton, sorghum, and jjaspalum grass {Paspaluin dilatatwm) but did 
 not attack other grasses or corn which were grown in these cages. 
 
 INJURY BY THE GRUBS TO VEGETABLE AND GARDEN PLANTS. 
 
 Practically all cases of injury mentioned below were accompanied 
 by living specimens of the larvae of the green June beetle. 
 
 February 4, 1901, Mr. S. J. Trepess wrote that the larvae occurred 
 in large numbers at Glen Cove, Long Island, especially where there 
 was mulching. There were large patches in lawns where the larvjie 
 had entirely killed the grass. He reported that four large beds of 
 geraniums were destroyed, that they ate the epidermis off the plants 
 at the surface of the ground, destroyed strawberry plants set out from 
 pots in September, and attacked roots and crowns, so that every day 
 plants were seen to wilt. Injured plants were replanted about the 
 beginning of October on land where no trace of the insects was 
 visible. Each plant was usually attacked by from two to six larvaj. 
 The soil contained much humus, which our correspondent recognized 
 as the cause of the larvae being so numerous and thriving. Mr. 
 Trepess had been bothered with these insects in his lettuce and 
 violet frames for two years, and had caught many of them in tomato 
 cans sunk in the ground, the top of the can being about half an 
 inch lower than the surface. February 5, Hon. J. H. Bromwell, 
 Cincinnati, Ohio, sent nearly mature larvae of this species, with state- 
 ment that it was acting like a cutworm in working around the stalks 
 of celery and other plants and actually cutting them off close to the 
 ground. 
 
 June 11, 1904, Mr. Moritz E. Kuther, Holyoke, Mass., sent speci- 
 mens about one-third grown, stating that they were feeding on beans, 
 beets, lettuce, potatoes, tomatoes, carrots, dahlias, roses, and other 
 plants, nipping the 3^oung plants just underneath the crown, and after- 
 wards pulling the leaves into the earth. ^ The trouble was described as 
 having begun about three years previously and attack was first 
 confined to lettuce and beets; later they were described as attacking 
 
 '' Unfortunately, a common cutworm was involved in this attack, and it is not known 
 positively that the grubs were responsible for the entire injury. 
 
12 BULLETIN 891, U, S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRTCULTURE. 
 
 everythin<i: <jrown. Chickens were stated to have refiisetl to eat the 
 grubs. 
 
 August 19, 1904, Mr. Henry Chapman, Saltville, Va., sent half- 
 grown larvae, stating that they were verj^ abundant in celery and 
 strawberry beds. A dozen of varying sizes were found near one 
 strawberry plant that day. The smaller grubs wliich had hatched 
 from eggs recently deposited by the beetles remained near the surface, 
 while the larger ones occurred farther below. The grubs were not 
 seen to injure the celery until it was put in the ground in the winter, 
 when a good-sized stalk was observed " eaten through." Strawberry 
 plants were destroyed in the midst of a host of these pests. On 
 September 14 specimens in different stages of growth were found 
 4 to 5 inches below the earth's surface. The beetles were numerous in 
 that vicinity during July. They were observed depositing eggs and 
 soon afterwards larvse were noted developing rapidly. 
 
 October 23, 1907, Mr. Barclay wrote that since 1903, when the 
 Bureau of Entomology had correspondence with him in regard to the 
 occurrence of this insect at Haverford, Pa., it had not appeared at all 
 in 1904, 1905, or 1906. October 26, Mr. P. Haupt, New Athens, 111., 
 reported that his vegetable and flower garden and a portion of his 
 lawn were very badly infested. Because of the great numbers of the 
 grubs, especially in the vegetable garden, it was feared that great 
 damage might be done the next spring. Lettuce which had been 
 sown several weeks before was undermined so badly when an inch 
 high that the plants died from drouglit. the grubs having worked 
 around the roots so much that the soil had become as fine and loose 
 as dust. The ginibs also ate off the leaves and gnawed the tips of 
 hyacinth bulbs. The presence of the insects in the vegetable garden 
 was attributed to the use of horse manure from the stable. 
 
 November 16, 1909, Mr. E. G. Smyth reported the following ob- 
 servations on this species from Churchland, Ya. : 
 
 The hard ground between frames of young cabbage is " pepper-boxed " with 
 holes made by tliese larvse in entering the gi-ound. The grower believes that 
 they come to the surface during the night to obtain moisture, and reenter the 
 soil before daylight. It is evident that they come forth to feed; but as they 
 can not possibly get into the frames of young cabbage, and as there is very 
 little vegetation outside of the frames, it is a question what they find to eat. 
 Plainly none had gained entrance to the frames, for the soil within had none 
 of their holes at the surface. Once inside, they could play consummate havoc 
 with the tender cabbage seedlings. In the preceding spring, beets had been 
 grown in these cold frames, and something working under the ground, presum- 
 ably the same larvse, did considerable damage to the plants. During the inter- 
 vening summer months the frames were in disuse, so only weeds grew in or 
 between them. Before planting the cabbage in the frames the old soil had been 
 replaced by fresh soil fi-um elsewhere, which accounts for there being no grubs 
 in the frames at this time. 
 
THE GREEiSr JUISTE BEETLE. 13 
 
 October 8, 1912, James Kenny & Co., Riverside, N. J., wrote relative 
 to this grub as follows : 
 
 It is cutting the lavvff arouiul lu>re every nisht, iind silso cuts tlie roots of 
 geraniums and otlier flowers. 
 
 January 11, 1913, Mr. E. B. Cantrell, Winston-Salem, N. C, re- 
 ported that the grubs were very abundant in his garden; so much 
 so as to interfere with the growth of the plants. The two years pre- 
 vious Mr. Cantrell used stable manure freely on his garden and, as 
 he surmised, this was doubtless responsible for the appearance of 
 the grubs in such numbers. Writing March 18, Mr. Cantrell said : 
 
 I have observed the grubs for a number of years and have never known them 
 to occur on any kind of land or injure any kind of crops excepting where stable 
 or lot manure had been used. Therefore their greatest numbers are to be found 
 in gardens. The grubs breed and thrive on manure and almost any crops 
 planted there. Especially in dry weather there is damage by them as they 
 plow up and make holes that cause plants to suffer for moisture. Sometimes 
 plants ai*e cut off, tomatoes on the ground eaten, and especially have they in- 
 .lured my celery. 
 
 May 17, 191-1, Mr. Edward T. Knight, Bureau of Plant Industry, 
 reported injury by this grub to iris, which had been a source of 
 complaint about a year before. 
 
 October 24, 1914, Mr. C. F. Turner, Bureau of Entomology, found 
 the grubs doing considerable damage in the gardens belonging to 
 Mr. L. G. Buckner at Memphis, Tenn. Corn, potatoes, turnips, 
 and eggplant were said to be attacked. Mr. Buckner wrote Novem- 
 ber 5, 1914 : 
 
 The grubs in our garden keep the ground near the surface pulverized. A 
 rain, of course, packs the ground and in a day or two the ground is again 
 pulverized. We are not sure that the plants died because the roots were eaten 
 or whether it was the continuous working under and around them. They did 
 not bother the plants on top of the ground. We had a very fine patch of 
 turnips and they killed nearly all of them. They also ruined tomato vines 
 and English peas. They attacked fall potatoes, not killing the vines, but 
 I know they ate some of the potatoes ; however, not a great deal. Our garden 
 has been well fertilized with stable manure. 
 
 During the same month Prof. James Troop, entomologist at 
 Purdue Experiment Station, received specimens from a correspond- 
 ent at Bedford, Ind., who reported that the larvae damaged endive. 
 The correspondent wrote October 27, 1914, as follows : 
 
 The endive I have covered with a board to bleach. Frequently when I would 
 lift a board off of the endive I would see the worm disappearing in the hole out 
 of which his head had been protruding, and quite often they would in this 
 manner eat a third and often half of the bunch of endives. 
 
 The correspondent had adopted two methods for bleaching the 
 endive — laying boards over the plants and bunching and tying up 
 the heads — but the grubs attacked only that under the boards. 
 
14 BULLETIISr 8&1, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 December IT, 1914, Mr. A. Patterson, Ensley, Ala., wrote that 
 these " grub worms " keep the soil in the garden very loose, especially 
 around the roots of collards and turnips. They were unevenly dis- 
 tributed in the garden, in 5 or 6 foot areas in holes 4 or 5 inches 
 apart. The surface of parsnips was eaten off in places, some eroded 
 areas extending completely around the root and stopping its growth. 
 
 Mr. Thomas H. Jones, Bureau of Entomology, has contributed the 
 following notes, based on specimens : 
 
 November 22, 1915, Mr. J. O. Bethes, Franklinton, La., wrote in substance : 
 This grub was taken from a garden here where the species is doing a great 
 deal of damage. In the daytime the worm penetrates the earth to a depth of 
 about a foot and at night comes to the surface and works up the ground in the 
 manner of a mole. It is doing damage to turnips, cabbage, and other plants 
 growing in the gardens this season of the year. 
 
 December 28, 1916, Mr. Jones observed the larvae in water in a 
 ditch at the Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, La. Although 
 they were motionless when removed they soon became active when 
 brought into the office. They had eyidently bred on the parade 
 grounds on the other side of a walk separating the groimds from the 
 campus, since the beetles had been observed in large numbers in 
 late summer. Numerous trails were found in the wet dirt, and there 
 were holes and piles of freshly worked-over dirt in the grassland. 
 The heavy rains caused the grubs to come to the surface. Prof. 
 O. W. Rosewall had previously seen the grubs above the surface at 
 night after heavy rains. 
 
 March 16, 1917, Mr. W. J. Sutcliff, Monroe, La., wrote: 
 
 A while back these grubs were in the garden by the millions, and yesterday 
 a number were found dead. They, or some other insect, literally plowed the 
 very top of the ground up, and by doing so they killed the little plants coming 
 up. Digging down below the surface of the groimd for three or four inches, the 
 ground is perforated with holes resembling on a small scale those made by 
 crayfish. 
 
 October 28, 1918, Mrs. A. M. Kistler. Morganton, N. C, sent speci- 
 mens of larvae with the statement that she could furnish them by the 
 bushel, and that they were infesting her garden and hotbed. They 
 were described as destroying everything in the garden — cabbage, 
 turnips, salsify, lettuce, radishes, peppers, tomatoes, and celery. 
 Paris green was tried without effect, and kerosene emulsion was 
 advised. 
 
 November 13, 1919, Mr. C. S. Stewart, Baton Rouge, La., reported 
 the grubs of this species in his garden. He wrote: 
 
 For the past six years my fall garden has been ruined almost entirely from 
 this cause. It is a grub that grows about 1 inch long, comes to the surface 
 during the night, runs on its back, eats almost eveiything green, and to give 
 you an idea of tJieir numbers I will say that I have picked up as many as 
 1,000 in a single night. Where they work and crawl the surface of the ground 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. " 15 
 
 looks as if it had been raked. I use stable manurf, but within two years liave 
 limed the soil. Right now I am plowing out my grub crop, turn the soil, pick 
 up, and throw to tlu' chickens. I haven't anything in my garden this fall except 
 grub worms. 
 
 INJURY BY THE GRUBS IN A GREENHOUSE. 
 
 A single instance of injury by the grubs of this species in green- 
 houses was reported in November. 1898. Mr. W. E. Pray, Kinkora, 
 N. J., reported injury in his violet houses (31). The larvae were 
 first noticed soon after the plants had been put in the bed, and at 
 this time they seemed to do little if any harm, but the ground was 
 described as being *" kept wvU cultiAated for 2 inches deep b}' their 
 movements.'" As the plants grew, t!ie larv;e, it is stated, began to 
 feed upon the fibrous roots, and Avere so doing at the time of writing. 
 They were <ilso said to devour the outside petals of the flowers which 
 rested upon the ground and frequently ate into the hearts of the 
 flowers, rendering them unfit for shipment. Specimens of A'iolets 
 shoAving the reported injury were received Avith the grubs. A great 
 number of the flowers Avere dcscrined as having been destroA^ed. It 
 Avas belicA'cd at the tinic tiiat cutworms might be the real culprits, 
 but no definite conclusions could l>e reached. 
 
 In this connci'tum it sliould be notrd that the grubs are frequently 
 brought into greenhouses Avith manure, and as a consequence of the 
 superheated indoor atmos]:)here the beetles issue practically^ through- 
 out the winter, as has happened at iVorfolk, Va,, and at Washing- 
 ton, D. C. 
 
 INJURY BY THE BEETLES. 
 
 Attention has been draAvn to the injurious attack of the beetles 
 to fruits. Of these, the thin-skinned fruits, especially figs, peaches, 
 and grapes, are most often damaged, other fruits which have been 
 listed being occasionally or slightly attacked. Injury to figs in 
 South Carolina, Georgia, and other southern States is an annual oc- 
 currence, and indeed one of the popular names of this beetle is " fig- 
 eater.'' From Pennsylvania southAvard come frequent reports of 
 injury to peaches, often to those which are quite sound, contrary to 
 the opinion of some authors that only decaying, partially decayed, or 
 overripe fruit is attacked. The green June beetle is a A^ery well- 
 knoAvn grape pest, and Prof. H. Garman (32) reported injuries to 
 this fruit in Kentucky as foUoAvs : 
 
 The common green June bug, well known to every Kentucky school boy, be- 
 comes very troublesome locally and occasionally by cutting the skins of grapes 
 and utterly destroying the fruit of Avhole bunches and even whole vines. On 
 the experiment farm at Lexington this pest would, if allowed to work unhin- 
 dered, destroy the whole crop of the early A'arieties in the experimental vine- 
 yard. It was formerly more troublesome than uoav, but is liable any season 
 
16 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 to appear in such numbers as to be the cause of anxiety on the part of those 
 liaving the vineyard in charge. The very sweet, tliin skinned, early sorts suffer 
 most severely. On a visit to the vineyard, August 1, 1896, I found Moore's 
 Early, Poughkeepsie, and White Imperial being severely damaged, while Bril- 
 liant was only moderately injured. The clumsy beetles were clinging to the 
 berries, in some cases a dozen on a bunch, greedily devouring the pulp and leav- 
 ing them in an unsightly and utterly ruined condition. They were guilty dur- 
 ing the same month of injury ro early peaches and plums. 
 
