SNAPPERS OF GULF OF MEXICO 
269 
Snout a little longer than maxillary. Head 2.82 (in 56-centimeter fish) to 2.92 (in 65-centi- 
meter individual). The difference in the scales above and below the lateral line not so 
great, 72 to 73 oblique rows above and 62 to 65 below. Gill rakers on lower limb of first 
arch 17, including 5 rudiments. Caudal peduncle more slender, 3.45 (in 56-centimeter 
fish) to 3.16 (in 65-centimeter fish), in head. Anal spines notably stouter. Posterior edge 
of preopercle making an obtuse angle with lower edge. Iris bright yellow in life (becoming 
reddish orange in older fish) ; caudal fin more or less extensively diffused with yellow shades. 
L. vivanus 
Anal fin with 9 soft rays. Scales in 58 to 63 rows above lateral line, 47 to 48 below. Lower 
limb of first gill arch with 14 gill rakers, including 5 rudiments. Scales on anterior part of 
the body below lateral line strikingly larger than those on posterior part of body. Eye in 
large specimens comparatively smaller, about 2% in snout. Snout slightly longer than max- 
illary. Iris red in life; yellow shades on caudal not extensively developed L. blackfordii 
The above analysis partly refers only to large specimens, 2 blackfordii 77.5 and 
79 centimeters, 2 vivanus 56 and 63 centimeters, and 2 campechanus 72.5 and 
50 centimeters. Smaller specimens of this genus differ markedly in their propor- 
tional measurements, the principal difference being in the strikingly larger mouth, 
comparatively, the longer maxillary, the larger eye, and the shorter snout in the young. 
These characters while of specific significance, are consequently of value only when 
specimens of approximately like size are compared. Also in the young, the pectoral 
and ventral fins extend further back in relation to the vent and anal origin, and the 
spines are relatively longer. The relatively large size of the scales on the anterior 
part of the side is strikingly evident in a specimen of blackfordii of 155 millimeters 
which has been examined. 
bb. 
aa. 
NOMENCLATURE AND SYNONYMY 
This species is evidently the same as is currently designated by writers as L. 
vivanus, and accepted usage and synonymy have been followed in this paper. One 
discrepancy, however, may be pointed out. Cuvier and Valenciennes describe 13 
dorsal rays. The same number was found by Jordan, who reexamined the types. 
Also, Gunther, who had four specimens from Jamaica and Bahia records the same 
number of dorsal rays. Now, since the number of dorsal rays in the species of 
Lutianus generally show but a small degree of variation, these recorded numbers are 
significant; and, while they may be due to errors hi counting or to individual varia- 
tion, yet it is well to bear them in mind in any future investigation of the snappers. 
With regard to profundus, which has generally been placed in the synonymy of this 
species, Poey states that the black lateral spot begins to disappear in individuals 
over 10 pounds. However, he later made another statement (in Fauna Puerto 
Riquena by Gundlach, p. 321) that he saw the lateral spot only once in a specimen as 
large as 160 millimeters, which by implication, corrects his previous statement re- 
garding the lateral spot. Poey, in his description of profundus, does not mention any 
yellow shades on the tail, but on the contrary states “le carmin devient plus vif a 
1’ extremite de la caudale.” This may be due, however, to individual variation. 
The synonymy of the three species is evidently inextricably scrambled. To 
straighten this out satisfactorily would require a reexamination of the widely scattered 
material on which the records are based, a task which is difficult to perform. Some 
of the records are also based on examination of fish in markets, and, consequently, are 
impossible of verification, while others no doubt include more than one species. 
However, it would help toward an understanding of the species, if the synonymy were 
segregated, in so far as that may be done by considering published descriptions solely. 
