472 
[Marc9 
origin of the front wings. Scute! with a deep basal transverse suture but no 
foveee, longitudinally semioval, opaque, not very finely rugose and with a sub- 
obsolete longitudinal slightly polished line. Abdomen, when viewed laterally, 
^ longer than wide, the dorsal edge in a quadrant and after relaxing the speci¬ 
men almost in a semicircle from the joints opening out dorsally: joint 2 mode¬ 
rately polished, horny and glabrous, the following joints of a somewliat softer 
consistence and opaque, except where their polished basal portion has been 
exposed by the relaxation, but scarcely rugose under the lens. Legs reddish 
brown, hind tibise and the tips of the intermediate ones and all the six tarsi, 
brown-black. Wings not expanded, but evidently not abortive. Length 9 
.16 inch; % unknown. One 9- 
With regard to the subdivision of Qi/nipidae, into true Gall-flies 
[ Psenides) and Guest gall-flies {Inqu{linm\ so far as my limited expe¬ 
rience goes, all the species belonging to A. I., “ Radial area narrow, 
areolet opposite its base,” are gall-makers, and all belonging to A. II.. 
“ Radial area broad, short; areolet opposite its middle,” are Guest galU 
flies. (See Proc. Ent. Soc. Phila. I, p. 48.) According to Hartig. 
some species belonging to A. I. are Guest gall-flies and some belonging 
to A. II. are gall-makers. (Ibid. p. 49.) It may be so; but it is pos¬ 
sible that Hartig may have been deceived, as he was in all probability 
deceived about his agamous species. Until some good observer suc¬ 
ceeds in obtaining two distinct species belonging to A. I. from the same 
gall, we may well hesitate to believe that any species of that group is 
inquilinous in its habits. May it not be possible that Hartig obtained 
two dimorphous forms of some true gall-fly from the same gall, and 
supposing them to be distinct species concluded that one of them 
must be an Inquiline ? x\gain, because a particular observer has 
hitherto bred nothing but species belonging to A. II. from a particular 
gall, it does not follow that no future observer will succeed in breeding 
from the same gall a species belonging to A. I. which may be the true 
maker of the gall. From over a hundred galls of C. q. palustris I bred 
one year nothing but great numbers of Chalcididse, and it was not till 
the next year that, under a slightly different mode of treatment, I suc¬ 
ceeded in obtaining the real maker of the gall in abundance. Some 
authors would have jumped to the conclusion at once, that the Chalci- 
didae made the galls. 
I observe in G. q. aciculatd 9 , G. q. spongijica 9 , G. q. iiianls 9 • 
G. nubilipennis 9 , and with two apparent exceptions in all the other 
species known to me, nearly twenty in number, which belong to A. I.. 
