Synonymization of the Family

Oxudercidae, with Comments on the

Identity of Apocryptes cantoris Day

(Pisces: Gobiidae)

VICTOR G. SPRINGER

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY • NUMBER 270
SERIES PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

Emphasis upon publication as a means of "diffusing knowledge" was expressed

by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph

Henry outlined a program that included the following statement: "It is proposed to

publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and

of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge." This theme

of basic research has been adhered to through the years by thousands of titles issued

in series publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian

Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series:

Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology

Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics

Smithsonian Contributions to Botany

Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences

Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology

Smithsonian Contributions to Zoo/ogy

Smithsonian Studies in Air and Space

Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology

In these series, the Institution publishes small papers and full-scale monographs

that report the research and collections of its various museums and bureaux or of

professional colleagues in the world cf science and scholarship. The publications are

distributed by mailing lists to libraries, universities, and similar institutions throughout

the world.

Papers or monographs submitted for series publication are received by the

Smithsonian Institution Press, subject to its own review for format and style, only

through departments of the various Smithsonian museums or bureaux, where the

manuscripts are given substantive review. Press requirements for manuscript and art

preparation are outlined on the inside back cover.

S. Dillon Ripley

Secretary

Smithsonian Institution
SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTION S TO ZOOLOGY • NUMBER 270

Synonymization of the Family

Oxudercidae, with Comments on the

Identity of Apocryptes cantoris Day

(Pisces: Gobiidae)

Victor G. Springer

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS

City of Washington

1978
ABSTRACT

Springer, Victor G. Synonymization of the Family Oxudercidae, with Comments

on the Identity of Apocryptes cantoris Day (Pisces: Gobiidae). Smithsonian

Contributions to Zoology, number 270, 14 pages, 6 figures, 2 tables, 1978.—The

holotype of Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and Souleyet, 1842, type-genus and

species (and only reported specimen) of the Family Oxudercidae, is an aberrant

specimen lacking pelvic fins of a gobiid species normally having pelvic fins.

Oxudercidae Giinther, 1861, is a junior synonym of Gobiidae Cuvier, 1816.

Oxudercidae, Amblyopina, and Trypauchenina (all Giinther, 1861) are the next

oldest family-group names available in the Gobiidae.

Normal specimens of Oxuderces dentatus have been described as Apocryptichthys sericus Herre, Apocryptes pellegrini Wu, and Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler, all of which are junior synonyms of O. dentatus. In current literature, normal specimens of O. dentatus are generally assigned to the genus Apocryptichthys Day, 1876 (type-species: Apocryptes cantoris Day, 1871) and often

reported as Apocryptichthys cantoris. Subsequent to the original description of

A. cantoris, Day changed his concept of the species and caused later workers

much confusion. The number of species or specimens comprising Day's type

material of Apocryptes cantoris is unknown, but only one specimen is extant.

The specimen, which conforms to current concepts of the genus Boleophthalmus

Valenciennes. 1837, is designated lectotype of Apocryptes cantoris.

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION DATE is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is recorded

in the Instiution's annual report, Smithsonian Year. SERIES COVER DESIGN: The coral Montastrea

cavernosa (Linnaeus).

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Springer, Victor Gruschka, 1928-

Synonymization of the family Oxudercidae, with comments on the identity of Apocryptes cantoris

Day (Pisces, Gobiidae).

(Smithsonian contributions to zoology ; no. 270)

Bibliography: p.

1. Gobiidae. 2. Boleophthalmus cantoris. 3. Fishes—Classification. I. Title. II. Oxudercidae, with comments on the identity of Apocryptes cantoris Day (Pisces, Gobiidae) III. Series:

Smithsonian Institution. Smithsonian contributions to zoology ; no. 270

QL1.S54 no. 270 [QL638.G7] 591'.08s 77-12002 [597'.58]
Contents

Page

Introduction 1

Historical Review 1

Identity and Redescription of Oxuderces dentatus 2

Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and Souleyet 4

Identit y of Apocryptichthys an d Redescriptio n of Apocryptes cantoris ... . 9

Boleophthalmus cantoris (Day) 9

Literature Cited 13

i n

Synonymization of the Family

Oxudercidae, with Comments on the

Identity of Apocryptes cantoris Day

(Pisces: Gobiidae)

Victor G. Springer

Introduction

It is the purpose of this study to expose the systematic relationships of the monotypic fish family

Oxudercidae and its type-genus and species, Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and Souleyet (1812),'

which was based on a single specimen. Since the

original description of O. dentatus, no additional

specimens have been reported, nor has anyone

reported reexamining the holotype. The taxonomy

of Oxuderces dentatus is intertwined with the taxonomy of Apocryptes cantoris Day (1871), type-species

of Apocryplichthys Day (1876), and requires discussion of Day's taxa.

1

 It is questionable whether the authorship of the new taxa

appearing in Eydoux and Souleyet (1842) should be credited

to them or to Valenciennes. The confusion results from a

footnote in Eydoux and Souleyet that states that all the

identifications of fishes that were figured on the plates accompanying the publication were owed to Valenciennes, and

all the fishes Eydoux and Souleyet treated were so figured.

It is not clear whether the descriptions and new names are

also the work of Valenciennes or if he merely informed

Eydoux and Souleyet that certain taxa were undescribed.

Most authors credit Valenciennes with the new names. For

convenience of citation, however, I credit Eydoux and Souleyet with the new taxa contained in "their" study.

Victor G. Springer, Division of Fishes, Department of Vetebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, D. C. 20560.

Abbreviations used in the text have become

standard in ichthyological studies, but are defined

in Springer and Gomon (1975).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.—Specimens used in this

study were generously provided by M.-L. Bauchot

(MNHN), M. Boeseman (RMNH), E. Bohlke

(ANSP), D. Hoese (AMS), P. Sonoda (CAS), and

P. J. Whitehead (BMNH). A. E. Spreitzer (National

Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian) prepared the photographs. A draft of the manuscript

was critically reviewed by R. S. Birdsong, R. H.

Gibbs, Jr., E. A. Lachner, J. F. McKinney, and

A. E. Spreitzer.

Historical Review

The following discussion reviews the classificatory history of Oxuderces and the Oxudercidae.

