NOTICE 
OP A 
COLLECTION OF FISHES 
FROM THE SOUTHERN BEND 
OF THE 
TENNESSEE RIVER, ALABAMA. 
L. AGASSIZ. 
EXTRACTED FROM THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND ARTS, VOLUME XVII, SECOND 
SERIES.—1854. 
NEW HAVEN: 
PRINTED BY B. L. HAMLEN, 
Printer to Yale College. 
1854. ON FISHES FROM TENNESSEE RIVER, ALABAMA. 
The only information we have at present upon the fishes of 
the Tennessee River, has been published by Dr. D. H. Storer, 
who mentions nine species from the vicinity of Florence, Alabama, 
in the Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural Plistory for 
1845, and of which short descriptions appeared in his Synopsis 
of the Fishes of North America, in 1846. Having lately received a 
collection of not less than thirty-three species from the same water 
system, brought together by the untiring efforts of Dr. Newman, of 
Huntsville, who has most kindly placed them in my hands for 
description, it seems desirable that an early notice of the general 
character of the ichthyological fauna of that region should be 
published, to serve as a standard of comparison with the fishes of 
the other western and southern rivers, in the study of their geo- 
graphical distribution. I arrange them below according to their 
natural affinities. 
PERCOIDS, Cuv.—Whether the genera Perea, Labrax, and 
Lucioperca, are really wanting in the Tennessee River remains to 
be ascertained. No specimens of these genera were found among 
those forwarded by Dr. Newman ; though many less conspicuous 
forms were collected. Thus far the genera Grystes, Centrarchus, 
and Pomotis, as understood at present by ichthyologists, are the 
only representatives of the family of Percoids in the Tennessee 
River. 
1. Grystes, Cuv.—I have already shown in my “ Lake Su- 
perior” that the genera Grystes and Huro of Cuvier do not differ 
essentially one from the other, and must therefore be united into 
one natural group; moreover when the fishes of Kentucky shall 
be better known, it may become necessary to substitute for either 
of them the name of Lepomis, introduced in ichthyology by 
Rafinesque, as early as the year 1820, for the western species of 
this genus. If I hesitate to make the change now, it is simply 
because I have not the means of deciding upon the value of his 
many species. The species of this group are indeed very difficult 
to characterize. They differ chiefly in the relative size of their 
scales, the presence or absence of teeth upon the tongue, though 
Cuvier denies the presence of teeth on the tongue of any of 4 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
them, &c. There are besides marked differences between the 
young and the adults. These circumstances render it impossible 
to characterize any one species without comparative descriptions 
and figures. The species from Huntsville, known there under 
the name of Trout, differs equally from the northern species men- 
tioned in my “ Lake Superior,” and from that of the Southern 
States described by Cuvier and Valenciennes as Grystes salmo- 
neus. Its snout is shorter, the posterior end of the upper maxillary 
extends beyond the hinder border of the eye, the head is higher, 
and the scales much larger in the dorsal as well as in the ventral 
regions. No teeth on the tongue. I call this species provision- 
ally Grystes vobilis, Ag. It reaches a large size, and weighs 
occasionally from ten to fourteen pounds. 
2. Centrarchus, Cuv.—Under this name Cuvier has combined 
a variety of Percoids agreeing in general form ; their body being 
oval and compressed, and the two dorsals continuous; but these 
fishes differ from one another in so many respects that they 
require to be further subdivided.* I shall retain the name of 
Centrarchus for that group of species of which Centrarchus 
irideus may be considered as the type. Thus circumscribed, the 
genus Centrarchus may be characterized as follows: Body very 
broad, greatly compressed, above as well as below. Dorsal long 
and high, gradually rising, without a depression between the 
spinous and soft rays ; spinous portion of the fin largest. Anal 
shaped like the dorsal, but with fewer spinous rays, extending 
between the ventrals. Mouth small. No species of this genus 
has been found in the Tennessee River. 
3. Pomoxis, Rafin.—This genus was established by Rafinesque 
for a species closely allied to the Centrarchus hexacanthus of 
Cuv. and Val., and it well deserves to be retained. The body is 
much elevated and compressed, resembling somewhat Centrar- 
chus proper. Like that genus it has a high dorsal and a high anal, 
of nearly equal size, and the spinous portion of these fins rises 
towards the soft rays without a depression ; but in Pomoxis the 
soft portion of these fins is much the largest, whilst it is the 
smaller in Centrarchus ; in Pomoxis the lower jaw is very promi- 
nent. The mouth is very large, which is smaller in Centrarchus. 
I have found representatives of this genus in all the Western 
States, from the western parts of New York to the Gulf of Mex- 
ico, and in the southern Atlantic States, but none in the northern 
Atlantic States. The species from the Tennessee River, called 
there Speckled or White Perch, agrees fully with the description 
given by Rafinesque of his Pomoxis annularis, with the sole 
exception of a golden ring at the base of the tail, which may be 
* DeKay has contrived to render the genus Centrarchus of Cuvier still less natu- 
ral, by introducing into it his Centrarchus fasciatus and obscurus, which truly belong 
to the genus Grystes. See “ Lake Superior,” page 295. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
5 
faded in the specimens sent by Dr. Newman, from Huntsville. 
Not having however specimens from the locality quoted by Rafin- 
esque, I must leave it for further investigations to determine 
beyond any doubt their specific identity or difference. Centrar- 
chus hex-acanthus, Guv. and Val., belongs unquestionably to this 
genus. 
4. Ambloplites, Rajin.—This is another of the natural genera 
established by Rafinesque for one of the many distinct types com- 
bined by Cuvier and Valenciennes under the name of Centrar- 
chus. The well known Centrarchus cenevs may be considered 
as its type, though Rafinesque founded his genus upon another 
species, from Kentucky, which has remained unnoticed since. 
The genus Ambloplites is easily distinguished from the preceding 
ones by the structure of its dorsal and anal fins. The spinous 
portion of the dorsal is much longer than the posterior soft por- 
tion of that fin and scarcely half its height, causing a marked 
depression to appear between the spinous and the articulated rays. 
The same is the case with the anal, which is also long ; but low 
in its anterior spinous portion. The general form of these fishes 
is oval, and the body less compressed than in the preceding genera. 
The species from the Tennessee River agrees in every respect 
with Rafinesque’s Ambloplites ichtheloides. It is called at Hunts- 
ville Goggle-eyed or Black Perch. In adopting the genus Am- 
bloplites and referring this species to it with Rafinesque’s authority 
I have acted with that discretion due to an author who labored 
under the greatest difficulties when preparing his work upon the 
fishes of the Ohio. It is true he himself describes this species 
as Lepomis ichtheloides; but he also suggests the desirableness of 
distinguishing it genetically and proposes a new name for the 
genus, should it be admissible. Finding it to be so, I do not 
hesitate in giving him the fullest credit for his suggestion, even 
though I must add that he has described another variety of the 
same species under the name of Ichthelis erythrops. I have 
found both these varieties among the fishes sent to me by Dr. 
Newman, and I have no hesitation in considering them as spe- 
cifically identical with one another and as agreeing fully with 
Rafinesque’s descriptions. Should naturalists be more generally 
inclined to correct simply what they consider as errors in their 
predecessors instead of discarding altogether what they can not 
at once determine, we should have much fewer of those nominal 
species in our descriptive works, which are the curse of our sci- 
entific nomenclature. Ambloplites ichtheloides is much stouter 
and more elongated than Ambl. ceneus; body less coinpressed 
above ; face broader, lower jaw less prominent, and strongly 
arched from side to side; mouth opens less obliquely upwards; 
spinous rays of dorsal and anal shorter than in A. seneus; dorsal 
sprinkled with white spots. 6 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
5. Calliurus, Rafin.—Among the many Percoids found in the 
freshwaters of the United States there is one very common in 
South Carolina, which was first described by Cuvier and Va- 
lenciennes under the name of Pomotis gulosus, and afterwards 
referred by them to the genus Centrarchus. This species how- 
ever belongs neither to Centrarchus nor to Pomotis, if we are to 
consider genera as expressing the same general features under a 
variety of modifications; for all true Pomotis are fishes with a 
small mouth, feeding on worms, while P. gulosus has a large 
mouth like Grystes and is a voracious animal living upon small 
fishes, which he chases with great energy. Again, Centrarchus 
has fins widely different in their structure from those of P. gulo- 
sus; there being a large number of spinous rays in advance of 
the anal in Centrarchus proper and those genera mentioned above 
which have been finally separated from Centrarchus ; whilst P. 
gulosus has only three, like the true Pomotis. Notwithstanding 
these peculiarities I have been hesitating for a long time to con- 
sider P. gulosus as the type of a distinct genus, until I ascertained 
that there exist many species of this type in different parts of the 
country, all of which reproduce the essential peculiarities of P. 
