CHAPTER XIV

THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF FISHES

=Zoogeography.=--Under the head of distribution we consider the

facts of the actual location of species of organisms on the surface

of the earth and the laws by which their location is governed. This

constitutes the subject-matter of the science of zoogeography. In

physical geography we may prepare maps of the earth or of any part of

it, these bringing to prominence the physical features of its surface.

Such maps show here a sea, there a plateau, here a mountain chain,

there a desert, a prairie, a peninsula, or an island. In political

geography the maps show their physical features of the earth as

related to the people who inhabit them and the states or powers which

receive or claim their allegiance. In zoogeography the realms of the

earth are considered in relation to the species or tribes of animals

which inhabit them. Thus series of maps could be drawn representing

those parts of North America in which catfishes or trout or sunfishes

are found in the streams. In like manner the distribution of any

particular fish as the muskallonge or the yellow perch could be shown

on the map. The details of such a map are very instructive, and their

consideration at once raises a series of questions as to the cause

behind each fact. In science it must be supposed that no fact is

arbitrary or meaningless. In the case of fishes the details of the

method of diffusion of species afford matters of deep interest. These

are considered in a subsequent chapter.

The dispersion of animals may be described as a matter of space and

time, the movement being continuous but modified by barriers and

other conditions of environment. The tendency of recent studies in

zoogeography has been to consider the facts of present distribution

as the result of conditions in the past, thus correlating our present

knowledge with the past relations of land and water as shown through

paleontology. Dr. A. E. Ortmann well observes that "Any division of the

earth's surface into zoogeographical regions which starts exclusively

from the present distribution of animals without considering its

origin must always be unsatisfactory." We must therefore consider the

coast-lines and barriers of Tertiary and earlier times as well as those

of to-day to understand the present distribution of fishes.

=General Laws of Distribution.=--The general laws governing the

distribution of all animals are reducible to three very simple

propositions.

Each species of animal is found in every part of the earth having

conditions suitable for its maintenance, unless

(_a_) Its individuals have been unable to reach this region through

barriers of some sort; or,

(_b_) Having reached it, the species is unable to maintain itself,

through lack of capacity for adaptation, through severity of

competition with other forms, or through destructive conditions of

environment; or else,

(_c_) Having entered and maintained itself, it has become so altered

in the process of adaptation as to become a species distinct from the

original type.

=Species Absent through Barriers.=--The absence from the Japanese

fauna of most European or American species comes under the first head.

The pike has never reached the Japanese lakes, though the shade of

the-lotus leaf in the many clear ponds would suit its habits exactly.

The grunt[22] and porgies[23] of our West Indian waters have failed to

cross the ocean and therefore have no descendants in Europe or Asia.

=Species Absent through Failure to Maintain Foothold.=--Of species

under (_b_), those who have crossed the seas and not found lodgement,

we have, in the nature of things, no record. Of the existence of

multitudes of estrays we have abundant evidence. In the Gulf Stream

off Cape Cod are every year taken many young fishes belonging to

species at home in the Bahamas and which find no permanent place in

the New England fauna. In like fashion, young fishes from the tropics

drift northward in the Kuro Shiwo to the coasts of Japan, but never

finding a permanent breeding-place and never joining the ranks of the

Japanese fishes. But to this there have been, and will be, occasional

exceptions. Now and then one among thousands finds permanent lodgement,

and by such means a species from another region will be added to the

fauna. The rest disappear and leave no trace. A knowledge of these

currents and their influence is eventual to any detailed study of the

dispersion of fishes.

The occurrence of the young of many shore fishes of the Hawaiian

Islands as drifting plankton at a considerable distance from the shores

has been lately discovered by Dr. Gilbert. Each island is, in a sense,

a "sphere of influence," affecting the fauna of neighboring regions.

=Species Changed through Natural Selection.=--In the third class,

that of species changed in the process of adaptation, most insular

forms belong. As a matter of fact, at some time or another almost

every species must be in this category, for isolation is a source of

the most potent elements in the initiation and intensification of

the minor differences which separate related species. It is not the

preservation of the most useful features, but of those which actually

existed in the ancestral individuals, which distinguish such species.

Natural selection must include not only the process of the survival

of the fittest, but also the results of the survival of the existing.

