Art. XXXV.—Notes on the Occurrence of the Genus Trachipterus in New Zealand.
[Read before the Wellington Philosophical Society, 22nd September, 1915.]
The object of this paper is to record the occurrence of five specimens of Trachipterus from the New Zealand coast, to bring together what is already known about their distribution in the Australasian region, and to offer comparisons with Trachipterids found in the Northern Hemisphere.
Early in 1914 a large specimen of Trachipterus, or deal-fish, was found on the beach at Waikanae, near Wellington, and forwarded to the Dominion Museum by Mr Watt, a local fisherman. In March, 1915, a smaller specimen was donated to the Museum by Mr. Foster, of the Wellington Meat Export Company, who obtained it from the Chatham Islands. Both specimens were considerably damaged, as is usually the case, but, being of such rare occurrence, were carefully preserved for future reference. Professor Benham, Curator of the Otago University Museum, and Mr. R. Speight, Curator of the Canterbury Museum, have kindly placed at my disposal three specimens not previously recorded, thereby allowing a survey of all known New Zealand occurrences. I am much indebted to these gentlemen for their co-operation, and also extend my thanks to Mr. E. R. Waite, of the Adelaide Museum, for his sound advice on the arrangement of the subject-matter.
Previous writers on the Trachipterids have laid stress on the fact that all original observations relating to their appearance and distribution should be recorded to help to solve the problem of their life-history and economy, for only by recording apparently simple facts and examining in detail long series of variable species can a definite conclusion be arrived at.
The Trachipterids of the Mediterranean, once regarded as four species, have been proved by Emery(2), after examination of twenty-three specimens in all stages of growth, to belong to one species only. He showed that the nominal species—viz, T. taenia Bloch & Schn., T. filicauda Costa,
T. spinolae Cuv. & Val., and T. iris Walb.—were merely successive stagegrowths of a very variable species, and must all be considered juvenile stages of the adult T. taenia, a species now more correctly known as T. trachypterus.
No similar work has yet been done on the Australasian and Pacific forms, but no doubt when sufficient material has accumulated and local libraries offer better facilities for reference our species of this genus will be thoroughly revised.
In a paper on the Southern Pacific forms of the Trachipterids, Ogilby(1) endeavoured to correlate many of the described New Zealand and Australian forms. He opposed the contention that similar species could inhabit widely disconnected areas of ocean, and for this reason did not compare the Australasian Trachipterids with northern forms, but qualified his remarks with the observation that, as far as our present knowledge extends, the conditions which regulate animal-life at great depths below the surface of the ocean are everywhere more or less identical as far as temperature is concerned. This being so, there should be no obstacle to the cosmopolitan distribution of similar forms. He admits that certain Australasian Trachipterids may be comparable to the Valparaiso species, T. altivelis Kner.
Since Ogilby wrote in 1897, American and Japanese authors have described several species from the Japanese and Californian coasts, and these have a distinct similarity to those found in the Australasian region.
A list of the fifteen occurrences of Trachipterus in the Australasian and New Zealand regions, as far as can be compiled from all sources, and arranged in chronological order, follows :—
