FLOUNDERS OF GENXTS PARALICHTHYS AXD RELATED GENERA 



335 



of head, forming an isosceles tiiangle witli (lie i)re- 

 pecliincular spot. 



-Vll the essential characters jiiven by Mii'anda 

 Riheiro agree with those of Pfteudorhoinhiis isos- 

 celes^ except that the body is not quite so deep as in 

 that species. Xorman examined four specimens 

 in the British Museum, fi'om Cape Frio. Brazil, 

 which he thinks are identical with fr/'oeeUatus. 

 Noi'uian's desci-iption is adeqiuite to distinguish 

 his specimens specifically from all known related 

 flounders on the coast of Brazil and should his 

 specimens ]irove to be cons]iecific with the type of 

 trioedliifiis. the species is distinct fi'om inosceles. 



The essential charactei-s in Xorman's desci-ip- 

 tion of these four specimens are as follows: Scales 

 mostly feebly ctenoid on ocular side, cycloid on 

 blind side; 40 ("about 60 in lateral line'"). Very 

 few accessfu-y scales. Gill rakers 8 or 9 on lower 

 limb. A. 67-()9; D. 82-S(;. Dorsal origin in 

 front of eye. Interorbital a narrow ridge. Teeth 

 of moderate size, canines not much enlarged, 

 ^laxillary extending to a little beyond middle of 

 eye. about 2 in head. Head -I'-^-'M : depth 40^3. 

 Color same as above, except that prepeduncular 

 spot sometimes lacking. 



There are two important discrepancies in the 

 accounts of the two authors. According to Mi- 

 landa Ribeiro, tnocellatitf! lacks accessory scales 

 and the scale count is 48; while Norman's speci- 

 mens have some accessory scales and the scale 

 count is 40. These differences may (possibly be due 

 to individual variability, or to different methods 

 of study followed by the two authors; but they 

 may also indicate specific differences. A solution 

 of these questions must wait until the range of 

 variation of friorellatiis is definitely established. 



The interorbital in this species is reduced to a 

 mere ridge, unlike that in any species of ParaJirh- 

 thys. Norman describes his specimens as having 

 the teeth moderate which is also unlike that in 

 most species of Paralichfhyft. Consequently, it 

 is doubtful whether this species belongs to Para- 

 licJithyH. 



Paralichthys triocellatii.i Miranda Ribeiro. Bol. 

 Soc. Agric. Rio de Janeiro 1!)()4, p. V.>1 (citation 

 not verified). — Miranda Ribeiro, Arch. Mus. Nac. 

 Rio de Janeiro 17 (Heterosomata) : 13, photo., 

 HUT) (Ilha Rasa. Brazil). — Xorman. .Monogr. 

 Flatfishes, p. 80, fig. 46, 1!);34 (Cape Frio, Brazil; 



40 fath. ) .—Xorman. Discovery Rept. 16 : 135, 1937 

 (compared witli P. IxoaceleH). 



PARALICHTHY.S COERULEOSTICTA 



This species was described from a single example 

 73 nun., from Juan Fernandez. Chile. The perti- 

 nent specific i'haracters given in the original de- 

 scription are as follows : A slender spine at begin- 

 ning of anal. Scales on eyed side thickly spimilif- 

 eious. esmooth on bliiul side; 50. (lill rakers on 

 lower limb of first arch -20. A. 70 ; D. 87. Dorsal 

 origin in front of eye. Eye 3 times in head. In- 

 teroibital very nariow. Teeth slender, pointed, 

 gradually and not nuich increasing in length for- 

 ward. Depth 45, heatl about ±2, maxillary 7.3. 

 Sinistral. 



This species apparently shows characters of 

 both Pardlichthi/x and Hippog/oxs/na. and if ])rop- 

 erly placed in the former largely destroys the 

 boundary between those two genera. The dorsal 

 origin is in front of the eye like Pnralichthyx; 

 but the interorbital is narrow, the teeth are small 

 and it has a preanal s])ine like Hippof/loxxina. 

 Assuming it to be a Hippogloxx'nut. it is to be noted 

 further that the preanal spine, the short maxillary, 

 the relatively many gill rakers and the rather large 

 scales are like in the subgenus llippoglvsx'ma. but 

 the fin rays have a high count and the eye is 

 medium large like in the subgeims Lloglos-nna. 



On the basis of the original description it is not 

 possible to place this species generically with confi- 

 dence. It is very possible that it belongs to 

 neither one of those two genera. This is further 

 indicated by the unusually short head aiul 

 nuixillary, strikingly shorter than in any species 

 of the two genera. 



PaniUchthiis cocnilio.ttirtn Steindachner, Fnnna Clii- 

 lensisi 1: :i27 (Zcnil. Jaluliiich. supp. lid. 4) is'.ls (Juan 

 Feniaiiflez I. Chile I .—I 'Ki. UN, Cat. I'oc. Chile, ii. lill, 1901 

 (listed). — XOKMAN, Jlouogr. Flatlishes, p. SS, 1934 (after 

 Steiudacliuer). 



HIPPOGLOSSUS KINGII 



This name was based by Jenyus not on actual 

 specimens, but on a (h'awing i)repared by an olli- 

 cei- of the Retigle. The figure luiblished by Jenyus 

 shows the following characters: Ventral short, 

 with a short base, synuuet rical. Interorbital wide. 

 somewhat as in males of some species of Syncitiin. 

 or in specimens of some other genera. A well 



