76 



FLATFISHES (HETEROSOMATA) 



The confusion of this species with P. lelhoslif;nia, as well as with P. dentattis, makes 

 it impossible adequately to disentangle the synonymy of the three species. Hilde- 

 brand and Cable (1931, torn, cit.), who have examined a large series of specimens from 

 Beaufort, North Carolina, find themselves unable to recognise more than one form 

 with a small number of gill-rakers, and it is possible that lethostignia, albigutta and 

 squamilentus will eventually have to be regarded as representing one variable species. 

 The size of the scales, however, a character which is not considered by these authors, 

 seems to provide a means of distinguishing these forms, coupled with the size of the 

 eye and the width of the interorbital space, as well as the a\'erage number of rays in 

 the dorsal and anal fins. 



This species is said to reach a smaller size than lethostigmu or dcntatus. 



5. PARALICHTHYS SQUAMILENl US, Jordan and Gilbert. 

 ahchthys squamiUntus , Jordan and Gilbert, 1883, Pror. U.S. Nat. Mus., v, (1882), p. 303 : Jordan 

 and Gilbert, 1885, Hull. U.S. X.it. Mus., .xvi, p. S::; ; lordan and (loss, 1889, Rep. U.S. Com. 

 Fish., xiv, (1886), p. ^48 ; Jordan and Hv,.Tinann, is.jS, Hull. U.S. Xat. Mus., xlvii (i), p. 2631, 

 Pl- 