1873. T. altivelis Kner ? Recorded by Hutton(6). Dried specimen in the Auckland Museum. (Since lost.)
1876. T. altivelis Kner. Identified by Hutton. Specimen in the Otago University Museum, Dunedin.
1881. T. arawatae Clarke(8). Type specimen in the Dominion Museum, Wellington.
1881. T. jacksonensis Ramsay(3). Type specimen in the Australian Museum, Sydney.
1882. T. altivelis Kner. Recorded by Johnston(7). Specimen in the Hobart Museum.
1886. T. taenia Bloch & Schn. Recorded by McCoy(5). Three specimens in the National Museum, Melbourne.
1897. T. jacksonensis polystictus Ogilby(2). Type specimen in the Technological Museum, Sydney.
1903. T. taenia Bloch & Schn. Specimen in the Otago University Museum, Dunedin, from Purakanui.
1905. T. taenia Bloch & Schn. Specimen in the Canterbury Museum, Christchurch.
1908. T. jacksonensis Ramsay. Caught at Nelson in November, 1908. Only a drawing preserved.
1911. T. taenia Bloch & Schn. Specimen in the Otago University Museum, Dunedin, obtained from Port Chalmers.
1914. T. jacksonensis Ramsay. Specimen from Waikanae, now in the Dominion Museum.
1915. T. taenia Bloch & Schn. Specimen from Chatham Islands, now in the Dominion Museum.
From the Northern Pacific area the following species have been recorded:—
1881. T. altivelis = rex-salmon rum Jordan and Gilbert(9). Specimen in the United States National Museum.
1894. T. rex-salmonorum Jordan and Gilbert(9). Type specimen in the Museum of Leland Stanford, Jr., University.
1901. T. ishikawae Jordan and Snyder(4). Type in the Imperial Museum, Tokyo.
1901. T. ijimae Jordan and Snyder(4). Type in the Imperial Museum, Tokyo.
1908. T. misakiensis Tanaka(11). Four specimens, including the type, in the Zoological Institute Museum, Tokyo.
The following species have been recorded from the west-coast areas of South America:—
1859. T. altivelis Kner. Type specimen in Vienna Museum.
1874. T. weychardti Phihippi (Arch. f. Nat, xl, 1874, p. 118, pl. iii; described from a photograph.)
These lists are given at length to show the total number of specimens known from the Pacific, and to assist in making comparisons with New Zealand forms. Another specimen, from Station 207, near the Philippine Islands, is recorded by Gunther in the “Challenger” Reports, xxii, p. 72, as being similar to T. repandus Costa (Faun. Napol, tab. ix). Perhaps this may be included in the Pacific regional forms.
Detailed descriptions of the several specimens are appended.
Trachipterus jacksonensis (Ramsay). Fig. 1.
1881. Regalecus jacksoniensis Ramsay, Proc. Linn. Soc. NSW, v, p. 631, pl. xx. 1886. Trachypterus jacksoniensis Ogilby, Cat. Fishes NSW., p. 43. 1901. Trachypterus ishikawae Jordan and Snyder, Jour. Coll. Sci. Tokyo, xv, 1901, p. 310, pl xvii.
B 6; D. VI-174, C?; P. II; V. 2.
Body long and slender, tapering backwards, and not constricted behind the vent. Greatest depth of body, half-way between snout and vent, and slightly greater than the length of head. Height of body at vent is contained 4 times in the distance from the snout. Abdominal profile is conspicuously tubercled. Vent is before the middle of the body. Head, 9 in length. Preorbital wide and rugose. Teeth, 8 in upper jaw, 8 in lower jaw, and 5 in the vomer Eye large and round, 3¼ in head.
Fins.—The first spines of the dorsal slender and not detached, beginning just behind the posterior margin of the eye. The complete dorsal composed of 174 rays, the longest opposite the vent and about ⅓ the height of the body. All rays smooth. Membrane uniting the rays not attached to the body, and composed of 2 distinct layers. The ventral fin is worn off, but shows the insertion of two spines in a triangular space opposite the base of the pectoral. The pectoral fin is composed of 11 rays, the first being the longest, about 2½ in. The tail is damaged. The lateral line is armed with bony scutes, having short stout spines towards the posterior end. Anterior surface of head and snout an intense black, the rest of the body a mottled grey. Darkened oblique bands, formed by bony scutes, run from the interspaces of the dorsal rays half-way to the lateral line.
The specimen, a female, measures approximately 6 ft. in length, and was found on the sandy beach at Waikanae, near Wellington.
A comparison of this description with Ramsay's original notes indicates that the species are identical. T. ishikawae Jordan and Snyder is synonymous with this species.
Ogilby(2), in summarizing the occurrence of Trachipterus in the Australasian region, includes under the name jacksoniensis specimens recorded by McCoy(3) as T. taenia and those of Hutton and Johnston as T. altivelis. He considers T. jacksonensis to be the adult form of T. taenia and T. altivelis, the dark markings being merely indicative of immaturity, yet he gives subspecific rank to a specimen he describes, differing, as he states, from T. jacksonensis in having the head and body dappled.
Unless the adult forms of this family lose the granulations on the fin rays, and also the spiny tubercles at the base of the spines, there can be no identity of T. taenia, T. altivelis, or T. polystictus with a form like T. jacksonensis, which has no spinules or granulations on the spine rays. As far as at present known, no radical change takes place on the surface of the fin rays with increasing age.
