492 
Dr. R. H. Traquair on 
Rhadinichthys elegantulus , Traq. 
Rhadinichthys Geikiei , Traq. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. xxx. 1881, p. 25, 
non Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. ix. 1877, p. 438. 
Rhadinichthys Geikiei , Tar. eleqantulus , Traq. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 
xxx. 1881, p. 27. 
Rhadinichthys delicatulus , Traq. ibid. p. 29. 
In the Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 1889-90, pp. 397, 398, I 
have given my reasons for referring the original Rhadinichthys 
Geikiei to Rh. carinatus , Ag., and also for believing that the 
Eskdale fish is a distinct species, for which the term elegan- 
tulus, which I had used to designate a variety, must now 
be adopted. From this species I can no longer separate Rh. 
delicatulus . 
Acrolepis ortholepis , Traq. 
Elonichthys ortholepis , Traq. Geol. Mag. (3) vol. i. 1884, p. 7. 
Acrolepis ortholepis. Traq. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 1889-90, p. 398. 
The Edinburgh Museum possesses a splendid specimen of 
a large Palaeoniscid, 25^ inches in length, which, from the 
scale-ornament, I must refer to the same species as the fish in 
the British Museum to which six years ago I gave the name 
of Elonichthys ortholepis. In the present specimen, however, 
the great thickness of the scales, along with their shape, 
indicate that its position is in Acrolepis , a position corrobo- 
rated by the absence of serrations along the posterior margins 
of the scales. The original u Elonichthys ” ortholepis is, it 
may be added, an immature example 12 inches in length. 
Styracopterus fulcratuS) Traq. 
Holurus fulcr atus, Traq. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. xxx. p. 46. 
The original specimen of Holurus fulcratus , Traq., in the 
collection of the Geological Survey of Scotland is a mere 
fragment. By a mistake its locality was given as Glen- 
cartholm, whereas it was in reality found at Tarras Foot. 
The Geological Survey officers have since acquired a number 
of additional specimens from the same locality which show 
that the species does not belong to Holurus } but to a new 
genus closely allied to Benedenichthys *, Traq., from the 
Carboniferous Limestone of Belgium. As these specimens 
belong to the Survey, I must defer their description to the 
forthcoming second part of the u Report.” 
* Benedenius , Traq., in de Koninck’s 1 Eaune du Calcaire carbonifere de 
la Belgique,’ pt. i. 1878, p. 15. A critic in the Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 
(5) vol. vi. 1880, p. 97, having pointed out that the name “ Benedenius ” is 
preoccupied, I propose to alter it to Benedenichthys , and at the same time 
to state that I have become convinced that, though it presents many re- 
semblances to the Platysomidse, it is after all more Pakeoniscid, and should 
be restored to the family Palaeoniscidae. 
