[Pfege 130] Chapter V Conclusions and Observations 



Section 1 Popular Theories 



As has been reported in the preceding sections of this paper, there have been 

 few accurate scientific studies made of poisonous fishes in the past, but various 

 theories on the subject have been current among natives and Japanese fishermen 

 and residents in the South Seas. They will be examined cursorily in this section. 



(1) The theory that fishes which are edible in Japan are poisonous in the South 

 Seas. 



This theory was heard wherever the writer traveled. It has already been con- 

 sidered in the paragraph on the species of poisonous fish in Chapter II, but our 

 observations will be repeated here for the reader's benefit. There is not space 

 here to cite all of the species which are given the same names as edible fishes 

 in Japan, but stane of them are the kamasu ( dokukamasu) , suzuki (aona), hiraaji 

 ( dokuhiraaji ) , jaimagl (dokuutsubo ), and so forth ^in each case the name in 

 parentheses is the s'bandard common name used in this report). These all closely 



resemble their Japanese namesakes ^most of them are of the same genus and 



consequently Japanese going to the South Seas and seeing similar fishes there 

 have applied these names to them, but they are entirely distinct species. These 

 poisonous fishes of the South Seas do not occur in Japanese waters (although some 

 of them are found in Okinawa and the Bonins), and the corresponding Japanese 

 edible species do not occur in the South Seas. 



For some time the author, seeing only the South Seas species, which so 

 closely resemble those found in Japan, was unable to decide whether they were the 

 same or different species, but by bringing back specimens and ccmparing them with 

 the Japanese species he was able to see clearly the difference between them. 

 Furthermore, taxonomists have in the past recorded them as distinctly different 

 species. 



Note should be taken of this popular belief because it has a very wide circu- 

 lation and has been subscribed to by many people for a long time. 



(2) The theory that the poison is due to the food which the fish eats. 



One often hears that fish become poisonous by eating poisonous seaweeds. 

 Matsuo recorded this theory, and it was also heard from fishermen at Saipan. We 

 requested that some of this poisonous seaweed be collected at Tenian in order to 

 find out exactly what it looked like, but the fishermen were afraid to collect 

 it. Thfhen asked why, they said that they would have to dive for it and that if 

 it touched the skin, it would cause a burning rash, with subsequent loss of the 

 ability to move the affected part. 

 [Page 131] 



lie tried to collect some from a boat with a plankton net, but were un- 

 successful. From what the fishermen say, it is assumed that this is some kind of 

 an eohinoderm rather than a seaweed. 



An examination of the stomach contents of poisonous fishes taken in the 

 vicinity showed neither seaweeds nor fragments of echinoderms but only -unidenti- 

 fiable digested remnants of small fish. 



80 



