348 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 



According to Doctor Koelz, to whom Doctor Clemens submitted part of his col- 

 lection for identification, the above species are all referable to his (Koelz's) L. artedi 

 ;ind can not be separated by the characters employed by Jordan and Evermann (1911) 

 or Clemens when abundant material is used. Doctor Clemens states (p. 5) that he 

 found it difficult to separate the young L. eriensis from L. artedi, and that his specimens 

 of L. prognathvs are of doubtful detemiination. 



Assuming that the identifications of the above species be correct, then, according 

 to current practice. Doctor Clemens employed too few specimens for his length and 

 weight averages. It is clear that 55 specimens distributed among 7 or more age groups 

 can not furnish very accurate averages for all age groups. Likewise, no attempt 

 was made to obtain homogeneous material for the growth detemiinations, as the 

 individuals of a species were taken at different ports on Lake Erie. 



In his curves illustrating the growth rates an anomaly apparently appears which 

 Doctor Clemens finds it difficult to explain. He finds that his L. sisco Tiuronius is 

 a faster growing fish than L. eriensis, the jumbo herring of Lake Erie. He refuses 

 to accept this result and states that it is probably due to his difficulty in estimating 

 the age of the former species. "In the majority of scales [of L. sisco huronius] some 

 of the winter bands were difficult to distinguish and there was evidence that in some 

 cases at least one ^\inter band was not recorded." What this evidence was he does not 

 state. It appears more probable, however, that Doctor Clemens's difficulty was due 

 to a failure to discriminate between the true and the false annulus. In his drawings 

 of the cisco scales his annuli are represented as broad bands of closely appro.ximated 

 circuH. Presmnably these broad bands continue around the scale, though only that 

 part that lies in the anterior field is drawn. . As may be seen from my photographs in 

 this paper, such broad annuH are not typical of the coregonid scales. The coregonid 

 annulus is characterized rather by the divergence of the circuli in the lateral fields, 

 the presence of a narrow, clear band, devoid of any sculpture, in the posterior field, 

 and the presence of a narrow, sometimes thickened band of incomplete, broken, anasto- 

 mosed and usually appro .ximated circuli in the anterior field. A true annulus can be 

 traced with varying distinctness entirely around the scale through all its areas. The 

 author's second annulus in his jumbo scale may not be a year mark at all. It hardly 

 appears reasonable to believe that the fastest growing cisco in the Great Lakes should 

 grow as slowly in its second year as the dri^wing indicates. For these reasons I am 

 unable to accept Doctor Clemens's results on the age and growth of the herring. 



JUVENILE LAKE HERRING 



Very little is known about the yoimg herring and very few have ever been 

 reported as taken. Hankinson (1914) found the juveniles (identified by Koelz as 

 very probably young herring) very abundant along the shores of Lake Superior at 

 Whitefish Point in water less than 3 feet deep. Fishermen report that millions 

 swarm around the docks and piers at Bay City and Alpena in the fall, but samples of 

 these so-called herring proved to be the minnow Notropis afherinoides. Doctor 

 Koelz's Lake Huron collection contained one specimen in its first year. It measured 

 180 millimeters in length and was taken bv a trout iiet in 15 fathoms off Alpena. (See 

 fig. 11.) 



