10. THE MARINE FISHES OF RENNELL ISLAND

BY

ROBERT R. ROFEN RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GEORGE VANDERBILT FOUNDATION AT STANFORD UNIVERSITY

CONTENTS

Introduction ...... 149 Gobiidae ...... 176 Methods for counts and measurements . 150 Kraemeriidae.witharevisionof the family 178 Dussumieriidae ...... 151 Blenniidae...... 195 Synodontidae...... 152 Ostraciontidae...... 204 M uraenidSe...... <...... 153 Balistidae...... 205 Exocoetidae ...... 154 Fishes from Rennell Island colleclcd by Mugilidae...... 156 the 1933 Templeton Crocker Expedition 206 Atherinldae...... 157 Acknowledgments...... 211 Pseudochromldae...... 168 Checklist of the marine fishes from Apogonidae ...... 170 Rennell Island...... 212 Pomaceniridae...... 171 Table I ...... 214 Acanthuridae...... 174 Literature ciled ...... 215 Siganidae...... 176

INTRODUCTION

The Danish Rennell Expedition 1951 which was part of the "Galathea" Deep-Sea Expedition Round the World 1950-1952 inade a collection of approximately 30 spe­ cies of smaller reef fishes froin several localities at Rennell Island, Solomons in the fall of 1951. Although this material represents only a small part of the fish fauna existing on the reefs at Rennell, it is a valuable addition to our knowledge of the ichthyology of the tropical Pacific, including many new records for the Solomon Is­ lands and several species apparently new to science. In an effort to make the present report on this collection useful to ichthyologists and to document each species, the means of identification are given for each species, as w’ell as the presently understood diagnostic characters. When it seemed advisable, more complete descriptions of the specimens and discussions of species are included in order to elucidate further the natuce of the various species involved. As is well appreciated by ichthyologists, it is often very difficult to identify unquestionably to species fishes from such a poorly known area as the Solomon Islands. It has been necessary in several cases to under­ take studies on species groups from a more extensive region than the Solomons. A survey is presented of the silversides of the genus Atherion (family Atherinidae) from Oceania. The Indo-Pacific family of sand fishes (Kraemeriidae) is reviewed with one subgenus (Schidokraemeria) and three species of the genus Kraemeria described as new (galatheaensis from Rennell Id., cunicularia from the Palau Is., and tongaensis from the Tonga Is.). All of the marine fishes collected at Rennell Island by the Danish Expedition were taken in the region of Kanggava Bay and in the vicinity of Lavanggu, 11 ° 39' S. Lat., 160° 14' E. Long., on october 20th to November 2nd, 1951. They were collected by Dr. Torben W olff and are in the following referred to as “Galathea material” . The collection is kept in the Zoological Museum, Copenhagen.

M. 516a In Kanggava Bay, October 20, 1951: three flying fishes, Cypselurus anton- cichi Woods & Schultz. M. 516b Water depth 0-0.25 meters, rock along beach, coral and sand, tidal zone, October 25, 1951; a collection of twelve species of reef and sand inhabiting fishes: gobies, damsel fishes, coral bass, sand fishes, silversides, blennies, surgeon fish, moray eel. M. 516d On the fringing coral reef, at low tide, depth O.J-0.5 meters, October 26, 195!; a collection of seven species of fishes, all small reef inhabitants: blen­ nies, cardinal fishes, damsel fishes, goby, spine fishes. M. 516e Near beach, bottom coral sand, depth 50 cm., October 28, 1951; two species of open water fishes: mullet and silversides. M. 516f Bottom coral, depth about 5 meters, October 30, 1951; five species of larger reef fishes: trigger fishes, lizard fish, surgeon fishes. November 2, 1951; two species of fishes: a box fish and the unicorn fish Naso lituratus (Bloch & Schneider). M. 516g Depth 0.75-1.50 meters, November 1 and 2, 1951; two young unidentified fishes, one a scorpaenid.

Following the account of the Galathea collection the only other fishes reported in the literature from Rennell Island are reexamined. The Templeton Crocker Expedi­ tion of 1933 under the auspices of the California Academy of Sciences collected at Rennell Island, particularly in Kanggava Bay, in June of 1933. These fishes were previously reported upon by S e a le (1935).

METHODS FOR COUNTS AND MEASUREMENTS

The methods used in this study for counts and measurements on the fishes are as follows, unless specified otherwise. All measurements were taken by means of dividers and recorded in millimeters. The standard length is the distance between the anterior tip of the snout and the base of the caudal fin (= the posterior edge of the hypural fan). S. L. is an abbreviation for standard length. The body depth is the greatest height of the body behind the head. The head length is the distance between the anterior tip of the snout to the most distant point on the operciflar margin including membranous flaps. The snout length i s the distance between the tip of the snout and anterior bony rim of the,eye socket. The eye d'ameter is the greatest horizontal distance between the free orbital rims. The interorbital width is the least bony width. The predorsal and preanal distances are the lengths between the anterior tip of the snout and the origins of the corresponding fins. The lengths of the pectoral and pelvic fins are of the longest ray of each fin. The cauda!pedude'depth is its narrowest height posterior to the dorsal and anal fin bases. The caudal peduncle length is the distance from the center point at the posterior tip of the hypural fan measured anteriorly to the base of the last dorsal or anal fin ray as stated. Unless indicated otherwise, measurements in percent o f stand­ ard length have the range of all measured specimens in parentheses preceded by the mean. The fin counts are by standard procedure. Spiny (unsegmented) rays are indicated by roman numerals: capital letters for relatively stiff rays; small letters for weak flexible spines. Soft (segmented) rays are indicated by arabic numerals. A comma separating the count of spnes and soft rays means the spinous fin is not separate from the soft rayed fin, but joined by membrane at least at the base. When the fins are separate, a dash is used to separate the counts. The last two fin rays in the dorsal and anal fins are counted as one, if closely applied; otherwise they are counted separately. The principal‘caudal rays are the branched rays plus one simple ray above and below. The gill rakers are counted on the first arch only, with the number of rakers above the angle of the arch presented first. Lateral line scales are counted from origin behind head to the end of the hypural fan.

FAMILY DUSSUMIERIIDAE ROUND HERRINGS Spratelloides delicatulus (Bennett)

Clupea delicatula Bennett 1831, p. 168 (original description; Mauritius). Spratelloides delicatulus Weber and de Beaufort 1913, p. 20 (synonymy; description; distribution). S e a le 1935, p. 238 (name only; specimens from Malaita I., Guadal- canar I., Rennell I., Samoa). S c h u l t z and W e l a n d e r in S c h u l t z et al 1953, p. 26 (descrfption; specimens from Bikini I., Rongelap L, Rongerik I., Eniwetok I., Kwajalein I., Likiep I.). Stolephorus delicatulus Fowler 1928, p. 29 (synonymy; description; numerous records and distribution). F o w le r 1934, p. 387 (synonymy; name only; examples from Roviana, British Solomons; Vila, New Hebrides; Ontong, Java). F o w le r 1949, p. 40 (synonymy). Stolephorus delicatulus (in part) Herre 1931, p. 4 (name only; Hathorn Sound; Tulagi; Shortland I., Solomon Is.). H e r r e 1936, p. 32 (synonymy; description; Ovalau, Fiji; Turtle Bay, Espiritu Santo I., New Hebrides; 65 specimens Tulagi Harbor, Solomon Is.; 40 specimens Hathorn Sound, New Georgia L). • This species has been previously recorded in the literature from the Solomon Is­ lands by H e r r e (1931, 1936), F o w le r (J934), and S e a le (1935), but the Hathorn Sound record of H erre* is actually Spratelloides atrofasciatus Schultz and not 5. delicatulus (Bennett). . The determination of the Galathea specimens was made on the basis of the de­ scriptions of W eber and de Beaufort (1913), Be r t in (1943), Schultz (1943), Schultz and W elander (1953) and comparative material in the Stanford University collections from Samoa, New Hebrides, Solomons,= New Guinea, Borneo and Philippines. Galathea material examined: Three specimens 29.0, 28.9, 27.8 mm. in standard length from station 516e, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea specimens: Measurements and counts are presented in the order given for standard length above. Head strongly compressed, snout not as wide as region across eyes. Lower jaw slightly protuberant, fitting into notch of upper jaw. No teeth in jaws. Deep notch in isthmus before pectoral fin. Gilirakers long, very slender 11 1 27, 10 - 1 - 27, 11 - I - 26. Short slit behind last gill arch. Dorsal fin origin before middle of standard length, rays ii, 9. Anal fin very short, rays ii,7. Pectoral fins ventral, rays 12 — 12. Pelvic fin origin below' middle of dorsal fin ii, 7 — 7, ii rays. Smallest specimen completely lacks any trace of pelvic fins and scales are normal over this region. Scales very deciduous; lateral scales with circuli and annuli extending vertically straight across scales; 4-5 annuli in Galathea specimens; other scales often reticulated. Base of dorsal fin with an elongate pointed scale on each side. Pectoral fins with an elongate, pointed, axillary scale at upper base, extending posteriorly along upper margin of fin. Each pelvic fin with a large reticulated scale covering almost the entire ventral surface of the fin; posterior '/j of fin free. Original coloration gone. Body evenly pigmented brown dorsally, shading to tiny constricted chromatophores ventrally. A darker narrow line of chromatophores ex­ tends along back on each side of mid-dorsal line. No lateral band present. Head heavily pigmented on occiput, interorbital, medial snout region and tip of snout and lower jaw. Side of snout, lower jaw and lower region of operculum lightly pigmented. A distinctive pigmented spot present immediately before eye. Measurements in percent of standard length: Body depth 17.4 (16.6-18.0). Head length 26.9 (25.2-28.4). Snout length 6.7 (6.5-6.9). Eye diameter 8.3 (9.9-8.7). Inter­ orbital width 6.7 {6.2-1.2). Caudal peduncle length from end of anal fin base 9.3 (6.9-11.2).

FAMILY SYNODONTIDAE LIZARD FISHES Synodus variegatus (Lacepede)

Salmo variegatus Lacepede 1803, p. 157, pi. 3, fig. 3 (original description; Isle de France). Saurus variegatus Seale 1935, p. 344 (name only; records, including Rennell Island, Solomons).

1. Stanford Univ. no. 25393 (orig. no. 916); 2) specimens 18-29 mm. Hathorn Sound. New Georgia Island, Solomon Is., coll. A. W. H frre, April 21, 1929. 2. Stanford Univ. no. 25151; 39 specimens 17-32 mm. S. L. Tulagi, Solomon Is., col!. A. W. H erre, April 21, 1929. 152 . c Synodus variegatus Norman 1935, p. 103, 106 (synonymy; description; records). • Sc h u lt z et al 1953, p. 39 (description; records). • One lizard fish was taken by the Galathea Expedition that was identified to Synodus variegatus on the basis of keys and descriptions by N orm an (1935) and Sc h u lt z et al (1953) and compafative material in the collection of Stanford Uni­ versity. Galathea material examined: One specimen 148.3 mm. in standard length from station 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea material: Head and body terete. Palatine teeth in a single band of 2-3 rows of teeth. Teeth in jaws with an outer row of low fixed teeth and inner series of longer depressible canines. Tongue densely covered with teeth. Snout length nearly twice eye-diameter, appreciably less than snout width at anterior border of eye. Top of head rugose, not scaled; bony interorbital width less than eye diame­ ter, concave. Lateral-line scales 57. Scales above lateral-line from base of anterior dorsal fin rays 5'/.; below lateral-line to midventral line 9. Dorsal fin rays ii, 9. Anal fin rays viii, 1. Pelvic fin rays i, 7. Pectoral fin rays total 12. Dorsal fin origin nearer to adipose fin origin than snout tip by a length equal to V, eye diameter. Coloration indistinct# Body with broad irregular vertical bands; no longitudinal bands evident.

FAMILY MURAENIDAE MORAY EELS Echidna leucotaenia Schultz

Echidna leucotaenia Schultz 1943, p. 22, pl. 3 (original description; 37 specimens from Enderbury I., Hull 1., Rose 1., Swains 1., Canton 1., Tutuila 1.). S c h u l t z 1953, p. 106, fig. 21e, f; pl. 12 (description of 32 specimens from Bikini 1., Eniwetok 1., Rongerik 1., Rongelap I., Kwajelein 1.. Guam 1., Saipan L). R a n d a l l MS 1955, p. 9 (descriptive notes; 2 specimens from Onotoa, Gilbert Is.).

The young example recorded agrees reasonably well with the descriptions by Sc h u lt z and directly keys out in his key (1953, p. 100); a search of the literature on species of Echidna occurring in Melanesia did not reveal any other species of which this might be the young. This species is previously known from shallow reefs in Samoan, Pheonix, Gilbert, Marshall and Mariana Islands. It is probably common throughout the central tropical Pacific, and the present record from the Solomons would be expected. Galathea materia! examined: One young 38.1 mm. in standard length from station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea specimen: Head profile same as in pl. 3 of Schultz (1943), except lacks indentation above eye. Five white-rimmed pores on each side below low er jaw and above upper jaw. Two pairs of medial pores on each side below lower jaw and above upper jaw. Two pairs of medial pores on snout. Anterior nostril in large raised tube; diameter slightly less than length; posterior nostril near upper anterior border of eye, without raised rim, somewhat larger than neighboring pore. Some teeth present, but general dentition not developed. Gill opening a small pore, situated slightly above midaxis of body. Body and head solid brown without any areas of white, except the narrow white rings around the head pores. Fins basally brown and distally white. Tip of snout, lower jaw and anterior nostrils more sparsely pigmented than remainder of head and body.

Gyninothorax pictus (Ahl)

Muraena picta Ahl 1789, p. 8 (original description; East India). Gymnothorax pictus Seale 1906, p. 6 (name only; Oceania records including Short- land Id., Solomons). H e r r e 1931, p. 4 (name only; Shortland 1., Solomons). Sc h u lt z et al 1953, p. 123 (description; records from Marshall and Mariana Islands).

One of the fishes supplied with the Galathea collections is identified as Gynm»* thorax pictus on the basis o f the currently accepted definition o f this species. However, it is quite likely that the highly variable assemblage now recognized as G. p/cfus will later be found to represent several species, a problem beyond the scope of the present investigations. Reviewers should note the large spot on each side of the snout in this specimen. Material examined: 1 specimen approximately 400 mm. in standard length from Ontong Java, Leuaniua Islands, Solomon Islands, from pool on exposed reef; collected by Mr. and Mrs. J. D. Bradley, September 28, 1953; provided for report with the Galathea material. Description of Ontong Java specimen: Teeth on dentary smooth, in two rows anteriorly; a single row posteriorly. Premaxillary teeth similar to those on dentary; slightly larger, in a single row laterally; a single large median fang anteriorly behind outer premaxillary row. Two median rows of low molariform teeth in roof of mouth starting anteriorly beneath eye. Gill opening white, situated laterally, slightly behind dorsal fin origin. Anterior nostrils tubular, near tip of snout. Posterior nostrils open pores with slightly raised rims, situated before upper anterior edge cf eye. Background color white shading to light brown, everywhere (except gular region and belly) closely speckled with irregular black spots. Each side of snout with an elongate large black spot.

FAMILY EXOCOETIDAE FLYING FISHES Cypselurus antoncichi Woods & Schultz

Cypselurus antoncichi Woods and Schultz in Schultz et al 1953, p. 181. fig. 35 (original description; Type locality Marshall Islands).

Three flying fishes collected by the Galathea Expedition agree fairly well with the description of Cypselurus antoncichi by W oods and Sc h u l t z , representing the second record of this species. Galathea material examined: 3 specimens from station no. 516a Rennell Id., Solomons. 2 specimens whole, 251.5 and 242 mm. in standard length; third specimen onjy anterfor half preserved, its size in life was approximately that of largest specimen. Description of Galathea material: Counts and measurements are given in order of specimens recorded above; all measurements are presented in millimeters. Head and body elongate, body moderately rectangular in cross section. Body depth 46.2, 42.9, 45.1. Center of anus 9.2, 7.4, - - before anal fin origin, situated in a well-defined elliptical pit; Anterior margin of anal pit slightly before a vertical from dorsal fin. Least depth of caudal peduncle 18.0, 16.7,— . Length of caudal peduncle from end of anal fin base 24.8,23.5, — . Width of body before pectoral fin base 36.3, 36.2, 34.3. Head moderately pointed, lower jaw distinctly longer than upper. Head length 65.5, 62.3, 65.9. Snout length 19.6, 18.9, 20.1, less than longitudinal eye diameter; which is 20.6, 20.4, 21.3. Fleshy interorbital width 25.6, 23.5, 24.5. Nostril pit large, aescent-shaped, divided in center by large fleshy membrane, situated approximately '/4 eye diameter before the upper anterior border of the eye. Postorbital length (di­ stance from hind margin of eye to upper edge of gill opening) 24.5, 22.4, 23.8. Jaws with minute teeth. Tongue elongate, tip rounded. Teeth in upper jaw in a single sparse row. Terthin lower jaw in a broad band at symphysis, narrowing laterally to a single row. Teeth presumed to be present on palate, although microscopic examination and staining in Alizarin Red S did not reveal any. Gular folds overlapping, left fold over right; gill membranes free from isthmus narrowly joined across isthmus below a ver­ tical from anterior margin of eye. Gillrakers on first arch slender, shorter than length of holobranchs, 5 -i- 18,4 + 17,5 — 18. Gillrakers on posterior arches short tubercles. Pharyngobranchial teeth minute shagreen-like, on rounded, flat ossifications. Scales large, with few radii on posterior margin (scales examined had approximately 6 radii). No annuli observed, numerous evenly spaced circuli around scale from tiny central focus to outer edge of scale. Scale rows in lengthwise series from upper edge of gill ojjening to midbase of caudal fin 52, 52,— . Lateral-line begins at lower edge of gill opening, extends straight down side to upper edge of pelvic fin, curves over base of pelvic fin and proceeds along side, ending before a vertical from procurrent caudal fin rays. Lateral-line scales 57, 62, — . Number of scales from dorsal fin origin obli­ quely forward to lateral-line 9, 8, — ; from lateral-line forward to anal fin origin 3, 4, — . Predorsal scale rows 37, 39, — ; predorsal scales e.xtending anteriorly to a vertical equidistant between nostrils and tip of snout. Dorsal fin rays 12, 13, — . Predorsal distance to tip of snout 188.6, 181.5, — . Length of dorsal fin base 46.2, 44.2, — . Anal fin rays 10, 10, — . Preanal distance 204, 188, — ; anal fin origin under fifth dorsal ray. Length of anal fin base 3L3, 28.4, — . End of anal fin base slightly before a vertical from dorsal fin base. Pectoral fin rays 16; 15; 15. First ray simple, second branched. Length of jjectoral fin 167.7, 163.5, 163.7, extending to a vertical slightly behind dorsal fin base. Pelvic fin rays 6; 6; — , outer ray broad, short, expanded, inner rays extending to penultimate anal fin ray. Pelvic fin origin midway between end of hypural fan and middle of postorbital length. Caudal fin deeply forked, lower lobe prolonged. Color in alcohol: Darker above, light below. Eye with a horizontal white crescent above pupil. Fin membranes all white. Upper pectoral fin rtiys dark. Inner base of pelvic fin black, anterior pelvic rays dark. Rays of dorsal and anal light. Caudal rays dusky. No fins striped or spotted.

FAMILY MUGILIDAE MULLET

A juvenile example 8 mm. in standard length from Galathea station 516b belongs in this family but cannot be indentified further.

Crenimugil crenilabis (Forskal) (PI. I, figs. I and 2)

Mugil crenilabis Forskal 1775, p. 73 (original description; Mari Rubro and Arabi). W e b e r and de Beaufort 1922, p. 256 (synonymy; description; distribution). F o w l e r 1928, p. 126 (synonymy; description; Oceania records). Crenimugil crenilabis SchuUz 1946, p. 387 (diagnosis; collections Indian Ocean, Christmas I., Phoenix Is., Samoan Is., Tahiti; Marshall Is., Guam). S m ith 1948, p. 836, fig. 5 (diagnosis; distribution). S c h u l t z et al 1953, p. 317 (description; Bikini I., Eniwetok I., Guam, I.). Liza crenilabis Herre 1953, p. 230 (distribution; synonymy).

Difficulty was encountered in identifying the present material since the papillae on the outside of the upper jaw look like flattened multi-cuspid teeth and at first did not appear to agree with any genus in the various keys of W eb er and de Beaufort, S c h u l t z , J. L. B. S m ith and others. On the basis of comparative material at Stanford University^ and the U. S. National Museum (see S c h u l t z 1943, 1946, 1953) the pre­ sent determination was confirmed. Galathea material examined: 20 specimens 17.8-48.5 mm. in standard length from station 5l6e, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description of Galathea material: This species is unique among m^gilids in struc­ ture of the lips. The lower lip is thin and its edge crenulate, directed forward and folded downward at symphysis. Lower lip strongly indented at symphysis from which the notched symphysial knob projects forward. No fleshy folds inside of upper jaw near front of mouth. The crenulate free border continues around the corners of the mouth and merges into the lower row of papillae of the upper lip. The upper lip is broad and vertically flat and smooth except for 2 series of papillae forming a fringe around the edge of the lip. No papillae inside lips. No teeth in jaws. Gillrakers long and slender, approximately 16 + 32 gillrakers on first arch. Inner margin of each raker with short, fine, lateral, cardiform rakers interdigitating with

3. S.U. 24625 Maraa, Tahiti; coll. A. W. H erre, Feb. 17, 1929, 1 specimen.

S. U. 31788 Near Mudikhari Bay, Port Blair, South Andaman Is.; coll. H. S. R o a , Dec. 29, 1934; 2 specimens. ■

S.U. 32738 Cocos Keeling, Indian Ocean; coll. A. W. H erre, Sept. 1933; 2 specimens. those of the neighboring gill. Gilirakers of anterior arch are pointed; those of po- .sterior arches are thicker, shorter, and with truncate and expanded tips. Pseudobran­ chiae wefi developed. Posterior face of first gill arch with a supplemental set of short raker-like structures interdigitating with the normal rakers of the second arch. Gili­ rakers and supplemental rakers well developed on all arches. Upper pharyngobran- chial greatly expanded into a large soft pad in which is imbedded bristles. Tongue with scattered teeth; 32 counted in one of the larger specimens that had the glosso- hyal stained with alizarin red S; scattered teeth on anterior tip, along sides and on center of posterior end of glossohyal. Preorbital slightly indented on anterior margin to receive mouth. Posterior region moderately expanded and its posterior end trun cate and cardiform with 10 ctenidia. General notes: As pointed out by various authors (see Ebeling 1957) the structure of the lips (and other mouth parts) of mugilids varies considerably among genera and species. Much remains to be done, however, to show the nature and extent of the remarkable specializations in the entire head structure in mullets. The whole feeding mechanism varies from group to group of mugilids and no doubt these dif­ ferences are due to variations in feeding methods, differences in substrate in which they feed, and in the food eaten. In general mullet feed over bottom ranging from course.rubble around coral heads to over shore flats to mud in mangrove swamps. This points out the differences in substrate and usually the species are restricted to feeding in one of these kinds of habitats, the mouth parts being modified accordingly. Variations in feeding methods include mullets that pick small invertebrates out of the substrate surface and those (such as Crenimugil crenilabis) that apparently taste by running their lips through sand, picking up mouthfuls of fine sand, and straining it and food out through their complex gill structures. Measurements in percent o f standard length (based on three specimens 38.8, 40.4, and 49.0 mm. in S. L. j: Greatest body depth 26.5 (26.0-27.1). Head length 31.4 (30.9-32.4). Snout length 8.2 (7.7-8.9). Eye diameter 10.0 (9.8-10.3). Interorbital width 11.7 (11.6-11.8). Least depth of caudal peduncle 13.1 (12.7-13.4). Length of caudal peduncle from end of dorsal fin base 16.2 (15.5-16.8).

FAMILY ATHERINIDAE SILVERSIDES A review of the genus Atherion Galathea material of the genus Atherion was difficult to identify from the existing literature in the genus and precipitated the following survey of Atherion.

Genus Atherion Jordan and Starks Atherion Jordan and Starks 1901, p. 203 (original description; genotype by monotype Atherion elymus Jordan and Starks).

The genus Atherion apparently is unique in the family Atherinidae because of the presence of spiny denticles over the surface of the head in each species. S c h u l t z (1948) emphasized their isplation by placing them in a monotypie subfamily Atherio- ninae. However, aside from the denticulate head, they appear not to differ from the Atherininae, and I prefer to consider them as being more naturally placed in that* subfamily. As alluded to by S c h u l t z (1948) in his exposition of the species of elymu^, the genus is in need of a critical analysis on the basis of considerably more material than presently available in museum collections. Three closely related species herein are recognized in the genus from the western Pacific Ocean but it is quite likely that as more collections become available from the Indo-Pacific region, further species will come to light. .

