n 



At p. 57, however, ia the chapter headed " Market Fish 

 and Fisheries," section ii., " Middle Q-round " Fisheries, Mr. 

 Johnston gives to what is certainly intended for the same 

 fish its correct name of Mugil dohulay and as no explanation 

 of the subsequent change of name to cephalotus is given, I 

 am somewhat at a loss to know whether or not he considers 

 Giinther's dobula to be inseparable from ForskaFs oeur^t or 

 whether the former name is merely due to a lapsus calami ; 

 the two species are quite distinct. 



In 1891 a revised list* by the same author appeared, in 

 which these two species — Mugil cephalotus and Agonostoma 

 forsteri — again figure as the sole representatives of the 

 Tasmanian Mugilidce, but with the substitution in the latter 

 of " Estuary Mullet " as a trivial name in place of " Sea 

 Mullet ; the amended name is much the more suitable, as the 

 fish, on our coasts at any rate, is principally an inhabitant of 

 brackish water. 



Mr. R. Sherrin, however, in his " Han«lbook of New 

 Zealand Fishes," p. 66, quoting Dr. Hector, writes in refer- 

 ence to the confusion in the popular mind between this fish 

 and the herring. "It is easily recognised from the true 

 herring by having two fins on the back, the first of which 

 has only four rays. I particularly mention this, as in some 

 years what is supposed to be this fish visits the coasts in 

 enormous shoalsjf like the herring of the British seas." I 

 give this quotation because the habit here alluded to is 

 totally opposed to all that we know of its life history in 

 Tasmanian and Australian waters, and indeed of the habits 

 of the other members of the genus, which are without 

 •exception denizens of fresh or brackish waters, and, if correct, 

 must be taken into consideration as a factor of some import- 

 ance as regarding the claims to specific separation put 

 forward by some writers on behalf of the Tasmanian fish. 

 It is probable, however, that this alleged difference in habit 

 is traceable to the confusion between the mullets and 

 herrings, the words "visits the coasts in enormous shoals" 

 being as indisputably true of the latter as it is probably 

 incorrect of the former fish. This solution of the difficulty 

 appears to have commended itself to Dr. Hector as well as 

 to myself, else he would hardly have penned the words 

 " what is supposed to be this fish." 



Continuing the same quotation, Mr. Sherrin writes : — 

 ** The Picton Herring, a dried fish commonly known through- 



^ Mu()Ulour,Forsk.'DescY. Anim. p. U,l775=Mugil cephalotus, Cuv. and VaU 

 H. N. Poiss. xi. p. 110, 1836. 



* Proc. Roy. Soc. Tas. 1890, pp. 26-34. 



t The italics are mine. 



