344 REPORT OF COMMISSIONER OF FISH AND FISHERIES, [2] 
It is but fair to say, however, that the arrangement adopted is not en- 
tirely satisfactory to us. The genera recognized are not equivalent in 
value, and no subdivision is possible in which they can be made so. 
The species of Scienine with long gill-rakers (Stelliferus, &c.), and 
those with short ones (Scicna, &c.) form together an almost perfect 
series. The characters on which the first of these groups is by us sub- 
divided into distinct genera (dentition, armature of the preopercle, &c.) 
cannot apparently be used for this purpose among the Sciena, as the 
gradation there is more perfect and the extremes less marked. It is 
quite true that a character may have a generic value in one section of 
a family and not in another, yet such generic characters of partial ap- 
plication should always be looked upon with question. 
The Scienide fall naturally into two suborders, which are well dis- 
tinguished from each other, and, so far as we know, not connected by 
intermediate forms. These are the Otolithineg and the Scienine. The 
extremes of the former group (Seriphus, Archoscion) have been of late 
usually set off as a distinct subfamily—JTsopisthinew. Dr. Bleeker has 
even removed this group, Jsopisthine, from the family of Scienide alto- 
gether. There is no warrant for this arrangement. While Seriphus 
seems quite different from the other Ofolithinew, Archoscion is intermedi- 
ate between Seriphus and Cestreus, and from the latter it is scarcely to 
be distinguished generically, so perfect is the gradation in the series of | 
species. At the opposite end of the series the genus Hques represents 
an aberrant form of the Scienine, and another is represented by Aplo- 
dinotus and Pogonias. The differences existing do not apparently re- 
quire the recognition of either of these groups as subfamilies, and we 
refer all to the Scienine. 
The Scicenine constitute an irregularly graduated series, the characters 
changing by small and often scarcely perceptible gradations from the 
forms allied to Cestreus on the one hand to those approaching Eques on 
the other. 
We begin our series with the genus Seriphus, which is perhaps most 
nearly related to the other percoid forms, and we close it with Hques, 
which stands at the opposite extreme from Seriphus. In passing down 
the series from Nebris and Odontoscion, the most Otolithus-like of the 
Scienine, to Sciena, Menticirrhus, Eques, and the other extreme forms, 
we find, as has been already stated, no very sharp line of division. The 
middle line, if we may so speak, lies between Bairdiella chrysoleuca and 
Scicena sciera, two species closely allied to each other. 
Nothing could be more unnatural or more ineffective than the subdi- 
vision adopted by Cuvier, whereby the Scianine without barbels are 
divided into three groups, Corvina, Johnius, and Sciwna, solely on the 
strength of the second anal spine. This is large in Corvina, very feeble 
in Scicna, and intermediate in Johnius. Giinther’s arrangement, by 
which the species referred to Johnius are divided between Corvina and 
