Biogeography 7.
85–90. Aug. 20, 2005

First Records of a Scorpionfish, Maxillicosta raoulensis (Scorpaeniformes,
Neosebastidae), from the Tasman Sea, with Fresh Colour Notes for the Species
Hiroyuki Motomura1*, Peter R. Last2 and William T. White3
1 Ichthyology, Division of Aquatic Zoology, Australian Museum,

6 College Street, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia
2 CSIRO Marine Research, GPO Box 1538, Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia
3 Centre for Fish and Fisheries Research, Murdoch University,

Murdoch 6150, Perth, Western Australia 6150, Australia
Abstract. Maxillicosta raoulensis, which has to date only been recorded from the Kermadec Islands and thenorthern North Island of New Zealand, is reported on the basis of four specimens (45.2–101.7 mm standard
length) collected from two localities in the Tasman Sea: near Balls Pyramid on the Lord Howe Rise in a depthof 76–81 m, and on the Taupo Bank in a depth of 142 m. These specimens represent the first records from
Australian territorial waters and an approximate 1,700–1,800 km range extension from the previously known
westernmost record of the species. A colour photograph of a fresh specimen of the species is given for the
first time.
Key words: Scorpaenidae, Maxillicosta raoulensis, Australia, Tasman Sea, colouration.

Introduction
The scorpionfish genus Maxillicosta Whitley,1935 (Scorpaeniformes, Neosebastidae) was
reviewed by Eschmeyer and Poss (1976) who recognized five species, including three new. Of the fivespecies, three are endemic to Australia, i. e. M. lopholepis Eschmeyer and Poss, 1976, M. scabriceps
Whitley, 1935 and M. whitleyi Eschmeyer and Poss,
1976, and one, i. e. M. reticulata (de Buen, 1961), is
known only from the Juan Fernández Islands (660
km west of Chile). The fifth species, M. raoulensis
was originally described by Eschmeyer and Poss
(1976: 442, figs 2d, 4, 7–8) from Raoul Island(29˚15´S, 177˚57´W) in the Kermadec Island group,
north of New Zealand, at a depth of 60 m, on thebasis of 12 specimens (37.8–101.0 mm standard*Corresponding author: Hiroyuki Motomura
e-mail: motomurah@austmus.gov.au

length, SL). Subsequently, Paulin (1982) reported a
total of 47 specimens (24.5–71.4 mm SL) of M.
raoulensis from the type locality and off White
Island in the Bay of Plenty, New Zealand, at depthsof 20–150 m. Thus, this species has been recorded
only from New Zealand waters (Francis, 1993: 159).
Two large specimens (93.1–101.7 mm SL), collected from Taupo Bank, off Newcastle, New South
Wales, Australia, at a depth of 142 m, and two small
specimens (45.2–70.5 mm SL), collected from Balls
Pyramid, Lord Howe Rise, at a depth of 86–113 m,
are identified here as M. raoulensis. These specimens, briefly described herein, represent the firstrecords of the species from the Tasman Sea(Australian waters). Although Eschmeyer and Poss
(1976) and Paulin (1982) provided morphologicaldescriptions of the species, such was based on preserved specimens only and therefore lacked any
information on fresh colouration. A colour photograph of the Lord Howe Rise specimen (70.5 mm− 85 −

First Records of Maxillicosta raoulensis from the Tasman Sea

SL), taken by K. Parkinson before formalin fixation,is therefore provided here (Fig. 1a) along with adetailed colour description.
Counts and measurements followed Motomura(2004a, b), with the following additions. Scales
above and below the lateral line were counted vertically between the lateral line and the first dorsal-fin
spine base and the first anal-fin spine base, respectively. Scales were also counted vertically between
the lateral line and the sixth dorsal-fin spine baseand the last dorsal-fin spine base. Predorsal scalerows are the number of rows between the first dorsal-fin spine base and the posterior margin of theoccipital pit. Scale rows between the pelvic fins arecounted between the last pelvic-fin soft ray bases inventral view. Head width is the straight-line distance between the posterior ends of the pterotic
spine bases. Interorbital width is the least bonywidth. Post-occipital pit length was measured fromthe origin of the first dorsal-fin spine to the posterioredge of the occipital pit. Maxilla depth is the distance between the two posterior corners. Counts are
given as the range with the mode in parentheses.
Measurements are expressed as percentages of SL
with the mean in parentheses. Institutional abbreviations used in this paper are as follows: AMS,
Australian Museum, Sydney; CSIRO, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Marine Research, Hobart; and NMV, National
Museum of Victoria, Melbourne.
Maxillicosta raoulensis Eschmeyer and Poss, 1976
(Fig. 1a)
New English name: Red Little Gurnard Perch
Material examined. CSIRO CA 3173, 93.1 mm
SL, Taupo Bank (33˚08´S, 156˚11´E), approximately
425 km east of Newcastle, New South Wales,
Australia, 142 m depth, coll. by FRV Soela, 28 Jan.
1982; CSIRO CA 3174, 101.7 mm SL, same data as
CSIRO CA 3173; NMV A 25132–002, 70.5 mm SL,
Balls Pyramid (31˚52´S, 159˚14–15´E), Lord Howe
Rise, New South Wales, Australia, 76–81 m depth,
coll. by RV Tangaroa, 23 May 2003; NMV A

