GENERAL ACCOUNT OF THE FISH FAUNA 257 



between the Patagonian fish fauna and that of these better-known fishing grounds outweigh the 

 resemblances, and .f we are to succeed in descnbing the general facies of fePatagoman fauna by 

 analogy with that of other regions it will be necessary to cast our mmds still farther afield. The differ- 

 ences have already been summarized (in part) in Table 3. Four notable ones are: predominance of 

 Nototheniiformes the relative unimportance of Gadidae and of flatfish, and an absence of Salmomdae 

 of useful size (which was not previously mentioned). In all these respects the Patagonian fauna differs 

 markedly from that of better-known fishing grounds in the northern hemisphere. It is also most 

 Unfortunately true that relative scarcity and small size of flatfishes and Salmomdae are features 

 common to all the other fishing grounds of the southern hemisphere. Consider, then, an area in the 

 northern hemisphere which we have not yet taken into account-the North Pacific. If we allow 

 ourselves to imagine this fauna without its two best fishes, salmon and halibut, what would be its 

 emating characteristics? Predominance of Scorpaemdae and allied families, especially Hexagram- 

 mle (with Ophiodon elongatus, the cultus cod) and the Cottidae or sculpins. Herring would be 

 Cort nt, but though Gadidae would be fewer than in other parts of the northern hemisphere they 

 n s'ili rank high The relative importance of Merluccius productus, a true hake hitherto despised 

 on that favoured coast, would be much enhanced. • , . . 



Now Jordan (,,05, vol. „. pp. 50. e. seq.) has pointed to the c ose analogy wh.eh ex.sts between 

 the exdusnely southern Notothemiformes and certain families of the great group of ma.l-cheeked 

 fishes whch L calls Pare.oplitae (including the Hexagrautmidae, etc.). Of the Notothenndae he 

 retarklAeir general resemblances to small Hexagrammidae •, and a little later he speaks of them as 

 ■ he n ipod s of the Cottidae and Hexagramm.dae ; although lacking the bony stay of the latter, they 

 show severa analogical resemblances and have very similar habits', and aga.n ' . . ^Harpagrtendae 

 resemb e u pins even more closely '. To th,s may be added the close superfiaal resemblances between 

 o hewia nt Antarcttc) Nototheniiform fishes (Ba.hydraconidae and Chaemch.hydae) and ye other 

 ?r,;ilsofth'emai.,cheked«..,.^^^^^^^ 

 Z ^:: ^fi^tt: ■rhrN^JSrl^alue biol„g,ca1 coLerpart of the Notothen.iform 



draw between uie r g a r f^.^oP^.n Micropadus znA Micromezistius, Merluccius productus 



callorhynchus, Clupea pallasei and C. fuegensis, Microgaaus an Sebcutodes is of 



Uckthy. spp.) m S™* Am ™^7*J.i, „„ait ons, and in colder waters the scarcity of flatfishes 

 :rj:f:Ui:ri:Tn-Uhrrngtn"he southern hem.sphere. Sizeable Salmonidae are also unknown 



