•b — 



1 



I 



i 



1 



Jh — 



Hl\e Stud Fishes 



CHARLES J. SAWYER 



* 



j Fundulus catenatus 

 I 



More than once I have heard aquar- 

 ists growling about changes in the scien- 

 tific names of fishes, and it has been 

 amusing to listen to the arguments. Male- 

 dictions have been heaped on the heads 

 of ichthyologists who have dared rele- 

 gate well established names to the back- 

 ground. The object of a change is to 

 place a fish with other species believed to 

 be its nearest of kin, or to bring into 

 usage a name found to antedate the one 

 by which it may be commonly known, 

 the latter becoming a synonym. There 

 are other reasons why a name must go, 

 such as preoccupation in the new genus, 

 and mere appropriateness never saves it, 



Stud Fish \ 



_ ) 



but all such changes follow definite rules 

 agreed to by zoologists and no one is a 

 law unto himself as some seem to think. 

 But among systematists it must be ad- 

 mitted that we have radicals and con- 

 servatives. The two groups are not in 

 accord as to what constitutes a species, 

 nor do they agree as to the limits of a 

 genus, that is, how far a form may de- 

 part in characteristics from the type and 

 still be retained. The radical will split 

 the genus and set up the divergent 

 species in a new one. It is in such inter- 

 pretations that the zoologist is guided by 

 the results of his researches, or influenc- 

 ed by personal opinion, rather than by a 



