296 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 
Type locality. — Oahu (first locality mentioned), Hawaiian Islands (Wilkes expedition). 
Distribution. — Hawaiian Islands: Oahu (Gould); Honolulu Reef, Oahu (Albatross); Maui (Gould). 
Material examined. — Three specimens, all males, are in the Albatross collection. All are in an 
excellent state of preservation. 
No. of 
sped 
mens. 
Locality. 
Collector. 
Sex. 
Author’s 
register. 
cf 
382 
Remarks. — The above description is drawn throughout from the specimens taken by tlie A Ibatross, 
special reference being had to the larger of the two individuals collected on the reef, as the large market 
specimen did not come into my hands until afterward and has been chiefly utilized in preparing the 
description of the hectocotylized arm. It will at once be noted that there are several rather astonish- 
ing discrepancies between these specimens and Dr. Gould’s description. Perhaps the most important 
of these is the relative length of the arms, which Gould states to be 2 , 4, 3 , i , an utterly different formula 
from that shown by the present material. As the quantitative differences between the arms of the 
respective pairs seem altogether too great for such variations to be due to inequalities in the methods 
of preservation, I am at a loss to accoxmt for the discrepanc}'^. It is of course possible that an error has 
crept in somewhere, for the Albatross specimens show not the slightest evidence of any abnormality, 
while Gould’s account of the consecutive diminution in bulk of the arms is entirely in accord with 
the condition I have described, though not at all what would be expected were his statement of their 
relative order of length correct. It may be that the type specimen was possessed of some unobserved 
defect, for where the arms are so slender as in the present species a mutilated and regenerating extremity 
might be readily overlooked were not special care taken to the contrary. The peculiarly definite 
color pattern is in all the specimens as striking as Gould ’s careful description would imply and is so 
utterly unlike that of any other Polypus known to me that I think there can be no doubt as to the cor- 
rectness of the identification. 
Granting this correction in the arm formula, it is interesting to note that the resemblance of this 
species to the Polypus macropus (Risso) becomes even more close than Gould supposed and extends 
even to such structmes as the hectocotylus and funnel organ. (Cf. Jatta, 1896, pi. 23, fig. 8.) A com- 
parison with the figures cited shows that the two species are throughout essentially similar in structure 
and indicates a very close degree of relationship. The geographical distribution of both forms yields 
additional strong evidence toward the same conclusion and further supports the idea that P. macropus 
is in fact the parent form. Although ornatus is thus far known only from the Hawaiian Islands, macro- 
pus has a remarkably wide and continuous range, extending from the Mediterranean, on the one hand, 
through the Red Sea and Indian Ocean to the Malay Peninsula and even to Japan, where it is still a 
hardy and abundant species Small diflerences between the two are numerous and constant, but 
perhaps are in no way different from the inevitable changes which should be expected to take place 
in the island species dining the long sojourn which it must have had in so isolated an environment. 
It is curious that the color pattern and surface ornamentation are the features which have undergone 
the most extensive modification. 
Polypus hoylei Berry 1909 (PL xlvii, fig. i; PI. xnviii, fig. 2-4; PI. nv, fig. i.) 
Polypus hoylei Berry 1909, p. 407, 418^ text fig. i. 
Body pouch shaped, rounded, more or less depressed above and below, about as long as broad, 
widening posteriorly and with an obscure longitudinal groove forming an incipient superficial division 
of the ventral region into halves. Mantle loose and semigelatinous, very soft to the touch; at 
