Histiophorus granulifer Castelnau, 1861. Type local- 

 ity, Cape of Good Hope. Holotype, a mutilated 

 skeleton, said to be in the Capetown Museum. 



Istiophorus greyi Jordon and Evermann, 1926. Type 

 locality, Cape San Lucas, lower California. Type 

 specimen, California Academy of Sciences (CAS) 

 Catalog No. 605, a photograph. 



Istiophorus wrighti Jordan and Evermann, 1926. 

 Type locality, off Miami, Fla. Type specimen, 

 CAS Catalog No. 603, a photograph. 



Istiophorus maguirei Jordan and Evermann, 1926. 

 Type locality, off Long Key, Fla. Type specimen, 

 CAS Catalog No. 604, a photograph. 



Istiophorus volador Jordan and Evermann, 1926. 

 Type locality, off Long Key, Fla. Type specimen, 

 CAS Catalog No. 606, a photograph. 



Istiophorus eriquius Jordan and Evermann, 1926. 4 

 Type locality, Hawaii. Holotype, Bernice P. Bish- 

 op Museum Catalog No. 3424. 



Istiophorus brookei Fowler, 1933. Type locality, 

 Tahiti. Holotype, Academy of Natural Sciences, 

 Philadelphia Catalog No. 55923. 



For further lists see Nakamura, Iwai, and Matsubara 

 (1968). 



Several authors have recently considered the senior 

 synonym of the Atlantic form of the sailfish to be 

 Istiophorus albicans (Latreille, 1804). Whitley (1939) 

 first called attention to a series of volumes entitled 

 "Nouveau Dictionaire d'Histoire Naturelle" pub- 

 lished in Paris from 1802 to 1804. The fish sections in 

 these volumes were by L. A. G. Bosc and are clearly 

 designated with the letter (B) at the end of each fish 

 account. Bosc (1803) in volume 13 described the 

 Atlantic sailfish based on Marcgrave's description 

 and figure. Bosc applied the common name 'le 

 makaira blanchatre' to this species. Latreille (1804) in 

 volume 24, following his description of the genus 

 Makaira, clearly applied a scientific name to Makaira 

 blanchatre, in the following manner: "Makaira 

 blanchatre, makaira albicans Bosc." Latreille wrote 

 nothing else, thus under the International Rules of 

 Zoological Nomenclature this name must be con- 

 sidered a nomen nudum. Had Latreille referred to 

 Bosc's description in the earlier volume the name 

 would be available. 



1.2 Taxonomy 



1.21 Affinities 



Suprageneric 



Phylum Chordata 



Subphylum Vertebrata 

 Superclass Gnathostomata 



'Jordan and Evermann ( 1926) attribute /. eriquius to Jordan and 

 Ball, but under present interpretation of the International Code of 

 Zoological Nomenclature, Jordan and Evermann must be given the 

 responsibility for the name. 



Class Osteichthyes 

 Subclass Actinopterygii 

 Order Perciformes 

 Suborder Xiphioidei 

 Family Istiophoridae 



Gosline (1968) in his review of perciform suborders 

 presented evidence that the relation of billfishes to 

 scombrids and their allies may be one of convergence. 

 He placed the family Istiophoridae along with the fam- 

 ily Xiphiidae and provisionally, the Luvaridae, in a 

 separate suborder Xiphiodei. 



Generic 



Monotypic genus, see specific diagnosis. 



Istiophorus Lacepede, 1802. (ref.). Type species 

 designated as Istiophorus platypterus (Shaw and 

 Nodder, 1791). Holotype, BMNH 1964.7.2.1. 

 Designated by Morrow and Harbo (1969). 



Specific 



Diagnosis, first dorsal fin very high, sail shaped, the 

 middle rays decidedly the longest; the ventral fin 

 rays very long and fin membrane well developed. 



1.22 Taxonomic status 



Two recent reviews have treated the sailfish genus 

 Istiophorus. Morrow and Harbo (1969) and Nakamura 

 et al. (1968). The latter recognized two species of 

 sailfishes — /. platypterus (Pacific sailfish, Bashoka- 

 jiki) from the Indo-Pacific and /. albicans (Atlantic 

 sailfish, Nishibashokajiki) from the Atlantic. They 

 based their separation on greater length of the pec- 

 toral fin and the caudal fin on Atlantic specimens less 

 than 90 cm in length. Above 90 cm in length they are 

 indistinguishable. Morrow and Harbo disputed this 

 contention in a footnote on p. 39 of their paper saying 

 that their data (though not presented) do not support 

 such a distinction. In this synopsis we follow Morrow 

 and Harbo, but emphasize that studies are needed to 

 determine exactly the specific status of the genus 

 Istiophorus. 



1.23 Subspecies 



Various authors have recognized subspecies. Based 

 on Morrow and Harbo (1969) this does not seem to be 

 justified. 



1.24 Standard common names and vernacular 

 names. 



The names capitalized are official or in more com- 

 mon use. Compiled mostly from FAO (1950). 



Arabia — FARAS 



Brazil — AGULHAO DE VELA, Agulhao bandeira, 

 Agulhao, Bicudo, Guebugii. 



96 



