f 



EXPLANATION OF FORM AND COLOURING. 375 



quickly to minimize risk of refusal for a Mylothris) ; tried and rejected M. campina, 

 ate readily N. agaiha, E. hiarbas, and II. perspicua. 



Latei'. Refused persistently without tasting T. brigitta, ate readily M. campina, 

 refused without tasting then tried and rejected T. brigitta, ate readily B. severina. 



Later, hungrier, ate readily T. brigitta, M. yulei, and A. esebria S , refused most 

 persistently without tasting D. chrysippus and A. lobengula, accepted, crushed well, 

 and threw away A. caldarena. He then ate several grasshoppers, &c., refused, then 

 tried and rejected T. brigitta and M. campina ; more grasshoppers, then tried and 

 rejected A. phalantlia and A. hiarbas, showed an inclination to swallow A. schceneia 

 and P. tugela, but ended by throwing each away. Refused without tasting, then 

 tried and rejected P. lyceus and P. dardanus (S , tried and rejected P. titgela, ate 

 readily G. brutus and O. ca^idiope. 



[Order : — 

 N. agatha, C\. C. brutus and perhaps C. candiope. 



P. isokani S , ■I'i. A. schoeneia and P. tugela, on manner above 



H. perspicua. . [ 3. E. hiarbas h A . phalantha, probably P. lyceus &■ P. dardanus c? . 



4. M. campina, B. severina. 



5. T. brigitta, A. caldarena, prob. not above T. brigitta, M. yidei, 



or A. esebria S • 



6. D. chrysippus and A. lobengula, for which less inclination was 



shown than for A. caldarena and the other species in grade 5. 



D. chrysippus, always hitherto refused without tasting, was so refused again 

 to-day.] 



Exp. 223. — March 27. Towards evening. Refused, then tried and rejected 

 M. campina., accepted readily, crushed and ate without hesitation IT. perspicua, 

 accepted Papilio echerioides, but on crushing it threw itaway with very evident dislike. 

 Refused without tasting, then tried and rejected If. campina, ate readily Henotesia 

 perspicua, tried and I'ejected E. hiarbas, P. lyceus, and Tagiades Jlesus, apparently 

 regarded white (J.jiorella with suspicion, refused, then took it in the point of his 

 bill, crushed it slightly, and dropped it. He also rejected an A. schoeneia, but he 

 readily accepted, crushed, and swallowed a Precis clelia, accepted and crushed a P. 

 dardanus J , then flung it away, crushed and rejected an H. perspicua and Tagiades 

 jlesus, refused, then rejected a C.florella and an E. hiarbas, but very readily ate a 

 P. tugela. It took me four or five minutes to hunt up another A. schceneia ; having 

 got it, I offered C.jiorella and P. lycBus. The first he refused, the second, after a 

 refusal, crushed and rejected, but he readily ate the A. schoeneia, then refused to 

 touch P. dardanus S , E. hicorbccs, and again P. lyceus. 



After a short interval he once again crushed and rejected an E. hiarbas, accepted 

 and ate a P. lyceus, refused, then crushed and rejected, again with marked dislike, 

 a c? P. echerioides ; also, once more, the E. hiarbas ; accepted and ate a P. dar- 

 danus (S and refused E. hiarbas and the C. florella. I then adopted my common trick 

 of bringing the latter up quickly and unexpectedly to his bill. Heat once seized it, 

 looked a little doubtful when he saw what it was, but after crushing it well, 

 swallowed it with no sign of dislike. He then tasted and rejected Neptis 

 sioynnertoni, and with almost a show of eagerness seized on a Le%f,ceronia argia ^ 



