Dr. W. O. Ayres on the Sebastoid Fishes of California. 331 
nebulosus, 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. rvder as a synonym of his S. 
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 S. ocellatus, Cuv. In 1861, Mr. 
Gill (Proc. Atead. 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 1562) 
the same author proposed to include all the other Californian species 
in a new genus, to he designated Sedbastichthys. In January 1863 
(Proc. Cal. Acad. Nat. Sci. ii. p. 209) I 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 
eareful 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 Sedastes, 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 slenderness, though in other respects 
they differ widely) to S. 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 different 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% 
