ablo, seem to have come from Q. Douglasii. My records show that for at least one of these collections I verified the host determination while noting its unique nature. It is, however, inconvenient that an insect that is all but confined to Q. lobata should carry the name douglasii, and the situation is the more unfortunate because the bisexual form of this same insect was named lobata by McCracken and Egbert.
In distribution this variety for the most part parallels echinus, wherever the hosts of the two occur together. But while echinus is replaced by another variety at the higher elevations fringing the Great Valley, I would refer insect and gall material which I have from Lake County to typical douglasii. I have 46 fine insects from Kelseyville alone, and cannot find material differences between them and douglasii unless the Lake County material averages darker. In the consideration of the reality of life zones, perhaps this case should be emphasized as an instance where two, very closely related insects (douglasii and echinus) do not respond in the same way to the same geographic factors.
If there are constant characters by which douglasii may be distinguished from echinus, no one has yet described them. Upon examining a large series of the insects, I find the color distinctions noted by Fullawav are highly variable. The distinctive form of the gall and the host seem to provide the only marks for recognizing this insect. It is surprising that no one has previously adjudged echinus and douglasii to be varieties of one species.
Cynips echinus variety douglasii
bisexual form lobata (McCracken and Egbert)
Figures 23, 180
Dryophanta lobata McCracken and Egbert, 1922, Stanford Univ. Publ. 3 (1):13, pl. 1 fig. 9.
FEMALE AND MALE.—With the first two segments of the antenna in the female rufous yellow, the entire antenna in the male brownish black; the parapsidal grooves distinct to the pronotum; the scutellum rather smooth, smoothest anteriorly; the foveal grooves finely roughened at bottom. Figure 180.
GALL.—Closely resembling the galls of the other bisexual forms of the species; perhaps more ovoid when fresh, the surfaces then pebbled, bearing low, indefinite ridges which terminate in short, soft spines especially near the apex of the gall; on Quercus lobata.