Key to the Species of Atherion

1 a. Median predorsal scales 20. Scale rows from upper edge of gill opening to mid­ base of caudal fin 47-48. Distal tip of maxillary hooked. 14-15 gillrakers below angle on first arch...... Atherion maccullochi Jordan and Hubbs Queensland and Lord Howe Island, Australia 1 b. Median predorsal scales 16-18. Scale rows from upper edge of gill opening to mid-base of caudal fin 41-44. Distal tip of maxillary straight. 10-14 (rarely 14) gillrakers below angle on first arch. ’ 2 a. Numerous rows of bright blue spots along top of back. No denticles before upper edge of pectoral fin. Distal tip of maxillary prolonged, pointed...... Atherion aphrozoicus Schultz Celebes and Philippines 2 b. No blue spots on body. Denticles usually present before upper edge of pectoral fin. Distal tip of maxillary blunt, rounded, often truncate, not prolonged into a point...... Atherion elymus Jordan and Starks • Solomons, Micronesia, Japan

Atlierioa elymus Jordan and Starks (PI. 1, fig. 3; pi. 11, fig. 5; pi. Ill, fig. 7a)

Atherion elymus Jordan and Starks 1901, p. 203, fig. 3 (original description; about dozen types from Misaki, Sagami, Japan). S c h u l t z 1948, p. 24 (relationships). K a m o h a r a 1954, p. 270, fig. 3 (many specimens from Takarajima and Nakano- shima, Tokara Islands, Kagoshima Prefecture). Atherina villosa Duncker and Mohr 1926, p. 135, fig. 10 (original description; 7 spe­ cimens from Neu-Pommern, New Guinea). Atherion elymus elymus Schultz et al 1953, p. 292 (key to characteristics). Atherion elymusfreyi Schultz et al 1953, p. 292, fig. 45 (original description; 115 types from Guam and Saipan, Mariana Is.). Atherion elymus asper Schultz et al 1953, p. 294 (original description; 6 types from Bikini, Marshall Is.). The Galathea material of the family Atherinidae is identified to the species Atherion elymus on the basis of the literature cited in the above synonymy, examina- tipn of tffe various types from Japan, Guam, Saipan, and Bikini and comparative materia] from Micronesia. S c h u l t z (1953) divides this species into four subspecies on the basis of counts of the second dorsal, ana! and pectoral fins and lateral-line scales. “The difierence in numbejr of fin rays, recorded in table 26, forms the chief basis on which all subspecies are separated,” states S c h u l t z on the basis of 115 spe­ cimens from the Mariana Islands for A. elymus freyi, 6 specimens from the northern Marshall Islands for A. elymus asper, 15 specimens from the Philippines for A. elymus aphrozoicus, and an unnamed number of specimens from Japan retained for A. elymus elymus. S c h u l t z further presents “. . . because lititudinal variation from Japan, the Bonin, Marianas and northern Marshall Islands is established in the key and in table 26, we think the naming of subspecies of Atherion is justified, since it expresses our concept of the geographical change of Atherion from Japan to Bikini and the Philippines.” Unfortunalely, the Bonin Islands record and specimens seem not to be included so it is not clear to which subspecies is therein being referred. The present Solomon Islands material keys out in S c h u l t z ' (1953) paper to the Japanese subspecies, which does not corroborate the concept of geographical change just presented. Furthe[more, it is difficult to understand the nature of S c h u l t z ’ subspecies since the variation among the subspecies material seems no more than would be expected frcm separate collections of the same population. S c h u l t z ’ discussion does not treat his ideas of the statistical ranges, intergrades, etc., since his descriptions are based only on the holotypes; the measurements are from the hoiotypes and one paratype of each subspecies. With all due regard to S c h h l t z ’ no doubt careful divi­ sions of Atherion elymus into four subspecies it does not seem to me possible to study the actual subspeciation within the genus Atherion on the basis of the widely scattered and inadequate collections presently available. The species are scarcely known, let alone delving into the matter of populations below the species level. However, I do agree with S c h u l t z that his form aphrozoicus is a recognizably distinct population. In fact 1 consider it one of the most dist inctive species of the genus Atherion and not a subspecies of Atherion elymus. Galathea material examined: Seven specimens 23.7-29.2 mm. in standard length from Galathea station 516b, Renneli Id., Solomons. Additional unrecorded material examined: Approximately 200 specimens from surge channels and coralline ridges of outer reef off Touhou Islet, Kapingamarangi Atoll, Caroline Islands, collected by the author June 28, 1954 on the Pacific Science Board Coral Atoll Program; r4'45” N. Lat., 154’ 48'50” E. Long. The specimens are in the George Vanderbilt Foundation collections at Stanford University. Description o f Galathea material: Body moderately elongate, slightly deeper than head, compressed laterally; deepest in region between pelvic and pectoral fins. Belly without fleshy keel. Anus advanced, slightly nearer anal fin than appressed pelvic fin fips. Distance between anal fin and anterior edge of anus goes more than twice into pelvic fin length. Head rather small, compressed, as wide as body in largest specimens; wider than body in smaller specimens. Top of head flat in older specimens; moderately concave in young. Jaws and anterior region of head covered with tiny fixed teeth as shown in figure 4. Premaxillaries, dentaries, frontals, supraorbitais, orbitals and'opercular series are the main bones bearing denticles. There is some variation in the distribu­ tion and number of denticles on the head, but the pattern remains the same. The younger and smaller specimens have fewer and profwrtionately smaller denticles, but in all specimens the largest and most closely spaced denticles are on the jaws. Mouth strongly oblique, small; upper jaw protractile. Premaxillary fairly broad, without posterior spines, with a round notch on posterior margin lateral to median process; distally sides of premaxillary parallel, fairly broad; distal tip truncate. Medial premaxillary processes broad, very short, blunt, slightly longer and not as blunt in young. To compensate for the missing premaxillary process each maxillary has a long, slender, rod-like process directed forward near its expanded medial tip; at the base of this process the inner face of the maxillary has a rounded, laterally compressed bony nodule. Maxillary with a short sharp spine on its posterior border; distal end of maxillary very slender, its tip not expanded, attached on the outer face and posterior tip of premaxillary. Dentary deep laterally, similar in outline to Sc h u lt z ’ figure (1948, p. 25, fig. 3 G ) of Hepsettia boyeri (Risso) except the superior lateral process is higher in the Galathea specimens. No distinct row of teeth on edge of jaw s; rows of denticles on outer face of jaws contiguous with those on biting edge of jaws. Lateral teeth on biting edge of madible extend posteriorly (to superior lateral process) approximately *, j-'/j of its lateral length when viewed in profile. Teeth on biting edge of premaxillary restricted to medial half of the length of this bone. Vomer with indistinct scattered teeth, roughly arranged in a triangular-shaped patch on largest specimens; point of triangle facing posteriorly. No palatine teeth. Gillrakers moderately long and slender, but distinctly shorter than eye lens diameter; each gill- raker base broad and compressed, tapering to a point distally; inner edge denticulate. All specimens have two rakers above the angle on first arch; below the angle there are 10-14 (average 12) rakers. Posterior arches with only short spinous tubercles for gillrakers. All gill slits complete. Eight large pseudobranchiae present. Pharyngobran- chial teeth long, pointed, much larger than those in jaws, situated in large patches. Branchiostegal rays 6 6. Nostrils relatively large and conspicuous. Posterior nostril near upper anterior border of eye, situated in a deep lateral notch of supraorbital bone, without raised rim; its edge bordered medially by denticles. Inside of nostril opening covered by thin membrane open only at upper margin. Anterior nostril situated in notch between supraorbital bone above and lachrymal (preorbital) bone below, near anterior mar­ gins of these bones; and situated slightly below horizontal level of posterior nostril. Anterior nostril smaller than posterior, in a forward-directed, open, swollen-tipped tube. Eye large, its margin denticulate (denticles on orbital bones) except along postero- ventral edge; upper bony orbital rim indented. Usually a patch of denticles on middle of interorbital region on frontal bones; another patch is present on larger specimens immediately before upper edge of pectoral fin. Lower posterior margin of preoper­ culum slightly indented. Lateral body scales short and broad, with vertical straight circuli parallel with free border; no radii present, posterior edge crenulate. No circuli on exposed portion of scale. Lateral scale series from upper edge of gill opening to tip of hypural fan 4f-44 (average 43). Three rows of scales between lateral-line series and first dorsal fin, and four between lateral-line series and anal fin origin. Predorsal scales 16-18 (average 17), originating over gill opening; first predorsal scale of each dorsal fin deeply notched. No scales present on top of head. Four enlarged tenacious scales present on operculum, none of which bear denticles. Basal one-fourth to third of caudal fin covered by small round scales. Axillary scales at pectoral base enlarged and modified; two overlapping scales curve over and shield upper pectoral origin. Pelvic fin lateral axillary scales pointed, sometimes bifid at posterior tip, originating at pelvic spine base. Median scales between pelvics consist of one broad median rounded scale and one narrow short rounded scale on each side. Small pointed scales present along anal fin base. A long scale is present laterally on each side of anus and minute urogenital papilla. Lateral-line present in association with median-lateral scales over pigmented stripe; usually each scale between region of appressed pectoral fin and last penultimate scale before caudal fin origin has a single pit and hole near margin of preceding scale. The Galathea material has 31-33 lateral-line bearing scales. First dorsal with 3-4 (average 4) flexible spines; outline of fin slightly rounded; first spine longest; last spine connected to body by broad membrane. Second dorsal with one flexible spine, followed by a long simple ray, and 7-9 (average 8) branched soft rays. First dorsal origin over or nearly over anus. Second dorsal origin o\er or nearly over seventh branched anal ray. Anal fin with one short flexible spine followed by a long simple soft ray, and 13 (largest specimen 14) branched soft rays. Anal fin origin below a vertical from the appressed first dorsal fin tip. End of anal fin below or nearly below a vertical from third from last ray of second dorsal fin. Second dorsal and anal fin outlines falcate. Pectoral fin rays 10-13 (average 13) upper and lower­ most ray simple, remainder branched; uppermost ray longest. Pelvic fin rays 1,5; inner and outermost rays longest. Principal caudal rays 9 — 8; lower caudal fin lobe slightly more prolonged. Coloration? The color no longer remains but the color pattern is well preserved. The fish were first preserved in formaldehyde so the lateral silvery stripe is not pre­ sent. Instead the underlying melanophores are the dominant coloration, forming a stripe from the axilla of the upper edge of the pectoral fin posteriorly onto the caudal fin base. Anteriorly the stripe starts in a point, and gradually broadens to its widest over the anal fin, rather abruptly constricts to about half this width on the caudal peduncle, and expands to a broad spot on the base of the caudal fin. The stripe is almost as wide as the overlying lateral-line scales in the region of the anal fin. The mid-lateral stripe pigmentation is entirely underneath the squamation. The other most distinctive markings are the color markings on the back. Basically there is a mid­ dorsal stripe from head to caudal fin with lateral crescentic stripes extending laterally and obliquely forward on each of the first lateral scales. The scale row above the lateral-line series is usually only lightly pigmented with scattered pigment cells. The mid-dorsal stripe is both beneath and on top of the medial scale series, but the re­ maining pigment is on top of the scales. Usually no or a few scattered superficial chromatophores on sides of body. Each side of anus and anal fin with rnderlying pigmentation associated with a medial spot behind anus and a stripe between pelvic fin bases and procurrent caudal fin rays. Peritoneum, upper lip, top of snout, upper edge of operculum, outer side of dentary, inside of operculum and occiput (except for medial transparent triangular fenestra) black. Operculum dusky black. First dorsal, anal and pelvics hyalin. Pectoral fins hyalin in smaller specimens except for an axillary spot near upper edge; in larger specimens axillary spot is large and fin rays have light pigmentation. Second dorsal hyalin except for posterior and sometimes anterior sides of rays being lightly pigmented. Caudal fin heavily pigmented at base in region of scales; rays lightly pigmented except at tips. Description o f the types o f Atherion elymus: S c h u l t z ’ consideration of the species of A. elymus as a complex of subspecific forms makes it necessary to reexamine the types of A. elymus and establish the variation of the original Japanese population. S c h u l t z (1948, p. 24) mentions that he has examined the five paratypes of A. elynrns from Japan deposited in the U. S. National Museum (no. 49812) but gives no descrip­ tion nor do they seem to have been utilized statistically in the comparison to the sub­ species he described in 1953 (see his table 26 and descriptions). I have examined all the types and describe below the holotype and paratypes deposited at Stanford Uni­ versity and the U. S. National Museum. Material examined: Holotype 27.6 mm. in standard length; S. U. no. 6528; collected at Misaki, Japan, by J o r d a n and S n y d e r in 1906. Ten paratypes 19.7-23.5 mm. in standard length; S. U. no. 6711; same data as holotype; one goby is also accidentally in the bottle. Five paratypes; same data, U. S. N . M. no. 49812. First it is important to note that the types are all immature, comparing closely with the smaller Galathea specimens. Therefore, there are some differences between them and the previous description (most notably in coloration) because the preceding description is based primarily on the more adult material that shows the characters more readily. The various measurements and proportions can be readily obtained from table one for comparison. Body form as in Galathea material, but not as deep as shown in illustration figure five; greatest depth immediately in advance of pelvic fins. Anterior edge of anus slightly nearer anal fin origin than appressed pelvic fins. Head moderately small, strongly compressed. Jaws and anterior region of head covered with tiny fixed teeth similar to those shown in figure three, but not as dense. The suboperculum is devoid of denticles except at the posterior margin. The denti­ culated patches before the upper edge of the pectoral fin and on the middle of the interorbital are missing. However, the denticles on the premaxillaries, dentaries, and lower edges of suspensorium are as denticultate as on the figure. Mouth strongly oblique and small, as in Galathea specimens. Only differences noted in mouth structure are that the lateral teeth on mandibles have not yet devel­ oped; the premaxiliary is slightly different from even the smallest Galathea specimens in not being as straight, and in having the lateral end distinctly expanded; the maxillary is also modified in that the medial processes are slightly longer than in corresponding Galathea specimens; there also appears to be a slight difference in the anterior rod- fike process of the maxillary: In the Galathea material it appears to be directed more mfcsially than in the Japanese types, which seem to point more directly forward. Gillrakers on first arch 2 above angle; 12-14 (arerage 13) on lower limb. Branchial apparatus same as description for Galathea examples. Nostrils, eyes, squamation and lateral-line same as Galathea specimens, except upper orbital rim not quite as deeply indented. Lateral-line scales same as in figure five, posterior edge crenulate. Scales in lateral series 42-44 (average 43); predorsal scales 16-17 (average 16). Fins same as in Galathea description. First dorsal rays IV (one specimen with V). Second dorsal rays I, i 8 (one specimen with 9). Anal fin I, i 13 or I, i 14 (average 1, i 13). Pectoral fin rays 11-13 (12). Pelvic fin rays 1,5. Principal caudal rays 9 -r 8. Coloration very similar to smaller Galathea specimens, but there are several appreciable differences. In general the pigmentation is more sparse. The lateral stripe k not evenly (Hgmented as in the Galathea examples but with a more intense line of black pigment cells along its center. In Galathea examples of commensurate size the scale row above the lateral-line series is practically devoid of pigmentation; in the Japanese types there are one or two melanophores on each scale, although they are faint and mostly missing on the smallest specimens. The Japanese examples (parti­ cularly noticable in holotype) also differ in less dense midventral pigmentation between anus and caudal fin; the peritoneum is not as dense black either.

Atherion aphrozoicus Schultz (PI. I, fig. 4; pi. II, fig. 6; pi. Ill, fig. 7b)

Atherion elymus aphrozoicus Schultz 1953, p. 295 (original description; 15 specimens from the Philippines.)

As can be seen from the illustations (Figures 4 and 6) Atherion aphrozoicus is a striking species with a greater development of the spines on the head than in the others, and a uhique color pattern of blue spots along the dorsum of nape and body. Material examined: 14 paratypes 25.5-33 mm. in standard length of Atherion aphrozoicus from Tara I., Philippines, Dec. 15, 1908, collected by the “Albatross” Expedition. 6 specimens 32.2-44.3 mm. in standard length from Lembeh Strait, Celebes, June 21, 1929, collected by A. W . H e r r e ; S. U. no. 29488. Description o f material examined: Body elongate, appreciably deeper than head, strongly compressed laterally. Body depth greatest in region of pelvic fins. Anus ad­ vanced, slightly nearer anal fin origin than appressed pelvic fin rays; distance between anal fin origin and anterior rim of anus goes barely twice or less into pelvic fin length. Head fairly small, compressed, slightly wider than body. Top of head flat. Jaws and .anterior region of head covered with tiny fixed teeth as shown in figure four; premaxillaries, dentaries, frontals, supraorbitals, orbitals and opercular series are the main bones bearing dentacles. Mouth strongly oblique, small; upper jaw protractile. Premaxillary very broad, without posterior spines, with a deep rounded notch on posterior margin next to medial process and a shallow depression laterally; distally sides of premaxillary approximately parallel, broad; distal tip slightly rounded. Medial premaxillary pro­ cess broad, blunt, short; posterio#tip truncate, laterally swollen. Maxillary similar to the condition described for A. elymus, but, as in A. maccullochi, the rod-like pro­ cess is markedly swollen at the tip and very slender in cross section at its origin; a short sharp spine is present on the posterior margin of the maxillary. At mid-lateral length the maxillary is constricted and flattened in cross section; the distal end of the maxillary is expanded and prolonged anteriorly into a blunt point, but not hooked. Dentary same as described for A. eh mus. Rows of denticles on outer face of jaws contiguous with those on biting edge of jaws. Lateral teeth on biting edge of dentary extend posteriorly to superior lateral process, approximately '/i-'/'e of its length when viewed in profile. Teeth on biting edge of premaxillary restricted to medial half of the length of this bone. Vomer with scattered teeth; no definite pattern or arrange­ ment discernable. No palatine teeth. Gillrakers and branchial apparatus same as in A. elymus. Gillrakers 3 — 11, in four paratypes, 4 — 12 in one paratype, 2 - 10 in two Celebes specimens, 2 — 11 in one Celebes specimen. Nostrils and eye as described for A. elymus. No denticles present on middle of interorbital, or before upper edge of pectoral fin. Lower posterior margin of preopercle distintly indented. Lateral body scales short and broad with vertical straight circuli parallel with free border; circuli curving around parallel to upper and lower margins, continuing further anteriorly than in illustration of A. elymus lateral-line scale. No radii present; posterior border weakly crenulate, lateral scale series from upper edge of gill opening to tip of hypural fan 41-42. Three rows of scales between lateral-line series and anal fin origin. Predorsal scales 16-18, originating over gill opening; first predorsal scale of each dorsal fin deeply notched. No scales present on top of head. Five enlarged tenacious scales on operculum of which lowermost bear denticles. Basal one-fourth of caudal fin covered by small scales. Axillary scales and other squamation same as described for A. elymus. Lateral-line well developed, but difficult to discern; a single tube present through each median-lateral scale from near gill opening almost to end of hypural fan. First dorsal with 3-4 flexible spines; outline of fin somewhat rounded; first spine longest; last spine connected to body by broad membrane. Second dorsal with one flexible spine followed by a long simple ray and 7-8 branched soft rays. First dorsal origin slightly before a vertical from anus. Second dorsal origin over a vertical from 7th-9th branched anal fin ray. Anal fin with one flexible spine followed by a simple soft ray and 12-13 branched soft rays. Anal fin origin before a vertical from appressed tip of dorsal fin. End of anal fin base approximately under vertical from third from last ray of second dorsal fin. Second dorsal and anal fin outlines falcate. Pectoral fin rays 10-12, all but outer­ most rays branched. Pelvic fin rays 1,5, inner and outermost rays longest. Principal caudal rays 9-1-8, lower caudal lobe more prolonged. Coloration no longer remains but the color pattern is well preserved. The lateral silver is still present, forming a band from the axilla of the upper edge of the pectoral fip posteriorly onto the caudal fin base. Anteriorly the stripe starts as a band in the axilla o f thfe pectoral fin; it is broadest above the end of the anal fin; it constricts on the caudal peduncle and expands into a pointed spot on the caudal fin. The stripe is as wide as the lateral-line scales in the region of the anal fin. The illustration (fig. 6) presents the lower half of the stripe as darker than the upper; this is due to preserva­ tion. The most distinctive color markings on the head and body are those on the dorsum. Dense melanophores form a mid-dorsal band the width of the medial scale row from head to procurrent caudal fin rays. In the center of each major melanophore is an iridescent light blue spot which was probably bright solid blue in life. Thus the center stripe has a pattern of three rows of blue spots. The next lateral-scale row has two or three dense melanophores; in the center of each melanophore is a hght blue spot; thus this scale series also has a series of two or three rows of blue spots along the back. The next scale series down, which is the scale row above tye lateral-line series, has few scattered melanophores and no blue spots. No pigmentation on side of belly or prepelvic region. Mid-ventral stripe underlying scales on each side of anus posteriorly to procurrent cuadal fin rays. Each larger dense melanophore with a blue spot in center as in mid-dorsal band, upper lip, top of snout, outer side of dentary„and occiput (except for medial transparent triangular fenestra) with dense melanophores. Top of head heavily pigmented with iridescent blue. Gill chamber and peritoneum dusky black. First dorsal, anal and pelvics hyalin. Pectoral fins hyalin except for an axillary spot near upper edge and distal pigmentation on rays. Second dorsal fin hyalin except for posterior and sometimes anterior sides of rays being lightly pigmented. Caudal fin heavily pigmented at base in region of scales; rays lightly pigmented except hyalin at tips.

Atberion m ac^lochi Jordan and Hubbs (PI. Ill, figs. 8 and 9)

Atherion maccullochi Jordan and Hubbs 1919, p. 30 (original description; 3 types from Lord Howe Island). W h itle y 1932, p. 278 ^description of three specimens. Low Isles, Queensland; reference to topotypes from Lord Howe Id.) W h itle y 1951, p. 394, fig. 3 (synonymy; figure of specimen from Low Isles, Queensland, Australia). S c h u l t z et al 1953, p. 292 (included in key to species and subspecies of Atherion).

So far as I have found, J o r d a n and Hubbs’ original careful and accurate descrip­ tion is the only full description of this species. In consideration of the present review of the species of Atherion a redescription is presented of the type material along with a table of measurements of the types and an illustration of one of the paratypes. , Material examined: Holotype 48.3 mm. in standard length; S. U. no. 23188 from Lord Howe Island, east of Australia, received from Mr. Allan R. M cC ulloch. Two paratypes 43 and 45 mm. in standard lengths; S. U. no. 23187; same data as holotypes. Description o f types: On the basis of material presently available it appears that Alherion macuUochi is an appreciably larger species than others within the genus, but the body and head proportions are within the same general range as the dther species of Atherion. Body moderately elongate, slightly deeper than head, strongly compressed laterally. Body depth about the same between head and anal fin, barely deeper at pelvic fin origin (lateral view illustration of paratype shows the belly slightly deeper than the specimen actually is; however, Miss Bradbury’s rendition is considered true to life in this species). Anus advanced, but much nearer anal fin than appressed pelvic fin tips; distance between anal fin origin and anterior rim of anus goes barely twice or less into pelvic fin length. Head rather small, compressed, slightly wider than body. Top of head slightly concave. Jaws and anterior region of head covered with tiny fixed teeth as shown in figure nine. The three types are almost exactly alike in denticle pattern. As in the other species, the premaxiilaries, dentaries, frontals, supraorbitals, orbitals, and opercular series are the main bones bearing denticles. Mouth strongly oblique, small; upper jaw protractile. Premaxillary very broad, without jxjsterior spines, with two rounded notches in jxjsterior margin lateral to medial process; distally sides of premaxillary not parallel, but widening; distal tip truncate. Medial premaxillary process long, broad, jxjsterior tip slightly expanded and bifid. Maxillary similar to the condition described for A. elymus but the rod-like process is markedly swollen at the tip and very slender in cross section at its origin; a short sharp spine is present on the jxjsterior margin of the maxillary, but it is not as well developed as in A. elymus. At mid-lateral length the maxillary is very constrict­ ed, and practically round in cross section; the distal end of the maxillary is expanded and has a blunt forward directed hook on its anterior margin; maxillary tip attached to outer face and jxjsterior tip of premaxillary. Dentary very deep laterally, same as described for A. elymus. Rows of denticles on outer face of jaws contiguous with those on biting edge of jaws. Lateral teeth on biting edge of mandible extend posterior­ ly approximately ' 5-'/« of its length when viewed in profile. Teeth on biting edge of premaxillary restricted to medial half of the length of this bone. Vomer and tongue with scattered teeth; no definite pattern of arrangement discernable. No palatine teeth. Gillrakers and branchial apparatus same as in A. elymus. Gillrakers on first arch of holotype and one paratype 3 - 14; smallest paratype 3 ^ 15. Nostrils precisely as described in A. elymus. Eye large, its margin denticulate (denticles on orbital bones) except on posterior-ventral margin; upper bony orbital rim indented. A sparse patch of denticles on middle of interorbital on frontal bones in the holo­ type; a single denticle present in one paratype, none in other. Lower jxjsterior margin of preopercle indented in holotype, but not in paratypes. Lateral body scales very short and broad, with vertical straight circuli parallel with free border; no radii present; posterior edge round. No curculi on exposed portion of scale. Lateral scale series from upper edge of gill opening to tip of hypural fan 47 in holotype and one paratype, 48 in other paratype. Three rows of scales between lateral-line series and first dorsal fin, and four between the lateral-line series and anal fin origin. Predorsal scales 20, originating over gill opening; first predorsal scale of each dorsal fin deeply notched. No scales present on top of head. Three en­ larged tenacious scales present on operculum, none of which bear denticles. Basal oije-fourtH of caudal fin covered by small round scales. Axillary scales not enlarged or modified; no scales present at upper pectoral fin origin. Pelvic fin lateral axillary scale pointed, originating at pelvic fin spine base. Median scales between pelvics consist of one broad rounded scale and one narrow short rounded scale on each side. Small moderately pointed scales present along anal fin base. No enlarged shield scales about anus as in A. elymus. Lateral-line very weakly developed; tubes present through only a few scattered scales of mid-lateral series. First dorsal with 4 (holotype 5) flexible spines; outline of fin slightly rounded; first spine longest; last spine connected to body by broad membrane. Second dorsal with one flexible spine, followed by a long simple soft ray, and 10 (9 in one paratype) branched soft rays. First dorsal origin distinctly before anus; conversely, anus ori­ ginates beneath middle of dorsal fin base. Second dorsal fin origin over or nearly over eighth branched anal fin ray. Anal fin with one short flexible spine followed by a long simple soft ray, and 15 (14 in one paratype) branched soft rays. Anal fin origin below a vertical from the appressed tip of first dorsal fin. End of anal fin base below or nearly below a vertical from fourth from last ray of second dorsal fin. Second dorsal and anal fin outlines falcate. Pectoral fin rays 11, all but outermost rays branched. Pelvic fin rays 1,5, inner and outermost rays longest. Principal caudal rays 9 + 8, lower caudal lobe more prolonged. Coloration no longer remains but the color pattern is well preserved. The types appear to have been first preserved in formaldehyde and no silver color remains. All that is left of the lateral stripe present in life is the underlying melanophores, which form a faint stripje from beforq the upper edge of the pectoral fin posteriorly onto the caudal fin base. Anteriorly the stripe starts as a spot before the pectoral fin and as it continues posteriorly it abruptly expands into a broad stripe at the axilla of the pectoral fin; it gradually broadens to its widest over the anal fin, constricts moderately on the caudal p>eduncle and expands into a large bilobed spot on the caudal fin. The stripe is ajmost as wide as the underlying lateral-line scales in the region of the anal fin. The mid-lateral stripe pigmentation is entirely underneath the squamation, and is darkest superiorly; ventrally the stripe is not as heavily pigmented as in the Galathea material of A. elymus, but similar to the Japanese types. The most di­ stinctive markings on the body are the oolor markings on the back. They are essenti­ ally the same as described in A. elymus. especially for the Japanese types, because each scale of the scale row above the mid-lateral series bears 2-3 melanophores. No pigmentation on side of belly, or prepelvic region. Mid-ventral stripe underlying scales between pelvic fins and procurrent caudal rays, continuing on each side of anal fin; this mid-ventral pigmentation is not as heavy as in the Galathea material of A. elymus, but is similar to the Japanese types. Upper lip, top of snout, outer side of denfary, and occiput (except for medial transparent triangular fenestra) black. Inner surface of operculum and peritoneum dusky black. First dorsal, anal and pjelvics hyalin. Pectoral fins hyalin, except for a large pigmented spot on upper axillary re­ gion. Second dorsal hyalin except the posterior and sometimes the anterior sides of the rays being lightly pigmented. Caudal fin heavily pigmented at base in region of scales; rays lightly pigmented except at tips. '