 Webster and Mally (27) have reported injury by the beetles to 
 tomatoes in southern Ohio, and state that melons are sometimes 
 eaten; corn in the ear is a favorite food, and not infrequently the 
 beetles are sufficiently numerous to injure noticeably both field and 
 sweet corn. They have even been observed injuring young corn 
 plants by gnawing into the stalk, and in one instance young sor- 
 ghum plants were attacked. 
 
 The beetles are also f requentl}^ complained of as a nuisance in well- 
 kept lawns and golf greens, because of the little mounds of earth 
 excavated by them as they enter the ground, but they are by no means 
 as troublesome in this respect as are the larvae. 
 
 In 1909 Mr. R. A. Vickery, Bureau of Entomology, observed the 
 beetles at Salisbury, N. C, August 10, feeding on kernels of corn 
 near the tip of the ear, the injury having first been started by the 
 related Euphoria sepulchralis Fab. At Wellington, Kans., Messrs. 
 E. 0. G. Kelley and T. H. Parks, Bureau of Entomology, observed 
 beetles feeding on young stalks of corn July 19, They were boring 
 large holes near the base of the stalk between the second and third 
 joints. Mr. Kelley repeated this observation and later, August 10, 
 1911, found them feeding on corn kernels. July 14 of the same 
 year Mr. G. G. Ainslie, Bureau of Entomology, observed the beetles 
 feeding on sweet-corn kernels at Nashville, Tenn. 
 
 At the same locality Mr. W. H. Larrimer, Bureau of Entomology, 
 reported injury to sorghum July 21, 1913. The beetles were ob- 
 served in the " throat " of the plants, evidently having been attracted 
 by the honeydew of the corn leaf-aphis,® or by the sweet sap of the 
 sorghum itself. This attack caused the leaves to split at the base, 
 injuring the plants to quite an extent. When the field was revisited 
 a week later the beetles had disappeared, and while the plants were 
 attempting to outgrow the injury, the damaged ones were easily 
 distinguished. 
 
 July 9, 1915, adults were observed at Ocean View, Va., flying over 
 lawns and hedges and floAver beds, those captured proving to be 
 largely females. Later in the month they w^ere also observed at 
 Portsmouth, Va. The parasitic sarcophagid flies were observed on 
 hedges, and in all probability thus able to deposit their larvae on 
 the adults of C. nitida, resting on the hedges. 
 
 ^ Aphis maidis Fitch. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 17 
 
 June 29, 1016, a sin«;le adult was captured at Norfolk, Va. B}'^ 
 July 10 numbers were observed flying around hedges and lawns. 
 
 By August 8 the beetles w^ere observed at Portsmouth, Va., in large 
 numbers. They disappeared about September 20. In 191C Mr. 
 J. E. L. Lauderdale observed adults at Baton Rouge, La., feeding on 
 the juices of corn. They were observed between July 8 and Septem- 
 ber 19, none being found after September 22, occurring in greatest 
 numbers in August. On August 4 Mr. F. B. Milliken, Bureau of 
 Entomology, observed the beetles at Wichita, Kans., feeding on egg- 
 plant in the early morning, maldng large ragged cavities in the sides 
 of the main stems or branches. 
 
 During the next five years, up to 1922, few complaints of injury 
 were received aside from the normal number to lawns and golf links, 
 these emanating from Maryland, Virginia, District of Columbia, 
 southern Pennsylvania, and New York. Injury to celery and en- 
 dive, resulting in a loss of more than 40 per cent of the crop which 
 might have been due to this insect, was reported at Sunbury, Pa., 
 but without specimens. Complaints of injury in gardens were re- 
 ceived from Louisiana in 1919, one correspondent at Amite stating 
 that for six years his garden had been almost ruined from this cause. 
 
 Beetles Entering Beehives. 
 
 During July, 1903, the senior author's attention was called to 
 great numbers of dead beetles of Colin is tiifida, found under the 
 entrances to beehives on the grounds of the Department of Agricul- 
 ture, where the living beetles were quite a nuisance. There were 
 considerable numbers of them endeavoring to obtain entrance to 
 the hives, and they occupied the attention of a number of the 
 bees that were as intent on preA'enting their entrance as the beetles 
 were on getting into the hives. On account of the hard exterior 
 coating of this insect the bees' stings did not appear to penetrate 
 until perhaps after a great many attempts. The beetles were per- 
 sistent, but very slow and sluggish, and under the circumstances it 
 can readily be imagined that an appreciable amount of honey that 
 might have been produced was lost through the distraction of the 
 attention of the bees to the intruders. The beetles appeared to be 
 utterly unaware of their danger and as stupid as the Scarabaeidae 
 are generally accredited with being, at least when not in flight. 
 
 LIFE HISTORY AND HABITS. 
 
 In the vicinity of Norfolk, Va., the beetles make their first appear- 
 ance about the middle of June, reaching their height in numbers 
 by the middle of July and continuing numerous until the middle of 
 August, disappearing about the first week in September, 
 186606°— 22— Bull. 891 2 
 
18 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTUEF. 
 
 Throughout a period of from 4 to 6 weeks the beetles occur 
 abundantly, beino; most active late in the afternoon, when they fly 
 either close to the ground or soar high among the tree tops. When 
 they alight on trees serious injury sometimes results from the 
 beetles gnawing into the young twigs, causing the latter to break off. 
 The beetles are also attracted to ripe fruit and gather by dozens on 
 ripe melons, tomatoes, and green corn. 
 
 Mating occurs during periods of rest, when the beetles alight on 
 tree tops, shrubbery, fences, or on lawns and grassy places, the fe- 
 males attracting the males — sometimes many males attending one 
 female. Before oviposition the females, buzzing like bees, fly close 
 to the ground and select a place to enter the soil. After alighting 
 they disappear rapidly from the surface and remain in the ground 
 for two days at a time, sometimes coming to the surface to feed 
 and again disappearing. 
 
 EGG LAYING. 
 
 The soil condition that attracts the parent beetles for egg laying 
 is land originally sandy, subsequently richly incorporated with 
 humus or organic matter, either in the form of well-rotted manure 
 or decomposing vegetation. Such are the field conditions of the 
 two principal infested localities in the vicinity of Norfolk, Va., where 
 the green June beetle occurs in abundance. This gives a soft, warm, 
 mellow soil, rich in organic food, retaining moisture, yet never soggy 
 or cold during the egg-laying period, and affords easy access for the 
 beetles to enter and deposit eggs. The conditions are ideal for 
 incubation and the subsequent work of the larvae. Cage experi- 
 ments demonstrated that a pure sandy soil does not attract the 
 beetles to oviposit, but when well-rotted manure is added in about 
 equal portions the beetles readily deposit their eggs.® 
 
 The reported finding of larvse in dung has often raised the ques- 
 tion as to whether eggs are deposited in manure. There are instances 
 on record where larvae have been so found, and the larvae have received 
 the local name of " dung grubs." Mr. F. Richardson, of Portsmouth, 
 Va.. states that about 1908, when he first began haiding cow manure 
 on his farm, he often noticed that hardened or caked pieces of dung 
 when broken revealed the presence of numerous "grub worms," of 
 what he supposed to be this insect. Several years after the use of 
 this manure his place became noticeably infested with the grubs, so 
 that he finally discontinued the use of this manure and supplanted it 
 with stable manure. During the height of their season the beetles were 
 often observed entering and issuing from the soil in the process of 
 
 » The beetles were induced to lay in pure sand, altlioush reluctantly, and with much 
 effort on the part of the female to escape confinement and to search through the sand for 
 a suitable spot for deposition. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 
 
 19 
 
 efjo:-laying. This matter of the dim<?-fee<lin<>: linbii will be discussed 
 further under the heading; "History and literature," p. 28. 
 
 Period oi- Incubation. 
 
 The period of incubation in the field, as will readily l)e understood, 
 depends in a larjje measure on climatic conditions for that period, and 
 moisture particularly plays a part in the development of the em- 
 bryonic larva. This fact has been illustrated with e^^s kept in the 
 laboratory in vials. It was determined that the i}<r<^H when first 
 deposited are small in size, but with suitable moisture conditions 
 finally become larjtjer and assume the spherical shape, the larvae 
 hatching within a period varying from 12 to 14 days. Eggs kept in 
 vials in which the sand is allowed to become dry remain small and 
 will not develop until suitable conditions of moisture occur. The in- 
 cubation period is then very much prolonged, and the resulting 
 larvae are not so vigorous and are somewhat smaller than the 
 average. T^sually the normal period is from 10 to 15 days. The 
 depth at which the eggs are deposited in the field provides a tempera- 
 ture nearly uniform, and even during dry weather the moisture con- 
 tent of the soil at a depth of from 6 to 8 inches can be but slightly 
 affected. The length of the incubation period, as observed in eight 
 instances, is given in Table I. 
 
 Table I. — Incubntiov period of Cotiiris nitida. 
 
 No. 
 
 Date of 
 deposi- 
 tion 
 of eggs. 
 
 Date of 
 
 hatching 
 
 of 
 
 larvae. 
 
 Incuba- 
 tion 
 period 
 (days). 
 
 1 
 
 Aug. 5 
 Aug. 14 
 Aug. 16 
 Aug. 21 
 Aug. 23 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 17 
 Aug. 23 
 Aug. 30 
 Sept. 3 
 Sept. 6 
 Sept. 7 
 Sept. 13 
 ...do 
 
 12 
 
 2 . 
 
 9 
 
 3 . 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 5. . 
 
 14 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 7 . 
 
 Aug. 25 
 Aug. 30 
 
 19 
 
 8 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 OviPosiTioN IN Tidewater Virginia. 
 
 All the pupal cells obtained in 191(5 were placed in a large cage, 
 and adults began to issue in July. Table II showsi the date of copu- 
 lation, the number of masses of eggs deposited by each female thus 
 separated, and the total number of eggs deposited. A pair in copu- 
 lation was isolated and a record made of egg laying. Flowerpots 
 contaming an equal mixture of sand and soil, having an abundance 
 of organic matter, and about 9 inches in depth, were used for study, 
 and were examined frequently, the examination being greatly facili- 
 tated bv the ease Avith which the soil was removed entire from the 
 
20 
 
 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 pots. This simulated natural conditions as nearly as possible. 
 Glass jars containing 6 inches of soil were also used. 
 
 When the pots were examined the female was very often surprised 
 during oviposition. On one occasion the burrow leading from the 
 surface to the bottom of the pot was excavated along one side of the 
 pot, so that the actual manner in which the nest was prepared before 
 the eggs were deposited was observed. In this instance the beetle had 
 widened the burrow considerably, forming an egg-shaped cavity with 
 the larger end towards the bottom of the pot. Its head Avas turned 
 upward, and was evidently used in the formation of the cavity. The 
 pot was replaced in its normal position and several days later, when 
 again examined, revealed the following conditions: When the pot 
 and about half an inch of the soil w'ere removed, several eggs, each 
 separated from the others, were found, as shown in Plate I. These 
 were removed, with a layer of soil, when other eggs were found, the 
 process being continued until the entire mass of 27 eggs was removed. 
 
 Table II. — Number of eqffs laid bii bred adults of Cotmis nitida, Norfolk, 
 
 Ya.. 1916. 
 
 
 Copula- 
 tion 
 date. 
 
 First mass. 
 
 Second mass. 
 
 Third mass. 
 
 Fourth mass. 
 
 Total 
 number 
 
 Cage No. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Num- 
 ber. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Num- 
 ber. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Num- 
 ber. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Num- 
 ber. 
 
 of eggs 
 
 de- 
 posited. 
 
 a 1 
 
 July 25 
 July 31 
 ...do 
 
 July 27 
 Aug. 2 
 Aug. 4 
 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 2 
 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 4 
 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 14 
 Aug. 18 
 
 56 
 20 
 25 
 13 
 12 
 14 
 ■22 
 27 
 15 
 19 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 56 
 
 b 
 
 Aug. 4 
 Aug. 14 
 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 4 
 Aug. 14 
 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 18 
 
 16 
 14 
 8 
 3S 
 14 
 29 
 20 
 
 Aug. 18 
 
 ...do 
 
 ...do 
 
 Aug. 16 
 Aug. 18 
 
 14 
 12 
 9 
 27 
 
 8 
 
 (2) 
 Aug. 28 
 Aug. 20 
 Aug. 28 
 
 33 
 3 
 8 
 
 16 
 
 83 
 
 c 
 
 54 
 
 d 
 
 July 28 
 July 31 
 July 29 
 Aug. 1 
 do... 
 
