NO. 1 - , OPINIONS 68 TO 77 II 



and had retained for Les Danrades the subgeneric name Sparus, as 

 shown in the following qnotation : 



p. 392, 92. Sparus. Teeth on the sides round, with flat summits. Jaws nearly 

 fixed. I. Sargus (S. sargus). 2. Sparus (S. atirata). 3. Pagrus 

 {S. pagrus). 



Accordingly, the premises presented by Doctor Jordan appear to be 

 incomplete, for Fleining's action of 1828 in adopting Spams for 

 Sparus aurata is virtually simply an adoption of his action of 1822. 



The same question and the same possibilities of interpretation now 

 arise in respect to Fleming's action of 1822 in regard to Spams, that 

 arose in connection with his action of 1822 in regard to Pleuronectes 

 (see Opinion No. 68, The Type of Pleuronectes L.) . 



While the evidence in the foregoing seems to point to the conclusion 

 that aurata should be taken as type species of Sparus on basis of Flem- 

 ing 1822, p. 392, it seems wise, in view of the possibility of a difference 

 of opinion in regard to the interpretation, to follow the case further, 

 in order to see how this view would coincide with the later history of 

 the generic name. 



Without entering upon a detailed discussion of this case, which 

 involves many references in addition to those cited by Doctor Jordan, 

 attention is invited to the facts that — 



(a) Fleming's action of 1822 in retaining Spams for the species 

 Spams aurata is followed by Fleming, 1828, and Fleming, 1842 %• and 



(b) Cuvier's action of 1829 in placing the species Sparus aurata in 

 the genus Chrysophris, 1829 {CJirysophrys, 1830) is followed by 

 Swainson (1829), Cuvier & Valenciennes (1830), Burmeister (1837) 

 who gives Spams Linn, as synonym, Giinther ( 1859) » Ludwig's Leunis 

 (1883), Claus (1885), Knauer (1887), R. Blanchard (1890), and 

 Railliet (1895), while Apstein (1915a), definitely designates Spams 

 aurata as type of CJirysophrys. 



From the two quotations given in the foregoing — 1822 and 1828 — 

 it will be seen that in 1828 Fleming is simply reporting the presence 

 of Sparus aurata in British waters, and that, " rigidly construed," he 

 does not here designate a type species for the genus Sparus, but in 

 1822 he distinctly recognizes a typical subgenus {Sparus s. str.) to 

 include Cuvier's 1817 " Les Daurades." Cuvier's 1829 genus Chryso- 

 phris (1830 Chrysophrys) , therefore,, includes Fleming's 1822 typical 

 subgenus Sparus. 



In answering the question presented by Doctor Jordan, the Com- 

 mission is therefore of the opinion that Fleming, 1828, p. 211, did 



*Also Jordan (1917a, 13, The genera of fishes). 



