Dr. G. B. Longstaff's Bionomic Notes on Butterjlies. Gil 



Danaida eresimus, Cramer (Colombia, Venezuela, 1907). 

 Of 2 ^ it is noted "? very slight pleasant scent"; of a 

 $ "strong, ? musk-rat odour when alive." 



Timviala septcntrionis, Butl. (Ceylon, 1908). 11 ^ were 

 examined, 9 of them yielded a scent, noted as " slight," 

 " moderate," or " decided," and described as pleasant or 

 sweet, and in two cases compared (with, however, s(jme 

 hesitation) to clover. In four instances the genital tufts 

 were displayed ; certainly in one of these no scent was 

 perceptible (though subsequently detected in the house). 

 In another instance it is noted tliat the scent was not 

 connected with the " sexual pouch " on the hind-wing. 



Seven $ were examined : in 6 the result was negative 

 or doubtful ; in the other a slight scent was found and 

 compared in the field to Stcphanotis, but Mrs. Longstaff 

 in the house said " ? ginger." 



This species is exceptional among Danaines,* having a 

 decidedly agreeable scent, strongest in the ^ . 



Danaida clirydppus, Linn. (Ceylon, 1908). Of 2 ^ 

 one was without scent, in the otlier the "musk-rat odour" 

 was detected both during life and after death. In 2 ^ 

 the musk-rat odour was detected in the field but noted 

 as especially strong at home.j- 



Chittira fumaf.a, Butl., taprohana, Feld. (Ceylon, 1908). 

 Out of 4 ^ and 4 $ a scent was noted in 2 of the latter 

 only, described in the field as " a slight musty scent," but 

 on re-examination in the hotel compared to stale tobacco- 

 smoke. In 1904 the results obtained were more positive 

 — " it has the ' acetylene ' odour of Cradia core, but not 

 so strong and with a difference." J 



Parantica cifilea, Cram., ceylanica, Feld. (Ceylon, 1908). 

 A distinct scent was detected in 15 ^ out of 17, and in 

 11 ^ out of 14. In the $ the scent varied from "very 

 slight " to " strong," twice indeed it was so strong as to 

 be clearly perceptible when the insect was fluttering in 

 the net. In quality it was in 13 cases compared to 

 acetylene (it being specially noted in one instance as " not 

 Hamamelis ") ; in the other 2 specimens it is described 

 as "acetylene j:»/?«.s cockroach," but these when re-examined 

 in the house were described as " cockroach only," and 



♦Compare Bingham, "Fauna of British India: Butterflies," 

 vol. i, p. 2. 



t Cf. Dixey, Proc. Ent. Soc. Lend., 1906, p. iv. 

 i Longstaff, Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1905, p. 131. 

 TRANS. ENT. SOC. LOND. ] 908.— PAKT IV. (JAN. 1909) 40 



