APOGONID FISHES OF THE ESTDO-PACIFIC — LACHNER 593 



than in A. fucata (pi. 17, h). The general body color appears to be a 

 slightly lighter tan in fucata and more dusky in lineolata. The caudal 

 spot varies to such an extent in intensity that in a single collection 

 certain specimens show gradations from plainly discernible to faintly 

 visible spots, or they may be obsolete. Both these species are widely 

 distributed. The synonymy listed for each illustrates the confusion 

 among many of the earlier workers. Descriptions were only general 

 and meager, and often of a single specimen, and the salient characters 

 were not critically studied. The variability of certain color marks 

 was not understood. For example, the spot at the base of the caudal 

 fin varies so considerably in intensity as to be completely obscure in 

 some specimens of fucata and lineolata^ and even in a few specimens 

 of A. Mguttata^ yet the humeral spot is always intensely developed in 

 higuttata. Thus, such writers as Jordan and Snyder (1901, p. 907) 

 recognized A. kagoshimana^ a manuscript name of Doderlein {in 

 Steindachner and Doderlein, 1884, p. 3) , on the basis of the absence of 

 the caudal spot in a single specimen and the fact that it was taken 

 in the Japanese f aunal area. 



Prof. L. Bertin, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, sent 

 word that no type material of Apogon inacrofterus Cuvier and Valen- 

 ciennes is at that museum, and that probably no type was designated, 

 as Cuvier and Valenciennes used a manuscript name of Kuhl and 

 Van Hasselt. From the above discussion of the fucata-lineolata com- 

 plex and the distribution of the anal-fin-ray counts (table 2), it is al- 

 most certain that Apogon rrmcropterus Cuvier and Valenciennes equals 

 Apongon Uneolatus Cuvier and Valenciennes. Giinther's description 

 (1859, p. 245) of Apogon hleeheH contained no diagnostic data. The 

 number of anal fin rays was said to range from II, 14 to II, 17. This 

 distribution overlaps that of fucata and lineolata^ and it is doubtful 

 which species he examined, since no color marking is indicated other 

 than the presence of a caudal spot. Dr. E. Trewavas, British Museum, 

 has informed me that the type of Apogon hleekeri Giinther cannot be 

 located. 



I am unable to determine the status of Archamia macroptera and 

 A. lineolata of Smith (1949, pp. 208-209, pi. 23, figs. 489 and 490). 

 Prof. J. L. B. Smith informs me that the two horizontal body stripes 

 of his figure of macroptera are life colors and are "virtually invisible" 

 after a day of preservation. The anal-ray count that he reported for 

 this species (ibid., p. 208), II, 14 to 17, represented the range of his 

 data and also that of "Day (Fishes of India, pt. 1, p. 64, pi. 17, fig. 4, 

 1875) and Fowler" (publication not given). Three adult specimens 

 received from Smith, collected in Delagoa Bay, East Africa (U..S.N.M. 

 No. 112206) have anal fin rays numbering II, 14 (2 specimens) and 

 II. 15 and gill rakers numbering 5 + 1 + 16. These statistics correlate 