 38 
 
 e3 
 
 93 
 
 f 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 51 
 
 h 
 
 Aug. 28 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 74 
 
 i 
 
 Aug. 8 
 ...do 
 
 (2) 
 
 16 
 
 30 
 
 
 Aug. 24 
 
 10 
 
 Aug. 28 
 
 7 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 Fe n lie e'^caped, all eggs found deposited in one mass. 
 
 2 Dissected. 
 
 3 Female taken from pupal coll. copulated soon afterward. 
 
 It is evident that the female after preparing the burrow or nest, as 
 already described, deposits several eggs and packs soil around them, 
 continuing the process, layer nfter layer, until the entire mass is 
 deposited. Since the packing is very thorough the mass of eggs 
 separates from the nest very readily if moist, creating the impression 
 of being deposited in a ball of soil. 
 
 The number of eggs deposited at one time or in a mass varies from 
 12 to 27. In one case 56 eggs were found, but since two sizes were 
 observed at one time it would seem that the female, if not disturbed 
 while in the nest, returns and deposits other masses. \^Tien dis- 
 turbed, as was necessary in cage experiments, four masses of eggs 
 were the highest number deposited by a single beetle, as shown in 
 Table II. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 21 
 
 It is evident that a female after depositing a mass of eggs comes 
 to the surface to feed or to rest, Later returning to the burrow (in 
 cages, only if the nest is not disturbed) to deposit other eggs, and 
 continuing this until the quota of eggs is deposited. Such are evi- 
 dently the natural field conditions. In confinement the females were 
 disturbed and new nests had to be constructed each time they desired 
 to oviposit. This probably accounts for the hmg period of agg laying 
 (nearly a month) as shown in the tables. 
 
 LIFE HISTORY OF THE LARVA. 
 
 When the eml)ryonic larva is ready to hatch it causes the egg to 
 split transversely at a point where the head and anal end of the 
 larva touch within the egg. Immediately on freeing itself from 
 the eggshell it becomes quite active, crawling on its back as do the 
 older grubs when placed on the surface of the soil. In two instances 
 a recently hatched grub crawled at the rate of 15 inches a minute, 
 and nearly mature individuals travel over 2 feet a minute. 
 
 The grubs grow very rapidly, feeding on animal manure and 
 similar decomj)osing matter, and their presence becomes more con- 
 spicuous daily. They are most noticeable in the late fall, and it is 
 at this time that complaints are most frequent. 
 
 The first grubs hatch the first of August, and often by the middle 
 of that month they become noticeable in lawns and gardens. At 
 this time numerous young grubs will be noticed in the same areas, 
 as though they worked in colonies, which is to be expected, since 
 a number of eggs are laid close together. Later the larvae scatter, 
 and infestation of the lawn or garden becomes more or less uniform. 
 
 The grubs have distinct open burrows which average 6 to 12 inches 
 in depth, although late in the fall they may reach a depth of a foot 
 and a half, and the surface hole is about the size of one's thumb. 
 The burrows usually go almost straight down, although there may 
 be lateral burrows, and during the day the grub is likely to be found 
 at the bottom. At night dirt is thrown out at the exit of their bur- 
 rows, the little mounds of earth thus appearing being from 2 to 3 
 inches in diameter and closely resembling ant hills, the particles of 
 earth being someAvhat coarser, but not as coarse or pasty as is earth 
 excavated by angleworms or nematodes. 
 
 Toward winter the grub usually deepens its burrows, and during 
 the colder months remains inactive at the bottom ; but it is quickly 
 revived even during short periods of warm weather, and not infre- 
 quently continues its work on warm days. In fact, even as far north 
 as Louisville, Ky., the grubs are active during parts of the months 
 of January and February. 
 
 As warmer weather returns in the spring the grubs likewise make 
 their normal reappearance, and after a short period of feeding be- 
 
22 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 come full grown, prepare their pupal cells a few inches to 8 inches 
 below the surface, and pupate within these. Pupation takes place 
 the latter part of May or first of June.^° 
 
 During cold spells in late fall and during winter, the larvae pene- 
 trate deeper into the soil. In tidewater Virginia certain crops are 
 grown during winter under frames, and in such cases, when weather 
 conditions are mild, the larvae may continue active during the entire 
 winter. In the field, the larvae are active during warm spells in 
 winter, otherwise they remain inactive in the ground at a depth of 
 from 7 to 10 inches. Early in spring activity is much increased, and 
 as the larvae are approaching full growth at this time they often 
 prove injurious to plants sown at this time, and to others that are 
 set out. The larvae continue active until the beginning of June, their 
 activity ceasing gradually as the time for transforming to pupae 
 approaches. By the middle of June the majority have transformed. 
 
 The newly-hatched larvae can live several days without feeding, as 
 long as the soil is moist.^^ 
 
 Observations on the feeding habits of the larva of the green June 
 beetle in the field in tidewater Virginia were made frequently from 
 the time the larvae were first hatched until they were ready to pupate, 
 and these, together with the experience of experts and farmers who 
 have had practical experience with this white grub, will serve as a 
 criterion in judging the injurious status of the larva to crops. 
 
 From the time the larvae hatch until some time after the first molt, 
 they invariably work in the vicinity of where the eggs were de- 
 posited. Later they come nearer the surface of the ground. In tlie 
 trapping experiments conducted for control, only larvae that had 
 molted at least once were captured, indicating that before that stage 
 is reached they do not usually come to the surface. After the first 
 molt, the larvae are about three-fourths of nn inch in length when ex- 
 tended. They become exceedingly active and their abundant numbers 
 in the soil are plainly visible by the numerous perforations and ridges 
 produced around the plants. 
 
 Probably the most important factor in judging the injuriousness 
 of the larvae is their extreme activity in the soil. This activity is in 
 large measure responsible for the damage they do to crops. Where 
 larvae are abundant seedling plants are thrown up from the soil or 
 buried beneath. In several instances two to three replantings have 
 been found necessary before a fair stand of plants could be obtained 
 
 10 The notes in some of the foregoing paragi-aphs are also recorded by Davis and I^ugin- 
 bill (45). 
 
 " In vials of moist sand containing no food whatever larvae were kept alive for three or 
 four days after hatching without any apparent effect on their health. The data in regai-d 
 to the molts of the larva were determined by confining lai-vffi in ,vials and supplying them 
 with fresh food daily by changing the soil. The soil was prepared by mixing sand and 
 compost in equal proportions. Tender these circumstances the larva was reared from the 
 time it was hatched until it changed to pupa. The number of molts was thus determined. 
 
THE GREEN JUiSTE BEETLE. 23 
 
 (see Pis. V and VI). Many fibrous roots, are broken either by tlie 
 movement of the larvae traveling from one place to another below the 
 surface or by their feeding when desirable food is near the roots. 
 Certain methods of farming or trucking, particularly those deemed 
 necessary in growing such crops as parsley, lettuce, celery, beets, and 
 turnips, where the seed is sown in drills, afford ample opportunity 
 for the young seedling plants to be injured as stated. Later, in such 
 crops as parsley, for instance, where the plants are grown in close 
 rows, the roots act as a barrier to the movement of the larvae ; hence 
 they are much injured, and the outer leaves of the plants turn yellow, 
 giving additional indication that root injury has taken place. Fur- 
 thermore, the habit of the larvae of coming to the surface at night, 
 or of working close to the surface of the soil during cloudy days, is 
 responsible for the undermining and uprooting of many larger plants. 
 Tlie carriage of soil into the heart of the susceptible crops mentioned 
 also causes the plants to become choked, and is likely to produce rot. 
 In many instances rows of plants have been found thus injured, let- 
 tuce being the greatest sufferer in this respect. 
 
 The object of the larvae in coming to the surface at night probably 
 is to change their feeding areas. Hundreds of larvae may be observed 
 traveling promiscuously, and the fact that the light of a lantern 
 causes them to become stationary, or immediately to bury themselves 
 beneath the surface, has prevented the determination as to whether 
 or not they feed on the surface. 
 
 Where the larvae occur abundantly the continual stirring up of the 
 soil renders it unfit for the growth of crops of any kind. Innumer- 
 able tracks are made by the larvae while crawling on their backs, and 
 as they crawl over plants leaves are buried, or soil carried into the 
 hearts of growing plants. 
 
 Number of Molts. 
 
 During the growing period the larva molts twice, a third molt 
 occurring when the larva transforms to pupa. 
 
 A large series of larvae were successfully carried through the 
 molting stages in tidewater Virginia, and it was determined that 
 the vigor of the larva when hatched, the richness of the food during 
 its active existence, and the frequent changing of the soil all played 
 an important role in determining the period before the larva molts. 
 In other words, when all conditions are favorable for rapid growth, 
 including warmth and the necessary moisture, the time between 
 molts is comparatively short. From the time the larva is hatched 
 until the first molt the minimum period observed was 13 days and 
 the maximum was 27. From 38 larvae carried through the molting 
 stages the average number of days before the first molt occurs was 
 determined to be 18. The minimum and maximum number of days 
 
24 
 
 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 before the second molt occurred were 15 and 32, respectively, while 
 the average number of days between the first and second molts was 26. 
 Thus a larva hatched July 27 will molt the first time in 13 to 15 
 days, or about August 11. The second molt will take place in about 
 20 to 25 days, or approximately the first week in September; from 
 the latter date until late in the following spring, a period of nearly 
 9 months, the larva grows, hibernates, and matures before it finally 
 transforms to pupa. 
 
 PUPATION. 
 
 When about to transform to pupa the larva constructs a cell by 
 cementing particles of soil together. Several days after the cell is 
 constructed the last larval skin is cast, disclosing the pupa. On 
 opening the pupal cell the third or last molt of the larva may be 
 
 <^^^v/225'./^?^9? /^^'^^/iijijrKc^i^^c^^^^/^^^. 5f/v:ocr7r At?/^ P£C. 
 
 Fig. 5. — Dlafertimmatic picture showing life history of green June beetle. (Walton del.) 
 
 seen. The time required to change from larva to pupa in the cell 
 varies from 3 to 8 days, according to temperature. The pupal period 
 consumes three weeks or more, also depending on temperature. 
 
 Cocoons from which the adults have escaped are shown in 
 Plate IV, B. 
 
 SUMMARY OF THE LIFE CYCLE. 
 
 The life history (fig. 5) of the green June beetle occupies only one 
 year. Approximately four-fifths of this time is spent in the larval 
 form. The most active growing larval period occurs in the first 2 
 months of its life, although 7 additional months are required in com- 
 l^leting full growth. 
 
 In tidewater Virginia the beetles appear about the middle of June, 
 continue through the months of July and August, and disappear by 
 the first week of September. Eggs are deposited from the middle 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 25 
 
 of July and through the month of August in the soil at a depth of 
 6 to 8 inches. The eggs hatch in from 10 to 15 days, and the larvse 
 pass their lives in the soil, feeding and molting twice by autumn. 
 By late fall the larvae have become three-fourths grown — in some 
 instances nearly full grown — and pass the winter in the larval form, 
 either inactive or active, depending on temperature conditions. 
 Early in the spring the larvae resume feeding until the latter part 
 of May and the first week in June, when they finally form cells in 
 which they transform to pupae. The pupal or donnant stage lasts 
 about three weeks, and the adults begin issuing from about the middle 
 of June onward. 
 
 LARVAL FOOD HABITS. 
 
 Experiments to determine if larvae feed on the roots of plants 
 must necessarily be taken for what they are worth, for the reason 
 that confining the larvae in a given area, as in flowerpots or boxes, 
 places them under conditions subject to the will of the experimenter, 
 and the larvae invariably will net results subject to the conditions 
 imposed on them. These results, therefore, may be misleading. 
 
 In confinement wheat plants were groAvn to provide food for the 
 larvae, and Riley (20) states that the larvae feed on the roots of the 
 plants. The following experiments for the purpose of determining 
 this factor were conducted by the authors. An equal number of 
 larvae were confined in 8-inch flowerpots under the following con- 
 ditions : 
 
 Experiment No. 1. — In a flowerpot containing pure sand the larvae 
 were very restless and worked the sand over thoroughly, evidently 
 looking for food, or a means of escape. Some of the larvae succeeded 
 in moving the broken pieces of stone at the bottom of the pot and 
 escaped in that way. 
 
 Experiment No. 2. — In a flowerpot containing pure sand, with a 
 growing cucumber plant, the larvae fed on the soil surrounding the 
 plant roots and on the roots of the plant, even gnawing the stem 1 
 or 2 inches above the ground. 
 
 Experiment No. 3. — In a pot containing garden soil they fed on 
 the organic matter. 
 
 Experiment No. ^. — About 25 larvae were placed in a large battery 
 jar with moistened earth, October 12. On the ITth, believing that 
 the larvae might be more hungry than when received, some beet roots 
 were placed in the jar with the leaves remaining. These leaves 
 touched the surface of the earth, and wdien they were examined two 
 days later it was found that the stems had been cut in most cases, 
 and that the leaf and stem together had been drawn down into the 
 cells of the larvae 5 or 6 inches below the surface. 
 
26 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Experiment No. 5. — A small lot of larvae was separated from the 
 main lot and placed in another jar with a large tuft of grass, roots, 
 and all the grass blades, and treated in the same manner, but the 
 roots were not materially affected. This experiment suggests that 
 there can be no doubt whatever that larvae feed, to a certain extent at 
 least, on vegetation, and that this is done when they come to the 
 surface of the earth, which they so frequently do at night, particularly 
 after rainy sjjells. It also suggests that ordinary poisoned baits of 
 grass or other vegetation strewed about the lawns and golf links 
 where these insects are so injurious would be a more or less effective 
 remedy, as the insects feed enough so that if the vegetation were 
 well poisoned and strewed in such manner that it would attract the 
 larvae for. protection as well as food beneath, they would eat enough 
 to be killed. 
 
