36 PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



or Lufjanus hiackfordi. It is therefore certain that' in his account of 

 the Mesoprion campechianus (Memorias Cuba, II, 140), Professor Poey in- 

 tended to describe the Ked Snapper, and that it is to this fisli that all 

 subsequent references made by him to Lutjanns or Mesuprion campe- 

 chianus should be assigned. 



The original type of Professor Poey, Xo. 71, " 370 mill.'' long, is a 

 stuffed skin of a young si)eciu)eu, mounted by Poey nearly thirty years 

 ago, and now preserved in the University of Ilavana. This has been 

 cursorily examined by me, but it being locked behind glass doors at a 

 considerable height from the Hoor, I took no notes save that it resem- 

 bled a young Ked Snapper, and that the eye appeared large, about 

 4 in head. 



Comparing Poey's description with a young Ked Snapper, I notice 

 the following discrepancies : '' LVeil est quatre fois dans la longueur de 

 la tete. Je compte 05 dcailles au-dessus de hi ligne laterale, 53 au-des- 

 sous." In a specimen of similar size, I find the scales as above counted 

 ff 5 and the eye 4| in head. The account of the color, as given by Poey, 

 applies very well to the young Red Snapper. In these, the lateral dark 

 blotch is large, disappearing when the fish is about 15 inches long. The 

 bluish lines along the rows of dorsal scales disappear earlier. Speci- 

 mens of 4 to G inches are olive rather than red. 



At present, I think that Professor Poey's identification of his type 

 with the '"'•Pargo Gnachinajigo^^ is correct, but I cannot consider this 

 opinion positively established. 



22. Rhomboplites aurorubens (Cnv. & Val.)- 



{Me>i<i2)rioii eU'ijati.^ Poey, Memorias Cuba, II, 153. 



Aprion ariommiix Jordan & Gilbert, Proo. U. S. Nat. Mus. 1883, 142.) 



There is not much doubt that the mutilated fishes from the stomachs 

 of the Snappers described by us as Aprion ariomnius, are the young of 

 Ehombojylites anrorvhens. The types of the former species were unfortu- 

 nately destroyed in the burning of the museum building of the Indiana 

 University, July 12, 1883. 



I have obtained numerous specimens of the "(7rt//o?i" {Rhomhoplites 

 vlegnns Poey) in the Havana market. I find no difference between these 

 a,nd the Pensacola S])ecimens, nor do I believe either to be different from 

 the original aiiroruhena of Cuvier. 



As this species, in addition to its other peculiarities, has a well-de- 

 fined patch of pterygoid teeth, the genus Rhomhoplites may j)erhaps be 

 t)e retained for it. 



"23. Sparus pagrus Linn.i'iis. 



I \ery much doubt the identity of this fish with the European species, 

 but I have as >et had no oi)portunity for making a direct comparison of 

 the two. 



24. Apogon maculatus (Poey) Jor. & Gilb. 



25. Micropogou undulatus (Liiiiianis) Cuv. & Val. 



The West Indian Micropogou is in my opinion a species distinct from 

 M. nndulatus. It should apparently stand as M. fournieri (Desmarest). 



