ART. 20 NEW AND IMPERFECTLY KNOWN FISHES GINSBUEG 3 



fins, the ventral, and the distal third of caudal with well-defined dark 

 blotches; a narrow area along upper and lower margins, anteriorly, 

 speckled with small brown spots, the speckling continued, but less 

 distinct, on eyed side. 



Holotype.—U.S.'NM. No. 88831. Juan Fernandez Island, Cliile. 

 The specimen was collected by Dr. Waldo L. Schmitt, curator of 

 marine invertebrates in the National Museum, during liis investiga- 

 tions of the marine fauna of South America, and I take pleasure in 

 naming the species after Doctor Schmitt. 



Remarks. — This species is closely related to Pamlichthys fernandezi- 

 anus Steindachner,^ but the latter species evidently has much smaller 

 scales. In his original description of jernandezianus, Steindachner 

 states "L.l.c. 140." This is a number greater by a wide margin than 

 several other species of Paralichthys described by the same author 

 and shows an unusually finely scaled species. In the type specimen 

 of schmitti the grooved scales in the lateral fine are covered by thick 

 skin and numerous accessory scales, and are partly hidden by the 

 overlapping normal scales on either side. An exact count of the 

 modified scales in the lateral line is therefore impossible; but the 

 number of such scales very closely coincides with the number of 

 oblique rows over the lateral line, or approximately 97. This num- 

 ber approximates that of most species belonging to the typical sub- 

 genus Paralichthys, while that given for fernandezianus shows too 

 wide a difference to be accounted for by individual variability. 

 Another significant difference in the types of the two species is found 

 in the number of gill rakers. That difference, however, may be due 

 to individual variability, and its true value, if any, may be deter- 

 mined only by a frequency distribution study of numbers of individ- 

 uals. Another species with which the present should be compared 

 is Paralichthys hilgendorfi Steindachner.'* It is to be noted that the 

 present species has the fins very distinctly blotched on the blind side, 

 an unusual color mark for a species of Paralichthys. The dorsal in 

 jernandezianus is also blotched, but this unusual color pattern is not 

 described for hilgendorfi and is evidently not present in the latter. 

 As to structural differences, comparing the specimen studied with 

 the description of hilgendorfi, we find that it has one more ray in the 

 pectoral, which is also shorter, the maxillary is longer, the snout 

 longer, the eye smaller, and the interorbital wider. The last two 

 differences may be due to the difference in size of the specimens; but 

 the other characters are of use in indicating specific divergences in 

 Paralichthys, although the exact morphological limits remain to be 

 worked out on series of specimens, as is necessary in all other 



3 Fauna Chilensis, vol. 3, p. 208, 1905 (Zool. Jahrb., Suppl.-Band 6). 

 < Idem, p. 209. 



