328 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF [June, 
Nauseous. Palatable. R 
Crateropus canorus 0.20... V+ 36 96 1 
Detothrtx ltews..ncccccecccccn . §2 22 94 21 
Dissemurus aaa tert a 22 54 6 
Dicrurus ater... dunn tose, Walid 2 32 4 
Kittacincla macroura... wees, Si 28 78 12 
Sturnus menzbieri.... paaetyens. Mth 16 42 7 
CROrOpsts SPocccccecccceee oe ni 6 5 16 5 
Malacias capistrata.......... 0... 0 0 5 5 
Otocompsa emeria” 000... .. 21 7 7 6 
Molpastes bengalensis”.. nica Bd 15 1 10 0 
Molpastes leucotis........... wae 15 0 5 0 
Pycnonotus sinensis... wee, 9 10 1 
TUr nrc bQuQor eeecccssccsccesccseecies see 29 1 20 3 
Acridotheres tristis..... 2 1 2 1 
343+ 150 471 2 
Finn’s conclusions may be discussed in order: 
1. “That there is a general appetite for butterflies among insec- 
tivorous birds, even though they are rarely seen when wild to attack 
them” (p. 667). 
This is a thing which can never be proven by experiment. As 
well say there is a general appetite for boiled rice, bread and milk, 
and domestic cockroaches which were the stock foods of the birds 
used in these experiments. Certainly, these things are no more 
foreign to the natural dietaries of many species of birds than are 
butterflies, and the eating of either in captivity is no proof that they 
are taken or even relished by wild birds. This argument is strength- 
ened by the record of the button-quail (Turniz tatgoor) in Finn’s 
experiments. This essentially ground-loving bird, which is in no 
way equipped for capturing butterflies under natural conditions, 
and consequently cannot have an appetite for them, in captivity 
took all but four out of a total of fifty-three that it tried. 
Mason and Lefroy, in the most comprehensive and valuable 
statement yet published regarding the food of birds in India, say:” 
“Butterflies do not form any appreciable proportion of the food of 
78 Finn records the refusal of Acrea by the red-whiskered bulbul (p. 640), 
while Poulton (Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1908, p. xxxi) publishes a letter from H. L. 
Andrewes, which states that this bird was chested to feed to its young Acrea 
viole, supposedly one of the most distasteful of the group. 
7 An interesting case of the diversity in results of experiments, and a proof, 
therefore, of their misleading character, probably refers to this bird, the common 
bulbul of India. A. G. Butler (Nature, 3, No. 61, December 29, 1870, p. 165) 
notes that a Mr. Newton, of Bombay, said it was ‘only by repeated persecution 
that a caged bulbul was induced to touch a Danais. The record of this bird 
-with Danais in Finn’s experiments is A 8 R 4 
80 Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Ent. Ser., Vol. III, January, 1912, p. 338. 