I have not seen either of Hutton's specimens of T. altivelis, but it is extremely probable that he based his identification on the description in Günther's catalogue, and would have noticed whether the fin rays were granular or not. As T. altivelis or some closely allied species seems to be the most common New Zealand form, it may be assumed that the granulations were present in Hutton's specimen.
The specimen under consideration appears to be the second recorded occurrence of T. jacksonensis in the Australasian region.
Trachipterus jacksonensis Ramsay? (Juvenile). Fig. 2
In November, 1908, a ribbon-fish, preserved in formalin, was forwarded to the Dominion Museum from Nelson, South Island. I was present when it arrived, and remember the extraordinary development of the dorsal and ventral fin rays. Unfortunately, I can find no trace of the specimen, but from a careful drawing made at the time I have reason to think that it was a young example of T. jacksonensis. The specimen was
Fig. 2.—Trachipterus jacksonensis Ramsay? From drawing of juvenile fish taken at Nelson in 1908. About ⅜ natural size.
13 in. long, and exhibits distinctive characters, as shown in the accompanying illustrations, especially in the crenulations of the abdominal profile. As it also bears a strong resemblance to Jordan and Snyder's figure of T. ijimae (now stated to be the young of T. ishikawae), and as I consider T ishikawae to be identical with T. jacksonensis, it may be that this is a young specimen of T. jacksonensis.
Trachipterus trachypterus (Gmelin). Fig. 3.
1873. Trachypterus altivelis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 5, p. 264.
1876. T. altivelis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 5, p. 264.
1882. T. altivelis Johnston, Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasmania, p. 123.
1886. T. taenia McCoy, Prod. Zool. Victoria, dec. 13, pl. cxxii.
B. 6; D. VI–175; C. 10; P. 11; V. 8.
Body long and tapering, slightly constricted behind the vent; greatest depth of body just behind the head, contained 5 ¾ times in the total length (excluding the caudal); abdominal profile studded with a double series of small tubercles; vent situated a little before the middle of the body. Head short and the muzzle truncated; jaws protractile; eye situated near the upper profile, and a little behind the middle; all the bones of the head thin, and radiatingly ridged. Eight teeth in the upper jaw, 8 in
the lower jaw, and 3 in the vomer. First 6 rays of the dorsal detached, spinous, and fragile; probably elevated; separated from the continuous dorsal by membrane; hinder portion of the dorsal composed of 175 rays, attaining their greatest height opposite the vent, and being contained 2 ½ times in depth of body; all rays spinous, and having a spiny tubercle at the base; membrane connecting the rays not attached to the body. Ventral fins composed of 6 to 8 rays, the first being the longest and strongest, with spines on anterior surfaces. The pectoral fins are damaged, but show basal portion of 11 rays, the first being the longest and strongest; all rays roughened. Caudal fin composed of 10 rays, directed obliquely upwards and backwards; all rays granulated and connected by membrane; signs of a lower rudimentary caudal. Lateral line composed of a row of conical spines, directed forwards and more strongly developed towards the posterior portion.
Colour generally bright silvery; transverse darkened lines correspond with neural spines; 3 large round spots above lateral line, and a fourth near the abdominal edge, a little behind the first on the back Nuchal crest and top of head darkened.
Measurements.—Diameter of eye, 26 mm.; depth of body at vent, 107 mm., greater length of dorsal rays, 45 mm.; height of body at insertion of ventral fin, 115 mm.; proportion of height to length (excluding caudal fin), 1–6.38; longest caudal rays, 140 mm.
Locality —Chatham Islands.
Professor W. B. Benham, Curator of Otago University Museum, has kindly placed at my disposal two specimens from the neighbourhood of Dunedin. Besides being able to examine the specimens themselves, I have the benefit also of his original notes made when the fishes were fresh. I beg to thank Professor Benham for his kind assistance in
allowing me to use his notes and offer descriptions of his specimens. These specimens are distinctly similar to the one described from Chatham Islands. The first was taken by Mr. Ewart at Purakanui, near Dunedin, on the 11th November, 1903, and was in good condition, except for having the caudal fin and part of the tail missing.
