EXPLANATION OF FORM AND COLOURING. 279 



Exp. 62. — July 5. Tasted and at once rejected Acrcea caldarena and i-efused 

 without tasting Aci-cea acara and Amauris lohengula. She then ate several grass- 

 hoppers, crushed and rejected Myloihris rueppelli, and obstinately refused without 

 tasting a Terias, but I'eadily ate a Neptis saclava and an Ypthima, rejected after 

 tasting it a Phrissura isokani, crushed and di'opped but on my reofFering it 

 ate readily a Rhopcdocampta forestan with a very strong Amauris-smeW, which was 

 presumably what obtained its rejection when first tasted. 



Fifteen minutes later, after an interruption, she refused without tasting a 

 Terias, refused, then tasted and rejected a Phrissura isokani, and ate with the 

 greatest readiness and no sign of dislike seven Neptis saclava, one Ypthima, 

 and one JVeptis goochi in rapid succession, first slightly crushing each. 



She now ate five small grasshoppers, refused without tasting a, Neptis saclava 

 and an Ypthima, refused, then tasted Neptis goochi, but at once emphatically 

 rejected it and proceeded to wipe her bill vigorously on the pei'ch, refusing then 

 without tasting a Neptis agatha. 



After three more small grasshoppers she tasted and rejected a Papilio lyceus $ , 

 persistently without tasting refused a Leuceronia argia S (as always, with one 

 hindwing), but recognized and at once crushed and readily ate a Catopsilia 

 Jlorella, difiering hardly at all in general appearance from the Leuceronia except in 

 the latters greener and more conspicuous eyes. She then once more refused 

 witliout tasting the Leuceronia argia, also a Eurytela dryope, then leaned forward, 

 barely tasted the argia, and withdrew, leaving it in the forceps. However, she 

 was evidently replete in any case, for she now just crushed and dropped or refused 

 without tasting several edible grasshoppers and refused again without tasting 

 Precis cehrene, Pyrameis cardui, and Precis archesia. 



Ten minutes later she tasted warily and I'ejected Leuceronia argia d and 

 Eu7^ytela dryope, but crushed and ate with apparent relish a large green Pentatomid 

 bug, Encostermim delegorguei. 



I continued the experiment — one object of which was to obtain an opinion from 

 the bird on the relative merits of Leuceronia and Papilio lyceus — an hour later, by 

 lamplight. She commenced by tasting and rejecting Eurytela hiarhas, then 

 crushed and I'eadily ate Pa2nlio lyceus, Leuceronia argia ^ , and a Gharaxes brutus, 

 crushed and dropped but on my reoiTering it crushed very thoroughly and ate 

 Papilio lyceus, tasted suspiciously or with disinclination and lejected two 2 Leu- 

 cero7iia ctrgia in succession, accepted readily but after crushing it well with a 

 doubtful look threw away Papilio dardanus S , and once more tasted and rejected 

 Eurytela dryope and the two Leuceronia ctrgia § s. She now for some time 

 refused to touch Papilio davdanits S , then crushed and rejected it, but on my 

 reofi"ering and continuing to hold it to her, crushed it well and swallowed it with 

 evident suspicion or disinclination. 



She next refused persistentl}' without tasting but in the end tasted and once 

 more rejected both the Leuceronia argia 5 s, tasted slightly (after at first refusing) 

 and rejected Eurytela dryope, but crushed and readily ate a " swift " moth with 

 ver}^ slight tomato-smell, ten minutes later again tasting and rejecting Leuceronia 

 argia 5 and Eurytela dryope. 



