PARTHENOGENF]'l'IO TENDENCY IN MBLANOCKRA MKNIPPE. 281 



motli could be definitely detected in the ojffspring. There was 

 a certain deficiency of pigment, which, however, was doubtless 

 associated with the unhealthy state of the larva, and was not 

 due, as was at first thought, to the influence of the male. In 

 all the more important chai-acters the present larva Avas so 

 completely menippe and not maia in character that it is 

 extremely doubtful if the offspring can be regarded as a 

 genuine hybrid. 



Pseudogamy. — We have already seen that the presence 

 of the male maia had an undoubted influence on the female 

 menippe; it caused the female to lay a good supply of eggs, 

 and these exhibited a greatly increased power of development. 

 The only obvious explanation of this rather remarkable result 

 would appear to be that copulation of the moths actually took 

 place; and that the semen from the male exerted a stimulat- 

 ing action on the normal, weak parthenogenetic power without 

 real fertilisation, or fusion of male and female pronuclei, 

 occurring. This has been termed pseudogamy, audit is the 

 explanation offered by Hans Przibram ^ in the case of the 

 artificial application of the semen of Mantis religiosa to 

 the eggs of female Sphodromantis bioculata. vSome of 

 the eggs were rendered fertile, but the offspring appeared to 

 be entirely like the mother, and there was no direct influence 

 from the male. 



In the present example it is to be regretted that there is no 

 cytological evidence to support this view, but careful consider- 

 tion of the facts renders any other supposition still more 

 difficult to accept. 



If the offspring was a true hybrid the almost complete 

 absence of any of the male characteristics is totally unlike 

 that which is found in the vast majority of the hybrids 

 between distinct species, since these so usually tend to be 

 more or less intermediate between the two parents. 



A possible explanation with respect to the absence of a re- 

 enforced parthenogenetic tendency in the pair No. 6 (table, 



' Przibram, Hans, ' Experimental Zoologie, Phylogenese,' p. 25, 

 1910. 



