362 MR. C. F. M. SWYNNERTON ON THE 



testimony to the deterrent value of even an imperfect likeness, and tliat no 

 inclination to take A. encedon or M. marshalli was displayed illustrates the view 

 that a still more perfect likeness may be still more effective. The treatment of 

 A.johnstoni and P. echerioides $ respectively was equally interesting, and the bird 

 was shown to be hungry enough for either. 



The three Indian buttei-flies were offered to test previous knowledge, as C. garrulus 

 visits India in its migrations. However, the result, though a refusal, can hardly 

 be regarded as in any way conclusive. 



Preferences: — 1. A.johnstoni, P. echerioides, CaUioratis hellatrix, and Paj). lyoeiis. 

 2. A. cdhimacidata, D. chrysippus, A. caldarena St and red § 

 A. igolct.^ 



Con AC I AS GABRULUS. B. 



Exp. 199. — April 2. Refused to touch a Diestogyna iris 2 ov a D. chrysippus, but 

 at once tried to seize on a D. chrysippus f. alcijypus. I withdrew it and once more 

 offered the other two, which were as persistently refused as before. I then 

 reoffered the cdcippus, and this time allowed the roller to seize it, which she did 

 readily ; but on crushing it she threw it away, refused, then crushed and rejected 

 an A. johnsioni, readily ate a Terias brigilta, and reached out readily enough for an 

 M. yulei. It was old and dry, and was accordingly at once rejected. I had merely 

 offered it to see whether it would be refused without tasting. 



Half an hour later, no food meantime, she tasted and rejected the Indian 

 Danaine, Parantica aglcea, with a lively D. chrysippxis body, refused then to touch 

 either it or a Nepheronia ceylanica, showed some inclination to try Hestia nama 

 but refrained, refused to touch Tirumcda septentrionis, tried Chittira fumata with 

 a Danaida body and rejected it, again refused persistently to have anything to do 

 with the Tirumcda, but hesitatingly once more tried the Parantica and again 

 rejected it. I now gave a small feed of grasshoppers, then offered a Terpsichrois 

 mulciber, which I had accidentally omitted before. It was refused without tasting. 



In this experiment the roller went back on his refusal of Parantica the other 

 day and showed a much more m^arked suspicion of Tirumala. 



[The special testing invited by an unaccustomed colour-variation was illusti-ated 

 at the commencement of the experiment, a form of D. chrysippus being thus 

 specially ti-ied when even a rather poor mimic of the commoner form was avoided. 

 The Indian butterflies also gave rise to quite a good colour-experiment and the 

 refusal of the Terpsichrois, unlike the others in coloration, struck me as conceivably 

 due to previous experience. 



T. hrigitta and M. yulei, both well known to the bird, were preferred to 

 J), chrysippus and A. johnstoni and, with the latter, fixed exactly her state of 

 appetite. She was probably even hungrier after the interval, though less so when 

 it struck me to offer the Terpsichrois.^ 



Exp. 200. — Ajjril 7. Hungry — early morning. I placed several coffee-bugs 

 {Antestia lineaticollis) in cage. The roller descended, tried one or two and rejected 

 them, then returned to her perch. From the forceps she refused one, then tasted 



