NO. 1800 IDENTITY OF A SUPPOSED WHITEFISH KENDALL 99 



form of the head and mouth parts and the fins are diagnostic, aside 

 from the characters mentioned in the description. 



In a letter accompanying the tracing, Professor ValUant says that 

 it is not to be doubted that the resemblance between the fish repre- 

 sented in Valenciennes' drawing and that of Richardson's plate of 

 Leuciscits gracilis is striking, and were it not for the adipose dorsal 

 one would not hesitate to consider them identical. But, he con- 

 tinues, it is not difficult to admit that Valenciennes may have added 

 the fin afterwards. 



Professor Vaillant further suggests that, while Valenciennes was 

 a very skillful and conscientious draughtsman, it is possible that he 

 may have been deceived by some accident which happened to the 

 specimen that he had before him. 



Either of the above suggestions may be the true explanation of 

 the erroneous presence of the adipose fin in the drawing; which is 

 the more probable is hard to say. 



