200 TREUBIA VOL. II, 2—4. 
abnormally shaped specimen corresponds entirely with the properly shaped 
bandeng as regards the number of transversal rows of scales, respectively the 
number of pierced scales along the lateral line !). 
Concerning this number BLEEKER (*) says: “Squamis 75 ad 80 in serie 
longitudinali basin pinnae caudalis inter et angulum aperturae branchialis 
superiorem”. WEBER and DE BEAUFORT (%) who in their Introduction say 
(p. XII): “In counting the scales, under “L.1.” is given the number of 
scales with or without sensory organs between the head and the caudal 
fin or in most cases between that fin and the upper corner of the opercle”, 
state for the bandeng: “L.l. 75—80”. Possibly this is derived from 
BLEEKER (*). In DAY () I found “L.1. 80—90”; in GUNTHER (5) “L: lat. 
85—88”. GÜNTHER (°) in Vol. I, says concerning the method of counting 
the scales: “L. lat. gives the number of pierced scales constituting the lateral 
“line from the humeral arch to the root of the caudal fin, i.e. the number 
“of transverse series of scales covering the body between the parts men- 
“tioned. The scales of the lateral line are often smaller or larger, or irre- 
“oular, and not congruent with the transverse series; in these cases I have 
“counted the transverse series’. 
These figures as given by BLEEKER (*) and WEBER and DE BEAUFORT (%) 
on one hand, not tallying with those of GUNTHER (©) and DAY (7) on the other 
hand, I counted the scales situated “in serie longitudinali” of some ten 
bandeng. In doing this I counted both the number of scales of the lateral 
line itself, and above the lateral line the number of transverse series of 
scales, comprised between the upper corner of the opercular aperture and 
the basis of the caudal fin. In the same individual I mostly counted about 
2 scales less for the lateral line itself than for the number of transverse 
series of scales on the same side of the body. All the countings however 
yield results between 83 and 90. It is remarkable that the number of 90 
scales happened to come from one side of the body of the abnormally 
shaped individual, distinguished by its shortening in the longitudinal direction. 
In morphological respect the bandeng presents a number of characte- 
ristics. The supraoccipital touches the frontals underneath the parietals. 
From the skull are absent the fossae temporalis and praeepiotica (which 
are characteristic of the (other) Clupeidae), the fenestra auditoria (which is 
present in most (other) Clupeidae) and the bullae proötica and pterotica. 
The accessory branchial organ with the so-called gill-helix (cf. HYRTL (?)) 
has already been mentioned above. The gill-membranes are entirely united 
below. Concerning all these points and likewise regarding the peculiarities 
of the scales, the eyes, the air-bladder, the very few (four) radii branchiostegi 
etc. the reader is referred to the anatomical and the comparative anatomical 
literature on the subject. 
1) Mr. DAvip G. STEAD F. L. S. (Lond.), Fisheries Enquiry Commissioner to the 
Government of New South Wales who saw the above mentioned abnormally shaped 
bandeng at my laboratory told me that in Australia be also had met with such abnor- 
mally shaped individuals of Chanos chanos (FORSK.). 
