1890.] DEEP-SEA FISH FROM THE CAPE. 245 



about ten weeks ago was washed up on the shore of Kalk Bay (which 

 is situated in False Bay). Unfortunately it was much injured and 

 broken by people before it was put into spirits. Mr. Percy Nightin- 

 gale, who was on a visit to the Bay, obtained possession of it and very 

 kindly brought it to me. I am unable to identify it by any books. 

 It is unknown at the South-African Museum, and, so far as I have 

 been able to ascertain, no one has seen an example of it before at the 

 Cape. The fishermen at Kalk Bay do not recognize it. If new 

 to Dr. Giinther, and he wishes to see it, I would gladly send it to 

 him to be at his disposal." 



The sketch which accompanied this letter was sufficiently exact 

 to enable me to recognize in the specimen a fish allied to Lophotes, 

 in spite of the extraordinary forward prolongation of the parietal 

 crest, which renders the appearance of the head still more bizarre 

 than in the typical species of the genus. But as it seemed desirable 

 to ascertain also other points of its organization which could not be 

 shown in the sketch, and also to give a detailed description and figure 

 of so extraordinary a fish, I sent a request to Mr. Fisk to let me 

 have the specimen for the British Museum, with which he most 

 kindly complied in due course. 



In the typical Lophotes the crest is elevated above the head, and 

 not pushed forwards beyond the snout ; it is also covered with soft 

 integuments and a muscular layer. In the new species the crest 

 is covered with a thin film of epidermis, leaving the sculpture 

 of the bone exposed. This is merely a difference of form, and can- 

 not, by itself, constitute a generic distinction, reminding us of similar 

 modifications of the cranial excrescences in Chameleons. In the 

 typical Lophotes a minute aud rudimentary ventral fin, consisting of 

 several rays \ but evidently fuuctionless, is present; in the new 

 species this rudimentary organ has entirely disappeared — a difference 

 which, in my opinion, is equally unfit for generic distinction. On 

 the other hand, it is very unfortunate that the caudal extremity has 

 been mutilated (apparently during life) in the Cape specimen, so 

 that we cannot be certain whether it possessed a separate small anal 

 and caudal fin like the type, or whether the caudal extremity was 

 tapering and without those appendages — a structure well compatible 

 with the greatly elongate form of the fish. 



The few specimens of Lophotes which have fallen into the hands 

 of naturalists were obtained in the Mediterranean, off Madeira, and 

 in the Japanese Sea ; and referred to three species — Lophotes cepedia- 

 nus, Lophotes capellei (Schleg.), and Lophotes cristatus, the latter 

 having been described in the Proceedings of this Society by Mr. 

 Johnson (1863) ; possibly all three are of the same species. A very 

 small fish believed to be the young of Lophotes is described and 

 figured in the Report on the Pelagic Fishes of the 'Challenger' 

 Expedition. 



The fishes of this genus have been long regarded as bathybial 

 forms, although, probably, not extending to the great depths inhabited 



^ In tbe specimens in the British Museum it is much smaller thau it is 

 represented in Ouvier and Valeucieuues's figure. 