Eydoux and Souleyet (1842) placed Oxuderces in

the family Gobioides, which agrees with the family Gobioides (later emended to Gobiidae), first

proposed by Cuvier (1816). Oxuderces was differentiated from all other gobies by lacking pelvic

fins and having a peculiar gill opening: continuous across the isthmus and restricted to the ventral

surface of the head. Although it was not commented on, the anal fin was reported to have six

spines, which would be extraordinary for a gobiid.
SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

Oxuderces was next treated by Gunther (1861),

who erected the family Oxudercidae for it. Gunther

united his Discobili, Gobiidae, and Oxudercidae in

a Division Gobiiformes of the Acanthopterygii, but

Gill (1872) isolated the Oxudercidae and excluded

it, without comment, from the families included

in his Gobioidea. Bleeker (1873), however, retained

Oxuderces in his family Gobioidei, but omitted

mention of Oxuderces in his important treatise

(1871) on generic groupings in the family. Gunther

(1880) questionably included Oxuderces in the

Gobiidae and made no mention of the Oxudercidae,

which he had earlier proposed, but Gill (1893)

recognized the Oxudercidae and Gobiidae as the

only families in his Gobioidea.

Boulenger (1904) included Oxuderces in the

Gobiidae, stating that Oxuderces appeared to differ

from Trypauchen only in the absence of pelvic

fins, a strange comment in view of the numerous

other pecularities given in the original description

of Oxuderces. Jordan (1905) also placed Oxuderces

in the Gobiidae, stating that Oxuderces had very

short dorsal and anal fins, facts belied by information in the original description. Jordan (1923),

however, without comment, chose to recognize the

Oxudercidae, and placed it in his order Jugulares

under his series Percophidiformes, which also included such families as the Trichonotidae, Mugiloididae, and Percophididae, but not the Gobiidae.

Reeves (1927) and Chu (1931) listed the Oxudercidae without comment.

Berg (1910, 1955) placed the Oxudercidae as

incertae sedis in his superfamily Trachinoidae, and

Fowler (1956), apparently following Berg, placed

it in the superfamily Trachinicae. Schultz (1960)

included Oxuderces, "for convenience," in his key

to the genera related to the families Trichonotidae

and Percophididae, but made no mention of the

Oxudercidae. Golvan (1962) allocated Oxuderces

as "(Gobioid.) Gobiid." but later (1965) placed it

in the Oxudercidae, which he included in the suborder Trachinoidei. Breder and Rosen (1966) listed

the Oxudercidae without comment, and Greenwood, et al. (1966) recognized the Oxudercidae in

the suborder Trachinoidei. Gosline (1968) placed

the Oxudercidae in the suborder Blennioidei, but

McAllister (1968), following Berg (19*10, 1955), included it as incertae sedis in the suborder Trachinoidei. Lindberg (1971) included the Oxudercidae

in the superfamily Trachinoidea.

Wheeler (1975) wrote of the Oxudercidae, "Its

standing as a family is open to serious doubt," and

of Oxuderces dentalus, "There seems to be considerable doubt as to whether it is a valid species,

and if it is, where it should be placed in the systematic arrangement." Finally, Nelson (1976) included the Oxudercidae in the infraorder Trachinoidea of the suborder Blennioidei.

Given the interest in, and doubt expressed about,

the Oxudercidae and Oxuderces dentalus during

the past 135 years, it is surprising that no one has

reported reexamining the holotype of O. dentatus.

M.-L. Bauchot ( in litt.) does not believe that the

holotype was ever loaned, and she located it only

after a long search, "oublie" sur un e"tagere a cote

des Lophiidae," in the collections of the Museum

in Paris. Nevertheless, accompanying the holotype

(MNHN A. 1822), which was lent me, was a tiny

vial containing some stained (alizarin?) scales that

appear to have been removed from the type, but

by whose action for what purposes, I am unaware.

Identity and Redescription of Oxuderces dentatus

My examination of the holotype of O. dentatus,

now in poor condition, confirms much of the information contained in the original description,

which, in general, is very good, but there are some

corrections that must be noted (Table 1), particuTABI.E 1.—Comparison of certain characters given in the

original description of Oxuderces dentatus with the same

characters as observed on the holotype

Character

Eyelids

Dorsal fin

Anal fin

Caudal fin

Pectoral fin

Scales

Original description

Present, resembling those

of Periophthalmus

6/24

5th S 6th spines illustrated as wel1 separated from first four

spines, from each other,

and from 1st ray

No mention

6/21

18

18

Very small, over entire

body

Head naked

Holotype

Absent

VI,27 (last ray split to

base, counted as one ray)

5th spine about same distance from 4th as 3rd is

from 4th; 6th spine well

separated from 5th spine

and 1st ray

Dark blotch on third and

fourth rays from posteriorroost ray

26 (last ray split to base,

counted as one ray)

17 segmented (16 branched)

24, each fin

Tiny anteriorly on body,

grading into relatively

large scales posteriorly

Few tiny scales dorsally

on head
NUMBER 270

larly the anal-fin formula. The absence of pelvic

fins and the erroneous report of six anal-fin spines

were undoubtedly the major sources of the classificatory confusion surrounding O. dentatus. To their

credit, Eydoux and Souleyet correctly assigned Oxuderces to the Gobiidae. My immediate impression

on first examining the holotype was that it was a

malformed specimen of a gobiid species that normally has pelvic fins. The anomalous absence of

pelvic fins occurs in a wide variety of fishes {see

bibliographies of anomalies by Dawson, 1964, 1966,

1971, and Dawson and Heal, 1976), and although

unreported in gobiids, should not be unexpected.

A search of museum collections uncovered numerous specimens that appeared to be conspecific with

O. dentatus. The specimens differed significantly

from O. dentatus only in having pelvic fins and in

having the gill openings restricted on each side of

the head. One of these specimens (CAS SU61139)

was obtained at the Macao fish market, a fortunate

circumstance as the type-locality of O. dentatus is

also Macao. My comparison of the holotype of O.

dentatus with the fish market specimen convinces

me that the two specimens are conspecific. The

fish market specimen, under current taxonomic

concepts, clearly belongs in the Gobiidae.

Although Oxudercidae thus becomes a junior

synonym of the Gobiidae, it is coequal in seniority

with Amblyopina and Trypauchenina, all three

names dating from Gunther (1861), as the next

oldest family-group names available in the Gobiidae. As such, Oxudercidae has priority over such

well-known gobiid taxa as Apocryteinae, Periophthalminae, and Boleophthalminae (all Bleeker,

1874; see Miller, 1973, for a list and discussion of

available family-group taxa of gobiids, except Oxudercidae), which heretofore have either included

taxa synonymous with Oxuderces dentatus or

closely enough related to O. dentatus to have

included it also.

