1918.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 335 



NOTE ON GISTEL'S GENERA OF FISHES. 

 BY DAVID STARR JORDAN. 



In 1848, Johannes Gistel of Stuttgart published a peculiarly con- 

 fused and crabbed volume called Naturgeschichfe des Thierreichs, 

 fi'ir hohere Schulen, containing new generic names offered as sub- 

 stitutes for old ones, and in every department of Zoology. Most 

 of the names he proposed to change were regarded by him, often 

 without reason, as being preoccupied. The book seems to have 

 been overlooked by workers in systematic zoology, and in every 

 field. 



In this paper I give the names of genera of fishes, as offered by 

 Gistel. Nearly all of these occur in Gistel's introductory pages, 

 these having their pagination in Roman. For a transcript of the 

 names referring to fishes I am indebted to Mr. Barton A. Bean of 

 the U. S. National Museum, and to Mr. C. Davies Sherborn of the 

 British Museum. I have later received a copy of the book itself 

 through the courtesy of Mr. E. P. Van Duzee of the California 

 Academy of Sciences. 



Of Gistel's new names, the following seem to be valid : 



ABRON Gistel, p. X, replaces Platystoma Agassiz. 

 DAPALIS, p. XI, replaces Smerdis Ag. (fossil). 

 ENIXE, p. IX, replaces Drepane Cuvier, and also the substitute 

 name, Harpochirus Cantor, 1849. 



HYPODYTES, p. VIII, intended to replace Apistus or Apistes 

 Cuvier; but its use by Quoy and Gaimard is especially mentioned 

 and the language used (highly elliptical) {"Aspistes Quoy, Astrol., 

 Fisch.") would indicate that Apistus longispinis should be taken as 

 type. This species is type of Paracentropogon Bleeker, w^hich name 

 Hypodytes should apparently replace. 



NOTACMON, p. IX, replaces Eurynotus Ag. (fossil). 



ODONUS, p. XI, is offered as a substitute for Xenodon Riippell 

 (1835), preoccupied. It is prior to Erythrodon Riippell and Pyrodon 

 Kaup, also offered as substitutes. But Swainson in 1839 called the 

 same genus Zenodon, but whether offered by Swainson as a sub- 

 stitute or as a characteristic piece of carelessness is not made clear, 

 most Hkely the latter. Fowler accepts Zenodon as a substitute for 



