43 
greatly in excess. Even in some few species the repeated excess of A s 
over J s,if proved,is no index, for other species, to be assumed as evidence. 
In the case of Hypolimjtas misippus, extraordinary and incom¬ 
parably greater prevalence of $ over $ was observed on N. 
Johnstone river, Queensland, an undoubtedly protected female 
resembling an extremely distasteful Danaid (? Petilius), also 
uncommon. On the contrary, the 2 s of H. bolina for six months 
were almost as strikingly observed more often than $ s, which 
suggests a possibility merely of $ s being more restricted to localities 
suitable to breeding grounds. In the cases of comparative rarity of 
A. card amines 2 s established as a repeated observation through many 
years, breeding, which, on the whole, nearly or quite equalises the 
numbers of the sexes, is reducing the number of conformances to 
any possible rule of $ s exceeding the J s, and reducing them con¬ 
tinually, and the same is true of L. argiolus. 
It would be quite as fair to represent the apparent commonness of 
the cf as an index of its greater exposure to a possibility of danger. 
1st.—Because of its greater brilliance or noticeability. 
2nd.—Because of its extended activity. 
3rd.—Often because of its greater pugnacity. 
Then the conclusion one arives at is that the $ s are greatly more 
in evidence, but not greatly commoner than the 2 s, is a rule generally 
for all species, or almost all. The probability is, as is here held, that 
the o seems more common because of its conspicuous activity, etc., 
exceeding that of the 2 , and that if more exposed to danger, it is 
just as able to escape from danger, also because of its greater con¬ 
spicuousness and activity, through the “quick-change” process being 
so marked. And a second proposition is advanced, viz.: —That the 
life of the $ requires protection and preservation as much as (or 
almost so) that of a 2 . 
(1) Because $ s are on the wing (it may be many) days before the 
5 s are more than quite scanty. 
(2) Though it is argued that, the functions of the $ once over, he 
is no longer wanted, undoubtedly, with a single copulation, many eggs 
laid are infertile (the later) in captivity, and in some species, e.g., L. 
bellargus and L. corydon, even as it is, sometimes their function never 
is finished, the last excluded 2 s are never fertilized in some seasons, 
there being no $ left to impregnate. More observation may show 
this to be more nearly general than can be here stated, observations 
referring only to L. icarus, L. bellargus, L. corgdon, H. comma, and A. 
aglaia. 
(3) The similarity between the undersides of $ s and $ s in each 
species does not point to any lack of necessity for protection of $ s as 
compared with 2 s. The sleep aspects of 2 and $ A. cardamines 
are precisely similar. 
The numbers of each sex being at all nearly equal, inadequate 
protection and survival of males must lead to an insufficiency of a 
considerable extent. 
(4) The observed copulation of 2 s with battered A s shows value 
of preserved $ s. The reflection naturally occurs that we may be 
holding exaggerated views of the dangers to tasteful imagines of their 
brilliant colours and contrasting designs. 
xix. 
