22 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol.76 



vated. 2 Pol^ the upper close to the lateral line and well behind 

 the vertical from the lower FoZ, which is again well behind, but 

 not so very much higher than, the last antero-anal organ (see fig- 

 ure). 7 postero-anals, entirely behind the base of anal fin and con- 

 fluent with the praecaudals, which have been counted as four. Ulti- 

 mate Ptc immediately below the end of the lateral line, vertically 

 above or even very slightly in advance of the penultimate Pro. 

 Interspace between ultimate and penultimate Pro greatly increased. 



Supracaudal luminuos plates occupy only about one-third of the 

 distance between adipose and caudal fins, while the infracaudal 

 plates extend through almost the entire length of the caudal pedun- 

 cle. The numbers of the luminous scales can not be counted. 



But for the type specimen there is no reliable record of the species. 



LAMPANYCTUS OMOSTIGMA Gilbert. 1908 



Lampanyctus amostigma Gilbert, 1908; Jordan and Jordan, 1922; Parb, 

 1928, Fowler, 1928 (?). 



Material investigated. Type specimen No. 75769, U.S.N.M. 

 From the Marquesas Island. 



Larnifanyctus omostigma has been very adequately and accurately 

 described and figured by Gilbert, 1908 (p. 232 and pi. 5). 



Correctly defined in the previously rendered key. 



LAMPANYCTUS REINHARDTI Jordan, 1922 



Nyctimaster reinhardti Jordan, 1922; Jordan and Jordan, 1922. 

 Lampanyctus omostigma (part ?), Fowler, 1928. 



Material investigated. Type lot No. 84095, U.S.N.M. (2 specimens 

 from the coast of Hawaii). 



This purely nominal species is entirely without taxonomic value, 

 being quite unidentifiable either from the types or from the original 

 description, on account of the dried out condition of the specimens 

 on which it has been based, and the consequent inadequacy of its di- 

 agnosis. It may be taken for granted from their general appear- 

 ance that the type specimens represent some species of the genus 

 Lampanyctus, but nothing is known or perceptible of the numbers 

 and arrangement of their photophores. 



Fowler, 1928 (p. 69), provisionally identifies L. reinhardti with 

 L. omostigma. This view on the taxonomic status of the former 

 nominal species is quite probably correct, but can neither be proved 

 nor disproved on the basis of the above discussed type specimens; 

 and, as the same will also hold good of any other theory that might 

 be advanced, the author has deemed it advisable not to accept or 

 attempt any identification at all. 



