48 
REVISION OF THE 
the body. Diameter of eye 1'25 in the length of the snout and con- 
siderably more than the interorbital width, which is 6*65 in the head. 
Premaxillary and mandibular teeth biserial anteriorly, a few of the 
front ones in the former somewhat enlarged ; vomerine teeth uni- 
serial. A single subopercular spine. Oral tentacles moderate, 
those of the distal end of the maxillary the largest ; no frontonasal 
tentacle ; two short supraciliary tentacles ; axillary pore large. 
Posterior dorsal and anal rays extending beyond the base of the 
caudal : caudal and pectoral fins rounded, the former 5'00, the latter 
6'20 in the body ; outer ventral ray 40 longer than the pectoral and 
165 in the head. Above dark brown, blotched and marbled with 
lighter, below dull white ; lower portion of tail with obscure whitish 
spots. Fins brown, the dorsal with two or three inconspicuous oblique 
whitish bars ; anal with similar bars and the free tips of many of 
the rays white ; caudal and pectorals with more or less pronounced 
indications of lighter transverse bars ; outer ventral ray dull white, 
basally spotted with brown, inner brown. One example differs as 
follows — Above purple, largely blotched with lavender, below white 
the chin faintly dotted brown ; lower half of the sides with numer- 
ous bluish spots. Dorsal and caudal fins like the back; anal lighter, 
tipped with purple ; pectorals lavender, with obscure rows of lighter 
spots ; outer ventral ray dull white, inner violet, {minor, lesser). 
Type in the collection of the Amateur Fishermen's Association 
of Queensland ; Cat. no. 348. Coll. & Pres. by Mr. J. T. Jameson. 
Total length 188 millimeters. 
A Jitoral and estuarine species from the East Coast of Australia 
(Cape York, Moreton Bay, p Port Jackson), Sue Island, Torres 
Straits, and British ISew Guinea (Port Moresby). 
This frog-fish is not uncommon in the lower reaches of the 
Brisbane liiver and the muddy foreshores of Moreton Bay. The 
five specimens which I have examined, measuring from 125 to 188 
millim., all differ from the Batrachus dubius of authors in the 
shortness of the tentacles and the narrowness of the interorbital 
region, which is considerably less than the diameter of the eye. 
B. dubius (White) having apparently villiform teeth can not belong 
to Batrachcmorus, and since his description and figure are worthless 
it would be better to drop the name altogether. As Castelnau's 
description is equally faulty— he does not mention the presence or 
absence of an axillary pore — his name is valueless, since it is 
impossible to say to what species he refers. I have, therefore, been 
obliged to give the small northern form a new name. 
