24 



PKOCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL, MUSEUM 



VOL. 76 



(p. 89), in the previously rendered key. These spots are, however, 

 both so minute that they will probably not be recognizable in small 

 or even moderate sized specimens, the type specimen being very 

 large, 120 mm. without caudal fin. This particularly holds good of 

 the photophore on the shoulder. The species will therefore prob- 

 ably more often be looked for in the said division <i, in which it has 

 previously been placed, or even in division a (loc. cit., p. 83). In 

 division c, L. HtteH will be easily recognizable by the low position of 

 its VLO, which is only about midway between the lateral line and 

 the base of ventral fin, while it is situated immediately below the lat- 

 eral line in the three other species of the same division (Z. punctatis- 

 simus, L. jordani^ and L. stiTbms). In division, a-, the species will 

 seem very close to L. inacdondldi^ as described on the preceding 

 pages, being differentiable, however, by the higher position of its 

 PLO^ which is much closer to the lateral line than to the base of 

 pectoral fin, instead of midway between as in L. macdonaldi, and 



FiGDKB 11. LAMPANYCTDS REGALIS GILBERT 



also by the slightly lower position of its VLO. The differentiation 

 of L. ritteri in division d has been treated in the previously rendered 

 key. 



Known only from the coast of California. 



LAMPANYCTUS REGALIS Gilbert, 1892 



Myctophum regale Gilbert, 1892. 

 Nannohrachium regale Jordan and Evebmann, 1896. 

 Myctophum {Lampanyctus) regale Brauee, 1906. 

 Lampanyctus regalis Gilbert, 1915; Pabr, 1928. 



Material investigated. Type specimen No. 44289, U.S.N.M. Coast 

 of California, 



The original diagnosis (Gilbert, 1892, p. 7) has been supplemented 

 by a detailed, and in general very accurate description rendered by 

 Gilbert, 1915 (p. 316), but no illustration has been previously 

 published. 



As in the case of L. ritteri, the " somewhat larger luminous body 

 ... on lower posterior portion of cheeks" is so minute that there 

 is a considerable probability of its being unrecognizable in small 



