89 355 



o|)erculiiiii in Tetrodon for cxamiile. tlioiii,'li here it lias i)asse(l witliin tlie sy m pi ecli ou m 

 ami l)e(()iiie united i)ehind fo tlie upper jiart of tlie outside of llie eeratoliyoideum, instead 

 of retaining its union to tiie subopereuluni, wliieli is liere reduced to an extremely thin disk 

 within tiie lower margin of the operculum. 



The lower jaw is remarkable for its extraordinary dci)th behind and its sharply curved 

 and toothless dental part. The maxillary bones are comparatively well-developed and their 

 hind (lower) extremity is exjianded; but the toothless intermaxillaries are small, styliform, 

 and without nasal i)roccsses. The i)alatine bones are shorter than the maxillaries and of 

 lairly unilorm breadtli. At the anterior angle of the union of each i)alatine bone to the to]) 

 of the ascending branch of the tpiadratc bone we (ind the narrow |)terygoid bone, which is 

 bent at an obtuse angle, and behind the sai<l union, close to the ridge of the snout, the 

 entopterygoid bone, which is united in the same manner to the quadrate bone." On p. 664 

 S. adds: "The tongue is wanting, and the glossohyoid bone can hardly be discerned; but the 

 urohyoid bone is comjiaratively long." 



The only point, in which S. seeius to be mistaken, is that he has found 3 suborbital 

 bones; in fact his anterior sub- or infraorbital is only the anterior outer, plateshaped part 

 of the entopterygoid. 



Smitt s work, although it is translated into English, seems not to have been noticed by 

 later authors, at any rate not so far as the Lophobranchiates are concerned; and all the 

 later authors are far inferior to him in theii- interpretations. 



Gii.L (14b, p. 156) says: "Some erroneous conceptions have been entertained and misstate- 

 ments made respecting features of the pipefish's structure. Only a few need be here noticed, 

 however. Such are the statements that the i)reoperculum and intero])erculum are wanting, 

 that the intermaxillaries are also absent, and that the symjilectic is a very im])ortant element. 

 The preoperculum and interoperculum, as well as intermaxillaries, are developed, but I am 

 imable to identify the symplectic. In no respect do the Lophobranchs deviate so materially 

 from ordinary lishes as has been sup])osed. But, as long ago shown by Parker, they mani- 

 fest, in addition to the i)eculiarities generally noticed, deviations in the scapular arch. There 

 is no posterotemporal. the posttemjioral and proscapula being immediately connected, and 

 the "coraco-scapular plate' is entiie and not broken uj) into hypercoracoid and hypocoracoid 

 bones." What GliJ, regards as preoi)erculum and interoperculum is not clear, but he un- 

 doubtedly did not recognize the large symplectic. In a later paper (14 c, p. 805) G. has adopted 

 Sc.ii.'VFF's figures and interpretations, and accordingly he says: 'the preoperculum is absent"; 

 about the interoperculum and symplectic nothing is stated. 



.lOHD.VN and EvKi\M.\NN (21 a, p. 759^ include among the distinctive characters for their 

 order Lophobranchii the following cranial features: "Superior branchihyals (i. e. epibranchials) 

 and pharyngeals, and basal branchihyals fi. c. hypobranchials wanting or not ossified. Post- 

 temporal simple, coossified with the cranium; basis of cranium simple ... Gillcovers i-e<luced 

 to a large simple plate." Most of these statements are probably taken from (^OI'E, but they 

 are not correct; they are repeated later by Jordan and Snydeu (22, p. 3). 



A. S. Woodward (59, p. 370) in the Synopsis of Families included under his Suborder 

 Hemibranchii states for the Lophobianchii . Solenoslonuiliilœ and Stingiiathida' 'opercular 

 ajiparalus much reduced", and j). 380 for the Family Syngnathidæ: "o|)ercular a|)paratus 

 reduced to operculum. 



SwiNNEurox (56 a, p. 554) referring to his lig. 50, copied below, says about Sijru/natlnis 

 {Siphonoslonui): "The palatine bone (pa.^ has the same characters as in the stickleback and 

 like that is partially enclosed posteriorly by the single pterygoid (c). The ethmoid region . . . 

 is seen to owe its great length to elongation, not of the hinder half, containing the mesetli- 

 nioid cartilage, but to that of the front half, consisting jiurely of ethmoid plate. Nevertheless 

 the mesethmoid bone ilig. .50 e. m.) has apparently extended quite to the anterior end, including 

 the preethiiioid cornu. The palatine bone ipa.i which is attached to the |)re-ethnioid cornu ipa'.) 

 between the mesethmoid bone and vomer is carried too far forward for it to bear any rela- 

 tionship to the paretlimoid -bone (e. j). b.i." To the above I would remark 1) that the pterygoid 



n. K. 1). ViilensU. Sclsk. Skr., 7. ItæliUc. n:ilni\ idonsk. og müthem. .^W. VIM. S. *)<> 



