(Atlantic) material shows the depth 1 2/5 and they are 
examples 117 to 128 mm,, long, this even deeper-bodied, 
A survey of the material at hand, therefore, does not 
disclose any appreciable way of separating the specimens 
into even tangible varieties, From his table it is inter» 
esting to note that the average of 22 dorsal rays for his 
Atlantic material agrees, also the 18 anal rays, Sur 
larger example of the 2 from West Africa has 31 Hiers on the 
lower part of the first arch, not 23 as stated by Fowle”®, 
Jordan and Rutter admit V, spigxii as distinct >” on &= 
count of its deeper body, giving the depth as 1 3/5 for Ja- 
maican specimens 125 mm, long. West Indian material in the 
Academy from Santo Domingo and St, Thomas, reported as V. 
spixii by Fowler’®, do not show sufficient characters for 
distinction, 
8 
Proc, Acad, Nat,Sci.thila.,1905, p. 87. 
89 
li; c.,1899, Pe*>- 
90 
L.C.,1905, p. 88. 
“SS. nT SS ER 8 RR SE I ee Ee FPR ER SEE EE De BEE et ie - Sa OE Re Ree les 
Nichols in the paper previously noted refers to Lut ~ 
ken's view that Alectis is the young of Hynnis, in which 
case Alectis has priority". In this event, jowever, 
Alectis Rafinesque though a substitute for Gallus Lacepede, 
which is preoccupied, leaving Alectis as valid as stated by 
Jordan and Evermann is misleading’+ It follows that Alectis 
91 Stamford Univ. Pub., 1917, p. 88. 
