T——ÉRR 
NTC NE S RUNE NES EER NA 
1894.] Variation of North American Fishes. 653 
Table VIII contains the same data with regard to the dorsal 
rays. In the last column is given the average number of dor- 
sal spines and rays combined. The rays do not show the same 
variation found in the dorsal spines, the number being the 
same for localities north and south. ` The average number of 
dorsal spines and rays combined consequently increases with 
the dorsal spines. 
TABLE VIII. 
Sai (al Bul Bol de | ba | 55 
ge (85) 8 | 28 | 28 ES) 33 
SE | ag [e3|w3 93 [se ya] Se 
RB of Teele Te? | et ret am 
a 22 | #3 2422/22/22 (22) 2: 
5% | Ss BB BH|BH|SH|SR| c8 
zZ < Z4 zZ z z < 
Torch Lake 7 15 14.5]. 1 294 
Cedar Rapids, Ia 1 15 1 29 
White River at Indianapolis......... 1 16 1 = 
Bean eee Ind 17 1515 2|14| 1/30; 
ille, Ind 1 15 i 29 
Wild Cat bm Ind 1 16 1 31 
In 2 16 2 30} 
Illinoi 1 14 1 29 
Nipisink Lake, Il 2 15 2 293 
Monongahela River i| deer + 15 1 30 
Hartford, y 4 | 15} Lire 3 30} 
Green River T, ; Greensburg, Ky ee 3 154 21 1 804 
Little Barren River, Osceola, Ky... 2 4 15 14 211 30 
Little South Fork ee 
rl a des RH uns 1 15 1 31 
Eagle Creek, Ol a, Tenn.« n 2 14 Lido 31 
Obeys Rives, «vage ttown, Tenn... 13 14:4 31:59 1| 31, 
Watauga Riv 2 16 2 313 
North hoe Tuki River, Sali 
ille, 15 1 31 
Eureka c ian Ark ea oe eei ta 1 15 i 31 
Chocola Creek, ' Oxford, S. RREA 4 16 2 2 | 31} 
` San Marcos Spring, 2 15 2 
Table IX gives similar data on the anal fins. The spines 
are not given since they were found to be two in all cases ex- 
amined. In the anal rays we have, as in the dorsal spines, a 
slight increase in their number from north to south. The — 