The following description is based on notes by Professor Benham and myself (Fig. 4) :—
B. 6; D. VI—168, C.—; P. II; V.—.
Body long and tapering, constricted behind the vent; greatest depth at a point just posterior to the pectoral fin, contained 5 times in total length, excluding the caudal; abdominal profile studded with tubercles; vent situated 228 mm. from tip of snout, height of body at vent, 73 mm.; width of tail, 7 mm. Head short and truncated. Eye a little behind the middle of the head; diameter of the eye, 17 mm. I was unwilling to examine the dentition for fear of damaging the specimen. First 5 rays of dorsal elevated and detached, spinous and granulated, in length about ⅜ height of body. Remainder of dorsal composed of about 166 rays, all granulated and having a spiny tubercle at the base; longest rays opposite the vent, being about ⅓ height at vent; membrane connecting
[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]
Fig. 4—Trachipterus trachypterus (Gmehn), from Purakanui, New Zealand, About 2/7 natural size
rays apparently connected to the body. The ventral is worn off. The pectoral is composed of 11 short, granulated rays, connected by membrane, inserted horizontally Tail absent The lateral line rather above the middle of the body—viz, 40 mm below base of dorsal fin and 45 mm above ventral margin of body at level of first black spot, armed with spiny tubercles directed forwards, but comparatively small and weak as compared with other specimens; more strongly developed towards posterior portion of tail. Colour silvery, with 3 black spots on dorsal surface and 1 near ventral margin. Spot A: Its middle is 65 mm from anterior end of base of predorsal fin, spot B is 100 mm from centre of A; spot C is 100 mm. from centre of B—it is less well defined than A or B. Top of head and crest, black; dorsal fin, red Eye silver with a pink iridescence
The second specimen was caught at Port Chalmers in November, 1911, and presented to the Otago University Museum It much resembles that described from Purakanui, but differs in having a fourth black spot on the tail in addition to three on the sides of the body.
B. 6; D VI–168; C. 9; P.—; V. 4. (Fig. 5.)
Body long and tapering, constricted behind the vent; greatest depth at position of pelvic fin is equal to one-fifth of length, excluding the caudal; depth at vent is greater than length of head; abdominal profile is tuberculate; vent situated about the middle of the body. Mouth inclined upwards; gape nearly vertical; jaws very protractile; teeth, 6 in upper jaw and 4 in the lower. The first dorsal spine nearly equal to the length of the profile; it is serrated, granular, and elevated. The insertion of 5 spines can be counted, and indications point to there being a sixth. Apparently the spines are connected by membrane with the remaining dorsal. Continuous dorsal composed of 168 rays, the longest being opposite the vent and 1 ⅞ in. in height; all rays connected by membrane, not attached to the body. The ventral and pectoral fins are not represented, as the abdominal cavity has been ruptured. The caudal fin is well preserved, and shows two distinct lobes; the upper lobe carries 9 rays, directed upwards and backwards. The outer rays are longest and strongest; all rays are granulated, and connected by membrane; anterior ray, 5 in. long; posterior ray, 6 ⅛ in. long; intervening rays less in height. Below the caudal fin is a well-defined lobe with 2 rudimentray rays, ¼ in. long, directed
[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]
Fig. 5.—Trachipterus trachypterus (Gmelin), from Port Chalmers, New Zealand. About 3/10 natural size.
backwards and downwards; the posterior surface of this lobe terminates in a strong spine directed forwards. Lateral line armed with bony scutes, directed forwards, and stronger towards the posterior end. Both generally bright silver; 4 black spots above the lateral line, 2 on the body and 2 on the tail; a fifth spot on the side of the abdomen, below the lateral line and a little behind the 1st dorsal ray. Top of head and crest, deep black; fins, red.
The fifth specimen I have the opportunity of describing was kindly lent by Mr R. Speight, Curator of the Canterbury Museum. It is labelled, “T. altivelis, New Zealand,” and bears the registered number P. 441–0. The fish was in a remarkably good state of preservation, the only damage being the loss of the anterior dorsal fin rays (see Fig. 6).
[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]
B. 6; D. VI–165; C. 8/5 P. 11; V. 7.
Body long and tapering, constricted behind the vent; greatest depth of body at the insertion of the ventral fin, contained about 4 ¼ times in length, excluding the caudal; depth at vent equal to the length of head; vent situated 158 mm. from tip of snout; abdominal profile studded with
tubercles. Head 43 mm. in length, short and truncated; mouth inclined upwards; gape nearly vertical; eye situated in posterior third of head; 13 mm. in diameter. Six teeth in the upper jaw and 4 in the lower.