Many of the normal specimens of O. dentatus

I located were registered in museum collections

under the gobiid genus Apocryptichthys Day (1876;

type-species: Apocryptes cantoris Day, 1871). A

search of the literature educed four nominal species that appeared to refer to normal specimens:

Apocryptes cantoris Day, Apocryptichthys sericus

Herre (1927), Apocryptes pellegrini Wu (1931), and

Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler (1935).

Before discussing Apocryptes cantoris, which is

not particularly closely related to Oxuderces dentatus, it is easiest to dispense with Herre, Wu and

Fowler's species. Apocryptichthys sericus Herre was

described from four specimens, three from Amoy

(Hsia-men) and one from Fuchow, China. The

locality for the holotype was not given. The type

material, deposited in the Philippine Bureau of

Science collections, was destroyed during World

War II; however, a specimen (CAS SU25524) is

available from Amoy that was identified as A.

sericus, apparently by Herre, which was collected in

1927, the same year in which Herre's description

appeared (the specimen was collected by Johnson

Chen, whereas Herre's types were collected by S. F.

Light). Herre did not compare his species with any

other except to state, "In general appearance this

species is very close to Day's A. cantoris . . . ."

Apocryptichthys sericus is the oldest name available for a normal specimen of Oxuderces dentatus,

but is, nevertheless, a junior synonym of that species. Herre's illustration of A. sericus is reproduced

herein as Figure la.

Apocryptes pellegrini Wu was described from

Foochow, China, based on a single specimen. The

depository of the holotype was not specified. The

species was stated to be "nearly related" to Apocryptes nexipinnis Cantor (1850), from which it was

differentiated. It was also compared with other

species of Apocryptes from China, but none of the

compared species are synonymous with Oxuderces

dentatus. Wu's (1931) description and illustration

(here reproduced as Figure 16) can be identified

only with Oxuderces dentatus, and Wu (in Chen,

1934) acknowledged this identification implicitly

by stating that his A. pellegiini was a synonym

of Apocryptichthys sericus. (I believe that A. nexipinnis is the nearest relative of O. dentatus, from

which A. nexipinnis differs most notably in having

a pair of canines posterior to the dentary symphysis, the entire head and body scaled, and more dorsal, anal, and pectoral-fin rays. I hazard the opinion

that A. nexipinnis will be assigned to Oxuderces

when the genera of Gobiidae are better delimited.

A cursory review of the literature indicates to me

that there are probably several synonyms, both

junior and senior, available for A. nexipinnis.)

Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler (holotype

herein illustrated in Figures 2a, 3a, 4a) was described from three specimens from Paknam, Thai-
SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

a •([//,; •-•„ .

FIGURE 1.—a, Apocryptichthys sericus (= Oxuderces dentatus) after Herre (1927); b,

Apocryptes pellegrini (— Oxuderces dentatus), after Wu (1931); r, illustration accompanying Day's 1876 account of Apocryptichthys cantoris.

land. It was differentiated only from Day's A. cantoris. All the type specimens are available and are

conspecific with A. sericus and, hence, Oxuderces

dentatus.

Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and Souleyet

FIGURES 2b, $b, 4b

Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and Souleyet, 1842:182, pi. 8: fig.

2 [original description; Macao; holotype MNHN A.1822].—

Gii n I her, 1861:165 [description after original; placed in new

family].—Bleeker, 1873:129 [included in Gobiidae].—Jordan,

1905:468 [listed, brief comment].—Jordan, 1919:213 [listed].

—Reeves, 1927:14 [listed].—Chu, 1931:169 [listed].—Fowler,

1956:343, fig. 61 [description and figure after original].—

Schultz, 1960: 274 [listed].—Lindberg, 1971:191, fig. 743

[figure after original].—Wheeler, 1975:275 [figure after

original; validity questioned].—Nelson, 1976:265 [listed].

Apocryptichlhys cantoris [not Day, 1871] Day, 1876:302 [in

part; pi. 62: fig. 7 does not pertain; Madras].—Day,

1889:279 [in pail; figure 94 docs not pertain; Madras].—

Smith, 1931: 189 [off mouth of Meklong. Gulf of SiamJ —

Koumans, 1932:16 [estuaries, eastern Java].—Koumans,

1941:276 [in part, description].—Smith, 1945:564 [comments;

habitat].—Koumans, 1953:252, fig. 62 [description; distribution].

Apocryptichthys sericus Herre, 1927:264, pi. 21: fig. 1 [original

description; Amoy and Fu-chow; holotype, Philippine Bureau of Science 11009].—Chen, 1934:39 [Foochow; Apocryptes pellegrini synonymized].—Koumans, 1940:191 [reexamination of types].—Fowler, 1962:3, fig. 72 [description after

original].—Chu and Wu, 1965: 133 and 134 [South and

East China seas].

Apocryptes pellegrini Wu, 1931:48, fig. 8 [original description, Foochow].

Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler, 1935:162, figs. 131 and

132 [original description; Paknam, Siam; holotype, ANSP

63091].—Smith, 1945:564 [comparison].

Apocryptes cantoris [not Day, 1871].—Whitehead and Talwar,

1976: 161 [in part; location of Day's Madras specimen].

DESCRIPTION.—Dorsal fin VI, 25-27; terminal

pterygiophore supporting two rays, posteriormost

of which is greatly reduced (the two rays here tabulated as one ray, but tabulated separately for Madras specimen in Table 2); spinous dorsal-fin pterygiophore formula (Birdsong, 1975): 3(12210)
NUMBER 270

FIGURE 2.—Oxuderces dentatus: a, ANSP 63091, holotype of Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler;

b, MNHN A. 1822, holotype of Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and Souleyet.

FIGURE 3.—Oxuderces dentatus, lateral view of head region: a, ANSP 63091, holotype of Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler; b, MNHN A.1822, holotype of Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and

Souleyet.
SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

FIGURE 4.—Oxuderces dentatus, ventral view of head region: a, AS'SP 63091, holotype of Apocryptichthys livingstoni Fowler; b, MNHN A.1822, holotype of Oxuderces dentatus Eydoux and

Souleyet.
NUMBER 270

(note: this particular formula typifies a large number of gobiids that are probably related to Oxuderces, including some that have only five dorsalfin spines; the posteriormost spine, the sixth of the

related forms, may be lacking, but its pterygiophore remains); base of sixth spine positioned

about midway between bases of fifth spine and

first segmented ray; first four interspinous spaces

about equal; spinous and segmented-ray portions

connected by membrane; separation between, portions marked by broad, shallow depression in membrane margin; fifth spine is longest fin element,

but only slightly exceeds longest segmented ray;

however, spinous portion not higher than segmented-ray portion because of strong dorsoposterior

arching of spines; insertion of last segmented ray

anterior to caudal-fin base, but tips of depressed

posterior rays extend posteriorly beyond base; last

ray not connected by membrane to caudal-fin base;

color pattern variably pale and dusky, not remarkable except for darkly pigmented membranes between last three or four rays, often appearing as

dark blotch at end of fin.

