Ill.—A REVIEW OF THE SCIANIDAD OF AMERICA AND EUROPE. 
By Davip STARR JORDAN AND CARL H. EIGENMANN. 
In the present paper we have attempted to give the synonymy 
of the species of Scicenide found in the waters of North and South 
America and of Europe, together with analytical keys by which the 
genera and species may be distinguished. The paper is based on the 
collections in the museum of the University of Indiana, on a large series 
belonging to the National Museum, the most valuable part of this 
series being the collections made by Professor Gilbert at Mazatlan and 
Panama, and on the collections in the Museum of Comparative Zoology 
at Cambridge, Mass. This collection is especially rich in South Amer- 
ican forms, and nearly all of our information regarding the South 
American species has been drawn from it. All the representatives of 
this family in the museum at Cambridge have. been examined by the 
senior author of this paper, and for all statements regarding the South 
American species he is responsible. 
We wish to express our special obligations to Prof. Alexander Agas- 
siz, Director of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, and to Mr. Samuel 
Garman, curator of the fishes, for the free use of the material in the 
museum, and to Dr. Tarleton H. Bean for a loan of special desiderata 
from the United States National Museum. Through the aid of these 
two great museums we have been enabled to examine nearly all the 
species included in the present paper. The only species not seen by 
us are the following: Cestreus obliquatus, Larimus stahli, Scicena gilli, 
Sciena heterolepis, Pachyurus francisci, Pachyurus schomburgki, Pachy- 
pops trifilis, Umbrina reedi, Lonchurus lanceolatus, and EKques pulcher, 
teu of the 113 species recognized. 
There is room for much difference of opinion as to the proper sub- 
- division of the Scicenide into genera. There are few families in which 
the various types are more definitely joined together by intermediate 
forms than in the present one. The subdivisions must be more or 
less arbitrary, or else the great bulk of all the species must be thrown 
into two genera, Scicna and Otolithus. Such an arrangement, however, 
tends to obscure the inter-relations of the species, and so we have 
adopted as distinct genera all the subordinate groups which we are 
able to restrict and define by structural characters of some importance. 
[1] 343 
