250 WAITE 
Zealand by Hutton,°! who writes: ‘‘Distinguished by having a 
small spine before each orbit,’’ which indeed is the only expressed 
difference rendered in Giinther’s work. I have compared the 
specimens used by Hutton with the fine series now at my com- 
mand, and I find them to be identical. It may be noted that 
small examples possess the preorbital spines, whereas larger 
ones do not, the spines are therefore characteristic of immaturity. 
I am not in a position to decide if OC. leucopaecilus is distinct 
from C. peruvianus; if not the latter name should be employed. 
It is certain, however, that we know but one species from New 
~ Zealand. 
The Pigfish was found to be feeding largely upon a minute 
hermit crab, which Dr. Chilton identifies as Eupagurus stewarti 
Filhol; the crustacean was not extracted by the fish, but the 
shell of the molluse or the small mass of calcareous polyzoon in 
which the crab resided was swallowed whole, and the crustacean 
was doubtless dissolved out by the juices of the fish’s stomach. 
I may here refer to another extremely doubtful New Zealand 
member of the family. Perca cottoides Linn. (= Cottapistus 
cottoides) was entered as a member of our fauna on the 
evidence of a specimen in the Haslar collection received at the 
British Museum, but in giving the range of the genus 
(Prosopodasys) Gunther placed New Zealand within brackets 
evidently to express doubt. The species, however, found a place 
in the New Zealand lists, but in 1890, Hutton®? marked the entry 
with a ?, and, in a working copy which he used, I find the species 
scored out and Agriopus peruvianus substituted. As far as I 
am aware, no further specimen has been identified from New 
Zealand, and I think that the species may be placed with those 
which remain to be rediscovered. 
Family COTTIDA. 
NEOPHRYNICHTHYS Giinther, 1876. 
NEOPHRYNICHTHYS LATUS Hutton. 
TOADFISH. 
Psychrolutes latus Hutton, T.N.Z.1I. viii., 1876, p. 214. 
Neophrynichthys latus Giinther, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (4) xvii, 
1876, -p. 396, (not P.Z:8. 1881, p. 20) plea.) Gulee US. er 
Mus. xi., 1888, p. 327, pl. xii. 
Stations 5, 28, 31, 32, 40, 43, 44. 50. 
This appears to be a southern species, not being taken north- 
ward of Pegasus Bay, though obtained from our most southerly 
(51) Hutton, T.N.Z.1. xxviii. 1896, p. 314. 
(52) id., ib. xxii. 1890, p. 277. 
