THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 149 
spring of the second year; Callimome abdominalis, Boh., 
August of thé same year; Callimome regius, Nees, in the 
autumn of the same year, according to Mayr; Pteromalus 
Saxesenii, Ratz., in the autumn of the same year; and 
Pteromalus incrassatus, Ra/z., in May of the second year, 
according to Ratzeburg. Kaltenbach gives the following 
parasites of Agama, but on what authority is not stated :— 
Eurytoma signata, Ns.; Torymus pubescens, Frst.; Eupelmus 
urozonus, Dim.; Pteromalus fasciculatus, F7rst., and Ptero- 
malus fuscipalpis, Frs/. (of these the E. signata of Nees is a 
compound species; T. pubescens, Frst., is also a doubtful 
species, pow restricted to a rose species of Syntomaspis ; 
E. urozonus occurs in many of the oak-galls, and the Ptero- 
mali are best left untouched).—Germar’s ‘ Zeitschrift. 
The other inhabitants of this gall are the same as those 
of the preceding species. Hartig, in support of his 
theory that the genus Cynips was agamic, relates his expe- 
rience in breeding this species and D. folii. He says of 
C. divisa (called C. disticha at first, in error) :—“ Cynips 
disticha was so rare in 1839 that I could not discover a single 
specimen in my excursions. | first found it myself in 1838, 
In the summer of 1840 | found it in such immense numbers 
that with little trouble I collected about 28,000 galls. On an 
average, about every third gall contained a Cynips; but out 
of these 9000 to 10,000 flies there was not a single male.” 
“Tn the summer of 1840, as mentioned above, I bred 9000 to 
10,000 females of C. divisa from 28,000 galls. Notwith- 
standing this I found the galls quite as abundant in 1841 and 
1842; and from galls collected, again bred nothing but 
females. The galls were not collected from one tree, but 
received each year from a large expanse of country.” He 
also bred from 3000 to 4000 examples of D. folii, all females. 
The question of parthenogenesis in some of the genera of 
Cynipide still remains a puzzle, although it seems nearer 
solution with some of the entomologists of America, where a 
male Cynips has been found; but if the European species 
are not asexual, how exceedingly rare must be the occurrence 
of the male element to elude detection for so long in the fifty 
species or upwards, known only in the female sex. I have 
not found the proportion, which the Cynips bred bear to the 
number of galls, to be anything like so near as in Hartig’s ~ 
