32 ICHTHYOLOGIA OHIENSIS 



River, not far from Mammoth Cave. He also made 

 a small collection near Shepardsville, in the Salt 

 River. At all of these places more or less extensive 

 observations on the fishes were conducted, always on 

 the living forms, none of which were preserved after 

 general description in crude and ill-conceived termi- 

 nology. Some of his observations were recorded in 

 proper form ; but, later, he supplied from a treacher- 

 ous memory details which should have found place 

 in his original notes, taken at the riverside. 



It is very evident, therefore, that the modern stu- 

 dent who would attempt to understand correctly the 

 species of Rafinesque must visit, with the original 

 descriptions at hand, the very streams which the 

 pioneer ichtliyologist visited; he must collect and 

 observe the fishes in a fresh state, and not after their 

 coloration has been destroyed and their forms dis- 

 torted by alcoholic preservation. He must also allow 

 for the dearth of a special literature, because there 

 was none in existence. The groupings and descrip- 

 tions were all, of necessity, at first hand. In a field 

 so wide, among forms so numerous, with individuals 

 often very closely related, as is the case in the large 

 and important genus Notropis, before the days when 

 systematic zoology had been reduced to the strictest 

 methodical basis, when sexual variations were unsus- 

 pected, and when nuptial brilliancy was regarded as 

 a permanent factor, little wonder is it that synonymy 

 was created, and that the true relations of many of 

 the fishes actually seen were misconceived. 



There yet remains a most important detail in Rafi- 

 nesque' s work on the fishes of the Ohio which must 

 have explicit mention. During Rafinesque's cele- 

 brated visit to Audubon, at Henderson, it appears 



