524 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 83 



result of the present study (see p. 572), while the Japanese species 

 was supplied with a name by Jordan and Snyder.^* 



Finally, it is necessary to discuss a short note on Hiijpocampus 

 published by de la Pylaie.^^ His account is as follows: 



"Parmi les petites especes qui completent cette classe, nous avons 

 encore les Syngnathes proprement dits, Syng. Acus. Pelagicus Linn, 

 ou Aciculus Dep., S. Rondeletii, Ophidion, auxquels il faut ajoutei 

 I'Hippocampe, Hippocampus, dont I'espece de I'ocean, H. atrichus, 

 N., est distircte d'une autre, H. Jubatus, ainsi nomme d'apres des 

 filaments qui 3omposent, le long de sou cou, une espece de criniere 

 peu fournie." 



This author based his new species, atrichus, entirely on the differ- 

 ence in the relative development of the filaments, a character that 

 does not distinguish any one species. Probably in all species of 

 Hippocampus the relative development of the filaments or even their 

 entire absence is due to individual variation, and to a certain extent 

 it is dependent on age, as has been discussed at greater length (p. 510). 

 Since this is the only character mentioned by de la Pylaie, liis descrip- 

 tion of atrichus is applicable to every species of Hippocampus and can 

 be regarded practically as nothing more than a nomen nudum, or at 

 the most as an unidentifiable species. 



What de la Pylaie understood as ^^H. Jubatus" is not clear to me. 

 I do not know of any other post-Linnaean writer who applied that 

 name to a seahorse; it is probably cited from some pre-Linnaean 

 author. Perhaps he had the following statement by VV^illughby ^^ 

 in mind: "Vidimis Venetiis hujus generis jubatum, nescimus an 

 specie diversum, an aetate aut sexsu tantum." If de la Pylaie cited 

 jubatus as the name of a pre-Linnaean writer, it evidently cannot 

 be recognized in nomenclature; even if it had been established by 

 that author, it is a nomen nudum and of no standing in nomenclature. 



To dispose of de la Pylaie's two names, they are here placed doubt- 

 fully in synonymy, jubatus in that of hippocampus and atrichus in 

 that of the new subspecies multiannularis, here described from the 

 Bay of Biscay. The name of de la Pylaie is not adopted for the 

 new subspecies because it was based on a misapprehension and would 

 give an incorrect description of the species. While any legitimately 

 established name stands even though it erroneously describes the 

 species, in the present case we are not obliged to perpetuate de la 

 Pvlaie's error. 



» Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 24, p. 14, pi. 8, 1901. 



55 Reeherches en France sur les poissons de I'ocean pendant les ann6es ]8.'52 et 1833. Congr. Sci. France, 

 Poitiers, 1834, 2d sess., p. 528, 1835. Dr. Carl L. Uubbs kindly called my attention to this reference, and the 

 quotation given is taken from Dr. Hubbs' letter, the original account not being available for consultation. 



'8 Historia piscium . . . , p. 158, 1686. 



