LUMPENUS LAMPETRIEORMIS ON THE COAST OE SCOTLAND. 89 
under notice and sent it to Dr. Day, who at once recognized it 
as L. lampetriformis , although differing very much in the form 
of the caudal fin from Prof. M c Intosh’s specimen, the dif- 
ference being that M°Intosh’s specimen had the outer caudal 
rays elongated beyond the central ones for nearly half the length 
of the caudal fin; while in my specimen the central ray was 
longest, the others decreasing in length on each side of it, thus 
giving the tail a lanceolate form, or, as Collett says, an “ acumi- 
nate form.” Strangely enough, all my specimens have the same 
form of tail. On receipt of this information, the fi.-h was for- 
warded to Cheltenham for examination by Dr. Day ; and in due 
course I received a note from him stating that the specimen w r as 
a female Lumpenus, while that of Prof. M c Intosh was an old male ; 
and this he considered would explain the difference in the form of 
the tail. 
The occurrence of this specimen Dr. Day recorded in ‘ Nature ’ 
for July 9th, 1885. Thus stood the matter until March 25th, 
1886, on which date a second example came to my hand, and on 
March 31st eleven more ; while from April 1st till May 31st fifty- 
seven specimens have made up my findings. This will indicate 
pretty clearly that the species is not so rare upon the coast of 
Britain as we were at first disposed to think. 
In general appearance, Lumpenus approaches very nearly 
to that of our common Blennies, Centronotus gunnellus and 
Zoarces viviparus, to which it is closely allied ; but on close exa- 
mination it is seen to differ from them considerably, both in 
externa] colouring, fin arrangement, and internal organization. 
To give a minute description of the external appearance of Lum- 
penus is quite unnecessary, as this has been done by Dr. Day 
in the article already mentioned, as well as by Collett. My 
purpose, then, is merely to note the points where the three 
species differ and w'here they agree, in so far as I have been able 
to observe the same. Comparing Lumpenus with the Spotted 
Gunnel (Centronotus gunnellus) , we find in both the spinous 
dorsal fin, the number of rays in Centronotus being 76 to 78, 
while in Lumpenus the number is 72 to 74 ; the latter number I 
have only once observed. In Centronotus the ventral fins have 
disappeared, and are represented by tv r o short stout spines ; in 
Lumpenus, however, these fins are comparatively well developed, 
each having one spinous ray and four soft ones. In the matter 
