Mimetic Relationships in the genus Heliconius. 139 



Both occur in Guiana and North Brazil as far as the Rio 

 Negro. Figs. 5 and 6 are burneyi hiibneri and melpomene 

 penelope, both from Bolivia. Figs. 9 and 10 represent 

 hewitsoni and pachinus from Panama. Figs. 13 and 14, 

 17 and 18, 21 and 22 represent respectively three forms 

 of sapho and three of cydno. Figs. 25 and 26 are himera 

 and melpomene timareta contiguus. In this case the patterns 

 are by no means so alike as in most of the other examples, 

 but that of the hind- wing of the melpomene form is the more 

 interesting in that it shows the crowding together of the 

 flame pattern rays in order to produce a resemblance to 

 the band of himera. 



Figs. 3 and 4 are notabilis microclea and xenoclea respec- 

 tively, and beneath them (figs. 7 and 11) are notabilis 

 notabilis and erato rothschildi, to which correspond the two 

 melpomene forms, figs. 8 and 12. Figs. 15 and 16 are 

 hydarus chest ertoni and weymeri gustavi. These, I am 

 told, have not the same vertical distribution, though 

 possibly their enemies may not be correspondingly separ- 

 ated. Figs. 19 and 20 are hydarus colombinus and amaryllis 

 rosina from Bogota. Figs. 23 and 24 represent erato phyllis 

 and melpomene amandus, the latter example approximating 

 to the form nanna burchelli, Poulton. It has been pointed 

 out by Professor Poulton (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., p. 33 et 

 seq., 1910) that where nanna occurs within the range of 

 erato phyllis the red bar of the fore-wing is deeply toothed at 

 the lower outer edge, just as in erato phyllis, whereas in his 

 form burchelli the red bar is of less irregular outline. 

 Finally, at figs. 27 and 28 are shown peculiar forms of erato 

 and melpomene from Bolivia. 



Adhering to our previous conclusions, we have, then, on 

 PI. XII, fourteen forms of one species of Section I which, 

 whilst differing widely from one another, present respectively 

 a remarkable resemblance to fourteen forms of Section II 

 belonging to six different species. The examples shown 

 by no means exhaust the subject. It would be possible 

 to fill another plate with corresponding forms of erato and 

 melpomene ; aoede, xanthocles and doris, all have forms which 

 could be included, and whilst so many forms in Section I 

 mimic others in Section II, some of those in the latter 

 seem to mimic each other. The nature of this mimicry 

 is somewhat difficult to define. Mr. Kaye (loc. cit.) has 

 himself pointed out its peculiarities. The comparative 

 rarity of the forms of Sections I and II is not constant. 



