340 DISCOVERY REPORTS 



D. eleginoides is one of the few Patagonian fishes known also from the Antarctic Zone. It has been 

 taken among the islands off Graham Land (Vaillant, 1906, pp. 36-9). 



Eleginops maclovinus (Cuvier and Valenciennes). This genus may at once be distinguished from 

 others of the family Nototheniidae by the entire absence of a lower lateral line. E. maclovinus is a 

 sizable fish, and appears to be exclusively littoral in its habits. We never captured any in the trawl. 

 Specimens were secured with ' Other gear ' as follows : 



724 10 (in seine) Connor Inlet 2 or 3 (on LH) WS586 i (on LH) 



In addition to these, Mr A. G. Bennett collected six specimens for Norman's report by seine-netting 

 in Port Stanley harbour, mostly at Weir Creek. 



Bennett also provided valuable notes on the habits of the fish which Norman (1937, pp. 93, 94) 

 quotes at length. The species is known locally as 'mullet', and this vernacular name is justified not 

 only by its strong superficial resemblance to true mullets {Mtigil spp.), which are absent from the 

 region, but also by its habits. Notable among these is its tendency to run right up into the mouths of 

 fresh-water streams on the last of the rising tide. Bennett tells us that it may grow up to 2 ft. long, 

 but unless this length is at times considerably exceeded, his figure of 15 lb. for the maximum weight, 

 quoted by Norman, must be a mistake. A fish 2 ft. long and 15 lb. in weight would have a ponderal 

 index just over 3-0 (calculated from K=w (g.)// (cm.)=^x 100),^ and it is clear that no fish approaching 

 the proportions of Eleginops could give even half this value. Authentic weight records of smaller 

 specimens give ponderal indices from 0-69 to 0-85, and if we assumed an index of i-o for a 2 ft. 

 specimen its weight would be just 5 lb. Conversely, even if we assumed an index as high as 1-25, a 

 15 lb. fish would be no less than 32 in. long. I believe that in all probability Bennett actually wrote 

 5 lb. and that some error crept in subsequently. 



Eleginops is eaten quite frequently at the Falkland Islands, but often has a muddy taste. Otherwise 

 it would be a promising subject for small-scale local exploitation by seine-netting. It extends round 

 both coasts of the mainland of South America from the River Plate in the east to northern Chile in 

 the west — much farther towards the equator than most other Nototheniidae. 



HARPAGIFERIDAE 



In his later report on the coast fishes of the Antarctic Zone Norman (1938, p. 43) places Harpogifer, 

 with four other (exclusively Antarctic) genera in this separate family and not, as heretofore, in the 

 Nototheniidae. The chief characteristic of the family is absence of scales on the body. 



Harpagifer bispinis (Schneider). This is the only member of the family found in the sub-Antarctic 

 Zone. To the southward it has a wide distribution in the northern part of the Antarctic Zone, having 

 been recorded from Graham Land and almost all the isolated island groups (Norman, 1938, pp. 52-3). 

 Norman's description of it as mainly littoral (and frequently intertidal) in habit, applies accurately 

 enough in the Patagonian region, though even there we have taken it down to 95 m. ; and the depth 

 relations, shown in Fig. 42, show it closer to the 'first-slope' dwellers than to the exclusively littoral 

 species of Nototheniidae. Farther south, however, where the intertidal zone is usually small and 

 subject to ice action, Harpagifer usually occurs at greater depths, although it is true enough that it 



' The high 'condition factors' quoted in some salmon literature (of the order 36-40 or more) are obtained from the formula 

 w (lb. & fractions)// (inches)^ x 10,000. Menzies' Scottish 'coefficients' make use of the same heterogeneous British units, but 

 get rid of the unwieldy decimal ciphers resulting from the first term of the formula by dividing by 0-00036, a figure just below 

 the mean for 'normal' east of Scotland salmon. This has the effect of bringing all the values close to unity (and close to those 

 obtained by direct use of the metric formula). His system is perhaps ideal so long as we wish to consider salmon only (and 

 only east of Scotland salmon !) but the principle of dividing by the mean value implies that the factors for any given species 

 (or local race) of fish will be grouped close around unity. If we wish to visualize the difference in the ratio weight to cube 

 of length between fish of diverse form it is not possible to use his method, whereas direct application of the metric formula 

 permits this, and with less heavy arithmetic. A propos the immediate problem above, Menzies' figures (1925, p. 190) show 

 that a 24 in. salmon should weigh about 5 lb. 2 oz. 



