Cottus cognatus, &c. with Cottus gobio. 138 
two “Eyes nearly vertical,’ and “teeth on the tongue.” 
That these two would be of themselves sufficient to separate 
a genus, we may doubt ; but we need not allow even them to 
remain. In all the species of the genus Cottus with which I 
am acquainted, the eyes are situated very near the top of the 
head; and in C. Grenlandicus and C. eneus, the character, 
“Eyes nearly vertical," may be applied with as much propriety 
as in Uranidea. 
As to the other item, * Teeth on the tongue,” I must be- 
lieve that Dr. De Kay has made a mistake, even in the 
description of his own species; for I have examined numerous 
‘imens of it, and in them the tongue is certainly smooth. 
t may be, however, that the one described by him presented: 
an exception to the general rule in the species, for I find a. 
somewhat analogous case in a. pecimen of my own, which 
shows three or four teeth on each of the palatine bones, simi- 
lar to the teeth on the vomer, while in all my other specimens 
those bones are perfectly smooth. 
There. is not, therefore, a single point in which Uranidea 
differs from Cottus, and the species, quiescens, whic Dr. De 
Kay has described, is not entitled to rank as the type of à 
new genus.» And apparently its claim to be considered a 
new species is no better. In the description we find nothing 
* which May prevent our believing that it relates to Cottus 
gobio. As to the proportions, we cannot judge, for they are 
not given. The only items in which the description fails to 
‘Ome Perfectly with the species to which the present commu- 
nication refers, are... the teeth on the tongue — the rays of 
the ventrals— and the branchial rays. Of the first of these 
I have already spoken. ‘The second is like the first; itið ~ 
+ 
"Pparently caused by an error in the description. The deh- = 
p, Pine of the ventrals probably escaped the notice of Dr. 
Kay, and the soft rays seem, in many instances, to be - 
ho ntil the integuments are removed. All my specimens, 
Wever, show that they are four, and that, of course, the fin 
contains five rays. The last mentioned difference I count of - 
$ 
