It seems

queen

bee

miracle if there were a positive reversal of sex. to me also that the prolongation of life in the may not be the direct consequence of the full development of her sex, but may arise from it in a secondary manner— viz., from her exemption from outdoor labour. Workerbees, when confined to the hive during winter, live five or six times as long as in the summer; and it appears, therefore, not improbable that, if proper means were adopted, the lives of fertile workers, which, I believe, never leave home, might be prolonged until they equalled those of queens."

From the same letter I will make one more short quotation. Mr W. says: "A young and prolific queen of the current year, in the full flow of working egg-laying, can scarcely be induced, under any circumstances, to deposit drone-eggs, but year by year she gets to lay them with greater and ever-increasing facility, till in extreme old age she may become incapable of laying any others. To my poor comprehension it seems perfectly impossible to reconcile these facts with your theory, that her eggs are throughout all of one kind, convertible by the workers into either sex."

It

Mr Woodbury's last letter of this correspondence goes deeper into the subject than any of the former ones. grapples with the physiology of the question. The reader, it is believed, will be greatly interested in perusing the following quotation:

"The ovaries of a queen bee are never impregnated, the semen being stored in a distinct vesicle called the spermatheca, a portion of the contents of which is either communicated to, or withheld from, every egg as it passes through the oviduct—and this difference determines the sex. Every egg which received a portion of the contents of the spermatheca becomes a female, either perfect or imperfect; every egg which passes unfecundated can hatch

only into a male. Drone - breeding queens are virgin queens, which can, of course, lay only unfecundated eggs, and whose eggs must therefore always hatch into males. Old queens, when the contents of their spermatheca become exhausted, may, and sometimes do, return to the drone-laying condition of virgins. These are not mere theories, but absolute facts, which have been abundantly demonstrated by anatomical and microscopical investigations. I can speak with perfect certainty on the point, as I happen to be the first Englishman who has been enabled to repeat and verify these investigations.

"I cannot tell why unfecundated ova in bees should always produce males: I only know that it is so."

Mr M. Quinby's book is remarkable for this, that, unlike most others on bees, it is not a mere compilation from various authors. He is an open-eyed bee-keeper of great experience, and a vigorous thinker, who can take nothing for granted. Somewhere in his book he shrewdly remarks that his bees do not behave like those of other people-meaning thereby that his experience is at variance with many writers. Though I cannot say Amen to some things advanced by Mr Quinby, I have great pleasure in stating that his book is the result of his own researches, and is, in my opinion, calculated to remove foolish notions from the minds of those who do not think for themselves.

At page 80 of his 'Mysteries of Bee-Keeping' Mr Quinby says: "I am not anxious to establish a new theory, but to get at facts. If we pretend to understand natural history, it is important that we have it correct; and if we do not understand, say so, and leave it open for further investigation. It is my opinion that we know very little about this point. I wish to induce closer observation, and would recommend no positive decision until all the facts that will apply have been examined. Theories differ

ing materially are advanced by nearly all writers. One says, 'In spring the queen lays about 2000 eggs of males, resumes it in August, but during the interval lays exclusively worker-eggs.' Another writer repeats the same, and states that he has found out that the eggs for the two kinds of bees are germinated separately, and the queen knows when each kind is ready, as well as the workers, &c. Now I beg leave to differ a little from these authors. Either there exists no difference in the eggs germinated, and any or all will produce drones or workers, just as they happen to be deposited and fed; or else the periods of laying drone-eggs are much more frequent than any writer with whom I am acquainted has been willing to allow. Whether these drone-egg theories have been too hastily adopted, the reader can decide: I shall offer a few more facts, somewhat difficult to reconcile with them. The following circumstance would appear to indicate that all the eggs are alike; and if they are laid in drone-cells, the bees give the proper food, and make drones—if in worker-cells, workers, just as they make a queen from a worker-egg when put in a royal cell.

"In a glass hive, one sheet of comb next the glass, and parallel with it, was full size; about three quarters of this sheet was worker-cells, the remainder drone-cells. In about the middle of June 1850, I discovered on this outside sheet the bees preparing it for brood, by cutting off the cells to their proper length. In a day or two after, I saw a few eggs in both worker and drone cells; four or five days afterwards, on opening the door, her majesty' was engaged in depositing eggs in the drone-cells. Nearly every one contained an egg; most of these she examined, but did not use them; six or eight were all that were unoccupied-in each of these she immediately deposited an egg. She continued to search for empty cells, and in

B

doing so she got on the part of the comb containing workercells, where she found a dozen or more empty, in each of which she laid one. The whole time, perhaps thirty minutes. Query, Was her series of drone-eggs exhausted just at this time? If so, it would appear that she was not aware of it, because she examined several drone-cells, after laying the last one there, before leaving that part of the comb, and acted exactly as if she would have used them had they not been preoccupied."

"If food and treatment would create or produce organs of generation in the female, by making an egg destined for a worker into a queen (a fact which all apiarians admit), why not food and treatment make the drone? the difficulty of developing one kind of sexual organs greater than another?"

Is

"Other animals or insects usually produce the sexes promiscuously. As we are ignorant of the causes deciding sex in any case, we must acknowledge mystery to belong to both sides of the question. The stumbling-block of more than two sexes which seems so necessary to make plain, is no greater here than with some species of ants, that have, as we are told, king, queen, soldier, and labourer -four distinct and different-formed bodies, all belonging to one nest, and descended from one mother. Whether they are four distinct kinds of eggs producing them, or the power is given to the worker to develop such as are wanted from one kind, we cannot say. If we make two kinds of eggs only, it helps the matter but little. There is still an anomaly."

"I shall leave this matter for the present, hoping that something conclusive may occur in the course of my experiments or those of others. At present I am inclined to think that the eggs are all alike, but am not fully satisfied."

The reader has in these quotations the opinions of two advanced bee-historians on the question before us. Observation, extending over many years, has not led Mr Quinby and myself to the conclusions arrived at by Mr Woodbury, who considers the evidences and facts which he has adduced quite sufficient to convince any reasonable mind that the eggs of a queen bee are, when laid, of a fixed sex, unalterable in that respect.

Having held the opinion that all the eggs of a queen bee, in proper condition, are of one kind only, and convertible into queens, males, or workers, for so many years, it becomes us to give our reasons for holding to the same opinion still. Supposing the eggs are of different sexes, we are yet to be convinced,

I. That queen bees know what kind they are about to lay. If Mr Woodbury's conclusions are correct, they do know this, and lay male eggs in drone-cells, and female eggs in worker-cells. The reader, of course, will use his own reason in settling this " knotty point" to his own satisfaction. Has a queen bee more power than a bird, or beast, or human being, in the generation of offspring, to determine and fix the gender before her eggs are dropped into cells? Can she will to lay 1000 male eggs to-day, and 1000 female eggs to-morrow? Or has she no more power to destine gender otherwise than may occur in human generation?

If the queen cannot will and fix the sex of eggs before they are laid, do the working bees know any difference between male and female eggs after they are laid? If neither the queen nor workers can distinguish the male from the female eggs-i.e., those that are not fecundated from those that are-how comes it to pass that male eggs are deposited in drone-cells, and female eggs in workercells? Till the knowledge of the difference of male and