O. G. Dely szerk.: Vertebrata Hungarica 3/1-2. (Budapest, 1961)
Berinkey, L.: On a new fish species of our fauna 1-26. o.
high values with respect to 5 features. BANARESCU* s measurements differ in 6 cases from those of SLASTENENKO, while the specimens measured by me deviate also in 6, but not the same, characters. These are contradictions which cannot hold in nature,nor could they be caused by errors in calculations /which were, by the way, controlled several times/. In my experience, the STUDENT-FISHER formula is very sensitive, and by its help one may segregate even relatively small differences, so it is highly recommended in the case of mainly a small number of specimens. Any great number of specimens will tend to increase the t. value, and it may happen that a small deviation will show a significant difference which can by no means be regarded biologically as a difference separating forms. As the number of specimens was in the present caee rather high, I also applied a method less sensitive than the STUDENT-FISHER formula, namely the comparison of the medium errors of the means. The resultB are presented in Table X. The Hungarian and the Temes specimens agree also by the use of this method, differring from BANARESCU'e data with concern to the same measurements. However, BANARESCU' s values show differences from those of SLASTENENKO in 2 cases only /diameter of eye and length of caudal peduncle/, as against the 6 differences in measurements given on Table IX, while there are deviations concerning 4 measurement ratios between specimens measured by me and SLASTENENKO* s data /diameter of eye, lowest height of body, length of caudal peduncle, predorsal distance/. We are now confronted by the question how these data should be evaluated. Can we separate two forms purely by variation statistical means, and can Gobio albipinnatus vladykov i retained as a distinct subspecies, - and if so, in what does it actually differ from Gobio albipinnatus beling i? In my opinion.variation statistical investigations, without other morphological, biological or osteological
