1912.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 307 



of the most far-fetched theorizing imaginable. Chcerocampa elpenor 

 is its name; "When approached the anterior part of the body is 

 distended and resembles a serpent-like head (of the cobra type)" 

 (p. 206). In Weismann's experiments, "A tame jay ate the larva at 

 once; sparrows and chaffinches (wild) were frightened by it, and 

 would not come near a seed trough in which it was placed; fowls 

 were evidently frightened, but in the end cautiously attacked it, 

 when it was soon eaten." Lady Verney notes that small birds 

 "would not come near a tray with crumbs on it on which the larva 

 had been placed" (p. 206). The larva of Chcerocampa is a large one 

 (the ocellated spots are present only in last stage; if so useful, why 

 is this the case?) and its size alone is sufficient to explain the actions 

 of the small birds. In the case of the sparrows at least, almost any 

 strange object of the same size might cause the same reaction. 

 Anything new about their regular haunts is viewed with suspicion. 



In regard to the Cobra-like appearance of Chcerocampa, Poulton 

 says: "It is likely that the terrifying appearance of our own larvae 

 probably first arose in the tropics, where the imitated cause of alarm 

 to the enemies of the larvae is real and obvious. And it is probable 

 that the success of the same method in countries where the reptilian 

 fauna cannot be said to constitute a source of alarm is due to the 

 inherited memories of a tropical life which live on, as that instinctive 

 fear of anything snake-like which is so commonly exhibited by the 

 higher land vertebrates, including ourselves" (p. 204). 



What a characteristic piece of selectionist reasoning(?) ; at least 

 four very debatable biological propositions, namely, the tropical 

 origin of the European fauna, its origin in a part of the tropics having 

 cobras, and instinctive fear in man and other vertebrates, are prac- 

 tically taken as established facts. Aside from these assumptions, 

 the argument is very amusing also when contrasted with that insisted 

 upon by selectionists, in a hundred places, that birds have no instinct- 

 ive knowledge of what is suitable for food, but must learn by experi- 

 ence. If an instinct of cobra fear is present in birds whose remote 

 ancestors may possibly have seen cobras, it would seem that instinct 

 about such an every-day matter as food were not a point to strain at. 

 However, it is obvious that both arguments cannot well be sup- 

 ported by any but the exceedingly versatile. 



Table III includes seven "not inconspicuous larva? which are not 

 nocturnal and which do not conceal themselves." Two are not 

 shown to be unpalatable to anything and four are included on the 

 basis of disregard by birds or lizards, at least two of which are eaten 



