•»,:,- 



06 [May 



The female of Aulax resembles that of Synergus in the structure of 

 the abdomen ; it differs, however, in the extreme shortness of the first 

 abdominal segment, which is not striated, and probably also by the 

 number of antennal joints, which, in both species known to me. is 12 

 and not 13. From the 9 of Geroptres, it is distinguished by the ab- 

 sence of any suture on the second segment. 



The S of Aulax is easily distinguished from the % of Synergm by 

 the structure of the abdomen ; it differs from that of Ceroptres by the 

 subdivision of the second segment into two parts, not merely by a con~ 

 nate suture, but by a real incisure. 



In the general remarks about the second section of Aynipidse, 1 have 

 discussed the question whether this genus is entirely inquilinous or 

 not. The question is still a doubtful one. The European A. BrandtU 

 Hartig, caniuse Hartig, germanus Gir. and the American ^4. pirata 

 0. S., and the doubtful A. semipiceus Harris, are guest gall-flies in 

 galls of the genus Rhodites. A. sylvestris 0. S. occurs in the galls of 

 Diastrophua. Aulax pumilus (fir. have been bred from an oak-uall of 

 Andricus. As psenidous species of Aulax have been considered : — A. 

 hieracii Htg., which I possess and which is no Aulax at all, A. gle- 

 ehomse Htg., which, according to Dr. Reinhard's statement, is pro- 

 bably a Diastrophus, A. Rhoeadis Htg.. A. minor Htg. (both on 

 Papaver), A. sabaudi (on ITieracium), A. salvise (on Salvia), A. scor- 

 zonerse (on Scorzonera). The five last species I do not know and am 

 not able to confirm whether they really belong to Aulax or not. 

 ( About A. potcntillse I have not been able to compare the reference.) 



The described X. A. species are the following: 



1. Aulax sylvestris 0. S. Proc. Ent. Hoc. Philad. II, p. 37. 

 Bred from the gall of Diastrophus nebulosus, on the blackberry. 



2. I possess a specimen very like the preceding species, only smaller 

 and showing but slight differences, which was bred from the gall of 

 Rhodites radicum. I have explained already (Proc. etc. II, p. 42, 4) 

 why ('//nips semipicea Harris (Ins. etc. p. 549), can hardly be synony- 

 mous with my Rhodites radicum. It is not at all improbable that Har- 

 ris reared the above mentioned Aulax from the gall and mistook it for 

 the gall-producer. This would then be Aulax semipiceus Harris. 

 Whether it is synonymous with A. sylvestris I do not attempt to decide, 

 having only a single specimen for comparison. 



3. Aulax pirata O. S., 1. c. p. 42. Bred from a rose-gall. 



4. Aulax? futilis 0. S.. 1. c. I, p. 64. This species is doubtful, 

 as I was not acquainted with the characters of the genus Aulax at that 



