74 



Indiana University Studies 



Diplolepis vaiiabilis varietj^ variabilis (Bassett) 



RJwdites variabilis Bassett 1890, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc, XVII, p. 61. 

 Cockerell, 1900, Ent, Student, I, p. 10. Dalla Torre and Kieffer, 

 1902, Gen. Ins. Hymen. Cynip., p. 79; 1910, Das Tierreich, XXIV, 

 pp. 720, 840. Beutenmuller, 1904, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XX, 

 p. 23; 1907, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXIII, p. 635, pi. XLVI, 

 figs. 5-9. Thompson, 1915, Amer. Ins. Galls, pp. 22, 23, 46. Felt, 

 1918, N.Y. Mus. Bull., 200, p. 146, fig. 150 (5-9). 



FEMALE. — Shows the following characters in addition to those 

 common to all varieties of the species: Head finely coriaceous rugose; 

 mouthparts rufous, the tips of the mandibles piceous, basal segments of 

 the antenna3 yellow rufous; thorax rather finely rugose posteriorly be- 

 tween the parapsidal grooves; parapsidal grooves of moderate width, 

 not as wide or rugose as in scidpta; scutellum moderately rugose; ab- 

 domen bright rufous, darker rufous posteriorly; legs entirely bright 

 rufous, the coxae darker basally; wing veins rather light brown; areolet 

 of moderate size or rather large ; cloud on veins of radial cell light 

 brown; length 2.5-2.8 mm., averaging distinctly smaller than in scidpta. 



MALE. — Differs from the males of other varieties as follows: 

 Thorax only moderately rugose; areolet large; wing veins of moderate 

 weight, light brown; length 1.7-2.5 mm. 



GALL. — Does not differ particularly from the galls of other va- 

 rieties. 



RANGE.— Utah: Provo. Idaho: Cedar Mountains. 



TYPES.— At the Philadelphia Academy, The American Museum of 

 Natural History, and the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Collected 

 in ''Southern Utah". 



I secured adults sometime after collecting at Provo on 

 April 18, 1920. 



This variety very much resembles variety scidpta ; the two 

 can be separated by the accompanying descriptions. I have 

 secured both varieties from Provo. Of 563 of these Provo in- 

 sects only 20 were variety variabilis. My work with other 

 rose cynipids indicates that Provo is the meeting point of 

 two distinct but related faunal areas which are not isolated 

 geographically. As with Diplolepis ttibercidatrix I find that 

 the less abundant varietj^ at this locality is the northern vari- 

 ety. Bassett recorded southern Utah for his material, but I 

 question the interpretation to give to his ''southern". Mate- 

 rial of this variety in The American Museum is labelled Cedar 

 Mountains, Idaho ; I take it these are the mountains near Mos- 

 cow; some of the mountains in that region contain a distinct, 

 restricted fauna, but as with this variety, the northern Utah 

 insects appear to extend at least as far north as Moscow and 

 Pullman. 



