Fishes taken at Madeira, 279 



the tip of the snout. There is no trace of ventrals. The vent 

 is about 84 inches distant from the snout ; and behind it begins 

 a low anal, which, though it may be traced for a considerable 

 distance, stops, like the dorsal, short of the end of the tail. 



The hinder part of the body tapers off gradually ; and the fin- 

 less tail is characterized by extreme tenuity, being reduced to 

 the thinness of a thread. Two bluish-white, parallel, closely 

 approximated lines begin at the distance of rather more than an 

 inch from the tip of the snout, and are traceable for a consider- 

 able space along the back, one at each side of the dorsal fin. 

 Dr. Mitchill speaks not only of a whitish line extending on each 

 side of the dorsal fin of his fish, but of a similar stripe at each 

 side of the anal fin. 



No lateral line is visible. The vertebrse are without ribs, and 

 all the bones are weak. 



And now as to the relationship of these three fishes. Whilst 

 it is pretty certain that all three are members of the same genus, 

 and whilst there is scarcely ground for holding that Dr. Har- 

 wood's fish and the Madeiran fish are specifically distinct (for 

 their differences may be due only to their different ages), yet 

 there is one part of Dr. MitchilPs description which makes it 

 difficult to suppose that his fish was identical in species with 

 mine. He says that it had filiform processes or excrescences 

 about an inch in length, and about fifty in number, depending 

 on each side of the back, all the way from the head to the tail. 

 In my fish there is no trace of such processes. Hence I venture 

 to conclude that if Dr. MitchilFs fish retains the name of Sacco- 

 pharynx flageUum, Dr. Harwood's and mine ought to be desig- 

 nated Saccopharynos ampidlaceus, 



I will only remark that Dr. Mitchill proposed the name 

 Saccopharynx in substitution for Shaw's Stylephorus, supposing 

 the two fishes thus designated to belong to the same genus. 

 But modern ichthyologists cannot admit this to be the case ; for 

 (to say nothing of other points) the structure of the mouth is 

 totally different, as may be at once seen by an inspection of 

 Shaw's unique specimen, now preserved in the Museum of the 

 College of Surgeons. 



Suborder Abdominales. 



Fam. ScopelidsB. 



Gonostoma denudata, Buon. Faun, Ital. (with a fig.), 



Gasteropelecus acanthurus, Cocco. 



The genus Gonostoma was indicated by Bafincsque, and defined 



by Buonaparte, as having an elongated body entirely covered 



with large caducous uniform scales ; uniscrial teeth in both jaws; 



pectoral fins inserted low down ; the first dorsal fin rather far 



