FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 71. NO. 2 



Figure 1. — Uruphycis cliuss, draw- 

 ing from USNM 28707, courtesy 

 of the Smithsonian Institution. 



r,2»&>.>'a** 



Figure 2. — Uruphycis icniiis, 

 drawing from USNM 21029, cour- 

 tesy of the Smithsonian Institution. 



meristic and 10 morphometric characters were 

 examined on 136 U. chides and 170 U. tenuis. 

 Six meristic and four morphometric characters 

 were chosen for statistical analysis. 



METHODS 



All samples were taken between the Gulf of 

 St. Lawrence and the Virginia coast (Figure 3 

 and Appendix Table). Preliminary studies sug- 

 gested that Urophycis of the chnss-teinds com- 

 plex from the study area could be readily placed 

 into two morphs by body shape and scale size, 

 thicker-bodied, small-scaled individuals being 

 similar to published descriptions of U. te)iuis 

 and slim-bodied, larger-scaled specimens re- 

 sembling descriptions of U. chuss. Thus speci- 

 mens were tentatively identified. U. te)iuis was 

 present in the entire sampling area, whereas 

 with the exception of a few Nova Scotian shelf 

 specimens U. chnss was found in the Gulf of 

 Maine and south and west of there. Samples 

 of U. tenuis were available, by chance, from 

 three geographic areas: the Gulf of Maine 

 and southern New England waters (N.E.), the 

 eastern coast of Nova Scotia from the vicinity 

 of Halifax to the north and east (N.S.), and 

 the Northumberland Straits in the Gulf of 

 St. Lawrence adjacent to Prince Edward Island 

 (P.E.L). This geographic segregation of sam- 



ples was maintained for statistical analyses 

 because U. te)iuis was predominant in Canadian 

 waters where the species of Urophycis have been 

 regarded with confusion for many years, espe- 

 cially in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The data 

 from all specimens of U. chnss were treated 

 as one statistical sample. 



Length in the rest of this paper refers to 

 standard length unless designated otherwise. 

 Specimens 50 mm long or less were cleared 

 and stained following a method modified from 

 Hollister (1934) to count the number of fin 

 rays, gill rakers, and vertebrae. Fin rays on 

 larger specimens were counted with the aid of 

 a fine needle and occasionally by x-ray examina- 

 tion. All radiographs were taken on Picker 

 "Pictronix 200"^ x-ray equipment, using Gevaert 

 D7 Structurix Industrial x-ray Safety Film 

 (Unipac), and developed by the procedure out- 

 lined by Bartlett and Haedrich (1966). Verte- 

 bral numbers on specimens longer than 50 mm 

 were determined from radiographs and, in two 

 instances, by dissection. Lateral line scale 

 rows were counted from a point directly above 

 the upper corner of the opercular opening to 

 the base of the midcaudal ray. 



All measurements taken from specimens 



^ Reference to trade names does not imply endorse- 

 ment by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. 



480 



