198 Mr. C. T. Regan on the 



caudal, this latter always with a large brown spot at the base 

 of each lobe. 



Total length W milliin. 



Chinese Seas, South Siias, coasts of x^ustralia. 



Lirus ovalis. 



Centrolophm oralis, Cuv. & Yal. ix. p. 346 (1833). 

 Centrolophns crasms, Cuv. & Val. t. c. p. 348. 

 iMupus impcrialis, Cocco. 

 Leirus Bennettii, Lowe, Traus. Canib. Phil. Soc. vi. 1834, p. 199, 



tab. V. 

 Crius Bennettii, Valenc. in Webb & Berthel. Hist. Nat. I. Canar., 



Poiss. ii. pt. 2, p. 43 (1836^4). 

 Crius Berthehtii, Valenc. I. c. p. 45, pi. ix. 

 Pompiliis Bemiettii, Lowe, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1839, p. 82. 

 Schedophilus Berthehtii, Giinther, Cat. ii. p. 412 (1860). 

 Cefitrolophus 2>orosissimus, Caiiestr. Mem. Ace. Tor. xxi. 1864, p. 3G5, 



pi. ii. 

 Schedophilus Botteri (Heck.), Steind. SB. Ak. Wien, ivii. 1868, 



p. 379. 



It has twice happened that the same author has described a 

 young and an adult example of this species as two different 

 species, Valenciennes describing a specimen 170 millira. long 

 as Crius Berthelotii and one of 600 millim. as Crius Bennettii, 

 and Canestrini one of about 250 millim, as Centrolophus poro- 

 sissimus and one of 440 millira. as Centrolophus crassus. 

 Even allowing for the changes which take place during 

 growth, some of the measurements given as to the height of 

 the dorsal fin and the size of the eye are outside the limit for 

 the species; this is probably due to different methods of 

 measurement, and when the height of the dorsal fin is stated 

 as ^ the depth of body, it was probably measured with the 

 fin laid back and not extended, or else from the upper edge of 

 the scaly sheath, this latter being included in the body depth; 

 which would be a very natural error in large specimens, in 

 which it is difficult to find the bases of the fin-rays. The 

 eye in this species and throughout the family has a prominent 

 circular lid, which extends to the outer margin of the iris, and 

 it often happens in preserved specimens that this lid is torn 

 or shrunk, thus apparently enlarging the size of the eye. 



I append in tabular form the measurements of the specimens 

 in the British Museum Collection and those described by 

 various authors. Tiie numbers in the various columns give 

 in millimetres : — A, total length with caudal, and B, without 

 caudal ; C, depth of body ; i), length of head, and E, of 

 snout; F, eye-diameter ; G, longest dorsal ray ; H, length of 

 pectoral, ai:d K, of ventral ; L, M, and N give the number of 

 rays in the dorsal and anal fins and the number of scales. 