This means the preservation through heredity of the traits not of the

species alone, but those of the actual individuals set apart to be the

first in the line of descent in a new environment. In hosts of cases

the persistence of characters rests not on any special usefulness or

fitness, but on the fact that individuals possessing these characters

have, at one time or another, invaded a certain area and populated it.

The principle of utility explains survivals among competing structures.

It rarely accounts for qualities associated with geographical

distribution.

=Extinction of Species.=--The extinction of species may be noted here

in connection with their extension of range. Prof. Herbert Osborn has

recognized five different types of elimination.

1. That extinction which comes from modification or progressive

evolution, a relegation to the past as the result of a transmutation

into more advanced forms. 2. Extinction from changes of physical

environment which outrun the powers of adaptation. 3. The extinction

which results from competition. 4. The extinction from extreme

specialization and limitation to special conditions the loss of which

means extinction. 5. Extinction as a result of exhaustion. As an

illustration of No. 1, we may take almost any species which has a

cognate species on the further side of some barrier or in the tertiary

seas. Thus the trout of the Twin Lakes in Colorado has acquired its

present characters in the place of those brought into the lake by its

actual ancestors. No. 2 is illustrated by the disappearance of East

Indian types (_Zanclus_, _Platax_, _Toxotes_, etc.) in Italy at the

end of the Eocene, perhaps for climatic reasons. Extinction through

competition is shown in the gradual disappearance of the Sacramento

perch (_Archoplitis interruptus_) after the invasion of the river

by catfish and carp. From extreme specialization certain forms have

doubtless disappeared, but no certain case of this kind has been

pointed out among fishes, unless this be the cause of the disappearance

of the Devonian mailed _Ostracophores_ and _Arthrodires_. It is not

likely that any group of fishes has perished through exhaustion of the

stock of vigor.

=Barriers Checking Movement of Marine Fishes.=--The limits of the

distribution of individual species or genera must be found in some sort

of barrier, past or present. The chief barriers which limit marine

fishes are the presence of land, the presence of great oceans, the

differences of temperature arising from differences in latitude, the

nature of the sea bottom, and the direction of oceanic currents. That

which is a barrier to one species may be an agent in distribution to

another. The common shore fishes would perish in deep waters almost as

surely as on land, while the open Pacific is a broad highway to the

albacore or the swordfish.

Again, that which is a barrier to rapid distribution may become an

agent in the slow extension of the range of a species. The great

continent of Asia is undoubtedly one of the greatest of barriers to

the wide movement of species of fish, yet its long shore-line enables

species to creep, as it were, from bay to bay, or from rock to rock,

till, in many cases, the same species is found in the Red Sea and in

the tide-pools or sand-reaches of Japan. In the North Pacific, the

presence of a range of half-submerged volcanoes, known as the Aleutian

and the Kurile Islands, has greatly aided the slow movement of the

fishes of the tide-pools and the kelp. To a school of mackerel or of

flying-fishes these rough islands with their narrow channels might form

an insuperable barrier.

[Illustration: FIG. 173.--Japanese filefish, _Rudarius ercodes_ Jordan

and Snyder. Wakanoura, Japan. Family _Monacanthidæ_.]

=Temperature the Central Fact in Distribution.=--It has long been

recognized that the matter of temperature is the central fact in all

problems of geographical distribution. Few species in any group freely

cross the frost-line, and except as borne by oceanic currents, not

many extend their range far into waters colder than those in which

the species is distinctively at home. Knowing the average temperature

of the water in a given region we know in general the types of fishes

which must inhabit it. It is the similarity in temperature and physical

conditions which chiefly explains the resemblance of the Japanese fauna

to that of the Mediterranean or the Antilles. This fact alone must

explain the resemblance of the Arctic and Antarctic faunæ, there being

in no case a barrier in the sea that may not some time be crossed. Like

forms lodge in like places.

=Agency of Ocean Currents.=--We may consider again for a moment the

movements of the great currents in the Pacific as agencies in the

distribution of species.

A great current sets to the eastward, crossing the ocean just south

of the equator. It extends past Samoa and passes on nearly to the

coast of Mexico, touching the Galapagos Islands, Clipperton Island,

and especially the Revillagigedos. This may account for the number of

Polynesian species found on these islands, about which they are freely

mixed with immigrants from the mainland of Mexico.

