INSECTS BRED FROM CYNIPS KOLLARI GALLS. 953 
Without further preface I give a list of the species, and 
include a few remarks which appear to be useful. My former 
article should also be consulted. 
HYMENOPTERA. 
Pecilosoma submuticum, Thoms.—Mr. Bignell bred one 
specimen of this sawfly in the spring of this year. The larva of 
the HEmphytide mostly bore into some hollow stem or similar 
situation in which to pupate; probably the full-fed larva of this 
Pecilosoma found an old gall handy. Its earlier stages are at 
present undescribed; it is not even known to be an oak-feeder. 
The imago is not rare. 
Harpiphorus lepidus, Klug.—Mr. Weston bred a specimen in 
1878, and another last year. Mr. Bignell bred one on May 20th, 
1879; and Mr. Vaughan also bred a single specimen. This last 
one had the wings much clouded; but Thomson gives the wings 
as slightly clouded, so I think it can be no other than a variety of | 
Hi, lepidus. This sawfly is figured by André, in his ‘ Species des 
Hyménoptéres d’Hurope’ (pl. xvii, fig. 1), now in course of 
publication. 
Cynipipz.—Cynips Kollari, the gall-maker, and the Synergi, 
its inquilines, were bred commonly by all the observers. Mr. 
Bignell bred one specimen of C. Kollari as late as August L5th, 
from old galls. Of Synergus—S. melanopus, Hart., S. Reinhardi, 
Mayr., and S. pallicornis, Hart., all occurred; the latter being 
much the rarest. 
Fenus jaculator, L.—Three females of this curious insect 
were bred by Mr. Weston. YF’. jaculator is well known as a 
parasite of various Osmie and Crabronide ; indeed its economy 
was correctly given by Linné, on the authority of Bergman, in 
his ‘Fauna Suecica,’ for he says—parasitic on Heriades truncorum, 
Chelostoma florisomne, and T'rypoxylon jigulus. Myr. Weston’s 
‘examples had most probably lived in the larvee of Crabro clavipes ; 
but the Fenus is a large parasite for so small a host; its 
emergence from so small a habitation as Kollari gall is alone 
remarkable. ‘These specimens certainly agree with Tournier’s 
F. terrestris, as described in his monograph of the genus F’e@nus 
(Comptes-rendus, Soc. Ent. Belg., 1877, pp. vi.—x.); but I doubt 
