30 UPPER CRETACEOUS TELEOSTS 
Family APATEOPHOLIDAE nov. 
Di1aGnosis. Head elongated and deepened posteriorly ; body deepened but not 
elongated. Post-temporal fossa unroofed. Parietals separated by the supra- 
occipital. Orbitosphenoid and basisphenoid absent. Posterior infraorbitals un- 
expanded. Mandibular suspensorium inclined forwards ventrally. Preoperculum 
with prominent postero-ventral spine. Vertebral elements incompletely fused ; 
centra as long as deep. Pelvics abdominal, below dorsal fin. Hyomandibular with 
a double head. Body naked except for scales along the lateral line. Dermal bones 
ornamented with minute bony tubercles. 
Genus APATEOPHOLIS Woodward, 1891 
D1aGNosis (emended). As for the family, only genus. 
Type sPECcIES. Rhinellus laniatus Davis. 
Remarks. This species was originally placed in the genus Rhinellus by Davis 
(1887 : 612). Woodward (1888b : 355) later placed the species in the genus Belono- 
stomus and later still in the new genus A pateopholis (1891 : 634). Ten years later 
Woodward (1901 : 232) considered Apateopholis to be synonymous with Prionolepis. 
In the present work the genus A pateopholis is re-erected to contain a single species. 
Apateopholis laniatus (Davis) 
(Text-figs. 13-15) 
1887 Rhinellus laniatus Davis : 612, pl. 37, fig. I. 
1887 Rhinellus longivostris Davis : 611, pl. 37, fig. 3. 
1888b Belonostomus laniatus (Davis) Woodward : 355. 
1891 Apateopholis laniatus (Davis) Woodward : 634, pl. 55, fig. 11. 
1901 Prionolepis laniatus (Davis) Woodward : 232. 
DiaGnosis (emended). Apateopholis reaching 10 cm. in standard length. Head 
with opercular apparatus occupies more than one-third of the standard length. 
Dorsal fin with 14 rays situated midway along the back. Anal fin with approxim- 
ately II rays, remote in position. Pelvics with 10 rays, opposite the middle of 
the dorsal fin. Pectoral fins low on the flanks with 16 rays. Lateral line scales not 
overlapping. 
HototyrPe. B.M.N.H. specimen number P.4745, from the Middle Cenomanian, 
Hakel, Lebanon. 
MATERIAL. The holotype and specimens in the B.M.N.H., numbers P.4869, 
P.4026, P.4870, the latter two having been prepared in acetic acid by the transfer 
method. 
REMARKS. The species is only known by these few specimens, but it is difficult to 
understand why Woodward (1888b, 1gor) placed the species in either of the genera 
Belonostomus or Prionolepis, since both of these genera possess enlarged shield-like 
flank scutes. None of the specimens listed above shows any evidence of such en- 
larged scutes, in fact they are devoid of scales, except along the lateral line. It has 