gulosus under a variety of modifications. Upon a careful inves- 
tigation of all the works in which American fishes are mentioned, 
I ascertained however that Rafinesque had already established a 
distinct genus for a species of this type described in his Ichthyo- 
logia Ohiensis under the name of Calliurus punctulatus. It is 
hardly surprising that this genus should have been overlooked by 
European ichthyologists and that it should even have escaped the 
notice of the authors of the great French Histoire naturelle des 
Poissons, for the fishes of the Ohio river have remained entirely 
unnoticed since Rafinesque, until Dr. Kirtland published his in- 
teresting and highly valuable papers upon the fishes of Ohio, in 
the Journal of the Natural History Society of Boston. Dr. Kirt- 
land however, though the first author who has done full justice 
to the valuable contributions of Rafinesque to the Ichthyology 
of the United States, does not mention the species described by 
Rafinesque, as Calliurus punctulatus, and so this genus has 
remained unnoticed until now. It has occurred to me that it 
would be but justice to a naturalist, whose labors have been so 
generally neglected, to call the attention of Ichthyologists to 
these facts. I subjoin a short diagnosis of the genus Calliurus: 
Body oval, rather elongated, not compressed above. Dorsal long 
and low in its anterior portion, with a slight depression between 
the spinous and soft rays; posterior portion of the dorsal shorter 
than the anterior, though higher. Anal not half the size of the 
dorsal, with only three spinous rays. Mouth large, opening some- 
what upwards, the lower jaw being longer than the upper. The 
species from Huntsville is identical with Rafinesque’s Calliurus 
punctulatus. It is called there Black Perch or Goggle-eye. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
7 
6. Pomotis, Rafin.—Every ichthyologist must be familiar with 
the freshwater sun fishes, so common throughout the United 
States; but it is perhaps not so generally known that the author- 
ity to which the genus Pomotis ought to be ascribed is question- 
able. Indeed, I find it universally ascribed to Cuvier : but that 
name occurs already in Rafinesque’s Ichthyologia Ohiensis, pub- 
lished in 1820, as a subgenus of his genus Ichthelis, which he 
there divides into Telipomis and Pomotis. It seems therefore 
probable to me that Cuvier not considering these subdivisions 
necessary, and finding the name Pomotis better adapted to ex- 
press the prominent character of all the species of this group, 
adopted the name of Pomotis in preference to Ichthelis, and in 
conformity with an objectionable practice, followed by some nat- 
uralists, to which Cuvier however did not adhere in other in- 
stances of applying a new authority whenever the range of a 
genus is modified, allowed in this case his name to supersede that 
of Rafinesque, which I would however restore, in conformity 
with the more just practice now prevailing. If it were further 
asked, what should be done with the name of Ichthelis which 
was proposed by Rafinesque as early as 1818. Whether it should 
be made a synonym of his own subgenus Pomotis ? or disregarded 
altogether, because Pomotis has come into general use ? I would 
suggest that neither would be the proper course to follow. It is 
my opinion that in a complete monograph of this group, the 
name Ichthelis should be finally restored to its right and Telipo- 
mis and Pomotis used for such sections or genera as it may be- 
come necessary to separate from it, now that the number and 
diversity of species of this group has increased beyond expecta- 
tion. This is at least the course I shall adopt when publishing 
the descriptions of the many new species of this type I have col- 
lected in the Southern States. For the present, I limit myself 
to describing the seven species sent to me by Dr. Newman, six 
of which are new to science. 
1. Pomotis sanguinolentus, Agass.—Called Sun Perch at Hunts- 
ville. The general outline of the body is that of Pomotis nitida, 
Kirtl., but the back is more compressed, the dorsal and anal fins 
are more pointed behind, and the spinous rays are longer, the base 
of the anal is shorter. The sides of the head are marked with 
irregular undulating longitudinal lines of a metallic steel blue 
color, extending from the cheeks across the gill cover to the base 
of the pectorals and even continuing alone the sides of the body 
in dotted lines. There are generally four of these lines below 
the eyes, the first being close to its margin, and extending back- 
wards along and around the border of the opercular appendage 
and returning, meets the centre of the hinder margin of the eye, 
but reappears immediately in front of the eye and continues to 
the edge of the upper jaw. Though the opercular appendage is 8 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
rather large, the lateral line is so high near the back, that it is not 
covered by it anteriorly. The general color is of a reddish brown, 
mottled with red above and passing gradually into a uniform 
bright brick-red color prevailing upon the lower part of the body, 
and sprinkled with irregular light dots. 
2. Pomotis inscriptns, Agass.—Small species, the outline of 
which is more elongated than in P. sanguinolentus. The gill 
covers are marked as in that species with three or four lines of a 
metallic steel blue color; opercular appendage long, directed more 
obliquely upwards than in any other species here described, black, 
with a light border which is a continuation of two of the lines 
of the cheeks, the one running below the eye, the other termina- 
ting behind the eye. Each scale of the back and sides is marked 
in its centre with a short narrow black line, hence the sides are 
regularly striped with dark interrupted lines as numerous as the 
rows of scales. Spinous rays all comparatively long and slen- 
der ; the passage from the anterior to the posterior part of the 
dorsal gradual. All the fins except the pectorals are tinged with 
black at the extremity. General color dark olive above, lighter 
beneath. 
3. Pomotis notatus, Agass.—Called Pond Perch at Huntsville. 
Body more elongated than in P. vulgaris; its upper and lower 
curve nearly equal. Opercular appendage very short, not ex- 
tending beyond the base of the pectorals; its hinder margin is 
orange-colored, with a black spot in front, from which a faint 
dusky band extends to the eye. The spinous rays of the dorsal 
and anal are more slender than in P. vulgaris, and the articulated 
rays are crossed by fewer dotted or broken dark lines. The pec- 
toral fins are long, extending beyond the base of the anal, as in 
Ichth. macrochirus, Raf. The color is of a uniform light olive; 
the sides, gill cover and belly being silvery ; scales not dotted 
with black as in many similar species. 
4. Pomotis incisor, Yal.—Also called Pond Perch at Hunts- 
ville. This species resembles very closely the preceding, and is 
considered the same by the fishermen ; but its profile is more 
arched and slants more abruptly ; the black opercular appendage 
is not encircled with a brighter margin. Sides of the head not 
banded, but of a uniform color throughout. Dorsal and anal not 
banded, but darker colored than in the preceding species. There 
is moreover a dark black spot near the base of the hind rays of 
the dorsal in P. incisor which is wanting in P. notatus. General 
color of the body the same in the two species. 
5. Pomotis obscurns, Agass.—Also called Pond Perch at Hunts- 
ville. Resembles P. incisor in the outline of the body, except 
that the profile is still more precipitate and the body somewhat 
more elongated as well as much stouter, especially in the region L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
9 
of the head and across the pectorals. The opercular appendage 
is longer and broader, bnt also without a light posterior margin. 
The posterior soft rays of the dorsal are marked with a black 
spot as in the preceding species, but all the spinous rays of that 
fin are shorter and stouter. It is a dark colored fish throughout 
the lower as well as the upper side of the body, almost uniformly 
brown, the belly only being somewhat lighter in hue. The face 
and lower jaw are of a leaden color. The fins are all darker than 
in P. incisor, especially the ventrals. 
G. Pomotis bombifrons. Agass.—Body higher than in P. obscu- 
rns and profile even more arched. Forehead prominent especially 
over the eyes. Head quite broad and short. Opercular append- 
age black, and small; a light narrow band runs along its lower 
margin. No black spot upon the hind part of the dorsal. The 
last spinous rays of this fin are shorter than in P. obscurus, thus 
making the passage to the soft rays more abrupt and marked, the 
soft portion of the fin being almost as prominent as in Ambloplites 
and Galliums when compared with the spinous rays. Body light 
brown, fins lighter colored; scales of the belly and sides dotted 
with golden orange. The face and under jaw have not the leaden 
color of P. obscurus. Considering the peculiar form of the ver- 
tical fins and of the forehead, it may become necessary to separate 
this species from the other Pomotis. Indeed, I know already 
several species which agree in these respects with one another 
and must at all events form a distinct group in the genus. 
7. Pomotis pallidus, Agass.—This species resembles P. incisor 
in the outline of the body, the nature and coloration of the scales, 
and in the size and form of the fins, but it differs greatly from it 
by its large mouth, the free extremity of the upper jaws reach- 
ing the vertical line of the middle of the eye, by the presence 
of teeth upon the palate, and by the ventral fins being placed 
immediately under the pectorals. The black opercular appen- 
dage which is very short, has a narrow orange border behind. 
There is a black spot at the base of the posterior rays of the 
dorsal. Both dorsal and anal are marked by one or two dark 
stripes; the caudal is crossed by several dotted vertical lines. 
There are eight or nine dusky bars across the sides, between the 
head and tail. This species bears the same relation to Pomotis, 
that Pomoxis bears to the true Centrarclms, in the size of the 
mouth, and the form of the body, and I have no doubt it will 
some day become the type of a distinct genus. 
ETHEOSTOMOIDS, Agass.—There are comparatively few 
natural families in the animal kingdom so limited in their geograph- 
ical distribution as to be entirely circumscribed within the boun- 
daries of a single continent, and these few belong mostly to the 
type of Vertebrata. Though among fishes we should least ex- 10 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
pect such local groups, considering the greater uniformity of the 
conditions of existence prevailing in the medium they inhabit, 
when compared with the main land, yet there are several fami- 
lies of this class, the geographical range of which is quite limited, 
I need only mention the Goniodonts of South America, the Laby- 
rinthici of the Indian Ocean and the Sunda Islands, the Lepidos- 
tei of North America, &c. Another natural family thus located 
within narrow limits is that of El/ieosloriwids, which I have for 
the first time characterized in my work “Lake Superior,” p. 298. 
