270 
Psyche 
[September 
of excitability is said to be characteristic of “reflex-immobilization” 
(Rabaud) but not of “voluntary immobilization” (Pieron). 
If one pushes a cricket “frozen” in the posture represented on 
figures d or i, it falls over. Careful manipulation does not disrupt 
the “cataleptic state”. Recovery is generally spontaneous. 
Differences in the postures represented on figures d and i might 
be related to differences in the kinds of activity the cricket was per- 
forming when freezing (“petrifaction”) occurred. Figure i (Plate 
23) might represent a cricket “frozen in a jumping posture” and 
figure d a cricket “frozen in a kicking (or in a tail erect) posture” 
(compare figures i and d with figures e and d, Plate 21). Some sup- 
port for this can also be found in discussion of question 1, above. 
Some predator-prey reactions or characteristics are also interpreted 
sometimes in terms of avoidance of release and “negative releasers” 
(see Tinbergen, 1966, etc.). “Frozen” crickets might be “negative 
releasers” with respect to stinging, attack and even investigation. 
Numerous examples of “intimidatory postures” , and reactions, 
“bluff behavior” , can also be found in the literature (see for instance 
Hinsche, 1939, 1942; Prop, i960). 
Many examples of “mimetic immobility responses” and mimicry 
of unpalatable or dangerous species have been reported too (see for 
instance: Carrick, 1936; Ford, 1964; Klopfer, 1962; Sheppard, 
1959). Whether or not “frozen crickets” belong to one of these 
categories is not known, but seems improbable. 
The same can be said from “protean displays ”, polymorphism. 
Multiple and frequent changes in appearance, behavior and posture 
might produce a “confusing effect” on the predator (see for instance 
Chance, et al., 1959). 
In conclusion, a considerable amount of experimentation is needed 
before the meaning and mechanism of all Lim-cricket interactions 
and responses can be clearly understood. 
Acknowledgements 
I am especially indebted to Professor P.-P. Grasse who initiated 
this project, and also to the following persons: Dr. L. Berland, 
Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris; Dr. P. Maillet, Station Bio- 
logique, Les Eyzies, France; Dr. E. P. Deleurance, Universite de 
Marseille (C.N.R.S.), France, for basic information concerning 
general technique of raising Hymenoptera in captivity, and behavior 
of Hymenoptera; Doctors H. E. Evans, Mus. Comp. Z00L, Harvard 
University, Cambridge, U.S.A. ; H. F. Clifford, University of Al- 
berta, (Zoology), Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and G. E. Ball, 