 Experiment No. 6. — Still another experiment was made with about 
 half as many larvae, which had been kept without food for several 
 days. A beet root and a small cabbage plant were placed in a jar so 
 that the leaves all projected. The beet was not touched the first 
 night, but five small cabbage leaves were dragged under the surface. 
 In each case the leaves were left and the stems were attacked first. 
 In the case of the fifth leaf the stem had been about half eaten and 
 dragged under. 
 
 Experiment No. 7. — In a pot containing garden soil and a grow- 
 ing cucumber plant most of the larvae were found feeding on the soil. 
 One larva, however, was observed feeding amongst the roots of the 
 plant, many fibrous roots were broken, and others had been injured 
 by the larvae feeding upon them. 
 
 HABITS OF THE ADULT. 
 
 The beetles make their first appearance above ground during June 
 in the middle Atlantic region and not until Jvdy in the more northern 
 range of the species, the exact time being dependent on atmospheric 
 conditions, especially temperature. They gradually become more 
 abundant until August, after which time their numbers usually 
 diminish or at least become less noticeable. 
 
 During their periods of abundance the beetles, according to Davis 
 and Luginbill (45),^^ appear about daybreak, the females appearing 
 first, at least relatively more frequently than the males, from day- 
 break until after sunrise. Shortly thereafter the females begin to 
 settle to the earth, of fen first searching for the exit of a burrow or 
 starting a fresh hole and then resting in the grass preparatory to 
 mating. By this time the males predominate, becoming relatively 
 
 1* Observations were made at Louisville, Ky., except as noted and are substantially as 
 already published. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 27 
 
 more abundant as the mornino; advances, and the number of females 
 gradually diminishes. By 7 a. m. (later on cloudy days) the males 
 are exceedingly numerous, btizzing here and there in search of 
 females. In heavily infested localities the air near the ground be- 
 comes "alive" with the beetles, which fly rai)idly back and forth, 
 buzzing incessantly, giving the impression of a clover field humming 
 Avith bumblebees. They usually fly 6 to 12 or 18 inches above the 
 ground, but often higher. 
 
 From observation it appears quite certain that the male is at- 
 tracted to the female by the rather strong and sickening odor of 
 a milky fluid secreted by the latter, for he usually drops to the groimd 
 within a few inches of a female and, searching through the grass, 
 seems to have no difficulty in finding her within a minute or two. 
 Male beetles will alight near a female even when the latter is com- 
 pletely hidden from view. In one case a male was seen attempting to 
 mate with a dead female, and as she was lying on her back it is 
 hardly probable that form or color was the attractive force. Often 
 one finds a " nest " of beetles in the grass, there being a number of 
 males and only one female, more often a male and female in copula 
 and the other males vainly endeavoring to copulate with her. In 
 such a " nest " as many as eight males have been observed attempting 
 to mate with one female. From these facts, and since the female in- 
 variably secretes this odoriferous fluid, it is believed that the females 
 are detected through the sense of smell. 
 
 Mating lasts only a few minutes, for, as a rule, after this space 
 of time the female forcibly frees herself from the male by entering 
 her burrow or crawling under matted grass. In one instance a pair 
 was found in copula about 5 inches below the surface in the soil of a 
 breeding cage, and even after their removal from the cage they did 
 not separate for some time. 
 
 From 8.30 to 11 a. m. the number of beetles gradually diminishes 
 and after that comparatively few are seen in flight. By 1 p. m. and 
 throughout the afternoon only an occasional beetle is observed flying 
 about. On one of the days when observations were made it rained 
 most of the morning until 10.45, after which the sun came out and the 
 beetles appeared in numbers. At Columbia, S. C, the beetles were 
 most active between 11 a. m. and 3 p. m., being quite difficult to 
 capture at this time, since even when feeding they took flight at the 
 least disturbance. Evidently most of the beetles spend the night in 
 the soil or under debris of one kind or another, but males were oc- 
 casionally found at night resting in shrubbery, quite inactive and 
 not feeding, nor were they attracted to the electric light carried by 
 the observer. 
 
 On entering the ground the beetle throws up a little mound of earth 
 rpot unlike that made by the grub (see p. 21). The mound resembles 
 
28 BULLETIN 8&1, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 a small ant hill, but differs in that the particles of earth are coarser. 
 (PI. VII.) More often the males, after their daily flight or after 
 mating, burrow just beneath grass or loose sod, and in the case of 
 the putting greens of a golf course which are kept perfectly level and 
 the grass closely clipped, small mounds, resembling miniature mole 
 burrows, indicate the presence of a resting beetle beneath. The 
 females after mating go deeper into the soil, that is, from 2 to 4 or 5 
 inches, where they lay the eggs for the next generation. 
 
 The beetles evidently detect their food by the sense of smell. An 
 overripe fig was placed in a rearing cage with a number bf beetles 
 which had not fed for several days. Immediately one about 6 
 inches distant moved its head as though scenting the odor, circled 
 the fruit, and soon thereafter moved directs toward it and began 
 feeding on it. In another cage beetles refused ripe figs which were 
 not bruised, but when the skin was removed immediately attacked 
 them. While this does not definitely prove that the beetles will not 
 attack perfectly ripe fruit it tends to show that they arc not at- 
 tracted to fig trees except by the odor of bruised fruits and it is of 
 course possible that they may when abundant attack fruits both 
 perfect and injured. 
 
 HISTORY AND LITERATURE. ' 
 
 While the literature of the green Jinie beetle is large and there ara 
 many unpublished notes in the Bureau of P^ntomology, it will not 
 be necessary in this article to mention any but the more interesting 
 facts, which have a bearing upon the destructiveness and the plant- 
 feeding habits of the species. 
 
 In the original description of the species, published in 1758 by 
 Linnaeus (1, p. 350) , the name Scarabaeus rdfldus was used. " Habi- 
 tat in India'''' was obviously erroneous. The genus Allorhina or 
 Cotinis is neither European nor Asiatic, and there is no doubt that 
 C. nitida is a native American species. The second habitat, "Caro- 
 lina," mentioned by Linnaeus (2, p. 26), refers to either North or 
 South Carolina. 
 
 The first account of the habits of this species was published in 
 1865 b}' Dr. B. D. Walsh (3). Early records of the Bureau of Ento- 
 mology show that the larva was probably first reported to attack use- 
 ful plants in 1868, by G. G. Baker, who observed it in strawberry 
 beds at South Pass, 111. The larvae were confined with wheat roots, 
 of which they devoured great quantities. April 15, 1868, they were 
 found in cocoons; by May 14 the change to pupa had taken place; 
 and by June 2 the adults had issued. 
 
 Mention of the green June beetle was made by M. D. Thompson 
 (4) of Illinois in 1869. He stated briefly that the grubs feed on the 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 29 
 
 roots of plants and sometimes become quite injurious to the straw- 
 berry. It is rather strange that this species should have first at- 
 tracted attention in Illinois in the most northern boundary of its 
 present habitat, when we take into account that it is normally a 
 habitant of the South. It was reported again from Illinois in 1874 
 by William LeBaron (5, p. 89-90). 
 
 In 1879 Dr. L. O. Howard (6, 7) noted September 15 that the 
 larvae w^ere found crawling on their backs in immense numbers on 
 the grounds around the Capitol at Washington, D. C, and that 
 after heavy rains at that season they were sometimes so numerous 
 that bushels had been swept away together. They were also found 
 crawling about the pavements of the Department of Agriculture. 
 September 5, 1881, Mr. B. P. Mann brought in grown larvae which 
 had been found around the roots of a pear tree. 
 
 In 1883 William Saunders (8) gave a brief account of this species 
 with an original figure. 
 
 The first, general account of this insect was given by Forbes in 
 1884 (9, p. 149-150). In this article Howard's previous paper is 
 quoted and characters are given for the separation of the beetle and 
 its larva from those of Lachnosterna (Ph3dlophaga). A similar 
 article was published by the same author in 1884 (10, p. 245). In 
 1884 also C. W. Leng (11) recorded an abundance of this species in 
 the Carolinas and Georgia, including notice of injury by the beetle 
 to walnut trees. 
 
 In 1885 Dr. J. A. Lintner gave a general account (12) of the 
 feeding habits of both larval and adult stages 
 
 In 1887 Dr. W. H. Ashmead (13, p. 16) mentioned the feeding of 
 the adult on corn in the ear. 
 
 In 1888 W. B. Alwood (14) reported the successful use of kerosene 
 emulsion against the grubs on the Capitol grounds at Washing- 
 ton, D. C. The same year Messrs. Eiley and Howard (15) mentioned 
 the feeding of the adult on the fungus Roestilia aurantiaca^ and the 
 following year (17) reported an abundance of beetles and their injury 
 to peaches in the District of Columbia. 
 
 Reports from Kentucky in 1890 (18) by Prof. H. Garman and 
 C. W. Mathews indicate that the grubs were injurious to strawberry 
 and the beetles to fruits, particularly grapes. In 1891 W. B. Alwood 
 (19, p. 26) stated that he had bred a dipterous parasite from the 
 adult. In 1895 Garman (23) further reported that the grub "feeds 
 on living roots of grasses, strawberries, and other plants, and never, 
 as far as I can learn, eats dead vegetable matter." The beetles were 
 also observed feeding in the husks of corn when the grain is in the 
 dough stage, boring in the latter often well down to the base of the 
 ears, and they sometimes proved annoying to the honeybee by per- 
 sistently trying to enter beehives. 
 
30 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPAETMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The importance of the species as a truck-crop pest was further 
 noted by Riley in 1893 (20), when he stated that an acre of celery 
 at Rives, Md., was found fairly teeming with the grubs. No direct 
 injury was noted to the roots, but the heart of the celery became 
 choked with soil, and rot was induced by the acid excrement of 
 the larvae. The great abundance of the larvae on this area was 
 attributed to heavy mulching with rotten straw, the odor of which 
 obviously had attracted the parent beetle to deposit her eggs. The 
 same year Dr. J. B. Smith (25, p. 510-511 ; 26) stated that the larvae 
 in 1896 were more abundant than those of May beetles, and that their 
 work beneath the sod is sometimes so rapid and complete that the 
 whole can be rolled up like a rug, every fiber of the roots having been 
 destroyed. P'orbes (22, p. 280-281) stated that this grub is normally 
 a grass insect, but also infests strawberry fields. 
 
 From Ruxton, Md., it was reported that in 1897 hundreds of Cali- 
 fornia privet plants were destroyed by the grubs. 
 
 The conviction of the authors engaged in truck-crop insect inves- 
 tigations, that the lar\a is more injurious than the beetle, is not 
 shared by all entomologists. M. V. Slingerland (24) wrote that the 
 grubs during growth are harmless, feeding largely on vegetable 
 humus, but when they attain growth, they often injure roots of 
 strawberry plants and grasses. 
 
 In 1898 Dr. Howard (28) wrote a somewhat extensive article on 
 the green June beetle in which the statement was made that the 
 actual amount of damage done by the larva was problematical, and 
 in fact that it was doubtful whether the larvae normally do damage 
 at all. In spite of this, numerous records of injury had been made 
 long before this date, some of which Dr. Howard noted, and a con- 
 siderable number of reports have been received since, particularly 
 during recent years, when many complaints have been made of in- 
 jury by white grubs, which proved on receipt of specimens to be 
 Cotinis nitida. 
 
 In 1900 the senior author (29, p. 55), in an account of insects and 
 the weather, stated that this species was less abundant in the Dis- 
 trict of Columbia than usual. The same year J. B. Smith (30, 
 p. 282) gave notes on the habits and occurrences of the species in 
 New Jersey. The following year the senior author (31, p. 76-77) 
 reported injury by the grubs to greenhouse plants, but the injury 
 might have been partly due to cutworms. 
 
 In 1905 Dr. Forbes (35, p. 101-103) published a general account 
 which included notes on the characters of this and other so-called 
 species of " June beetles." 
 
 In 1909 Prof. H. Garman (35), in writing of this species, stated 
 that it Avas destructive to corn planted near manure heaps and men- 
 tioned injury by the beetles gnawing the tips of eare of com. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 31 
 
 In 1910 Prof. W. S. Blatchley (37, p. 995-996), after furnishing 
 a technical description of the species, gave some brief notes on its 
 habits, including some references. The same year J. B. Smith (38, 
 p. 321, fig. 129) published notes on the occurrence of this species 
 in Xew Jersey, and in 1910 (39, p. 444) reported injury to lawns by 
 the larvae in southern NeAv Jersey, recommending kerosene emulsion. 
 
 In 1914 Prof. E. N. Cory (40,' p. 13-15) stated that the adult did 
 serious damage to corn by cutting holes in the leaves. He recom- 
 mended a rigid cleaning up in the fall and fall plowing. The same 
 year Prof. Franklin Sherman, jr. (41) published a summarized 
 account of this and other species of gi'ubs. The same year also 
 Slingerland and Crosby (42, p. 296-298) gave a concise account of 
 this insect as a pest on peach and other fruits. 
 
