REVISION OF THE FISH FAMILY LIPARIDAE O 



chloride of lime brings these and other fishes into view, when they can 

 be picked up with a dip net or a strong pair of forceps. 



Preservation. — Special care should be taken in hardening these 

 fishes. If not properly treated they soon macerate and identification 

 then becomes difficult. Many of the museum specimens examined 

 were in a deplorable condition and practically valueless. The best 

 results are obtained by hardening overnight in a 3 to 5 per cent 

 solution of formalin, then washing off in water and running through 

 alcohol up to 75 per cent. The formalin should not be strong enough 

 to swell the tissues. If placed in strong alcohol, without first harden- 

 ing, the specimens quickly shrivel and lose their normal appearance. 

 If permanently preserved in formalin a more lifelilie appearance is 

 retained. This is especially true of the deep-sea species, which soon 

 lose their gelatinous appearance if preserved in alcohol. 



Historical} — The most comprehensive account of these fishes in 

 recent years is the work of Garman on the Discoboli, 1892. This 

 has been followed by a review of the deep-sea species by Goode 

 and Bean in Oceanic Ichthyology, 1895. Jordan and Evermann 

 give a review of the North American species in their Fishes of Middle 

 and North America, 1898. The few known Asiatic species are de- 

 scribed by Peter Schmidt in Pisces Marium Orientalium, 1904. 

 A large number of smaller papers contain notes and descriptions 

 dealing with these fishes The Europeans, lacking the wealth of 

 material found in America, have contributed but few descriptions 

 and notes. 



Jordan and Evermann, 1898, say that there are "Genera 9; species 

 about 40." Since that time the number of genera has been increased 

 and the number of species more than doubled. In the present work 

 the writer recognizes 13 genera and 1 14 species. In 1906 the Albatross 

 collected 4 new genera and 32 new species. With the discovery of 

 Acantholi'paris and Nedoliparis our knowledge of the amount of 

 modification within the family has been greatly extended. It seems 

 safe to predict that with further exploration of the Antarctic and deep- 

 sea regions the number of genera and species wUl be considerably 

 increased. 



In order to facilitate a comparison of the species described by Gar- 

 man in the Discoboli, 1892, and those recognized by the writer the 

 following table of species is given. It indicates the writer's conception 

 of the species listed by Garman. It refers solely to the specimens in 

 the museum and not to the synonomy. It was a surprise to find that 

 Garman was able to produce such splendid work with such a small 

 amount of material. It seems advisable also to give a table of the 

 species listed by Evermann and Goldsborough ui their Fishes of Alaska, 



1 For a more complete historical account, see Gill, 1891, and Garman, 1892. 

 91668—30 2 



