100 
Indiana University Studies 
Tavares, 1928, Broteria 25: 35 (Spain, Q. Toza and Q. lusitanica 
records only). 
In addition, I question the records for the variety flosculi 
(inch form pubescentis) on oaks other than Q. pubescens and 
its immediate relatives. I have, however, not attempted to 
distinguish the doubtful references except by question marks 
in the bibliography of flosculi , and in the revival of Kieffer’s 
ilicis as a distinct variety of folii. 
While it is simple enough to understand the existence of 
distinct varieties of folii in northern, central, and Mediter- 
ranean Europe, and of the host-limited variety in Spain, the 
nomenclatorial problem is complicated enough to make one 
question the fundamental bases of our International Code. 
The identity of the Linnean folii must be based on the original 
description or on definite knowledge of the source of Linnaeus’ 
material, since the Linnean material of Cynips seems no 
longer in existence. That Linnaeus had some Swedish mate- 
rial of this species is asserted in his Fauna Suecica (1746: 
947, and 1789, Ent. Faunae Suecicae 3:71) but it is just as 
certain that he was in a position to have received Central 
European material from many sources. The possibility of 
his having received the more southern European variety seems 
more remote, since we have so few collections of that insect 
even today, but even this cannot be settled on the basis of 
definite data from the Linnean publication. 
The original description of the; insect (quoted under the 
variety folii ) is inadequate unless in its reference to a “ Cynips 
thorace lineato . . which, I take it, must be translated 
to mean a black Cynips with a striped thorax. This might 
apply to the rufous and black insects of either Mediterranean 
or Central Europe, but it would not apply to the entirely black 
insect of more northern Europe. The Linnean description of 
the gall is also inadequate unless the “avellanae magnitudine” 
(size of a filbert) is noted as too small for some of the Cen- 
tral European galls — but it is still a fair average for unse- 
lected lots of material from that region. The later descrip- 
tion in the Linnean Entomologia Faunae Suecicae is more 
detailed, and it seems to apply to an insect darker than the 
Central European but not as black as the northern European 
variety, so it is possible that Linnaeus’ Swedish material was 
hybrid between the two. 