From the Revillagigedos[24] the current moves northward and westward,

passing the Hawaiian Islands and thence onward to the Ladrones. The

absence in Hawaii of most of the characteristic fishes of Polynesia

and Micronesia may be in part due to the long detour made by these

currents, as the conditions of life in these groups of islands are

not very different. Northeast of Hawaii is a great spiral current,

moving with the hands of the watch, forming what is called Fleurieu's

Whirlpool. This does not reach the coast of California. This fact may

help to account for the almost complete distinction in the shore fishes

of Hawaii and California.[25]

No other group of islands in the tropics has a fish fauna so isolated

as that of Hawaii. The genera are largely the ordinary tropical types.

The species are largely peculiar to these islands.

The westward current from Hawaii reaches Luzon and Formosa. It is

deflected to the northward and, joining a northward current from

Celebes, it forms the Kuro Shiwo or Black Stream of Japan, which strews

its tropical species in the rock pools along the Japanese promontories

as far as Tokio. Then, turning into the open sea, it passes northward

to the Aleutian Islands, across to Sitka. Thence it moves southward as

a cold current, bearing Ochotsk-Alaskan types southward as far as the

Santa Barbara Islands, to which region it is accompanied by species of

Aleutian origin. A cold return current seems to extend southward in

Japan, along the east shore perhaps as far as Matsushima. A similar

current in the sea to the west of Japan extends still further to the

southward, to Noto, or beyond.

It is, of course, not necessary that the movements of a species in an

oceanic current should coincide with the direction of the current.

Young fishes, or fresh-water fishes, would be borne along with the

water. Those that dwell within floating bodies of seaweed would go

whither the waters carry the drifting mass. But free-swimming fishes,

as the mackerel or flying-fishes, might as readily choose the reverse

direction. To a free-swimming fish the temperature of the water would

be the only consideration. It is thus evident that a current which to

certain forms would prove a barrier to distribution, to others would be

a mere convenience in movement.

In comparing the Japanese fauna with that of Australia, we find some

trace of both these conditions. Certain forms are perhaps excluded by

cross-currents, while certain others seem to have been influenced only

by the warmth of the water. A few Australian types on the coast of

Chile seem to have been carried over by the cross-currents of the South

Atlantic.

It is fair to say that the part taken by oceanic currents in the

distribution of shore fishes is far from completely demonstrated. The

evidence that they assist in such distribution is, in brief, as follows:

1. The young of shore fishes often swim at the surface.

2. The young of very many tropical fishes drift northward in the Gulf

Stream and the Japanese Kuro Shiwo.

3. The faunal isolation of Hawaii may be correlated with the direction

of the oceanic currents.

=Centers of Distribution.=--We may assume, in regard to any species,

that it has had its origin in or near that region in which it is most

abundant and characteristic. Such an assumption must involve a very

large percentage of error or of doubt, but in considering the mass

of species, it may represent essential truth. In the same fashion we

may regard a genus as being autochthonous or first developed in the

region where it shows the greatest range or variety of species. Those

regions where the greatest number of genera are thus autochthonous may

be regarded as centers of distribution. So far as the marine fishes

are concerned, the most important of these supposed centers are found

in the Pacific Ocean. First of these in importance is the East-Indian

Archipelago, with the neighboring shores of India. Next would come

the Arctic Pacific and its bounding islands, from Japan to British

Columbia. Third in importance in this regard is Australia. Important

centers are found in temperate Japan, in California, the Panama region,

and in New Zealand, Chili, and Patagonia. The fauna of Polynesia is

almost entirely derived from the Indies; and the shore fauna of the Red

Sea, the Bay of Bengal, and Madagascar, so far as genera are concerned,

seems to be not really separable from the Indian fauna generally.

[Illustration: FIG. 174.--Globefish, _Tetraodon setosus_ Rosa Smith.

Clarion Island, Mexico.]

I know of but six genera which may be regarded as autochthonous in the

Red Sea, and nearly all of these are of doubtful value or of uncertain

relation. The many peculiar genera described by Dr. Alcock, from the

dredgings of the _Investigator_ in the Bay of Bengal, belong to the

bathybial or deep-water series, and will all, doubtless, prove to be

forms of wide distribution.

