BURBOT. 
531 
New. In the southern hemisphere it has an extremely 
near relation among the marine fishes — from the Straits 
of Magellan and the neighbouring waters — in the genus 
Salilota, which by the deeper form of the body and 
the larger scales forms a transition to the following 
genus ( PJiycis ). Nilsson" was the first to distinguish 
Lotto, from Molua; but like Jenyns * 6 before him, he 
adopted the Linnaean specific name of Lota c as a ge- 
neric name, instead of the older name of Lotta c! , which 
was introduced into the system by Rissok 
The most striking external difference from the 
preceding genus lies in the close approximation of the 
vertical fins, it being scarcely possible to detect any 
Unless part of the tail even in middle-sized specimens 
of Lotto , as the caudal fin can hardly be described as 
distinctly divided from the second dorsal or the anal fin. 
The connexion is closest between the caudal fin and 
the second dorsal, and is so intimate that the last rays 
of the latter are generally set in the membrane that 
unites the two fins. This character also belongs, how- 
ever, to the primary stages in the development of the 
Ling (cf. above, figs. 124 and 125), and in this capa- 
city is an evident expression of the near relationship 
of the two genera, pointing to the common original 
forms in which the vertical fins were never differentiated. 
How near Lotto and Molua stand to each other in this 
respect, also appears from the fact that the distance 
between the tip of the tail (the middle of the base of 
the caudal fin) and the termination either of the second 
dorsal or of the anal fin is remarkably alike in both 
genera, varying between about 7 and 9 % of the length 
of the body, with the following averages: 
Average in 
Molua 
dipterygia 
4 specimens. 
Molua molva 
5 specimens. 
Lotta lota 
5 specimens. 
Distance between the tip of the tail and the end of the second dorsal fin in % of the length of the body... 
anal 
8.1 
8.3 
8.i 
8.o 
7.9 
8.3 
Thus we find from this table that the character 
in point — the absence in Lotto of the peduncle 
of the tail — is essentially due to the greater exten- 
sion in a forward direction of the caudal fin with its 
supporting rays at the upper and lower margins of 
the tail. 
In common 'with the preceding genus, on the other 
hand, and in contradistinction to Merlucius , Lotto is 
furnished with the pendulous barbel under the chin. 
During life this barbel projects more or less distinctly 
forward. 
The covering of the body consist in Ljotta of re- 
markably small, thin, round or roundish quadrangular 
scales, with almost central nucleus, and with the stria- 
tion especially dense, but consisting almost exclusively 
of concentric striae, the radiating striae being present 
only in the form of short, small, dentiform processes 
on the outer side of the concentric striae. 
a Skancl. Fn., Fisk., p. 579. 
6 Man. Brit. Vert. Anim. (1835), p. 448. 
c The name is taken from Rondelet ( De Pise, lacustr., p. 164). 
d The name occurs in Belon, and is a Latinized form of the French Lotte , which was applied to n subgenus by Cuvier in 1817, 
and was not supplemented by the Latin Lota until 1829, or later than the appearance of Risso’s work. In Cuvier, however, the species is 
always called Gadus lota. 
e Ear. Mer ., tom. Ill (1826), p. 217. 
