l.YCnlHWF.. 



l 5 



name L. vahlii Reinh. were apparently not distinguishable from the IngolFs two /.. gracilis. At that 

 time I had no opportunity of following up the matter; but now that I have examined it more 

 thoroughly I find that my first impression was correct. 



Proportions of the body. In order to display the proof of the correctness of this position, 

 I give here the measurements of a number of specimens, in part the two from the [ngolf, identified 

 by me as L. gracilis, in part the earlier ones ascribed by Reinhardt and Lutken to /..vahlii. 



Measurements of L. vahlii Reinh. from West Greenland: 



Total length in mm. 



Length of the head 



Distance from snout to anus 



Height over the anus 



The length of the head is therefore in females 18,8—21%, in males 19,6 — 23,8",, of the total 

 length; in the specimens from Scandinavia the figures, expressed in " „ from Collett's statement of 

 measurements, are 18,8—21,4% and 20,4 — 22,7",, respectively. Further, the head and the trunk 

 together (i. e. distance from snout to anus) is in the Greenland specimens 36,4— 4r,6° ,,, in those from 

 Scandinavia 37,1 — 41,3% of the total length. — In other words, there is as close an agreement as is 

 possible between the Greenland L. vahlii and Scandinavian [..gracilis, with regard to the most 

 important measurements of the bodv ' ). 



Colour-markings. The smallest, Greenland specimen (one from the Ingolf Expedition) is a 

 male 143 mm., figured in Tab. I, fig. 2 a. The body is adorned with broad, dark cross-bands, 2 on the 

 trunk and 7 on the tail; on the tail posteriorly the bands extend right across and out to the borders 

 of the unpaired fins, further forward thev reach below to only a little under the median line; for the 

 rest, each band has a light part in the centre which is not much darker than the grayish yellow ground- 

 colour of the back and sides. In the anterior part of the dorsal fin are 3 very dark, elongated spots, the 



') In his work ■ Skandinaviens Fiskar II, 1S95, p. 615, Prof. F. A. Sniitt has expressed the conjecture that L.gracilis, 

 which was only known at that time (in the literature) from the original specimen of Sars, is the young stage of L. vahlii. 

 In a later note On the Genus Lycodes (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7) V, 1900, p. 57), written after the appearance of Colletfs 

 treatise on L. gracilis, the same statement is repeated, but at the same time, L. gracilis is given in his analytical table as a 

 peculiar form (iorea/is) of L. vahlii, specially characterised by this that the length of the head is usually less than 22°, oi 

 the total length, whilst in L. vahlii iy pica (forma arc Hca) the length of the head exceeds 22"., of the total length; with regard 

 to the first form it is correct that the length of the head is usually less than 22 ° of the total length (see above); but it does 

 not agree with the results of my measurements to say, that the length of the head in L. vahlii exceeds more than 2! ol 

 the total length (see above) for the simple reason that Smitt's /.. vahlii is not the same as /.. vahlii Reinhardt, as we 

 shall soon see. — Lastly, in his latest contribution concerning the systematic relations of the genus, Smi 1 1 speaks thus: Within the 

 limits of the former species (i.e. L. vahlii) it is easy enough to distinguish a local form, gracilis, living in the more southerly 



localities on the European side of the Atlantic and perhaps by this geographical selection from the true home of the 



genus stopped in the evolution and retaining the juvenile characters-. (On the genus Lycodes. II. Bih. K. Sv. Vet-Akad. 

 Handl.Bd.27, Afd. IV, No. 4. 1901, p. 20). About the same time I expressed a similar idea, as 1 also looked on /. gracilis as 

 a local form of L. vahlii (but as a dwarf form indeed, not as a form which had preserved the characters of the young of /.. vahlii; 

 cf. Vidensk. Medd. Naturh. Foren. Kbhvn. 1901, p. 202 and the present treatise p. 19), and in a footnote (1. c. p. 203) I cited Prof 

 Smitt's opinion as agreeing essentially with my view; but since I have had the opportunity, thanks to Prof. Smitt, oi 

 examining his L. vahlii typica , at Stockholm. I must take back my earlier half-agreement with his view; the form mentioned 

 is not L. vahlii Reinhardt at all, but contains heterogeneous element,, chiefl) specimens of L. pallidus Colletl and /.. 

 pleurosticlus mihi two species which, in my opinion, show no special relationship to L. vahlii Reinhardt. 



