418 
Indiana University Studies 
Gillette described undulata by comparing it with macrescens 
(= Bassett’s macro carpae) . Beutenmiiller, examining para- 
types of the two in 1907, failed to find these differences and 
considered the names synonymous. I agree with Beuten- 
nhiller that none of the characters noted by Gillette are rea- 
sonably appreciable or constant enough among the individuals 
of the type series to warrant taxonomic recognition. On the 
other hand, Beutenmiiller, perhaps because he worked with 
a hand lens which would not show the diagnostic characters 
on the much reduced thoraces of these insects, failed to ob- 
serve several distinctions which seem to me to be of signifi- 
cance. Other authors have followed Beutenmiiller’s synon- 
omy without having examined material. Weld, whose 1922 
revision of Acraspis was critical as far as it went, did have 
types of undulata but none of macrescens for comparison. 
Undulata differs from macrescens chiefly in having more 
distinct lateral lines, more naked and shining areas on the 
mesopleuron, and wings that are (Gillette’s original descrip- 
tion to the contrary) a little longer than in macrescens. My 
measurements are made from camera lucida drawings of type 
material. The discovery of the bisexual generations of these 
insects may (or may not) offer further data for making dis- 
tinctions, but the characters now recorded seem to warrant 
the recognition of these varieties with distinct geographic 
ranges and distinct hosts. 
Cynips hirta variety packorum, new variety 
agamic form 
Figures 70, 317-318, 380, 424 
FEMALE. — Almost entirely piceous black, the legs largely dark 
rufous to rufo-piceous; the antennae piceous black even basally; the 
lateral lines indicated as distinctly smoother areas; wings 0.28 of the 
body in length, longer than in the more eastern varieties (except ob- 
trectans ) , reaching about a third of the way along the second abdominal 
segment; body 2.3 to 3.5 mm. in length. Figures 380, 424. 
GALL. — Nearly spheroidal, moderately large, up to 6.0 mm. in 
diameter, with the faceted surface set with very short, cone-like pro- 
jections, the gall consequently rough and short-spiny in appearance; on 
leaves of Quercus utahensis. Figures 317-318. 
RANGE. — Utah: Wales and Central in Sevier County (galls, Hagen 
in Kinsey coll.). Salt Lake City (thru C. T. Dodds, in Kinsey coll.). 
