b ON THE OCCURRENCE OF THE GENUS BELONOSTOMUS IN THE 



Belonostomiis crassirostris, 0. G. Costa, Pal. Eegno Napoli, Pt. II., p. 33, 

 PI. II., Figs. 1, 2. Belonostomus gracilis, 0. G. Costa, ibid., p. 35, 

 PI. II., Fig. 3. — Upper Cretaceous ; Pietraroja, near Naples, i Imperfect 

 fish.] 



Belonostomus (?) indicus, A. S. Woodward, Rec. Geol. Surv. India, 1890, Vol. 

 XXIII., p. 23. Upper Cretaceous (Lameta beds) ; Dongargdon, Nagpur, 

 India. [Imperfect skull and mandible.] 



Belonostomus lesincinsis, F. Bassani, Denkschr. math.-naturw. CI. k. Akad. 

 Wiss. Wien, 1882, Vol. XLV., p. 198, PI. I., Fig. 10. Upper 

 Cretaceous ; Isle of Lesina, Dalmatia. [Imperfect fish.] 



Of these species B. attenuatus, and B. ? indicus, are not strictly comparable, 

 being known only by parts of the head ; but the absence of ornamentation on these 

 fossils renders most improbable any intimate relationship with the Queensland fish. 

 The feeble character of the ornament of B. ductus, which is known by scales, as 

 well as jaws, also excludes this species from comparison. B. crassirostris, and B. 

 slcinansis are small slender fishes, apparently as much elongated as any of the 

 .Jurassic species. Indeed, the only form which seems to approximate at all closely 

 to the species now under consideration is the large B. comptoni from Brazil. The 

 few proportions that can be compared are very similar, and the superficial 

 ornamentation in adult fishes is equally conspicuous. The principal flank scales of 

 B. comptoni, however, never appear to exhibit the prominent, fine, transverse 

 striations, so characteristic of the hinder margin of all the flank scales of B. sweett, 

 and we thus venture to regard the latter as specifically distinguished by its superficial 

 ornament. 



