1912.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 331 
least one experimenter, Lieut.-Col. Neville Manders, has done so. 
Manders himself says: ‘I am extremely doubtful as to any real 
value accruing from experiments on caged birds, whether nestlings or 
adult. No one, I imagine, believes that all butterflies taste alike; 
no doubt some are more tasty than others, and caged birds fed upon 
butterflies, even with other insect food, would no doubt learn in 
time to distinguish the different kinds; but this procedure to my mind 
begs the question, as it assumes that butterflies are an ordinary 
article of food in the wild state, a proposition .... which the 
evidence . . . . does not altogether support.’®! It is noteworthy 
that the free birds Manders did induce to take disabled butterflies 
were not seen by him to attack these insects under normal con- 
ditions. He frequently comments (pp. 736-739, 741) on this fact. 
Although the birds ate the helpiess butterflies, they took no notice 
of the freely flying ones that abounded in the vicinity. 
The wild birds experimented upon in Ceylon by Manders, with 
their records, are as follows: (Disregarded—D.—means simply 
not taken and not tried. Behavior toward dead butterflies not 
noted). 
Nauseous Palatable 
group. group. 
; A. R. D. A. R. D. 
Robin flycatcher, Siphia hyperythra.... 2 0 2 6 0 1 
Dusky-blue “ Stoparola sordida.... 7 0 0 2 0 4 
Brown shrike, Lantus cristatus........ 40 7 4 0 5 
Magpie robin, Copsychus saularis...10 3 4+ 21+ 0 6 
Mynah, Acridotheres tristis..11 0 1 5 0 1 
34 3 144 38+ 0 17 
Thus there were no refusals (upon trial) of any living butterflies 
except by the magpie robin. This bird has three rejections, two of 
Euplea core, one of which it ate immediately afterwards. The 
bird’s record with this butterfly was A9 R2. Manders says the 
other butterfly (Terias hecabe) refused by this species was too dry. 
The percentage of insects disregarded is practically the same for the 
“nauseous”’ and the “palatable” groups. Manders’ conclusion from 
this and other evidence is that ‘‘the terms palatable and unpalatable 
are not justified at present’’ (I.c., p. 742). 
Experiments in America. é 
Unfortunately, the natural food habits of many of the Indian, 
8 Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., September, 1911, p. 745. 