Fins.—Anterior portion of dorsal fin composed of 6 elevated, spiked, and granulated rays, united by membrane; remainder of dorsal composed of 165 rays, attaining their greatest length opposite the vent, being there 35 mm. long; all rays granular, and having a spiny tubercle at the base; membrane uniting the rays not attached to the body; no signs of articulations in the rays. The caudal fin is well developed, composed of 8 rays, united by membrane, the longest being 99 mm. long; the two outer rays are strong and granulated; whole fin directed upwards and backwards. On the inferior portion of the caudal lobe there is a well-defined rudimentary adipose caudal fin, as is illustrated in Fig. 6. Besides having the hair-like
Fig. 6.—Trachipterus trachypterus (Gmelm), in Canterbury Museum. About 3/10 natural size.
appendages found in many specimens, there are 3 distinct membrane-connected spines, curved upwards and directed backwards, situated below these appendages. The ventral fins are well preserved. Each fin composed of 7 rays, apparently branched and fissile; the anterior rays being armed with 2 spines directed forwards; all rays roughened and granular; longest ray equals the depth of the body at the pectoral. The pectoral fin is small and delicate, composed of 11 rays, inserted horizontally just below the apex of the outer gill-cavity; the 1st ray strongest and curved; length of pectoral about equals diameter of the eye. The lateral line armed as usual, but showing a spike, directed forwards at the confluence of the lateral lines on the caudal lobe.
Three black spots on the upper surface, the first opposite the 25th dorsal, the second opposite the 60th, and the third opposite the 94th dorsal; a fourth spot on the abdominal surface about opposite to the 46th dorsal. All spots and markings on the head of brownish colour, due to the action of preservatives. Rest of body bright silvery.
Comparisons of New Zealand Trachipterids.
The descriptions of the last three specimens from the New Zealand coast show that they are closely allied, if not identical. That from Purakanui agrees almost exactly with the Chatham Island individual, not only
in regard to the position and size of the spots, but in the relative proportions of the body. The Purakanui specimen is deeper, the body being contained 5 times in the total length, while the depth of the Chatham Island specimen is contained 5 ¾ times therein (excluding the caudal fin in both cases). This may be accounted for by the fact that the smaller specimen is young, while the Chatham Island fish is probably the adult form. In other respects —viz., shape of head and position of eye, nature of fin rays and spines, position and shape of spots, texture of integument, and other characters —the fishes are identical.
The specimen from Port Chalmers has a fifth spot not present in the other examples.
In discussing the variations in T. taenia, Emery writes, “The distribution of spots is not constant, and is therefore fallacious for specific purposes…. In one example I have seen four spots in the dorsal series.”
The three specimens under consideration illustrate successive stage-growths of the same species, the Chatham Island specimen the mature form, the Portobello example being more developed than the juvenile Purakanui fish.
Professor Benham has drawn my attention to the similarity of Clarke's drawing of T. arawatae to Emery's illustration of T. spinolae Cuv. & Val. The main difference lies in the fact that T. spinolae has 3 spots that are not represented in T. arawatae.
The outstanding features of this last-named species, the type of which I have examined, are the rudimentary dorsal and anal fins. The ventral rays are extremely long, and, with other characters, indicate that the specimen is young.
McCoy's smaller figured specimen of T. taenia shows an apparently rudimentary anal fin. The larger example, admitted to be the same species, shows only traces of such a fin. Clarke made an error in separating the rudimentary dorsal from the continuous dorsal, for the specimen shows no signs of a break.
Throughout the genus Trachipterus there are indications pointing to the degeneration and disuse of the anal and ventral fins, and the ultra-development of the dorsal appendages. Even the caudal fin is assuming an almost vertical position, and usurping the functions of a dorsal fin. It is only in the juvenile forms that any signs of the existence of ventral and anal appendages can be recognized. The cause for the degeneration of these fins must remain obscure until we know more about the life-history of these extraordinary fishes.
