262 REVISION OF THE AUSTRALIAN SPECIES OF TEKIAS WITH 



T. Candace, Feld.—Reise. Nov. Lep II. p. 213, n. 228 

 (1865). 



T. Simulata, Moore. — Lep. Ceylon, p. Ill), T. 45, .f. 2, 2a. b. 

 (1880-1). 



Citrina, Moore.— Lap, Ceylon, p. 119, T. 45, f. 4, 4a. (1880-1). 

 Rotunduli.i, Moore. — Lep. Ceylon, p. 120, T. 46, f. 1, la. b. 

 (1880-1). 



Uniformis, Moore. — Lep, Ceylon, p. 120, T. 46, f. 2, 2a, b. 

 (1880-1). 



T. Vallivoians, Butler.— An. Mag. N. H. (5) Vol. XI. p. 420, 

 n. 71 (1883).i 



Distant.— Rhop. Malay, p. 306, n. 4, T. XXVI., f. 17 (1882-6). 

 T. Pumildris, Butler. — Proc. Zool. Soc. p. 617, n. 36, T. 67, 

 f. 7 (1875) j Trans. Lin. Soc. Ser. 2, Zool. Vol. 1., p. 550, n. 5 

 (1877). Distant.— Rhop. Malay, p. 306, T. XXVI., f. 10 

 (1882-6). 



T. Phoebus, Butler.— An. Mag. N. H. (5), XVII. p. 22 T, T. 

 V. £. 4. (1886). 



This widely distributed and exceedingly variable species is 

 common throughout Queensland ; it is one of the most abused by 

 the species makers. I have had the advantage of raising it from 

 the larva, and from the same brood had specimens in which the 

 oblong apical patch of underside of primaries was developed to 

 the fullest extent, and in others was entirely absent, presenting 

 also considerable variations in the development of the marginal 

 bands on the upper-side. The infinite variability of the species 

 is well illustrated by Mr. Butler in his paper upon Japanese 

 forms of the genus (Trans. Ent Soc, Lon., 188". p. 197. T. VI,) 

 wherein his contention seems to be that the excessive variability 

 is due to hybridization, surely a very unsatisfactory conclusion, 

 because if such a theory be maintainable then good bye for ever 

 to specific distinction, I think on the contrary that Mr. Butler's 

 comparison of the various forms that he has collected together in 

 his paper, goes incontestably toprovethe fallacy of depending upon 

 the mere variations of development of marking in individuals as 



