PROC. ENT. SOC. WASH., VOL. 24, NO. 2, FEB., 1922 35 



parasitic and phytophagous forms, if published records are to 

 be credited. 



Attention should also be called to the fact that the phyto- 

 phagous species, so far as known, belong almost exclusively to 

 groups in which a large percentage of the related parasitic 

 forms breed in host larvae which are concealed within plant 

 tissue. Parasitic Eurytomidae and Callimomidae are largely 

 found infesting gall-makers, borers in wood or herbaceous 

 plants or insects which infest fruits or seed capsules. Rarely 

 if ever is a species of either of these groups parasitic upon a free 

 living or exposed larva. The phytophagous Eulophidae like- 

 wise apparently belong to groups in which many of the species 

 are parasitic upon gall-makers and leaf-miners although the 

 hosts are not so restricted as in the previously mentioned groups. 

 The single phytophagous genus and species of Encyrtidae 

 placed by its describer in the subfamily Eupelminae, tribe 

 Tanaostigmini, is unknown to the writer except through the 

 description and figure. The tribe is an anomalous one and its 

 relation to the Eupelminae is open to serious doubt. The known 

 species are not numerous. The type genus and species were 

 described by Howard (Ins. Life, vol. 3, 1890, p. 147) from 

 specimens cut from abnormally swollen ovaries of a leguminous 

 tree (Coursetia? mexicana), and the author was uncertain 

 whether the species was phytophagous or parasitic, although 

 he states that no indications of parasitism were found. Other 

 species of the tribe are said to be parasitic upon various species 

 of Coleoptera, which cause gall-like malformations of the seed 

 heads of Prosopis, Hibiscus, Helianthus, and other plants. 

 The phytophagous species of Perilampidae, if rightly placed, 

 would form an exception to this rule since true Perilampids are 

 usually associated, either as primary or secondary parasites, 

 with- free living host larvae. The writer is strongly inclined to 

 doubt the relationship of these gall-making forms to true 

 Perilampids. They appear to be more closely related to the 

 Decatomini, and it is not improbable that all ot these so-called 

 Perilampids really belong to the Eurytomidae (?) and that they 

 should constitute a separate subfamily made up of many 

 genera now placed in the Perilampidae, as well as several from 

 the Pteromalid tribe Isoplatini. The writer is not willing to 

 commit himself definitely on this point without further study. 



Consideration of the foregoing facts very naturally starts a 

 train of speculation as to the evolution of the phytophagous 

 habit in Chalcidoidea. Were the Chalcidoids originallv 

 parasitic as a group with phytophagy a more recently acquired 

 habit? Were they as a group originally vegetable feeders and 

 is the present parasitic habit ot the vast majority ot the species 

 a later development, the phytophagous habit being retained 

 by only a comparatively few forms. Or were they originally 



