FRESH- WATER TROUT— LOCHLEVENS AND THEIR HISTORY. 219 



In the New Statistical Account of Scotland mention is made of a trout taken 

 April 27t]i, 1841, that weighed ten lb., being twenty-seven inches long and seven- 

 teen inches in girth. We are likewise told of the fish in this lake, that their 

 superiority in quality is not confined solely to the Lochleven trout proper, but is 

 to be observed in the common trout, and even in the pike, perch, and eels ; also 

 that the trout of Loch Leven do not continue to exhibit the same distinctive 

 superiority should they be removed to other waters. In new quarters, however 

 favourable such may appear to be, they are said to invariably deteriorate and lose 

 much of their quality. 



The peculiarly excellent food in the water at Loch Leven has been supposed to 

 consist of a small reddish-coloured shell-fish, believed to be restricted to the shallow 

 shingly beds lying near to the shores (the form here alluded to would seem to be 

 the Limnea) ; also the sessile-eyed crustacean " screw," or " water-shrimp," 0am- 

 marus; and Mr. Wilson concluded that it was owing to the abundant and perpetual 

 breeding of these and other living creatures that the trout in question owed their ' 

 superiority. But a fisherman who had the management of the curing of the trout, 

 and had observed the food taken from their stomachs, remarked that he had never 

 observed any small shells, but mostly worms, minnows, perch, and young trout ; 

 while evidence was adduced by fish-dealers and others who had been regularly 

 supplied with trout, both before and since the drainage, and who distinctly stated 

 that they could observe no deterioration whatever in the fish. Parnell, however, 

 held a different view, while there cannot be a doubt but that the stock of fish was 

 largely diminished from some cause. I will now pass on to a description of these 

 trout as well as the inquiry into the reasons why the Lochleven trout has been 

 regarded as a distinct species, and whether any persistent differences from other 

 trout can be shown in its external form, its internal organization, its tints, or the 

 colour or taste of its flesh ? 



B. x-xii, D. 12-13 (^VA), P- 12-14, V. 9, A. 10-12 (|:|), C. 19, L. 1. 120-130, 

 L. tr. |A:|f, Ceec. pyl. 47-90, Vert. 56-59. 



Body rather elongate,* with the abdominal profile a little more curved than 

 that of the back. Length of head about 4j to 5j, rather longer in the males : 

 of caudal fin 8 : height of body 4| to 5 in the total length. 



As to external form, it has been said to be less stout, and its head shorter than 



1832, p. 317, observed upon a form of trout wMoli was found in Ulswater and Windermere, termed 

 by the residents a "gray trout," and having the habits of a char, and which he asserted was 

 captured up to twenty lb. weight : he likened it to Lac^p^de's fish. 



* Parnell in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1837, p. 154, appears 

 to have been the first who scientifically investigated this form of trout, and he remarked as 

 Jardine had previously done respecting the " par," and as Giinther subsequently did of the 

 "hirling," that "I consider it, however, not only as distinct from S.fario, but as one of the best 

 defined and most constant in its characters of all the species hitherto described." 



From his remarks, we learn that he thought " the differences that exist between 8. ccscifer {as 

 he termed this form) and S. fario are very striking. The pectorals of S. ceecifer, when expanded, 

 are pointed ; in S. fario they are rounded. The caudal fin in S. ceecifer is lunated at the end ; in 

 S. fario it is sinuous or even. S. ceecifer has never any red spots ; S. fario is scarcely ever 

 without them. The caudal rays are much longer in S. ceecifer than in S. fario, in fish of equal 

 length. In S. ceecifer the tail-fin is pointed at the upper and lower extremities ; in S. fario they 

 are rounded. The flesh of S. ceecifer is of a deep red, that of S. fario is pinkish or often white. 

 The C£ecal appendages in 8. ceecifer are from 60 to 80 in number ; in S. fario I have never found 

 them to exceed 46." He also observed that this fish does not appear to be pecuhar to Lochleven, 

 as he had seen specimens that had been taken in some of the lakes of the county of Sutherland. 



Sir John Eichardson, in the Fauna Boreali-Americana, I. u., remarked that in " external 

 form, the proportional size of various parts of the head and gill-covers, the size of the scales and 



the dentition, agrees with 8. lemanus Three individuals of the Lochleven trout that 



were dissected had each 73 pyloric cteca, and in one of them 59 vertebrce were counted." Yarrell 

 added nothing to the previous descriptions. Knox, Lone Glens of Scotland, 1854, observed of this 

 trout of Lochleven, that it " is a beautiful silvery dark-spotted trout, imagined by some to be 

 peculiar to the lake. This, however, is not likely, since trout quite resembling those of Leven are 

 found in many northern lakes " (p. 36). He concluded, after citing some of the opinions of others, 

 that he was " disposed to think that two species of trout inhabit Loch Leven, independent of the 

 common river trout ; namely, the trout which lives on entomostraca, and comes into season in 

 December, January, and February ; and the trout, which, feeding on the buccinum, and on flies, 

 worms, and all the common food of the common river trout, comes into season later in the 



