pees Pees pave es, cers oe n s . ” 4 he he ‘ qe hel ae! LZ ASNY GS lz Of Pa Av OQ GY Gi = O44 wy) 9 #f fray s) z= A NA x Z A fr : NS Luss = Sy | = , “i a errs a f | on . a “as Zz 7) z mi ON NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHIINS Sa 1YVYdIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITL T | Y- = ~ ; > nw = it n us wn ul Vg 30 NG) \ = c ‘2 = Of%y.% Kem J = = eS i Bo c KK Hi7 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3ZI1yVvy ~ z - ra a z _@ wo 2 ¢ 0 = oa \ pe xB Je LY fp m) >] es 7\3 > - «ZZ > ce > { = hay Vy -- ws ae : Hiei: 2 ; 2 ON NOILQNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3ZIYVYEIT LIBRARIES = << = see =! < : “Z 2 é : : Z 2 g : g 2 | 2 = =o = Zz 2 > G = > = se = : 2 7) Z 7) Ae ae an Lh 72 LIBRARI ES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS -$ai Uva Pd uJ = lw Fd x ae be ee! x a. 1h Uy ws . 4 AS a = Pip = < = \e = x Wyigg S c: ah. NN a 3 a “We 3 he 2 NG =z ea Pe a Zz og ON NOILALILSNI NWINOSHLINS S31YVYgIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN ma cabin z r z re 2 a = 9 Y, OD a > a > Pod i> = aie = a = a wo ” a dl = = wn < a aaah: . eI INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYE “s ” ise ” z | Jia E 2 < s < = wy ike : S = _2 2 ¢ 4 ok w ” Oo WM a2) G De O po cate © , O = = iS Z, 22 z ie \ be = >’ = > ee = ” rei = ” = ON L NOLLNLILSNI _NVINOSHLINS Sa 1YVYGIt LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN n ap Ps oe 7 z a aa Ww wi bey, : = : : - Vy? < =. 1) ie - <x te — oc ac oe oc c. = fae) a = 4, fe) an ) ody Oo Nwoswsd oo” ae sil = mer z= : Wi. tsi RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uVUs nt m = 3a z= t R | 0 © oe oO G4] “5 = 3) am = = < ay a = 70 2 se oO tee 7 ay ~ Sea viocanins Guill en Z ss a ON NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS SAlYVUaI TL LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN = s ie. aa ee Z z = aa of 5 on) O y ” n 7) @) O 4 a O B < = a = rai > > = oF ae = ae ae ” bs Pd W”? Eee sos \ ep ee | Re Ee a Ye Jar NE swe lee ee Ge ee Nr 2 YE NW 297 2" EM a eS ‘S os se = SS yy = Say >" = : = 7p) : z 7p) 2 Y LLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS S3INVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILI ES LIBRARIES NOILNLILSNI NOILNLILSNI NOILNLILSNI , _e ‘ a ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uvugi7_LIBF SatuvudIT LIBRARIES cc <x EE m a = ¢o = = o S ee) a - 0 — *% xO - ze Ay F 2 : ; = ea D z Z . NLILSNI < IAN ALILSNI_ pod ldWa aI T_LIBRARIES SMITHSON AN _INSTITUTION,, < = os = x w = rie 4 oO aes — > ‘3 ae a Mf * & 2 % a. Ee lio = > = ess = ot ie ; Ww J me (9) < PA YU) a Pid RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILMLILSNI_NVINOSHLIWS sgiuvugi7_+!2 lw Lit SOK LS Lid oe) a 2% a af ASS oF a ' ae pal SAI AES ox <j; me < =I WA < e bi _ oO cal ae = _ Pca eee < S31uYVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION c Zz a Zz a z Oo © = w 2 YY, a c x Wg = 70 = li, 9 5 > SONS “a > = Lob > E 2 AY = z EG fC : j pea ap) = Ww — RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS, Saluvuat| ee d . Ww : 4 1 < 7 a 5 Wy, = ° Mn DE Aas 1? He: AS 2 8 he = a i ae KZ Ee =e ie FOO Sn fe le = = > 7 = >" = NLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYEIT LIBRARIES INSTITUTION a “ne ” z oe z2 We oe eS ” iw Ww —_ ee. Xe Pa a = = ac = fod og ae Cc a fend ies w = oc aa. 5 + aa = ON roa) = co. — oO oO . ~ oO a @ aes Zz i a z= a z - SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31u¥vudI7 LIB = i = a x ey ot, iA = 2) oi oe fe) = : = - “A = 4 ao = ks Wea eS | > Ke > - > “SS - ” om = a aS - a zZ . wo z a ae w NVINOSHLINS S3IYVHYEI1_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOL Zz ” = oe ” z ee 2) ts = Noes = < Ny = a A et fy =f z ia » EA ate = Se, ho FE zZ “fy = Zz = 2 = > SF = > = > Sa wens 2 a SYVWIlY Daw a3 VOLUME 68 Number 1 J Our nal of the MARCH, 1978 WASHINGTON ACADEMY., SCIENCES Issued Quarterly at Washington, D.C. t CONTENTS Features: WALTERI FREEZEE: The First Trans-Atlantic Cable ................. SIMON W. STRAUSS: The General Linear, First-Order Ordinary Differential ese MOU rte. Nel tacos ev oud gO Sone be eS nes os SRS 14 Research Reports: RICHARD H. McCUEN: Design of Detention Structures for Controlling Riot mem Ibnighway SUMACES:. 2222.22. 5.260.085 nee es see ea Mew ne oe 19 G. C. SMITH and R. B. EADS: Field Observations on the Cliff Swallow, Petrochelidon pyrrhonota (Vieillot), and the Swallow Bug, Oeciacus Pale EDITS MEA OANA Oe a) tcdsle cUNS te stays < a's! Ss annie sx pemdys Elele's Soe See al ee 23 RICHARD H. FOOTE: New Genera and Species of Neotropical Tephritidae STS IGTERD 275.61 6 oR SR ae enema cn a Academy Affairs: KELSO B. MORRIS: The Awards Program of the Academy .............. 33 SCSI TISS TUE a Gian Sees Rae oS ae New Affiliate The Potomac Chapter, American Fisheries Society ................... 40 Obituary LOTUS So GUS 87S AgSs ea eR a Se) ee ae ee eee... eee Washington Academy of Sciences EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE President Richard H. Foote President-Elect Mary H. Aldridge Secretary Kelso B. Morris Treasurer Alfred Weissler Members at Large George Abraham Grover C. Sherlin BOARD OF MANAGERS All delegates of affiliated Societies (see facing page) EDITOR Richard H. Foote EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Elizabeth Ostaggi ACADEMY OFFICE 9650 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD. 20014 Telephone: (301) 530-1402 Founded in 1898 The Journal This journal, the official organ of the Washington Aca- demy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, September, and December)—the September issue | contains a directory of the Academy membership. Subscription Rates Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- | ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are |} available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- | vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the | following rates: U.S. and Canada....... $15.00 Foreign: ..; +... cose 16.50 Single Copy Price ...... 5.00 Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is $15.00. Back Issues Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- | tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 | (1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings and Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, | volumes, and sets (Vols. 1-62, 1911-1972) and all cur- | rent issues. i Claims for Missing Numbers Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 | days after date of mailing plus time normally required | for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- | lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a | change in address. Change of Address Address changes should be sent promptly to the Aca- | demy office. Such notification should show both old | and new addresses and zip number. Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. | { i a Rs = en = a i ae DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES Binigsopnical Society Of Washinpton (2). 20.5.0). 0.66 oso ees ole ew ae eroues sein ue ele sees James F. Goff | Pminnepologzical Society Of Washington .......06 uke cee wea ccs cess sun tmeaeeecnecr Jean K. Boek eemricamuciciyrOl WaShingtONy 2.25.0 6 ac. oe bid alee od. 6 pias doveanls Eile ce «Bisa dic William R. Heyer BMC MNEAIESNcIcty Ol WaShINStON | 22... fae coe bse vee bc pemelsnausaeevceuaeovanye David H. Freeman mapoamolorical Society of Washington .......2 0.0.0. cee cb cane ev edecceeeers D. W. S. Sutherland emer OORAP MIC: SOCICLY® 35.009. )e ce. ae susie sod w dlels cease snd Ads ale wise we ea dee ue cones T. Dale Stewart eeeolorieasociety, of Washmegton: . 1... 2.06. flee oe kee eee tee eet eees Marian M. Schnepfe memedesociety- othe Distmctof Columbia 2.2.2.6... ce ea hae els tose a ce cae wea sdesbneens Inactive OT OPER Di, IB TIS IOIRCR TS TOLCTIS NG AA AIS 7 a oP A ae ae OE Sv amen Paul H. Oehser Persmie wES@cietyrol WaShiNBfON 6 ssi wie els oles De cce el ebuedcuabacedbececcceeceaes Conrad B. Link Pie Ome TCAMMEONCSUCTS. Gio. .c 8 suis siete eb Soe wh da wean cs cee bow eeeeed Thomas B. Glazebrook asmmatanmnsociety Of BMpincers: so... 6 ie cc be cae ce cee ew oe deenes sed’ George Abraham Pastituce on Hlectrical and Electronics Engineers -.........6/2...0. 0c et ee ee cee eeeees George Abraham Pratcnieanisociecy of Mechanical EMGINEErs,..... ee ee eee tte vee cemeeeete Michael Chi Meimimenolorical Society of Washington: VP. )o.25. 0 ce. ee ee ON ve dle we aes Robert S. Isenstein eeincMcAnESOCICLY, TOL MICTODIOIOSY 3. ccs ss oes ee eet ee tee ce mem ence ce ece cabs Michael Pelzcar Bacicnnemamentcan Military EMPIMCCLS « a ites sje psenis acs ssecs aa m,oisie siwierslevens,» Oe Gas aioe eee ees H. P. Demuth BEMMchic HmOOGICtVAOl Civil PMOINEEIS 55 we eos We Pe le a be oie ws C8 oak Mee BERN Robert Sorenson Bociciion Expenmental Biology and Médicine §.... 2.22.52. .2. cece eee ee tenes Donald Flick ERIMCHIC AE SO CI IVI Tes ICCA Sealy c. gees ‘eilaia, 20s: Macspatananendtaed ose sane “eiacaeaprey abeaaredee wig ice sa ope. ePsuauace Glen W. Wensch mitermational Association of Dental Reséarch .2.......0....... 0.2 cee ec eee William V. Loebenstein wAmerican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics .............0cccecccesevcceevees George J. Vila Pecan VicteCOlOlOSICAl SOGICLY 5.5... iwee coe sesh a deen beak gene bade tae ce we eedede A. James Wagner MIscelicmMeSOCIetyrOL VWaShiNetOMm ... 3 fo. cela se eke cea ees cee ewe woneds sree deers Robert J. Argauer PRC OMSUICAMSOCICLV) OloAMENCA 5c. 5. 502s ce See ac abe case ngewe wot esweeeee de Delegate not appointed Paine THM INC it SOCICUY, 2s aayecs tus sus oe Ee Ws 6 Gash wise e clk gue Oe Ga eie e wl don't a, oie sbetmie, apeeear ele Dick Duffey RSH ROIBEOOG NECIMOLOSISES, 95. < gcse apse son 6 alos Siege Sis Wa tees Sgee nese see eee ee es as William Sulzbacher “PREG (CSRAITING SICILY ie ee coe ORC mn eon ar Eee arene Inactive BE eats RMN TAS OCIS BV ee ss ese Gros Sica cike leywieeshegane © o/ausieishs: +) dyaqejpgendeayauel@Rraosaun ote is Delegate not appointed IMMMOLONG eH ISLORVNOL SCIONC Ss CIID) a.i.. sas iak seed 3 sadeere soled wage aks pane aeeveye ouevalaieoyere wie Mugen Inactive Panenican Association Of Physics Feachers =...) .. os .vscie ieee Beda is sure olan s eevee hate 6 alee To be appointed ManicaleSGctelyeOleAMeniGa tae 4. 4s: Rak RPh ss hi. oie Poa Soe. arindinweeh deve Lucy B. Hagan minencan Society of Plant PhysiOlogistS.\) . 5.056. be ee ee See Walter Shropshire Sashineton Operations Research Council i iaide. ol os OSA ee ee ee ln uate John G. Honig ESOC TAS OCICLY Ole AMNCMICA . Sciat e rsh oe ee as oa OER Ne Sa BUM viet es, ota a ee eet San Inactive American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical ACME SURG CUMMME TM CUNE CLSin, ein tosses ice is cotta: cot nec aiede a ee oe Stile aie fore neve wrei svnieyaustena ele Carl H. Cotterill MeO EC ADIFONVASTRONOMELS icc ec: oiciact cove Sis see iage cL eR raw wise mie ees eles wwe me otal Benson J. Simon MieGhemMAaliCal ASSOCIALIONUOL AMMETICA |.) cmd socks so ve tec are ne ee bole e, bee geges coe we oe eae ein Syere Patrick Hayes Orel StILUte: Ofg CHEMISES A Ai 6 5 Se 6S. < Sie bo oh 6 wre budpag® san bow b+ Ryepvils oye B is Oye Boe epee Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. eer ESVChOlOPICal ASSOCIATION: ind «cle 'ce os Mb S Gue Aa a homperet oped 6 wins unas os eb ae, lace Bola Spee. « John O’ Hare mica asnineton Pant Nechnical Group ©... 2 2). sale iagl wep eels e)ote eels eainlale vines «oda s Paul G. Campbell Senicnican Ehytopathological Society =... us. 6c. <2 se sib Shae ene bie ald eee oie) 4. Tom van der Zwet Bowler ton General Systems Research! os. cio... adda cee hee elk Meet Ronald W. Manderscheid BAM ACTORS: SOCICDY ere rk a ae ee one oa ee ON Ue DE ala wees Bewhth was H. McIlvaine Parsons EMME CATIONS NEIMESESOCIELYN fot t in te ates tie aie fs etal s SES oa wy oN ale ee a ee as Wied Slaey No delegate Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 1 FEATURES The First Trans-Atlantic Cable | Walter D. Freezee 12 Pershing Ave., Ridgewood, New Jersey ABSTRACT I The first trans-Atlantic cable was successfully laid in 1866. The cable itself and | virtually all the equipment was designed from scratch, and a great deal of pioneering q was done in many technical fields. Much of the development was a learn-by-doing i process, but sound scientific principles were observed throughout. The article describes ! the progress of the project from beginning to completion. It includes as analysis of the | conditions that led to the project and the developments that made it succeed after | many attempts. The completed cable not only bound Britain and America in instant | | communication — it furnished an indispensable foundation for the scientific development || of modern deep-sea cable construction and design. Modern submarine telephone cables to- _day connect important countries through- / out the world under wide oceans and seas and enable persons to talk with each other as easily as if they were in the same town. One cable can carry as many as 1,840 two-way talking circuits, and a new |, cable now planned will increase this to 4000. The wonders of today’s submarine cable accomplishments have been built upon a long background of scientific development dating back many years. |! Many of the cable-laying and design tech- ‘niques go back to the early telegraph > cables of over a century ago. One of those that probably contributed more than any other was the first Atlantic cable, finally successfully laid in 1866. SS 3 | Favorable Conditions of the Times | The idea of spanning the Atlantic first ) developed into a practical application in 1854. Cyrus Field, a successful American business man, was attracted to the idea oa | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 ! through his chance acquaintance with a venturesome but unsuccessful engineer, Fredrick Gisborne. Gisborne had started, but because of financial difficulties, failed to complete a telegraph line through Newfoundland which would connect with existing lines to New York. Field was looking for new ventures on which to use his time and money, and it occurred to him that the telegraph line should not stop at Newfoundland but should con- tinue across the Atlantic to Ireland, the closest part of the British Isles. Telegraph land lines had already been built in great numbers on both sides of the Atlantic, and connected most of the large cities in Europe, Britain, and the United States. Short submarine cables had also been laid between England and Ireland, across the English Channel, the Mediterranean, and the Black Sea. How- ever in each of these cases the waters’ were relatively shallow and distances were short. Largely unexplored were such basic considerations for a trans- atlantic cable as the character of the ocean bottom, the time delay, and reduc- tion of signal strength in long distance cable transmission, and the techniques of laying cables at great ocean depths. Field had been to England a few years before and could see the need for better communication between America and Europe or England. He was impressed with how little America knew about what went on in the other two areas. There were American reporters on the scene, but their reports lost their vitality in trans- mittal by boat. Business between the areas was slow and handicapped for the same reason. Everywhere Field went he found a spirit of optimism, progress, and inno- vation. The railroads, telegraph, mills, and foundries seemed far more advanced than in America. Such geniuses as Farady and Thomson were introducing Britain to the Age of Electricity. New principles of electricity, magnetism, and physics were being discovered. New products such as gutta percha were also being developed. This material could be moulded into various shapes and sizes such as plastic dolls, caps for cabmen, handles for surgical appliances, and tubes for hearing devices. Farady had found gutta percha to be an effective insulation for telegraph wires in cables, and it was starting to be used for several short submarine cables in England and Europe. It was water resist- ant, durable, and pliable, and it could be molded around the conductors in liquid state. After cooling it became hard but not brittle, and its insulation qualities improved in the ocean depths. Field returned to America with a firm conviction of the need for improved com- munication with England and Europe. He could also see that England, with its progress in manufacturing and business management, would be the land to turn to for help in any great project. Exploring the Possibilities After his meeting with Gisborne, Field lost no time in exploring the feasibility of an Atlantic cable. Lieut. Maury, head of the U. S. National Observatory and a leading authority on oceanography, ad- vised Field that recent soundings indi- cated that the ocean bottom of the route between Newfoundland and Ireland was primarily a plateau, deep enough to clear iceburgs and ships, but shallow enough to make a submarine cable feasible. Sam- ples from the ocean floor indicated that it was composed of soft microscopic shells, with no sand or gravel to damage a cable. Professor Morse, a noted American telegraph scientist and inventor, advised Field that telegraph transmission through a long cable such as the trans-Atlantic was entirely feasible, and that commer- cial service could be provided. Two years later Morse proved this, in cooperation with some English scientists, by sending telegraph signals at commercial speeds as fast as 270 per minute through a looped cable network of over 2000 nautical miles in length. Financing the Project With the encouraging reports from Lieut. Maury and Prof. Morse, Field secured the financial assistance of a ven- turesome group of business associates, that was needed to complete the project started by Gisborne. A company was organized and financed to construct the telegraph line in Newfoundland, and thus have a complete telegraph system from New York to the American end of the proposed Atlantic cable. This would cut almost in half the boat time, and thus materially improve communication until the cable was finished. The Newfoundland project included 500 miles of land line on poles, and 90 miles of submarine cable. Because of the rugged terrain and bad weather, it took two years to complete the extension (in 1856). The first submarine cable was lost in a storm due primarily to using a sailing vessel to lay it. These experiences proved that only a steamship should be used in cable laying, and that much im- provement was needed in cable laying methods and machinery. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 The company that completed the New- foundland project was also organized to construct the Atlantic cable. However upon completion of the former, it was clear that the company did not have suf- ficient money to construct the latter. Since the Atlantic cable would terminate in Britain, it was decided to try to raise the needed money in that country. A new company (Atlantic Telegraph) was there- fore organized in England, and the initial | capital of £350,000 (about $1,750,000) was subscribed in that country. There were a number of prominent English scientists and business men who were ‘active or interested in telegraphy, and most of this capital was furnished by them. Several of these became officers | in the new company and took an active part in the Atlantic cable project. Finan- _ cial assistance was also obtained from the British and United States govenments on ' the basis that they would have prior rights | to the use of the cable. The two govern- | ments also agreed to provide the neces- sary ships to lay the cable. _ During the ten years that were required | to bring the project to a successful con- “clusion (1856-1866) the Atlantic Tele- graph Company (or its successors) raised | an additional £700,000 (about $3,500,000) to finance a total of five major cable laying expeditions. In spite of the apparent fail- ures of the early expeditions, the optimis- | tic faith of the company’s officers always led them to approve the continuation of the project, and even to furnish their own 'money to help in the financing. In the final stages of the project the newly formed t Telegraph and Maintenance Company, responsible for manufacturing and laying the cable, showed such faith in the project | that it agreed to accept no payment unless the cable operated satisfactorily. Developments Leading to Success The same optimistic faith displayed by the officers of the company was also shown throughout the project by those in charge of the cable construction. To them the unsuccessful termination of each expedition was not a failure but only } _ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 a temporary setback that would ultimately lead to success. Something was learned from each failure, and they could see the progress that was being made each time. They were confident that they could over- come all difficulties, and they were able to instill this same confidence into those associated with the project. There were many developments and improvements during the period of ten years construction. Different cables were manufactured and laid, setbacks were experienced, and changes were made to correct troubles. During this period only 335 miles of cable were laid in 1857, and 341 miles were laid in the first expedition of 1858 (fig. 9). Cable-laying was sus- pended in each case because of cable breakage, and because no equipment was available to recover the end of the cable from the ocean bottom. In preparation for the second expedi- tion of 1858, the cable payout machinery was completely redesigned by William E. Everett, Chief Engineer of the U. S. Navy. This greatly reduced its size and weight and simplified its construction. Self-releasing brakes were provided, which automatically released when the cable tension reached an unsafe value. Electrical testing and signal transmission was also greatly improved by the inven- tion of Prof. Thomson’s ‘‘marine’’ gal- vanometer of extreme sensitivity. The second expedition was an apparent suc- cess as the entire cable of 2050 miles was laid with only minor difficulties due to several mysterious but temporary electrical interruptions in the cable con- tinuity. However, success was _ short lived. Signals over the cable gradually weakened, and they failed completely a month after the cable had been completed. Group Scientific Research After the cable failure in 1858 there was an extensive study made of the entire cable project by a committee of experts called the ‘‘Joint Scientific Committee.” The committee analyzed all the difficulties that had been experienced and made recommendations for correcting them. Fig. 1. Improved cable (cross section) used in 1865 and 1866 expeditions. Heavy shore end. These included cable specifications, cable manufacturing and laying, and telegraph transmission arrangements. A summary of its report, published in 1863, stated that the 1858 cable failure was due to a number of causes which could and should be corrected before another attempt was made. These in- cluded the following: 1. During storage the cable had not been properly protected from the heat of air and sun, and this had softened and weakened the gutta percha insulation. The committee recommended that the cable be stored in water at all times during manufacture, laying, and intermediate operations. 2. In the early expeditions inadequate stowage on ship allowed the cable to shift during severe storms, so the cable was badly tangled and twisted. This undoubt- edly weakened the insulation and may have caused some of the temporary inter- ruptions. These failures were mainly due to the use of ships not constructed for cable laying. Such ships should be of large capacity, very steady in rough seas, and should have sufficient power to main- tain constant speeds over the range of 4 to 6 knots in all kinds of weather. 3. A careful survey of the ocean bot- tom along the cable route should be made before laying the cable. Irregularities in ocean bottom levels are more important than actual depths in placing the cable so as to provide proper slack. Complete records of the survey would also facilitate any future cable repairs. 4. The conductivity and insulation of the cable conductors should be improved by increasing the size of each strand from No. 22 to No. 18 BWG, and the copper purity should be maintained at no less than 85%. Insulation should be of the latest improved gutta percha, and should be tested under the highest hydraulic pressure attainable. Joints should be tested separately, and should not show a greater leakage than twice that of a cor- responding length of core. The committee concluded its report by | Stating that a well insulated cable, prop- erly protected, of suitable specific gravity, made with care, properly tested under water throughout the project, and laid with the best machinery, could not only be successfully installed, but should give satisfactory service for many years. The report was signed by the following prominent telegraph engineers and scien- tists: Douglas Galton, Cromwell F. Var- ley, Charles Wheatstone, George Saward, Latimer Clark, William Fairbairn, Edwin Clark, and George P. Bidder. The committee’s findings were rather broad and required more specific develop- ment and design. This work was carried out under the direction of Charles T. Bright, a prominent British telegraph engineer, in collaboration with the com- mittee. The result was a cable with three times the copper cross section, tensile strength, and weight. However because of the increased diameter, its weight in water was practically the same as the previous cable. Preparation for laying the improved cable (figs. 1, 2) proceeded more care- fully than in earlier expeditions, and it was 1865 before all was ready. This time the Great Eastern (figs. 3—5) a huge steam ship, five times the size of any other ship afloat, was used to lay the entire cable. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 The ship had the needed cable capacity and power, and needed only the required stowage and payout equipment. The _cable-laying operation worked perfectly, and over 1200 miles of cable were laid. _ However, two serious cable defects were experienced from bits of metal between the conductor and the metal sheath. In each case it was necessary to recover several miles of cable (fig. 6) to find the trouble, and the recovery operation was | slow and cumbersome. In the second case _the cable broke and sank (fig. 7), and the grappling equipment was not strong enough _ to raise the cable. Final Success _ In spite of another failure and the ap- | parent loss of 1200 miles of cable, it was felt that the 1865 expedition contained all || of the elements of success. The cable lay- _ ing operations had worked perfectly, and _it was only in the recovery operations | where improvement was needed. To cor- | rect this condition, both fore and aft re- | covery gear was provided with more | powerful steam engines. This would _avoid moving the cable from stern to i Fig. 2. Improved cable used in 1865 and 1866 expeditions. The seven-strand copper core was covered by four layers of gutta percha, wrapped in tarred hemp, and protected by ten steel wires, each wrapped in impregnated hemp. bow when the recovery operation was started. Improved grappling equipment was also provided that was stronger and more flexible. Sufficient cable was manufactured at Greenwich, England, and the Great Eastern was fitted out for an 1866 expedi- tion. With the improved equipment pro- vided, one cable was laid the entire dis- tance between Ireland and Newfoundland Fig. 3. The Great Eastern, 1860 (courtesy Burndy Library). _ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 Fig. 5. Paying-out machinery, the Great Eastern (courtesy Burndy Library). 8 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 oN Fig. 6. Searching for fault after recovery of cable from bed of the Atlantic, July 31, 1865 (courtesy | Burndy, Library). | without difficulty. The end of the 1200- mile cable laid in 1865 was then recovered, after considerable difficulty due to bad weather, and was extended the remaining distance. Thus two working cables were provided between Ireland and New- foundland. | After suitable testing the first cable was placed in service, to be followed six weeks later by the second cable. Both cables carried increasing message loads, and the ‘benefits to trade and international rela- | tions were soon apparent. Business and ) government problems were solved faster, and people were kept better informed of what was happening in the different coun- | tries. Trading was based on sound infor- ‘mation, and much of the business insta- bility between Europe and America was corrected. The cable was also of great | help in settling the differences between the United States and Britain arising \ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 from the latter’s help given to the South during the Civil War. Important Technological Problems Solved A great deal of basic experimentation and scientific planning went into prepa- ration for the first cable expedition in 1857, and was continued during the life of the project. This included experiments in the fundamental laws of telegraph transmission in long cables, determining the electrical and mechanical require- ments of the cable and terminal equip- ment, electrical tests in manufacture and laying of the cable, and cable laying meth- ods and equipment. Laboratory facilities were elementary and inadequate, and it was frequently a learn-by-doing process. In spite of these handicaps a remarkable amount of progress was made. The experiments in telegraph trans- Fig. 7. Forward deck cleared for final attempt at grappling, Aug. 11, 1865. mission conducted by Dr. E. O. W. White- house, British scientist, indicated that the telegraph signals would be consider- ably retarded through a long cable such as the Atlantic. The time lag between sig- nals would thus seriously impair the read- ability of the dots and dashes of the Morse code. Although not completely under- stood, it was realized that this retardation was related to the capacity and inductance of the cable and was proportional to the cable length. The tests indicated that this reduction in transmission speed and received signal current was much closer to a direct proportion to the cable length, rather than to the square of their ratios as was first believed (Table 1). The use of reversed polarity signals reduced this retardation, because they were opposite to the charge and discharge currents. It was also first thought that sending po- tentials equivalent to about 2000 volts were needed for satisfactory transmis- sion. However, after the failure of the 1858 cable, further tests indicated that 10 this may have weakened the cable insula- tion and that satisfactory transmission was possible with much lower potentials. As aresult of this fundamental research, the terminal equipment was considerably improved during the life of the project. The polarized receiving relay, responding to sending voltages of reversed polarity, was later replaced by the more sensitive ‘‘marine’’ galvanometer, invented by Prof. Thomson (later Lord Kelvin). This greatly increased the speed of telegraph reception and permitted reduced trans- mitting voltages. The ‘‘marine”’ galva- nometer (fig. 8) used a beam of light to magnify the tiny movements of a mirror suspended in the magnetic field of the received signal current. The beam of light was reflected on to a graduated screen where the amplitude of the coded signals could be read. Kelvin later improved his galvanometer with the so-called ‘‘si- phon recorder.’’ This automatically re- corded the coded signals as an undulating line on paper tape and thus eliminated J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 | Table 1.—Transmission Loss in Long 16-Gauge Gutta Percha-Insulated Cable _ Conductors. 1. Transmission Time of the Signal Test No. 1.—Direct Battery Supply Transmit Miles of Ratio of Time in Ratio of Conductor Cum. Dist. Sec. Cum. Time 83 — 08 zat 166 z 14 ees 249 3 36 4.5 498 6 .79 9.87 1,020 {2 14D WES! Test No. 2— Magneto Electric Supply 300 1 .06—.08 = 600 2 iG 38322-0600 900 3 EOS 301223733 | (Note No. 1—Magneto-electric supply provided through induction coils and alternate reversals of supply polarity.) Test No. 3—Effect of Increased Size of Conductors Miles of Transmission Time (Sec.) Each No. of Wires sa a a anc et ina Conductor in Parallel Battery Mag. Elec. 166 1 16 .08 166 y 44 .09 166 3 28 .095 250 1 29 145 250 2 406 185 2. Reduction of Received Signal Current 7 Strength Ratio of Miles of Ratio of of Current Rec’d Conductor Cum. Dist. (grains) Current 0 = 25,000 — 200 os: 10,650 23 400 2.0 3,250 335 600 5 1,400 pes) (Note No. 2—Measurements made with a so-called magneto electrometer, designed to measure the » mechanical force of the signal exerted through an electromagnet.) the need to read the signals as they were time. By use of the Wheatstone bridge sent. Equipment was also later providedfor principle, the receiving relay was made duplexing the telegraph circuit, whereby insensitive to transmitted signals but two messages could be sent at the same __ sensitive to received signals. _ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 11 Se jee pe eee Se ey es c sera a ie }—— = — = = = "EL ae (5) ~ =. b a as ——s Sas =< a TSS ™”~ Fig. 8. Prof. Thomson’s marine galvanometer, consisting of a very small magnet to which was fastened a mirror. The magnet was suspended by a silk filament within a coil through which the signal current was passed. A light source from lamp (a) passed through slot (b) and was reflected from mirror (c) upon the scale (d). As the project developed, complete manufacturing specifications were needed to make sure the cable was as perfect as possible. Based on the research done by the Joint Committee, the manufacturer, under the direction of Mr. Bright, EXPEDITION 1857 1858 (first) 1858 (second) Niagara (American) Aug. 5 Niagara ee 1,03 be Trinity Bay, oP Newfoundland CABLE LAID BY DATES AND SHIPS mid-Atlantic -. June 26 255 mi. . Great Eastern J 1865 [Ho i 2 Geis Valentia, Trinity Bay | July 27 Great Eastern 1,852 mi. July 13 1866 I Valentia, Sept. 7 Great Eastern Lifting Tesland 680 mi. Aug. 12 - Sept. 1 prepared specifications covering the im- portant electrical and mechanical re- quirements of the cable. Seven strands of No. 18 BWG conductors were spe- cified with a carefully controlled cop- per content of at least 85%. Machines for stranding the conductors and the appli- cation of gutta percha by an extrusion process had been developed earlier in the project. During cable manufacture and placing, electrical continuity, insulation, and resistance were measured with the cable immersed in water under pressure. Mechanical breaking tests were also made periodically to insure the proper strength of the cable. An artificial line, invented by C. F. Varley, was used in preliminary cable design. The line was composed of variable resistances, induc- | tances, and condensers, and by its use _ the transmission characteristics of various cable designs could be predicted. Electrical insulation and continuity tests for use during cable laying were developed by Latimer Clark, noted Brit- Niagara A 335 mi. Valentia, Ireland Agamemnon (British) June 27 June 29 July 29 Agamemnon Aug.5 Valentia, 102 Ics Cong Ireland Ireland Fig. 9. Summary of five Atlantic cable expeditions, 1857-1866. 12 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 | ee en nn ES as —_ . ; . — Saas = ish telegraph engineer. These insured that conductor troubles were detected as soon as they developed. Charles Wheat- stone invented a resistance bridge for measuring the conductor resistance, and Varley devised a method of using the bridge to locate conductor troubles. This avoided the effect of fault resistance, thus improving the accuracy of trouble location. It was realized that improvement was badly needed in cable laying and recovery methods to avoid costly cable damage that had been experienced. Therefore Lord Kelvin made a scientific analysis _ of the mechanical forces involved in these operations and their application to the ‘method of operations. The analysis was so complete and accurate that it is still the standard mathematical treatise on the subject. Kelvin showed that when a cable is laid in deep water, at uniform speed, on a level bottom, and without tension |, at the bottom, it moves on an inclined straight line from the water’s edge to the ocean floor. Under these conditions the cable tension at the ship during cable laying is essentially equal to the weight in water per unit length of cable multi- plied by the depth of the water. The cable should therefore be laid with just enough slack to conform to the contour of the ocean floor, so as to avoid residual bot- tom tension during and after laying. In cable recovery, a method of lifting the cable from the ocean floor was described using three ships. Each ship would raise the cable only part way, and the tension would always be less than the breaking strength of the cable. Kelvin’s methods were successfully used in laying the 1865 and 1866 cables, and recovery of the partially laid 1865 cable in 1866. Cable-laying and recovery machinery was also developed, and many improvements were made during the project. These included the use of self- releasing brakes, recovery machinery at _the same location as the payout machinery, and an electric log for automatically re- cording the speed of the ship. The machin- ery for cable laying and recovery was so J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 satisfactory that the design was used for many years on other cable-laying projects. Compared to modern day standards, the methods and equipment used in the first Atlantic cable seem rather elemen- tary. However, the scientific knowledge of submarine cable manufacture and installation that was developed provided a very important foundation for modern day methods and equipment. Although the knowledge was not as complete nor were the phenomena as well understood as they are today, what was available was used in the scientific way. Develop- ment was accelerated under the pressure to complete the project, and failures did occur. However it was recognized that these were a part of the development process, and were to be expected as steps leading to ultimate success. Bibliography —A List of Sources Consulted by the Author ‘The Atlantic Telegraph— Present State and Prog- ress of the Undertaking.’’ R. J. Mann, London, 1857. ‘‘Experimental Investigation of Laws Governing Propagation of Electric Currents in Long Sub- marine Cables.’’ Latimer Clark, London, 1861. ‘‘Report of Joint Committee to Inquire into the Construction of Submarine Cables.’’ Board of Trade, London, 1861-1863. ‘‘The Atlantic Telegraph’? W. H. Russell, Lon- don, 1866. ‘‘The Forces Concerned in Laying and Lifting Deep Sea Cables.’’ William Thomson (Lord Kelvin), London, 1866. ‘‘The Atlantic Telegraph—Description of Laying and Working of 1865-1866 Cables and Re- covery of 1865 Cable.’’ Edward B. Bright, London, 1867. ‘‘The Trans Atlantic Submarine Telegraph.” George Saward, London, 1878. ‘‘One Hundred Years of Submarine Cables.”’ G. R. M. Garrat, His Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, 1950. ‘‘Dynamics and Kinematics of Laying and Recov- ery of Submarine Cables.’’ E. E. Zajac, Bell System Technical Journal, Sept. 1957. ‘‘The Atlantic Cable.’’ Bern Debner, Library, 1959. ‘*The Tooth of Time.’’ Jean Ford Brennan, D. Van Nostrand Co., 1967. ‘‘Cyrus Field—Man of Two Worlds.’ Samuel Carter III, Putnam & Sons, 1968. Burndy 13 The General Linear, First-Order Ordinary Differential Equation Simon W. Strauss Directorate of Science, Director of Science and Technology, HQ Air Force Systems Command, Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland 20334. ABSTRACT A tersely annotated collection of references on types of approaches used in currently available methods to solve the general linear, first-order ordinary differential equation is presented, and another variant on a standard technique is described for obtaining the general solution of this type of equation. In applied mathematics, the most im- portant and frequently occurring dif- ferential equations are linear differential equations (51). This class of equations supplies some of the most frequently used models in all branches of science. Additionally, because any differential equation is linear to a first-order approx- imation, knowledge of the linear theory (already satisfactorily developed) often Suggests how one should study a non- linear problem (11). The present paper is concerned with a special type of linear equation, namely, the general linear, first-order ordinary differential equation. This equation is written in standard (normal) form as d — + Py=Q, dx where P and Q are continuous functions of x over the intervals for which solu- tions are sought. Although this is one of the simplest types of differential equa- tions, its practical importance stems from its applicability to a wide variety of problems (see, for example Betz, Bur- cham and Ewing (6); Buck and Buck (11); Spiegel (65); and Tenenbaum and Pollard (67)). A number of standard techniques and many variations thereof is already available to solve the above type of equation. The objectives of the present paper are to (a) provide a tersely annotated collection of references on (1) 14 types of approaches used in currently available methods to solve equation (1), and (b) describe another variant on a ~ standard technique for obtaining the general solution of equation (1). The sub- stance of the present paper should be of particular interest to the undergraduate student encountering for the first time the rudiments of elementary differential equations in general and equation (1) in particular. Approaches to Existing Methods of Solution Approaches used in existing tech- niques to obtain the general solution of equation (1) range from the very sim- plistic to the more mathematically elegant and include: I. Simply stating the general solution as a formula (17, 37)—a trivial case indeed, II. Direct application of a known posi- tive integrating factor (2, 21, 23, 33, 38, 43, 50, 59, 65, 67), or a minor variation thereof (5, 52, 54, 63, 66, 69), III. Determination of an integrating factor by considering the homogeneous equation (also referred to as the reduced, abridged, associated homogeneous, cor- responding homogeneous, or related homogeneous equation) and its solution (7, 8, 16, 19, 30, 34, 35, 46, 47), IV. Introduction of an unknown inte- grating factor followed by the applica- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 tion of the necessary and sufficient condition for exactness which enables the determination of this factor (14, 26, 28, 62 357/41-,53, 60, 67), V. A variation of IV which considers equation (1) as a special case. of a cate- gory of equations having an integrating factor which is a function of one variable only (6, 8, 26, 39, 40, 46, 65), VI. Another variation of IV which is based on the identification (by the per- spicacious observer) of a_ potentially integrable combination consisting of the derivative of a product of the de- pendent variable and an unknown but determinable function of the independent |. variable (an integrating factor) (3, 4, 9, | 10,11, 13,24, 29, 31, 42, 55, 56, 64, 68, 70), VII. An interesting variation of VI in which the simultaneous consideration of equation (1) and its adjoint equation leads to a directly integrable differential equa- tion which readily yields the desired general solution (25), VIII. The method of Lagrange (gen- erally called the method of variation of parameters or variation of constants) in which the general solution of equation (1) is obtained from the general solution of the corresponding homogeneous equa- tion by allowing the integration constant to vary with the independent variable (that is, by replacing the integration constant in the solution of the homogene- ous equation with an unknown but de- terminable function of the independent variable) (10, 12; 14, 15, 20, 26, 32, 40, 43, 44, 49, 57, 59), and IX. A change in variable approach which assumes the dependent variable to be a product of 2 functions of the independent variable (an assumption possessing the advantage that one of these 2 functions can be made to satisfy ' any convenient condition (58)) (22, 29, — 44, 48, 50, 51, 57, 58, 61, 62). For a rather unique change in variable approach (i.e., Z = Q/P — y) leading to a non-conven- tional, but correct, expression for the general solution of equation (1), see page 2 of the second entry in reference (20). J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 Another Variant On A Standard Technique With the above information as a back- drop, we are now ready to proceed with the second objective of the present paper. In order to perform certain oper- ations in the technique to be described, let us assume that the quotient Q(x)/y(x) is continuous on the interval of inte- gration and y + 0. Equation (1) can now be rewritten in the form d oo ay [P x =a 0a) y y then integrated, and the result ex- pressed as ye! Pdx,—f(Qy)dx — K, (3) where K is an integration constant. Ob- viously, equation (3) does not yet con- stitute a satisfactory solution because it contains a factor having the dependent variable, y, under an integral sign. Taking into consideration properties of exponen- tials suggests a way to complete the solution. Equation (3) is differentiated, yielding d e —f(Q/y)dx eter (ye! Pax) dx d + yelPdx a (e SQMdx) = 0. (4) Rearranging terms and simplifying, we obtain ate (ye! Pax) = ye! Pdx ie | = dx. dx AK, With the conditions imposed above on Q(x)/y(x) and y(x), a a ee gle dx J y(t) y(x) and equation (5) becomes be (ye! Pax) as Qe! Pax, (7) dx Direct integration of equation (7) gives the general solution y =e JPAxIC + fQelPXdx], (8) 15 where C is an integration constant. The restriction y #0, which we had im- posed in a previous section of this paper, can now be removed since equation (8) is valid for all y, C, P(x) and Q(x). Concluding Remarks Although the above derivation is a variant on a standard technique, it has the desirable feature of dealing with equation (1) in its entirety without re- sorting to homogeneous equations, un- known integration factors, or changes in variables. It is always instructive to examine the solution process of funda- mental equations from various perspec- tives (as exemplified by the hundreds of proofs of the well known Pythagorean proposition (theorem) (36)) since this al- lows one to obtain a greater insight and understanding of fundamental concepts. APPENDIX (Consideration of a Nonlinear Differential Equation) Phillips (page 64, reference (S0Q)) dis- cusses a problem in mathematical biol- ogy which gives rise to the differential equation d : sabi + mx = Rx’, (9) dt with initial condition x =a at t = 0, where x is the number of inhabitants in a country who at the end of t years have no ancestors in a specified group (of inhabitants); e—t/100 R= ————. 50(a + b) where a and b are positive constants (for additional details, see Phillips (50)). Equation (9) is a nonlinear differential equation (a special case of the so-called Bernoulli equation). This type of equa- tion is ordinarily solved by first reduc- ing it to a linear differential equation by a change of variable (see, for example, Rainville and Bedient (53)). We shall, however, solve equation (9) by applying the technique used in the present paper for the solution of equa- tion (1). Equation (9) is rewritten in the form b) AEE al ai le acti ti ONG »4 then integrated, and the result expressed as xemte —JRxdt = M, (11) 16 where M is an integration constant. As in the case of equation (3), equation (11) does not yet constitute a satisfactory solution because it contains the de- pendent variable (x in the present case) under an integral sign. Equation (11) is differentiated, yielding e J Rxdt d (xe™) 3 " neM a (eT/RXCh) aes) Rearranging terms and simplifying, we obtain d d ~(xe™) = xem == ee 13 (xem) - | (13) Since . i R(z)x(z)dz = R(t)x(t), (14) equation (13) becomes ye (xem), = Rx2e™ = Rene m ean i>) Replacing m and R with the values given, equation (15) may be written in the di- rectly integrable form t/100 tt —t/50 d(ixet™) _ (Cae (16) (xet/190)2 (a a2 b) Integration of equation (16) followed by evaluation of the integration constant J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 (using the given initial condition x = a at t = 0) gives the desired solution a(a + b) x = ——__—__.. (17) qe—t/100 4 pet/100 Additional cases of nonlinear differen- tial equations will be investigated to de- termine conditions under which the tech- nique used in the present paper can be extended to other differential equations of the nonlinear-type. References Cited (1) Apostol, T. M. Calculus. Volume 1, Blaisdell Publishing Co., New York, 1961. (2) Bak, T. A., and J. Lichtenberg. Mathematics for Scientists. Volume 3; Series, Differen- tial Equations and Complex Functions. W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York, 1967. (3) Bajpai, A. C., I. M. Calus, and J. Hyslop. Ordinary Differential Equations. