92 
MBMOmS OF TEE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM. 
indicus, B. sufor, B. vvxjorj and Gallichflnjs chevola, the first and last representing 
tlie Indo-Malayan, the others the Atlantic form. These latter, if they should be 
separable, Avould of course have to be relegated to the synonymy of Alectis 
crinita^ to give in that case Llitchiirs fish its correct name. Bleeker next added 
Iiis coniribution to tlic confusion by giving it the totally unnecessary name of 
CaraiUjoidcs blepharis] this name is doubly erroneous because, witli the exception 
of the similarity of the dentition, our fish has ])ut little in common Avith Caranx 
pnensius Bennett,® Avhich is the type of Carangoides Blocker, ° not C. p^agiotcenia 
Bleeker^^ as stated by Jordan and Evermann (1).’-^ In Gimther^s (2) figure of 
a young specimen (59 millim.) he depicts the body as being rather deeper than 
long and nearly three times as long as the head, Avhich is just Avhat might haA^e 
been exjiected a.s compared Avith the same measurements taken from the larger 
(99 millim.) example before me. Tlie specimen figured by Giinther on the same- 
page as adult {(tusgeu'Gchsotcn) is, hoAvcA^er, little more than if so mucli as half- 
grown, as may be proA’ed hy the depth of tlie body being 1-1 in its length, instead 
of 1-6, Ai-hieh is the case in the adult fish. The ventrals also by their length shoAV 
that his fish is (juite immature, and it is very interesting to note how their decrease 
in lengtli coincides AA’ith the increase in the pectorals. 
Uses: — i\Iost Avriters, liaA’ing only seen young specimens, are silent as to 
its edil)le qualities, but there is no reason to belicA^ that it differs from those of 
its congener, though Valenciennes, on the authority of Dr. Ka?nig, remax*ks of 
Blepharis indious that its flesh is poor, stringy, and insipid.” 
Bange : — Warmer parts of the Indian, Pacific, and perhaps West 
Atlantic Oceans. On our (-oast Ave can only report it Avith certainty from Moreton 
Bay, S.Q., and Edgecumbe Bay, iM.Q;. From th(‘ former Ave have seen about a 
dozen examples, mostly young, in as many years; from the latter seventy-two, all 
young, AA'ere traAA'led ])y the ” EiuleaA'our”' along AA’ith A. indica. Since, hoAvever, 
it occurs as far south as Port Jackson and also throughout the Avhole of the 
3ialayan subregions, aa’c may safely assume that it is found along our entire 
coast-line though. ]iossibly for reasons connected AA’itli its habits and as yet 
unascertained, it does not come AA’ithiu the scope of our fishermeiPs o])erations. 
The earliest Austi*alian rt^cord that Ave can find is that of ]\Iacleay in 1881, 
AA'hich simply runs ‘A^ort Jackson North Coast” without giving any indication 
«Life of Kaflles, 1830, ]>. 0S9. 
“Nat. Tijds. Nederl. Ind., i, 1851, p. 352. 
’“Act. S(te. ScL Indo-Neerb, ii, 1857, p. 59. 
Carauffoides ■\vas tii'st defined by Bleeker thns — ‘‘Dentes supramaxiUarcs et inframaxil- 
larcs pluriserintif wquales. Dentes romcn/n, lingitaJesP’ On tlie following pages lie 
gives a list of sonie extra-arcliipelagian siiecies, commencing with “Caranx fusus Geolfroy^^ • 
which, if Giinther account of the dentition be correct, is more of a Carangiis. But as I 
understand the recommendations in “ The Tnternational Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 
1905, p. 25 his Carangoides pnvustas, being the first species described in the paper quoted 
(p. 363), takes ju'eeedenco as the type. 
