THE FISHES OF THE <INGOLF> EXPEDITIONS. 



U. S. fish commission steamer Albatross» (Report U. S. Comm. Fish etc.) 1896 and to Jordan and 

 Evermanns: The fishes of Nortli and Middle America* (Bulletin United States National Museum 

 Nr. 47, 1896), p. 67—76. 



Raja rostro acutiusculo, pinnis pectoralibus antice rotundatis, cauda sat robusta, spinis non- 

 nullis supraorbitalibus, rostralibus et scapularibus, c. 47 in parte mediana dorsi et caudte, interpinnali- 

 bus caudse nullis. 



Raja FyUae Ltk. (Tab. II, fig. 2). 

 J'^. oniata Garman? 



A male specimen captured on Station 25 off frodthaab (63' 30' Lat. North, 54 25' Long. West, 

 at 582 fathoms, at a temperature at the bottom of 3". 3 C), which has a length of 555™'" (about 21 

 inches) and a greatest diameter of the disk of 310""" (ii3/^ inches), and whose large appendices gciiitalcs 

 demonstrate that it is adult and capable of procreation, agrees else completely with another specimen 

 somewhat smaller (470"""), taken in 1889 in the Denmark Strait at 426 fathoms, and referred by me 

 («Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra den naturhistori.ske Foreuing 1891, p. 32) to the Raja Fyller^ established 

 not long tiine before (ibid. 1887, P- ^ — 4) P^-^) '^y '"^ ^s a new species on a younger female specimen 

 from the same seas. This specimen, which is thus the proper original specimen of the species, had, 

 to be sure, in many respects another aspect, and it was therefore with some doubt that I identified 

 the adult male from the Denmark Strait (1889) with the young female from the Davis Strait (1884). 

 I was induced to this determination by the fact, that other species of Rays were not known at that 

 time from the Greenland seas than Raja Fylhr and R. radiata^ and by the examination of a couple of 

 still younger males from the Davis Strait (likewise from 1889). The new capture from 1895 induced 

 me to take up the question again and to examine as far as possible, if the difference of age or sex 

 is so large as supposed b}- me or if a specific difference had been overlooked. The two elder 

 specimens I shall mention together, designating however the larger figured Ingolfian specimen (from 

 1895) as No. I, the somewhat smaller one (from 1889) as No. II. 



The incisions of the margins of the disk (at the height of the jjarietal foramina) are still 

 sharper defined in No. I than in No. II. The other portion of the pectoral fin is rounded in a cor- 

 responding manner in both. The genital appendages are no'"™ long in No. I, 105'"™ in No. II. There 

 are larger and smaller spines in a marginal zone more or less broad, commencing at the point of the 

 snout and terminating somewhat before the terminal portion of the groups of pectoral cards which 

 are generally speaking comprised in the said zone; the following zone, comprising the rest of the back 

 of the pectoral fins and of the trunk, is naked with the exception of the proper median party, which 

 begins at the point of the snout, embraces the interorbital .space and is continued over the median 

 portion of the trunk and the whole backside of the tail. Covered with larger spines of the A', radiafa- 

 type are especially the back of the snout, the space between the eyes especially the supraorbital margin, 

 a rather broad scapular party with many spines and a broad zone at the median part of the back, con- 

 tinued on and covering the whole dorsal part of the tail. According to the more or less pronounced 

 stoutness of the tail, there may be counted 3, 4 or 5 spines be.side each other, forming rather regular 



