FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 78, NO. 2 



scR 



PCR 



Figure 21. — Caudal complex of Coryphaena equiselis, 15.9 mm 

 SL. Symbols: PCR, principal caudal rays; SCR, secondary 

 caudal rays. Stippled, articular cartilage; darkened, bone. 



autogenous (Figures 23, 24). These were two 

 haemal spines, a parhypural, a ventral and dorsal 

 hypural plate, hypural 5, a uroneural pair (fused 

 from two pairs), and an epural (fused from two). 

 Nonautogenous bones were the specialized neural 

 arch and one neural spine. The relationship of the 

 urostyle with the uroneural pair and hypural 5 is 

 shown in Figure 24. Articular cartilage was pres- 

 ent on all distal parts of the hypural complex 

 posterior to preural centrum 4 (Figure 22). 



The parhypural and hypurals 1-5 supported the 

 principal caudal rays. The distribution of principal 

 caudal rays on the various hypural bones can only 

 be seen in larvae and smaller juveniles of both 

 species before hypural fusion (Table 11). There was 

 no difference in distribution of principal caudal 

 rays between the two species. 



Uns 



Hy3&4 



Art 



Hyi*2 



Figure 22. — Supporting bones of the caudal complex of Coryphaena equiselis, 55.5 mm 

 SL. Symbols: Art, articular projection. For explanation of other symbols, see Figures 

 19, 20. Stippled, articular cartilage; darkened, bone. 



phaena spp. remained autogenous in the adults, 

 but were closely articulated with the ventroposte- 

 rior edge of the urostyle. 



During development of the hypural complex 

 bones a small hypurapophysis (Lundberg and 

 Baskin 1969) was observed on hypural 1 in both 

 species. It appeared before hypural fusion, but 

 could not be illustrated in the lateral view. Dis- 

 articulation of adult caudal skeletons of both 

 species of Coryphaena revealed the presence of the 

 hypurapophysis. The hypurapophysis articulated 

 with the urostyle just dorsad of the parhypur- 

 apophysis (Nursall 1963). 



In the adults of Coryphaena spp., most bones of 

 the hypural complex were closely articulated, but 



298 



The anatomy and development of the caudal 

 complex of Coryphaena spp. had similarities and 

 dissimilarities with other fish. The hypurapophy- 

 sis observed in Coryphaena spp. was noted in such 

 fish as siluriform catfish (Lundberg and Baskin 

 1969) and adult sea bream, Archosargus rhom- 

 boidalis (Houde and Potthoff 1976). The hypura- 

 pophysis was not observed in the blackfin tuna, 

 Thunnus atlanticus (Potthoff 1975). 



In the Coryphaenidae and other percoid fishes 

 such as Apogonidae (Fraser 1972), A. rhomboi- 

 dalis (Houde and Potthoff 1976), Carangidae ( Ahl- 

 strom and Ball 1954; Berry 1969), Haemulon 

 plumieri (Saksena and Richards 1975), and some 

 Scombridae (Conrad 1938; Mago Leccia 1958), the 



