Tavares, 1928, Broteria 25:35 (Spain, Q. Toza and Q. lusitanien records only).
In addition, I question the records for the variety flosculi (incl. 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 Mediterranean 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 material 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 Central European galls—but it is still a fair average for unselected lots of material from that region. The later description 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.
