406 PACKARD— ORIGIN OF MARKINGS OF ORGANISMS. [Dec. 2, 



attack them." His experiments were made with caged passerine 

 birds of the babbler and bulbul groups. He fed the birds with a 

 number of non-warningly-colored butterflies, together with four 

 Danais chrysippus and a Delias. On five occasions the supposed 

 inedible Danais was eaten by the bird, and at other times the Danais 

 were eaten, though on the whole the edible species were preferred by 

 the Liothrix, while Mr. Finn was not so sure about the bulbuls. In 

 other series of experiments the ** protected" butterflies were eaten 

 by the bulbuls, even when offered as a choice a non-protected 

 Catopsilia. 



It is to be observed that the birds would peck at Euplcea and 

 other protected butterflies, and afterward wipe their beaks, but sub- 

 sequently would return to the attack, beat off the Euploea's wings 

 and swallow it. It thus seems that even if a bird wipes its beak as 

 if in disgust after attacking an inedible butterfly, it may eventually 

 devour it. 



Experimenting with a single bird in a cage, the racket-tailed 

 drongo shrike, it eat ''without persuasion " several Danais chrysip- 

 pus and three D. genuiia, and " with persuasion " two Papilio aris- 

 iolochi(B and a P. polites^ though maggots had been fed to them or 

 were available. The foregoing experiments give us the impression 

 that these birds in nature would not eat butterflies, when seed, 

 fruit or maggots, etc., were to be had. 



Experimenting with birds at liberty, on giving a Papilio demo- 

 leus to a wild mynah {Acridofheres tristis) which he had seen trying 

 to get at some butterflies in an insect cage, the bird knocked off 

 most part of the butterfly's wings and flew off with the tody. 

 Another mynah seized a disabled Danais genutia^ and after batter- 

 ing it ate most of it. Another mynah seized a disabled Catopsilia 

 and Danais limniace, knocked off a fore wing of each and flew with 

 them to a high building. On another occasion birds of the same 

 species pecked at Papilios, then leaving them. 



Of two hornbills (Anthracoceros) one did not care about insects 

 at all, while the other readily ate several unprotected butterflies, 

 but "took, rubbed and refused Danais chrysippus 2ind D. genutia 

 and Euploea," yet it also refused a Junonia and a Papilio. 



It seems, then, in the words of Mr. Finn, that the common bab- 

 blers {Crateropus canorus) ate the Danaid butterflies readily enough 

 in the absence of others, but when offered a choice showed their 

 dislike of these ''protected" forms by avoiding them. ''This 