In the Atlantic, the chief center of distribution is the West Indies;

the second is the Mediterranean. On the shores to the northward or

southward of these regions occasional genera have found their origin.

This is true especially of the New England region, the North Sea, the

Gulf of Guinea, and the coast of Argentina. The fish fauna of the North

Atlantic is derived mainly from the North Pacific, the differences

lying mainly in the relative paucity of the North Atlantic. But in

certain groups common to the two regions the migration must have been

in the opposite direction, exceptions that prove the rule.

=Distribution of Marine Fishes.=--The distribution of marine fishes

must be indicated in a different way from that of the fresh-water

forms. The barriers which limit their range furnish also their means

of dispersion. In some cases proximity overbalances the influence of

temperature; with most forms questions of temperature are all-important.

=Pelagic Fishes.=--Before consideration of the coast-lines we may

glance at the differences in vertical distribution. Many species,

especially those in groups allied to the mackerel family, are

pelagic--that is, inhabiting the open sea and ranging widely within

limits of temperature. In this series some species are practically

cosmopolitan. In other cases the genera are so. Each school or group of

individuals has its breeding place, and from the isolation of breeding

districts new species may be conceived to arise. The pelagic types have

reached a species of equilibrium in distribution. Each type may be

found where suitable conditions exist, and the distribution of species

throws little light on questions of distribution of shore fishes. Yet

among these species are all degrees of localization. The pelagic fishes

shade into the shore fishes on the one hand and into the deep-sea

fishes on the other.

=Bassalian Fishes.=--The vast group of bassalian or deep-sea fishes

includes those forms which live below the line of adequate light. These

too are localized in their distribution, and to a much greater extent

than was formerly supposed. Yet as they dwell below the influence

of the sun's rays, zones and surface temperatures are nearly alike

to them, and the same forms may be found in the Arctic or under the

equator. Their differences in distribution are largely vertical, some

living at greater depths than others, and they shade off by degrees

from bathybial into semi-bathybial, and finally into ordinary pelagic

and ordinary shore types. Apparently all of the bassalian fishes are

derived from littoral types, the changes in structure being due to

degeneration of the osseous and muscular systems and of structures not

needed in deep-sea life.

[Illustration: FIG. 175.--Sting-ray, _Dasyatis sabina_ Le Sueur.

Galveston.]

The fishes of the great depths are soft in substance, some of them

blind, some of them with very large eyes, all black in color, and very

many are provided with luminous spots or areas. A large body of species

of fishes are semi-bathybial, inhabiting depths of 20 to 100 fathoms,

showing many of the characters of shore fishes, but far more widely

distributed. Many of the remarkable cases of wide distribution of type

belong to this class. In moderate depths red colors are very common,

corresponding to the zone of red algæ, and the colors in both cases are

perhaps determined from the fact that the red rays of light are the

least refrangible.

A certain number of species are both marine and fresh water, inhabiting

estuaries and brackish waters, while some more strictly marine ascend

the rivers to spawn. In none of these cases can any hard and fast line

be drawn, and some groups which are shore fishes in one region will be

represented by semi-bathybial or fluviatile forms in another.[26]

=Littoral Fishes.=--The shore fishes are in general the most highly

specialized in their respective groups, because exposed to the greatest

variety of selecting conditions and of competition. Their distribution

in space is more definite than that of the pelagic and bassalian types,

and they may be more definitely assigned to geographical areas.

=Distribution of Littoral Fishes by Coast-lines.=--Their distribution

is best indicated, not by realms or areas, but as forming four parallel

series corresponding to the four great north and south continental

outlines. Each of these series may be represented as beginning at

the north in the Arctic fauna, practically identical in each of the

four series, actually identical in the two Pacific series. Passing

southward, forms are arranged according to temperature. One by one

in each series, the Arctic types disappear; subarctic, temperate,

and semi-tropical types take their places, giving way in turn to

south-temperate and Antarctic forms. The distribution of these is

modified by barriers and by currents, yet though genera and species may

be different, each isotherm is represented in each series by certain

general types of fishes.

[Illustration: FIG. 176.--Green-sided Darter, _Diplesion blennioides_

Rafinesque. Clinch River. Family _Percidæ_.]

