Parental care among fresh- water pishes. 417 



beef. According to J. G. Wood (18();j) '"'■ the mode of eating; was very 

 remarkable. Taking- the extreme tip of the meat between its sharp 

 and strongly formed teeth it would bite very severely, the Avhole of 

 the head seeming to participate in the movement, just as the temporal 

 muscles of the human face move when we bite anything hard or tough. 

 It then seemed to suck the meat a very little farther into the mouth 

 and give another bite, proceeding in this fashion until it had snl>- 

 jected the entire morsel to the same treatment. It then suddenly shot 

 out the meat, caught it as l)efore by the tip, and repeated the same 

 process. After a third such maneuver it swallowed the morsel with 

 a quick jerk. The aninuil always went through this curious series 

 of operations, never swallowing the meat until after the third time 

 of masticating." In other words, the animal subjects its food to a 

 kind of chewing process. 



If left free in water where other fishes occur, the}- are very much 

 at home and exercise a choice of food at the expense of many a coin- 

 habitant. '"A fish may be quietly swinnning about susi)ecting no 

 evil *' and a Protoptere " rise very quietly beneath it until quite close 

 to its victim " and then make "" a quick dart with open mouth " and 

 seize '" the luckless fish just by the pectoral fin, and with a single 

 effort " bite '' entirely through skin, scales, flesh and bone, taking 

 out a piece exactly the shape of its mouth." With this plunder the 

 Protoptere will sink to the bottom and there chew as is its wont. It 

 ncA'er chases its victim or takes a second bite. But when, in an aqua- 

 rium, the keeper offered a Protoptere a frog attached to the end of a 

 stick it acted differently. '' No sooner did the frog begin to splash 

 than the fish rose rapidly beneath it, seized it in its mouth, dragged it 

 off the stick like a pike striking at a roach, and sunk to the bottom 

 with its prey. Xot a vestige of the frog was ever seen afterwards." 

 It w^as naturally inferred that '" the poor victim was gradually chawed 

 up like the beef with which the creature was formerly fed." 



Another peculiarity in ingestion of food was observed by McDon- 

 nell (IS(')O). He had "seen an active little minnow an inch and a 

 half or two inches from the mouth of the " Protoptere " suddenly 

 sucked in and devoured. The prey is drawn into the mouth with im- 

 mense rapidity by depressing the hyoid bone, and making a gulp 

 rather than a snap." 



They are very quarrelsome, and Boulenger declares that it is 

 almost impossible to preserve many together in an aquarium without 

 their maiming their fellows or amputating fins or tail. It is to be 

 remarked in this connection that those ]iarts are readily regenerated, 

 but not to the same size or shape as the original, and consequently 

 much variety may be observable in those respects. 