This family is founded upon the genus Ethcostuma of Rafin- 
esque, to which are added the genera Pileoma and Boleosoma of 
Dekay (of which the genus Percina of Haldeman is a synonym) 
and my genus Poscilichllrys.* The three first of these genera 
were referred by their authors to the family of Percoids; but the 
absence of an air-bladder and of pseudobranchias, and the incom- 
plete suborbital arch precludes such an association. Indeed these 
fishes are more closely allied to the true Cottoids and in particu- 
lar to the genus Gasterostens than to the Percoids, though the 
want of connection between the single suboperculum and the 
preoperculum forbids also a more intimate alliance with that fam- 
ily. The form of the ventrals of the Etheostomoids reminds 
us somewhat of those Gobioids in which the two ventrals are dis- 
tinct. Since the publication of the work above mentioned, I 
have become acquainted with three new genera of this family, 
for which I would propose the names of Hyostorna, Calouotus, 
and Hadropterns. 
The more extensive knowledge I have acquired of this family 
by these recent accessions enables me to give more precision to 
the characters assigned at first to its genera ; as follows: 
1. Ethcostoma, Rcijin.—Head elongated pointed ; mouth ter- 
minal. widely open, not protractile, broad ; jaws of equal length. 
Opercular apparatus and cheeks bare. First dorsal distinctly sep- 
arated from the second. Anal and second dorsal smaller than the 
* The genus Pcecilichthys was first mentioned under the name of Pcecilosoma. Be- 
ing however at the time of its publication far away from Cambridge, and unable to 
consult my library or any other, 1 did not perceive that that name was already pre- 
occupied ; I would therefore change it now to Pcecilichthys. Several new species of 
this genus have been discovered since. One described by Dr. Kirtland as P. erythro- 
gaster from the vicinity of Cleveland, Ohio. Ann. of Sci., Jan., 1854, p. 4. Another 
collected by Mr. Geo. Stollev in the Osage River, Mo., remarkable for its brilliant 
colors, the body being light brown, with dark black lines upon the sides of the back 
and with broader transverse bands alternately black and orange red, especially bright 
upon the sides of the tail; dorsals banded with black, white and red. I call this 
species P. spectabilis. Another found by Dr. L Watson in small creeks near Quincy, 
Illinois, similar in color to the preceding but without black stripes along the back, 
also less compressed. I call this species P. versicolor. Specimens of this species 
were also received from Osage River. A fourth species from the Osage River, Mo., 
also discovered by Mr. Geo. Stolley, is of a greenish color mottled with black, the 
second dorsal, the caudal, the anal, the ventrals and the pectorals being dotted all 
over with minute dark specks. I call this species P. punctulatus. L. Agassiz on Fishes of Tennessee River. 
11 
first dorsal, hut equal to one another. Caudal lunate. Type of 
the genus: Elfiblennioides, Raf. 
2. Catonotus, —Head elongated, obtuse ; mouth termi- 
nal, widely open, not protractile, lower jaw longer than the up- 
per. Opercular apparatus, cheeks and neck destitue of scales. 
First dorsal much lower than the second, with clubshaped rays 
when full grown; membrane of this fin extending to the base of 
the second dorsal. Anal smaller than the second dorsal. Caudal 
rounded. Only one species known: C. lineofatus, Agass., dis- 
covered by Dr. L. Watson in small creeks near Quincy, 111. The 
whole body olive green with close narrow interrupted black longi- 
tudinal lines; transverse lines of the same color across the caudal. 
3. Pileoma, Dekay.—Head conical, pointed, truncated at the 
end, in form of a hog’s snout; mouth moderate, in form of an 
oblique arc of a circle, opening below the end of the snout, very 
slightly protractile. Lower jaw shorter than the upper. Oper- 
culum and cheeks scaly. Membrane of the first dorsal not reach- 
ing the base of the second. Anal smaller than the second dor- 
sal. Caudal truncate or slightly lunate. Type of the genus: 
P. caprodes. (Etheostoma caprodes, Rafin.) 
4. Hadropterus, Agass.—Head conical, obtusely pointed, 
rounded at the end ; mouth moderate, terminal, not protractile, 
jaws nearly equal. Operculum and cheeks scaly. Membrane of 
the first dorsal extending to the base of the second. Anal and 
second dorsal large and equal. Caudal truncate or slightly lunate. 
Only one species known: II. ?iigrofasciatas, Agass. From the 
neighborhood of Mobile, Alabama. Discovered by Albert Stein, 
Esq. Brown above, lighter below, with transverse black bands, 
wider in the middle than nearer to the back or the belly. 
5. Hyostoma, Agass.—Head short, blunt, rounded, with swol- 
len cheeks. Mouth comparatively small below the snout, slightly 
protractile. Lower jaw shorter than the upper, which may be 
concealed in a deep furrow below the snout. Opercular appara- 
tus and cheeks scaly. First, dorsal long, but not reaching the 
base of the second. Anal smaller than the second dorsal. Cau- 
dal slightly lunate. Only one species known: H. Newmanii, 
Agass. Discovered by Dr. Newman in the vicinity of Hunts- 
ville, Alabama, where it is called u Salmon.” This fish is uni- 
formly brown with irregular transverse black blotches. A red 
stripe along the base of the first dorsal. 
6. Pcecilichthys, Agass.—Head short and strong, tapering into 
a rounded snout. Mouth terminal, proportionally broad, not pro- 
tractile, though the maxdlary bone be moveable. Opercular ap- 
paratus scaly, cheeks bare. First dorsal distinctly separated from 
the second. Anal smaller than the second dorsal. Caudal trun- 
cate or slightly rounded. The species of this genus are among 12 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of Tennessee River. 
the most brilliant freshwater fishes in the world. Type of the 
genus: Etheostoma variatum, Kirtl. Several new species are 
mentioned in the note above. 
7. Boleosoma, Dekay.—Head short, rounded ; mouth below 
the end of the snout, small, horizontal, slightly protractile. Op- 
ercular apparatus and cheeks scaly; neck scaleless. Membrane 
of the first dorsal reaching the base of the second, though the 
two fins are distinctly separated. Second dorsal much larger than 
the anal. Caudal rounded. Type of the genus: Boleosoma 
tessellation, Dekay. For references to other species, see “Lake 
Superior,” page 299. 
All the representatives of this family are confined, as far as we 
know, to the fresh waters of North America; not a single spe- 
cies having thus far been noticed either in Europe or Asia. To 
this circumstance we must no doubt ascribe the total neglect of 
the genus Etheostoma of Rafinesque by European ichthyologists. 
The genus Hyostoma is the only type of this family I am ac- 
quainted with from the southern bend of the Tennessee River. 
It is true, Dr. Storer has described two species of Etheostoma 
from the vicinity of Florence, Alabama, but they do not seem to 
occur farther east; at least I have found nothing to remind me of 
his species in the collection forwarded by Dr. Newman. 
It is a fact worthy of notice that not a single species of Gas- 
terosteus has as yet been discovered in the Mississippi River or 
its tributaries, or in any of the rivers emptying into the Gulf of 
Mexico. I have also searched in vain for them in the southern 
Atlantic states, though they are common in the northern states 
and in the waters emptying into the St. Lawrence. 
SOLENOIDS, Cuv.—In the old world no representative of this 
family is known to inhabit the freshwaters, whilst in North Amer- 
ica a remarkable species has been found in Lake Champlain, Lake 
Erie, Lake Ontario and the Ohio River, which truly belongs to 
this family and has generally been referred to the genus Corvina, 
under the name of Corvina Oscvla. It should however be re- 
marked that this species is but remotely allied to the genus Cor- 
vina and must in reality be considered as the type of a distinct 
genus, which has already been characterized, thirty-four years 
ago by that indefatigable naturalist, Rafinesque, under the name 
of Amblodon. Nobody has however thus far taken the trouble 
to examine the value of this genus, nor even to state on what 
ground it has been rejected by those who have incidentally no- 
ticed it as a synonym of Corvina. The truth is that Rafinesque 
was right in considering this Corvina Oscula as a distinct genus, 
the characters of which he has well defined, as may be seen‘by 
comparing his description in the Ichthyologia Ohiensis with that 
below. Moreover I have lately ascertained that there are several L. Agassiz on Fishes of Tennessee River. 
13 
species of Amblodon in different parts of the United States and 
that this type is not limited to the Northern States blit extends 
west as far as the western parts of Missouri and South as far as 
Louisiana and Alabama. 
Amblodon, Rajin.—External characters of Corvina, combined 
with the form and appearance of Pogonias. Upper pharyngeals 
distinct, covered with broad, hemispherical teeth closely set, like 
pavement stones and arranged in regular rows; outside of these 
are a few small pointed teeth. The lower right and left pharyn- 
geals are soldered together into a broad triangular plate, covered 
with teeth of the same kind and arranged in the same manner as 
upon the upper pharyngeals. In the genus Corvina the lower 
pharyngeals are distinct as the upper ones and support short coni- 
cal teeth not numerous, nor closely set. From want of a suffi- 
cient number of specimens I am unable to determine whether the 
specimens from the great Lakes are specifically identical with 
those of the Ohio River described by Rafinesque as Amblodon 
grunniens; but I have ascertained that the species of the Ohio 
River differs from that of Huntsville, which I call Amblodon con- 
ciimus, Agass. This species differs from A. grunniens in having 
the body less elongated, the profile steeper, and the dorsal fill 
placed further forwards. The profile is most arched immediately 
over the upper attachment of the preopercle, in A. grunniens 
it is most prominent over the opercule. The dorsal fin ends 
slightly in advance of the base of the pectorals; in A. grunniens 
behind these. The serrated edge of the preopercle is directed 
more obliquely downwards and backwards, making the inferior 
angle of the preopercle more acute. This species is known in 
the Tennessee River by the name of Drum. It reaches there the 
weight of fifty pounds. 
