THE ENTOMOLOGIST, 65 



by himself), maintains that the author of this startling 

 hypothesis has confounded two distinct species; that alluded 

 to as aforesaid being, as he conceives, a new species (to 

 which he gives the name of P. Lichtensteinii), differing from 

 P. Vastatrix in all stages of development, including that of the 

 sexual race; while the manner in which it had been sought 

 to explain the return of the progeny of the latter from the 

 oaks to the vines, by means of a second suppositious winged- 

 type, would be contrary to all the analogies of the genus. 

 M. Lichtenstein demurs to these conclusions, and repudiates 

 the name given by M. Balbiani, alleging: — (1) That the 

 species adverted to by the latter is not new, being his 

 P. Rileyi, described also by Kaltenbach in 1873, under the 

 name of P. corticalis ; (2) that this is not the species which he 

 had found on the Kermes oak ; (3) that although the former 

 subsists on the Quercus Robur, he expects to prove next 

 year that both this species and the P. Vastatrix I'esort to the 

 Q. coccifera to deposit their pupce ; and (4) that he has 

 found another species sparsely associated with these on the 

 same oak, and nurtured thereon, being met with not only in 

 the winged form, but also in the larval and pupal stages 

 (distinguished by having two cylindrical and retractile 

 tubercles between the antennae), on which he confers the 

 name of P. Balbianii. With respect to the galls on the 

 under side of certain vine-leaves, less frequently met with in 

 France than in America, and having a fimbriated aper- 

 ture from above, Mr. Riley, the State Entomologist of 

 Missouri, has long since shown (Third Report, 1871) that 

 the autumnal individuals emanating from these galls descend 

 to the roots, as subsequently verified by M. Signoret and 

 others; and more recently Mr. Riley has obtained a leaf-gall 

 (which, however, subsequently proved abortive) from one of 

 the root-infesting type, which he defines as Radicicola, in con- 

 tradistinction to the other, which he designates as Gallaecola. 

 These galls, tenanted by an agamic apterous race, which 

 never acquires wings (formerly attributed to the ovipositing 

 winged females), Mr. Riley is now disposed to ascribe to the 

 young hatched on the roots, more extensive experience 

 having satisfied him that the presence of the Gallaecola type 

 is not the invariable precursor of the Radicicola in an unin- 

 fected vineyard, nor in anywise essential to the continuance 



