718 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. 
cent of the length from the cephalic end of the body in four¬ 
teen cases. The intestine, which is far shorter than in the 
'other species, is but 62.5 per cent of the length, the average of 
ten cases. This may result from the large part of the food of 
this species consisting of plankton. The short intestine goes 
with long caeca in this species. 
The arrangement of the viscera differs somewhat from that 
in the Lepominae. The slender caeca are not spread out on the 
side of the stomach, but are characteristically bent ventral, then 
dorsal. This different position is doubtless the cause of the 
relative lengths of the caeca being so different from the type 
seen in the Lepominae. Plate XLIV, Pigure 6, shows that 
caecum IV is longer than its neighbors, and that the left caeca 
lack the characteristic shortness observed in the other species 
Two cases of fused caeca were found (Plate XLIII, Fig. 
7). In Figure 7 there were two lumina extending to the 
base. Since such fusions were not found in the other species, 
it seems possible that one other case of apparent branched 
caeca seen in this species represented a case of fusion. 
Both of the two species of the Micropterinae occur in the 
lakes of Madison. 
Micropterus dolomieu Laeepede. 
This species has the largest number of caeca of all the species 
examined. Gunther says of the caeca, “14 or more.” The 
range was found to be 11-15 and the mode 13. The loop of 
the intestine passing the pylorus does not produce an interval, 
but the caeca are so pressed from their natural position that 
its position is evident after removal of the intestine. The 
number of caeca between the gastric interval and the loop of 
the intestine is two to four, most often three. This is to be 
expected, owing to the larger number of caeca. The relative 
lengths of the caeca are shown in Plate XLIV, Figure 9. 
As in Pomoxis, there is an increase in length from I to III. 
The differences in length are less, owing to the length being 
longer in proportion to the diameter of the intestine, which as 
stated above I believe to be a cause of the difference in length. 
Branching was met with once, as shown in Plate XLIII, Fig¬ 
ure 9. 