In discussing his specimens of T. taenia, McCoy(5) observes that “the young are deeper and shorter in proportion than the old, and consequently specific differences founded on the greater number of times the length of the head or the depth of the body are contained in the whole length are not to be trusted for specific characters when the length of the specimens is different” It may be noted that McCoy's young specimen of T. taenia has no black spots, as is also the case in T. arawatae.
Emery(1) demonstrated that in T. taenia the fin rays commence to grow when the young is about 6 mm. long, and continue to lengthen till the fish is about four times that size, after which period a shortening of the rays takes place.
Jordan and Snyder(12) now think that T. ijimae is a young specimen of T. ishikawae On consulting the original descriptions and the two figures, one would pronounce the specimens to be distinct, for no two fishes
ever looked more unlike. These ichthyologists must have additional evidence in favour of the view expressed, although they do not state on what grounds it is based. T. ijimae has an extraordinary development of the pre-dorsal fin rays, while T. ishikawae has no pre-dorsal appendages whatsoever. The conditions show what remarkable and incomprehensible changes take place in the life-history of these fishes. No excuse is, therefore, needed for advancing the opinion that T. arawatae Clarke is the young of T. taenia.
Comparisons with Australian Trachipterids.
Excluding T. jacksonensis, which is obviously a distinct species, the only Australian records I can find are T taenia by McCoy, Victoria; T. altivelis by Johnston, Tasmania; and T polystictus by Ogilby, New South Wales.
Johnston(7) only briefly describes the specimen from Tasmania, and Ogilby(2) states that it should be associated with those from Victoria.
In recording the occurrence of T. taenia, McCoy(5) gives descriptions and excellent figures, and there can be no doubt that the Victorian examples are co-specific with those found round the New Zealand coast.
With T polystictus Ogilby it is more difficult to deal Ogilby published a description, but gave no figure. His specimen differs in the main from T. taenia McCoy in having no spiny granules on the outer rays of the caudal fin and a markedly different coloration, but in many other characters the specimens agree. Why Ogilby should regard his specimen as being closely allied to T. jacksonensis is not clear, as it is most certainly more nearly related to T. taenia McCoy.
Comparisons with Other Regional Forms.
T. rex-salmonorum, from the Californian coast, as described by Jordan and Gilbert(9), differs from the local species in the position and size of the black spots. In nearly all other respects there is close agreement As previously stated, Emery showed that the position and number of spots cannot be relied on for specific purposes. Perhaps further investigations will show identity between the Californian and New Zealand species, for the two regions have much in common zoologically.
With T. altivelis, described by Kner(15) from Valparaiso, one local specimen shows close similarity. Jordan and Gilbert originally identified a Californian fish as T altivelis, but in 1894 named it rex-salmonorum The reasons for so doing were based on the angle of the nuchal crest, the height of the dorsal and ventral fins, the texture of the skin, and the size and position of the black spots—all characters, however, that depend on the state of development, and, as previously mentioned, change greatly during the growth of the fish.
Nomenclature of Australasian Trachipterids.
Until more evidence has been collected regarding the life-history of the Southern Pacific forms of these fishes all efforts at correct nomenclature must be regarded as tentative only.
In consideration of the wide distribution of these deep-sea fishes, previous writers have compared their specimens with those found chiefly
in the Mediterranean seas. It has been shown that these Mediterranean species—T. iris, T. spinolae, and T. taenia—should be correctly identified with Gmelin's Cepola trachyptera. Since Cepola of Gmelin(13) had to give way to Trachipterus of Gouan(14), the correct name for the type of the genus should be Trachipterus trachypterus.
After comparing the descriptions of the fishes from Chatham Island, Purakanui, Port Chalmers, Victoria, and Tasmania, it is concluded that they are all referable to T. taenia Bloch & Schn., the conclusion arrived at by McCoy(5) when describing the Victorian example. As previously stated, T. taenia Bloch & Schn. must be looked on as a synonym of Gmelin's Trachipterus trachypterus and (Gmelin).
Ogilby's specimen from Newcastle, to which he gave the subspecific name of polystictus, is evidently very closely related to the fish described by McCoy from the Victorian coast. If entitled to the rank of a subspecies it must certainly be referred to Trachipterus trachypterus, and would therefore be known as Trachipterus trachypterus var. polystictus Ogilby.