25132–003, 45.2 mm SL, same data as NMV A
25132–002.
Description. Meristics—Dorsal fin with 13
spines and 8 soft rays. Anal fin with 3 spines and 5
soft rays. Pectoral fin with 24–26 (mode 26) rays; 1
or 2 (1) uppermost ray and 10–17 lower rays
unbranched, remaining rays branched (number ofbranched rays increasing with growth).
Longitudinal scale rows 47–49 (48). Pored lateralline scales 27–29 (27). Scales above lateral line 2 or
3 (3), below 13–16 (14). Scale rows between sixth
dorsal-fin spine base and lateral line 3 or 4 (3);between last dorsal-fin spine base and lateral line 4.
Predorsal scale rows 4 or 5 (4). Gill rakers on upper
limb 4 or 5 (4), lower limb 9 or 10 (10), including 1
or 2 (2) rakers on hypobranchial; total rakers 13–15(14). Morphometrics—Body depth 33.8–28.2% of
SL (mean 36.2%); body width 23.2–25.7 (24.7);
head length 44.0–45.4 (44.7); snout length 8.2–9.5(8.9); orbit diameter 16.9–18.6 (17.4); interorbital
width 2.8–4.0 (3.3); head width 16.6–18.1 (17.2);
upper-jaw length 20.4–21.5 (21.0); maxilla depth
6.7–7.3 (6.9); postorbital length 19.0–20.5 (19.8);
post-occipital pit length 6.9–8.9 (7.6); predorsal-fin
length 37.1–38.3 (37.8); preanal-fin length 67.0–69.7(68.5); prepelvic-fin length 41.4–44.8 (43.0); firstdorsal-fin spine length 10.0–11.3 (10.4); second dorsal-fin spine length 15.0–17.3 (16.4); third dorsal-fin
spine length 20.4–23.0 (22.0); fourth dorsal-fin spine(longest) length 26.5–30.5 (28.0); fifth dorsal-fin
spine length 25.1–26.2 (25.8); twelfth dorsal-fin
spine length 8.6–10.7 (9.4); thirteenth dorsal-fin
spine length 13.2–13.9 (13.5); longest dorsal-fin ray(first or second) length 21.5–22.4 (21.9); first analfin spine length 10.4–12.8 (11.8); second anal-fin
spine (longest) length 19.0–21.5 (20.3); third analfin spine length 12.8–15.2 (13.9); longest anal-fin
ray (first or second) length 19.5–21.3 (20.5); longest
pectoral-fin ray (ninth or tenth) length 33.2–36.6(35.2); pelvic-fin spine length17.2–18.1 (17.7);
longest pelvic-fin ray (second) length 28.1–31.1(29.2); caudal-fin length 29.0–29.9 (29.5); caudalpeduncle length 17.0–18.4 (17.4); caudal-peduncle
depth 10.5–10.9 (10.7). Scales—Cycloid scales,− 86 −

Hiroyuki Motomura, Peter R. Last and William T. White

Fig. 1. Maxillicosta fishes of Australia. a. M. raoulensis, NMV A 25132–002, 70.5 mm SL, Balls
Pyramid, Lord Howe Rise, New South Wales (photo by K. Parkinson). b. M. scabriceps,
Port Philip Bay, Victoria (photo by R. Kuiter).