Amblodon lineatus, Agass.—This species sent to me by Mr. 
Geo. Stolley from the Osage River, Mo., resembles more A. con- 
cinnus than A. grunniens, but the head is shorter; the promi- 
nence of the forehead is nearer the dorsal fin, immediately over 
the opercle, thus having a less arched profile. The anterior 
border of the eye nearly reaches the profile of the head. The 
spines of the dorsal fin are bent more backwards. The dark col- 
oration of the centres of the scales, especially in younger speci- 
mens produces the appearance of regular lines following the di- 
rection of the rows of scales, hence the name of this species. It 
grows also very large, and bears in Missouri the same name of 
Drum as the species of the Tennessee River. Mr. Stolley in- 
forms me that the Amblodons are very sluggish, and live at the 
bottom of muddy waters, where they are often seen progressing 
slowly, raising as it were, clouds of dirt before them, now lying 14 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of Tennessee River. 
upon one side of their body, then turning upon themselves or 
plunging headlong into the snft ground with their body in a ver- 
tical position. They feed upon worms, and small shells, large 
numbers of which are often found crushed to pieces in their 
stomach ; they however bite occasionally at a minnow. 
ESOCES, Cuv. (Joh. Muller.)—Though we have only the 
genus Esox representing this family in North America, if is perhaps 
not superfluous for me to state that I agree with the modifications 
J. Muller has introduced in this group since it was first established 
by Cuvier. We have one species from the Tennessee River, 
called Pike at Huntsville. 
Esox crassus, Agass.—This species agrees fully with the type 
of Esox reticulatus in having both the operculum and cheeks 
covered with scales. It is, however, a much deeper fish than E. 
reticulatus; its scales are larger and nearly of an hexagonal form. 
The scales of the preopercle and cheeks are as large as those of 
the body ; those on the opercle are smaller. The superior orbital 
ridges are more prominent : the depression between these ridges 
is deeper. The anal and caudal fins are shorter. The body is 
marked as in Lsox reticulatus. The genus Esox has a very wide 
range in North America, but there is no difference of structure 
between those of the Canadian Lakes and the western waters, 
and those of the Atlantic lakes and rivers, as Mr. Girard affirms 
in a notice recently published in the Proceedings of the Academy 
of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia (1853, page 3S6). In the 
first place my Esox Borens, from Lake Superior, does not belong 
to the same type as Esox Estor, its cheeks being covered with 
scales. Moreover, I know already three species from the western 
waters, one of which is noticed above, the cheeks and operculum 
of which are as completely covered with scales as in Esox reticu- 
latus. There are in reality more species of the type of Esox 
reticulatus, in the western waters and the Canada lakes, than of 
the type of Esox Estor, and far from excluding one another these 
types occur there together. As to the application of the names 
Pike and Pickerel to the different type of our Esoces, it cannot 
be justified, since such a use would be a scientific sanction of the 
misapplication of English names to our native animals, which has 
already led to so much conlusion. Unless applied as a generic apel- 
lation, the name Pike must be retained for the European Esox 
Lucius, to which only it belongs by right ; whilst the name 
Pickerel designates the young of that fish. It would be quite as 
advisable to introduce in our scientific nomenclature the name of 
Calf to distinguish the Bisons from the type of our domesticated 
cattle, as to apply the name Pickerel to any particular species or 
set of species of the genus Esox. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
15 
CYPRINODONTS, Agass.—Only two species of this family 
have thus far been discovered in the waters of the Tennessee 
River, and bolh of them have already been described by Dr. Sto- 
rer under the names of Pcecilia catenata and olivacca, Synopsis, 
p. 178. Having made lately however, a thorough revision of the 
genera and species of this family found in the United States, I 
would remark that Pcecilia catenata, St., ought to be referred to 
the genus Hydrargyra, and that Peed Ha olivacea belongs to my 
newly established genus Zygonectes. These species ought there- 
fore to stand in future in our systematic catalogues under the 
names of Hydrargyra catenata, and Zygonectes olivaceus.* 
CYPRINOIDS, Cuv.—This is one of the most interesting 
families of our freshwater fishes, both on account of the number 
of genera and species inhabiting our lakes and rivers, and of the 
diversity of their forms and habits. 
Cakpiodes, Rafin.—In the great French Ichthyology, Valen- 
ciennes has established a new genus under the name of Sclero- 
gnathvs, for Lesueur’s Catostomus cypiinus, and this genus has 
deservedly been acknowledged by subsequent writers. In con- 
sidering this type of Cyprinoids as a distinct group among the 
Catostomi, Rafinesque has however the priority over the able pro- 
fessor of the Jardin des Plantes; for we find in his Ichthyolo- 
gia Ohiensis that the third subgenus of Catostomus, which he 
* The species of the genus Zygonectes may be arranged in two groups: 1, those 
in which there are several more or less distinctly dotted lines along the sides 
of the body, and in which a broad black band extends across the eye and cheek. 
To this group belong: Z. Nottii, Agass. The darker continuous longitudinal lines 
alternate with fainter interrupted ones. Males with distinct, transverse bands. 
Dark olive above, fading upon the sides, silvery below. Operculum, throat, and 
space in advance of the eye light orange color. Mobile, Alabama. Collected there 
With Dr. Nott. Mississippi: Col. Deas.—Z. lineolatus, Agass. Longitudinal lines 
broader and undulated or serrated, the transverse bands of the male very distinct 
and broader than the longitudinal ones. Olive colored, darker along the back 
and fading upon the sides, lower parts silvery Discovered by Dr. W. I Burnett at 
Augusta, Ga.—Z. guttatus, Agass. A large dark spot upon the centre of each scale 
on the back and sides, forming longitudinal rows of disconnected dots. The trans- 
verse bars of the males are much narrower and nearer together‘than in Z. lineolatus. 
Dark olive above, fading upon the sides; abdomen silvery. Mobile, Alabama.—Z. 
dispar, Agass. Longitudinal lines of minute dots particularly distinct in the anterior 
part of the body, alternating backwards with continuous lines in the males, which 
are besides transversely barred, whilst the female has only continuous serrated lines 
upon the sides. Light olive above, silvery upon the sides and below. In small 
creeks near St. Louis, Mo., on the Illinois side of the Mississippi, and also in the Illi- 
nois River at Beardstown.—Z. hieroglgphicus, Agass. Anterior and upper part of the 
body irregularly sprinkled with dark spots, passing into longitudinal rows backwards. 
Light olive above, silvery upon the sides and below. Mobile, Alabama. 2. The 
second group includes species witli one broad longitudinal black band extending from 
the tip of the lower jaw to the base of the tail, passing in a straight line through the 
eyes and along the sides of the body. To this group belongs the species mentioned 
above from the Tennessee River, and also Z. laterals, Agass, which is a more elon- 
gated species from Mobile, Alabama; also dotted above the broad lateral band, and 
Z. zonatus, Agass, from St. Louis, Mo., which has no spots upon the sides of the 
back, and in which the outlines of the longitudinal band are serrated. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
16 
calls Cnrpiodes, though not characterized with the precision with 
which Valenciennes has circumscribed his genus Sclerognathus, 
exactly corresponds to it. I do not hesitate therefore to adopt 
Rafiuesque’s name as the older; the more so. since this writer has 
at the same time wisely separated from the common Catostomi 
at that early day two other types of the same group, which are 
even now left among Catostomi by all ichthyologists. I allude 
to the subgenus Ictiobus, with Cat.ostom;us Biibolus as its type, 
and to the genus Cycleptus for the Missouri sucker ; for though 
Rafinesque did not himself examine this latter fish, and ascribes 
to it two dorsals, it must be evident to any one who has had 
an opportunity of investigating this rare species that the few 
words with which it is mentioned apply to it, and that the indi- 
cation of two dorsals is easily explained by the very form of that 
fin, the anterior part of which rises like a separate fin in advance 
of the following low part which extends uniformly far behind. 
I should add that Catostomus elongatus belongs also to this genus 
Cycleptus. As to Ictiobus, it resembles Carpiodes in external ap- 
pearance. but is at once distinguished by its thin lips and more 
terminal mouth.* Nothing is to be more regretted for the progress 
of Natural History in this country, than that Rafinesque did not 
put up somewhere a collection of all the genera and species he 
has established, with well authenticated labels, or that his cotem- 
poraries did not follow in his steps, or at least preserve the tradi- 
tion of his doings, instead of decrying him and appealing to for- 
eign authority against him. Tracing his course as a naturalist 
during his residence in this country, it is plain that he alarmed 
those with whom he had intercourse by his innovations and that 
they preferred to lean upon the authority of the great naturalists 
of the age then residing in Europe, who however knew little of 
the special Natural History of this country, than to trust the 
somewhat hasty man who was living among them, and who had 
collected a vast amount of information from all parts of the 
States, upon a variety of objects then entirely new to science. 