A table of comparative measurements of four specimens of T. trachypterus is appended. (All measurements are in millimetres.)
|—||Chatham Islands (Fig 3)||Purakanui (Fig. 4).||Port Chalmers (Fig. 5).||Canterbury Museum (Fig. 6).|
|Total length, excluding caudal fin||730||375||761||274|
|Depth at pectoral fin||115||92||90 ?||62|
|Length of head||94||73||59||43|
|Depth at vent||107||73||73||42|
|Tip of snout to vent||371||228||230||158|
|Dorsal fin rays opposite vent||45||28||45||35|
|Caudal fin rays||140||?||151||99|
|Pectoral fin rays||??||20?||14|
|Diameter of eye||26||17||16||13|
|Ventral fin rays||?||?||?||61|
|Proportion of height to length||6.38||4.01||5.1||4.42|
List of Authors Quoted.
(2.) Ogilby, J. D. “Remarks on the South Pacific Species of Trachypterus Gouan.” Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxii, 1897, pp. 646–59.
(3.) Ramsay, E. P. “On a New Species of Regalaecus from Port Jackson.” Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W, v, 1881, p. 631, pl. xx.
(4.) Jordan, D. S., and Snyder, G. O. “Description of Nine New Species of Fishes contained in Museums of Japan.” Journ. Coll. Sci. Tokyo, xv, 1901, p. 310.
(5.) McCoy, F. “Trachypterus toenia (Bloch): the Southern Ribbon-fish.” Prod. Zool. Vict., dec. 13, ii, 1886, pl. 122.
(6.) Hutton, F. W. “Contributions to the Ichthyology of New Zealand.” Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 5, 1873, p. 264; vol. 8, 1876, p. 214; vol. 22, 1890, p. 281.
(7.) Johnston, R. “On Trachypterus altivelis from Spring Bay, Tasmania.” Proc. Roy. Soc. Tas., 1882, p. 123.
(8.) Clarke, F. “On a New Species of Trachypterus: T. arawatae.” Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 13, 1881, p. 195.
(9.) Jordan, D. S., and Gilbert C H. “Description of a New Species of Ribbon-fish, Trachypterus rex-salmonorum, from San Francisco.” Proc Calif. Acad. Sci. (2), iv, 1894, p. 144.
(10.) Snyder, J. O. “Description of Trachypterus seleniris, a New Species of Ribbon-fish from Monterey Bay, California.” Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., vol. 60, 1908, p. 319
(11.) Tanaka, S. “Notes on some Japanese Fishes.” Journ. Coll Sci. Tokyo, vol. 23, 1908, art. 7, p. 52
(12.) Jordan, D. S., and Snyder, J. O. “On a Collection of Fishes made by Mr. Alan Owston in the Deep Waters of Japan.” Smith's Miscell. Coll., vol. 45, 1904, p. 240, pl. lxiii.
(13.) Gmelin, J. F. “Linnaeus Systema Naturae.” Ed. 13, cura J. F. Gmelin, Lips., 1789, p. 1187.
(14.) Gouan, A. Hist. Piscium. Argent., 1770, p. 104.
(15.) Kner, R. “Ueber Trachypterus altivelis und Chaetodon truncatus n. sp.” Sitzungsler d. math.-wiss Cl. d. K. Akad. d. WISS, Wien, Bd. xxxiv, 1859, pp. 437–45.
List of Papers Referred to and Pertaining to The Genus Trachipterus.
Macleay, W. Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., VI, 1882, p. 55, and IX, 1884, p. 120. (List of names.)
Jordan, D. S., and Gilbert, C. H. Proc U.S Nat Mus., 1881, p. 52.
Ogilby, J. D. Catal. Fishes N.S.W., 1886, p. 43.
Lucas, A. H. S. Proc. Roy. Soc. Vict. (2), ii, 1890, p. 32.
Hutton, F. W. Trans. N Z. Inst., vol. 22, 1890, p. 281. (List of names.)
Gill, T Mem. Acad. Nat. Sci. Wash., vi, 1894, p. 120.
Jordan, D. S., and Gilbert, C. H Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. (2), iv, 1894, p 144.
Waite, E R. Mem N.S.W. Nat. Club, ii, 1904, p. 54.
Poey, F. Mem. Cuba, ii, 1861, p 420.
Gunther, A. C. Cat Fish, iii. 1861, p 303.