SCIENTIFIC HISTORY OF THE BLACK BASS. 19 



are supposed to exist in our waters ; but it is evident from a perusal 

 of the descriptions that the distinctions liitherto made are of very 

 doubtful value. 



Having been requested by the United States Commissioner of 

 Fish and Fisheries (Prof. S. F. Baird) to determine tlie number of 

 species represented in the fresh waters of tlie United States, and the 

 earliest names respectively assigned to them, all the specimens in the 

 collections of the Smithsonian Institution were examined, as well 

 as a large series from many other localities kindly transmitted for 

 that purpose by the Museum of Comparative Zoology (Prof. Agassiz, 

 Director). Study and comparison of those specimens clearly demon- 



but at this latter place their [the scales^] smaller size w quite remarkable; this 

 latter character is very striking when we compare tooth species."— Agass., 

 Lake Superior, p. 296. —Tlie italicized portion (not italicized in original) 

 indicates that the tr. saZmoiV/es Agass. was a large-mouthed form. (3) "Huro 

 nigricans Cuv. is another siDecies of the lower Canadian lakes, which occurs 

 also in Lake Champlain .... I shall, therefore, call it in future Grj/s^es 

 nigricans .... Dr. DeKay describes it as Centrarchus fasciatus. although 

 he copies also Cuvier's description and figure of Huro nigricans, but without 

 perceiving Iheir identity." Agass., Lake Superior, p. £97. — Iluro nigricans 

 Cuv. and Val. and Centrarchus fasciatus DeKay are unquestionably distinct, 

 the former being the large-mouthed species, and the latter the small- 

 mouthed one. It is probable, however (thus giving bim tlie benefit of the 

 doubt), that Prof. Agassiz based his idea of the species on the large-nioutlied 

 form. 



" The species of this group [Orystes Cuv.] are indeed very difficult to char- 

 actei'ize. They differ chiefly in the relative size of their scales, the presence 

 or absence of teeth on the tongue, .... etc. There are, besides, marked 

 diflTerences between the young and adults. These circumstances render it 

 Impossible to characterize any one species without comparative descriptions 

 and figures. (4) The species from Huntsville [Ala.] . . . differs equally from 

 [tr. fasctatus Agass. and G. "salmoneus" Agass.]. J call this species pro- 

 visionally Grystes nobilis Agass."— Am. Jour. Sci. and Arts (2), xvii, p. 297, 

 298, 1854. 



Prof. Agassiz thus recognized four species (besides indeterminate ones), 

 viz :— 



1. G. fasciatus Agass. = M. salmoides. 



2. G. salmoides Agass. (not Cuv. and Val. nor G. salmoneus Agass., 1854) = 

 M. nigricans. 



3. G. nigricans Agass. = M. nigricans f 



4. G. nobilis Agass. = M. nigricans. 



Judging by the comparisons. Prof. Agassiz had in view, in 1854, in the 

 "Gr. salm-oneus," the true M. salmoides. 



Baird and Girard added to these species, also, in 1854, (5) their G. '. 

 (M. nigricans). 



