5o "ENDEAVOUR" SCIENTIFIC RESULTS 



cc. No black mark on the base of the pectoral. 



s^. \'entrals placed below the origin of the first 

 dorsal. 

 h. D. xi., i8; .A. 20; 1. lat. 65: — robusta. 

 gg. \'entrals placed in advance of the origin of 

 the dorsal. 



/. D. x.-xi., 18-20; .\. 20-22; 1. lat 



66-68 : — hassensis. 



a. I), xi., 21-22; .A. 19-21; 1. lat. 



69-74: — hostockii. 



Hi. U. xi., 22-23; '^- -4'-5 ; '• '^it. 70: — 



sihunia. 

 Neosillago marniorafa, Castelnau,! having only fi\e spines- 

 in the first dorsal, is evidently not a member of this family, 

 but possibly belongs to the Xototheuiidcp. 



Having had the opportunity of examining the types of 

 Isosillago maculata, Macleay,^ I find that the number of 

 spines and rays in the dorsal and anal fins are incorrectly 

 stated in the original description. There are thirteen spines, 

 in the first dorsal and one spine and twenty-four or five rays, 

 in the second ; the anal has twenty-four spines and rays in 

 all. In these and all other characters they agree with Sillago 

 punctata, Cuv. & \'al., but may Aery well form the type of a 

 distinct genus Isosillago, characterised by the union of the 

 two dorsals, larger number of spines in the first, and by having 

 very small scales. 



I am unable to find any specimens marked as the types of 

 Sillago gracilis, Alle^ne and Macleay,^ in the Macleay 

 Museum, but there are two small specimens labelled "Sillago 

 sp? Torres Straits," which I have no doubt are the types. 

 Through the kindness of Professor Hasvvell and Professor 

 Da\id, I have been allowed to borrow them for examination. 

 One is a little larger than the other, and from the snout to the 

 end of its broken tail is almost 82 mm. long, which is exactly the- 

 length of the figure of -S'. gfacilis. In other details also, such 

 as the form of the damaged tail and the pronounced shrinkage 

 marks on the head, it agrees perfectly with the figure, though' 

 it has lost all trace of the colour markings with the exception 

 of the sihery lateral band. Both differ from the description in 

 the number of fin-rays in the dorsal and anal, there being, 

 only one spine and twent} ravs in each instead of one, twentv- 



1 Castelnau— Ees. Pish. Austr. (Vict. Rec. Philad. Exhib.), 1876, p. 16. 



2 Macleay— Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales, iii., 1878, p. 34. pi. iv., fl^. 3. 



3 AUeyne and Macleay— Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales, i., 1877, p. 279, pi. vi... 



lig. 2. 