From what I can learn of Rafinesque, and from a careful study 
of his works, I am satisfied that he was a better man than he ap- 
peared. His misfortune was his prurient desire for novelties, and 
his rashness in publishing them, and yet both in Europe and in 
* In connection with the genera mentioned above, I may remark here that Rafin- 
esque has established another sub-genus under the name of Moxostoma, which fully 
deserves to be recognized as a distinct genus, as far as I am able to judge from the 
three species belonging to it, with which I am especially acquainted, which are Ca- 
tostomus anisurus of the West, C. gibbosus or tuberculatus of the East, and C. Suceti 
of the South. After acknowledging these alterations of the genus Catostomus, as it 
is now generally understood by ichthyologists, there would still remain a group of 
species to constitute the genus Catostomus proper of which C. hudsonius, for which 
the name Catostomus was first proposed, may be considered as the type. Thus 
freed of all unjustifiable additions engrafted upon it in course of time, the genus Ca- 
tostomus would be restored to its primitive natural circumscription. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
17 
America he has anticipated most of his cotemporaries in the dis- 
covery of new genera and species in those departments of science 
which he has cultivated most perseveringly, and it is but justice 
to restore them to him, whenever it can be done. Personal con- 
siderations should no longer be allowed to interfere with this late 
act of redress. May the example of Rafinesque not be lost for 
those naturalists in this country who describe new species with- 
out taking the least care to preserve the original specimens of 
their descriptions, or to circulate authentic ones among other nat- 
uralists. 
Besides the well known type of the genus Carpiodes, the C. 
Cyprinus, and the other species described by Valenciennes and 
Rafinesque, 1 have ascertained the existence of five undescribed 
species, of which I give below short comparative descriptions. 
These species bear to one another similar relations as the species 
of Cyprinus described by Heckel; indeed they truly represent 
upon the Continent of North America the genus Cyprinus of the 
old world to which they bear the greatest resemblance in out- 
ward appearance, though they differ strikingly in their generic 
characters. I have applied to the new species here mentioned 
names reminding us of the common name of Buffalo applied to 
all of them throughout the country. The large number of spe- 
cimens including all sizes, which I have been able to collect of 
some species of this genus, has enabled me to ascertain the range 
of variation in their characters. 
1. Carpiodes Urus, Agass.—From the Tennessee River. It 
grows very large, weighing occasionally from 30 to 40 pounds. 
The body in this species is not so high as in C. Cyprinus, nor is 
it so compressed above; the scales are also not so high, but more 
angular behind, and the anterior portion of the dorsal is not so 
elongated. The gill cover is larger, and the distance from the 
hind border of the eye to the inferior angle of the subopercle, 
near the base of the pectorals, and the distance from the same 
point to the superior and posterior angle of the opercle, are nearly 
equal. In C. Cyprinus the distances differ by nearly one-third. 
The subopercle is not triangular, but its hind border is nearly 
regularly arched from the upper angle to the posterior angle of 
the interopercle. The anal has its posterior margin full, and not 
lunate; the caudal is not so deeply furcate as in C. Cyprinus. 
The ventrals do not reach the anal. All fins are of a dark color. 
I am indebted to Dr. Newman for this species. 
2. Carpiodes Taurus, Agass.—From Mobile River, Alabama. 
The form of the body is intermediate between that of C. Cypri- 
nus and C. Urus. The gill cover has the same form as in C. 
Urus, but it is larger and more strongly arched behind. The 
hind margin of the scales is waving, owing to a somewhat prom- 
o 18 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
inent middle angle. The anterior rays of the dorsal equal in 
length two-thirds of that of the base of the fin. Anal not lunate 
behind. The ventrals do not reach to the anal opening. Cau- 
dal not so deeply furcate as in C. Cyprinus. 
3. Carpiodes Bison, Agass.—From the Osage River, Missouri. 
This species is more elongated than C. Taurus. The head is 
smaller, the opercle also smaller, and the subopercle triangular. 
The dorsal has its anterior rays longer, hence its hinder border is 
more deeply ernarginate. Anal more deeply lunate. Horizontal 
diameter of scales greater. I have received this species through 
the attention of Mr. George Stolley. 
4. Carpiodes Vitulus, Agass.—From the Wabash River, Indi- 
ana. This seems to be a smaller species than the preceding ones. 
The form of the body resembles that of C. Taurus; but the eyes 
are smaller; the opercle is more broadly rounded behind; the 
subopercle has its posterior and free border regularly arched above 
and below, and not ernarginate as in C. Taurus. The direction 
of the numerous water tubes on the head and cheeks also differ. 
The upper and lower borders of the scales are nearly straight. 
The dorsal does not extend quite so far forwards. I am indebted 
to Col. Richard Owen of New Harmony for this species. 
5. Carpiodes Vacca, Agass—From the Susquehannah River. 
This species resembles more closely C. Cyprinus than any other; 
the anterior rays of the dorsal are also very elongated, yet they 
do not reach beyond the base of the fin itself when bent back- 
wards; the caudal is not so deeply furcate, and the scales have a 
greater horizontal diameter, i owe this species to the kindness 
of Professor S. S. Haldeman. 
Catostomus, Lesueur.—The following species of this genus 
have been collected by Dr. Newman in the vicinity of Huntsville : 
Catostoiims communis, Lesueur.—Called Fine-scaled Sucker 
at Huntsville. 
Catostomus nigricans, Lesueur.—Called Hog Sucker at Hunts- 
ville. 
Catostomus Duquesnii, Lesueur.—Called May Sucker at 
Huntsville. 
Catostomus melanops, Kirtl.—Also called May Sucker at 
Huntsville. This species agrees with Kirtland’s description of 
C. melanops, except in having longer pectorals and in the reddish 
color along the sides. Rafinesque’s description cannot apply to 
this fish. Having no specimens from the localities mentioned by 
Rafinesque and Kirtland, I do not venture to pursue further a 
comparison between these fishes. 
Rhinichthys, Ag'ass.—This genus was established by me in 
“ Lake Superior,” page 353. Several new species have been dis- L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
19 
covered since by Prof. Baird and myself.* Dr. Newman has sent 
me another undescribed species, which I call 
Rhinichthys obtusus, Agass.—Body cylindrical, slightly com- 
pressed, more blunt than in Rh. marmoratus. The mouth ex- 
tends but little beyond the margin of the upper jaw; lower jaw 
strongly arched from side to side. Eyes rather large and nearer 
the end of the snout than the posterior angle of the opercle. 
Dorsal exactly intermediate between the ventrals and the anal, 
quadrangular, its last rays about two-thirds the length of the fish, 
so that when the fin is folded backwards their ends meet. Pec- 
torals broadly rounded behind ; do not reach the base of the ven- 
trals. Caudal not very deeply furcate ; its lobes are broad, rather 
than slender, the lower lobe is generally a little the longer. The 
color of the body is dark chocolate above, and of a silvery white 
below; these two colors are separated by a longitudinal band of 
a darker color than the back, extending from the end of the snout 
through the eye in a direct line along the sides to the middle of 
the base of the caudal. The whole dorsal region is mottled with 
black blotches, sometimes running together and forming large 
patches, and often descending to the lighter portion of the sides. 
Scales rather small. Called Minnow at Huntsville. Found in 
the Spring branch. 
Chondrostoma, Agass.—This genus was established by me in 
1834 in the Memoires de la Societe des Sc. Nat. de Neuchatel, 
for the Cyprinus Nasus of Europe, and has been adopted with 
various modifications by subsequent writers. Thus far no repre- 
sentative of this type had been known to exist in North America, 
though the species I now refer to it here, has been described for 
sometime by Dr. D. H. Storer; but having been referred to the 
genus Leuciscus, to which C. Nasus was also referred formerly, 
it has not been distinguished from the ordinary Leucisci. I need 
only allude to it for the present.f Other species occur in the 
fresh waters of the Pacific coast of North America. Exoglossum 
dubium, Kirtl., may belong to this genus. 
Chondrostoma prolixum, Agass.—Leuciscus prolixus, Storer, 
Synops., page 165. Called Minnow at Huntsville. Found in the 
Spring branch. 
* I am indebted for another new species of this genus to Dr. I. H. Rauch, of Bur- 
lington, Iowa, which I would call R. Meleagris, Ag. It is remarkably short and stout 
in comparison to its congeneric types, also smaller. The whole body is dotted with 
black upon a silvery ground, the dots partly confluent; the belly only is plain sil- 
very white. 
f I owe another entirely new species of this genus to Dr. I. H. Rauch, of Bur- 
lington, Iowa; which I inscribe as Ch. pullum, Ag. It is the smallest species of the 
genus; much broader than the others in comparison to its length; head especially 
small, almost indicating distinct generic peculiarities, into which I am however una- 
ble to enquire from want of a sufficient number of specimens. This pretty little 
fish is of a peculiar deep but dull green, darker above, passing into yellowish white 
below. 20 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
Hybopsis * Agass.—So little attention has thus far been paid to 
the generic differences existing between the American Cyprinoids 
that it is not surprising to find several yet unnoticed. Among 
others I mention here a new type remarkable for its slender elon- 
gated form, its long head, its obtuse prominent snout, its inferior 
mouth and the advanced position of the anal. This genus is 
founded upon a small species from Huntsville. Lciiciscus Slo- 
rerianus, Kirtland, which I have however not examined in na- 
ture, may be another species. 
Hybopsis gracilis, Agass.—Body much elongated and slightly 
compressed; head long, equalling nearly one-fourth the entire 
length of the fish. The snout is very short and broadly rounded ; 
the nostrils are large, above the middle line of the eye and nearer 
the end of the snout than the centre of the eye. The eyes are 
very large in proportion to the size and width of the head; the 
horizontal diameter which is slightly the longest, equals one-third 
the length of the head, their upper edge is on a line with the top 
of the head, the lower edge with the anterior edge of the inter- 
maxillaries and the extremity of the upper maxillaries reaches 
the line of their anterior border. The fins are all long and 
pointed. The pectorals are low down on the sides and reach the 
base of the ventrals. The hinder base of the dorsal is midway 
between the end of the snout and the extremity of the tail. 
