[61] REVIEW OF THE SCLENID.E. 403 



rr. Dorsal rays XI-I, 23 ; snout extremely short and 

 blunt ; second anal spine 2J- in head. Body deep, the 

 back elevated ; anterior profile very steep and some- 

 what convex ; the back a little compressed ; snout 

 low, thick, blunt, and short, 3| in head, its pores 

 and slits conspicuous ; mouth inferior, horizontal, 

 the maxillary reaching middle of eye, 3 in head ; 

 teeth in broad bands, the outer above somewhat en- 

 larged; preopercle with membranaceous serrae ; pre- 

 orbital very broad, as broad as eye; gill-rakers very 

 short and thick, rough, as long as high, 5 or 6 of them 

 developed; eye 5^ in head ; dorsal spines moderate, 

 the longest 2£ in head; second anal spine stout and 

 rather shorter than in related species ; longest soft ray 

 of dorsal 2£ in head ; pectoral shortish, If. Color 

 dusky, the young with two or three vague blackish 

 cross-bands; fins all dusky. Head 3£ in length; 

 depth 2*. D. XI-I, 23 ; A. II, 8. Scales 57. 



Fasciata, 69. 



57. SCIiENA GILLI. 



Corvina gilli Steindachner, Ichthyol. Notizen, vi, 29, 1867 (Rio de la Plata). 



Habitat. — Atlantic coast of South America. 



We know this species from the account given by Dr. Steindachner. 

 It is very close to Sciwna adusta, and may prove to be the same, but 

 the description seems to indicate some differences. 



58. SCLSJNA ADUSTA. 



Scicena {Corvina) adusta Agassiz, Spix Pise. Bras., 126, plate 70, 1829 (Montevideo). 

 Jenyns, Zool. Beagle, Fishes, 42, 1842 (Maldonado ; Montevideo). Giinther, 

 Cat. Fish. Brit. Mus., ii, 289, 1860 (South America). 



Habitat — Coast of Brazil and the West Indies. 



We refer to this species several specimens in the museum at Cam- 

 bridge from Pernambuco, Fonteboa, and Jer6mie, Hayti. Our descrip- 

 tion is drawn chiefly from the largest example (22417, M. C. Z., 7 inches 

 long) collected at Pernambuco by Rev. J. C. Fletcher. These speci- 

 mens agree almost perfectly with the figure of Scicena adusta, given by 

 Agassiz, the only discrepancy being that the second anal spine is a little 

 longer than is shown in the figure. They agree fairly with the descrip- 

 tions of Jenyns and Giinther, except in the number of rays in the soft 

 dorsal. In Agassiz's text, as well as by Jenyns and Giinther, 28 soft 

 rays are enumerated. We count 22 and 23 in different specimens. But 

 in Agassiz's plate but 19 or 20 are shown, and it has occurred to us that 

 the number 28 in the description was a misprint for 18 or for 20, and 

 that possibly this number, 28, may have been copied without verification 

 by Jenyns and by Giinther. If this is not so Agassiz's description 

 must refer to one species, the one examined by Giinther and Jenyns, 

 and his figure to another, the one examined by us. In that case our 

 species must receive a new name. But we regard this as highly im- 

 probable, and refer all these accounts to the synonymy of Sciwna adusta. 