FAMILY PSEUDOCHROMIDAE CORAL BA SSES Plesiops caeruleolineatus Riippell

Plesiops caeruleolineatus Riippell 1835, p. 5, pi. 2, fig. 5 (original description; type from Massaua). Sm ith 1952, p. 143, fig. 1, pi. 10 (synonymy; detailed description; specimens from Inhaca I., Ponte de Barra, Ilha de Goa, Baixa Pinda, Shimoni, and Mombasa). I nger 1955, p. 270, figs. 2a, 3a (synonymy; description; records, including Bougainville, Solomons). Plesiops melas Bleeker 1849b, p. 9 (original description; type from Boleling, Bali). W eber and de Beaufort 1929, p. 378 (synonymy; description; distribution; re­ lationships). Sc h u lt z 1953 et al, p. 400, table 35 (descripiion; 165 specimens from Bikini L, Rongelap I., Rongerik L, Kwajalein I., Eniwetok L, Guam L, Saipan L). H erre 1953 (synonymy; distribution). Plesiops nigricans (in part) Fowler 1928, p. 188 (synonymy; description; distri­ bution). '

Galathea material examined: One specimen 30.8 mm. in standard length from Station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. It is identified to this species on the basis of literature cited in the synonymy, particularly following the results of Inger (1955) and from the examination of the comparative material listed below which is in the Stanford University fish collection.

S.U. 18345 Tide pool at Agate Village, Guam Island. Coll. O rro So k o l , Aug. 15, 1952; 2 specimens 21 and 24 mm. S.L. S.U. 20257 Calayan, Philippines; coll. R. C. M cG regor, 4 specimens 27-50 mm. S.L. S.U. 25057 Wala Is., New Hebrides; coll. A. W. H erre, March 29, 1929; I specimen 33 mm. S.L. S.U. 28035 Waigiu; coll. A. W. H erre, June 6-8, 1929; 6 specimens 27-48 mm. S.L. S.U. 24067 Malo Is., New Hebrides; coll. A. W. H erre, March 30, 1929; 8 specimens 29-43 mm. S.L. S.U. 28524 Dumaguete, Philippines; coll. A. W. H erre, June-Aug., 1931; 9 speci­ mens 21-49 mm. S.L. S.U. 28525 Punta Flecha, Zamboanga, Mindanao, Philippines; coll. A. W. H erre, July 29, 1931; 10 specimens 16-49 mm. S.L. S.U. 28526 Culion, Philippines; coll. A. W. H erre, May 3, 1931; 1 specimen 48 mm. S.L. S.U. 28528 Dumaguete, Philippines; coll. A. W. H erre, June 13, 1931; I specimen 40 mm. S.L. S.U. 29337 Palau Is.,; coll. A. W. H erre, Oct. 13, 1933; I specimen 33 mm. S.L. V>8 S.U. 32864 Tide pools, Pulo Tioman, Ayer Batang; coll. A. W. H erre, 1937; 2 • specimens 49 and 51 mm. S.L. S.iJ. 3894S Dumaguete, Oriental Negros Province, Philippines; coll. A. W. H erre, Aug. 7-12, 1940; 2 specimens 45 and 60 mm. S.L. S.U. 38947 Brook’s Point, Palawan, Philippines; coll. A. W. H erre, June, 1940; 5 specimens 35-48 mm, S.L. S.U. 38949 Nasugbu, Batangas Prov., Luzon, Philippines; A. W. H e r r e , June 11, 1940; 1 specimen 32 mm. S.L.

The latest revisions of the genus Plesiops by Smith (1952) and I nger (1955) have been followed in using the name caeruleolineatus. As alluded to by earlier authors and well presented by Smith and I n g er, the nomenclature and systematics of the genus Plesiops deserve detailed investigation and revision. Such study must be based on material from the central tropical Pacific through the Indian Ocean over to Africa. Smith has given an account of African material as a basis for this comparison and has dearly pointed out m any of the problems involved. Inger has carried this work further and incorporated Pacific material to clear up the basic problems of the species. Description of Galathea Specimen: Body strongly compressed; outline concave between pelvic fins and anus. Head broader than body. Head covered with numerous tiny lateral-line pores, ^hich do not have raised rims or only slightly raised rims. Eye very large, upper border entering into profile of head. Interorbital very narrow, less in width than snout length. Anterior nostril with a low raised tube; posterior margin with a raised flap. Posterior nostril bordering eye with a slightly raised rim anteriorly. Maxillary extends posteriorly slightly beyond vertical from eye. Teeth in a course villiform band on jaws, vomer and palatines, tending to be caniniform and enlarged at symphysis of jaws. Ail teeth directed posteriorly, depressible. Tongue slightly notched. Gillrakers very short and slender, covered with minute sharp denticles; 3 — I -j 6 on first arch. No slit behind last arch. Upper pharyngobranchial teeth conical, tending to be molariform; arranged in a circular patch on each side. Branchiostegal rays 5 — 5. Gill membranes deeply cleft, free from isthmus. Dorsal rays XI, 7.* Anal rays 111, 9.* Pectoral fin rounded, rays iii, 19. Pelvic fin very elongate, b y s 1,4. Caudal fin rounded, 16 principal rays. Upper lateral-line with 20 scales bearing pores. Measurements in percent of standard length: Body depth 30.3. Caudal peduncle depth 16.6. Caudal peduncle length to dorsal fin base 14.7. Head length 36.8. Snout length 06.5. Diameter of eye 11.1. Least bony interorbital width 05.9. Longest pectoral fin ray length 24.4. Longest pelvic fin ray length 45.2. Longest dorsal spine length 18.6. Longest dorsal soft ray length 22.2. Longest anal soft ray length 22.2. Coloration: Nothing is left of the original coloration except the general pattern. Head and body solid brown. Under the posterior edge of each lateral body scale is a vertical darker brown spot. Posterior border of eye with two darker brown spots. No black spot on operculum, or light dots on head or body. Dorsal fin basally brown; distal V«-‘/s of rays, membranes, and flaps of spinous dorsal white. Tips of first four

4. Last two rays counted as one. soft dorsal rays white. Basal dark portion of dorsal fin with indications of two light longitudinal stripes. Anal fin white on anterior membranes and on soft ray tipe. Pectoral fins lightly, evenly pigmented. Pelvic fins mottled in a zigzag pattern of horizontal stripes across the membranes and rays.

FAMILY APOGONIDAE CARDINAL FISHES Apogon novemfasciatus Cuvier & Valenciennes

Apogon novemfasciatus Cuvier & Valenciennes 1828, p. 154 (original description; types from Timor and Guam). W e b e r and de Beaufort 1913, p. 302 (synonymy; description; distribution). H e r r e 1931, p. 6 (name only; Tenibuli, Solomon Is.). L a c h n e r in S c h u l t z et al 1953, p. 461, pi. 37B (synonymy; description; Bikini I., Eniwetok I., Rongelap I., Rongerik I., Guam I., Rota L). H e r r e 1953, p. 312 (synonymy).

The present material was identified to the polymorphic species A. novemfasciatus on the basis of L a c h n e r ’s key and descriptions (1953) and from comparative material in the George Vanderbilt Foundation and Stanford collections from various localities in the East Indies, Melanesia, Micronesia, Polynesia and the Phillippines. The species has been previously recorded from the Solomons by H e r r e (1931). Galathea material examined: Five specimens 18.3, 20, 25, 32.3, and 33.5 mm. in S.L. from station 5l6d, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea material: Maxillary extends to near a vertical from po­ sterior border of eye. Anterior nostril in a raised straight tube; posterior nostril larger, without raised rim or tube; internasal area on each side with numerous mi- nute.mucus papillae. Posterior margin of preopercle serrate; lower limb of preopercle smooth or irregular, with a few weak denticulations. Teeth in jaws villiform, inwardly depressible, equal-sized, not enlarged at symphysis; in approximately 3-4 irregular series along jaws. Teeth on palatines and vomer same as on jaws, in 1-2 irregular series. The teeth on vomer arranged in the shape of a chevron. Gillrakers slender, inner face densely denticulated. Outer end of gill arch with 3 denticulated tubercles above and below arch in same series with the rakers. Gillrakers 2 - I r 9, 2 - I +9, 2 -f I — 10, in three largest specimens (not including counts for tubercles which would add 3 to each first and last count). Pseudobranchiae well developed, about 12 tufts. Dorsal rays VII-1,9, third spine longest. Anal rays 11,8. Pectoral fin with 11-12 distinct rays, not including short “splint-ray" applied closely to uppermost normal ray. Caudal fin forked. Lateral-line complete, approximately 27 lateral-line scales from upper edge of operculum onto caudal fin. Body with five, fairiy wide, brown longitudinal stripes. Middle three stripes extend anteriorly across head and posteriorly converge onto caudal fin. Middle stripe sligthly wider than other stripes, passing above pectoral fin base, not widened in'\o a spot posteriorly. No oblique stripes on head or body. First dorsal dusky brown. Soft dorsal and anal with a dark brown bar near base.

IfTO ' Measurements in percent o f standard length (Three largest Galathea specimens): Body depth 33.4 (32.2-34.0). Head length 41.1 (39.7-43.2). Snout length 10.2 (8.7-10.8). E y diame*ter 13.7 (13.0-14.8). Interorbital width 8.7 (8.4-9.2). Least caudal peduncle depth 14.3 (14.0-14.9). Caudal peduncle length from end of anal fin base 26.2 (25.7­ 26.8).

FAMILY POMACENTRIDAE DAMSELFISHES Dascyllus aruanos (Linnaeus)

Chaetodon aruanus Linnaeus 1758, p. 275 (original description; habitat in Indii). Dascyllus armnus Seale 1906, p. 55 (name only; one specimen Shortland Id., Solo­ mons). H e r r e 1931, p. 8 (name only; Shortland Island, Solomons). S e a le 1935, p. 368 (name only; Solomons; Rennell Island at KanggavaBay; Sikaiana Island, Steward Is.). H a r r y 1949, p. 143 (name only; Solomons; Purvis Bay, Florida Island; Shortland Island; Kanggava Bay, Rennell Island; Sikaiana Island, Steward Islands).

This well known species has been recorded from the Solomon Islands three times by S e a le (1906, 1935) and H a r r y (1949). One lot of Galathea specimens is identified to this species on the bifsis of the distinctive color markings; first vertical dark band through the eye; second vertical band through pectoral fin base and pelvic fins; third dark band across body and soft dorsal and anal fins; caudal fin light, without bands. Galathea materia! examined: 5 specimens 23.6-41.0 mm. in standard length from station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons.

Abudefduf glaucus (Cuvier & Valenciennes)

Glyphisodon glaucus Cuvier and Valenciennes 1830, p. 475 (original description; Guam). Abudefduf glaucus Herre 1953, p. 600 (extensive synonymy; distribution).

This distinctive species is represented by a collection of young to adults in the Galathea material. Apparently it has not been recorded from the Solomons although it has been extensively recorded across Oceania and the East Indies. The determination was confirmed on the basis of comparative material in the Stanford collections and elsewhere. Galathea material examined: 6 specimens 17.0-48.8 mn-.. in standard length from station 5l6d, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description of Galathea material: Counts and descriptive details prepared from all but smallest specimen. Mouth strongly oblique; maxillary extending posteriorly behind a vertical from anterior border of eye. Teeth in each jaw long, slender, incisi- form, in two closely appressed rows; tips of individual teeth rounded. Some authors state the teeth are in one row and they might be interpreted as such since every other tooth is in the inner, slightly shorter row but filling the gap in the outer row, closely appressed to the outer teeth. Depth of preorbital slightly over 3 times in eye in largest specimen, ranging to approximately 6 in smallest specimen. Preorbital n&t n o tc l^ . Opercle with three vertical scale series. Two broad, flat, pointed spines at posterior border of operculum. Preopercular free borders without scales. Six series of scales between tip of maxillary and posterior edge of preopercle. Subopercle with two rows of large scales along its length. Lower and posterior borders of preopercle free and smooth. Scales on top of head not extending as far forward as nostrils or a vertical from anterior border of eye. Numerous tiny lateral-line pores on head, particularly behind eye. Nostrils with a slightly raised rim. Gill membranes free from isthmus. Gillrakers on first arch long, slender, 5-7 + 14-15 rakers on largest specimens. Rakers on posterior arches short, spinous tubercles. Branchiostegal rays 6-1-6. Dorsal fin rays XIll, II or 12. Anal fin rays 11,12. Pectoral fin rays 17-19. Pelvic fin rays 1,5. Principal caudal fin rays 8-1-7. Upper lateral-line scales 17-19, counting the tubular scales. Lower lateral line scales 8. The “two” lateral-lines are usually continuous, since the oblique scale series containing the last upper lateral-line scale also has the first scale bearing pores of the lower lateral-line as well as having the two scales in between the lateral lines bearing pores. Mid-lateral scales from opercle to end of hypural fan 24-25. • Distinctive color markings in preservative: Anus solid black. Top of head and upper part of body dark brown. Belly, lower half of sides caudal peduncle, yellowish. Indistinct darker spots behind eye, faintly leading into two longitudinal streaks along back between upper lateral-line and dorsal fin. These streaks extend forward onto snout; one above eye; the other from middle of eye to upper edge of snout. Spinous dorsal fin evenly brown. Soft dorsal, caudal, anal pelvic fins dusky. Only base of pectoral fin pigmented. Tips of middle caudal rays darker. Anal fin with a marginal band.

. Abfldefduf septemfasciatus (Cuvier & Valenciennes)

Glyphisodon septemfasciatus Cuvier and Valenciennes 1830, p. 463 (original de­ scription; Isle-de-France). ^ Abudefduf septemfasciatus Seale 1906, p. 53 (name only; Shortland Id., Solomons). H e r r e 1931, p. 8 (name only; Shortland Island, Solomons), de Beaufort 1940, p. 401 (synonymy; description; distribution).

One lot of young examples of Abudefduf septemfasciatus was taken by the Ga- lathea Expedition, providing the second record of this species from the Solomons. The species is abundant in the central Western Pacific and Indian Ocean. The Rennell Island specimens are similar to Abudefduf sordidus in color, having a large black spot on anterior dorsal spines and a black saddle across the top of the caudal peduncle. However, they have 13 dorsal rays and 12 anal rays, while A. sordidus has 14-15 rays in these fins. * Galathea material examined: 6 specimens 13-21.7 mm. in standard length from station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f the Galathea material: (Notes based on larger examples). Teeth in a single row; tricuspid. Free borders of preoperculum smooth. Scales on top of head ej^tend as far forward as middle of eye. Gillrakers 7 + 14 on first arch oflargest spe­ cimen. Gillrakers on posterior arches short spinous tubercles. Teeth on pharyngo- branchials molariform.

Dorsal fin rays XIII, 13. Anal fin rays II, 12. Principal caudal fin rays 8 - j - 7. Pectoral fin rays 18. Pelvic rays 1,5, long, extending past anal fin origin. 24 mid­ lateral scales in largest specimen between operculum and end of hypural fan. Distinctive color markings: A large dark spot covering anterior rays of spinous dorsal; an equally dark patch forms a saddle over the top of the caudal peduncle behind the dorsal fin base. A small dark spot present in larger specimens on the outer base of upper pectoral fin rays. Seven vertical dusky bands on head and body.

Abudefduf biocellatus (Quoy and Gaimard)

Glyphisodon biocellatus Quoy and Gaimard 1824, p. 389 (original description; Guam). Abudefduf biocellatus de Beaufort 1940, p. 436 (extensive synonymy; description; distribution).

A single specimen among the Galathea collections belongs in the complex of forms now lumped together under the species name Abudefduf biocellatus. The material available does not make it possible to shed any further light on the speciation of this group. The Galathea specimen was identified on the basis of camparative ma­ terial in the Stanford collection and from the key and description of de Beaufort (1940). It is the first record of the species from the Solomons. This species is common throughout the Indo-Pacific about coral reefs in shallow water. Galathea material examined: One specimen 26.5 mm. in standard length from station 516d, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea material: Maxillary extending posteriorly behind a vertical from anterior border of eye. Teeth in each jaw long and slender, incisiform, in two closely apprejsed rows; tips of individual teeth rounded. Depth of preorbital about 4'/2 times into eye. Preorbital not notched. Opercle with two vertical series of scales. Four scale series between tip of maxillary and posterior edge of preopercle. Sub- opercle with a single row of large scales. Lower and posterior preopercular borders free and smooth. Scales on top of head extending as far forward as a vertical from the anterior border of the eye, but not reaching to the nostrils. Extensive lateral-line pore system present on head; upper posterior rim of eye lined with a single closely-spaced row of 10 pores. Nostrils with slightly raised rims. Gill membranes free from isthmus. Dorsal fin rays XI11, 12. Anal fin rays 11, 12. Principal caudal fin rays 8 4-6. Pectoral fin rays 18. Pelvic fin rays 1,5. Lateral-line scales 18-7. Mid-lateral scales 23 or 24 from operculum to end of hypural fan. All scales ctenoid. * Distinctive color markings consist of a suffuse longitudinal band from the fore­ head across the side of the head above the eye, posteriorly extending along the base of the dorsal fin and top of caudal peduncle as far as caudal fin origin: this band is interrupted along the base of soft dorsal fin. A large dark spot is present on the band at the end of the spinous dorsal and extends up on the basal half of the fin. Anothes slender stripe extends from upper lip posteriorly across preopercle and onto operc^e; it is interrupted by the eye. Paired fins and caudal and anal fins with little pigmenta­ tion.

FAMILY ACANTHURIDAE SURGEON FISHES Acanthunis triostegus (Linnaeus)

Chaetodon triostegus Linnaeus 1758, p. 274 (original description; Indies). Hepatus triostegus Seale 1935, p. 364 (records Santa Ana Island, Tai Lagoon, Malaita Island, Solomons). Acanthurus triostegus Randall 1956, p. 172, figs. la, 2a, 3, 4 (synonymy; description; records, including Solomon Islands).

A single specimen of the wide ranging surgeon fish species Acanthurus triost^ut was taken by the Galathea Expedition from Rennell Island. Although it must be abundant around coral reefs in the Solomons, it has been recorded only once pre­ viously from there by S e a le . Galathea material examined: One specimen 93.8 mm. in standard length from sta­ tion 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea material: Teeth in jaws broad, flat; tips evenly rounded, usually with 5 major denticles, as in fig. 2a of Randall (1956). Nostrils on each side close together, near anterior border of eye; anterior nostril with a raised flap on upper margin; posterior nostril with a sligthly raised rim anteriorly. Anal soft rays 20. Dorsal fin rays IX, 23. Pectoral fin rays 15. General background color light; six black stripes on side of fish, the last on caudal peduncle, interrupted on side. One large black spot on pectoral fin base.

Acanthurus lineatus (Linnaeus)

Chaetodon lineatus Linnaeus 1758, p. 274 (original description; Indies), Hepatus lineatus Evermann and Seale 1923, p. 78 (descriptive notes; Guadalcanar, Solomon Islands). Acanthurus lineatus Herre 1931, p. 7 (name only; Tenibuli, Solomons) R andall 1956, p. 193 (synonymy; description; records). .

Galathea material examined: One specimen 156.5 mm. in standard length from station 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea material: This specimen has been identified in R andall’s key (1956 p. 167) and elsewhere to Acanthurus lineatus. Snout 5.2 into standard length, not produced. Teeth large, imbricate, each with approximately 7 denticles. 14 teeth in lower jaw. Upper Vs of body with narrow longitudinal stripes ending posteriorly at several vertical stripes on base of caudal fin. Stripes alternating light and dark, the latter bisected with a paler longitudinal stripe. Stripes on lower third of body uniformly pale. Head with oblique stripes on lower sides. Dorsal and anal fins dark. Pectoral fins light. Pelvic fins light, with a marginal black stripe anteriorly. Caudal fin dark, with a lighter crescentic area on middle posterior third of fin; outer lobes produced into filaments.

Ctenochaetus striatus (Quoy & Gaimard)

Acanthurus striatus Quoy and Gaimard 1824, p. 372, pi. 63, fig. 2 (original descrip­ tion; Guam). Ctenochaetus striatus Seale 1906, p. 67 (name only; records, including Shortland Id., Solomons). R andall 1955, p. 155, text-fig. 1, A, 3, B-D, pi. 1, D-F (synonymy; description; records). Ctenochaetus strigosus Herre 1931, p. 7 (name only; Tenibuli, Shortland Island, Solomons).

One example of Ctenochaetus striatus was taken at Rennell Island by the Galathea Expedition. The determination was made from R a n d a l l ’s review of the genus (1955) and comparison to other specimens in the Stanford collection from Oceania. The specimen recorded b y 'H e r r e (1931) from the Solomons was reexamined and was found to be Ctenochaetus striatus, also:

S.U. 25380 Tenibuli, Ysabel Is., Solomons; coll. A. W. Herre, April 17, 1929.

Galathea material examined: One specimen 135.3 mm. in standard length from station 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea materia!: Teeth in lower jaw with 4 denticles on lateral face, crown smooth; pedicels lon^, strongly angular near pediculate tip. Teeth in upper jaw with 6 denticles, counting the notched crown; pedicels neither as long as in lower jaw nor as angular near pediculate tip. Posterior nostril with a slightly raised margin; posterior rim with a groove toward upper anterior margin of eye. Anterior nostril with a thin raised rim, posterior margin with a flat fleshy prolongation. Dorsal fin raj's Vlll, 30. Anal rays 111, 27. Last dorsal and anal rays split to base, counted separately. Pectoral fin rays 16. Coloration of head, body and fins uniformly dark brown. Membranes between pectoral fin rays hyalin. No black spots at ends of dorsal and anal fin bases.

Naso lituratus (Bloch & Schneider)

Acanthurus lituratus Bloch and Schneider 1801, p. 216 (original description, locality not given). Acanthurus lituratus Seale 1935, p. 363 (color notes; Sikaiana Island, Stewart Islands, * Solomons). Naso lituratus Schultz and Woods in S c h u l t z 1953 p. 642 (description; records from the Marshall and Manana Islands).

• -J5 One large specimen of Naso lituratus was taken at Rennell Island by the Galathea Expedition. It was identified to this well known species on the basis of the caudal peduncle having a white area around each of the two fixed caudal spines, the presence of a pale streak from mouth to eye; caudal fin lunate, with lobes prolonged; posterior edge of caudal fin white, outer region of dorsal and anal fins white with a submarginal black line; remainder of body head and fins dark, except lips and preopercular margin light. Teeth incisiform, tips rounded. Galathea material examined: One specimen 190 mm. in standard length from sta­ tion 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons.

