Page:The Gall Wasp Genus Cynips.pdf/191

Rh They differ no more from the agamic forms than the bisexual forms of European Cynips differ from their experimentally connected agamic forms.

There are only three species recognized among the agamic forms of Antron, and the present bisexual forms appear to be connected with the agamic echinus rather than with teres or guadaloupensis, for the following reasons: They have the mesonotum reticulated; they have blotched but not spotted wings; there is another bisexual insect (Beutenmüller's pulchella) which shows the spotted wings of the agamic teres.

The present bisexual forms are represented by varieties on Q. lobata, Q. Douglasii, and Q. dumosa, on all of which hosts we find the agamic echinus but not teres or guadaloupensis; teres is unknown from Q. Douglasii on which the agamic echinus is common.

The bisexual form is represented in the Central Valleys of California, an area in which echinus is common but teres unknown.

The bisexual galls are similar to the galls of the agamic echinus in being fundamentally spherical with short, blunt, projections; and the bisexual gall is most nearly spherical and most nearly spineless on the host that bears the agamic echinus galls of this nature (variety schulthessae on Q. durata).

There is nothing in the structural, host, and distributional data which would preclude the connection of these bisexual forms with echinus, while there would be the several inconsistencies noted above in connecting the forms with teres.

In spite of the difficulty of collecting the spring galls, they are known to represent four varieties and therefore probably belong to a species that has at least as many common agamic forms known. The agamic echinus again qualifies on this count.

This species contributes materially to our comparison of morphologic and physiologic data in taxonomy. The agamic insects of the several varieties are all similar, and in several cases practically identical; the bisexual insects are as nearly identical; the bisexual galls are indistinguishable in three varieties, but the agamic galls are so distinct that most workers would accept them as the work of different species. Were we dealing with a group of insects in which we had no such