 In 1921 Mr. J. J. Davis and Mr. Philip Luginbill, Bureau of Ento- 
 mology (45), furnished the most complete account of this species 
 that has heretofore been published. It includes many instances of 
 injury, especially to laAvns and golf greens, and a most excellent 
 account of the life history and habits, together with technical descrip- 
 tions of the different stages. It also contains a consideration of nat- 
 ural enemies and methods of control, especially with regard to the 
 occurrence of the insect in lawns and golf greens, and a bibliography 
 of economic literature. 
 
 CONTROL BY NATURAL AGENCIES. 
 
 White grubs in general have many natural enemies without which 
 there is no doubt that injuries from this source Avould be much 
 greater. The grub of the green June beetle is without doubt largely 
 held in control by natural enemies. 
 
 INSECT ENEMIES. 
 
 Blow-fly Parasites. 
 
 In the vicinity of Norfolk, Va., two species of parasites were 
 reared from the pupa and adult of Cotinis nitida, one of which 
 proved to be new. 
 
 Sarcophaga utilis Aid. was reared from the adult, and as many 
 as two and three parasites were obtained from a single parasitized 
 individual. This parasite is a comparatively large-sized species and 
 sometimes occurs quite abundantly along the seashore. Hundreds 
 of these flies were observed frequently on seaweeds along the coast, 
 sometimes alighting on any marine animal matter cast up by the 
 sea. From the number of the parasites observed it would appear 
 that this species is a natural inhabitant of this locality, and might 
 prove parasitic on other insects besides Cotinis nitida. The habits of 
 this fly are not definitely known in regard to its method of ovipo- 
 
32 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 
 
 sition on the host. Several beetles were observed with larvae at- 
 tached to their bodies near the base of the head and thorax, and it 
 may be that the parasite normally deposits its larvse on that part 
 of the host. The reason for this belief is that parasitized beetles 
 which have been examined usually have their heads severed at the 
 junction of the thorax. A large number of beetles thus examined 
 also have the contents of the thorax and abdomen devoured by the 
 parasitic larvae. When the parasitic larvae become mature they 
 leave the body of the host and transform to pupae either at or a 
 little below the surface of the soil. 
 
 Sarcophaga {Ilelicohia) helicis Towns, was reared both from the 
 pupa and adult. It is only about half the size of the former, but 
 is more commonly parasitic on Cotinis nitida^ and is known as a 
 parasite on a number of other insects. It is quite common in many 
 localities and is widely distributed. The rearing of this species 
 from the pupa of Cotinis leads to the question as to how the adult 
 parasite oviposits (33, p. 25). Evidently the larvae must be para- 
 sitized, and in order to reach the host the only plausible method is 
 for the parasite to enter the ground and deposit the larvae on the 
 host larvae. Considering the habit of this white grub in making 
 perforations to the surface of the ground, it would be an easy matter 
 for the fly to enter a burrow leading to the abode of the host and 
 parasitize it. 
 
 The ability of the host larva to live for a considerable period 
 after being parasitized, and even to pupate in many instances when 
 pupal cells were found with the parasitic larva, is somewhat re- 
 markable. 
 
 An instance of this is recorded by Mr. H. A. Morgan, Bureau of 
 Entomology, when /iS'«rc6>/>A«(7a {Helicohia) helicisTowns. was reared 
 from grasshoppers, and it was found that the functions of the grass- 
 hopper, including mating and ovipositing, continued normally for a 
 period of 95 days, notwithstanding the fact that it harbored the 
 parasite for that length of time. 
 
 Pupal cells contained as many as six or more parasitic larvae of 
 Sarcophaga helicis, and the contents of the cell were completely 
 devoured. In some instances the last larval skin of the host larva 
 was found in the cell, indicating that the larva was able to trans- 
 form into pupa before succumbing to the attacks of the parasitic 
 larvae. 
 
 In laboratory observations the parasitic larvae after becoming full- 
 grown transform to pupae on the surface of the ground or become 
 attached to the body of the beetles when they emerge from that source, 
 or may even enter below the surface of the ground for some distance. 
 
 The good service which this latter parasite may render is. however, 
 problematical. Reasoning from Morgan's observations on grass- 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 
 
 33 
 
 hoppers, the functicjii of matinn: and e<;g \i\y'm<r by the beetles might 
 continue normally in spite of their being parasitized. 
 
 A D[(iiiER-wA.sp Enemy. 
 
 Among the known natural enemies of the green June beetle, if we 
 except such birds as robins and blackbirds, is one that is more than 
 probably responsible for the extreme fluctuations in the numbers of 
 this species observed in some years and in certain localities. 
 
 During the months of August and SeptemV)er of the last decade of 
 the nineteenth century, on numerous occasions the flight of a digger 
 wasp, DlscoUa duhia Say (fig. 6), was observed by the senior author. 
 The wasps gradually increased in numbers until they became suffi- 
 ciently abundant to attract general attention. The same abundance 
 
 Fig. 6. — The digger wasp (DlscoHn duhia) : n. Female wasp; b, antenna of male; c, cocoon 
 showing opening above. Twice natural size. 
 
 was reported in other quarters in the city of Washington, and it 
 was presumed that white grubs of some sort were the attraction. 
 Finally it was learned that the insect seemed to be present only in 
 the male sex. Later the species was reared from Cotinis nitida in 
 different localities and reported to the Bureau of Entomology. 
 
 In Maryland, near Washington, the same phenomenon was wit- 
 nessed, and it was also noted that the wasps congregated in great 
 numbers on convenient shrubbery. It may be said in general that 
 the wasp is most conspicuous on lawns and near shrubbery in just 
 such localities as are frequented by its host. One year this species 
 was so abundant in some of the smaller parks of Washington and so 
 disturbed the children who used the parks for playgrounds that the 
 wasp became the subject of newspaper notice. 
 
 A few words in regard to the digger wasp above mentioned may 
 be interesting. It is one of our medium-sized species, measuring 
 
 186606°— 22— Bull. 891 3 
 
34 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 about three- fourths of an inch from head to tip and with a wing 
 expanse of about an inch and a fourth. It is subject to considerable 
 variation, however, in size. The main color is black; the wings are 
 dusky with a purplish luster ; the first two segments of the abdomen 
 are similar, but the remaining abdominal segments are reddish 
 brown, the third segment being marked above with two conspicuous 
 transverse yellow spots. The female has comparatively short an- 
 tennae, and those of the male are nearly twice as long. 
 
 In large collections which have been made and in observations 
 the male greatly predominates, females being decidedly rare. The 
 males are also more slender and smaller than the other sex and are 
 provided with strong clasping organs, which perhaps have the power 
 of puncturing the skin. The female is undoubtedly a poisonous 
 stinging form. The cocoon of this species is shown in figure 6, C. 
 
 Our first report of this natural enemy of Cotinis nitkla was re- 
 ceived from Mr. F. W. Barclay, Haverford, Pa., who wrote October 
 12, 1903, and sent numerous specimens of nearly grown larvae as well 
 as cocoons, showing dead beetles, and cocoons of this digger wasp. 
 He stated that the grubs at that time were becoming scarce. He 
 had observed two of these wasps enter holes made by the grubs and 
 remain there for a few minutes. It was the general opinion of the 
 men working on the grounds of the golf links at Haverford, where 
 the grubs were most injurious, that the wasps sting and kill the 
 grubs. If the grubs were dug up after the wasp had entered the 
 holes, the wasp would be found attached to them. He also stated 
 that the wasp killed the grubs, attacking them on the golf greens 
 in the morning. 
 
 We also have record of this species occurring as a parasite of the 
 green June beetle at Harrisburg, Pa., made by the late H. O. Marsh, 
 Bureau of Entomology, about the middle of August, 1906. Numer- 
 ous individuals were observed flying over soil known to be infested 
 by the host larva and the wasps were observed to crawl into the bur- 
 rows made by the host. 
 
 June 6, 1908, Mr. W. A. Kapner, Charlottesville, Va., wrote that 
 he had seen a wasp of this species collected September 21, 1907, 
 carrying a larva of the beetle when taken. Swarms of the wasps 
 were flying in the autumn of 1907. In a later letter, June 12, our cor- 
 respondent stated that the wasp was seen dragging the host larva. 
 No doubt the females of this species are quite capable of doing this 
 work, although it would seem to be unusual for the group to have 
 this habit. It is remarkable in any case, since the wasp is so light 
 as to be seemingly incapable of flying with so large an object as this 
 grub, unless the latter is of small growth, more particularly because 
 the grub is usually full of humus and moisture, making it quite heavy 
 for its bulk. 
 
THE GREEN .TTTNE BEETLE. 35 
 
 There is no doubt that the female wasp often crawls into the bur- 
 rows and deposits her e<j:<»:s on the larva?, while on other occasions she 
 may dra<jj and fly about with small larvae until she finds a hole or 
 makes one herself. It has been stated by certain entomologists that 
 wasps of the family Scoliidae are not known to have the power of 
 buildinjL!: nests or of transporting!; their ])rey to them for their car- 
 nivorous larva% in this respect differing from many other solitary 
 wasps such as the cicada killer {M egastizus \Sphecius\ speciosus 
 Dru.), whose habits arc well known. On tlie other hand, J. B. Smith 
 has written that they burrow into the ground in search of white 
 grubs, in M'hich they lay their eggs and on which their larvae develop. 
 That this habit is true of I>. diihid was proved by additional observa- 
 tions conducted in 1916 at Kampton and Diamond Springs, Va., 
 wdiere the wasp Avas observed entering openings of the burrows. 
 Many dead larva> were in evidence at the openings, indicating that 
 the wasp larva> had fed on them. 
 
 It is worthy of note that the presence of the grubs of this species 
 might have escaped notice on the grounds of the Department of 
 Agriculture w^ere it not for the unusual appearance of the wasp 
 parasites DiscoVm duhki^ whicli Avere noticed first in 1897 and for 
 many years thereafter. During a period of 15 years there was no 
 evidence of attack by the larvae of the June beetle in Iowa Circle, a 
 little more than a mile north of the affected patch in the department 
 grounds.^' Both are heavily manured each spring and the Iowa 
 Circle grass is kept moist by constant use of a hose during the 
 warm season. This may account for the discovery made September 
 10, 1916, that the ground was almost honeycombed with the holes 
 made by the grubs on the latter grounds, a fact which would have 
 entirely escaped notice had not the wasp Discolia dubia drawn at- 
 tention by disappearing entirely in the earth. Upon examination 
 numerous holes were found wherever there w ere heaps of earth, and 
 these were at intervals of no more than an inch. 
 
 AIISCELLANEOUS. 
 
 There are no doubt many other predacious insect enemies of the 
 white grub under consideration but they have not been reported. 
 
 Two individuals of Searltes suhte7^ran£us Fab. were observed in the 
 District of Columbia, May IT, 1914, associated with larvae of Cotinis 
 nifida, which was said to be injurious to iris. 
 
 In the control experiments at Xorfolk, Va., where flowerpots and 
 troughs were used, a carabid or ground-beetle, Cychrus elevatiis Fab., 
 a nocturnal sandy-looking spider, and the northern mole-cricket 
 
 ■•''A parallel case may l>e cited tor the yellow-necked flea-beetle (Disonijcha meUteoUis 
 Say), which was found one year in great abundance at Iowa Circle, in Washington, D. C, 
 and very rarely in the department grounds on the same food plant. 
 
36 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 {Gryllotdlpa horealis Burm.) were ol^served, but it is (juestionable if 
 any of these actually feed on the larvae. 
 
 MacrocheJes maryinafus Ilerm., a mite, according to Harry B. 
 Weiss, has been found attached to the adults of this species. 
 
 A FUNGUS PARASITE. 
 
 Adults of this grub are often found dead and their bodies covered 
 with a fungous growth. In some instances, when a pupal cell Avas 
 opened, the pupa would be found dead, apparently from the effect 
 of some fungous disease. 
 
 In rearing cages maintained by the cereal and forage crop insect 
 investigations the grubs were noted to be attacked by the green mus- 
 cardine fungus {Metan'Mzium anisopUae) . 
 
 The same fungous disease was observed attacking the larvae at 
 Norfolk, Va., during July, 1916." 
 
 From what has been stated in regard to the control of this species 
 by natural enemies, the evidence is that this manner of reducing the 
 numbers of both beetles and grubs, especially the latter, is of the 
 highest importance. In the District of Columbia, and probably in 
 many other localities in similar latitudes, including portions of 
 eastern Pennsylvania, the digger-wasp, Discolia duhla^ has con- 
 trolled this species for several years. In other localities perhaps 
 other predators are largely instrumental in holding the pest to 
 normal numbers; and the numerous bird enemies, especially the 
 crow blackbird, are also very efficient destroyers. It has already been 
 stated that the habit of the larva of coming to the surface of the 
 ground after storms also serves as a means of repression, in that it 
 exposes them to the attacks of agencies of various sorts, including 
 man. Other atmospheric conditions are apparently inactive. 
 
 A BACTERIAL DISEASE. 
 
 A bacterial disease known as Micrococcus nigrofaclens has been 
 recorded from the larva of this species, 96 per cent of the larvae 
 obtained from North Carolina in 1913 showing slight infection. So 
 far as known, however, this disease exercises no appreciable effect 
 on the numbers of the host. 
 
 MAMMAL ENEMIES. 
 
 Many instances have been recorded of the destruction of white 
 grubs by wild mammals, such as foxes, raccoons, gophers, skunks, 
 and chipmunks. The last two mammals mentioned and the opossum 
 have been recorded as eating the grubs of this species. The much- 
 abused mole destroys large numbers of the grubs on laAvns and some- 
 times in gardens, but unfortunately it is difficult to determine which 
 does the more damage to the lawns or gardens, the grubs or the moles. 
 
