226 PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Ill 1794 (as appears froQi the dates on the plates), Shaw published a 

 uuoiber of his "Naturalists' Miscellany", in which he described three 

 fishes under the generic name Lopkius. These were designated as — 



(1) Lophhis striatus (the Striated Lophius), pi. 175; 



(2) Lophius pictus (the Variegated Lophius), pi. 176, upper fig. ; and 



(3) Lophius marniorattis {Ibe Marbled Lophius), pi. 170, lower fig. 

 The originals of these are evidently the varieties (a, b, and c) of Lophius 



histrio admitted by Bloch and Schneider. It is quite clear that the hist 

 two were based on species of typical Autennarius (not Pferophryne), 

 while the third is incomprehensible, and, if the figure is at all correct, 

 must represent a factitious fish; it most certainly has nothing to do 

 with Pterophryue. The other species, however, notwithstanding the bad 

 figures, are readil.v identifiable. 



The Lophius striatus (as has recently been recognized by Giinther)* 

 is the first name of an Antennarins peculiar to the Pacific, and quite dis- 

 tinct from the Caribbean Antcnnarivs scaler ( = A. histrio Gthr.), with 

 wliich it was at first confounded by Giinther.t 



Tlie Lophius pictus was evidently based on the species or variety of 

 Antcnnarius which was afterwards named Antennarius phymatodes by 

 B eeker, and it agrees very closely, in the distribution of colors, with a 

 specimen figured by that ichthyologist,! and would probably be consid- 

 ered by Giiuther§ as a variety of his Antennarius Commersonti. 



But whatever may be the value of the forms embraced under the 

 name Antennarius Gommcrsonii by Giinther, — whether species or vane- 

 ties, — the name Antennarius pictus must be revived from Shaw, either 

 es|)ecially'for the Antennarius phymatodes of Bleeker or for the collection 

 designated as Antennarius Commersonii. 



It has thus been demonstrated (1) that the Linnaean name Lophius 

 histrio was originally created for the common Pterophryne, and (2) that 

 the names generally employed for the Pterophryne were originally ap- 

 plied to very diiferent forms, and members of even a different genus. 

 Hence, if the laws of priority as formulated by the British and Amer- 

 ican Associations for the Advancement of Science are to guide us, there 

 can be no question that the species of Pterophryne must hereafter be 

 deignated as Pterophiyne histrio; if, however, it is allowable to go be- 

 hind even the tenth edition of the Systema Naturae, and to take the 

 oldest binomial name, without other considerations, the designation tu- 

 midus must be revived. It seems best, however, to follow general 

 usage. 



*(JuuTber, Audiew Garrett's Fische der SU<lsef , v. 1, p. 162, 1878. 



tOuntLuT, Cat. Fishes iu Brit. Miis., v. 3, p. 1H8. 



t Bleeker, Atlas Icbtbydloj^iqiio des Indes O ientales N^rlandaises, t. 5, pi. 19i), Qjj;. 5, 

 1H(5.">.— It must be rem rked tbat Sh:iw represents 5 ventral rays in his A. pictus, while 

 Blt'cker attribnte.H 6 to bis A. phymatodes. 



■^ Giinther, in Cat. Fishes in Brit. Mus., v. 3, p. 195, has referred Shaw's name (o "Jh- 

 ti-nnoriuH multiuccUatus \iiT. y. = leucosoma", hut iu the "Fische der Siidsee" did not 

 refer to the L. pictus, and places the L. marmoratiis as a synonym of A. Commersonii^ 

 having evidently transposed the names of the two. 



