Resemblance between Huphina corva and Ixias baliensis, 523 
that has departed from the usual aspect of its nearest 
relatives, becoming in this case the mimic, while the 
Huphina stands as the model. The resemblance has 
therefore been attained by a process of give-and-take on 
both sides; nor would it be easy to find a better illustra- 
tion of the principle of reciprocal change or diaposematism. 
It is fair to note that specimens of 7. corva from Java 
and the representative form H. swmatrana from Sumatra 
also possess the dark border to the hind-wing, and are not 
known to be in mimetic association with any Jazas found 
in those islands. It is perhaps unlikely, though not impos- 
sible, that a corresponding Jazias may yet be observed to 
inhabit these localities; but in view of well-ascertained 
facts as regards the shifting of areas of distribution among 
butterflies it would not be extravagant to suppose that the 
Huphina has somewhat extended, or the Jzias has con- 
tracted its range since the resemblance was first set up. 
In any case, we have the fact that the specimens shown in 
Figs. 3-7 were all caught by the same person in the 
same place and on the same day. HH. corva occurs also in 
Lombok, where its relation with Jxias reinwardtu, Voll. §, 
is no doubt the same as with J. baliensis in the neighbour- 
ing island. 
It is to be observed that not all female specimens of 
HT. corva show the mimetic approach to Jzias in the same 
degree. Thehind-wings are sometimes rather conspicuously 
veined, as often in the wet-season phase of H. phryne; 
moreover the dark Ixias-like border is less distinct in 
some specimens than in others. So: too, L. baliensis 9 
may possess a pale orange suffusion in the central area of 
the fore-wing. These features, which may possibly be 
dependent on season, certainly tend when present to 
impair or abolish the excellence of the mimetic picture. 
Mr. Finn, in the “Journal of the Asiatic Society of 
Bengal,” 1895, pp. 621, 624, 626, 635, etc., has produced 
some direct evidence that Huphina phryne is disliked by 
insectivorous birds (Liothrix and Chloropsis). There is 
not, so far as I am aware, any such evidence ijn the case 
of Jxias. But if the foregoing conclusions are well- 
founded, it will follow that the association between the 
two forms here discussed must be synaposematic and not 
pseudosematic, Miillerian and not Batesian. 
