164 REPORTS ON INVESTIGATIONS AND PROJECTS. 



while Dr. Goldfarb and the reviewer swam away. Up to a distance of ap- 

 proximately 100 yards the faint sounds made in the above manner were 

 distinctly heard by both observers with head and body immersed. At this 

 distance Dr. Mayer tapped the two pieces of coral together in the air. They 

 were clearly audible to the observer with head in the air, but unfortunately 

 we did not try the experiment of giving the sound in the air with the ob- 

 servers' heads immersed. 



In Dr. Parker's work no mention is made of the possibility of vision being 

 responsible even for the slight responses he obtained. In the opening sen- 

 tences of his present paper he says that the fish can feel sounds through the 

 skin, lateral line organs, and through the ears proper. One of the strong 

 criticisms urged against all of Parker's auditory work by certain German 

 reviewers is that he does not exclude the possibility of response through 

 vision (i. e., visual response to actual wave-motions produced by the sound- 

 ing body). In the present paper, although he cites the work of Hunter 

 (1782) on the responses of fishes to the noise produced by the discharge of 

 fowling-pieces, he does not consider the work of Bernoulli (Zur Frage des 

 Hoerenvermoegens der Fische, Arch. f. d. ges. Physiol, cxxxiv, 633-644; 

 see review of 1910 literature in Journal of Animal Behavior, vol. i, p. 436), 

 who made similar experiments and arrived at similar conclusions. 