Anal fin 24-27 (usually 25 or 26), all rays segmented and branched; terminal pterygiophore supporting two rays, posteriormost of which is greatly

reduced (the two rays here tabulated as one ray,

but tabulated separately for Madras specimen in

Table 2); insertion of last ray below or anterior

to vertical from base of penultimate dorsal-fin ray;

tips of depressed posterior rays extend posteriorly

beyond caudal-fin base; no membrane attaching

last ray to caudal peduncle: color almost immaculate.

Pectoral fin 22-24, ventralmost rays shortest,

finest, difficult to delineate; color mostly immaculate but fleshy base darkly dusky.

Pelvic fin 1,5, joined by membrane with fin of

opposite side to form cup; frenum well developed;

color immaculate.

Caudal fin lanceolate, with 17 segmented rays,

of which 15 or 16 are branched; dorsal and ventral

procurrent rays each 5 or 6; parhypural, ventral

hypural plate (composed of fused hypurals 1 and

2), hypural 5, and two epurals all autogenous;

dorsal hypural plate (composed of fused hypurals

3 and 4) fused to urostylar complex; uroneurals

not present; color dusky.

Vertebrae 10 + 16. Branchiostegals 5.

Scales cycloid, covering most of body, sparse and

embedded or absent on sides of head, varying from

an elongate patch on either side on top of head

to covering top of head to level just posterior to

eyes, absent on prepectoral and prepelvic areas,

smallest anteriorly on head and body, largest on

caudal peduncle and caudal fin basally; diameter

of anterior body scales about one-sixth to one-fifth

diameter of largest scales; diagonal scale rows irregular, impossible to count accurately, about 60-70

scales along line between pectoral-fin axil and

caudal-fin base.

Gill opening restricted, extending dorsally from

point somewhat dorsal to pelvic-fin origin to opposite level of about sixth to eighth from ventralmost

pectoral-fin ray.

All teeth with obtuse tips; upper jaw with one

or two prominent, elongate teeth ("canines") on

each side of premaxillary symphysis; canines extending ventrally beyond lower lip when mouth

is closed; row of 3-19 (usually 12—14) much smaller

teeth on each side of jaw posterior to canines;

lower jaw with row of 7-14 (usually 10-14) more

or less laterally projecting teeth on each side;

lower jaw teeth shorter than canines, but longer

than small teeth of upper jaw; no erect canine

tooth on each side of symphysis internal to anterior margin of lower jaw; upper jaw teeth extending about half length upper jaw further posteriorly

than lower jaw teeth; vomer and palatines edentate.

Gape relatively large; posterior tip of maxillary

about two eye diameters posterior to vertical from

posterior margin of eye, but rictus only one diameter posterior to vertical. Upper lip conspicuously

dark dusky for most of length. Lower jaw spoon

shaped, tongue adnate; posterior free edge of lower

lip juts laterally, bears about six acutely to obtusely

tipped crenulae. On each side of roof of mouth,

just posterolateral to vomer, is a pendulous flap

that questionably has a minute opening at its tip.

Eyes located dorsally on anterior third of head

length; ventral eyelid absent. Small pore (posterior

nostril?) just anterolateral to midanterior margin

of eye; unpaired (common) opening located anteriorly in interorbital region, connected by internal

canal on each side of head to large pore located

midway between anterior edge of upper lip and

anterior margin of eye. Lateral to large pore, above

upper lip, a pendulous fleshy tube with minute

pore (anterior nostril?) at tip overhangs lower jaw
8 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

when mouth is closed; canal of tube leads to large,

glandlike organ (nasal rosette?).

In many specimens, the color pattern, except for

the dark spot posteriorly on the dorsal fin and the

dark edge of the upper lip, was not noteworthy,

but in other specimens the dorsal portions of the

head and, anteriorly, the body exhibited an irregular pattern of small, dusky vermiculations. Herre

(1927) illustrated a specimen with seven or eight

barlike marks on the body (see Figure la). I have

not seen these marks on any of the specimens I

examined.

DISTRIBUTION.—See "Material Examined" and

Figure 5.

MATERIAL EXAMINED—INDIA: Madras, AMS B.8336 (47.2

mm SL). INDONESIA: Pulu Wch, NW Sumatra, RMNH

17382 (71.6); E Java, RMNH 12091 (3: ca. 68 -ca. 80), RMNH

12092 (19: 62.5-79.5), RMNH 12433 (55.0); Surabaja, Java,

RMNH 12570 (79.7). THAILAND: Paknam, ANSP 63091,

(holotype of Apocryptichthys livingstoni, 73.4), ANSP 63092-3

(2: 73.7, 76.1); off mouth of Mcklong, USNM 119547 (67.9).

MACAO: MNHN A.I822 (holotype of Oxudercrs dentatus,

ca. 75; fish mkt, CAS SU61139 (76.7). CHINA: Foochow and

vicinity, USNM 86378 (2: 56.7, 70.3), USNM 86954 (2: 80.5.

81.5); Fcngsien (also Feng-hsicn, near Shanghai, 2: ca. 81, ca.

93); Amoy, CAS SU25524 (65.6).

2O°

80° |OO

FIGURE 5.—Distribution of Oxuderces dentatus.
NUMBER 270

Identity of Apocryptichthys and

Redescription of Apocryptes cantoris

All references to Apocryptichthys in keys to

gobiid genera refer to Oxuderccs, and the name

Apocryptichthys cantoris is often assigned in the

literature and in museum collections to specimens

of Oxuderccs denlatus. Neither of these names,

however, is a strict synonym of Oxuderces or O.

dentalus. The circumstances surrounding and following Day's (1871) description of Apocryptes cantoris have caused much confusion. Apocryptes cantoris was described in a paper on Andaman Island

fishes, but Day mentioned that he included some

fishes from the Nicobars as well. All of the new

species descriptions, except that of A. cantoris, included in Day's paper specify the locality (Andamans or Nicobars) from where the species came.

Because Day, in later publications, did not report

A. cantoris as occurring in the Nicobars, we can

assume that it came from the Andamans (a locality

at which Oxuderces dentatus is not known to

occur). Day also did not indicate the number or

sizes of the specimens on which the species account

was based, although it could have been based on

only one specimen as no variation was mentioned.

