82 
DOTTED MACKAUEL. 
groove that received it longer than in the other Maclcarel. 
Lateral line remarkably and irregularly bent. First dorsal fin 
with twelve rays, the first longest; second dorsal with eleven 
rays, the terminal rays extended to overlap the first finlet; 
the space between the dorsal fins a little longer than the first 
dorsal; pectoral fin with twenty rays; a spine in front of the 
anal; five finlets above and below. Tail rather more slender 
than in the Common Mackarel, and in the attenuated portion 
of the body, close before the caudal fin, depressed and square. 
But the most remarkable distinction between this and the 
other British species of Mackarel was in the colour, which 
was a uniform dark neutral tint over the head and back, 
without any bands or variegations, — it might be termed an 
olive bluish green, with green reflections at the sides; and 
from before the eyes, along the back and sides to the tail, 
the surface was thickly covered with spots of the size of a 
small pea, generally round and well defined, but a little larger, 
and elongated transversely on the summit of the back. The 
spots ended a little below the lateral line, and the belly was 
pure white; the surface between the carinations of the tail a 
bronzed yellow colour. A membranous process united the fifth 
ray of the first dorsal fip with the shin of the back; but this 
may not be a permanent character. I found this specimen a 
female, large with roe, and destitute of a swimming-bladder, 
as is also our Common Mackarel, and I believe also the S. 
colias, or Spanish Mackarel; and this observation becomes 
important when we keep in mind that Sir John Eichardson 
has made the mistake of quoting my authority as if it had 
possessed that organ; and also that there is a species, not 
uncommon in the Mediterranean, which is only to be definitely 
distinguished from the Common Mackarel by being supplied 
with it. 
Having obtained a figure, of the size of nature, with a 
description, I sent this fish with a copy of the drawing to 
Mr. Yarrell, in order to obtain his opinion with regard to its 
identity with any known species; and a portion of his reply 
is here given: — “On comparing the preserved skin of our fish 
with your representation I observe some points of distinction, 
which, though slight, may increase the amount of differences. 
Your fish appears to be less deep in proportion to its whole 
