216 



NOTES. 



the produce of the same species of CeciJnmyia; the differences in the 

 shape of the gall seem to be due, not to a specific difference among 

 the insects, but to the specific difference of the willows on which they 

 occur. The triflin,^ differences between the flies, as described by Walsh, 

 as well as the circumstance that each of those five forms of galls har- 

 bours only a single larva, strengthen this view. The european relative 

 of this species, Cccid. rosaria Lobav, likewise produces differently 

 shaped galls on different species of willows." Bergenstamm and Low, 

 1. c p. 71. 



5. Cecid. salicis-strobiloides. „This gall is the exact counterpart of 

 the gall of Cecid. rosaria Loew, on the european Salix purpurea." 

 Bergenstamm and Low, 1. c. p. 72. 



6. Several of the galls which I descrihed as occurring on hickories, 

 as caryae, caryaecola, holotriuha , parsicoides, even tubicola, and other, 

 undescribed forms, sometimes occur promiscuously, on the same leaf. 

 It remains to ascertain, whether they are really produced by different 

 species of Cecidomyia, or whether most of ihem ai'e not merely modi- 

 fications in shape and degree of pubescence, of the gall of Dijjhsis 

 caryae. 



7. Cecidcmyia poculum I am very much inclined now to believe 

 that the larva of a Cecidcmyia, which 1 lound in the gall that I thus 

 named, was a mere inquiline, and that the gall was the work of a 

 Cynipid. The ground for my belief is, that there is an analogous gall 

 in Europe, that of Ncurotcrus Icntiadaris, which frequently harbours 

 inquilinous larvae of Cecidomyiae. As long as the gall is on the leaf, 

 no larva of a Cynips can be found in it; it develops only when the 

 gall falls to the ground. If my supposition is correct, this peculiarity 

 of the gall of Neuroterus would explain why, in most cases, I did not 

 find any larvae whatever in the gall poctdum. 



8. Mycetophilidae. For the definition of the genera see: Winner tz, 

 Beitr. zu einer Monographie der Filzmi'icken, in the Verb. Zool. Bot. 

 Gesellsch. 1863, p. 687—964. Mr. Loevv's species M'ere all referred by 

 him to the new genera formed by Winncrtz. The older species by 

 Saj', Wiedemann, etc., unless identified, I have left in the genera in which 

 they were described. 



9. Empheria is preoccupied by Hagen in the Psocidae, 1856. 

 GlaphyroiAcra by Heer, fossil Buprestidae, 1852. 



10. Sciara and Trichosia. Compare Winnertz, Beitrag zu einer 

 Monographie der Sciarinen, in Verb. Zool. Bot. Gesellsch. 18b7. 



11. SimuUum There is a monograph of this genus by Fries; 

 compare also Zetterstedt, Meigen, Schiner. 



12. Bibio. A nionogra|>h of the european species by Loew, in 

 Linnaea Entomologica, I, p. 342. In quoting Geoffroy, here and else- 

 where, I rely upon Schiner, because I possess only the second edition 

 of Geoffroy. 



The name Bihio was first introduced by Geoffroy in 17G4; he in- 

 cluded five species in it, three ot which where Biuio's in the present 

 meaning and two Psychodae 