The species was not illustrated in the original

description.

Day's next reference to Apocryptes cantoris was

in 1876, at which time he erected the genus Apocryptichthys for it alone, expanded and changed

the description of the species, included a figure

(herein reproduced as Figure If), and gave the

geographic range of the species as Andamans and

Madras. The illustration conforms to no specimen

or other species description of which I am aware.

The 1876 description of A. cantoris, which agrees

with the only other report of A. cantoris given by

Day (1889), differs significantly from the 1871 description. A comparison of the important features

of the 1871 and 1876 descriptions, together with

the same features as taken from the only two specimens known to have been identified by Day as

A. cantoris (one each from the Andamans and

Madras) is given in Table 2. A supposed third

specimen, from the Andamans, on which, according to Day, the 1876 figure is also supposedly

based, is reported to be lost or destroyed (Whitehead and Talwar, 1976). Of the two extant specimens, the one from Madras, which has no status

as a type, is a normal specimen of Oxuderces dentatus; the one from the Andamans is referable to

the genus Boleophthalmus, as currently treated in

the literature,- and I am unable to assign a species

name other than cantoris to it.

One can readily conclude from the information

in Table 2 and the above discussion that Day

changed his concept of Apocryptes cantoris between 1871 and 1876 to conform more closely with

normal specimens of Oxuderces dentatus, and that

the original description of A. cantoris was either

based on more than one species (and genus), or

contained errors, or both. The simplest solution

to the problem is to assign Day's species name to

a specimen. Inasmuch as there is an extant specimen from the Andaman Islands that Day identified as Apocryptes cantoris (presented to the British

Museum in 1870), and which largely agrees with

his original description, it appears that this specimen was part of, if not entirely, Day's type material

of A. cantoris. I, therefore, designate this specimen

(BMNH 1870.5.12.23) lectotype of Apocryptes cantoris Day. As a result of my action, Apocryptichthys

becomes, for the moment, a junior subjective synonym of Boleophthalmus Valenciennes.

Boleophthalmus cantoris (Day)

FIGURE 6

Apocryptes cantoris Day, 1871:693 [original description; Andamans].—\Vhitehead and Talwar. 1970:161 [in part; location of Day's type specimens].

2

 Valenciennes (in Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1837) cited

page 130 of Osbeck (1757; reference unavailable to me) as the

original source of the genus Apocryptes. Valenciennes also

cited page 170 of the German translation (1765) of Osbeck as

a second source for Apocryptes. The name Apocryptes does

not appear in the German translation (nor in a later English

translation). Even if Apocryptes is cited in the pre-Linnean

original edition of Osbeck, it is not available from the date

of that publication. Jordan (1917, 1919) reporied that Boteophthalmus Valenciennes in Cuvier and Valenciennes (1837)

possibly should be synonymized with Apocryptes Osbeck,

German edition, which Jordan erroneously dated 1762. Jordan

also erroneously cited page 130 of the German edition as

containing the reference to Apocryptes (however, he accurately

stated that Albula appeared on page 309). Koumans (1931)

summarized Jordan"s discussion of Apocryptes and Boleophthaltmis and also gave 1762 as the date for the German

translation. The Apocryptes-Boleophthalmus problem is

nomenclatuially complex and decisions must rest with the

first reviser. I follow Koumans (1931), who. for convenience,

recognized both these genera as valid senior synonyms.
10

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

TABLE 2.—Comparison of certain characters in Day's descriptions of Apocryptkhthys cantoris

with the same characters as exhibited by specimens identified as A. cantoris by Day

Characters

Dorsal-fin rays

Anal-fin rays

Pectoral-fin rays

Total length (TL) ran

Head length

Caudal-fin length

Body depth

Teeth

Maxillary

First dorsal fin

Second dorsal fin

Scales

Head coloration

Day (1871)

6/27

26

19

Not given

2/9 TL (22.2%)

2/9 TL (22.2%)

1/6 TL (16.7%)

"The anterior of the

upper jaw enlarged,

whilst those of the

lower jaw are horizontal. A pair of

canines at the

symphysis."

Not mentioned

"...extends to below

middle of the orbit."

"...some distance

from second; its

first three rays...

elongated."

"dark, with three

black bands along

1t."

"only a notch between It and the

caudal"

Not mentioned

"very minute, most

visible in the

posterior part of

the body."

Not mentioned

"Cheeks and under

surface...with

black spots."

Descriptions

Day (1876)

6/27

26

19

Not given

1/4 TL (25.0%)

1/5 TL (20.0%)

1/9 TL (11.1%)

"...in prenaxillaries

curved,pointed,elongated., .a long canine

on either side of the

symphysis...in lower jaw

sub-horizontal...no posterior canines above the

symphysis of the lower

jaw."

"about 13 on either side

of both jaws"

"...reaches to 1 diameter

of the orbit behind its

[orbit's] posterior

edge."

"First and second dorsals

of about same height;

the membrane of the

first dorsal continued

almost to the base of

the second."

"dark, longitudinally

banded"

Not mentioned

Not mentioned

"cycloid, absent from

head, becoming largest

posteriorly."

"about 90 rows along

the body"

Not mentioned

Illustration in

Day (1876)

VI,26

25

?

80, reportedly

natural size

about 25% TL

about 16% TL

about 10% TL

Not Illustrated

Not illustrated

Extends well posterior to vertical from posterior margin of eye.

Close to, but completely separated

from, second dorsal ; spines not

elongate.

Dark, with three

dark stripes.

Well separated

from caudal fin.

Variably dusky, no

stripes

Not discernible

Not discernible

Dark spots on

cheeks.

Specimens

BMNH 1870.5.18.23

Andaman Islands

V,27; last element

distinct

25; last element

distinct

19-19

82.3

20.3S TL

21.0% TL

8.9% TL

Upper jaw: anterior 14

teeth curved, pointed,

not elongate, 2X size

of lateral teeth; no

elongate canines.

Lower jaw: curved,

pointed, subhorizontal; 2 erect canines

posterior to symphysis.

31 in upper jaw; 48 + 2

canines in lower jaw

Extends to below level

of posterior half of

eye.

Hell separated from,

and not connected by

membrane to, second

dorsal; 3rd-5th spines

elongate, 4th filamentous.

Dusky, no stripes.

Terminal membrane

notched, but continuous with caudal fin.

With three dark stripes.

Cycloid, minute, tubercuiate on head and body

anteriorly, most visible posteriorly.

