ART. 20 NEW AXD IMPERFECTLY KNOWN FISHES GINSBUKG 19 



The color is strikingly different on direct comparison, and this is what 

 first attracted my attention to the type specimen. The anal has one 

 ray less than the great majority of specimens of ginsburgi, but since 

 some specimens of the latter species also have 10 rays in the anal, the 

 difference in the number of rays in the anal fin, if any, needs to be 

 worked out by a frequency distribution study of numbers of specimens. 



Genus EUCTENOGOBIUS Gill 



Euctenogohius Gill, Ann. Lye. Nat. Hist. New York, vol. 7, p. 45, 1859. 



Genotype. — Euctenogohius badius Gill, by monotypy. 



In 1859 Gill described a new species of goby, Euctenogobius badius, 

 from the Amazon River, based on a single specimen. The above 

 generic name was also introduced there for the first time, and since 

 it contained but tliis single species, the latter must serve as the type 

 of the genus. The species was described originally as having only 

 one row of teeth in the upper jaw, and on the basis of this single 

 character different species of gobies, of diverse generic types, have 

 been assigned to the genus Euctenogobius from time to time by various 

 authors, such as Giinther,'^ Jordan and Gilbert, ^^ Jordan and Ever- 

 mann,'^ Meek and Hildebrand,^" and others. 



While working in the United States National Museum, comparing 

 the gobies of the coast of the Gulf of Mexico with material from 

 adjacent regions, I came across a jar labeled only Euctenogobius badius, 

 "Amazon River" containing one specimen. This is probably Gill's 

 original type, although it does not bear the red "type label." It is 

 well preserved and agrees very closely with the original description 

 in all details of structure and in color. The only important discrep- 

 ancy is in the length of the head, which Gill states to be "little more 

 than a sixth" of the total length, whereas it is only a little more 

 than a fifth, this dift'erence, most probably, being due to a slip of the 

 pen or to an error in calculation. 



An examination of the type specimen shows that it is most closely 

 related to the species now placed in (Chonophorus) Awaous. It has 

 the general appearance of the species of that genus and agrees with 

 them in the squamation, the structure of the fins, and other charac- 

 ters. Moreover, it has the well-marked fleshy papillae on the shoulder 

 girdle, a structure which is characteristic of Awaous and which was 

 not mentioned in the description of the type specimen. In view of 

 the general misinterpretation of this genus, as well as of the inade- 

 quate original description, the following account of the species and 



1' Proc. Zool. Soe. London, 1861, p. 372. 



" U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 16, p. 633, 1883. 



» U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 47, pt. 3, p. 2226, 1898. 



s« Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Publ. Zool., vol. 15, pt. 3, pp. 874-875, 1928. 