FAMILY SIGANIDAE SPINE FISHES Siganas rostratiis (Cuvier & Valenciennes)

Amphacanthus rostratus Cuvier & Valenciennes 1835, p. 158 (original description; Massuah [Red Sea]). Siganus rostratus Seale 1906, p. 67 (name only; four specimens, Shortland Id., So­ lomons). DE Beaufort in de Beaufort and C h a p m a n 1951, p. 102 (synonymy; description; distribution). Teuthis rostrata Herre 1931, p. 7 (name only; Tenibuli, Shortiand Island, Solomons), H e r r e 1953, p. 558 (synonymy).

Two lots of young siganids were collected from Rennell Island by the Galathea Expedition. They are rather young to identify to species with certainty but by tracing through ontogenetic series in the Stanford collections it seems quite certain that they are Siganus rostratus. Disregarding the scale characters (scales are completely lacking in the young) the Galathea specimens key out in de Beaufort (1951) to the a'—d ’ section under a. Further structural characteristics which seem to narrow the deter­ mination down to S. rostratus are the high number of pectoral fin rays (18), the pre­ sence of large flap on the anterior nostril border, deeply forked caudal fin and mottled coloration. Galathea material examined: 35 specimens 31.5-35 mm. in standard length from station 516d, Rennell Id., Solomons.

FAMILY GOBIIDAE GOBIES Paragobiodon echinocepluiliis (Riippell)

Gobius echinocephalus Riippell 1828, p. 136, pi. 34, fig. 3 (original description). Paragobiodon echinocephalus Herre 1935, p. 9 (name only; Bougainville Island, Shortland Island, Solomons). H a r r y 1949, p. 145 (name only; Solomons; Purvis Bay, Florida Island; Bougainville Island and Shortland Island). K o u m a n s 1953, p. 3, fig. 1 (synonymy: description; distribution). ’ Paragobiodon melanosomus Seale 1935, p. 372 (name only; Rennell Island). Paragobiodon xanthosomus Seale 1935, p. 372 (name only; Rennell Island). \ip One lot of fishes collected by the Galathea were the tiny gobies Paragobiodon efhinocephalus as delimited by most authors including Herre (1927), Koumans (1953), Harry (1949) and Tomiyama (1936). This species has been previously reported from the Solomons, and particularly from Rennell Island by Seale (1935). Galathea material examined: 17 specimens 11.5-22.3 mm. in standard length from station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description of Galathea material: Head, nape, breast and base of first dorsal fin lacking scales; remainder of body covered with large ctenoid scales. Head, nape, breast and pelvic fins covered with elongate papillae. Mouth short, oblique. Teeth in several rows on jaws; enlarged canines at symphysis of both jaws. Nostrils large, whh raised rims. Lateral-line pores on head large with slightly raised rims; interor­ bital with one pore in middle, one pore at the upper anterior border of each eye, another at the upper posterior border of each eye. Dorsal fins joined at base, practic­ ally separate. Coloration of specimens in preservative varies from solid white to brown to very dark brown. No markings evident. Note on the classification o f the genus Paragobiodon: The speciation of the genus ParVgobiodon is presently very poorly understood. Paragobiodon echinocephalus is not the. highly polymorphic species it has been made out to be. Several names now recognized as synonyms are valid species. The genus needs to be revised by someone who will look at the collections with care and not just throw them all together under one name. This problem was considered beyond the scope of the present paper.

EvioU zonuni Jordan & Seale

Eviota zonura Jordan and Sea^e 1906, p. 386, fig. 75 (original description; Apia and Pago Pago, Samoa). Koumans 1953, p. 317 (synonymy; description; distribution).

One of the fishes collected by the Galathea Expedition belongs to Exiota, a genus of gobies the species of which are very small and poorly known. The specimen could not be identified satisfactorily from the literature but was found to agree completely with the paratypes of Eviota zonura in the Stanford collection.

S.U. 8709 Apia, Samoa; coll. D.S. Jordan and party. 21 specimens 11-16.5 mm. ■ (Note: number of specimens does not agree with original description by • J o r d a n and S e a le ; since the bottle was broken during the 1906 earthquake, very likely both Apia and Pago Pago specimens are mixed together.)

However, it is not clear whether Eviota zonura is a valid species or not. Presum­ ably it is, but a review of the genus is needed to clarify the situation. Eviota zonura, as presently understood, is widely recorded in the tropical Pacific but has not been indicated from the Solomons before. The closest record is Samoa. Ichthyologists studying the genus Eviota should note that the opercular bones are reduced in size and their function has been supplanted by the branchiostegal rays, which are enlarged and expanded over the gills. Galathea material examined: I specimen 14.3 m. in standard length from station 516d, Rennell Id., Solomons. „ Description o f Galathea material: Body strongly compressed. Hekd slightly deeper than body. Nostrils large, in raised tubes; anterior nostril pair with longest tubes, rim flared out. Posterior nostrils in low straight tube, situated at upper anterior edge of eye. Interorbital very narrow with a single large median pore. Each posterior nostril with a pore at its upper margin. No other pores encircling eye. Teeth in jaws in several rows, caniniform; outer row consisting of fewer teeth, all enlarged. Gill membranes separate, jointed to isthmus. No scales on belly, breast, head, nape or body between operculum and dorsal fin. Body scales large, all ctenoid; 23 between mid-base of pectoral fin and end of hypural fin. The paratypes of Eviota zonura have 23-24 scales for this same count. Just how Jordan and Seale counted 28 lateral scales is not known. Seven scales in an oblique series forward from side of anal fin base to dorsal fin base. Caudal fin with one row of scales posterior to edge of hypural fin. Anal papilla small, enclosed in approximately 6 short tentacles. Ventral fins long,^ narrow, rays fringed on outer margin. Dorsal fins separate to base. Dorsal fin rays VI-10. Anal fin rays 9. Pectoral fin rays 16. Pelvic fin rays 1,4. Caudal fin rays 7 — 7. Branchiostegal rays 6 -r 6. " Distinctive color markings — Broad dark band along middle of anal fin; base of fin and tips of rays light. Two light stripes across first dorsal fin, one along outer edge of fin, the other across middle of fin. Pectoral fin base covered with evenly scattered melanophores. Head with a pattern of melanophores arranged in the form of spots. No large distinct black spots on bottom of head. Snout with one spot between anterior and posterior nostril on each side and a median spot on upper lip. Side of caudal peduncle with a suffuse black spot over the median lateral scale and the scale imme­ diately above it. Caudal fin evenly lightly pigmented. Second dorsal, pectoral and pelvic fins practically hyalin, very lightly pigmented.

FAMILY KRAEMERIIDAE SAND FISHES A Review of the Fishes o f the family Kraemeriidae « Two lots of Galathea specimens from Rennell Island belong in Kraemeria, a poorly defined genus sometimes placed with the family Trichonotidae, but more often with the gobies in either the family Gobiidae or Eleotridae. The status of the genus Kraemeria has been recently considered by GosLiNt (1955), who recognized the genera Gobitrichinotus and Kraemeria in the family Kraemeriidae in the suborder “Gobioidei” of the order “Perciformes.” He presents a history of the group which need not be repeated here. G osline (1955) states that “the main purpose of the present paper is to place the genera Kraemeria and Microdesmus securely among the gobioid fishes. This has not been difficult, for osteologically the gobioids exhibit many distinguishing characters. A glance at the branchiostegal ray structure, the suspen- sorium, or even the caudal skeleton would seem sufRcient to determine whether or not a fish a is nember of the suborder Gobioidei.” However, G osline docs not define and differentiate from the neighboring suborders any of these characters that he ys • considers diagnostic. Furthermore, considering the status of just Kraemeria without attempting to examine the genera with which it has been previously associated raises more questions than solves problems. If Kraemeria is a goby as G o s lin e and others state, what are the relationships of the other “trichonotids,” particularly the genus Trichonotus? What are the limits of the gobioid group itself, if all these strange peripheral groups are added? Is it a natural group or are the gobioids now being used as a catch-all instead of the neighboring suborders? Such questions are beyond the scope of the present contribution but certainly should be given serious considera­ tion by ichthyologists shuffling these families about among the major percomorph groupings. The problem at hand is to identify the Rennell Island collections of Kraemeria. and thereby add new knowledge to the classification of Kraemeria and its relatives. I agree with F o w l e r (1943) and G o s lin e (1955) that the genera Kraemeria and Gobitrichinotus form a natural group distinct from other fishes and further agree with GosLiiNE that on the basis of our present knowledge they should be recognized as a distinct family. Whether the Kraemeriidae belongs with the gobies or elsewhere I wish to leave for later discussion. Nevertheless, 1 might add here that my examina­ tion of representatives of most of the genera placed by S c h u l t z (1943) and others in the.Trichonotidae and of most goby genera leads me to believe that the genus Trichonotus is the closest relative of the kraemeriids. The placing of the Rennell Island specimens proved difficult, because kraemeriids are so small, the characters somewhat difficult to distinguish, and comparative material so scattered. In the course of studies on the group a revision of the family became necessary, resulting in recognition of two genera and seven species; one subgenus and three species are described as new. The Rennell Island specimens proved to be unknown and represent pne of these new species. Definition of the family. Head and body elongate, spindle-shaped, moder­ ately compressed to round in cross section. Anus immediately before anal fin. No scales present. Head and body smooth. Greatest body depth in region of anterior dorsal fin rays (in fresh material). Head, body and fins diaphanous, all but one species lacking extensive color pigmentation. No lateral-line present. Head pointed, encased in a swollen free epidermis, its length approximately Vi-‘/s Standard length. Mouth moderately oblique, posterior tip of maxillary extending beneath ,eye. Lower jaw distinctly longer than upper, its tip prolonged, forming a fleshy tactile pad: notch present under lower jaw. Free edges of lips and lower free edge of preopercle usually scalloped. Nostrils small; anterior nostrils next to upper lip, in a short straight tube; each posterior nostril a small indistinct hole before eye, usually bordered medially by a smaller pore. Caniniform teeth present on jaws in one or two rows depressible. Individual teeth curved inward. No teeth on vomer or palatines. Tongue strongly bilobed. Gillrakers absent, or, if present, short and usually blunt. Opercular bones of suspensorium reduced in size; preopercle largest bone. Branchiostegal rays well developed, long, 5 - 5, the innermost pair buried in flesh and sometimes difficult to discern without staining. Eyes fully formed but tiny, situated close together on top of the head, directed upwards and obliquely laterally. Interorbital width narrow, less than eye diameter in all but one species (Kraemeria galatheaensis). , Fins low, transparent without pigmentation or markings, composed<-of simple rays in the dorsal and anal fins; rays may be branched once in the caudal and paired fins. Dorsal fin long, continuous, anteriorly with 4-6 weak spines, and posteriorly with 13-17 soft rays. Last two rays of both dorsal and anal closely applied, spUt to base, their position correlated to neural and haemal spines of fifth vertebra from posterior end of vertebral column, and counted as one in the soft ray counts. Origin of dorsal fin near a vertical from tip of pectoral fin. The first 4-5 spiny rays of the dorsal fin are evenly spaced, a slightly wider gap separates the next spine, and an even wider gap separates the last spine and the first soft ray. The mombranes between the rays of the dorsal fin are all slightly indented except for a somewhat deeper in­ dentation between the last spine and the first soft ray. Anal fin similar in shape to dorsal fin except shorter in length; all rays equidistant apart with one weak spine followed by 11-14 soft rays; membranes between rays equally indented. Origin of anal fin under second to sixth soft dorsal ray, before middle of distance betweea opercular margin and end of hypural fan. Ends of dorsal and anal fin bases opposite to each other. Principal caudal rays 5 — 6 or 6 -r 5. Pectoral fin situated mid-la^er- ally at gill opening; size small, rounded, with 3-9 rays. Pelvic fins situated far for­ ward, jugular in position; base mostly in advance of a vertical from pectoral fin rays; outline generally rounded, rays i, 5 4 - 5, i. The pelvic fins serve as a sitting platform for all the species of Kraemeria, and perhaps serve the same purpose in Gobitrichino- tus; in the former genus the pelvic fins are wide spread, parallel to the body, and separate for all or most their length from the fin bases; in *he latter genus the pelvic fins are parallel and joined together. Vertebrae 26-30; 10-14 abdominal vertebrae, 16-17 caudal vertebrae;^ vertebrae strongly constricted at middle. Most neural spines with large foramen. Relationships within the family: The Kraemeriidae forms a closely related group uniform in general physiognomy of at least seven species in two genera, Kraemeria and' Gobitrichinotus. Both genera are highly specialized, but the latter probably retains more primitive characteristics in its retention of coloration, stronger dentition, more elongate form, higher number of vertebrae and fin rays, and lesser development of scalloped borders on the head. However, Kraemeria likely retains more generalized conditions in the presence of gillrakers. Whether the^ separate pelvics of Kraemeria are more specialized or primitive than the joined pelvics of Gobitrichinotus likely depends on a better understanding of the families considered as possible relatives of the Kraemeriidae, which should include consideration of the Trichonotidae, Limnichthyidae, Parapercidae-Pinguipedidae, Callionymidae, Ammo- dytidae, and the gobioid families centered around the Gobiidae. The genus Gobitrichinotus is monotypic. The genus Kraemeria comprises six species in two basic groups recognized as subgenera. The species around the generic type, Kraemeria samoensis, are retained in the subgenus Kraemeria, and the distinctive s. Counts here and elsewhere are prepared from x-rays of all species in Kraemeriidae.

180 • Kraemeria bryani is placed in a new subgenus, Schidokraemeria named from the Greek Schidion = Something split off; generic type of the monotypic subgenus Schi- dolfraemeria is Kraemeria bryani Schultz. The latter species is the most extreme form in loss of characters in the family: loss of number of pectoral fin rays, lesser develop­ ment of genipores (mucus papillae) and scalloped edges on head flaps, smaller and fewer teeth, and lack of nostril tube. Distribution of the family: Since the species are so small, transparent in life and cryptic in habits, the family is no doubt more widely spread in the tropics than now known, and species remain to be discovered. The family is both freshwater and marine, recorded from the Samoan and Tonga Islands, Australia, Solomons, Marshalls, Carolines, PhiUppines and Seychelles Islands. The genus Gobitrichinotus is known only from the Philippines. The genus Kraemeria has been taken at the remaining localities cited. Habits of the family: So far as known, the species live at the waters' edge in the shallowest water possible buried in the sand. Kraemeria galatheaensis, Kraemeria bryani, Kraemeria tongaensis and Kraemeria nudum are only known as marine on shallow reefs. Kraemeria samoensis is both marine on shallow reefs and freshwater in streams. Gobitrichinotus radiocularis and Kraemeria cunicularia have been taken only in freshwater streams. , The superior upturned mouth of kraemeriids suggests that they wait mostly buried in sand or mud with eyes exposed to watch for unsuspecting prey to come within reach. The swollen opercles probably give it considerable suction power to suck in small prey without moving from its hiding place. The scalloped ridges border­ ing the mouth of kraemeriids resemble the fringed mouths of dactyloscopids and uranoscopids and most likely serve the same purpose of keeping sand out of their mouths when they grab their food. While the complete transparency of Kraemeria might indicate that they live printiarily on a light sand background, the color markings of Gobitrichinotus may indicate that it lives over a darker substrate and is more aggressive in moving about in the open, making it more important for it to have protective coloration. The restricted habitat zone and sedentary habits of the species is reflected in their speciation. It appears that none of the species are particularly wide-ranging, and a detailed study or the basis of extensive Indo-Pacific collections may reveal that each major island group has distinct species. • ‘ Synopsis and key to the genera and species o f Kraemeriidae

1 a. Pelvic fins separate. 3-8 pectoral fin rays. Head and body diaphanous or with only light pigmentation. Developed gillrakers present. Anal fin origin under second or third soft ray of dorsal fin. 10 abdominal vertebrae. (Subfamily Krae- meriinae, Genus Kraemeria). 2a. Pectoral fin rays 3-4; none of the rays branched. Nostrils minute, not in raised tubes. Dorsal fin origin well behind a vertical from pectoral fin tips. (Subgenus Schidokfaemeria, n o v .)...... Kraemeria bryani Schultz. 2 b. Pectoral fin rays 7-8; middle rays branched. Anterior nostrils in distinct raised tubes. Dorsal fin origin distinctly before a vertical from pectoral fin tips. (S\ib- genus Kraemeria). “ ^ 3 a. Eyes close together, interorbital width less than eye diameter. Gill membranes joined at isthmus well before a vertical from posterior margin of preopercle. Lower edge of gill cover with no scalloped flaps or with four or more. 4a. Pelvic fins split to base, no membrane between inner rays. Lower edge of gill cover usually with no scalloped flaps or with more than six. Anal papilla flat and broad or narrow and pointed. 5a. Scalloped flaps on lower edge of gill cover modified into the form of a row of approximately 10 simple cirri. Anal papilla narrow, its posterior tip pointed or rounded. Interorbital width very narrow, less than one-half eye diameter ...... Kraemeria samoensis Steindachner 5b. Lower edge of gill cover with approximately four scalloped flaps. Anal papilla broad and flat, its posterior tip usually with a median notch. Interorbital width narrow, but not less than one-half eye diameter . . . Kraemeria cmiadaria, n. sps 5c. Lower edge of gill cover straight, without scalloped flaps or cirri. Anal papilla broad and flat (not known whether indented or not). Interorbital width nsfrrow, approximately one-half eye diam eter...... Kraemeria nudum (Regan). 4b. Pelvic fins not split to base, membrane connecting fins for one-fifth the length of inner rays. Lower edge of gill cover with 4-6 scalloped flaps. Anal papilla narrow and pointed ...... Kraemeria tongaensis, n. sp. 3 b. Eyes not close together, interorbital width greater than eye diameter. Gill mem­ branes joined at isthmus below a vertical from posterior margin of preopercle. Lower edge of gill cover with two scalloped flaps .. Kraemeria galatheaensis, n. sp. 1 b. Pelvic fins united their full length by a membrane. 9 or 10 pectoral fin rays. Head and body covered with a reticulate color pattern. Gillrakers absent. Anal fin origin approximately under sixth soft dorsal ray. 14 abdominal vertebrae. (Subfamily Gobitrichinotinae, Genus Gobitrichinotus) ... Gobitrichinotus radiocularis Fowler.

Genus Kraemeria Steindachner *

Kraemeria Steindachner 1906, p. 41 (original description; type by monotypy, Krae­ meria samoensis Steindachner); S c h u l t z 1941, p. 241 (Synonymy). . Viireola Jordan and Seale 1906, p. 393 (original description; type by monotypy, Vitreola sagilla Jordan and Seale). Psammichihys Regan 1908, p. 246 (original description; type by monotypy, Psam- michthys nudus Regan).

Diagnosis of genus: Head length less than '/» standard length. Anal papilla en­ larged, situated immediately before anal fin. Gillrakers present, short, usually blunt, tending to be swollen at tips and imbedded in a fleshy membrane. Anal fin brigin under second or third soft dorsal fin ray. Soft dorsal rays 13-14. Pelvic fins spread apart, separate to, or nearly to, base, tips of rays slightly curved upwards. Pectoral fin rays 3-8, branched or unbranched. Head and body diaphanous, or with sparse pigmentation. , Six species known from oceanic islands in the tropical central western Pacific and Indian Oceans. Freshwater and marine.

Knemeria bryani Schultz (PI. IV, figs. 10, II and 12)

Kraemeria samoensis (in part) Fowler 1928, p. 425, fig. 68 (synonymy; description; specimens from Oahu). Kraemeria samoensis (not of Steindachner) Pietschmann 1938, p. 43, pl. 16, A (de­ scription, 15 specimens Oahu, Malaekahana). Kraemeria bryani Schahz 1941, p. 271, fig. 1 (original description; 26 types from Oahu, Hawaiian Islands); S c h u l t z 1943, p. 262 (name only in key to Trichonotidae).

W Material examined: Fowr paratypes from the Hawaiian Islands: Bishop Museum no. 4904; 2 specimens approximately 19 and 24 mm. in standard length from Laie, OaRu, collected by C. M. C cx)ke, Jr., June 4, 1923. Bishop Museum no. 4905 ; 2 specimens approximate^y 19-20 mm. in standard length from Malaekahana, Oahu, collected by C. M. C ooke, Jr., on May 30-31, 1926 (larger specimen now S.U. no. 52004). Ten specimens 14.7 to 20 mm. in standard length from Malaekahana, Oahu, Hawaiian Islands; U.S.N.M. no. 143153; collected by C. M. C o o k e , Jr., May 30-31, 1926 (one specimen now S.U. no. 52005). Description of material examined: Body moderately compressed laterally and elongate. Head distinctly wider than body; head width as wide as, or wider than, deep. Opercle and subopercle small, overlapping; upper edge of opercle extending in thin filaments to posterior margin of gill cover. Free edge of preopercle without vertical foramen or fleshy bridges characteristic of the subgenus Kraemeria. No fold behind eye. Anterior nostrils in a slighriy raised swelling, but lacking tubes; po­ sterior nostril^ minute pores. Free edges of preopercle, supra and infra-lip folds with or without weakly scalloped edges. Tiny genipores present in short rows over sides and top of head. Lower border of eye with two sets of 2-3 genipores. No genipores on interorbital region. Scattered genipore series present under inner edge of sub­ orbital fold, infra-lip fold, and preopercle, but none actually on scalloped borders; genipore series present in scalloped border of supra-lip fold. Branchiostegal rays very slender, elongate, extending posteriorly almost to edge of gill cover. Membran­ ous gill cover extending to, but not beyond, base of pectoral fin rays. Edge of gill cover irregularly rounded, very weakly scalloped, if at all; genipores present along folds of weak scallops. Gill membranes joined to isthmus at a vertical from posterior margin of preopercle. Isthmus with three indistinct longitudinal folds with papillate free’edges; the lateral folds converge anteriorly. Gill arches armed with short slender rakers, those on first arch somewhat larger; all rakers imbedded in flesh and much shorter thail holobranchs. First gill arch with no rakers on hypobranchial or above

* angle on epibranchial; 8-10 rakers below angle on ceratobranchial. No teeth on upper jaw. Teeth on lower jaw very small, in a single row. Teeth depressible; anterior teeth directed inward, lateral teeth directed upward. Tongue bilobed at tip, not deeply cleft. Eyes very small, directed laterally and obliquely upward. Transparent, separate, epidermal envelope around head moderately developed around eyes and snout. Dorsal fin fairly long, consisting of six anterior spines and 13-14 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin distinctly behind a vertical from tips of pectoral fins. Anal fin rays i, 12 toi,14. Pectoral fin with 3 or 4 unbranched rays; membranes between rays deeply incised. Pectoral fin base narrow, its width less than one-half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins usually moderately curved from belly, widespread, innermost ray bases slightly before a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. Pelvic fin rays un­ branched. Principal caudal fin rays 6 + 5. This species completely lacks pigmentation except for the eyes, and must be transparent in life. Relationships: This species appears to be the most extreme form known in the family, representing specialization to the point of reduction of such characters ai genipores on the head, scalloped borders on the head folds, loss of pigmentation on the head and body, reduction in pectoral fin ray number and fin size, loss of teeth in upper jaw. , ' It has the most highly developed tactile papillae on the isthmus in the family. Its closest known relatives appear to be species of the subgenus Kraemeria, parti­ cularly Kraemeria cunicularia and its relatives, Kraemeria nudum and Kraemeria samoensis. The largest specimen in the lot from U.S.N.M. no. 143153 is a 20 mm. S.L. gravid female with large eggs.

‘ Kraemeria samoensis Steindachner (PI. IV, fig. 13; pi. V, figs. 14 and 15)

Kraemeria samoensis Steindachner 1906, p. 41 (original description; numerous examples from Samoa). Schultz 1941, pp. 270, 271 (name only; compared with Kraemeria bryani Schultz). Sc h u ltz 1943, p. 262, 267 (name only; compaml with Kraemeria bryani Schultz). G osline 1955, p. 158 (relationships; material from the Marshall Islands). Vitreola sagitta Jordan and Seale 1906, p. 393, pi. 37, fig. 1 (original description; 3 specimens from Pago Pago, Samoa). . Kraemeria samoensis (in part) Fowler 1928, p. 425 (synonymy; description; locality records and part of description refer to Kraemeria bryani Schultz). Kraemeria samoensis merensis Whitley 1935, p. 245, fig. 11 (original description; 56 specimens from Murray Island, North Queensland; comparison to Vitreola sagitta Jordan and Seale).

