182 
ZOOLOGICAIi LITERATURE. 
distinguished from the Parr-state of any migratory Tront^ at 
least as far as the British species are concerned. The two 
Scandinavian naturalists have not paid any attention to hybridism 
in the- species observed by them^ and as hybrids are probably of 
as common occiuTence in Scandinavia as elsewhere^ they may 
perhaps have examined hybrid specimens which confused their 
ideas altogether. It was long ago observed that in natural 
groups of animals the species of inferior size retain through their 
whole life characters which are peculiar to the young state only 
of the larger and more fully developed species. This is beauti- 
fully illustrated in the genus Salmo, and S. fario is one of those 
species in which characters of the young Sea-Trout and of the 
young Salmon are retained throughout life. 
Salmo alpinus. Hr. Malmgren (Wiegm. Arch. 1864, p. 328) calls the 
Scandinavian Chair Salmo salvelinus, being of opinion that the various Charr 
of Scandinavia are specifically identical with the Saelhling ” of South 
Germany ; S. umhla is also referred as a synonym to S. salvelimis. He is sur- 
prised that Prof. Siebold asserts that S. alpinus from Lapland is different from 
S. salvelinus, hut explains this by the circumstance that Prof. Siebold never 
had an opportunity of examining a Lap specimen. On p. 350, he denounces 
the British species established by the llecorder as so many additions to the 
synonymy. 
If the author had been satisfied to give the results of his examinations of 
the Scandinavian fishes we should have felt ourselves bound to respect his 
opinion as to the specific unity of the Scandinavian Charr, of which we have 
seen very little, particularly if he had shown how he arrived at this 
opinion. But as he not only puts forward his assertions unsupported by a 
single fact, but also ventures upon ground entirely unknown to him (he has 
not had extra-Scandinavian specimens for comparison), his opinion may be 
considered to be of the same weight as that of Prof. Siebold on S. alpinus. 
Tt is a misfortune that, when the knowledge of the Salmonoids first began to 
be developed, a number of nominal species were created simultaneously with 
others which are really distinct j in consequence of this. Naturalists look with 
distrust upon every step in a similar direction. Add to this that it certainly 
requires good material, patient inquiry, and an experienced eye, to discover 
specific characters among the multitude of accidental and other variations, 
and we cannot be surprised that many zoologists will prefer to adopt Agassiz’s 
opinion uttered in 1834, that all the Charr of Europe are specifically the same. 
If there are many more species of Salmo than Hr. Malingi-en is inclined to 
admit (as the Becorder has been compelled to believe, from a long study of 
them in nature,” as well as in the collection), this will be merely an instance 
analogous to that of the genus Coregonus^ of which numerous Scandinavian 
species are described by Hr. Malmgren. But then it is easier to perceive 
the characters of the species of the latter genus than those of Salmo, although 
one would scarcely have expected that the slightest doubt could be enter- 
tained as to the specific distinctness of the Irish Charr. 
Osmerus eperlanus. 4’he Smelt is found in all the larger lakes of Finland, 
and is common along the sea-shores. Malmgren, in Wicgin. Arch. 1864, p. 339. 
Coregomcs. The Finnish species of this genus have been determined by 
