272 MR. C. F. M. SWYNiSfERTON ON THfi 



swynnertoni, again refused without tasting, most obstinately, Neptis sadava, tasted 

 and crushed very thoroughly and swallowed Papilio lycBus,t\\en refused but, on my 

 continuing to hold it to her, tasted slightly and di-opped Pseudacrcea trimeni. 



After a short interval she refused without tasting Mylothris yulei and Mylothris 

 agathina, readily ate a Charaxes hrutus with one wing, refused for a time quite 

 decidedly Neptis agatha and Neptis sadava, but ate readily after thorough crushing 

 Pseudacrcea lucretia, Ypthima, and a second NejMs agatha, this one with all wings 

 attached ; then the Neptis sadava. " Appetite " — for butterflies of this category — 

 " had evidently come in the eating " of the Pseudacrcea {cf. yesterday's experiment). 



She now ate a second but this time wingless Charaxes hrutus, and tasted warily 

 and emphatically threw away an Ypthima. I had only a dead and completely 

 dried-up Neptis left {Neptis sadava), but, wishing to see whether it would be refused 

 without tasting, oflfered it. The bird at once freely accepted it, thereby showing 

 once more, I thought, that it preferred it to Ypthima, but, finding it doubtless to 

 be dry and unattractive, pitched it right away. 



[Summary : — 



(«) 1 C. hrutus, P. isokani, N. macrops, N. swynnert07ii, and 

 P. lyceus. 

 2. M. yulei and M. agathina, larva of A. serena. 

 (b) 1. N. swynnertoni, P. lyceus, and Ps. lucretia apparently above 



2. N. sadava (and P. lucretia above N. agatha). 



3. (On manner) Ypthima. 



As my object had been to compare Pseudacrma trimeni with N. sadava or 

 P. lucretia (I had previously " placed " these two in the same grade) and I had 

 none left, I discontinued. During the next two hours I was fortunate enough to 

 secure both N. sadava and P. lucretia, and on my return, the P. trimeni being still 

 alive, resumed the experiment.] 



Exp. 55. — To place PseudacrcBa. The roller had become fairly hungry in the 

 interval, but tasted and rejected with the greatest promptness a larva of Acro&a 

 serena and refused Mylothris yulei without tasting. She now ate four small 

 grasshoppers, and after them an Ypthima. She had evidently not quite reached 

 the desired stage. A Charaxes brtttus however carried her just too far, for she 

 now obstinately refused without tasting a Neptis sadava and a second Ypthima. 

 I therefore waited five minutes, when a Henotesia perspicua was also refused without 

 tasting. Three minutes later the bird refused a Neptis sadava but tasted well and 

 readily ate a Eurytela dryope. 



Three minutes later again she crushed and as readily ate a Neptis sadava, 

 refused an Ypthima most obstinately without trial, tasted and dropped a second 

 Neptis sadava, evidently more ready to consider it, tasted very thoroughly and 

 dropped both Pseudacrcea trimeni and Pseudacra^a lucretia, thus indicating that 

 neither was more acceptable to her than the Neptis, tasted and at once rejected a 

 Brihlia, refusing to touch a second ; refused but then, wavering, tasted and, evidently 

 reassured, at once ate Eurytela hiarhas and after it, after thorough crushing, 

 a Papilio lyceus $ . 



The bird had quite evidently just before arrived at the stage of wavering whether 



