1912. | J. T. Jenkins: Indian Marine Fauna. 59 
The trawl of the ‘‘ Investigator” was very much smaller than 
that of the ‘‘Golden Crown’’ and consequently the larger species 
of Elasmobranchs would not be captured by it. Apart from these 
gigantic rays and saw-fish there is a marked similarity in the 
catches of the two vessels. The predominant feature of the 
bottom in the area trawled over by the ‘‘Golden Crown”? was 
sand and, owing to circumstances which need not be specified here, 
her trawling was carried out on a much more limited area than 
that of the ‘‘ Investigator,’’ which worked in this neighbourhood 
in depths from shoal water up to 100 fathoms. The latter 
depth may be taken as the limit in a discussion of shallow- 
water forms. Consequently the faunistic lists of the “ Investi- 
gator’’ (apart from records of large species) are much more 
complete than those of the ‘‘ Golden Crown.’’ Not only was the 
latter vessel compelled to trawl in waters where fish might be 
expected in quantities sufficiently large to make out a case for 
commercial fishing, but the net used was designed only to catch 
fish sufficiently large to be marketable. Invertebrates of any 
kind (except prawns) were regarded as undesirable débris. 
No account, however cursory. of this area can be considered 
complete which omits reference to the shallow-water forms 
captured by the catamarans and the masula boats of Puri. From 
the latter vessels, which fish during the period of the N.E. 
monsoon, a large seine-net of semicircular ‘‘sweep’’ is used. The 
catching part of the net is of very small mesh so that forms 
which would pass through the cod-end (tail-end) of the ‘‘ Golden 
Crown’s’’ trawl would be enmeshed by this ‘‘ bara jal’’ of the 
native fishermen at Puri. Consequently forms like Clupea kunzez, 
which are occasionally captured in immense quantities on the 
shore, are absent or represented only by isolated individuals in 
trawl net hauls made further out. Hauls made by the seine-net 
on Puri beach in December 1908 consisted mainly of this species 
with a few other forms such as Scomber microlepidotus, Upeneoides 
vittatus and Tetrodon lunaris. Elacate mgra, Cybium guttatum and 
a few “‘ skates”? (Myliobatis nieuhofit) may also be regarded as 
typical. 
The following list, though not to be regarded as complete, 
gives one an idea of the species most prevalent at Puri at this 
time of the year (December) :-— 
Elasmobranchit. 
Torpedo marmorata. | Myliobatis nieuhofil. 
Trygon walga. var. cornifera. 
var. imbricata. 
d) +) 
9) d+) 
Alcock, ‘‘A supplementary list of the Marine Fishes of India, with 
descriptions of two new genera and eight new species,’’ 
Journ. As. Soc. Beng., vol. lxv, pt. ii, No. 3, 1896, pp. 
301— 338. 
(The above is not a complete list of Dr. Alcock’s papers on Indian marine 
fish but refers only to those which contain descriptions of or reports on shallow- 
water species.) 
