EXPLANATION OF FORM AND COLOURING. 



289 



grasshopper, without tasting. Evidently, in so far as butterflies and Orthoptera 

 were concerned, she was fairly replete. Nevertheless, on my offering her another 

 large Petascelis remiqjes with a very strong smell, she accepted, crushed thoroughly 

 (her peculiar manner in doing so reminding me of one's sensations in drinking a 

 glass of particularly strong liqueur), and swallowed it, afterwards wiping her bill. 

 I then offered a still larger though very similar bug, with, if anything, a still 

 stronger smell and a quantity of bright blue matter exuding at the base of the 

 thorax. The bird at once accepted it, and crushing it well, its breath once more 

 almost taken away with the strength of its flavour, which it nevertheless obviously 

 relished immensely, ate it. She then once more wiped her bill on the perch and 

 refused obstinately to touch Papilio hippocoon or various favourite grasshoppers. 



Ten minutes later she ignored Catopsilia fiorella c^ , just took in the point of her 

 bill and tossed aside Papilio lyceus, Papilio hippocoon^ and Hamanumida dcedalus, 

 and simply ignored various of her favourite grasshoppers. 



Five minutes later she refused to touch Papilio lyceus and Papilio hippocoon. 



Five minutes later she accepted, crushed and swedlowed' Papilio lyceus ?ind two 

 small grasshoppers, then refused without tasting a second P. lyceus, the P. hippocoon, 

 and the Catopsilia florella, refused momentarily then accepted, crushed and swal- 

 lowed Hamanumida dcedalus, accepted, crushed very thoroughly and swallowed 

 without hesitation the hippocoon, but repeatedly and with shakes of the head 

 refused to have anything whatever to do with Papilio lyceus and the S Catopsilia. 



Three minutes later she readily ate the S Catopsilia, tasted and rejected Papilio 

 lyceus, readily ate a yellow $ Catopsilia, tasted and rejected a Lycoid Cetoniid 

 (Glycyphana balteata var.), looking very bee-like with its wiilgs spread (she did not 

 crush into it at all — the beetle was hard — so I am doubtful whether it was properly 

 tasted— no smell and no juices), and once more ate readily a c? and a yellow 5 

 Catopsilia. 



Twenty minutes later she crushed and readily ate Papilio lyoius, two small 

 grasshoppers, and a second Papilio lyosus, tasted and at once rejected Leuceronia 

 thalassina S and Papilio echerioides 5 , accepted, crushed and held, then once 

 more crushed and held, and finally rejected a Papilio lyceus. 



I three times subsequently, at intervals of ten minutes, offered her Pap>ilio 

 lyceus, Papilio echerioides 5 , and Leuceronia thalcossina, but she each time refused 

 without tasting or just crushed them slightly and rejected them, without giving 

 the slightest further indication as to their relative acceptability. The one indica- 

 tion that she had given points to Pajnlio echerioides $ being less acceptable than 

 Papilio lyceus $ , though not necessarily more so than Leuceronia thalassinco 6 . 



[Summary:— 



(1) Grades : — 



P. cardui. 



P. dardanus S • 



lycyphcmu 

 halteatct. 



1. Coreid bugs. 



2. H. dcedalus, P. cehrene, a favourite grasshopper. 



3. C. florella S and yellow ^ , A. schceneia, P. hijjpocoon. 



4. P. lyceus. 



5. L. thalassina c? • 1 -P. echerioides $ , 

 .6. E. dryope. J A. serena's pupa (on taste), N. acjatha (?). 



■ku.rf \'^- Syniomis cerhera, M. agathina S , Osjjryjichotus flcwipes, 



Lygceus, I'ed beetle. 



