66 HIALMAR RENDAHL 



This specimen agrees fairly well with Regan's original description and 

 figures. The proportions are: Height 2,9 in length without caudal; head 3,37 

 in the same; diameter of eye 7,4 in head, 3 in snout; interorbital region 3,6 

 in head. Scales in the lateral line 26. The part of the united branchiostegal 

 membrane which covers the istmus is light blue. The naked strip from the 

 occiput to origin of dorsal fin is very distinct. 



13. Platophrys mancus Brouss. — Pleuronectes mancus, Broussonet, 

 Ichthyologia, 1782, descr. and pi. 3 and 4 (Pacific Ocean). — Platophrys pavo, 

 Bleeker, Atl. Ichth., VI, 1866—72, p. 11 and Atl. Tab. CCXXXV, Pleur. IV, 

 fig. 2 (Cocos I.) — Rhomboidichthys mancus Giinth., Fische d. Siidsee, VIII, 

 1909, p. 342 (East Coast of Africa to the Sandwich I.) — Platophrys mancus 

 (part.) Jordan and Seale, Bull. U. S. Fish Comm., XXV, 1905, p. 412 {fwt 

 of Smith and Swain, Proc. U. S, Mus, V, 1882, p. 142 and Jordan and 

 EvERMANN, Bull. U. S. Fish Comm., XXIII, 1903, p. 513). 



One specimen, iii mm (s. c). 



For the identification of this species it is necessary to fix some charac- 

 teristics, viz. the nature of the scales (if ctenoid or cycloid), the arrangement 

 of the teeth and the degree of development of the nasal apertures. 



Broussonet gives no statements about the first point. The teeth are 

 described by him as biserially arranged and about the nasal apertures he 

 says: »Aperturae nasales in latere sinistro oculis quam apici rostri dimidio 

 fere propiores, separatae, minutae, posterior paulo major, orbicularis, tubulosa, 

 tubulo brevi, anterior orbicularis, tubulosa, tubulo antice lineari; aperturae in 

 latere dextro ad basin pinnae dorsalis obsoletae.» 



Bleeker states that the scales are ctenoid on the eye-side and cycloid 

 on the blind-side. According to him the teeth are biserial anteriorly and 

 uniserial laterally. The nostrils are distinct. 



GUNTHER notices, that the scales are ctenoid on the eye-side (in the 

 descr. of the genus Rhomboidichthys') and that the teeth are arranged in a 

 single series (Cat. Fish. B. M., IV, 1862, p. 435). 



From the above descriptions, which doubtless all refers to the same 

 species, we can characterize the true Platophrys mancus Brouss. with regard 

 to the features in question as follows: i. Scales ctenoid on the eye-side, 

 cycloid on the blind-side, 2. Teeth biserially, partly biserially, or uniserially 

 arranged, 3. Nasal apertures distinct. 



It is evident, that the Hawaiian samples, described by Smith and SwAiN 

 as well by JORDAN and Evermann as P. mancus cannot be identified with 

 this species, though very nearly allied to it, the distinguishing features having 

 scarcely more than subspecific value. For the Hawaiian form in question I 

 propose the new name of Platophrys smithi^ differing from P. mancus by 

 having the scales cycloid and similar on both sides and the nostrils apparently 

 wanting. The teeth are biserially arranged in both jaws. 



The present specimen form Easter Island is not to be separated from 

 true P. mancus, with which it also agrees in the features mentioned. 



The following data may be given. Head 3,8 (4,1) in length; height 1,85 

 (2,0); D. 99; A. yG. Body broadly elliptical, the profile line of the fore-head, 