with a weak median ridge, covering area behindorbit above suborbital ridges and upper opercle.
Cycloid scales, without a median ridge, covering
cheek and middle of opercle. Predorsal scales
ctenoid, with a serrated median ridge. No scales on
snout, interorbital space, occipital pit, maxilla, andunderside of lower jaw. Most scales above lateralline with a distinct serrated median ridge. Scales
below lateral line cycloid, without median ridge.
Exposed cycloid scales covering pectoral-fin baseand ventral surface of body, including between
pelvic fins. Spines and Ridges—Nasal spine with
2–13 spinous points distally, 1–19 spinous points onanterior surface of spine. Median interorbital ridge
absent. Interorbital ridges weakly developed; adjacent to each ridge at slightly anterior to a verticalthrough centre of eye; ending at anterior margin of
occipital pit, then forming distinct coronal spines.
Coronal spine well developed, with 3–22 spinous
points distally. Preocular spine well developed,
anterior and dorsal surface with 4–6 distinct ridges
and 11–30 spinous points on ridges. Supraocularand postocular bones continuous, with 8–13 ridges
and 33–121 spinous points on ridges. Occipital pit
relatively shallow, surrounded laterally by tympanic
spines, parietal spines, several spinous points andlow ridges in dorsal view; surface of pit with several
spinous points. Tympanic and parietal spines serrated; several serrated spinous points around spines.
Nuchal spine serrated; not joined with parietal spine
at base. Sphenotic with 4–13 small spines.

Postorbital with numerous spinous points. Pterotic,
upper and lower posttemporal and supracleithralspines serrated. Lateral surface of maxilla with 5 or
6 distinct longitudinal ridges, uppermost ridge on
dorsal edge. Posterior margin of maxilla just reaching or extending slightly beyond a vertical at posterior margin of pupil. Underside of lower jaw with 3
distinct ridges in ventral view. Lacrimal withnumerous small sharp spines laterally; continuouswith suborbital ridges. Three or 4 suborbital ridges
with numerous pointed spines. Suborbital pit absent.
Preopercle with 5 spines; preopercular margin,
between uppermost preopercular spine and upper
end of preopercle, with 5–18 small pointed spines.
Upper opercular spine with 3–7 spinous points atspine tip; spine with a low median ridge, 2–15
spinous points on ridge. Lower opercular spine with
1–5 spinous points at spine tip; spine with a distinct
median ridge, 6–15 spinous points on ridge.
Cleithral spine flattened with a pointed spine.
Colour when fresh (Fig. 1a). Head mostly red.
Anterior portion of lacrimal yellowish. Lips pale
red with vertical white narrow bands. Membrane
between upper lip and premaxilla whitish.
Underside of mandible mottled with red and white
blotches. Preocular and supraocular spines brilliant
red. Parietal, nuchal, pterotic, upper and lower posttemporal spines red with whitish tip. Anterior portion of suborbital ridge brilliant red, progressively
whitish posteriorly. Cheek red, whitish dorsoposteriorly. Lower part of opercle white with distinct red− 87 −

First Records of Maxillicosta raoulensis from the Tasman Sea

spots; upper part of opercle mottled with red andwhite blotches. Outer margin of eye membrane
whitish with small red spots; membrane, between
pupil and outer eye membrane, brilliant yellow;
pupil dense black. Trunk strongly variegated, mainly red. Three red saddles; first saddle indistinct,
extending from first to fifth dorsal-fin spine base to
above pectoral-fin base; second widest, extending
from sixth to twelfth dorsal-fin spine base to underpectoral fin; third distinct, extending from soft-rayed
portion of dorsal-fin base to above anal-fin base;trunk between second and third saddles whitish withpoorly defined small red spots; caudal-fin base witha narrow vertical pale red band; caudal peduncle
whitish with small reddish yellow spots. Abdomen
whitish without distinct red spots. Pectoral-fin basewhitish with red posteriorly. Membrane of spinous
portion of dorsal fin transparent basally and whitish
medially, with red distally in anterior spines and alarge black blotch between fourth and tenth dorsalfin spines. Dorsal-fin spines whitish with yellowish
red spots; dorsal-fin soft rays white with red spots.
Pectoral fin whitish with several vertical irregularnarrow yellowish bands. Pelvic fin white with apoorly defined yellow blotch medially. Membraneof anal fin whitish anteriorly, transparent basally,
pale red medially and white distally. Anal-fin spines
and soft rays without red or yellow spots.
Membrane of caudal fin transparent. Caudal-fin rays
whitish with red spots posterior two-thirds of fin,forming irregular vertical bands.
Distribution. Currently known from New
Zealand (Raoul Island, the Kermadec Islands and off
White Island, the northern North Island; Eschmeyer
and Poss, 1976; Paulin, 1982; Francis, 1993) andAustralia (Balls Pyramid on Lord Howe Rise andTaupo Bank, Tasman Sea; this study) (Fig. 2). The
Tasman Sea specimens represent the first records
from Australian waters and an approximate 1,700–
1,800 km westward range extension from the previously known westernmost record of the species.
The absence of the species from Norfolk or ThreeKing Ridges, which are located between the
Kermadec Islands and Lord Howe Rise, is probably

