genus unless evidence was found that indicated 

 a difference in specificity. When available, a 

 bark extract of the same or a closely related 

 species was used inorder to compare specific- 

 ities. 



The data have been divided into six tables 

 for the purpose of clarity. Each table repre- 

 sents a natural, though in some instances 

 broad, grouping offish species, with the pro- 

 gression being from more to less primitive. 

 American Fisheries Society (1960) was used as 

 the reference for fish classification. 



Table 3 represents reactions of the four 

 most primitive species tested. The single 



ratfish tested showed the only reaction against 

 Laburnum imlgare bark and the strongest reac- 

 tion (where titered) against Suphura japonica 

 bark. Indication of individual variation was 

 noted in the reaction of dogfish against Robinia 

 pseudoacacia bark extract. 



Table 4 includes various members of the 

 order Clupeiformes. Four of the extracts de- 

 tected within species variations in Pacific 

 salmon. The Cytisus scoparius bark extracts 

 reacted variably with chum and red salmon; 

 lima bean with pink, red, silver, and Chinook 

 salmon; Robinia pseudoacacia With Chinook 

 salmon; and \l isiaria florihunda bark with red 

 and silver salmon. The same extracts appear 



Table 1. —Explanation of symbols used in tables 2-8. 



