90 ANNUAL REPORT OF 



ticularly those of the dorsal line. On the other hand they ap- 

 proach through the smaller individuals the group to which I have 

 given the name of /. elegans; but these latter are smaller, the 

 arch of the back is higher, the head more depressed and acute, 

 the fins and scales, are more delicate. Still another variety, in- 

 cluding the narrower forms, comes nearer to I. fultus. On the 

 whole, however, this group of long, ovoid fishes, from two to 

 three inches wide, are distinguishable at a glance from those 

 which have the narrow lanceolate outlines of I. fultus." 



At the close of his general remarks on the genus Ischypterus, 

 on page 27 of his Monograph, Newberry makes the following 

 significant statement : "In the following pages, so far as I have 

 been able, I have enumerated and defined all the species of the 

 genus which have come under my observation. I deem it neces- 

 sary to say, however, that future observations will probably 

 diminish rather than increase the number of forms in which the 

 differences should be given specific value. For example, /. alatus 

 may prove to be only a variety of /. lineatus, and I. modestus a 

 phase of /. elegans; but with marked differences and without 

 connecting links, so> far as yet observed, it has seemed to me 

 hardly justifiable without further evidence of identity to unite 

 them under a common name." 



Amongst the species admitted by Newberry to bear a close 

 resemblance to »S\ lineatus, his so-called S. alatus approaches it 

 so closely as to have created doubt in the author's mind whether 

 it was really distinct from the form under consideration. His 

 remarks on this subject are as follows: "The fishes to which 

 I have given the name of Ischypterus alatus, and have repre- 

 sented in PI. VIII., are perhaps most like those under considera- 

 tion [S. lineatus], and I have hesitated long before separating 

 them; indeed it is probable they will be found to run into' each 

 other, so- that they must be regarded as varieties of one species." 

 Not only was their founder sceptical as to> a distinction between 

 S. lineatus and S. alatus, but no one else who' has examined his 

 types has been able to' discover essential differences between them. 

 They are here regarded as identical, and it may be further stated 

 that the resemblance between S. lineatus and S. elegans is such as 

 to excite suspicion lest we have not to do in the one case with 



