78 CONTRIBUTIONS TO NORTH AMERICAN ICHTHYOLOGY II. 



Stage in the growth of the Ichthcelurus punctatus, or on some real or 

 imagined variation of it. 



The specific name ccerulescens has been the one most generally em- 

 ployed, although, as will be seen from the above synonymy, eight dif- 

 ferent specific and varietal names have priority over it. The oldest 

 description is apparently that of liaflnesque under the name of Sllurus 

 punctatus. The specific name of punctatus is accordingly the one to be 

 employed. The other Eafinesquian names evidently apply to different 

 stages in the growth of the species. Eafiuesque's P. ccerulescens, how- 

 ever, as well as that of Dr. Kirtland and others, includes Amiunis 

 nigricans. This error has been the source of much confusion ; the great 

 Mississippi Cat-fish having been wrongly supposed to be an Ichtlicelu- 

 rus. I find nothing in the accounts given of furcifer and caudafurcatus 

 to indicate that they were founded on species distinct from punctatus. 

 I. gracilis Hough {=hougMi Grd.) is said to have a less number of anal 

 rays than has been noticed in punctatus. Hough's specimens were from 

 Kortheru New York. I have examined specimens from Saint Lawrence 

 County, New York, presumably referable to gracilis^ but they have 27 

 anal rays, and, so far as I can see, are precisely like the ordinary jpMwc- 

 tatusj except that the serrations of the pectoral spine are perhaps a 

 trifle weaker. An examination of the types of beadlei, simpsoni, oliva- 

 ceus, and vulpes shows nothing of specific value. The number of 

 anal rays is 25 to 28 in them all, as in typical punctatus. OUvaceus 

 appears rather more slender than is usual. Notatus and hammondi 

 are rather indifferently described, but there is nothing in the description 

 of either to show that it does not belong here. The types of graciosus 

 and mcgalops have a rather longer anal fin than usual, and differ slightly 

 in form. I have seen other specimens like them, but am unable to rec- 

 ognize even a variety. Girard's statement of the size of the eye in 

 megalops is exaggerated. 



4. ICHTH^LURUS MERIDIONALIS, [Gilnther) Jordan. 

 Southern Channel Cat. 



(Figs. 7 and 8.) 



Amiarus meridionalis, Guntiier (1864), Cat. Fisbes Brit. Mus. v, 102; (1868), Trans. Zool. 

 Soc. London, 473. 



I infer, from the figure only, that this species belongs to Ichtlicelurus 

 rather than to Amiurus. Although the distinctive characters of the 

 two genera were made known in 1862, in the description of this species 

 we find no allusion to those characters, and no attempt at comparison 



