INTRODUCTION TO THE

(adapted from printed version, but with some formatting changes)

Programmers: David Boughton and Barbara Weitbrecht
Data Entry Assistance: Pamela Donegan, Jon Fong, Melissa Gibbs

Preface*

The Audience needing information about fishes is broader today than ever. It includes evolutionary and environmental biologists concerned with biodiversity, fishery biologists, ecologists, and even administrators and legislators. There is no up-to-date summary of the knowledge of the kinds of fishesª and one must rely on regional works and on abstracting services such as the Zoological Record (Biosisc and Biological Abstracts that provide an ongoing review of the increase in knowledge. Computer searches for cumulative information (by taxa and key words) are becoming available, but the changing nature of taxonomic classifications and scientific names sometimes makes it impossible to know under which specific, generic or even family names one will find pertinent information. It is hoped that the present summary will serve several audiences. The broad audience consists mostly of non-specialists needing information about fishes. For them, this summary may be useful in providing a guide to recent literature treating the various genera and species of fishes. For fish systematists, a special effort was directed towards making this catalog accurate with regard to spellings, type species, location of type specimens, and nomenclature particulars such as availability of names, date of publication, and authorship. Other zoological taxonomists may use the catalog to avoid creating new names that are already used in fishes, or to solve homonymy problems. Appendix A provides as interpretation of the Code of Zoological Nomenclature as it applies to species and genera (with examples from fishes), and this may prove of interest to taxonomists generally.

* Adapted from the Introduction of a "Catalog of the Genera of Recent Fishes," Eschmeyer 1990.

William N. Eschmeyer

In the fall of 1990, a "Catalog of the Genera of Recent Fishes" was published (Eschmeyer 1990). With continued funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation, the database for species of fishes was completed. At the same time, the genera database was updated with new information and with corrections to the 1990 edition. The present work is produced from these databases. Partial versions of the databases are available on the internet (click here) . The databases contain over 10,300 genera and subgenera and approximately 53,500 records for species and subspecies. About 50,000 names are available for use at the species/subspecies level. We estimate that the number of valid species of fishes is about 25,000. We show valid species at 23,250, assuming that every species described since 1990 is valid; but this figure does not include status for a number of species described in the 1950s through the 1980s for which we lack a status reference. New species of recent fishes continue to be described at about 200 a year, and the number of valid species could reach 30,000 or 35,000 as poorly sampled geographic areas are studied and new equipment becomes available, such as wider use of submersibles.

The Role of Taxonomy

The primary way basic information about animals and plants is organized and stored is by taxonomic categories (typically species) [another way is by subject, such as vision or food and feeding]. It is important to understand (1) why good taxonomic databases are essential for studying biodiversity, (2) what taxonomy entails, (3) why a hierarchical classification is useful, and (4) why classi- fications and names change, thereby making it more difficult to accumulate and keep track of information for many purposes from conservation management to inventories, to species entering commerce, etc.
Taxonomist do two important tasks: name organisms and make classifications. The system of hierarchical classification and a two- word system for naming species began with Linnaeus in 1758. The system was codified in 1842 (Strickland et al. 1843), and it became the system used by all zoologists worldwide from 1843 to the present, with changes and improvements along the way. (The present "Code" which all zoologists follow is discussed in Appendix A.) The two-word name for species consists of a generic name and a specific name. A genus may contain more than one species, and species are placed together in a genus based on perceived genetic affinity (as determined mostly by morphological differences and similarities, although biochemical techniques are providing new, additional information). (Subspecies are sometimes used to define smaller categories within a species.) Taxonomists discover or describe species (1) by assembling specimens through fieldwork and/or by borrowing from museum collections, (2) by studying variation, (3) by grouping the specimens into species categories, (4) by comparing these with previously described species, (5) then naming the new species following specific rules (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature 1985), and (6) by publishing the information in scientific journals and books. Monographs contain thorough treatments of all the species in a larger group, such as a genus or family, and monographs represent the latest summary of information for that group.