The height of the dorsal is one-third greater than the length of 
the base ; the second and the third rays longest; number total of 
rays 8, and two united as one for the last ray of the fin. The 
base of the ventrals is below the anterior part of the dorsal; their 
extremities reach nearly to the anal fin. The distance of the 
anal from the base of the tail is equal to twice the length of its 
own base. The anal is like the dorsal in form, but smaller, num- 
ber of rays 7, with a last double ray. Caudal long, deeply fur- 
cate, the lobes being slender and pointed. 
Chrosomus, Rajin.—The fish for which Rafinesque established 
this group in his genus Luxilus, well deserves to be considered as 
* While these pages were setting in type. I have received another pretty species 
of this interesting genus, through the attention of Dr. I. H. Rauch, from Burlington, 
Iowa. The large number of specimens obtained enables me to make some additions 
to the characteristics of the genus: “ The mouth is protractile downwards, after the 
fashion of Catostomus, so much so that had I not had ample opportunity to exam- 
ine young Catostomi, and to study the changes thejr undergo with age, I might have 
supposed my Hybopsis to be the young of some species of that genus. Moreover 
the lips are not swollen nor thickened. The pharyngeal teeth differ also greatly 
from those of Catostomi, there being only four or five compressed and hooked ones 
in each main row, and one or two in a second row.” 
This new species differs from that of Huntsville, by its smaller size, its more 
pointed snout and the peculiar coloration. A deep black narrow band extends from 
the neck to the base of the caudal along the whole back, dividing in advance of the 
dorsal to encircle that fin, and uniting again behind it upon the middle line. Gene- 
ral color olive, silvery upon the sides, the dorsal and caudal faintly tinged with rose 
color and a deeper rose-colored spot upon the base of the first ray of the dorsal. I 
shall call this species H. dorsalis, Ag. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
21 
a distinct genus, as it stands very isolated among the other Amer- 
ican Cyprinoids. It may be considered as corresponding upon 
this continent to the genus Phoxinus of Europe, from which it 
differs however by the continuous lateral line and the shorter 
lower jaw. Rafinesque has given it a very appropriate specific 
name, calling it 
Chrosomus erythrogaster, Raf.—It is one of the prettiest fresh- 
water fishes of North America, varying greatly with age and at 
different periods of the year. It remains yet to be ascertained 
whether the specimens from the Tennessee River are strictly 
identical with those from the Ohio River. I have received speci- 
mens from the Osage River, from Mr. G. Stolley, which differ 
somewhat in having deeper colors and a somewhat elongated 
form. 
Stilbe, DeKay.—In his Natural History of New York, DeKay 
has established this genus for the Cyprinus chrysoleucos of 
Mitchell. Without a thorough revision of the many new genera 
of Cyprinoids established by Heckel and Prince Canino, for 
which.I have not the necessary materials on hand, I am unable to 
decide whether DeKay’s genus may stand or not. So much how- 
ever is certain, that Storer’s Leuciscus obesus from Florence, 
Alabama, which has also been obtained in the vicinity of Hunts- 
ville by Dr. Newman, also belongs to this genus. Abramis versi- 
color, DeKay, must also probably be referred to it. I know several 
other undescribed species of this type from other parts of the 
United States. It is intermediate between Alburnus and Abra- 
mis, having the form of Abramis elongatus, and other elongated 
species of that genus with comparatively small anal, and the 
prominent lower jaw of Alburnus. 
Stilbe obesus, Agass.—Leuciscus obesus, Storer, Synopsis, p. 
166. Called Hickory or Gizzard Shad at Huntsville. 
Hypsolepis, Baird.—This genus was established for those 
species of Leuciscus the body of which is compressed and cov- 
ered with high short scales. Leuciscus cornutus may be consid- 
ered as its type. My Leuciscus frontalis from Lake Superior, is 
another species of this genus. To it belongs also Dr. Storer’s 
Leuciscus gibbosus from Florence, Alabama, which has also been 
found about Huntsville, by Dr. Newman. 
Hypsolepis gibbosus, Agass.—Leuciscus gibbosus, Storer, Sy- 
nop., page 166. Called Silver-sides at Huntsville. 
Leuciscus, Cuv.—Onq species from Huntsville, the same 
which Dr. Storer has described from Florence, Alabama, under 
the name of 
Leuciscus croceus, Stor., Synop., p. 165. 22 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
SAUROIDS, Agass.—Before I began to collect the materials 
for a monograph of the genus Lepidosteus, I had no idea of the 
wide geographical range of this type in North America. Indeed 
our ichthyological works mention only Lake Huron, Lake Erie 
and Lake Champlain in the North, the Ohio and Mississippi in 
the West, and S. Carolina and Florida in the South, as its home, 
and the whole number of species described, even including all 
those of Rafinesque without questioning the validity of any of 
them, does not exceed nine or ten. Yet I have now, in my own 
collection, not less than twenty-two well characterized species of 
the genus, and I have ascertained its existence in all the water 
systems of the South from Florida to Texas, in the Mississippi 
and all its larger tributaries up to the latitude of Lake Superior, 
where it does not however occur, in all the lower great Canadian 
Lakes, and in the St. Lawrence. Also in those river and Lakes 
of western New York which empty into the waters of the St. 
Lawrence ; in those of western Pennsylvania emptying into the 
Ohio, and in all the Atlantic rivers, from the Chesapeake Bay to 
Florida; leaving only the New England States East of Lake 
Champlain without any of its representatives. Poey describes 
also one species from Cuba. It seems however to be wanting 
west of the Rocky Mountains and in Central America. The 
species sent me by Dr. Newman from Huntsville, agrees with 
Rafinesque’s 
Lepidosteus platostomus.—It differs however from the species 
described under the same name by DeKay from Florida, the 
original specimen of which I have examined myself. Its name 
at Huntsville is Gar. 
The identification of species in this genus is extremely difficult 
owing to the great changes they undergo with age. Indeed the 
young differ so much in form and structure from the adult that 
Rafinesque has established a distinct genus for the young of his 
Lepidosteus oxyurus under the name of tSarchirus vittatus. In 
this immature state these fishes have the upper region of the caudal 
separate from the lower, as a distinct lobe, the body is scaleless and 
the pectorals consist of a membrane rising from a fleshy tubercle, 
hence the name Sarchirus of Rafinesque. Another peculiarity of 
the young lies in their coloration ; they having mostly a broad 
longitudinal black band along the middle line. This has for a 
time led Rev. Z. Thompson to consider the young of Richard- 
son’s Lepidosteus huronensis as a distinct species which he has 
described as L. lineatus. DeKay’s L. Bison is also the same 
species as L. huronensis ; this differs however widely from the 
southern L. osseus and from Rafinesque’s L. oxyurus from the 
Ohio River. I shall take an early opportunity of describing all 
the species I know of this genus and settling as far as possible 
their complicated synonymy. L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
23 
CCELACANTHS, Agass.—Until an extensive and minute 
comparison of all the representatives of the genus Ainia from 
different parts of the United States can be made to ascertain the 
true value upon which the different species described by Rich- 
ardson, DeKay and Valenciennes, are founded, it may be sufficient 
to mention here the existence of that genus in the waters of the 
Tennessee under the name of 
Arnia calva, L, which has long been considered and may in 
reality be the only one of the genus. It is known at Huntsville 
under the name of Scaly Cat and Carp. Found in Mill ponds. 
SILUROIDS, Cuv.—Two species of this very natural family 
have been sent to me from Huntsville by Dr. Newman. 
Pimeloclus rosrulescens. Rafin.—Channel Cat. Grows very 
large and weighs occasionally over one hundred pounds. 
Pimelodus Catus, Lin.—Several species are confounded under 
this name ; but it is impossible to characterize them without en- 
tering into details which would be out of place in this short no- 
tice. Called Mud Cat at Huntsville. 
STURIONES, Cuv.—Two species of Sturgeons occur in the 
Tennessee, specimens of which I have received from Dr. New- 
man. 
Acipenser rubricundus, Lesueur. 
Acipenser maculosus, Lesueur. 
These two species have been considered as synonymous by 
some ichthyologists. It is true that the young A. rubicundus 
like all young Sturgeons are more or less maculate, and yet there 
are so many other differences between the two specimens I have 
before me, which are nearly of the same size, that I can hardly 
consider them as identical. The whole genus requires a thorough 
revision and would be an interesting subject fora monograph. 
There are some genera of North American fresh-water fishes 
the absence of which surprises me in the collection sent by Dr. 
Newman, and mention them with the view of calling attention 
to them more particularly. Lucioperca, generally called Salmon 
in the West. Is it not possible that the specimens of Hyostoma 
described above were mistaken for young Lucioperca and sent 
as specimens of the Salmon ? Labrax, known everywhere as 
White Perch. The presence of the genus Perea seems more 
doubtful. Chalasssus, generally known as Hickory or Gizzard 
Shad. I fancy that the Stilbe obesus mentioned above, was mis- 
taken for a small specimen of this type. Hyodon, known as 
Toothed Herring. Anguilla, the Eel. Lota, known as Barbot 
or Eelpout. The genus Pogostoma., of Rafinesque, is evidently 
synonymous with Lota. Polyodon, known as Shovelbill, and 
Petromyzon, the Lamper-eel. I should also expect a long-billed 24 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
species of Lepidosteus, for the two types of this genus occur 
everywhere together in the West. 