The previous descriptions and valid records of this species are those of Stein­ dachner (1906), J o rda n and Seale (1906), and probably those of W hitley (1935) and G osline (1955). As Sch ultz (1941, 1943) pointed out, the remaining records in the literature are actually of another species, Kraemeria bryar.i Schultz. The description of the subspecies merensis by Whitley agrees reasonably well with the prpsent material; this subspecies may not be valid since it was based on a comparison of the Australian specimens with F o w l e r ’s illustration of Kraemeria samoensis. But F o w l e r ’s illustration was based on material of Kraemeria bryani, not samoensis. Furthermore, F o w l e r often prepares his finished drawings from sketches without the specimens at hand. Therefore, his illustrations are often not reliable. Nevertheless, merensis may be valid on the basis of other grounds. The Marshall Islands population can be readily differentiated from the Samoan. Subspecific or perhaps even specific differentiation may be found to be the case for the Australian, Samoan and Marshall Is. populations. Material examined: One paratype of Vitreola sagitta Jordan and Seale 27 mm. in standard length; S.U. no. 52002 (formerly U.S.N.M. no. 51784) from Pago Pago, Samoa, collected by D a v id S. J o r d a n and party, summer of 1902. Twenty-nine specimens 14.3.-25.4 mm. in standard length; U.S.N.M. no. 166741, fit)m station El-54, Ine Id., Amo Atoll, Marshall Islands, collected by S t r a s b u r g and H i a t t , on June 11, 1950 (two specimens now S.U. no. 52000). ^^ourteen specimens 17-26.5 mm. in standard length; Univ. Hawaii collection, from Arno Atcll, Marshall Islands, collected by Strasburg, summer 1950 (one specimen now S.U. 52001). One specimen 17.5 mm. in standard length; U.S.N.M. no. 140902, acc. no. 172586, field no. S-46-237, from Rongerik Atoll, Bock Id., ocean reef, Marshall Is., collected by L. P. S c h u l t z and E. S. H erald, June 27, 1946. Description of material examined: The general proportions and physical charac­ ters of the Arno specimens agree closely with the Samoan specimen, but the colora­ tion differs. In the following description all of the larger specimens agree, unless otherwise noted. Body moderately compressed laterally, moderately elongate. Head distinctly wider than body and head depths. Body depth 8.9 (8.5-10.2) into standard length. Anal papilla pointed posteriorly, not indented. Head lengU^ 4.1 (3.9-4.3) into standard length. Opercle and subopercle short, overlapping, ending well before posterior free margin of gill cover except for superior slender prolongations of opercle imbedded in gill cover. Free edge of preopercle joined to* opercle by a narrow fleshy bridge. Free edges of preopercle, supra and infra-lip Colds strongly scalloped. Tiny genipores present on head; no genipores around eyes or under edges of head folds. Genipores sometimes present in scalloped border of gill cover. Branchiostegal rays slender, elongate. Membranous posterior margin of gill cover extending well over base of pectoral fin. Edge of gill cover irregularly rounded posteriorly, distinctly scalloped ventrally; the scallops are unique in that they are modified inlo the form of a row of approximately 10 simple cirri; Kraemeria samoensis is unique in the family in this characteristic. Gill membranes extend moderately far forward, narrowly joined to isthmus well before a vertical from posterior margin of preopercle. Isthmus variously with and without three median lon^tudinal folds with free (>apillate edges; the lateral folds converge an­ teriorly. Gill arches armed with short blunt rakers which are imbedded in flesh; those on first arch somewhat larger, but all rakers much shorter than holobranchs. The first gill arch with no rakers above angle, 10 rakers below angle on ceratobr^n- chial, none on hypobranchial. No pseudobranchiae. Teeth on jaws fairly large, slightly curved. Teeth of lower jaw in two rows, anterior teeth directed straight in­ ward ; outer row of teeth sligthly enlarged in size over those of inner row. Teeth in upper jaw and lateral teeth in lower jaw very close together, directed vertically. Buccal valves in mouth large. Tongue bilobed, deeply cleft. Eyes very small, close together, interorbital width less than one-half eye diameter. Transparent, separate, epidermal envelope around head slightly distinct. Dorsal fin consisting of five anterior spines and 14 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin before a vertical from tip of pectoral fin. Anal fin rays i,13. Pectoral fin with 7-9 soft rays, usually all branched except for the outermost upper and lower ray. Pectoral fin base broad, its width approximately one-half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins moderately curved from belly, widespread, separated to base, innermost ray bases at a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. All pelvic fin soft rays nsujllly'' branched. Principal caudal rays 6 - 5. This species appears to be transparent in life without pigmentation except for the eyes and scattered melanophores on top of the head and along the base of the anal fin. The Arno specimens consistently differ from the Samoan specimens in pigmen­ tation. The latter have a short streak of pigment extending obliquely downward and forward from the anterior-ventral border of the eye; the interorbita! region has two longitudinal streaks; the top of the cranium is pigmented on each side, and there is no pigmentation at the isthmus or along the anal fin base. The Arno specimens lack pigmentation on top of the head, or at most have a few scattered melanophores, but they do have a longitudinal row of melanophores at the isthmus, and there is usually present a melanophore on each side of each anal fin ray. Measurements in percent o f standard length based on 10 specimens 18.7-26.7 mm. in standard length (range in parentheses preceded by the mean): Greatest body depth 11.1 (10.4-11.8). Head length 24.4 (22.9-25.8). Snout length 03.6 (03.3-03.9). Eye (ball) diameter 01.3 (01.1-01.6) Interorbital width between eyeballs 00.4 (00.4-00.S). Predorsal distance 30.2 (27.9-31.7). Pectoral fin length 06.8 (05.7-08.8). Caudal peduncle depth 05.3 (04.1-05.9). Caudal peduncle length from end of dorsal fin base 08.8 (07.3-11.9). . Relationships: While the Marshall and Samoan material examined is very similar in physical structure and shares the distinctive character of the papillate fringe on the gill cover, the coloration is quite different. It is possible that future research on more adequate material will reveal that the two populations are distinct species. However, it should be noted that the description and illustration of Jordan and Seale (1906, p. 393, pi. 37, fig. 1) show that their material had an irregular band o f brownish dots down the back, a character not evident in the material at hand. Per­ haps the color pattern of this species is variable and unreliable as an indicator o f separate species. This latter opinion has been followed in the present review o f the species of kraemeriids. However, this species, or group of species, is or'tends to be the most pigmented form in the genus Kraemeria. It is unique and extreme in struc­ ture in the family for its papillate fringe to the gill cover and for the eyes being closer togpther than in any other kraemeriid. Kraemeria samoensis is most closely related to Kraemeria nudum, and to a lesser extent to Kraemeria tongaensis and Kraemeria cunicularia.

■ Kraemeria cuniailaria, new species (PI. VI, figs. 16 and 17; pi. VIII, fig. 21)

Holotype: 19.0 mm. in standard length; S.U. no. 52007, from station no. 183, Palau Islands, at the east side of Babelthuap Id., Melekeiok Municipality, Ngermelech Vil­ lage in Behes freshwater streamlet; 7 29' 54’ N. Lat., 134 38' 25" E. Long. (30th Eng. Base Tope. N718-El342/28x15); collected by the "Project Coral Fish" Expedi­ tion of the George Vanderbilt Foundation, Sept. 27, 1955, under the auspices of the Pacific Science Board (NAS-NRC) and office of Naval Research, U.S. Dept. Defense. Farutypes: 15 spedmens 16.5-22.1 mm. in standard length; same collection and data as holotype, S.U. no. 52008. bescription o f types: The Palau Islands specimens are uniform in structure and all agree with the follo.wing description. Body distinctly compressed, moderately elongate. Head approximately twice as wide as body, about as wide as deep. Body depth 8.7 (7.9-9.5) into standard length. Anal papilla flat, outline in most specimens heart-shaped, being indented posteriorly; in few remaining paratypes outline rounded posteriorly. Head length 3.7 (3.5-3.9) into standard length. Opercle and subopercle relatively large for the genus Kraemeria, opercle with approximately three slender filaments extending to the posterior free margin of the gill cover. Free edge of preopercle joined to opercle by narrow flbshy bridge. Free edges of preopercle, supra and infra­ lip folds, and gill cover strongly scalloped. Tiny genipores present in short rows over sides and top of head. No radiating genipore rows from eyes; instead a ring of geni­ pores is present in the deep groove around the lower and posterior margin of eye. No genipores on ijjterorbitai region. Genipores series present in groove under inner edge of suborbital fold, infra-lip fold, preopercle, and in all scalloped borders. A pair of open pores before and behind eye. Branchiostegal rays long and slender. Membranous posterior margin of gill cover extending well over base of pectoral. Edge of gill cover irregularlji rounded posteriorly, distinctly scalloped ventrally with four scalloped flaps. Gill membranes extend moderately far forward, narrowly joined to isthmus slightly before posterior margin of preopercle. Isthmus w ith three median longitudinal folds with papillate free edges; the lateral folds converge anteriorly. Scattered papillae on branchiostegals and isthmus. Gill arches armed with short blunt rakers which are free, not imbedded in flesh, those on first arch somewhat larger; but all rakers much shorter than holobranchs. First gill arch with no rakers above angle, 10 rakers below angfe on ceratobranchial, none on hypKjbranchial. No pseudobranchiae. Teeth on jaws fairly large, slightly curved, directed inward, outer row of teeth only slightly enlarged ovfcr size of inner row of teeth; all teeth close together. Moderately large buccal valves present in mouth. Tongue bilobed, deeply cleft. Eyes very small, directed obliquely upward and slightly forward. Eyes close together, interorbital width one-half eye diameter. Transparent envelope around head only !>ligthly,di­ stinct, mostly around eyes and snout. Dorsal fin consisting of five anterior spines and 14 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin at a vertical from tip of pectoral fin. Anal fin rays i,13. Pectoral fin with 8, rarely 9, soft rays, usually all branched except outermost rays. Pectoral fin base broad, its width approximately one-half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins flat, separated to base but close together, parallel to belly; innermost ray bases slightly before a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. All pelvic fin soft rays usually branched. Principal caudal rays 6 — 5. This species is transparent in life except for the eyes. It has distinctive pigmenta­ tion markings of a few melanophores under each eye and a melanophore on each side of the body near the base of each anal ray. In these color characteristics it is similar to the Samoan population of Kraemeria samoensis. Measurements in percent of standard length (range in parentheses preceded by amount for holotype and followed by median for all types measured; 10 paratypes meas­ ured). Greatest body depth 12.6 (10.3 12.6) 11.5. Head length 27.0 (25.5-28) i4.4. Snout length 04.2 (03.6-04.4) 04.0. Eye (ball) diameter 01.6 (01.2-01.6) 01.3. Inter­ orbital width between eyeballs 01.1 (00.6-01.1) 00.9. Predorsal distance 35.5 (31.7-33.2) 32.4. Preanal distance 53.7 (49.8-54.4) 53.2. Pectoral fin length 06.8 (06.8-08.2) 07.5. Caudal peduncle depth 04.7 (04.7-06.0) 05.2. Caudal peduncle length from end of dorsal fin base 10.5 (07.5-10.5) 09.0. Relationships: While a combination of characters clearly differentiates this form from all other species, it does not have any strikingly unique characters in the family. It is most closely related to the species centered about Kraemeria samoensis, including Kraemeria nudum and Kraemeria tongaensis. This form will probably be found to be more widespread in Micronesia. There is a possibility that when large collections are studied this form will ultimately be found to be conspecific with Kraemeria nudum; however, evidence on the basis of present material does not support that view. Name: Kraemeria cunicularia is named from the latin cuniculariuf =- burrower.

Kraemeria nudum (Regan) (PI. VII, figs. 18 and 19; pi. VIII, fig. 22) ' m Psammichthys nudus Regan 1908, p. 246, pi. 31, fig. 1 (original description; types from Seychelles Group, Praslin Retf, sand siftings). R e g a n 1911, p. 733 (description after original account; relationships).

Material examined: One paratype* 25.3 mm. in standard length; S.U. no. 52003 (formerly British Museum (Natural History) no. 1908. 3.23.257) from Seychelles Is-

6. R e g a n recognized the types as co-types. Therefore, this specimen is hereby designated a para- type. One of the other two specimens in the British Museum (Natural History) should be designated the holotype. ' lands collected by J. Stanley Gardiner on the Percy Sladen Trust Expedition in the Indian Ocean in 1905. , Description of material examined: The specimen available is shrivelled, as is shown in the illustrations. However, examination has allowed us to present an account of most characters utilized in the descriptions, even though all are not in­ corporated in the drawings. Body distinctly compressed laterally, moderately elongate. Head approximately twice as wide as body. Body depth 7.4 into standard length. Anal papilla flat, posterior margin rounded. Head length 3.8 into standard length. Opercle and subopercle relatively large for the genus Kraemeria, the opercle with slender filaments extending to the end of the gill cover. It is impossible due to preservation to determine whether or not a fleshy bridge connects opercle to preopercle. Free edges of preopercle, and supra and infra­ lip folds scalloped, but not shown in illustrations. Free opercular fold and free edge of gill cover smooth, not scalloped. No genjpores evident. Posterior margin of gill cover not covering base of pectoral fin. Gill membranes extending moderately far forward, joined to isthmus slightly before posterior margin of preopercle. No papillate folds evident at isthmus. Gill arches armed with short blunt rakers that are free, not iml)edded in flesh; those on first arch distinctly larger, but all rakers shorter than 'holobranchs. First gill,arch with no rakers above angle on epibranchial, 10 rakers below on ceratobranchial, none on hypobranchial. No pseudobranchiae. Teeth fairly large in both jaws, slightly curved, close together. Teeth in lower jaw directed straight inward, in two rows, outer row only sligthly enlarged over size of inner row. Tongue bilobed, deeply cleft. Eyes very small, directed obliquely upward. Eyes very close together, interorbital width approximately one-half eye diameter. Epidermal envelope of head not distinct due to preservation. Dorsal fin long, consisting of five anterior spines and 14 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin over a vertical slightly anterior to tip of pectoral fin. Anal fin rays i, 13. Pectoral fin with 8 soft rays; pectoral fin base broad, its width approximately one-half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins widespread, separate to base, parallel to belly, innermost ray bases slightly before a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. All pelvic fin soft, rays branched. This species appears to be completely transparent in life without any pigmentation except the eyes. The paratype described is a gravid female. The proportionately large eggs can be seen through the diaphanous body wall. Measurements in percent of standard length: Greatest body depth 13.4. Head length 25.7. Snout length 03.1. Eye(ball) diameter 01.6. Interorbital width between eyeballs 00.8. Predorsal distance 33.2. Preanal distance 54.1. Pectoral fin length 08.6. Caudal peduncle depth 09.5. Caudal peduncle length from end of dorsal fin base 05.5. Relationships: Apparently this species has not been taken subsequent to ihe ori­ ginal account, and is the only record of the family Kraemeriidae in the Indian Ocean. This species is generally the least distinctive species known in the genus Kraemeria, being fairl^ similar to Kraemeria samoensis and its relatives, including Kraemeria longaensis and Kraemeria cunicularia. Since the paratype available is in poor condi­ tion, the description of such characters as folds and scalloping on the head shouM be used with care. Nevertheless, there appears to be little question that nudum ,'s distinct form samoensis and a valid species.

Kraemeria tongaenas, new species (Pi. VII, fig. 20; pi. Vlll, fig. 23)

Holotvpe: 25.4 mm. in standard length; U.S.N.M. collection; shore of Namuka Id., Tonga Islands, collected by Agassiz South Sea Cruise, U.S.F.C. Str. “Albatross” on Dec. 2, 1899. Description o f Holotvpe: Body strongly compressed laterally, moderately elongate. Head distinctly wider than body, approximately as wide as deep. Body depth 7.9 into standard length. Anal papilla tubular, not indented posteriorly. Head length 3.9 into standard length. Opercle and subopercle relatively large for the genus Kraemeria. the opercle with two filamentous processes extending in the' membranous gill cover to the posterior margin. Free edge of preopercle joined to opercle by narrow fleshy bridge. Free edges of preopercle, supra and infra-lip folds, and gill cover moderately deeply scalloped. Tiny genipores present in short rows over sides and top of head. No radiating genipore rows from eyes; instead a ring of geni­ pores is present in the deep groove around the lower and posterior margin of eye. No genipores on interorbital region. Genipore series present in groove under inner edge of suborbital fold, infra-lip fold, preopercle, and in all scalloped borders. Branchiostegal rays slender, elongate. Membranous posterior margin of gill cover extending well over base of pectoral fin. Edge of gill cover irregularly rounded posteriorly, distinctly scalloped ventrally with 4-6 scalloped flaps. Gill membranes extending moderately far forward, narrowly joined to isthmus well before posterior margin of preopercle. Isthmus has weakly developed median fold with papillate free edge; lateral folds lacking, in their place one papilla present. Gill arches armed with short slender rakers imbedded in flesh; those on first arch larger, but all rakers much shorter than holobranchs. First gill arch with no rakers above angle, 10 below angle on ceratobranchial; none on hypobranchial. No pesudobranchiae. Teeth on jaws not as large as in most other species of Kraemeria, slightly curved. Teeth anteriorly in jaws directed straight inward; outer row of teeth only slightly enlarged over that of inner row; lateral teeth close together, those in lower jaw dircted straight inward. Large buccal valves in mouth. Tongue bilobed, deeply cleft. Eyes very small, directed laterally and obliquely upward. Eyes close together, interorbital width less than one- half eye diameter. Transparent, epidermal envelope around head only slightly distinct around eyes and tip of lower jaw. Dorsal fin consisting of five anterior spines and 14 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin over a vertical from tip of pectoral fin rays. Anal fin rays i,13. Pectoral fin with 8 soft rays, 4th-7th rays (counted from uppermost ray) branched. Pectoral fin base moderately broad, its width somewhat less than half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins parallel with belly, widespread, separated for approximately four-fifths

is e * their length, joined by membrane across the base; innermost pelvic fin ray bases at a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. All pelvic fin soft rays branched. Prin­ cipal caudal fin rays 6 -1- 5. This species appears to be entirely transparent in life without pigmentation except for the eyes and a few pigment spots in a short suffuse streak before the lower an­ terior border of the eye. Measurements in percent of standard length: Greatest body depth !2.6. Head length 25.1. Snout length 04.7. Eye(ball) diameter 01.9. Interorbital width between eyeballs 00.7. Predorsal distance 27.1. Preanal distance 53.1. Pectoral fin length 07.8. Caudal peduncle depth 05.5. Caudal peduncle length from end of dorsal fin base 07.8. Relationships: This new species is distinctive in the genus Kraemeria by its low number of scallop folds on the gill cover and by the presence of a membrane connect­ ing the pelvic fins. In the latter character it approaches the full connection of the pelvic fins in the genus Gobitrichonotus. Other than for its few unique characters Kraemeria torrgaensis is generally similar to the species centered about Kraemeria samoensis, including Kraemeria cunicularia and Kraemeria nudum. Name: Kraemeria tongaensis is named after the Tonga Islands. • ^ « Kraemeria galatheaensis, new species (Pi. VIII, fig. 24: pi. IX, figs. 25 and 26)

Holotype: 40.1 mm. in standard length: station 516b, from Rennell Id., Solomons. Paratypes: Seven specimens 26.3-39.1 mm. in standard length; same locality and data as holotype (three specimens S.U. no. 52(X)9). Description oj types: The Rennell Island specimens are quite uniform in structure with little variability except in range of size. The following characteristics agree in all specimens unless otherwise noted. Body slightly compressed laterally, moderately elongate. Head distinctly wider than body and head depths. Body depth 8.0 (mean) 7.0-9.1 (range) into standard length. Anal papilla round, not indented posteriorly. Head lengUi 3.9 (mean) 3.2-4.4 (range) into standard length. Opercle and sub- opercle short, overlapping, upper edge of opercle filamentous, extending to posterior margin of gill cover. Free edge of preopercle joined to opercle by narrow fleshy bridge. Free edges of preopercle, supra and infra-lip folds, and gill cover strongly scalloped^ usually to a greater extent than shown in the accompanying illustrations. Tiny genipores present in short rows over sides and top of head. Four rows of geni- pores radiate from lower and posterior border of eye. No genipores on interorbital region. Genipore series also present in grooves under inner edge of suborbital fold, infra-lip fold, preopercle, and in scalloped borders. A pair of larger open pores present before each eye. Branchiostegal rays slender, elongate. Membranous posterior margin of gill cover extending well posteriorly, distinctly scalloped ventrally, with approximately two scalloped flaps. Gill membranes extend moderately far forward, narrowly joined to isthmus sligthly before a vertical from posterior margin of pre­ opercle. Isthmus with three median longitudinal folds with papillate free edges, the lateral folds converge anteriorly. Gill arches armed with short blunt rakers which are free, not imbedded in flesh; those on first arch somewhat larger, but all rakers much shorter than holobranchs. First gill arch with one raker above angle np.ar upper end of epibranchial, 10 rakers below angle on ceratobranchial, none on hypo- branchial. No pseudobranchiae. Teeth on jaws fairly large, slightly curved. Anterior teeth in jaws directed straight inward, outer row of teeth only sligthly enlarged in size over that of inner row. Lateral teeth in jaws very close together, those in lower jaw directed upwards. Large buccal valves in mouth. Tongue bilobed, deeply cleft. Eyes very small, directed upward more than laterally. Eyes wide apart for the genus Kraemeria, interorbital width distinctly greater than eye diameter. Transparent, separate, epidermal envelope around head moderately distinct, particularly around eyes and snout. Dorsal fin consisting of five anterior spines and 14 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin before a vertical from tip of pectoral fin. Anal fin rays i,13. Pectoral fin with 7 soft rays, usually all branched except for the outermost upper and lower ray. Pectoral fin base broad, its width approximately one-half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins usually moderately curved from belly, widespread, separated to base, innermost ray bases slightly before a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. All pelvic fin soft rays usually branched. Principal caudal fin rays 6 + 5- The caudal fin count appears to be 9 in some of the youngest specimens because the outer rays have not conspicuously branched yet. This species must be transparent in life without any pigmentation except for the eyes and scattered melanophores on top of the head. One paratype 36.2 mm. in standard length is a gravid female. The eggs can be easily distinguished through the diaphanous body wall and are approximately .5 mm. in diameter. Measurements in percent of standard length (range for all types in parentheses preceded by median and followed hy amount for holotype: Greatest body depth 12.7 (10.9-14.3) 12.5. Head length 24.6 (22.6-26.6) 23.7.'Snout length 04.0 (03.2-04.6) 03.2. Eye(ball) diameter 00.7 (00.6-00.8) 00.8. Predorsal distance 28.9 (24.0-33.1) 29.2. Preanal distance 49.5 (47.4-50.9) 47.4. Pectoral fin length 07.7 (07.2-08.2) 07.2. Pelvic fin length 12.5 (11.8-13.3) 12.2. Caudal peduncle depth 05.1 ((^1.4-05.9) 05.7. Caudal peduncle length from end of dorsal fin base 08.3 (07.3-09.2) 08.7. Relationships: The Rennell Island specimens represent a strikingly unique species in the genus Kraemeria that is not closely related to any known species. Itfis differ­ entiated from all other members of the family in having the smallest eyes, and by the eyes being wide apart, the interorbital width being approximately twice or more greater than the eye diameter. In all other kraemeriids the interorbital width is one- half the eye diameter or less. This species has the dorsal origin farther forward in rela­ tion to tips of pectoral fins than any other kraemeriid, the brain appears to be propor­ tionately the smallest in size (possibly because of the reduction in size of the eyes), while the species appears to be the largest of the genus Kraemeria in physical size. There are many other distinctive characteristics of the species and as the family be­ comes better known, this species may best be separated from Kraemeria as a distinct genus. This form is a highly specialized kraemeriid, having the highest development of genipore pattern on the head, and the greatest reduction in size of opercular bones of the suspensorium. , It is difficuh to determine to which other species of Kraemeria this form may be most closely related. It approaches different species in different characters, e. g. Kra- meria cunicularia in form of scalloped gill cover, Kraemeria bryani in complete lack of pigmentation. Name: Kraemeria galatheaensis is named after the ship “Galathea” of the Danish Deep-Sea Expedition Round the World 1950-52.

Genus Gobitrichonotus Fowler

Gobitrichinotus Fowler 1943, p. 85 (original description; type by original designation Gobitrichinotus radiocularis Fowler).

Diagnosis o f Genus; Head length approximately one-fifth standard length. Anal papilla indistinct, not enlarged, situated in advance of anal fin. Gillrakers rudimentary or absent, a few tiny remnants buried in the flesh of the first arch. Anal fin origin approximately under sixth soft dorsal ray. Soft dorsal rays 18-19. Pelvic fins joined, parallel, tips straight. Pectoral fin rays 9 or 10, branched. Vertebrae 14 abdominal, 16 or 17 caudal, total 30 or 31. Head and body spotted and blotched with melanopho- res. Fins hyalin. A single species, Gobitrichinotus radiocularis Fowler, is known of this genus which has been recorded only in the Philippines in freshwater streams.

Gobitrichinotus radiocularis Fowler (PI. X, figs. 27, 28 and 29)

Gobitrichinotus radiocularis Fowler 1943, p. 86, fig. 22 (original description; Malabang River, southern Mindanao, Philippines).

