PKOTKCTIVK MIMICRY. 249 



verse is proved to be the case, this explanation of Mr. Belt's 

 will obviously at once fall to the ground. 



A curious disadvantage in the restriction of mimicry to the 

 female insect is quoted from Dr. Frit/, Miiller by Mr. Wallace.* 

 " One of the most interesting of our mimicking butterflies is 

 J.i'l>tnlix nu'liti 1 . The female alone of this species imitates one 

 of our common white Pieridre, which she copies so well that 

 even her own male is often deceived; for I have repeatedly 

 seen the male pursuing the mimicked species, till, after closely 

 approaching and becoming aware of his error, he suddenly 

 retnrned." It is quite possible that, in this and other cases, 

 actual pairing may take place, which would be clearly dis- 

 advantageous to both species concerned. This instance proves 

 that it is not always the female insect which shows mimetic 

 resemblances ; the female of Leptrill* mcllfc is perhaps more 

 normal in coloration than the male. 



Mimicry between Unprotected Forms. 



This last instance leads to the consideration of apparently 

 mimetic resemblances between genera and species which are 

 perfectly eatable, and are not protected from attack by a dis- 

 agreeable taste or any other unpleasant attribute. 



Instances of this kind, Dr. Scudder t thinks, are probably 

 much more numerous than the other classes of mimicry, though 

 they are less conspicuous. What advantage can this confer ? 

 Probably the advantages are the same as those enjoyed by 

 distasteful species that mimic each other, and which 1 have 

 gone into more fully on page 1 UO. The whole theory of mimicry 

 would of course collapse, if no usefulness could be shown to 

 exist in any of the 'mimetic resemblances; other explanations 



* " Darwinism," p. '24~>. 



f " Butterflies of the Eastern United States." 



