2604 Bulletin 47, United States National Museum. 



Psettichthysmelanostictus 11 + 29= 40 



Paralichthys oblongus 11 -j- 30 = 41 



Paralichthys dentatus 10 + 30 = 40 



Paralichthys lethostigmus 10 + 27 = 37 



Paralichthys albiguttus 10 + 27 = 37 



Paralichthys californicus 10 + 25 = 35 



Xystreurys liolepis 12 -f 25 = 37 



Ancylopsetta quadrocellata 9 -f- 26 = 35 



II. PLEURONECTIN.E. 



Glyptoeephalus zachirus 13 + 52 = 65 



Glyptocephalus cynoglossus [58] 



Microstomus pacificus 12 -f 40 = 52 



Microstomus kitt [13 + 35= 48] 



Parophrys vetulus 11 4-33= 44 



Pleuronectes platessa [14 -f- 29 = 43] 



Isopsetta isolepis 10 -f- 32 = 42 



Lepidopsetta bilineata 11 + 29 = 40 



Limanda limanda [40] 



Liopsetta glacialis 13 + 27 = 40 



Pleuronichthys decarrens 14 -j- 26 = 40 



Pleuronichthys verticalis 13 + 25 = 38 



Flesusglaber 11 + 26= 37 



Flesusflesus [12 + 24= 36] 



Pseudopleuronectes americanus 10 -j- 26 = 36 



Hypsopsetta guttulata 11 + 24 = 35 



Platichthys stellatus 12 + 23= 35 



III. PSETTIN^E. 



Monolene sessilicanda [43] 



Lepidorhombus whiflf-iagonis . . ^ [11 + 30 = 41] 



Citharichthys sordidus 11 + 2 = 40 



Platophrys lunatus 9 + 30 = 39 



Arnoglossus laterna 10 + 28 = 38 



Arnoglossus grohmanni 10 + 28= 38 



Zeugopterus punctatus ". [12 + 25= 37] 



Platophrys ocellatus 10 + 27= 37 



Lophopsetta maculata 11 + 25 = 36 



Bothus rhombus 12 + 24 = 36 



Syacium papillosum 11 + 25 = 36 



Citharichthys arctifrons 10 + 26 = 36 



Syacium micrurum 10 + 25 = 35 



Phrynorhombus regius 10 + 25 = 35 



Citharichthys spilopterus 10 + 24= 34 



Citharichthys macrops 10 + 24 = 34 



Etropus microstomus 10 + 24= 34 



Etropus crossotus ^ 10 + 24= 34 



Azevia panamensis 33 



Psetta maxima 12 + 19= 31 



The subdivision of the flounders into genera leaves room for considerable 

 variety of opinion. Most of the species are well denned and easily recog- 

 nized, but they do not fall readily into generic groups unless we regard 

 almost every well-marked species as the type of a distinct genus. A natu- 

 ral result of an attempt at sharply denning the genera is to reach what 

 seems an extreme degree of generic subdivision. On the other hand, at- 

 tempts to unite these smaller groups to form larger ones often leave these 

 larger ones at once unnatural and ill-defined. 



