Cope passed away in l896, leaving to the Academy all of his "wet preparations" (mostly alcohol preserved) fishes, reptiles, etc. In 1898, Fowler transferred all of Cope's "alcoholics" to the Academy, and spent the next several years organizing the collection. As a result of his work and friendship with Cope, Fowler vowed to illustrate all the species in Cope's collection that had not previously been illustrated. Fowler drew a number of trout from the Academy collection, but whether he illustrated Cope's Mexican "black-spotted trout" is unknown. We have considered the possibility that Fowler might have rendered an illustration of Cope's trout, thus giving a clue to the identification of his Mexican specimens. Unfortunately, Fowler did not record which specific museum specimens he used for his drawings -- but he had the habit of writing updated scientific names on his illustrations. Thus, any Rio Grande cutts would appear as Salmo clarkii spilurus, which was the accepted name in Fowler's day. There are some intriguing possibilities among his illustrations.
A.
This trout is labeled as "blotchtail cutthroat, S. clarkii spilurus."
The spotting pattern is similar to Snake River cutthroat and
Yellowfin cutthroat, but we cannot find the common name "blotchtail
cutthroat" anywhere in literature! In any case, the moniker "spilurus"
should mean the collection locale was in the Rio Grande watershed, or at
least that Fowler believed that the Rio Grande was the locality.
B. This drawing is labeled, "Salmo clarkii virginalis." The spotting pattern is somewhat analagous to Mexican golden, but is sparse, and lacks spots on the head. The jaw is also long as in cutthroats. Virginalis was the original name misapplied to Bonneville or "Utah cutthroats," and only more recently has been correctly applied to Rio Grande Cutthroats. This is almost certainly the Bonneville subspecies, laboring under the old name as misapplied in Fowler's time.
C. This drawing is labeled "Salmo c. spilurus," and looks indeed to be a small specimen of Rio Grande cutthroat. Perhaps this was Cope's type specimen for his description of the species in 1872. Cope's name for the fish was a full species, Salmo spilurus, so the scientific name was surely not taken from Cope's label, but added later by Fowler.
In Cope's time, scientists had the unfortunate habit of labeling specimens on the outside of jars, typically on tags tied around the neck of the jars. In 1899, some of the older specimens of fish in the Academy's collection were rendered useless when a flooded basement ruined such labels, and it is possible that Cope's trout were lost at that time. Needham and Gard in their 1959 monograph "Rainbow Trout of Mexico and California," remarked that their "assiduous inquiry" had failed to locate Cope's trout, and the specimens were presumed lost.
We can only hope that more information about Cope, Lupton, Fowler and others involved in this mystery might come to the forefront and clarify where Lupton's trout came from. In the meantime, we will simply quote our esteemed Mexican colleagues: ¿Quien sabe?
For an in-depth look at Lupton, his travels, and where his trout might have come from, see Lupton's Story. Back to page 1 Home