190 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. xxviii. 



attention to the following- facts: We know another Lqx(rlsy{\\\v\\ lias 

 the same peculiarity. It is covered, and often very densely covered, 

 with osseous prickles. It is regarded as a variety of a vei'v common 

 Arctic species, LiixmH fahricl! Kro^^er {— L. tunicata Reinhardt). 

 Long ago this form was described by C. F. Liitken" as Lipar/s f(il>- 

 rlcil Kroyer forma leprom '^ and figu^red by him on his Plate XV, fig. 5. 

 In the zoological museum of the Imperial Academy of Sciences of St. 

 Petersl)urg we have some still undescribed specimens of this variety, 

 brought by Mr. N. M. Knipovitch from Murman, on the coast of 

 Lapland. By the kind permission of Mr. Knipovitch I have compared 

 the structure of the prickles of both forms. The prickles of LiparU 

 fabricil leprom, are exactly like those of the Japanese form. Thev 

 are also armed each with a sharp spicule, but the plate is not so flat as 

 in Lipar'iH oimtoni. It is more conical, though of the same charactei'. 

 It has even the same radiating striations. I believe that if a peculiarity 

 is not even of a specific value (other varieties of the same Z/^wr/.v/'^/Z*- 

 ricii have no such prickles at all) it can not be taken as the distinction 

 of a genus. In all other respects the new Japanese form is a true 

 Liparls^ of course of gigantic dimensions, but entirely like — for 

 instance, Liparls agasHizli Putnam — as already mentioned by Prof. 

 D. S. Jordan and J. O. Snj^der. 



My specimen is a little larger than the type; its total length is 457 

 mm.; length to base of caudal fin, 417 mm.; it is a full-grown female 

 filled with eggs, which was purchased by me in the fish market at 

 Nagasaki, in April, 1901, and is now catalogued in the ichthyological 

 collections of the zoological museum of the Imperial Academy of 

 Sciences in St. Petersburg as No. 13173. Japanese fishermen have 

 informed me that it is a very rare form, with no Japanese name. 



The fin formula of my specimen is D. 12, A. 31, P. 13, C. 10; head 

 1| in length measured to base of caudal fin; depth 5; eye 10 in length 

 of head; snout 2jV; width of mouth If; width of interorbital space 

 2yV- It difi'ers from the described species by the width of the inter- 

 orbital space, which is a little larger (2^*0 instead of If), but I have no 

 doubt that this is a difterence of individual or possibly a sexual char- 

 acter (the sex of the described species is not given by the authors). 



Interorbital space flat; gill rakers 1 + 7, like warts covered with 

 seta% placed in a double row on the inner and on the outer side of a 

 gill arch; width of gill opening contained 2^ times in the length of 

 head; origin of dorsal at a vertical passing through a point about one 



«Chr. F. Liitken. Et Bidrag til Kundsgab om Kara-tlavets Fiske. Dijinphiia 

 Tagtete Zool.-Bot. Udbytte: Kj<')])enhavii, 1886. 



& Apparently Lipai'is fabricil ])elongs to the same group ( Trismtyistua) as L. oivstoni. 

 To settle finally the question of the generic value of these i)rickles, we should know- 

 under what conditions L. fnbricii is without prickles; whether these structures lie 

 seasonal, sexual, dimorphic, rudimentary, or on localized individuals. In other 

 words, what is the real significance of Liitken' s " forma leprosa.'" — D. S. J. 



