Quoy and Gaimard figure their M. multifasciatus as a very 
different fish. It is shown with a dark postocular blotch; 
another behind but predorsal, including first 3/5 of spinous 
dorsal base; then narrower interdorsal band; little wider 
band from and before first half of soft dorsal; median caudal 
peduncle blotch above; soft dorsal and anal each with 2 longi- 
tudinal lines; barbels little less than head or not reaching 
hind opercle edge. Uf course this is not entirely in agreement 
with our examples, which are more as pictured by Jorden and 
Evermann’. They do not show the dark predorsal band or the 
lines on the soft dorsal, the dark interdorsel, and band following 
from front’ of gork dorsal, and ell much narrower than in our 
examples, 
EO EOL IE LEI CLE LOO LLL A ee: ee ie oO ee a ee rs Be BO IT or ewe ee See ee a Bes 
0168 
Bull, U.S.Fisk Com.,vol.23,pt.1,1903(1905), p. 256. 
Oe Be OT ee er TE EPO ORs ee Oe 6 ea ee a i I Sl Ele nee ee Oe 
Sauvage, under the name of Upenedides vittatus ©”, shows 
a fish very close to both Jordan and Evermann's figure and our 
Maui specimen, It differs largely in its pale color, doubtless 
due to preservation, immaculate soft dorsal anan and ventral 
not darker than other fins and lack of smell scales on caudal 
lobes, 
RE ee 
169 
Hist,Nat,Madagascar, Poiss.,vol.16,1991, p.219,P1.27,fig.c. 
eee ee RI TE EE CL CLES: LOL ATA LE ALON Ba: R$ AR Se ee 8 ee Br ee A De Be ET 
