54 HIALMAR RENDAHL 
head; interorbital space 0,9 length of eye. Fin formula: D. 5/61, A. 57, P. 
24, V. 9. 
STEINDACHNER first identified the Lofe//a from Juan Fernandez as ZL. 
rhacinus Forst.; subsequently he »nach der Zahl der Ventralstrahlen» referred 
it to L. physis Schleg., previously known from Japan. I think, however, that 
it is distinct from both these species. Unfortunately I have no material of the 
two mentioned species for comparison and must base my opinion only upon 
the rather short descriptions in the literature. 
From L. physis the proposed new species may be distinguished by its 
broader interorbital region. The width of the latter in Z. physzs is less than 
the diameter of the eye. STEINDACHNER and DODERLEIN, who redescribed 
the species (Denk. Akad. Wiss. Wien. LIII, 1887), based their statements on 
seven samples, the length of which they do not mention. One of the speci- 
mens is, however, stated to be 21 7/3 cm. The proportion zzéerorbital space : eye 
is of course a characteristic, that varies with the size of the specimen. In 
my specimen, which is not more than 15 '/2 cm., the width of the interorbital 
space exceeds, however, the diameter of the eye, whereas it in the smaller 
sample, II */10 cm., is slightly smaller than the eye. Further, in L. fernande- 
ziana there is no row of teeth behind the large conical teeth in the mandible, 
while there occur an outer row of very small teeth labially of the great ones. 
The evidently closely allied Z. rhacimus Forst. from New Zealand has 
only six rays in the ventral fin, in which respect it agress with the related 
L. marginata Macleay (Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. Wales, VI, 1881, p. 114. No¢ 
of GUNTHER 1878, cfr. below.) from South Australia, and with ZL. dacchus 
Forst. from the New Zealand coasts as well. The number of rays in the dor- 
sal and the anal fins is perhaps also smaller in the new species, FORSTER and 
HuTTON state for L. rhacinus the fin formula D. 5/68, A. 62, whereas the 
same in L. fernandesiana (when STEINDACHNER’s statements are added) is 
D. 5/58—65, A. 55—60. 
In the Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., vol. I, 1878, p. 9g GUNTHER described 
a Lotella from the Pacific Coast of south-western South America, L. marginata 
(see also Chall. Rep., Zool. XXII, p. 86). This species has the fin-formula 
D. 7—8/65, A. 62, V. 5 and thus is more different from L. fernandezzana than 
the species mentioned above. 
As the specific name marginata already was given to a species of the 
genus Lotella by GUNTHER 1878 (I. c.), MACLEAY’s name marginata of 1881 
(l. c.) cannot be accepted. As apparently it has not been changed later, I 
propose the new name Lofella macleayz for L. marginata Macleay 1881 (as 
described in Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. Wales, VI, 1881, p. 114 on specimen from 
Port Jackson, Australia). 
3. Trachichthys fernandezianus Giinth., Rep. Chall. Exp., Zool., vol. 
XXII, 1887, p. 23 (Juan Fernandez). 
One specimen, 89 mm. (s. c.). Near the shore in a depth of 20 m.; 
Masatierra 19/3 1917. 
The present sample agrees entirely with STEINDACHNER thorough de- 
scription. 
fe te 
