ON THE RELATIONS AND NOMENCLATTTRE OF STIZOSTE- 

 DION OR LUOIOPERCA. 



By Theodore Gill, M.I)., Ph.D. 



In a valuable article on Lucioperca marina, C & V.,* Mr. Boulen- 

 leuger has raised two questions of interest, viz: 



L The point to which I now wish to draw special attention its tiie close affinity 

 which the Black Sea and Caspian species bears to the North American, and especially 

 to L. canadensis. 



2. Liicioperca should date from the first edition of the ' Rcgne Animal ', 1817, where 

 Cuvier (p. 295) does nse the Latin name ("ce qui lenr a fait donner le nom de lucio- 

 perca^'), although indirectly and without a capital. 



The former involves an important question of zoogeography. Is the 

 form in question really related more nearly to the American than 

 to the other European species? 



The second involves a question of nomenclature affecting important 

 economical species. Is the passage of Cuvier cited the expression of 

 a historical fact or a nomenclatural proposition f 



The great and deserved reputation of Mr. Boulenger calls for an 

 extended consideration of the questions involved, and this 1 have ven- 

 tured to attemj)t. 



CLAHSIPICATION. 



In 1877 I was led to investigate, in company with Dr. Jordan, the 

 interrelationships of the species of Stizostedioji, and both of us were 

 struck by the contrast between the European and American species, 

 and jointly elaborated the characteristics which Ave observed, in an 

 analytical synopsis published in the second number of Dr. Jordan's 

 "Contributions to American Ichthyology."! 



I have lately reviewed the specimens of tlie four species in the National 

 Museum in connection with the description and figure of Lucioperea 

 marina given by Mr. Boulenger, and the conclusions to which I have 



*Proc. Zool. Soc. Loudon, 1892, pp. 411-413, pi. 2.5. 

 tBull. U. S. Nat. Mus. 10. 



Proceedings Natioual Museiiui, \'ol. XVII— No. 993. 



123 



