62 



Therefore I think that we need no more ascribe a secondary 

 character to the pupal stage of Lepidoptera, than we should be 

 inclined to do so to the larval or nymphal instar of Heini-or Aineta- 

 bola. A grasshopper during I he succession of its moults, passes 

 through a series of successive stages of colour-pattern as well as a 

 moth. The idea that the last stage but one of this series bears a 

 different character from the preceding instars or the following 

 ultimate stage, would never occur to us. Neither is this supposition 

 necessary or useful for the understanding of the Lepidopterous design. 

 That the latter is secondarily modified, is beyond doubt, it has been 

 changed in all stages, but precisely in the pupal stage less so than 

 in the preceding larval instar or the succeeding imaginal state, as 

 ScHiKRBEEK has sliown by comparing the pupal design with that of 

 the caterpillar in its first instar. 



As to the colour-pattern of the pupa, the same considerations 

 can be ap|)lied to it as to so many of its further properties. Poulton 

 e.g. has pointed out, that in the pupae of those butteiflies, whose 

 forewings show a denticulated outer margin, the wing sheaths do 

 not stop at that broken line, yet clearly marked out on its surface, 

 but continue for a short bit and then end in an unbroken front line. 

 He rightly takes this feature as an indication, that the ancestors of 

 those butterflies at one time possessed normally rounded wings. In 

 the same way he was able to show, that in those moths wiiose 

 females have oidy vestigial wing-rudiments (the wings of the male 

 sex being well developed) the female pupae differ much less from 

 the male ones, because their wing-siieaths are only a little bit 

 shorter than those of the males. 



Likewise the difference between the sheaths for harbouring the 

 filiform antennae of the females and those for the pectinate ones of 

 the males was found to be smaller than that between these antennae 

 themselves. 



Would not all these features be caused by a recapitulation of 

 their phytogeny, by the preservation during the subimaginal stage 

 of former conditions which have lost their original meaning. 



On this topic dk Meyeke makes the following remark: 'Tt is 

 difficult to explain the presence of this line" (viz. Poulton's mark) 

 "already on the young pupal wing, otherwise than by anticipation 

 of hereditary tendencies. Anyhow a sufficient number of instances 

 can be adduced of cases in which features of different stages are 

 transferred to the pupa in both directions, as well from the imago 



as from the larva To this same influence of precocious 



entrance into activity might also be ascribed the fact, that certain 



