28o 



BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 



Thirty-two specimens were examined, as follows: 



Specimens op Polypus bimaculatus. 



This fine Polypus has undergone so complete and accurate description at the hands of Verrill that 

 duplication here may appear a futile waste of space, but as his diagnosis is not always readily accessible, 

 I have endeavored to be sufficiently full at least to enable the easy recognition of the species. This is 

 especially important since in the local literatiu-e this form seems to have been frequently confused with 

 the widely different P. hongkongcnsis {Octopus puncialus), so that some of the southern California cita- 

 tions which I have listed under the latter species may well have had reference to specimens of P. bimacu- 

 latus. South of Point Conception it becomes the most abimdant littoral devilfish, judging from its 

 frequency in collections from that region. 



It does not appear to be closely allied to any of our other species. The curious ocular spots in front 

 of the eyes are probably the most prominent distinctive feature. Although sometimes partially obscured 

 by the surface coloration, I have never known this character to fail, so it would seem to be quite diag- 

 nostic. The hectocotylization is inconspicuous in the extreme and would be apt to escape a merely 

 casual inspection. The customary component structures are greatly reduced, but I am unable to quite 

 concur with Verrill in his statement that it is " without any appearance of the spoon-shaped cavity and 

 transverse grooves found in other species," since in the majority of my (male) specimens a few such 

 grooves are quite clearly to be made out. Possibly in larger individuals they become obscured. 



The smooth and rugose states of P. bimaculalus are so different that at first sight they do not appear 

 to represent the same species. The larger warty tubercles, however, seem to exhibit a remarkable 

 constancy, and, although often reduced to mere concentrically lined or laminated callouses, can usually 

 be made out. These structiues, like the general relative dimensions, are probably greatly affected by 

 the state of the animal when killed and the manner of preservation. 



Polypus hongkongensis Hoyle, 1885. (PI. xxxv, fig. 3; pi. xxxvi, fig. i; pi. xxxix. fig. 3-4; pi. xl, 

 fig. I.) 



Octopus punitaltis Gabb, 1862, p. 170 (not Octopus punctatits Blainvillc 1826, p. 195, teste d'Orbigny). 



Carpenter, 1864, p. 613, 632, 664 (merely listed). 



Dall, 1866, p. 243, fig. 27 (dentition). 



? Cooper, 1870, p. 70 (listed from Monterey). 



Dall, 1S73. p. 484 (large specimens from Sitka). 



Tryon, 1879, p. 45. 86, 117. pl- 19, fig. 3; pl- 34. fifi- 43- 



Verrill,. 1S80, p. 252. 



Verrill, iSS^a, p. 282 (72). 



Verrill, 1883a, p. 117, pi. iv. pl. v. fig. 2. 



Dall, 1S84, p. 341 (listed from Avatcha Bay, Kaipchatka). 



Orcutt, 18S5, p. 535 (listed from San Diego). 

 f Octopus hongkongensis Hoyle, 1885, p. 2:4 (Japanese specimens). 

 Hoyle, iSSsa. p. 99 (Japanese specimens). 

 Hoyle, 1SS6, pi. V (Japanese specimens). 

 Octopus puiutatus Hoyle, 1886, p. 11. 100. (pi. v) (Japanese specimens). 



Hoyle, iSS6a, p. 220 (16) (no description). 



WilUamson, 1892, p. 217 (listed from San Pedro). 



Taylor, 1S95, p. 98 (listed from Victoria). 



Joubin, 1S97, p. J10-113, pi. IX. 



Joubin, iS97a, p. 98. 



Jenkins & Carlson, 1903, p. 262 (physiology of nerves). 



Keep, 1904, p. 271, 351 (no description). 



