We think our specimen the young of Bleeker's species, 
in that it agrees in the numerous lateral scutes, branched 
dorsal and anal rays, scaled breast and absence of a dark» 
opercular spot, 
In this connection we note th@t Bleeker’ s name Pseud0- 
caranx falls as a synonym of his earlier Uraspis, if the 
two names are really defined by the same characters, 
Caranx hasseltii (Bleeker), 
Head 3 1/8, depth 2 2/3; D. I, VIII = I, 2473 A. II «= 
I, 19; scales 40? 38 inlateral line, last 8 scutes on Cau# 
dal base; snout 32 on head; eye 3; maxillary 21/8; intere 
orbitel 4; rakers 11+32; length 44? mm, Fiji. Compared 
with an example in the Academy 130 mm,, long from the Phile 
ippines, we find the latter has 40 specimen scutes in the 
lateral line ; 
straight section of the t.1. and the rakers as above, 
Caranx ignobilis (Forskil). fog _//5~ 
Head 3 1/6 to 34; depth 24; D. “¢ VIII = I, 19 or 20; 
A. II = I, 16 or 17; scales 66 or 67/30 to 33 in lateral line; 
snout 3 in head from upper jaw tip; eye 4z to 43; maxillary 
21/6 to 2 1/5; interorbital 34 to 3 2/3; rakers II, 2 or 3 
14, ii, or 15, 1, lanceolate, equal filaments or 1 3/4 in eye; 
length 145 to 200 mm. One Hawaiian and the other without lo» 
cality, probably Pacific? 
Compared with the Sumatran example of C. sem. describe 
77 
ed by Fowler , in the Academy, All show the breast ventral- 
ly and in front of ventral, except median small ellipsoid scé}y 
patch,, naked. Scales of all non-striate, with 35 to 45 circuli, 
1T Proo.Acad.Nat.Sci. Phila., 1905, p. 79 
