WHITE BREAM. 
803 
elsewhere, between the Breams and the Lenciscines. 
Instances of a Roach or a Rudd with more than 14 
branched rays in the anal tin, of a Roach with pha- 
ryngeal teeth set in two rows, or of a White Bream 
with less than 18 branched rays in the anal tin, have 
been explained on the assumption that these forms are 
hybrids between the White Bream and the Roach or 
the Rudd. This explanation is indeed correct to all 
appearance; but its demonstration, which can lie at- 
tained only by experimental methods, has still to be 
made by pisciculturists. These remarks also apply to 
the assumed hybrid between the Bream and the Roach. 
The last form is usually most like a Bream, but has 
only 15 — 18 branched rays in the anal fin. 
THE WHITE BREAM OR BREAMFLAT (sw. bjorknan). 
ABRAMIS BLICCA. 
Plate XXXV, fig. 2. 
Scales in the lateral line about 46 (45 — 50). Anal fin with 21 — 23 a branched rays. Between the lateral line 
and the dorsal fin 9 or 10, in exceptional cases 11, rows of scales. Pectoral and ventral fins red or yellow at 
the base. Pharyngeal teeth set in two rows: (1)2(3), 5(6) — .5, (1)2(3). 
a 
Fig. 199. Pharyngeal bones and pharyngeal cartilage of Abramis blicca, natural size; a, b , and c as in the preceding figure. 
R. hr. 3; D.—.\ A. 3 ; 
’ 8 6 2 1 c — 23(24) 
P. 
14—16(17)’ 
2 
v. n 
C. x + 1 4- 17 + 1 + x; L. lat. (43)45 — 50; L. tr. ^ 1; 
5—6(7) 
Vert. 38—40. 
Syn. Ballerus, Rondel., De pise, lacustr., p. 155. Blicca , Gesn., 
Hist. Anim., lib. IV (Francof. 1620), p. 24 ( + (?) Plestya, 
p. 25, ex Belon.). Gyprinus quincuncialis, pinna ani ossi- 
culorum viginti quinque, Art., Gen., p. 3; Syn., p. 13; 
Spec., p. 20. Cyprinus pinnae ani - radiis viginti quinque, 
Lin., Fn. Suec., ed. I, p. 124 (syn. nec descr.) = Cyprinus 
Bjoerkna, Syst. Nat., ed. X, tom. I, p. 326 (syn. nec. descr.). 
Cyprinus Plestya , Leske, Ichtliyol. Lips. Spec., p. 69. 
Cyprinus Blicca, Bl., Fische Deutschl., part. I, p. 65, tab. X; 
Ekstk. (subg. Abramis ), Vet.-Akad. Handl. 1830, p. 179; 
Nilss., Prodr. Ichtliyol. Scand., p. 31; Fr., Ekstr., v. Wr., 
Skand. Fisk., ed. 1, p. 64, tab. 12; Kr. {Abramis), Damn. 
Fisk., vol. Ill, p. 389; Sundev. {Cyprinus), Stockh. L. Hush. 
Sallsk. Handl. 1855, p. 82; Gthr. {Abramis subg. Blicca), 
Cat. Brit. Mus., Fish., vol. VII, p. 306; Feddersen, Naturh. 
Tidskr. Kbhvn, ser. 3, vol. XII, p. 86; Day, Fish. Gt. Brit., 
Irel., vol. II, p. 196, tab. CXXXVI; Mob., IIcke, Fisch. 
Osts ., p. 118; Lillj., Sv., Norg. Fn., Fisk., vol. Ill, p. 313. 
Cyprinus Laskyr, Guldenst. apud Pall., Zoogr. Boss. Asiat., 
tom. Ill, p. 326; — vide Nordm., Voy. Russ. Mer. (Demidoff), 
° Sometimes 24. 
b 7 — 9, according to Kroyer. 
c Sometimes 19, according to Fatio. 
tom. Ill, p. 504, tab. 22, fig. 1 ; — Hckl., Kn. {Blicca), 
Susswasserf. Ostr. Mon., p. 123. 
Abramis micropteryx et Abr. erythropterus, Agass., Mem. Soc. 
Sc. nat. Neuch., vol. I, p. 39 (cf. Cuv., Val., Hist. Nat. 
Poiss., vol. XVII, pp. 44 et 58). 
Abramis Bjoerkna , Nilss., Skancl. Fn., Fisk., p. 328; Sieb. 
{Blicca), Susswasserf. Mitteleur., p. 138; Mgrn, Finl. FisJcfn., 
disp. Helsingf. 1863, p. 42; Blanch. {Abramis, subg. Blicca), 
Poiss. eaux douces Fr., p. 359; Malm {Abramis), Gbgs, Boh. 
Fn., p. 565; Mor., Hist. Nat. Poiss. Fr., tom. Ill, p. 398; 
Bncke {Blicca), Fisch., Fischer., Fischz. O., W. Preuss., 
p. 123; Fat., Fn. Vert. Suisse, vol. IV, p. 358; Mela 
{Abramis), Vert. Fenn ., p. 333, tab. X; Reut., Sundm., 
Finl. Fisk., tab. IV. 
Blicca argyroleuca , Hckl. Kn., 1. c., p. 120; Dybowski, Cypr. 
Livl., p. 202. 
Obs. Artedi described this species with fair accuracy in De- 
script. Spec. Pise. (p. 20, No. 9), under its Upland name of Bjorkna, 
and also included it in Synonymia Piscium (p. 13, No. 27) and Gen. 
Pise. (p. 3, No. 3). But he failed to perceive that it was the spe- 
cies called Ballerus and Blicca by former ichthyologists, referring 
these names instead to his own Blicca {Descr. Pise., No. 11), to 
which Linnaeus on his authority applied the specific name of Ballerus, 
which it has since retained. Artedi’s Bjorkna remained unknown to 
Linnaeus, though the name is given both in the Fauna Suecica. and 
