. 
7 
[61] REVIEW OF THE SCIZNIDZ. — 403 
rr. Dorsal rays XI-I, 23; snout extremely short and 
-blunt; second anal spine 24in head. Body deep, the 
back elevated ; anterior profile very steep and some- 
what convex ; the back a little compressed ; snout 
low, thick, blunt, and short, 33 in head, its pores 
and slits conspicuous; mouth inferior, horizontal, 
the maxillary reaching middle of eye, 3 in head; 
teeth in broad bands, the outer above somewhat en- 
larged; preopercle with membranaceous serre ; pre- 
orbital very broad, as broad as eye; gill-rakers very 
short and thick, rough, as long as high, 5 or 6 of thei 
developed; eye 5} in head; dorsal spines moderate, 
the longest 2} in head; second anal spine stout and 
rather shorter than in related species; longest soft ray 
of dorsal 24 in head; pectoral shortish, 13. Color 
dusky, the young with two or three vague blackish 
cross-bands; fins all dusky. Head 3 in length; 
depth 24. D. XI-I, 23; A. II, 8. Scales 57. 
FascIiAtTa, 69. 
‘57. SCIZANA GILLI. 
Corvina gilli Steindachner, Ichthyol. Notizen, vi, 29, 1867 (Rio de la Plata). 
Habitat.—Atlantic coast of South America. 
We know this species from the account given by Dr. Steindachner. 
It is very close to Sciwna adusta, and may prove to be the same, but 
the description seems to indicate some differences. 
58. SCIZANA ADUSTA. 
Sciena (Corvina) adusta Agassiz, Spix Pisc. Bras., 126, plate 70, 1829 (Montevideo). 
Jenyns, Zool. Beagle, Fishes, 42, 1842 (Maldonado; Montevideo). Giinther, 
Cat. Fish. Brit. Mus., ii, 289, 1860 (South America). 
Habitat.——Coast of Brazil and the West Indies. 
We refer to this species several specimens in the museum at Cam- 
bridge from Pernambuco, Fonteboa, and Jérémie, Hayti. Our descrip- 
tion is drawn chiefly from the largest example (22417, M. C. Z., 7 inches 
long) collected at Pernambuco by Rev. J.C. Fletcher. These speci- 
mens agree almost perfectly with the figure of. Sciana adusta, given by 
Agassiz, the only discrepancy being that the second anal spine is a little 
longer than is shown in the figure. They agree fairly with the descrip- 
tions of Jenyns and Giinther, except in the number of rays in the soft 
dorsal. In Agassiz’s text, as well as by Jenyns and Giinther, 28 soft 
‘rays are enumerated. We count 22 and 23 in different specimens. But 
in Agassiz’s plate but 19 or 20 are shown, and it has occurred to us that 
the number 28 in the description was a misprint for 18 or for 20, and 
that possibly this number, 28, may have been copied withouié verification 
by Jenyns and by Giinther. If this is not so Agassiz’s description 
must refer to one species, the one examined by Giinther and Jenyns, 
and his figure to another, the one examined by us. In that case our 
species must receive a new name. But we regard this as highly im. 
probable, and refer all these accounts to the synonymy of Scicna adusta. 
