i 9 4i CATALOGUE OF FISHES OF TORTUGAS 309 



angle. Below and somewhat forward of the last-mentioned ocellus is a smaller 

 one, and there is still another at about mid-length on middle rays of caudal. In 

 addition to the dark spots or ocelli mentioned, the body and fins, exclusive of 

 the abdomen and ventral fins, are speckled with smaller dark dots. 



The other 2 specimens agree with the one just described in having an ocellus 

 on soft dorsal, situated on and between rays 8 and 9 in one and 9 and 10 in the 

 other. No other ocelli are present in either specimen. The 42-mm. fish, which 

 is light brown, has scattered dark points on upper parts of body, and on all the 

 margins of the fins. The 40-mm. specimen is rather darker brown; has a pinkish 

 cast along back, on caudal peduncle, and on dorsal, caudal, and anal fins; the 

 fins in part being rather deep pink, this color broken up and intermixed with 

 pale markings distally on dorsal and anal, and on entire caudal fin. The pale 

 markings extend to upper parts of body, where there also are a few minute dark 

 specks. 



Apparently known only from Florida. S. F. H. 



Family CHAUNACIDAE 



The presence of a single dorsal spine, the rostral or "bait spine," has been 

 considered an important character for separating this family from the Anten- 

 nariidae. I find, however, that Tortugas specimens of Chaunax actually have 1, 

 sometimes 2, more dorsal spines than Antennarius , all the spines except the 1st 

 being hidden under the loose skin. The 2d and 3d spines indeed are long, and 

 the 2d one also rather stout. These spines are followed by 2 rudimentary ones 

 (short, stout stumps), which may be easily detected by running the side of a 

 dissecting needle along the median line of the back. Antennarius and Histrio 

 each have only 1 rudimentary spine at most, as determined by dissection, be- 

 tween the 3d free spine and the origin of the soft dorsal. The 2d and 3d dorsal 

 spines of Chaunax cannot be felt under the skin because they are long and lie 

 close to the back. 



It is evident, then, that the number of dorsal spines is not a valid character for 

 separating the genera mentioned into two families. The gill opening in Chaunax, 

 however, is well behind the base of the upper rays of the pectoral, and lies under 

 the anterior part of the base of the soft dorsal, whereas in Antennarius and 

 Histrio it is just below the base of the pectoral. Furthermore, the head is low and 

 broad in Chaunax, whereas it is compressed in the other genera. Regan, in his 

 classification of the Pediculati (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 8, vol. 9, 1912, pp. 

 261-289), listed other osteological characters. The remaining differences, then, 

 still seem to justify the retention of the family Chaunacidae. S. F. H. 



Chaunax plctus Lowe 



Chaunax pictus Lowe, Trans. Zool. Soc. London, 1846, p. 339 — Camera de Lobos, Madeira. 

 Chaunax nuttingii Garman, Bull. Lab. Nat. Sci. Univ. Iowa, vol. 4, 1896, p. 86, pis. 2 and 

 3, fig. 2 — Sand Key Light, Florida. 



Dr. Longley did not prepare an account of this species, nor a synonymy. He 

 did question in his notes, as others have done, whether C. nuttingii was actually 



