8 STUDIES IN THE ICHTHYOLOGY OF QUEENSLAND 



very readily employed as a weapon of ofifence. Some of th& 

 species are also credited with the possession of toxic qualities, 

 and there can be no question as to the acuteness of the pain 

 caused by a stab from either the Bullrout or the Fortescue, 

 which belong to this group. 



In 1860 four species were referred to his genus Centropogon 

 by Giinther. These four species may for convenience be tabulated 

 as follows : — 



Second anal spine longer than the third — Species, australis. 



Second and third anal spines subequal — Species, robustus. 



Second anal spine appreciably shorter than the third — 

 Species, fnncomrens, leucoprosopon. 



To the first of these three sections the generic name 

 Centropoijon rightfully belongs, the type being Cottus australis, 

 White. Centropogon robustus, Giinther, the sole representative 

 of the second section, is generically separable, and it is here pro- 

 posed to establish a genus, Notesthes, for its accommodation. 

 The third section will be dealt with farther on in connection 

 with an undescribed Queensland fish, which is perhaps allied to 

 its representatives though widely separated from the typical 

 (1entropo<ion. 



Subsequent to the publication of the second volume of the 

 British Museum Catalogue of Fishes, four more species were 

 added to Centropogon, namely : — 

 C. marmoratus, Giinther, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., (3) xi. 1863, 



p. 136, Moreton Bay. 

 C. indicus. Day, Fish. India, p. 155, pi. xxxviii. fig. 2, 1875, 



Madras. 

 C. ediinatus, Macleay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales, v. 1881, 



p. 436, Endeavour River. 

 C. nitens, De Vis, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales, ix. 1884, p. 



459, Coast of Queensland. 



According to ray views only the first of these is a true 

 Centropogon, while of the three remaining species no two are 

 congeneric. To add to these complications Castelnau in 

 1872 confused Centropogon australis, White, with the fish 

 described by Guichenot (Mem. Soc. Imp. Sc. Nat. Cherbourg, 

 xiii. 1868, p. 89) as Neosebastes scorpienoides, and in the 

 following year, when seeking to correct his mistake, made 

 matters worse by rejecting the genus Xeosebastes and relegating 

 Guichenot's fish to the genus Centropogon, with which it has not 

 the slightest affinity, {v. Proc. Zool. & Accl. Soc. Vict., ii» 



