THE STATE GEOLOGIST. 81 



in having the original description placed before them, which we 

 quote as follows : 



"Head narrow and pointed, scales large and smooth, sometimes with faint 

 concentric striae; those of the anterior portion of the dorsal ridge very much 

 elongated, strong and pointed, and apparently erectile; when in an erect posi- 

 tion much resembling rays, and giving the appearance of a comb-like dorsal 

 fin; back arched, but not so abruptly as in P. tenuiceps. The widest portion 

 of the fish is found just anterior to the ventral fin; pectoral fin moderate; 

 anterior raylets rather short; primary rays, six or eight; ventral fins small; 

 anterior raylets, about ten; primary rays, about five or six; dorsal fin large, 

 triangular, preceded by erect, pointed scales ; anterior raylets very long, twelve 

 or more in number; primary, eight to ten; anal fin large, but not so much 

 elongated as in P. tenuiceps or P. fultus; anterior raylets very strong, about 

 twelve in number; primary rays, six to eight; tail forked, lobes acute, anterior 

 raylets rather stout, rays of lower lobe much stouter than those of upper; 

 length, seven to eight inches ; breadth, three to three and one-half inches. 

 Occurs at Sunderland, Mass. ; Westfield and Middlefield, Conn. ; Pompton and 

 Boonton, N. J." 



The additional characters are mentioned by Newberry that the 

 dorsal ridge-scales, which are usually depressed, are less strongly 

 developed than in S. tenuiceps, and "the arch of the back does not 

 show the hump which is so characteristic of that species ; the fins 

 are very strong; the fulcra of the dorsal and anal fins unusually 

 broad and long, forming arches nearly half an inch wide at the 

 base, curving gracefully backward to a point." 



It is further stated by Newberry that fishes answering to the 

 above description occur nowhere except at Boonton. As for the 

 remarkably similar specimens from the Connecticut Valley, these 

 were held by him to constitute a distinct species, which he de- 

 scribed under the name of Ischpterus marshi. The latter form 

 was supposed to differ from S. agassizii in having a less-deepened 

 trunk, weaker dorsal and anal fins, and thicker scales arranged in 

 more oblique rows along the flanks. At a subsequent period, 

 although there is no published record of it in his writings, he 

 appears to have become convinced that actual differences did not 

 exist, and that S. marshi should be treated as a synonym of S. 

 agassizii. This view certainly accords with all the facts, and is 

 adopted in the present paper. But as Newberry did not himself 

 propose the abandonment of his S. marshi, it is proper to explain 

 this matter more fully. 



6 GEOiv 