due to inadequate sampling.
Remarks. Maxillicosta raoulensis is characterizedby having a large black blotch on the spinous portion of the dorsal fin (versus blotch absent in M.
reticulata), scales above the lateral line with a strong
serrated median ridge (distinct median ridge absent
in M. scabriceps and M. whitleyi; serrations absent
from median ridge in M. lopholepis), 25–27 pectoral-fin rays (20–23 in M. whitleyi; 21 or 22 in M.
lopholepis; 21–23 in M. scabriceps; 23–25 in M.
reticulata), and 14–17 gill rakers (10 or 11 in M.
whitleyi; 11 in M. lopholepis; 11–13 in M. scabriceps; 14 or 15 in M. reticulata) (Eschmeyer andPoss, 1976). Characters of the present specimensfrom the Tasman Sea agreed closely with those of
M. raoulensis from New Zealand, given by
Eschmeyer and Poss (1976: 435, 442–445) andPaulin (1982: 443–444), with the exception of thefollowing minor differences: 24–26 pectoral-fin rays
in four Tasman Sea specimens (versus 25–27 in 59
New Zealand specimens; Eschmeyer and Poss,
1976; Paulin, 1982) and 13–15 gill rakers (versus
14–17 in 12 specimens; Eschmeyer and Poss, 1976).
In their review of Maxillicosta, Eschmeyer andPoss (1976: 444) presumed that body colour of M.
raoulensis in life was “probably mostly red”, and it
was verified by this study. A colour photograph of a
fresh specimen of M. raoulensis is provided here forthe first time (Fig. 1a). Several underwater photographs of M. scabriceps and M. whitleyi have beenreported (e. g. Kuiter, 1993: 118, unnumbered fig.;
Gomon et al., 1994: fig. 483) after Eschmeyer andPoss (1976), although the remaining two species (M.
lopholepis and M. reticulata) are still known only
from two and three preserved specimens, respectively (one of the three specimens was lost). An underwater photograph of M. scabriceps, taken in Port
Philip Bay, Victoria by R. Kuiter, is provided here
for comparative purposes (Fig. 1b). Live colouration of M. scabriceps and M. whitleyi are similar toeach other (Poss, 1994). Colouration of M. raoulensis (Fig. 1a) significantly differs from that of M.
scabriceps (Fig. 1b) and M. whitleyi in having a reddish body and yellowish pectoral and pelvic fins,− 88 −

Hiroyuki Motomura, Peter R. Last and William T. White

Fig. 2. Distributional records of Maxillicosta raoulensis. Circles and stars indicate localities ofpreviously recorded specimens and specimens examined in this study, respectively.

compared to a whitish body with brownish or blackish blotches and whitish pectoral and pelvic fins forthe latter two species. Many deep water species ofscorpionfish tend to have a reddish body colouration,compared to a whitish or blackish colouration forshallow water species. In addition, the colourationof some scorpionfishes can vary intraspecificallyaccording to the water depth in which they occur (e.
g. Motomura and Shinohara, 2005). However, capture depths of M. raoulensis (20–150 m; Paulin,1982) are similar to those of M. whitleyi (26–137 m;
Poss, 1994), and all preserved specimens of M. whitleyi examined here have distinct melanophores on
the body (although all specimens of M. raoulensis
examined here lack distinct melanophores), indicating that a reddish body and the yellowish pectoraland pelvic fins when fresh appear to be a diagnostic
character for M. raoulensis.
Maxillicosta raoulensis has been classified as‘threat level 7 – range restricted’ by the Departmentof Conservation, New Zealand Government (DOC,
2005). The threat level 7 is defined as “These taxa
either occur in a small geographic area, are restricted
to a particular habitat, or require very specific substrates, and for colonial breeders, have fewer than 10
subpopulations (DOC, 2005)”. However, this study

