- 241 - 



in the European eel. And conversely, not a single European eel was found with so low 

 a number of vertebrae as the highest shown in the American eel. 



To judge from this the American and European eels are two very wellmarked forms, 

 even from the number of vertebrae. At any rate this investigation quite confirms the 

 view, that it is the great distances of the central Atlantic which make the division between 

 the stock of eels on the American and European side. 



Further the number of vertebrae is not the only feature in which the eels from the 

 American and European sides of the Atlantic differ. If we compare an American eel 

 with an European of the same size we find that there is a difference in form. The 

 American eel gives one the impression of being considerably shorter and plumper, and 

 the caudal fin also is generally broader and more rounded posteriorly than in the 

 European eel. This appeared to hold good for all the ca. 100 $ eels from Canada I 

 examined. There is also a difference in the position of the dorsal fin in the two eels. 

 Concerning this Seth E. Meek' says: "in American specimens the dorsal fin is propor- 

 tionately further from the end of snout, making the distance between front of dorsal 

 and front of anal a little shorter than in European specimens. Otherwise no permanent 

 difference seems to exist." On measuring 7 European and 4 American eels he obtained 

 the following averages: 



A. vulgaris A. chrysypa 

 Distance from end of snout to front of dorsal 30-5 % 33 °/o 



— ——---._- anal 4-3"8% 437% 



— — front of dorsal to front of anal i3'6°/o io'6°/o 



the proportions being given in hundredths of the length to the end of the last vertebra. 

 Other measurements are also given (length of head, mandible, pectoral, depth of body at 

 front af anal,_ distance from gills to vent), but in these no difference between the two 

 species was found. The character showing the most distinct difference between the 

 American and European specimens was the distance from the beginning of the 

 dorsal fin to the beginning of the anal fin in percentage of the total 

 length. Seth E. IVIeek found the following results: 



Angtiilla vulgaris Anguilla chrysypa 



Total length Total length 



in inches in inches 



iS'ls — 14% i^'/s — II=/4% 



16I/3 — 13114% I3^ls — 101/2% 



^ ao'/s — 14V4 °/o lo'/s — loVs % 



ïxHt — ii?\i°lo iÇ^/s — 9^14% 



i2'/4 - .21/2% Average - ,o-6 0/0 



lî'^ls — 14% 



231/8 — 141/4% 



Average — 13-6 % 



It seems therefore as if there was a small difference between A. V7ilgaris and 

 chrysypa in this regard, but the numbers are far too small and no attention has been 



I Seth E. Meek, A note on the Atlantic species of the genus Anguilla (Bull. U. S. Fish Commission, 

 vol. m for i8g3, 1883, p. 430). 



