78 CONTRIBUTIONS TO NORTH AMERICAN ICH'THYOLOGY—II. 
stage in the growth of the Ichthelurus punctatus, or on some real or 
imagined variation of it. 
The specific name cerulescens has been the one most generally em- 
ployed, although, as will be seen from the above synonymy, eight dif- 
ferent specific and varietal names have priority over it. The oldest . 
description is apparently that of Rafinesque. under the name of Silurus 
punctatus. The specific name of punctatus is accordingly the one to be 
employed. The other Rafinesquian names evidently apply to different 
stages in the growth of the species. Rafinesque’s P. cerulescens, how- 
ever, aS well as that of Dr. Kirtland and others, includes Amiurus 
nigricans. This error has been the source of much confusion; the great 
Mississippi Cat-fish having been wrongly supposed to be an Ichthelu- 
rus. I find nothing in the accounts given of furcifer and caudafurcatus 
to indicate that they were founded on species distinct from punctatus. 
I. gracilis Hough (=houghit Grd.) is said to have a less number of anal 
rays than has been noticed in punctatus. Hough’s specimens were from 
Northern New York. I have examined specimens from Saint Lawrence 
County, New York, presumably referable to gracilis, but they have 27 
anal rays, and, so far as I can see, are precisely like the ordinary pune- 
tatus, except that the serrations of the pectoral spine are perhaps a 
trifle weaker. An examination of the types of beadlei, simpsoni, oliva- 
ceus, and vulpes shows nothing of specific value. The number of 
anal rays is 25 to 28 in them all, as in typical punctatus. Olivaceus 
appears rather more slender than is usual. Notatus and hammondi 
are rather indifferently described, but there is nothing in the description 
of either to show that it does not belong here. The types of graciosus 
and megalops have a rather longer anal fin than usual, and differ slightly 
in form. I have seen other specimens like them, but am unable to rec- 
ognize even a variety. Girard’s statement of the size of the eye in 
megalops is exaggerated. 
4, ICHATHASLURUS MERIDIONALIS, (Giinther) Jordan. 
Southern Channel Cat. 
(Figs. 7 and 8.) 
Amiurus meridionalis, GUNTHER (1864), Cat. Fishes Brit. Mus. v, 102; (1868), Trans. Zool. 
Soc. London, 473. 
L infer, from the figure only, that this species belongs to Ichthelurus 
rather than to Amiurus. Although the distinctive characters of the 
two genera were made known in 1862, in the description of this species 
we find no allusion to those characters, and no attempt at comparison 
