134 Part I11.— Twenty-fourth Annual Report 
the snout ; lengths of the ventral and pectoral fins ; length of the bases 
of the third dorsal and first anal fins ; the horizontal diameter of the eye ; 
breadth of the hind extremity of the maxilla; distance between the 
ventral fin and beginning of the first anal fin. All these characters were 
represented as percentages of the total length of the fish. In most of 
these characters not only do Juscus and minutus come close together, but 
they both closely resemble esmarkzi, as reference to Table XIII. will show. 
In the characters the length of the bases of the third dorsal, minutus and 
esmarkii, come close together, both being separated from minutus. In the 
length of the base of the first anal considerable diversity exists between 
the three forms. It is not necessary to follow Smitt into the other 
characters, which are represented as percentages of various standards. It 
is to be expected that the different species in a genus will show very 
many points of close resemblance, and that the characters in which they 
differ may be few. The specific tout ensemble may be very characteristic, 
and still not be easily reduced to a specific description. The specific 
descriptions of the two fishes in the “Scandinavian Fishes” recite in 
detail many points in which the two species of luscus and minutus agree, 
and do not emphasise the points of difference. 
The fin-formule and vertebree given in the “Scandinavian Fishes ” are 
as follows :— 
Luscus—1 D, 12-14; 2 D, 20-26; 3D, 18-20; : A, 27-35; 2 A, 
17-21; Pect., 19-20; Ventr., 6. Vertebre, 48. 
Minutus—1 D, 12-15; 2 D, 19-25; 3 D, 17-24; 1 A, 25-31; 2, A, 
17-23 ; Pect., 17-19; Ventr., 6. Vertebre, 50. 
The variations in the number of fin-rays found during the present 
research are arranged in Table V., p. 149, and the variations in the 
number of vertebre appear in Table VI., p. 150. 
Schmidt discusses Smitt’s evidence on the question of the identity of 
the two species. He shows that in the.young stages /uscus and minutus 
are quite characteristic, and are easily separated by the specific characters 
that hold good in the adult. He emphasises the position of the anus 
with reference to the first dorsal fin, and the union of the anal fins which 
he finds constant in the young stages. He also lays stress on the differ- 
ence in depth between the two species. He describes and figures a series 
of both species up to 5cm. in length. 
Parnell, in his account of the Brassy (Morrhua lusca), mentions that 
the scales are very deciduous. It is characterised by a dusky spot at the 
base of each pectoral, by the first anal fin commencing under the middle 
of the first dorsal. He had examined Morrhua lusca up to a size of 17 
inches (42cm.). Parnell says that this fish resembles Morrhua minuta, 
but the latter has a shorter anal fin than Morrhua lusca. This author 
does not record Morrhua minuta from the Firth of Forth. The fin- 
formula of a Morrhua lusca, measuring 16 inches (40cm.) in length, he 
gives as follows:—1 D, 13; 2 D, 24; 3D,17; 1 A, 31; 2 A, 18; P, 
15; V, 6. In the case of the third dorsal he obtained a number (17) 
which is less than the smallest number found in any of the specimens 
examined in the present research, viz., 18 rays. 
Gadus esmarkii. 
This form, which was first recorded for Scottish waters by Giinther, 
was obtained by Sir John Murray in the Clyde and certain lochs on the 
West Coast of Scotland. 
The distinctive characters selected by Giinther are the following :— 
The lower jaw projects beyond the upper. 