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., London, 1970. (4) Bateman, H. Differential Equations. Chelsea Publishing Co., New York 1966. (5) Belman, R., and K. L. Cook. Modern Ele- mentary Differential Equations (2nd Ed). Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1971. (6) Betz, H., P. B. Burcham, and G. M. Ewing. Differential Equations with Applications (2nd Ed). Harper and Row, New York, 1964. (7) Birkhoff, G., and G. C. Rota. Ordinary Dif- ferential Equations (2nd Ed.). Blaisdell Pub- lishing Co., Mass. 1969. (8) Boas, M. L. Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York 1966. (9): Boyce, W. E.. and RC: DiPrma. Ele- mentary Differential Equations and Boundary Valve Problems (2nd Ed). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1969. (10) Brookes, C. J., I. G. Betteley, and S. M. Loxston. Mathematics and Statistics. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., London, 1966. (11) Buck, C. R., and E. F. Buck. Introduction to Differential Equations. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1976. (12) Chisholm, J. S. R., and R. M. Morris. Mathematical Methods in Physics. W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 1965. (13) Coddington, E. A. An Introduction to Ordi- nary Differential Equations. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961. (14) Cohen, A. An Elementary Treatise on Dif- ferential Equations. (2nd Ed.), D. C. Heath and Co., New York 1933. (15) Courant, R. Differential and Integral Cal- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 culus (Vol. 2). Interscience, New York, 1936. (16) Curle, N. Applied Differential Equations. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1971. (17) Daniels, F. Mathematical Preparation for Physical Chemistry. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1928. (18) Davis, H. T. Introduction to Nonlinear Dif- ferential and Integral Equations. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1960. (19) Dence, J. B. Mathematical Techniques in Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons, New York, LOTS: (20) Forsyth, A. R. A Treatise on Differential Equations (6 Ed.). Macmillan and Co., Ltd., London, 1951; Solutions of the Examples in a Treatise on Differential Equations, same publisher and date. (21) Gaskell, R. E. Engineering Mathematics. The Dryden Press, New York, 1958. (22) Granville, W. A., P. F. Smith, and W. R. Langley. Elements of Calculus. Ginn and Co., New York, 1946. (23) Greenspan, D. Theory and Solution of Ordinary Differential Equations. The Mac- millan Co., New York, 1960. (24) Hildebrand, F. B. Advanced Calculus for Engineers. Prentice-Hall, New York, 1949. (25) Hochstadt, H. Differential Modern Approach). Holt, Winston, New York, 1964. (26) Ince, E. L. Ordinary Differential Equations. Dover Publications, New York, 1944; Inte- gration of Ordinary Differential Equations (7th Ed.). Oliver and Boyd, London, 1956. (27) Jeffrey, A. Mathematics for Engineers and Scientists. Barnes and Noble, Inc., New York, 1969. (28) Kaplan, W. Ordinary Differential Equations. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1958. (29) Karman, T., and M. A. Biot. Mathematical Methods in Engineering. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1940. (30) Kells, L. M. Elementary Differential Equa- tions (6th Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1965. (31) Kreider, D. L., R. G. Kuller, and D. R. Equations (A Rinehart and Ostberg. Elementary Differential Equa- tions. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass. 1968. (32) Kreyszig, E. Advanced Engineering Mathe- matics (3rd Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1972. (33) Kynch, G. L. Mathematics for the Chemist. Butterworths Scientific Publications, London, 1955. (34) Lambe, C. G., and C. J. Tranter. Differential Equations for Engineers and Scientists. The 17 English Universities Press Ltd., London, 1961. (35) Langer, R. A First Course in Ordinary Differential Equations. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1954. (36) Loomis, E. S. The Pythagorean Proposition. National Council of Teachers of Mathemat- ics, Washington, D. C., 1968. (37) Mackie, R. K., T. M. Shepherd, and C. A. Vincent. Mathematical Methods for Chem- ists. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1972. (38) Margenau, H., and G. V. Murphy. The Mathematics of Physics and Chemistry. D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., New York, 1943. (39) Martin, H. G. Mathematics for Engineering, Technology and Computing Sciences. Pergamon Press, New York, 1970. (40) Martin, W. T., and E. Reissner. Elementary Differential Equations (2nd Ed.). Addison- Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1961. (41) Mellor, J. W. Higher Mathematics for Students of Chemistry and Physics. Dover Publications, New York, 1946. (42) Middlemiss, R. R. Differential and Integral Calculus (2nd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1946. (43) Morris, M., and O. E. Brown. Differential Equations (revised Ed.). Prentice-Hall, Inc., New York, 1945. (44) Murphy, G. M. Ordinary Differential Equa- tions and Their Solutions. D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., Princeton, New Jersey 1960. (45) Murray, D. A. Introductory Course in Dif- ferential Equations (Revised Ed.). Long- mans, Green and Co., New York, 1908 (reprinted 1949). (46) Nelson, A. E., K. W. Folley and M. Coral. Differential Equations. D. C. Heath and Co., Boston, 1952. (47) Nielsen, K. L. Differential Equations (2nd Ed.). Barnes and Nobel, Inc., New York, 1966. (48) Oakley, C. O. Calculus: A Modern Ap- proach. Barnes and Noble, Inc., New York, 1971. (49) Petrovski, I. G. Ordinary Differential Equa- tions (Translated and edited by Silverman, R. A.). Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1966. (50) Phillips, H. B. Differential Equations (3rd Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1951. (51) Pipes, L. A., and L. R. Harvill. Applied Mathematics for Engineers and Physicists 18 (3rd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1970. (52) Rabenstein, A. E. Introduction to Ordinary Differential Equations. Academic Press, New York, 1966. (53) Rainville, E. D., and P. E. Bedient. Ele- mentary Differential Equations (4th Ed.). Macmillan Co., New York, 1969. (54) Randolph, J. R. Calculus and Analytic Geometry. Wadsworth Publishing Co., Be- mont, California, 1961. (55) Reddick, H. Differential Equations (2nd Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1949. (56) Reddick, H. W., and F. H. Miller. Ad- vanced Mathematics for Engineers. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1938. (57) Rektorys, K. (Editor). Survey of Applicable Mathematics. The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1969. (58) Relton, F. E. Applied Differential Equations. Blackie and Son, Ltd., London, 1948. (59) Ritger, P. D., and N. J. Rose. Differential Equations with Applications. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1968. (60) Ross, S. L. Differential Equations. Ginn (A Zerox Corp), Waltham, Mass., 1964. (61) Rubinstein, Z. A Course in Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations. Academic Press, New York, 1969. (62) Sokolnikoff, I. S., and E. S. Sokolnikoff. Higher Mathematics for Engineers and Sci- entists (2nd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1941. (63) Schwarzenberger, R. L. E. Elementary Dif- ferential Equations. Chapman and Hall, Ltd., London, 1969. (64) Spain, B. Ordinary Differential Equations. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Ltd., Lon- don, 1969. (65) Spiegel, M. R. Applied Differential Equa- tions (2nd Ed.). Prentice-Hall, Inc., Engle- wood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1967. (66) Taylor, A. E. Calculus with Analytic Geom- etry. Prentice-Hall, Inc.. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1959. (67) Tenenbaum, M., and H. Pollard. Ordinary Differential Equations. Harper and Row, Publishers, New York, 1963. (68) Thomas, G. B., Jr. Calculus and Analytic Geometry (3rd Ed.). Addison-Wesley Pub- lishing Co., Inc., Reading, Mass., 1960. (69) Woods, F. S. Advanced Calculus. Ginn, New York, 1926. (70) Wylie, C. R., Jr. Advanced Engineering Mathematics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1951. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 } Richard H. McCuen College Park 20742. RESEARCH REPORTS | Design of Detention Structures for Controlling _ Runoff from Highway Surfaces || Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, ABSTRACT Storm water runoff from highways and parking lots causes frequent localized flooding in urban areas. Storm water detention provides a means of minimizing the hydrologic impact of increased highway development and simultaneously reducing the total cost of the drainage system. A hydrologic model was formulated to determine the volume of storage that would be required to limit the peak rate of runoff from highways and parking lots to the discharge that occurred prior to development. A design curve that relates the area under development to the required volume of detention storage is presented for use specifically with highways and parking lots. In most metropolitan areas, streets and parking lots may account for as much as 20% of the total area. Wallace (9) indi- _ cated that in 1968, highways and parking areas represented 17.22% of a 134-square- mile (347 km?) watershed, which includes part of Atlanta, Georgia; the correspond- ing figure for 1949 was 8.62%. An exten- sive land-use sampling analysis of a 132- Square-mile (342 km?) watershed in sub- urban Washington, D. C., showed that, in 1971, 12.83% of the watershed was paved in either streets or parking areas (6). And for smaller subwatersheds in urban areas the percentage may be sig- nificantly greater. Furthermore, the area paved in streets and parking lots may represent over 50% of the total im- pervious area. In many urban areas the peak rate of runoff may be 5 times greater than the peak discharge on a natural nonurbanized watershed having similar physiographic characteristics (e.g., slope). To cope with such increases in runoff rates, the size and capacity of a storm drainage system J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 must be increased significantly. In many areas a portion of the runoff from roof- tops, both residential and commercial, is not connected directly to the storm drain- age system. Since streets and parking lots account for a major portion of the im- pervious area and are usually connected directly to the drainage system, they may be a primary source of increases in peak rates of runoff. Stormwater runoff from highways and parking areas entering directly into small streams may be responsible for increased erosion and degradation of the quality of the water. Many stormwater management prac- tices have been suggested as alternatives for minimizing the hydrologic impact of continued urbanization. Various forms of stormwater detention and/or retention have proven to be both a practical and economically efficient means of reducing peak runoff rates, especially the frequent storms of small volume and small return periods. The objective of on-site storm- water detention is to redistribute the runoff with respect to time such that the 19 peak rates of runoff are below some prescribed standard. The use of temporary ponding in the Fort Campbell (Ky.) storm drainage system reduced the total project cost from an estimated $5,500,000 to $2,000,000 (3). In addition to the cost of the storm drainage system, stormwater detention can reduce downstream flood- ing and channel erosion, which may be a primary cause of stream pollution. Design of Detention Structures The maximum allowable discharge rate and the required volume of storage are the primary variables considered in the design of a detention structure. The maximum allowable discharge rate is usually set equal to the discharge rate that would occur on the site prior to development; a return period is usually selected for the design storm. However, in some instances, the maximum allow- able discharge rate may depend on the discharge capacity of downstream sewer systems or the bankfull flow rate of re- ceiving streams. The time distribution of inflow and the maximum allowable discharge rate is necessary but not sufficient to determine the required storage. The required stor- age will also depend on the configuration of the detention structure. The required volume of storage will be equivalent to the maximum difference between the cumulative distribution of inflow and the cumulative distribution of outflow when the maximum allowable discharge is not exceeded. The inflow to a detention structure may be simulated by routing a design hyetograph over the highway sur- face or parking lot and through the gutter/culvert system that connects the paved surface to the detention structure. The depth-discharge (or volume-dis- charge) relationship of the detention structure must be specified in order to route the inflow distribution through the detention structure. Different design criteria exist for designing detention structures. Design curves may differ because of different hydrologic criteria or because of differ- 20 ences in the models used in their deriva- tion. A model used in the derivation of detention structure design curves should include the following components: (1) a design hyetograph of some preselected frequency and duration, (2) a routing procedure to represent the effect of over- land runoff and gutter flow on the design storm, and (3) a stage-discharge relation- ship, which is controlled by certain deten- tion facility design parameters, for the detention structure. The third component is especially important if the required volume of storage, and thus project cost, is to be minimized. But many models do not include this important component. In some cases the maximum allowable dis- charge may be determined from an empirical prediction equation, such as the rational method or the Burkli-Ziegler formula. In the past, design criteria have been established for use in residential and commercial areas. Such criteria assume that the area under development is com- posed of a variety of land uses, including buildings, streets, and non-impervious surfaces. As such the design criteria may be inadequate for use with land uses that are predominantly transportation oriented. For areas that include only small parcels of pervious surface, such as a major highway and the adjoining right-of-way, the time of concentration will be much shorter than that of a residential development that includes large quantities of pervious surfaces. Thus, the peak discharge from a highway or parking lot after development will be greater than that for a residential area, and thus, a larger volume of detention storage may be required. The design of detention structures requires the determination of the required volume of storage and the maximum allowable release rate. The maximum allowable release rate was assumed herein to be the peak discharge on a natural watershed prior to development. The rational method is used herein to estimate the design peak discharge Q,. An estimate of the time of concentration of the watershed is required for estima- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 tion of Q, with the rational formula. Estimates of the time of concentration T. were computed using a method out- lined by Kent (2). A runoff coefficient of 0.2 was used for determining the peak discharge for the natural watershed. The area was varied over the range shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 1 shows the resulting peak discharge for an undeveloped drainage area. A design hyetograph having a duration of 24 hours and a 10-year return period was formulated. The total volume, in inches, was determined from Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 40 (7). The method by Kent (2), which was de- scribed above, was also used to deter- mine the time of concentration for the developed drainage area. The 10-year rainfall volume for a storm of duration equal to the time of concentration was then obtained from Technical Paper No. 40 (7); this volume was uniformly dis- tributed at the center of the design hyetograph over-a period of time equal to the time of concentration. The volu- metric difference between the 24-hour storm and the storm of duration equal to the time of concentration was dis- tributed over the remainder of the 24- hour period using a cumulative distribu- tion graph. A unit hydrograph approach was used in the model to represent the effect of overland flow routing. A unit hydrograph was determined for the developed drain- age area using a method outlined by Viessman (8). The inflow hydrograph to the detention structure was determined using the convolution integral, which is given in a generalized form by: | X(7)h(t — 7)dr (1) 0 Where X(7) is the design hyetograph, h(t — 7) is the 1-minute unit hydrograph, and 7 is the variable of integration. The discrete form of the above integral was used with the computer program to deter- mine the inflow hydrograph. A mathematical model of a stormwater detention facility (]) was used to deter- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 (=) Zz ° S10 ¢2) ~ = uJ uJ kw oO @o =) o —_ an io) ce C-¢ eS © 2 (=) 0.1 0.1 10 AREA (ACRES) Fig. 1. Allowable release rate. mine the required storage. The model requires values representing the length, width, and side slope of the detention basin, the diameter of the riser pipe, the height of the top of the riser and bottom of the spillway above the bottom of the detention basin, and the cross sectional properties of the emergency spillway. The model also includes an option to simulate the effect of holes in the riser; if this option is selected, input variables are required that describe the number of holes, their diameter and the height of each hole above the bottom of the deten- tion structure. The stage-discharge relationship of the detention structure is represented by an algorithm that describes flow through the performations in the riser, flow through the top of the riser, and flow through the emergency spillway. If the option for flow through holes in the riser is selected, the flow rate through the holes is com- puted by Q; = 0.0436C,;N;D,?H,°° (2) where Q, (cfs) is the flow through the i set of holes, C is a discharge coefficient for orifice flow, N; is the number of holes in the i set, D, is the diameter (inches) of the holes and H, is the effective head (feet) of the holes. 21 STORAGE (10° CUBIC FEET) (é* Oo 5 15 20 10 AREA (ACRES) Fig. 2. Required storage. Flow over the top of the riser was treated as flow over.a sharpcrested weir having a length equal to the circum- ference of the riser pipe. The outflow can be computed by Q a mC,D,H,*? (3) where Q is the flow, cfs, C, is a discharge coefficient, D, is the diameter of the riser, in inches, and H, is the effective head, in feet. If flow in the riser is controlled by the pipe, the discharge from the pipe is given by Q = 0.44 D,7H,°*/ (1.5 + 3.8 L,/D,'33)°> (4) where L, is the length of the pipe in feet. Flow through the emergency spillway is treated as flow over a broadcrested welr: OF Solel (5) where Q is the flow in cfs, b is the width, in feet, of the spillway and H is the effective head, in feet. Thus, the total flow is the sum of the orifice flow, flow over the crest of the riser, and flow through the emergency spillway. The above procedure, which involved the determination of an inflow hydrograph and routing the hydrograph through a detention structure, was used to 22 determine the detention storage re- quired to maintain a flow that did not exceed the flow prior to development. The resulting storage requirements for different areas of development are given in Fig. 2. The relationships shown in Figs. 1 and 2 are designed especially for use with highways and parking lots. Because highways and parking lots do not usually include significant portions of pervious surfaces, the required storage indicated by Fig. 2 will be greater than the storage required for other patterns of land use that include significant amounts of pervious surfaces. Discussion and Conclusions A mathematical model that includes components representing overland runoff from an impervious surface, such as a parking lot or highway, and a detention structure was used in formulating design curves for determining the storage re- quired to minimize the hydrologic impact of highway development. In addition to the reduction in flooding, detention struc- tures will also have a positive effect on water quality. If properly designed, a detention basin can serve as a Settling basin and thus serve to remove dust and particulate matter that is suspended in the runoff from the highway surface or sedi- ment and/or decayed leaves that are in the runoff originating from nght-of-way areas. In many areas the poor quality of runoff from highways and parking lots is respon- sible for a reduction in the efficiency of waste water treatment facilities and deg- radation of water quality in receiving streams. In addition to reducing the problem of localized flooding, the use of stormwater detention as part of a drainage system for highways should result in significant reductions in the cost of drainage systems. Leach and Kittle (3) and Poertner (/0) demonstrated that detention storage can result in significant reductions in the cost of a storm drainage system. Rawls and McCuen (//) provided an equation for estimating the cost of detention storage facilities. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 | References Cited (1) Curtis, D. C. ‘‘A Mathematical Model of a Storm Water Detention Structure.’’ Tech- nical Report, Department of Civil Engineer- ing. University of Maryland, 1974. (2) Kent, K. M. ‘‘A Method for Estimating Volume and Rate of Runoff in Small Water- sheds.’’ Soil Conservation Service, SCS- TP-149, 1968. (3) Leach, L. G., and B. L. Kittle. ‘‘Hydraulic Design of the Fort Campbell Storm Drainage System.’’ Highway Research Record, No. 116, pp. 1-7, 1966. (4) McCuen, R. H. ‘‘The Role of Sensitivity Analysis in Hydrologic Modeling.”’ Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 18, pp. 37—53, 1973. (5) McCuen, R. H. “‘Urban Storm Water Deten- tion: A Regional Approach.’’ Paper pre- sented at the 55th Annual Meeting, Ameri- can Geophysical Union, Washington, D. C., April 8—12, 1974. (6) Ragan, R. M., and E. C. Rebuck. Resource Identification Study for the Anacostia River Basin. Vol. 1, Department of Civil Engineer- ing, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1973. (7) U. S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States. Technical Paper No. 40, May 1961. (8) Viessman, W., Jr. ‘“‘Runoff Estimation for Very Small Drainage Areas.’’ Water Re- sources Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 87-93, 1968. (9) Wallace, J. R. The Effects of Land Use Change on the Hydrology of an Urban Watershed. School of Civil Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, 1971. (J0) Poertner, H. G. ‘“‘Better Storm Drainage Facilities — At Lower Cost.”’ Civil Engineer- ing, pp. 67-70, Oct. 1973. (J1) Rawls, W.J., and R. H. McCuen. *‘A Planning Tool for Economic Evaluation of Alterna- tives for Storm Drainage Facilities.’’ Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Geophysical Union, Washington, DiC -e 1977: Field Observations on the Cliff Swallow, Petrochelidon pytrhonota (Vieillot), and the Swallow Bug, Oeciacus vicarius Horvath G. C. Smith and R. B. Eads Vector-Borne Diseases Division, Bureau of Laboratories, Center for Disease Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, P. O. Box 2087, Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 ABSTRACT Observations are presented on the longevity of swallow bugs, Oeciacus vicarius Horvath, in the prolonged absence of their normal hosts and on the parasites and predators of these bugs. The use of the cliff swallow nests by other birds and mammals is discussed. Studies on known and suspected vec- tors and pathogens were initiated by Vector-Borne Diseases Division person- nel in the Colorado Counties of Morgan and Logan in 1972 in connection with a proposed impoundment of the South Platte River. Of special interest has been the report by Hayes et al. (1977) of the recovery in 1973 of an alphavirus strain J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 serologically related to western encepha- litis (WE). The virus was isolated from a pool of the swallow bug (Oeciacus vi- carius ) from an inactive house sparrow (Passer domesticus) nest built inside a cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) nest under Bijou Bridge, just outside Fort Morgan, Morgan County, Colorado. Hayes et al. (1977) recovered virus from 23 O. vicarius from several swallow nesting sites around Fort Morgan each month from May 1974 through February 1975, and from nestling house sparrows and cliff swallows during the summer months of 1974. These findings suggested the swallow bug as a possible overwintering mechanism for WE virus. Later studies have indicated that the virus strains from the bugs, house spar- row nestlings and cliff swallow nestlings represent 2 viruses, | serologically related to WE (tentatively named Fort Morgan virus), and the other related to Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) (referred to as Biou Bridge virus). Investigations designed to clarify the taxonomic status and natural history of these viruses are continuing. Viral isola- tions have been made more frequently from nestling house sparrows than from nestling cliff swallows, and antibodies to the viruses are more prevalent in adult house sparrows than in adult cliff swal- lows. This presents a rather anomalous situation. O. vicarius normally parasi- tizes cliff swallows, although we have on occasion found the species in considera- ble numbers in barn swallow (Hirundo rustica) and bank swallow (Riparia ri- paria) nests. We know of no record of this bug being recovered from house Sparrow nests unassociated with cliff swallow nests. If these are normal house Sparrow viruses, vectors other than cimi- cids would have to be involved when the sparrows are not nesting within or in the vicinity of swallow nests. O. vicarius seems to be restricted to only a portion of the extensive range of the cliff swallow. It is widely distributed in the United States, although to our knowledge it has not been previously reported from the southeastern region. We have the species from cliff swallow nests from the face of Hartwell Dam located on the Savannah River in northern Georgia, July 12, 1975, coll. T. Monath. In spite of intensive efforts, Usinger (1966) was unable to find O. vicarius in the Southern Hemisphere where the cliff swallows spend the winter. In Colorado, cliff swallows commonly 24 use cliff faces, bridges, and culverts for nesting, with buildings less frequently selected as nesting sites. During our cimi- cid bug collecting in Colorado, we have found house sparrows nesting in cliff swallow nests only under bridges and culverts. There are records, however, in the literature of house sparrows rearing their young in cliff swallow nests on buildings (Grinnell 1937, Herman 1935). It would appear that cliff swallow nests on cliff faces are not especially attrac- tive nesting sites for house sparrows, although on one occasion one of us (GS) found house sparrow nests in such a situ- ation in Bon Homme County, South Dakota on June 21, 1977. The life cycle of O. vicarius is adjusted to long periods of fasting. In northern Colorado, cliff swallows begin returning in late April and early May and depart in September. Thus, the swallows are only in the area 5S months and considerably less than half of this time is spent in the nesting cycle, when adult and young birds are in the nests for appreciable periods of time. In this connection, cliff swallows probably produce single annual broods, with only an occasional second brood. In contrast, the house sparrow rears multibroods. The cliff swallows begin nesting activities at widely spaced inter- vals, with the consequence that in early July the nests may contain all stages— from eggs to almost fully feathered fledg- lings. Swallow bugs have been observed to survive in the nest for 2 years in the ab- sence of the swallows. A colony of cliff swallows consisting of some 300 nests under a concrete culvert in Lory State Park, some 10 km west of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, has been under observation for several years. These nests were occupied by cliff swal- lows during the summer of 1975. The nests were heavily infested with both nymphal and adult bugs during the winter of 1975— 76. Winter-collected bugs fed readily in the laboratory on adult pigeons, wet chicks, mice and people, but laid negligi- ble numbers of eggs, even when cold- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 treated in an attempt to break the ap- parent diapause. In the spring of 1976, the bugs were observed massed just inside the nest entrances, awaiting the return of the swallows. Bugs collected at this time were fed in the laboratory on wet chicks, nestling house sparrows and adult cliff sparrows. All O. vicarius females laid numerous eggs, although more were pro- duced from bugs fed on cliff swallows. Swallows did not use the nests in the Lory Park culvert during the summer of 1976. There have been reports of swal- lows alternating the use of nesting sites (Grinnell et al. 1930, Mayhew 1958). { Our observations, however, have been that cliff swallows continue to use an established nesting site each year, except for some specific reason. In this case, the small stream that usually provides water through the culvert was dry, and mud for nest repair and building was not available. Several collections made during the winter of 1976-77 demonstrated the continuing presence of live bugs in the nests. In late April of 1977, bugs were not present in sufficient numbers to mass at the nest entrances as they had done the previous spring. However, 25 live nymphal and adult bugs were taken from 2 nests. A third swallow nest in which a well-formed grass nest had been built contained several hundred cimicids in all Stages of development. It was evident that a pair of birds other than swallows had used the nest the previous summer, providing an opportunity for the cimicids to feed. The swallows also passed up the Lory Park nesting site during the summer of 1977, even though water ran through the culvert in April and the first 2 weeks in May. Thus, the cliff swallow bugs in this colony sustained themselves in large - numbers through the winter of 1975-76 and the summer of 1976 and in fair num- bers during the winter of 1976-77 and the summer of 1977, in the absence of their regular hosts. This is not to say that the bugs might not have had an opportunity to take blood J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 meals. No house sparrows have been observed in this nesting site during sum- mer or winter. However, on May 12, 1977, we found a pair of western blue- birds, Sialia mexicana, rearing a brood of young within one of the swallow nests; 2 other swallow nests containing well formed grass nests of the type constructed by bluebirds were seen, but they con- tained no eggs or young birds. Considerable activity of other bird species in cliff swallow nesting sites in all seasons has been documented, espe- cially in natural nesting sites on cliff faces. Sooter et al. (1954) reported use of cliff swallow nests as winter shelter in Larimer County, Colorado, on cliff faces by the black rosy finch (Leu- costicte atrata), the gray-crowned rosy finch (L. tephrocotis) and the canyon wren (Catherpes mexicanus), and for summer nesting by a pair of Say’s phoebe (Sayornis saya). Bailey and Niedrach (1965) indicate that both gray-crowned and brown-capped rosy finches (L. aus- tralis) were seen in numbers in and about cliff swallow nests near Ault, Weld County, Colorado, February 13, 1960. We have observed 3 species of birds nesting in association with 2 large cliff swallow colonies on cliff faces in Eden Valley, some 16 km west of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The swal- lows did not return to nest repair and building until the middle of May in 1977. For several weeks prior to this, rock doves (Columba livia) were nesting on ledges in the immediate vicinity of the swallow nests; starlings (Sturnus vul- garis) were nesting in cracks and crevas- ses in the rocks and 2 pair of canyon wrens built grass nests within swallow nests for rearing their young. Of interest has been the comparatively harmonious relationships which seem to exist between cliff swallows and other species of birds utilizing their nests. Win- ter usage of the nests as shelter would present no problems as the swallows are not there. However, in the Fort Morgan study area, house sparrows may occupy one-half or more of the nests in a swallow nesting site. This is a year-round occu- 25 pancy, with the nests also used for winter shelter. The house sparrows have a brood of young about ready to fly by the time the swallows return from the south. When the swallows reappear, they simply repair old nests not being used by the sparrows and build new ones sufficient for their needs. The sparrows have not been ob- served to interfere with the brooding activities of the swallows. However, it is entirely possible that they do evict the swallows, because sparrow nestlings in newly constructed nests have been com- monly observed. The use of cliff swallow nests by other animal species is not confined to birds. In August of 1975, 2 juvenile deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus, were discov- ered in a grass nest within a cliff swallow nest on a cliff face at the Weaver ranch near Fort Collins, Colorado. The mud nests are finite, being subject to action of the elements when on exposed cliff faces. Nests under bridges frequently are loosened and fall as a result of continu- ing traffic vibrations. Without annual re- pair of old nests and the construction of new ones by returning swallows, the crumbling nests would, in a few years, be unsuitable for use by other species of birds either in the summer or winter. Conse- quently, the long-term maintenance of large populations of bugs depends on the regular return of cliff swallows. High population densities of the swal- low bugs commonly encountered attest to the fact that natural enemies exercise little control of the species. Spiders are commonly observed in and around the nests, evidently preying on the bugs. No systematic effort has been made as yet to collect spiders from the nests for iden- tification. The following have been taken from cliff swallow nests in Larimer County, Colorado, in 1976-77: Steatoda borealis , family Theridiidae; Herpyllus propinquus , family Gnaphosidae; Nuctenea sp. (juven- iles), family Araneidae; Dictyna sp. (females and juveniles), family Dic- tynidae; and Mallos niveus, family Dic- tynidae. Four specimens of the masked bed bug 26 hunter (Reduvius personatus), 2 early and 2 late instar nymphs, were discovered in a cliff swallow nest September 27, 1976, in the Lory State Park nesting site (Larimer County, Colorado). Two addi- tional nymphs were taken from cliff swal- low nests under a bridge June 6, 1977, in Weld County, Colorado. It seems unlikely that parasitic wasps would overlook the concentrated mass of swallow bugs. However, the only spe- cies we have taken from the swallow nests has been Nasonia vitripennis, a parasite of the blow fly, Protocalliphora hirundo, which attacks the nestling swal- lows. Acknowledgments We thank Norman I. Platnick, Ameri- can Museum of Natural History, for determining the spiders; Jon L. Herring, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, U.S. Department of Agriculture, for identify- ing the Reduvius; C. W. Sabrosky of the same Laboratory for the blow fly determination; and H. Evans, Colorado State University Zoology and Entomology Department, for specifically naming the wasp. References Cited Bailey, A. M., and R. J. Niedrach. 1965. Birds of Colorado. Denver Mus. Nat. Hist., Denver, Colorado. 895 pp. Grinnell, J., J. S. Dixon, and J. M. Linsdale. 1930. Vertebrate natural history of a section of northern California through the Lassen Peak region. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 35: 1—594. Grinnell, J. 1937. The swallows at the Life Sciences building. Condor 39: 206-210. Hayes, R. O., D. B. Francy, J. S. Lazuick, G. C. Smith, and E. P. J. Gibbs. 1977. Cliff swallow bug (Oeciacus vicarius Hovath) role in the natural cycle of a western encephalitis-like alphavirus. J. Med. Ent. 14(3): 257-262. Herman, C. M. 1935. Bluebirds and English spar- rows in a cliff swallow colony. Bird-Banding 6: 137. Mayhew, W. W. 1958. The biology of the cliff swallow in California. Condor 60: 7—37. Sooter, C. A., E. E. Bennington, and L. B. Daniels. 1954. Multiple use of cliff swallow nests by bird species. Condor 56: 309. Usinger, R. L. 1966. Monograph of Cimicidae. The Thomas Say Foundation. Vol. VII. En- tomol. Soc. Amer. College Park, Md. 585 pp. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 New Genera and Species of Neotropical Tephritidae (Diptera) Richard H. Foote Systematic Entomology Laboratory, IIBIII, Agric. Res. Serv., USDA (mail address: %U.S. National Museum NHB 168, Washington, D. C. 20560). ABSTRACT The following Neotropical taxa in the dipterous family Tephritidae are described: Lezca, n. gen., type-species L. tau, n. sp.; Laksyetsa, n. gen., type-species L. trinotata, n. sp.; Caenoriata, n. gen., type-species Acrotaenia pertinax Bates; and Neotaracia, n. gen., type-species Acrotaenia imox Bates. Comments on the relationships of these taxa to others are presented. The following taxa of Mexican and Neotropical Tephritidae are described to make the names available for inclusion in a forthcoming key to the genera of Tephritidae occurring south of Texas and Florida. Genus Lezca, new genus Type-species. —Lezca tau Foote, new species. Diagnosis. —In lateral view, head higher than long, frons and face meeting at an angle of about 135°; frons haired; 3 pairs lower fronto-orbitals; 2 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, ocellars poorly de- veloped; face shining, spotted, with deep antennal grooves and broadly rounded carina; antenna dis- tinctly longer than face, 3rd segment quite narrow, arista bare; 1 pair dorsocentrals, situated between transverse lines through the anterior supra-alars and postalars; acrostichals present; | pair anepisternals; 2 pair scutellars; wing hyaline with a prominent transverse two-toned brown band and other dark marks; vein r-m closer to vein dm-cu than length of former; vein R2 + 3 slightly sinuate; vein R4 + 5 haired; posterior extension of basal cubital cell long. Discussion. —The genus Lezca rather closely resembles 3 other trypetine genera—Cryptodacus Hendel (Hendel 1914a, b), Cryptoplagia Aczél (Aczél 1951), and Haywardina Aczél (Aczél 1951). These 4 distinctive Neotropical genera feature a distally narrowed 2nd cell C, at least 1 prominent dark trans- verse band from the costa at or near the stigma to the posterior wing margin that may or may not cover both crossveins, a J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 dark area covering the basal cubital cell and a region anterior to it, and usually an apical infuscation. From closely related genera, Lezca can be distinguished by the features shown in Table 1. The wing venation and pattern also afford dis- tinguishing characters: veins r-m and dm-cu in Cryptodacus and Cryptoplagia are far removed from each other and are covered by separate transverse brown bands, while those of Lezca and Hay- wardina are situated very close together and are covered by a single brown band. The latter 2 genera differ from each other in that the transverse band of Hay- wardina is very narrow, and a 2nd partial transverse band is completely lacking. All 4 of these genera belong to the tribe Trypetini of the subfamily Trypetinae. The name Lezca, gender hereby desig- nated feminine, is an anagram of the name Aczél. Martin L. Aczél labored effec- tively to bring order out of chaos among the Neotropical genera of the subfamily Trypetinae. Lezca tau, new species (Figs? 1,274)" Head (fig. 1).— About 1.3 times as high as long; frons yellow, rather narrow, proportion of greatest width to length from ptilinal fissure to anterior corner of ocellar triangle 1.0:1.8, frontal setulae very slender, short, sparse; ocellar triangle black, ocellars only about as long as, but more slender than, posterior upper fronto-orbitals; 3rd antennal segment 4.5—5.0 times as long as greatest width, 27 Table I.— Comparison of taxonomic characters of trypetine genera. Lezca Haywardina Cryptodacus Cryptoplagia Face and frons mmeting in angle of 135° angle of 13S° curve curve Face surface shining matte matte matte Facial spots present absent absent absent Facial carina present present absent absent Apex 3rd antennal segment rounded pointed rounded pointed Antenna longer than face yes no no no Ocellar bristles short long long long Gena 14 eye height yes shorter shorter shorter Location of dorso-centrals between asa at asa at pa at asa and pa Vein r-m beyond mid beyond mid beyond mid discal at mid discal discal cell discal cell cell cell Vem) R25-3 straight sinuate straight straight Vein R4 + 5 haired haired haired bare slightly wider near apex than at base, base of arista yellow, remainder black; face in profile slightly swollen at middle, 1 pair large, rounded dark spots near anterior oral margin, antennal grooves deep along each side of rounded facial carina; gena with elongated black spot immediately ventrad of eye, postgenal setulae black; palpi expanded. Thorax.—Scutum orange with a large black inverted triangle between and touching humeri, its apex extending posteriorly along 4 to 4 length of scutum, or a longitudinal line in this position; a rounded black spot at base of prescutellar bristle and 2 narrower dark parallel postsutural fasciae, the supra-alar bristle in the ectal fascia and the postalar between them; a distinct median whitish triangle occupying posterior half of scutum; scuto-scutellar suture with a rather wide black band lying partly on the scutum, partly along anterior margin of scutellum, otherwise scutellum entirely light yellow; postscutellum black to yellow with longitudinal dark median line; humerus yellow; pleuron black but for contrasting yellow markings as follows: a wide band along dorsal margin of katepisternum; a diamond-shaped area along pleural suture, including wing base posteriorly, the top half of the diamond extending dorsally to cover visible portion of transverse suture; a small area surrounding base of halter. Legs with basal % of fore femur markedly expanded, setae in posteroventral row slender, shorter than width of femur at insertions, dorsal femoral setae scattered; basal half of mid femur infuscated posteriorly and ventrally; mid tibia yellow, lacking a row of outstanding setae; basal % of hind femur darkly infuscated around entire circumference; hind tibialess darkly but more extensively infuscated, with a row of heavy antero- dorsal setae, each about %4 as long as diameter of tibia, extending full length of tibia. Wing (fig. 4) rather narrow, about 7 mm long, proportion of width to length 1.0:2.5; disk hyaline, with the following dark areas: a triangular area in posterior 12 of cell M extending posteriorly into basal part of CulA and 28 ending about 4 the distance between base and apex of vein A; a wide brown fascia with narrow darker borders extending from cell 1st C through cell 2nd C, subcostal cell, bases of cells R1 and R3, apical 4 of cell R and extreme base of cell RS, through apical Y of discal cell to hind margin; a much lighter brown area at apices of cells R3 and RS, and a faint dark area between the latter and the broad 2-toned brown band; vein r-m at a definite angle to vein dm-cu, these 2 veins much closer together along vein M than length of vein r-m, both crossveins covered by the dark brown margin of the wide transverse band; posterior extension of basal cubital cell about 4 times as long as its width at base. Abdomen (fig. 2).— Yellow, a broad brown band covering all but extreme anterior and posterior borders and a narrow central area of tergite III, and 2 narrower mesal bands separated by a yellow area as wide as one of the bands, on each of the following tergites; in addition, dark spots at the extreme lateral margins of tergites IV and V and large paired dark spots laterally on tergite VI and sternite VI in the female; ovipositor sheath orange yellow, about as long dorsally as tergite VI. Epandrium rounded dorsally with rather long, thickly set setae; surstyli long, slender, only very slightly curved; glans nearly rectangular in outline, the basiphallus relatively short. Type-series.—Holotype female, Cuernavaca, Mexico, 13-III-57, trampa cebo, O. Hernandez, coll. (USNM Type No. 75865); allotype male, same data; paratype (head and abdomen missing), same data, wing slide No. 15 (USNM). The species is named for the unusual dark ‘‘T’’-shaped mark on the abdominal dorsum. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 Genus Laksyetsa, new genus Type-species. —Laksyetsa_trinotata Foote, new species. Diagnosis. —In profile, head higher than long, frons and face meeting at an angle of about 120°; face shining, rather deep grooves beneath antennae but in no sense is a distinct carina present, spotted; frons haired, wider than long; 3 pairs lower fronto- orbitals, the anterior pair white; 2-3 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, all white; postoculars mixed black and white; parafrontal spot present; antenna as long as face, 3rd segment triangular but not distinctly pointed apically, arista bare; 1 pair dorsocentrals, situated in a transverse line through supra-alars; 3 pairs anepisternals; 1 pair katepisternals; 2 pairs anepimerals; 2 pairs scutellars, equal in length; wing essentially dark with numerous light spots; bulla present, vein R2 + 3 bent forward around it; - vein r-m apicad of middle of discal cell; vein R4 + 5 bare or haired only at base; posterior exten- sion of basal cubital cell nearly 2 times as long as its width at base. Discussion. —This genus comes out in a key to Neotropical genera now in preparation with Para- cantha Coquillett and Neorhabdochaeta Malloch in a unique group of genera within the tribe Ditrichini having a number of characteristics in common. The heads of species of all 3 genera are quite similar in having a wide frons, large lunule, antennae widely separated at their bases, notably projecting oral margin, the face with a spotted, shining surface, mixed black and white postoculars, the anterior lower fronto-orbital light colored in contrast to the 2 dark posterior pairs, the upper fronto-orbitals all light colored or whitish, the scutum beset with setulae such that 6-8 rounded bare spots remain on the surface in barely dis- tinguishable patterns, and the fore femora with mixed dark and light bristles dorsally and ventrally. From Paracantha and Neorhabdo- chaeta, Laksyetsa may be distinguished by the wing pattern, which does not possess the characteristic dark rays from the center of the disk to the anterior, apical, and posterior margins, but is mainly dark with numerous light spots. In addition, the dorsocentrals of Laksyetsa are closer to a transverse line through the supra-alars than to the suture, and the anterior upper fronto-orbitals are located distinctly behind a transverse line through the posterior lower fronto-orbitals. The name Laksyetsa, gender hereby designated feminine, is an anagram of the name Steyskal. George C. Steyskal J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 originally pointed out that this genus had never been described or named. Laksyetsa trinotata Foote, new species (Figs. 3, 5) Head (fig. 3).—In profile, about 2.5 times as high as long; frons about 2.4 times as wide as length from anterior tip of ocellar triangle to ptilinal fissure; setulae on surface extremely fine, lacking pigment; upper fronto-orbitals well mesad of line through lower fronto-orbitals, anterior upper fronto-orbital distinctly posterior to a transverse line through posterior lower fronto-orbitals; anterior pair of lower fronto-orbitals white, about 0.5 times as long as middle pair; ocellar triangle black; lunule with an ‘‘M’’-shaped dark mark; face with 1 median black spot at level of posterior margin of 3rd antennal segment, another median spot at oral margin, and larger paired spots immediately anterior to anterior-most genal setulae; parafacial spot small but distinctly bordered; postocular row with 2-4 light colored setae among the black; genal bristle and 2—4 bristles close to it all about equal in size. Thorax.