 " Specific identification by Dr. A. T. Speare, Bureau of Entomology. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 37 
 
 BIRD ENEMIES. 
 
 Of bird enemies one of the most important is the common crow 
 bhvckbird or purple grackle {Qulscalun (juheula). In the case of 
 this bird 75 stomachs were examined and found to contain tlie <j^reen 
 June beetle, and in several instances 7 or 8 were found in a single 
 stomach. The constantly increasing; numbers of this bird on the 
 <!^rounds of the Department of Agriculture where the grubs of tliis 
 species were formerly very abundant has undoubtedly been one of 
 the causes of the insects' decrease. Robins and crowds frequent the 
 same locality and have undoubtedly helped toward the same end. 
 
 Domestic ducks, according to Davis and Luginbill (45, p. 22), 
 have been observed to seek the grubs eagerly, but, as a rule, gather 
 only those which are on or near the surface of the ground. Chickens 
 occasionally follow the plow and destroy these insects; but, so far as 
 we know, domestic fowls are of very little value in the control of 
 this pest. 
 
 During July, 1882, Mr. John D. Wilkins, Selma, Ala., observed 
 that the mocking bird {Minnis pol //(/lottos), the blue jay {('yanocltta 
 crlstata), and cardinal grosbeak {Cardhmlis cai'dmalis) were feed- 
 ing on the beetle of this si^ecies. The kingbird {Tymnnus ti/ratmus) 
 and cardinal grosbeak have been recorded by the Biological Survey 
 as enemies of this species. The robin {Planesticus inigrdtorhis) and 
 the yellow hammer or flicker {('olaptes auratus) have been observed 
 attacking the grubs. Other species of birds which have been found 
 by the Biological Survey to feed on either larvse or adults include 
 the Avoodcock {Philohela minor), broad-winged hawk {Buteo platyp- 
 terus), screech owl {Otns asio), pileated woodpecker {PJiloeotomus 
 pileatus), red-headed woodpecker {Melanerpes evythrocephalus) ^ 
 chuck-will's- widow {Antrostomus cajrolinensh) , nighthawk {Chor- 
 dellcs vlrgimanus) , crow {Corvus Irachyrhynchos), red-winged 
 blackbird {Agclalus phoeniceus), crow blackbird {Quiscalus quis- 
 cula), loggerhead shrike {Lanius ludoviclanus) , catbird {DumeteUa 
 carol /neusis), brown thrasher {Toxoatcnia rufum), and wood thrush 
 ( Hyloclch la mustelina) . 
 
 METHODS OF CONTROL. 
 
 FOR THE BEETliES. 
 
 Remedial measures against the adults of the green June beetle 
 have been tried, usually without success, by entomologists and 
 other practical workers. In 1899 Dr. A. L. Quaintance, of the 
 Bureau of Entomology, when working in the South, used poisoned 
 
38 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 bait sweetened with sugar, but the beetles did not relish it. Others 
 sprinkled poison on ripe fruit as a means of attracting the beetles, 
 also without success. Prof. Henry Oarman (36), Kentucky State 
 zoologist, stated that hand picking for the adults seemed to be the 
 only safe remedy. 
 
 If it were possible to destroy the beetles in larger numbers than 
 has been done heretofore this would mean a great lessening in the 
 abundance of the grubs, which, as we have plainly shown, are even 
 more injurious than the beetles. 
 
 FOR THE GRUBS. 
 
 Numerous remedies which have been practiced successfully against 
 the common white grubs (Phyllophaga) have been reported effective 
 against the Cotinis grub, and again as useless. Years ago, according 
 to Dr. L. O. Howard, an experiment was made which consisted of 
 a modification of the bran-arsenic mash and met with success against 
 this grub in a celery field. 
 
 Poisoned Baits. 
 
 There is little doubt that still better results might be obtained by 
 using a grasshopper remedy, called the Criddle mixture, which may 
 be modified to suit the grub under consideration. It has been used 
 with great success in Manitoba. As originally used it consisted 
 of 1 part of Paris green mixed thoroughly in 60 parts of fresh horse 
 droppings, 2 pounds of salt to half a barrel of mixture being added 
 after being dissolved in water. This is placed in a half barrel and 
 drawn on a cart to the edge of the infested field, or one likely to 
 be infested. The mixture is then scattered broadcast along the edge 
 of the crop, or wherever needed, by means of a trowel or wooden 
 paddle. The grasshoppers are attracted to it and are killed in large 
 numbers by eating the poison. 
 
 A cheaper arsenical is white arsenic (arsenious oxid), used in the 
 same proportion. 
 
 An application of poisoned bran mash was made at Norfolk, Ya., 
 November 18, 1914, in the field and under glass, but examination two 
 days later failed to indicate results. It is believed, however, that if 
 this remedy had been applied in September or October the grubs 
 might have been killed. 
 
 Collecting and Hand Picking. 
 
 It has been shown repeatedly in different localities that after 
 heavy rainfall these grubs are brought to the surface in large num- 
 bers, and it is not difficult to collect them early in the morning when 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 39 
 
 the}' are crawling over sidewalks and on unused "ground. At such 
 times they should be picked up and thrown into bags, barrels, or 
 large baskets and promi)tly burned. Not infrequently they have 
 been swept up from pavements and have received similar treatment. 
 The same result may be obtained by flooding, which causes the grubs 
 to appear at their exit holes in a few minutes. 
 
 Wherever it is possible to flood fields, such as lawns, celery beds, 
 and similar areas, most aft'ected by the grubs of this species, it 
 should prove effective; in fact, one of our correspondents has re- 
 ported that it is the only successful remedy that he has found on 
 golf greens, and it should answer equally well for lawns. 
 
 Mr. Theodore Strohhaecher, of the Louisville Country Club 
 grounds, stated to Mr. Davis that he had picked up as many as 3 
 quarts of grubs from a single putting green after flooding with water. 
 
 Collecting the beetles has been practiced to a considerable extent, 
 and while this method may not be entirely effective, it is a means 
 which should be adopted wherever practicable. Various methods 
 have been adopted in different places. The Louisville Country Club 
 pays the caddies for collecting the beetles, the work being done in the 
 morning. At Hot Springs, Va., the golf club pays the boys so much 
 a quart. Here they also used a trap which Mr. W. T. Bingham 
 described April 30, 1914, as follows: "Wire netting was stretched 
 on a frame 10 feet long and width of the roll (about 3 feet). This 
 frame was set in a trough partly filled with water with a little float- 
 ing kerosene. The beetles strike the netting and fall into the 
 trough and the kerosene finishes them." 
 
 The time of collecting is of the greatest importance because of the 
 habits of the females. They appear at daybreak and settle in the 
 grass shortly after sunrise ; hence, in order to destroy them, collecting 
 must begin early in the morning. Also, collecting should start as 
 soon as the beetles make their appearance in July, before they lay 
 eggs, and should be continued throughout the month. 
 
 On an area of about half an acre at Portsmouth, Va., large num- 
 bers of grubs were picked by hand by following the plow (PI. VIII, 
 A). Some time later an application of kainit was made at the rate 
 of 1,000 pounds to the acre. Less injury by the grub on this particu- 
 lar area was noted by the farmer. Undoubtedly the hand-picking 
 had much to do with this success, but benefit from the kainit, while 
 possible later on, has no direct noticeable benefit in destroying the 
 grubs. 
 
 Carbon Disulphid. 
 
 Carbon disulphid has been used for many years with varying degrees 
 of success for different forms of white grubs and other subterranean 
 insects. Its cost, however, is somewhat prohibitive, and while it 
 
40 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 may be effective on a small scale it is scarcely applicable for large 
 areas. It has been pronounced the most direct remedy or insecticide 
 employed experimentally by the cereal and forage crop insect spe- 
 cialists. 
 
 Since the burrows of this grub are open they are easily reached by 
 the fumigant, the poisonous fumes of which are heavier than air. 
 Carbon disulphid is injurious to grass and to plant life generally 
 when applied direct and it is therefore recommended that a funnel 
 be inserted into the holes made by the larvae and beetles before pour- 
 ing in the required amount of liquid disulphid, in this case about a 
 teaspoonful to each opening. A large copper engine oiler forms an 
 efficient injector for this purpose. 
 
 Caution. — Care should be exercised in the handling and use of 
 carbon disulphid, since it is highly inflammable and the fumes, when 
 mixed with a certain proportion of air, are explosive. There should 
 be no fire of any kind, such as a cigar, near by when handling the 
 liquid. 
 
 Kerosene Emulsion. 
 
 Kerosene emulsion Avas tested in 1888 by Mr. AV. B. Alwood (14), 
 when engaged in the Bureau of Entomology, on the Capitol grounds 
 at Washington, D. C., where the grubs occurred abundantly on lawns. 
 Application at the rate of 1 part of the standard mixture to 15 parts 
 of water was made, and for several da^^s afterwards the ground was 
 kept freely soaked Avith water, with the result that not a single 
 larva was found while the check plat adjoining contained numerous 
 larvae, only a few of which were dead. 
 
 Writing in 1901, Dr.-L. O. Howard (32) stated that in experi- 
 ments by Mr. Lull, formerly of the Bureau of Entomology, kerosene 
 emulsion proved effectiA^e against such grubs as happened to be 
 near the surface, but failed to reach those which were lower. Ex- 
 periments with kerosene emulsion against the grubs of C. nitida 
 conducted by others tally Avith the above observation. 
 
 TESTS AVITH KEROSENE EMULSION. 
 
 Several experiments Avere conducted in the vicinity of Portsmouth, 
 Va., Avith kerosene emulsion applied at the rate of 1 to 5 and 1 to 10 
 to cold-frame sash-growing parsley, using from 1 to 4 gallons of the 
 liquid per sash. Tests Avere also conducted in the field, and in 
 hath instances the liquid was poured into the perforations made by the 
 grubs, which extended from the surface of the soil to 6 to 10 inches 
 below. At the time these tests were made the grubs were from one- 
 half to three-fourths groAvn, and weather conditions Avere such that 
 they worked at the depth mentioned above. It was not surprising, 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 41 
 
 tlierefore, tluit the results o})tiiine(l did not inlly substantiate expec- 
 tations. Even iit that stii*!:e of ^rowtli and a( the depth mentioned, 
 hoAvever, the liquid penetrated to the lar\a% and several j^rubs were 
 found to have come to the surface, tuitied yellow, and perished. It 
 is evident, as a result of these tests, that the success of kerosene 
 emulsion as an insecticide where growing crops are concerned is 
 dependent upon the stage of growth of the larvsp and the depth at 
 which the grubs hai^pen to be at the time of application. When 
 they are young and work relatively near to the surface kerosene 
 emulsion will prove more efficacious than Avhen they are older and 
 farther below the surface. In cold frames particularly, and in other 
 instances where the grubs are known to be present and other methods 
 of control suggested do not seem feasible, kerosene emulsion should 
 be applied at the rate mentioned and be followed by a copious water- 
 ing from a garden hose or sprinkler unless there are heavy rains. 
 
 EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED ELSEWHERE WITH KEROSENE EMULSION. 
 
 Five additional experiments were conducted with kerosene emul- 
 sion with variable results. At Rosslyn, Va., an imperfect emulsion 
 was made on golf links by using a barrel and a half of kerosene 
 mixed with water and passing the oil and soap from one tub to 
 another until an emulsion was supposed to be produced. This killed 
 all the white grubs, but it also destroyed the grass. Still the ex- 
 perimenter was perfectly satisfied with the result. Other corre- 
 spondents had the same experience, as usual not making a perfect 
 emulsion. A correspondent at Saltville, Va., experimented with a 
 combination of kerosene oil and castile soap, according to directions, 
 but since an egg-l)eater was used in agitating the mixture, it was 
 not properly mixed. It was applied on the pJants with an ordinarj^ 
 Avater sprinkler, the grubs were killed, but about 75 per cent of the 
 strawberry plants were injured. 
 
 Another experiment was made with the same imperfect emulsion 
 which was poured nhouf the plants. It killed the grubs irithout 
 injuring the plants, as the leaves did not come in contact with it. 
 
 In experiments performed by Mr. Davis at Louisville, Ky., on 
 golf links 80 per cent of the grubs in the treated area were killed 
 by a single application of kerosene emulsion made at the rate of 
 about 1 gallon to 6 or 8 square feet and afterwards thoroughly washed 
 into the soil by copious sprinkling with w^ater, a remedy which the 
 Bureau of Entomology has recommended for many years for white 
 grubs and similar forms of insects. An important point in the ap- 
 plication of this insecticide is that it should be made as soon as 
 the grubs become conspicuous, usually about the middle of Septem- 
 ber, or at about the time when they begin to crawl about on the sur- 
 face of the ground. 
 
42 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPAETMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 PREPARATION OF KEROSENE EMULSION. 
 
 There are several forms of kerosene emulsion, but that used with 
 fish-oil or soft soap has been found by years of experience to be 
 the best. 
 
