menhaden in the Gulf. Since only spe- 

 cific names \were used in his paper, 

 Gunter (1945) referred to E. t. pairOHUS 

 as B. tyranniis- Hildebrand (1948) also 

 noted that B. patroilUS had generally 

 been considered by authors as only 

 subspecifically distinct from B, tyvan- 

 HUS or identical ^with it. However, 

 Hildebrand's diagnosis showed that 

 B. patronus had fewer oblique scales, 

 fewer modified scales in front of the 

 dorsal, fewer vertebrae, fewer ventral 

 scutes and fewer pectoral and dorsal, 

 and more anal rays. The lower caudal, 

 pectoral, maxillary and lower mandible 

 were generally longer. The head was 

 longer and deeper and body depth was 

 greater. B. patronus was accorded full 

 specific rank in Hildebrand's 1948 

 revision of BrevoOTtia. Meristic char- 

 acters indicated that B. patronilS re- 

 sembled B, tyrannUS of easternFlorida 

 more than it did B. tyranrais farther 

 north. Hildebrand (1948) noted that the 

 lack of a decrease in number of ver- 

 tebrae in southern menhadsn was con- 

 trary to the general observation of 

 lower vertebrae counts for other fishes 

 in warmer waters. 



Hildebrand (1941) described a 

 small-scaled, nonslimy, yellow-finned 

 menhaden fronn the coast of Carolina 

 and nanned it Sniithi . Ho had pre viously 

 (Hildebrand, 1920) called this fish 

 Brevoortia aurea (Agassiz), which is a 

 South American species. The range 

 was given as Beaufort, North Carolina, 

 to Indian River, Florida. Hildebrand 

 (1941) noted that B. smithi was not 

 abundant, did not school in large num- 

 bers, and was called "yellowfin shad" 

 by local fishermen. He said the fisher- 

 men kept fish of this species aside and 

 carried them home for food. Suttkus 

 (1958) reported B. smithi from the 

 eastern Gulf of Mexico between Cedar 

 Keys and Placida, Florida, noting ". . . 

 that Hildebrand was aware of the pres- 

 ence of Brevoortia smithi in the Gulf 

 of Mexico long before I made my inde- 

 pendent discovery." 



Gunter (1945) noted a second spe- 

 cies of menhaden in the Gulf which he 

 said was close to if not identical with 



Brevoortia smithi of the Atlantic 

 Hildebrand (1948) described this as a 



new species, B. gunteri, which he con- 

 sidered to be a Gulf cognate of B, 

 smilhi. B. smithi and B. gunlcri agreed 

 in having small scales, pointed yellow- 

 ish fins, more silvery color and less 

 green along the back, and in being 

 notably less slimy than B, lyVdlllluS and 

 B. patronus. B. glinteri differed from 

 B. smithi in having a larger head, 

 greater depth and longer maxillaries, 

 mandibles and pectorals. The ventral 

 scutes and vertebrae were fewer in 

 number. Hildebrand (1948) examined 

 specimens from Grand Isle, Louisiana; 

 Aransas Bay, Texas; and the mouth 

 of the Rio Grande, Texas. 



The fifth North American species 

 of Brevoo^'tia is brevicaudata. Goode 

 (1878) described the species from the 

 only known specimens, collected at 

 Noank, Connecticut, in 1 874. Hildebrand 

 (1948), after re -examining the se speci- 

 mens, listed nine ways, including the 

 short caudal fin, in which they differed 

 from B, tyranmiS. Scalation was simi- 

 lar to that of B. tyrannus. Bigelow and 

 Schroeder (1953) questioned the cor- 

 rectness of these views. 



The ranges of Brevoortia aurea 

 (Agassiz) and Brevoortia pectinata 

 Jenyns in South America are not well 

 known. 



Hildebrand (1948) pointed out that 

 the seven American menhaden could be 

 divided into a large -scaled group, B. 

 tyratmiis, B. brevicaudata, B.patromis, 

 B. pectiiiata, andB. aurea , and a small - 

 scaled group, B. smithi and B, gunteri. 

 He further stated that these menhaden 

 could also be divided into two groups 

 according to the shapes of the ventral 



fins. Brevoortia tyramms, B. brevi- 

 caudata, and B. patronus had rounded 

 fins, while the other four had pointed 

 fins. The two South American species 

 differed from the others by less reduc- 

 tion in size of the scales on the back 

 and on the base of the caudal as com- 

 pared to mid-scales on the sides. 



Hildebrand (1948) noted that with 

 the exception of B, brevicaudata, North 

 American species of Brevo&rtia could 

 be divided into two closely related 

 pairs on either side of the Florida 



