134 THE KNTOMOLOGIST. 



guus, Schenck, and A. glabriuftculus, Schenck. From 

 Professor Schenck's description in the above-cited work 

 (pp. Ill and 112) it is easy to see that the galls themselves 

 differ from one another, yet when 1 compare these types 

 together and those galls which belong here, collected by 

 myself from the same tree, I do not find the least substantial 

 difference between them ; still the matter might be otherwise 

 if the Andrici preserved in Heyden's collection were put by 

 together with the actual galls in question from which they 

 were bred. It may, therefore, be judicious to retain the 

 Schenckian species specially. A. quadrilineaius. — The gall 

 is brown, smooth, oviform, three millimetres long by two thick ; 

 its periphery is uneven, as it is traversed with raised longi- 

 tudinal stripes, which are are more or less united ; it might 

 also be described as having moderately deep, partly 

 interrupted and distinct partly confluent longitudinal furrows. 

 The dried perianth may be found at the base of the gall, and 

 there is a rather conspicuous papilla at the apex. The gall, 

 when broken open, exhibits a very thin, oviform, yellow- 

 coloured inner gall, which is attached through its whole 

 surface to the reddish brown gall tissue : that this tissue was 

 at first soft, and later on became dried, there can be no 

 doubt, owing to the ridges and furrows with which it is 

 normally covered. The insect gummed on the same paper as 

 the gall is an Andricus, which agrees perfectly with Hartig's 

 description of A.guadriiineatus. The types oi' A-Jlavicortiis 

 consist often galls and one Andricus; the galls do not differ 

 at all from those of A. quadrilineatus. This is the opinion 

 also expressed by Prof. Schenck ; only I must remark, for 

 the sake of accuracy, that in some of these the fm-rows here 

 and there through being deepened have convex surfaces, so 

 that by the drying of the gall tissue the inner gall becomes 

 exposed at these spots. In other shrivelled specimens this 

 also happened in different ways, and the appearances 

 described above were only due to it being a later gathered 

 i^all. The typical Andricus is undoubtedly a different 

 species from A. quadrilineatus. It certainly is possible, but 

 is not probable, that two undoubtedly distinct insects should 

 be bred from exactly the same species of gall from the same 

 part of the tree of which the species is already known. We 

 must leave it to time to clear up this difficulty, and so let 

 both species remain at present, for I have no grounds lor 

 doubting the accuracy of the late Senator v. Heyden. The 

 types of A. pedunculi are before me : they consist of a gall 



