1898.] PLAffKTON Otf 0?HE tfAEROE CHANNEL. 551 



the adult S. norvegicus differs most strikingly from S. dactyloptera. 

 I infer, from the condition of young examples of 40 mm., that the 

 approximation of the eyes manifests itself, in the last-named species, 

 at a very early stage. 



The specimen occurred at 60 2' K, 5 49' W., 100 to fath. 

 Fragments of a little fish, taken at 60 16' N., 5 49' W., 200 to 

 100 fath., seem to have belonged to a member of this species, about 

 20 mm. long. 



Collett records examples of 62 to 143 mm. from the bottom at 

 120 to 150 fathoms. If I have correctly identified Dr. Fowler's 

 larger specimen, it would appear that the younger stage occurs in 

 mid-water as well as at the surface. 



G-ADUS ^GLEFINTJS Linn. Haddock. (Plate XLYII. fig. 12.) 



Gadus ceglefinus, GL O. Sars, Rep. Cod Fish. Lofod. (1866, 1867), 

 in Cornm. Rep. U.S. Comni. Fish. Fisher. (1877), 1879, p. 590; 

 Mclntosh, 15th Rep. Fish Bd. Scot. 1897, p. 196, pi. v. 



The collection contains only one Gadoid, viz. a Gadus measuring 

 8 mm. without the caudal rays aud terminal process of the urochord. 

 It is in a good state of preservation, and may be identified with 

 approximate certainty as a young Haddock. The eggs and very 

 early larvae of this fish are well known l , and later stages, from 19 

 mm. upwards, have been well figured by Mclntosh. Intermediate 

 conditions have received less attention. Such were known to 

 G. O. Sars, who probably studied them exactly : but, in the only 

 account which lhave seen, the Norwegian observer simply remarks 

 that they are distinguishable from corresponding stages of the Cod, 

 G. morrhua, by their shorter and stouter shape. Mclntosh describes 

 very briefly some specimens of 7 to 8, 11, 12-5 and 19 mm., which 

 he attributes to the Haddock. He supposes that the smaller of 

 the series correspond to the stages taken by Sars. 



My figure (Plate XLVIL fig. 12) shows what I suppose to be 

 the essential features of the Faeroe Channel specimen. The 

 proportions and conformation being accurately drawn, need no 

 elaborate description. As in the case of the young Haddock 

 studied by Sars, the form is much more massive than in the Cod. 

 This is seen at once on comparing my drawing with Prince's figure 

 of a Cod, '33 in., 8*25 mm. c.a. The total length is about the same, 

 but the larval Cod is much more slender and appears less advanced 

 in general development. The eye is also smaller. Probably 

 whatever postmortem shrinkage may have occurred in one specimen 

 is compensated by a similar condition in the other, and even if the 

 Cod were drawn from a living specimen the difference in confor- 

 mation is too striking to be entirely explained by a possible 

 distortion of the supposed Haddock. In the latter the pelvic fins 

 are indicated, if at all, by a very slight prominence of the thoracic 

 region. The dorsal and anal fins are indicated by the inflections 

 of the embryonic fin, but only a few of the permanent fin-rays are 



1 Vide Mclntosh and Prince : Trans. E. S. Edin., xxxv. 1890, p. 822. 



