PISCES. 137 
and enumerates about seventy different species trom nearly all families, 
llepert. Fis.-nat. Cub. ii. 18GG; pp. 1-24. 
Mr. Higgins lias delivered an address upon Otoliths, in which he states 
that they are “ the only portion of the skeleton w;hich possessed a specific 
distinctive character,” ‘‘ that they had not only a distinctive specific character, 
but special generic characters also, and, further, that he believed that their 
microscopic structure would be found to be characteristic of groups,” &c. 
Proc. Bristol Nat. Soc. 18GG, pp. G9-70. 
Pyrenean Peninsula. Dr. Steindachner has supplied a great desideratum 
in our knowledge of European fishes by collecting and examining the fresh- 
water species of the Pyrenean Peninsula, which were less known than those 
of many extra-European countries. He has been rewarded by the dis- 
covery of many undescribed and highly interesting forms, which are well de- 
scribed and figured by him. The commencement of his report on this col- 
lecting-tour has been noticed in last year’s ^Record ’ (ii. p. 175). It is con- 
tinued in ‘ Sitzgsber. Ak. Wiss. Wien,’ 18GG, liii. p. 198, with “ The Fishes 
of the Ebro and rivers near Bilboa,” where 13 species are enumerated, among 
which Salmo solar, S. fario, Alosa vulgaris, Acipenser sturio. Four species 
were collected in the lliver Tet near Perpignan. From the Bivers Tajo, 
Duero, Miuo, and Jucar twenty-two species are described (ibid. liv. 18G6, pp. 
G-27), among which Tinea vulgaris, Salmo trutta [?], Cobitis to‘7iia, Gas- 
tej'ostcus aculeatus,ydiX. brachycenU'us ; and, finally, nineteen from the southern 
parts of the Peninsula (ibid. pp. 2G1-272). 
Italy. It is universally acknowledged that Bonaparte’s bulky work on the 
Fauna Italica does not contain a satisfactory account of the freshwater fishes 
of this country ; not only is it incomplete, but the distinction of species is 
carried to an extent perfectly bewildering, and not warranted by the researches 
of the author, who was limited chiefly to museum specimens, sometimes 
stuffed and in a very indifferent state of preservation. Therefore a critical 
examination of these fishes by an Italian zoologist was very desirable, and 
has been made in a truly scientific manner by Prof. Canestrini, who 
published the results of his researches in ‘ Aych, per la Zool. Anat. ecc.’ iv. 
18GG, pp. 47-187. He gives a critical review of the synonomy, and a full de- 
scription of each species, paying particular attention to the variations of form, 
&c. Unlike M. Blanchard, he reduces the number of species to GO, 17 of 
which are peculiar to Italy, whilst 30 of them occur in Central Europe, and 
24 in Great Britain. However, we must mention that the author has 
omitted several s])ccific names occurring in the works of Bonaparte and Va- 
lenciennes. He makes the very true observation that the representatives of 
Central European species in Italy are generally smaller and less developed. 
France. Prof. Blanchard’s book on French Fishes has been noticed 
above, p. 132. 
France — Depart, de Saonc-ct- Loire. M. Grognot has given a short account 
of the Fishes of this D<5partement in ‘Mt5m. d’Hist. Nat. Soc. lidueime,’ i. 
pp. 205-232. The paper does not contain anything of general interest. 
Noi'th Uist, Outer Hebrides. Dr. W. C. MTntosh has given a list of 33 
species of fishes observed by him in this island. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. v. 
18G6-GG, p. G14. 
Denmark. Dr. Liitken adds to the Danish fauna 4 species, viz. Coitus 
gobio, Cantharus lincatus, Liparis ekdrbmii (Malm), and Syngnathus rostel- 