Passing southward the two American series, the East Atlantic and the

East Pacific, pass on gradually through temperate to Antarctic types.

These are analogous to those of the Arctic, and in a few cases they

are generally identical. The West Pacific (East Asian) series is not

a continuous line on account of the presence of Australia, the East

Indies, and Polynesia. The irregularities of these regions make a

number of subseries, which break up the simplicity expressed in the

idea of four parallel series. Yet the fauna of Polynesia is strictly

East Indian, modified by the omission or alteration of species,

and that of Australia is Indian at the north, and changes to the

southward much as that of Africa does. In its marine fishes, it does

not constitute a distinct "realm." The East Atlantic (Europe-African)

series follows the same general lines of change as that of the West

Atlantic. It extends, however, only to the South Temperate Zone,

developing no Antarctic elements. The relative shortness of Africa

explains in large degree, as already shown, the similarity between the

tropical elements in the two Old-World series, as the similarity in

tropical elements in the two American series must be due to a former

depression of the connecting Isthmus. The practical unity of the Arctic

marine fauna needs no explanation in view of the present shore lines of

the Arctic Ocean.

=Minor Faunal Areas.=--The minor faunal areas of shore fishes may be

grouped as follows:

East Atlantic.

Icelandic,

British,

Mediterranean,

Guinean,

Cape.

West Atlantic.

Greenlandic,

New England,

Virginian,

Austroriparian,

Floridian,

Antillæan,

Caribbean,

Brazilian,

Argentinan,

Patagonian.

East Pacific.

Arctic,

Aleutian,

Sitkan,

Californian,

San Diegan,

Sinaloan,

Panamanian,

Peruvian,

Revillagigedan,

Galapagan,

Chilian,

Patagonian.

West Pacific.

Arctic,

Aleutian,

Kurile,

Hokkaido,

Nippon,

Chinese,

East Indian,

Polynesian,

Hawaiian,

Indian,

Arabian,

Madagascarian,

Cape,

North Australian,

Tasmanian,

New Zealand,

Antarctic.

=Equatorial Fishes Most Specialized.=--In general, the different

types are most highly specialized in equatorial waters. The processes

of specific change, through natural selection or other causes, if

other causes exist, take place most rapidly there and produce most

far-reaching modification. As elsewhere stated, the coral reefs of

the tropics are the centers of fish-life, the cities in fish economy.

The fresh waters, the arctic waters, the deep sea and the open sea

represent forms of ichthyic backwoods, regions where change goes on

more slowly, and in them we find survivals of archaic or generalized

types. For this reason the study in detail of the distribution

of marine fishes of equatorial regions is in the highest degree

instructive.

=Realms of Distribution of Fresh-water Fishes.=--If we consider the

fresh-water fishes alone we may divide the land areas of the earth

into districts and zones not differing fundamentally with those marked

out for mammals and birds. The river basin, bounded by its shores and

the sea at its mouth, shows many resemblances, from the point of view

of a fish, to an island considered as the home of an animal. It is

evident that with fishes the differences in latitude outweigh those of

continental areas, and a primary division into Old World and New World

would not be tenable.

The chief areas of distribution of fresh-water fishes we may indicate

as follows, following essentially the grouping proposed by Dr.

Günther:[27]

=Northern Zone.=--With Dr. Günther we may recognize first the _Northern

Zone_, characterized familiarly by the presence of sturgeon, salmon,

trout, whitefish, pike, lamprey, stickleback, and other species of

which the genera and often the species are identical in Europe,

Siberia, Canada, Alaska, and most of the United States, Japan, and

China. This is subject to cross-division into two great districts,

the first Europe-Asiatic, the second North American. These two agree

very closely to the northward, but diverge widely to the southward,

developing a variety of specialized genera and species, and both of

them passing finally by degrees into the Equatorial Zone.

Still another line of division is made by the Ural Mountains in the

Old World and by the Rocky Mountains in the New. In both cases the

Eastern region is vastly richer in genera and species, as well as in

autochthonous forms, than the Western. The reason for this lies in the

vastly greater extent of the river basins of China and the Eastern

United States, as compared with those of Europe or the Californian

region.

[Illustration: FIG. 177.--Japanese Sea-horse, _Hippocampus mohnikei_

Bleeker. Misaki, Japan.]

