304 Dr. Frederick A. Dixey on the 
generic with H. socialis (which he does not seem to have 
seen.),* his description, nevertheless, renders it extremely 
probable that they are more closely related to that 
species than any other known butterfly. The Pierines of 
the first grade may accordingly be said to consist of 
Eucheira, with Behr’s two “ Neophasias,” Pontia and 
Metaporia. The prevalent larval habit of spinning is no 
doubt an indication of the high antiquity of the group, 
and suggests, as do other features, a relationship with 
the Parnassids. This suggestion is further borne out by 
the aspect of Mesapia jpeloria, which is no doubt an off- 
shoot of the genus Pontia. But such relationship is 
certainly of no close or direct kind, and is probably only 
referable to an extremely remote ancestor of the two 
subfamilies.+ 
Leaving the genus Pontia fora time, we may make 
a fresh start with Metaporia agathon, from which point it 
is not difficult to trace another principal stem, with 
numerous and important ramifications. ‘The females of 
several species of Mr. Moore’s genus Huphina, for 
instance H. phryne ?, show what is to all intents and 
purposes the same pattern as M. agathon (Figs. 7, 8) ; 
and the males differ only or chiefly by the more ready 
admission of the white invasion, at the expense of the 
remains of dark ground-colour. The pattern of such a 
form as H. nama 9, seems at first sight to belong to 
a different category, but a very good transition from 
that of M. agathon is afforded by H. eperia 9, which 
shows how the arrangement of white patches in H. nama 
? has grown out of the discal and cellular white, while 
the more marginal series I sinks gradually into the back- 
ground, and with its disappearance the two dark series 
S and M lose of course their distinctive character. Iu 
one ancestral point, namely the fillimg up to a greater 
or less extent of the interspaces of the hindwing under- 
side with yellow, Huphina shows a closer resemblance to 
Delias and Prioneris than to M. agathon, in which insect 
this feature is only slightly indicated. In many species 
* N. menapia, included by Behr in the same genus, differs from 
Eucheira is neuration and other points. 
t+ Davidina armandi has been spoken of as a transitional form. 
But, as remarked by Staudinger and Schatz (op. cit., Th. ii., p. 57), 
it is shown by Oberthiir’s figure (Etudes, iv., pl. 1i, fig. 1) to be 
without any of the points characteristic of the Papilionide. 