A second thing taxonomists do is make classifications. Classifications are useful because they contain information about relationships. For example, when a chemical suitable for a pharmaceutical product is found in one species, biochemists can quickly learn from classifications the close relatives (e.g., other species in the same genus or the "sister-species") that might contain similar or even better chemicals. All species in the same genus should share many behavioral, biochemical, ecological, and biological properties because they are closely related evolutionarily. The effect of pollution on a species at one location should be similar to the effect on a close relative living in a different area. Those in the same family (next primary category up) similarly share many but fewer features. Classifications thereby have predictive value. Since the late 1960s, most taxonomists have used "cladistic" methods of forming classifications, basing them on shared advanced (new) features. This approach results in cladograms or trees that reflect ancestry as well as relatedness of individual taxa. The changing nature of classifications and scientific names (because of changing ideas of relationships and because of technical [nomenclatural] rules changes) makes it almost impossible to know under which species, genus, or even family names one will find pertinent information in the prior literature or in specimen collections. For example, in 1989 both the genus name and specific name of the rainbow trout were changed (see Smith [G. R.] and Stearley 1989). Thousands of publications cite Salmo gairdneri as the name of the rainbow trout; now we call it Oncorhynchus mykiss. The genus name was changed from Salmo to Oncorhynchus partly based on fossil evidence because the Pacific trouts were thought to be more closely related to the Pacific salmon than to the Atlantic salmon [the name carrier or type of Salmo]. Pacific trout and salmon are now classified in Oncorhynchus. The species name gairdneri was changed to mykiss when it was thought that mykiss from Kamchatka, Russia, was the same as gairdneri; since mykiss was described first, that name had priority for use over gairdneri. Another major activity of taxonomists is to make "synonymies" that summarize prior accumulated knowledge about species. Unfortunately, scientific names change for several reasons, which makes inventory especially difficult since information about a single species may be found under several scientific names. Names change because:

1. One species may have been described more than once (such as from different geographical areas, from different sexes, from atypical specimens, or from a lack of knowledge of earlier descriptions). As these "duplicates" are discovered, the first described name is selected as the valid name, often resulting in a name change, such as for the rainbow trout.
2. Scientists may differ on what species to include in a particular genus, or species are moved to different genera based on perceived relatedness. This results in the first half (generic) of the name changing; sometimes the ending of a specific name also changes since, if is an adjective, it must agree (decline) in gender with the genus.
3. Sometimes names are changed for technical reasons. Another problem is that scientific names are frequently misspelled in scientific publications, in collection records for museum holdings, and by abstracting services. Often a name is misspelled because the spelling as originally presented was not verified by subsequent workers. Although there are current arguments about how to incorporate fossils into classifications, and especially how to treat them in higher taxa, the present system probably will continue for many years. Numbering taxa has not worked either. Often common names are more stable than scientific names, and they can be useful in some groups.

Building the Databases

The building of large computer databases should facilitate the availability and usefulness of taxonomic information. Obviously, once an authoritative database is available, other databases can be associated with it, such as information on larval fishes, country species lists, DNA sequences, or any other kind of information that is organized around species or genera. Extensive databases for all fish genera, described species, and pertinent taxonomic literature have been built at the California Academy of Sciences. In 1984, we began building a database of fish genera, and shortly thereafter received a grant from the National Science Foundation to assist in this work. The strategy used for building the genera of fish database was to enter information from the most complete sources first and then edit. For this phase we used Jordan's "Genera of Fishes" (published in the 1920s and containing about 50 percent of the genera now named); Fowler's "Fishes of the World" [partially published in the Journal of the Taiwan Museum, with much of the remaining parts in manuscript form]; cards of genera, described since Jordan, that were maintained at the University of Michigan; the Zoological Record; and 3x5 cards prepared by Henry W. Fowler (to dates up to about 1905) from the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences. At this point, we had assembled more than 10,000 generic group names and the corresponding literature. The database contained misspellings, and there were many problems including where and when a genus was published and its original spelling. We then began editing and proofing. We examined nearly all original descriptions from their original sources (first publication) for content and for the reference citations. This phase involved solving nomenclatural problems (and an "interpretation of the Code" was prepared). Using current literature sources, the status (valid or a synonym of another genus) was established. The genera were allocated to a classification. This work was published in 1990, and went out-of-print in 1994.

While the genera database was being readied for publication, we began preparing the database for species. We used the same strategy (few initial sources) including (1) the Zoological Record from 1864-present, (2) Fowler's 3x5 cards -- 1858 to about 1905, and (3) Fowler's "Fishes of the World" to the mid-1950s. This resulted in a database of about 58,000 records and a total of about 10,000 references. The rough database was completed in 1991. A three-year continuation grant was received from the National Science Foundation in April 1992 to complete the species database to (1) improve information in records, (2) tie all records to the original publication, (3) proof information against original descriptions (verifying spelling, authorship, reference date, plates and figures, type specimens, type localities), (4) record information on location of types (from type catalogs and museum visits), (5) document status using current literature (major journals and recent monographs), (6) ready the database for publication, and (7) make available electronically the information in the databases. Some additional funding was received to bring Dr. N. V. Parin to the California Academy of Sciences to assist in working though Russian literature and localities. NSF funds provided for Dr. Carl Ferraris to participate fulltime in the project for two years. The Academy provided salary funds for Douglas Long for 6 months while I was employed in an administrative position at the Academy. Both Carl and Doug continued voluntarily on a part-time basis thereafter. Mysi Hoang participated actively on the project, from assembling the "Genera" for publication to completion of the present work. The grant and additional funds provided an opportunity to work in several major natural history libraries (Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Museum of Comparative Zoology of Harvard University, the American Museum of Natural History, and the British Museum of Natural History (now the Natural History Museum).