Minor divisions are those which separate the Great Lake region from

the streams tributary to the Gulf of Mexico; and in Asia, those which

separate China from tributaries of the Caspian, the Black, and the

Mediterranean.

=Equatorial Zone.=--The Equatorial Zone is roughly indicated by the

tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. Its essential feature is that of the

temperature, and the peculiarities of its divisions are caused by

barriers of sea or mountains.

Dr. Günther finds the best line of separation into two divisions to lie

in the presence or absence of the great group of dace or minnows,[28]

to which nearly half of the species of fresh-water fishes the world

over belong. The entire group, now spread everywhere except in the

Arctic, South America, Australia, and the islands of the Pacific, seems

to have had its origin in India, from which region its genera have

radiated in every direction.

The Cyprinoid division of the Equatorial Zone forms two districts,

the Indian and the African. The Acyprinoid division includes South

America, south of Mexico, and all the islands of the tropical Pacific

lying to the east of Wallace's line. This line, separating Borneo from

Celebes and Bali from Lompoe, marks in the Pacific the western limit

of Cyprinoid fishes, as well as that of monkeys and other important

groups of land animals. This line, recognized as very important in

the distribution of land animals, coincides in general with the ocean

current between Celebes and Papua, which is one of the sources of the

Kuro Shiwo.

In Australia, Hawaii, and Polynesia generally, the fresh-water fishes

are derived from marine types by modification of one sort or another.

In no case, so far as I know, in any island to the eastward of Borneo,

is found any species derived from fresh-water families of either the

Eastern or the Western Continent. Of course, minor subdivisions in

these districts are formed by the contour lines of river basins. The

fishes of the Nile differ from those of the Niger or the Congo, or of

the streams of Madagascar or Cape Colony, but in all these regions

the essential character of the fish fauna remains the same.

=Southern Zone.=--The third great region, the Southern Zone, is

scantily supplied with fresh-water fishes, and the few it possesses

are chiefly derived from modifications of the marine fauna or from the

Equatorial Zone to the north. Three districts are recognized--Tasmania,

New Zealand, and Patagonia.

=Origin of the New Zealand Fauna.=--The fact that certain peculiar

groups are common to these three regions has attracted the notice of

naturalists. In a critical study of the fish fauna of New Zealand,[29]

Dr. Gill discusses the origin of the four genera and seven species

of fresh-water fishes found in these islands, the principal of these

genera (_Galaxias_) being represented by nearly related species in

South Australia, in Patagonia,[30] the Falkland Islands, and in South

Africa.

According to Dr. Gill, we can account for this anomaly of distribution

only by supposing, on the one hand, that their ancestors were carried

for long distances in some unnatural manner, as (_a_) having been

carried across entombed in ice, or (_b_) being swept by ocean currents,

surviving their long stay in salt water, or else that they were derived

(_c_) from some widely distributed marine type now extinct, its

descendants restricted to fresh water.

On the other hand, Dr. Gill suggests that as "community of type must

be the expression of community of origin," the presence of fishes of

long-established fresh-water types must imply continuity or at least

contiguity of land. The objections raised by geologists to the supposed

land connection of New Zealand and Tasmania do not appear to Dr. Gill

insuperable. It is well known, he says, "that the highest mountain

chains are of comparatively recent geological age. It remains, then,

to consider which is the more probable, (1) that the types now common

in distant regions were distributed in some unnatural manner by the

means referred to, or (2) that they are descendants of forms once

wide-ranging over lands now submerged." After considering questions as

to change of type in other groups, Dr. Gill is inclined to postulate,

from the occurrence of species of the trout-like genus _Galaxias_, in

New Zealand, South Australia, and South America, that "there existed

some terrestrial passage-way between the several regions at a time

as late as the close of the Mesozoic period. The evidence of such a

connection afforded by congeneric fishes is fortified by analogous

representatives among insects, mollusca, and even amphibians. The

separation of the several areas must have occurred little later than

the late Tertiary, inasmuch as the salt-water fishes of corresponding

isotherms found along the coast of the now widely separated lands are

to such a large extent specifically different. In general, change seems

to have taken place more rapidly among marine animals than fresh-water

representatives of the same class."

