297 APPENDIX. Notice of a collection of Fishes from the southern bend of the Tennessee River, in the State of Alabama; by L. AGASSIZ. THE only information we have at present upon the fishes of the Tennessee River, has been published by Dr. D. H. Storer, who mentions nine species from the vicinity of Florence, Alabama, in the Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History for 1845, and of which short descriptions appeared in his Synopsis of the Fishes of North America, in 1846. Having lately received a collection of not less than thirty-three species from the same water system, brought together by the untiring efforts of Dr. Newinan, of Huntsville, who has most kindly placed them in my hands for description, it seems desirable that an early notice of the general character of the ichthyological fauna of that region should be published, to serve as a standard of comparison with the fishes of the other western and southern rivers, in the study of their geographical distribution. I arrange them below according to their natural affinities. PERCOIDS, Cuv.-Whether the genera Perca, Labrax, and Lucioperca, are really wanting in the Tennessee River remains to be ascertained. No specimens of these genera were found among those forwarded by Dr. Newman; though many less conspicuous forms were collected. Thus far the genera Grystes, Centrarchus, and Pomotis, as understood at present by ichthyologists, are the only representatives of the family of Percoids in the Tennessee River. 1. GRYSTES, Cuv.-I have already shown in my "Lake Superior" that the genera Grystes and Huro of Cuvier do not differ essentially one from the other, and must therefore be united into. one natural group; moreover when the fishes of Kentucky shall be better known, it may become necessary to substitute for either of them the name of Lepomis, introduced in ichthyology by Rafinesque, as early as the year 1820, for the western species of this genus. If I hesitate to make the change now, it is simply because I have not the means of deciding upon the value of his many species. The species of this group are indeed very difficult to characterize. They differ chiefly in the relative size of their scales, the presence or absence of teeth upon the tongue, though Cuvier denies the presence of teeth on the tongue of any of SECOND SERIES, Vol. XVII, No. 50.-March, 1854. 88 them, &c. There are besides marked differences between the young and the adults. These circumstances render it impossible to characterize any one species without comparative descriptions and figures. The species from Huntsville, known there under the name of Trout, differs equally from the northern species mentioned in my "Lake Superior," and from that of the Southern States described by Cuvier and Valenciennes as Grystes salinoneus. Its snout is shorter, the posterior end of the upper maxillary extends beyond the hinder border of the eye, the head is higher, and the scales much larger in the dorsal as well as in the ventral regions. No teeth on the tongue. I call this species provisionally Grystes nobilis, Ag. It reaches a large size, and weighs occasionally from ten to fourteen pounds. 2. CENTRARCHUS, Cuv.-Under this name Cuvier has combined a variety of Percoids agreeing in general form; their body being oval and compressed, and the two dorsals continuous; but these fishes differ from one another in so many respects that they require to be further subdivided.* I shall retain the name of Centrarchus for that group of species of which Centrarchus irideus may be considered as the type. Thus circumscribed, the genus Centrarchus may be characterized as follows: Body very broad, greatly compressed, above as well as below. Dorsal long and high, gradually rising, without a depression between the spinous and soft rays; spinous portion of the fin largest. Anal shaped like the dorsal, but with fewer spinous rays, extending between the ventrals. Mouth small. No species of this genus has been found in the Tennessee River. 3. РOMOXIS, Rafin.-This genus was established by Rafinesque for a species closely allied to the Centrarchus hexacanthus of Cuv. and Val., and it well deserves to be retained. The body is much elevated and compressed, resembling somewhat Centrarchus proper. Like that genus it has a high dorsal and a high anal, of nearly equal size, and the spinous portion of these fius rises towards the soft rays without a depression; but in Pomoxis the soft portion of these fins is much the largest, whilst it is the smaller in Centrarchus; in Pomoxis the lower jaw is very prominent. The mouth is very large, which is smaller in Centrarchus. I have found representatives of this genus in all the Western States, from the western parts of New York to the Gulf of Mexico, and in the southern Atlantic States, but none in the northern Atlantic States. The species from the Tennessee River, called there Speckled or White Perch, agrees fully with the description. given by Rafinesque of his Pomoris annularis, with the sole exception of a golden ring at the base of the tail, which may be *DeKay has contrived to render the genus Centrarchus of Cuvier still less natural, by introducing into it his Centrarchus fasciatus and obscurus, which truly belong to the genus Grystes. See "Lake Superior," page 295. faded in the specimens sent by Dr. Newman, from Huntsville. Not having however specimens from the locality quoted by Rafinesque, I must leave it for further investigations to determine beyond any doubt their specific identity or difference. Centrarchus hexacanthus, Cuv. and Val., belongs unquestionably to this genus. 4. AMBLOPLITES, Rafin.-This is another of the natural genera established by Rafinesque for one of the many distinct types combined by Cuvier and Valenciennes under the name of Centrarchus. The well known Centrarchus æneus may be considered as its type, though Rafinesque founded his genus upon another species, from Kentucky, which has remained unnoticed since. The genus Ambloplites is easily distinguished from the preceding ones by the structure of its dorsal and anal fins. The spinous portion of the dorsal is much longer than the posterior soft portion of that fin and scarcely half its height, causing a marked depression to appear between the spinous and the articulated rays. The same is the case with the anal, which is also long; but low in its anterior spinous portion. The general form of these fishes is oval, and the body less compressed than in the preceding genera. The species from the Tennessee River agrees in every respect with Rafinesque's Ambloplites ichtheloides. It is called at Huntsville Goggle-eyed or Black Perch. In adopting the genus Ambloplites and referring this species to it with Rafinesque's authority I have acted with that discretion due to an author who labored under the greatest difficulties when preparing his work upon the fishes of the Ohio. It is true he himself describes this species as Lepomis ichtheloides; but he also suggests the desirableness of distinguishing it generically and proposes a new