2. ONCORHYNCHUS. 157 



mojaponensis;" but ou comparing the former with Pallas's description 

 of Salmo leucichthi/s, it is quite e%ident that this cannot be the fish 

 80 named by Pallas, and that some confusion of the labels has taken 

 place. As regards the second specimen, we find in the same col- 

 lection anothei fish (no. 75) named S. japonensis, which is the Salmo 

 seouleri of Richardson We cannot think that PaUas entertained 

 for one monient the idea of an identity of the specimens 75 and 76, 

 and we suppose that 76 only can be considered a typical specimen of 

 Si japonensis. Probably one or both of the specimens marked 91 and 

 76 belong to the species named S. lycaodon by Pallas ; vet it is not 

 impossible that ne referred one to S. proteus, a species very closely 

 allied to S. lycaodon. 



Pallas and Richardson agree that this is a migratory species, which, 

 according to the former, ascends the rivers entering the Sea of 

 Okhotsk in the month of May ; it is equally abundant on the Ameri- 

 can side of Behring's Sea, and known to the fur-hunters on the 

 Yukon River by the name of " Redfish." 



2. Oncorhjniclius proteus. 



Salmo proteus, Pall. Zoogr. Ross.-As. iii. p. 37G. 



In the CoUectiou of PaUas's specimens in the Berlin Museum 

 there is the flat skin of a male Salmonoid, 15 inches long, marked 

 " no. 89. Salmo trutta," which probably was one of the specimens 

 which served Pallas for the description of his Salmo proteus. The 

 label was evidently misplaced, as there cannot be the slightest doubt 

 that Pallas never would have determined a Salmonoid with seventeen 

 anal rays as Salmo trutta. 



If we are correct in referring this specimen to Salmo proteus, being 

 induced to do so by the statement of Pallas that it has small scales, 

 " corpus microlepidotum " (which character cannot be assigned to 

 S. lycaodon), S. proteus would be nearly allied to S. lycaodon, dif- 

 fering from it in the much narrower praeoperculum, smaller scales, 

 and less deeply emarginate caudal fin. 



It would appear that. SteUer's remarks, quoted by PaUas for this 

 species, are better referred to S. lycaodon ; there is, at present, no 

 evidence of this species occurring on the American continent. 



The species may be characterized from the specimen mentionea as 

 follows : — 



B. 15. D. 12. A. 16. 



In habit similar to ;S^. salar. Praeoperculum with the margins 

 somewhat rounded and with the angle rather obtuse ; it is not broad, 

 but much narrower than the orbit. Vomerine teeth in a single 

 series, rather feeble, distant from one another; jaws slightly curved, 

 with teeth of moderate size [in older individuals probably similar to 

 those of S. lycaodon'] ; maxillary narrow, feeble, extending to below 

 the hind margin of the orbit. The appendages in the axil of the 

 ventral more than half as long as the fin. Caudal fin slightly emar- 

 ginate, the middle rays more than half as long as the outer ones. 



