398 Survey of Fishing Grounds, West Coast of Ireland, 1890-1891. 



value of the alar ocelli as a specific character is difficult to express succinctly ; but 

 it may be said that all Blondes have a number (about five or more) of small pale 

 circular areas on each wing, which can readily be seen, and which, in fact, cannot 

 escape observation, whereas in the Homelyn, if conspicuous ocelli exist at all, 

 there is only one on each wing (in the position in which an ocellus is found in the 

 young of every species of ray with which we are acquainted), and any other pale 

 areas that may exist require a more careful search, and, when found, are seen to 

 lack the definite rings of spots which invariably encircle their homologues in the 

 Blonde. 



The shortness of the rostral projection in the Blonde imparts to the anterior 

 profile a shovel-like appearance which is wanting in the Homelyn. In the shape 

 of the disk, in fact, the Blonde resembles R. microcellata more than the Homelyn, 

 and the difference is especially noticeable when specimens of about the same size 

 are compai'ed. As we have noted in our introductory remarks the anterior margin 

 of the wing becomes more sinuous with age, and Homelyns are always more 

 advanced in adult characters than Blondes of corresponding size, since R. maculata 

 is by far the smaller species. Of course the difference is most marked when a 

 mature male Homelyn is compared with a male Blonde of the same size and 

 consequently immature. An old male Homelyn has a snout somewhat resembling 

 that of R. fullonica, though, of course, shorter, whereas in even the oldest male 

 Blondes the tip of the rostrum is merely a broad cone ; its sides practicall}'' con 

 tinuous with the anterior convexity of the front margin of the wing. The smallest 

 Blonde we have seen measures a little less than nine inches across. Very small 

 specimens probably resemble young Homelyns pretty closely, as far as the shape 

 is concerned ; and indeed this character is much alike in the youngest stages of all 

 the short-nosed rays. 



The smaller size of the eye, and the difference in its relations to the width 

 between the supra- orbital ridges is apparent enough where specimens of the same 

 size are concerned. The other diiierences of proportion are most readily brought 

 out by measurement, and do not appeal at once to the eye. 



The formula of the linear spines is identical in the two species, but of course 

 the difference in ultimate size involves a difference in the development of the 

 spines when examples of the same size are compared. Thus, the large spines 

 which replace the original lateral caudal row of the young ray, may have made 

 their appearance in a Homelyn only 12 inches across, and may be, or, perhaps, 

 always are still absent in a Blonde with a transverse measurement of 18 inches. 

 Further, if specimens of about 9 inches be compared, the spines will be found the 

 smaller in the Blonde, and their bases seem always to have a yellowish tinge, not 

 observable in those of the Homelyn. The presence of more than two spines in the 

 middle line in front of the shoulder in young Blondes seems to be a character of 