One of the most enjoyable aspects of the project for me was the search for type specimens. Until now, one beginning a revisionary study, such as of a family of fishes, usually spent months trying to assemble the species that probably belong to the group in question - - that now can be done form this work in a matter of hours. Often, in revisionary studies, it is necessary to examine the original specimens used by the original author. Most of these specimens, even some from Linnaeus 1758, are available in natural history museums. Yet, there is no single guide to where they are located. Some museums have published type catalogs, but many have not. It was my pleasure to work in a number of major museums and with a number of curators and collection managers. Each museum was different. In some, I was able to check my information against the bottles in the collection. At others this was impossible. The British Museum contains types for over 8000 nominal species. On my first visit it was apparent that a series of binders prepared when types were moved to secure locations during World War II would be extremely valuable to me -- they contained catalog numbers and type status; these binders were kindly loaned to me. I entered information from these binders and with a printout returned to the British Museum with a purported type catalog of over 8000 species. The British museum has not "computerized" and their records are entered in four separate written systems; I checked my information against the catalogs; remaining however is to compare this information with the actual bottles in the collection. For some collections (MCZ, USNM, FMNH), I had much follow-up correspondence regarding types. Collections visited were as follows: AMG, AMS, BMNH, BPBM, BSKU, CAS, CSIRO, FAKU, FMNH, FRSKU, FUMT, HUJ, HUMZ, IRSNB, LACM, MNHN, MOM, MRAC, MSNG, MSNM, MZUB, MZUF, NMV, NMW, NSMT, QM, QVMT, RMNH, RUSI, SAM, SIO, SMF, SU, TMH, UF, UF-FSU, UMMZ, ZMB, ZUMT.

Organization of the Catalog

The catalog is divided into five major sections: Part I. Species and subspecies arranged alphabetically; Part II. Genera and subgenera arranged alphabetically. Part III. Species and subspecies names in a classification. Part IV. Genera and subgenera names arranged in a classification, and Part V. Literature cited. Two appendices follow, (A) an interpretation of the Code of Zoological Nomenclature with examples from fishes, and (B) a compilation of the Opinions and other actions of the International Commission involving fishes.

Part I. Species of Fishes

This part consists of species-group names (species, subspecies, and qualifying variety names -- and referred to collectively as "species") arranged alphabetically. The following items are provided:

NAME. The species-group name as originally proposed is given first. The original spelling is used except where mandatory changes (based on the Code) are required, such as beginning the name of a species with an lower case letter when it was a capital letter originally, normal removal of hyphens, and providing the required spelling when diacritical marks are removed.

ORIGINAL GENUS. The genus used by the original author of the new species-group name is given next. If a subgenus was also involved, the subgenus follows the genus in parentheses.

SUBSPECIES AND VARIETIES. When the species-group name was proposed as a subspecies, then the species name follows the original genus. When proposed as a variety or form, the original genus is followed by "var." or "forma" or other attribute. A species described initially as a variety and also involving use of a subgenus would appear as follows: "alba, Scorpaena (Sebastapistes) var."

AUTHOR. The author of the new name is given next, and the authorship is qualified by "in" statements, such as Cuvier in Cuvier & Valenciennes, or "ex" meaning from, such as Lacepede (ex Commerson). The use of these expressions and authorship in general are discussed in Appendix A.

DATE. The year of publication is given (see also discussion on dates of publication in Appendix A).

PAGE. Usually only one page is cited -- the page on which the main descriptive account for the new taxon begins (and not necessarily the page on which the new taxon is first mentioned). When more than one page is given it usually means the new taxon was presented in some detail (such as in a key) in one place and amplified in a second place; usually the secondary treatment is included in parentheses, e.g. (14) 30. Pages in brackets are those assigned in an unpaginated work or in a separate in which pagination differs from that in the original publication, e.g., 456 [25].

