88 PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



6. Genus Ch^nobryttus Gill. 



7. Cheenobryttus gulosus (C. & V.) Jor. = Centrarchns vlridis C. <fe V. ; Chwixobryttm 



viridis Jor. ; Lepomis gilli Cope ; Calliurus floridcnsis Holbr. 



8. Chaenobryttus antistius McKay, nom. sp. nov. = Glossoplites vielanops Jor. Man 



Vert. ed. i, p. 317, and CJicenohryttus gulosus Jor., Ann. Lye. Nat. Hist. 1876. 



This species is best distinguished from the preceding by the position of 

 the dorsal, the first spine being situated over the posterior margiu of the 

 opercular lobe, while in C. gulosus the first spine is situated directly over 

 the posterior portion of the base of the pectorals. The only specimens 

 of this species known to me are in the collection of Professor Jordan. 

 The types are from Lake Michigan. There are smaller specimens in the 

 collection from the Upper Wabash and the Illinois Elvers. I have ex- 

 amined specimens of G. gulosus, which is a southern form, in the Na- 

 tional Museum, from each of the Southern States, from Texas to Vir- 

 ginia. 



7. Genus Lepomis Eafinesque. 



This genus, as understood by me, includes Apomotis, Xenotis, Bryttus, 

 Helioperca, Xysfroplites, and Eupomotis of authors. Apomotis has been 

 separated from Lepomis on account of the large size of the sujjplemental 

 maxillary. On careful comparison this is found to be scarcely larger 

 than in one or two other species of Lepomis. It disappears by degrees, 

 but seems to exist in all the species, though sometimes so small as t% be 

 inappreciable. I have even found it present in large specimens of L. 

 yallidus. Its presence in the species is only a character of degree, there- 

 fore not generic. Till the group had been more fully studied, Xenotis 

 was supposed to contain a large number of species, and was Separated 

 from Lepomis principally for convenience' sake, and on the slight char- 

 acter of the feeble gill-rakers. By the comparison of a very large series 

 of the alleged species from Professor Jordan's collection I have come to 

 the conclusion that they are all forms of a single species. The gill- 

 rakers are usually rather more feeble than in the rest of the species of 

 Lepomis, but this again is a question of degree. Bryttus has been dis- 

 tinguished from Lepomis by the presence of palatine teeth. This is also 

 a character of degree, and is subject to the most perfect gradation. I 

 have found it impossible to retain Xystroplites and Eupomotis also, as 

 there is complete gradation in the character of the pharyngeals between 

 Lepomis proper and Xystroplites, and again between Xystroplites and 

 Eiipomotis both as to the width and form of the bones themselves and 

 the form of the teeth. 



9. Lepomis cyauellus Raf. 



10. LepomLs symmetricus * Forbes, MSS. (in Jordan & Gilbert's Synopsis Fishes N, 



A. hied.). 



11. Lepomis phenax (Cope tfc Jor.) McKay. 



12. Lepomis murinus (Grd.) McKay. 



Some of the types of Calliurus murinus Grd. belong to L. cyanellus, but 

 the specimen figured by him in the U. S. P. E, E. Exp., x, pi. vii. Fig. 



