NYMPHALIDAE. — Introductory. By Dr. A. Serrz. 357 
7. Family: Nymphalidae. 
This gigantic family — even understood in the narrower sense — embraces approximately 2000 American 
forms, which in spite of apparently great superficial differences yet form a very natural division of the butter- 
flies. Its delimitation has been worked out on very varying principles. Sometimes they have been grouped 
together with the Satyrids and Danaids as a subfamily, on account of their agreement with these in the struc- 
ture of the legs, sometimes the Acraeinae, Apaturaand the genus Heliconius, the Biblinae and others have been 
eliminated from them. After the comprehensive works of DouBLEDAY and Westwoop C. FELDER was the first 
who made the classification of the Nymphalids a speciel study. But he was too much prepossessed in favour 
of HERRICH-SCHAFFER’s exaggerated estimate of neuration to be able to establish a purely natural system. 
Although his publication appeared almost at the same time as HmrrricH-SCHAFFER’s “Revision der Tagfalter’’, 
and apparently independently, yet he was bound, with only prepared butterflies before him, to come to pretty 
similar results, and he classified essentially according to the number and the origin of the subcostal veins and 
the presence or absence of a discocellular vein, although he himself pointed out the worthlessness of these two 
characters. Evidently neither author knew the function and influence of the discocellular vein and they 
were also unaware that a discocellular which we fail to detect with the aid of our rough appliances is never- 
theless frequently present though in a greatly reduced form, or is present in the pupa before emergence. 
When the wing-stratum is sufficiently firm the discocellular is not only unnecessary but it is even detrimental 
to the flight, as it makes independent movements of the costal and inner-marginal parts of the wing quite 
impossible. A slight bend of the wings, particularly of the hindwing, allows the butterfly to steer its course 
much more conveniently, hence it is especiaily the more highly developed species that are without a disco- 
cellular vein and consequently also even when flying at a great speed never give the same impression of preci- 
pitation, haste or exertion as when the inflexibility of the costal and median systems precludes any sailing 
pose of the wings. Compare, the elegant motion of an Apatwra with the unsteady, jerky flight of a pursued 
Charaxes or a Prepona, which in spite of their great strength give almost the impression of moths dashing 
about and witha far greater expenditure of energy only reach the elevations which an Apatura attains without 
visible effort by, an imperceptible bend of the costa and with scarcely appreciable motion of the wings. Moths 
without a discocellular, e. g. Actias artemis, I have seen ascend without trouble in a straight line vertically 
skywards, whilst Satyrids, which disappear in the blue heavens, rise in corkscrew-shaped gyrations and Papilio 
has to raise itself laboriously with continued flutterings. The arrangement of the subcostal veins is also in- 
adequate to support a classification system, and thus it came about that Fetper included Lweides in his Nym- 
phalids but omitted Heliconius, thus placing’ these quite nearly allied genera in two separate families. Hnrricu- 
ScHAFFER, however, included Morpho in his more restricted*Nymphalids. 
In the meantime later attemptsYat taxonomy received considerable assistance from the knowledge 
of the formerly almost entirely unknown larvae. F. Moors and L. pr NichviLtEe bestowed special attention 
on the Asiatic, H. Burmeister and W. Miter on the American butterfly-larvae and thus provided a really 
solid foundation for a newsystem. E. Reurer called attention to the systematic utility of more exact and more 
specialized anatomical investigations and E. Haase harmonized thejresults of biological research with the con- 
clusions previously arrived at in another way and thus correctly separated off for the first time, under the name 
“4 cracomorpha’, the section here accepted by us, in contradistinction to the Satyromorpha and Danaomorpha. 
He divided the group into 3 subdivisions, which he named Heliconini, Acraeini and Nymphalini. 
These 3 groups are unmistakably somewhat further removed from one another than any 2 neighbouring 
“subfamilies” out of the number of those into which Haasn again split up the Nymphalini. Hence we might 
more accurately classify Haasn’s 3 groups as subfamilies and the further subdivisions as tribes, so that we 
obtain the following scheme for the American Nymphalidae: 
I. Acraeinae. 
Il. Heliconiinae. 
III. Nymphalinae s. s. 
A. Clothildidi. G. Eunicidi. 
B. Argynnidi. H. Catagramimidi. 
CU. Vanessidi. I. Limenitidi. 
D. Biblidi. K. Gynaeciidi. 
E. Diademidi. L. Apaturidi. 
F. Ageroniidi. M. Anaeidi. 
