128 
MEMOIRS OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM. 
under lbs. The Trout Cod is much smaller than the Murray Cod, and has eye larger 
and body higher and its bold inexcavate snout overhangs the lower jaw. Sides spotted 
instead of marbled and a dark stripe along head in life.” 
I have examined all the Murray Cod in the Australian Museum from Benalla, 
Victoria ; Mary R., Queensland ; Richmond River, Wellington, Murrumbidgee and 
many other New South Wales localities, also the Murray River, and cannot find valid 
criteria for specific separation. ^ 
The depth of body is comparatively slightly greater in most of the Trout Cod 
but in several there is no appreciable divergence from the Murray Cod in this respect. 
The snout overhangs the lower jaw in most specimens but in one the jaws are equal, 
and, as the fish grows, the lower jaw evidently projects more and more. The spotted 
sides of the Trout Cod do not differ from those of a large Murray Cod and it is evident 
that the latter is merely the adult form of the young or Trout Cod stage ; it is remark- 
able that we have no young Murray Cod without the Ti-out Cod characteristics. The 
dark stripe from snout to eye and gill-cover, the large eyes, and small size are plainly 
juvenile characters similar to those found in other fishes and I am of the opinion that 
the Trout Cod, so-called, is merely the young or perhaps a stunted or precocious form 
of the Murray Cod, and I can find no scale, fin, or other structural characters, not 
depending on growth or natural variation, to warrant the separation of the two nominal 
forms as a species or even as a variety. Further, Roughley (Fish. Austr. 1916, p. 63) 
states, “ As the ovaries develop prior to spawning, a marked difference is noticeable 
in the shape of the fish, the belly becoming rounder and protruded, which considerably 
increases the depth of the fish. This has, in the past, been the cause of some confusion, 
and the fish in such condition has been regarded as a separate species.” Furthermore, 
in Cuvier and Valenciennes’ original description of the TYPE-specimen of 
macquariensis, a ten-inch male from Bathurst, we read (Histoiro Naturelle des Poissons 
hi, 1829, p. 58) “ c’est plutot sa machoire superieure qui depasse I’autre” (It is rather 
the upper jaw which extends beyond the other) and ” seme de taches nuageuses 
noiratres, mediocres et irregulieres ” (strewn with cloudy blackish spots, mediocre 
[in size] and irregular). Thus the tijpiail Murray Cod was evidently a “ Trout Cod.” 
Therefore the names proposed by earlier authorities for the “ Trout Cod ” : mitchelli 
Castelnau, gibbiceps Macleay (based on a teratological or “ pug-headed ” specimen) 
and a name given by Stead in 3IS., arc synonyms of the true macqiiarieiists C. & V. 
If it be later found necessary to distinguish the two nominal forms, the custom 
of some Palaearctic ichthyologists might bo followed and the Trout Cod known as 
Maccullochella macquariensis forma macquariensis and tlie Murray Cod as Macculloch- 
ella macquariensis forma 2 )eelii, tliis name having been given to a specimen with 
marbled coloration and a projecting lower jaw by Major Mitchell in 1839. 
