PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 247 



tion. This in spite of the fact that the lai'vje are not coloured like the 

 foodplant, and there are numerovis sparrows in the roads. 

 With regard to his conclusions, page 98 : — 

 (a). I should say on his own evidence the reverse is the case, 

 (b). I will follow his example and leave this to the optical surgeon, 

 (c). I cannot understand how this conclusion could have been 

 arrived at, except to attempt to " nullify the supposed diffi- 

 culty with regard to the slight difference in modes of flight 

 existing between model and mimic, on which so much stress 

 has been laid," to which he refers. 

 It is the \vorst evidence in favour of the " protective resemb- 

 lance " theory by weeding out if " tlie bird's ileductin' capacitij 

 ■is probably inferior to tliat of titan, and certainhj inferior in all- 

 round canacitij to that of trained man (ej/., entomologist), icho 

 recof/nises the sitting object as a niot/i before mt>vement betrai/s 

 the fact of life." I shall have occasion to refer to this declara- 

 of Mr. Curtis's later, 

 (d). With this I agree, with the reservation that this might apply 

 to the nesting season only, as after the fledging of the young 

 birds the families shift their quarters and start working south. 

 Mr. Curtis draws my attention to the fact that owls, nightjars and 

 the stone curlews " have a vision modified for their manner of life." 

 No one knows this better than I do, as I have spent many pleasant 

 nights in their haunts, particularly that of the stone curlew, besides 

 watching the latter for hours in the daytime. Mr. Curtis, however, is 

 again mixing up " protective resemblance (cryptic coloration) " and 

 " warning coloration." I did not say that the latter was lost on them, 

 although so far as the suggestion being " gratuitous," I may mention 

 that I spent a most interesting evening in the late spring of 1912 under 

 an arc lamp, at Ventnor, where the bats and an owl were having a 

 splendid time. I saw them repeatedly take Sjiilosoma Inbi icipcda and 

 <S'. menthastri. I was able to identify them as the bats worked close to 

 the ground, and occasionally I managed to net them. There were 

 numbers of small moths besides Dicraniira rinitla and Siihin.c li(/ustri. 

 The bats were as plentiful as the last named, and chased them close to 

 my face, so that I often did not know if I was striking at a bat or a 

 moth. I was not speaking of " warning colours " at all, however, but 

 of "protective resemblance," and I still maintain that it is absurd to 

 suggest that " cryptic coloration " can have any protective value when 

 the moths are flying after dark. With regard to white night-flying 

 moths being instances of "warning coloration," anyone spending an 

 evening around electric arc lamps will easily be able to refute this. I 

 have frequently seen Ljencoma salicis taken by bats and owls. In fact 

 it ha,s always struck me that white or light coloured moths have a most 

 unfortunate time when flying to light. On page 100, under example 

 11, Mr. Curtis, after noting various insects taken by birds, says, " I 

 consider that the above cited instances support very materially the 

 view that birds do search for insect food." I have never doubted this, 

 otherwise we should not have insectivorous birds. In a number of the 

 instances recorded, however, the insects were taken in grass, and there 

 is no evidence that they were taken at rest. In the search the bird 

 would move the herbage, disturb the insect, and movement would 

 result in capture. 



