500 
It was based originally on six species, 
thrissa, nasica, pilchardus, sinensis, africanus, 
Jussieu. 
In 1810, Rafinesque proposed to substi- 
tute Thrissa for Clupanodon, presumably be- 
cause the latter name is badly formed. 
Presumably again, thrissa would be the type 
of this genus of Rafinesque, who again 
presumably took it, as the first species 
mentioned, as the type of Clupanodon. 
In 1820, Rafinesque founded the Amer- 
ican genus, Dorosoma (Chatoéssus), and to 
this genus nasicus, and afterwards thrissa 
were referred; pilchardus was long left in 
Clupea, which is older than Clupanodon, but in 
1860 a related species (pseudohispanicus) be- 
came the type of the genus Sardinia of Poey. 
Africanus has teeth and does not conform 
to the definition of Clupanodon. It was 
made, in 1839, the type of a genus Platygas- 
ter, Swainson, but this name is preoccupied. 
Afterwards Ilisha (Gray, 1846) and Pellona 
(Valenciennes, 1847) were based on a spe- 
cies of the same type, the former without 
definition. Stnensis and jussiew were placed, 
in 1847, in a genus Clupeonia, by Valen- 
ciennes. Finally in 1900, Jordan and Sny- 
der established the genus Konosirus on a 
Japanese species (punctatus) which proves 
identical with thrissa,and to which group 
nasicus also belongs. 
In their first consideration of this generic 
name, Jordan and Gilbert succeeded in con- 
vincing themselves that Clupanodon should 
take the place of Clupeonia. Eliminating 
Pellona, and the earlier names Dorosoma 
and Clupea, Clwpanodon was left for the re- 
maining species, sinensis and jussiew. 
But in 1896, Jordan and Evermann rec- 
ognized that if Sardinia were a distinct 
genus, the rule of elimination required them 
to transfer to it the name Clupanodon, as 
Sardinia is of later date than Clupeonia. 
In 1900, Jordan and Snyder showed that 
Dorosoma punctatus was the type of a distinct 
genus, which they called Konosirus. Later 
SCIENCE. 
[N.S. Von. XIII. No. 326. 
it became evident that thrissa was identical 
with punctatus and by the law of elimina- 
tion the name Olupanodon must supersede 
Konosirus as thrissa was the last of its species 
to be removed to a genus of its own. By 
this system the old generic name can never 
come to rest, but must be held in readiness 
to replace any new genus which may be 
formed from species included in its original 
content. 
It was possible to defend in turn the use 
of Clupanodon in place of Clupeonia, Sardinia, 
and Konosirus. Should nasica ever receive 
a distinct generic name, Clupanodon must 
again move forward to replace it. On the 
other hand, writers called ‘conservative’ 
will reunite Konosirus with Dorosoma and 
Sardinia and Clupeonia with Clupea. In 
such case Clupeonia must fall back on 
Ilisha, a group originally included in Clu- 
panodon by error. It is evident, that in this 
case no fixity is possible by the method of 
elimination, unless imposed by the tempo- 
rary authority of some ichthyological union 
or mutual agreement among writers. 
In default of such the present writer will 
use Clupanodon in place of his own genus, 
Konosirus, not on account of the results of 
elimination, but because the type of Kono- 
sirus is the first species named by Lacépéde 
under his account of Olupanodon. If he 
should grow more ‘ conservative’ he might 
reunite Olupanodon with Dorosoma. In such 
case he would call the whole genus, Clupan- 
odon, because the name is prior to Dorosoma. 
The third method of determination of 
generic type is through:consideration of the 
work of the author of the genus in question, 
without regard to the views or work of any 
subsequent matter. 
This we do in accepting as the type of a 
genus the species indicated as such by the 
author. Such a statement cannot be re- 
versed by any later author. In recent days, 
the type of a genus usually is indicated 
once for allinsomany words. -With earlier 
