280 



►SOME FURTHER NOTES ON THE GENUS TERIAS. 



By Capt. E. Y. Watson, Indian Staff Corps. 



(Read before the Bombay Natural History Society on lA^th Jan., 1896.) 



In a paper entitled " Notes on the Synonymy of some Species of 

 Indian Pierince,^'' published in the Society's Journal, voh viii, page 489, 

 (1894), I stated on page 517 that I was unable to suggest to what species 

 certain forms of Terias described under the names T. sodalis, 

 T. contuhernalis and T. andersonii^ all of Moore, should be assigned, 

 as the forms were not represented in the British Museum, on which 

 collection the paper was based. The above-named forms, together 

 with some others, were described by Mr. Moore in a paper on Butter- 

 flies from the Mergui Archipelago, published in the Journal of the 

 Linnsean Society, Zoology, vol. xxi, page 29, (1886), and through 

 the instrumentality of Mr. de Niceville I have been enabled to examine 

 the actual specimens which were described, which are in the collection 

 of the Indian Museum at Calcutta, in addition to which Mr. de Niceville 

 has sent me over 500 specimens of Terias from his own collection 

 to assist me in working out the affinities of the different forms. 



In the present paper I therefore propose to discuss the distinctness 

 of each species mentioned by Mr. Moore, and to try to point out 

 what corrections should be made in their synonymy owing to our 

 recently-acquired knowledge of the seasonal variation which occurs in 

 the genus. 



The following are the species mentioned by Mr. Moore : — ■ 



" TERIAS FORMOSA, Hubner." This, as I have already pointed 

 out, is a synonym of T. harina, Horsfield. 



" TERIAS SODALIS, n. sp." In describing this species, Mr. Moore 

 says it differs from typical Javan and Sumatran T. sari, Horsfield, 

 in being smaller, and in some slight differences in the markings. 

 However^ none of the points of distinction given holds good. 

 Mr. Moore gives the expanse of his T. sodalis as from 1'4 to 1*5 

 inches. I find from actual* measurement of the specimens described 



» It is probable my method of measurement is not the same as Mr. Moore's, whicfh would 

 account for the discrepancy between the measurements given by him and by me of the same 

 specimens. 



