32 ON THE ZOOLOGICAL POSITION OF TEXAS. 



interoperciilnm covering only half that bone; fifth, scales of preop. 

 ercular limb none; seventh, scales ascending high between rajs of 

 anal fin ; eleventh, spinous dorsal depressed, the ninth spine half as 

 long as the longest, and two-thirds as long as the tenth. These points 

 of difference are those given by Professor Gill as characters of the M. 

 salmoides, excepting the last. The form of the spinous dorsal tin is 

 nearly that of the BL floridanus,, but the proportions of the spines are 

 those assigned by Grill to the 21, salmoides. 



The difterences in the size of the cheek scales, with the characters of 

 the nakedness of the preopercle, and half nakedness of the interoi^ercle, 

 wouklindicate a valid third species of the genus, were the characters 

 assigned by Professor Gill permanent in the species to which he assigns 

 them. Such supposed species would not be the Bioplites nuecensis of 

 Girard, because this author exjiressly states that the scales of the cheeks 

 and opercula are of equal size. I have, however, examined some 21. 

 floridanus, from Florida, in my collection, and find these also to differ 

 from parts of Professor Gill's description. I find the cheek scales large, 

 as stated by Gill, and different from the Texan specimens, but the inter- 

 opercle is only half covered by its scales. The spinous dorsal presents 

 almost exactly the characters of the Texan specimen, and the soft dorsal 

 has the rays 1-13, the number assigned by Gill to the 2L salmoides. The 

 second dorsal and anal fins are naked, as Gill describes. 



It ax)pears, then, that the only important character which distin- 

 guishes the Texan form from the Ploridan is the much smaller size of 

 the cheek scales. I do not know how constant this character will ijrove. 

 Perhaps some of the names recently given to Mexican forms may be ap- 

 plicable to a variety so defined. 



The Llano fish is rather light colored, and there is a dusky line along 

 the middle of each row of scales, which are especially distinct below 

 the lateral line. 



I may add here that it seems that the name and characters of the 

 genus 2Iicropterus were based on a monstrous or mutilated specimen. 

 The characters thus derived were false and absurd. Under ordinary 

 circumstances this name should be relegated to the limbo of undeter- 

 minable myths. The next name in order is Callmrus Eaf., which is only 

 applicable to young fishes of this genus, and was almost as badly char- 

 acterized as 2Iicro])t€rus. This name should, however, be adopted, as 

 its characters were drawn from normal objects. As, however, 2iicrop- 

 terus has obtained some currency, and as the name Calliunis is pecul- 

 iarly false in significance, I retain the former provisionally. 



