Are all these different host reports really referring to the same species of moth? They are all woodland Astereae, but I can't help but wonder whether there have been some mistakes in host identification. Miller (2000) reported that he could only find these galls on Aster sagittifolius [now Symphyotrichum sagittifolium - if segregated from S. cordifolium], from which he reared adults that matched those of the original describer, Kellicott. Judd (1962) could not find any galls on S. caesia despite there being large numbers of these plants near a S. flexicaulis site with many galls. Earlier sources report galls from Eurybia and Doellingeria, suggesting a much wider range of acceptable hosts. Busck (1911, 1939) considered this problem of host identification, and concluded that the species may simply have a wide host range. His "S. latifolia" is our current S. flexicaulis; his Aster corymbosus apparently refers to E. divaricata.

Fyles (1911) made a strong case that at least the Doellingeria galler is distinct - it would then have his name, Gnorimoschema gallaediplopappi. McDunnough (1959) agreed with Fyles, while also adding Solidago uliginosa to the list of G. gallaeasterella hosts. Doellingeria is more distantly-related to the other hosts above than they are to one another, a fact not perhaps not appreciated in earlier decades when it was lumped into "Aster" sensu latissimo. This separation is now followed here on gallformers.org.

I still can't help but wonder how many of these hosts are misidentified or otherwise inaccurately assigned to this species. Multiple moth species being conflated here, each galling a different phylogenetic range of hosts, would explain some discrepancies in gall morphology between Miller (2000) and earlier sources, particularly whether or not this species constructs bungs.