NEW OE RAEE FISHES FROM EASTERN AUSTRALIA — WAITE. 267 



A more serious difference, but one not shown in the figure, is 

 in the number of branchiostegal rays. In the Shoalhaven River 

 specimen thei-e are seven ; in the type, and also in that from the 

 Snowy River, they number but six. 



Giinther states that there is no lateral line. If the type were 

 re-examined possibly some indication would be found, as an 

 incomplete one exists in both our specimens. 



Apart from these points, and slight variation in the length of 

 the head, etc., I do not see any differences between our specimen 

 and the type as described ; certainly, with an almost typical 

 specimen from the Snowy River — an intermediate locality — any 

 thought of regarding the Shoalhaven River fish as specifically 

 distinct from the type would be unwarrantable. It would, how- 

 ever, be interesting if Zoologists in Southern Australia and 

 Tasmania would ascertain to what extent the species varies in 

 their waters. 



In Tasmania, where it is very common, this fish is known as 

 the Grayling — a name also applied in New Zealand to the second 

 species of the genus, Prototroctes oxyrhynchus, also described by 

 Giinther,^ and figured by Hector.^ 



Tetragonurus cuvieri, Risso. 



Tetragonurus cuvieri, Risso, Ichth. Nice, 1810, p. 347, pi. x., 

 fig. 37. 



The specimen noticed below is the first record of the species 

 for continental Australia. From Lord Howe Island two examples 

 have been made known. The first was described and figured by 

 Macleay^ as Ctenodax ivilkinsoniy the author afterwards publishing 

 its generic identity with Tetragonurus? The second example was 

 obtained in 1887, by members of the Museum collecting party. 

 These two specimens formed the subject of Ramsay and Ogilby's 

 paper, "On the Genus Tetragonurus of Risso."* These authors, 

 on comparison with a specimen from the Mediterranean, came to 

 the conclusion that whereas the Pacific and Atlantic forms were 

 specifically identical, those from the Mediterranean could not be 

 so regarded until further examinations had been made. The 

 attitude of the authors is expressed by one of them^ using Lowe's 

 name of T. atlanticus for local specimens instead of Risso's T. 

 cuvieri, first applied to an example from Nice. 



* Giinther— Proc. Zool. Soc, 1870, p. 150. 



5 Hector— Edib Fish. New Zealand, 1872, p. 123, pi. x., fig. 91. 



6 Macleay— Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., x., 1885, p. 718, pi. xlvii. 



7 Macleay— Loc. cit., (2), i., 1886, p. 511. 



8 Eamsay and Ogilby— Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., (2), iii., 1888, p. 9. 



9 Ogilbj— lust. Mas. Mem., ii., 18S9, p. 61, 