More than 100 In linear

series along body.

Dark spots on cheeks;

ventral surface evenly

pale.

AMS B.8336

Madras

VI,27; last element

indistinct

26; last element

indistinct

23-23

58.0

23.6% TL

18.3% TL

10.8% TL

Upper jaw: elongate

canine on each side of

symphysis, 4X size of

lateral teeth. Lower

jaw: curved, tips obtuse, horizontal; no

canines posterior to

symphysis.

30 in upper jaw, 18 in

lower jaw

Extends posteriorly

more than one eye

diameter beyond vertical from posterior

margin of eye.

Much closer to second

dorsal than in BMNH

specimen; connected by

membrane to second

dorsal; spines not

elongate.

Dusky, no stripes.

Hell separated from

caudal fin.

Dusky, with dark,distal

blotch over terminal

three or four rays.

Cycloid, minute anteriorly, quite large posteriorly; absent on

head and body anteriorly.

About 65 in linear

series along body.

No dark spots.

Apocryptkhthys cantoris {Day).—Day, 1876:302 [in part; pi.

62: fig. 7 does not pertain; Andaman*].—Day, 1889:279 [in

part; figure 94 does not pertain; Andamans].—Koumans,

1931:132 [listed].—Koumans, 1941:276 [in part; description).

DESCRIPTION OF LECTOTYPE OF Apocryptes cantoris.—Dorsal fin V.26; terminal pterygiophore supporting two subequal rays (the two rays here tabulated as one ray, but tabulated separately in Table

2); spinous dorsal-fin pterygiophore formula (Birdsong, 1975): 3(122/0) (note: the posteriormost of

these pterygiophores is not associated with an external element); interspinous spaces equal; spinous
NUMBER 270 11

FIGURE 6.—Lectotype of Apocryptes cantoris Day, BMNH 1870.5.18.23.

and segmented ray portions of fin well separated,

not connected by membrane; fourth spine filamentous, by far the longest dorsal-fin element; insertion

of last segmented ray anterior to caudal-fin base,

but depressed last rays extending posteriorly well

beyond caudal-fin origin; last ray connected by

membrane to caudal fin basally; color pattern,

spinous portion pale dusky except second spine

dark dusky distally; segmented ray portion pale

anteriorly, with dusky stripe gradually making appearance at about midlength of fin, grading into

three dusky stripes at posterior end of fin.

Anal fin 24, all rays segmented and branched;

terminal pterygiophore supporting two subequal

rays (the two rays here tabulated as one ray, but

tabulated separately in Table 2); insertion of last

ray below vertical from base of last dorsal-fin ray;

tips of depressed posterior rays extend posteriorly

beyond caudal-fin base; membrane attaches last

ray for most of its length to caudal peduncle; color

almost immaculate.

Pectoral fin (each) 19, venti almost ray shortest,

about equal to dorsalmost ray but much stouter;

color variably dusky with one or two small, promi-
12 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

nent, dark spots; fleshy base with two or four small,

prominent, dark spots.

Pelvic fin, 1,5, joined by membrane with fin of

opposite side to form cup; frenum well developed;

color mostly immaculate with faintly dusky pigment in membranes between three innermost rays.

Caudal fin lanceolate with 16 segmented rays, of

which only dorsalmost is simple; dorsal procurrent

rays 2, ventral procurrent rays 1; parhypural, ventral hypural plate (composed of fused hypurals

I and 2), hypural 5, and two epurals all autogenous; dorsal hypural plate (composed of fused

hypural 3 and 4) fused to urostylar complex; uroneurals not present; color pattern generally dark

dusky, except immaculate over ventralmost three

rays, and several dark-margined pale spots slightly

distal to fin base.

Vertebrae 10 + 16. Branchiostegal number could

not be determined without dissection.

Scales cycloid, tiny, subequal throughout, covering body and sides and top of head, absent from

head ventrally and prepectoral and prepelvic areas;

minutely tubercular or imbedded on head and

anteriorly on body; diagonal rows impossible to

count; more than 100 scales along line between

pectoral-fin axil and caudal-fin base.

Gill opening restricted, extending dorsally from

point slightly dorsal to pelvic-fin origin to opposite

level of eighth or ninth from ventralmost pectoralfin ray.

All teeth with acute tips; upper jaw teeth uniserial, composed of 14 large, subequal teeth anteriorly, followed posteriorly on each side by eight

or nine much smaller teeth, about half length of

large teeth; lower jaw with large erect canine internally on each side of symphysis and outer row

anteriorly of 15 or 16 large teeth, equal in size

to small teeth of upper jaw, followed posteriorly

on each side by offset row of 4 or 6 much smaller

teeth, about half size of anterior teeth, followed

posteriorly by another offset row of 3 or 4 teeth

equal in size to first offset row; total lower jaw

teeth, excluding erect canines, 48; lower jaw teeth

(except erect canines) inclined somewhat laterally;

teeth extend posteriorly for same distance in both

jaws; vomer and palentines edentate.

Gape moderate; posterior tip of maxillary failing

to reach vertical from posterior margin of eye;

upper lip minutely papillose posteriorly, not modified anteriorly; color dusky but unremarkable;

lower lip not modified. Lower jaw rounded anteriorly, not remarkable; tongue adnate; roof of

mouth with broad, fleshy flap on either side of

vomer.

Eyes located dorsally on anterior third of head;

ventral eyelid well developed; small pore (posterior

nostril?) opening just anterolateral to midanterior

margin of each eye; no openings in interorbital

region (see description of Oxuderces dentatus);

only other opening is minute pore (anterior nostril?) at end of short ventrally directed tube originating above upper lip anteriorly on each side;

tube does not extend ventrally beyond ventral

margin of upper lip.

Head dusky dorsally and laterally, with two

dusky bands dorsoposteriorly; sides with sparse

scattering of small dark spots limited to area posterior to snout. Body dusky, with fine peppering

of dark melanophores (visible only under magnification); numerous faint, slender, pale bars on

sides; bars most obvious in nape area and below

spinous dorsal fin; venter pale.

DISTRIBUTION.—Known only from the lectotype

from the Andaman Islands.
Literature Cited

Berg, L. S.

1940. Classification of Fishes Both Recent and Fossil.

Travaux de I'Institut Zoologiqtie de I'Academie des

Sciences de VU.R.S.S., 5(2):87-345. [In Russian and

English.]

1955. Sistema Ryboobrarnykh i Ryb, Nyne Zhivushchikh i

Iskopaemykh. Trudy Zoologicheskogo Instituta, 20:

1-286. [In Russian; German translation 1958.]

