152 Mr. W. J. Kaye's reply to 



be an instance of mimetic approach. Such cases are 

 common with the HeUconii such as H. aoede astydamia, 

 H. egeria egeria, and H. burneyi catharinae, which all 

 belong to group II and occur together in the Potaro dis- 

 trict of British Guiana. The red marks on the under- 

 sides of all forms of cydno are sometimes reproduced on 

 the underside of weymeri, but these might only be mimetic. 

 H. choarinus shows this red marking beneath, but is in no 

 way related to cydno, as it belongs to group II. 



With the two groups of forms united respectively under 

 melpomene and erato it is, however, just possible that Dr. 

 Eltringham's contention of their respective co-specificness 

 may be correct. But at present there is a great deal of 

 proof still needed and several obstacles to be overcome. 



With several of the other groupings I am afraid I could 

 not agree. Numata and silvana are, I feel sure, always 

 distinct, and although numata varies enormously it is easily 

 separable from the much more stable silvana; in British 

 Guiana they would form two subspecies occurring together. 

 With part of the remainder of the forms which Dr. Eltring- 

 ham groups together into (1), composed of narcaea, 

 ethilla, gradatus, sidphureus, it is possible they might be the 

 same, although narcaea does not come very close in fascies, 

 but it is significant that going northwards from Rio its 

 habitat, on arriving at Bahia the characteristic white 

 apical patch has become yellow, while further north it 

 is possible the yellow patch might be found broken up 

 into a spotted band so characteristic of a number of the 

 forms proposed to be united. 



With Dr. Eltringham's group of species number (2) at 

 the present time it seems impossible to unite aristiona 

 with ithaca and auUcus. Ithaca in the female is no doubt 

 a mimic of aristiona messene. The two sometimes occur 

 together, but show no tendency to form one species. 

 Hecale, ithaca, quitalenus and anderida are quite possibly 

 the same, though the first two needed further proof. The 

 form fulvescens figured in the P.Z.S., 1906, PI. XXXIV, 

 fig. 1, might be an aberration of hecale (pasithoe), or, as has 

 been suggested by Mr. P. I. Lathy, it might be a hybrid 

 between vetustus and hecale. Vetustus occurs along several 

 of the rivers of British Guiana, including the Demerara, 

 while hecale is seemingly confined to the latter. 



Atthis (4) is found to be indistinguishable from aristiona 

 lenaeus. This must be only coincidence. No one could 



