Siqiiatic Mti 



103 



mens are for brevity termed A, B and 



CO- 

 In all three specimens the pharyngeal 



bones (which form an accessory jaw in 

 the throat behind the gills), were wider 

 than in incisor, and many of the pharyn- 

 geal teeth were molars rather than ca- 

 nines, yet neither the bone nor the teeth 

 it bears were nearly as havy as in gib- 

 bosus. The gill-rakers in all were like- 

 wise intermediate. The structure and 

 coloiation of the opercular flap in speci- 

 men A was intermediate, but more like 

 that of incisor; in B also intermediate, 

 yet not so unlike that of gibbosns ; in C, 

 indistinguishable from that of gibbosns. 

 In none of the specimens was the blue 

 margin of the gill-covers (a character of 

 incisor) distinctly developed; the blue 

 cheek markings of gibbosns were evident 

 in A, barely apparent in B, fully devel- 

 oped in C, in all the bronzy blotches on 

 the cheeks (another gibbosns character) 

 were developed ; in none, except faintly 

 in A, 7 were the streaks of color behind 

 the mouth, and in line with it (a feature 

 of incisor), developed. In the outlines 

 and form of the head and body all were 

 variously intermediate. Specimens A 

 and B possessed, while C lacked, the blue 

 metallic luster of incisor ; all had the cof- 

 fee-colored flecks on the body and the 

 numerous dark spots on the vertical fins, 

 both of which are features of gibbosns, 

 never evident in incisor. It seems legiti- 

 mate to regard these three individuals 

 as hybrids between Lepomis incisor and 

 Lepomis gibbosns. 



Of the three presumed type of hybrid 

 sunfishes here discussed, namely Chaen- 

 obryttus gulosus x Lepomis incisor; Le- 

 pomis cyanellus x Lepomis gibbosns, and 

 Lepomis incisor and Lepomis gibbosns, 

 it should be noted with emphasis, that 

 for each of the three pairs of supposed 

 parent-species the breeding seasons, the 



breeding habits and the breeding areas 

 actually overlap. Furthermore, the writ- 

 er has observed a male pumpkin-seed (/,. 

 gibbosns) and a female blue-gill (L. in- 

 cisor) engaged in their characteristic 

 gyrating spawning movements, over a 

 nest at the very edge of the Jackson 

 Park lagoon in Chicago. Significantly, 

 also, the largest specimen (here called C ) 

 of the presumed hybrids between these 

 two species secured in Michigan, was a 

 male taken in the breeding season of 

 both parent species; yet the tests were 

 not enlarged, and the characters were 

 those of the females or immature, rather 

 than of the males of each species. 



In conclusion we must not overlook 

 (as others have done), the fact that spec- 

 imens similar to the supposed hybrids 

 described above have long been known, 

 yet referred to as distinct species. It is 

 certainly probable, however, in some 

 cases indeed almost certain, that some or 

 all of these specimens are also hybrids, 

 and that consequently the so-called spe- 

 cies based on them should no longer re- 

 tain a place in the system. The nominal 

 species referred to are m nr inns, iscliyms, 

 phenax; possibly macrochirns, albulus 

 and gill ii, and almost certainly Lepomis 

 enryorns. Two Michigan specimens 

 typical of the last named "species," which 

 has been recorded as such, on the basis 

 of a few individuals in each case, from 

 Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and 

 Minnesota, are found on careful examin- 

 ation to be intermediate between Lepo- 

 mis cyanellns and L. gibbosns in all 

 characters of form ; structure and posi- 

 tion of mouth ; pharyngeal arch and 

 teeth, and at least in some of the color 

 characters ; they can scarcely be other 

 than hybrids. 



If a man's in debt it proves that he once 

 had credit. 



