116 THE ENEMIES OF BUTTERFLIES [ch. 



their behaviour towards these three "nauseous" forms. 

 The Hornbill, for example, refused the Danaines and 

 P. aristolochiae absolutely, but ate Delias eucharis. 

 Some species again, notably the Bulbuls (Molpastes) 

 and Mynahs, shewed little or no discrimination, but 

 devoured the "protected" as readily as the "un- 

 protected" forms. Finn also states that ^'Papilio 

 polytes was not very generally popular with birds, but 

 much preferred to its model, P. aristolochiae.''^ 



In many of Finn's experiments both model and 

 mimic were given to the birds simultaneously so that 

 they had a choice, and he says that "in several cases 

 I saw the birds apparently deceived by mimicking 

 butterflies. The Common Babbler was deceived by 

 Nepheronia Tiippia^ and Liothrix by Hypolimnas misip- 

 pus. The latter bird saw through the disguise of the 

 mimetic Papilio polites, which, however, was sufficient 

 to deceive the Bhimraj and King-crow. I doubt if 

 any bird was impressed by the mimetic appearance of 

 the female Elymnias undularis^'' (cf. PI. IV, fig. 5). 

 Finn concluded from his experiments that on the whole 

 they tended to support the theory of Bates and Wallace, 

 though he admits that the unpalatable forms were 

 commonly taken without the stimulus of actual hunger 

 and generally without signs of dislike. Certainly it 

 is as well to be cautious in drawing conclusions from 

 experiments with captive birds. The King-crow, for 

 instance, according to Finn shewed a marked dislike 

 for Danaines in captivity; yet Manders records this 



' A form closely resembling P. ceylonica figured on PI. I, fig. 1. 



