382 Mr. A. Alcock on the BathyUal Fishes 



HALIEUTiEA, C. & V. 



Halieutcea coccinea^ sp. nov. 



D. 5. A. 4. C. 9. P. 14. V. 1/5. 



Discriminated at once from Halieutcea steUata by the less 

 depressed head, the fine needle-pointed spines, which also 

 extend over the under surface, and the bilobed supraoral ten- 

 tacle. Head much as in H. steUata, but with its surface more 

 convex from side to side and rising more from behind for- 

 wards, so that anteriorly it forms a wide dome. Disk and 

 body uniformly covered above and below with spines having 

 steliiform bases and simple, tapering, acute points, except 

 round the edge of the disk, where they are trident ; those on 

 the under surface are small. Skinny filaments round the 

 disk and mouth few and inconspicuous. Supraoral tentacle 

 with two fleshy lobes. Eyes large, their major diameter 

 one ninth the disk-length. Interorbital space widest behind, 

 where it is equal to two eye-lengths, slightly concave in 

 front, flat behind ; its surface covered with small steliiform 

 spines. No prominent supraorbital edge. Nostrils situated 

 as in H. steUata, but pioportionately larger. Mouth as in 

 H. stellata and with similar teeth ; its cleft nearly half as 

 broad as the disk, its floor up to the root of the tongue 

 coloured (sepia-brown in spirit). 



Other external characters as in H. stellata. 



Colours : — " Dorsum bright pink, with fine black vermicular 

 lines j under surface dark crimson" {Prof. Wood-Mason). 

 In spirit quite white, with the dark vermicular lines showing. 



Branchial and peritoneal cavities lined with a thick, jet- 

 black, velvety membrane. Intestine long and coiled. No 

 pyloric cssca. 



One specimen, 7|- inches long. 



Hah. Andaman Sea, 7 miles south-east by south of Ross 

 Island (Middle Andaman group) , in 265 fathoms. 



One more Acanthopterygian remains to be described — an 

 apparently mature bathybial fish, which does not wholly con- 

 form to the diagnosis of any described family of the suborder. 

 In the majority of its characters it agrees with the Trachi- 

 nidffi, differing, however, from the members of that family in 

 the entire absence of teeth. It appears, in short, to be a 

 toothless Trachinid. I describe it, leaving its exact deter- 

 mination to more experienced ichthyologists. 



