24 
BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 
anal ray. The ventrals reach halfway to front of anal. The height of dorsal equals 
length of head witliout snout. 
Scales small, adherent, very regularly imbricated. Lateral line 90 on one side, 87 
on the other; 11 scales in an oblique series between front of dorsal and lateral line. 
D. II, 11-; the last ray split. Anal i, 11. 
The color must have been very dark in life. Fins all blackish; in spirits with a 
bluish tinge. Traces of what may have been blackish spots and vermiculations are 
discernible on basal i)ortiou of dorsal and anal fins. Miss Taylor kindly writes me 
concerning the color of tins species in life: 
The Delta whitefish was far less silvery than other species of whiteflsh, with fawn color or 
brownish tints npon it. The scales, too, were sharply defined with a l>rownish line, almost as if a fine 
brown netting had been placed around the fish. 
Ooncerniug one of the types of G. I'ennicotU (No. 8971, U. S. Nat. Mus., Fort Good 
Hope, British America), Prof. B. W. Evermann sends me the following notes: 
This specimen is askin 21 inches long. Length of head, 3^ inches ; tip of snout to end of maxillary 
If inch; diameter of eye (not orbit), f inch ; length of longest gill-raker, inch. Maxillary contained 
4'A times in head; longest gill-raker, S} times; width of preorbital, 2| times in eye. Number of gill- 
rakers, 7-f-13. Scales, 10-90-10. 
This species seems closely related to G. richardsoni Gunther, with which it may 
prove identical. Giinther’s descrij)tiou (Catalogue of Fishes, vi, 185) includes no 
account of the gill-rakers, which may be long and numerous, as in G. clupeiformis, but 
indicates a fish with a longer snout and a broader supplemental maxillary bone. 
Coregonus lucidus Eichardson. 
Two specimens from Great Bear Lake River (Nos. 805 and 806, L. S. Jr. Univ. 
Mus.). They are each 40 cm. long. This species is very close to Goregonus artedi, of 
which it may prove to be a subsjiecies. As pointed out by Dr. Giiuther, this northern 
form differs in its shorter head and smaller eye. It seems also to have the iiremaxil- 
laries placed at a greater angle than in G. artedi. Following is a description of the 
two specimens : 
The body is slender, elongate, the curve of back and belly about equal, the greatest 
deiith exceeding length of head, 4^- to 4f in length to base of caudal. Least depth 
of caudal iieduncle 27 mm. Head small, 5 to 5^ in length; the snout narrow, almost 
vertically truncate when mouth is closed, the lower jaw fitting within the upper, but 
the mouth not inferior. Distance from snout to nape 2| or 3 in distance between 
nape and front of dorsal. Tlie head is thus much smaller in one specimen 
(No. 805) than in the other. Nape little elevated. Mouth oblique, with rather 
slender maxillary, which extends to a vertical midway between front and middle of 
pupil, its length from tip to articulation equaling distance from end of snout to front 
of pupil, and contained 3| to 3^ in length of head. Supplemental maxillary bone jirob- 
ably broader than in artedi, from three-fifths to two-thirds greatest ividth of maxillary. 
Suborbitals very narrow, their least width less than diameter of pupil. Eye slightly 
less than length of snout, its diameter contained 5 times in length of head, 1^ times in 
interorbital width. Supraorbital bone large, its width 24 to 2| in its length. Gill- 
rakers very long and slender, the longest slightly more than two-thirds length of eye; 
164-28 in number in both specimens.' Front of dorsal slightly nearer tip of snout than 
base of upper rudimentary caudal rays. The fins are mutilated, so that their length 
