FISH. 



33 



genus from Aspidophorus, or at least considered as one of its subgenera. But in 

 the present uncertain state of our knowledge with respect to the exact value of 

 this character,* and from the general resemblance of the A. Chiloensis in all its 

 principal characters to the other species of this genus, | I have not thought this 

 step necessary. 



This species was taken by Mr. Darwin at Chiloe. There are two specimens 

 in the collection. The second differs from the one above described, only in 

 having one ray less in the first dorsal, and two more carinated scales in each of 

 the dorsal ridges. Independently of its having vomerine and palatine teeth as 

 above noticed, this species will not enter into any of Cuvier's sections of the 

 genus Aspidophorus, but combines in itself the characters of his first and third ; 

 the dorsals being separated by nearly three scales, the jaws being very nearly 

 equal, the rays of the first dorsal not stouter than those of the second, and the 

 throat being bearded. 



Platycephalus inops. Jen. 



P. capite longo, Icevi, ubique inermi, spinis duabus ad unguium preoperculi brevissimis 

 cequalibus exceptis ; oculis magnis, arete propinquantibus : dorso et lateribus fuscis ; 

 abdomine albido ; pinna dorsali prima liturd magna irregulari nigro-fuscd postice 

 maculald ; dorsali secundd, caudali, et pectoralibus, maculis fuscis parvis ; anali et 

 vent ralibus fere omnino nigricantibus. 



B. 7 ; D. 8—12 ; A. 12 ; C. 13, &c. ; P. 19 ; V. 1/5. 



Long. unc. 16. 



Form. — Head very much depressed, and rather longer than in most of the species of this genus ; its 

 length being nearly twice its own breadth, and nearly one-third of the entire length. Breadth 

 of the body at the pectorals one-seventh of the entire length : depth at that point half the 

 breadth. Snout rounded horizontally. Lower jaw longest. Gape reaching to beneath the 



* Cuvicr seems to have attached much value to the character of teeth on the palate ; but I agree with Dr. 

 Richardson, {Faun. Bor. Am. Part iii. p. 19.) in considering it " of little importance as a generic character in 

 some families of fish." And the author last mentioned notices an instance (exactly analogous to that of the 

 Aspidophorus Chiloensis) in the Thymallus signifer, which, he says, " resembles the common grayling very 

 closely in its general form, but differs from it in having palatine teeth." 



f In its general characters it does not depart from the A . cataphractus of the British seas, anything like so 

 much as the^l. quadricornis, and A. monopterygius do. 



F 