Material examined; Six specimens 21.3-37.8 mm. in standard length; U.S.N.M. coUe(Aion, acc, no. 210800, from Mindoro, Phillippines; collected by H i l a r i o C. A n ­ to n io , Bureau of Fisheries, Dept. Agriculture and Natural Resources, Republic of the Philippines, Feb. 20, 1956, (one specimen now S.U. no. 52006). Description o f material examined; Body moderately compressed laterally, elongate. Head slightly wider than deep, head width less than its greatest depth. Body depth 8.7 (8.4-9.0) into standard length. Head length 4.5 (4.2-4.8) into standard length. Opercular cones irregular in outline, variable from specimen to specimen; greater part of subopercle is overlapped by opercle, both bones covering most of posterior face of gill cover and extending to posterior margin of gill cover. Membranous gill cover extending over base of pectoral fin rays. Edge of gill cover rounded, not scalloped or indented. Gill membranes extend far forward, joined to isthmus under middle of preopercle. Gular region with small simple and multifid cirri; no longitudinal folds present. Gill arches smooth, without raUers. Three specimens have three tiny bony knobs imbedded in flesh of the lower limb of first arch (ceratobranchial) which may develop into small rakers in larger specimens. Teeth large, strong, in two rows on each jaw; outer row enlarge;d, consisting of about 20 teeth in lower jaw. Tongue truncate at tip, detply slit in middle. Eyes small, directed laterally and upward; eyes close together, interorbital width less than eye diameter. Transparent, separate, epidermal envelope around head distinct, particularly around top of head and lower jaw. Dorsal fin long, consisting of 4-6 anterior spines followed by 18-19 soft rays. Dorsal fin origin over a vertical from posterior tip of pectoral fin. Anal fin rays i,13 or 14. Pectoral fin rays 9 or 10, the middle four rays branched. First and second rays usually not segmented. Pectoral fin base broad, its width approximately one-half the length of the longest ray. Pelvic fins i,5 — 5,i, straight, parallel with belly, tips of rays straight or only slightly curved; innermost pelvic fin ray bases distinctly before a vertical from anteriormost pectoral fin rays. Pelvic fins joined together by membrane for their entire length. Principal caudal fin rays 5 5. Head and body covered with black spots and blotches in irregular pattern; no two specimens alike in pattern. Head and body pigmented primarily on upper half. - Darkest markings on head about eye, tending to form streaks leading from eye. Markings on body tend to be congregated along myomeres. Fins hyalin. Otdliths conspicuously white through cranial wall. . > Measurements in percent of standard length (range for all material examined in parentheses preceded by median): Greatest body depth 11.4 (it. 1-11.6). Head length 22.4 (20.9-24.2). Snout length 03.4 (03.2-04.1). Eye diameter 01.5 (01.4-01.8). Inter­ orbital width 00.8 (00.7-00.9). Predorsal distance 28.1 (27.3-31.1). Preanal distance 61.2 (59.4-62.8). Relationships: This species is the most generalized form in the family and comes closest to retaining the primitive characteristics of the group, as exemplified by: ( 1) pelvic fins joined together (see previous discussion under “relationships within family”); (2) large size and elongate compressed form; (3) heavy pigmentation over head and bodj; (4) lack of scalloped edge on gill cover and folds weakly scalloped on head; (5) presence of almost fully developed opercular bones without reduction in size posteriorly to filaments as is the condition in Kraemeria. Gobitrichinotus radiocularis in turn is specialized in lack of genipores over most of head. This species has a unique position in the family, and its relationships to other kraemeriids are remote. Perhaps it is closest to Kraemeria tongaensi,s, because of the latter form having the base of the inner pelvic fin rays joined together. In regard to coloration it appears closest to Kraemeria samoensis. A character worthy of special mention is the complete line of genipores along the lower edge of the gill cover in Gobitrichinotus radiocularis. It is easy to visualize the trend of evolution from this condition to that of scalloped border of cover in Krae­ meria where the genipores remain only in the concavities of the scallops. The original line of genipores is then interrupted by the scallops. The function of the scalloped borders of the gill cover is perhaps revealed in the young of Kraemeria cunicularia in which the scalloped flaps of each gill cover tend to interdigitate, a characteristic that would keep out sand. < FAMILY BLENNIIDAE BLENNIES Alticus saliens (Forster) (PI. X, fig. 30)

Blennius saliens Forster 1788, p. 343 (original description). Alticus saliens Chapman in de Beaufort and C h a p m a n 1951, p. 266 (synonymy; description; distribution).

A single female of Aliicus saliens was present in the Galathea collections, record­ ing this species for the first time from the Solomons. The identification was confirmed by the keys and descriptions of C h a p m a n 1951 and by comparison to other material in the Stanford collections determined by W. M. C h a p m a n .

S.U. 8991 Pago Pago, Samoa; coll. J o r d a n and party, 1902 ; 4 specimens. S.U. 25132 Hog Harbor, Espiritu Santo Is., New Hebrides; coll. A. W. H e r r e , April 1, 1929; 2 specimens. ^.U . 37122 East Rocs Is., Port Blair, South Andaman Is.; coll. H. S. R a o , Nov. 23, 1932; 12 specimens. • Galathea material examined: One specimen 34.8 mm. in standard length from •station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description oj Galathea material: No nuchal crest present; in its place is a slightly raised fleshy ridge. Nostril with a broad flaring rim; border next to eye, with a small pointed nasal cirrus. Supraorbital cirrus short, bearing three simple and one bifid filaments. Both lips crenulate along their entire edges; in upper lip the lateral crenula- tions are narrower. Intricate fold pattern present at rictus of mouth. Dentition apparently has never been properly described (see figure 30), present on jaws in a single cardiform series; loosely set in flesh. Individual minute teeth closely appressed, lateral sides parallel, and compressed, tips chisel-shaped, lips directed posterioriy without indentations on border. Lower jaw included. No canine posteriorly on dentary. Conspicuous lateral-line pores present on head; three pores on interorbital, one median between supraocular flaps, a pair present anteriorly. Nine postocular and subocular pores around eye. Eight pores in vertical series bordering posterior pre- opercular edge. Two lateral-line pores above opercular opening. One median pore be­ fore dorsal fin origin. Free fold across isthmus. Gular region with two pairs of lateral swollen Jobes near rictus of mouth. Anus closely appressed against first anal ray. All rjys in fins simple. Dorsal rayfs XV, 22, the last two soft rays split to base and counted separately; posterior soft dorsal rays longer than spinous dorsal rays. Moderate notch between dorsal fins. Anal rays 11,27, last two rays counted separately. Pectoral rays 15. Pelvic rays 1,4. 13 distinctly developed caudal fin rays, upper rays longer than lower. Distinctive color markings are about 13 abroad dark vertical bands on body. Superimposed on general body color pattern are thin vertical reticulate lines, approx­ imately one to each myotome. Operculum, pectoral fins, upper lip, snout and nape spotted. Head faintly marbled with darker coloration. Spinous dorsal dusky, remain­ ing fins lighter. Istiblenniiis cyanostigma (Bleeker)

Salarias cyanostigma Bleeker 1849 b, pp. 5,7,18 (original description). CfiAPMAN in DE B e a u f o r t and C h a p m a n 1951, p. 332 (synonymy; description; distribution). htibknnius cyanostigma Schultz and Chapman in S c h u l t z et al MS in press.

Two small Galathea specimens are clearly the females of Istiblennius cyanostigma as presently understood. This species has been greatly confused and is likely to be further divided when the speciation of the genus is reviewed in greater detail. The determination of the Galathea material has been made on the basis of the literature cited in the synonymy and the following comparative material in the Stanford collec­ tions. It has been recorded previously from the Solomons by C h a p m a n (1951). The species appears to live in shallow reef situations near shore about high islands from Melanesia, Micronesia, and the East Indies in the Pacific through the Indian Ocean to East Africa. The East African specimens (S.U. 31476, 31478) appear to be quite similar to the Galathea and other material examined, although the longitudinal lines on the females may be more pronounced in the former. * S.U. 8989 Apia, Samoa; coll, D. S. J o r d a n and K e l l o g g 1902 ; 5 specimens paratypes of Salarias actuosus Jordan and Kellogg). S.U. 14753-4 Apia, Samoa; coll. D. S. J o r d a n and K e l l o g g 1902 ; 4 specimens (cotypes of Salarias thalassinus). S.U. 14755 Wala Is., New Hebrides; coll. A. W. Herre, March 29, 1929; 6 spe- and 25071 cimens. S.U. 14756 South Point, South Andaman Is.; coll. D. D. M u k e r ji, April 12, 1930; 1 specimen, female. S.U. 14757 Dumaguete, Oriental Negros, Philippine Is.; coll. A. W. H e r r e , June 27, 1931; 5 specimens, all males. S.U. 14802 Dumaguete, Oriental Negros, Philippine Is., coll. A. W. H e r r e , 1931 • and Dec. 24, 1936; 3 specimens, males. S.U. 24898 Nukulauls., Fiji Is.; coll. A.W. H e r r e , Mar. 16, 1929; 1 specimen,male. S.U. 25135 Hog Harbor, Espiritu Santo Is., New H e b rid es; coll. A. W. H e r r e , Apr. 1, 1929; 5 specimens, all females. S.U. 28433 Nasugbu, Philippine Is.; coll. A. W. Herre, 1931; 4 specimens, all males. ’ S.U. 31476, Mombasa, East Africa; coll. A. W. H e r r e , Apr. 23, 1934; 7 speci- 31478 mens. S.U. 32285, Nasugbu, Batangas Prov., Philippine Is.; coll. A. W. H e r r e , Feb. 32308 11, 1936; 11 specimens.

Galathea material examined: Two young 18.2 and 20.0 mm. in standard length from station 516d, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description of Galathea material: No nuchal crest present; medial ridge slightly developed. Anterior (lower) nostril in a low raised tube, with a slightly flaring rim; border nearest eye with a short, slender, pointed, simple curris. Supraoibital cirras simple, slender, pointed, its length approximately one-half eye diameter. Edges of jpoth lips smooth, not crenulate. Dentition in jaws in a single cardiform series. Individual teeth similar to that described for A/ticus saliens, except tips straight, not curved abruptly inward. No enlarged teeth present on dentary. Lateral-line pores on head not yet developed. Lateral-line on body conspicuous, originating over base of pectoral fin, indistinct posteriorly over ana! fin. Gular fold free from isthmus. Anus slightly advanced before first anal fin ray. All rays in fins simple. Dorsal fin rays XIII,19 or 20. Anal fin rays 11,21. Pectoral fin rays 14. Major caudal fin rays 5 4 -7 . Pelvic fin rays 1,3. Branchiostegal rays 6 + 6. Distinctive color markings are three streaks on side which break into three series of spots posteriorly. Head and base of pectoral fin dotted with expanded chromato- phores. Upper-lip colored same as head; lower lip more heavily pigmented with more closely spaced melanophores. Gular region crossed by a broad suffuse band. Dorsal and caudal fin vertically striped. Anal fin pigmented in a broad longitudinal Voedial band. Peritoneum of belly black.

• Istiblennius edentulos (Bloch and Schneider) • . Blennius edentulus Bloc^ and Schneider 1801, p. 172 (original description; Huaheine Id., Societies). Salarias edentulus Chapman in de Beaufort and C h a p m a n 1951, p. 328 (synonymy; description, records, including Solomons). Istiblennius edentulus Strasburg 1955, p. 298 (distribution).

One lot of young blennies are identified clearly to the Istiblennius edentulus complex (see Strasburg’3 discussion, 1955), but there are doubts that the Galathea specimens are this species sensu stricto. However, as amply shown by S t r a s b u r g (1955), there is considerable variation in Istiblennius edentulus and a more exact taxonomic placement of the Galathea specimens would require a racial study of the enti*e complex. A detailed description of the Galathea material is presented for comparison. Calathea material examined: Five specimens 20.5-22.2 mm. in standard length from Gjlathea station 516b, Rennell Id., Solomons. Measurements of three speci­ mens 20^5, 21.3 and 22.2 mm. in standard length are recorded in sequence in the following description. Diagnosis o f Galathea specimens: Edge of lips smooth. T^eth in jaws v ery numer­ ous, freely movable. No teeth on vomer. Nuchal, nasal and suprocular cirri present, all simple. No nuchal crest. No barbels or sucking disk on underside of head. Pelvic fin rays 1,3. Dorsal fin rays XI11,20, a deep notch separating the soft dorsal from the spinous dorsal; last dorsal spine much shorter than first soft dorsal ray. Last dorsal ray broadly joined to procurrent caudal rays. Last anal ray without membranous attachment to caudal peduncle. No s\^ollen anal rays. Head, body and fins over-all pigmented brown, without distinct markings. Description o f Galathea specimens: Body moderately elongate,stronglycompressed, deepest at forepart of pectoral fin; belly rounded. Anus immediately before anal fiii. Anal papilla small, simple. ' Head almost as broad as deep; upper lip inferior. Profile of snout before eye rounded. Teeth minute, elongate, implanted in a single cardiform row in the flesh of the lips, freely movable. No enlarged teeth in jaws. Teeth equal in size and extent on upper and lower jaws. Upper (posterior) nostril large, round, next to border of eye, without a raised rim. Lower (anterior) nostril in a slightly raised, flaring tube, with a simple cirrus on the upper margin. Eyes large, close together, not entering into dorsal profile. Interorbital width approximately IV2 times in length of supra­ orbital cirrus. Latter structure simple and slender. Gill membranes broadly joined, free fold across isthmus. Lateral-line short, well developed anteriorly above pectoral fin; terminating under sixth or seventh dorsal spine. - All fin rays simple. Spinous dorsal fin distinctly lower than soft dorsal. Dorsal rays XIII,20 in all specimens. Anal fin much shorter than soft dorsal, its origin approximately under ninth or tenth dorsal spine; anal rays 11,21 or 22. In both dorsal and anal counts the last two separate rays are counted individually. Pectoral fin large, outline rounded, rays 14 in all types. Pelvic fin rays 1,3, the outer soft ray small tnd indistinct, along inner surface of second soft ray. Caudal fin outline truncate; 11 rays entering into the posterior profile. ' The coloration in life was probably black; in preservative the types are shades of brown. The color pattern is well preserved. No sexual dimorphism noted. Body solid brown; belly lighter; no distinct markings except for light indications of the myomeres; there are faint indications of pairs of vertical bars on the body. Head solid brown, lighter on throat and posterior to jaws. Large dark brown melanophores on cranium visible as spots on top of head. Nasal, supraorbital and nuchal cirri pigmented brown. Dorsal fin pigmented brown; first dorsal with indications of two medial longitudi­ nal darker bands separated from each other by a series of lighter spots; border of first dorsal dark brown. Upper band black on first membrane shading to brown posteriorly. Second dorsal solid even brown except for indications of a medial lighter spot on the membranes between the first four soft rays. Anal fin brown, shading to darker on outer half; soft rays edged in white. Pectoral and caudal fins pigmented light brown basally; brown on rays distally only. Pelvic fins mottled light brown. Measurements in percent of standard length: Greatest body depth 19.5, 21.1, 19.4. Head length 26.4, 26.3, 25.7. Snout length 06.3,08.5, 09.0. Eye diameter 09.3, 08.9, 09.0. Interorbital width 04.4, 03.8, 03.6. Predorsal length 19.5, 21,1, 19.4. Longest ray first dorsal 12.7, 11.7, 10.8. Longest ray second dorsal 15.1, 16.4, 13.1. Preanal di­ stance 49.8, 45.5, 45.1. Pectoral fin length 24.4, 24.9, 23.4. Pelvic fin length 17.6, 18.8, 17.1. Caudal fin length 22.0, 22.5, 21.2. Istiblennius rennellensis, new species (PI. XI, fig. 32)

Holotype: 41.7 mm. in standard length from Galathea station 516d, Rennell Id., Solomons. Paratypes: 12 specimens 15.8-41.8 mm. in standard length, same data as holotype. Diagnosis of Galathea material: Edge of lips smooth. Teeth in jaws very numerous, freely movablq. No teeth on vomer. No nuchal cirri. High medial crest. Nasal cirrus simple. Supraocular cirrus large, filamentous. No barbels or sucking disk on under­ side of head. Pelvic fin rays 1,3. Dorsal fin rays XIII, 18 or 19, a deep notch separating the soft dorsal from the spinous dorsal; last dorsal spine much shorter than first soft dorsal ray. Last dorsal ray broadly joined to back by membrane, but not connect­ ed to procurr^nt caudal rays. Last anal ray without membranous attachment to caudal peduncle. No swollen anal rays. Large black spot on membrane between first two dorsal spines, before pectoral fin and on caudal fin base. Adults with dark black spots on side of head, and large oblong ringed spots on side of body. Black spot on caudal fin posteriorly broadly margined in white. * Description of Galathea material: Body moderately elongate, strongly compressed, Meepest below tips of pectoral fins; belly rounded. Anus immediately before anal fin. Anal papilla small, simple. Head moderately compressed; upper lip inferior. Profile of snout before eye vertical or slightly rounded in larger specimens. Teeth very small, elongate, implanted in a single cardiform row in the flesh of the lips, freely movable. Tips of teeth rounded, not expanded or pointed inward. No enlarged teeth in jaws. Teeth equal in size and extent on upper and lower jaws. Upper (posterior) nostril next to border of eye, without a raised rim. Lower (anterior) nostril slightly raised, flaring tube, with a large simple cirrus on the upper margin. Eyes large, very close together entering into dorsal profile of head. Interorbital width approximately 3-4 times in length of supraorbital cirrus. Latter structure broad, flat, pointed, fringed with numerous filaments along each edge. Nuchal flap large, long, evenly rounded, not as high as supraorbital cirrus, lacking in two smallest specimens. Gill membranes broadly joined, free fold across isthmus. Gillrakers very short and slender, 12 on first arch in one paratype counted. Four large pseudobranchiae present. Lateral-line short, weakly developed anteriorly above pectoral fin, approximately 3-7 pores evident. Several scattered genipores evident above lateral-line below dorsal fin origir;. All fin rays simple except caudal fin rays branched. Dorsal fin moderately high, rays XII or XllT, 18 or 19. Anal fin similar to dorsal, origin approximately under a vertical from tenth dorsal spine; anal rays 11,19 or 20. In both dorsal and anal counts the last two separate rays are counted individually. Pectoral fin large, outline rounded, rays 15 all types; lower rays slightly thickened. Pelvic fin rays 1,3 the outer soft ray much smaller than other rays, along inner surface of second soft ray. Gaudal fin outline rounded; JO or 11 principal rays (8 or 9 branched in larger specimens; none branched in two smallest paratypes). The coloration has been mostly lost, the fishes being shades of brown and black, but the pattern is well preserved. It is presumed that both sexes are included and if so, they are essentially similar in markings. The pattern in the young specimens 17.3-32.3 mm. follows first: Body with six pairs of vertical bars on body, which appear as groups of 4 suffuse spots (2 above, 2 below) on the side of the body. The last set on the base of the tail is modified by being one vertical bar followed by a conspicuous median spot on the middle caudal rays. The strongest pigmentation on the body is a dark spot before the base of the pectoral fin.The belly externally lacks pigmentation; the body wall ventrally is hyalin and the peritoneum has scattered melanophores. Region immediately before pelvic fins with a sufTuse black transverse band. Head pigmented with scattered black spots o\er opercular region; darker spot behind eye. Snout and upper lip evenly pigmented. Nuchral crest evenly pigmented dusky black. Supraorbital cirrus suffusely pigmented. Bottom of head with 4 sets of bands directed obliquely inward, the anteriormost extending on the lower lip, and meeting on gular region in the form of a chevron. Dorsal fin with a black spot on middle of membrane between first two spines. First dorsal evenly pigmented suffuse black over the entire fin except for numerous scattered hyalin spots; along base of fin are five large hyalin areas bordered in betwe’en by darker black. Second dorsal with similar pigmentation to first dorsal except for no dark spot and the hyalin areas are arranged into numerous oblique stripes. Anal fin with distal half of fin black; basal half hyalin. Pectoral fin with light scattered melano­ phores on rays; membranes hyalin. Pelvic fins lightly pigmented black or lacking pig­ ment. Caudal fin with a spot at the base of central rays. Middle of fin with a vertical crescentic dark band paralleling a broad sufface dark band following posterior margiu of fin. No light spots on caudal fin. Adult color pattern is same as that described for young with the following exceptions; The body is suffusely mottled in background color; the distinctive markings are three irregular longitudinal series of oblong spots narrowly ringed in dark brown; these spots are particularly evident between end of pectoral fin and caudal fin base. The black spots on the head are much more promi- nant in the adults. Pectoral fin lightly pigmented over rays and membranes. Measurements in percent o f standard length ( Range o f eight types in paranti)eses preceded by mean and followed by percentage for holotype): Greatest body depth 17.6(15.8-19.6) 17.2. Head length 23.0 (21.1-26.6) 22.1. Snout length 07.0 (06.2-08.3) 07.2. Eye diameter 06.4 (05.7-07.4) 05.8. Interorbital width 01.1 (01.0-01 4) OI.O. Predorsal distance 22.9 (22.3-23.9) 22.3). Longest ray first dorsal 11.9 (10.5-13.4) 13.4. Longest ray second dorsal 13.3 (12.I-I5.2) 14.8. Preanal distance 47.5 (44.1­ 52.0) 44.1. Longest anal ray 11.6 (11.2-12.9) 12.9. Longest pectoral fin ray 20.4 (18.2-23.6) 18.9. Longest pelvic fin ray 13.0 (11.2-14.5) 11.7. Caudal fin length 20.7 (18.6-23.3) 20.6. ^ Relationships: The present specimens fall completely within the genus /stiblennius follwoing the publications of N o r m a n (1943) and S c h u l t z and Chapman (MS), as indicated by the characters given in the diagnosis. All of the Indo-Pacific species that are currently referred to the genera /stiblennius, Salarias and their relatives were systematically examined and compared to the present material in an attempt to identify it to a known species. The material agreed with no description found, and no specimens of the collections of the George Vanderbilt Foundation and Stanford University. Istiblennius rennellensis appears to be related to Istiblennius macneilli ( W h itle y 1938) from the New Hebrides and Santa Cruz Islands, Istiblennius natalis ( R e g a n 1909) from Christmas I., /. we/eagm (Cuvier and Valenciennes 1836) from Australia, I. margaritatus (Kendall & Radcliffe 1912) from Samoa, I. raoi ( H e r r e 1939) from the Philippines and Andaman Islands, I. bilineatus ( P e te r s 1865) from Oceania, I. goesii ( B le e k e r 1859) from New Guinea and the Philippines, I. amboinen- sis ( B le e k e r *1857) from the East Indies and /. unicolor (R C p p e l 1838) from the Indian Ocean. Istiblennius rennellensis is similar to I. natalis in tentacle formation, fin counts, general coloration and distinctive spot on the base of the caudal fin. It differs from /. natalis by important details of color pattern by having a spot before the pectoral fin, entirely different coloration of the first dorsal, and presence of only one spot behind the eye instead of two. The pairs of vertical bars break up to form three *distinct longitudinal series of spots in /. natalis and only two distinct series in /. ren­ nellensis, although the third upper series is faintly evident. A pair of posterior canines art present in the lower jaw of /. natalis but absent in I. rennellensis. • Istiblennius rennellensis is similar to /. meleagris in the lack of canine teeth, presence of fringed supraocular tentacle and nuchal crest and general color pattern. It differs from I. meleagris by having a simple instead of fringed nasal cirrus, by the dorsal fin not extending onto the caudal, by the lack of white spots in the anal fin and on the body. Istiblennius rennellensis is similar to I. amboinensis and I. unicolor in fin counts and in general tentacle formation. It differs from I. amboinensis and /. unicolor in having a smooth versus crenulate upper lip and by entirely different color patterns. I. unicolor has a filamentous nasal cirrus, versus I. rennellensis having a simple nasal cirrus. /. rennellensis is most closely related to the species surrounding I. bilineatus, over which there is considerable confusion in the literature. The species primarily involved in the bilineatus group are /. margaritatus, I. raoi, I. goesii. and species presently in their synonymy. I. rennellensis was compared to the following material of this group*

Istiblennjus goessi (det. by W. M. C h a p m a n with note "martini-colei-goesii”) S.U. 14915 Estancia, Panay, Philippine Islands, July 26-29, 1940; coll. A . W. H e r r e 10 specimens. S.U. 5521 (paratype of S. colei Herre 1934) Culion, Philippine Is., May 2, 1931 coll. A. W. H erre; one specimen. Istiblennius bilineatus S.U. 40642, Mercedes, Samar, Philippine Is., May 10, 1945 coll. R a lp h F. Annereaux; two specimens. S.U. 32284 Nasugbu, Batangas, Philippine Is., Dec. 11, 1936; coll. A. W. H e r r e • four specimens. S.U. 14746 Pago Pago, Samoa, 1902; coll D. S. J o r d a n and party; 13 specimens. Istiblennius raoi S.U. 41346 Andaman Islands; coll. A. W. H e r r e ; one specimen. On the basis of the above cited specimens and descriptions in the literature the following conclusions can be drawn: I. rennellensis is very close to the above cited specimens of I. bilineatus and I. goesii, particularly S.U. 40642, differing from them primarily in the presence of a spot the pectoral fin, oblique markings on the lower lip and lower side of the head, solid dark spots on the head in adults and prominent white band posterior, all of which are absent in the specimens identified as bilineatus by W. M. C h a p m a n and A. W. H e r r e . However, it should be noted that I. rennellensis differs even more from the original description of bilineatus in number of dorsal rays XIII, 18 or 19 in rennellensis versus XI, 17 in the latter, and presence versus absence of a nasal cirrus. I. rennellensis differs from I. raoi by having a lower crest, less rounded snout in profile, solid dark spots on head in adult instead of ringed spots, banded instead of spotted caudal fin, a more filamentous supraorbital tentacle, and larger ringed spots on body in adults. The illustration of Istiblennius macneilli by W hitley (1928) looks very much like the present species, except for the lack of a spot on the base of the pectoral fin, lack of numerous spots on the first dorsal fin, broad dark bands on chin, two versus one basal caudal spots, and lack of white area around basal caudal spot. Istiblennius macneilli further differs from the present species in number of dorsal spiqes (12 versus 13 in all but holotype). The types of Istiblennius macneilli coloratus (W hitley 1928)' [which I doubt are the same species as macneilli] differ from the present species in number of soft dorsal rays (18-19 in rennellensis versus 17 in coloratus), and differences in coloration of second dorsal and anal fins.