—Brown, matte, with golden setulae which are absent directly behind head between humeri, in vicinity of visible parts of transverse suture, and directly posterior to bases of acrostichals on each side; 1 pair semicircular dark spots at extreme posterior end of scutum, continuing across scutoscutellar suture to cover basal corners of scutellum; 1 pair large rounded dark spots at bases of postalars; pleurae concolorous with scutum except for an indistinctly bordered dark brown stripe involving humerus and proceeding posteriorly between notopleurals below and presutural and postalar above, and a somewhat narrower dark stripe along upper margin of katepisternum; center of anepisternum and most of katespisternum suf- fused with darker brown; postscutellum entirely dark but with a pair of lateral, black bands when viewed in incident light from behind. Legs yellowish brown with darker brown markings in the following areas: most of posterior margin of fore femur but darker ventrally subapically and sub- basally, fore tibia suffused with brown sub- apically and subbasally, femora and tibiae of mid and hind legs each with distinct black subbasal and subapical black spots, especially ventrally on the femora; posteroventral row of setae of fore femur mixed black and white; S—6 setae in a posterior row on hind tibia, rather slender, shorter than diameter of tibia. Wing (fig. 5) 2.3 times as long as wide, field dark brown to base but slightly lighter along costa and in cell A, beset with numerous small rounded light brown (rather than hyaline) spots except in proximal posterior 4 of disk, where these small spots lighten and coalesce to form a rather broad, nearly hyaline area; vein dm-cu distinctly bowed apically at middle. 29 ~—~—\—-<-—-+ SEAL Lit A moS& me Figs. 1-3. Lezca tau: 1, side view of head, female; 2, abdominal tergum, ovpestiay sheath, ovipositor, female. Laksyetsa trinotata: 3, side view of head, female. Abdomen. — Abdominal terga entirely matte, in female with paired median spots on tergites IV and V, dark area about 2 times as large on tergite IV as on tergite V; tergite VI entirely unspotted; in male, tergite V mostly black, those spots on tergite IV larger than in female. Ovipositor sheath as long as tergites V and VI together, suffused with brown, especially toward apex: epandrium with 30 long setae dorsally, surstyli short, truncated, the prensisetae distinctly separated; glans with the appearance of a transverse plate subapically. Type-series. —Holotype, female, Llano de las Flores, Oaxaca, Mexico, 24 November 1969, R. L. Hodgdon, flower J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 head of Dahlia tenuicaulis. Intercepted Laredo, Tex. No. 000548, 69-24957 (USNM Type No. 75866) Allotype, male, same data. Paratypes: 1 male, 2 (without abdomens), same data, 1 female, 10 mi. W. El Salto, Durango, Mexico, 9000’, 30 June 1964, W. R. M. Mason (Canadian National Collection, Agriculture Canada). The specimens from Oaxaca were found in the flowers of Dahlia tenuicaulis being sent to the United States for propagation. The species is named for the 3 dark spots on the anterior oral margin. Genus Caenoriata, new genus Type-species.—Acrotaenia pertinax Bates 1934: 12, fig. 3 (wing). Diagnosis. —Frons bare; 3 pairs lower fronto- orbitals; 2 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, both pairs light-colored; all setae in postocular row con- colorous light; face with broad, rounded carina; 2 pairs dorsocentrals, 1 pair anterior to transverse suture; both pairs notopleurals unicolorous; 2 pairs scutellars, posterior pair longer than 0.5 times anterior; basal 0.6 of wing (fig. 6) almost entirely dark with narrow dark rays radiating to anterior, apical, and posterior margins from center of cell R5; vein r-m apicad of middle of discal cell; vein R2 + 3 rather sinuate; posterior extension of basal cubital cell rather long; bulla absent. Discussion.—The type-species, Known only from Brazil, is the only Known representative of the genus. For comments on relationships with other genera, see discussion section under the following genus. The name Caenoriata, hereby desig- nated feminine in gender, is an anagram of the generic name Acrotaenia. Genus Neotaracia, new genus Type-species.—Acrotaenia imox Bates 1934: 11, fig. 2 (wing). Diagnosis. —Frons bare, 3 pairs lower fronto- orbitals; 2 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, only the posterior pair light colored; all setae in postocular row light colored; broad, rounded facial carina present; 1 pair dorsocentrals, situated almost directly in transverse suture; both pairs noto- pleurals the same color; 2 pairs scutellars, posterior pair less than 0.5 times length of anterior pair; wing (fig. 7) mostly dark, cell R1 almost completely and evenly dark save for a hyaline incision im- mediately apicad of subcostal cell and one at J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 Figs. 4-7, right wings. 4, Lezca tau; 5, Laksyetsa trinotata; 6, Caenoriata pertinax (Bates); 7, Neotaracia imox (Bates). extreme apex descending into cell R2 + 3; vein r-m at or very close to middle of discal cell; vein R2 +3 nearly straight; posterior extension of basal cubital cell quite short; bulla absent. Discussion.—The type-species has been recorded to date only from Trinidad, Costa Rica, and Panama. The name Neotaracia, gender hereby designated feminine, is an anagram of the generic name Acrotaenia. Caenoriata and Neotaracia are closely allied to Acrotaenia Loew and beiong, with several other genera, to the tribe Platensinini of the subfamily Tephritinae. Table 2 sets forth the principal characters 31 Table I1.—Comparison of taxonomic characters of tephritine genera. Acrotaenia Color of postoculars mixed dark and light Frons bare or haired Upper fronto-orbitals unicolorous Facial carina absent Dorsocentrals 1 pair Posterior pair scutellars equal to anterior Vein r-m beyond mid discal cell Vein R2 + 3 sinuate Posterior extension of basal cubital cell very short distinguishing the 3 genera being con- sidered here. Although the wings of all 3 are rather similar structurally, their wing patterns differ markedly as shown in figs. 6 and 7. The wing of neither of the new genera possesses a) strongly empha- sized bullae in the anterior basal quarter of the wing disk, b) the numerous small rounded hyaline spots in the basal half, nor c) the transverse brown bands in the apical third of the wing disk, all of which are so characteristic of testudinea (Loew), the type-species of Acrotaenia, and its true congeners. Species of Acrotaenia have been recorded from southern United States, Mexico, Central America, Ba- hamas, West Indies, Trinidad, and Brazil (Foote 1967), and I have seen additional specimens more recently from Colombia and Surinam. Acknowledgments The assistance of George C. Steyskal, my colleague in the Systematic Ento- 32 Caenoriata Neotaracia all light all light bare bare unicolorous posterior pair light present present 2 pairs 1 pair longer than 0.5 shorter than 0.5 anterior anterior beyond mid discal at mid discal cell cell straight straight moderately long very short mology Laboratory, in making prelim- inary studies of some of the new taxa described herein, is deeply appreciated. He and F. L. Blanc, Sacramento, Cali- fornia, critically and very effectively reviewed the manuscript. References Cited Aczél, M. L. 1951. Géneros y especies neo- tropicales de la tribus ‘‘Trypetini.’”’ II. Dos géneros e una especie nuevos. Acta Zool. Lilloana 12: 253-278, illus. Bates, M. 1934. Notes on American Trypetidae (Diptera). IV. Acrotaenia and similar genera. Rev. Entomol. 4: 7-17, illus. Foote, R. H. 1967. Fasc. 57, Family Tephritidae, pp. 57.1-57.91, in Vanzolini, P. E., and N. Papavero (eds.), A Catalog of the Diptera South of the United States. Dep. Zool., Secr. Agr., Sao Paulo, Brazil. Hendel, F. 1914a. Die Gattungen der Bohrfliegen. (Analytische Ubersicht aller bisher bekannten Gattungen der Tephritinae.). Wien. Entomol. Z. 33: 73-98. . 1914b. Die Bohrfliegen Stidamerikas. K. Zool. Anthrop.-Ethnogr. Mus. Abhandl. Ber. (1912)14(3): 1-84, illus. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 ACADEMY AFFAIRS THE AWARDS PROGRAM OF THE ACADEMY Kelso B. Morris, General Chairman The Annual Awards Dinner meeting of the Academy was held on Thursday, March 16, 1978 at the Indian Spring Country Club. The general chairman, Dr. Kelso B. Morris of the faculty at Howard University, announced that four research ) scientists and three science teachers were recipients of the Academy’s awards for outstanding scientific achievement. In the area of research, the persons honored were the following: Dr. Robert Hogan (for the Behavioral Sciences) of the Johns Hopkins University; Dr. John Kebabian (for Biological Sciences) of National Institutes of Health; Dr. Tse-Fou Zien (for Engineering Sciences) of the Naval Surface Weapons Center; and Dr. Sandra C. Greer (for Physical Sciences) of the National Bureau of Standards. For the Teaching of Science, a joint award was presented to Dr. David S. Falk and Dr. Marjorie H. Gardner, both at the University of Maryland in the Physics and Chemistry Departments, respec- tively. The honoree for the Berenice G. Lamberton Award for teaching of High School Science was Mr. John Lieber- mann, Jr., of the T. C. Williams High School in Alexandria, Virginia. Behavioral Sciences Dr. Robert Hogan, Professor of Psy- chology at the Johns Hopkins University, was cited for ‘‘theoretical and empirical _ work in the developmental process of socialization.’”’ He was born in Los Angeles, California. In 1960, he received the A.B. degree from the University of California at Los Angeles. His Ph.D. degree was earned at the University of J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 Robert Hogan California at Berkeley in 1967. After completing all work for the Ph.D. degree, he was appointed Assistant Professor of Psychology at the Johns Hopkins Univer- sity and held that position for four years (1967-71). He next advanced to the rank of Associate Professor and held that posi- tion until he was promoted in 1976 to his present rank, Professor of Psychology. He has more than forty publications at the present time. He holds memberships in the following organizations: Eastern Psychological Association; American Psychological Association, and American Association for the Advancement of Science. Honors received by him are Summa Cum Laude when the A.B. was conferred; Phi Beta Kappa; and Fellow, Division 8, American Psychological Association. 33 John Kebabian Biological Sciences Dr. John Kebabian, Experimental Therapeutics Branch of the National Institute of Neurological and Communi- cative Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Mary- land, was cited for “‘outstanding demon- stration of dopamine-sensitive adenylyl cyclase in mammalians.’’ Dr. Kebabian was born in New York City. His B.S. degree was received from Yale College in 1968. At the graduate level, his M. Phil. (1970) and Ph.D. (1973) degrees were both earned at Yale University. The honoree is a world recognized authority on the mechanism by which dopamine initiates its physiological effects. Our present knowledge of the biochemical events associated with dopamine receptor activity in the striatum is largely due to Dr. Kebabian’s efforts. Engineering Sciences Dr. Tse-Fou Zien, Research Aero- space Engineer of the Mathematics and 34 Engineering Branch (NSWC) was cited for ‘‘Significant contributions to the field of fluid mechanics and heat transfer through research and teaching that have gained him national recognition.’’ He was born in Shanghai, China. His B.S. degree was received in June 1958 from National Taiwan University. His M.S. and Ph.D. degrees, respectively, were earned at Brown University and California Insti- tute of Technology. Organizations in which he holds mem- bership are American Institute of Aero- nautics and Astronautics (Associate Fellow); American Physical Society, and Society of the Sigma Xi. The current issue of ‘‘Oak Leaf,’ a publication of the Naval Surface Weapons Center at White Oak, Maryland, contains a very enlightening article about Dr. Zien and his researches. In the article, Dr. Zien states that ‘‘heat transfer is closely tied to fluid mechanics. It is important to understand the heat transfer phenomena in the optimal design of vehicles.’’ In addition to his being a Tse-Fou Zien J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 Biographee in the current issue of ‘‘Who’s Who in the East’’ (Marquis), he received an outstanding performance award with quality salary increase in 1974. Physical Sciences Dr. Sandra Greer, the honoree this year in the Physical Sciences, is a researcher in the Institute for Basic Standards at National Bureau of Stand- ards, Washington, D. C. She was cited for ‘‘her outstanding achievement as a re- search scientist in devising a carrying out experiments and applying new theories so as to help produce a better under- _ standing of the behavior of systems near critical points.”’ Dr. Greer is a native of Greenville, South Carolina. Her undergraduate de- gree, B.S. (magna cum laude) was received at Furman University in 1966. Both her M.S. (1968) and Ph.D. (1969) degrees, respectively, were earned at the University of Chicago. Organizations in which she holds mem- Sandra Greer J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 bership are the following: AAAS; Ameri- can Physical Society, and American Chemical Society. In her researches, she and her asso- ciates recognize that critical points are points of inherent instability. Such points occur in diverse systems such as, for example, pure fluids; fluid mixtures, magnetic solids, and binary alloys. The instabilities are sufficiently strong to produce anomalous behavior over a moderately large region around the critical point for each kind of system. This and the fact that critical points are end points of loci of phase transitions makes understanding the behavior of systems near their critical points im- portant both scientifically and _ tech- nologically. Teaching of Science A Joint Award The two recipients of this Award are Dr. David S. Falk and Dr. Marjorie H. Gardner, both at the University of Maryland. Dr. Falk was cited for being an innovative teacher and an able adminis- trator of Physics Education.’’ For Dr. Gardner, the citation was ‘‘for her great local, national, and international impact on chemistry teaching.”’ Dr. Marjorie H. Gardner was born in Logan, Utah. Her B.S. in Political Science/Chemistry was received from Utah State University in 1946. Her M.A. and Ph.D. degrees, both in Science Education and Chemistry, were earned at Ohio State University in 1958 and 1960, respectively. Her experience in higher education is rather noteworthy. She joined the Uni- versity of Maryland as an Assistant Professor (Chemistry and Secondary Education) in 1964. Today she is an Associate Dean in the College of Educa- tion and a Professor of Chemistry and Secondary Education. Part of her experi- ence involves participation in national and international meetings. Memberships in scientific organiza- tions include the following: American Association for the Advancement of 35 David Falk Science; American Chemical Society; American Educational Research Asso- ciation; American Institute of Chemists; and others. The other co-winner of the Award, Dr. David S. Falk, was born in New York City. His B.S. degree was earned at Cornell University in 1954. The M.A. and Ph.D. degrees were both earned at Harvard University in 1955 and 1959, respectively. Marjorie Gardner 36 He has been associated with the Uni- versity of Maryland since 1961. Today, he is Professor and Associate Chairman of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Maryland. Professional and honorary member- ships include Tau Beta Pi, Sigma Xi, and the American Physical Society. He is described by associates as an able administrator of science teaching. As the Department Associate Chairman for Educational Affairs, he is responsible for the total physics teaching program. The Berenice G. Lamberton Award Teaching of High School Science Mr. John Liebermann, Jr. is a resident of Fairfax, Virginia. As the recipient of the Berenice G. Lamberton Award for Teaching of High School Science, he was cited for ‘‘inspiring students to excell in science through effort and application by the example he set for them in his teach- ing and research.”’ He was born in Washington, D. C. His B.S. degree in Chemistry was received from George Mason University in 1969. He is currently studying toward the Ph.D. degree at American University. Organi- zations in which he holds membership are: NEA, VEA, EAA, and American Chemical Society. At the end of the presentation of the Awardees, the General Chairman stated that personal efforts were made by hima few years ago to make certain that the President, Deans and Department Heads in science-related fields at the Johns Hopkins University developed a greater awareness of the Awards Program of the Washington Academy of Sciences. It is significant, therefore, that the awardee this year in the Behavioral Sciences is the first one from that institution. — Kelso B. Morris. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 SCIENTISTS IN THE NEWS Contributions in this section of your Journal are earnestly solicited. They should be typed double-spaced and sent to the Editor by the 10th of the month preceding the issue for which they are intended. _ National Institutes of Health Dr. Robert H. Purcell, head of the Viral Hepatitis Section of the Laboratory of Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was _ recently awarded the Gorgas Medal for _ 1977 by the American Association of Military Surgeons. This medal is presented annually for ‘‘distinguished work in preventive medi- cine’’ and Dr. Purcell was given the honor for his outstanding contributions to the development of methods for detecting and preventing viral hepatitis. Dr. Purcell has made many contribu- tions to the study of viral hepatitis and his accomplishments have made him an internationally recognized authority. His leadership of research teams attacking the various aspects of this major public health problem has led to the development of prototype vaccines for hepatitis B, and to visualization of the virus causing hepatitis A—a first step toward prevention. Recently, Dr. Purcell and his colleagues have presented evidence that in addition to hepatitis B virus at least one other hepatitis viral agent (non-A non-B) can be transmitted by blood transfusions. A graduate of Oklahoma State Uni- versity in 1957, Dr. Purcell received his M.S. degree in biochemistry from Baylor University in 1960 and received his M.D. degree in 1962 from Duke University. Dr. Purcell came to NIAID in 1963. Since 1967 he has headed the Institute’s intramural hepatitis research program. Dr. Robert J. Huebner has retired after 35 years with the U. S. Public Health Service. He came to NIH in 1944 and Studied infectious diseases until 1968, when he became chief of the National Cancer Institute Laboratory of RNA Tumor Viruses. Dr. Huebner will continue doing re- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 search at NCI as an expert consultant on RNA tumor viruses and on immune protection against cancer. He entered the PHS in 1942 after re- ceiving his M.D. degree from the St. Louis University School of Medicine. ‘‘I wanted to go into endocrinology,’’ he says, ‘‘but infectious disease was the only field that was open.”’ While working for the National Insti- tute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Huebner’s experience ranged from catching rats in Harlem to checking household milk supplies in Los Angeles to investigating Coxsackie virus in Texas. Dr. Wallace Rowe, a co-worker at NIAID, said that Dr. Huebner first received distinction by investigating a rickettsial outbreak in New York City. ‘In record time, Dr. Huebner had identified the organism and the vector,”’ says Dr. Rowe. ‘‘He had solved the whole problem in 2 months—and he was basically a kid just starting out.”’ Then Dr. Huebner was off to Cali- fornia to investigate a Q-fever epidemic which was being spread in milk. Q-fever is a respiratory infection caused by another rickettsial microorganism. He set up his lab in a garage and hired young people living in the neighbor- hood to take care of his experimental animals. In 1950, after 3 years and between 3,000 and 4,000 household visits, his report that the disease was carried in milk was released by the American Medical Association. ‘‘When that hit the papers, there were weeks that no milk could be sold. The dairy industry didn’t even want me in the state,’’ he recalls. Dr. Huebner did extensive work with Coxsackie A virus in Maryland, swab- bing the throats of hundreds of school children in the process. He also dis- covered several viruses responsible for herpangina. 37 Dr. Huebner also worked in Texas with a disease called devil’s grip, distinguished by chest pain and fever. He demonstrated that devil’s grip is caused by the Cox- sackie B3 virus. In the late 1950’s, Dr. Huebner began to work with polyoma viruses and other tumor viruses in animals, and he de- veloped a special procedure that enables research to be done with tumor viruses just as it is with other viruses. He later discovered that adenoviruses produced tumors in mice. Further study showed that these tumors contained viral proteins, which are the telltale signs of virus infection in the cell. However, subsequent studies he has conducted have shown that there is no relationship between adenoviruses and human cancer. In 1969, Dr. Huebner and Dr. George Todaro of NCI introduced the viral oncogene theory. This theory incorporated the idea that cancer viruses were genetically inherited and yet could be dealt with as an in- fectious disease, plus the idea that the key determinant of cancer is in the genes. It states that there are transforming genes, or oncogenes, that exist in DNA and viruses. These can transform the cell from a normal state to a cancerous state when a cellular mechanism is not in control. ‘‘Dr. Huebner has a _ tremendous breadth of interest and the ability to see things that others just don’t see,’ Dr. Todaro says. ‘‘His contribution to tumor virology goes far beyond the oncogene theory. ‘‘Some of his observations in the early 1960’s were key to the molecular biology now being done; things that are now being taken for granted.”’ Dr. Huebner is now trying to identify a tumor antigen associated with many types of cancer in man. Such an antigen might lead to the development of tumor vaccines in humans. ‘‘There are a lot of things still left to do,’ he says. ‘‘One of these days I’ve got to write a book. . . . It’s all kind of an adventure.”’ 38 NAVAL SHIP R&D CENTER Dr. Elizabeth H. Cuthill, the Numerical Analysis Coordinator for the Computa- tion, Mathematics, and Logistics Depart- ment of the David W. Taylor Naval Ship R&D Center (DINSRDC), Bethesda, Maryland, recently received the David W. Taylor Award for Scientific Achieve- ment for the calendar year 1976. Dr. Cuthill was recognized for her valuable contributions in the develop- ment and exploitation of mathematical and computational techniques for signifi- cant Navy applications. Her achieve- ments date back to when she first joined DTNSRDC in 1953 and include technical leadership in the development of the | Navy’s nuclear reactor codes, a field in which she and her colleagues were preeminent and internationally recog- nized for their many accomplishments. Upon completion of this effort, Dr. Cuthill led the successful development of the widely used General Bending Response Codes which have received Dr. Elizabeth H. Cuthill J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 wide acceptance and are in general use throughout the nation. She was also the leader within the Navy in promoting the use of general purpose finite element codes for structural analysis. Dr. Cuthill’s personal technical con- tributions include the development of band width reduction techniques which | reduced by half the time and cost of structural analysis calculations. A leader in exploiting the use of computers for symbolic mathematics, she is presently engaged in making this capability avail- able to the entire Navy laboratory community. Captain Myron, V. Ricketts, USN, | DTNSRDC Commander, presented the Award to Dr. Cuthill, citing her ‘‘out- standing personal contributions and tech- nical leadership.’’ Reviewing her ac- complishments Captain Ricketts praised her ‘‘technical excellence and expertise of the highest order, scientific pro- ductivity addressed to Navy applications of major significance, and an ability to motivate and lead colleagues and sub- ordinates.”’ The Award is named after Rear Admiral David Watson Taylor, a naval constructor with a brilliant reputation in the field of naval engineering who was the driving force behind the development and adoption of modern experimental techniques in ship and aircraft research. Originally established by the Navy in 1961, this Award has been presented annually since that time to the individual scientist whose contributions were con- sidered truly outstanding in the field of research and development. Dr. Cuthillis the author of many papers on mathematical and computational tech- niques and is a member of the following societies and associations: Phi Beta Kappa, Sigma Xi, the American Mathe- matical Society, the Mathematical Asso- ciation of America, the Society for In- dustrial and Applied Mathematics, the Association for Computing Machinery, the American Association for the Ad- vancement of Science, and the Washing- |) ton Philosophical Society. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 RICE UNIVERSITY Dr. Frederick D. Rossini, professor emeritus of chemistry at Rice University and an internationally recognized au- thority on petroleum chemistry, received the National Medal of Science from President Carter at ceremonies in Wash- ington, D. C., Tuesday, Nov. 22, 1977. Dr. Rossini, 78, was honored for his ‘‘contributions to basic reference knowl- edge in chemical thermodynamics.’’ The award—one of 15 made by Presi- dent Carter—came to Dr. Rossini some 13 months after receiving the coveted Carl Engler Medal from the German Society for Petroleum and Coal Chem- istry, Germany’s equivalent of the American Petroleum Institute. It recog- nized the Rice professor’s outstanding contributions to Petroleum research over the past several decades. Dr. Rossini is one of the very few non-Germans to win the Carl Engler Medal. The National Medal of Science Dr. Rossini received Tuesday from President Carter was established in 1959 by the 86th Congress. It is awarded to individuals ‘‘deserving special recognition by reason of their outstanding contributions to knowledge in the physical, biological, mathematical, or engineering sciences.”’ Dr. Rossini, a native of Monongahela, Pennsylvania, is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and past presidents of the London-based World Petroleum Congress and of the Washing- ton Academy of Sciences. He is the author of some 250 scientific articles and 11 books dealing mainly with thermo- dynamics, thermochemistry, numerical data for science and technology, and the physical chemistry of petroleum and hydrocarbons. Dr. Rossini joined the Rice faculty in 1971 after a distinguished academic and governmental career that began in 1923 as a laboratory assistant in physics at the Carnegie Institute of Technology (now Carnegie-Mellon University) and _ in- cluded 22 years (1928-1950) with the National Bureau of Standards in Wash- ington, D. C. 39 NEW AFFILIATE The Potomac Chapter of the American Fisheries Society, organized as a local chapter of the parent national society in 1976, is a new affiliate of the Academy. Objectives: a.) To promote the conserva- tion and effective management of fish, other aquatic environment for the op- timum benefit of the people of this continent. b.) To advance the science, technology, education, and practice of all branches and disciplines related to the conservation of aquatic resources. c.) To encourage and recognize effective per- formance in all aspects of the fisheries profession. d.) To encourage and pro- mote effective communications among professional aquatic scientists, and be- tween the profession and the public. Members: The membership of the Chap- ter shall be composed of those American Fisheries Society members in good stand- ing residing in Maryland, Virginia, Dis- trict of Columbia, and Jefferson, Berkeley, and Morgan Counties of West | Va. who are listed on the Chapter | membership roll by virtue of having paid | established Chapter dues. Meetings: The chapter shall hold at least | one (1) meeting annually at a time and | place designated by the Executive Com- | mittee or its officially delegated alternate | committee. The program and presenta- tion of papers shall be the responsibility of the Program Committee. OBITUARY Louis S. Jaffe, 63, professor of epi- demiology and environmental health at George Washington University’s medical school, died July 24, 1977 after a heart attack while vacationing in Israel. He lived on Highland Drive in Silver Spring. Jaffe was a pioneer in the development of air quality criteria—the technical documents which delineate the various effects of specific air pollutants on man, animals, vegetation and materials and serve as the cornerstones of the national air quality standards. He joined the medical school staff in 1970 upon his retirement from the U. S. Public Health Service. His last assign- ment during his 31 years of government service was as physical science adminis- trator and special assistant to the director 40 of the air quality criteria and standards development program. A native of Newark, N. J., and a graduate of Brooklyn College and Colum- | bia University, Jaffe was elected a fellow in the Washington Academy of Sciences in 1974 in recognition of his contributions to environmental medicine. Jaffe was active in civic affairs and at the time of his death was a vice president of the National Capital Area of B’nai B’rith Lodges. He was a past president of the Cardoza and Montgomery Lodges. He also served a two-year term as president of the Woodside Park Civic Association in Silver Spring and was a former chairman of the Montgomery County Civic Federation’s planning and zoning committee. | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 { jj ! | ‘ | : t JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Instructions to Contributors Seneral ‘| Type manuscripts on white bond paper | sither 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double space all lines, including those in abstracts, | ables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- -|ments, and references cited. Number pages sonsecutively. Place your name and com- ylete address in the upper right hand corner pf the title page. ‘ifitle, Author, and Affiliation Page | of your manuscript should contain Jonly this information and your name and laddress. Choose a concise but complete and | meaningful title. In research papers con- cerning biological subjects, include an indi- vation of the order and family of the taxa discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- mally be included unless the author so specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- ‘ion and mailing address (including Zip) so chat readers can write to you directly. ae ‘Abstract | Type on a separate sheet at the end of the manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible without reference to the text of the paper. '|\Write an informative digest of the significant jcontent and conclusions, not a mere descrip- tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- seed 3% of the text. Footnotes Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. || Number text footnotes consecutively with Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- |sate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- script. Type table footnotes, if any, below |)each pertinent table on the same page. Illustrations and Legends | The quality of all original illustrations must be high enough to facilitate good offset jeproduction. They should have ample mar- gins and be drawn on heavy stock or jrastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- jing. They should be proportioned to column ‘al x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, ‘seaving space for legend material. Photo- graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- produce best when the contrast is fairly high. Identify each illustration with number and author in light pencil marks on the reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- rately — please do not glue or clip them to the pages of the manuscript. Do not type or write legends directly on the illustrations. Type legends on a separate sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. Indicate where you want illustrations to appear in the printed paper by writing the figure numbers lightly in the text margins, and be sure that each figure is properly re- ferenced in the text itself. Original “art” will be returned only at the author’s request and expense. Tables Include tables only when the same infor- mation cannot be presented economically in the text, or when a table presents the data in a more meaningful way. Consider preparing extremely complicated tabular matter in a form suitable for direct reproduction as an illustration. In such cases, the use of the typewriter is not recommended. References to Literature Limit references within the text and in synonymies to author and year (and page if needed). In a ‘Reference Cited” section, list alphabetically by senior author only those papers you have included in the text. Like- wise, be sure all the text references are listed. Type the “References Cited” section on a separate sheet after the last page of text. Abbreviations should follow the USA Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, EST S-1965. Submission of Manuscripts Send completed manuscripts and sup- porting material to the Academy office (see address inside front cover) in care of the Editor. Authors will be requested to read Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- print orders prior to publication. Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. Washington Academy of Sciences 2nd Class Postage Paid | 9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) at Washington, D.C. _ Washington, D.C. 20014 and additional mailing offices. | Return Requested with Form 3579 AL MJSEUM LIBRARY ) OC 20025 8 iN (2a Cg 3 VOLUME 68 Number 2 | J our nal of the JUNE, 1978 WASHINGTON ACADEMY .. SCIENCES Issued Quarterly at Washington, D.C. CONTENTS Features: RAYMOND J. SEEGER: On the Humanism of Science .................. A. G. WHEELER, JR.: Mortimer Demarest Leonard, Entomologist: Biographical Sketch and List of Publications.....................008- Research Reports: NORMAN LIN: Contributions to the Ecology of the Cicada Killer, Sphecius speciosus (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae)....................... DORIS H. BLAKE: Colaspis quattuordecimpunctata costata Lefévre and Its Close Relatives in Brazil (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) ............. Academy Affairs: SCICMUStSHIMMMO SING WS: sie aides ioc a susie s/ecd alee aelays dsl hase be sia aw ded nee Obituaries SS CMMMICINE MIDS UNMET Is erties ete es ete tare ccs bl grduchbre cnchiearle dire. @ ola “ove Guede Beevers 91 MHEOROKE CG avONMSTaANG: aoc. ose G auw oui dinw Hae ¥ 30 aie pinta mide coer a oes ane Washington Academp of Sciences EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE President Mary H. Aldridge President-Elect Alfred Weissler Secretary James F. Goff Treasurer Nelson W. Rupp Members at Large Conrad B. Link Elaine Shafrin BOARD OF MANAGERS All delegates of affiliated Societies (see facing page) EDITOR Richard H. Foote EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Elizabeth Ostaggi ACADEMY OFFICE 9650 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD. 20014 Telephone: (301) 530-1402 Founded in 1898 The Journal This journal, the official organ of the Washington Aca- demy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, September, and December)—the September issue contains a directory of the Academy membership. Subscription Rates Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the following rates: U.S. and Canada....... $15.00 FOLIO ac aces 16.00 Single Copy Price ...... 5.00 Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is $15.00. Back Issues Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 (1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings and Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, volumes, and sets (Vols. 1-62, 1911-1972) and all cur- rent issues. Claims for Missing Numbers Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 days after date of mailing plus time normally required for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a change in address. Change of Address Address changes should be sent promptly to the Aca- demy office. Such notification should show both old and new addresses and zip number. Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. _ DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES | PEMoMcal SOcIety Of WaSRINGLON, 3.505. 66 6 s)s bss aie a a oe o's’ w se oe re a es a oe eae James F. Goff PEReMOoric al SOCIety Of Washington: «.. . ......6.. sic 2 oa ss sc es Cee ne oo ee es oe Jean K. Boek Pee TeNOMICLy Of VW aSMINGtON «2. occ 6 eco eb Noda Sa Sale gee wt ase ow cee een elem c William R. Heyer DRC MEMPICtAOle WASHINEION) 225. 2 652.5 2266 oases Sac ac a a bance sb s Se tbees se beece David H. Freeman Para AUS OCIELY OF Washington j: 22 22s es che cece cee c scar ceasneseos D. W. S. Sutherland MINE AEE ApHIC SOCICLY. | 25. pc 5 aoc be code bac dd vee cid chews lecular lisavdes T. Dale Stewart DEREUMPEEBESOCICLY OF WaASHINCTON 2.) . 6. oi ceeee cece ce ee ata wesc cewceadeaes Marian M. Schnepfe Deemacicingorine District of Columbia no nn 660 So. oe ele ee ics Ge ee cee cece cseweeeceeees Inactive _ Columbia SLE POG EL SOILS LSS et SR ee Paul H. Oehser DEMS ESD CICHVEO! WASHINPLON «2.2045. 02s eee cc ewes cence cw cw ucreceeeentseaeie Conrad B. Link Society of American Foresters ....... BN Ree ek cca oh tae Larter igh ied Thomas B. Glazebrook PnEECrESOCICly Of ENPINEETS ... 5.1... ce ee ke eee ce neh eneteaneeueus George Abraham Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ............0.0..0 ccc ceeeeeeeeeeee George Abraham Sememeanesocicty Of Mechanical Engineers ....... 06.6. ees cc cece eee ee eeeenteesbeeenes Michael Chi Helminthological SacietyaGk Was minPtONel 5x. 0G oct oe ete Sad eae ane. Bee Robert S. Isenstein memmearansocicry tor Microbiology .... 2-2... 6. ee deca eden e bases beecnecteueses Michael Pelzcar Society Ma MeTICANE VINIPATY EMOIMEETS! . 2. oss vies. 6 os ore at gheial ces @ bie SHG bold e wet oleae eles H. P. Demuth American SORIETS CH CIT BIT VS en Robert Sorenson MMe vaor Experimental Biology and Medicine ..........0..0.0.cccccecscnsecaccecets Donald Flick eR SEAGER VICES oc oe 2 oii on tik a as 2 oe oa a hn ee Gale os tines ss eee ores Glen W. Wensch International pssoctation Of Dental Research . 222... 2.256663 sie esas sees owes William V. Loebenstein | Pemeneam Mstitute of Aeronautics and Astromautics .............0.2 ccs ccsacccescnces George J. Vila | American PLETED PTL IGALP SOS Ie yee a re Pn ee en gee a eer ne A. James Wagner “Insecticide IMMA AS NMG OM ewe cy oro, ci5 Fs ees, sfoba cas. ola a woes aie whi’ snyoree « Sutecverse Sale seks Robert J. Argauer Memeeeieesucicty of America ...............0--sscceenveuevensouse es dove: Delegate not appointed | American PAE TIS OCICLYE Se ee eet. mee ts ce Ss cea ba el. Be eke Lee ek Dick Duffey | RM ETO OUNCCIMIOIOLISES: ofits 5. 6S a's obs os dw nd oa late wide be od Gos ee we oe William Sulzbacher | Vi erican PET AMH CES OCICI NEE eRe Bn eee MANS on sch eal ok MA EMEN GNU ois lols Lie aes ee Inactive EMPMEMMCAIOSOCICEY® 5-05 5 sfc ie Eke be elkalba ee ccceeedeadacatecanes Delegate not appointed MR EMMPEMIMAIS(ONY Ol SCIENCE CID) 25.06 ci oe ce kb chess ce nese leeaebectecebebohnaeeet cee Inactive Pee ane association Of Physics Teachers. ...... 2.56.20 ee ese c ee cece nese ne esees To be appointed | TED SDSS RY CLP EATEST ETE eR ee Lucy B. Hagan | mem SOcicty. Of Plant PHYSIOIOZIStS: 2.25.5 5-606 eee ee ae et ce ect ene eewesese Walter Shropshire | Seemann Operations Research COUNCI!) «2. <<. 65. 6 a0sspane Ka sas de oye 0 ede e nite ede nines John G. Honig EME NOCICIN TORU ANICIIC A: e525. 51. « piyansus cle Goes mie svsinls 4 cho 4 ie’ epnscecainim ween deus d «ar, Sagres « Inactive _ American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical } Pee OIC UISE MEINE CESH NS. oo. 25): etek Seite bo Sees LTA. Pah. eee ies See GE. Carl H. Cotterill PEER IEO ADILOVAC(EONOMENS *. 2. knees... cles so te NN TB be ba ies ale Benson J. Simon 1) Seem aericaleAssociation-of America. 2600... ac et te ll Sean ele ne eee es notte as Patrick Hayes \ MIS HEIEC OKC HETINIS(S Sc ce OS Se ie aa OSs DSS Sel elele ce eee eek eee Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. Meretoloricalt Association ©) le Le ee John O’ Hare | See asaineton Paint Pechimical Group. ..... 2-06. cs cess ewe ese ew es cctereeseseees Paul G. Campbell Me annehiyiopatholopical Society... ..... 6-5. eee n ee tec eee e eet eet seeetace ns Tom van der Zwet | | Society MG ENCEAISVStCMS RESEALCM. oc 2). <5 och = Haus a ereters @ epee apo ecko oe Ronald W. Manderscheid MELTS OSES OCLC (Ne aoe y fo oalat 05.0 ie ah, Sosy 2 late Mandi. 5, «oppo one Shag whe H. Mcllvaine Parsons \ PEELS ICSE OCI CEM a Seco ons cats a5 vn ede. 8 + aleveinaers atl ele s Saka sige pps he eae No delegate | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 41 ae EIS ca A, “ i¥ Stil 34 GRiAL , of Mist oT 7 fo “ey btess ~itt ei 10 VIOWOADA WOEDARBAW SRT OT BITAD Lea, DAWAE SBT avIT Viner aaa Dek it, % be * 7 é gs ke iv ' . HK Y isie Page THe TAO Me CaN: aie aoosies Wee Hau litle itt spelt me S000 2a t0¥ AI das Per nt Pe clences qoinudes 4 Yo seal tole yorads ol Rites tar (ae a. yoda oh ‘TiNy 2 Te. 3 ue): sa ee ‘wee (ee : moss aga = weet) gon Ff 7 74% iJ gw Tee fh “Ee | al | Saas kA na” ‘ nail i mTorr, Ts ‘ c a>: Fe. rele Wa - a ee eee ee abe ries rietald ols dash ean Pal fe? ‘ ; SeRER - : We hg “as JiA fey as | | Raymond J. Seeger | National Science Foundation (Retired). ' John Donne, the poetic Dean of St. | Paul’s Cathedral (London), wrote in his | ‘Devotions’? (1624), ‘‘No man is an | island entire of itself.’’ We live in one world; we all live in the same world. There isn’t an old world and a new world, ) a white world and a black world, a man’s | world and a woman’s world, a starry ) world above and a moral world within, a | natural world and a supernatural world, / an objective world and an existential | world, a world of science and a world of ' humanities. We all live in one world, the a pele) = @) = ie) ak Q. Our experience, too, is one: we the subject, the world the object. Years ago when I was teaching a physics course, on “Our Physical Heritage’ for non-science students, I invited a professor of history to lecture on the reciprocal influences of history and science. ‘‘What,’’ he began, “is history?’ ‘‘History,’’ he proclaimed, “is the study of man and his environ- ment!’’ I made a note of this; although I had studied history all my life, no one had ever bothered to define it for me. | Later I asked a professor of philosophy ‘to discuss philosophical implications of science. ‘‘ What is philosophy?’’ he asked | thetorically. ‘‘The study of man and his -environment!’’ he explained. For the ‘| moment I was nonplussed. The next year, however, I introduced the course with a ‘| query, “‘What is physics?’’ ‘‘The study of ann annaRamapRRaRRRE : =e = a ‘Given at colleges and universities under the | NSF-funded Sigma Xi Bicentennial Lecture Pro- | gram (1974-1977) on **Science and Society.” | _J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 {ej | oe |On the Humanism of Science! FEATURES man and his environment!’ I joyfully announced. I, too, had realized that we are all studying the same thing, namely, the universe with man at its focus—but different aspects of it. The English Augustan poet Alexander Pope argued in his ‘“‘Essay on Man’’ (1737), ““The proper study of mankind is man’’ — usually understood to advocate a separation of man from his environment. This poem, however, which deals pri- marily with the justification of God’s ways to man, connotes a quite different discrimination as shown in the preceding line: “‘Know then thyself, presume not God to scan.’’ Ralph Waldo Emerson, the American transcendentalist essayist, also invoked the Delphic oracle in his famous Phi Beta Kappa address (1837) on ‘‘The American Scholar; ‘The ancient precept, ‘Know thyself,’ and the modern precept, ‘Study nature,’ become at last one maxim.’’ Man is thus part and partner in his changing environment— what might properly be called human ecology. The Greeks never separated man from his environment. They looked at nature and discovered it to be real and interesting and comprehensible. Greece itself contained both scientific Ionia and humanistic Attica in continuous communication. The word interesting, by the way, comes from the Latin inter esse, meaning to be among, viz., man and his environment. One cannot conceive of a man without an environment, and even the women’s lib is loath to have an environment without a man. 43 Nevertheless, we are wont to view our experience in differently colored lights, whether we look at a planet ora plant or a person. We can distinguish three primary cultural colors. There is sky blue signifying our aesthetic enjoyment—‘‘how brief the beauty of the moon!’ Grass green symbolizes the nourishment of scientific relatedness —how ‘‘the moon may draw the sea!’ Earth red represents tech- nological use—how ‘‘He appointed the moon for certain seasons!’’ Possibly a fourth light! an invisible aura— within the red, beyond the violet—that intimates mystically the unity of the universe! This many colored rainbow shines upon our everyday life. We need its integrated light to insure the integrity of our personal experience. Our outlook, however, is colored by our daily lookout through the tinted education spectacles furnished each one of us upon scholarly matriculation. Everyone nowadays is familiar with the two academic cultures publicized (1959, 1963) by Charles Percy Snow, the British novelist. He himself is always careful to indicate that these two cultures—so- called humanities and science—are strictly academic fields. He deplores the gap between them and urges that it be bridged (modern education is spuriously measured at times by their very distance apart). It is, indeed, remarkable that both the ‘‘Civilisation”’ (1969) by the English art connoisseur Kenneth McKenzie Clark and the “‘Ascent of Man’’ (1971) by the English humanist mathematician Jacob Bronowski exhibit so little overlap, al- though they are presumably describing the same world. They reveal little evi- dence of the underlap of their common experience—a natural bridge. I must confess, however, my own deeper anxiety about the need to bridge a far greater gap, namely, that between these very academic cultures and the nonacademic—not our concern here. Victor Cousin, the French eclectic philosopher, sounded a tocsin in his 1818 Sorbonne lectures: “‘L’art pour lart’’ (‘art for art’s sake’’). Some modern scientists would counter with the slogan, Ay ‘*Science for the sake of science.’’ More basic, I believe, is, ‘‘Art and science together for man!’’ We must comprehend them. I am personally dissatisfied with the academic compartmentalization of ideas resulting so often from an adminis- trative departmentalization of fields of interest. Like the pilgrim (1638) of the English non-conformist preacher John Bunyan, we are eager to set out on a quest for ultimate truths. But like Alighieri Dante, the Italian philosophic poet, “‘Midway upon the journey of our life I found myself in a dark wood where the right way was lost’? (c. 1307). It was the Roman epic poet Vergil who guided him through Hell, where he accosted the Greek empirically oriented philosopher Aristotle as “‘the. | master of those who know.”’ Aristotle, indeed, had begun his “‘metaphysics,”’ All men by their very nature feel the urge to know’’—owing to an innate curiosity about their awful environment. Wondering Ionians sought eternal an- swers to their perennial questions: where am I? who am I? what will I be? This perpetual quest is a unique human activity. In his pursuit of it man has become enchanted with his mysterious | universe; he zealously searches for a unifying pattern—not a crazy quilt of his | own making. I do not fathom a recent | pronouncement of Harvey Cox, that , apparently godless Harvard theologian: ‘Life is not an unfathomable mystery. ... We know there is no ordered | universe awaiting the discovery of it by | man. . . . The universe is a human in- | vention.’’ Who would be so egotistical | as to believe the universe to be man-made? | I pity the modern Macbeths who regard | life as ‘‘a tale told by an idiot, full of | sound and fury, signifying nothing.” I | pity modern dramatists—the Czech Karl | Capek who would try to solve human } problems with dehumanized robots | (R. U. R. 1921); the German Friedrich | Diirrenmatt who would have physicists seek security in an insane asylum (1962). } I pity modern novelists: the English } George Orwell with his 1984 madmen seemingly united in a meaningless brother- | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | | hood (1949); the English Aldous Huxley seeking solace in his caricature of | scientists as cringing creatures crawling | blindlessly to escape his so-called ** Brave | New World’’ (1932), only to become later (1958) Buddhist addicts to painless nihilism. | In his perpetual quest for knowledge, | on the contrary, man has found some ' comfort in science’s liberation from cultural bondage of some of his attitudes and thoughts. We shall now focus our ‘| attention on this humanistic science. Confusion is rampant with respect to | humanism in general and the humanities | in particular. One speaks thoughtlessly of literary humanists, scientific humanists, | Christian humanists, et al. The term | humanities, in turn, varies from college to college (in their catalogues); it is | actually defined in the final report (1964) of the U. S. Commission of Humanities, _viz., ““The humanities are the study of |that which is most human... . The body is usually taken to include the study of history, the arts, religion, and phi- _losophy.’’ No science? Jacques Maritain, the French religious philosopher, whom ‘no one can accuse of being partial to / natural science, advocated in the Terry }lectures (1943) on ‘‘Education at the Crossroads,’ ‘‘Physics should be taught and revered as a liberal art of the first rank, like poetry.’’ We are liable to forget that one of the nine muses was Urania (astronomy). The Roman statesman Cas- siadorus’ seven liberal arts comprised the trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric) and the quadrivium (astronomy, arithmetic, ‘geometry, music (then largely applied 'mathematics)). What happened over the ages? Nevertheless, the liberal arts, in principle, have always been for free men, to set men free, free to drink hemlock or , to die on a cross for the general welfare. | In historical perspective we can see the omnipresent role of science in the spread of humanism. What is humanism? We might seek its origin in the Greek philosopher Socrates’ ethical concerns in the golden age of antiquity or in the Renaissance’s emphasis ‘upon the dignity of an individual. It is _| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 la amazing how often a _ representative humanist is popularly selected to be a non-scientist. My own preference would be a person like the Italian genius Leonardo da Vinci who doodled with art alongside his engineering notes and with engineering alongside the ones on art. Another versatile person was the Italian natural philosopher Galileo Galilei. In later life he reminisced about his youthful dream of becoming an artist (the Ameri- can art critic Erwin Panofsky concluded that he probably would have been suc- cessful in this capacity). In the tradition of his family (his father was a composer) he himself played several musical instru- ments. He boasted, when young, of knowing by heart the entire ‘‘Orlando Furioso”’ (1516) by the Italian poet Lodovico Ariosto. His own writings in the vernacular was an expression of his overwhelming desire to impress his own convictions on the common reader of his day. That led to his celebrated social controversy with the ruling Church; the people understood him. The popular formulation of humanism is credited to the Roman dramatist Publius Terentius Afer; in his comedy ‘‘Heauton Timoramenos’’ (168 B.C., ‘*The Self-Tormentor’’) a retired farmer justifies his own interest in the activities of a neighbor’s son by the remark, ‘‘Homo sum: humani nihil a alienum puto’’ (‘‘Iamaman: I consider nothing of man alien to me’’). There are, however, different levels of human interest, from the star light of idealistic youth to the earth dung of realistic babes. The intelli- gent (Latin inter legere—to choose between): person chooses between possible courses of action; he dis- criminates rather than behaving pro- miscuously at random. The Greeks, for example, chose the potential excellence of the individual; for them humanism meant man at his best. In this spirit, we, too, might regard humanistic science from purely classical viewpoints: ‘‘the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome,” the grace that was Galilee. We must, how- ever, be careful not to become mere 45 antiquarians; we must look also from a modern point of view. For example, it is not enough that we share Dante’s feeling as he regarded the Ptolemaic universe of his day; we must consider how he might have felt in the Copernican universe of today. Regardless of our esteem for the classical vision (I myself began college as a classics major) or of our indebtedness to its later renascence (I still admire Galileo) we must be sensi- tive to the distinctive feature of our current culture, its new dimension of science and technology. To be sure, this itself is actually an extension of man’s propensities and interests and capabili- ties. It is, therefore, surprising to find so little regard for science in ‘‘Demo- cratic Experience’’ (1975) by the Pulitzer prize winning Librarian of Congress, Daniel Joseph Boorstin. There is, moreover, understandably widespread popular confusion between these two technical terms, science and technology. They can be regarded actually as the extremes of a whole spectrum; scientific understanding per se and tech- nological utilizing per se. The former leads to intellectual abstractions, the latter to social (including moral) applica- tions. One cannot fix any artificial line of demarcation which, at best, would shift with dominant interest from time to time. The picture is further complicated by their continuous interactions. For ex- ample, the amusing electric phenomena of the early nineteenth century gave rise to the engulfing electrical age at its close, while the contemporary powerful steam engine led inevitably to the fascinating field of thermophysics. It is helpful to distinguish three differ- ent types of revolutions in this cultural melée. First of all, there have been a number of technological revolutions, all of which have been concerned primarily with sources of energy and power. (As someone remarked, **The greatest inven- tion in the nineteenth century was the invention of invention.’’) One begins naturally with man’s use of mechanical energy, the energy of the wind and of the wave, with manpower and horsepower. 46 Then came his employment of electrical energy, which was succeeded by chemical energy, and now by so-called atomic energy. As each new form of energy has come into prominence, new social (and moral) problems have been encountered. Strictly scientific revolutions, on the contrary, have revolved about central ideas. For example, in the time of Galileo one might have properly inquired, ‘‘How does a stone fall?’ ‘“‘Let us consult Aristotle,’ would volunteer a classical scholar. ‘‘Why not Thomas Aquinas?’’ would urge a Christian thinker. Galileo, however, would probably ask, *‘Why not observe it directly as it falls?’’ Such a suggestion that one might obtain some answers directly from nature itself was truly revolutionary. In the nineteenth | century some speculators were em- boldened to seek answers to all man’s questions in this manner (but not J). Today there are some who claim that man can obtain such answers solely by the method of the physical sciences (but not I). Even though we may be able prag- matically to describe behavior sufficiently for everyday use, we cannot necessarily explain it to our complete satisfaction; for example, the origin of matter and life, of mind and spirit. With each scientific revolution there are disclosed new in- tellectual problems of a decidedly per- sonal concern because of their philo- sophical and religious implications. The twentieth century ushered in a third type of revolution, what might be called scientific-technological. Certain (not all) fields of science and of tech- nology apparently converge with bene- ficial interactions. Because one can de- scribe certain phenomena scientifically, one then finds that one can make tech- nological predictions. Accordingly, or- ganized research, jointly basic and ap- plied, has become sponsored by industry and by government and even by academia. In such common ventures, however, there is always a danger that one com- ponent will completely overshadow the other. In his ‘‘Grand Academy of Lagado in Laputa’’ (1726) the Irish satirist Jonathan Swift noted that while the J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 dedicated projectors were trying to understand phenomena (e.g., the extrac- tion of sunbeams out of cucumbers), ‘‘the whole country lies miserably waste, the houses in ruins and the people without food or clothes.’’ Here was an extreme prevalence of personal scientific interests with dire social consequences. Nowadays the opposite is increasingly true: an anxious overemphasis upon harvesting technological fruits is leading to a care- less neglect of sowing scientific seeds, a short-sighted search for social applica- tions to the neglect of long-range basic science (new wars are not won now with old weapons). In life one must always allow a margin for the unexpected, in _ science for technology and in technology for science. Evidently a primary democratic need today is understanding of science by the public. We shall not be concerned here with reasons for the widespread current misunderstanding; to what extent it may be due to the spreading habit of technical jargon in all fields of human endeavor, to what extent it is a consequence of ever vacillating fashions of professional edu- cationalists. Mommy consoles Johnny, ““You are having trouble with the new mathematics? Don’t worry; Mommy had trouble with the old mathematics. And look how she turned out!’’ (When Johnny did, he really became worried.) One time when I passed out problems to my sophomore Physics students, one of them exclaimed, ‘‘Do you expect me to do these? Who do you think Iam? Einstein?”’ I looked at him quizzically and replied, ‘‘No! Einstein wouldn’t be taking this course the fourth time.’’ A Congressman once illustrated the scientific method as follows: Pluck the legs off a grasshopper, one by one. In each case tell the grass- hopper then to hop; he will do so until all the legs have been removed. ‘‘Prov- ing,’ said the Congressman, ‘‘by the scientific method that when a grass- hopper has lost all its legs it has lost also its sense of hearing!’ Our modern culture is permeated with such everyday mis- understandings of science. Evidently the public needs to improve J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 sophical and religious its understanding of natural phenomena, and, even more, the very understanding of that understanding, viz., the develop- ment of scientific thinking, including its interactions with politics and economics, with sociology and ethics, its philo- implications. Science, Iam convinced, can and must be taught humanistically. After all, scien- tists are people, human beings. They are not the youthful (21) Mary Godwin Shelley’s Frankenstein creating fantastic monsters; they are not the fanciful creatures lurking in the horror nightmares of science-fiction writers. On the other hand, one is well aware that even the so-called humanities are not necessarily taught humanistically. What is science? Essentially it is not such academic misrepresentations as the following: ‘Information, please!’’ Or- ganized common sense. Black magic (‘Beyond me!’’) Black-box gadgetry. Mysterious mathematics (with the im- primatur Q.E.D.). Technically, it is not primarily induction as popularized by the English lawyer statesman Francis Bacon (1620), or deduction as argued by the French mathematical philosopher René Descartes (1637), or puzzle solving as advocated by the American historian of science Thomas Samuel Kuhn (1962). Each of these, to be sure, may be involved in scientific reasoning, but none of these is the fundamental criterion which was characteristic of the experi- ential work of Galileo. What, then, is science? Obviously the result of the so-called scientific method! And this? Something used by a scientist! It would appear that we are merely begging the question. On the contrary, we are emphasizing that the ‘‘what’’ of science is dependent on ‘‘how’’ this is reached, which is meaningless except in terms of ‘‘who’’ does it. This point of view can be illustrated with four essential elements that are inherent in any ac- cepted scientific method. First of all, I—and you (the scientific method is necessarily communal)—ex- perience something, with nature as a source (possibly indirect). (One should 47 preferably study nature—not science. Note that mathematics per se is excluded in this definition.) Out of our intellectual curiosity we frame questions, selected, but not necessarily answerable at the time. In religious studies, for example, typical questions were the following: Why cannot an omnipotent God make a triangular circle? How many angels can be placed on the point of a needle? In mathematics, why can’t I try to square a circle if I wish to do so? Which is larger V1 or V—1? In physics, what is the color of that beautiful atom? Where is the elusive electron inside it? Selective ques- tions allow for even fewer possible answers, obtained sometimes by pene- trating insight, at other times through mystifying intuition. What is truly em- barrassing is to have irrelevant questions reveal relevant answers, to find im- pertinent questions lead to pertinent rela- tions. One’s experience, to be -sure, depends upon the questioner “‘who.”’ Secondly, I—and you—review these findings somehow, with imagination as inspiration—in the sense of the English romantic poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge, i.e., definitely not imaginary or fanciful, like a mermaid. An old lady once accosted the English romantic painter Joseph M. W. Turner, ‘“‘I’ve never seen a sunset look like that!’’ He replied ‘‘Don’t you wish you could?’ The French Fauvist Georges Rouault was asked how he was able to portray so brilliantly the glistening white birches of spring. ‘‘By observing the snow-clad fields of winter’’ was the reply. As the English natural philosopher Isaac Newton sat under an old apple tree, an apple fell on his head. ‘‘What a lucky day!’ he probably mused, ‘‘Suppose it had been the moon!’ What a revolu- tionary comparison, a moonlike apple and an applelike moon! This was the first time man conceived of a physical uni- verse, where the gravity of the earth acts on both moons and apples. Up to that time, man had actually inhabited a duoverse with the celestial heaven per- fect and unchanging while in the terrestrial region below it there was a perfect mess ever changing. What a comprehensive 48 imagination—made possible by the in- tellectual and emotional freedom of a scientist ‘‘who.”’ The third element is your ability —and mine—to deduce something else, with reason as a guide. We insist upon logical consistency with respect to man’s mind. In this connection we note the role of mathematics which may insure suffi- ciency, but not necessity. Suppose, for example, the price x of an apple is given by the equation x? = 25. Is 5¢ the correct answer? No! there are two answers; the one we choose is determined by the marketplace. Mathematics, you see, may tell us about all possible worlds that fit our stipulations. The actual world, how- ever, can be determined only by some experiential boundary condition. The fourth element is that very criterion: I—and you—check our con- — clusions, with nature as a re-source. Our speculations must be bound by our experience. You may recall the antics which the Greek giant Antaeus exhibited when he was strangled mid-air by that work-force of the Greek gods, Heracles. The unforgettable trick was to keep Antaeus’ feet from touching his mother earth where his strength would always be nourished upon contact. To me this is a parable of science —not to mention art and religion; one’s vital strength is con- tinually renewed so long as there is direct contact with experience, otherwise one merely goes through antics, regardless of how clever or complex. The sequence of these four elements is not significant, being dependent largely upon the skill of the explorer. The success iS a consequence mainly of the properties of the materials themselves. The whole process, however, is cumula- tive—not so much like the smooth ascent of a pyramid as the rough climbing a mountain with its unexpected ups and downs, going arounds, and occasional lost direction amid engulfing fog. In this concise review of what I call the scientific method (in preference to various incomplete statements which are often popularly dubbed scientific methods) we have ignored certain important tacit J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 assumptions. The most familiar one is the seeming experiential unity of nature. _ Nowadays we have become accustomed | to the apparent uniformity of matter whether it exists on the earth or on the _ moon, whether on the planet Mars or on evolving stars. More significant is the assumption of human comprehensibility. _ The German theoretical physicist Albert Einstein is said to have remarked that the one fact about the universe incom- | prehensible to him is its evident com- | prehensibility by man. Recently we have become more and more aware of the importance of a third requirement, viz. social acceptability. This assumption takes two prominent forms, viz., special professional dominances and the general cultural matrix. Max Planck, the German theoretical physicist, who conceived the quantum theory, notes in his posthumous (1948) ‘Scientific Autobiography’: ‘‘A new scientific truth does not triumph by con- vincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its Opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.’ In this connection one recalls the first presentation of the conservation of energy to professional scientists. When James Prescott Joule, the English experi- mental physicist, presented a paper at the 1847 Oxford meeting of the British Asso- ciation for the Advancement of Science, the chairman of the session insisted that the Manchester brewer’s son be brief, and allowed no time for any discussion. Fortunately a young Scotch-Irish pro- fessor of natural philosophy at the Uni- versity of Glasgow, William Thomson (later Baron Kelvin), academically ac- ceptable, rose to call attention to this epoch-making work that was about to be by-passed. Almost a century later (1937) | the English experimental physicist Ernest Rutherford (Baron of Nelson) predicted | the impracticability of atomic energy — only eight years prior to awesome Hiroshima. Senior scientists are wont to re-view current developments in the per- _ Spective of their own pioneering work — ) areactionary procedure. | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 This retarding social behavior is even more widespread with respect to the current cultural matrix. If there had been a Vatican Digest in 1616, it would undoubtedly have presented Galileo’s dilemma with respect to the Ptolemy- Copernicus issue in the form of a do-it- yourself analysis. Which is true: the hypothesis of the Alexandrian Claudius Ptolemy that all planets revolve about the earth, or that of the Polish Nicholaus Copernicus with the earth itself joining the planets all moving about the sun? What factors are critical in making such a decision? First of all, I suppose, is the requirement of agreement with observa- tional data. In this case both hypotheses could be regarded as satisfactory, al- though the data themselves were wanting in precision (the Ptolemaic theory how- ever, had been useful for more than 1400 years). The Copernican theory, to be sure, waS more mathematically elegant than the Ptolemaic in the disuse of any large epicycles (there were still 34 circles in the Copernican theory in constrast with more than 80 in the Ptolemaic). Ptolemy’s view, however, was enshrined in Dante’s ‘‘Divine Comedy,”’ an epitome of the culture of the day, whereas Copernicus’ radical conception would have to be regarded as philosophically wanting. What about usually reliable common sense? Francis Bacon believed that any ‘‘fool’’ could see the sun moving across the sky. On the basis of these considerations one would reasonably favor overall the Ptolemaic hypothesis. Such as the concensus of intellectual opinion in Galileo’s day. Science is evidently culture-bound; hence the in- creasingly important new field, the sociology of science. We digress to discuss briefly several fruitful by-products of the scientific method that are noteworthy. First of all, there are the observed facts. Despite the German historian Leopold von Ranke’s dictum to let facts speak for themselves (‘‘wie es eigentlich gewesen’’ —‘‘how it really was’’), they don’t! It is rather the scientist who selects, questions, ob- serves, describes, and infers with respect 49 to what, where, when, how, and how much (measures always approximate). These observed facts, in short, reveal ° man’s fingerprints, like the soil that clings to a plucked root. Science, moreover, is never merely a loose-leaf notebook of recorded facts; it at least has them classified. But the Scientist again plays the chief role; he himself identifies associates, idealizes, and conceives. He transforms percepts into concepts, both empirical and theo- retical. For example, it is truly amazing that there was not even a thermoscope to detect temperature changes until the advent of Galileo. Up to that time a thing was regarded as having either heat or cold. It was Galileo who viewed these two conditions as being different states on a single scale—thus leading to the invention of a thermometer. Even more significant is the first theoretical concept ever formulated by man. The story is a familiar one. Hieron II, king of Syracuse (3rd century B.C.), ordered his goldsmith to make a new crown out of the royal gold. He was, how- ever, suspicious of the goldsmith; he wondered if the gold was in the com- pleted crown or under the goldsmith’s gown. He called upon his chief scientist Archimedes (the first great mathematical physicist) for advice. Archimedes’ cele- brated bath in this connection was not an uneventful occasion. In his life of Marcellus the first-century Greek biog- rapher Plutarch notes that this action was community inspired every now and then. In his Roman bath Archimedes was cer- tainly not striving to be the best bathed Syracusan. He was anxiously waiting for the ordeal to be over. Meanwhile he paddled playfully in the water and sud- denly noted that just as much water would overflow as he himself became immersed. Rushing out down the street, he shouted, ‘‘Eureka!’’ (“‘I have found it’’). The townspeople were amazed— not because he was naked (Greek runners always ran naked), but because there was no race. Out of this simple experience Archimedes formulated the first theo- retical concept in the history of mankind, 50 viz., specific gravity, which relates two important factors, the weight of a body and that of an equal volume of water. The concept is just as valid and useful today as when it was proposed more than 2000 years ago. In addition to observed facts and related factors, there is a third important by-product, namely, a factitious theory. The word theory itself comes from the same Greek root as theatre; it signifies a view. The scientist attempts finally to relate all his findings in a single view, to comprehend all the facts and factors. A Scientist is thus a creative artist and science a human artifact. To change the metaphor, he is like an involved coach with a game plan—not a neutral referee judging the legality of each play. Max | Born, the German theoretical physicist, concludes the Appendix of his Wayne- flete Lectures (1949) on ‘‘Natural Phi- losophy of Cause and Chance’’ with his conviction that ‘‘faith, imagination, and intuition are decisive factors in the progress of science as in any other human activity.”’ Science in the making is adventure-some (one can always expect the unexpected), wonder-full, and joy-full. What are the chief factors that deter- mine the progress of science? Why does it flourish here and now, but not there and then? Why, for example, in colonial England and France, but not in colonial Spain? What are the essential develop- mental conditions? We would all like to optimize them. We will just mention two important factors. The progress of science depends in the first place on the definability of phe- nomena, which, in turn, is a function of their complexity and of the inevitable involvement of the observer. (Pure ob- jectivity does not exist, although the object aspect may be _ distinguishable.) The second major factor is the repro- ducibility of the phenomena, which is dependent upon the multiplicity and interrelatedness of their constituents, e.g., the proverbial unpredictability of weather is a notable illustration. The rapid development of the physical sci- ences in comparison with that of the life J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | sciences and of the social sciences is owing largely to their relative simplicity —more so than to the interest of private investigators or to the funds available | from social agencies (usually in propor- tion to the practicability expectation). The progress of science is civilly LTD. There are definite limitations to any man’s dream that the scientific method will achieve success at all times and all places under all conditions. Blaise Pascal, the French philosophical physicist, noted | in his fragmentary ‘‘Pensées’’ that man is seemingly suspended between the | infinite and infinitesimal. Today man is )) floundering between ignorance of the ) very large (e.g., nebulae receding with | almost the speed of light away from us) and ignorance of the very small (e.g., the German theoretical physicist Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle with respect to precise knowledge simul- taneously of the position and speed for an elementary particle). A fog shrouds our scientific venture as it moves forward. Complete liberation seems more and more doubtful as we find ourselves bound /not only by our mental processes, but also by our man-made instruments. As an expanding ball of light spreads its illumination, at the same time it reveals proportionately more the immensity of the surrounding darkness. This phe- nomenon has become increasingly evi- | dent in the well-developed physical Sciences; one wonders how long it will take the life sciences, basking currently 'in the glow of success through utilizing | fruits of the physical sciences, to reach a | similar apparent impasse. | Let us now touch lightly upon some } philosophical limitations—at least from | | my own point of view. There are four | primary scientific approaches to the basic | problem of man and his environment, | viz., the avenue of the physical sciences, | that of the biological sciences, that of | psychology, and that of the social sciences. Each of these avenues is | attendant with certain common ques- ) tions: Pilate’s, ‘‘What is truth?’’ Mac- | beth’s, ‘‘is this a dagger?’ Hamlet’s, | “To be or not to be!’’ The attempt to SS aae is answer these three questions on truth, reality, and value is the philosophy of science. Physics, for instance, pre- supposes some metaphysics—not that metaphysics is essentially a part of physics, but rather it is part of the scaffolding used in building the physics edifice. In the twentieth century, ac- cordingly, science has become more philosophical and philosophy, in turn, more science based. What is true? This formulation of the first question, more akin to Hebraic verbal action than to the Greek nounal abstraction of Pilate, is typical of a behavioral approach. (The legal demand to “‘tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth’? belongs to the ‘“theater of the absurd.’’ Who would claim to know all the truth?) In science, accordingly, one is content to insist only that a statement be true to observation and logic, and to hope that it may lead to a greater comprehension of the known and possibly to the unification of science itself. A scientist never pretends to know everything; on the other hand, he cannot deny knowing something. An illustration or two may serve to clarify how scientific thinking has influenced philosophical ideas. Imagine a trailer with two newlywed coeds inside. As she lights a candle in the very middle of the trailer, she muses, ‘‘Have you ever had physics?’’ Chagrined by the very thought — particularly on his honeymoon—he grunts, ‘‘Yes.’’ She then asks, ‘‘When I light this candle, will the light reach the forward end first, or the rear?’ His countenance beams; he knows the answer, ‘‘It reaches both at the same time.’’ You and I, however, stand- ing outside, see that the trailer is moving. Obviously, the light will reach the ap- proaching rear end before it gets to the receding front end. Which answer is correct? Both! The theory of restricted relativity is based on the experimental fact that the speed of light is the same for all observers, independent of any relative motion of the observed and the observer. If we are not positive about the simul- taneity of such phenomena, how can we 51 be certain about basic concepts like space and time? Our notion of these, indeed, has had to be revised. The essence of relativity, indeed, is not that phenomena may be relative to the observer; rather, that some (e.g., the speed of light) are invariant to all observers. It is unfortunate, therefore, that a popularizer like Joseph Fletcher, the Cambridge (MA) secular theologian, has made relativity per se the corner stone of his so-called new mortality with respect to old situation ethics. What is requisite for relative mores are ethical invariances—what used to be called absolutes. Another familiar misunderstanding seems to be inherent in the popular notion of atomic energy. (cf. Jacob Bronowski’s comment (1973), ‘‘We should never have turned mass into energy.’’) By the end of the nineteenth century it had become customary to regard the world as con- taining electromagnetic radiation (light, x-rays, et al.) coexistent with material things. But how does radiation differ essentially from matter? Both have energy (E) and momentum. In addition, however, matter has mass (M); does radiation have mass also? Albert Einstein concluded from basic physical laws that radiation, as well as matter, has mass given by the universal formula E = Mc?, where c is the speed of light. Its mis- interpretation consists in thinking of mass transforming into energy, or vice versa. Actually neither is true. Mass is always conserved, and so is energy. The diffi- culty, I believe, stems from our short- hand way of speaking. We _ charac- teristically associate inert matter with its characteristic property mass and pene- trating radiation with its dominant characteristic energy. Hence when matter is transformed into radiation, we carelessly think of their associated characteristics as being transformed. Ever since the Ionian philosophers, the nature of matter itself has intrigued think- ing man. Immanuel Kant, the German transcendental philosopher, first pointed out the antimony lurking in matter; one cannot conceive of its infinite division or of its limited divisibility (cf. the Greek 52 radical concept of an atom). There was a time when the story of the universe could presumably be written with an alphabet of 92 letters, which could be formed with a single p e n (proton, electron, neutron). Then a number of new elementary particles were discovered: the positron, neutron, meson, and so on. Each year the situation became more and more puzzling as the number of so-called elementary particles increased to more than 200. In view of their approximate similarity of mass and electric charge, Werner Heisen- berg proposed the possibility of these | particles being merely different states of — a single dynamical system—like the | various energy levels of a single atom. The second philosophical question is | concerned with the reality of scientific. | theory. One would certainly prefer a | behavioral approach here, too; largely | because of the linguistic confusion in- | herent in the multiple usage of the word | real. (The American experimental phys- | icist Percy Williams Bridgman refused } ever to use the word real.) For example, | how does realism in art differ from that | in philosophy? Or existence in religion | from that in mathematics? Scientists, | therefore, are wont to content themselves | with a pragmatic use of the term. The gravitational force field, for instance, is | generally accepted as real because of its | usefulness as aconcept. May there not be |; other logics? Say, some kind of Aristo- | telian potential reality, where a New- j tonian material force and a Maxwellian | force field may be regarded as different manifestations of the same reality? | Suffice it for the moment to comment that | reality appears as a tantalizing multi- | faced creature facing many different | points of view. We shall not discuss it | further here except to remind you of the | confusion that arose in physics itself as to | the basicity of particles and waves, both | of which were unwarranted speculations | with respect to experiential phenomena. | The question of value presents an | immediacy of practical concern. Here, | too, a behavioral approach is desirable; ' for scientists do behave like human | beings. Noting their failures they make J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | V4 value judgements—zin terms not always of scientific goals, but rather of pragmatic | successes. They have generally been | successful when they themselves have | been truth-full and hope-full, as well as cooperative, regardless of color or creed, class or country. In so doing man has found himself to be a partner in a creative coordination like snowflakes that crystal- lize out of chaotic vapor motion. Out of the complexity emerges order, out of un- certainty an apparent sense of direction. Not that a scientist ever attains ultimate truth—or even strives for it. Great ‘scientists like the English natural phi- losophers Isaac Newton and Michael Faraday have been sincerely humble. Extrinsic values, however, are of ‘greater concern nowadays than these ‘intrinsic ones. For example, is science \possibly evil? Some years ago I was in- -vited to participate in a symposium on ‘Poetry and Science’’ sponsored by the American Society of Aesthetics. Another speaker was a poet-in-residence at a well known college, the third was a phi- losopher at a major university. The poet began by addressing me, ‘‘I do not know : you. I have nothing against you per- | sonally. Science, however, is essentially evil!’ I was dumfounded by this novel introduction to an academic discussion. I had to lay aside my notes, which jargued that science, dealing with the }) whole universe, is probably more imagi- }|native than poetry, restricted narrowly to ‘)man’s own feelings. I was forced, how- ever, to tackle the problem at hand. | Take a knife,’ I said, ‘‘Is it good or j\bad?”’ In the hands of a benevolent }) physician it can cut out a bad appendix; |\in the hands of a predatory man it can \stab a good heart. The knife itself is ‘‘/neither good nor bad, but it can be used by its holder for either good or bad. | Science, to be sure, in times of war can ‘}jand must help to produce longer spears, ‘/)sharper swords, and bigger bombs, but '))that same science can enable the partially }/blind to see better, the partially deaf /\io hear more, the very lame to get about from place to place. Science of itself is t) Meither good nor bad; it is neutral. It can, J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 however, be used by technological man for good or for bad. The heart of the war problem, for instance, has been, is now, and ever will be the heart of man himself. Scientists, however, are people; their personality has many aspects. As citizens, for example, they cannot remain morally neutral. Recently I had occasion to note the Greeks whom Dante had assigned to the first circle of Hell; among the chatting throng was the mathematician Euclid, the astronomer Ptolemy, and the physician Galen. I was surprised, moreover, to find the famous adventurer, wise Ulysses, being tormented in the eighth circle for his abandonment of his old father Laertes, of his faithful wife Penelope, and of his infant son discreet Telemachus; he was pictured by the English poet Alfred Tennyson as still setting out in his last years *‘to follow knowledge like a sinking star.’ Each individual, scientist or not, must personally solve his own social problems. He may appear vacillating like Albert Einstein who, as a nationalist, recommended the making of an atomic bomb (potentially for war), and later, (as a pacifist, deplored its actual use. Each one of us has to decide for himself; and no one knows just what he will do under stringent circumstances. Each scientist, however, should strive to tell just what he truly knows and the limitations of that very knowledge, beyond which he must act on faith. It is impossible to quaran- tine a scientist from the contagious ills of society. Intimately related to philosophical beliefs are religious implications of science. Man, of course, is intellectually curious about his spatial environment and is awfully inspired by its challenging mystery. His personal concerns, how- ever, are more apt to be confined to earth, which moves like a life boat in space with man himself seemingly the captain, without chart or compass. In addition to speculative philosophical issues, there is also Everyman’s question (cf. the popular 15th century morality Dutch play ‘‘Everyman’’): ‘‘Alas, whereto may I trust?’’ There is a vital 53 need for every man’s commitment to some overwhelming pattern for his every- day living. Whereas science is neutral, scientists themselves are people who have to couple their scientific experience and religious experience. They, too, may behave like the prophet Elijah who heard a still small voice, or like the patriarch Job who discerned an act of God in a whirlwind. Religious men of science have subscribed to many different personal beliefs. There have been Anglicans like Clerk Maxwell and Isaac Newton; Con- gregationalists like Josiah Willard Gibbs and Robert Andrews Millikan; Friends like John Dalton and Arthur Stanley Eddington; Lutherans like Werner Heisenberg, Hermann von Helmholtz, and Max Planck; Presbyterians like Arthur Holly Compton; Sandemanians like Michael Faraday; Roman Catholics like Galileo Galilei, Albertus Magnus, Gregor Mendel, Blaise Pascal, and Louis Pasteur; Unitarians like Benjamin Frank- lin; et al. —to mention only a few about whose lives I am somewhat familiar. (An interesting study would be the reciprocal influence of science and of religion.) One wonders why there is a wide- spread notion that there are apparent conflicts between science and religion. In the 18th century controversy was cer- tainly focused on the physical sciences; in the 19th century it was centered in the biological and earth sciences; in the 20th century it is apparent in psychology and the social sciences. On college campuses it still lurks often beneath a veneer of academic sophistication. The laboratory is frequently too narrow to permit a look out upon the whole universe; the chapel door (usually closed) may be too narrow to let even God enter. The average per- son, I suppose, does not have any problem of science and religion. Here is a scientist: he has had genuine scientific experiences, he believes these experi- ences to be true, he hopes truth is single. If there is any apparent conflict between science and religion, he chooses science which he knows. Here is a man of religion: he has had genuine religious 54 experiences, he believes these experi- ences to be true, he hopes truth is single. If there is any apparent conflict between religion and science, he rejects science which he does not understand. In both cases it is not a matter of science and religion, but rather of science or religion. There is naturally a desire by some for simply a theoretical world of science alone or for simply a theoretical world of religion alone; occasionally one finds an individual trying to straddle the two worlds despite a wide gulf between them. In my own judgement, however, conflicts between science and religion are always inevitable. Although each field deals with a particular aspect of our one world, each — is continually imperfect and incomplete; | their overlap, therefore, is necessarily | full of inconsistencies and lacunae. One | would, nevertheless, hope that the con- | flicts of a person at age sixty would not | be the same as those of the same person | at age sixteen; over the years there should | have been both scientific and spiritual | growth. ; We began our discourse with the con- | cept of one world. As we now look back, | we can discern three essentially different | scientific outlooks: first, every man looks | out on the world of phenomena as a | second, a scientist’s outlook | covers selected phenomena; third, an | individual’s outlook beyond phenomena | per se. Does science, however, ever | real’’ world of nature? At | have emphatically | shouted, ‘‘Yes!’’ But physicists nowa- | days are inclined to be cautious; they | are more apt to point to a possible dis- | closure without insisting on a logical | proof. To illustrate, consider the con- | tinual doubling of the number of sides of a | regular polygon. One can see a circle | emerging as the doubling increases | without end, but one cannot actually | reach it. Likewise in the case of the | whole; C6 visualize a times scientists infinite series 1+4+%44+%4+... one expects the ultimate sum to be 2, although it will not ever be attained. Ina ; similar manner, I believe, science in its | successive approximations discloses the | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | )) ‘‘real’’ world of nature; it points to it |) symbolically. | Everyone has to make his own choice | with respect to the philosophical and | religious implications he discerns per- ) sonally in the world of phenomena. There |) are three primary attitudes. First of all, | there are those who boastfully claim )) they do not know; they are called agnostics | (or ignoramuses). (One wonders how they themselves know that they don’t know.) Their closed minds, however, do |, not allow entrance into the storehouse | of knowledge. Then there is a group of persons who modestly admit they do not | know, but . . . These are skeptics who _ see the door ajar but hesitate to enter; their mind is open, but empty. Still |) others, admit that they do not know, but } boldly enter and find out more and more. || These are men of faith; their open mind | steadily approaches answers to the | perennial questions: where am I? who am | I? what will I be? Civilization has not | been built by agnostics and skeptics, but ) by men of faith. _ People differ, however, as to what they |) put their faith in. Some have been thrilled ’ by the gay flowers about them by day and | the bright stars above them at night. They put their faith in the material environ- ment to provide answers to the basic i = | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 oe questions; they may be called materialists. Others, however, have been entrapped in floods or earthquakes, in hurricanes or dust storms. They fear to put their trust in impersonal matter. On the other hand, they have been entranced by man’s music and painting, by his writings and build- ings. They put their faith in man; they are atheistic humanists. Still others have seen man’s inhumanity to man, in his city slums about and in atomic bombs above. They are compelled to look up for salvation to some higher power, which for want of a better name they call God; they are theistic humanists. Religion then becomes the binding together of the plane of man and his environment and God. One cannot prove that any of these attitudes is true or false. I myself have one life to live; Iam a theistic humanist. I believe in the divine rights of man. ‘‘The world stands out on either side No wider than the heart is wide; Above the world is stretched the sky, — No higher than the sky is high. The heart can push the sea and land Farther away on either hand; The soul can split the sky in two, And let the face of God shine through. But East and West will pinch the heart That cannot keep them pushed apart; And he whose soul is flat—the sky Will cave in on him by and by.’’ Edna St. Vincent Millay (‘‘Renascence’’) So Mortimer Demarest Leonard, Entomologist: Biographical Sketch and List of Publications A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (1) Bureau of Plant Industry, Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, Harrisburg 17120 : Mortimer Demarest Leonard’s diverse and unconventional career spanned more than half a century, beginning as an under- graduate in 1909 during the glory years of entomology under J. H. Comstock at Cornell University and officially closing in 1961 near the end of an era of chlori- nated hydrocarbon insecticides and during the early days of integrated pest manage- ment. He has been described as one of the best-known members of his profes- sion (2); the reasons for his extraordinary visibility are many. Dr. Leonard’s career took him into the study of insect systema- tics, biology, and distribution in which he edited the New York State list of in- sects, revised the dipterous family Rhag- ionidae, and published on immature stages of Hemiptera and aphid distribu- tion; into extension entomology where he was a pioneer in establishing services for fruit growers; and into industry where he developed uses for numerous agricul- tural insecticides as one of the first ento- mologists to serve commercial interests. He worked for industry in nearly all re- gions of the country and abroad where he collaborated with hundreds of state, federal, and foreign workers. His out- going personality and genuine interest in others won friends wherever he went. My first association with Dr. Leonard came shortly after I began my graduate work at Cornell in 1966. He promptly identified a collection of aphids I had made and urged me to do additional col- lecting that might add data for the sec- ond supplement to his list of the aphids of New York State. Possibly because I was associated with his beloved Cornell, he took a special interest in my graduate career, encouraging me throughout in 56 correspondence from 1967 to 1971. I met | Dr. Leonard just once, at the 43rd An- | nual Meeting, Eastern Branch, Entomo- | logical Society of America at Philadelphia | in October 1971, shortly after I had fin- | ished my studies at Cornell. His encour- | agement and continued interest in my | work prompted me to assemble more | biographical material than space per-’ mitted Louise Russell to present in her © excellent obituary written after Dr. Leon- | ard’s death in August 1975 (Russell 1975). | The preparation of this sketch and | accompanying data was made easier for | me because Dr. Leonard had maintained | a partial list of his publications and had listed the species named in his honor, | scientific societies to which he belonged, and the professional congresses he had | attended. These personal items were | given to Cornell University and were | made available by L. L. Pechuman. I | am also indebted to Donald D. Leonard, | Mortimer’s younger brother and former | raw silk and yarn broker in New York | City, for answering many of my questions | about Dr. Leonard in a series of letters | to me from November 1976 to April 1978. Much valuable information was available | in letters by F. L. Campbell and J. S. Wade in recommending Leonard for membership in the prestigious Cosmos | Club of Washington, D. C. C. P. Alexan- | der provided details of his and Leonard’s | student years at Cornell. These sources | have enabled me to discuss fully Leon- § ard’s fruitful career. I hope to avoid a | mere sterile recording of his accomplish- | ments but to capture some of his per- | sonality. To this end, the narrative is q somewhat informal and anecdotal; at ; times I refer to Leonard affectionately | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | as ‘‘Mort’’ since this was how most of his friends and colleagues knew him. The Making of a Naturalist M. D. Leonard, born on June 23, 1890, grew up in the comfortable Brooklyn home of his talented parents, Mortimer Haight Leonard and Elizabeth Reid Demarest. His father, whose ancestors had come to New York City from Eng- land in the 18th century (3), attended family-interest businesses of banking and insurance and was active in amateur theatricals. His mother (Fig. 1), of Scotch- French Huguenot ancestry (3), was a well-known contralto soloist in New York City churches and oratorio and teacher and conductor of womens’ choral societies (4). City born and bred, young Mort at- tended neighborhood schools at 81st and 91st streets. He was able to enjoy out- door activities at his parents’ summer home in Ridgewood, New Jersey, a coun- try place with swimming holes, brooks, and open fields where he collected butter- flies and pointed out insects to his parents. Mort worked in the garden and on the one-acre grounds of their summer home. Never a robust youth, he did not hold any other jobs since his parents consi- dered the physical work good for their son. Mort’s father died in 1908 when Mort was in high school and his brother Donald was 12 years old. Mrs. Leonard was a remarkably capable person who assumed the duties of mother and father, including buying and selling property and building a permanent home in Ridgewood (4, 5). In 1904 Leonard entered Chesire Aca- demy near New Haven, Connecticut, where he met Louis Dunham, a student of nearly his own age who had a keen interest in birds. Together they spent much of their spare time in the nearby woods and fields observing birdlife. Mort soon learned ‘‘almost by heart and rather effortlessly, the identifying characters of Fig. 1. M. D. Leonard with his wife, Doris Gardner Pratt (left), and his mother, Elizabeth Reid Demarest (right), ca. 1920. Courtesy of Donald D. Leonard __ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 = 57 a great many of our Northeastern birds’’ (Leonard 1957). Entomological Father. — After spend- ing a year at Chesire, Leonard began to commute from Ridgewood to New York City’s De Witt Clinton High School, at the time this country’s largest second- ary school (ca. 2500 students) (6). Dr. George Washington Hunter, author of the most widely used textbook of high school biology, was head of the biology department; one of his staff members was the well-known student of Hemiptera, Harry G. Barber. By chance, Leonard was assigned to Barber’s section of Bot- any and with his previous fascination with bird study, Mort showed an unusual interest in the class and attracted his teacher’s attention. The following year, Mr. Barber asked that Leonard be placed in his zoology class and obtained permis- sion for Mort to share his lunch periods with him. He told his student that ento- mology was a legitimate profession, and one spring Saturday he invited Mort to collect insects with him near his Rosell, N. J. home. Leonard described the im- pact this trip had on his career: I accepted at once, although I had not the slightest idea of what doing so entailed. This experience proved so fascinating that I decided then and there —that I wanted, more than anything else, to be- come an entomologist (Leonard 1957). Noting Leonard’s continued enthu- siasm for insect collecting, Mr. Barber stressed that Cornell was the school to attend if one really aspired to a career in entomology. At Barber’s suggestion, Mort’s family gave him a copy of A Man- ual for the Study of Insects by Professor Comstock and his wife Anna Botsford Comstock at Christmas, 1908. Mr. Barber then convinced the family that ento- mology could be a reasonably lucrative profession; they eventually consented for Mort to attend Cornell (6). Years later, Leonard gave credit to Barber for charting the course of the rest of his life, and he kept *‘in constant touch with him until the very day of his [Barber’s] death’? (Leonard and Sailer 1960: 127). Several reprints that Mort 58 sent to his esteemed friend and teacher were fondly dedicated to his ‘‘Entomo- logical Father.”’ Cornell, Comstock and Crosby The Undergraduate Years.—Amidst the bustling activity in J. H. Comstock’s department, even Leonard’s first days on campus proved exciting. On September 24, 1909, the freshman approached an- other young student in the departmental library, then housed in Roberts Hall, asking: ‘‘Sir, could you tell me where I could find a copy of Aldrich’s Catalogue of North American Diptera?’’ (7). After a moment, the surprised student told Mort that he too had an interest in the Diptera and had arrived in Ithaca only the day before. Together the two fresh- © men located a copy of the Aldrich cata- logue and marvelled over the fascinating volume. The other young man was Charles P. Alexander, destined to describe more than 10,000 insect species and publish more than 1,000 papers on crane flies (Diptera: Tipulidae) in studies that con- tinue today. Out of that chance meeting evolved several joint projects and two publications on crane flies during their freshman and sophomore years and arose a deep, life-long friendship. Leonard’s formal introduction to en- tomology was Professor Comstock’s gen- eral lecture course. The textbook used was the Manual with which Mort already was well versed. Additional courses under J. C. Bradley (Systematic Ento- mology), G. W. Herrick (Economic En- tomology), J. G. Needham (General Biology), A. D. MacGillivray (Systema- tic Entomology), and W. A. Riley (Medi- cal Entomology and Parasitology) served only to pique Leonard’s interest. He also benefitted from courses under other of Cornell’s famous zoologists: Ornithology under A. A. Allen, Comparative Anatomy of Vertebrates under H. D. Reed, and Systematic Vertebrate Zoology under A. H. Wright (6). Leonard also had the opportunity of associating with students who later achieved some distinction in entomology: C. P. Alexander, R. N. Chap- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 man, H. Dietrich, A. E. Emerson, H. E. Ewing, J. C. Faure, A. D. Funkhouser, S. W. Frost, S. A. Graham, G. H. Griswold, Rew... Harned, H. C. Huckett, H. B. Hungerford, H. H. Knight, H. Morrison, ee WW. Muesebeck,. E. M. Patch,-H: Ruckes, R. C. Shannon, R. C. Smith, J. D. Tothill, J. R. Traver, and others I might have mentioned. Cornell’s faculty shared a camaraderie with their students, often entertaining them in their homes. Sunday night open house at the Comstock’s, which Mort frequently attended, was a tradition. Edith Patch (quoted in Mallis 1971) de- scribed the student-faculty relationship: My first impression of Entomological Cornell was that it was sort of a family with the faculty acting as older brothers to the graduate students and everybody loving the Professor and Mrs. Com- stock better than they did anybody else and that Cornell was the friendliest group of people in the world. For such a distinguished group there was, as Prof. Bradley noted, a surprising lack of jealousy: In those early days, our Department was small enough so that the entire staff and graduate students could be sort of like a family. We all know each other well. . . . Inso far as I have known, there were no jealousies—there was always harmony amongst the members of the staff (8). Louis Agassiz Fuertes, the great bird artist, allowed Mort to accompany him to his studio to watch him paint; (6) Pro- fessor Bradley took Leonard with him to a December 1911 meeting of the New York Entomological Society. Mort also was privileged to participate in the Cor- nell Okefenokee Expedition as the first group of naturalists to explore that great southern Georgia swamp. Led by Brad- ley, other members of the expedition were C. R. Crosby (Cornell economic entomologist), A. H. Wright, W. D. Funk- houser (Headmaster of Ithaca’s Casca- dilla Preparatory School and specialist on the Membracidae), Lee Worsham (Geor- gia State Entomologist), and Leonard’s fellow classmate Sherman C. Bishop, who later became State Zoologist of New York. During late May to mid-July 1912, _ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 2 Pa £E My Wy Fig. 2. Mort at Gutland Vineyards, Patras, Greece, Sept. 18, 1911. Courtesy of D. D. Leonard. the group prepared hundreds of bird skins and thousands of insects. Mort brought back 5 closely pinned Schmitt boxes of flies after identifying some of them during a week’s stopover at the U. S. National Museum in Washington (6). Van Duzee (1915) named in Leonard’s honor a doli- chopodid fly Mort had collected in the swamp, the first named of many insects bearing the specific name leonardi. The love Mort had developed for insect collecting as an undergraduate can be shown by relating an incident that took place on a Mediterranean trip (Fig. 2) he made with his mother, his brother, and a Greek friend during the summer of 1911 between his sophomore and junior years. When the other members of the party were sightseeing in Algiers, the Leonard boys wandered off to collect insects in the city square park. Mort became so fascinated with collecting exotic species that he and Donald overstayed their time. A search party located them, but Mort 59 drew a sharp reprimand for delaying departure of the Martha Washington (4). An obvious enthusiasm and aptitude for entomology brought Leonard into a close relationship with the department head, Prof. Comstock. When Leonard reported for his first class in the fall term of 1911, Dr. Riley informed him that the Professor wanted to see him in his office. Comstock had received a call from L. O. Howard, Chief Entomologist of the U. S. Department of Agriculture in Washington, who explained that Col. Gorgas urgently needed an entomologist to assist in malaria control in order to protect those working to build the Panama Canal. Anyone Com- stock recommended could have the posi- tion. The man Comstock chose was Leonard, after first checking with Riley to see whether Mort had satisfactorily completed his Medical Entomology and Parasitology course. Leonard considered the offer overnight, then decided to de- cline; he appreciated the compliment to his ability, but he did not want any- thing to interfere with his obtaining a Cornell degree (6). At the completion of the spring term in 1913, the University awarded him a B.S. degree. The Graduate Years.—At the urging of some of his professors, Leonard de- cided to stay at Cornell to pursue a Ph.D. Although his research (a revision of the dipterous family Rhagionidae of America north of Mexico) was begun under Professor Bradley and completed under O. A. Johannsen, Mort’s graduate years were influenced more by an economic entomologist and spider taxonomist, C. R. Crosby. Late in 1913 Leonard found several large notebooks in the Agriculture Li- brary that contained clippings of short articles written by Prof. Mark V. Slinger- land, who had died in 1909 at the age of 45. Leonard showed his find to Crosby, who then told Comstock about the dis- covery. Comstock considered the clip- pings to represent valuable information on injurious insects of New York State, and since Slingerland’s writings were scattered in various popular magazines 60 and in newspapers, he suggested that if Mort were interested in compiling them for publication, he would furnish a photo- graph of Slingerland and write an intro- ductory biographical sketch (6). Thus, Leonard published in 1914 ‘‘A Bibliog- raphy of the Writings of Mark Vernon Slingerland,’’ consisting of titles of more than 800 articles published mainly in the Rural New-Yorker. Apparently Crosby and Leonard had hoped to complete and publish an index to the Experiment Sta- tion literature of entomology, a project begun earlier by Prof. Slingerland. The Comstock Memorial Library at Cornell contains five bound volumes of Slinger- land, Crosby, and Leonard’s ‘Index to Experiment Station Literature, 1888 to 1913,’’ the first two volumes dated 1915, the last three, 1916. For some reason this extensive compilation was never published. Leonard further became involved in the practical aspects of entomology when he began to work with Crobsy to control the tarnished plant bug as a pest of peach nursery stock, part-time at first so he could continue his graduate studies. During the summers of 1913-15, he worked at Chase Brothers Nursery, a grower of fruit nursery stock and large importer of plant material, at Honeoye Falls, N. Y. In 1914 federal funds became available for extension work, and Leon- ard was appointed as assistant extension entomologist under Crosby during 1915— 16. Together they described as new sev- eral chalcidoid wasps that parasitized economically important insects, published various bulletins relating to control of fruit pests, and their model bibliography of the tarnished plant bug, which con- tained 315 titles. Their joint publications culminated in a 1918 book on vegetable garden insects. The teacher and student remained close friends long after Mort left Cornell. A series of letters from Crosby to Leon- ard, written daily or every few days while the professor was on an extended collect- ing trip through the south and west, re- veals the depth of their relationship. In his first letter to Mort, dated February J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 22, 1936, and extracted by Osborn (1946), Crosby wrote: By this time you must realize that I am not merely writing you letters but keeping a diary. I never could keep a diary because I had no audience. By doing it this way I may be able to keep a record of the trip. I hope you find it of some interest. In spite of the bad weather we are getting a lot of stuff. Wish you were along. Perhaps more important than the Crosby-Leonard publications was the method they helped devise for trans- lating results of research work into prac- tical use by farmers. With plant pathol- ogists and other members of the Cornell extension group, they developed a spray service for the commercial fruit growers of the state. Special assistants of the New York State Food Supply Commis- sion were placed in the field, beginning in Monroe and Niagara counties in 1917, to show the growers how and when to apply various insecticides and fungicides. This idea, soon copied by other states, helped growers reduce their losses to insects and disease and represented one of this country’s first successful exten- sion programs in entomology and plant pathology (2). Despite the considerable influence of Prof. Crosby and the time-consuming work on control of the tarnished plant bug, Leonard must have initiated several of his own projects. During 1915-16, he managed to publish 4 papers containing descriptions and illustrations of the im- mature stages of plant bugs and leaf- hoppers, some of the first North American work on immatures of the Miridae and Cicadellidae. Some of his illustrations _ were used by Prof. Comstock in his 1918 treatise on the wings of insects. It was in this period that Leonard become inter- ested in the plan to publish a list of New York State insects. J. C. Bradley was named Editor-in-Chief; the leading spe- cialists in the major groups of insects were to serve as sub-editors. Emergency extension work often took Leonard away from campus during the later years of his graduate studies. For short periods he worked on control of vegetable pests at Pennsylvania State | J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 College’s Erie County laboratory in 1918, on truck crop insects on Long Island in 1919, and with Prof. Robert Matheson of Cornell on the European corn borer in Massachusetts in 1920. On October 28, 1918, shortly after he returned from his stay in Pennsylvania, Mort married Doris Gardner Pratt (Fig. 1), a former secre- tary at Cornell and daughter of the pro- duction manager of the Ithaca Journal. Perhaps Crosby now thought his assist- ant had prolonged his graduate work long enough; he urged Leonard to com- plete his dissertation so he would be available to accept job offers (9). Leonard was awarded his Ph.D. in February 1921. Entomological Jack-of-All-Trades Off the Beaten Path.—In late 1921 Bowker Chemical Co. of New York City offered the new graduate the opportunity to direct its field research in the eastern states. To leave Cornell for industry was a radical step since Leonard perhaps was only the second well-trained member of his profession to enter the commercial field. Leonard credits Otto H. Swezey with being the first graduate entomologist to serve a profit-making organization (Leonard 1958). The new job subjected Leonard to ridicule from his colleagues in official positions who made it known that Mort had compromised his principles. Years after his move to Bowker, he wrote: ‘‘Few but the older entomologists can realize today the feeling which prevailed in this matter 25 or 30 years ago’ (Leon- ard 1946). So great could be the oppro- brium that J. G. Sanders (first State En- tomologist of Wisconsin and later director of Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Plant Indus- try), who joined the Sun Oil Co. in the early 1920’s, felt compelled to respond to his tormentors: “* . an economic entomologist still retains his identity and worth, irrespective of the source of his remunerations ... .’’ (Sanders 1925). As Bowker’s director of field research Leonard was to determine new uses for an old copper-arsenical compound that had recently been modified. In coopera- tion with land-grant colleges in several 61 eastern states he planned and carried out experiments with the new material on apples, potatoes, and other crops. In April 1923 he left to re-enter official entomology. When New York’s State Entomologist E. P. Felt was temporarily transferred to the State Conservation Department, Leonard was appointed Acting State Entomologist. At this time the editorial board of the New York Insect List was revised and Leonard succeeded Bradley as Editor. Among Mort’s other duties in Albany was the investigation of the ~ state’s injurious and beneficial insects. When Felt returned, Leonard was ap- pointed and sent to Spain as special investigator by the New York Fruit Ex- change to determine the conditions sur- rounding the USDA’s embargo against Almeria grapes infested with Mediter- ranean fruit fly. Back to Cornell.—His assignment in Spain completed, Leonard returned to Cornell in December 1924 to see the New York Insect List through to comple- tion as its Editor-in-Chief. He also wrote two fascicles for the List: Families Xylo- phagidae, Coenomyiidae, and Rhagioni- dae (Diptera) and (with A. B. Gahan and Crosby) the Superfamily Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera). Mort truly delighted in seeing the insect fauna of his home state documented. In studies on chrysomelid beetles under Prof. Matheson, T. L. Bis- sell collected a rare species and recalls Mort’s elation at having a new addition to the List (10). All possible sources of records were explored. As an example, he spent considerable time rummaging through W. T. Davis’ attic in search of records of Long Island and Staten Island insects (Abbott 1949). The project was completed in 1925, but it was not until 1928 that the List was published as Cor- nell Memoir 101. With its more than 16,000 insects and related arthropods, the List remains as the most comprehensive work on the insect fauna of any geographic region in North America. More than 150 scientists had collaborated to do the col- lecting and taxonomic study necessary to complete the project. 62 Retreat from Blind Alleys.— Again Leonard had to leave Ithaca; once again, as F. L. Campbell aptly described (2), he was forced off the beaten path to ex- plore this way and that, often having to retreat, never becoming entrenched in a permanent position. During 1925—27 Leonard conducted field experiments relating to control of citrus and vegetable pests for the Florida Agricultural Supply Co. of Orlando, a position similar to the one he had held with Bowker Chemical. For part of this period Leonard also worked for the Wilson & Toomer Fer- tilizer Co. of Jacksonville. In August 1927 he returned to Ithaca for a few months as a special agent in the joint Cornell-USDA campaign to clean up in- festations of European corn borer. The campaign completed, Leonard returned to industry, this time as research entomologist with Tobacco By-Products and Chemical Corporation of Louisville, Kentucky. He was stationed at Wenat- chee, Washington, to test insecticides for control of codling moth. In slightly more than a year the experimental work was completed; Mort soon was back to official entomology. Basic Biology Again.—In January 1930 Leonard became Chief of the Divi- sion of Entomology at Puerto Rico’s Insular Experiment Station at Rio Piedros (Fig. 3). His duties were broad: to make general insect surveys and to investigate the control of insect pests of all crops grown on the island. Here Leonard was able to return to active publishing. He had published his first paper as a sopho- more at Cornell and by the time he re- ceived his Ph.D. his scientific contribu- tions numbered more than 30. But in nearly a decade away from Ithaca, mainly in industry, he had published fewer than 10 papers, most of those during his editor- ship of the New York list of insects. At the Insular Experiment Station he was able to carry out basic life history stud- ies similar to those he and Crosby had conducted at Cornell. Leonard and his co-workers studied the biology of the lima bean pod borer, bean lace bug, pink bollworm, cottony cushion scale, J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | sugar cane borer, a lepidopterous leaf- miner of cotton, a root weevil of cas- sava, a coreid bug that injures citrus, papaya fruit fly, as well as other species. The annotated bibliography of Puerto Rican entomology published by Leonard (1933) lists 38 of his own titles, only 7 of them with a co-author. With political changes in the insular government in late 1932, Mort was left without a position. After working for a month or so as a consulting entomologist for United Chem- ical and Exterminating Co. of New York City, Leonard settled into relative secur- ity as a research entomologist for the John Powell Co. of New York. For 5-4 years he was stationed in Florida to con- duct tests with pyrethrum and rotenone in control of vegetable and other crop pests. His next three positions were short- lived: entomologist in charge of Du Pont’s pest control exhibit at the New York World’s Fair (Feb. 1939-—Nov. 1940), and entomologist with Angier Products of Cambridge, Massachusetts (Dec. Fig. 3. Mort in Puerto Rico, ca. 1930. Courtesy of D. D. Leonard. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 Fig. 4. Mort near his Dorchester House apart- ment, spring 1948. Courtesy of D. D. Leonard. 1940—May 1941), and then with the Orange Manufacturing Co., Orlando, Florida (May—Oct. 1941). From December 1941 to late 1945 he served as business analyst for the Office of Price Administration and was in charge of price controls for insec- ticides during World War II. His resi- dence at Dorchester House, 2480 Six- teenth Street NW (Fig. 4), about a mile north of the White House, would be his home for more than 30 years and would become the site of many ‘‘yellow-pan”’ collections of aphids. Looking for Security. — After the war Leonard sought security with the U. S. Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quaran- tine, then under the direction of E. R. Sasscer who had succeeded C. L. Mar- latt. He was assigned to Sasscer to help collect data on exotic insect pests, which if introduced into the U. S., would prove the greatest threat to our agriculture. Sasscer intended for the Bureau to pub- lish on all foreign insect pests that might enter the country, a work that would 63 supersede the well-known manual pub- lished by W. D. Pierce (1917). Leonard helped prepare a draft of a manuscript treating exotic pests of cruciferous crops (11), but even this first part of the intended series was never published. Funds for the project had been depleted; Leonard was dropped from the payroll in 1947. As noted by Campbell: ‘‘It is a tribute to his reputation and ability that at the age of 57 he was promptly employed by another insecticide manufacturer for de- velopmental work (2).’’ In October 1948 Leonard joined the Julius Hyman Co. of Denver, Colorado, to aid in developing uses for new hydrocarbon insecticides in the eastern states. Shell Chemical Co. purchased Julius Hyman in 1952, acquir- ing exclusive rights to the compounds aldrin and dieldrin. In his position Leon- ard cooperated with numerous workers in state, federal, and foreign governments and functioned as an ‘‘Entomological Diplomat’’ in planning overseas uses for his company’s insecticides and dealing with various agencies such as the Foreign Health Division of the U. S. Public Health Service, the Institute of Inter-American Affairs, and the Pan-American Sanitary Bureau. As an example of his involve- ment with foreign countries, he was in- strumental in shipping to Egypt two air- planes loaded with insecticides to combat a locust plague. The promptness of his and Shell’s action helped save most of the cotton crop (12). Upon his retire- ment in July 1961, Shell honored Dr. Leonard ‘‘.. . for his integrity as a scientist and for his many contributions to advance the interests of entomology and his fellow entomologists’’ (13). Entomologist to the End Aphids on a Rooftop—Leonard had not yet developed an interest in aphids when, on his return to Ithaca from the 1912 Okefenokee Expedition, he stopped at Plummers Island, Maryland to collect with H. S. Barber, W. L. McAtee, E. A. Schwarz, and H. L. Viereck (Leonard 1966). We know, however, that by 1916 he had begun to collect aphids; he sent a id letter to Edith Patch informing her of a collection he had made from golden seal. Her reply of September 1, 1916, cited by Mallis (1971) to capture the ‘‘flavor of her personality,’’ was essentially a repri- mand to Leonard for his careless packing of the vials containing the specimens. The zeal with which Mort later was to pursue studies of aphid distribution was the result of a reunion with Crosby dur- ing a short vacation at Cornell in the fall of 1932. At Crosby’s suggestion, Mort did some collecting in the Ithaca area and was impressed with the diversity of the aphid fauna. The recently published work on Illinois aphids (Hottes and Frison 1931) further stimulated Leonard’s inter- est in the group. Separately and together Crosby and Leonard collected aphids until the Professor’s death in 1937 (Leon- ard 1963). Mort published their new records of New York species in a 1937 paper, the first of his more than 50 papers on aphids. Although he had begun to collect aphids in the Washington area in 1945, it was not until the mid-1950’s that he concen- trated on the group. As consulting ento- mologist with Shell Chemical Co., he had time to operate a Moericke (‘‘yellow- pan’’) trap on the roof of his 9-story apart- ment building and accumulate records of the local fauna. Every six months or so, he and his wife Doris would visit her niece (Mrs. David Winters) in Haddon- field, N. J., and invariably Mort would set up his trap in the Winters’ yard (14). Some members of the prestigious Cos- mos Club in Washington must have looked askance when Mort collected from plants in the club’s gardens. For Mort there was always time for collecting: If one keeps at it as he travels, a great deal of valuable stuff can be gotten by dropping by for a few minutes at a likely spot, or during noon hour or after supper as well as on Sundays & occasional holidays. Anyone who really wants to collect .. . can find time even tho busy with other matters”’ (15). Leonard constantly encouraged his friends to collect aphids for him and, if they neglected to send specimens, he would remind them to be more diligent (9). J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 Roy Latham, a close friend and long-time naturalist on Long Island, made numerous collections of aphids from accurately determined host plants; Prof. L. L. Pechu- man collected two new species of New York aphids and contributed many new state records; and C. P. Alexander and others also submitted numerous collec- tions to Mort. It should be pointed out that Leonard was not a taxonomic spe- cialist in the Aphididae and did not de- scribe new species as he had for the Dip- tera and Hymenoptera earlier in his career. He did make many of his own identifications but usually submitted specimens to specialists for verification of his tentative determinations. Many of the world’s aphid authorities were called on for assistance: T. L. Bissell, V.F. Eastop, M. E. MacGillivray, A. T. Olive, J. O. Pepper, F. W. Quednau, A. G. Robinson, L. M. Russell, C. F. Smith, H. L. G. Stroyan, and A. N. Tissot. Through Mort’s own collecting and his encouragement of others, our knowl- edge of the aphid fauna of New York is better known than that of any other state, with some 462 species having been recorded up to publication of his fourth supplement in 1975. He also published distribution records for the aphids of Arizona, California, Connecticut, Dela- ware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia, as well as Cyprus and New- foundland. The Last Years.—Mort remained an active entomologist until his final months; his ambition seldom waned. Even in his later years he still had hopes for finishing a supplement to his New York Insect List (15); he still mentioned the possibility of publishing sketches of entomologists he felt had been neglected (C. H. Hadley and J. G. Sanders for ex- ample) (16); and he was still having aphids sent to him. Less than a month before he died, he turned over to Prof. Pechuman the notes that were to comprise a fifth supplement to his New York list of aphids J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 and asked him to oversee the typing of the manuscript (17). When Doris’ health began to fail, the Leonards moved to a Cherry Hill, N. J. nursing home in early August 1975. With his own health also beginning to decline and without the opportunity of daily tele- phone chats with his Washington friends and occasional visits to the Cosmos Club, Mort may literally have died of a broken heart. He died on August 26, 1975 and was buried in the family plot in Ridge- wood, N. J. Doris died soon after on February 29, 1976. Evaluation of a Career Mortimer D. Leonard’s more than 170 publications in insect biology, distribu- tion, and control; in extension work; and on new uses of insecticides attest to a long and diverse career. He had the op- portunity to be part of the Comstock years at Cornell and to associate with some of the greatest scientists in his field and to be active both in basic and applied research in official and commercial posi- tions. His outstanding achievement prob- ably was overseeing the completion of the New York State List of Insects. Such an ambitious compiling of a state’s insect fauna may never again be attempted. The List is an invaluable reference for insect distribution records and, ina lighter vein, it inspired the long-running column *‘Au- tographa OO”’ by the editor of the Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America. Mort delighted in the explanation of how the name for the column (loosely ex- pressed as ‘‘Oh! Oh! What have I writ- ten’’!) was derived (with apology to gram- marians) from the noctuid moth, Auto- grapha oo, on page 627 of the List (18). In economic entomology the develop- ment and testing of new agricultural insecticides was an outstanding contribu- tion, although no single accomplishment or publication commemorates his devel- opmental work. F. L. Campbell credits Mort with benefitting peoples the world over: There is no question... that the present effectiveness of chemical control of insects can be 65 attributed to the effort over the years of Dr. Leon- ard and men like him. To a considerable extent credit for this great development in food production should go to Dr. Leonard who has been a pioneer and leader in this field (2). According to Leonard’s own estimate, 40% of his time was spent in “‘official”’ entomology, 60% in ‘‘commercial’’ posi- tions (Leonard 1957). He declined to select either as the more enjoyable, although he was justly proud of being one of the first well-trained entomologists to serve industry. He traced the develop- ment of commercial entomology in the United States (Leonard 1958) and, accord- ing to one of Mort’s closest friends, the preparation of the paper truly was a labor of love (19). But did Dr. Leonard fulfill the promise he showed as a taxonomist and general biologist during his student years at Cor- nell? Would Prof. Comstock and _ his friend and adviser Cyrus Crosby have been pleased with their student’s accom- plishments? Comstock might well have been disappointed that Mort so soon abandoned his life history and taxonomic studies and only briefly returned to bio- logical investigations. As a pioneer in extension entomology, Crosby probably would have been pleased to see Mort develop new uses for agricultural chemi- cals which resulted in improved public health and increased food production throughout much of the world. He cer- tainly would have been pleased to see Mort continue his studies on aphids. In fairness to Leonard it should be emphasized that his wanderings were not intended, that a career characterized by an absence of stepwise progression was not planned (2). Sometimes he simply was the victim of bad luck. At various times political tampering (Puerto Rico), business failure (Orange Manufacturing Co.), and termination of funds (U. S. Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quaran- tine) cost him his position. In other cases Mort’s own actions may have kept him from securing permanency in a certain job. One of Leonard’s. compelling desires was to return to Cornell, and Prof. Crosby indeed tried (unsuccessfully for reasons 66 not known) to obtain a permanent faculty position for his friend (9). For an entomologist as well known and admired as Leonard was, one might ex- pect him to have held office in the many societies to which he belonged. His fre- quent shifting of positions and the exten- sive travel required by his developmental work in industry probably prevented him from holding office. In his later years he enjoyed counting ballots for the Entomo- logical Society of America at their head- quarters in College Park, Maryland (20), and he regularly attended meetings of the Entomological Society of Washington. In February 1975 he was elected to Honorary Membership in the Washington society. In an evaluation of Leonard’s work one should not be too critical of a career so diverse and fruitful. Earlier I referred to him as an ‘‘entomological jack-of-all trades,’ not disparagingly, but as a com- pliment to his achievements in several areas of his science. Perhaps his produc- tivity (however that might be measured) would not have been enhanced had he remained at Cornell. Certainly he would never have had the opportunity to make such lasting contributions to world food production. In the end, what others thought of his productivity matters less than how Mort viewed his life’s work. Clearly he enjoyed it: As I look back over the years, it seems to me that being an entomologist has been a very reward- ing way of life. I have travelled widely and met hosts of interesting people, including many from foreign lands, and I have made many valued friends. I believe my activities have been of benefit to my fellow man (Leonard 1957). Mort Leonard the Man Russell’s (1975) obituary of Dr. Leon- ard provides good insight into his per- sonality. She described him as ‘‘kind, cordial, sociable, communicative, and intensely interested in people and their activities.”’ Mort seldom failed to add a personal touch; nearly always he re- membered his friends’ anniversaries and birthdays (9). At the close of my graduate work at Cornell, Dr. Leonard learned that I had scheduled my “‘defense of the- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 sis’ exam and took time to send a letter wishing me success. When Mort’s father died, he became and would remain a ‘‘tower of strength’’ (21) to his younger brother Donald and an affectionate son to his mother. Although he was seldom home after he enrolled at Cheshire Academy, he helped his mother when he could and did his best to return for high days (the Leonard’s were Episcopalian) and holidays (5). At Cornell Mort enjoyed a social life apart from activities associated with the Entomology Department and lectures and field trips of the Agassiz Club. He was a member of Eleusis, a local fra- ternity that was merged into the national Theta Kappa Nu and then into Lambda Chi Alpha. Mort was a great storyteller and, like his father, had a flair for mimick- ing a Jewish and a Spanish dialect. He often was called on to entertain his fra- ternity’s ‘‘rushees’’; he had some of his mother’s musical ability and was a good ‘fiddler’? (21). In the Agriculture College Mort was a member of the Violin Quar- tet and the Mandolin Club. Sometimes he made a small sum of money by playing at local dances. Over the years he sang and interpreted some of the humorous songs that his Aunt Neil, his mother’s younger sister, had handed down (22). A write-up prepared for the 1913 Cor- nell classbook vividly characterizes Mort the student: We call him ‘‘Bug’’ Leonard because of his proclivities not because of his state of mind. Despite his habitual church—deacon expression, Mort can, on occasion, give a very correct imitation of ‘The Missing Link.’ He is perfectly at home with his pipe and his ‘“‘bugs,’’ a master stuntster, and a charter member of the Bachelors Club (23). To really capture the flavor of Mort’s personality, more should be said about Cornell. When he finished his doctoral work, Leonard probably wanted to re- main on the Cornell staff. Despite the disappointment of failure to land a perma- nent position, Mort always cherished memories of his years in Ithaca and rel- ished the opportunity to visit with Cor- nell alumni. In 1967 he donated to Cornell his personal collection of aphids con- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 sisting of some 500 species and nearly 17,000 slides. Leonard’s collection, together with the aphids assembled by former Cornell entomologist Grace H. Griswold, is known as the ‘‘Griswold- Leonard Collection of Aphididae’’ (Pechu- man 1969). Shortly before he died, Leon- ard gave his books, reprints, reprint col- lection, diplomas, and microscope to the University (9). Although not physically impressive (he was 5'7” tall and weighed 125 lbs. as a Cornell student) (23), Mort was a hand- some man, bearing (some thought) a resemblance to the actor Adolph Men- jou. He was always well dressed, even dapper (Fig. 4); above all, he was a gentle- man. Like many entomologists, Leonard was not without his quirks. At times he could be stubborn. In restaurants his second cup of coffee had to be brought in aclean cup (20), and on his 50th reunion at Cornell he insisted on retracing his original route to Ithaca. Since train serv- ice was no longer available to Ithaca, Prof. Pechuman met Mort at the railroad station in Binghamton to take him and Doris to his reunion (9). In short, Mort Leonard was a convivial, gregarious sort. Robert Hamman per- haps said it best: ‘‘Mort never met a stranger, only friends’’ (19). The Writings of M. D. Leonard (Authorship of publication is in the order given) 1912. Venational variation in Cladura (Tipulidae Diptera). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 20:36-39. (C. P. Alexander and M. D. L.). 1912. A new Palaearctic Geranomyia (Tipulidae, Diptera). Can. Entomol. 54: 205-207. (C. P. Alexander and M. D. L.). 1913. Additions to the New Jersey Tipulidae (Dip- tera), with the description of a new species. Entomol. News 24: 247-249. 1914. An egg-parasite of the tarnished plant bug, Lygus pratensis L. Can. Entomol. 56: 181-182. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 1914. The tarnished plant-bug. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 346, pp. 461-526. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 1914. A bibliography of the writings of Professor Mark Vernon Slingerland. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 348, pp. 621-651. 1914. The cabbage aphis. N. Y. State Coll. Agr., 67 1S: 1915. LOSE LSS: 1915. LOS: 1915: 1915: 19S: LOIS: 1916. 1916. 1916. 1916. 1916. 1916. 1916. 1916. 68 Cornell. Unnumbered leaflet. 1 p. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Insects injurious to the fruit of the apple. N. Y. State Coll. Agr., Cornell Reading Courses 4(84) Insect Series 1: 121-144 and supplement pp. 1-4. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). The role of sucking insects in the dissemina- tion of fire blight bacteria. Phytopathology 5: 117-123. (V. B. Stewart and M. D. L.). Spray calendar prepared for the E. C. Brown Co., of Rochester, N. Y. 16 p. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). The control of insect pests and plant dis- eases (revised). Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 283, pp. 463-500. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Further experiments in the control of the tarnished plant-bug. J. Econ. Entomol. 8: 361-367. The immature stages of the black apple leafhopper ([diocerus provancheri Van Duzee). J. Econ. Entomol. 8: 415-419. The immature stages of Plagiognathus politus Uhler and Campylomma verbasci Herrick-Schaeffer (Capsidae, Hemiptera). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 23: 193-197. A new species of Gonatocerus (Mymaridae) parasitic on the eggs of a new species of Idiocerus (Bythoscopidae) feeding on poplar. J. Econ. Entomol. 8: 541-547. (M. D. L. and C. R. Crosby). How and when to spray (revised). D. B. Smith, Utica, N. Y. 4 p. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Directions for use of insecticides. Insecti- cide and Disinfectant Manufacturers Assoc., Inc., N. Y. 36 p. (C. R. Crosby ~ andsM. Dy 22 The immature stages of Tropidosteptes cardinalis Uhler (Capsidae, Hemiptera). Psyche 23: 1-3. The immature stages of two Hemiptera— Empoasca obtusa Walsh (Typhlocybidae) and Lopidea robiniae Uhler (Capsidae). Entomol. News 27: 49-54. Further studies in the role of insects in the dissemination of fire blight bacteria. Phyto- pathology 6: 152-158. (V. B. Stewart and M. D. L.). Suggestions to rosebush owners. Honeoye Falls Times (N. Y.), June 1, 1916, 1 p. Rose slugs discovered on bushes. Honeoye Falls Times (N. Y.), June 8, 1916, 1 p. Striped cucumber beetle. Honeoye Falls dimes (Ns Y.); June15,; 1916, 1p: A tachinid parasite reared from an adult capsid (Dip., Hem.). Entomol. News 27: 236. Grass insects. Pages 2745-2756 and clover insects, Pages 2864-2874. In Grasses and leguminous crops in New York State. N. Y. State Dept. Agric. Bull. 87. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 1916. 1916. 1916. 1917: 1917: 1917. 1907: 1972 EDIT: 1917. 1918. 1919: 1920. 1922, 1922. 1923: 1924. 1924. The part played by insects in the spread of Bacillus amylovorus. Intl. Inst. Agric. Bur. Agric. Intel. and Plant Dis. Mon. Bull. 7: 1198-1199. (V. B. Stewart and M. D. L.). Rose insects and their control. Pages 57-67. In The American Rose Annual, 1916. Am. Rose Soc., Harrisburg, Pa. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Rose insects. Pages 3018-3019. In L. H. Bailey, The standard cyclopedia of horti- culture, Vol. S Macmillan Co., New York. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). The farm bureau as an agency for demon- strating the control of injurious insects. J. Econ. Entomol. 10: 20-25. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Controlling plant diseases and insect pests by dusting. Field Illustrated, March, pp. 193-195. (C. B. Savage and M. D. L.). An egg parasite of the sumac flea-beetle (Hym., Chalcid.). Entomol. News 28: 368. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). The egg of Byturus unicolor Say. (Col.). Entomol. News 28: 438. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Apple spray schedule. N. Y. State Coll. Agr. 1 p. card. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Insects injurious to late cabbage. Proc. N. Y. State Veg. Growers’ Assn. Tulley, N. Y., May 2, 2 p. Grass and clover insects. Cornell Univ. Ext. Bull. 20. 20 p.; reprint of same title pub- lished as N. Y. Dept. Agric. Bull. 87, 1916. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Manual of vegetable garden insects. Mac- Millan Co., New York. 391 p. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). An injurious leaf-miner of the honeysuckle. J. Econ. Entomol. 12: 389-392. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). A dipterous parasite of the parsnip webworm (Depressaria heracliana Linn.). J. Econ. Entomol. 13: 491-492. Insects that hunt the rose. Pages 89-100. In The American Rose Annual, 1922. Am. Rose Soc., Harrisburg, Pa. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). The Pyrox spray guide (revised). Bowker Insecticide Co., New York. 32 p. The immature stages of the catnip leaf- hopper (Eupteryx mellissae Curtis). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 31: 181-184. (M. D. L. and G. W. Barber). The apple and thorn skeletonizer and its control. Cornell Univ. Ext. Bull. 86. 7 p. (E. P. Felt and M. D. L.). The present status and distribution of the apple and thorn skeletonizer (Hemerophila pariana Clerck, Lepid.). 54th Ann. Rep. Entomol. Soc. Ont. 1923: 18-20. . Spray calendar (revised). E. C. Brown Co., Rochester, N. Y. 16 p. (C. R. Crosby and Mead). «L.). . Entomology. Pages 32-40. In 19th Rep. . WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 1925 1925 1926. 1928. 1928. - 1928. 1928. 1929. 1930. 1930. 1930. 1930. 1930. 1930. 1930. 1951 1931. 1931. Dir. N. Y. State Mus. and Sci. Dept. N. Y. St. Mus. Bull. 253. Notes on the embargo of grapes from Almeria, Spain, on account of the Mediterranean fruit-fly (Ceratitis capitata Wied). J. Econ. Entomol. 18: 257-265. The spray service. Pages 87-90. In Proc. 70th Ann. Mtg. N. Y. State Hort. Soc. Some profitable Florida crops. Wilson & Toomer Fert. Co. and Fla. Agr. Supply, Jacksonville & Orlando, Fla. 48 p. (M. D. L. and B. F. Floyd) (revised 1927). A list of the insects of New York, with a list of spiders and certain other allied groups. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 101. 1121 p. (M. D. L. Editor-in- Chief). Xylophagidae, p. 750; Coenomyiidae, p. 750; Rhagionidae, Pages 758-760. In Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 101. Chalcidoidea. Pages 975-985. In Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 101. (A. B. Gahan, C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). The European corn borer clean-up cam- paign in New York State 1927. J. Econ. Entomol. 21: 778-783. Observations on the oil-nicotine combina- tion for the control of the codling moth and other apple insects in the Pacific Northwest. J. Econ. Entomol. 22: 72-78. (F. B. Herbert and M. D. L.). Further experiments with nicotine-oil for the control of the codling moth in the Pacific Northwest. J. Econ. Entomol. 23: 61-74. An unrecorded food habit of the large tobacco suck-fly in Porto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 23: 640-641. A revision of the dipterous family Rhagioni- dae (Leptidae) in the United States and Canada. Amer. Entomol. Soc. Mem. 7: 1-181. A new leaf-miner of cotton in Porto Rico (Nepticula gossypii new species). J. Dept. Agric. Porto Rico 14: 151-158. (W. T. M. Forbes and M. D. L.). A little-known root-weevil of cassava (Codo- sternus sulcatulus Boheman). J. Dept. Agric. Porto Rico 14: 159-165. Plagas de insectos de la Cual Esta Libre la Cana en Puerto Rico. Rev. de Agr. de Puerto Rico. 15: 62—63, 93-94. Recomendaciones para combatir las plagas que afectan en Puerto Rico al cultivo del algodon. El Mundo (San Juan). Oct. 14, 1930. pp. 3, 9, 11. (Reprinted in Rev. Agr. Puerto Rico 25: 135-136, 163-164). Entomology in Puerto Rico during the past decade. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 141-151. The papaya fruit fly in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 331-332. (M. D. L. and F. Sein, Jr.). A bibliography of the banana root weevil. J. Dept. Agric. Porto Rico 15: 147-176. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 19511. 1931. 1931. 19351- 1931. LOSI: 1955: 19531. 1931. 1931: 1931. eeu 19311. 1937. 193i. 1931. LOS. 1931. 1952. A preliminary report on the lima bean pod- borer and other legume pod borers in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 466- 473. (M. D. L. and A. S. Mills). Report of the Division of Entomology for the fiscal year 1929-30. Pages 110-123. In Ann. Rep. Ins. Exp. Stn. Dept. Agric. & Labor Porto Rico. The eggs of the lima bean pod borer in Puerto Rico Maruca testulalis Geyer (Lepid., Pyralidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 763. (A. S. Mills and M. D. L.). Leptoglossus gonagra Fab. injuring citrus in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 765-767. Two new species of Symphoromyia (Rhag- ionidae, Diptera) from the eastern United States. Amer. Mus. Novitates 497: 1-2. Some notes on my Revision of the Rhagioni- dae (Diptera). Trans. Amer. Entomol. Soc. 57: 321-323. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1930. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 33-37. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during January and February 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 76-78. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during April, 1931 "Ins. “Pest!” Surv “Bull. “14: 235-238. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during May 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 317- 319. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during June 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 409- 412. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during July 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 492- 494. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during August, 1931. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 574-577. Insect conditions in Antigua, August 25-29, 1931. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 577-579. Insect conditions in Porto Rico during September 1931. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 642-645. Notes from annual report on insect condi- tions in Porto Rico July 1, 1930 to June 30, 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 682-685. Observations on the bean lace bug in Porto Rico. J. Dept. Agric. Porto Rico. 15: 309- 323. (M. D. L. and A. S. Mills). [Descriptions of two new species of Ptiolina (Rhagionidae)]. Pages 250-251 In C. H. Curran. Some new North American Dip- tera. Can. Entomol. 63: 249-254. Entomology at the Fourth Congress of the International Society of Sugar Cane Tech- nologists of Porto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 25¢ (732=7332" (CC. Es Pemberton and M. D. L.). [publ. under same title in Ent. News 43: 195-196]. 69 1932: 1932. 1932. 1932: 1932: 1932: 1952" 1932. 1932; 1932. 19372. 1933% 11933: 1933; 1933. 1933: 11933: 1953) 19332 1934. 1936. 1936. 1936. 70 Thrips injury to citrus and rose in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 25: 934-935. Additional references to the bean lace bug. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 75-76. An early quarantine in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 25: 930-931. The initiation of an insect pest survey in Porto Rico. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 59-64. The pink bollworm of cotton in Porto Rico. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 65-73. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during the fiscal year, July 1, 1930 thru June 30, 1931. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 121-144. The cottony cushion-scale in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 25: 1103-1107. Insect conditions in Porto Rico October 1, 1931 to Jan. 31, 1932. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 12: 36-38. Insect conditions in Porto Rico during Feb- ruary and March 1932. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 12: 121-123. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during April and May, 1932. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 12: 185-186. Insect conditions in Puerto Rico from Jan- uary 1 to June 30, 1932. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 12: 405-408. Observations on some factors which may affect the abundance of Diatraea sac- charalis in Porto Rico. Proc. 4th Congr. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Techs. (Preprint Bull. No. 92: 1—2). Notes on the giant toad, Bufo marinus (L.), in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 26: 67-71. A braconid parasite of a coccinellid new to Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 26: 294. Insects of coniferous evergreens. Pages 338—354 In L. H. Bailey, The cultivated conifers in North America. Macmillan Co., New York. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). Pyrethrum as an insecticide. Valley Farmer and South Texas Grower, March, 3 p. (M. D. L. and A. Weed). An annotated bibliography of Puerto Rican entomology. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 17: 1-96. Notes on insect conditions in Puerto Rico for the fiscal year, July 1931 thru June 1932. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico. 17: 97-137. A summary of recent results with pyrethrum as an agricultural dust. 8 p. John Powell Co., New York. (A. Weed and M. D. L.). Recent developments with pyrethrum and derris. Fico News 1(11): 4. Toxicity of rotenone powders. Soap 12(3). 1 p. (D. G. Hoyer and M. D. L.). Pyrethrin content of pyrethrum flowers from various sources. J. Econ. Entomol. 29: 605-606. (D. G. Hoyer and M. D. L.). Additions to the New York State list of aphids with notes on other New York 1936. 1939. 1940. 1944, 1946. 1947. 1956. L957: 1958. 1959" 1959: 1960. 1960. 1961. 1962. 1963. . Additional species. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 44: 177- 185. El valor insecticida de la Rotonona y el Pieretro. La Hacienda, Sept., 2 pp. Broadening the field of usefulness of applied entomology. J. Econ. Entomol. 32: 229-234. The modern chemical arsenal and what it means in the fight against insects. Pests (March). 2 p. Wholesale prices of insecticides during World Wars I and II. J. Econ. Entomol. 37: 854-855. (E. R. de Ong and M. D. L.). Victor Irving Safro, 1888-1944. J. Econ. Entomol. 38: 727-729. The ‘‘Special Survey in the Vicinity of Ports of Entry”’ as a contribution to “‘A List of the Insects of New York.’’ J. N. Y. Ento- mol. Soc. 55: 215-217. A preliminary list of the aphids of New Jer- sey. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 64: 99-123. How I became an entomologist. Nat. Agric. Chem. Assoc. News 15(5): 12-13. The development of commercial entomology . in the United States. Proc. 10th Int. Congr. Ent. 3: 99-106. A preliminary list of the aphids of Missouri. J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 32: 9-18. A proposed list of the aphids of New York. Bull. Brooklyn Entomol. Soc. 54: 47—S0. Harry Gardner Barber, 1871-1960. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 62: 125-129. (M. D. L. and R. I. Sailer). The aphids that feed on cacti. Bull. Brooklyn Entomol. Soc. 55: 64—66. Joseph Sanford Wade, 1880-1960. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 63: 219-222. (M. D. L. and W. H. Larrimer). [Discussion of the case “‘Aphis Linnaeus, 1758; its type-species, and the family- group name derived from it (Insecta, Hemiptera) Z.N.(S) 881.’’] Bull. Zool. Nomencl. 19: 196. The distribution and habits of the mint aphid Ovatus crataegarius (Walker) (Homptera: Aphidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 65S: 55-62. records of Missouri aphids. J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 36: 65-84. . A list of the aphids of New York. Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. 10: 289-428. . Additional records of New Jersey aphids. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 72: 79-101. . Aphids on a rooftop. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 66: 167-168. . Aphids on a rooftop— 1963. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 67: 253-254. . Apreliminary list of Texas aphids. Fla. Ento- mol. 48: 255—264. (M. D. L. and A. N. Tissot). . A preliminary list of the aphids of Massachu- setts (Homoptera). Trans. Amer. Ento- mol. Soc. 92: 29-66. . Natural history of Plummers Island, Mary- land. XIX. Annotated list of the aphids . WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 ——— 1966. 1966. 1966. 1967. 1967. 1967. 1967. 1968. 1968. 1968. 1968. 1969. 1969. 1970. 1970. 1970. 1970. 1970. 197 1. (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 79: 117-126. Further records of Missouri aphids. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 68: 97-99. Additions to the list of aphids of Massachu- setts. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 68: 273. An aphid with four cornicles (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 68: 320. Macrosiphum rosae (Linnaeus) on Ilex. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 69: 59. The aphids or plant lice of Delaware (Homop- tera: Aphididae). Univ. Del. Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. 363. 18 p. (M. D. L. and P. P. Burbutis). Further records of New Jersey aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae). J. N. Y. Ento- mol. Soc. 75: 77-92. A list of the aphids of Cyprus (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 69: 259-266. Further records of aphids from Plummers Island, Md. (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 70: 84. __ California aphids in the Cornell University collection (Homoptera: Aphididae). Cor- nell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 407. 31 p. The greenbug in the Atlantic Coast States (Schizaphis graminum (Rondani)) (Homop- tera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 18: 930-938. A supplement to a list of the aphids of New York. Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. 11: 257-361. Aphid investigations at the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum. Laska Leaves 19: 29-31. (H. G. Walker, M. D. L., and L. Enari). Selected regional lists of North American aphids. USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 19: 558-564. Records of new or little-known aphids in Massachusetts (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 72: 201-202. Host plants of Myzus persicae at the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum, Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphidi- dae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 72: 294-312. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. Enari). A list of the aphids of District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. Univ. Md. Agric. Exp. Stn. MP 770. 129 p. (M. D. L. and T. L. Bissell). Early records of a few Connecticut aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 72: 499. Records of a few Vermont aphids (Homop- tera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 72: 507. Host plants of Aphis gossypii at the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum, Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphidi- dae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 73: J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 1971. 1971. 1971. 19g. 1971. 1972: 1972. 1972: 1972 1973: 1973: 1973: 1973: 1973: 1974. 1974. 1974. 9-16. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. Enari). Host plants of three polyphagous and widely distributed aphids in the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum, Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 73: 120-131. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. Enari). More records of New Jersey aphids (Homop- tera: Aphididae). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 79: 62-83. Records of aphids collected in Newfound- land (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Ento- mol. Soc. Wash. 73: 168-169. Host plants of Toxoptera aurantii at the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum, Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphidi- dae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 73: 324-326. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker and L. Enari). A second supplement to a list of the aphids of New York (Homoptera: Aphididae). Search (Agriculture); Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Stn., Ithaca, N. Y. 1(12): 1-31. Aphids in a yellow water-pan in Haddon- field, New Jersey. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 74: 26-31. Host plants of aphids collected at the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum dur- ing 1966 and 1967 (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 74: 95-120. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. Enari). Aphids of New Jersey, a few more records (Homoptera: Aphididae). J. N. Y. Ento- mol. Soc. 80: 182-194. Corrections to the Cavariella slides in the Cornell University collection (Homoptera: Aphididae). Search (Agriculture); Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Stn., Ithaca, N. Y. 2(18): 1-2. Glutops singularis Burgess on Long Island, N. Y. (Diptera: Pelecorhynchidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 75: 149. Aphids collected in the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 75: 209-212. (M. D. L. and H. G. Walker). A third supplement to a list of aphids of New York (Homoptera: Aphididae). Search (Agriculture); Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Stns aTthaca, N. Y. 3:8); 1-23. Records of a few aphids in Hawaii. USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 23: 542. Records of a few Virginia aphids (Homop- tera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 23: 769-771. A list of the aphids of Staten Island, New York (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 12-18. Aphids in the Pine Barrens of New Jersey (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 530-534. How international is ESA? Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 20: 327. 71 1974. More records of Massachusetts aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 558-560. Aphids collected in Arizona by S. M. Dohan- ian (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 561-562. A list of aphids of Oregon (Homoptera: Aphididae). Ore. Dept. Agric., Salem. 116 p. Records of a few Vermont aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. DAT. Additional aphids collected in the Los Angeles State and County Arboretum (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 778-779. (M. D. L. and H. G. Walker). Senekerim Mardiros Dohanian, 1889-1972. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 64: 250-251. 1975. S. M. Dohanian (addendum). J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 65: 48. 1975. A fourth supplement to a list of aphids of New York. Search (Agriculture); Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Stn., Ithaca, N. Y. 5(4): 1-11. 1974. 1974. 1974. 1974. 1974. New Names Proposed by M. D. Leonard Hemiptera-Homoptera Cicadelloidea-Idioceridae Idiocerus gemmisimulans Leonard & Crosby 1915, J. Econ. Entomol. 8:542 (a syn- onym of J. decimaquartus (Schrank)). Diptera Tipulidae Geranomyia bezzii Alexander & Leonard 1912, Can. Entomol. 54:205. Limnophila albipes Leonard 1913, Entomol. News 24:248 (listed as an unplaced species of Limnophila by Alexander 1965). Limnophila nigripleura Alexander & Leonard 1914, in Alexander, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil. 66:592 (a synonym of Pseudolimnophila con- tempta (Osten Sacken)). Xylophagidae Rachicerus niger Leonard 1930, Mem. Amer. Entomol. Soc. 7:13. Xylomyidae Xylomyia pallipes Loew var. flavomaculata Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:43 (a synonym of Solva pallipes (Loew)). Rhagionidae Chrysopilus andersoni Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:131. Chrysopilus fasciatus var. infuscatus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:141 (a subspecies of C. fasciatus (Say)). Chrysopilus pilosus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:152. Ptiolina alberta Leonard 1931, in Curran, Can. Entomol. 63:250. Ptiolina obsoleta Leonard 1931, in Curran, Can. Entomol. 63:250. Rhagio brunneipennis Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:92. 72 Rhagio californicus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:93. Rhagio concavus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:94 (a subspecies of R. maculi- fer (Bigot)). Rhagio costatus var. limbatus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:96. (a synonym of R. costatus (Loew)). Rhagio pollinosus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:116. Symphoromyia algens Leonard 1931, Am. Mus. Novitates 497:1. Symphoromyia currani Leonard 1931, Am. Mus. Novitates 497:2. Hymenoptera Mymaridae Anagrus ovijentatus Crosby & Leonard 1914, Can. Entomol. 46: 181 (now placed in the genus Anaphes Haliday). Gonatocerus ovicenatus Leonard & Crosby 1915, J. Econ. Entomol. 8:545 (now placed in the genus Lymaenon Haliday). Eulophidae - Tetrastichus ovipransus Crosby & Leonard 1917, Entomol. News. 28:368. Species Named in Honor of M. D. Leonard Acarina . Tarsonemidae Hemitarsonemus leonardi Smiley 1967 Odonata Gomphidae Gomphus mortimer Needham 1943 (a synonym of G. descriptus Banks) Hemiptera-Homoptera Aphididae Calaphis leonardi Quednau 1971 Uroleucon leonardi (Olive 1965) (described in Dactynotus) Coleoptera Mordellidae Mordellistena leonardi Ray 1946 Diptera Tipulidae Rhabdomastix leonardi Alexander 1930 Shannonomyia leonardi Alexander 1932 Dolichopodidae ] Condylostylus leonardi (Van Duzee 1915) (de- scribed in Sciapus) Tachinidae Trochilodes leonardi (West 1925) (described in Rhamphina) Hymenoptera Scelionidae Trimorus leonardi Fouts 1948 Platygasteridae Inostemma leonardi (Fouts 1925) (described in Acerota) J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 M. D. Leonard: Membership in Scientific Societies American Association of Economic Ento- mologists, Elected 1911 American Association for the Advance- ment of Science - Brooklyn Entomological Society, 1943 Entomological Society of America, 1910 Entomological Society of Japan, 1957 Entomological Society of Washington, 1921—E lected to Honorary Member- ship, February 1975 Florida Entomological Society New York Entomological Society, 1921 Sigma Xi, 1915 Texas Entomological Society, 1933 Washington Academy of Sciences, 1958 Acknowledgments I am especially indebted to M. D. Leonard’s younger brother, Donald D. Leonard, now a resident of Spartan- burg, S. C., who kindly answered my numerous questions about Mort, sup- plied all photographs used in this paper, and read an early draft of the manu- script. C. P. Alexander, Amherst, Mass., and L. L. Pechuman, Depart- ment of Entomology, Cornell Univer- sity, supplied valuable information and also reviewed the manuscript. I appre- ciate permission to refer to conversa- tions or correspondence with: T. L. Bissell, Hyattsville, Md.; R. E. Ham- man, Greensboro, N. C.; R. H. Nelson, Mechanicsburg, Pa.; L. L. Pechuman; P. M. Schroeder, USDA-APHIS, Hyattsville, Md.; and Mrs. David Win- ters, Haddonfield, N. J. My colleagues at the Bureau of Plant Industry in the Pennsylvania Department of Agricul- ture, T. J. Henry and Karl Valley, kindly criticized the manuscript. References Cited Abbott, M. 1949. The life of William T. Davis. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, N. Y. 321 p. Hottes, F. C., and T. H. Frison. 1931. The plant lice, or Aphiidae, of Illinois. Bull. Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. 19: 121-447. Leonard, M. D. 1933. An annotated bibliography of Puerto Rican entomology. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 17: 1-96. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 1946. Victor Irving Safro, 1888-1944. J. Econ. Entomol. 38: 727-729. . 1957. How I became an entomologist. Nat. Agric. Chem. Assoc. News 15(5): 12-13. 1958. The development of commercial entomology in the United States. Proc. 10th Int. Cong. Ent. 3: 99-106. . 1963. A list of the aphids of New York. Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. 10: 289-428. . 1966. Natural history of Plummers Island, Maryland. XIX. Annotated list of the aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 79: 117-126. Leonard, M. D., and R. I. Sailer. 1960. Harry Gardner Barber, 1871-1960. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 62: 125-129. Mallis, A. 1971. American entomologists. Rutgers Univ. Press, New Brunswick, N. J. 549 p. Osborn, H. 1946. Fragments of entomological history, Part II. Publ. by the author, Columbus, Ohio. 232 p. Pechuman, L. L. 1969. Recent gifts to the Cornell University Insect Collection. Entomol. News 80: 43. Pierce, W. D. 1917. A manual of dangerous insects likely to be introduced in the United States through importations. USDA, Washington, D. C. 256 p. Russell, L. M. 1975. Obituary, Mortimer D. Leon- ard, 1890-1975. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 77: 505-507. Sanders, J. G. 1925. Entomologists entering com- mercial fields. J. Econ. Entomol. 18: 163 (Abstr.). Van Duzee, M. C. 1915. Descriptions of three new species of the dipterous genus Sciapus with a key to the North American species. Entomol. News 26: 17-26. Footnotes (1) Adjunct Assistant Professor of Entomology. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802. (2) Letter dated May 31, 1952, from F. L. Campbell to Committee on Admissions, Cosmos Club, Washington, D. C. (3) Letter dated February 27, 1978, from Donald D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (4) Letter dated January 27, 1977, from Donald D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (5) Letter dated January 18, 1978, from Donald D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (6) ‘““‘Why I Went to Cornell,’’ notes provided by M. D. Leonard, March 29, 1975, in a letter to E. H. Smith, Chairman, Department of Entomol- ogy, Cornell University; on file in Comstock Memorial Library, Cornell. (7) Letter dated January 7, 1977, from Charles P. Alexander to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (8) Interview with J. Chester Bradley, December 18, 1962, by Gould P. Colman, Archivist, De- partment of Manuscripts and University Archives, 73 Cornell University; transcript on file in Com- stock Memorial Library, Cornell. (9) Personal communication with L. L. Pechuman, Department of Entomology, Cornell University. (10) Letter dated December 17, 1977, from T. L. Bissell to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (11) Personal communication with P. M. Schroeder, USDA-APHIS, PPQ, Hyattsville, Md. (12) Letter dated April 17, 1978, from Donald D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (13) Shell Chemical Agricultural News, New York, N. Y., August 1961. (14) Letter dated January 13, 1978, from Mrs. David Winters to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (15) Letter dated January 22, 1945, from M. D. Leonard to L. L. Pechuman. (16) Letter dated April 26, 1975, from M. D. Leon- ard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 74 (17) Letter dated July 30, 1975, from M. D. Leonard to L. L. Pechuman. (18) Personal communication with R. H. Nelson, Mechanicsburg, Pa. (formerly Executive Secre- tary, Entomological Society of America); see ‘‘Autographa OO,’ inside front cover, Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am., Dec. 1968. (19) Personal communication with Robert E. Ham- man, Greensboro, N. C. (20) Personal communication with R. H. Nelson, Mechanicsburg, Pa. (21) Letter dated December 1, 1976, from Donald D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (22) Letter dated January 7, 1977, from Donald D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (23) From Alumni Office records, Cornell Univer- sity, Ithaca, N. Y. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 RESEARCH REPORTS Contributions to the Ecology of the Cicada Killer, Sphecius speciosus (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae) Norman Lin 1487 East 37th St., Brooklyn, New York 11234 ABSTRACT The cicada killer Sphecius speciosus (Drury) emergence hole was linked to the wasp by a direct observation of an emergence. Wasps do not emerge via their burrows but tunnel directly from their cells to the surface. The fixed order of first emergences in the different populations appears related to the friableness of the soil. The harder the soil the later the emergence season begins. Males begin emerging before females, although there is considerable overlap. Males emerge from holes 10 mm and smaller and females emerge from holes 12 mm and larger. Holes of 11 mm are about one-half male and one-half female. The specific density or the total number of wasps over the tract inhabited by Population 1 was taken daily. The sex ratio of Population | was highly male biased, 2:1 based on the specific density and 3:1 based on the total number of emergence holes. Sphecius in the Brooklyn area apparently had no natural enemies, and wasps died of old age. The female life span is approximately 30 days and the male life span is approxi- mately 15 days. Studies of four populations of the soli- emergence hole was definitely linked to tary wasp Sphecius speciosus (Drury) were conducted during the summer of 1956-1963. The populations were desig- nated 1, 2, 3, and 4, inhabiting tracts on opposite sides of 2 adjacent baseball dia- monds in the Parade Grounds, a huge sandlot ball field area in Brooklyn, New York. Certain discrepancies uncovered in the literature concerning various as- _pects of the life history of the cicada killer are now reviewed in the light of new evi- dence. Direct Observation of Emergence The emergence hole was first described by Dambach and Good (1943) as the exit tunnel made by the young wasp in leaving the nest. It was also described as being nearly perpendicular to the surface. The J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 the wasp in 1958, when a direct observa- tion of emergence was made in popula- tion 1. On July 23, 1958, in the early after- noon, the surface of the ground suddenly broke in one spot, the wasp’s face was vis- ible, and after a minute’s struggle the young adult was on the surface. It was inactive for 2 or 3 seconds and then flew off. Description of the Emergence Hole In hundreds of holes noted, nearly all were perpendicular to the surface of the ground. They are circular in shape, and the 145 holes to appear in Population 1 (1958) ranged from 6—16 mm in diameter at the surface with 10 mm being the mode diameter (N = 40). In depth they varied from 25 mm to 304 mm with more than half falling in the 76—203 mm range. The 75 hole whose formation was observed was 88 mm deep and 10 mm in diameter. Place of Emergence Dambach and Good (1943) in their description of the nest found the burrow to be 30.4—45.7 cm in length from the entrance to the terminus where the first cell was excavated. A new cell was gen- erally made immediately in front of the one just completed. As many as 4 have been found in one series. After a cell or series of cells is completely provisioned, a new lateral off the main tunnel is exca- vated, and the process is repeated. Riley (1893) stated that the young wasp in leaving the nest passes through the burrow made by the female the year before. Considerable evidence to the contrary indicates that each wasp tunnels independently to the surface from its cell. The basis of this conclusion lies in the following evidence: 1. Of a total of 145 emergence holes to appear in Population 1 in 1958, all but 7 were more than 15.2 cm from a wire fence whose lower rim runs the length of the tract. Yet of the estimated 159 burrows dug in Population 1 in 1957, all but 13 had their entrance within 15.2 cm of the fence, and the bulk of these were against it. The same general picture was noticed from 1956-1963. The burrows were dug along the fence near the edge of the tract while the wasps emerged further out on the tract. 2. In Population 1| (1958) almost half of the emergence holes (44%) appeared within 3 days of another hole located not more than 35.6 cm away. Often holes appeared within centimeters of one another. 3. The emergence holes come to the surface of the ground vertically, while the burrow entrances are inclined at angles of about 45°. 4. In many years there was a much larger number of holes than of nests dug the previous year. For example, in Popu- lation 1 in 1960, there were 125 nests, yet these nests produced 939 emergence holes in 1961. 76 The different locations of the emer- gence holes and burrows are clearly ex- pected if the wasps tunnel directly from their cells to the surface, since the cells as indicated are a distance from the en- trance burrow. The appearance of clusters of emer- gence holes is also to be expected if wasps from the same nest emerge about the same time from separate tunnels, and if, as according to Dambach and Good (1943), cells are made in series. The vertical emergence hole need hardly be pointed out as obviously distinct from the comparatively gently sloping entrance of the nest burrow. Variations in the Emergence Period In 1957 in Population 1 the date of first emergence was June 30, and the date of first emergence of Population 2 was July 1. In 1958 in Populations 1, 2, 3, and 4, the dates of first emergence were July 15, July 24, July 31, and August 7, respec- tively. In 1958 in Populations 1, 2, 3, and 4, the dates of last emergence were Sep- tember 1, September 1, September 1, and August 14, respectively. Seasonal fluctuations in the date of earliest emergence in a specific popula- tion can be quite large, with a difference of 23 days recorded between the first emergences in Population 2 during the years 1957 and 1958. When computed for different populations (1 and 4), a differ- ence as great as 38 days was obtained between 2 generations (1957-1958). Climatic conditions are not entirely re- sponsible for this fluctuation, since pop- ulations in the same field (1 and 4) under identical weather conditions can differ as much as 23 days in their date of first emergence during the same season (1958). This is hardly surprising, since a differ- ence as great as 48 days was recorded between the first and last emergence hole to appear in a single population (Popula- tion 1, 1958). The friableness of the soil in Population 1 and its greater hardness in other populations probably explain the nearly fixed order of first emergences among the populations (see Lin 1966 and J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 Lin (personal communication) in Evans, 1966). Dambach and Good (1943) (in comput- ing the life span) considered the mean first date of adult life as July 1. By this they probably meant the date over a period of years which averaged the greatest number of emergences. This is apparently completely invalid for the Parade Ground populations during the summers 1957- 1958, as the dates of first and last emer- gences show. In all cases there was only 1 emergence hole for a given population on the dates of first and of last emergence. Emergence Time in Relation To Sex Considerable evidence indicates that the males generally emerge earlier than the females, although there is much over- lapping. As is well known, the female is usually larger than the male (Riley, 1893; Dow, 1942). Accordingly, the diameter of the emergence hole seems to provide a good index of the sex of the emerged individuals. As indicated, emergence holes varied from 6—16 mm in diameter (Population 1, 1958). It was subsequently found (1958-1967) that males emerge from holes 10 mm and smaller, and fe- males emerge from holes 12 mm and larger. Holes of 11 mm are about one- half male and one-half female. On July 27 (Population 1, 1958) the first nest appeared. Only | hole which had yet appeared was as large as 12 mm, further supporting the view that holes 12 mm and larger were formed by females. Evidence of the relationship between the size of the emergence hole and the sex of the wasp is further shown in the following account. Of a total of 66 emer- gence holes appearing before July 28 (Population 1, 1958), none was larger than 12 mm. On that date, 1 appeared which was 14mm. On July 29, 2 appeared which were 13 and 14 mm, and for the first time 2 females were seen. One very huge one, by far the largest wasp seen this season, was resting on a fence rail- ing in section 39, the same 3-m quadrat in which the 14 mm hole was located, while another very large female and a J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 50 De} WwW bh [e) [e) {e) NUMBER OF EMERGENCE HOLES S WiS-T/25 1/29-8/4, 85-8 /ii DATE T22-7/28 8/i2- 8/18 8/19- 8/25 8/2-9/ Fig. 1.—Evidence of earlier male and later female emergence is shown by the generally earlier appearance of “‘male’’ holes (clear bars) and later appearance of ‘‘female’’ holes (shaded bars). male were flying around in copulo. Such a simultaneous appearance of large holes and large wasps on the same tract cer- tainly suggests that the relationship is not fortuitous and that the appearance of large holes provides an excellent indi- cation of the emergence of female wasps. Fig. 1 plots the weekly total of male emergence holes against female emer- gence holes (Population 1, 1958) begin- ning on July 15, the date of first emer- gence. It is evident that the male holes are more common, accelerate faster, peak and decline earlier than the female holes. While the male holes are on the decline during the week beginning July 29, the female holes are in the peak stage. During the following week the decline of male holes was very sharp while the fe- male holes were still near their peak. On July 25, 1957 (Population 1), when the emergence holes were well into the de- cline, 10 of the total of 14 were 12 mm or larger. What the graph does not show is the earlier appearance of the male holes. The first male hole appeared on July 15 and the first female hole on July 20. In that period before July 20, 11 male holes appeared. Of the total 145 emergence holes to appear in Population 1 in 1958, 35 were not included in the graph for various reasons such as not having been meas- ured because of their inaccessibility or WW. Table 1.—Specific density or the number of wasps present at a given time on the tract inhabitated by Population 1 in 1958. Every other date was deliberately omitted in the interests of condensing the table. Specific Number of Number of Date Time density females males Number unknown 7/20 0910 1 0 1 0 7/22 1803-2045 1 0 1 0 7/24 0737-0858 3 0 3 0 7/26 1520-1915 1 0 0 1 7/28 1340-1530 4 0 3 1 7/30 0821-1045 B) 0 6) 2 8/1 1045-1105 9 0 4 =) 8/3 1045-1215 9 lie 3 =) 8/5 0845-1008 16 1 1 14 8/7 1130-1145 9 {3 2 y | 8/9 1355-1410 2 i 1 1 8/11 1015—1050 6 Ze 2 4 8/13 1000-1150 8 i? 0. 8 8/15 0947-1430 D 1 3 3 8/17 1845-2020 1 1 0 0 8/19 1as2 1 1 0 0 8/21 0950-1010 3 is |e ps 8/23 1004-1140 3 2 0 1 8/25 1115-1130 0 0 0 0 8/27 1745-2003 3 3 0 0 8/29 1540-1700 3 3 0 0 8/31 1820 1 1 0 0 9/2 1630-1930 1 1 0 0 9/4 0800-0847 0 0 0 0 9/6 1905-1955 1 1 0 0 9/8 1040-1100 0 0 0 0 9/10 1745-1830 0 0 0 0 9/15 1820-1905 0 0 0 0 @ = new nest or nests. > = found dying. © = paralyzed cicada. having been damaged. During the first and sixth weeks only 1 11-mm hole ap- peared, and it was not counted as either male or female. Daily sexing of living wasps, primarily on the basis of behavioral differences between the sexes, gives evidence in complete accord with that derived from the emergence holes. In the examination on 5 different dates (between July 30, 1958 and August 15, 1958) of the sex of wasps engaging in territorial behavior, without exception all were males (see Lin, 1963). In territorial behavior, the male defends a small area, about 2.5 m?, against intruding males and conspicuous insects. These are chased from the area while the male continually returns to a usually localized spot (generally an emer- gence hole) within the territory. Terri- 78 torial behavior thus becomes a means for recognizing the male. The female is like- wise recognized by behavior such as the manner of flight, leaving or entering the nest, digging, or carrying a cicada to the nest. Specific Density Table 1 contains an exact, or nearly exact, determination of the specific den- sity (total number of wasps over or on the tract inhabitated by Population 1, 1958) at any one point during the time listed. The specific density was deter- mined by total counts repeated several times after which the same sum was usually obtained. It is the large size of the wasp and its tendency for localiza- tion, whether the male around his terri- tory or the female around her nest, which J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 makes this most accurate of methods possible. On some occasions when the number of wasps was greatest, the high- est count with certainty that no wasp had been counted twice was taken as the density. The vertical bars on the fence broke the tract up into 51 3-m sections for a total of 153 m. During most determinations of the specific density, a number of wasps com- pletely at random (dependent on chance opportunity) were sexed, usually by behavioral determinations; sometimes by anatomical means consisting of body segment counts while in the field. As Table 1 shows, in complete agreement with the evidence from the emergence holes, the males appeared earlier, peaked earlier and declined earlier than the fe- males. In Population 1 (1957) the first male was recorded on July 3 and the last on July 25. The first female was recorded on July 14 and the last on Aug. 27. In Population 3 (1958) the first male was recorded on Aug. 4 and the last on Aug. 23. The first female was recorded on Aug. 9 and the last on Sept. 3. Fig. 2, based upon data from Table 1 (including the data omitted to condense the table), with the exclusion of indirect signs, shows the weekly sex ratio for Population 1 in 1958. It is readily seen that numbers of males are on the decline before the females reach their peak. The males then disappear entirely while the females are still present. This graph bears a striking resemblance in the relative number of males to females for any week to that of the relative number of male to female emergence holes the week before, as shown in Fig. 1. In later years it was found that the females rejoin the society about a week after emergence, and males spend considerably more time in their territories after about a week after emer- gence. During the week July 15—21, only male emergence holes appeared, with one exception. In the week beginning July 20 only males were observed. In the week of July 22-28 there was an increase of female and male holes and in the follow- ing week the number of females relative J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 to males was about what might be antic- ipated from the emergence holes. To give a final instance, in the week of Au- gust 5-11, the male holes had greatly declined so that the numbers of male holes and female holes were almost equal. The situation was almost the same for the relative numbers of males and females for the following week. This similarity between the graphs has a basis if males emerge predominately from holes 10 mm and smaller while females emerge from those which are 12 mm and larger. This similarity is also based on the extensive marking data of later years showing that wasps habitat imprint to the tract from which they emerged. The inevitable con- clusion is that females were seen later in the season because they generally emerged later. Also, as will be shown, the female life span is approximately double the male life span. The Sex Ratio Dambach and Good (1943) in their review of the sex ratio gave the following account. “‘Of 25 adults emerging from stored larval cases, 15 were males and 10 were females. Seven collected in Musk- higum County were females, and of speci- mens at Ohio State University and Ohio State Museum, 29 were males and 37 were females. Denton (1931) obtained 13 females and 7 males from a group of 20 he collected from a colony on August 2, 1930 at Robbinville, North Carolina. These collections totaling 128 specimens indicate a sex ratio of 70 females to 48 males or 59.3% females to 40.7% males.”’ Only their data obtained from stored larval cases can be considered reliable. Dow (1942) likewise obtained a male biased ratio from adults (6 females and 12 males) reared from 18 stored cocoons he collected. Dambach and Good’s (1943) method in determining the sex ratio is invalidated by their method of adding together the total males and females caught by dif- ferent observers from completely unre- lated populations. They failed to take into consideration such factors as the differ- 79 NUMBER OF WASPS Fig. 2.—The weekly sex ratio (males clear bars, females shaded bars) based only upon the number of wasps sexed in determinations of the specific density, shows considerable fluctuation. Absolute numbers between any 2 weeks should not be com- pared, since more determinations of specific density were made in some weeks than in others. ences in the time of emergence between the sexes, the longer active season of females, and the tendency of females to be present on the tracts the entire day, while the males seldom remain past the morning. To illustrate the former, if, as shown in Fig. 2 using Dambach and Good’s method, collecting was done in Popula- tion | between July 20 and July 26, the conclusion arrived at would be a popu- lation of 100% males. Conversely, if collections were made between August 24 and September 6, the conclusion would be a population consisting of 100% fe- males. Lin and Michener (1972) state, ‘‘it seems that the evolution of the sex ratio depends more on the natural history of the species’’ in reference to male hap- loidy. According to White (1954) the entire order of Hymenoptera with the exception of a few species show haploid parthenogenesis. White states, “‘It is characteristic of groups with haploid males that the sex ratio fluctuates rather widely from species to species and from strain to strain within the species, and also to some extent with various environ- mental factors, showing no particular tendency to conform to any fixed percen- tage of males’’. Consequently the sex 80 ratio becomes meaningful only in terms of the population and even here seasonal fluctuations are likely to be considerable, so that separate determinations should be made for each season. In Population 1 (1958), 139 wasps were sexed during daily determinations of the specific density. A total of 121 wasps were not sexed although their behavior strongly suggested males. Only the wasps themselves, living or dead, were used in determining the sex ratio, since indi- rect evidence like new nests or paralyzed cicadas would obviously distort the pic- ture in favor of the female. Fig. 2 plots the weekly sex ratio, which is seen to vary considerably. By taking the sum total for all the weeks of the season, a seasonal ratio of 91 adult males to 48 adult females (65% males to 35% females) in the Population 1 area (1958) is obtained. The high male frequency suggests pos- sibly the easier recognition of the male behaviorly rather than so great a number of males. This possibility has been consi- dered, and it appears that this conclusion would be unwarranted. | Of the 110 emergence holes Fig. 1 (Population 1, 1958) the ratio of male holes to female holes was 83 to 27 or 3:1. In 1959 the ratio was 132 to 22 or 6:1, in 1960, 137 to 45 or 3:1; in 1961, 630 to 212 or 3:1; in 1962, 596 to 235 or 2.5:1; and in 1963 293:to SSion ieee Adult Longevity and Mortality Dambach and Good (1943) consider July 1 and September | as the mean first and last dates of adult life and thus ap- proximate the life span of the adult to be 65 days. In 1956-58 dead and dying wasps were found on the tracts between August 3 and 31. The dead wasps were in most cases in perfect condition. Though wasps were usually present in considerable numbers before August, out of a total of 20 dead or dying, none was found in July. There was in these cases no evidence of preda- tion though on the other hand the good condition of the dead wasps, the wasps found dying from no apparent outside J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 Table 2.—Adult S. speciosus longevity table. First emergence Year Location hole 1957 Population 1 6/30 1957 Population 1 6/30 1957 Population 1 6/30 1957 Population 1 6/30 1957 Population | 6/30 1958 Population 1 7/15 1958 Population 1 TINS 1958 Population 3 TEM 1958 Population 3 7/31 1958 Population 3 7/31 1958 Population 3 7/31 1958 Population 1 WLS 1958 Population 1 aS 1958 Population 1 TINS 1958 Population 4 8/7 1958 Population 1 Sy 1958 Population 3 7/31 1958 Population 1 7/15 1958 Population 3 7/31 1958 Population 2 7/24 4 found dying. causes, and the period in which dead wasps were found, make it highly im- probable that death (at least in most cases) was due to anything other than old age. No natural predators of the adult cicada killer have been observed in Brook- lyn during the period of study. In 1957 the first emergence hole on the tract inhabitated by Population 1 ap- peared June 30. The last dead wasp on this tract was found on August 14, thus no wasp was older than 45 days. In 1958, the first emergence hole on the tract in- habited by Populations 1, 2, 3, and 4 ap- peared respectively July 15, 24, 31, and August 7. Table 2 gives the maximum age of wasps found on each tract. In 1958 in Populations 1—4, 32% or more of the emergences took place on or after August 1. It is these later emergences which probably account for wasps seen in late August or September. Dambach and Good (1943) were probably unaware of these later emergences (since mark- ing the emergence holes appears neces- sary), and attributed all wasps of the season to emergences in early July. Table 2 reveals a pattern with 3 excep- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 Maximum age Dead wasp of wasp found Sem (for population) 8/4 g 35 days 8/7 2 38 days 8/8 eS 39 days 8/9 2 40 days 8/14 2 45 days 8/3 va 19 days 8/10 3 26 days 8/11 63 11 days 8/12 3 12 days 8/13 3 13 days 8/14 ? 14 days 8/16 & 32 days 8/18 & 34 days 8/19 ? 35 days 8/19 ? 12 days 8/20 2 36 days 8/23 ? 23 days 8/23 ? 39 days 8/24 ? 24 days 8/31 2 38 days tions in which the maximum age of fe- males dying were in their 30’s. Males of which there were only 4 with 1 excep- tion of 26 days, were 11, 12 and 13 days of age. In later years, a number of males and females were captured and marked on emergence and followed daily for their entire lives. This highly precise data indicates that Table 2 is roughly correct. Males live about a maximum of 15 days and females live a maximum of about 30—33 days. Acknowledgments I am indebted to Dr. Charles D. Mich- ener and Dr. Howard E. Evans for con- structive criticism of this paper. References Cited Dambach, C. A., and E. G. Good. 1943. Life history and habits of the cicada killer in Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 43(1): 32-41, 6 fig. Denton, S. B. 1931. Habits of cicada killer. Bull. Brook. Entomol. Soc. 26: 35. Dow, Richard. 1942. The relation of the prey of Sphecius speciosus to the size and sex of the adult wasp. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 35(3): 310-317, 4 fig. 81 Evans, H. E. 1966. The Comparative Ethology and Evolution of the Sand Wasps. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Lin, N. 1963. Territorial behavior in the cicada killer wasp Sphecius speciosus (Drury) (Hy- menoptera: Sphecidae). Behaviour 20: 115-133. . 1966. Weather and the natural regulation of three populations of the cicada killer wasp, Sphecius speciosus. Amer. Zool. 6(3): abstract 208. Riley, C. V. 1893. The larger digger wasp. Insect Life 4: 248-252. White, M. J. D. 1954. Animal Cytology and Evolu- tion. Cambridge University Press, pp. 326-338. Lin, N., and C. D. Michener. 1972. Evolution of sociality in insects. Quart. Rev. Biol. 47(2): 131-159. Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefevre and Its Close Relatives in Brazil Doris H. Blake Research Associate, U. S. National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. ABSTRACT Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefévre is redescribed from the type specimen, and nine additional Brazilian species of Colaspis are described and figured. In my studies of the Chrysomelidae I have had difficulty in establishing the true identity of the species from Brazil de- scribed by Lefévre in 1887 as Colaspis quattuordecimcostata. My study of Lefé- vre’s type was made possible by Nicole Berti, who sent the holotype from the Natural History Museum in Paris for my examination. There are 9 closely related new species of Colaspis, all from Brazil, which I am describing in this paper. Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefévre (Fig. 1) Colaspis 14-costata Lefévre, 1887. Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 1887, p. 144-45. Length 11 mm. Width 4.3 mm. Oblong oval, shining black with mostly black antennae. Head black with fine punctures, interocular space half width of head, a medium depression down front, labrum dark brown, antennae with only joints 2 and 3 pale. Prothorax twice as broad as long, margin with tooth below middle, disc with mod- erately dense punctures. Scutellum shining black. 82 Elytra a little more than 3 times as long as pro- thorax and wider, punctures in geminate rows except near suture where in single row and near the apex of second row, with well marked costae. Body beneath with blue-green lustre. Legs black, hind tibiae short and almost the same length as other tibiae. Holotype. —Female, Natural History Museum, Paris (from which I borrowed the type specimen and made a drawing). Type-locality. —Brazil. Remarks. —The most striking charac- ter in this species is the very short hind tibiae. Colaspis paracostata, n. sp. (Fig. 2) Length 8 mm. Width 4 mm. Elongate oblong oval, shining black with dark blue-black head and prothorax. Head with dense fine punctures, labrum brown. Interocular space a little more than half width of head, antennae with only third joint pale. Pro- thorax approximately twice as wide as long, margin with tooth below middle, disc sparsely punctate. Elytra more than 3 times as long as prothorax J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 —_——_ -*- and wider. Elytra with geminate punctures except near suture and at apex of next row with costae between rows. Body beneath shining blue-black. Prosternum with few punctures. Legs all black. Holotype —Female, USNM Type No. 75744. Type-locality. —Brazil. Remarks.—This species so closely resembles C. guattuordecimcostata that I am naming it C. paracostata n. sp. It differs in having longer hind tibiae. Colaspis braxatibiae , n. sp. (Fig. 3) Length 8 mm. Width 4 mm. Very elongate oblong oval, black all over, an- tennae black. Head densely punctate with a depression down front, interocular space half width of head, anten- nae all black. Prothorax with margin having tooth below middle, disc with dense punctures, prothorax not twice as wide as long. Scutellum black. Elytra more than 3 times as long as prothorax and wider, so densely punctate that arrangement of punctures is not clear, but with tendency to be geminate, costae fairly well marked. Hind tibiae short. Pro- sternum with punctures. Holotype. —Female, USNM Type No. 75745. . Type-locality. —Curraliahe, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Remarks. —This species has unusually long elytra and short hind tibiae. Colaspis corumbensis, n. sp. (Fig. 4) Length 8 mm. Width 4 mm. Elongate oblong oval, black with green lustre. Antennae with four basal joints pale. Head small, interocular space less than half width of head, head rather sparsely punctate, antennae with seven apical joints dark. Prothorax approximately twice as wide as long, margin with tooth below middle, disc densely punctate. Scutel- lum black. Elytra more than 3 times as long as prothorax, and wider, with more or less geminate punctures when they are not in single lines sep- arated by costae. Hind tibiae rather short for so long a body, and with green lustre. Holotype.