BY J. DOUGLAS OGILBY. 289 



descriptions of 0. halearicum they differ in the larger mouth, the 

 maxillary reaching to below the middle of the eye. It is 

 probable, howcA^er, that adults of all the species of Ophisotna 

 agree in this respect. Direct comparison of specimens from 

 the Mediterranean with those from the AVest Indies and from the 

 tropical Pacific may show them to be specifically distinct, but it 

 seems more advi'-rable for the present to consider halearicum a 

 widely distributed form, agreeing in this respect with its near 

 ally Leptocephalus conger. Ophisoma anago may also be proj^erly 

 referred to this species." Drs. Jordan and Davis in the same 

 year, and Drs. Jordan and Evermann later on, accept Prof. 

 Gilbert's conclusions, but with evident and, I think, well-founded 

 hesitation. The former authors, writing under Ophisoma hale- 

 aricum, say : " As it now stands the range of the species is wide, 

 and there may prove, upon comparison of specimens from 

 different parts of the range, to be specific differences ; as yet no 

 such comparison has been made. The specimens before us are 

 from Palermo, and from tlie Bonaparte collection without locality. 

 We have compared these with Poey's account of the Cuban 

 species called imprfssiis, and can find no difference. Conger 

 analis, Poey, also from Cuba, seems to differ only in the slightly 

 larger mouth and stronger teeth, and is probably identical with 

 impressiis. Congromurcena mellissii, Giinther, seems to belong 

 here rather than under the synonymy of mysiax, where it is 

 placed by Dr. Steindachner. Conger opisthophthalmus and Conger 

 microstomus seem to be the same, and specimens recently 

 obtained by Dr. Gilbert from the Galapagos Islands seem refer- 

 able to this species. Should the American prove different it will 

 stand as Ophisoma opisthophthalmus." 



The same note of indecision runs through the subsequent 

 utterances of Jordan and Evermann, and though I have pro- 

 visionally accepted their conclusions with regard to the specific 

 identity of the western Atlantic forms — opisthophthalmnsy 

 Ranzani ; microstomus, Castelnau ; analis, Poey ; and imjjressus, 

 Poey* — with halearicus, I am not disposed to assent so readily to 



* I have not been able to cousult the descriptions of any of these fishes. 

 20 