FIGURES. Figures accompanying the original description are provided. If a figure is shown on a plate, the plate is given in arabic numbers and the figure is given in parentheses, e.g. Pl. 4 (fig. 2) or Pl. 2 (upper). If a text figure and a plate are involved, the text figure is shown with a capital "F", as in "Pl. 4 (fig. 2), Fig. 24." If only a text figure is provided, then this is shown with a capital "F", as in "Fig. 1." We try to limit plates and figures to ones showing specimens or parts of specimens and not, for example, to figures of maps showing distribution.

REFERENCE AND REFERENCE NUMBER. Provided first within brackets is an abbreviated citation to the journal or book in which the original description appeared, and this is followed by the unique reference number, e.g., [Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. v. 43; ref. 1234], which corresponds to the number given in the Literature Cited section (Part V) for the reference containing the original description. For book titles and monographs or other non-journal works, we have coined shortened versions, such as "[Fish. Nile; ref. 3333]."

TYPES. The location of type specimens is given next. An Abbreviations system is used to denote museums containing the type specimens; a list is provided after the introduction. Information on various kinds of type specimens and how they are established is given in Appendix A. A variety of different numbering systems are used by museums, some with unique numbers, others with numbers preceded by letters, etc. If the specimen(s) was/were first at another museum, then that information is given in brackets -- USNM 12345 [ex BPBM 3456].

The single name-bearing type is given first where available, e.g. holotype, lectotype, or neotype. Lectotypes or neotypes require designation (see Appendix A), and this documentation is provided in the account of the species taxon. If no single name-bearing type is provided, then syntypes are listed. Number of specimens in a lot is given in parentheses. If no type specimens are known, this is noted at this point in the account. Question marks are used to indicate doubt as to type status, such as "Paratypes: ?USNM 34567 (3)."

This is the first attempt at a World type catalog for fishes. We have obtained information on types from several sources. Published collection type catalogs have been consulted, and these are included in the account, such as, "Type catalog: Bohlke 1984:16 [ref. 13621]." Monographic or revisional studies usually involve examination of types, and some status references may include information on types. Sometimes individual articles may deal only with type specimen problems. For a few groups, such as darters, myctophids, and callionymids, there are checklists by families that include information on types. In some cases, we have personally examined type specimens in collections.

Even with these sources, the availability and location of types for many species is uncertain. In some cases, the various sources available to us include more or less specimens than mentioned in the original description; in at least some of these cases we are able to give the original number in parentheses, such as: "Syntypes: (10)..." We provide statements such as "Not found" or "No types known" when that is the best information available to us. In some cases we are able to report the condition of the types, such as dried skin, skeleton, disintegrated, poor condition. The expression c&s refers to specimens that have been cleared and stained for anatomical study.

TYPE LOCALITIES. If there is a unique name-bearing type, then the type locality of this primary type is given; when there are, in addition, secondary types, such as paratypes, then no localities are provided for them. If there are only syntypes and more than one locality is involved, a general locality may be given first, and then more specific localities with syntypic lots. Considerable thought was given to whether we should provide the locality as given in the original description, either alone or in addition to a modern locality, and whether we should improve the locality by providing more detail. It was decided to provide a locality one would find in a modern atlas, geographical dictionary, or gazetteer, and to improve that locality to include at least the modern country name, and in some cases a latitude and longitude; occasionally we include the original locality in brackets. For example, the locality may have been "Kosseir," so we use "Al-Quseir [Kosseir], Egypt, Red Sea" and for Ceylon we use "Sri Lanka." For some localities it is difficult to be more precise than in the original presentation, such as "Carolinas" to which we add Carolinas, U.S.A. We generally treat localities as specific to general, the later usually being the country. Vessel station numbers, though not part of a geographic locality as such, are given in some cases, such as for "Albatross" stations, since for many of these collections published station lists are available. We do not give station numbers of individuals, collectors names, dates of collections and other information that is not part of the geographic locality. The depth of capture is given at the end of the locality information. Terrestrial collections may have an altitude of capture, and we give this as, for example, "... elev. 3460 m." As collections worldwide become computerized, the specialists will be able to obtain or refer to more detailed information relating to types directly from on-line databases for specific museums. It was our aim to record the types and the museums holding them to assist the specialists in obtaining type specimens for study.

