434 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 
tember. Pearson (loc. cit.) did not get the fry in Texas until October, when this new 
year class had “a mode around 1 centimeter.” 
Hildebrand and Schroeder (1928, p. 284), working with fishes from Chesapeake 
Bay, agree essentially with Welsh and Breder (loc. cit.) relative to the duration of 
spawning. The first named authors found croakers with well-developed roe “com- 
mon” during October and early in November which thej^ believed to be the principal 
spawning period in Chesapeake Bay. These investigators took specimens of the 
O class in October which were 10 to 105 millimeters long; in November the range in the 
length of specimens assigned to this year class was 15 to 116; in December, 11 to 120; 
in January, 10 to 110 (none reported for February); and in March the range was 32 
to 64 millimeters, the largest fish of this year class not being represented. The 
absence of very small fish in the catches after January suggests that spawning may 
end in December or January in Chesapeake Bay, whereas at Beaufort fry 3 to 15 
millimeters long were common as late as April. (Table 9.) It is of interest to note 
that Pearson (1929, p. 200, Table 28) took a single specimen around 10 millimeters 
in length in February, none much less than 30 millimeters in March, and only 2 
around 20 millimeters in length in April. It would appear, therefore, from published 
accounts and the present investigation, that spawning probably begins in August 
in Chesapeake Bay and northward, in September at Beaufort, and in October in 
Texas; also, that it probably ends in December or January in Chesapeake Bay and 
northward, in April at Beaufort, and in February in Texas. 
A spawning season of about nine months’ duration, as found at Beaufort, must 
be considered an exceptionally long one. It is by far the longest reproductive 
period known to the writers among oviparous fishes. Such a long spawning season 
suggests the possibility that we are dealing with more than one species. It is 
pointed out in a preceding paragraph that the croakers inhabiting the brackish to 
fresh waters during the summer run larger in size than those from strictly salt water 
and, furthermore, they have pinkish to reddish pectoral, ventral, and anal fins, 
whereas these fins are pale to slightly yellowish in the salt water inhabiting croakers. 
These differences may be due entirely to environment, but the fish are worthy of a 
much more detailed study than they have received to date. It would not be sur- 
prising if a thorough study would reveal structural differences; possibly somewhat 
different, yet overlapping, spawning periods; and finally that they are separate and 
distinct species. The fact that few croakers seem to contain spawn at any one time 
at Beaufort, as shown in a preceding paragraph, however, militates somewhat 
against the 2-species theory. 
The almost total absence of adult croakers from the shallow shore waters during 
the greater part of the chief spawning period, as already pointed out, shows almost 
conclusively that the eggs at that time are not deposited in these shallow waters. 
The distribution of the very small fry, on the other hand, indicates that the eggs 
can not be cast at a great distance from the harbor. Young fish, only 3.5 millimeters 
long, have been taken in the harbor during the winter and smaller ones, some of them 
slightly under 3 millimeters, have been collected on the outer shores of the banks. 
These small fry, and especially somewhat larger ones, usually are common to abun- 
dant throughout the winter and are quite generally distributed in the waters wherein 
towings were made, extending from the estuaries through the harbor and a dis- 
tance of about 15 miles out to sea. Fry only 3 or 4 millimeters in length are helpless 
creatures; they are without developed fins, and no doubt are wafted from place to 
place by winds and tides. Therefore, under ordinary weather conditions, with only 
