FITCH and BARKER: FISH FAMILY MORIDAE 



"Strinsia sobeivi is based on very faint impres- 

 sions [and] ... I cannot say what it is." In view 

 of the fact that the type of the genus Strinsia 

 is a macrourid, that Steindachner's S. alata can- 

 not be located, that Danil'chenko has moved his 

 S. sobievi from family Moridae into family Bro- 

 tulidae, and that diagnostic features cannot be 

 found on the available material representing this 

 species, it seems unlikely that this fish is a morid. 



LEPIDION MIOCENICA SATO, 1962 



Although this Miocene fossil from Japan prob- 

 ably is a gadoid and may be a morid, characters 

 which could validate its assignment to family 

 Moridae are either lacking or cannot be seen in 

 the unique holotype. The vertebrae behind the 

 second dorsal fin base are missing, otoliths are 

 not mentioned and apparently were dissolved 

 during fossilization, and if fontanelles evfer were 

 present in the exoccipitals they were rendered 

 unrecognizable when this fish was crushed into 

 a two-dimensional imprint. 



In making his generic assignment, Sato 

 (1962) states that "the present species is ap- 

 parently referable to the genus Lepidion ... in 

 having [the] following important features: tail 

 elongate and tapering posteriorly; two dorsals 

 well developed together with the anal, and they 

 are all composed of soft rays; anal fin is inserted 

 far behind a perpendicular through origin of 

 second dorsal fin base; snout is short and rather 

 bluntly pointed in lateral view." Unfortunately, 

 none of these characters is diagnostic of Lepidi- 

 on, either by itself or in combination with the 

 others. It would have been helpful to know if 

 there were teeth on the vomer and the length 

 of the anterior ray of the first dorsal fin (Norm- 

 an, 1957) .' Although Sato (1962) reported that 

 the vomer was present, he failed to indicate 

 whether it was toothed or naked. The anterior 

 ray of the first dorsal fin is neither prolonged 

 nor filamentous in the photograph of the type, 

 but in his reconstruction Sato has made it fila- 

 mentous. 



= Norman, J. R. 1957. A draft synopsis of the or- 

 ders families and genera of recent fishes and fish-hke 

 vertebrates. British Museum (Natural History), Lond- 

 on, 649 p. (Unpubl. manuscr.) 



ODONTOBUTIS CF. OBSCURA HATAI, 1965 



Apparently because of incorrectly identified 

 comparative material Hatai (1965) assigned a 

 "worn [morid] otolith measuring about 5 mm in 

 length" from the Pliocene of Japan (Hamada 

 sea cliff, Tanabu-machi, Shimo-Kita-gun, Ao- 

 mori Prefecture) to family Eleotridae under the 

 name Odontobutis cf. obscura. We do not know 

 what species of morid he had for comparison 

 [listed as Odontobutis obscura obscura (Tem- 

 minck and Schlegel), and 0. o. yuriagensis new 

 subspecies], but the otoliths he illustrates ap- 

 pear to be identical to one reported by Fitch and 

 Brownell (1968) from the stomach of a pygmy 

 sperm whale harpooned off Japan. His fossil 

 otolith has a bluntly rounded anterior end and 

 differs in other features from those he affiliated 

 it with, so it could not be identical. Based upon 

 morid sagittae we have seen, Hatai's fossil oto- 

 lith is most closely related to Physiculus, but 

 correct generic placement must necessarily await 

 comparison with morid species inhabiting the 

 waters of Japan today. Karrer (1971) assigns 

 this fossil to genus Physiculus (i.e., "ohne 

 Zweifel der Gattung Physiculus angehoren"). 



DISCUSSION 



Based upon skeletal imprints, 12 fossil species 

 have been assigned to family Moridae at various 

 times in the past. Subsequently, one of these 

 {Merriamina ectenes) was deemed conspecific 

 with another {Eclipes veternus) , and a second 

 {Strinsia sobievi) was made the type of a new 

 genus and moved into family Brotulidae. Our 

 studies revealed that of the ten remaining spe- 

 cies, one {Eclipes santamonicae) is conspecific 

 with E. manni and three others {E. veternus, E. 

 manni, and E. extensus) definitely are not mor- 

 ids. In addition we were informed that the type 

 and only known specimen of Strinsia alata can- 

 not be found, but since the tail portion of this 

 imprint was never present and the remaining 

 skeletal parts are not diagnostic, it could not be 

 assigned to family Moridae even if the type were 

 located. For the same reason (missing caudal 

 complex) , neither Lotella smimovi nor Lepidion 



581 



