374 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol.40. 



is also a character of degree, and is subject to the most perfect gradation. I have 

 found it impossible to retain Xystroplitcs and Ewpomotis also, as there is complete 

 gradation in the character of the pharyngeals between Lepomis proper and Xystro- 

 plites, and again between Xystroplites and Eupomotis both as to the width and form of 

 the bones themselves and the form of the teeth. 



Jordan and Gilbert 1 include all the species in the single genus 

 Lepomis, giving as one of the characters "lower pharyngeals narrow, 

 the teeth conic or paved." • That this will not hold true of all species 

 may be seen from an examination of the accompanying illustrations. 



Charles Harvey Bollman, in A Review of the Centrarcliidx, 2 

 places all the species under one generic name, Lepomis. 



Boulenger 3 separates the genera Apomotis, Lepomis, and Eupo- 

 motis on the characters of the supplemental maxillary and of the form 

 of the pectoral fin. He does not mention the pharyngeal bones or 

 teeth. 



Jordan and Evermann 4 base the genera Apomotis, Lepomis, and 

 Eupomotis on the characters of the pharyngeal teeth and the supple- 

 mental maxillary. Under the genus Lepomis, page 999, they say: 

 "* * * lower pharyngeals narrow, the teeth spherical or paved, 

 all or nearly all sharp, few or none conical." This does not hold true 

 of Lepomis pallidus or Lepomis megalotis. 



Tarleton H. Bean 5 follows Jordan and Evermann 6 in assigning 

 characters to the three genera. 



Robert Earl Richardson 7 disagrees with the findings of McKay 

 and of Bollman and makes two genera, Lepomis and Eupomotis, on 

 the character of the pharyngeal teeth. He examined the bones and 

 teeth of many specimens of about fifteen species. His conclusions 

 were justified by the material used and it was largely by accident 

 that we found the intermediate conditions. 



Henry W. Fowler 8 mentions the pharyngeal teeth in the key to 

 the genera of Centrarcliidse, where he used the same terms descriptive 

 of the shape of teeth and bones as are used by Jordan and Evermann 9 

 In the description of Lepomis phenax (p. 290) and of Eupomotis 

 gibbosus (p. 295) the pharyngeal bones and teeth are briefly described. 



Hugh M. Smith 10 includes all the species mentioned under the 

 genus Lepomis, giving the following diagnosis on page 239: 



Body ovate, compressed, the dorsal outline in adults rather more strongly arched 

 than the ventral; mouth of moderate size, jaws equal, maxillary narrow and not 

 extending beyond pupil, supplemental bone small or wanting; no teeth on tongue 



i Bull. 10, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1S82, p. 472. 



2 Report U. S. Fish Commission tor 1888 (1892), p. 565. 



3 Catalogue of Fishes in the British Museum, ed. 2, vol. 1, p. 6. 

 <Bull. 47, U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 1, 1896. 



6 Fishes of New York, 1903, pp. 475, 477, 4S2. 

 6Bull. 47, U. S. Nat. Mus. 



'Bull. 111. State Lab. Nat. Hist., vol. 7, March, 1904, p. 27. 

 8 Fishes of New Jersey, 1905, p. 728. 

 'Bull. 47, U.S. Nat. Mus. 

 io Fishes of North Carolina, 1907. 