If the study of the geographical distribution of animals is ever 
to furnish us any indications respecting the circumstances under 
which organized beings were created, we must, in investigating 
it, turn our attention particularly to those facts which disclose 
differences of structure in connection with the special localization 
of the different representatives of each family within their natu- 
ral boundaries. For years I have been collecting diligently all 
the data within my reach bearing upon this question, and from 
the results of this enquiry already in my possession, lam satisfied 
that the day is not far distant when we shall know with sufficient 
precision where all the living beings now existing upon earth 
have made their first appearance. This must of course be the 
first step towards a deeper insight into the conditions of that ori- 
gin itself. 
In connection with this train of thoughts it is interesting to 
notice how much different families of animals vary from each 
other in the most prominent features of their geographical distri- 
bution. There are those the representatives of which are almost 
uniformally distributed over the whole range of their natural 
arena. Such is the family of Salmonidce proper. There are spe- 
cies of true Sal mo, of Thymallus, of Coregonus, of Osmerus 
very equally scattered over Europe, Asia and North America. The 
same is the case with the family of Esoces, which has however a 
much greater number of species in the fresh waters of North 
America. So are also the Sturgeons, with this difference, that 
upon the continent of America two peculiar genera, Scaphirhyn- 
chus and Polyodon, are added, which have no representatives in 
the old world. The Percoids however present very different 
combinations : some types are common to North America, Europe 
and Northern Asia, as the genera Perea, Lucioperca and Labrax, 
with this difference however, that North America has many fresh 
water representatives of the genus Labrax which are wanting in 
the old world; other types are only to be found either in North 
America or in the old world,—for instance Grystes, Centrarchus, 
Pomoxis, Amploplites, Calliurus, Pomotis, have no representatives 
in Europe where we find in their stead the genera Aspro and 
Acerina ; the balance being in favor of North America as far as 
the number and diversity of the fresh-water types of this family 
is concerned, whilst the old world has many more and more di- 
versified marine representatives. The family of Cyprinoids 
agrees with that of the Percoids in the features of its geographi- 
cal distribution; the types peculiar to each side of the Atlantic 
being however more equally distributed, for whilst in the old 
world we find the genera Cyprinus, Barbus, Tinea, Cobitis, Pele- 
cus, Aspius, Rhodeus, Phoxinus, North America has its Car- L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
25 
piodes, Ictiobns, Cycleptus, Catostomus, Rhinichthys, Chrosomns, 
Hypsolepis, Hybopsis which are foreign to the old world, and 
they share together the genera Alburnus, Chondrostoma, Leucis- 
cus, &c., still, with this difference, that the true Leucisci are far 
more numerous in the old world than in North America. In the 
family of Cyprinodonts we find exactly the reverse, there being 
in North America a much greater diversity and a larger number 
of representatives of this type than in the old world. The case is 
still different with the family of the Etheostomoids ; which are 
altogether peculiar to North America, not a single species being 
known in the old world. The family of Coelacanths is also en- 
tirely foreign to the old world, whilst the Sauroids are represented 
by one genus, Polypterus in the old world and by another, Lepi- 
dosteus in America. The Sciaenoids differ in another respect: 
whilst these fishes inhabit exclusively the sea in the old world, 
there are in North America besides many marine representatives, 
a number of fresh-water species constituting a distinct genus, Am- 
blodon. Again the family of Siluroids, is represented by a great 
variety of species in North America, and only by a few in the 
old world. Similar facts might be mentioned of other families, 
but this may be sufficient to show how important it is to combine 
the study of the modifications of the structure of animals with 
that of their geographical distribution. 
For it is not the presence here or there of this or that species 
of any genus, or family or higher group which I would particu- 
larly consider in the study of the geographical distribution of 
organized beings, but the localization upon certain parts of the 
surface of the globe of special modifications of definite types 
representing each a distinct idea, expressed in a variety of living 
forms and combined in various ways in time and space. 
There is another point of view of equal interest in this con- 
nection; the mode of association of different families in different 
parts of the world. It is a fact for instance that the Goniodonts 
are limited to South America, and that this family, which is en- 
tirely wanting in the old world, has no nearer relative than that ge- 
nus of Sturgeons peculiar to North America, the Scaphirhynchus. 
Again, whilst the families mentioned above as characteristic of 
the North American fresh-water fish fauna seem to be equally 
distributed over the surface of this vast continent, there is yet a 
special adaptation of some of their types to peculiar localities. 
The great similarity of their representatives throughout the 
Southern Atlantic States, the Gulf States and the Mississippi 
Valley, as high up as the Ohio, including even Lake Champlain, 
does not extend to the New England States, which although en- 
circled by this uniform combination of fresh-water animals, have 
another zoological character, peculiar to itself, and approximating 
more to that of the old world under the same climatic conditions 26 
L. Agassiz on Fishes of the Tennessee River. 
than the western and southern parts of the Union. In this iso- 
lated region of North America, in this zoological island of New 
England, as we may well call it, we find neither Lepidosteus, nor 
Amia, nor Polyodon, nor Amblodon, nor Grystes, nor Centrar- 
chus, nor Pomoxis, nor Ambloplites, nor Galliums, nor Carpiodes, 
nor Hyodon, nor indeed any of the characteristic forms of North 
American fresh-water fishes, so common everywhere else, with 
the exception of two Pomotis, one Boleosoma, and a few Catos- 
tomus. The study of these features is of the greatest importance, 
inasmuch as it may eventually lead to a better understanding of 
the intentions implied in this seemingly arbitrary distribution of 
animal life. 
Before closing this notice I would remark that there is still 
another very interesting problem respecting the geographical dis- 
tribution of our fresh-water animals, which may be solved by 
the further investigation of the fishes of the Tennessee River. 
This water course, taking the Powells, Clinch and Holston Riv- 
ers as its head waters, arises from the mountains of Virginia in 
latitude 37°, it then flows S. W. to latitude 34°-25, when it turns 
W. and N. W., and finally empties into the Ohio under the same 
latitude as its sources in 37°. The question now is this: Are 
the fishes of this water system the same throughout its extent ? 
in which case we should infer that water communication is the 
chief condition of the geographical distribution of our fresh-water 
fishes. Or do they differ in different stations along its course ? 
and if so, are the differences mainly controlled by the elevation 
of the river above the level of the sea, or determined by climatic 
influences corresponding to differences of latitude ? We should 
assume that the first alternative was true if the fishes of the upper 
course of the river differed from those of the middle and lower 
course in the same manner as in the Danube, from its source to 
Pesth, where this stream flows nearly for its whole length under 
the same parallel. We would on the contrary suppose the second 
alternative to be well founded, if marked differences were observed 
between the fish of such tracks of the river as do not materi- 
ally differ in their elevation above the sea, but flow under differ- 
ent latitudes. Now a few collections from different stations 
along this river, like that sent me by Dr. Newman from the vicin- 
ity of Huntsville, would settle at once this question, not for the 
Tennessee River alone, but for most rivers flowing under similar 
circumstances upon the surface of the globe. Nothing, however, 
short of such collections, compared closely with one another, 
will furnish a reliable answer. I know already from a mere cat- 
alogue of the vernacular names of the fishes from the vicinity of 
Jonesboro, sent me by Dr. Cunningham, and from a few speci- 
mens collected by Prof. Erni, late of Knoxville, that the fishes of 
the upper and lower course of the Tennessee differ greatly from Additional Notes on the Holconoti. 
27 
each other, without being able to tell exactly how, from want of 
specimens. To set this question completely at rest, it would be 
best to obtain collections from the different tributaries of the Ten- 
nessee, as well as from the main stream, one from the Powells, 
one from the Clinch, one from the Holston, one from the French 
Broad, &c., and from the main river, one from the vicinity of 
Washington, Tenn., or from Chattanooga, another from Florence, 
(the Muscle Shoal being the point, as I am informed by Ur. 
Newman, above which fish do not migrate in the Tennessee,) 
and another anywhere above its junction with the Ohio, perhaps 
best about Reynoldsburg, at some distance from the Ohio. Who- 
ever will accomplish this survey will have made a highly val- 
uable contribution to our knowledge. 
Appendix.—Additional Notes on the Holconoti. 
Having lately received a large number of specimens of Holco- 
noti, from California, through the kindness of my friend, T. G. 
Cary, Esq., of San Francisco, I avail myself of this opportunity to 
make several additions to my first notice of that remarkable family. 