name for the genus, should it be admissible. Finding it to be so, I do not hesitate in giving him the fullest credit for his suggestion, even though I must add that he has described another variety of the same species under the name of Ichthelis erythrops. I have found both these varieties among the fishes sent to me by Dr. Newman, and I have no hesitation in considering them as specifically identical with one another and as agreeing fully with Rafinesque's descriptions. Should naturalists be more generally inclined to correct simply what they consider as errors in their predecessors instead of discarding altogether what they can not at once determine, we should have much fewer of those nominal species in our descriptive works, which are the curse of our scientific nomenclature. Ambloplites ichtheloides is much stouter and more elongated than Ambl. aneus; body less compressed above; face broader, lower jaw less prominent, and strongly arched from side to side; mouth opens less obliquely upwards; spinous rays of dorsal and anal shorter than in A. æneus; dorsal sprinkled with white spots. 5. CALLIURUS, Rafin.-Among the many Percoids found in the fresh waters of the United States there is one very common in South Carolina, which was first described by Cuvier and Valenciennes under the name of Pomotis gulosus, and afterwards referred by them to the genus Centrarchus. This species however belongs neither to Centrarchus nor to Pomotis, if we are to consider genera as expressing the same general features under a variety of modifications; for all true Pomotis are fishes with a small mouth, feeding on worms, while P. gulosus has a large mouth like Grystes and is a voracious animal living upon small fishes, which he chases with great energy. Again, Centrarchus has fins widely different in their structure from those of P. gulosus; there being a large number of spinous rays in advance of the anal in Ceutrarchus proper and those genera mentioned above which have been finally separated from Centrarchus; whilst P. gulosus has only three, like the true Pomotis. Notwithstanding these peculiarities I have been hesitating for a long time to consider P. gulosus as the type of a distinct genus, until I ascertained that there exist many species of this type in different parts of the country, all of which reproduce the essential peculiarities of P. gulosus under a variety of modifications. Upon a careful investigation of all the works in which American fishes are mentioned, I ascertained however that Rafinesque had already established a distinct genus for a species of this type described in his Ichthyologia Ohiensis under the name of Calliurus punctulatus. It is hardly surprising that this genus should have been overlooked by European ichthyologists and that it should even have escaped the notice of the authors of the great French Histoire naturelle des Poissons, for the fishes of the Ohio river have remained entirely unnoticed since Rafinesque, until Dr. Kirtland published his interesting and highly valuable papers upon the fishes of Ohio, in the Journal of the Natural History Society of Boston. Dr. Kirtland however, though the first author who has done full justice to the valuable contributions of Rafinesque to the Ichthyology of the United States, does not mention the species described by Rafinesque, as Calliurus punctulatus, and so this genus has remained unnoticed until now. It has occurred to me that it would be but justice to a naturalist, whose labors have been so generally neglected, to call the attention of Ichthyologists to these facts. I subjoin a short diagnosis of the genus Calliurus: Body oval, rather elongated, not compressed above. Dorsal long and low in its anterior portion, with a slight depression between the spinous and soft rays; posterior portion of the dorsal shorter than the anterior, though higher. Anal not half the size of the dorsal, with only three spinous rays. Mouth large, opening somewhat upwards, the lower jaw being longer than the upper. The species from Huntsville is identical with Rafinesque's Calliurus punctulatus. It is called there Black Perch or Goggle-eye. 6. POMOTIS, Rafin.-Every ichthyologist must be familiar with the freshwater sunfishes, so common throughout the United States; but it is perhaps not so generally known that the authority to which the genus Pomotis ought to be ascribed is questionable. Indeed, I find it universally ascribed to Cuvier: but that name occurs already in Rafinesque's Ichthyologia Ohiensis, published in 1820, as a subgenus of his genus Ichthelis, which he there divides into Telipomis and Pomotis. It seems therefore probable to me that Cuvier not considering these subdivisions necessary, and finding the name Pomotis better adapted to express the prominent character of all the species of this group, adopted the name of Pomotis in preference to Ichthelis, and in conformity with an objectionable practice, followed by some naturalists, to which Cuvier however did not adhere in other instances of applying a new authority whenever the range of a genus is modified, allowed in this case his name to supersede that of Rafinesque, which I would however restore, in conformity with the more just practice now prevailing. If it were further asked, what should be done with the name of Ichthelis which was proposed by Rafinesque as early as 1818. Whether it should. be made a synonym of his own subgenus Pomotis? or disregarded altogether, because Pomotis has come into general use? I would suggest that neither would be the proper course to follow. It is my opinion that in a complete monograph of this group, the name Ichthelis should be finally restored to its right and Telipomis and Pomolis used for such sections or genera as it may become necessary to separate from it, now that the number and diversity of species of this group has increased beyond expectation. This is at least the course I shall adopt when publishing the descriptions of the many new species of this type I have collected in the Southern States. For the present, I limit myself to describing the seven species sent to me by Dr. Newman, six of which are new to science. 1. Pomotis sanguinolentus, Agass.-Called Sun Perch at Huntsville. The general outline of the body is that of Pomotis nitida, Kirtl., but the back is more compressed, the dorsal and anal fins are more pointed behind, and the spinous rays are longer, the base of the anal is shorter. The sides of the head are marked with irregular undulating longitudinal lines of a metallic steel bluecolor, extending from the cheeks across the gill cover to the base of the pectorals and even continuing alone the sides of the body in dotted lines. There are generally four of these lines below the eyes, the first being close to its margin, and extending backwards along and around the border of the opercular appendage and returning, meets the centre of the hinder margin of the eye, but reappears immediately in front of the eye and continues to the edge of the upper jaw. Though the opercular appendage is |