admitted as a true Labroid, differs from the other genera of that family 

 by the separation of the inferior pharyngeal bones, and would therefore 

 be an Acanthopteran of Miiller, and consequently a member of a different 

 order from the Labroids. 



But even if the Labroids, the Pomacentroids and the Chromoids are 

 ordinally distinct from the Acanthopteri, they can scarcely be considered 

 a3 natural associates of the Scomberesocoids, which have, by Miiller. 

 been placed in the same order, but under a distinct suborder. The Scom- 

 beresocoids appear, indeed, to be much more nearly related to the Scom- 

 broids and their allies than to any other members of the class. This 

 relation we perhaps see more strongly in the genus Scomberesox than any 

 other, but in all it is quite apparent. The pinnules or false finlets of 

 Scomberesox above and below the caudal peduncle remind us at once of 

 the true Scombroids. The structure of the scales, the mode of squama- 

 tion, and the lateral carina add to the likeness. We even see an analogous 

 instance of the prolongation of the maxillaries, nasal and frontal bones, 

 to form a beak in the family of Xiphioids, which, by all naturalists, have 

 ever been regarded as very near allies of the Scombroids, and by many 

 as belonging to the same family. 



The Aulostomoids have also many characters in common with the 

 Scomberesocoids, and should be apparently classed near them- To those 

 who object, on account of the different nature of the fin rays, to the like- 

 ness of Scomberesox and the Scombroids as not being indicative of affinity. 

 we would refer to the well known Solenostomi (Channorhynchi of Cantor 

 or Fistularioe of Linnasus.) Those fishes are as totally destitute of spines 

 as any of the Scomberesocoids, and yet no naturalist can overlook their 

 affinity to the Aulostomi of Lacepede or Polyptericlithys of Bleeker, each 

 of which have a number of spines before the rayed dorsal fin, and are thus, 

 if we look to single characters only, truly referable to the Acanthopteri. 

 But why need we say anything on the futility of an ordinal classification, 

 based on the nature of the rays alone ? It is only necessary to mention 

 the Ichthyoscopi of Swainson and Leptoscopi and Dactyloscopi of Gill 

 among the Uranoscopoids ; the Aspidophoroides of Lacepede among the 

 Agonoids ; the genus Gobiopus of Gill, and others among the Gobioids. 

 and the whole family of Pseudochromoids. Convinced, then, that the 

 nature of the rays alone is not sufficient to determine the affinities of 

 fishes, and as there are no important anatomical differences, we have ap- 

 proximated both the Aulostomatoids and the Scomberesocoids to the 

 Scombroids, as well as the Echenioids, which are related to the same 

 fishes through means of Elacates. 



To those who refer to the abdominal position of the ventral fins, as an 

 argument against the affinity of Scomberesox and the Scombroids, we 

 point to the same Aulostomoids, to the Sphyraenoids, the Atherinoids. 

 and Campylodontoids, and perhaps the Gasterosteoids. 



The likeness of Scomberesox to the Scombroids has already been 



