﻿'27fi THK RNTOMOLOGIST. 



other parts of Eastern Asia, and is one of the Pharmacophagous 

 or Aristolochia-ieeding Papilionids, a branch of the family which, 

 as has been stated in a former note, Laertias philenor represents 

 in North America. I bred it successfully, both in my butterfly- 

 house and out-of-doors in the summers of 1913 and 1914. But 

 in point of adaptability to its English environment, it is far 

 from proving as accomodating as its Nearctic congener. In my 

 butterfly-house, though I had a considerable number of fertilized 

 females on the wing, it oviposited sparingly ; out-of-doors, under 

 natural conditions, it did so freely enough. In both circum- 

 stances, however, not only did the larvae feed up very slowly, but 

 the resulting pupae all gave rise to a second brood in the early 

 autumn. The newly-formed pupae, unlike those of L. j^hilenor, 

 I found to be exposed to the attacks of earwigs, which in 

 many cases devoured them and left only their shell, and in 

 several instances I bred a large member of the Ichneumonidae, 

 closely resembling Trogus exesorius, from the pupae which I re- 

 ceived from Japan. I found, however, that my alcinous pupae were 

 not subject to the ravages of the small black fly which infests 

 my butterfly-house. I am unable to explain why my alcinous, 

 which fed upon the same plants of Aristolochia sipJio as my 

 philenor, did not enjoy an equal immunity. It has been stated 

 by Leech, who quotes Pryer, in his ' Butterflies of Japan and 

 Corea,' and by Seitz in his ' Macro-Lepidoptera of the World,' 

 that the larva of alcinous feeds upon Coccidiis Thunbergii 

 (natural order Menispermaceae) ; though I had a number of plants 

 of this creeper growing both in my butterfly-house and out-of- 

 doors, I never found the ova or larvae of alcinous on them. 

 A. sipho was without exception the food-plant chosen, the 

 imagines, as if they wished to accentuate the fact that they 

 were true Aristolochia -ie,e([Qy:^, haunting the large Aristolochia 

 plants in my kitchen garden for days at a time, sunniug them- 

 selves upon the broad leaves and returning to them if driven 

 away almost invariably. Mr. Green, who came over from 

 Camberley a few months ago to see my butterfly-house, gave me 

 the probable explanation of this. It appears that A. Indica, 

 a common Eastern member of Aristolociaceae, greatly resem- 

 bles both in habit of growth and in leaf C. Thunhergii. 

 Hence the mistake probably has arisen. In its like-habits this 

 butterfly presents some points of difference from L. philenor. 

 The ovum, which is like that of the latter species in colour, 

 being of a brownish red, is laid singly, instead of in batches, 

 upon the fully expanded leaves, not the stems or budding leaves 

 of the food-plants. The larva is solitary, not gregarious, and is 

 as sluggish in habit as that of philenor is active. It clings to 

 the under side of the largest Aristolochia leaves, and moves as 

 little as is compatible with feeding. It is a striking-looking 

 object when fully grown, brownish black, with scarlet and white 