 Kerosene-soap emulsion is prepared by combining 2 gallons of 
 kerosene, 2 pounds of fish-oil or other soap, or 1 quart of soft soap, 
 with 1 gallon of water. Laundry soap, if dry, is shaved and dis- 
 solved in boiling water and then poured (away from the fire) while 
 still boiling hot into the kerosene. The mixture is then churned 
 rapidly for from 5 to 10 minutes, pumping the liquid back upon 
 itself by means of a force pump and direct-discharge nozzle throw- 
 ing a strong stream. At the end of this time the mixture will have 
 become of the consistency of thick cream. Properly prepared, an 
 emulsion will keep throughout a season and should be diluted only 
 as needed for use. For most species of insects the staple emulsion 
 should be diluted with from 10 to 20 parts of water. For this species 
 a 10 per cent dilution has been found effective. In the preparation 
 of kerosene emulsion a force pump is a necessity, since if not made 
 according to directions a perfect emulsion is not formed. There is 
 then danger of injury to the plants by the kerosene, as also useless 
 waste of material. 
 
 After the emulsion has been applied it should be followed by a 
 copious application of water from a hose in order that the insecticide 
 may penetrate more deeply into the soil. In the preparation of 
 kerosene emulsion other soaps than those mentioned may be used. 
 
 A¥here unskilled labor is employed, the operators should be care- 
 fully instructed as to the difficulties and intricacies involved in apply- 
 ing the emulsion that it may not be brought into direct contact with 
 the plants, which might thus be seriously injured. Where laborers 
 of the better class are not available.' fish-oil soap and other soap solu- 
 tions containing no kerosene are preferable. 
 
 Trapping Methods for the Grubs. 
 
 Three methods for trapping the green June beetle larvae were used 
 experimentally during the fall of 1914 on the farms of Messrs. Fred 
 and George Richardson, at Portsmouth, Va. : 
 
 (1) By placing boards on the surface of the ground; (2) by set- 
 ting flowerpots in the ground; and (3) by constructing V-shaped 
 troughs in infested fields. 
 
 the BOARD METHOD. 
 
 Boards 12 feet long and 16 inches wide were placed closely to- 
 gether on the surface of the ground in a field infested with grubs 
 
THE GREElSr JUNE BEETLE. 43 
 
 (PI. VIII, B). Early every nioriiiiig the boards were turned over, 
 and the larvae which had worked close to the surface during the 
 night were collected in cans or pails. Several dozen larvse were 
 usually found under every board thus turned, and after several days 
 the boards were shifted to new areas. Since this method necessitates 
 a large amount of hand labor it is somewhat expensive. 
 
 THE FLOWERPOT METHOD. 
 
 A severely infested field Avas selected in which parsley was 
 growing in beds 6 to 7 feet wide and 200 feet long, with the plants 
 in rows 6 inches apart. Three-inch flowerpots with the bottoms 
 stopped with corks were set l)etween the rows of ])ai-sley 2 to 3 feet 
 apart in the rows, with the top of the flowerpot about a half inch 
 below the surface of the ground, the soil being packed around the pot 
 in a sloping fashion (PI. IX, B). 
 
 The habit of the grubs of coming to the surface at night and 
 crawling on their backs proved to be their doom. In passing a 
 flowerpot the larvte invariably fall in, and owing to the smooth sur- 
 face and steepness of the sides they are unable to crawl out. Two 
 to three dozen larvne were usuall}^ caught in one of these small 
 pots. A bed containing approximately 150 pots Avould in the course 
 of several days trap from 2,000 to 3,000 grubs. 
 
 The redeeming feature in the use of this method is that the pots 
 act as a permanent trap, and after a bed has been thoroughly rid of 
 the grub the pots can easily be shifted to other infested fields. More- 
 over, the pots need not be emptied oftener than two or three times 
 a week, or until they become two-thirds filled with grubs. In most 
 instances observed, when larvae are thus confined they destroy each 
 other, thus preventing the pots becoming filled or affording the larvae 
 a nieans of escape. 
 
 In fallow fields or in spaces between beds, larger pots may be 
 used. Experiments were conducted by using T-inch flowerpots in the 
 ground in the same manner as described for the small pots (PI. IX, 
 A). The advantage in the use of the larger pots is that the contents 
 need not be emptied. Sometimes, when rains occur, the pots become 
 filled Avith Avater, Avhich droAvns the larA'se. 
 
 This method is the only one noAv known that can be safely used in 
 saving a crop that is planted in an infested field. Except for the 
 outlay in obtaining the pots and the labor required in setting them 
 in the ground, there is no expense attached to this method. 
 
 THE V-SHAPED TROUGH METHOD. 
 
 Trapping the grubs by constructing V-shaped troughs proved 
 quite successful. (PI. X ; text fig, 7.) Owing to their size they can be 
 
44 
 
 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 used only between beds of growing crops like lettuce, beets, parsley, 
 turnips, celery, or in uncultivated fields. The method of procedure 
 is to use boards 6 to 8 inches wide and of any length desired. These 
 are placed in the ground in the form of a steep V, having the top 
 edges of the board about half an inch below the surface of the 
 ground. The boards can be made to overlap as shown in Plate X. 
 
 The only precaution 
 necessary is to block 
 out any cracks or 
 open places where the 
 larva? are likely to 
 escape. At each end 
 of the trough a keg 
 or bucket is sunk into 
 the ground and the 
 larvffi that fall in the 
 trough usuall}' crawl 
 along the bottom and 
 fall into the keg. 
 
 A trough con- 
 structed through the 
 length of a field 
 serves as a barrier, 
 and grubs coming 
 from either side of 
 the trough are unable 
 to pass without fall- 
 ing in. They are un- 
 able to crawl up the 
 steep sides of the 
 troughs ; moreover, 
 they seem to j)refer 
 to crawl along the 
 bottom, with the re- 
 sult that they eventu- 
 ally fall into the kegs. 
 One of the large 
 troughs thus con- 
 structed captured between 3.000 and 4,000 grubs in a single night. 
 Estimates were made of the number of grubs captured on a 2-acre 
 field containing 12 troughs, each 200 feet long, and within the short 
 period of three weeks more than two 50-gallon barrels of grubs were 
 trapped. Since there are approximately 400 grubs to each quart, 
 and 200 quarts to a r)0-ga]lon barrel, the number of ginibs in a barrel 
 would ))e 80,000, or about 160,000 grubs captured from a 2-acre field. 
 (Fig.T.) 
 
 Fig. 7. — BaiTel of irnilis of green June beetle, estimated 
 to contain 75,000 to 100,000, caught by trapping- with 
 troughs and floweipots. 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate VIII. 
 
 l^^^^^^H^C*:^ -fl^^^^lk 
 
 mmL^j&m^lk 
 
 H^^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 Capturing Grubs of Green June Beetle. 
 
 A, Method of picking up grubs by following a plow; B, boards placed over beds for trapping grubs. 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 PLATE IX. 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 Trapping Grubs of Green June Beetle with Flowerpots. 
 
 A, Field with 7-iiieh pots set about 3 feet apart; B, field in parsley with 3-iiich pots set between 
 rows, and 7-inch pots set in runways between beds. 
 
Bui. 891, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate X. 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 Trapping Grubs of Green June Beetle. 
 
 A, Field set with V-shaped troughs 12 feet apart; B, the simple construction of a trough and 
 keg for reception of captured grubs. 
 
TllK GREEN JUNE P.EETI.E. 45 
 
 The adults of this species observed at Portsmouth, Va., (hiring 
 1915 shoAV a A'erv cousi(U'rable reduction in numbers, undoubtedly (hie 
 to tlie hirp;e number of hirvso which had been captured in the fall 
 of 1914. 
 
 SIMPLE TRAPPINd MKTHODS. 
 
 The grubs have also been successfully captured in cold frames by 
 the use of emi)ty tomato cans. Mr. Trepass experimented on a larger 
 scale on lawns and gardens at (Uen Cove, Long Island, by setting 
 boxes of the size of ordinary flats, about 8 inches deep, just below the 
 surface, making the ground smooth around the boxes. During Sep- 
 tember he caught no less than I-IG gallons, or nearly 2-40,()()() of these 
 insects. 
 
 Gas Lime. 
 
 Gas lime, which can be procured gratis for the expense of hauling, 
 is well worthy of a trial. It should be applied in September or 
 October for most vegetable crops; and for strawberry beds, potatoes, 
 or vegetable crops, as soon as possible after the crop is made. One 
 cauti(m is to be observed, i. e., gas lime is dangerous to plant life; 
 hence, it should be used experimentally on a small scale before em- 
 ploying it in entire fields. 
 
 INEFFECTIVE OR IMPRACTICAL METHODS. 
 
 A few remarks should be added in regard to what should be 
 termed " ineffective methods " — remedies which have been suggested 
 at times but which knowledge of the habits of the species show^ to be 
 unworthy of trial, or which are impractical on account of their cost. 
 
 In 1895, Dr. J. B. Smith (25) claimed that kainit mixed with lime 
 in the proportion of 1 ton of the former to 1,000 bushels of the latter 
 proved fairly successful where tested in some parts of New Jersey. 
 The high price of mineral fertilizers at the present time prohibits 
 their use, otherwise they could be recommended in lieu of manure 
 which, it is well known, serves to attract the female beetles for 
 depositing their eggs. 
 
 Among the direct remedies which have been found most useful 
 against the common white grubs (Phyllophaga et al.) there is 
 scarcely one, with the possible exception of kerosene emulsion and 
 carbon disulphid, which will be found effective against the grubs of 
 this species. 
 
 Plowing. 
 
 Plowing seems inapplicable in the case of these grubs, except pos- 
 sibly in late May or June, when they are in the prepupal stage or have 
 recently pupated and are consequently soft and delicate. The plow- 
 
46 BULLETIN 8?/l, V. R. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 ing should be deep and when possible should be followed by thorough 
 disking. 
 
 Neither spring nor fall ploAving would be practicable when the 
 plants are growing, and at other times the grubs penetrate too deeply, 
 to the depth of 18 to 30 inches, after the crops are gathered, for the 
 plow to reach them. Naturally if the insects are capable of exist- 
 ing in humus, or in land from which crops have just been taken, 
 plowing in summer would be of little value. 
 
 PotrLTRY AND HoGS. 
 
 Poultry of such kinds as chickens, ducks, and turkeys, are useful 
 destroyers of white grubs. Their use for this particular grub, how- 
 ever, would obviously be limited to their following the plow when 
 the grubs are most active. Since the latter are not exposed to any 
 extent except at night, fowls would not be of much value. Swine 
 are also known to be exceedingly fond of white grubs, and when 
 allowed the run of fields infested by Phyllophaga larvae destroy 
 great numbers of them. It is problematical whether it would be 
 possible to pasture hogs in areas infested by the grub of this species 
 with any appreciable effect. 
 
 Everything considered, it would appear that the utility of domestic 
 animals is confined to such times as after rainfall or in connection 
 with flooding. 
 
 Crop Rotation. 
 
 In regard to crop rotation it would be difficult to name a truck crop 
 that could be profitably grown which this grub would not attack. 
 Field and sweet corn, because of the woody nature of their stalks 
 and roots, are not apt to suffer severe injury except when young. 
 Cucurbits are not as a rule seriously affected by the larvae, and in 
 all probability pumpkin, squash, and melons are not so injured as 
 to hinder growing them where these grubs are abundant. Onions 
 are grown in rich land such as these grubs prefer, and as we have no 
 record of injury it is t^uite possible that onions are distasteful to the 
 grubs; the same might be true of pepper. Eggplant and potato, 
 while occasionally attacked, are seldom reported severely injured. 
 
 In general it may be said that late crops, planted in June and after- 
 ward, will not suffer from this grub. All early seedlings, on the 
 other hand, are subject to injury. 
 
 SUMMARY OF CONTROL MEASURES. 
 
 For Beetles. 
 
 Hand methods are the best to employ for capturing the beetles 
 as they occur on fruits. They may be captured in buckets or similar 
 
THE GREEN TUNK BEETLE. 
 
 47 
 
 receptacles containing a little water on which a film of kerosene is 
 floating. A boy passes along the plants and knocks tlie beetles into 
 the bucket. Sprays are impractical. 
 
 FoK Grubs. 
 
 From experiments which were conducted during two seasons in 
 tidewater Virginia against the larvse of the green June beetle, the 
 conclusion points to trapping as the best means of control in that 
 region and probably in most others. 
 
 Tkapping. 
 
 Flowerpots and V-shaped troughs have proved the most success- 
 ful and inexpensive methods. Their simplicity and cheapness are 
 factors in their favor. They also serve as permanent traps until a 
 certain area is cleared of all grubs, and they can afterwards be 
 shifted from one field to another. Where a crop has already been 
 planted, the flowerpot method is the only one that can be safely used. 
 In other situations where a trough can be placed, this method is 
 the most advantageous and inexpensive. 
 
 Kebosene Emulsion. 
 
 Experiments with kerosene emulsion indicate that success can be 
 obtained when the grubs occur within 2 or 3 inches below the surface 
 and when they begin to crawl above ground. In large areas the appli- 
 cation is expensive but in more limited areas, as under sash, good 
 results may be obtained with the emulsion at a strength of 1 to 10, 
 using 3 gallons of liquid to a sash. The cost is approximately 2 or 3 
 cents a sash. There is no injury to foliage if carefully applied; 
 parsley, a delicate plant, has not been harmed in the least. 
 
 Unless directions are carefully followed for the preparation and 
 application and necessary precautions taken, kerosene emulsion is 
 apt to fail. This, however, does not detract from the fact that 
 properly ajjplied it can be used quite successfully. 
 
 Other Remedies. 
 
 Poisoned baits such as have been used successfully against cut- 
 worms and grasshoppers have not been given a thorough test but 
 are worthy of a trial. The same applies to lime and gas lime, because 
 they have proved valuable against the common white grubs. 
 
