Viewing page 23 of 42

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

23

appear to have been erroneously considered as new:

1. [[underlined]] Chimæra abbreviata [[/underlined]], Proc. Nat. Mus., 1883, 254, is the young of [[/underlined]] C. plumbea [[/underlined]] Gill, which is identical with [[underlined]] C. affinis [[/underlined]] Capello, described in 1868.

2. [[underlined]] Sigmops stigmaticus [[/underlined]], Proc. Nat. Mus., 1883, 256, does not represent a new genus and species, but is simply a badly preserved example of [[underlined]] Gonostoma denudata [[/underlined]] (Raf.) Bonap., which we already had a drawing of from a "Fish Hawk" specimen taken October, 1881.

3. [[underlined]] Halosaurus goodei [[/underlined]], Proc. Nat. Mus. 1883, 257, is not sufficiently distinguished from [[/underlined]] H. macrochir [[/underlined]] Gthr. to receive a new name. Mr. Goode and I observed more variation among the types of the latter species than will be found between the published descriptions of the contrasted forms.

4. [[underlined]] Stephanoberyx monae [[/underlined]], Proc. Nat. Mus. 1883, 258, belongs to the same genus as Gill's proposed [[underlined]] Acanthochænus [[/underlined]] and the family [[underlined]] Acanthochænidæ [[/underlined]] is unnecessary, as both the species are Berycoids.

The remark "Closely allied to [[underlined]] Melamphaēs [[/underlined]]" was intended to follow and apply to [[underlined]] Plectromus. [[/underlined]]