330 



FISHERY BULLETIN OF THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 



west coast of Florida. It is 00111111011 or abundant 

 througliout its range. 



This species lias been recorded a number of times 

 as occurring north of Albemarle Sound. Smith 

 (1907) states that "It ranges as far north as New 

 York, but is most common from Chesapeake Bay 

 to the Gulf Coast." From New York it has been 

 recorded by Jordan and Goss (1889), by Jordan 

 and Evermann (1898) and by Bean (fith Ann. 

 Rept. Forest Fish Game Commission, New York, 

 p. 472. 1902 : ibid., 7th Ann. Rep., p. 456, 1903 ; Cat. 

 Fish New York, p. 720, 1903) . 



Smith does not .state whether he actually ex- 

 amined specimens from Chesapeake Bay: while, 

 on the other hand, the rather extensive collections 

 of Parol ichfhys made by Schroeder in Chesapeake 

 Bay and reported on by Hildebrand and Schroeder 

 (Bull. U. S. Bur. Fish., vol. 43, pt. 1, p. 165, 1928) 

 all represented dentatus and not a single specimen 

 of lethostigma was taken. In this study also, no 

 lethostigma was found among the extensive col- 

 lections obtained by others in Chesapeake Bay. 

 It is, therefore, safe to state that the species does 

 not occur in Chesapeake Bay. 



Likewise, the repeated records of this species 

 from New Yoi'k evidently are not based on the 

 study of any specimens collected there. They 

 have a common origin and may be traced to an 

 cironeous interpretation of De Kay's work (Zool. 

 New York, Fishes, pp. 299-300) by Gunther (Cat. 

 Fish. Brit. Mus., vol. 4, pp. 426^130, 1862) and 

 Jordan and Goss (1889). De Kay described two 

 species of left-handed-flounders which he desig- 

 nated as Plafexsa obJonga and Plafrsxa ocellifer. 

 Both of these species are evidently referable to 

 Paralichthys dcnfah/ft (Linnaeus), judging by De 

 Kay's accounts. His PJafes-^a ocellifrr is without 

 a doubt the same as Paralichthys dentatus, since 

 his figure shows the typical color pattern of that 

 species, while no other species is known from New 

 York to which this figure may apply. It, there- 

 fore, only remains to consider what his ohlonga 

 represents. The author distinguishes his obJonga 

 from his ocellifer, by the angulated shape of the 

 caudal, the lesser number of rays in the dorsal 

 and the lack of ocellated spots. These three char- 

 acters, as distinguished by De Kay, are not ten- 

 able. The number of dorsal rays as given by De 

 Kay, SS and 95, fall within the range of variation 

 of dentatUis (table 6, p. 279) . The lack of ocellated 



spots in De Kay's ohlonga may well be ascribed 

 to his having dark individuals in which the ocel- 

 lated spots are faint; such individual specimens 

 of dentatus occur sometimes. P. dentatus always 

 has an angulated caudal, and the material on 

 which De Kay based his ocellifer with a sup- 

 posedly rounded caudal, either had- the caudal 

 frayed at the end or it was shrunken so that it 

 appeared rounded. There is hardly a doubt that 

 ocellifer and ohlonga of De Kay refer to the same 

 species, dentatus of Linnaeus. This was correctly 

 pointed out long ago by Stoi'er (1846 and 1863). 



Besides the three characters pointed out by De 

 Kay, his figure shows another difference which, 

 however, is not mentioned in the description, 

 namely, that his ohlonga shows a much wider 

 intei'orbital. Gunther who did not have any speci- 

 mens but relied solely on De Kay's account, kept 

 the two species separate, emphasizing the differ- 

 ences in the interorbital width shown by the fig- 

 ures. Jordan and Goss following Gunther, also 

 state that ocellifer and ohlonga of De Kay are 

 distinct and that the latter species is the same as 

 lethostigmu. This is evidently the basis of the 

 frequent reference of lethostigma to New York. 

 While the combination of wide interorbital and 

 the lack of ocellated siwts generally does distin- 

 guish lethostigma from dentatus when specimens 

 of like size are compared, the fornix- character 

 varies greatly with size in both species and the 

 latter varies much with individual fish. The de- 

 cisive difference, the character which would show 

 without a doubt whether the ohlonga of De Kay 

 was based on specimens of lethostigma, namely, 

 the number of gill rakers, is not given by that 

 author. Furthermore, De Kay states in regard to 

 his ohloTiga that it ''is common along our sandy 

 shores, and is procured abundantly in the months 

 of September and October." This statement cer- 

 tainly can not apply to lethostigma. On the basis 

 of the data now extant, therefore, the present 

 species is not known to occur north of North Cai'o- 

 lina. 



The species prefers a mud bottom (p. 324), and 

 is generally found along the shore, in bays, sounds 

 and lagoons in comparatively shallow water where 

 it is captured readily by si>earing. This flounder 

 also enters fresh water where it is sometimes taken 

 in numbers. It has been reported from Lake 

 George, St. John's River, and Ocklawaha River 



