376 HELICONIINAE. By Dr. A. Ssrrz. 
poisonous nature of the fluid in their bodies derived from certain plants; and it is equally certain that many 
Heliconiinae are protected against certain other enemies by a most acrid odour of the living insect, which, if 
the wind was favourable, I not only perceived at a distance of 10 yards, but which in the case of H. phyllis may 
be called just as penetrating as that of a flying bug (Pentatoma). Whichever it is, itis certain that this protection 
must be a most effective one. This is best shown by the habits developed by them in their various functions 
of life: They fly in open places, alight very frequently, assemble in groups, have a slow, deliberate, perfectly 
straight and often soaring flight, and are so little shy that many may be almost taken up with the hand. They 
have a very tough life, enabling them to fly away without any difficulty even after having had the thorax com- 
pressed; they display the brightest and most striking colour-patterns that may be imagined, and, nothwithstan- 
ding the fact that by means of their broad wings they can easily gain the tops of the trees upon which they pass 
the larval stage, they descend very often to lower heights, or fly near the ground. 
If, leaving aside the colour-scheme, we consider their relationship from a systematic point or view, we 
meet with two theories. One, considering the neuration to be the only valuable criterion for the classification of 
lepidoptera, separates the Heliconiinae, i. e. the two genera Heliconius and Hueides, as a family of their 
own, contrasting it with the Nymphalidae, a number of which have the cell of the hindwing open. But it must 
not be forgotten that a great number of Nymphalid genera have the cell of the hindwing also closed, as f. i. 
Argynnis, Hypanartia, Vanessa, Pyrameis, Kallima, Ageronia, Callithea, Amnosia and many others, among them 
also a number of genera considered to be closely allied to the Heliconiinae (Cethosia, Terinos, Atella, Hwptoieta 
etc.). During the process of development in the chrysalis, the tubular discocellular, commonly called the cross- 
vein, is always present, disappearing as a rule in the best fliers (Apatura, Doleschallia, Junonia, Catagramma) 
either entirely, or at least in the hindwings (Colaenis, Cirrhochroa, Araschnia, Melitaea etc.). Beyond that the 
venation fails to afford us any possibility of effectively separating the genera Heliconius, or Hueides (a genus with 
very short antennae) from the Nymphalidae. Of much greater importance seem their habits and earlier develop- 
ment, and these closely connect the Heliconiinae with the New World genera Colaenis, Metamorpha and Dione 
and even more so with Cethosia of the Old World. Already Frrrz MULLER observed that a group of structurally 
more or less similar genera, among them the American Heliconius, Hueides, Metamorpha, Colaenis and Dione, 
live in the larval stage almost exclusively on the leaves of Passiflorae, for which reason he comprised them all 
under the name of ‘‘Maracuja-butterflies” (from the Brazilian name of those plants). This group to which 
would have to be added the Old World genus Cethosia, would be followed by the Argynninae, comprising the - 
genera Argynnis, Melitaea, Euptoieta, Cirrhochroa, Atella, Terinos, Cynthia, the African Lachnoptera etc.; there- 
after would come the Vanessinae, the Limenitinae etc., the Charaxinae and Apaturinae concluding the series. 
Haase, although separating the Heliconiinae as a subfamily, united them with the group of Nymphalinae 
(comprising all other Nymphalids), as well as with the Acraeinae into the main group of the Acraeomorphae. 
Here we only wish to point out these differences of opinion, since it would exceed the limits of our work to 
introduce new points of view; on the contrary we think it best to retain the old system in order to render it 
easier to readily find the described forms. For that reason we also give the Heliconids in the same sequence 
adopted in the classical treatises of WEYMER’s and Rirrartu’s. The latest monography (StrcHEL and RIFFARTH, 
das ““Tierreich’’, Heliconiidae) is only a recent, rather more complicated edition of Rirrarrn’s earlier Work, 
embodying but a few changes. For practical reasons we will refrain from introducing any changes in RIFFARTH’s 
system, without, however, agreeing to it in every instance. Thus we would not place passithoé after novatus, nor 
hortensia after clysonimus, their resemblance being merely mimetic. But on the whole RirraRTH’s system 
clearly shows, in the chaos of colour-resemblances the natural relationship, for which reason we follow it without 
essential changes. Only for the genus Hueides we have adopted a system which seemed to enable the student 
to find more readily the desired forms. ? 
Judging from RrerartH’s Work which within recent years has been supplemented by some new additions, 
the number of known Heliconiinae amounts to 420, of which 360 belong to Heliconius, and 60 to Hueides. They 
are entirely limited to Tropical America, neither passing in the North the boundaries of Texas and Florida or 
going (except as a great rarity) as far south as Buenos Aires. In the Antilles, nothwithstanding their favourable 
climate, only one species is known. On the whole there are not so very many separate species, but every one 
of them has developed a large number of frequently quite unsimilar forms, mimicking the outward appearance 
of some other protected species occurring in the same locality, as we! have already mentioned above. The other 
genera of the subfamily barely comprise a dozen of species. % 
I doubt if any species of Heliconiusis really scarce. Often I have observed in certain localities of South America 
certain Heliconiinae to be rather scarce, but linvariably found later on, that be species first considered so rare would, 
at some more distant place, at some other time or in a certain limited locality, suddenly appear in great numbers, 
