PankEn.— On a Specimen of the Great Ribbon Fish. 291 
question either gives the result of the examination of several specimens, or 
is restored more or less conjecturally. It would be interesting to know the 
precise history of the figure, but I have, unfortunately, no means of getting 
at it. 
In some species of Regalecus a caudal fin is present. Günther states that 
in R. russellii the caudal rays are distinct. In R. glesne he says, “it appears 
very doubtful whether the dorsal fin really was continuous with a caudal.” 
A distinct caudal fin continuous with the dorsalis, however, shown in the 
Schneider-Bloch figure of that species (pl. xxiv, fig. 9). The ordinary 
forked homocercal tail in Bloch’s figure of Gymnetrus hawkinsii is certainly 
mythical. ^ Cuvier's figure of R. gladius shows a delicate caudal fin 
(pl. xxiv, fig. 7), eonsisting of seven very fine rays standing out from the 
slightly enlarged extremity of the tail, and unconnected by any membrane. 
Of this fin Günther makes no mention in his systematie description of the 
species. In R. banksii and R. pacificus the tail ends in a bluntly-pointed 
extremity quite devoid of fin rays. In both there is a slight emargination 
on the ventral side, a short distance from the end. In all these respeets 
the Moeraki specimen agrees exactly with the two last-named species. 
Liitken is of opinion that this absence of a caudal fin is due to ‘‘ the peculiar 
mutilation or curtailment which the caudal extremity always seems to suffer . 
. to a greater or less extent in these fish." I fail to see any evidence of such 
mutilation in my specimen. 
The number of rays in the pectoral fin is tolerably constant in the dif- 
ferent species, the range being from 11 (R. banksii and R. russellii) to 14 (R. 
gladius and R. glesne): in my specimen there are 13 pectoral rays. 
In the present specimen the pectoral fin is remarkable for its vertical 
position, its line of attachment being almost perfectly horizontal. This 
appears to be the case also in R. gladius (pl. xxiv, fig. 6), and in R. pacificus 
(fig. 1). -In R. banksii (figs. 8-5), and R. glesne (fig. 8), the fin has a 
markedly oblique position. ` 
The pelvic (ventral) fins are represented in all species each by a single 
long ray, the biradiate ventrals of Gymnetrus hawkinsii having been shown 
to owe their origin to an error on the part of the artist who drew the figure. 
The ventrals of R. russellii have also been erroneously described as bira- 
diate. In the ures I have seen, the ventrals are represented as perfect in 
nos. 2 (pl. xxiv, fig. 6), 6 (fig. 4), 8 and 10 (fig. 8) of the list on pp. 285-6 above. 
In R. gladius the ventral is represented as terminating in an irregularly 
lanceolate cutancous lobe, and as having a second somewhat triangular lobe 
on the post-axial side of the middle third of its length : no fringe of mem- 
brane is shown on either side of the ray. In the ^r UE figure of the 
Nelwyn Quay specimen, (R. banksii? fig. 4), the tert inal lobe is represented 
