Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-lcgwf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-13T05:21:02.995Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

II.—The Antarctic Fishes of the Scottish National Antarctic Expedition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

C. Tate Regan
C. Tate Regan
Affiliation:
Assistant in the British Museum (Natural History)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Our knowledge of the Antarctic fish-fauna has greatly increased during the last ten years. The Belgian expedition to Graham Land (1897–1899) was followed by that of the Southern Cross to Victoria Land (1898–1900), fitted out by Sir George Newnes. Next were the British expedition of the Discovery to Victoria Land and Edward Land (1901–1904), the German voyage of the Gauss to Kerguelen and Willhelm Land (1901–1903), and Nordenskjöld's Swedish expedition to South Georgia, the South Shetlands, and Graham Land. Then came the voyage of the Scotia to the South Orkneys and Coats Land (1902–1904), and Charcot's expeditions to the Palmer Archipelago and Graham Land in the Français. (1904–1905) and the Pourquoi Pas? (1908–1910), and finally Shackleton's expedition (1908–1909).

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , 1913 , pp. 229 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1913

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

page 229 note * Proc. Boy. Soc. Edin., xxvi., 1906, p. 172; xxviii., 1908, p. 58; xxix., 1909, p. 316.

page 231 note * A series of nine water-colour drawings made by Mr Cuthbertson for the most part represent fishes from Scotia Bay, South Orkneys, viz. Notolepis coatsii, Harpagifer bispinis, Trematomus newnesii, Notothenia coriiceps, N. nudifrons, and N. gibberifrons: there is also a sketch of Lycenchelys antardicus. In one or two cases I have referred to these in the text.

page 233 note * This is regrettable, as this specimen was originally so perfectly preserved and was brought home in perfect condition, and was acknowledged to have been received by Dr Bollo “en bon état.”—W. S. B., Editor.

page 241 note * The habitat of Gymnelis pictus, Günth., is unknown, and there is no justification whatever for the statement that it comes from Magellan Straits.

page 246 note * Garman, (Mem. Mus. comp. Zool., xxiv, 1899, p. 137)Google Scholar has described a fish from 16° N., 99° W., 660 fathoms, and has named it Phucocoetes suspecttis. It is not a Phucocostes, nor does it seem to be congeneric with any of the southern littoral forms.

page 288 note * A fish from Wilhelm Land, 69 mm. long, is recorded by Pappenheim under the name Pagetodes antarcticus. The number of fin-rays (DIV, 31. A 31) scarcely justifies this determination, and the fish may well belong to an undescribed species. But as it is so juvenile and even its generic position uncertain, I refrain from giving it a specific name.

page 289 note * The fish named Pagetodes by Richardson (”Erebus” and “Terror” Fish., p. 15, pl. viii. fig. 3) may have belonged to the genus Gryodraco, but in the form of the body, the length of the pelvic fins, and the continuous dorsals it shows more resemblance to Pagetopsis. Until Richardson's species is rediscovered, the name Pagetodes cannot be used.

page no 229 note † Dollo's figure of the upper surface of the head is enlarged, the length of the head, to the end of the bony operculum, to 80 mm. and the interorbital width to 16 mm.