536 MR. F. DAY ON ANGUILLA KIENERI. [June 6, 
EXPLANATION OF PLATE XXXV. 
Fig.1. Actinometra annulata, showing the disk with its cirri, the mode of 
division of the arms, and one arm along the whole of its uninjured 
extent. 
2. View of part (fig. 1, x) of the dorsal surface of the arm. 
2a. View of dorsal surface-further out (fig. 1, y). 
2b. View of ditto, near the tip: all x 4. 
3. The first pinnule (of 50 joints), x 38. 
3a. A pinnule (of 21 joints) near the middle of the arm, X 6. 
36. A pinnule (of 26 joints) from near the end of the arm, x 6. The 
hooks on the free ends of the later pinnules are shown. 
4. A cirrus, x 6. 
4, On the Identity of Anguilla kieneri, Giinther, with a 
Gadoid Lycodes. By Francis Day, F.Z.S. 
~ [Received May 26, 1882.] 
Inthe‘ Annals and Magazine of Natural History,’ 1874 (xiii. pp. 138, 
139), Dr. Giinther gave some notes upon fishes obtained at consider- 
able depths in the North Atlantic, remarking (p. 139) that “a small 
fourth bottle contains only one specimen; it is labelled, im Mr. 
Couch’s handwriting, ‘ Ophidium—eel-like, deep sea—1869. H.M.S. 
‘Porcupine.’ 180 fathoms.’ This specimen is the young of Angudlla 
kieneri, a species hitherto known from the Mediterranean only.” 
The capture of this so-called “eel” is part of the evidence adduced 
to prove “that fishes hitherto known from more southern latitudes 
occur in the North Atlantic at a moderate depth (of between 80 and 
200 fathoms).”’ 
It was with some interest that I commenced my examination of 
this British fish, which had been placed in such dissimilar positions 
in the ichthyological system, viz. by Couch among the Gadoids, by 
Giinther among the Eels. The first thing that struck my attention 
was that it possessed small and jugular ventral fins and non-imbricate 
scales on the body, and was evidently widely separated from the Eels. 
Spineless, with its vertical fins confluent, a narrow gill-opening, the 
gill-membranes attached to the isthmus, and the upper jaw longer 
than the lower, it was evidently a Gadoid (as characterized in the 
British-Museum Catalogue), but had not the wide gill-openings of 
fishes belonging to the genus Ophidium, in which Couch had located it, 
but the narrow ones of the Lycodontide, and appertained to Lycodes. 
Lycodes isnot a Mediterranean form, but is found in Arctic America 
and Greenland, from which wanderers may extend southwards; for 
this genus has been shown to possess more species than any other 
deep-sea Arctic form at present known. 
Naming such a young example of ZLycodes, or instituting a new 
designation for the reception of this specimen, would be open to 
strong objections’. Soon after it was captured it was evidently 
placed in very strong alcohol, and as a result has stiffened, shrivelled, 
and contorted into an unnatural shape. Irrespective of this, as 
‘ Until it can be ascertained what species it is the young of, the specimen 
may be termed Lycodes kieneri, Giinther. 