suggests that M. raoulensis is more widely distributed on the oceanic ridges in the southwestern Pacific
Ocean than was first thought.
Comparative material examined. Maxillicosta
scabriceps: AMS IA. 21, holotype, 60.5 mm SL,
Kingscote, Kangaroo Island, South Australia;
CSIRO A 705, 75.4 mm SL, Great Australian Bight,
Western Australia, RV Commiles, 28 May 1951.
Maxillicosta whitleyi: AMS IB. 4409, holotype, 56.1mm SL, off Southport, Queensland, Australia; AMS
IB. 4406, paratype, 48.0 mm SL, same data as holotype; AMS IB. 7023, paratype, 45.3 mm SL, off Port
Stephens, New South Wales, Australia, trawl; AMS
I. 23469–005, 51.0 mm SL, off Eden (37˚02–04´S,
150˚03–04´E), New South Wales, 73 m depth, prawn
trawl, FRV Kapala, 12 Nov. 1982; AMS I. 25936–
004, 67.5 mm SL, off Clarence River (28˚40´S,
152˚32´E), New South Wales, 55 m depth, FRV
Kapala, 12 Oct. 1985; AMS I. 26023–003, 57.6 mm
SL, off Green Cape (37˚18–22´S, 150˚05´E), NewSouth Wales, 80–82 m depth, FRV Kapala, 22 Nov.
1984; AMS I. 26397–003 (1 of 2), 55.7 mm SL, off
Broken Bay (33˚36´S, 151˚29´E), Sydney, NewSouth Wales, 71 m depth, FRV Kapala, 10 Feb.
1986.

− 89 −

First Records of Maxillicosta raoulensis from the Tasman Sea

Acknowledgements
We are especially grateful to A. Graham, G.
Yearsley, T. Fountain and L. Conboy (CSIRO) for
their kind curatorial assistance during this study.
We wish to thank M. McGrouther (AMS) and M.
Gomon and D. Bray (NMV) for specimen loans and
R. Kuiter (Aquatic Photographics, Seaford, Victoria)
for providing underwater photographs of species ofMaxillicosta. The first author thanks M. Mc
Grouther, J. M. Leis, T. Trnski, S. Reader, A. Hay,
K. Parkinson and all staff of the Fish Section,
Australian Museum, Sydney and Y. Motomura for
their generous support during his stay in Australia:
CSIRO Marine Research, Hobart provided support
for work in Hobart. Lastly, the first author thanks T.
Mukai (Gifu University, Japan) for his kind assistance.

Literature Cited
DOC (Department of Conservation, New Zealand
Government), 2005. Threatened speciesclassification list—Marine fish. World wide web
electronic publication (version 29 March 2005).
Available at http://www.doc.govt.nz
Eschmeyer, W. N. & Poss, S. G., 1976. Review ofthe scorpionfish genus Maxillicosta (Pisces:
Scorpaenidae), with a description of three new
species from the Australian-New Zealand region.
Bull. mar. Sci., 26: 433–449.

Francis, M. P., 1993. Checklist of the coastal fishesof Lord Howe, Norfolk, and Kermadec Islands,
southwest Pacific Ocean. Pacif. Sci., 47: 136–
170.
Gomon, M. F., Glover, J. C. M. & Kuiter, R. H.,
1994. The fishes of Australia’s south coast. 992
pp. State Print, Adelaide.
Kuiter, R. H., 1993. The complete divers’ & fishermen’s guide to coastal fishes of south–eastern
Australia. xxxi, 437 pp. Crawford House Press,
Bathurst.
Motomura, H., 2004a. New species of scorpionfish,
Scorpaena cocosensis (Scorpaeniformes:
Scorpaenidae) from the Cocos Islands, Costa
Rica, eastern Pacific Ocean. Copeia, 2004: 818–
824.
——, 2004b. Revision of the scorpionfish genus
Neosebastes (Scorpaeniformes: Neosebastidae),with descriptions of five new species. IndoPacif. Fish., 37: 1–76.
Motomura, H. & Shinohara, G., 2005. Assessmentof taxonomic characters of Scorpaenopsis obtusa
and S. gibbosa (Scorpaenidae), with first records
of S. obtusa from Japan and Australia and comments on the synonymy of S. gibbosa. Cybium,
29 (in press).
Paulin, C. D., 1982. Scorpionfishes of New Zealand(Pisces: Scorpaenidae). N. Z. Jl Zool., 9: 437–450.

− 90 −(Accepted June 8, 2005)