—Male, USNM Type No. 75747. One paratype. Type-locality. —Corumba, Grosso, Brazil. Remarks. —The unusually small head and interocular space are noticeable for Mato J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 so large a beetle. The aedeagus has a long narrow tip. Colaspis ekraspedona, n. sp. (Fig. 5) Length 7.5 mm. Width 3.5 mm. Oblong oval, shining black, antennae and legs black. Head with interocular space more than half width of head, densely and finely punctate. Anten- nae all black. Prothorax with margin with tooth, disc very densely punctate. Elytra not 3 times as long as prothorax and somewhat wider, densely punctate, punctures in geminate rows except near suture, with costae near punctures. Body beneath with dense punctures on prosternum, dark brown, legs dark brown. Holotype. —Male, USNM type No. 75748. Type-locality. —Lombory, Minas Gerais, Brazil, collected by J. Halix in November. Remarks. —The aedeagus of this spe- cies has an unusually broad tip and as a whole is longer than usual. The beetle itself is densely punctate. Colaspis lampomela, n. sp. (Fig. 6) Length 7 mm. Width. 3.5 mm. Elongate oblong oval, shining black with mostly black antennae, black legs, ventral surface very dark green. Head with interocular space more than half width of head, finely and densely punctate, anten- nae with only joint 2 entirely pale, joints 1, 3, 5, and 6 partly pale, remainder black. Prothorax twice as wide as long, margin with tooth below middle, disc sparsely punctate with median elevations about punctures. Scutellum shining black. Elytra more than 3 times as long as prothorax and a little wider, densely punctate with geminate punctures except near suture and near apex, with costae between. Prosternum rather sparsely punctate. Ventral surface greenish black. Legs dark brown, nearly black. Holotype.—Female, USNM Type No. 75749. Type-locality. —Corotuba, Brazil. Collected Feb. 19, 1947. From Monros collection. Remarks.—Unfortunately the only specimen is a female. However, this spe- cies differs from all the others described here in having few punctures on the pro- thorax. 83 Figs. 1-10 (left to right, top to bottom), species of Colaspis. Fig. 1, Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefévre; fig. 2, C. paracostata Blake, n. sp.; fig. 3, C. braxatibiae Blake, n. sp.; fig. 4, C. corumbensis Blake, n. sp.; fig. 5, C. ekraspedona Blake, n. sp.; fig. 6, C. lampomela Blake, n. sp.; fig. 7, C. flavantenna Blake, n. sp.; fig. 8, C. purpurala Blake, n. sp.; fig. 9, C. manausa Blake, n. sp.; fig. 10, C. juxaoculus Blake, n. sp. Colaspis flavantenna, n. sp. (Fig. 7) Length 10.5 mm. Width 5.0 mm. Elongate oblong oval, dark brown, almost black, shining with a green lustre. Scutellum shining margins, legs dark brown, antennae pale. Head with interocular space half width of head, densely punctate, antennae all pale. Prothorax 84 twice as wide as long with margin having tooth below middle, disc rather irregularly punctate, shining with a green lustre. Scutellum shining with a dark green lustre. Elytra a little more than 3 times as long as prothorax and somewhat wider, punctures mostly in geminate rows except near suture and apex, where they occur in single or sometimes alternate rows, costae between very conspicuous. Body beneath shining dark blue- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 green, prosternum punctate. Legs with femora dark above and all dark near tip, tibiae all dark. Aedeagus long and broad with tip very broad, and widening somewhat behind tip. Holotype.—Male, USNM Type No. 75751. One female paratype. Type-locality. —not given (from Bow- ditch collection). Remarks.—This species is very like C. quattuordecimcostata but larger, with a larger head and longer hind tibiae. No locality is given, but the fact that it resem- bles so many of the group leads me to believe that it, too, may have been col- lected in Brazil. It is the only one of the group with yellow antennae, which dis- _ tinguishes it from the rest of the species. In addition, the aedeagus has an unusu- ally broad tip. Colaspis purpurala, n. sp. (Fig. 8) Length 9 mm. Width 4.5 mm. Very elongate oblong oval, black, elytra with a rosy lustre and sides with a green lustre, anten- nae all black. Head with interocular space half width of head, a median depression down front, finely and densely punctate, antennae all black. Prothorax approxi- mately twice as wide as long, margin with tooth below middle, disc densely punctate. Scutellum black. Elytra nearly 4 times as long as prothorax with geminate punctation becoming alternate and then in single row below middle, costae promi- nent. Body beneath blue green. Prosternum with few punctures. Legs long and black. USNM Type Holotype. — Female, INO: 75752. Type-locality.—Not given. Bowditch collection). Remarks .— A member of the quattuor- decimcostata group with unusually long elytra. It resembles C. brachytibiae, except that the legs are much longer. The Specimen on the pin bears the name ‘‘pur- ' purala,’ a name I cannot find in any ' catalogue. (from Colaspis manausa, Nn. sp. (Fig. 9) Length 10.5 mm. Width 5.7 mm. Elongate oblong oval, black shining with a green J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 lustre in the light, undersurface dark green, anten- nae with first 2 joints and up to the tip of third joint pale, joint 4 all dark, remainder missing. Head densely and finely punctate, a median depression down front, interocular space less than half width of head, labrum dark. Prothorax nearly twice as wide as long, margin with prominent tooth below middle, disc irregularly punctate with many bare spaces. Scutellum shining black. Elytra not 3 times as long as prothorax and wider, with punc- tures somewhat irregular but tending to be gemi- nate, becoming single near suture and apex, costae between prominent. Body beneath dark green, prosternum with deep punctures. Femora near body dark green, becoming dark brown before end, tibiae dark brown, almost black. Holotype.— Female, No. 75753. Type locality. —Manaus, Brazil. Remarks. —This species appears black except in bright light, where it has a green lustre all over body. The interocular space is less than half the width of the head, in this feature resembling C. corom- bensis which is unusual in this group. It is also like C. flavantenna except that the antennae are not completely pale. USNM Type Colaspis juxaoculus, n. sp. (Fig. 10) Length 11 mm. Width 4.6 mm. Elongate oblong oval, shining black. Head with interocular space half width of head, densely punctate, antennae with first joint dark from above, joints 2 and 3 pale, remainder missing. Prothorax twice as wide as long with margin having a tooth below middle, disc densely punctate. Scutel- lum shining black. Elytra more than 3 times as long as prothorax and wider, with geminate punctures except near suture and apex of next row, where punctures are in single line. Legs and ventral sur- face black, mesosternum without punctures. Holotype.—Female, USNM Type No. 75754. Type locality. —Brazil. Remarks. —This beetle bears the label ‘‘Colaspis 14-costata Lefévre,’’ and it is very close to Lefévre’s species, with the difference that the hind tibiae of C. quat- tuordecimcostata are very short and the hind tibiae of C. juxaoculus are much longer than those of the former. 85 ACADEMY AFFAIRS SCIENTISTS IN THE NEWS Contributions in this section of your Journal are earnestly solicited. They should be typed double-spaced and sent to the Editor three months preceding the issue for which they are intended. NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY Dr. Isabella Karle has been elected to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). She is the only female physical chemist in the Academy. Her husband, Dr. Jerome Karle, also a physical chemist at NRL, was elected to the Academy two years ago. The Karles are one of the few husband-wife teams elected to the Academy. The National Academy of Sciences, a private organization of eminent scientists and engineers dedicated to the ‘‘further- ance of science and its use for the general welfare,’’ was established in 1863 by a Congressional Act of Incorporation signed by President Lincoln. The Academy is frequently called upon to act as an official adviser to the Federal Jerome and Isabella Karle 86 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 4 government in matters of science or technology. Mrs. Karle, a native of Detroit, Michi- gan, joined the NRL staff in 1946 and holds BS and MS degrees in Chemistry and a PhD in Physical Chemistry, all from the University of Michigan. She heads NRL’s X-ray Analysis Section in the Laboratory for Structure of Matter. Ever since Mrs. Karle developed the.symbolic addition method of determining molecular _ structures directly from x-ray diffraction experiments 15 years ago, she has con- tinued to make significant contributions in crystallography by her analyses of important materials particularly of in- _ terest in organic and biological chemistry. _ Mrs. Karle has gained world-wide recog- _ nition for her work in this field. Dr. Jerome Karle, Chief Scientist of _NRL’s Laboratory for Structure of Matter, was elected to the Academy in 1976, at which time he was also named recipient of the 1976 Captain Robert Dexter Conrad Award for Scientific Achievement, the highest recognition the Navy can bestow on any of its scientists engaged in Naval R & D. Mrs. Karle has been active in teaching, training many postdoctoral students in new analytical techniques. She and her husband are members of several scientific associations, including the American Chemical Society, the American Physical Society, the American Crystallographic Association, the Biophysical Society and the Washington Academy of Sciences. The Karles live in Falls Church, Va. They have three daughters, Madeleine, Jean and Louise. Madeleine is a graduate of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University. Jean, Louise and Louise’s husband, Jonathan Hanson, have earned PhDs in Chemistry. Drs. Ming-Chang Lin and George Sigel, Jr. are the 1978 recipients of the Pure Science and Applied Science awards from the Naval Research Laboratory’s Chapter of Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society of North America. Each year the NRL chapter presents awards to two outstanding NRL scientists who have made distinguished contribu- J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 Ming-Chang Lin tions to pure science and applied science while conducting research at the Labora- tory. These awards are in keeping with the objective of the chapter, which is to encourage investigation in pure and applied science, and to promote the spirit of scientific research at NRL. Lin was cited for his discovery of the first chemical Transverse Electric-dis- charge Atmospheric (TEA) laser and its application to chemical systems. He is also noted for his discovery of numerous new chemical laser reactions, for his pioneering research in laser-accelerated chemical reactions and ‘‘for furthering our knowledge of chemical reaction mechanisms.”’ Sigel was recognized for providing new insights concerning the optical properties of oxide glasses, their atomic defect structures and their response to ionizing radiation, and for applying this knowl- edge to the selection and development of radiation resistant optical fibers for military data links. Lin, a research chemist, joined the 87 George Sigel, Jr. NRL staff in 1970. He received his BS from Taiwan National Normal University in 1959 and his PhD degree from the University of Ottawa, Canada, in 1965. He has authored or co-authored over 140 technical papers and scientific presenta- tions in the area of chemical kinetics and lasers. He is a member of several technical societies and organizations and was the recipient of the 1975 Hillebrand Prize from the American Chemical So- ciety of Washington, D. C., and the 1976 Physical Sciences Award of the Wash- ington Academy of Sciences. He lives with his wife, Judy, and their three children, Karen, 11, Ellena, 7, and Linus, 10, in Oxon Hill, Md. Sigel, who is aresearch physicist, came to NRL in 1966, working in the areas of glassy materials and radiation damage in glasses. He received his BS in physics from St. Joseph’s College in Philadelphia, Pa. and his MS and PhD degrees in physics from Georgetown University in Washington, D. C. He is a member of the American Physical Society and the American Ceramic Society and has served as the Chairman of the Tri- Service Working Group on Radiation Effects in Optical Fibers. He has authored or co-authored over 50 technical papers in the area of glasses. Sigel lives with 88 his wife, Jean, and their two children, Bobby, 9, and Laura, 7, in Great Falls, Va. Dr. Theodore A. Jacobs, former Super- intendent of the Optical Sciences Divi- sion at the Naval Research Laboratory, has been appointed an Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy in the Office of Research and Advanced Tech- nology. Prior to his employment at NRL in 1976, Dr. Jacobs had served in high level positions for the TRW Corporation, Aerospace Corporation, California In- stitute of Technology, Rocketdyne Divi- sion of North American Aviation and Douglas Aircraft Company. He was a research associate and lecturer in me- chanical engineering at the University of Southern California in the late 1950s. Dr. ~ Jacobs has held formal Defense Depart- ment appointments to the Army Missile Command Scientific Advisory Group, Defense Intelligence Agency Scientific Advisory Committee, and the Chief of Naval Operations. A native of Atlanta, Georgia, Dr. Jacobs holds an A.B. degree in chemistry from Emory University in Georgia, an M.S. in mechanical engineer- Theodore A. Jacobs J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 ing from the University of Southern California and a Ph.D. in engineering } and chemistry from the California In- stitute of Technology. He is a member of numerous professional and scientific | societies, and holds one U. S. patent and has another pending. In a change of command ceremonies | held at the Naval Research Laboratory, Navy Captain Edward E. (Buzz) Henifin became the new NRL Commanding Officer on July 31, 1978. He relieved _ Captain Lionel M. Noel, who is retiring from the Navy. Captain Noel has been Commanding Officer of NRL since June, 1976. Prior to his new assignment, Capt. -Henifin served as Deputy Director of Navy Technology. Capt. Henifin was born in Madison, South Dakota, August 23rd, 1931. He was graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and commissioned an Ensign in June 1954. He served aboard the USS THE SULLIVANS (DD-537) before volunteer- ing for submarine duty. Following duty aboard HARDHEAD and BARBEL, Captain Henifin attended post-graduate school at the University of Washington, receiving a BA in Physical Oceanography in 1962. He then served aboard the USS ALBACORE (AGSS-569) in’ various Capacities including Executive Officer. During this tour in 1963, Captain Henifin, on an additional duty assignment, par- ticipated in the search for the USS THRESHER. His next assignments were as Officer in Charge of the BATHY- SCAPH TRIESTE II and then Command- ing Officer USS POMFRET (SS-391), followed by an extended tour in the Deep Submergence Program Coordi- nators Office. In 1975 Captain Henifin reported to the Naval Material Command Headquarters and served as the Deputy Director of Navy Laboratories. He moved to the Deputy Director of Navy Technology billet in February of 1977. Captain Henifin is a designated Deep Submergence Vehicle Operator and a designated subspecialist in Oceanog- raphy. He was awarded the Navy Achievement Medal for his performance J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 ID a Edward E. Henefin aboard TRIESTE II and the Meri- torious Service Medal for the planning of and participation in deep submergence operations in 1971. Additionally, he is authorized to wear the Navy Unit Commendation Ribbon for participation in the THRESHER search, and in the Palomares bomb search in 1966. Captain Henifin is married to the former Elisabeth Phillips of Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania. The Henifins have three children, Ann, David and Edward, and reside in Alexandria, Virginia. Dr. Richard Tousey, a space scientist at the Naval Research Laboratory since 1941 and the physicist credited with pioneering NRL’s rocket spectroscopy research, was honored with a seminar on solar radiation prior to his official retirement from the Laboratory on June 30. He is widely recognized throughout the scientific community for his out- standing leadership in solar spectroscopy investigations and was the principal investigator for four successful solar experiments carried out by astronauts aboard the Skylab space station in 1973-74. Dr. Tousey’s experiments aboard Skylab provided a wealth of new 89 Richard Tousey data on the physics of the sun, and color enhanced photos of solar activity taken by his instruments have been appearing in scientific journals and popular astronomy magazines throughout the world ever since. The retiring NRL scientist received his doctorate in physics from Harvard in 1933, and from 1935 until his employ- ment at NRL in 1941, he was a research instructor at Tufts University, . . . the school that granted him an honorary D.Sc. degree in 1961. Appropriately enough, Dr. Tousey began his Navy career at NRL by initiating a program of upper atmosphere research to investigate the brightness of the sky and the visibility of the stars from aircraft in the daytime. In addition, Dr. Tousey headed the investigations into the fields of vision and atmospheric optics during World War II and received the Meritorious Civilian Service Award in 1945 for the design and development of a reflector gun sight for the Navy. In 1946 he began a series of experiments from high-altitude probes using captured German rockets with his spectrograph instrumentation aboard them. This en- abled him to obtain the first detailed record of the sun’s radiation in the far .— ultraviolet region and extreme short wavelengths that are otherwise hidden to an observer because of the absorption of the atmosphere. His upper atmospheric research from rockets resulted in the first extension of the solar spectrum into the ultraviolet, high resolution solar extreme ultraviolet spectra, the discovery of many emission lines in the ultraviolet spectrum of the sun, the determination of the profile of the Lyman alpha line of hydrogen, and the direct measurement of the altitude of several night airglow emissions. During the late 1950’s, Dr. Tousey also directed an NRL program of research on the visibility of earth satellites and was a member of the Science Program Com- - mittee of Project Vanguard. (Inciden- tally, the Navy’s Vanguard satellite launched in 1958 is still traveling in space and is now the oldest man-made satellite in orbit. It is expected to be in orbit for about 400 years.) Among his awards are the 1959 Progress Medal of the Photographic Society of America, the Frederick Ives Medal of the Optical Society of America for 1960, the Prix Ancel of the Societe Francaise de Photographie in 1962, the Draper Medal for investigations in astronomical physics and the NASA Medal for Excep- tional Scientific Achievement. Dr. Tousey is a member of many professional associations, including the National Academy of Sciences and the International Academy of Astronautics; and he is a fellow of the American Physical Society, the Optical Society of America, and the American Geophysical Union. His publications include some 200 papers. Lendell E. Steele, associate super- intendent of the Materials Science and Technology Division and head of the Thermostructural Materials Branch, has been named a recipient of the Award of Merit by the American Society for Test- ing and Materials (ASTM). Steele re- ceived the award from ASTM President William A. McAdams during ceremonies J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, No. 2, 1978 hosted by ASTM Standing Committee on Standards in Boston on 30 June 1978. | Steele was cited for ‘‘distinguished | service rendered in encouraging the transfer of research results to technology, furthering ASTM Committee E-10 on Nuclear Technologies and Applications goals and redirecting E-10 activities to a broader nuclear area, and leadership of the Committee on Standards.’’ OBITUARIES Samuel B. Detwiler, Jr. Samuel Bertolet Detwiler, Jr., a retired | research administrator, U. S. Depart- | ment of Agriculture, died in the Sleepy ' Hollow Nursing Home, Fairfax, after a ' long illness following a heart attack | in 1973. He lived on Walter Reed Drive - in Arlington. Born in Wabasha, Minn. in 1909, son of Samuel B. and Kate E. Detwiler, he attended public schools in Arlington, the old Western High School in Georgetown, and received a BS degree in chemistry in 1934 from the George Washington University while working as a laboratory assistant at the National Bureau of Standards, then located at Connecticut Avenue and Van Ness Street. He was awarded an MA degree in organic chemistry by the University of Illinois in 1941. He served as research chemist at the USDA Regional Soybean Industrial Products Laboratory in Urbana, IIl., where his work helped lay the ground- work for the emergence of the soybean as the primary source of vegetable oil for shortenings and margarine in the United States. The Urbana laboratory was the prototype for a number of larger USDA laboratories, later established, dedicated to discovering new and wider uses for U. S. farm products. In 1944 he returned to the Washington area proj- ect officer of the Bureau of Agricultural and Industrial Chemistry, USDA, and became Assistant to the Administrator of the Agricultural Research Service in 1958, a position he held until his retire- ment in 1972. In the latter capacity he was intimately involved in the direction J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 of agricultural research in foreign uni- versities supported by proceeds from the sale of surplus U. S. agricultural com- modities abroad. His official travels took him to most of the countries of Western Europe, Israel, and India. During the past several years he served as research associate with the Federation of Ameri- can Societies for Experimental Biology, Bethesda. He was author of many scientific articles on chemistry and research administration. He was manager, councilor, treasurer, and secretary of the Chemical Society of Washington and editor of its publica- tion, the Capital Chemist. Mr. Detwiler received the Honor Scroll of the Ameri- can Institute of Chemists and the Public Service Award of the Chemical Society of Washington. He was a member of the American Chemical Society, the Ameri- can Institute of Chemists, the American Oil Chemists’ Society, Alpha Chi Sigma, Phi Sigma Kappa, Omicron Delta Kappa, and the Cosmos Club. He was life member of the Hugenot Society of Penn- sylvania. Among his many interests, any of which could have become a second vocation, were photography, military history, music, genealogy, mathematics, firearms, farming, and boating. For a number of years Mr. Detwiler was a Fellow of the Washington Academy of Sciences. As editor of the Academy Journal in the recent past, he abundantly demonstrated his love and regard for his fellow scientists by the meticulous atten- tion he devoted to promoting that activity. He also served in a number of offices in the Academy during his association with that organization. 91 Theodor C. von Brand Dr. Theodor C. von Brand, 78, a retired physiologist and parasitologist for the National Institutes of Health and a former president of the American Society of Parasitologists, died on July 18, 1978 in Suburban Hospital after a heart attack. Von Brand was head of the physiology and biochemistry section of the parasitic diseases laboratory of the National Institute of Allergy and Infec- tious Diseases from 1947 until he retired from NIH in 1969. He was known inter- nationally for his work in invertebrate physiology and biochemistry. He was amember of many professional organizations and was on the expert advisory panel on parasitic diseases of the World Health Organization. At his retirement he was presented the Superior Service Honor Award of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare for ‘‘meritorious research on the chemical composition and metabolism of para- Sites.” Dr. von Brand was a true pioneer in the 92 field of parasite physiology and bio- chemistry. It can be said with justifica- tion that he single-handedly through his research and scholarship founded and | developed this area of parasitology in this | country. His intellect, immense scholar- | ship and productivity enabled him to be- | come the author of more than 200 papers © and 6 textbooks. Although he was _ mandatorily retired at age 70 from the | NIH in 1969, he continued to be active until the end. His latest textbook will be | published this autumn. A native of Ortenberg, von Brand received a Ph.D. in zoology from the University of Munich and a Germany, | M.D. from the University of Erlangen. | After immigrating to the United States — in 1936 he was a research fellow at Johns Hopkins University’s school of hygiene. — He also taught at Barat College in — Illinois and at Catholic University before © joining the NIH staff in 1946. He leaves his wife, Margarethe, at the home on Hempstead Avenue in Bethesda; a son, Theodor P., of Bethesda; a sister and three grandchildren. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 er OP er Be oh, JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES | Seneral Type manuscripts on white bond paper sither 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double |ypace all lines, including those in abstracts, ‘ables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- ments, and references cited. Number pages sonsecutively. Place your name and com- plete address in the upper right hand corner of the title page. Title, Author, and Affiliation _ Page | of your manuscript should contain only this information and your name and }address. Choose a concise but complete and meaningful title. In research papers con- cerning biological subjects, include an indi- cation of the order and family of the taxa discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- mally be included unless the author so specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- tion and mailing address (including Zip) so that readers can write to you directly. Abstract | Type on a separate sheet at the end of the pimaniuscript. Make the abstract intelligible without reference to the text of the paper. Write an informative digest of the significant content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- ceed 3% of the text. Footnotes | Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. Number text footnotes consecutively with Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- script. Type table footnotes, if any, below each pertinent table on the same page. ' Illustrations and Legends | The quality of all original illustrations must be high enough to facilitate good offset reproduction. They should have ample mar- gins and be drawn on heavy stock or fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- ing. They should be proportioned to column {1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, leaving space for legend material. Photo- Instructions to Contributors graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- produce best when the contrast is fairly high. Identify each illustration with number and author in light pencil marks on the reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- rately — please do not glue or clip them to the pages of the manuscript. Do not type or write legends directly on the illustrations. Type legends on a separate sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. Indicate where you want illustrations to appear in the printed paper by writing the figure numbers lightly in the text margins, and be sure that each figure is properly re- ferenced in the text itself. Original “‘art” will be returned only at the author’s request and expense. Tables Include tables only when the same infor- mation cannot be presented economically in the text, or when a table presents the data in a more meaningful way. Consider preparing extremely complicated tabular matter in a form suitable for direct reproduction as an illustration. In such cases, the use of the typewriter is not recommended. References to Literature Limit references within the text and in synonymies to author and year (and page if needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list alphabetically by senior author only those papers you have included in the text. Like- wise, be sure all the text references are listed. Type the “References Cited” section on a separate sheet after the last page of text. Abbreviations should follow the USA Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, Z39.5-1963. Submission of Manuscripts Send completed manuscripts and sup- porting material to the Academy office (see address inside front cover) in care of the Editor. Authors will be requested to read Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- print orders prior to publication. Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. Washington Academy of Sciences 9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) Washington, D.C. 20014 Return Requested with Form 3579 2nd Class Postage Pai d at Washington, D.C and additional mailing offices. VOLUME 68 Number 3 | Journal of the SEPTEMBER, 1978 Issued Quarterly at Washington, D.C. Directory Issue CONTENTS Directory, 1978: Mitceminpol Whe ACAGEMY 2366220. 6 sce eee oe hee se co ewe Alphabetical MSU Pw ee ysis a dk i eo a aa ena seemes Washington Academy of Sciences Founded in 1898 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE President Mary H. Aldridge President-Elect Alfred Weissler Secretary James F. Goff Treasurer Nelson W. Rupp Members at Large Conrad B. Link Elaine Shafrin BOARD OF MANAGERS All delegates of affiliated Societies (see facing page) EDITOR Richard H. Foote EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Elizabeth Ostaggi ACADEMY OFFICE 9650 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD. 20014 Telephone: (301) 530-1402 The Journal This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, September, and December)—the September issue contains a directory of the Academy membership. Subscription Rates Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- - ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the following rates: U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 FP OLEIRM sew din covese.oe ae os 18.50 Single Copy Price ...... 6.00 Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is $7.50. Back Issues Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 (1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings and Vols. 1—40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, volumes, and sets (Vols. 1-62, 1911-1972) and all cur- rent issues. Claims for Missing Numbers Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 days after date of mailing plus time normally required for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- | lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a change in address. Change of Address Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- emy office. Such notification should show both old and new addresses and zip number. Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES Eimmsemsnical-SOcCIeLY OF WaSMINGION) 55/0). .0006 ln ee e as os See esc e eae wee eae ee wee ole James F. Goff PMMTMreOrical SOCIELY Ol WaSMiMetON: 605 00) 4g .ecoe ete ts ee ae vis eevee dee eee ne wees Jean K. Boek Sue TE SCICEVEOL NVASHINGLOM: «252: she) oi5. es) Reeso ia ce 5265 yegeh oe idaci ith loys a leds ny AiaeelS doak woe William R. Heyer Bema cicty Ob) Washington! ".7...\22). 24... ole ae be ee ee Res Delegate not appointed Pac SOCIcIY Of Washington .:..5 5s 2 icc cae seals t fede wt le ween s Oe Maynard Ramsay Se ASR PRAT Ce SOUL CO a osc Blois as Shey ashes tet mx akon a celia, a aseinue revere, = OMe, ease tare wee © T. Dale Stewart Pe eie AS GCICly Ol WasmingtOM in)Pesh oie oe ee ec bede edad oe ate ceca Delegate not appointed mete mcieiycor the Disthict of Columbia. 5... 6.22). oe cic oa snc ole ge ede ee cae decd ucwewe ees Inactive 7 LER TTS, SUAS ICIRIGALIS OTTER ea enone et Paul H. Oehser PLM OMLILIN OM NV ASHINGLON 2... a. fe nears ceo ok fee ata e ble as bese ate se as Conrad B. Link ee aH TECH AM) MOLCSLCES | 05 oagsjnie s)sco. sie asad doe coe ew elare oe salt oe eae ee ea Thomas B. Glazebrook ae OCICINGOU FNPITCCES. soccisa. is = 2 ectysu AG aus aoe jets SM Annus Baye WEIS a a2 Bel arne oe George Abraham Mamecmaricctticaland Electronics’ Engineers... 05. 26s se0 . ed Pek a a George Abraham Pmcneamoucicty Of Mechanical ENQINEErs .... oso. ek ee dc obs t ce evoke ee weasceaene Michael Chi a PeminenOlOPical Society Of Washington -. 2... i.e ce nese eee caw ea set ees Robert S. Isenstein eee SIC IR Ols MICTOULOIONY, 2 Me. eee edn a a6 een sie viele no dale G oo ele g-ehbie cs Siadeerdls Michael Pelzcar Paine Mei winetican Military ENGINEERS 9... 6... e ck cae eee eee en neeweneceeees H. P. Demuth 4 SLE GED SOCE Cel Cia a) SN i0oT (ce) nei ee Robert Sorenson MmEmemmonexpenmental Biology and Medicine... 2.0.2.2. le et ee eee ene Donald Flick Pe MESO IC I Om NMCIAIS (265 Ute EME as ai. as he a ede aaa ee aha we se Glen W. Wensch armavienal Association of Dental Research ... 2.20.22. ee ce ee eee William V. Loebenstein minvenean Institute of Acronautics and Astronautics .............060.c0 ces eeceeecsaes George J. Vila PEAS SIC OL OIG PICA SOCICLY fay oiayc)- Is So ce ee eases bas bed eee see neeee A. James Wagner PP IAC SOCICIYIOl WASHINGTON (0... on2 ce hate kl asa se sate ca seta te se dea bas Robert J. Argauer PESEE AES OCICIN OL AMONCA Ye i einpn ME 5 acini © ahapeyeiZya se mae Be eoielel bie e eeheads 5 Delegate not appointed ee ee ABC ATES OIE LY P58), 2 SP ye Ne eae a ease eke is ALS 6 oad edness ela Sa auelo Dick Duffey NCCES OM NC CHOI OPISES ip aci02 a s-seNepeens oie, so eas 6 olefe ee Yew eae need be ame e eo William Sulzbacher cae IO CECE SOCICUY, gt A TA,...0k RENE MIN. A sas at. Ps Een i LI Re Inactive LE PLSD G EGIL GAL SVC SL SY aa aes Sit en rer ae ee oe aie eee bd David R. Flinn et POI ELI STOTV OLS SCICMCE HO MED) ice cou iaieaci bd be! c3e o0o avalon Sle we aw eaten WS oe se we a bee oo reve ae Inactive Phe Ane ASSOCIALION OF PHYSICS LCACNEDS —2 222 cb eecds ec ce ccs cede ceed epee cesacees To be appointed (LL BELL SCVGr Sty LAITY S LEY C7 Ip Ree ores, TET eer Re Te eo Lucy B. Hagan Pemeniean SoOciciy Or Liant Physiologists 45 sik Disc. od Plea aialeanie dae depen eyes + Walter Shropshire Beene On Operations KeEScarch COUNCH ieee) 2 fos Bt sso 4 Bee eee eee nes teeelone eis ime John G. Honig PEER ME SOREL VEO NINCIICAL To gyro ane sacs cstiaye eo c= ne, 3. 6de SeBtysgcKe oie eS oie Soe a wien bo, fa)iel ines lae Inactive American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical ee UN MITRE IST CET. Sig eee a 1h, ols Seu A eyes: Said Se Seeiatta Sod SA Gy opie Sco 'e ew agony es Gus H. Goudarzi SMITA AIOMAGITONOMELS: Falennd.os. SP eiolits s Mowea dhe ew ekumber Reltawws . te abt Benson J. Simon Sraucinaticd Association Of Amenca 6. 5 tiiin . ales OOR n Pn F Patrick Hayes EIS ETI CUOLACHEMMSES 50 Sie ona caso ake, sos as occu sinus 30 210 +) ein, oie a 0/8 ® tyne es Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. SEC HOLGSICAl-ASSOCIATION ... Se cabteaaier. ek: Hokie bce oe cone bed eee seers mbien John O’ Hare Pee asnincon bam Dechmical Group) c.0 bos 6 Uk eee et oe he we bldre eit be ne we stew Paul G. Campbell Pemeican PAytopathological SOCICEY=0..G... Gaicrab < fs. 2 seveswmats Smmrttaponisy. oie Sl a bh Tom van der Zwet mere tor General Systems Research ™...22. 6600) 0.. be. fe die lo Ronald W. Manderscheid 7 REESE TRPSIOTRS) SYOCTE I pine IGS 65 eee EIR AG co ene a Ane H. McIlvaine Parsons Sees HIN EISHEHIESISOCICLY. 2.) Aeeitiny: bos a Se eels das dle « 4 ceria) oNasinte ws Sapte te ate 2 Irwin M. Alperin Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 93 ooh os wee acy } gi AOE aa ye 4 " AL 1 3090 0 Wy | TAR gran! are orp ae ® ond ie et Keiennes al TA ry top : : i. . ‘a ’ Cy “see 4 ae notgnisten ta on 6 St ombecitr #4 avdiegt if sia a songs ON iV rs ay * \ Plaetin dees alia iN iat! a ‘ ° . ' ium ee itehicle: tah VE Of Bea ee € MQOT b nNOS a ao OE le ania Nas as ; io and bs . bias Ve d z ~* *p* ne MN y Tie er eel = yo -" a OM petite: oe icky a Pee ary 4 t ; a the Ole , moore oa es 4 ; t 5 . A if i ‘ a! he a " * 4 7 . 2 Ley : ’ baci .' aes ee ys . - Ae | he eee ee . 28. QO AACS i orig os i FER ROAD Se . i * = . ajar Ae i rt i GS)? yi rac raid aa ane a 4 my Hse | 4 1? 4 (Tir) d, , ‘ ¥ fit et 4 fait she rae aon io Lot weNeioiyh Bonga biyeoyetl 4 . i py : 45 . nigrctus f jeaonre Siocus ot . fe ae aa , rir ; va le ; ; 2 " YW wal 3 . | m a Sn Sel SE a i$ SRSA 5. ih Si AT ue ree i Aisvter ec Ht. Vc vs ‘i +e a * : ) VW 050 i : . att . HOS Cpe tao Prd meatmaaasle “se ; et At { . eee ie ee coor Me . a s ya 5h oO animal Wag, * . t ‘ ~ LS (3 taM ' . ‘ at g+' oN th y it i F atin 7 bins mn? |. EVO y SER , : real 1a) re ees 6, ‘fe , i ‘ ngelsy: ge TEs J ne 4 aiieekhcte ede He : we ei aes Laat ; a ij ‘ ; . Cae T. 1M Me of ae het oir eyiene ; VYlaw * { 114 fool Regs) fe ike’ pitti ‘pelaae. Ff. Me Cy ‘i ri 4 ihe, yb i Pa +4, Lt} ) ; tg © ° © aru ve or 1, SRR ie Mak rs IR Ss late . Ladchaninn ‘ena hr ssuktg Nast wert | ries } 7 uss ee hy te bey pet ar . . os er v4 rz wig ‘tet Daisies ; a eT oes eae ee yay SEA « » aD aaah “dale eyestett >» aie i" TN gore En, i pias Yleiwoe bai vied! Wa My MEY 2 ap ats ae ‘ hee a verre Voom a CPE a NS Ay Cae i ae 5 een emg Rhiiiterd anit or is arse Tipe Sepa wes. % tae 5 We pe VF ‘ ‘ \ wed apiRy i) OM ikke OF Sheers POT RA he: bissveaies noise PIS oA AHA Alden bierag tural Res apn eM ore comer ana ie ; ‘Ot age, vas Leer A WO ahety vet enetoetes: saregey: BxSht yatlho at he eh y i - 4 f 94 * P : e : THE DIRECTORY OF THE ACADEMY FOR 1978 Foreword The present, 53rd issue of the Academy’s direc- tory is again this year issued as part of the September number of the Journal. As in previous years, the alphabetical listing is based on a postcard question- naire sent to the Academy membership. Members were asked to update the data concerning address and membership in affiliated societies by June 30, 1978. In cases in which cards were not received by that date, the address appears as it was used during 1978, and the remaining data were taken from the directory for 1977. Corrections should be called to the attention of the Academy office. Code for Affiliated Societies, and Society Officers 1 The Philosophical Society of Washington (1898) President: George T. Armstrong, 1401 Dale Dr., Vice-President: Secretary: Delegate: James F. Goff, 3405 34th Pl., 2 Anthropological Society of Washington (1898) President: 20016 President-elect: Secretary: Delegate: VA 22201 3 Biological Society of Washington (1898) Ruth Lardman, Dept. of Anthropology, American Univ., Silver Spring, MD 20910 William G. Maisch, 205 Yockum Parkway, Alexandria, VA 22034 Lowell D. Ballard, 722 S. Colonial, Sterling, VA 22170 N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 Washington, D.C. Marie Bourglaise, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20014 Mary F. Gallager, Montgomery College, Rockville, MD 20853 Jean K. Boek, National Graduate Univ., 1101 N. Highland St., Arlington, W. Duane Hope, Dept. of Invertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institutions, Washington, D.C. 20560 President: Richard S. Cawan Vice-President: Clyde F. E. Roper Secretary: Delegate: William R. Heyer, Amphibian & Reptiles, Nat. History Bice Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 4 Chemical Society of Washington (1898) President: Vice-President: Secretary Cheryl Marks, 6004 Balsam Dr., Delegate: Not appointed 5 Entomological Society of Washington (1898) President: Vice-President: ton, D.C. Secretary: Douglas W. S. Sutherland, 125 Lakeside Dr., Donald R. Davis, Dept. of Entomology, Smithsonian Institution, Washing- 20560 Donald R. Whitehead, Rm. W-605, U.S. National Museum of Natural David H. Freeman, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 Walter Benson, FDA-HFD 420, 200 C St. S.W., Washington, D.C. 20204 McLean, VA 22101 Greenbelt, MD 20770 History, Washington, D.C. 20560 Delegate: 6 National Geographic Society (1898) President: Chairman: Secretary: Delegate: Maynard J. Ramsay, 3806 Viser Court, Bowie, MD 20715 Robert E. Doyle, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 Melvin M. Payne, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 Owen R. Anderson, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 T. Dale Stewart, Smithsonian Institution, Museum of Natural History, Washington, D.C. 20560 7 Geological Society of Washington (1898) President: Vice-President: Francis R. Boyd, Jr., Lab., 2801 Upton St., J. Thomas Dutro, U.S. Geological Survey, Branch of Paleontology and Carnegie Institution of Washington, Geophysical N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 Stratigraphy, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 Secretary: Delegate: Not appointed J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 William E. Davies, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston VA 22092, Mail Stop 973 95 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Medical Society of the District of Columbia (1898) President: William S. McCune President-elect: Frank S. Bacon Secretary: Thomas Sadler Delegate: Not appointed Columbia Historical Society (1899) President: Wilcomb E. Washburn, Amer. Studies, S.I., Washington, D.C. 20560 Vice-President: William H. Press, 1511 K St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 Secretary: Marcellina Hummer, 2006 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 Delegate: Paul H. Oehser, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 Botanical Society of Washington (1902) President: Robert L. Boher, Dept. of Horticulture, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 Vice-President: Richard S. Cowan, Dept. of Botany, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 Secretary: James J. White, Dept. of Botany, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 Delegate: Conrad B. Link, Univ. of Md., Dept. of Horticulture, College Park, MD 20742 Society of American Foresters, Washington, Section (1904) President: Thomas B. Glazebrook, 7809 Bristow Dr., Annandale, VA 22003 President-elect: Arthur H. Smith, 3301 Wessynton Way, Alexandria, VA 22309 Secretary: George Cheek, American Forest Institute, 1619 Mass. Ave., N.W., Wash- ington, D.C. 20036 Delegate: T. B. Glazebrook Washington Society of Engineers (1907) President: Jeffrey H. Rumbaugh, Potomac Electric Power Co., 1900 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20068 Vice-President: Guy H. Hammer, Washington Hospital Dr., Washington, D.C. 20010 Secretary: Charles E. Remington, 2005 Columbia Pike, Arlington, VA 22204 Delegate: George Abraham, 3107 Westover Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Washington Section (1912) Chairman: Horst W. A. Gerlach 4521 Cheltenham Dr., Bethesda, MD 20014 Vice-Chairman: G. David Crandell, 12214 Old Colony Dr., Upper Marlboro, MD 20870 Secretary: Richard J. Bache, 10400 Burnt Ember Dr., Silver Spring, MD 20903 Delegate: George Abraham, 3107 Westover Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Washington Section (1923) Chairman: Robert L. Hershey, 1255 New Hampshire Ave., N.W., Apt. 433, Wash- ington, D.C. 20036 Vice-Chairman: Ron Niebo, 8587 Brae Brook Dr., Lanham, MD 20801 Secretary: Markley An, 8800 Fox Hill Trail, Potomac, MD 20854 Delegate: Michael Chi, 2721 N. 24th St., Arlington, VA 22207 Helminthological Society of Washington (1923) President: Harley G. Sheffield, Lab. of Parasitic Diseases, NIH, NOAID, Bldg. 5, ‘ Bethesda, MD 20014 Vice-President: Ronald Fayer, SEA, USDA, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 Secretary: J. Ralph Lichtenfels, Animal Parasitology Inst., SEA, BARC-East, Belts- ville, MD 20705 ; Delegate: Robert S. Isenstein, FSQS, USDA, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 American Society for Microbiology, Washington Branch (1923) President: June A. Bradlaw, Food & Drug Adm., Genetic Toxicology Branch, HFF-156, Washington, D.C. 20204 Vice-President: Irvin C. Mohler, The George Washington University School of Medicine, Dept. of Medical & Public Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20037 Secretary: Phyllis D. Kind, The George Washington University School of Medicine, Dept. of Microbiology, Washington, D.C. 20037 Delegate: Michael J. Pelczar, Jr., Vice President for Graduate Studies & Research, University of Md., College Park, MD 20742 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 Society of American Military Engineers, Washington Post (1927) President: Col. Edwin P. Geesey, DAEN-FEZ-B, Washington, D.C. 20314 Vice-President: R.Adm. H. R. Lippold, NOAA, Washington, D.C. 20233 Secretary: William I. Jacob, DAEN-FER-P, Washington, D.C. 20314 Delegate: Hal P. Demuth, 4025 Pine Brook Rd., Alexandria, VA 22310 American Society of Civil Engineers, National Capital Section (1942) President: James W. Harland, 1511 K St., N.W., Suite 337, Washington, D.C. 20005 Vice-President: Norman L. Cooper, Dept. of Transportation, 400 7th St., Rm. 9422, Wash- ington, D.C. 20590 Secretary: Robert Efimba, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Howard University, Washing- ton, D.C. 20059 Delegate: Robert Sorenson, Coastal Engineering Research Ctr., Kingman Bldg., Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060 Society for Experimental Biology & Medicine, D.C. Section (1952) President: Arthur Wykes, Natl. Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD 20014 President-elect: Elise A. Brown, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20014 Secretary: William Von Arsdel, Food & Drug Adm., Bureau of Drugs, Rockville, MD 20850 Delegate: Donald F. Flick, 930 19th St., So., Arlington, VA 22202 American Society for Metals, Washington Chapter (1953) Chairman: Klaus M. Zwilsky, U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., Washington, D.C. 20545 Vice-Chairman: Alan H. Rosenstein, Air Force Office of Scientific Res., 1400 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22209 Secretary: Joseph Malz, NASA, Code RWM, Washington, D.C. 20546 Delegate: Glen W. Wensch, U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., Washington, D.C. 20545 International Association for Dental Research, Washington Section (1953) President: John D. Termine, Natl. Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, MD 20014 Vice-President: William R. Cotton, Naval Medical Research Institute, Bethesda, MD 20014 Secretary: Stanley Vermilyea, Walter Reed Army Inst. of Res., Washington, D.C. 20012 Delegate: William V. Loebenstein, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, National Capital Section (1953) Chairman: Robert O. Bartlett, 18333 Duchess Dr., Olney, MD 20832 Vice-Chairman: George J. Vila, General Dynamics, 1025 Conn. Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 Secretary: Richard Hallion, 1003 Montrose Lane, Laurel, MD 20810 Delegate: George J. Vila American Meteorological Society, D.C. Chapter (1954) Chairman: Celso Barrientos, Natl. Weather Serv. W427, 821 Gramax Bldg., 8060 13th St., Silver Spring, MD 20910 Vice-Chairman: June Bacon-Bercey, Rm. 1310 Gramax Bldg., W 116X2, Silver Spring, MD 20233 Secretary: David H. George, Rm. 1424, Gramax Bldg., Silver Spring, MD 20233 Delegate: A. James Wagner, National Weather Service, World Weather Bldg., 5200 Auth Rd., Washington, D.C. 20233 Insecticide Society of Washington (1959) Chairman: Neal O. Morgan, USDA, ARS, Bldg. 476, Rm. 100, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 Chairman-elect: Jack R. Plimmer, USDA, ARS, Bldg. 306, Rm. 313, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 Secretary: John Neal, ARS, ARC, Bldg. 467, Beltsville, MD 20705 Delegate: Robert Argauer, ARS, ARC, Bldg. 309, Beltsville, MD 20705 Acoustical Society of America (1959) Chairman: John A. Molino, Sound Section, NBS, Washington, D.C. 20234 Vice-Chairman: Charles T. Molloy, 2400 Claremont Dr., Falls Church, VA 22043 Secretary: William K. Blake, Naval Ship R & D Ctr., Bethesda, MD 20034 Delegate: None appointed J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 ae 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 98 American Nuclear Society, Washington Section (1960) President: Arthur Randal, Am. Nuclear Energy Council, 1750 K St., N.W., Washing- ton, D.C. 20006 Vice-President: S. Bassett, NUS Corp., Rockville, MD 20852 Secretary: Ray Durante, Westinghouse Electric, 1801 K St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 Delegate: Dick Duffy, Nuclear Engineering, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 Institute of Food Technologists, Washington Section (1961) Chairman: Tannous Khalil, Giant Foods, Inc., Landover, MD 20785 Vice-Chairman: Florian C. Majorack, Food & Drug Adm., Washington, D.C. Secretary: Glenn V. Brauner, National Canners Assoc., Washington, D.C. 20036 Delegate: William Sulzbacher, 8527 Clarkson Dr., Fulton, MD 20759 American Ceramic Society, Baltimore-Washington Section (1962) Chairman: W. T. Bakker, General Refractories Co., P.O. Box 1673, MD 21203 Chairman-elect: L. Biller, Glidden-Dirkee Div., SCM Corp., 3901 Hawkins Point Rd., Baltimore, MD 21226 Secretary: Edwin E. Childs, J. E. Baker Co., 232 E. Market St., York, PA 17405 Delegate: None appointed Electrochemical Society, National Capital Section (1963) Chairman: David R. Flinn, Bureau of Mines, College Park Research Center, College Park, MD 20740 Vice-Chairman: John R. Ambrose, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 223, Rm. B254, Washington, D.C. 20234 Secretary: George Marinenko, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 222, Rm. A217, Washington, D.C. 20234 Delegate: David R. Flinn Washington History of Science Club (1965) Chairman: Richard G. Hewlett, Atomic Energy Comm. Vice-Chairman: Deborah Warner, Smithsonian Institution Secretary: Dean C. Allard Delegate: None appointed American Association of Physics Teachers, Chesapeake Section (1965) President: William Logan, D.C. Teachers College, 2565 Georgia Ave., Washington, D.C. 20001 Vice-President: Eugenie V. Mielczarek, George Mason Univ., 4400 University Dr., Fairfax, VA 22030 Secretary: John B. Newman, Towson State College, Towson, MD 21204 Delegate: None appointed Optical Society of America, National Capital Section (1966) President: Mark Daehler, Naval Research Laboratory, Code 7122.2, Washington, D.C. 20375 Vice-President: George J. Simonis, Harry Diamond Laboratory, Branch 32, 2800 Powder Mill Rd., Adelphi, MD 20783 Secretary: Martin J. Koomen, Naval Research Laboratory, Code 7141, Washington, D.C.226375 Delegate: Lucy B. Hagan, National Bureau of Standards, Rm. B360, Physics, Washington, D.C. 20234 American Society of Plant Physiologists, Washington Section (1966) President: Anne H. Datko, NIMH Bldg. 32A, Rm. 101, Bethesda, MD 20014 Vice-President: Werner J. Meudt, USDA, ARS Bldg. 50, Beltsville, MD 20705 Secretary: Charles F. Cleland, Radiation Biology Lab., 12441 Parklawn Dr., Rock- ville, MD 20852 Delegate: W. Shropshire, Jr., Smithsonian Institution, 12441 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20852 Washington Operations Research Council (1966) President: Charles Tiplitz, 8809 Bells Mills Rd., Potomac, MD 20854 Vice-President: Thomas Sicilia, 113 N. Oakland St., Arlington, VA 22212 Secretary: James Boisseau . Delegate: John G. Honig, 7701 Glenmore Spring Way, Bethesda, MD 20034 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Instrument Society of America, Washington Section (1967) President: Francis C. Quinn President-elect: John I. Peterson Secretary: Frank L. Carou Delegate: None appointed American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical & Petroleum Engineers (1968) Chairman: Garrett R. Hyde, 6027 Springhill Dr., Greenbelt, MD 20770 Vice-Chairman: John A. Patterson, 7705 Hamilton Spring Rd., Bethesda, MD 20034 Secretary: John H. DeYoung, Jr., 12677 Magna Carta Rd., Herndon, VA 22070 Delegate: Gus H. Goudarzi, 658 Pemberton Court, Herndon, VA 22070 National Capital Astronomers (1969) President: James Trexler, 5609 Otlarow St., Oxon Hill, MD 20021 Vice-President: Daniel G. Lewis, 11201 Farmland Dr., Rockville, MD 20852 Secretary: William R. Winkler, 15804 Pinecroft Lane, Bowie, MD 20716 Delegate: Benson J. Simon, 8704 Royal Ridge Lane, Laurel, MD 20811 Maryland-District of Columbia and Virginia Section of Mathematical Assoc. of America (1971) Chairman: Orville Thomas, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD 21401 Chairman-elect: John Smith, 1837 Negel Ct., Vienna, VA 22180 Secretary: Reuben Drake, 3701 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 Delegate: Patrick Hayes, 950 25th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 D.C. Institute of Chemists (1973) President: Kelso B. Morris, 1448 Leegate Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20012 President-elect: Leo Schubert, 8521 Beech Tree Rd., Bethesda, MD 20034 Secretary: Fred D. Ordway, 2816 Fall Jax Dr., Falls Church, VA 22042 Delegate: Miloslav Rechcigl, Jr., 1703 Mark Lane, Rockville, MD 20852 The D.C. Psychological Association (1975) President: John F. Borriello, St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Overholser Division, Washing- ton, D.C. 20032 President-elect Eugene Stammeyer, St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Overholser Division, Washington, D.C. 20032 Secretary: Sylvia M. Tetrault, Howard Univ. College of Medicine, Washington, D.C. 20059 Delegate: John J. O’Hare, Office of Naval Research, 800 N. Quincy St., Arlington, VA 22217 The Washington Paint Technical Group (1976) President: Maurice S. Moen, Sherwin Williams Co. Vice-President: Robert F. Brady, Jr., GSA Secretary: Mildred A. Post, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 226, Rm. B-348, Washington, D.C. 20234 Delegate: Paul G. Campbell, National Bureau of Standards, B-348 Br., Washington, D.C. 20234 Potomac Division, American Phytopathological Society (1977) President: C. W. Roane, Dept. of Plant Pathology, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061 Vice-President: J. R. Stavely, Tobacco Laboratory, USDA, Agric. Research Center, Beltsville, MD 20705 Secretary: L. D. Moore, Dept. of Plant Pathology, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061 Delegate: T. van der Zwet, Fruit Laboratory, USDA, Agric. Research Center, Beltsville, MD 20705 Metropolitan Washington Chapter of the Society for General Systems Research (1977) Chairman: Ronald W. Manderscheid, 6 Monument Ct., Rockville, MD 20850 Secretary: Helen G. Tibbitts, 4105 Montpelier Rd., Rockville, MD 20853 Delegate: Ronald W. Manderscheid, 6 Monument Ct., Rockville, MD 20850 Potomac Chapter, Human Factors Society (1977) President: M. Dean Havron, 6222 Edgewater Dr., Falls Church, VA 22041 Vice-President: Michael L. Fineberg, 10707 Huntley Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20902 Secretary: Erwin W. Bedarf, 12901 Livingston Rd., Oxon Hill, MD 20022 Delegate: H. Mcllvaine Parsons, 4701 Willard Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20015 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 99 45 Potomac Chapter, American Fisheries Society (1978) President: Worrall R. Carter, III, Maryland Fisheries Admin., P.O. Box 68, Wye Mills, MD 21679 President-elect: Galen L. Buterbaugh, Dep. Assoc. Director, Fish., U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept. Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240 Secretary: Norville S. Prosser, Sport Fishing Institute, 608 13th St., N.W., Suite 801, Washington, D.C. 20005 Delegate: Irwin M. Alperin, Exec. Director, Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Comm., 1717 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 100 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 i aide Alphabetical List of Members M = Member; F = Fellow; E = Emeritus member; L = Life Fellow. Numbers in parentheses refer to numerical code in foregoing list of affiliated societies. A ABDULNUR, SUHEIL F., Ph.D., Chemistry Dept. The American University, Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) ABELSON, PHILIP H., Ph.D., Editor SCIENCE Magazine, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1550 Mass. Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 (F-1, 4, 7, 16) ABRAHAM, GEORGE, M.S., Ph.D., 3107 West- over Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 (F-1, Gmi2. 13,25, 31, 32) ACHTER, M. R., Code 6416, U.S. Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-20, 36) ADAMS, CAROLINE L., 242 North Granada St., Arlington, Va. 22203 (E-10) ADLER, SANFORD C., 14238 Briarwood Terr., Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-1) ADLER, VICTOR E., 8540 Pineway Ct., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F-5, 24) AFFRONTI, LEWIS, Ph.D., Dept. of Microbiology, George Washington Univ. Sch. of Med., 2300 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-16, 19) AHEARN, ARTHUR J., Ph.D., 9621 East Bexhill Dr., Box 294, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-16) AKERS, ROBERT P., Ph.D., 9912 Silverbrook Dr., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-6) ALBUS, JAMES S., 4515 Saul Rd., Kensington, Md. 20014 (F) ALDRICH, JOHN W., Ph.D., 6324 Lakeview Dr., Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F) ALDRIDGE, MARY H., Ph.D., Dept. of Chemistry, American University, Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-4) ALEXANDER, ALLEN L., Ph.D., 4216 Sleepy Hollow Rd., Annandale, Va. 22003 (E-4) ALEXANDER, BENJAMIN, Ph.D., Pres., Chicago State Univ., 95th St. at King Dr. Chicago Ill. (F) ALGERMISSEN, S. T., 5079 Holmes PI., Boulder, Colo. 80303 (F) ALLEN, ANTON M., D.V.M., Ph.D., 11718 Lake- way Dr., Manassas, Va. 22110 (F) ALLEN, FRANCES J., Ph.D. 7507 23rd Ave., Hyattsville, Md. 20783 (F)45 ALLEN, WILLIAM G., P.E., B.S., 8306 Custer Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-14) ALTER, HARVEY, Ph.D., Nat. Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., 1211 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (F-4) ANDERSON, JOHN D., Jr., Ph.D., Dept. Aerospace Eng., Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-6, 22) ANDERSON, MYRON S., Ph.D., 1433 Manchester Lane, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20011 (E-4) J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 ANDERSON, WENDELL L., Rural Rt. 4, Box 4172, La Plata, Md. 20646 (F-4) ANDREWS, JOHN S., Sc.D., 10314 Naglee Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (E-15) ANDRUS, EDWARD D., BS., 1600 Rhode Island Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (M-7, 25) APOSTOLOU, Mrs. GEORGIA L., B.A. 1001 Rockville Pike, #424, Rockville, Md. 20852 (M-4) APSTEIN, MAURICE, Ph.D., 4611 Maple Ave., Bethesda, Md., 20014 (F-1, 6, 13) ARGAUER, ROBERT J., Ph.D., 4208 Everett St., Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-24) ARMSTRONG, GEORGE T., Ph.D., 1401 Dale Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 4) ARONSON, C. J., 3401 Oberon St., Kensington, Md. 20910 (E-1, 32) ARSEM, COLLINS, 10821 Admirals Way, Potomac, Md. 20854 (M-1, 6, 13) ARVESON, PAUL T., Code 1926, Naval Ship R&D Ctr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 ASLAKSON, CARL I., 5707 Wilson Lane, Be- thesda, Md. 20014 (E) ASTIN, ALLEN V., Ph.D., 5008 Battery Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-1, 13, 22, 35) AXILROD, BENJAMIN M., Ph.D., 9915 Marquette Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-1) AYENSU, EDWARD, Ph.D., 9200 Wilmett Ct., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-3, 10) BAILEY, R. CLIFTON, Ph.D., 6507 Divine St., McLean, Va. 22101 (F) BAKER, ARTHUR A., Ph.D., 5201 Westwood Dr., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-7) BAKER, LOUIS C.W., Ph.D., Dept of Chemistry, Georgetown University, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007 (F-4) BALLARD, LOWELL D., 722 So. Colonial, Ster- ling, Va. 22170 (F-1, 6, 13, 32) BARBOUR, LARRY L., 19309 Poinsetta Court, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (M) BARBROW, LOUIS E., Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 13, 32) BARGER, GERALD L., Ph.D., Rt. 4, Box 165AC, Columbia, Mo. 65201 (F-23) BEACH, LOUIS A., Ph.D., 1200 Waynewood Blvd., Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-1, 6) BECKER, EDWIN D., Ph.D., Inst. Arthritis & Meta- bolic Dis., Bldg. 2 Rm. 122, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4) BECKETT, CHARLES W., 5624 Madison St., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 4) 101 BECKMANN, ROBERT B., Ph.D., Dept of Chem. Engineering, Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-4) BElJ, HILDING, K., 69 Morningside Dr., Laconia, NH 03246 (L-1) BEKKEDAHL, NORMAN, Ph.D., 405 N. Ocean Bivd., Apt. 1001, Pompano Beach, Fla. 33062 (E) BELSHEIM, ROBERT, Ph.D., 2475 Virginia Ave. #514, Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-1, 12, 14, 25) BENDER, MAURICE, Ph.D., 16518 N.E. 2nd. PI., Bellevue, Wa. 98008 BENESCH, WILLIAM, Inst. for Molecular Physics, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-1, 32) BENJAMIN, C. R., Ph.D., IPD/SEA, USDA, Rm. 459, Federal Bg., Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (F-6, 10, 42) BENNETT, BRADLEY F., 3301 Macomb St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1, 20) BENNETT, JOHN A., 7405 Denton Rd., Bethesda Md. 20014 (F, 20) BENNETT, MARTIN TOSCAN, Ch.E., 3700 Mt. Vernon Ave., Rm. 605, Alexandria, Va. 22305 (F-4, 6) BENNETT, WILLARD H., Box 5342, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, N.C. 27607 (E) BENSON, WILLIAM, Ph.D., 618 Constitution Ave., N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002 (M-32, 44) BERGMANN, OTTO, Ph.D., Dept. Physics, George Washington Univ., Washington, D.C. 20052 (F-1) BERMAN, ALAN, Ph.D., 9304 Maybrook PI., Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F-25) BERNETT, MARIANNE K., Code 6170, Naval Res. Lab., Washington D.C. 20375 (M-4) BERNSTEIN, BERNARD, M.S., 7420 West- lake Terr., #608, Bethesda, Md. 20034 (M-25) BERNTON, HARRY S., 4000 Cathedral Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F 3-8) BESTUL, ALDEN B., 9400 Overlea Ave., Rock- ville, Md. 20850 (F-1, 6) BICKLEY, WILLIAM E., Ph.D., P.O. Box 20840, Riverdale, Md. 20840 (F-5, 24) BIRD, H. R., Animal Science Bg., Univ. of Wis- consin, Madison, Wisc. 53706 (F) BIRKS, L. S., Code 6680, U.S. Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) BLAKE, DORIS H., A.M., 3416 Glebe Rd., North Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-5) BLANK, CHARLES A., Ph.D., 5110 Sideburn Rd., Fairfax, Va. 22030 (M-4, 39) BLOCK, STANLEY, Ph.D., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4) BLONG, CLAIR K., Ph.D., 10603 Tenbrook Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M) BLUNT, ROBERT F., 5411 Moorland Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) BOEK, JEAN K., Ph.D., Natl. Graduate Univ., 1101 North Highland St., Arlington, Va. 22201 (F-2) BOGLE, ROBERT W., Apt. 1433, 3001 Veagly Terr., Washinton, D.C. 20008 (F) 102 BONDELID, ROLLON O., Ph.D., Code 6640, Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) BORGESEN, KENNETH G., M.A., 3212 Chillum Rd. #302, Mt. Rainier, Md. 20822 (M) BOTBOL, J. M., 2301 November Lane, Reston, Va. 22901 (F) BOWLES, R. E., Ph.D., 2105 Sondra Ct., Silver Spring, Md. 20904 (F-6, 14, 22, 35) BOWMAN, THOMAS E., Ph.D., Dept. Invert. Zoology, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3) BOZEMAN, F. MARILYN, Div. Virol., Bur. Biologics, FDA, 8800 Rockville Pike, Rock- ville, Md. 20014 (E-16, 19) BRADY, ROBERT F., Jr., Ph.D., 706 Hope Lane, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4, 41) BRANCATO, E. L., M.S., Code 4004, U.S. Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 13) BRANDEWIE, DONALD F., 6811 Field Master Dr., Springfield Va. 22153 (F) BRAUER, G. M., Dental Research & Medical Materials, A-123 Polymer, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 21) BREGER, IRVING A., Ph.D., 212 Hillsboro Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 6, 7, 39) BREIT, GREGORY, Ph.D., 73 Allenhurst Rd., Buffalo, N.Y. 14214 (E-13) BRENNER, ABNER, Ph.D., 7204 Pomander Lane, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 29) BRICKWEDDE, F. G., 104 Davey Lab., Dept. of Physics, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa. 16802 (L-1) BRIER, GLENN W., A.M., Dept. Atmosph. Sci., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, Colo. 80523 (F-6, 23) BROADHURST, MARTIN G., B322, Bldg. 224, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) BROMBACHER, W. G., 17 Pine Run Community, Doylestown, Pa. 18901 (E-1) BROWN, ELISE A. B., Ph.D., 6811 Nesbitt Place, McLean, Va. 22101 (F-4, 19) BROWN, RUSSELL G., Ph.D., Dept. of Botany, Univ. of Maryland College Park, Md. (F) BROWN, THOMAS, McP., 2465 Army-Navy Dr., Arlington, Va. 22206 (F-8, 16) BRUCK, STEPHEN D., Ph.D., 1113 Pipestem PI., Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-4, 6, 39) BURAS, EDMUND M., Jr., M.S., Gillette Research Inst., 1413 Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-4, 6, 39) BURGER, ROBERT J., (COL. M.S.) 953 Lynch Dr., Arnold, Md. 21012 (F-6, 22) BURGERS, J. M., Prof. D.Sc., 3450 Toledo Terr., Apt. 517, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (F-1) BURK, DEAN, Ph.D., 4719 44th St., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-4, 19, 33) BURNETT, H. C., Metallurgy Division, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) BYERLY, PERRY, Ph.D., 5340 Broadway Terr., #401, Oakland, Calif. 94618 (F) BYERLY, T. C., Ph.D., 6-J Ridge Rd., Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-6, 19) N.W., J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 C CAHNMAN, HUGO N., 125-10 Queens Blvd., Kew Gardens, N.Y. 11415 (M) CALDWELL, FRANK R., 4821 47th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 6) CALDWELL, JOSEPH M., 2732 N. Kensington St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-18) CAMPAGNONE, ALFRED F., P.E., 9321 Warfield Rd., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F) CAMPBELL, LOWELL E., B.S., 10100 Riggs Rd., Adelphi, Md. 20783 (F-12, 13) CAMPBELL, PAUL G., Ph.D., 3106 Kingtree St., Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 41) CANNON, E. W., Ph.D., 5 Vassar Cir., Glen Echo, Md. 20768 (F-1, 6) CANTELO, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 11702 Wayneridge St., Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-6, 24) CARNS, HARRY R., Bg. 001, Agr. Res. Cent. (W.), USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-33) CARROLL, Miss KAREN E., M.S., 815 18th St., #504, Arlington, Va. 22202 (M) CARROLL, WILLIAM R., 4802 Broad Brook Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) CARTER, HUGH, 2039 New Hampshire Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (E) CASH, EDITH K., 505 Clubhouse Rd., Bingham- ton, N.Y. 13903 (E-10) CASSEL, JAMES M., Ph.D., 12205 Sunnyview Dr., Germantown, Md. 20767 (F-4, 21) CHAPLIN, HARVEY P., Jr., 1561 Forest Villa Lane, McLean, Va. 22101 (F-22) CHAPLINE, W. R., 4225 43rd St., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-6, 10, 11) CHEEK, CONRAD H., Ph.D., Code 8330, U.S. Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-4) CHERTOK, BENSON T., Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, American Univ., Wash. D.C. 20016 (M-1) CHEZEM, CURTIS G., Ph.D., % Waterman, Inc., P.O. Box 11133, Amarillo, Tx. 79111 (F) CHI, MICHAEL, Sc.D., Civil Engr. Dept., Catholic Univ., Washington, D.C. 20064 (F-14) CHOPER, JORDAN J., 121 Northway, Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (M) CHRISTIANSEN, MERYL N., Ph.D., Chief Plant Stress Lab. USDA ARS, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-6, 33) CHURCH, LLOYD E., D. D. S., Ph.D., 8218 Wis- consin Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 9, 19, 21) CLAIRE, CHARLES N., 4403 14th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-1, 12) CLARK, FRANCIS E., ARS Research Lab., P.O. Box E, Ft. Collins, Colo. 80521 (F) CLARK, GEORGE E., Jr., 4022 North Stafford St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F) CLARK, JOAN ROBINSON, Ph.D., U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, 345 Middlefield Rd., Menlo Park, Calif. 94025 (F-7) CLEEK, GIVEN W., 5512N. 24th St., Arlington, Va. 22205 (M-4, 6, 28, 32) CLEMENT, J. REID, Jr., 3410 Weltham St., Suitland, Md. 20023 (F) N.W., J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 CLEVEN, GALE W., Ph.D., RD. 4, Box 334B, Lewistown, Pa. 17044 (F-1) COATES, JOSEPH F., Off. of Tech Assessment U.S. Congress Wash. D.C. 20510 (F-1, 2, 4) COHN, ROBERT, M.D., 7221 Pyle Road, Be- thesda, Md. 20034 (F-1) COLE, KENNETH S., Ph.D., 2404 Loring St., San Diego, Ca. 92109 (F-1) COLE, RALPH I., M.S., 3431 Blair Rd., Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F-12, 13, 22) COLLINS, HENRY B., Dept. Anthropology, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (E-2) COLWELL, R. R., Ph.D., Dept. of Microbiology, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-6, 16) COMPTON, W. DALE, Ford Motor Co., P.O. Box 1603, Dearborn, Mich. 48121 (F) CONGER, PAUL S., M.S., Dept. of Botany, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 (E) CONNORS, PHILIP I|., Central New England Col- lege, 768 Main St., Worcester, Ma. 01608 (F-6, 31) COOK, RICHARD K., Ph.D., 8517 Milford Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 25) COONS, GEORGE H., Ph.D., % Dr. J. E. Dees, 413 Carolina Circle, Durham, N.C. 27707 (E-42) COOPER, KENNETH W., Ph.D., Dept. Biol., Univ. of California, Riverside, Cal. 92521 (F-5) CORLISS, EDITH L. R., Mrs., 2955 Albemarle St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-13, 25) CORLISS, JOHN O., Ph.D., 9512 E. Stanhope Rd., Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-6) CORNFIELD, JEROME, G.W.V. Biostat-Ctr., 7979 Old Georgetown Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) COSTRELL, LOUIS, Chief 535. 02, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) COTTERILL, CARL H., M.S., U.S. Bureau of Mines 2401, E. St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20241 (F-36) COYLE, THOMAS D., National Bureau of Stand- ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) CRAFTON, PAUL A., P.O. Box 454, Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) CRAGOE, CARL S., 6206 Singleton Place, Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-1) CRANE, LANGDON T., Jr., 7103 Oakridge Ave., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6) CREITZ, E. CARROLL, 10145 Cedar Lane, Ken- sington, Md. 20795 (E-32) CREVELING, CYRUS R., Ph.D., 4516 Amherst Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F 4-19) CROSSETTE, GEORGE, 4217 Glenrose St., Ken- sington, Md. 20795 (M-6, 17) CULBERT, DOROTHY K., 812 A St., S.E., Wash- ington, D.C. 20003 (M-6) CULLINAN, FRANK P., 4402 Beechwood Rad., Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-10, 13) CULVER, WILLIAM H., Ph.D., Optelecom, Inc., 2841 Chesapeake St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (M-1, 32) CURRAN, HAROLD R., Ph.D., 3431 N. Randolph St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-16) 103 CURRIE, CHARLES L., S.J., President, Wheeling College, Wheeling, W.Va. 26003 (F) CURTIS, ROGER, W., Ph.D., 6308 Valley Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E) CURTISS, LEON F., 1690 Bayshore Drive, Eng- lewood, Fla. 33533 (E-1) CUTHILL, JOHN R., Ph.D., 12700 River Rad., Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-20, 36) CUTKOSKY, ROBERT D., 19150 Roman Way, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-13) D DARRACOTT, HALVOR T., M.S., 3325 Mansfield Rd., Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F-13, 34, 38) DAVIS, CHARLES M., Jr., Ph.D., 8458 Portland Pl., McLean, Va. 22101 (M-1, 6, 25) DAVIS, MARION MACLEAN, Ph.D., Apt. 100, Crosslands, Kennett Square, Pa. 19348 (L-4, 6) DAVIS, R. F., Ph.D., Chairman, Dept. of Dairy Science, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F) DAVISSON, JAMES W., Ph.D., 400 Cedar Ridge Dr., Oxon Hill, Md. 20021 (E-1) DAWSON, ROY C., Ph.D., 7002 Chansory Lane, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-16) DAWSON, VICTOR C. D., 9406 Curran Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (F-6, 14) DEAL, GEORGE E., D.B.A., 6245 Park Road, McLean, Va. 22101 (F-34) DE BERRY, MARIAN B., 3608 17th St., N.E., Washington, D.C. 20018 (M) DEDRICK, R. L., Bldg. 13, Rm. 3W13, NIH, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1) DE VOE, JAMES R., 17708 Parkridge Dr., Gai- thersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4, 6) DE WIT, ROLAND, Metallurgy Division, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 6, 36) DELANEY, WAYNE R., The Wyoming Apts., 111, 2022 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (M-6, 9, 32) DEMUTH, HAL P., MSEE, 4025 Pinebrook Rd., Alexandria, Va. 22310 (F-13, 17) DENNIS, BERNARD K., 915 Country Club Dr., Vienna, Va. 22180 (F) DERKSEN, WILLARD L., 11235 Oak Leaf Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M) DESLATTES, RICHARD D., Jr., 610 Aster Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) DEVIN, CHARLES, Ph.D., 629 Blossom Dr., Rockville, Md. 20850 (M-25, 31) DI MARZIO, E. A., 14205 Parkvale Rd., Rockville, Md. 20853 (F) DICKSON, GEORGE, MA, 52 Orchard Way North, Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-6, 21) DIEHL, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 200 Maple Ave., Falls Church, Va. 22046 (E-10) DIGGES, THOMAS G., 3900 N. Albemarle St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-20) 104 DIMOCK, DAVID A., 4800 Barwyn House Rad., #114, College Park, Md. 20740 (M-13) DIXON, PEGGY A., Ph.D., 422 Hillsboro Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F) DOCTOR NORMAN, B.S., 3814 Littleton St., Wheaton, Md. 20906 (F-13) DOFT, FLOYD S., Ph.D., 6416 Garnett Drive, Ken- wood, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 6, 19) DONALDSON, JOHANNA B., Mrs., 3020 North Edison St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F) DONNERT, HERMANN J., Ph.D., RFD 4, Box 136, Terra Heights, Manhattan Ks. 66502 (F) DONOVICK, RICHARD, Ph.D., 16405 Alden Ave., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-6, 16, 19) DOUGLAS, CHARLES A., Ph.D., 7315 Delfield St., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6, 32) DOUGLAS, THOMAS B., Ph.D., 3031 Sedgwick St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-4) DRAEGER, R. HAROLD, M.D., 1201 N. 4th Ave., Tucson, Ariz. 85705 (E-32) DRECHSLER, CHARLES, Ph.D., 6915 Oakridge Rd., University Park (Hyattsville), Md. 20782 (E-6, 10) DUBEY, SATYA D., Ph.D., 7712 Groton Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) DUERKSEN, J. A., B.A., 3134 Monroe St., N.E. Washington, D.C. 20018 (E-1, 6, 38) DUFFEY, DICK, Ph.D., Nuclear Engineering, Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-1, 26) DUNKUM, WILLIAM W., M.S., 3503 Old Dominion Bivd., Alexandria, Va. 22305 (F-31) DU PONT, JOHN ELEUTHERE, P.O. Box 358, Newtown Square, Pa. 19073 (M) DUPRE, ELSIE, Mrs., Code 5536A, Optical Sci. Div., Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-32) DURIE, EDYTHE G., 5011 Larno Dr., Alexandria, Va. 22310 (F) DURRANI, S. H., Sc.D., 17513 Lafayette Dr., Olney, Md. 20832 (F-13, 22) DYKE, E. D., 173 Northdown Rd., Margate, Kent, England (M) E EDDY, BERNICE E., Ph.D., 6722 Selkirk Ct., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-6, 16) EGOLF, DONALD R., 3600 Cambridge Court, Upper Marlboro, Md. 20870 (F-10) EISENBERG, PHILLIP, C.E., 6402 Tulsa Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20034 (M-6, 14, 22, 25) EISENHART, CHURCHILL, Ph.D., Met B-268, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 38) EL-BISI, HAMED M., Ph.D., 135 Forest Rd., Millis, Ma. 02054 (M-16) ELLINGER, GEORGE A., 739 Kelly Dr., York, Pa. 17404 (E-6) ELLIOTT, F. E., 7507 Grange Hall Dr., Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (E) J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 EMERSON, K. C., Ph.D., 2704 Kensington St., - Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-3, 5, 6) EMERSON, W. B., 415 Aspen St., N.W., Wash- ington, D.C. 20012 (E) ENNIS, W. B., Jr., Ph.D., Agricultural Res. Ctr. U. of Florida, 3205 S.W. 70th Ave., Ft. Lauder- dale, Fl. 33314 (F-6) ERNST, JOHN A., NOAA/NESS WWB, S3X1 Room 810-G, Washington, D.C. 20233 (M-22, 23) ETZEL, HOWARD W., Ph.D., 7304 Riverhill Rd., Oxon Hill, Md. 20021 (F-6) EWERS, JOHN C., 4432 26th Rd., N, Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-2, 6) = FAHEY, JOSEPH J., U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 20242 (E-4, 6, 7) FARROW, RICHARD P., 2911 Northwood Dr., Alameda, Ca. 94501 (F-4, 6, 27) FATTAH, JERRY, 3451 S. Wakefield St., Arling- ton, Va. 22206 (M-4, 39) FAULKNER, JOSEPH A., 1007 Sligo Creek Pky., Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (F-6) FAUST, GEORGE T., Ph.D., P.O. Box 411, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 (E-7, 28) FAUST, WILLIAM R., Ph.D., 5907 Walnut St., Temple Hills, Md. 20031 (F-1, 6) FEARN, JAMES E., Ph.D., Materials and Com- posites Sect., Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6, 9) FELDMAN, SAMUEL, NKF Engr. Associates, Inc., 8720 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (M-6, 25) FELSHER, MURRAY, Ph.D., NASA Code ERS-2, Wash. D.C. 20546 (M-1, 7) FERRELL, RICHARD A., Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-6, 31) FIFE, EARLH., Jr., M.S., Box 122, Royal Oak, Md. 21662 (E-6, 16, 19) FILIPESCU, NICOLAE, M.D., Ph.D., 4836 S. 7th St., Arlington, Va. 22204 (F-4) FINN, EDWARD J., Ph.D., 4211 Oakridge La., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6, 31) FISHER, JOEL L., 5602 Asbury Ct., Alexandria, Va. 22313 (M) FISHMAN, PETER H., Ph.D., 3333 University Blvd. West, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F) FLETCHER, DONALD G., Natl. Bureau of Stand- ards, Rm. A102, Bldg. 231-IND, Washington, D.C. 20234 (M-4) FLICK, DONALD F., 930 19th St. So., Arlington, Va. 22202 (F-4, 19, 39) FLINN, DAVID R., 8104 Bernard Dr., Ft. Washing- ton, Md. 20022 (F-4, 29) FLORIN, ROLAND E., Ph.D., Sci. & Stds. Div., B-318, National Bureau of Standards, Wash- ington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) FLYNN, DANIEL R., Ph.D., 17500 Ira Court, Derwood, Md. 20855 (F-4) J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 FLYNN, JOSEPH H., Ph.D., 5309 Iroquois Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-4) FOCKLER, HERBERT, M.A. MSLS., 10710 Lorain Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-22, 43) FONER, S. N., Applied Physics Lab., The Johns Hopkins University, 11100 Johns Hopkins Rd., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F-1) FOOTE, RICHARD H., Sc.D., 8807 Victoria Road, Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-5, 6) FORZIATI, ALPHONSE F., Ph.D., 15525 Prince Frederick Way, Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (F-1, 4, 29) FORZIATI, FLORENCE H., Ph.D., 15525 Prince Frederick Way, Silver Spring, Md., 20906 (F-4) FOSTER, AUREL O., 4613 Drexel Rd., College Park, Md. 20740 (E-15, 24) FOURNIER, ROBERT O., 108 Paloma Rad., Por- tola Valley, Calif. 94025 (F-6, 7) FOWLER, EUGENE, Int. Atomic Energy Agency, Kartner Ring 11, A-1011, Vienna, Austria (M-26) FOWLER, WALTER B., M.A., Code 683, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. 20771 (M-32) FOX, DAVID W., The Johns Hopkins Univ., Applied Physics Lab., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F) FOX, WILLIAM B., 1813 Edgehill Dr., Alexandria, Va. 22307 (F-4) FRANKLIN, PHILIP J., 5907 Massachusetts Ave. Extended, Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-4, 13, 39) FRANZ, GERALD J., M.S., Box 695, Bayview, Id. 83803 (F-5, 25) FREDERIKSE, H. P. R., Ph.D., 9625 Dewmar Lane, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F) FREEMAN, ANDREW F., 5012 N. 33rd. St., Arling- ton, Va. 22207 (M) FRENKIEL, FRANCOIS N., Code 1802.2, Naval Ship Res. & Develop. Ctr., Bethesda, Md. 20084 (F-1, 22, 23) FRIEDMAN, MOSHE, 4511 Yuma St., Washing- ington, D.C. 20016 (F) FRIESS, S.L., Ph.D., Environmental Biosciences Dept., Naval Med. Res. Inst. NNMC, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4) FRUSH, HARRIET L., 4912 New Hampshire Ave., N.W., Apt. 104, Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-4, 6) FULLMER, IRVIN H., Lakeview Terrace, P.O. Box 100, Altoona, Fla. 32702 (E-1, 6, 14) FURUKAWA, GEORGE T., Ph.D. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 4, 6) G GAFAFER, WILLIAM M., 133 Cunningham Dr., New Smyrna Beach, Fla. 32069 (E) GAGE, WILLIAM, Ph.D., 2146 Florida Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-2) 105 GALLER, SIDNEY, 6242 Woodcrest Ave., Balti- more, Md. 21209 (F) GALTSOFF, PAUL S., Ph.D., 15 Jacque Loeb Rd., Woods Hole, Mass. 02543 (E) GANT, JAMES Q., Jr., M.D., 4349 Klingle St., N.W. Wash. D.C. 20016 (M) GARDNER, MARJORIE H., Ph.D., 7720 Hanover Parkway, Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F) GARNER, C. L., The Garfield, 5410 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (E-1, 4, 25 lee 16) GARVIN, DAVID, Ph.D., 18700 Walker's Choice Rd., Apt. 519, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4) GUANAURD, GUILLERMO C., Ph.D., 4807 Macon Rd., Rockville, Md. 20852 (M-1, 6, 25) GHAFFARI, ABOLGHASSEN, Ph.D., D.Sc., 5420 Goldsboro Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (L-1, 38) GHOSE, RABINDRA N., Ph.D., LL.B., 8167 Mul- holland Terr., Los Angeles Hill, Calif. 90046 (F-13, 22) GIACCHETTI, ATHOS, Dept. Sci. Affairs, OAS, 1735 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 (M-32) GIBSON, JOHN E., Box 96, Gibson, N.C. 28343 (E) GIBSON, KASSON S., 4817 Cumberland St., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E) GINTHER, ROBERT J., Code 5585, U.S. Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-28, 29) GIST, LEWIS A., Ph.D., Science Manpower Improvement, National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. 20550 (F-4, 39) GIWER, MATTHIAS M., 3922 Millcreek Dr., Annandale, Va. 22003 (M) GLADSTONE, VIC S., Ph.D., 8200 Andes Ct., Baltimore, Md. 21208 (M-6, 25) GLASGOW, Augustus R., Jr., Ph.D., 4116 Hamil- ton St., Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (F-4, 6) GLAZEBROOK, THOMAS B., 7809 Bristow Dr., Annandale, Va. 22003 (F-11) GLICKSMAN, MARTIN E., Ph.D., Materials Engr. Dept., Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, N.Y. 12181 (F-20, 36) GLUCKSTERN, ROBERT L., Ph.D., Chancellor Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-31) GODFREY, THEODORE B., 7508 Old Chester Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E) GOFF, JAMES F., Ph.D., 3405 34th Pl., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1) GOLDBERG, MICHAEL, 5823 Potomac Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 38) GOLDBERG, ROBERT N., Ph.D., 19610 Brassie Pl., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-39) GOLDMAN, ALAN J., Ph.D., Applied Math. Div. Inst. for Basic Standards, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-34, 38) GOLDSMITH, HERBERT, 238 Congressional Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852 (M-32, 35) GOLUMBIC, CALVIN, 6000 Highboro Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) GONET, FRANK, 4007 N. Woodstock St., Arling- ton, Va. 22207 (F-4, 39) 106 GOODE, ROBERT J., B.S., Performance Metals Br., Code 6380, Metallurgy Div., U.S.N.R.L., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 20) GORDH, GORDON, Systematic Entomology Lab. 11B111, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. (M) GORDON RUTH E., Ph.D., Waksman Inst. of Microbiology, Rutgers Univer., P.O. Box 759, Piscataway, N.J. 08854 (F-16) GRAHN, Mrs. ANN, M.A., 849 So. La Grange Rad., La Grange, III. 60525 (M) GRAMANN, RICHARD H., 1613 Rosemont CT, McLean, Va. 22101 (M) GRAY, ALFRED, Dept. Math., Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F) GRAY, IRVING, Ph.D., Georgetown Univ., Wash- ington, D.C. 20057 (F-19) GREENOUGH, M. L., M.S., Greenough Data Assoc., 616 Aster Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) GREENSPAN, MARTIN, B.S., 12 Granville Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-1, 25) GREER, SANDRA, Ph.D., 11402 Stonewood Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-1, 4) GRISAMORE, NELSON T., Nat. Acad. Sci., 2101 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418 (F) GRISCOM, DAVID L., Ph.D., Material Sci. Div., Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-6, 28) GROSSLING, BERNARDO F., Rm. 4B102, USGS Nat. Ctr., 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr., Reston, Va. 22092 (F-7) GUILD, PHILIP W., Ph.D., 3609 Raymond St., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (M-7, 36) GURNEY, ASHLEY B., Ph.D., Systematic Ento- mology Laboratory, USDA, % U.S. National Museum, NHB-105, Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3, 5, 6) GUTTMAN, CHARLES M., 9510 Fern Hollow Way, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4) H HACSKAYLO, EDWARD, Ph.D., Agr. Res. Ctr., West, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-6, 10, 11, 33) HAENNI, EDWARD O., Ph.D., 7907 Glenbrook Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4, 39) HAGAN, LUCY B., Ph.D., Natl. Bur. Stds., Rm. B360, Bg. 221, Washington, D.C. 20234 (M-4, 32) HAINES, KENNETH A., M.S., ARS, 3542 N. Dela- ware St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-5, 24) HALL, E. RAYMOND, Ph.D., Museum of Natural History, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, Kans. 66044 (E-3, 6) HALL, STANLEY A., M.S., 9109 No. Branch Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4, 24) HALL, WAYNE C., Ph.D., 557 Lindley Dr., Lawrence, Kans. 66044 (E-6, 13) HALLER, WOLFGANG, Ph.D., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 HAMBLETON, EDSON J., 5140 Worthington Dr., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-3, 5, 6) HAMER, WALTER J., Ph.D., 3028 Dogwood St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-4, 13, 29, 39) HAMMER, GUYS, II, 8902 Ewing Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (M-12, 13) HAMPP, EDWARD G., D.D.S., National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-21) HAND, CADET H., Jr., Bodega Marine Lab., Bodega Bay, Calif. 94923 (F-6) HANIG, JOSEPH P., Ph.D., 822 Eden Court, Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-4, 19) HANSEN, LOUIS S., D.D.S., School of Dentistry, San Francisco, Med. Center, Univ. of Calif., San Francisco, Calif. 94122 (F-21) HANSEN, MORRIS, H., M.A., Westat Research, Inc., 11600 Nebel St., Rockville, Md. 20852 (F) HARDENBURG, ROBERT E., Ph.D., Agr. Mktg. Inst., Agr. Res. Ctr., (W), Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-6) HARR, JAMES W., M.A., Lanham, Md. 20801 (M-6) HARRINGTON, FRANCIS D., Ph.D., 4600 Ocean Beach Blvd., #204, Cocoa Beach, Fla. 32931 (F) HARRINGTON, M. C., Ph.D., 4545 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Apt. 334, Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-1, 32) HARRIS, FOREST K., Ph.D., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) HARRIS, MILTON, Ph.D., 3300 Whitehaven St., N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20007 (F) HARRISON, W. N., 3734 Windom PI., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 6, 25) HARTLEY, JANET W., Ph.D., National Inst. of Allergy & Infectious Diseases, National In- stitutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) HARTMANN, GREGORY K., Ph.D.,10701 Keswick St., Garrett Park, Md. 20766 (F-1, 25) HARTZLER, MARY P., 3326 Hartwell Ct., Falls Church, Va. 22042 (M-6) HASKINS, C. P., Ph.D., 2100 M St., N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20037 (F) HAS, GEORG H., 7728 Lee Avenue, Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-32) HAUPTMAN, HERBERT, Ph.D., Med. Fndn. of Buffalo, 73 High St., Buffalo, N.Y. 14203 (F-1, 6, 38) HAYDEN, GEORGE A., 1312 Juniper St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20012 (M) HAYES, PATRICK, Ph.D., 950 25th St., Apt. 707, Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-38) HEADLEY, ANNE R., Ph.D., Ms., 2500 Virginia Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (F) HEIFFER, M. H., Whitehall, #701, 4977 Battery La., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-6, 19) HEINRICH, KURT F., 804 Blossom Dr., Woodley Gardens, Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) HEINS, CONRAD P., Ph.D., Civil Engr. Dept., Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-6, 18) HENDERSON, E. P., Div. of Meteorites, U.S. Na- tional Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 (E-7) 9503 Nordic Dr., J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 HENDRICKSON, WAYNE A., M.D., Ph.D., Lab. for the Structure of Matter, Naval Res. Lab. Code 6030, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) HENNEBERRY, THOMAS J., 1409 E. North Share, Temple, Ariz. 85282 (F) HENRY, WARREN E., Ph.D., Howard Univ., P.O. Box 761, Washington, D.C. 20059 (F-1, 31) HENVIS, BERTHA W., Code 5277, Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (M-32) HERBERMAN, RONALD B., 8528 Atwell Rd., Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) HERMACH, FRANCIS L., 2415 Eccleston St., Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-1, 13, 25) HERMAN, ROBERT, Ph.D., Traffic Sci. Dept., General Motors Res. Lab., 12 Mi & Mound Rds., Warren, Mich. 48090 (F-1) HERSCHMAN, HARRY K., 4701 Willard Ave., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E) HERSEY, JOHN B., 923 Harriman St., Great Falls, Va. 22066 (M-25) HERSEY, MAYO D., M.A., Div. of Engineering, Brown Univ., Providence, R.!. 02912 (E-1) HERZFELD, KARL F., Dept. of Physics, Catholic Univ., Washington, D.C. 20017 (E-1, 25) HESS, WALTER, C., 3607 Chesapeake St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-4, 6, 19, 21) HEWSTON, ELIZABETH, Felicity Cove, Shady Side, Md. 20867 (F-39) HEYDEN,. FR. FRANCIS, Ph.D., Manila Observa- tory, P.O. Box 1231, Manila, Philippines D-404 (E-32) HEYER, W. R., Ph.D., Amphibians & Reptiles, Natural History Bldg., Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3) HIATT, CASPAR W., Ph.D., Univ. of Texas Health Science Center, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., San Antonio, Texas 78284 (F) HICKLEY, THOMAS J., 626 Binnacle Dr., Naples, Fla. 33940 (F-13) HICKOX, GEORGE H., Ph.D., 9310 Allwood Ct., Alexandria, Va. 22309 (E-6, 14, 18) HILDEBRAND, EARL M., 11092 Timberline Dr., Sun City, Ariz. 85351 (E-10, 16, 33, 42) HILL, FREEMAN K., Ph.D., 12408 Hall’s Shop Rd., Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-1, 6, 22) HILLABRANT, WALTER, Ph.D., Dept. Psychol- ogy, Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 (M-40) HILSENRATH, JOSEPH, 9603 Brunett Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (F-1, 38) HOBBS, ROBERT B., 7715 Old Chester Rad., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 4, 39) HOFFMANN, C. H., Ph.D., 6906 40th Ave., Univer- sity Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-5, 11, 24) HOGAN, ROBERT, Dept. of Psychology, the Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Md. 21218 (F) HOGE, HAROLD J., Ph.D., 5 Rice Spring Lane, Wayland, Me. 01778 (F-1) HOLLIES, NORMAN R. S., Gillette Research Institute, 1413 Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-4) HOLMGREN, HARRY D., Ph.D., 3044-3 R St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007 (F-1) 107 HONIG, JOHN G., Office, Dep. Chief of Staff for Res., Dev. and Acquis., Army, The Penta- gon, Washington, D.C. 20310 (F-34) HOOD, KENNETH J., 2000 Huntington Ave., #1118, Alexandria, Va. 22303 (M-6, 33) HOPP, HENRY, Ph.D., 6604 Michaels Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-11) HOPP, THEODORE H., 2800 Powder Mill Rd., Adelphi, Md. 20783 (M-6, 13) HOPPS, HOPE E., Mrs., 1762 Overlook Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (F-16, 19) HORNSTEIN, IRWIN, Ph.D., 5920 Bryn Mawr Rad., College Park, Md. 20740 (F-4, 6, 27) HOROWITZ, E., Asst. Deputy Director, Institute for Materials Res., National Bureau of Stand- ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) HORTON, BILLY M., 14250 Larchmere Bivd., Shaker Heights, Ohio 44120 (F-1, 6, 13) HOWARD, JAMES H., Ph.D., 3822 Albemarle St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) HUANG, KUN-YEN, M.D., Ph.D., 1445 Laurel Hill Rd., Vienna, Va. 22180 (F-16) HUBBARD, DONALD, Ph.D., 4807 Chevy Chase _ Dr., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 6) HUBERT, LESTER F., 4704 Mangum Rad., College Park, Md. 20740 (F-23) | HUDSON, COLIN M., Ph.D., Product Planning Dept., Deere & Co., John Deere Rd., Mocine, Il. 61265 (F-6, 17, 22) HUDSON, GEORGE E., Ph.D., Code WR 4, Naval Surface Weapons Ctr., White Oak, Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 6) HUDSON, RALPH P., Ph.D., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1) HUGH, RUDOLPH, Ph.D., George Washington Univ. Sch. of Med., Dept. of Microbiology, 2300 Eye St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-16, 19) HUNT, W. HAWARD, B.A., 11712 Roby Ave., Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-6) HUNTER, RICHARD S., 9529 Lee Highway, Fairfax, Va. 22031 (F-6, 27, 32) HUNTER, WILLIAM R., M.S., Code 7143, U.S. Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-1, 6, 32) HURDLE, BURTON G., 6222 Berkeley Rd., Alex- andria, Va. 22307 (F-25) HURTT, WOODLAND, Ph.D., ARS-USDA, P.O. Box 1209, Frederick, Md. 21701 (M-33) HUTTON, GEORGE L., 809 Avondale Dr., W. Lafayette, Ind. 47906 (F) INSLEY, HERBERT, Ph.D., 5 Graund Place, Albany, N.Y. 12205 (E-1, 7) IRVING, GEORGE W., Jr., Ph.D., 4836 Langdrum Lane, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 6, 27, 39) IRWIN, GEORGE R., Ph.D., 7306 Edmonston Rd., College Park, Md. 20740 (F-1, 6) ISBELL, H. S., 4704 Blagden Ave., Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-4) N.W., 108 ISENSTEIN, Robert S., FSQS, Bldg. 318-C, Barc- East, USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-6, 15) JACKSON, H. H. T., Ph.D., 122 Pinecrest Rd., Durham, N.C. (E-3) JACKSON, PATRICIA C., B.S., Ms., Plant Stress Lab. Plant Physiology Inst., Agr. Res. Ctr. (W), ARS, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-4, 6, 33) JACOBS, WOODROW C., Ph.D., 6309 Bradley Bivd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-23) JACOBSON, MARTIN, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agr. Res. Center (E) Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-4, 7, 24) JACOX, MARILYN E., Ph.D., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4) JAMES, MAURICE T., Ph.D., Dept. of Ento- mology, Washington State University, Pull- man, Washington 99164 (E-5) JANI, LORRAINE L., 430 M St., S. W. Apt. #N800, Washington, D.C. 20024 (M) JAROSEWICH, EUGENE, NMNH, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (M-4) JEN, C. K., Applied Physics Lab., John Hopkins Rd., Laurel, Md. 20810 (E) JENSON, ARTHUR S., Ph.D., Westinghouse Defense & Electronic Systems Ctr., Box 1521, Baltimore, Md. 21203 (F-13, 31, 32) JESSUP, R. S., 7001 W. Greenvale Pkwy., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6) JOHANNESEN, ROLF B., Ph.D., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) JOHNSON, CHARLES, Ph.D., Inst. for Fluid Dy- namics & App. Math. Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20850 (F) JOHNSON, DANIEL P., Ph.D., Rt. 1, Box 156, Bonita, La. 71223 (E-1, 22, 35) JOHNSON, KEITH C., 4422 Davenport St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) JOHNSON, PHILLIS T., Ph.D., Nat. Marine Fisheries Serv., Oxford Lab., Oxford, Md. 21654 (F-5, 6) JOHNSTON, FRANCIS E., Ph.D., 307 W. Mont- gomery Ave., Rockville, Md. 20850 (E-1) JONES, HENRY A., 1115 South 7th St., El Centro, Calif. 92243 (E) JONES, HOWARD S., 6200 Sligo Mill Rd., N.E., Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-6, 13) JONG, SHUNG-CHANG, Ph.D., Amer. Type Cul- ture Collection, 12301 Parkland Dr., Rock- ville, Md. 20852 (F-16, 42) JORDAN, GARY BLAKE, Ph.D., 1012 Olmo Ct., San Jose, Calif. 95129 (M-6, 13, 22) JUDD, NEIL M., % C. A. McCary, 5311 Acacia Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-2, 6) K KABLER, MILTON N., Ph.D., 3109 Cunningham Dr., Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F) J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 | | | | KAISER, HANS E., 433 South West Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-6) KARR, PHILIP R., 5507 Calle de Arboles, Tor- rance, Calif. 90505 (F-13) KARRER, ANNIE M. H., Ph.D., Port Republic, Md. 20676 (E-6) KAUFMAN, H. P., M.P.L., Box 1135, Fedhaven, Fla. 33854 (F-12) KEARNEY, PHILIP C., Ph.D., 13021 Blairmore St., Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-4) KEBABIAN, JOHN, Ph.D., 12408 Village Sq. Terr. #402, Rockville, Md. 20852 (F) KEGELES, GERSON, RFD 2, Stafford Springs, Conn. 06076 (F) KENNARD, RALPH B., Ph.D., Apt., 1207 Ross- moor Tower I, Leisure World, Laguna Hills, Calif. 92653 (E-1, 6, 32) KESSLER, KARL G., Ph.D., B164 Physics, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 6, 32) KEULEGAN, GARBIS H., Ph.D., 215 Buena Vista Dr., Vicksburg, Miss. 39180 (F-1, 6) KLEBANOFF, PHILIP S., Fluid Dynamics Sect., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 22) KLINGSBERG, CYRUS, Adams House, #1010, 118 Monroe St., Rockville, Md. 20850 KLUTE, CHARLES H., Ph.D., Apt. 118, 4545 Con- necticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1, 4, 39) KNOBLOCK, EDWARD C., RD 4, Box 332; Mt. Airy, Md. 21771 (F-4, 19) KNOWLTON, KATHRYN, Ph.D., Apt. 837, 2122 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-4) KNOX, ARTHUR S., M.A., M.Ed., 2006 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (M-6, 7) KNUTSON, LLOYD V., Ph.D., Insect Introduction Inst., USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-5) KRUGER, JEROME, Ph.D., Rm B254, Materials Bldg., Natl. Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 29, 36) KURTZ, FLOYD E., 8005