58 



AFRICAN MIMETIC BUTTERFLIES 



has, however, been set at rest by the fact that Mr. Millar, at Durban, has bred a fine series 

 of both deceptor and * kirhyi ' from ova, aU the deceptor being females, and all the ' kirhyi ' 

 males. The resemblance of deceptor to A. ochlea is very striking in both sexes, and is some- 

 what accentuated in the female by the larger area of the white markings. The butterfly 

 is highly iridescent,^ and fresh specimens are exceedingly beautiful, the males having a rose- 

 coloured sheen, whilst the females vary in different lights from blue to mauve. The species 

 is found in Natal, Nyassaland, and British and Portuguese East Africa. It is described as 

 not rare but difficult to obtain in good condition. 



PSEUDACRAEA LUCRETIA. 



Cramer, Pap. Exot., i, p. 71, pi. 45,f.c, d (1775). var. tarquinia. 



Fabricius {sulpitia), Ent. Syst., iii, i. p. 245 Trimen, Trans.Ent.Soc.,p. 79, pi. 5, f. 3 (1868). 



(1793). — S. Af. Butt., i, p. 289 (1887) ; iii, p. 404 (note) 



var. expansa, (1889). 



Butler, An. N. H. (5), ii, p. 177 (1878). var. heliogenes. 



Trimen (delagoae), S.Af. Butt., i, p. 291 (1887). Butler, An. N. H. (6), xviii, p. 69 (1896). 



var. protrada. Aurivillius, Synonymy, Rhop. Aeth., p. 174 



Butler, Ent. Mo. Mag., xi, p. 164 (1874). (1898). 



Plate IV, Fig. 15 {expansa). Plate V, Fig. 14 {tarquinia 5 ab.). 



Of the varieties of this Pseudacraea enumerated above, several, in the absence of long 

 series for comparison, have been described as separate species. Professor Aurivillius, how- 

 ever, regards them as aU forms of the original lucretia of Cramer. The species is very common, 

 and I have received it in considerable numbers from various localities. In one form or another 

 it extends from Sierra Leone to Natal. In no form can it be considered as a close mimic of 

 any dominant species, though its general black and white appearance suggests various species 

 of Amauris, whilst the varieties with black and white markings approach A. echeria. The 

 lucretia form resembles Plate IV, Fig. 15, but the white areas are more restricted and clearly 

 defined, whilst the ground-colour is richer. In the protracta variety the pale markings are 

 all more or less ochreous, and darker in the hind-wing. In tarquinia the sub-apical white 

 markings are smaller and more separated, and in the female the pale discal area of the 

 hind-wings is ochreous. Sometimes the spots of the fore-wings are also ochreous, and in 

 one specimen I have seen aU the markings are of that colour. On Plate V, Fig. 14, I have 

 illustrated a peculiar aberration of the female from my own collection, not because it is 

 a good instance of mimicry, but because it appears to illustrate the limit of variation in the 

 female. Some forty-five examples are before me as I write, and one specimen from Natal 

 comes very near to the above variety, though the hind- wings are nearly white. The remainder 

 present every gradation from this form to an example from North-East Rhodesia, in which 

 the hind-wings are nearly all white, having only a narrow brown margin, and the white 

 bar in the fore- wings is broad and continuous, extending from just below the costa to the 

 posterior angle, where it is nearly joined by the inner-marginal patch. The weU-known 

 Planemoid aposeme, viz. the brown, black-spotted basal patch on the underside of the hind- 

 wing, is very conspicuous. It may be noted here that the West African Papilio adamastor 

 appears to be synaposematic with Ps. lucretia. From this fact and its great abundance, 

 I am inclined to regard this Pseudacraea as a MiiUerian mimic. 



^ This iridescence is much brighter in the ? than in the 0^, a circumstance unusual in butterflies. 



