Los Angeles daily herald., 1876-04-07
BEE KEEPERS COLUMN.
Parthenogenesis.

In the January NUM- ber of Moon's
Bee World, Mr.. J. w. Howell express
ses some doubt as to the usually ad-
vanced theory regarding the produc-
tion of drones by the queen before inn
pregnasion and says further that he
has come to the conclusion "that the
various writers on Zee culture must
be mistaken in regard to the rearing
of drones, and the whole subject it
seems to me, ought to be rehashed and
COTTON up on more scientific princi-
ples.n AS there are many others who
have misgivings as to the tru tn of
parthenogenetic production, / have
condensed in the following article
some information regarding parthen-
ogenesis gathered at various times
from various sources. It is now fully
thirty years ago that the Rev. DR..
Dyierson, announced in a modest
manner, that ''drone eggs do not re-
quire formulation, but the cooperation
of the drOne is imperatively necessary
for the production of worker BEES"
OF course there was no want of persons
who were ready, with their pens, to
inveigh against such bold attacks up
OH the holy truths of science; but all
that investigated the matter expert
mentally were compelled to acknowI-
edge it's truth; and thus was the sane
ton of science at last obtained and the
fact or "lawn discovered by DIR. Dy-
erson was therefore called partheno-
genesis. But few aspiarians push
their inquiries further than the mar
row limits of the apiary, and but few
know whether this law is restricted to
the bee alone or whether it has wider
dominion in animated nature general
ly. Of all investigators of the subject
Messrs. Won Siebold and Lenhart have
contributed most towards placing the
law upon firm scientific basis. Mr..
Won Siebold has given to the public
the result of his many years labor in
his latest work entitled Regarding !
Parthenogenesis of Autteropodesn
(Leipsic.) This work exhibits con-
scientious and laborious examina-
tion of the subject, marked in the
manner of conducting the same,
by the greatest perspicacity. The
author gives his experiments with
seven different species, and closes
his work with chapter summaris-
ing his conclusions. Early in the con-
troversy regarding the truth of par
thenogenesis, the possibility of the
queen bee being a hermaphrodite was
seriously broached, but v. Sicbold has
fully demonstrated the falsity of this
proposition. He has likewise discov-
cred that some species produce males
and others females /; and that this is
not a matter of chance, but that the
POlistes, Vespd and Nemdtd as well as
the bee produce only males, while the |
ApuS, Artenaa and Limnddia always
produce females. The same holds
true Of various species of hymenoptera
and the terms of Arrenotody and The
lytoklg have been applied to male and
female producing species respectfully.
He has no doubt but that further in
vestigation will prove that partheno-
genesis is no isolated exception to the
law of reproduction, but that it occu-
pies hitherto unthought of range in
animate creation. To such as feel re-
luctant to abandon the belief in the
hitherto universally accepted law or
theory of reproduction, which impera.
lively requires, in all cases, a cooper
alton of sexes to produce an animate
creature, he recalls the words of Aris-
totle, Conservation is more truetwor-
thy than theory and the latter is to
be only then acce pted when it agrees
with the former"
JOHN P. BRUCK.
Arroyo Sico Apiary, Los Angeles
County, California, March %, 1875.