BY J. DOUGLAS OGILBY. 9 



1873, p. 40). In this he was unfortunately followed by Macleay, 

 who, however, it is but just to say, expressed his doubt as to the 

 propriety of the course followed by Castelnau. Here, so far as 

 this fish is concerned, the matter might have been left for the 

 present, but that Jordan and Everinann (Pish. N. & Mid. 

 Amer., p. 1889) place Neoschastes among the synonyms of 

 Scorpcena. The type of Neosebaste-f is the South Australian 

 Scorp(Pna panda, a species which, like N, scorpienoides, I have 

 never seen. Judging, however, from McCoy's fine figure and 

 description of the latter species (Prodr. Zool. Vict., dec. xx, pi. 

 193) I am inclined to recognise Guichenot's genus, the com- 

 plete lepidosis of the upper surface of the head and the absence 

 of simple pectoral rays being inimical to its inclusion in 

 Scofpana . 



Reverting to the list given above it will readily be seen that 

 the fish described by Day as Centropogon imiicus differs greatly 

 from that genus as here restricted. Among the characters 

 which separate it may be noted — the difference in the contour 

 of the head and nape, the longer lower jaw, the absence of an 

 enlarged outer series of teeth in the premaxillaries, the decreased 

 number of dorsal spines, the elongation of the third anal spine 

 beyond the second, the pauciradiate pectorals, and the obso- 

 lescence of one of the ventral rays. 



As I cannot find any other genus in which this combination 

 of characters exists I propose to separate the Indian fish from 

 Centropoyon under the name Data, in honor of Surgeon-General 

 Francis Day, author of the Fishes of India and other works.* 



As to the species to which Macleay gave the name Cen- 

 tropoyon echinatus, the author's description is of little value in 

 assisting us to determine its affinities. We learn, however, that 

 the lateral line is provided with filaments, and that the second 

 anal spine is greatly enlarged, while the neglect to mention a 

 preorbltal spine suggests the absence of that character. Taken 

 together these point to a scorprenine rather than an apistine fish, 

 and I am inclined to believe that Macleay 's species will event- 

 ually prove to belong to that group. 



Finally, with regard to the remaining species, Centropoyon 

 nitens, the generic identification is greatly hampered by the 

 omission on the author's part of any reference as to the extent 

 of the dorsal lepidosis, and to the comparative length of the 



*Tetraroge rubripinnis (Schlegel, Faun. Japon., Poiss, p. 49, pi. xxii. 

 fig. 2) may be a Daia. 