As I had anticipated, the number of species belonging to it is rap- 
idly increasing. I have now no less than six distinct species before 
me, presenting even a far wider range of differences than I was 
prepared to find among them, which has led me to establish several 
new genera, besides Embiotocci. Respecting the family characters, 
I have to add that there is another space deprived of scales, extend- 
ing along the middle line of the belly, from the sides of the ventrals 
to the base of the anal, undoubtedly a provision to facilitate the 
dilatation of the abdominal cavity during the growth of the aston- 
ishingly large young of these fishes. It is rather surprising, how- 
ever, that this scaleless space exists also in the males, and this 
might be considered an objection to the explanation just given, 
did we not find also tits and mammary glands in the males of 
Mammalia. Nevertheless the males and females differ widely 
from one another, in each of the four species of which I have 
thus far been able to obtain both sexes. This circumstance adds 
greatly to the difficulty of distinguishing and characterizing the 
species. The males are uniformly smaller than the females, con- 
trary to what has been observed in the genus Poecilia, in which 
the males (Mollinesia) and the females (Poecilia) differ so much 
as to have been considered as distinct genera, but agreeing in this 
respect with my genus Heterandria, in which the males are also 
smaller than the females. The difference consists chiefly in the 
peculiar form of the anterior part of the anal in the males, which 
resembles somewhat that of the male of Mallotus villosus, being 
more rigid and more expanded than in the females. The jaws 
are more or less protractile. Air bladder large and simple. In 28 
Additional Notes on the Holconoti. 
males the sexual aperture is at the summit of a projecting conical 
papilla. The genus Embiotoca as first established, does not re- 
quire modifications ; I have only to add a new species to it, and 
to mention some features by which it differs from the following 
genera: The spinous portion of the dorsal is uniformly low, so 
that the soft portion rises abruptly to a much greater height; the 
anterior articulated rays of the anal simple and not branching at 
their extremity. In the male the anterior articulated rays of the 
anal are swollen near their base, forming a continuous longitudi- 
nal ridge on each side of the fin. This ridge is variously modified 
in the different species. The jaws are moderately protractile ; 
the lower lip is fixed by a frenum to the symphysis of the lower 
maxillaries, and not free and moveable all round the jaw. The 
young of the third new species of this genus resembles exactly 
those of the two formerly described, but differ remarkably from 
those of another species belonging to a new genus which I shall 
mention below, thus showing that there are generic modifications 
in the growth of the young, though the mode of reproduction is 
exactly the same in all. In Embiotoca proper, the young resem- 
ble most remarkably the mother, about the time of their escape 
from their confinement, except in color; in addition to the pecu- 
liarities described in my former paper, I would mention a large 
black diffused spot upon the anterior part of the soft portion of 
the dorsal and of the anal, which is found in the young of all 
three species of this genus, whilst E. Caryi alone shows signs 
of it when full grown. The male papilla is rather large. 
Embiotoca Caryi.—I possess the most complete series of this 
species, for besides two pregnant females with young ready to 
escape, caught in July, I have males and females of various sizes 
caught in January; at this period the marsupial sac is reduced to 
a fusiform tube, extending from the sexual aperture to the an- 
terior extremity of the air bladder, but the state of preservation 
of the intestines did not allow a minute examination of its struc- 
ture. The male, which is more elongated than the female, has 
also much brighter colors: the longitudinal and transverse bands 
of the body are more distinct, the black specks upon the soft 
dorsal and the anal are more brilliant, and the cheeks, opercule, 
jaws and chin are adorned with bright blue blotches more or less 
confluent ; the ground color of the body seems to vary from 
olive on the back to a yellow-orange upon the sides. 
Embiotoca; Jacksoni—The form of the male does not differ 
quite as much from that of the female in this species, as in the 
preceding, though it is also slightly narrower. The color, as far 
as I can judge from alcoholic specimens, is of a deeper olive 
green, whilst the female is more yellowish. 
Embiotoca lateralis, Agass.—Resembles closely E. Jacksoni in 
general form and appearance, but seems to bring forth its young Additional Notes on the Holconoti. 
29 
at an earlier period, for among several specimens caught in July, 
only one was full of young, and that was a younger specimen. 
The body is dark olive above ; sides with alternate silver-gray 
and rusty bands; fins brown. In younger specimens the longi- 
tudinal bands are more yellow, and the fins also yellowish. 
Rhacochilus, To-ass.—In this genus the vertical fins have the 
same structure as in Embiotoca and the sexes differ in the same 
manner ; but the jaws are very protractile, almost as in our south- 
ern Lachnolaemus, and the lips very fleshy, the lower lip especially 
broad, lobed and have their outer margin free from the jaw bone 
all round, and not attached by a frenum to the chin, as in Embi- 
otoca and Amphistichus. Teeth few and only in front of the 
jaws, and none on the sides. The body is also more elongated. 
The young differ widely from those of the preceding genus : 
their form is more elongated, the caudal remarkably large and 
long and truncate at its extremity, whilst it is forked in Embi- 
otoca; and the extremities of the dorsal and anal extend beyond 
the base of the caudal, whilst in Embiotoca they do not even 
reach it; finally there is no black speck upon either the dorsal 
or the anal. 
Rhacochilus toxotes, Agass.—Color uniform olive above; sides 
silvery with light longitudinal bands; female darker than male; 
vertical fins and ventrals dark ; male blackish upon opercule and 
cheeks. Female with mature young in July. 
Amphistichus, Agass.—The spinous rays of the dorsal shorter 
than the soft rays, but gradually increasing in length, so that the 
soft portion of the fin does not rise abruptly higher than the 
spinous portion, though the anterior soft rays are the longest of the 
fin. Articulated rays of the anal all divided, and not simple in front 
as in Embiotoca, nevertheless the fin is separated into an anterior 
and a posterior portion, by the introduction in the male of a short 
flat-triangular ray, which produces a deep emargination in the 
outline of the fin, and in the female by the presence of two or 
three articulated rays of equal length with the others but much 
stouter and oftener divided. In the male the anterior rays are 
swollen as in Embiotoca and Rhacochilus. Papilla of the males 
very large. Jaws little protractile ; with two rows of teeth above 
and below, lips thin, lower lip not free in the middle. The 
young have not been observed, the specimens obtained having 
been caught in January. 
Amphistichus argenteus, Agass.—Bluish gray above, sides sil- 
very with occasional indistinct and irregular transverse bands of 
olive color. Vertical fins yellowish. 
Holconotus, Agass.—Dorsal long, and lowest behind, its spi- 
nous rays being the longest; the anterior and posterior parts of 30 
Additional Notes on the Holconoti. 
this fin are not separated by a depression, but its outline descends 
regularly from the fourth or fifth anterior spinous rays to the 
posterior extremity. Structure of the anal the same as in Ain- 
phistichus but proportionally longer; the sexes differing also in 
the same manner. Young not known, the female obtained hav- 
ing been caught in January. Jaws very slightly protractile, lower 
jaw projecting; two rows of teeth in the upper jaw only. Lips 
not fleshy; lower lip free all round. 
Holconotus rhodoterus, Agass.—Bluish gray above, silvery upon 
the sides with rose colored spots in irregular longitudinal lines; 
vertical fins, especially the caudal, reddish. 
I have just been informed (February 28th) that the California 
Academy of Natural Sciences claims for Dr. W. P. Gibbons the 
discovery of the viviparous fishes upon which I had established 
the family Holconoti and the genus Embiotoca; but upon what 
ground I am not informed. This is a question in which I am 
entirely disinterested, having thus far been only the historian of 
the discovery and the biographer and godfather of the fishes. 
Dates and reference to other publications which may have been 
made in California, will easily settle the question of priority which 
as far as the discovery of the viviparity of these fishes is con- 
cerned, rests between Mr. Jackson and Dr. Gibbons, and not with 
me. I learn also, from the same quarter, that Dr. Gibbons has 
dedicated to me a new species of this family and that the Cali- 
fornia Academy has inscribed another species to him ; but I have 
not yet seen descriptions of them. Should either of these species 
coincide with one or the other of those described above, I shall 
of course adopt, in the more elaborate paper, accompanied with 
figures, which I am now preparing upon this family, the names 
first established in accordance with the rules of our science. 
The knowledge of this curious family is likely to lead to many 
other interesting disclosures. Dr. Thom. H. Webb, one of the 
scientific corps of the Mexican Boundary Line Commission, has 
sent me under date of Dec. 9th, 1853, the following abstract from 
his diary, dated San Diego, May 3, 1852: “ Capt. Ottinger, of 
the U. S. Revenue service, caused his seine to be drawn for us 
to-day. Caught many Tiger and Shovel-nose sharks, two floun- 
ders, . . . also a number of small fish, about two or three inches 
long, each of which contained, ten or twelve living young.” He 
adds : “ The viviparous progeny I exhibited to the Commissioner 
and several of the gentlemen of the Commission ; and I also kept 
quite a number of them alive, in a vessel of water, for some days. 
In the mother they were not, so to speak, indiscriminately hud- 
dled together, but methodically arranged, and so placed in relation 
to each other as to form a compact series, without the loss of in- 
terstitial space, in other words, so disposed as to best accommodate 
the family. On leaving San Diego, I took extra pains to preserve Additional Notes on the Holconoti. 
31 
specimens of this fish, but these special efforts proved an injury,” 
&c. We may therefore confidently look forward for some new 
type of viviparous fish from San Diego. Mr. Wra. Couper of 
Toronto, Canada, writes me also that an intelligent young man 
residing in Buffalo, New York, obtained some fish taken at Black 
Rock, in which a number of young were found enclosed in a 
pouch attached to or near the back bone, resembling the parent 
in form. May this not be some Cyprinodont? I am inclined to 
believe it, since I have of late ascertained that many of our rep- 
resentatives of that family, if not all, bring forth living young, 
though these are very small at the time of their birth. 
That among our Sharks the Dogfish (Acanihias americanus, 
St.), is viviparous, has long been known. So is also Mustelus 
Canis, Mitch. But Mr. Thayer S. Abert, of the U. S. Engineers, 
informs me that the Stingray of the coast of North Carolina also 
brings forth living young. This would be, as far as I know, the 
first example of a viviparous species in the family of Rays.