80 
SCANDINAVIAN FISHES. 
RASCH’S SEA-BREAM. 
BRAMA LONGIPINNIS. 
Fig. 24. 
Length of the lower jaw more than * 2 * / 5 of that of the anal fin , which is less than % of the length of the body. 
Greatest height of the dorsal fin more than 2 / 5 of its length or than of the length of the head. 
Fig. 24. Brama longipinnis from Hammerfest. 
nat. size. After Esmark 
R. hr. 7; D. a - 4 A. h P. c 18; V. V 5 ; U. d x+ 15 + .<?). 
2 8 1 22 
Syn. Brama longipinnis, Lowe, Proc. Zool. Soc., Lond., 1843, p. 
82; Lillj. Ups. Univ. Festskr. 4 Nov. 1864, p. 7. 
Brama Raschii , Esm., Fork. Vid. Selsk. Christ. 1861, p. 238 
cum tab.; Forh. Skand. Naturf. Mode, Christ. 1868, p. 521; 
Collin, Forh. Skaud. Naturf. Mode. Kbhvn. 1873, p. 418; 
Collett, Forh. Vid. Selsk. Christ. 1874, Tillaegsh., p. 46; 
Lillj., tiv., Norg. Fiskar, p. 310. 
( J)Brama princepis , Johnson, Proc. Zool. Soc., Lond., 1863, 
p. 36. 
( '?) Brama Raii, Lute., /Spol. Atl., 1. c., tab. IV, fig. 2. 
Obs. In his first description of this species Lilljeborg held 
that Esmark’s Brama Raschii, now known both in Norway and 
Iceland, should be considered identical with LcSwe’s Brama longi- 
pinnis from Madeira. The objections to this opinion given by 
Esmark, Collin, and Collett only concern the changes due to age 
in the head and fins, which we have mentioned above and which 
a I). — according to Lowe; — 3g * n Brama princeps according to Johnson. 
2 3 
b A. 27 according to LOtken; — according to Lowe; — in Br. princeps according to Johnson. 
c P. 20 according to Lowe; also in Br. princeps according to Johnson. 
d C. 4 + 17 + 4 according to Lowe; 4 + 15 + 4 in Br. princeps according to Johnson. Esmark gives C. 20, whence I assume that 
he also counted all the visible supporting rays. As usual, in the above formula by x we denote the upper and lower, simple, supporting rays. 
