286 MR. C. F. M. SWYNNKETON ON THE 



a surprise to me that she was so immensely attracted by the Euralia, which she 

 ate with unmistakable relish. Evidently to her it was very acceptable indeed." 

 (2) Grades: — 



1. Euralia mima. 



2. P. cebrene, C. brutus, A. schoeneia, P. lyceus. 



The previous P. lyceios was accepted only near repletion-point, but in view of its 

 refusal and rejection just before, and the obvious growth of appetite required to 

 get it accepted, it cannot be placed necessarily above C. hrittics.'] 



Exp. 71. — August 11. Yery hungry; readily accepted and ate Terias brigitta, 

 then, very hesitatingly, a Mylothris agathina $ with veiy little smell, crushed and 

 rejected a, Mylothr is rueppeUi, crushed it very thoroughly indeed and finally rejected 

 it on its being reoffered, then refused and, on my persisting, tasted and at once 

 rejected a Mylothris agathina c? with the usual sweet-brier scent, but readily 

 accepted and ate a Terias senegalensis. I then offered her the dull green and blue 

 Phymateus. It was accepted, crushed very thoroughly, and at last swallowed. 

 The bird then refused but, on my continuing to offer it, tasted and rejected Terias 

 brigitta, but crushed and very readily ate Belenois severina, once more refusing the 

 Terias without tasting. She then eagerly ate several grasshoppers, readily ate 

 JSfeptis agatha, refused obstinately to touch Belenois severina, but once more readily 

 accepted and ate Neptis agatha. 



I then gave her six small grasshoppers, after which she crushed and eite Uurytela 

 dryope, refused without tasting Neptis agatha, and tasted veiy slightly and threw 

 aside a second Eurytela dryope, readily eating, however, a Papilio lyoius. She next 

 refused, then tasted and rejected Leuceronia thalassina 6 , refused, then tasted, 

 crushed and ate Papilio demodocus, tasted and I'ejected Papilio angolanus, then 

 refused persistently without tasting Papilio demodocus and Papilio lyceus, also the 

 red-winged Phymateus viridipes, which was offered with its wings spread and 

 ignored. I then closed its wings and reoffered it in that position. The bird, which 

 was at the further end of a perch, at once sidled up, looked at it closely, and then 

 at once sidled back again without touching it. 



Ten minutes later she readily ate Papilio lyceus, but crushed and rejected Leu- 

 ceronia thalassina J and Papilio cmgolamts, refused momentarily, then accepted, 

 crushed well, and ate Papilio demodocus and, evidently just too replete for it, 

 persistently refused Papilio lyceus without tasting. 



After an interval she crushed well and very nearly ate Leuceronia thalassina c? , 

 but at the last moment rejected it, then refused without tasting Eurytela dryope, 

 tasted and rejected the Phymateus viridipes, and refused without tasting Papilio 

 lyceus. 



An hour later she tasted and rejected Neptis agatha and Eurytela dryope, but 

 ate readily Leuceronia argia $ , crushed thoroughly for a long time and rejected 

 the Phymateus viridipes, then, suddenly waking up, readily ate Eurytela dryope 

 and Neptis agatha, tasted and rejected the Phymciteus, ate readily a Papilio lyceus 

 and a Neptis agatha, but tasted and rejected a Terias brigitta, as also once more the 

 Phymateus viridipes. 



