374 
IOWA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE Voi.. XXVIT, 1920 
scription of Boleichthys fusiformis but in the original descriptions 
of Poccilichthys quiescens Jordan or Copelandellus quiescens Jor- 
dan which appears in the Proceedings of the United States 
National Museum for 1884, page 478, together with the 
description of the same species which appears in Jordan 
and Evermann’s Fishes of North America, page 1100. It was 
with some hesitancy that we compared these descriptions, but 
when it was all done the evidence against the separation of 
Copelandellus from Boleichthys was so strong that we are con- 
vinced that the former is a synonym of the latter. The most 
striking differences did not occur between the descriptions of 
Boleichthys fusiformis and either species description of Cope- 
landellus but rather between the two separate descriptions of 
Copelandellus. 
An examination of the characters given in these descriptions 
should show that the main differences between Boleichthys fusi- 
formis and Copelandellus quiescens are that the former has a 
naked area on top of the head and a maximum of X spines in 
the dorsal while the latter has the top of the head scaled and a 
maximum of XII spines in the dorsal. If we are to believe the 
descriptions given by Jordan and Evermann for B. fusiformis it 
is manifest that the scalation about the head is variable, for we 
read, “opercles, nape and breast usually well scaled, sometimes 
partly naked.” Since this is a variable character it would seem to 
us unwise to separate species or genera fundamentally upon such 
characters. If the descriptions of other characters were con- 
sistent, we might be more prone to recognize Copelandellus but 
Jordan and Evermann’s^® description is at variance with Jordan’s^'^ 
original description to such an extent that one must question the 
accuracy of observation or the interpretation used. It is evident 
that there must be error when we read that the body is extremely 
elongate and not greatly elongate ; the gill membranes are sep- 
arated and yet united; and that there is a black humeral spot 
and no black humeral spot. Added to this is the assertion that 
the anal fin is finely barred and yet plain. 
The presence of a maximum of XII spines in the dorsal of 
Boleichthys is easily accounted for. The original description of 
Copelandellus was made from a single specimen which may have 
had twelve spines. We believe this to be exceptional as of seven 
specimens collected by Woolman,^^ six had nine and one ten. Even 
if XII spines is characteristic of Copelandellus it should not be 
