22 



The British form of Solea, which is distinguished from the others by the dilatation of 

 the left nostril, was first observed by Yarrell, who described and figured it in the 

 " Zoological Journal," Vol. IV, in 1829, under the name Solea pegusa. His description is 

 so bad that it would be impossible to identify the species by its means with certainty, 

 but his plate shows the distinguishing characters quite clearly. Yarrell considered 

 his specimens to belong to the species Pleuronectes pegusa of Lacepede's " Histoire 

 Naturelle des Poissons," Vol, IV, 1803, and with the Pleuronectes pegusa of Eisso's 

 " Ichthyologie de Nice," 1810, which is called Monochirus pegusa in the same author's 

 " Hist. Nat. de 1'Europe Meridionale." In the third edition of Yarrell's " British Fishes," 

 Sir John Eichardson identified this species as the Pleuronectes nasutus of Pallas' 

 " Zoographia Eosso-Asiatica," 1811. But the PL pegusa of Lacepede is the Solea 

 ocellata of Giinther's Catalogue, the Pleuronectes ocellatus of Linnaeus, the Solea 

 oculata of Eondelet, a well-marked species in which the nostril is not dilated ; and the 

 Monochirus pegusa of Eisso is another species of the Mediterranean which has no 

 pectoral fin on the blind side, and in which also the left nostril is not dilated : it is the 

 Solea monochir of Giinther's Catalogue. 



Yarrell's identification was therefore entirely incorrect, and Pallas' description of 

 PL nasutus is so extremely vague that it is difficult to ascertain to what species it 

 referred. The specimens described by Pallas by the name nasutus were taken in the 

 Theodosian Gulf in the Black Sea. The Solea ocellata and Solea monochir both occur 

 at Nice. 



Dr. Giinther, in his "Catalogue of the Fishes in the British Museum," Vol. IV, 1862, 

 distinguishes four species of Solea in which the left nostril is dilated and flattened. 

 The British form, called by Yarrell Solea pegusa, the lemon sole, or French sole, is 

 described as distinct from, any other known species, and is named by Dr. Giinther, 

 Solea aurantiaca. The second of the four species is the Solea lascaris of Eisso, the 

 thiid Solea impar of Bennett, and the fourth Solea margaritifera of Giinther, another 

 new species. I have examined myself the specimens in the collections of the British 

 Museum, which Dr. Giinther thus described in his Catalogue, and in many respects I 

 cannot agree with him in his arrangement and identification of them. 



Eisso's original description of Solea lascaris is not very exact, and the small figure 

 he gives is quite worthless ; it would be impossible to identify the species from the 

 figure. The numbers of fin-rays he gives are as follows : 



D. 85, A. 68, P. 7, V. 5, C. 15. 



He says that the colour is " fauve tigre de noir, avec des reflets violets, parsemes de 

 points grisatres sur la surface droite." He says that the upper jaw covers the inferior 

 in such a manner as to imitate the beak of a parroquet, and then continues : " Le 

 dessous de la t&te est orne de petits cils soyeux, blanchatres, entourant un long tube 

 qui re"pand une humeur glaireuse." Now it is difficult to understand how a naturalist 

 could describe the dilated nostril of Yarrell's lemon sole as " un long tube," but as 



