218 Transar.tions. 



sheathed for extrusion, from the stomach of a groper. It is p' obable, there- 

 fore, that the bass is similarly voracious. The fishermen and salesmen tell 

 me that the flesh of the bass is more flaky and delicate than that of the 

 groper, and is generally preferred by those who may be acquainted with the 

 difference. The bass is, however, always sold as groper, and as small speci- 

 mens of the latter are preferred, on account of the more tender flesh, the 

 merits of the bass may be said to be unknown outside professional fishing 

 circles. The wholesale value of the specimen described was 10s. 



Eespecting the bass in the Wellirgton district, Mr. W. Lucena, of 

 Picton, writes to me as follows : " They abound in Palliser Bay, Wellington, 

 but only odd ones are caught in Cook l^trait in deep water, and, as a rule, 

 in the autumn. As far as our fishermen know, the bass are rare about 

 Picton, but they say there is a shoal in the middle of tlie Strait where big 

 fish are caught, but, being so far off, it has not been properly located. 

 The habits seem to be similar to those of the liapuka, and their diet is 

 also much the same." 



I take this opportunity of gratefully acknowledging the kindness and 

 assistance rendered to me by the following Kaikoura fishermen, namely : 

 Messrs. Jensen Bros., Nelson Bros., H. Kelleher, C. Kingsnorth, and P. 

 Petersen. I also desire to thank Mr. Hahn for permitting use of the pro- 

 tected photograph reproduced on Plate VI. 



In the " Basic List of the Fishes of New Zealand " this species will 

 stand as No. 110a. 



12. Plagiogeneion rubiginosus Hutton. 

 Plate VII. 



This species was originally described by Hutton* iu 1876 from a mounted 

 specimen in the Otago Museum under the provisional name Therafon (?) 

 rubiginosus. In 1890 Forbes,t accepting Mutton's suggestion, instituted the 

 genus Plagiogeneion, a fresh specimen taken near the mouth of the River 

 Avon enabling him to supply certain deficiencies in the original account. 



Another specimen, slightly smaller, is also in the Canterbury Museum 

 collection, labelled " Canterbury." As Forbes does not mention this, it 

 was evidently received after he wrote his paper. 



It is to be noted that both Hutton and Forbes count 11 spines and 12 

 rays in the dorsal fin, whereas in both our examples, of which one is the 

 specimen described by Forbes, the numbers are 12 spines and 11 rays. 



Owing to a more modern method of computation, the following descrip- 

 tion differs somewhat from the previous ones, and, as neither Hutton nor 

 Forbes furnished a figure, the accompanying illustration is prepared from 

 the example which I have reason to believe is the type of the genus. 



D. xii, 11; A. iii, 10; V. i, 5; P. 21; C. 24-t-6. L. lat. 81; L. tr. 

 12-1-24. 



Length of head, 3-59; height of body, 2-76; length of caudal, 7-0 in 

 the length ; diameter of eye, 3-36 ; interorbital space. 3-06 ; and length of 

 snout, 4-0 in the head. 



Head compressed, eyes lateral ; snout notched in front to receive the 

 premaxillary ; the nostrils are small vertical orifices, each pair close together, 



* Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 8, 1876, p. 209. 

 t Forbes, ib., vol. 22. 1890, p. 273 



