to the
Labridae. The intestine of Pseudochromis is similarly formed, the stomach
being continuous with the rest of the alimentary canal, and not
distinguished by any cul de sac. Having but one specimen of Assiculus for
examination, I have not been able to submit it to dissection to see
whether the structure of its intestines be the same or not, but both it
and Pseudochromis differ very widely from the labroid type in their
scales, possessing the peculiar firm, shining, strongly ciliated
structure, which we observe in Glyphisodon and its allies, and in the
lateral line being interrupted in a precisely similar manner. Chromis and
Plesiops have already been removed by M. Valenciennes from the Labridae
to the Glyphisodontidae, and it is with them that we feel inclined to
range Assiculus and Pseudochromis, notwithstanding the discrepancies in
the form of the intestinal canal. We can, however, trace a gradation in
the variation of form. The normal number of caeca in the Glyphysodontidae
is three. In Chromis there are generally two small ones, while the Bolti
of the Nile, or the Chromis niloticus of Cuvier, has no pyloric caecum,
but a large cul de sac to the stomach. Malacanthus is widely separated
from the Glyphisodontidae by its continuous lateral line. Since these
remarks were written I have seen Muller's paper, entitled, Beitrage zur
Kentniss der naturlichen Familien der Fische, in which the Chromidae are
indicated as a distinct family from the Glyphisodontidae, which latter he
names Labroidei stenoidei; and Pseudochromis, it is stated, belongs to
neither of these families, because it has twofold pharyngeals with a
division between them. Dr. Muller promises a separate article on
Pseudochromis, which I have not yet seen.

...

Assiculus punctatus.

RADII. BR. 6; D. 3 : 23; A. 3 : 12; C. 21; P. 18: V. 1, 5.

FISHES. PLATE 2. Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

This fish is as thin in the body as a lath, whence the generic name. Its
greatest width is at the cheek, as shown by the section figure 3, where
the transverse diameter is about half the height. Figure 4 shows the
section at the gill cover, and third dorsal spine, where the thickness is
less; and figure 5, represents a section behind the ventrals, where the
thickness is little more than a tithe of the height, and it gradually
decreases to the caudal fin. The oblong profile is highest at the third
dorsal spine, whence it descends with a slightly convex curve to the
mout