TEXT REMARKS. A variety of remarks may follow the information on types and type localities, and these generally are presented in a standard order.

a. Alternate Pages and Publications. When the original description appeared in a separate (offprint, reprint) with different pagination, then this information is given first, such as "Appeared on p. 4 of separate." When the taxon was published at about the same time in another article, this information is provided, and it usually take the form of, "Also appeared as new in ....."

b. Original or Multiple Spellings. When the taxon was spelled in a way that requires a mandatory correction, the original incorrect original spelling may be provided, such as "Spelled albo- marginatus originally." When the original genus was misspelled this is noted. When the taxon was spelled two or more ways in the original description this is discussed -- sometimes one spelling is regarded as typographical error and in some cases a first reviser is needed.

c. Preoccupied Names/Replacement Names. Primary and secondary homonyms are mentioned, such as for Dentex rivulatus Ruppell 1838 is found, "Preoccupied by Dentex rivulatus Bennett 1838, replaced by Gymnocranius ruppellii Smith 1941." [Over 500 primary homonyms are known in fishes.]

d. Emendations. Misspellings and other emendations are provided.

e. Other Remarks. When subsequent type designations are needed, such as for lectotypes or neotypes, this information is given. Actions by the International Commission may be mentioned. Misspellings, when considered significant, and unjustified emendations are also included.

STATUS. The status of each nominal species or subspecies is given next. We have limited this to the status of the name at the species level. For example, a name originally proposed as a subspecies may be shown as valid (as a species), or it may be shown as a synonym of another species; its status as a subspecies is sometimes given when it is valid, "Synonyn of .... but as a valid subspecies (Jones 1984 [ref. 12345])." There are several conditions in which a name may be valid -- for example, an original species name may be valid exactly as proposed (same genus and species spelling) in which case we record the name as "Valid." The species name may be valid but be placed in a genus other than the original one in which it was proposed, and in these cases we give the current genus, such as "Valid as Serranus guttatus." Sometimes the name (for example when an adjective) needs to have its ending modified to agree in gender with the genus, so that the original proposal may have been marmorata if it originally was in a feminine genus, but becomes marmoratus when placed in a masculine genus. When the name is a synonym, we give the author and date for the valid name; if it is a synonym of a genus and species as originally proposed then the author and date of the valid name are not in parentheses -- "Synonym of Melanocetus murrayi Gunther 1887." If the name treated is a synonym of a species that is now placed in a genus different from the one in which it was proposed, then the author and date are in parentheses -- "Synonym of Scyliorhinus stellaris (Linnaeus 1758)." If a generic name is not an available name, we use the convention, "In the synonymy of...," since an unavailable name is not really a synonym of an available name. The status reference is given next in parentheses, and all status references include a reference number; typically this includes the author, date, page and reference number, but the page is often omitted if the entire article deals with only that taxon. When a page is given, it refers to one pertinent page in which the status of the taxon is discussed. Typically only publications since 1980 are used for status, although some earlier monographs have been included. [The selection of status references was not systematically organized, and it should be pointed out that thousands of other status references would have been available if time permitted.]

FAMILY/SUBFAMILY. At the end of each account the family and subfamily (if used) in which the nominal species has been placed (see Part III) is provided. Some species or subspecies may be classified only to class, order or suborder.

Part II. Genera of Fishes

This part contains all genus-group names of Recent fishes (genera and subgenera -- and referred to collectively as "genera" in the catalog). The following items are treated.

NAME. The genus-group name as first proposed is given first, and names are arranged in alphabetical order. The original spelling is given except where mandatory changes are necessary, such as removing hyphens (e.g., changing Lucio-Perca to Lucioperca).

SUBGENUS OF. When the name was proposed as a subgeneric one, the genus of which it was a subgenus is given in parentheses.
Author. The author of the new name is given next (see Author in Part I above).

DATE. The year of publication is provided (see Date in Part I above).

PAGE. Usually only one page is cited--the page on which the main generic description begins (not necessarily the page on which the genus is first mentioned). When more than one page is given, the genus may appear in a key, for example, and be followed later in the text by additional information. In some early works, where a typical generic description may not have been given, several pages that concern publication of the name may be cited. Pages in brackets are those assigned in an unpaginated work or in a separate (offprint, reprint) in which pagination differs from that in the original publication.

REFERENCE AND REFERENCE NUMBER. See this section for Part I above.

GENDER. Abbreviations are Masc. = masculine, Fem. = feminine, Neut. = neuter.

TYPE SPECIES, AUTHOR, DATE. The original genus of the type

Mandatory corrections to species names have been made. Occasionally a second species is indicated in parentheses, and the use of this convention may have several meanings (usually amplified in the remarks section). The species in parentheses is typically the senior objective synonym, especially when the author of the genus provided a new (unneeded) name for the older species name. In other cases the author of the new genus or subgenus may attribute authorship of the type species not to the original author of the species but to some later author; normally the original author of the species is given (regardless of the species authorship attributed by the author of the genus), but there are some statements such as, "Type species Alpha beta of Jones (= Gamma delta Smith 1945). When an author makes an equivalent type designation statement -- i.e., type is so-and-so = so-and-so, amplification is given in the remarks. The use of parentheses does NOT show subjective taxonomic decisions involving the status of the type species; only objective synonyms are dealt with.

