LYCODIX.K. 



considers that his specimen (which I have examined in detail p. 28— 30) fills up the gap between the 

 two forms in this regard Lonnberg might even have concluded this from the large series of 

 measurements of L.esmarkii, which Col let t published in 1884. Putting these into percentages, they 

 show that the length of the head in L. esmarkii varies from 19,2—24% of the total length; as the 

 relation in /.. vahlii according to numerous measurements by myself, is 18,8 — 23,8 %, no specific difference 

 consequently can be founded on this. Nor does the second important proportion give any basis for a 

 distinction; the distance between the snout and the anus for example is in L.esmarkii 38—42,9",,, 

 in L. vahlii 36,5— 42,3 " ,,')• 



When Collett further asserts that the shortness of the row of teeth on the palatal bones 

 distinguishes /.. esmarkii from L. vahlii ', where this row is as a rule longer than that on the inter- 

 maxillary, seldom if ever shorter, he has allowed himself to be misled by Liitken's erroneous observa- 

 tions; as we have seen (p. 18 & p. 20) the palatal row of teeth in the adult males of L. vahlii is 

 always shorter than that on the intermaxillary. This character on whose uncertainty Prof. Smitt 

 has alreadv remarked, must therefore also fall to the ground. 



Lastly, Li") nu berg remarks that little reliance can be placed on the character, that L. vahlii 

 has only one, L.esmarkii two lateral lines, since Collett has seen traces of a mediolateral lateral line 

 in one of the type-specimens of L. vahlii, and conversely the mediolateral line in L. esmarkii is often 

 defaced. This must however be corrected, as L. vahlii never occurs with a mediolateral lateral 

 line; this specimen, on which Collett has based his statement and which is in reality one of 

 Reinhardt's type-specimens, is in no way L. vahlii but belongs to the following species which is 

 provided with two lateral lines (see more in detail p. 36). 



If now, one wishes to settle the independence of L.esmarkii - just as it has been done above, 

 by consideration of the identical and exclusion of the unrelated elements --as against L. vahlii, one 

 must first and foremost lay stress on the following characters: (1) want of pyloric appendages; (2) the 

 larger number of rays in the pectorals; (3) the characteristic colouration; (4) the double (ventral and 

 mediolateral l lateral line. 



They differ from one another also in biological relations; L. esmarkii lives on the whole at 

 greater depths than L. vahlii, and feeds chiefly on echinoderms whilst L. vahlii feeds on Crustacea 

 and Mollusca. 



Distribution. 



According to Collett, L. esmarkii must be considered a stationary and scarcely a rare 

 fish on the coasts of Finmark; almost all the specimens examined hitherto have been caught in the 

 Varanger Fjord on lines, and at the depth of 150—200 fathoms. Between Norway and Bear 

 Island (73 3' XT. r.8 30' E.L.), where the depth was 410 m. and bottom-temperature -- 2 : C. the 

 Nathorst Expedition caught the young specimen (192 mm.) referred to in detail above (p. 28) on the 

 )th of September 1898. 



It was taken by the Norwegian Fisheries steamer Michael Sars in the summer of 1902 at 



the following places: Slope between Norway and Shetland (62 c 30' NX. 1° 56' EX.), depth 



■) The apparently smaller variation in L.esmarkii arises from the fact that the numbers are based on measurements 

 of only 5 specimens and of these but one only was a young individual. (Appendix: in one of the specimens obtained later 

 Michael Sirs 1902] the distance between the snout and the anus amounts to only 37,5 °/ of the total length). 



