The Zoologist— June, 1869. 1727 



weets ; by the middle of June, male and female gall-flies (Cynips quercus-spongifica, 

 Osten-Sacken) emerge from a small proportion of them, say one-fourth ; the remaining 

 three-fourths do not develop flies until the autumn, and then produce gall-flies 

 (C. q. aciculatu) closely allied to, yet quite distinct from, those produced in June, and 

 out of thousands of the autumnal flies which were examined not one was a male. 

 Mr. Walsh placed some of the autumnal form (C. q. aciculata) on oak-trees, and they 

 created galls, from some of which were obtained the spring form (C. q. spongifica), 

 whilst a few produced the autumnal form (C. q. aciculata), and all the latter were 

 females. These last again were placed on isnlaied oaks, galls were formed by their 

 ])uncturing, and from these the spring form (C. q. spongifica) was again obtained. 

 From which observaiions it was to be inferred that the two forms are not distinct 

 species, but dimorphous forms of the same species. From the red oak (Quercus 

 inanis) a difTevent gall was obtained, smaller than the former, and the central cell not 

 woody : from these galls came male and female gall-flies (Cynips quercus-inanis, 

 Osten-Sacken), which were undistinguishable from the spring form of C.q. spongifica, 

 but no autumnal form of this fly had been discovered. Mr. Walsh felt himself com- 

 pelled to consider the flies distinct, because the galls were diSerent and were obtained 

 from distinct species of oak; but the gall-flies were exactly alike. An account of 

 Mr. Walsh's observations had been given in " The American Entomologist," of which 

 Mr. Smith mentioned that, though 6000 copies were struck ofi", the early numbers 

 were already out of print. 



Mr. Charles Home stated the result of his observations in India on various insects, 

 as regards their liability to or freedom from the attacks of animals, birds, lizards, &c. 

 In corroboriition of his previous statement (S. S. 1648) he might mention that the 

 brown or yellow bear (Ursus isabellinus) was described by Dr. Jerdon as eating scor- 

 pions, insects, honey and fruit; the Himalayan black bear (U. Tibetanus) was very 

 fond of locusts, but with this exception did not afi'ect insects; the black bear 

 (U. labiatus) was said to " suck the grubs of large Longicorns " in the Neilgherries, 

 having first dug them out of the soil, but this bear was not found among the hills of 

 the Norlh-West Provinces, and Mr. Home was not personally acquainted with its 

 habits. Anlhia quadrimaculala, all the species of Blaps, and all the observed Myla- 

 bridiE and Geotrupidae, were refused by everything. A brightly coloured locust was 

 refused by birds and lizards; it exuded a yellow acrid juice with a pungent odour. 

 The wingless female Lampjrid^ were not eaten, though perhaps the males might be. 

 Small round hard Coleoptera, and Mantispse, were refused by the Gecko lizards, which 

 were otherwise omnivorous. Termites in all their stages, and migratory locusts, were 

 generally eaten by birds, frogs and lizards ; even the smallest birds would lake 

 locusts, as would also squirrels and mice. Hemiptera were generally refused. Man- 

 tidse were freely eaten by birds. Merops viridis and other birds eat bees; the honey- 

 buzzard tears oS the comb of bees aud wasps, and heedless of their slings sits and eats 

 the honey, wax, grubs, and all. Crows eat all visible caterpillars, but prefer smooth- 

 bodied ones. King-crows (Dicrurus) eat all insects on the wing; a large fat-bodied 

 moth with red under-wings was a great favourite with them. Sparrows delight in the 

 Noctuidae ; so do the hunting spiders, and Mr. Home was at a loss to understand why 

 the spiders were not carried oflf by the moths. Most of the thrush tribe gobble up 

 almost indiscriminately every insect or caterpillar they find. Sparrows had been seen 

 lo refuse cockroaches, but other birds would eat them. Most of the Blatticlie were 



