426 Memoir Sears Foundation for Marine Research 



Range. Western tropical Atlantic from southern Caribbean to Florida in coastwise 

 waters, occasionally to North Carolina. 



Details of Occurrence. U.jamaicensis has been reported often enough from Trinidad, 

 Santo Domingo and Haiti, Jamaica, Cuba, and the Bahamas, to prove it widespread 

 throughout the Caribbean-West Indian region. This may be equally true of it in the 

 southern part of the Gulf of Mexico, though the only published record for it there is 

 from Progresso, Yucatan. To the northward it occurs rather commonly among the 

 Florida Keys and along both coasts of southern Florida. ^"^ But its regular range appears 

 to extend little, if any, beyond middle Florida, for the only positive record of it farther 

 north is of a single specimen taken near Cape Lookout, North Carolina, in June 1 9 1 1 .i"' 



The published record, taken at face value, would suggest that this little Ray is 

 wholly absent from the northern and western parts of the Gulf of Mexico. But its 

 distribution elsewhere suggests that it will be found eventually all along the coast of 

 Mexico in suitable situations, and perhaps along southern Texas as well. 



It seems likely that it ranges eastward and southward along the South American 

 Coast considerably beyond Trinidad, the farthest station in that direction where its 

 presence has been actually reported, for there is no apparent thermal barrier to the 

 southward dispersal of this or any other tropical Ray along South America short of the 

 annual mean location of the isotherm for about 25° C (77° F) off mid-Brazil at about 

 Lat. 20° S. 



Synonyms and References: 



Tngon jamaicensis Cuvier, Regne Anim., 2, 1817: 137, footnote (Jamaica, ident. by ref to Pastinaca marina, 

 ferruginea, tuberculata Sloane [Hist. Jamaica, 2, 1725: pi. 246, fig. i, Jamaica]); Regne Anim., 2, 1829: 

 400 (reprint of Cuvier 18 17). 



Trygonobatus torpedinus Desmarest, Prem. Decade Ichthyol., 1823: 6, pi. i, fig. i ; also, Mem. Soc. Linn. Paris, 

 2, 1823: 166 (descr., color, Cuba, ill. not seen); Bory de St. Vincent, Diet. Class Hist. Nat., 14, 1828: 

 449; Atlas, 1 831: pi. 116 (descr., ill. after Desmarest, 1823; Havana, Cuba); Gray, List Fish. Brit. 

 Mus., I, 1851: 125 (listed, Cuba). 



Rata sloani Bancroft, Zool. J., 5, 1830: 83 (listed, Jamaica). 



Urolophus torpedinus Miiller and Henle, Plagiost., 1841: 173, pi. 56, fig. i (descr., meas., ill., St. Domingo 

 and Cuba); Poey, Memorias, 2, 1858: 360 (listed, Cuba); Dumeril, Hist. Nat. Poiss., J, 1865: 628 

 (descr., color, Haiti, Cuba specimens, type included); Garman, Proc. U.S. nat. Mus., 8, 1885: 41 

 (descr. embryo, but local. "New Jersey" probably erroneous) ; Lonnberg, Ofvers. Svensk. Vet. Akad. Forh., 

 51, 1895: 112 (listed. Key West and old Florida records); Duerden, J. Inst. Jamaica, 2 (2), 1895: 166 

 (no. tail spines, Jamaica); J. Inst. Jamaica, 2 (6), 1899: 614 (listed, Jamaica). 

 Urolophus torpedinus (in part) Gunther, Cat. Fish. Brit. Mus., 8, 1870: 485 (listed, W. Indies, Jamaica, but 

 U.halleri Cooper 1863 and U.mundus Gill 1863, of Pacific Coast of Central America, included in 

 synonymy); Werner, Zool. Jb., Syst. Abt. 21, 1904: 301 (color, Jamaica, but California specimen also 

 included). 

 Urolophus jamaicensis Jordan and Evermann, Bull. U. S. nat. Mus., 47 (i), 1896: 81 (descr., W. Indies; New 

 Jersey doubtful); Rep. U. S. Comm. Fish. (1895), 1896: 223 (listed as above); Jordan and Rutter, Proc. 

 Acad. nat. Sci. Philad., [49], 1897: 93 (listed, Jamaica); Evermann and Kendall, Rep. U.S. Comm. 

 Fish. (1899), 1900: 49 (listed. Key West, Florida, by ref. to Lonnberg, 1894); Bean, B.A., Bahama 



108. Recorded from Punta Gorda, Tortugas, Key West, the vicinity of Key Largo, Biscayne Bay, and Miami. 



109. An embryo of this species, described many years ago by Garman (Proc. U. S. nat. Mus., 8, 1885: 41, as U. torpedi- 

 nus Desmarest), was reported from New Jersey. But this is so far beyond the normal limits of the range of this spe- 

 cies that the specimen in question probably came from some more southern locality. 



