Parker. — 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. Griinther 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 dorsal is, however, shown in the 

 Schneider-Bloch figure of that species (pi. 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 

 (pi. xxiv, fig. 7), consisting of seven very fine rays standing out from the 

 slightly enlarged extremity of the tail, and unconnected by any membrane. 

 Of this fin Griinther makes no mention in his systematic 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 respects 

 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 (pi. xxiv, fig. 6), and in R. pacificus 

 (fig. 1). In R. banksii (figs. 3-5), 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 figures I have seen, the ventrals are represented as perfect in 

 nos. 2 (pi. 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 cutaneous 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 Banksian figure of the 

 Nelwyn Quay specimen, (R. banksii? fig. 4), the terminal lobe is represented 