 Collecting the grubs by mechanical measures is also of value, but, 
 everything ^considered, is not as good as trapping measures which 
 have been thoroughly tested. 
 
48 BULLETIN 891, V. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Carbon disiilphid will kill the insects and has been used successfully 
 by Davis and Luginbill (45, p. 25) on putting greens, but it has 
 not been thoroughly tested on truck farms. The same applies to the 
 rotation of crops. 
 
 It should be remembered that other remedies which are applicable 
 for common white grubs, such as plowing and the utilization of 
 domestic animals as destroyers, are ineffective under ordinary cir- 
 cumstances. 
 
 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 The green June beetle is a common and well-known insect in the 
 eastern United States, from New Jersey and southern Illinois south- 
 ward. It occurs also connnonly on Long Island and in southern 
 Connecticut. 
 
 It prefers a sandy or sandy loam soil, richly incorporated with 
 humus, and for that reason is troublesome in many trucking sections 
 of the country, particularly the sandy coast regions. 
 
 The larvae, or grubs, injure vegetables of many kinds, particularly 
 celery, parsley, lettuce, beets, turnips, carrots, parsnips, collards, 
 sweet corn, and peas and beans in the seedling stage. 
 
 While there is evidence that the larvae injure certain of these 
 plants by severing the roots and young stalks, major injury is due 
 to the upheaval of the soil around the plants, which distuj'bs the 
 root system. Their constant burrowing near the surface in the fields 
 and garden loosens the earth, causing it to dry out, which greatly 
 retards and injures the plants' growth. 
 
 The grubs are the cause of extensive trouble on lawns and golf 
 greens and do injury also to alfalfa, oats, and some other crops, in- 
 cluding ornamental plants. 
 
 The beetles injure fruits of various kinds, especially grapes, 
 peaches, apricots, and figs, and growing ears of corn, and feed also 
 on the sap of trees. 
 
 There is only one generation or brood of this insect a year. 
 
 The beetles occur from the middle of June to September and are 
 to be seen in greatest numbers from the middle of July to the middle 
 of August, these periods varying somewhat according to location and 
 temperature. 
 
 Eggs are deposited from 6 to 8 inches below the surface of the 
 soil and hatch in from 10 to 15 days. After the first molt the larvae 
 feed nearer the surface of the soil. Larvfie become three-fourths 
 grown by late fall, having molted twice. With the approach of 
 cold weather, they go deeper into the ground — 8 to 10, and even 30, 
 inches below the surface — and continue inactive during the winter, 
 except in mild winter localities where the grubs may be active at any 
 time during warm spells. Early in spring, depending on locality. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 49 
 
 the ofrubs a^ain become active until the mi(hlle of May, when the 
 larva makes a substantial cocoon, in which it transfonns to the pupa. 
 The pupal period lasts 15 to 20 days. 
 
 Many natural enemies of the grubs and beetles, such as birds and 
 certain internal insect parasites and predacious insects, materially 
 aid in the reduction of the pest, (^f these, blackbirds, robins, and 
 a large digger wasp are the most effective. 
 
 For the control of the grubs in cultivated fields, trapping with 
 flowerpots or V-shaped troughs are the most successful. Poisoned 
 baits, prepared in the same manner as for cutworms, scattered on 
 lawns and cultivated fields late in the evening, are also valuable. 
 Kerosene emulsion is an excellent remedy. Flooding is of value on 
 golf links and lawns. 
 
 Hand methods are employed for capturing the beetles as they 
 occur on fruits and for the larvae on lawns and golf greens. 
 
 LITERATURE CITED. 
 
 (1) Linnaeus. Caeolus V. 
 
 17.58. SYSTEMA NATUR.^, t. 1, ed. 10. 824 p. Holniire. 
 
 (2) 
 
 1764. MUSEUM LUDOVIC.^ ULRIC.E, INSECTA ET CONCHILIA. 720 p. 
 
 Holmise. 
 
 (3) Walsh, B. D. 
 
 186.5. THE GRUB-WORM. In Colman's Rural World, Dec, 1865. 
 
 (4) and Riley, C. V. 
 
 1869. BEETLES SWARMING AROUND THE LAWN. In Ajiier. EntoDiologist, 
 V. 1, no. 12, p. 246. 
 
 (5) .LeBaron, William. 
 
 1874. fourth annual report on the noxious and beneficial insects 
 OF the state of ILLINOIS. 199 p., iUiis. Springfield, 111. 
 
 (6) Howard, L. O. 
 
 1879. [notes on the larva of the may beetle — lachnosterna fusca.] 
 In Can. Ent., v. 11, p. 200, Oct. ' {Also in Ann. Rept. Ent. Soc. 
 Ontario f(»r the year 1879, p. 35, 1880.) 
 
 (7) 
 
 1882. dorsal locomotion of allorhina nitida. In Amer. Nat., v. 
 16, p. 411. 
 
 (8) Saunders, William. 
 
 1883. INSECTS iN.iURiors TO the fig. In Insects injurious to fruits, 
 p. 424, fig. 440. 
 
 (9) Forbes, S. A. 
 
 1884. thirteenth report of the state entomologist on the noxious 
 
 AND beneficial INSECTS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. 203-|-XXi p. 
 
 XV pi. Springfield, 111. 
 (10) 
 
 1884. SITPLEMENTARY REPORT ON INSECTS AFFECTING THE STR.\WBERRY. 
 
 In Trans. Miss. Valley Hort. Soc. for the year 1884, v. 2, p. 234-258. 
 186606°— 22— Bull. 891 4 
 
50 BULLETIN 891, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTUEE. 
 
 (11) Leng, C. W. 
 
 1884. MisiKLLANEors NOTES. In Bui. Brooklyn Eiit. Soc, v. 7, p. 70-77. 
 
 (12) LiNTNER, J. A. 
 
 1885. THE FiG-EATBK, ALLORHiNA NiTiDA. Jti Cultivator and Couiitry 
 Gentleman, v. 50, p. 575. 
 
 (13) ASHMEAU, W. H. 
 
 1887. REPORT ON INSECTS IN.TITRIOI'S TO GARDEN CROPS IN FLORIDA. Ill 
 
 U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Bui. 14 (old ser.), p. !)-29. 
 
 (14) Alwood, W. B. 
 
 1888. kerosene emulsion as a remedy for white grl'bs. in u. s. 
 Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Insect Life, v. 1, no. 2, p. 48-50. 
 
 (15) Riley, C. V., and Howard. L. O. 
 
 1888. AN unpublished habit of allorhina nitida. In U. S. Dept. 
 Agr., Div. Ent., Insect Life, v. 1, no. 3, p. 88-89. 
 
 (16) Bates, H. W. 
 
 1S8G-1S90. coLEOPTEEA. V. II, lit. 2. Bi( login Centrali Americana. In- 
 secta. 
 
 (17) KiLEV, C. v., and Howard, L. O. 
 
 1889. damage to fruit by the adult of allorhina. In U. S. Dept. 
 Agr., Div. Ent., Insect Life, v. 1, p. 226-227. 
 
 (18) Garman, H. 
 
 1890. some strawberry pests. Ky. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bnl. 31. 27 p. 
 8 figs. 
 
 (19) Association of Economic Entomologists. 
 
 1891. THIRD ANNUAL MEETING. In U. S. Dept. Agi'., Div. Ent., In.sect 
 Life, V. 4, p. 4-73. 
 
 (20) Riley, C. V. 
 
 1893. INJURIOUS insects of MARYLAND. ]\Id. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bui. 23, 
 p. 71-93, 24 figs. 
 
 (21) Alwood, W. B. 
 
 1896. THE WHITE GRUB QTn:sTiON. In Rural New Yorker, v. 55, no. 
 2421, p. 418-419. 
 
 (22) Forbes, S, A. 
 
 1896. insects IN.II'RIOI'S to the seed and root OF INDIAN CORN. 111. 
 
 Agr. Expt. Sta. Bui. 44, p. 209-296, 61 figs. 
 
 (23) Garman, H. 
 
 1896. entomological notes for isvin. In Ky. Agr. Expt. Sta. 8tli 
 Ann. Rpt. 1895, p. xxxvii-lvii. 
 
 (24) Slingerland, M. V. 
 
 1896. more light turned on white grubs. the trail of the " DUNG 
 
 worm." In Rural New Yorker, v. 55, no. 2418, p. 369, flg. 119. 
 
 (25) Smith, .L B. 
 
 1896. report of the entomological department of the new .jersey 
 
 AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT s'tATION, lS!t."). lU N. J. Agr. Expt. Sta. 
 
 Ann. Rept. for 1895, p. 363-526. 
 
 (26) 
 
 1896. LAWN AND GRASS INFESTING iNSECTS.-II. In Garden and Forest, 
 v. 9, no. 457, p. 472-473. 2 figs. 
 
 (27) AVebster, F. M., and Mally, C. W. 
 
 1897. INSECTS OF the year IN OHIO. In Bui. 9 (new ser.), Div. Ent., 
 U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 40-46. 
 
THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE. 51 
 
 (28) Howard, L. O. 
 
 1S98. THK FIG-EATER OK (iKEEN JUNE BEETLE { AJloi'Uina nitido Liiiii.) In 
 U. S. Dept. Afiv., Div. Kni., Rul. 10 (now scr.), p. 20-2G, li.c 6. 
 
 (29) Chittenden. F. H. 
 
 1900. insects and the weather! ohservations during the season 
 OF 1801). In U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Bui. 22 (new ser.), p. 51-(j4. 
 
 (30) Smith, J. B. 
 
 1900. INSECTS OF NEW JERSEY. Supplouu'iit to 27tli Aim. Kept. X. J. 
 Bd. Agr. 1899. 7n5 p., 282 figs. 
 
 (31) Chittenden, F. H. 
 
 1901. some insects initkious to the violet, rose, and other orna- 
 MENTAL PLANTS, r. S. Dept. Agr., Div. lOiit.. lUil. 27. 114 p., 29 
 figs., 4 pi. 
 
 (32) Howard. L. O. 
 
 1901. ineffectiveness of kerosene emulsion against white gri^bs. 
 In V. S. Dept. Agr., Div Eut., Bui. 30 (new ser.), p. 92. 
 
 (33) Morgan, H. A. 
 
 1901. THE DIFFERENTIAL GRASSHOPPER IN THE MISSISSIPPI DELTA — OTHER 
 
 COMMON SPECIES. /» U. S. Dept. Agr., I)iv. Ent., Bui. 30 (new ser.), 
 p. 7-33, 19 figs. 
 
 (34) Garman, H. 
 
 1904. ON AN INJURY TO FRUITS RY INSECTS AND BIRDS. Itl Ky. Agr. 
 
 Expt. Sta. Bui. 116, p. 63-78, 9 figs. 
 
 (35) Forbes, S. A. 
 
 1905. TWENTY-THIRD REPORT Of STATE ENTOMOLOGIST ON THE NOXIOLTS 
 AND BENEFICIAL INSECTS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. 273 + XXXiii p., 
 
 238 figs., 8 pi. 
 
 (36) Carman, H. 
 
 1909. CORN PESTS. Ky. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 145, p. 269-298, 5 figs. 
 
 (37) Blatchley, W. S. 
 
 1910. AN illustrated descriptive catalogue of the COLEOPTERA OR 
 BEETLES (EXCLLTSIVE OF THE RHYNCHOPHORA) KNOWN TO OCCUR IN 
 INDIANA. 1385 p., 590 figs. 
 
 (38) Smith, J. B. 
 
 1910. INSECTS OF NEW JERSEY. //( Auu. Kept. N. .T. state ]Mus., 1909. 
 888 p., 340 figs. 
 
 (39) 
 
 1912. REPORT OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT OF THE NEW JERSEY 
 AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE EXPERIMENT STATION FOR 1911, p. 401-582, 
 
 5 figs. 
 
 (40) Cory, E. N. 
 
 1914. entomological features of the year lul.i, and some work 
 
 I'NDERTAKEN IN CONTROL OF INJURIOUS INSECTS. 7» Kept. I\l(l. State 
 
 Hort. Soc, V. 16 for 1913, p. 168-170. 
 
 (41) Sherman, Franklin, jr. 
 
 1914. INSECT ENEMIES OF CORN. Bul. N. C. Dept. Agv., V. 35, no. 5, 
 whole no. 196. 56 p., 20 figs. 
 
 (42) Slingerland, M. V., and Crosby, C. R. 
 
 1914. MANUAL OF FRUIT INSECTS. 503 p., 395 figS. 
 
 (43) NoRTHRUP, Zae. 
 
 1914. a BACTERIAL DISEASE OF Jl^NE BEETLE LARV^, LocJinOSterna Spp, 
 
 Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta., Tech. Bul. no. 18, 37 p. Part II : Experi- 
 ments with larvae of Allorhina nitida, p. 26-36. 
 
52 BULLETTlSr 891, U, S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 (44) Aldrich, J. M. 
 
 1915. A NEW SABCOPHAGA PARASITIC ON AXLORHINA NITIDA. In Joum. 
 
 Econ. Ent., v. 8, p. 151-152. 
 
 (45) Davis, J. J., and Luginbill, Philip. 
 
 1921. THE GREEN JUNE BEETLE OR FIG EATER. Bul. 242, N. C. Agr. Exp. 
 
 Sta., 35 p., 9 figs. Appendix, 8 p., 4 pi. 
 
 o 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 021 528 291