In this case, when one guess is set against another, it seems to me

that the hypothesis first suggested, rather than the other, lies in

the line of least logical resistance. I think it better to adopt

provisionally some theory not involving the existence of a South

Pacific Antarctic Continent, to account for the distribution of

_Galaxias_. For this view I may give five reasons:

1. There are many other cases of the sort equally remarkable and

equally hard to explain. Among these is the presence of species of

paddle-fish and shovel-nosed sturgeon,[31] types characteristic of

the Mississippi Valley, in Central Asia. The presence of one and only

one of the five or six American species of pike[32] in Europe; of one

of the three species of mud-minnow in Austria,[33] the others being

American. Still another curious case of distribution is that of the

large pike-like trout of the genus _Hucho_, one species (_Hucho hucho_)

inhabiting the Danube, the other (_Hucho blackistoni_) the rivers of

northern Japan. Many such cases occur in different parts of the globe

and at present admit of no plausible explanation.

2. The supposed continental extension should show permanent traces in

greater similarity in the present fauna, both of rivers and of sea. The

other fresh-water genera of the regions in question are different, and

the marine fishes are more different than they could be if we imagine

an ancient shore connection. If New Zealand and Patagonia were once

united other genera than _Galaxias_ would be left to show it.

3. We know nothing of the power of _Galaxias_ to survive submergence in

salt water, if carried in a marine current. As already noticed, I found

young and old in abundance of the commonest of Japanese fresh-water

fishes in the open sea, at a distance from any river. Thus far, this

species, the hakone[34] dace, has not been recorded outside of Japan,

but it might well be swept to Korea or China. Two fresh-water fishes of

Japanese origin now inhabit the island of Tsushima in the Straits of

Korea.

4. The fresh-water fishes of Polynesia show a remarkably wide

distribution and are doubtless carried alive in currents. One

river-goby[35] ranges from Tahiti to the Riu Kiu Islands. Another

species,[36] originally perhaps from Brazil through Mexico, shows an

equally broad distribution.

5. We know that _Galaxias_ with its relatives must have been derived

from a marine type. It has no affinity with any of the fresh-water

families of either continent, unless it be with the Salmonidæ. The

original type of this group was marine, and most of the larger species

still live in the sea, ascending streams only to spawn.

When the investigations of geologists show reason for believing in

radical changes in the forms of continents, we may accept their

conclusions. That geological evidence exists which seems to favor

the existence of a former continent, Antarctica, is claimed on high

authority. If this becomes well established we may well explain the

distribution of _Galaxias_ with reference to it. But we cannot, on

the other hand, regard the anomalous distribution of _Galaxias_ alone

constituting proof of shore connection. There can be no doubt that

almost every case of anomalies in the distribution of fishes admits of

a possible explanation through "the slow action of existing causes."

Real causes are always simple when they are once known. All anomalies

in distribution cease to be such when the facts necessary to understand

them are at our disposal.

FOOTNOTES:

[22] _Hæmulon._

[23] _Calamus._

[24] Clarion Island and Socorro Island.

[25] A few Mexican shore fishes, _Chætodon humeralis_, _Galeichthys

dasycephalus_, _Hypsoblennius parvipinnis_, have been wrongly

accredited to Hawaii by some misplacement of labels.

[26] The dragonets (_Callionymus_) are shore fishes of the shallowest

waters in Europe and Asia, but inhabit considerable depths in

tropical America. The sea-robins (_Prionotus_) are shore fishes in

Massachusetts, semi-bathybial fishes at Panama. Often Arctic shore

fishes become semi-bathybial in the Temperate Zone, living in water of

a given temperature. A long period of cold weather will sometimes bring

such to the surface.

[27] "Introduction to the Study of Fishes."

[28] Cyprinidæ.

[29] "A Comparison of Antipodal Faunæ," 1887.

[30] _Galaxias_, _Neochanna_, _Prototroctes_, and _Retropinna_.

[31] The shovel-nosed sturgeon (_Scaphirynchus_ and _Kessleria_) and

the paddle-fish (_Polyodon_ and _Psephurus_).

[32] _Esox lucius._

[33] _Umrba_, the mud-minnow.

[34] _Leuciscus hakuensis._

[35] _Eleotris fusca._

[36] _Awaous genivittatus._

A Guide to the Study of Fishes, Volume 1 (of 2) · 第 14 / 35 章