E. Encrasicholus, Flem. Brit. An. p. 183. Clupea Encrasicholus, Linn. Syst. Nat. torn. i. p. 523.* Bloch, Ichth. pl. 30. f. 2. Don. Brit. Fish. vol. iii. pl. 50. Turt. Brit. Faun. p. 107. Encrasicholus, Will. Hist. Pise. p. 225. tab. P. 2. f. 2. Anchovy, Penn. Brit Zool. vol. iii. p. 347. pl. 67. Id. (Edit. 1812). vol.iii. p. 441. pl. 78. L'Anchois vulgaire, Cuv. Reg. An. torn. ii. p. 322.

Length

Six inches and a half. Penn.

Description

{Form). Body slender, but thicker in proportion than the Herring: eyes large: under jaw much shorter than the upper: teeth small; a row in each jaw, and another on the middle of the tongue: the tongue doubly ciliated on both sides: dorsal consisting of twelve rays, transparent, and placed nearer the nose than the tail: scales large and deciduous: edge of the belly smooth: tail forked. {Colours). Back green, and semipellucid: sides and belly silvery, and opaque: irides white, with a cast of yellow. Penn. According to Donovan, the number of the fin-rays is as follows:

D. 15; A. 14; C 24; P. 15; V. 7.

Apparently a rare species in the British seas. First obtained by Ray from the estuary of the Dee. Pennant mentions a few which were taken near his house at Downing, in Flintshire, in 1769. Donovan procured a specimen from the coast of Hampshire. More recently single individuals have occurred on the coasts of Norfolk and Durham. Common in the Mediterranean, where there is also (according to Cuvier) a second and smaller species, distinguished by the profile being less convex. Both this last and the British one belong to that section of the genus, in which the belly is smooth without a sharp edge, and the dorsal opposite the ventrals.

(4). LEPISOSTEUS, Lacep.

(22). L. Gavialis, Lacep

Hist. Nat. des Poiss. torn. v. p. 333. Esox osseus, Linn. Syst. Nat. torn. i. p. 516. Bloch, Ichth. pl. 390. Berkenh. Syn. vol. i. p. 81. Don. Brit. Fish. vol. v. pl. 100.

Berkenhout was the first to include this species in the British Fauna. He gives us to understand that it had occurred on the Sussex coast. The only other author who has mentioned any locality for it is Stewart, who statest that it has been taken in the Frith of Forth. It is probable, however, that in both these instances there is some error, as the species is a native of America, where it is said to inhabit lakes and large rivers.

* Gleanings in Nat. Hist. Second Series, p. 129. † Elements of Nat. Hist. vol. i. p. 374.

(II. SUBBRACHIALES).