264 Dr. R. H. Traguair—Devonian Fishes of Canada. 
Canadian species curtum of Whiteaves into a new genus characterised 
by its double dorsal fin, and for which the name Scaumenacia may 
be proposed. 
Mr. Smith Woodward has recently pointed out’ that in curt the 
proximal interspinous elements (axonosts) of the anal fin are as in 
the second dorsal of Eusthenopieron and Tristichopierus fused into one 
piece which is followed by three distal elements (baseosts). This is 
well shown in the present series of specimens, but in one splendid 
example, wanting the head it is true, but which originally must 
have been over two feet in length, it is also shown that a third and 
additional set of ossicular fin-supports followed on the second, though 
they are ordinarily concealed by the bases of the fin-rays. 
Classification.—Although the Dipnoan affinities of Phaneropleuron 
were certainly indicated by Huxley in his “ Essay on the classi- 
fication of the Devonian Fishes,” he placed the genus among the 
Crossopterygii in a distinct family of  Phaneropleurini” which he 
thus defined :— 
-« Dorsal fin single, very long, not sub-divided, supported by many 
interspinous bones, scales thin cycloidal, teeth conical ; ventral fins 
very long, acutely lobate.” 
To this family I afterwards added the Carboniferous Uronemus, 
but the cranial structure and dentition of both genera were then 
very imperfectly known. 
Cope was, I believe, the first who boldly relegated Phaneropleuron 
to the Dipnoi; but the thing was beyond all doubt when Whiteaves 
showed that his Phaneropleuron curtum was possessed of a ctenodont 
dentition and an arrangement of cranial plates resembling that in 
Dipierus. That the same points hold good for Phaneropleuron 
Andersoni there cannot be any doubt, and as for the conical - 
marginal teeth, described by Huxley, I have satisfied myself that 
they are merely the outer denticles of ctenodont plates. Whiteaves’s 
statement that in Scaumenacia curta “both the upper and under jaw 
are armed with smooth conical and somewhat compressed teeth” I 
have never been able to confirm—at least if “marginal teeth” are 
hereby meant. Consequently, puiting aside the older but less 
suitable name of Ctenododipterini (Pander and Huxley), I proposed 
the family term Ctenodontide for Phaneropleuron, Ctenodus, and 
Dipterus, but not for Uronemus. 
For I had already in 1882 shown that the dentition of Ganopris- 
tcdus splendens, Traqg., which I afterwards merged in Uronemus, was 
not ctenodont; but that on the other hand the anterior part of the 
palatopterygoid bone, broad and flat, is covered merely by small 
rounded tubercles, while along the outer margin is one row of 
laterally compressed, basally confluent, short conical teeth. Such an 
important difference in dentition seemed to me in 1890 amply to 
justify the separation of Uronemus from Phaneropleuron and its allies 
in a distinct family of Uronemide.* 
_? Ann and Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) vol. xi. p. 241. 
2 Geox. Mac. (2) Vol. IX. p. 543. 
3 Proc. Roy. Soc. Edin. vol. xvii. p. 393. 
« 7hgpenbenmnre Chale 
