IN THE SOUTH-WESTERN DISTRICT. 



121 



In describing some late larva? taken off the Fowey river on the 29th 

 and oOth June, I omitted to point out the close resemblance 'vvhich 

 they bear, in pigmentation, to young Lepadogaster of about the same size. 

 The arrangement of the black chromatophores is practically identical. 

 The supposed Capros are, however, deeper in the body. I cannot find, 

 examining them either as opaque objects or clarified in xylol, that they 

 have any trace of a sucker, while at 5"5 mm. the development of the 

 tail is much more advanced than in a Lepadogaster himaculatus (with 

 well-developed sucker) of 7'5 mm. The condition of the dorsal and 

 anal fins would refer the supposed Capros larv?e to that species of 

 Lepadogaster, if to any. The differences noted above dispose of such 

 a suggestion, but the resemblance in pigmentation is interesting. 



Lophius piscatorius. Linn. Monk, &c. 



The ripe ovaries of a monk were brought to the Laboratory on 

 the 20th January, 1898. I saw, but did not closely examine, the 

 ovaries of another specimen on the same day ; they appeared also to 

 be ripe. Thompson, according to Day, observed a female with advanced 

 ovaries in December, so that the spawning season would appear to 

 commence very early in the year. 



The ovaries were placed in sea-water, and as much as possible of 

 the delicate ovarian wall stripped off. The mucous sheet soon swelled 

 to a considerable width, and the spawn-mass floated for an hour or 

 more. The oil-globules imparted to the whole a brilliant orange or 

 salmon-colour. They were found to be divided, in a number of eggs 

 examined, into numerous particles of various sizes. The mucous 

 matter was only slightly adherent externally. 



As is well known, the spawn, although a very conspicuous object, 

 is rarely encountered at the surface. Is it possible tliat the parent 

 manages to hitch it in some way to a submarine object ? 



