76 PARKER— A CRITICAL SURVEY OF 



accustomed to life in aquaria.^ The source of sound was a "cri- 

 cri," a child's toy consisting of a slightly deformed metal key which 

 on being depressed gave forth a momentary high-pitched, penetrat- 

 ing sound. This sound was made under water at a distance of 30 

 to 60 centimeters from the fish and was in no instance followed by 

 a response. Korner (1905, p. 126), therefore, concluded that hear- 

 ing was an unproved function for the ears of fishes. 



Marage (1906) was also unable to get any responses from seven 

 species of fis'hes subjected to synthetic vowel sounds led into the 

 water through a rubber tube closed by a thin rubber diaphragm. 

 Six of these fishes (Gobio fluviatilis, Anguilla vulgaris, Esox lucius, 

 Tinea vulgaris, Cyprinus carpio, and Leuciscus rutilus) were tested 

 in confined water and one (Alburnus lucidus) in the open. 



Briining (1906) noted that stickelbacks in an aquarium were not 

 disturbed by the clapping of hands even when this was done close to 

 the top of the water and that fishes in a pond did not respond to a cry 

 though they were startled by the tread of the observer on the bank. 



Maier (1909) installed under water in an aquarium an electric 

 bell so wired that it could be controlled from outside. \A'ith this 

 device he tested eleven species of marine fishes {Gadiis morrhua, 

 Clupea harengus, Amniodytes lanceolatus, Trigla gunardus, Cottus 

 scorpius, Rhombus inaximus, Solea vulgaris, Pleuronectes platessa, 

 P. flesiis, P. limanda, and Raja clavata) and twelve species of fresh- 

 water fishes {Cyprinus carpio, Alburnus lucidus, A. bipunctatus, 

 Idus mclanotus, Gobio fluviatilis, Barbus fluviatilis, Rhodeus amarus, 

 Anguilla vulgaris, Macropodius sp., Anabas sp., Osphroniemis sp., 

 and Girardinus sp.). To the sound of the bell no reaction of any 

 kind was given by any of these fishes and Maier (1909, p. 394) 

 concluded that they possessed no powers of hearing. Nevertheless 

 he was surprised to find in connection with another line of experi- 



1 The fishes tested by Korner (1905, p. 123) were as follows: Ahraniis 

 blicca, Cobitis fossilis, Gastcrostens pungitins, Idus melanotus, Pctromyzon 

 fluviatilis, Rhodeus amarus, Betta pugnax, Callichthys fasciattis, Carassius 

 auratus, and two varieties, Chromis multicolor, C. tristramus, Eleotris sp., 

 Gambusia affinis, Geophagus brasiliensis, Girardinus candimaculatus, Haplo- 

 chiltis panchax, Heros fascetus,Pxcilia mexicana, P olyacanthus viridi-auratus , 

 Saccobranchns fossilis, Teiragonopterus sp., Trichogastcr fasciatus, and T. 

 lalius. 



