FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 70, NO. 3 



miocenica can be retained in family Moridae 

 with any certainty. Finally, the descriptions of 

 the remaining three (Onobrosmius elongatus, 

 Lotella andi-ussovi, and Onobrosmius elongatus) 

 are all lacking in characteristics which are diag- 

 nostic of any gadoid family, and until or unless 

 such features can be observed on the type spe- 

 cimens, the only reason for retaining them in 

 family Moridae would be mere intuition. 



Morids have also been reported in the fossil 

 record from otoliths found in New Zealand, Cal- 

 ifornia, and Japan. One of these, reported as 

 Odontobutis cf. obsciira (an eleotrid) from the 

 Pliocene of Japan, appears to represent an ex- 

 tant species of Physiculus, but no specific assign- 

 ment can be made until comparative material 

 from Japanese waters has been examined. All 

 of the species known from otoliths are unques- 

 tionably morids. 



On paleontological evidence, Danil'chenko 

 (1960) reported that the Moridae constitute 

 probably the oldest family of the order Gadi- 

 formes. He based this opinion on the belief that 

 Melanoniis, abundant in Oligocene rocks, was a 

 morid, but Marshall (1965) removed Melanonus 

 to its own family, and our investigations have 

 revealed that none of the fossil morids, or pre- 

 sumed morids, is more ancient than Lower Mi- 

 ocene. Rosen and Patterson (1969) pointed out 

 additional reasons for questioning morid an- 

 tiquity and the logic of relating their ancestry 

 to other gadoids. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



John Fitch's work with otoliths has been sup- 

 ported by grants (GB-1244 and GB-6490) from 

 the National Science Foundation. 



Little could have been accomplished in this 

 study of fossil and living morids, however, with- 

 out assistance from a multitude of people. Some 

 loaned material from their fish collections, and 

 several gave us otoliths, fossil imprints, or fresh- 

 ly caught specimens that we needed for making 

 comparisons or to complete a particular line of 

 investigation. We were accompanied by stud- 

 ents and fellow workers on fossil collecting trips, 

 and we often were sent fossiliferous matrix that 

 we were unable to collect ourselves. Among those 



who rendered such assistance, as well as those 

 who offered counsel and helpful criticism were: 

 E. H. Ahlstrom and Amelia Sandknopf, National 

 Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla; Nelson W. 

 Baker, Santa Barbara Museum of Natural His- 

 tory (SBMNH); Frederick H. Berry, Maricul- 

 ture Research, Marine Protein Corp., Florida; 

 William A. Bussing, University of Costa Rica 

 (UCR); Victor J. Bye, Fisheries Laboratory, 

 Lowestoft, England; Peter H. J. Castle, Victoria 

 University of Wellington; Daniel M. Cohen, 

 NMFS Systematics Laboratory, U.S. National 

 Museum (USNM), Washington, D.C.; Hugh H. 

 DeWitt, University of Maine; William N. Esch- 

 meyer and W. 1. Follett, California Academy of 

 Sciences; Richard A. Fitch, San Pedro; Spano 

 Giacalone, San Diego; J. A. Grant-Mackie and 

 L. L. Wakefield, University of Auckland; Carl 

 L. Hubbs, and Richard H. Rosenblatt, Scripps 

 Institution of Oceanography (SIO) ; Richard 

 Huddleston, Rio Hondo College; Roy Kohl, Hum- 

 boldt State College; Robert J. Lavenberg, Los 

 Angeles County Museum of Natural History 

 (LACM); Robert N. Lea, California Depart- 

 ment of Fish and Game; Richard McGinnis, Uni- 

 versity of Southern California; Charles Mitchell, 

 Marine Biological Consultants, Costa Mesa; John 

 Paxton, The Australian Museum; William G. 

 Pearcy, Oregon State University; John Steph- 

 ens, Occidental College (Oxy) ; Boyd W. Walker, 

 University of California at Los Angeles (UC- 

 LA); and Wilhelm Weiler, Worms, Germany. 

 Barbara Barmore and P. Patricia Powell, Cal- 

 ifornia Department of Fish and Game, and Lil- 

 lian Dempster, California Academy of Sciences, 

 were able to obtain some critical references for 

 us. 



Gerhard Bakker, Los Angeles City College, 

 prepared the excellent drawings of otoliths and 

 the caudal skeleton; and Jack W. Schott, Cali- 

 fornia Department of Fish and Game, took the 

 otolith photographs. 



LITERATURE CITED 



Barn HART, P. S. 



1936. Marine fishes of southern California. Univ. 

 Calif. Press, Berkeley, 209 p. 

 Bean, T. H. 



1890. Scientific results of explorations by the U.S. 



582 



