200 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. VI, July, 1952 
behind anterior nostril and extending nearly 
to vent; ventral spine also very long, about as 
long as pectoral. Caudal deeply forked. 
Gill rakers (Fig. 4) small, mostly hidden 
under the skin, each usually armed with 3 or 
4 sharp cusps and provided with a broad, 
roundish, never vertically elongated basal 
plate armed with 1 to 5 small accessory spines; 
1 or 2 small accessory rakers, armed with 
small spines, interpolated between some 
larger rakers; raker at angle of first gill arch 
T-shaped, with about one third of its entire 
length exposed; its inner surface not armed 
with minute spines. 
Color of body when fresh, before preser- 
vation, light grayish blue, not paler below; 
head more or less darker. Interradial mem- 
branes of spinous dorsal and those of ventral 
fin before third soft ray jet-black; basal part 
of caudal fin dark blue; caudal fin jet-black 
except for the whitish 8 shorter rays near axis 
of body; pectoral and rays of soft dorsal 
spotted with black; anal pale. Buccal and 
branchial cavities pale, but peritoneum black. 
REMARKS: Our single specimen differs 
from the descriptions of Atlantic specimens 
in having a larger number of dorsal rays 
(XVI, I, 18, instead of XV, I, 16), a larger 
number of anal soft rays (16 instead of 13), 
and a shorter snout (1.5 times instead of twice 
the diameter of eye) , and in having the longer 
ventral fin about 1.5 times as long as the 
pectoral, reaching nearly to the vent rather 
than being about two thirds as long as the 
pectoral, and far removed from the vent when 
the fin is laid back. These discrepancies, how- 
ever, appear to be attributable largely to the 
difference in size of the specimens, inasmuch 
as ours is merely 242 mm. instead of 980 
mm. long. 
Our specimen agrees well with Kamohara’s 
description (1938^: 48, pi. 3, fig. 3) except in 
having slightly fewer anal soft rays (16 in- 
stead of 17) and a somewhat longer ventral 
fin (the fin 1.25 instead of 1.6 to 1.7 in length 
of head). 
Apart from the generic differences afore- 
mentioned, this species may be distinguished 
from Neoepinnula orientalis in having much 
larger eyes, fewer anal soft rays (16 or 17 in- 
stead of 19 or 20), and a longer ventral fin 
(in our single specimen of this species, 188 
mm. in standard length, the ventral measures 
1.25 in the head length, whereas in 2 speci- 
mens of N. orientalis^ Nos. 13960 and 4259, 
177 and 179 mm. long, this fin measures 3.17 
and 3.25, respectively). 
E. magistralis appears to be a pelagic species. 
Its stout body, strong dorsal spines, and 
colorless buccal and branchial chambers favor 
this interpretation, which is strongly sup- 
ported by the fact that it has well-developed 
ventral fins — at least as indicated by the im- 
mature specimen examined by us. 
Mimasea Kamohara 
Mimasea Kamohara (1936^: 929 — type M. 
taeniosoma Kamohara) . 
This monotypic genus is closely related to 
Neoepinnula and Epinnula, with which it agrees 
in having well- developed ventrals and in 
lacking detached finlets. It resembles Gem- 
pylus in form of body and structure of the 
snout, which is rather sharply pointed, termi- 
nates in a large conical cartilaginous process, 
and projects far beyond the anterior extremi- 
ties of premaxillaries (Fig. 5A). In other 
genera of this group the premaxillaries termi- 
nate at the anterior extremity of the snout. 
Thus, the present genus is intermediate be- 
tween Neoepinnula and Epinnula on the one 
hand and Gempylus on the other. Gempylus is 
apparently the most specialized of these 
genera. The species of Gempylus have greatly 
elongated bodies and ventral fins of greatly 
reduced size, represented by one spine and 
four or five weak soft rays. 
Mimasea taeniosoma Kamohara 
Figs. IB, 2C, 5A 
Mimasea taeniosoma Kamohara, 1936^: 929, 
fig. 1; 1938^: 47, pi. 3, fig. 3; 1938^: 20; 
- 1946: 96, fig. 45. 