Birdsong, R. S.

1975. The Osteology of Microgobius signatus Poey (Pisces:

Gobiidae), with Comments on Other Gobioid Fishes.

Bulletin of the Florida State Museum, 19(3): 135-187.

Bleeker, P.

1873. Memoire sur la Faune Ichthyologique de Chine.

Nederlandsch Tijdschrijt voor de Dierkunde, 4:113-

154.

1874. Esquisse d'un Systeme Naturel des Gobioides.

Archives Neerlandaises des Sciences Exactes et Naturelles, 9:289-331.

Boulenger, G. A.

1904. Teleostei. Pages 541-727 in volume 7 of The Cambridge Natural History.

Breder, C. M. Jr., and D. E. Rosen

1966. Modes of Reproduction in Fishes, xv + 941 pages.

Cantor, T.

1850. Catalog of Malayan Fishes. Journal of the Asiatic

Society of Bengal, 18(2):i-xii + 983-1443, plates 1-14.

Chen, J.T.F.

1934. Note sur les Gobioides de la collection du Museum

Metropolitain de Nankin. Bulletin du Museum

National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, series 2,6(1):

36-39.

Chu, Y., and H. Wu

1965. A Preliminary Study of the Zoogeography of the

Gobioid Fishes of China. Oceanologia et Limnologia, 7(2): 122-140. [In Chinese with English summary.]

Chu, Y. T.

1931. Index Piscium Sinensium. Biological Bulletin of

St. Johns University, l:iv+1-291.

Cuvier, G.L.F.C.D.

1816. Le Regne Animal. Volume 2, xviii + 532 pages.

[Dated 1817 on title page.]

Cuvier, G.F.L.C.D., and A. Valenciennes

1837. Histoire Naturelles de Poissons. Volume 12, xiv +

508 pages, 19 plates.

Dawson, C. E.

1964. A Bibliography of Anomalies of Fishes. Gulf Research Reports, l(6):308-399.

1966. A Bibliography of Anomalies of Fishes, Supplement

1. Gulf Research Reports, 2(2): 169-176.

1971. A Bibliography of Anomalies of Fishes, Supplement

2. Gulf Research Reports, 3(2):215-239.

Dawson, C. E., and E. Heal

1976. A Bibliography of Anomalies of Fishes, Supplement

3. Gulf Research Reports, 5(2):35-41.

Day, F.

1871. On the Fishes of the Andaman Islands. Proceedings

of the Scientific Meetings of the Zoological Society

of London for the Year 1870, pages 677-765.

1876. The Fishes of India. Pages 169-368, plates xli-lxxi.

1889. Fishes. The Fauna of British India, 2:xiv + 509

pages.

Eydoux, J. F. T., and F. L. A. Souleyet

1842. Poissons. Pages 155-216 in Zoologie, volume 1, part

2, and plates 1-10 in Atlas in Voyage autour du

Monde execute pendant les annees 1836 et 1837

sur la corvette La Bonitr, commande'e par M.

Vaillant.

Fowler, H. W.

1935. Zoological Results of the Third DeSchauensee Siamese Expedition, Part VI: Fishes Obtained in 1934.

Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of

Philadelphia, 87:89-163.

1956. A Synopsis of the Fishes of China, Part VII. Quarterly Journal of the Taiwan Museum, 9(3^4): 161-

354.

1962. A Synopsis of the Fishes of China, Part X. Quarterly Journal of the Taiwan Museum, 15(1-2): 1-77.

Gill, T.

1872. Arrangement of the Families of Fishes. Smithsonian

Miscellaneous Collections, 247:xlvi -f- 1-49.

1893. Families and Subfamilies of Fishes. Memoirs of the

National Academy of Sciences, 6:127-138.

Golvan, Y. J.

1962. Repertoire systematique des noms de generes de

Vertebres (suite). Annales de Parasitologie Humaine

et Comparee, 37(5-6):870-997.

1965. Catalogue Systematique des Noms de Genres de

Poissons A duels. 227 pages.

Gosline, W. A.

1968. The Suborders of Perciform Fishes. Proceedings of

the United States National Museum, 124(3647): 1-78.

Greenwood, P. H., D. E. Rosen, S. H. Weitzman, and G. S.

Myers

1966. Phyletic Studies of Teleostean Fishes, with a Provisional Classification of Living Forms. Bulletin of

the American Museum of Natural History, 131(4):

541-455.

Giinther, A.

1861. Catalogue of the Acanthopterygian Fishes in the

Collection of the British Museum. Volume 3, xxv+

586 + x pages.

13
14 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

1880. An Introduction to the Study of Fishes, xvi + 720

pages.

Herre, A. W.

1927. Gobies of the Philippines and the China Sea. Monographs of the Bureau of Science, Manila, Philippine

Islands, 23:1-352, 26 plates.

Jordan, D. S.

1905. A Guide to the Study of Fishes. Volume 2, xxiii +

599 pages.

1917. The Genera of Fishes. Leland Stanford Junior University Publications, University Series, pages 1-161.

1919. The Genera of Fishes, Part II. Leland Stanford

Junior University Publications, University Series,

pages i-ix + 163-284 -+- i-xiii.

1923. A Classification of Fishes Including Families and

Genera as Far as Known. Stanford University Publications. University Series, Biological Sciences,

3(2):77-243 + i-x.

Koumans, F. P.

1931. A Preliminary Rex'ision of the Genera of the Gobioid

Fishes with United Ventral Fins. 174 pages.

1932. Notes on Gobioid Fishes. Zoologische Mededeelingen, 15(1-2): 1-16.

1940. Results of a Reexamination of Types and Specimens of Gobioid Fishes, with Notes on the Fish

Fauna of the Surroundings of Batavia. Zoologische

Mededeelingen, 22:121-210.

1941. Gobioid Fishes of India. Memoires of the Indian

Museum, 13(3): 205-329.

1953. Gobioidea. The Fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago, 10:xiii -f 423 pages.

Lindberg, G. U.

1971. Opredelitel i Kharakteristika Scmeistu ryb Mirovoi

Fauny. Akademiya Nauk SSSR Zoologicheskii Institut, 470 pages. [In Russian. English translation,

Fishes of the World, 1974.]

McAllister, D. E.

1968. Evolution of Branchiostegals and Associated Opercular, Gular, and Hyoid Bones and the Classification of Teleostome Fishes, Living and Fossil. National Museum of Canada Bulletin, 221:xiv + 239

pages, 3 charts.

