EXPLANATION OF FOKM AND COLOURING. 281 



As it was made with the experiment fresh in my mind it deserves con- 

 sideration, but I should not deduce quite so much from the experiment as it stands 

 recorded. 



(3) P. antilope, P. cebrene, P. clelia, P. cardtoi, a Sesperia, and a common cock- 

 roach were all, even allowing for special stimulation, eaten fairly near repletion- 

 point, 



(4) The recognition and ready acceptance of Catopsilia after an obstinate refusal 

 of Leuceronia argia S , diffeiing from it in appearance chiefly (to speak roughly) in 

 the colour and greater prominence of the eyes, suggests perhaps how such fine 

 points in mimicry as the fulvous palpi of Pseudacrcea trimeni may have been 

 brought about. It must be remembered that the capture of an insect is not 

 equivalent to its death, which would usually onh' take place as the result of 

 the subsequent crushing process. Small resemblances which can only be detected 

 at the closest quarters, as when the insect is already in the bill, will therefore have 

 a chance of counting.] 



Exp. 63. — July 6. I had put in a handful of grasshoppers and other Orthoptera, 

 nearly all of which probably belonged to high-grade species. The bird merely 

 leant over and scanned them from her perch at the top of the cage, then resumed 

 her usual position of repose with a shake of the head that seemed to indicate 

 " No, I can't be bothered to go down." 



Half an hour later, as the grasshoppers still remained untouched, I offered the 

 smaller ones one by one in the forceps. The bird readily ate eight, then refused 

 persistently without tasting an Ypthima, a Pseudacrcea lucretia, and a Teracolus, 

 ate another grasshopper, but merely crushed and threw away a second and refused 

 without tasting all of many others that 1 now offered her. She also refused 

 without tasting a Cyrestis camellus, a Leuceronia argia $ (without wings) and a 

 Eurytela dryope, but quite readily accepted a.nd ate a Precis cebrene. 



Later, by lamplight, she crushed and readily swallowed Leuceronia argia $ , 

 tasted and rejected E%irytela dryope, Cyrestis camillus, an Ypthima, a Teracolus (?), 

 and, after thorough crushing, Pseudacnxa htcretia and again the Cyrestis. She 

 then ate with relish Pyrameis cardui and Precis cebrene, and after them the. Eurytela 

 dryope and the Pseudacrcea (with all wings) after prolonged crushing, tasted and 

 rejected once more the Cyrestis, refused, then changing her mind crushed and 

 swallowed the Teracolus, rejected a dead but supple Neptis goochi, but on its being 

 reoffered ate not only it but a second, and refused a Terias brigitta (?). She 

 finally, however, tasted and rejected it. 



[SUMMAEY : — 



(a) 1. P. cebrene. 



2. Grasshoppers. 



3. C. camillus, E. dryope, L. argia $ . 

 (6) 1. Pyrameis cardui. 



2. C. camillus, E. dryope, Ypthima. 



It is probable that E. dryope, C, camillus, Ypthima and the Teracolus were 



