FAMILY, XXX— BLEXXIID^. 337 



lateral. Gill-opening small, placed before the base of the pectoral fin. Teeth in maxilla of subeqiial size, conical, and 

 placed close together, with a lateral canine : in the loiver jaw more curved : palate edentulous. Fin rays flexible, the 

 dorsal commences on the head, it and the anal are united to the caudal. Ventral of three rays inserted anterior to the 

 branchial orifice. 



The fishes of tliis Genus were but imperfectly known, until Dr. Bleeker, in 1863, discovered a specimen 

 in the Leyden Museum. In his Memoir he showed Xiphasia to belong to the Blenniidw, or in fact a 

 Petrosciiies, ha^dng a tasnioid or eel-like body, with the dorsal and anal fins united to the caudal, he therefore 

 placed it in the present family. He also sui'mised that Nemophis, Kaup, might be a fish of this Genus, perhaps 

 wanting the ventral and caudal fins. 



Dr. Giinther remarks, (Zool. Record, 1868, p. 150), " the Recorder has recently had an opportunity of 

 examining nine examples obtained in various parts of the Indian Ocean, and convinced himself, 1, that 

 (Xiphogadus) Xiphasia is identical with Nemophis of Kaup (who overlooked the ventral fins) ; and, 2, that 

 although the examples examined by him may belong to two distinct species, differing only in the extent of the 

 snout, there is no evidence to show that the fishes described by Riippell, Kaup, and Bleeker are specifically 

 distinct.* He makes this observation on account of Col. Playfair having described as a fourth species a 

 Xiphogadus Madagascariensis, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1868, p. 11. Ha^ang examined the typical example (which is in 

 a very bad state) the Recorder may add that it cannot be made the type of a distinct species." 



Amongst Sir W. Elliot's drawings is a figure of one of these fishes which may be a new species, or the 

 caudal fin of Russell's specimen may have been injui'ed, I have given it from the illustration alluded to, Jerdon 

 (M. J. L. and Sc. 1851, p. 139) observes of the fishes from which the figm-e was drawn, " I one day 

 procured two specimens of this very curious species of Gymnotus, which Swainson has named from Russell's 

 figure, which however is very defective. Its tail ends in a long filament, and the dorsal and anal fins are much 

 higher than is there represented." 



Examining the figure of Xiphasia trachypareia, Bleeker, with Sir Walter Elliot's and Jerdon's, I am 

 unable, without further proof, to consider them identical unless great sexual differences exist. At the end of 

 the tail in Russell's specimen are two very short filaments. However, I am inclined to think Jerdon was correct 

 in considering his species as most probably Russell's. 



SYNOPSIS OF INDIVIDUAL SPECIES. 

 1. Xiphasia setifer, D. 223 (? 123), A. 112. 



1. Xiphasia setifer, Plate LXXIII, fig. 1. 



? Ophidiwn tonhah-talawaree, Russell, Fish. Vizag. i, p. 28, pi. xxxis. 



.'' Xiphasia setifer, Swainson, Fishes, ii, p. 269. 



Xiphichthys Eussellii, Jerdon, M. J. L. and Sc. 1851, p. 139 (not Swainson). 



.'' Xiphogadus setifer, Giinther, Catal. iv, p. 374. 



B. vi, D. 223 (? 123), P. 13, V. 3 (?), A. 112, C. 10. 



Russell's figure shows D. 123, not 223 as stated in the text, and which is probably a misprint. This fish 

 has an eel-like body and high vertical fins. 



The figure is from a drawing in Sir W. Elliot's collection, and which has been named X. setifer by Jerdon 

 who remarks, " said to be venomous." 



Habitat. ^CoToiria,Jide[ coast of India. 



* X. setifer appears to have its central caudal ray or two rays elongated : X. i/rachypareia, Blecker=X. Madagascariensis, 

 Playfair, has the dorsal fin commencing above the eyes : X Lessonii, Kaup, has it beginning behind the eyes. 