Miller, P. J.

1973. The Osteology and Adaptive Features of Rhyacichthys aspro (Tcleostei: Gobiodei) and the Classification of Gobioid Fishes. Journal of Zoology, 171:397-

434.

Nelson, J. S.

1976. Fishes of the World, xvi -|- 416 pages.

Osbeck, P.

1765. Reise nach Ostindien und China, xxvi + 578 pages,

13 plates. [Translated from Swedish by J. G. Georgi.]

Reeves, C. D.

1927. A Catalogue of the Fishes of Northeastern China

and Korea. Journal of the Pan-Pacific Research

Institution, 2(3): 1-16.

Schultz, L. P.

1960. Fishes of the Marshall and Marianas Islands: Family Trichonotidac. United States National Museum

Bulletin, 202(2):273-281.

Smith, H. M.

1931. Notes on Siamese Fishes. Journal of the Siam Society, Natural History Supplement, 8(3): 177-190.

1945. The Fresh-water Fishes of Siam, or Thailand.

United States National Museum Bulletin, 188:xi +

622 pages

Springer, V. G., and M. F. Goman

1975. Revision of the Blenniid Fish Genus Omobranchus

with Descriptions of Three New Species and Notes

on Other Species of the Tribe Omobranchini.

Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 177:1-135.

Wheeler, A.

1975. Fishes of the World, xv + 366 pages, 96 plates.

Whitehead, P. J. P., and P. K. Talwar

1976. Francis Day (1829-1889) and His Collections of Indian Fishes. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series, 5(1): 1-189, 4 plates.

Wu, H.-W.

1931. Notes on the Fishes from the Coast of Foochow

Region and Ming River. Contributions from the

Biological Society of China, Zoological Series, 7(1):

1-64.


REQUIREMENTS FOR SMITHSONIAN SERIES PUBLICATION

Manuscripts intended for series publication receive substantive review within their

originating Smithsonian museums or offices and are submitted to the Smithsonian Institution

Press with approval of the appropriate museum authority on Form SI-36. Requests for

special treatment—use of color, foldouts, casebound covers, etc.—require, on the same

form, the added approval of designated committees or museum directors.

Review of manuscripts and art by the Press for requirements of series format and style,

completeness and clarity of copy, and arrangement of all material, as outlined below, will

govern, within the judgment of the Press, acceptance or rejection of the manuscripts and art.

Copy must be typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of standard white bond paper,

with iyA" margins, submitted as ribbon copy (not carbon or xerox), in loose sheets (not

stapled or bound), and accompanied by original art. Minimum acceptable length is 30 pages.

Front matter (preceding the text) should include: title page with only title and author

and no other information, abstract page with author/title/series/etc., following the established format, table of contents with indents reflecting the heads and structure of the paper.

First page of text should carry the title and author at the top of the page and an unnumbered footnote at the bottom consisting of author's name and professional mailing address.

Center heads of whatever level should be typed with initial caps of major words, with

extra space above and below the head, but with no other preparation (such as all caps or

underline). Run-in paragraph heads should use period/dashes or colons as necessary.

Tabulations within text (lists of data, often in parallel columns) can be typed on the text

page where they occur, but they should not contain rules or formal, numbered table heads.

Formal tables (numbered, with table heads, boxheads, stubs, rules) should be submitted as camera copy, but the author must contact the series section of the Press for editorial attention and preparation assistance before final typing of this matter.

Taxonomic keys in natural history papers should use the alined-couplet form in the

zoology and paleobiology series and the multi-level indent form in the botany series. If

cross-referencing is required between key and text, do not include page references within the

key, but number the keyed-out taxa with their corresponding heads in the text.

Synonymy in the zoology and paleobiology series must use the short form (taxon,

author, year:page), with a full reference at the end of the paper under "Literature Cited."

For the botany series, the long form (taxon, author, abbreviated journal or book title, volume,

page, year, with no reference in the "Literature Cited") is optional.

Footnotes, when few in number, whether annotative or bibliographic, should be typed

at the bottom of the text page on which the reference occurs. Extensive notes must appear at

the end of the text in a notes section. If bibliographic footnotes are required, use the short

form (author/brief title/page) with the full reference in the bibliography.

Text-reference system (author/year/page within the text, with the full reference in a

"Literature Cited" at the end of the text) must be used in place of bibliographic footnotes in

all scientific series and is strongly recommended in the history and technology series:

"(Jones, 1910:122)" or ".. . . Jones (1910:122)."

Bibliography, depending upon use, is termed "References," "Selected References," or

"Literature Cited." Spell out book, journal, and article titles, using initial caps in all major

words. For capitalization of titles in foreign languages, follow the national practice of each

language. Underline (for italics) book and journal titles. Use the colon-parentheses system

for volume/number/page citations: "10(2):5-9." For alinement and arrangement of

elements, follow the format of the series for which the manuscript is intended.

Legends for illustrations must not be attached to the art nor included within the text but

must be submitted at the end of the manuscript—with as many legends typed, doublespaced, to a page as convenient.

Illustrations must not be included within the manuscript but must be submitted separately as original art (not copies). All illustrations (photographs, line drawings, maps, etc.)

can be intermixed throughout the printed text. They should be termed Figures and should

be numbered consecutively. If several "figures" are treated as components of a single larger

figure, they should be designated by lowercase italic letters (underlined in copy) on the illustration, in the legend, and in text references: "Figure 9b.." If illustrations are intended to be

printed separately on coated stock following the text, they should be termed Plates and any

components should be lettered as in figures: "Plate 9.b_." Keys to any symbols within an

illustration should appear on the art and not in the legend.

A few points of style: (1) Do not use periods after such abbreviations as "mm, ft,

yds, USNM, NNE, AM, BC." (2) Use hyphens in spelled-out fractions: "two-thirds." (3)

Spell out numbers "one" through "nine" in expository text, but use numerals in all other

cases if possible. (4) Use the metric system of measurement, where possible, instead of

the English system. (5) Use the decimal system, where possible, in place of fractions.

(6) Use day/month/year sequence for dates: "9 April 1976." (7) For months in tabular listings or data sections, use three-letter abbreviations with no periods: "Jan, Mar, Jun," etc.

Arrange and paginate sequentially EVERY sheet of manuscript—including ALL front

matter and ALL legends, etc., at the back of the text—in the following order: (1) title page,

(2) abstract, (3) table of contents, (4) foreword and/or preface, (5) text, (6) appendixes,

(7) notes, (8) glossary, (9) bibliography, (10) index, (11) legends.
«

•

,111/.