NO. 1266. LABROID FISHES OF JAPAN— JORDAN AND SNYDER. 
607 
EuscMsiodus Gill, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1862, p. 145 (declivifrons) . 
Hemiglyphidodon Bleeker, Holl. Maatsch. Wetens., 1877, p. 91 {plagiometopon) 
(lower pharyngeals quadrate). 
Amblyglyphidodon Bleeker, Holl. Maatsch. Wetens., 1877, p. 92 {aareus) (scales 
above lateral lines in 1 or 2 rows) . 
Glyphidodon corrected spelling. 
Body deep, compressed, covered with large ctenoid scales; snout 
without scales; preopercle and preorbital entire, the lower limb of 
preopercle scaleless; 3 to 4 rows of scales between lateral line and 
dorsal; teeth compressed, fixed, more or less distinctly emarginate, in 
one series in each jaw, those below occupying most of the free edge of 
the jaw; jaws subequal. Dorsal usually with 13 spines, the last 
slightly shorter than the median ones; branchiostegals 5 or 6; pyloric 
works of the last century. An inspection of the work makes it likely that con- 
siderable confusion occurred in the arrangement of his notes for publication. It 
is not likely that he intended to have Abudefduf used as a generic name. It was 
apparently an Arabic word placed in his notes as a stop-gap until a classic word 
should be chosen, as was done in the case of Accmthurus. If the case of Abudefduf 
stood alone, we might feel compelled to use the name as that of a modern genus. 
But there are a number of similar cases in Forskal's work, among which it will be 
difficult to draw the line. For example, he states that the very vast genus Scixna will 
also admit of convenient subdivision, and a number of groups under Arabic names 
are more or less fully defined, the type species in each case being evident. Some of 
these, as Ncvpia and Hand, are plainly not available, but for others, as Djabub and 
Abudefduf, something of an argument can be made. In our judgment, all these 
group names may be rejected as of merely vernacular, not binomial, character. In 
almost every case the name of Forskal (1775) has priority over its modern equivalent. 
The names concerned are the following: 
Forskal's group name. 
Page. 
Type. 
Equivalent. 
Naqua 
Louti 
Daba 
Abudjubbf . 
Harid 
Abuhamrur 
Hobar 
Farer 
Ghanan 
Djabub 
Gaterin 
Schoiir 
Tahhmel ... 
Abudefduf . 
XVII 
44 
44 
44 
44 
44 
44 
44 
44 
44 
45 
45 
45 
59 
gibba? 
louti 
areolatus . . . 
lunulatus. . . 
harid 
hamrur 
fulviflamma 
sammara . . . 
ghanam 
yarbua 
gaterina 
mahsena ... 
tahmel 
sordidus 
Genyoroge. 
Variola. 
Epinephelus. 
Cheilinus. 
Scarus. 
Pri acanthus. 
Lutianus. 
Holocentrus. 
Scolopsis. 
Therapon. 
Pleotorhynchus. 
Lethrinus. 
Opisthistius. 
Glyphisodon. 
Of these names, Naqua is especially dubious, as Forskal was uncertain as to its 
application. Louti, Daba, and Abndjubbe may be rejected on account of the peculiar 
form in which they are proposed, "Perca dentibus Louti," "perches having the 
teeth of Perca loud,'' being the designation of the subgeneric group. Harid is equiv- 
alent to the earlier Scarus. Ghanan, Schour, and Tahhmel have no definition except 
that implied in the name, being the vernacular appellation of species defined fur- 
ther on. Abuhamrur, Hobar, Farer, Djabid), and Gaterin stand on a basis similar to 
that of Abudefduf. There is no injustice done in regarding all of these as of vernac- 
ular character, and in rejecting them all, as we reject "Les Spheroide.'^" and "Les 
Pristipomes^' of French authors, when not placed in classical form or in binomial 
position. 
