78 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 
Goode and Bean * 4 described the common red snapper of the Gulf of Mexico, from 
the vicinity of Pensacola, under the name L. blackfordii. In the paper cited these 
authors make the following statement: 
The well-known red snapper of our southern coast has, strangely enough, never been scien- 
tifically described. This is due to an erroneous identification of this species with a common West 
Indian form ( Lutjanus aya) from which it differs in several particulars, notably in the size of 
th$ eye and of the scales. * * *. 
This species is closely allied to the L. torridus of Cope, but differs in several particulars, 
notably (1) in the smaller eye, (2) the greater number of dorsal and anal rays, (3) the smaller 
and more numerous scales, (4) the less emargination of the tail, (5) the shorter ventral fin 
(according to figure of Cope) , (6) the higher occipital crest, and (7) in coloration. 
Goode, 5 6 * in a catalogue of the fishes of Bermuda, calls the red snapper found in 
those waters L. aya. Although not directly stated by him, it seems that this author 
still regarded the Bermuda red snapper as distinct from the Pensacola red snap- 
per, because in a list of species common to Bermuda and the West Indies, given on 
page 13 of the same paper, this red snapper is included, but it is not included in 
a similar list of species common to Bermuda and the coast of the United States 
which is also given in the same paper. 
Jordan and Swain 8 described a red snapper under the name Lutjanus vivanus 
(Cuvier and Valenciennes). These authors evidently were of the opinion that 
there was only one species of red snapper, as they put the Mesoprion campechanus 
of Poey, the L. torridus of Cope, and the L. blackfordii of Goode and Bean in the 
synonymy of L. vivanus. They also placed the name Bodianus aya of Bloch in the 
synonymy of L. vivanus, prefacing it, however, with a query. The following 
quotations indicate the opinions of these authors regarding the identification of 
the red snapper. 
We place here with doubt the names aya and ruber, based on the Acara aya of Marcgrave. 
This is said to be a red Lutjanus, 3 feet in length, and with a red circle around its iris. It is there- 
fore much more likely to have been this species than the Lutjanus -profundus , with which it has 
been identified by Cuvier. It seems to us, however, that this identification is too uncertain to 
warrant the use of the name for either species. 
The name vivanus is based on two young specimens which Professor Jordan has examined 
and which he considers to belong to this species, although, as already stated, these specimens 
are for this species unusually slender. 
The type of Mesoprion campechianus is a stuffed skin of a young fish apparently belonging 
to this species. In this specimen the eye is larger than it should be in a red snapper of that size, 
it being, as Poey has correctly stated, 4 in head. This large size is, however, probably due to the 
shrinkage of the orbit in drying. 
Poey also counts “65 scales above the lateral line and 53 below,” a larger number than others 
count in this species. This difference is doubtless dependent on the method of counting. 
Lutjanus torridus, loosely described and poorly figured by Cope, seems to be also the red 
snapper. We have examined Professor Cope’s type of L. torridus in the Museum of the Academy 
of Philadelphia. It is 11 inches in length and in poor condition, but it apparently belongs to this 
species. * * *. 
1 “Descriptions of two new species of fishes, Lutjanus blackfordii and L. stearnsii, from the coast of Florida.” Proceedings, 
U. S. National Museum, Vol. I, 1878 (1879), p. 176. Washington. 
8 “Catalogue of the fishes of Bermuda.” Bulletin, U. S. National Museum, No. 5, 1876, p. 55. 
6 “A review of the species of Lutjaninae and Haplopagrinse found in American waters.” Proceedings, TT. S. National 
Museum, Vol. VII, 1884 (1885), pp. 453-455. 
