PALATABILITY OF SOME BRITISH INSECTS. 851 



One given to CoUai'ed Jay-Thrush, which pecked it about and 

 scraped it in the sand for a. long time, wiping his beak in the 

 intervals, and ultimately left it. It was then picked up by a 

 White-crested Jay-Th]'ush, whicli treated it for some time in the 

 same way, but at last ate the mangled remains. This same bird 

 then took a specimen of the mimetic fly Arctojjhila mussitans, but 

 made just the same fuss over the eating of it as he had in the 

 case of the bee. 



8ept. 18, 1910. One taken at once by Dial Bird, and after a 

 good deal of pulling about, pecking and Aviping in the sand, was 

 eaten. This bird had just previously eaten a small Tortoiseshell 

 Butterfly, and he took about the same time to finish off the one 

 insect as the other. 



Sept. 20, 1910. One offered to Dial Bird was taken at once and 

 eaten with very little delay, after being wiped once or twice in 

 the sand. The bird flew away with a second specimen and I did 

 not see what became of it ; but he returned to me, and I had 

 difficulty in keeping him away from the bees with which I was 

 experimenting with other birds. 



This Dial Bird was the one that ate the same sj^ecies of \{ umble 

 Bee two days previously. 



Humble Bee {Bomhus'l joncellus). 



July 31, 1909. One offered alive to Mona Monkey was 

 snatched at once and eaten bit by bit. 



Humble Bee (Bombus ? terrestris). 



July 31, 1909. One (dead) taken by Brazilian Hangnest and 

 pecked to pieces, the bird holding it the while in his foot against 

 the perch. The pieces pecked oflF were dropped about the cage 

 and not eaten. 



Humble Bee [Bombus lapidariics). 



May 31, 1909. One dead specimen given to the Meerkat was 

 eaten bit by bit, after being rubbed in the sawdust by the 

 animal's paws. 



One dead specimen given to Capuchin (Cebiis sp. a) was taken 

 in the hands find eaten bit by bit, just as the Monkey would eat 

 a piece of hard biscuit or sugar. Neither of these mammals 

 showed any signs of disliking the ta.ste of the bees ; quite the 

 contrary. Their molar teeth are evidently much better adajjted 

 for crushing the chitinous exoskeletons than are the beaks of the 

 bii-ds that tasted them. 



One dead specimen offered to Syrian Bulbiil was taken after 

 about a minute's inspection. The bird pecked it and pulled it 

 about for at least five minutes and dodged away with it from 

 other birds that chased him. He grew, however, less and less 



