DRAGONETS. 
271 
and may be of no small importance as food for other 
fishes, especially young Cod, small Gadidce and Her- 
rings. The want of regularity in its annual appearance 
at a certain spot may, therefore, be well deserving of 
careful investigation, as we may possibly find herein 
a clue to the explanation of the varying occurrence 
of these last species at different spots and in different 
years. 
Crystallogobius Nilssonii has only once been found 
out of Scandinavia. This find was made in Scotland, 
where, according to Day, in May, 1868, Edward dis- 
covered a male specimen in a pool on the shore near Banff. 
Fam. < A L L I 0 N V M 1 1) JE. 
Body elongated , more or less Cottiform , anteriorly depressed and posteriorly terete or of a rounded, quadrangular 
shape. Two dorsal fins, the base of the anterior shorter than that of the posterior, and, the former composed 
of flexible, simple rays. Anal fin in structure and position analogous to the second dorsal. Ventral fins of 
normal structure and set far apart , but jugular, and generally longer and broader than the pectoral fins. Psendo- 
branchice present. Six branchiostegal rays. Air-bladder and pyloric appendages wanting. No osseous connexion 
between the suborbital ring and the preoperculum. 
Bonaparte defined and established this family® as 
a subfamily ( Callionymini ) of the Gobioids, and Va- 
lenciennes made the suggestion 6 afterwards adopted by 
Richardson 0 , when he gave the family the above name. 
It is probably a question of no great importance whether 
we follow Cuvier and Gunther, and retain the Drago- 
nets within the Gobioid family, or place them as a 
distinct family beside the latter. Like the Gobies they 
a, re bottom-fishes, with the form of the body still better 
adapted to their manner of life, depressed as it is, 
sometimes almost to the base of the caudal tin. In 
addition to the common character which lies in the 
structure of the first dorsal fin, with its flexible rays 
and short, but sometimes remarkably high shape the 
resemblance between the Dragonets and the Gobies is 
further enhanced, in particular, by the similarity of 
their external sexual characters. Distinctive characters 
for these families are, however, not wanting. In the 
Dragonets the mouth admits of protrusion; and the 
jugular ventral tins are set so far apart that the pos- 
terior part of their membrane projects upwards along 
the front of the base of the pectoral fins. 
The family of the Dragonets is not rich in forms. 
About 80 species are known, all but one, Callionymus 
Agassisii, which, during the voyages of the American 
steamer “Blake’’ between 1877 and 1880, was found at 
a depth of 340 fathoms in the Gulf of Mexico' 6 , be- 
longing to the Eastern Hemisphere. By far the greater 
part of them belong to the genus 
CALLIONY M U S. 
Body naked,, scales appearing, in some cases only, on the lateral line. Small, car di form teeth on the intermaxillary 
bones and in the lower jaw. The lower posterior corner of the preoperculum prolonged into a spinous point. 
(Till-openings small, sometimes shrunk into two, round, foramina, one on each side of the occiput. Vertebrae about 20". 
The ancient writers did not know this fish, to lionymus, derived from Aristotle 6 ', who used it, how- 
which LinnvEUS' has applied the generic name of Cal- ; ever, according to Athenteus and Pliny, as a synonym 
0 See Isis, 1833, p. 1199. 
b Cuv., Val., Hist. Nat. Poiss., vol. XII, p. 202. 
c Zool. Ereb., Terr., II, 2 ( Ichthyol .), Method. List, p. IV. 
d Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., Harv. Coll., Mass., vol. XV, p. 29, fig. 207. 
* From 19 to 21. 
1 Syst. Nat., ed. X, tom. I, p. 249. 
,J From Aristotle we only learn that Kaliieuvugog (fair-named) was a shorefish with a large gall-bladder. In the Dragonets the 
gall-bladder is small, and it seems, therefore, improbable that the name was originally applied to them. 
