630 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 
ACHIRUS FASCIATUS LACEPEDE. AMERICAN SOLE 
The American sole, Achirus fasciatus , n as understood here, ranges from Massa- 
chusetts to Texas, and is also recorded from the Atlantic coast of Panama. This 
species is very common on the coast of North Carolina, where it is often found in 
abundance in estuaries, and the mouths of fresh-water streams, on muddy bottom. 
It generally may be secured in numbers in the estuary of the Newport River at Beau- 
fort, and the young especially range in abundance up the river into fresh water. 
Small examples of this sole sometimes are taken in fresh water far from the sea. 
For example, it is a more or less permanent resident, at least during the summer, of 
the Potomac River as far up as Washington. The senior author also has seen a small 
specimen taken in the Savannah River at Augusta, Ga., slightly more than 200 miles 
from the sea, following the course of the river. He also has a specimen from the Pas- 
cagoula River, taken at Merrill, Miss., probably fully 75 miles by the course of the 
river from the Gulf, where we were informed by a local game warden the fish, though 
considered a curiosity, is taken from time to time. It may be said, therefore, that this 
sole ranges from salt, through brackish water, and sometimes far into fresh water. 
However, in the vicinity of Beaufort, N. C., at least, it is most numerous in water 
that is more or less brackish. It is, of course, a bottom-dwelling fish, like other flat- 
fishes. 
The usual book name of this species is American sole. In the field the names, 
sole, flounder, and hogchoker, are heard. In North Carolina hogchoker is almost 
universally used. In bygone times, and to a limited extent to the present day, hogs 
have fed on waste fish, cast on the shore by fishermen. Among them, of course, was 
the sole, for it has no commercial value. It is related that occasionally this sole act- 
ually became a hogchoker. In case the hog masticated poorly and tried to swallow 
the fish tail foremost, the fish sometimes lodged in the hog’s throat, because of its 
extremely rough (ctenoid) scales. The hog, apparently being unable either to 
swallow or regurgitate the fish, eventually was choked to death. 
CHARACTERS OF THE ADULT 
The hogchoker is characterized chiefly by the short deep body, the depth generally 
being contained in the length to the base of the caudal fin considerably less than two 
(1.6 to 1.81) times. The eyes, which are very small, and the color, are on the right 
side of the body. The color is variable ; generally it is brownish with darker blotches, 
and with about seven or eight dark cross lines. The mouth is very small, terminal, 
and the jaws are twisted; the maxillary reaches under the lower eye. The dorsal 
and anal fins are long, the former having 50 to 56 rays and the latter 36 to 42. The 
caudal fin is round, and the pectoral fins are missing. 
METHODS OF COLLECTING 
Adult fish, as well as young ones ranging upward of 18 mm in length, were 
collected mostly with otter trawls, though larger ones frequently were taken with 
seines also. 
13 Considerable discussion relative to the correct scientific name of the American sole has taken place during the past several years 
The reader interested is referred t-o Chabanaud (1928 and 1935), Myers (1929),and Hubbs (1932.) If the set-up of genera proposed by 
Chabanand, who recognizes more genera than most authors, is accepted the name, Achirus, is not available for the American sole, 
and is replaced by Trinectes. According to Hubbs and Chabanaud, fasciatus should be replaced by maculatus. Notwithstanding 
that this name was assigned to a fish of the Indian fauna by the original describes, it is now claimed that the designation of that 
locality was an error. Therefore, the last mentioned authors arrive at the conclusion that the correct name of the American sole is 
Trinectes maculatus (Bloch and Schneider). The present writers, nevertheless, prefer to retain the long familiar name, Achirus 
fasciatus, for the reason that the extensive splitting of genera does not seem to us to be advantageous, and because there seems to 
be insufficient evidence that fasciatus actually is a synonym of maculatus. 
