﻿GOATFISH 
  GENUS 
  UPENEUS 
  — 
  LACHNER 
  515 
  

  

  tross 
  Philippine 
  Expedition; 
  Japan, 
  Kagoshima, 
  Satsuma, 
  USNM 
  

   71354, 
  2 
  specimens, 
  106 
  and 
  125 
  mm. 
  (Samoan 
  Islands, 
  USNM 
  41559, 
  

   2 
  specimens, 
  78 
  and 
  79 
  mm., 
  questionable 
  identification). 
  

  

  Description. 
  — 
  Dorsal 
  rays 
  VIII-i,8(15), 
  the 
  first 
  spine 
  minute; 
  

   pectoral 
  rays 
  16.0: 
  15 
  to 
  18 
  (20); 
  vertical 
  scale 
  rows 
  34.5: 
  33 
  to 
  36 
  

   (13); 
  scale 
  rows 
  above 
  lateral 
  line 
  3: 
  (7); 
  scale 
  rov»^s 
  below 
  lateral 
  

   line 
  7: 
  (8); 
  total 
  number 
  of 
  gillrakers 
  28.9: 
  27 
  to 
  31 
  (20); 
  length 
  of 
  

   longest 
  raker 
  in 
  longest 
  filament 
  1.0 
  to 
  1.4 
  (5). 
  

  

  Peritoneum 
  uniform 
  light 
  brown 
  to 
  dark 
  brown; 
  preorbital 
  scales 
  

   absent; 
  barbels 
  extend 
  to 
  area 
  between 
  eye 
  and 
  preopercular 
  margin, 
  

   and 
  barbel 
  length 
  in 
  percent 
  of 
  head 
  length 
  48 
  to 
  64 
  (21 
  specimens); 
  

   second 
  and 
  third 
  dorsal 
  spines 
  about 
  equal 
  in 
  length 
  and 
  these 
  only 
  

   slightly 
  greater 
  than 
  fourth 
  spine. 
  

  

  Color 
  in 
  alcohol. 
  — 
  Head 
  and 
  body 
  pale 
  to 
  brown 
  above 
  and 
  silvery 
  

   to 
  light 
  tan 
  below; 
  a 
  sharp 
  horizontal, 
  lemon-yellow 
  stripe 
  persists 
  

   on 
  the 
  body 
  in 
  some 
  specimens 
  after 
  about 
  50 
  years 
  of 
  preservation 
  

   and 
  extends 
  from 
  eye 
  to 
  area 
  just 
  above 
  midbase 
  of 
  caudal 
  fin. 
  

  

  The 
  spiny 
  dorsal 
  fin 
  has 
  tlu-ee 
  dark 
  brown 
  bars 
  separated 
  by 
  three 
  

   transparent 
  to 
  whitish 
  bars, 
  and 
  the 
  tips 
  of 
  the 
  second 
  to 
  fourth 
  

   spines 
  are 
  whitish; 
  soft 
  dorsal 
  with 
  brown 
  bars 
  separated 
  by 
  two 
  trans- 
  

   parent 
  to 
  whitish 
  bars 
  with 
  the 
  tips 
  of 
  the 
  longest 
  rays 
  sometimes 
  in 
  

   white; 
  caudal 
  fin 
  with 
  tlu-ee 
  to 
  four 
  brownish 
  to 
  dusky 
  oblique 
  bars 
  

   on 
  the 
  upper 
  lobe, 
  the 
  lower 
  lobe 
  clear 
  to 
  dusky, 
  especially 
  near 
  tips 
  

   of 
  rays; 
  pectoral, 
  pelvic, 
  and 
  anal 
  fins 
  clear. 
  

  

  Geographical 
  distribution. 
  — 
  From 
  India 
  (Day, 
  1868 
  and 
  1876) 
  east- 
  

   ward 
  through 
  the 
  East 
  Indies 
  to 
  the 
  Philippines 
  and 
  possibly 
  Oceania 
  

   (Samoan 
  Islands); 
  from 
  Japan 
  (Kagoshima) 
  southward 
  to 
  Australia 
  

   (Kner, 
  1865). 
  

  

  Remarks. 
  — 
  Certain 
  characters 
  given 
  in 
  the 
  account 
  and 
  shown 
  on 
  

   the 
  illustration 
  of 
  Mullus 
  dubius 
  Temminck 
  and 
  Schlegel 
  (1843, 
  p. 
  

   30, 
  pi. 
  11, 
  fig. 
  3) 
  can 
  be 
  associated, 
  in 
  part, 
  to 
  those 
  of 
  U. 
  moluccensis. 
  

   The 
  narrow, 
  yellow 
  stripe 
  on 
  the 
  body, 
  the 
  oblique 
  bars 
  only 
  on 
  the 
  

   upper 
  lobe 
  of 
  the 
  caudal 
  fin, 
  and 
  the 
  bars 
  on 
  the 
  dorsal 
  fins 
  as 
  shown 
  

   for 
  dubius 
  are 
  characteristic 
  of 
  moluccensis. 
  Seven 
  spines 
  in 
  the 
  

   spiny 
  dorsal 
  fin 
  were 
  listed 
  for 
  dubius, 
  but 
  a 
  report 
  on 
  the 
  type 
  by 
  

   Boeseman 
  (1947, 
  p. 
  44) 
  revealed 
  eight. 
  Boeseman 
  found 
  the 
  type 
  

   specimen 
  in 
  a 
  very 
  bad 
  state 
  of 
  preservation 
  and 
  the 
  color 
  and 
  color 
  

   pattern 
  were 
  faded. 
  He 
  recently 
  examined 
  the 
  dentition 
  of 
  the 
  type 
  

   of 
  dubius 
  for 
  me 
  and 
  found 
  the 
  teeth 
  of 
  the 
  jaws 
  to 
  be 
  rather 
  stout 
  

   and 
  large 
  and 
  clearly 
  separated 
  from 
  each 
  other. 
  No 
  teeth 
  were 
  on 
  

   the 
  vomer 
  or 
  palatines. 
  Thus 
  Mullus 
  dubius 
  Temminck 
  and 
  Schlegel 
  

   must 
  definitely 
  be 
  referred 
  to 
  the 
  genus 
  Parupeneus 
  Bleeker 
  (1868, 
  

   p. 
  344). 
  We 
  may 
  never 
  know 
  if 
  more 
  than 
  one 
  species 
  was 
  involved 
  

   in 
  their 
  description. 
  

  

  