750 ON ARNOGLOSSUS LOPHOTES AND A. GROHMANNI. [DcC. 19, 



in the Lemou Sole — clearly indicating that such a variation in number 

 is well within such as is normally perceived in European species 

 which visit the British coast. This deviation in the number of rays 

 is consequently an insufficient reason for constituting A. lophotes a 

 species ; and it must be regarded as a synonym of A. grohnanni, 

 which can now be recorded among the wanderers to our shores. 



I now come to the consideration of the statement that this Cardiff 

 example " establishes the validity of Dr. Giinther's classification of 

 this fish {Lophotes artiogJossus) as a distinct British species." 



I have only seen Dr. Giinther's remarks that "it is not at all im- 

 probable that these three specimens (skins from Yarrell's collection) 

 really are British" (Cat. iv. p. 418); but in his 'Introduction to 

 the Study of Fish,' p. 556, 1880, he merely places one species of this 

 genus, Arnofflossus laterna, as extending to the south coast of 

 England. 



After Dr. Giinther had recorded the skins as forming a distinct 

 species. Couch was, I believe, the first and the last author who 

 admitted Arnoglossus lophotes, Giinther, to be a British form. He 

 gives as his reason that " these same examples [the three skins] were 

 examined by myself at Mr. Yarrell's house, at which time I made a 

 note of its being that gentleman's opinion that they formed varieties 

 or monstrosities of the Megrim or Scaldfish (Arnoglossus laterna) ; 

 but that they appeared to me to differ considerably from other 

 examples of the last named" &c. (Fish Brit. Isles, iii. p. 1/9). He 

 says that he "judged them to be a species new to Britain; but from 

 whence they were procured did not appear." Couch considered 

 that he had seen an example of the same species among a collection 

 made by Lieutenant Spence, of the Royal Navy, at Plymouth ; 

 and it was on this supposition that he introduced it into his work. 



The only doubt is, whence Yarrell's skins which formed the type of 

 Arnoglossus lophotes were derived. In the last edition of his work, 

 vol. i. p. 645, he records the possession of a Mediterranean specimen of 

 the Megrim, Arnoglossus laterna, and tells us that the lateral line at 

 its commencement rises higher than in his figure of the British Me- 

 grim. I think that this will account for one example of the three skins 

 in the national collection, which has the curved portion of the lateral 

 line abnormally elevated, as shown in Couch's figure. But as this 

 specimen is one of three of certainly the same species, all forming 

 types of A. lophotes, Giinther, I think we are justified in concluding 

 that all may be Mediterranean specimens, especially as we have no 

 evidence whatever of their being British. This would lead to the 

 inference tliat they would probably be Mediterranean specimens ; and 

 certainly the example obtained at Cardiff gives us every reason to 

 suppose that it is^. grohmanni, identical with the types of J4. lophotes, 

 Giinther. 



The figure (Plate LIII.) is taken (natural size) from the example 

 of this fish obtained by Prof. Moseley in the British Channel, and 

 now in the British Museum. It therefore represents an unquestion- 

 ably British specimen of Arnoglossus grohmanni. 



