OBSERVATIONS ON THE BEHAVIOR OF BUTTERFLIES 255 



Hole in July and early August and had to do with another 

 butterfly, namely, Argynnis idalia, a species rather common 

 in the locality. The specimens are of the field habit rather 

 distinctly and seek the open sunshine. Like Vanessa this butter- 

 fly orients itself in almost exactly the same manner. But their 

 reaction is much less exact than that of Vanessa. And when 

 tested as to the effect of shadows to my surprise they showed 

 hardly any reaction. In a number of cases the shadow of a hat 

 interposed and withdrawn as many as a dozen times at intervals 

 • of from a few seconds to as much as a minute produced no re- 

 sponse. These experiments were repeated on other specimens 

 and with the same results. When put to flight a specimen soon 

 comes to rest in the same general attitude as before. The color 

 of this insect is much more striking than is that of Vanessa, 

 and if this were a means of attracting mates, as Parker has 

 suggested, then it might be expected to be much more effective. 

 But I have never, in either case, seen the slightest evidence 

 that this is in any sense such a device, nor that the special pose 

 and orientation has anything to do with such ends. As with 

 Vanessa specimens of Argynnis show great variation as to ease of 

 approach, some being exceedingly wary and wild, others tame 

 and easily studied. Such is the case with almost all the species 

 studied. Whether this may be due to greater or less visual 

 sensibility or simply to more or less alarm in the presence of 

 strange objects may be matter of doubt. 



My next observations which add anything essential to the 

 facts concerned were made in September of the following year 

 in the fields adjacent to Syracuse. I had at this time oppor- 

 tunity to observe several species in addition to Vanessa antiopa, 

 among them a species of Papilio, probably asterias, and another 

 which I was not able to identify. As compared with Vanessa 

 the behavior of Papilio showed several rather marked differ- 

 ences. In the first place there was no indication of phototropism 

 of any sort. On coming to rest upon the ground there was not 

 the slightest disposition to orient itself with reference to the sun's 

 rays. On the other hand there was orientation with respect 

 to direction of wind, the creature seeking to face the wind thus 

 probably taking the position of least resistance to the wind 

 which was rather strong at times in the exposed field. Con- 

 tinued observation showed that this behavior was not merely 



