the oak. It is possible that both the adults and galls of this bisexual form will resemble Cynips divisa form verrucosa.
Küstenmacher has briefly described the histologic structure of the galls of agama (acc. Darboux and Houard 1907).
The insects of the Central European material of agama and divisa are even closer than their galls, agama differing primarily in its shorter abdomen, mesopleura with larger naked areas, and a second abscissa of the radius with a tip that is hardly enlarged.
As far as the records indicate, agama is as strangely absent from the Mediterranean area of Europe as Cynips longiventris. Tavares' record (1902, Ann. Sei. Nat. Porto 7:49) of agama in Portugal probably applies to Cynips divisa (see Tavares 1902, Rev. Sei. Nat. S. Fiel 1:115), and the record for Spain is open to question (see Tavares 1928:48). I have galls (Forsius coll.) from Finland that certainly belong to this species; but the other Cynipidae from that region so often prove distinct that we shall wait insect material to determine whether another variety of agama is represented in more northern Europe.
In Darboux and Houard's publication (1907) of Giraud's Galles de Cynipides the plate (number 22, figs. 9, 10) bearing the legend agama obviously represents Cynips disticha. Bayer (1908) has also pointed this out, and Houard himself (1909), Marcellia (8:70) has agreed to this interpretation. Figures 4 to 6 on the same plate do represent agama.
I do not feel that the Réaumur references (Réaumur 1737, Mém Ins. 3:416, 440, 445, 447, 448, pl. 35 figs. 3, 4) given by many European authors, including Dalla Torre (1893) and Kieffer (1901), may be interpreted with any certainty as one or the other of three closely related species, Cynips divisa, C. agama, and C. disticha.
Cynips (Cynips) disticha Hartig
agamic form
Figures 20, 86, 105, 123-124, 133-134
Cynips disticha Hartig, 1840, Germar Ent. Zeit. 2:188 (♀, ⊕). [NOT Hartig, 1841, Germar Ent. Zeit. 3:324]. Hartig, 1843, Germar Ent. Zeit. 4:406. Reinhard, 1865, Berliner Ent. Zeit. 9:6. Schenck, 1865, Jahrb. Ver. Nassau 17-18:158, 176, 180, 223, 227, 250 (♀,
