Dr. W. 0. Ayres on the Sebastoid Fishes of California. 331 



nebulosiis, S. paucispinis, S. ruber, and S. variabilis were mentioned 

 again by me in the ' Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural 

 History.' In 1856 the species referred to by me under Cuvier's 

 name variabilis was described by Girard as S. melanops (Proc. Acad. 

 Nat. Sci. Phil. viii. p. 135). In 1858, in the tenth volume of the 

 • Pacific Railroad Reports,' Girard described all the species as he 

 then understood them, giving my S. ruber as a synonym of his iS". 

 rosaceus, — an error on his part, since the two species are entirely 

 distinct. In October 1859, S. nigrocinctus, S. helvomaculatus, and 

 (S. elongatus were described by me in the * Proceedings of the Cali- 

 fornia Academy of Natural Sciences.' Of these, /S. helvomaculatus 

 is considered by Mr. Theodore Gill (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., 

 June 1862) as merely a synonym of 5. ocellatus, Cuv. In 1861, Mr. 

 Gill (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., July 1861) proposed to separate 

 Sebastes paucispinis from the other species, under a new generic 

 name, Sebastodes. In 1862 (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., June 1862) 

 the same author proposed to include all the other Californian species 

 in a new genus, to be designated Sebastichthys. In January 1863 

 (Proc. Cal. Acad. Nat. Sci. ii. p. 209) 1 described two new species, 

 Sebastodes flavidus and S. ovalis. At the same date (op. cit. p. 211) 

 I gave a brief sketch of what I believed to be the correct synonymy 

 of the species now known on the coast of California. 



Such has been, in brief, the series of notices and publications re- 

 lating to these fishes. We have thus eleven species, all of which 

 were (or would have been) until recently designated as Sebastes. A 

 careful investigation of them all, with examination of very numerous 

 specimens, has, however, convinced me that they must be arranged 

 in two generic groups ; and inasmuch as two generic names have, as 

 above stated, been proposed for them by Mr. Gill, it is well to consider 

 whether these names truly represent the two groups as seen in nature. 



Of Sebastodes he gives the following diagnosis : — " This genus is 

 framed for the Sebastes paucispinis of Ayres. It has a very different 

 facies from Sebastes, and is readily distinguished by the longer body, 

 the very protuberant lower jaw (which has a symphysial swelling 

 beneath), the minute scales, the form and armature of the head, the 

 deep emargination of the dorsal fin, and the emarginated caudal." 

 Such a grouping of characters as this belongs only to the single spe- 

 cies, S. paucispinis. In the ratio of depth to length we have every 

 step, from the " longer body" of S. paucispinis and (S. elongatus 

 (which two are of about equal slendemess, though in other respects 

 they difiFer widely) to 5. ovalis and S. nigrocinctus. And I may here 

 take occasion to remark that the practice, in describing fishes, of giving 

 the ratio of depth to length with such minuteness as is the custom of 

 some writers, has no warrant in nature, since <lifFerent individuals of 

 the same species vary widely in their relative depth ; and not only 

 so, but the same individual varies widely at different times, accord- 

 ing to the abundance or scarcity of food, and from other causes. 

 The "emargination of the dorsal fin" is most decided in S.flavidus, 

 while the least emargination of all occurs in S. elongatus, and the next 

 to that is in S. ovalis, which latter, however, is most closely allied to 



22* 



