[129] [For cases of correlation of habit with protective resemblance in larvæ, see a paper in “Ann. and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,” Feb., 1878, pp. 159, 160. Also Fritz Müller on a Brazilian Cochliopod larva, Trans. Ent. Soc. 1878, p. 223. Mr. Mansel Weale states, with reference to S. African _Sphingidæ_ (Proc. Ent. Soc. 1878, p. vi.), that many species when seized “have a habit of doubling up the body, and then jumping a considerable distance with a spring-like action. This is especially the case with species having eye-like markings; and it is probable that if attacked by birds in a hesitating manner, such species might effect their escape amid the grass or foliage.” Many of the defensive weapons and habits of larvæ are doubtless means of protection from ichneumons and other parasitic foes. In the case of saw-flies, Mr. Peter Cameron has shown (Trans. Ent. Soc. 1878, p. 196) that the lashing about of the posterior part of the body may actually frighten away such enemies. The grotesque attitude and spider-like appearance and movements of the caterpillar of _Stauropus Fagi_ are considered by Hermann Müller (“Kosmos,” Nov., 1879, p. 123) to be means of protection from ichneumons. Among the most remarkable means of defence possessed by larvæ is that of secreting a liquid, which Mr. W. H. Edwards has shown, in the case of certain North American _Lycænidæ_ (“Canadian Entomologist.” vol. x., 1878, pp. 3-9 and 131-136), to be attractive to ants, who regularly attend these caterpillars, in the same manner and for the same purpose as they do our aphides. The mutual advantage derived by the ants and larvæ was discovered in the case of _Lycæna Pseudargiolus_. Mr. Edwards states that the _mature_ larva of this species is singularly free from Hymenopterous and Dipterous parasites:--“Why this species, and doubtless many other _Lycænæ_, are thus favoured will, perhaps, in some degree appear from a little incident to be related. On 20th June, in the woods, I saw a mature larva on its food-plant; and on its back, facing towards the tail of the larva, stood motionless one of the larger ants.... At less than two inches behind the larva, on the stem, was a large ichneumon-fly, watching its chance to thrust its ovipositor into the larva. I bent down the stem, and held it horizontally before me, without alarming either of the parties. The fly crawled a little nearer and rested, and again nearer, the ant making no sign. At length, after several advances, the fly turned its abdomen under and forward, thrust out its ovipositor, and strained itself to the utmost to reach its prey. The sting was just about to touch the extreme end of the larva, when the ant made a dash at the fly, which flew away, and so long as I watched--at least five minutes--did not return. The larva had been quiet all this time, its tubes out of sight, and head buried in a flower-bud, but the moment the ant rushed and the fly fled, it seemed