TEXT REMARKS. Remarks, given next, cover such items as the method of type designation, the subsequent designator, comments on preoccupation, misspellings, emendations, and other pertinent remarks.

a. Method of Type Designation. First is given the method by which the type species was established (fixed). This subject, which is discussed in some detail in Appendix A, seems to cause current workers many problems. Although "type by original designation" takes precedence over other designations, a distinction is made between "original designation (also monotypic)" and "original designation"; the former insures that the likelihood of the name having a different type is remote; the latter means there was more than one originally included available species treated as valid. Other amplification is sometimes given, e.g., "Type by monotypy (also by use of typus)," but in these instances the use of typus or similar denotation is a form of indication that comes into play only when other designations do not take precedence, and when there are two or more originally included species in the taxon. When the type species is designated after the original description, amplification is provided, such as a citation to the subsequent designation.

b. Secondary Appearances. If the genus appeared in a second work at or near the time of the first appearance, a citation to this second work is provided. It was not uncommon in the early literature for an author to publish a new genus description in more than one place.

c. Preoccupied Names. Names that are unavailable because of previous use are preoccupied. To be sure that a genus of fishes is in fact preoccupied -- for example in insects -- would require going to the original description of the insect and confirming the original spelling, date, availability, and other details. Preoccupied names in fishes were verified, but names preoccupied in other groups were not.

d. Misspellings and Emendations. Misspellings that are included are ones made by the original author in later papers, or made in Jordan's "Genera of Fishes," in the "Zoological Record" the first time the genus was listed there, in major treatments (such as monographs), or in references used to document the status of the genus. Many other misspellings were not included. Emendations require careful study; some were evaluated as to whether they were justified emendations or unjustified ones (or merely misspellings). In those not so evaluated, the expression "Spelled ..." is often used to show that the investigation was not made.

e. Other Remarks. Such items as action by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN), nomenclatural remarks, and other comments are included.

f. Status. When given, the status of the nominal genus is provided next. Citations documenting the status include the author, date, page, and the reference number. When a page is not given, the entire article typically deals with only that taxon. For example, under Brochus, the citation "Nijssen & Isbrucker 1983 [ref. 5387]" is found; reference 5387 treats only the genus Brochus. When a page is given, it refers to one pertinent page in which the status of the taxon is discussed, although the taxon may be mentioned on other pages in the same article; for genera that are junior synonyms the page given usually refers to the page on which a generic synonymy occurs.

The status of some genera is not provided. Some of these taxa are old synonyms not mentioned in current literature, whereas others have just not been treated recently. In some cases, the status has been obtained by looking for the placement of the type species in current genera, even though the genus in question is not mentioned; these are qualified with statements like, "Synonym of ... (Paxton et al. 1989:470 [ref. 12442] based on placement of type species)." In general, only literature from the last 15-20 years has been used to document status, although some earlier monographs have been included, especially when that monograph is the only thorough treatment available that mentions the taxon. In some current systematic papers, authors tend to omit old synonyms. The aim in documenting the current status of taxa was not to provide extensive synonymies, but to be able to give one or a few recent references that can serve as an entry or source to other literature treating the taxon. Information can be obtained from both the genera and species accounts; for example, a status reference for a genus may not be listed under species, and the reverse may be true. Family/Subfamily. At the end of each account the family and subfamily (if used) in which the genus has been placed in Part III is provided. See this section under Part I above.

Parts III and IV. Genera and Species in a Classification

The classification used for the species (Part III) and for the genera (Part IV) is identical, but the classification has been modified since its publication in the "Genera (1990)." The original goal was to provide a framework of orders, families and subfamilies (with occasional use of suborders). The classification portion, however, was secondary to the goal of compiling parts I and II. Unfor- tunately, at this time in ichthyology there is no generally accepted classification, and many workers are actively engaged in research on higher-category taxa. Many follow Nelson (1994), and we have used his classification in most areas. At the same time, cladistic studies produce hypotheses of relationships, often based on examination of a very few taxa in each larger taxon, but these hypotheses need to be corroborated by other workers. Cladistic studies offer a rational and logical methodology for studying relationships, but reversals, parallelisms, and problems of polarizing characters and outgroup selection for such polarization can be problematic. Often, many trees may be generated from computer programs, sometimes with substantial differences among them. To adopt each new hypothesis as proposed is not warranted in a work such as here presented, where stability for communication to many audiences is desired. The aim of the classification is to group related genera or species together, rather than attempt to reflect relationships evenly. For example, if a group of genera has been recognized as a family but a more recent study shows that these genera are specialized or highly modified members of another family, the genera are moved to the "new" family but may be retained there as a subfamily, thereby keeping those related genera together. In some groups, subfamilies are not used, although they may be used in current literature; these include some small families with only a few genera, but also some large families, such as the Cyprinidae, where some "specialized" subfamilies could be recognized, but the family as a whole has not been divided into subfamilies on which there is general agreement.
Synonyms of family group names are not provided, and the indexes to higher taxa names presented at the end of Parts III and IV include only those names actually mentioned. However, it is possible to determine the current placement of a family or subfamily that is not specifically included in the classification. For example, in the literature one may encounter a species placed in a family that is not included in the Catalog. Since family group names are based on a stem-genus (by dropping the terminal letter or letters and adding -idae for a family or -inae for a subfamily), one may look up the genus in Part II, go to the end of its account, and find where that family is now placed.