Entomacrodus wolffi, new species (PI. XI, fig. 31 and text-fig. 1)

One adult blenny from Rennell Island collected by the Galathea Expedition belongs in the Entomacrodus striatus (Qouy & Gaimard) complex but is unique from all previous known members by lacking nuchal cirri and canine teeth, by having fila­ ments on both sides of the supraorbital flap (see text-fig. 1), and by having a Hack axilla. Detailed comparison with material of Entomacrodus appears to confirm this unique example as representing a new species. Holotype: 65.4 mm. in standard length from station 516b, Rennell Id., Sojomons. Diagnosis of Galathea type: Edge of upper lip crenulate for its entire length; edge of lower lip smooth. Teeth in jaws very numerous, cardiform, freely movable. No nuchal crest or cirri, nasal and supraorbital cirri present, filamentous; supbraorbital cirrus filamentous on both margins. No barbels or sucking disk on underside of head. Pelvic fin rays 1,4. Dorsal fin rays XIII,16, a deep notch separating the spinous from the soft dorsal; last dorsal spine tiny, much shorter than other spines. Last dorsal ray bound to caudal peduncle by a membrane which does not quite reach procurrent caudal rays. Last anal ray without membranous attachment to caudal peduncle. No swollen anal rays. Axilla of pectoral fin solid black. 7. From the Santa Cruz Archipelago. • Fig. 1. Supi’aorbital flap of Entomacrodus wolffi.

Description of Galathea type: Body moderately elongate, almost round in cross section behind axilla, strongly compressed posteriorly, deepest below middle of spinous dorsal fin; belly rounded. Anus immediately before anal fin. Anal papilla complex in form, posterior tip pointed, joined to first anal rays. Head broader than deep, upper lip inferior. Profile of snout before eye rounded. Teeth minute, elongate, implanted in a single cardiform row in the flesh of the lips, freely movable. No enlarged teeth in jaws. Teeth equal in size and extent on upper auid lower jaws. Posterior nostril a large round hole at upper anterior border of eye, without a raised rim; anterior nostril smaller, with a low flaring rim; cirrus on inner maf^in consisting of a short pedicel bearing 8-9 filaments palmately at its end. Eyes large, moderately close together, not entering into the dorsal profile. Supraorbital cirrus length approximately Vj eye diameter, with six filaments along its length on outer side, four filaments on inner side. Gill membranes broadly joined, free fold across isthmus. Lateral-line well developed anterirorly over pectoral fin, arching down to mid-lateral region, terminating at a vertical from ninth dorsal spine. All fin rays simple, except caudal fin rays branched. Spinous dorsal distinctly lower than soft dorsal, last spine very small. Anal rays 11,17, last two rays separate at base, and counted individually as was done for dorsal count. Anal spines imbedded in fleshy genital papilla. Origin of anal fin under penultimate dorsal spine. Pectoral fin large, 14 rays. Inner two pelvic fin rays much more slender than outer two rays. Caudal fin outline rounded, 6 — 5 principal rays. The coloration is very similar to Entomacrodus striatus and apparently well preseFved. A vertical black streak behind eye; head otherwise covered with even shading broken up into light mottling on the snout and upper lip. As shown in the illustration, top and sides of head, nape and upper anterior region of body covered with low. whitish welts formed from mucus. No silvery dots evident under eye. Thro’at with three sets of faint lines arranged in from of chevrons, first two sets joined at apex. Abdomen without pigmentation. Vertical body only faintly evident dorsally. Numerous round brown spots on sides, most intense on upper sides, particularly in mid-lateral region. Smaller faint brown dots present along sides of ventral half of body. No black spot over pectoral axil. Entire axilla solid black from upper edge of pectoral fin base to below pectoral fin rays. Pectoral base lightly pigmented. Dorsals with clearly defined oblique dark lines. Caudal fin crossed by six vertical bands nar- rowfler than light interspaces. Anal without pigmentation except for three black spots on penultimate, third and fourth from last rays. No pigmentation on pelvic and pectoral fins. 203 « Measurements in percent of standard length: Head length 22.9. Snout length 08.9. Eye diameter 05.1. Predorsal distance 23.1. Longest ray first dorsal 09.0. Longest ray second dorsal 12.9. Preanal distance 53.5. Longest anal ray 12.9. Pectoral fin length 21.6. Pelvic fin length 14.8. Caudal fin length 22.8. Relationships: While generally this specimen looks like a member of the highly variable species Entomacrodus striatus (Quoy & Gaimard), it differs from it trenchantly, in form of cirri on the head, in absence of canine teeth, and axilla pigmentation. Comparative material of Entomacrodus striatus was examined from Waigiu, Andaman Islands, Ceylon, India and Palau Islands. All of these specimens (over 50 examples) agreed with the general description of C h a p m a n (in de Beaufort and C h a p m a n 1951, p. 283) and diff'ered from Entomacrodus wolffi by possessing nuchal cirri, by having the supraorbital cirri fringed on only the upper side, by possessing large canine teeth, and by lacking axillary pigmentation. • Name: Entomacrodus wolffi is named after Dr. Torben W olff, leader of the Danish Rennell Expedition 1951.

FAMILY OSTRACIONTIDAE BOX FISHES r Ostraclon meleagris Shaw

Ostracion meleagris Shaw 1804, p. 428, pi. 172 (original description; “Southern Ocean”).

One box fish was collected by the Rennell Expedition representing the first record of Ostracion meleagris from the Solomon Islands. F raser-B runner (1935, 1940) and Schultz (MS) have been followed in identification and in consideration of Ostracion lentiginosum Bloch and Schneider and O. sebae Bleeker as synonyms. Galateha material examined: One specimen 129.0 mm. in standard length from station 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galatliea material: Teeth blunt, incisiform, tips rounded, brown, Twelve teetTi in upper jaw. Nine teeth in lower jaw. Body rectangular in cross section; each side convex; no ridge on back. Dorsal fin rays 1,9. Anal fin rays 1,9. Pectoral fin rays 10. Sides and top of head and body dark, covered with closely spaced white spots. Ventor light except darker around edges and posteriorly about anal fin; anus ringed black; white spots at ventor edges opposite pectoral and anal fins. White spots on sides of body larger. Some white spots on caudal peduncle and base of caudal fin joined in irregular lines. Remainder of caudal fin black except for lighter crescentic area on posterior third of fin.

FAMILY SCORPAENIDAE ROCK FISHES

A tiny specimen of scorpaenid approximately 8.5 mm. in standard length was taken at station 516g. It is too young to identify. ‘ FAMILY BALISTIDAE TRIGGER FISHES * Rhinecanthus aculeatus (Linnaeus)

Salistes aculeatus Linnaeus 1758 p. 328 (original description; habitat India). Balislapus aculeatus Herre 1931, p. 9 (name only; Solomon Islands). Rhinecanthus aculeatus Fraser-Brunner 1935, p. 662 (key; name only).

One specimen collected by the Galathea Expedition provides the first definite locality record for the species within the Solomon Islands. Galathea material examined: One specimen 142.7 mm. in standard length from station 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons. Description o f Galathea material: Snout elongate. Osseous gill plates developed behind gill opening. Teeth white, tips irregular. No groove before eye. Head completely scaled except for region around mouth. Caudal peduncle greatly constricted. Side of caudal peduncle with three rows of small forwardly directed spines; upper row ‘ with 10 spines; middle row with 8 spines; lower row with 4 spines. Dorsal fin rays 1,24. Anal fin rays 1,21. Pectoral fin rays 13. Dorsal and anal fins low, rounded, not elongate. Third dorsal spine minute. Caudal fin truncate. • Coloration generally light with dark oblique bands and lines on lower half of body. Anal region black, receiving the oblique dark bands from behind fin. Base of pectoral fin with a vertical black band. Interorbital region with a broad black band extending below eye to pectoral fin. Subopercular band preceded by a vertical line originating from anterior margin of interorbital band. Soft fins light colored, mem­ branes hyalin.

Balistapus iindulatus (Mungo Park)

Baliste undulatus Mungo Park, 797, p. 37 (original description; Sumatra). • Balistapus undulatus Seale 1906, p. 74 (name only; records including Shortland Id., Solomons). H e r r e 1931, p. 9 (Tenibuli, Ugii, Shortland I., Solomons). S e a le 1935, p. 376 (color note; Kanggava Bay, Rennell I., Solomons). Fraser-Brunner , ‘1935, p. 662 (name only). Balistapus capistratus Harry 1949, p. 145 (name only; Purvis Bay, Florida Island, Solomons; Stanford University catalogue numbers 14790-92).

* One adult of the distinctive species Balistapus undulatus was taken by the Rennell Expedition. Its identification was confirmed in F raser-Brunner' s key (1935) of the family Balistidae and from comparative collections in the Stanford collections. The species has been previously recorded from Rennell Island by Seale (1935). Galathea material examined: One specimen 154 ram. in standard length from ■ station 516f, Rennell Id., Solomons. ' Description o f Galathea material: Osseous gill plates developed behind gill opening. Teeth white with light brown tips. No groove before eye. Head completely scaled except for region around mouth. Caudal peduncle not unusually constricted. Side of caudal peduncle with two parallel rows of forwardly directed spines; upper row with 3 spines, lower with 2 spines. Dorsal fin rays 1,25. Anal fin rays 1,22. Pectoral fin rays 13. Dorsal and anal fins low, rounded, not elongate. Third dorsal spine well developed, not minute. Caudal fin truncate. General color dark brown; body with approximately 14 distinct oblique lighter stripes. Head with 3 stripes extending from about mouth posteriorly below pectoral fin, forming the first two oblique stripes on body. Soft fins light colored, membranes hyalin.

FISHES FROM RENNELL ISLAND ' COLLECTED BY THE 1933 TEMPLETON CROCKER EXPEDITION

The 1933 Templeton Crocker Expedition to the Polynesian and Melanesian Islands of the Western Pacific collected fishes for several days during the middle of June in the vicinity of Rennell Island, primarily at Kunggava Bay. A collection of fishes totalling approximately 50 or more species was taken from about Rennell Island and A lvin Seale (1935) lists most of the specimens and species in his report on the expedition results. He describes one species as new (Cypselurus crockeri). The entire collection was deposited by Seale in the fish collection at the California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco. All the Crocker specimens from Rennell Island that could be found were reexamined and the results are presented in this section. Spratelloides delicalulus (Bennett). Rennell 1. one specimen, 30 mm. total length; June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5712. Specimen not found. Muraeiiichthys sp. Rennell I., one specimen; June 14, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5607 (1041). Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 341 Muraenichlhys gymnopterus but the Rennell Island example appears to be far from that species. In Schultz and W oods (1949) and Sch u ltz (1953) key and descriptions the present specimen is in the region of Muraenichlhys retropinnis Fowler, Muraenichlhys johnslonensis Schultz and Woods, and Muraenichlhys philippinensis Schultz and Wood, but greatly differs from all three species by having a larger eye, a longer head, different dentition, and so forth. Presumably the Rennell Island specimen is a new species but until the classification of the group is better known perhaps it is best not to assign a new name to it. Gymnolhorax buroensis (Bleeker). Rennell I., two specimens 101 and 174 mm. in standard length; June 13, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5599 (1040). Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 342 Gymnolhorax ftwcA; (Bleeker), but determination by recent litera­ ture and comparison to both species in the Stanford collection conclusively shows the specimens to be typical G. buroensis, as the species is currently understood. Uroplerygius sp. Rennell I., June 13; 1933, C.A.S. no. 5600 (1040a). Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 343, Gymnolhorax chilospilus, but it is most certainly not a Gymnolhorax because the dorsal and anal fins are confined to the tail. A deter­ mination to a known species could not be made, but it definitely falls within the limits of the genus Uroplerygius and in Sch u ltz’ key (1953) to the genera and species related to Uroplerygius it comes closest in color pattern to Uroplerygius concolor Ruppell. It differs from that species by the rear nostril over the eye not having a raised rim, by the tail being brown, not white, by the gill opening being at the middle of the side, etc. Synodus variegatus (Lacepede)? Rennell I., four specimens 34-46 mm. in standard lerfgth; June 12, 1933; C .A .S . no. 5926. Original determination by S e a le 1935, p. 344, Saurus variegatus. Specific determination not checked because examples too small. Traciiinocephalus myops (Blech and Schneider)? Rennell I,, two specimens 34 and 40 mm. in standard length; June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5919. Original determination by Seale Saurus myops. Identification not checked because examples too small and color pattern lost. Myctophum prislilepis (Gilbert and Cramer). Rennell I., one specimen 80 mm. total length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5805 (1039). Specimen not found. Cypselurus erockeri Seale. Rennell I., holotype 144.6 mm. in standard length; June 17, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5506, original no. 0667 (Since many of the species of flying fishes in the tropical Pacific are poorly known and the classification confused, S redescription of the type is presented below). Body moderately compressed, somewhat rectangular in cross cestion. Anus in a sharp-edged elliptical-shaped depression slightly before anal fin. Anterior edge of jnus sljghtly behind a vertical from dorsal fin origin. Head moderately snfall, angular in cross section. Top of head flat, slightly concave in interorbital region. Snout broad and short. Large hemispherical nostril pit before anterior border of eye in which is a vertical flap. Flat side of hemisphere facing eye. Scales present over top of head onto interorbital and upper region of gill cover. Upper edge of gill opening at pectoral fin origin. Gill folds extend far forward, narrowly joined to isthmus below middle of eye. No barbel on chin. No teeth seen in jaws. Upper and lower jaws with coalesced sharp edges. Palatines long, with scattered minute teeth along their length. Tongue large, broad, tip rounded. All arches with gillrakers. First arch with 19 rakers on lower limb, 5 rakers above angle; inner edges of rakers denticulate, moderately long and slender, but not as long as holo- branchs. Rakers on posterior arches short tubercles. Reduced gill slit behind last arch, Pharyngobranchial teeth on a round flat pin-cushion-like pad on each side, preceding a much larger similar pad medially. Pharyngobranchial teeth tiny, fixed, completely covering pharyngobranchial bones. . Scales on body moderately large. Lateral-line at lower edge of gill cover and ex­ tends straight along lower side of belly until pelvic fin where it rises slightly and extends straight along side until near end of hypural fan 14.3 mm. from a vertical from end of anal fin base. 52 lateral-line scales with large tubps. Dorsal fin origin far posterior, distinctly anterior to verticals from anus and anal fin. Last dorsal fin rays reach well beyond posterior edge of hypural fan. All rays segmented. Last dorsal ray split into several branches with a common base and is counted as one. Dorsal fin rounded in outline, the posterior portion of the fin much longer than anterior rays. Base of fin light. Remainder of fin black, darkest posteriorly. Distance between dorsal origin and first procurrent caudal rays appreciably longer than head length. Anal fin small, shoft in length. All rays segmented, first simple, remainder branched. Anal fin origin approximately opposite fifth dorsal ray. End of anal fin base distinctly anterior to a vertical from end of dorsal fin base. Pectoral fins large, long, round in outline, extending near to middle of dorsal fin base. Pectoral fins solid black without trace of markings. Last rays slightly lighter in coloration. Pelvic fins large, long, extending slightly beyond base of caudal fin rays. Origin of pelvics over an eye diameter before a vertical from dorsal fin origin. Middle rays of pelvics solid black. Outer rays dusky. First ray broad, flat, expanded at base, pointed at tip. Caudal fin deeply forked, tips of lobes broken off, but lower lobe appears to have been much longer than upper. Head and body have an over-all brassy coloration; brown above, more silvery below. No definite markings evident on head or body. Suborbital region a darker brassy brown. Rim of eye and edge of upper lip dark brown. Caudal fin appears to have had at least four broad vertical irregular bands in life. Center of caudal fin base black, . Counts: Dorsal 12, all segmented rays, last two rays joined, counted as one. Anal 8. Pectoral i,14. Pelvic 6. Caudal 9 ^ 8 principal rays. Mid-lateral scale series approx­ imately 44. Predorsal scales 37. Measurements in percent of standard length: Greatest body depth (belly shrunken) 18.1. Head length 22.8 (fleshy flap included). Head width (at opercles) 14.8. Hoad depth (at nape) 16.5. Snout length 05.0. Eye diameter 07.1. Bony interorbital width 08.7. Predorsal distance 75.5. Preanal distance 82.1. Pectoral fin length 52.3. Pelvic fin length 37.8. Pelvic to anal distance* 19.0. Anal to dorsal distance* 6.7. Longest anal fin ray (first ray) 06.0. Longest dorsal fin ray (third from last) 15.4. Holocentrus opercularis Cuvier and Valenciennes. Kanggava Bay, Rennell Is­ land; one specimen 190 mm. standard length; June 10, 1933; C .A .S . no. 6008. Determination same as presented by S e a le 1935, p. 351. Holocentrus spinifer (Forskal). Kanggava Bay, Rennell L; one specimen 108 mm. in standard length; June 10, 1933; C .A .S . no. 6009. Original determination by S e a le 1935, p. 352 Holocentrus caudimaculatus Riippell; present determination according to W eber and de Beaufort; the presence of four rows of scales between spinous dorsal and Jateral-line appear decisively to preclude the specimen from being caudi­ maculatus. Two other specimens of the same species in the same bottle 98 and 138.mm. in standard length labelled from Pago Pago, Samoa, May 19, 1929. Corythoichthys nigripectus Herald. Rennell L, three specimens 43-54 mm. In standard length. June 16, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5901 (1039). Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 353 Corythoichthys fasciatus (Gray). Present identification was made from H erald’s key to the species of Corythoichthys (1953, p. 266) and comparative material. Aulostomus chinensis (Linnaeus). Rennell L, one specimen 133 mm. in standard length. June 17, 1933; C .A .S . no 5768 (1042). Original determination by S e a le 1935, p. 354, Aulostomus valentini (Bleeker); this name is a synonym of A. chinensis, as presented in the recent review of the genus Aulostomus by W heeler 1955. Fistularia petimba Lacepede. Rennell L, three specimens 104-114 mm. In standard

8. Distance between verticals from respective fins. 208 length. June 17, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5735. Determination same as presented by Seace W35, p. 354. , Hypoatherina barnesi Schultz. Rennell I., 15 specimens 32-42.5 mm, in standard length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5638. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 354 Atherina uisila Jordan and Seale. According to the keys and descriptions of Sch ultz 1953, pp. 291, 303 and continuing, the Rennell material clearly agrees with H. barnesi in all key characters. Chelon seh^li (Forskal). Rennell 1., one specimen 294 mm. in standard length, C.A.S. no. 6023 (0655). Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 355 Li:a caeruleoma- culata (Lacepede). We find that it agrees more closely with Mugilseheli in the account of W eber and de Beaufort 1922. We have followed Schultz (1946, 1953) in placing the species in the genus Chelon but it should be noted that the example does not key out properly to* any genus in Sch ultz’ keys, nor are we cetain that it is seheli. Con­ siderably more research is needed on the differentiation of species in the family Mugilidae. Carany marginatus Gill. Rennell I., two specimens 323 mm. total length. June 17, 1933. Specimens not found. *Caranx sexfasciatus Quoy and Gaimard Rennell I., one specimen 195 mm. total Tength.»June 9, 1933. Specimen not found. Trachurops crumenophthalmus (Bloch). Rennell I., one specimen June 17, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5988 (0668). Specimen recorded in C.A.S. catalogue but not recorded by Seale 1935 and not found in collection. Coryphaena equisetis Linnaeus. Rennell I., one specimen 50 mm. in standard length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5686. Apparently not included by Seale in his report on the Crocker Expedition fishes; determination was made from H erre and H erald’s differentiation of Coryphaena hippurus and C. equisetis (1951, p. 327): Two gillrakers present above angle on first arch; 53 dorsal fin rays. * Epinephelus merra Bloch. Kanggava Bay, Rennell 1., one specimen 170 mm. in standard length. July 8, 1933; C.A.S. no. 6016, one specimen 61 mm. in standard length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5914. Same as original determination by Seale 1935* p. 359. Jhe Rennell Island specimens of the Crocker Expedition are inexplicably mixed with other collections, including material from Indiana University from Apia, Samoa. ■ Pseudogramma polyacantha Rennell I., two specimens 28 and 33 mm. in standtyd length. June 13, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5892. Same as original determination by Seale 1935, p. 360. Priacanthus cruentatus (Lacepede). Rennell 1., one specimen 37 mm. in standard length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5917. Same as original determination by Seale 1935, p. 360. ^ ^ Gerres filamentosus Cuvier and Valenciennes. Kungava Bay, Rennell L, one specimen 164 mm. in total length. June 9, 1933. Specimen not found. ' Parupeneus hifasciatus (Lacepede). Rennell L, one specimen 70.5 mm. in standard length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5858. Same as original determination by Seale 1935, p. 3fl2 — Pseudupeneus hifasciatus (Lapecede). 209 # Mulloidichthys samoensis (Gunther). Kanggava Bay, Rennell I., June 9, 1933 two specimens 153 and 218 mm. in standard length C.A.S. nos. 6021 and 602? Same as original determination by Seale 1935 p. 362 — MuUoides samoensis Gunther Vpeneus arge Jordan and Evermann. Rennell I., one specimen 75 mm. in standarc length. June 14, 1933; C.A.S. 5850. Seale apparently never recorded this specimen Present determination was made from Lachner’s MS on the Mullidae of the Mar shall and Mariana Islands. Sebastapistes bleekeri (Day). Rennell I., one specimen 39 mm. in standard length June 13, 1933. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 365 Scorpaenopsis cookii (Gunther) but the specimen does not have the characteristics of the genus or that species. A search of the literature and collections at Stanford University revealed only one species with which it can be identified — S. bleekeri; but the classification of the group seems in such confusion that only a tentative determination could be made. Sebastapistes bynoensis (Richardson). Rennell I., one specimen 27 mm. in standard length. June 11, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5934. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 365 Sebastopsis guamensis (Quoy and Gaimard), but the specimen has palatine teeth and does not belong in the genus Scorpaemdes where guamensis is now placed. It agrees with bynoensis, as presently understood. ’ Caracanthus unipinna (Gray). Rennell I., 12 specimens 24.5-30 mm. in standard length. C.A.S. no. 5891. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 365, — Premnas biaculeatus [Bloch], obviously a lapsus calami. Pomacentrus nigricans (Lacepede). Rennell I., one specimen 85 mm. in standard, length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no 5869. Same as original determination by Seale 1935 p. 366. Dascyllus aruanus (Linnaeus). Rennell I., three specimens 38-44 mm. in total length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no, 5888 (1038). Specimens not seen. Dascyllus melanurus Bleeker. Rennell I., one specimen 22 mm. in standard length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5845 (1038a). Same as original determination by Seale 1935, p. 368. Chromis atripectoralis Welander and Schultz. Rennell ]., one specimen 16.4 mm. standard length. May 21, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5835. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 368 Chromis caeruleus (Cuvier and Valenciennes). Rennell I., 24 specimens 16-17.7 mm. in standard length. May 21, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5838. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 368 Chromis cinerascerts (Cuvier and Valenciennes), but the specimens have the outer row of teeth near the symphysis directed outwards, and the high pectoral fin ray count of C. atripectoralis. Rennell I., one specimen 10 mm. in standard length. May 21, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5881 (1041). Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 368 Chromis bitaeniatus Fowler and Bean. The young example appears to be a juvenile C. atripectoralis but the determination should remain in doubt until the younger developmental stages of the genus Chromis are known and the specimen can be reexamined in the light of such knowledge. ' Eleotris fusca (Bloch and Schneider) has been revised by Bruun and N ielsen in the following paper of this series. Eviota afelei Jordan and Seale. Rennell I. one specimen 20 mm. in total length. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5752 (1038). Specimen not seen. Gobiodon citrinus (Ruppell). Rennell I., sixteen specimens 15-23 mm. in total length. Specimens not found. Gobiodon erythrospilus Bleeker. Rennell I., eight specimens 20.5-29 mm. in stand­ ard length. June 13, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5760. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 372 Gobiodon rivulatus (Ruppell). The present identification has been made from the key and descriptions of K oumans 1953. Paragobiodon echinocephalus (Ruppell). Rennell I., nine specimens 12.5.-20.5 mm. in standard length. June 13, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5762. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 372 Paragobiodon melanosomus (Bleeker). Rennell I., eleven specimens 15-21 mm. in standard length. June 13, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5764. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 372 Paragobiodon xanthosomus (Bleeker). Parapercis he.xophthalma (Cuvier). Kanggava Bay, Rennell I., one specimen 156 mm. in standard length. June 10, 1933. Specimen not found. Aspidontus filamehtosus (Cuvier and Valenciennes). Rennell I., one specimen 44.5 mm. in standard length. June 16, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5651. Same as original deter- minatiqn by Seale 1935, p. 373 — Petroscirtes filamentosus (Valenciennes). Salarias margaritatus (Kendall and Radcliffe). Rennell I., five specimens 25-50 mm. in total length July 12, 1933. Specimens not found. Istiblennius sp. Rennell 1., 13 specimens 18-20.5 mm. in standard length. June 17, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5657. Original determination by Seale 1935, p. 375 “very near Salarias Uneatus”. However, as previously pointed out by Dr. W. M. Chapman in litt. the juveniles are not Salarias. Also included under this identification was one anchovy 22 mm. in standard length. Enneapterygius pardochir Jordan and Seale. Rennell I., one specimen 22 mfn. in standard length. June 13, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5751 (1040). Specimen not found. Balistapus undulatus (Mungo Park). Rennell I., one specimen 185 mm. in stand­ ard length. May 31, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5992 (0651). Same as original determination by Seals 1935, p. 376. Canthigaster margaritatus (Ruppell). Rennell 1., one specimen. June 12, 1933; C.A.S. no. 5953. Since the specimen is shriveled beyond recognition, Seale’s identi­ fication has not been checked. biodon hystrix Linneaus, Rennell I., one specimen 20 mm. in total length. June 12, 1933. Specimen not found.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is a pleasure to record here my sincere appreciation for the help that has been given me by various individuals and institutions during the preparation of this report. Dr. T orben W olff and Dr. A nton F. Bruun graciously made the reef collection of fishes available to me for study. And I also wish to express my gratitude and admira­ tion to the many people connected with the Danish Deep-Sea Expedition Round the W orld 1950-52 who made the Rennell Island collection possible. _ D r. E thelw ynn T rewavas of the British Museum (Natural History) kindly sent a paratype of Psammichthys nudus Regan. Dr. W illiam A. G osline of the University of Hawaii provided material of Kraemeria samoensis from A rno Atoll. Mr. E dw in H. Bryan, Jr. of the Bishop Museum loaned paratypes of Kraemeria bryani. Dr. W . I. F ollett and M rs. L illian D empster of the California Academy of Sciences loaned the Crocker Expedition collection from Rennell Island. Some of the research was carried out in and loan of specimens was obtained from the Division of Fishes of the U.S. National Museum through the cooperation of Dr. Leonard P. Schultz and D r. E rnest A. L achner. The David Starr Jordan Ichthyological Library and the Stanford University fish collections under the curatorship of Prof. G eorge S. M yers and Miss M argaret H. Storey were extensively utilized while preparing this report. D r. D onald Strasburg of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (P.O.F.I. at Hawaii) gave valuable advice on the specimens determined as I.stibknnius edentulus. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the considerable aid given by the George Vander­ bilt Foundation at Stanford University for allowing me to devote time to the present study and for the illustration expenses. The drawings were prepared by Miss M a r ­ garet Bradbury of Stanford University and by the scientific illustration staff of thi George Vanderbilt Foundation at Stanford University - Miss Sue Sellars, Mrs. Janet (Roemhild) Canning, and Mrs. Eva Soule, in charge. One drawing was made by Mr. P o u l H. W in t h e r , Copenhagen. Miss E li z a b e t h S c o f ie ld and Mrs. R o b e r ta Usher Schmidt helped in editing the manuscript.

