66 HIALMAR RENDAHL 
This specimen agrees fairly well with REGAN’s original description and 
figures. The proportions are: Height 2,9 in length without caudal; head 3,37 
in the same; diameter of eye 7,4 in head, 3 in snout; interorbital region 3,6 
in head. Scales in the lateral line 26. The part of the united branchiostegal 
membrane which covers the istmus is light blue. The naked strip from the 
occiput to origin of dorsal fin is very distinct. 
13. Platophrys mancus Brouss. — /Pleuronectes mancus, Broussonet, 
Ichthyologia, 1782, descr. and pl. 3 and 4 (Pacific Ocean). — Platophrys pavo, 
Bleeker, Atl. Ichth., VI, 1866—72, p. 11 and Atl. Tab. CCXXXV, Pleur. IV, 
fig. 2 (Cocos I.) — Rhombotdichthys mancus Ginth., Fische d. Siidsee, VII, 
1909, p. 342 (East Coast of Africa to the Sandwich I.) — Platophrys mancus 
(part.) Jordan and Seale, Bull. U.S. Fish Comm., XXV, 1905, p. 412 (zo 
of SMITH and SWAIN, Proc. U. S. Mus, V, 1882, p. 142 and JORDAN and 
EVERMANN, Bull. U. S. Fish Comm., XXIII, 1903, p. 513). 
One specimen, III mm (s. c.). 
For the identification of this species it is necessary to fix some charac- 
teristics, viz. the nature of the scales (if ctenoid or cycloid), the arrangement 
of the teeth and the degree of development of the nasal apertures. 
BROUSSONET gives no statements about the first point. The teeth are 
described by him as biserially arranged and about the nasal apertures he 
says: »Aperture nasales in latere sinistro oculis quam apici rostri dimidio 
fere propiores, separate, minute, fosterzor paulo major, orbicularis, tubulosa, 
tubulo brevi, azterzor orbicularis, tubulosa, tubulo antice lineari; aperture in 
latere dextro ad basin pinnz dorsalis obsolete.» 
BLEEKER states that the scales are ctenoid on the eye-side and cycloid 
on the blind-side. According to him the teeth are biserial anteriorly and 
uniserial laterally. The nostrils are distinct. 
GUNTHER notices, that the scales are ctenoid on the eye-side (in the 
descr. of the genus Rhomboidichihys) and that the teeth are arranged in a 
single series (Cat. Fish. B. M., IV, 1862, p. 435). 
From the above descriptions, which doubtless all refers to the same 
species, we can characterize the true Platophrys mancus Brouss. with regard 
to the features in question as follows: 1. Scales ctenoid on the eye-side, 
cycloid on the blind-side, 2. Teeth biserially, partly biserially, or uniserially 
arranged, 3. Nasal apertures distinct. 
It is evident, that the Hawaiian samples, described by SMITH and SWAIN 
as well by JORDAN and EVERMANN as P. mancus cannot ‘be identified with 
this species, though very nearly allied to it, the distinguishing features having 
scarcely more than subspecific value. For the Hawaiian form in question I 
propose the new name of Platophrys smithi, differing from P. mancus by 
having the scales cycloid and similar on both sides and the nostrils apparently 
wanting. The teeth are biserially arranged in both jaws. 
The present specimen form Easter Island is not to be separated from 
true P. mancus, with which it also agrees in the features mentioned. 
The following data may be given. Head 3,8 (4,1) in length; height 1,85 
(2,0); D. 99; A. 76. Body broadly elliptical, the profile line of the fore-head, 