Family-group names used in the classification follow current use. Some problems involving family-group names in fishes include currently used family names that are not the oldest for the family and should be replaced by the older names unless a case can be presented to retain the younger name, some family names are being misspelled in the current literature, or two spellings are used (such as Engraulidae or Engraulididae). See Robins et al. (1980:4 [ref. 7111], Steyskal 1980 [ref. 14191], and Gery 1989 [ref. 13422]). These problems are not addressed directly in the Catalog, but some comments regarding family-group names are mentioned under their type genera (e.g., see Phosichthys and Bovicthys).

A few genera or species are not placed within families in the classification. Some are based on mythical specimens, or are indeterminable, or they are names only (without a description); many of these are unavailable names. They are often listed under a class, order, or suborder. In the genera listing, unplaced genera appear at the end.

Part V. Literature Cited

This section includes citations to all literature mentioned in the previous parts, along with some additional references that complete a series in which only some works in that series are actually cited. Author. Author's initials are given, and to obtain a date-ordered printout, these have been standardized. For example, Theodore Gill published as T. Gill, T. N. Gill, and Theodore Gill; these are treated as authored by T. N. Gill, although both abbreviations did not appear in some of his publications. If an author's name normally has a diacritical mark, it is added to all citations of that author, for example Gery publishes both as Gery and Gery. We are unable to provide diacritical marks for some languages, such as Romanian. Chinese names are given as they might appear in an English language journal; typically there is a family name plus two given names, and the two given names are often written together or hyphenated; Wu is given as H.-W. Wu although in the actual article his name may be given as Wu Hsienwen, Wu Hsien-Wen, H.-w. Wu, H.-W. Wu, or H. W. Wu.

All names with "de" are entered in one form; de Buen, for example, published as Buen and as de Buen. Some cross- referencing of names is provided.

Many large books, such as "Smith's Sea Fishes" have chapters authored by specialists, and in order to show the specialists involvement, especially for status documentation, we have a separate entry for each author with an individual reference number for the families in "Smith's Sea Fishes" treated by that author. Arrangement by author is alphabetical, but in outputting from databases to word-processing, those names with diacritical marks occur further down than anticipated, e.g. Gunther [with " over u] references appear at the end of the G's and were "manually" moved up. Alphabetizing is on the first two authors, so entries with more than 2 authors may or may not be in the correct sequence alphabetically. Date of Publication. The year given is that in which the publication appeared first in an available (published) way. The date may differ from that appearing on the journal or publication, and dates may be advanced because of preprints (see Appendix A). When available, the month or month and day of publication is given in parenthesis after the year. References are ordered by year, not by date of publication within a year.

Reference Number. Each reference has a unique reference number, and this is given next in brackets. The number corresponds to the entry of that reference in a larger database maintained at the California Academy of Sciences. A unique number is used instead of "a,b,c., etc." that one might find in a smaller bibliography. The unique numbers were an aid in proofing original descriptions that could be accessed by reference number/page. The use of reference numbers also allows on-line searches by reference numbers and the downloading of them electronically.

Title. The title of the article is given as published with the article; not the title as given, for example, in a table of contents (which sometimes differs). Scientific names are italicized even though, because of constraints in type style, they may not have been so treated in the title as published. Titles in Russian, Japanese, and Chinese are given in English.

Book and Journal Citations. Journal abbreviations in general follow the BioSciences Information Service "Serial Sources for the BIOSIS Data Base, volume 1984." We have composed comparable abbreviated journal titles for old, discontinued journals not treated in the BIOSIS list. We capitalize the first letter of all nouns and adjectives, so we give, for example, "Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila." rather than "Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Phila." To aid in finding literature, we designate volume ("v"), number (no.), part (pt), or other amplification, but usually if a foreign word (e.g. tome, fascicle) corresponds to an English word, we give the English equivalent abbreviation. This is followed by the inclusive pages of the work and plates if any.

