MILNEK ON THE GRAYLING. loD 



Outario, North America; T. Mertensii described from a drawing- of a 

 grayling' from Kamtchatlca. In 18(50, B. N. Dybowsky named a gray- 

 ing, from Southern Siberia, T. Gruhii. 



Siebohl, in his work on tiie fresh-water fishes of Central Europe, 

 under Tkyinallus vulgaris, inchuies, T. vexiUifer^ T. thi/mallus, and T.yym- 

 nothorax of all authors, and, in a foot note, is iucliued to refer T. gymno- 

 gastcr to the same species. 



Giinther believes that Tkymallu.s vexillifer, T.tliymaUns, and T.gymno- 

 ihorax as referred to by all authors are one and the same species with 

 the first-named T. vulgaris of Xilsson. T. oniariensifi and T. Mertensii 

 he casts aside as invaluable; the latter probably because it was described 

 from a drawing more or less inaccurate of the species it was intende<l 

 to represent. 



The genus has a wide range in the northern latitudes from La[>]and 

 through England and Northern and Central Europe to Italy; through- 

 out Siberia and Kamtchatka; in the northern fresh waters of Alaska 

 and British America; and in at least two localities in the United States, 

 that of a portion of INIicliigan and some of the ui)per tributaries of the 

 Missouri Kiver. 



A very fine specimen of the grayling from the region where Richard- 

 son procured his specimens is in the possession of the National Museum 

 collection, which corresponds quite nearly with his original description. 



It measures, in extreme length, seventeen and a half inches; and the 

 dorsal fin exceeds in dimensions everything that has been described or 

 figured, excei)t the original figure* of Richardson's type of the species 

 T. sigui/er, in the appendix to the narrative of Sir John Franklin's first 

 journey to the Arctic Sea. 



A comparison of the proportions of the specimen in hand vrith those 

 which have been compiled from the figure t published in the Fauna 

 Boreali-Americana of a specimen from Great Bear Lake affords very 

 close similarity of characters. The most marked variations in the two 

 series of measnrements are the greater height of body in the drawing 

 and slightly greater length in the maxillary. The description and figure 

 of Richardson make the number of scales in the lateral line to be 87, 

 ■while in the Fort Simj^son specinten there are 98. 



In the description of T. signi/er, it is stated that there are no teeth 

 upon the tongue, while they are present in the specimen. 



In the descrii)tion, especiall}- in the measurement of the head on its lat- 

 eral and superior surfaces, and the" length of the snout, the differences are 

 much more marked. But these differences are of such extent when com- 



* Richardson states that this figure is not correct. 



tRichardson says of this figure, "I n^uch regret that that specimen, [alluding to the 

 type specimen of the species obtained trom Winter Lake,] having gone to decay, I can- 

 not compare it with the one brought bj' the hist expedition from Great Bear Laice, of 

 which the figure in the present work is an exact representation, drawn on a scale of 

 half the natural size." 



