THE WHITEFISHES OF NORTH AMERICA. 



303 



maxillary scarcely reaches the eye, and is contained 3f times in the 

 head; the scales are unusually large, there being but 68 in the course 

 of the lateral line; and the body is very deep, the form being much 

 like that of the common whitefish. No. 120, from Lake Memphremagog, 

 has the usual more elongate form of the species, the maxillary is 

 shorter and the scales are much smaller, there being 87 in the course 

 of the lateral line. The examples from Lake Champlain are deeper and 

 paler than those from Lake Memphremagog. 



These variations in proportions are exhibited in the following table: 



Tahlr of comparative measurements of specimens of Labrador whitefish (C. labradoricus). 



No. 



63 

 65 



67 

 68 

 120 

 279 

 382 



Locality. 



Lake of the Woods 



do 



Lake Champlain 



do 



Lake Memphremagog. 

 Basswood Lake, Minn 

 Ely, Minn 



Ins. 



21 



20 

 15 

 20 

 18 



is' 

 15! 



Lbs. 

 2* 



5 + | 3J 

 4-1 



3 P 



2s 12 



2| 12 



.... 11 



.... 12 



2? 10 



2 J 11 



2 J 12 



Scales. 



10-68-9 

 10-80-9 

 10-72-9 

 10-71-8 

 10-87-8 

 9-80-8 

 10-84-8 



Gillrakera. 



Number. 



10 + 15; 10+15 

 9 + 16; 



9+17; 9 + 17 

 9+16; 9 + 16 

 9 + 16; 9+16 



In 



eye. 



2+ 

 11 



2 + 

 2 + 

 2 



Distribution and abundance. — This species was originally described 

 from the Musquaw Eiver, Labrador, in 183(5. In 1851 it was rede- 

 scribed as new by Prescott, under the name of ( 'oregon us neohantoniensis, 

 from Lake Winnipiseogee, New Hampshire. The specimen described in 

 1818 from the Saskatchewan Eiver as Coregomis angusticeps by Cuvier 

 & Valenciennes is probably identical with the Musquaw Eiver species. 

 It is now known from the Lake of the Woods eastward through the Great 

 Lakes, the Adirondacks, the lakes of Vermont, New Hampshire, and 

 Maine, and northeast through New Brunswick into Labrador. It doubt- 

 less inhabits most of the eastern Canadian lakes. We have examined 

 specimens from the following places: Lake of the Woods; Lake Supe- 

 rior ; Basswood Lake and Ely, Minn. ; Hudson Bay ; Ecorse, Mich. ; Gross 

 Water and Mississquoi bays, Lake Champlain; Cooperstown, N. Y. ; 

 Lake Memphremagog; Lake Winnipiseogee; Moosehead Lake and 

 Grand Lake Stream, Me.; Fredericton and St. Johns Eiver, New 

 Brunswick; Labrador. 



This species does not appear to be common in any of the Great 

 Lakes; indeed, we have no authentic record of its ever having been 

 taken in Lake Ontario or Lake Erie, while the few definite records for 

 Lake Huron and Lake Michigan would indicate that it is a rare fish in 

 those two lakes. Lake Superior seems to be the only one of the Great 

 Lakes in which it is at all common. This is no doubt due to the fact 

 that the waters of Lake Superior are colder than those of the other 

 Great Lakes, thus approaching in that regard the character of the 

 more northern lakes of Canada, where this whitefish appears to reach 

 its greatest abundance and largest size. 



