211 



Ommastrephes megapterus (Verrill). 



Architeuthis megaptera, Verrill (1878). 

 Sthenotcuthis mcfjaptcra, Verrill (1880). 

 Ommastrephes me(japtcrus, Steenstrup (1880). 



The specimen upon which this species is based was "cast ashore, durin- 

 a severe gale, near Cape Sable, Nova Scotia, and was secured for the Pro"- 

 yincial Museum at Halifax by J. Matthew Jones, Esq. It is preserved entire, 

 in alcohol, and is still in good condition." 



" I refer, doubtfully, to this species, an entire beak, with the odontophore 

 presented by Capt. Geo. A. Johnson and crew, of the schooner A h' 

 Johnson. It was taken ac Sable Island Bank, Nova Scotia, in 280-300 

 fathoms, Sept., 1878" (Yerrill ; op. cit, p. 227). 



The "terminal part of a tentacular arm " of a specimen which Professor 

 Vernll(op. cit., p. 193) thinks may also be referable to this species, was 

 taken "from the stomach of a large and voracious fish {Alepidosaurus ferox)" 

 caught on a halibut line off Banquereau, N.S., in 1879. 



Family Sejnolini. 

 RossiA Hyatti, Verrill. 



1878. Amer. Journ. Sc. and Arts, Third Series, vol. xvii., p. 208. 



1880. Idem., Third Series, vol. xix., p. 291. 



1881. Trans. Conn. Acad. Arts and Sc, vol. v., p. 351. 



" Off Cape Sable, N.S., 82-92 fathoms ; off Halifax, N.S., 57-100 fathoms, 

 on a fine compact sand and mud bottom." "It has also been received 

 through the Gloucester halibut fishermen, from the banks of Nova Scotia " 

 (Verrill ; op. cit., p. 353). 



RossiA suBLEVis, Verrill. 



1878. Amer. Joiirn. Sc. and Arts, Third Series, vol., xvi, p. 209. 

 1881. Trans. Conn. Acad. Arts and Sc, vol. v., p. 354. 



Taken by the dredging parties of the U. S. Fish Commission, in 1877, in 

 the trawl-net off Halifax, N.S., in 42 and 101 fathoms, fine sand. It has 

 also been brought in by Capt. J. W. Collins and crew, of the schooner 

 Marion, from tlie banks off Nova Scotia (Verrill ; op. cit., p. 356). 



Rev. Canon Norman, however, in the first part of his recent " Revision of 

 British MoPusca," (published in the Annals and Magazine of Natural 

 History for June, 1890) thinks that R. sublevis is not distin-t from R. 

 glaucopis, Loven (1846). 



