THE HEAD OF OSTEOLEPIS. 



183 



although my restorations apply more particularly to 0. macrolepidotus, 

 yet I find no important difference between that species and 0. microlepidotus. 

 The most careful scrutiny has convinced me that the supposed transverse 

 series of small plates behind the parietals figured in 0. microlepidotus by 

 Pander, and accepted by Gregory, are not separate elements. They are 

 parts of the supratemporals and parietals, and the often incomplete lines 



Fig. 1 B. 



j, #f#»t 7 <* 7 



sc 



TrUte 



irruc 



Restoration of the head of Osteolepis macrolepidotus, Ag. 



Left side view. 



a, angular; o, main lateral-line canal; d, dentary ; e, ethmoid included in rostral shield; 

 fr, frontala fused in middle line and enclosing the pineal opening; toe, infra-orbital 

 canal ; it, intertemporal ; j, jugal ; I, lacrymal ; Iff, lateral gular ; mclc, mandibular 

 canal; my, median gular ; mx, maxilla; n, nostril; na, nasal included in rostral shield ; 

 o, orbit; op, opercular ; p, pineal opening ; pop, preopercular ; pope, preopercular canal ; 

 pf.f, postfrontal ; pto, postorbital ; rs, rostral shield ; sc, scale-like plate overhanging hyo- 

 lnandibular ; so, supraorbital ; soc, supraorbital canal ; sop, subopercular ; spo, dermal 

 supraoceipital or postparietal ; sq, squamosal; sqe, squamosal canal; st, supratemporal 

 or pterotic ; stc, supratemporal canal ; tb, tabulare ; toe, transverse occipital canal ; vy, 

 ventral paired gular. 



which were .supposed to be sutures marking them off from these bones are 

 merely superficial grooves involving only the cosmine layer, and possibly 

 indicating the presence of rows of small pit-organs or some other sensory 

 structures. I can find no evidence of the existence of such a transverse 

 series in any other Osteolepid ; and an examination of the under surface 



LINN. JOURN. ZOOLOGY, VOL. XXXIV. \i 



