BROAD-NOSED EEL. 189 



appear in spring-, and bite readily at the hook, which Common Eels in that neighbourhood 

 will not. They have a large head, a blunter nose, thicker skin, and are less fat than the 

 common sort; neither are they so much esteemed; nor do they often exceed three or four 

 pounds in weight." The term grig is also applied to any kind ' of Eel, especially to those 

 individuals of small growth. 



I have taken this Broad-nosed species, in companj^ with Mr. Masefield, of Ellerton Hall, 

 on several occasions, in Knighton Reservoir. Our plan is to set trimmers in the different 

 parts of the pool baited with small Roach or other bright coloured fish, the bait being 

 near the bottom ; the bull-headed appearance and great thick lips, generally speaking, indi- 

 cate the species. As already stated, as food it may be discarded ; at least to the palate its 

 flesh is very disappointing when one thinks of the deliciousness of the " white armed 

 goddess," the Common Eel. 



Dr. Giinther describes this species as follows : — " The length of the head is contained 

 once and a half, or once and three fourths in the distance of the gill opening from the 

 origin of the dorsal fin, and twice and a half in its distance from the vent. Distance 

 between the commencements of the dorsal and anal fins shorter than- the head. Lips broad and fleshy, 

 lower jaw prominent. Angle of the mouth below the hind margin of the eye, which is rather 

 small, much shorter than the snout. Tail considerably longer than the body. Mandibulary 

 teeth in a single band, without longitudinal groove." 



This species occurs in Europe, the Nile, China, New Zealand, and the West Indies; it 

 is the only form of all the varieties of the Common Eel, which is regarded by Giinther as 

 entitled to specific rank. " The width and length of the snout cannot be taken as a distinctive 

 character, as there are found all intermediate forms between the extremes. I am more in- 

 clined to consider the situation of the origin of the dorsal fin, and the development of the 

 lips, to indicate a distinct species." 



Some years ago when I had been for some time occupied in dissecting a number of 

 Common Eels and a couple of Congers, I observed the invariable presence of two sub-triangular 

 openings in the fleshy portion of the head, just at its juncture with the spinal column. My 

 first impression with regard to the use of these orifices was that they were connected with 

 the auditory organs, and that they probably led to the vestibular cavity. Although so far, I 

 believe, as has hitherto been observed, the existence of external auditory organs in the whole 

 class of fishes is very exceptional — the Skates amongst the cartilaginous order, and a few of 

 the members belonging to the Gadida: and Clupeida amongst the osseous order alone possessing 

 them — still I thought it not improbable that the Eel, which is commonly supposed to hear 

 well, and which is occasionally an overland traveller, might prove another exception to the 

 general rule. I may observe that Mr. Cholmondeley Pennell, in his work 7he Angler Natu- 

 ralist (p. 397), asserts the presence of an "ear or auditory aperture" amongst the various 

 mucus pores about the head, but from the most minute examination of a large number of 

 Eels' heads I can confidently affirm that no such external auditory aperture exists. I have, 

 therefore, no doubt that Mr. Pennell must have mistaken two of the mucus pores for ears. 



Upon my inserting a bristle in each of these orifices, and on clearing away the flesh 

 from the head, I found that each bristle traversed a closed-in duct or tube in the cranium, 

 and came out just above the orbital bone (see fig. i). On making a vertical section of the 

 skull, and examining with great care the vestibular sacs, I became convinced that the tubular 

 ducts had no connection with them nor with the auditory nerve (fig. 4). Each of these tubes, 

 which in the Common Eel is just wide enough to admit a fine piece of silk-gut, terminates 

 in a membranous fold or hollow in the subcutaneous tissue just above the eye (fig. 5), and 

 contains a certain quantity of thin fluid or lymph, which, by the way, bears no resemblance 

 to niucns. Are these cavities reservoirs for the supply of fluid to lubricate the surface, and 

 may we conjecture that the lymjjh -is drawn up the tubular ducts by capillary attraction ? 



