CONGER. 
1039 
of the tip of the snout, and are tubular, but compara- 
tively shorter than in the preceding species. The 
mouth is similar to that of the common Eel, but the 
gape is comparatively larger, and the lips are still 
broader, especially in front, on the sides behind the 
tips of the snout and lower jaw, where the outer folds 
may be expanded almost like wings. Into the base of 
the outer fold on the upper jaw projects the lower 
posterior corner of the preorbital bone, which is fur- 
anterior part of the upper jaw and on the tip of the 
lower, subulate teeth are set in a card containing se- 
veral rows, the two first-mentioned groups being often, 
not always, separated by a toothless space at the above- 
mentioned constriction. On the jaws these pointed 
teeth are continued backwards in a row double in front, 
single behind, farthest back on the inside of the above- 
mentioned great median row of compressed teeth, for 
a short distance on its outside. The tongue is free, 
Fig. 283. Branchial arches of a Conger ( Conger niger ) seeri from above. Natural size. Halves of the right arches in a natural position, 
those of the left arches bent outwards, so that the under surface of their upper parts is visible. 
glh, glossohyoid (true lingual) bone; cop I — IV, first — fourth copulas; libr I — IV, first — -fourth hypobrauchials ; cbr I — IV, first — fourth cerato- 
branchials; epbr I — IV, first — fourth epibranchials ; pbbr I and II, first and second pharyngobranchials ; stbr, stylobranchials ; 
phs, upper, phi, lower pharyngeals. 
nished on the outer side with a large, round hollow, 
including a muciferous cavity belonging to the cephalic 
system of the lateral line. The length of the upper 
jatv from the tip of the snout is about 37 or 38 %, 
the length of the lower jaw about 48 — 52 %, of the 
length of the head. In front, both on the under sur- 
face of the rostro-ethmoidal tip (of the interm axillaries, 
according to Peters’ theory) and on the vomer, in the 
narrowing abruptly to a point. The branchial arches 
(fig. 283) are here too without gill-rakers, and the cardi- 
form pharyngeal teeth resemble those of the common 
Eel. The structure of the opercular apparatus we have 
mentioned above. To the gill-openings essentially the 
same remarks apply as in the case of the common Eel. 
The dorsal and anal fins differ from those of the 
common Eel in having their longest rays somewhat 
Scandinavian Fishes. 
131 
