304 MR, C. F. M. SVVYNNERTON ON THU 



refused rather obstinately but finally crushed and rejected Eurytela dryope, refused, 

 then crushed and readily ate Leuceronia argia $ . 

 [Summary : — - 



(1) Note: ''This experiment appears to place Pajjilio angolanus and Papilio 

 echerioides on roughly the same level, probably that of Leuceronia thcdassina, that 

 is to say if anything just above Eurytela dryope and just below Leuceronia argia. 

 P. echerioides dead." 



(2) Grades:— 



il.L. argia $ . 

 Byhlia {2. P. angolanus and P. echerioides S &>^ 



r, HT 7 I -^- (li^yOpe. 



6. JV. agatha. J 



4. T. brigitta.] 



Exp. 83. — iSejjtember 8. In morning, hungry, crushed and ate a fi'eshly-caught 

 Acrcea rabbaice, tasted and rejected Acrcea sp., crushed very thoroughly, nearly 

 swallowed and finally rejected Planema aganice 5 , lively but rather long caught 

 and juiceless. She then tasted a wingless Danaida and three times in succession 

 rejected it with an air of suspicion. The Acrcea rabbaice was unmistakfibly liked 

 the best, and next to it came the Planema, showing that at all events without its 

 "poppy" secretion, it is not obviously very violently unpleasant [wrong order for 

 this deduction — though impression at time must count — and aganice incident 

 perhaps due to stimulation by i-abbaioi]. 



Later in the day, once more fairly hungry, she hesitated over, then accepted, 

 crushed, and swallowed a Terias brigitta, ate six or seven small grasshoppers, 

 absolutely refused to touch either a Terias brigitta or a Neptis agatha, but readily ate 

 a Papilio angolanus ; ate three more grasshoppers and another Pajnlio angolanus 

 and three more and a third angolanus. After the next three grasshoppers she 

 absolutely refused to have anything to do with a Papilio angolanus and tasted and 

 at once rejected Papilio echerioides S • Three minutes later she crushed and 

 rejected Papilio angolanus and refused without tasting Papilio echerioides S ; 

 tasted and rejected Eurytela dryope and refused without tasting Eurytela hiarbas. 

 Three minutes later she crushed well and ate with no sign of dislike a Pinacopteryx 

 saba, crushed and ate a Papilio angolanus, refused, then tasted and rejected the 

 <S Papilio echerioides ; refused to touch a Neptis agatha, readily ate another Papilio 

 angolanus, once more obstinately refused to taste a Neptis agatha, tasted and rejected 

 Eurytela hiarbas, refused persistently without tasting Eurytela dryope, readily ate 

 another Papilio angolanus, once more refused to have anything to do with Neptis 

 agatha or ^ Papilio echerioides, accepted suspiciously but having tasted it readily 

 ate a Plenotesia perspicua, two more grasshoppers and yet another Papilio angolanus. 

 I was here inteirupted. 



Fifteen minutes later she readily ate six grasshoppers and a Papilio angolanus, 

 refusing without tasting Neptis agatha. After three more grasshoppers she refused 

 persistently without tasting Neptis agatha, Eurytela dryope, and Papilio angolanus. 

 It struck me to get them definitely tasted by offering a very minute grasshopper 

 or a small portion of a grasshopper between each. I therefore now gave the bird 

 a very din}inutive grasshopper from the well-known tin and then from the same 