C.A.S. ^ California Academy of Sciences, Department of Ichthyology Collection. S.U. Stanford University, Natural History Museum Fish Collection. U.S.N.M. = United States National Museum, Washington, D.C., Division of Fishes Collection.

CHECKLIST OF THE MARINE FISHES FROM RENNELL ISLAND

Combining the Galathea records with those of the 1933 Crocker Expedition a total of 68 marine species are known from Rennell Island, Solomons, although the identi­ fication of several species by S e a le (1935) is in doubt. The species collected by the Galathea Expedition are indicated by an asterisk.-

Spratelloides delicatulus (Bennett)* Holocentrus spinifer (Forskal) Trachinocephalus myops (Bloch & Muraenichlhvs sp. Schneider) Echidna leucotaenia Schultz’* Synodus variegatus (Lacepede)* Gymnothora.x buroensis (Bleeker) Myctophum pristilepis (Gilbert & Cra- Uropterygius sp. mer) Corythoichthys iiigripectus Herald Holocentrus opercuhris Cuvier & Valen- Auloslomus chinensis (Linnaeus) ciennes . Fistularia petimba Lacepede Cypselurus antoncichi Woods & Schultz* Acanthurus Uneatus (Linnaeus)* • (^ypselurus crockeri Seale Ctenochaetusstriatus (Quoy & Gaimard)* Crenimugil crenilahis (Forskal)* Naso lituratus (Bloch & Schneider)* Chelon seheli (Forskal) Siganus rostratus (Cuvier & Valencien­ Atherion elymus Jordan & Starks* nes)* Hypoatherina barnesi Schultz Exiota afelei Jordan & Seale Epinephelus merra Bloch Eviota zonura Jordan & Seale* Pseudogramma^ polvacantha (Bleeker) Gobiodon citrinus (Riippell) Plesiops caeruIeoUneatus Riippell* Gobiodon erythrospilus Bleeker Apogon novemfasciatus Cuvier & Valen­ Paragohiodon echinocephalus (Rupf)ell)* ciennes* Kraemeria galatheaensis, new species* Priacanthus cruentatus (Lacepede) Parapercis he.xophthalma (Cuvier) Gerres filamentosus (Cuvier & Valenci­ Enneapterygius pardochir Jordan & Seale ennes) Salarias margaritatm (Kendall & Rad- MuUoidichthys samoensis (Gunther) cliffe) ‘Parupenetis bifasciatus (Lacepede) Aspidontus filamentosus (Cuvier & Valen­ Upeneus arge Jordan , OC O C d v » r i ^ ■ r*'. v » vri d r^' T f rt » n VC r i 1 - — rj n 11 o q o O C 0 0 T f 0 0 q — v » q m i n m O' r - r j 0 0 (jO O S o TT r i ^ ^ T t f-% d r^* O v i n r»‘ T t V C Tf vo* r-' m * I 3 a S rJ r i < 1 q o < N VC O C 0 0 0 0 r ~ rj q VO 0 0 q v n r>-. q 0 0 » n 0 0 Q. S' » n r-’ 0 \ r^i o r t r i r^’ r t r^. 0 0 d vo’ r r r-’ » n • n 00* T f r j m r j -

» n q < N w-j NC v » r j r j r*'. q VC » n VO v O 0 0 O v O • n cc c 4 00 r t r i r-: r^. O v r t r i 0 0 » n r i r O r i v » ^ • r t >c r O n n

• n O o \C ir» — q q q r j f»-. — ir» 0 0 q q r t O v r-. r^i v o ■«t r-'* r i OC r t r i 00 r f OC r i m TT i n r t VC 00* r^. r-j r j

< > q r t r*'. r < q q r f • n r^. r J 00 0 0 r j r - — r f q — r - — r^! r ~ (N 0 0 r i r>% r^. m " oo' r i 0 0 v O r i m VO r t ■«t • n 0 0 rO r j r j

r-% (N < N r t r j r j q q OC r- VC r j q q r j v q r j r i q r J q sC r~' r j 00 r i r i r^. r^* 00 r i * n r i r n r t >C ^ ■ *n O' ? r i r4 (NO o - 0 0 q OC r~ O' q q r i OVO q VC q q q >c V-, rj ' O sC < N 30 rj- r i r i ri r^‘ 00 ■«t 0 0 r^. v C r i r t v O r n 0 0 r j r j ■£ — OC TT 0 0 q o r » r - r j tr'. f-. q r r q i n q » n * n f-. v » < r-'* r i O' i n r i r t r^* 0 0 »X VO r i TT 'O TT NC a m ri r j r J O o r - 0 0 r^. ' t r- r t q q q q » n q i n VO q VC r^. i n r-‘ r^. r i r i r i r^'. r t vC O'* r t r i r i r t > © r^. _ _ r - r-- r f r^. r ~ OC r r TT r j VO 0 0 q O O ro o q r^. rt > p r i r i r i r ~ r i 0^■ r-' r i * n r i 'C r t «n *0 o n rj f-. q q o r^. q q TT v» q X r - r f r ~ v O v C v O q r^, O' 0 0 d r^. r-' i n v O r i r n ■«t v d » n r t d S r » r i £ f^. 00 -c X 'O — VC O' • n q m r l r t 0 0 0 0 X O _ 0 0 < 0 0 r^. — r i r i r“! r i r-: r t iTi 0 0 rj r- — — m — r^. 00 r t >C 'C q O' r^, v O r j q _ r i r t O r*~. —- >c f--! — r i r i r i — m' r f 30 r t r i r i ^ ‘ r t r t

0 0 rj o O C T f T f 00 r 4 3C 00 O o 00 r - ’ -«t r i — r i r i ^ C^ O >C O w"i —

0 c o CC c 1 •o o c •o c c •o ■o c Z O c3 £ ■& o c ■o o O C. c o ■§) i. g. c — o o 'M) § «= — c o^ L> £ -O 1o 'C ab t:; ■Q o c Si C ?3 o c X ■Q (C u •D £ ■Q c o c o 'ey > ao ■C u 01) '-J c c o c cc g. a. o '5i 'C -C -O o o CL o c j o S3 ■O •= O X >> -DS3 o *0 ■§ *D 3 o O « c c I oa c/5 :!3 A hl, J. N., 1789: Specimen ichthyologicum de Muraena et Ophichtho. - Inaug. * Dissert. Uppsala [not seen], DE Beaufort, L. E., 1940: The fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. - Vol. 8, Leiden, xv 508 pp., 56 figs. DE Beaufort & W. M. C hapman, 1951: The fishes of the Indo-Australian Archi­ pelago. - Vol. 9, Leiden, xi 4- 484 pp., 88 figs. Bennett, E.T.*1831 : [Species new to science of a collection of fishes formed at Maritius by Charles Telfair, Esq.] - Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1830-1831, pt. 1 : 165-169. B e r tin , L., 1943: Revue critique des Dussumieriides actuels et fossiles. Description du’n genre nouveau. - Bull. Inst. Oceanogr. no. 853 : 1-32, figs. 1-8. B le e k e r , p., 1849a: Bijdrage tot der kennis der Blennioiden en Gobioiden van den Soenda-Molukschen Archipel, met beschrijving van 42 nieuwe soorten. - Verh. Batav. Genootsch., 22 (1848) : 1-40. •- 1849b: Bijdrage tot der kennis der ichthyologische Fauna van het eiland Bali, met beschrijving *van eenige nieuwe species. - Verh. Bat. Gen., 22 (1948) : 1-11. B u o c h , M. E. & J. G. Schneider, 1801: Systema ichthyologie iconibus cx illustra- • turn. - Berolini, Ix + 584 pp., 110 pis. C u v ie r , G. L. & A. Valenciennes, 1828: Histoire naturelle des poissons. - V ol. 2, Paris, xxi + 490 pp. - 1830: Histoire naturelle des poissons. - Vol. 5, Paris, xxviii — 499 pp. - 1835: Histoire naturelle des poissons. - Vol. 10, Paris xxiv 482 pp. D u n c k e r , G. & E. M o h r , 1926: Die Fische der Siidsee-Expedition der Hambur- gischen Wissenschaftlichen Siftung 1908-1909. - Mitt. Zool. Staats Zool. Mus. Hambrug, 42 : 126-136, figs. 1-10. E beling, a . W., 1957: The dentition of eastern Pacific mullets, with special reference . to adaptation and taxonomy. - Copeia no. 3 : 173-185, 3 pis., 7 figs. E v e r m a n n , B. W. & A. S e a le , 1923: Note on fishes from Guadalcanar, Solomon Islands. - Ibid., no. 120 : 1-2. FoRgKAL, P., 1775: Descriptiones animalium avium, amphibiorum, piscium, in- sectorum* vermium, quae in itinere orientali observavit. Post mortem auctoris edidit Carsten Niebuhr. - Havniae, 164 pp., 43 pis., map. .F orster, J. R., 1788: Enchiridion historiae naturali inserviens, quo, termini et ’delineationes ad avium, piscium, insectorum et plantarum adumbrationes intelli- gendas et concinnandas, secumdum methodum systematis Linnaeani continentur. - Halae [not seen]. F o w le r, H. W., 1928: The fishes of Oceania. - Mem. Bishop Mus., vol. 10, iii -r 540 pp., 82 text-figs., 49 pis. - 1934: The fishes of Oceania — Supplement 2. - Mem. Biship Mus., 11,6 : 385­ 466, figs. 1-4. -• 1943: Descriptions and figures of new fishes obtained in Phihppinc seas and adjacent waters by the United States Bureau of Fisheries Steamer “Albatross”. - U.S. lilat. Mus. Bull. 100, 14, 2 : 54-91, figs. 4-25. F o w l e r , H. W., 1949: The fishes of Oceania — Supplement 3. - Mem. Bishop Mus., 12, 2 : 37-186. Fraser-Brunner, a ., 1935: Notes on the Plectognath fishes. I. synopsis of the genera of the family Balistidae. - Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 10, 15 : 658-663, 2 figs. - 1940: Notes on the Plectognath fishes. - IV. Sexual dimorphism in the family Ostraciontidae. - Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 11,6: 390-392, 2 figs. G o s lin e , W. A., 1955: The osteology and relationships of certain gobioid fishes, with particular reference to the genera Kraemeria and Microdesmus. - Pacific Sci.,9, 2 : 158-170, figs. 1-7. H a r r y , R. R., 1949: A new species of goby and new records of fishes from the Solomon Islands. - Jour. Washington Acad. Sci., 39, 4 : 140-146. H erre, a . W., 1927: Gobies of the Philippines and China Sea. - Mon. Bur. Sci., Manila, no. 23, 352 pp., 30 pis. - 1931: Check list of fishes of the Solomon Islands. - Journ. Pan-Pacific Res. Inst., 6, 4 : 4-9. ■ - 1936: Fishes of the Crane Pacific Expedition. - Zool. ser.. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., 21, 472 pp., 50 text-figs. ■ - 1953: Check list of Philippine fishes. - Res. Rep. Fish & Wildl. Serv., U.S. Dept. Int., no. 20, 977 pp. H e r r e , A . W. & E. S. H e r a l d , 1951: Noteworthy additions to the Philippine fish fauna with descriptions of a new genus and species. - Philippine Jour. Sci., 79, 3 : 309-340, 12 figs. I n g e r , R. F., 1955: A revision of the fishes of the genus Plesiops Cuvier. - Pacific Sci. 9, 3 : 259-276, figs. 1-4. J o r d a n , D. S. & C. L. H u b b s, 1919: Studies in ichthyology. A monographic review of the family of Atherinidae or silversides. - Stanford Univ. Publ., Univ. ser., 87 pp., 11 pis. J o r d a n , D. S. & A. S e a le , 1906: The fishes of Samoa. Descriptions of the species found in the Archipelago with a provisional checklist of the fishes of Oceania. - Bull. Bur. Fisheries, Washington, 15 : 173-455, 111 figs., pis. 33-53. , J o r d a n , D. S. & E. C. S t a r k s , 1901: A review of the atherine fishes of Japan. - Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 24, 1250 : 199-206, 4 figs. K a m o h a r a , T., 1954: A list of the fishes from the Tokara Islands, Kagoshima Prefecture, Japan. - Publ. Seto Marine Lab., 3, 3 : 265-299, figs. 1-17. ' K o u m a n s, F. p ., 1953: The fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago, by Weber and de Beaufort. - Vol. 10, Leiden, xiii 423 pp., 95 text-figs. L a c e p e d e , B. G., 1803: Histoire naturelle des poissons. - Vol. 5, Paris, Ixviii + 803 pp., 21 pis. Linnaeus, C., 1758: Systema naturae. - Tomus 1., Editio Decima, reformata. 823 pp. Norman, J. R., 1935: A revision of the lizard-fishes of the genera Synodus, Trachi- nocephalus, and Saurida. - Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1935, pt. 1 : 99-135, 18 figs. - 1943: Notes on blennioid fishes. 1. A provisional synopsis of the genera of the family Blenniidae. - Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 11, 10, 72 : 793-817. Park, Mungo, 1797: Descriptions of eight new fishes from Sumatra. - Trans. Lino. ^ Soc. London, 3 : 33-38, 1 pi. PiETSCHMANN, V., 1938: Hawaiian shore fishes. - Bull. Bishop Mus., no. 156 : 1-55, * pis. 1-18. Q uoy, J. R. C. & P. Gaimard, 1824: Voyage autour du monde . . . execute sur les corvettes de S. M. “L’Uranie” et “La Physicienne’’ pendant les annees 1817-20. Poissons. - Paris, pp. 192-410. R andall, J. E., 1955; Fishes of the Gilbert Islands. - Atoll Res. Bull, no. 47 : i-xi, 1-243, 2 figs. [mimeographed, unpublished manuscript]. - 1956; A revision of the surgeon fish genus Acanihurus. - Pacific Sci., 10, 2 : 159­ 235, 23 figs., 3 pis. R e g a n , C. T a te , 1908: Report on the marine fishes collected by Mr. J. Stanley Gardiner in the Indian Ocean. - Trans. Linn. Soc. London, 12, 3 ; 217-255, pis. 23-32. - 1911: The osteology and classification of the gobioid fishes. - Ann. & Mag. Nat. • Hist., ser. S’, 8 : 729-733, 2 figs. R C p p e ll, W. p . E. s .,*1828: Atlas zu der Reise im nordlichen Afrika. Zoologie. Fische •des Rothen Meeres. 4 yols. - Frankfurt-a-Main 1826-28, 119 pis. •- 1835: Neue Wirbelthiere zu der fauna von Abyssinien gehorig, entdeckt und beschrieben von Dr. Eduard Riippell. Fische des Rothen Meeres. - Frankfurt- am-Main, 148 pp., 33 pis. Sc h u lt z, L. P., 1941: Kraemeria bryani, a new species of trichonotid fish from the Hawaiian Islands. - Jour. Washington Acad. Sci., 31, 6 : 269-272, 1 fig. - 1943: Fishes of the Phoenix and Samoan Islands collected in 1939 during the expedition of the U.S.S. “Bushnell.” - Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., no. 180, iii-x -f- 316 pp., 27 figs., 9 pis. - 1946: A revision of the genera of mullets, fishes of the family Mugilidae; with • descriptions of three new genera. - Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 96, 3204 : 377-395, figs. 28-32. - 1948: A revision of six subfamilies of atherine fishes, with descriptions of new genera and species. - Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 98 : 1-48, 9 figs., 2 pis. Schultz & t . P. W oods, 1949: Keys to the genera of echelid eels and the species of Muraenichthys of the Pacific, with two new species. - Journ. Washington Acad. . Sci.,,39, 6 : 169-174, 2 figs. ScrfuLTZ, L. p. et al., 1953: The fishes of the Marshall and Marianas Islands. Vol. 1, Families from Assymetrontidae through Siganidae. - Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., no. 202, xxxii — 685 pp., 90 text figs. 58 tables, 74 pis. S e a le A., 1906: Fishes of the South Pacific. - Occ. Pap. Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, 4, 1 : 1-89, 23 figs. - 1935: The Templeton Crocker Expedition to western Polynesian and Melane­ sian Islands, 1933. Fishes. - Proc. Cahf. Acad. Sci., ser. 4, 21, 27 : 337-378, • pis. 20-23. Sh a w , G., 1804: General Zoology or systematic natural history. - Vol. 5, pt. 2, London, vi -p 463 pp., pis. 134-182. Smith, J. L. B., 1948; A generic revision of the mugilid fishes of South Africa. - Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 11, 14 : 833-843, 15 figs. - 1952: Plesiopid fishes from south and east Africa. - Ibid., ser. 8, 12 : 140:151, figs., pis. 9-10. ' Steindachner, F., 1906: Zur fischfauna der Samoa-Inseln. - Sitz. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss. Wien, 115, 1 : 1369-1425. Strasburg, D. W ., 1953: Fishes of the southern Marshall Islands. - Office of Naval Research rep. for contract 695 (00). 267 pp. [mimeographed, unpublished], - 1955: North-south differentiation of blenniid fishes in the central Pacific. - Pacific Sci., 9, 3 : 297-303, 2 figs., 2 tables. T o m iy am a, 1., 1936: Gobiidae of Japan. - Jap. Jour. Zool., 7, 1 : 37-112, 44 figs. W e b e r, M. & L. F. de Beaufort, 1913: The fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. - Vol. 2, Leiden, pp. i-ixx, 1-404, 151 figs. - 1922: The fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. - Vol. 4, Leiden, pp. i-xiii, 1-410, 103 figs. - 1929: The fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. - Vol. 5, Leiden, pp. i-xivi 1-458, 98 figs. W h e e le r , A. C., 1955: A preliminary revision of the fishes of the genus Aulostomui.. - Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 12, 8, 92 : 613-623. W h itle y , G. P., 1928: Studies in ichthyology no. 2. - Rec. Austr. Mas., 16, 4 : 211­ 239, pis. 16-18. " - 1932: Fishes. - Great Barrier Reef Expedition 1928-29. Sci. Reps., 4, 9, Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.): 267-316, 5 figs., 4 pis. - 1935: Studies in ichthyology no. 9. ~ Rec. Austr. Mus., 19, 4 : 215-250, 11 figs., pi. 18. " - 1951: Studies in ichthyology no. 15. - Ibid., 22, 4 : 389-408, figs. 1-14. PLATES I-XI

Figures 1-6, 8, 9, and 13-23 were drawn by Miss M argaret Bradbury, figs, 7a, 10-12, and 24-29 by Miss Sue Sellars, figs. 7b and 30 by Mrs. Eva Soule, fig. 31 by Mrs. Janet (Roemhild) Can- .\(N>G, and fig. 32 by Mr. P o vl H. W j n t h e r . Fig* I. Oblique lateral view of the head of Crenimugil crenilabis (Forskil). Specimen drawn from Rennell I., Solomons, Galathea station SI6e, 48.5 mm. in standard length. Fig. 2. Ventral view of head of Crenimugil crenilabis (Forskil). Same specimen as fig. I. Fig. 3. Atherwn elymus Jordan & Starks. Head of specimen from Rennell 1., Solomons, Galathea station 5l6t^ Fig. 4. Atherion aphrozoicus Schultz. Head of specimen from Lembeh Strait, Celebes. « ^ Fig. 5. Atherion elymus Jordan & Starks. Same specimen as fig. 3. 39.2 mm. in standard length. Fig. 6. Atherion aphrozoicus SchulU. Head of same specimen as fig. 4. 37.0 mm. in standard length. Fig. 7. Lateral-line scales, a, Aiherion elymus Jordan & Starks. Same specimen as figs. 3 and 5. , b, Atherion aphrozoicus Schultz, Same specimen as figs. 4 and 6. Fig. 8. Atherion macciillochi Jordan & Hubbs. Paratype drawn from Lord Howe Island. 45 mm. in standard length. . Fig. 9. Aiherion maccuHochi Jordan & Hubbs. Head of same specimen as fig. 8. * Fig. 10. Kraemeria bryani Schultz. Paratype 20 mm. in standard length, S.U. n'o. 52004. Fig. 11. Kraemeria bryani Schultz. Sid^ of head of paratype. Same specimen as fig. 10. , Fig. 12. Kraemeria bryani Schultz. Top of head. Same specimen as fig. 10. Fig. 13. Kraemeria samoensis Steindachner. Specimen drawn from Arno Atoll, Marshall Islands, _ 25 mm. in standard length; S.U. no. 52001. Fig. 14. Kraemeria samoensis Steindachner. Side of head. Same specimen as fig. 13. Fig. 15. Kraemeria samoensis Steindachner. Top of head. Same specimen as fig. 13. rf '

5 mm 16 H .

5 mm H

' Fig. 16. Kraemeria cunicularia, new species. Side of head of holocype from Babelthuap I., Palau Is.; S.U. no. 52007. ‘ Fig. 17. Kraemeria cunicularia, new species. Top of head of holotype. • I^ . f . • . * 1 PLATE VII •

Fig. 18. Kra'emeria nudum (Regan). Side of head of paratype from the Seychelles Is., S.U. no. 32003. Fig. 19. Kraemeria nudum (Regan). Top o^head. Same specimen as fig. 18. Fig. 20. Kraemeria tongaensis, new species. Side of head of hololype. 25.4 mm. in standard length. II \

Fig. 21. Kraemeria cunicutaria, new species. Holotype 19.0 mm. in standard length. Fig. 22. Kraemeria nudum (Regan). Same specimen as fig. 18. 25.3 mm. in standard length. Fig. 23. Kraemeria tongaensis, new species. Pelvic of holotype, showing inner rays joined together. Fig?24. Kraemeria galatheaensis. new species. Paratype 29.3 mm. in standard length from Rennell 1., ■ Solomons, Galathea station 516b. Fig. 25. Kraemeria galatheaensis, new species. Side view of head. Same specimen as fig. 24. j Fig. 26. Kraemeria galatheaensis, new species. Top view of head. Same specimen as fig. 24. O

m

\)A_ ik -;

Fig. 27. Gohitrichinotus radiocularis Fowler. Specimen 29.8 mm. in standard length from Mindoro, Philippines; S.U. no. 52006. , Fig. 28. Gobilrichinotus radiocularis Fowler. Side view of head. Same specimen as fig. 27. Fig. 29. Gohitrichinotus radiaruhris Folwler. Top view of head. Same specimen as fig. 27. Fig. 30. Atilcus saliens (Forster). Teeth in upper jaw near symphysis of specimen 34.8 mra. in standard length from Rennell I„ Solomons, Galathea station 516b. A. End view. B. Side view. 4 --^ -

Fig. 31. Entomacrodus wolffi. new spccies. Holotype 65.4 mm. in standard length from Rennell I., Solomons, Galathea station 5!6b. Fig. 32. Istiblennius reimellensis. new species. Holotype 41,7 mm. in standard length from Rennell 1., , Solomons, Galathea slation 5l6d.