IQ 342 



temporalis", or pterotic, in spite of tlie fact, that lie has rightly observed that the "hinder 

 part" of his "ala temporalis" contains Ihe exterior semicircular auditory canal, as the i)terotic 

 does in other fishes, and that his "sciuaiiia temiioralis" here docs not take any share in the 

 formation of the wall of the brain cavity, as the pterotic normally does. The coalesced 

 epiotics together with the supraoccipital are described as "occipitale superius"; but he has, 

 however, observed (b, p. 144) that: "Die in den Gehôrkapseln sich entwickelnden occipital, 

 extern., epiotica, sind mit der untern Fläche des occipital, superius verwachsen", which fact 

 he later repeats (c, p. 18() and especially p. 207). In a parenthesis on p. 142 he states: "parietal, 

 lassen sich nicht als abgesonderte Platten darstellen", and later, on j). 246 he declares, that he 

 has not been able to find parietals in several fishes, among others (kislerosteus (where parie- 

 tals are present!) and Fislnlaria; "sie sind entweder als völlig mit den frontalia verwachsen, 

 oder überhaupt fehlend zu betrachten." He rightly describes the parasphenoidal fossa for 

 the eye-muscles and points out that there is no proper eye-muscle canal; further the pre- 

 frontals (b, p. 188) (only his remark about the attachment of the "Infraorbitalbogen" is wrong, 

 in as much infraorbitals are totally wanting!). In the snout region (b, p. 221— 22) he commits 

 a mistake in regarding the whole dorsally visible i)art as one bone, the mesethmoid, his 

 "septum narium"; his "vomer" is only the ventrally projecting, keclshaped i)art of the real 

 vomer (the part carrying teeth). Finally (b, p. 251i he mentions Fisliilaria among other fishes 

 which lack nasalia. It is worth pointing out that Klein is the only earlier author — as far 

 as I have seen — who has examined the inner aspect of the brain-case; the descriptions of 

 the inner structures, which — it may be said by the way — are by no means easy to make out, 

 are dis])ersed throughout his work; a good deal is to be found in (c) on page 206—07. Upon 

 the whole Kl.'s account is very scattered; the principal descriptions of the posterior part of 

 the skull will be found in (a, p. 325) b, |)p. 141-144; of the anterior part 188-89; p. 221-222; 

 several details are found in c, p. 140, 186, 206 etc. 



Jordan and Evermann state 21 a, p. 755) tliat tlie long tubiform snout in Fislnlaria is 

 "formed by the symplectic, proethmoid (=? prefrontal), metapterygoid, mesopterygoid (= ento- 

 pterygoid), quadrate, ])alatines, vomer, and mesethmoid." "Post-temporal coossified with the 

 cranium. Branchiostcgals 5 to 7." "(lill-rakers obsolete. Basibranchial elements wanting." 

 And on j). 756 they add a tabular formula of the branchial skeleton after Mr. Hutteh, which 

 is correct, save on two points: 1) a first basibranchial is present, and 2) the 3 pharyngo- 

 branchials are to be referred to the second, third and fourth arch, not to the first, second 

 and third. Already in 1871 Cope (8, p. 437), calling attention to the structure of the branchial 

 skeleton in the fishes, for which he founded his group Htmibranchii, ascribed to Fislnlaria 

 "three osseous anterior superior branchihyals (= epibranchials) and three superior pha- 

 ryngeals, directed forwards." 



Siebenrock (53, PI. 5, Fig. 17) figures the brain-case of '/<". scrrata", seen from above; 

 the figure is good in most respects but defective on one essential point: the sutures lietween 

 the supraoccipital and the epiotics are omitted, because S. regards the supraoccipital ^ the 

 two epiotics as one bone, which he calls "Supraoccipitale" (so). Describing on p. 131 the 

 connections of the posttemporal (^.Suprascapulare", s. sc.) he says: "Die sonst übliche Ver- 

 bindungsweise mit dem Paroccipitale (= epiotic) kann hier nicht stattlinden, weil dieser 

 Knochen gänzlich fehlt. Eine weitere Merkwürdigkeit bilden die Parietalia, die zu einer 

 unpaaren Platte vereinigt sind und vom Supraocciiiitale bei F. lahacaria Linné nahezu, bei 

 F. scrrala Bloch aber gänzlich bedeckt werden. Daher reichen die F'rontalia (fr.) so weit 

 nach rückwärts, dass sie nach Wegnahme der Sujjrascapularia f= posttemi)orals) theilweise 

 den Hinterrand des Schädels begrenzen helfen." What S. liere regards as the coalesced 

 parictals is simply the supraoccipital (shown in my figure 6 on PI. I as so), and there is no 

 difference between the species; in my specimens of "F. serrala" (i. e. petimba), the narrow 

 supraoccipital is quite as visible as in F. tabacaria. 



Swinnerton (56 a, p. 575 f. f.) compares the skulls of (iasterosteiis . Syiuiiiathus and 

 Fislnlaria, which he believes all to be more or less related to each other and therefore has 

 put together in one group, his Thoraroslci. In tpioting S. below, I emphasize the niistak'es 