Remarks. Information in brackets includes the original language of the article if not clear from the title, sources for information on dates of publication, or dates of appearance of parts of the work if it was published in sections. The entry "Not seen." at the end of a reference indicates that the work or article has not been examined.

Appendix A. Species and Genera of Fishes and the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature

Appendix A in the "Genera" (1990) has been expanded to include more information on sections of the Code involving species-group names, and it is included here as Appendix A. This is an interpretation of the Code, with supporting examples for fishes, that served as the basis for nomenclatural decisions made in Parts I and II of the Catalog.

Appendix B. Opinions and Other Actions of the International Commission Involving Fishes

This appendix was included in the "Genera" (1990) and treated all Opinions and other actions of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature through June 1990 that involve fish taxa. It has been updated to include actions through Sept. 1997. Opinions, Directions, and presence of names on Official Lists or Indexes as cited in Parts I and II of the Catalog are listed in this appendix.

Errors and Discrepancies

A work of this size and complexity will have many errors and discrepancies. Some discrepancies can be anticipated, and the more likely of two or more choices can be identified. For discrepancies in dates, the dates of publication given in the references section are more accurate than corresponding dates elsewhere in the work. Many problems remain, however -- for example a number of Steindachner papers appeared in 3 places; while in Vienna an effort was made to determine the order of publication; this information has been used in the Part I but not fully in Part II [resulting in discrepancies]. The spelling, authorship, and date of type species in the "Genera" section may differ from the information in the "Species" section; the information in the species section is more accurate. The taxa in a classification (Parts III and IV) were electronically prepared, and the taxa, authors, and dates should agree fully with the information in the respective alphabetically- arranged sections. The short-version citation before the reference number was electronically entered in the alphabetically-arranged "Genera" section, but in the "Species" section, entry of the short version citation was a 2-step process, and some may differ from information in the references section. The reference number associated with an original description was electronically assigned, and these should all be in agreement, but some reference numbers in the status portions may involve typographical errors. The family/subfamily assignment was done electronically, so the family/subfamily at the end of the alphabetically-arranged section should be in agreement with the placement of taxa in the classification. Because of the way we entered status references using "function" keys, the page on which the author treated the taxon may be in error by 1 or more pages, but the reference number should be accurate. Museum collection abbreviations are usually used in taxonomic papers to abbreviate the name of the repository containing specimens, but these change and many new ones have been introduced; there are some discrepancies in our use of abbreviations, and some may appear in our list of abbreviations and some may not.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments for the "Catalog of the Genera of Recent Fishes" are presented as they appeared in the 1990 publication at the end of this section. Persons providing information on genera since 1990 are incorporated in the acknowledgments below. First, I am indebted to the hard work of my co-authors. Mysi Dang Hoang started on the project in 1990 and continued to the present. She has been an assistant in the Department of Ichthyology during this period, and has worked on average about halftime on the project. Much of the initial entry for species was done by her. She not only has wonderful typing and observational skills, but also a reading knowledge of several languages, including French, German, Chinese and Vietnamese. Carl Ferraris received his Ph.D. from the City University of New York, and brought to the project extensive knowledge of fishes, including especially South American fishes, and is an expert in several groups of catfishes. Carl shares with me an interest in nomenclature, and we spent many hours discussing the Code and its proper interpretation. He is also very skilled and clever in word-processing, and he, assisted by Mysi, did the final composition of camera-ready copy. Carl was employed full-time on the project for 2 years, beginning in the fall of 1992, and volunteered part-time on the project thereafter. Douglas Long received his Ph.D from the University of California at Berkeley in 1994; his speciality is elasmobranch fishes, although he publishes on many groups of fishes. Doug was employed for 6 months in 1996/97 while I was assigned other duties. He volunteered actively thereafter, and took a special interest in the treatment of sharks and their allies. Carl and Doug continue as research associates at the California Academy of Sciences.

This project could not have been completed without the assistance of persons skilled in computer programming, especially until very recent times when programming has become somewhat easier. Initial programming for the "Genera" was by Barbara Weitbrecht, and programming to complete the "Genera 1990" and for the species was done by David Boughton (now at the University of Texas, Austin). A number of assistants provided initial data entry, and for the species I am thankful to Pamela Donegan, Jon Fong and Melissa Gibbs.

Funding from granting agencies made the project possible. Primary assistance came from of the U. S. National Science Foundation. The initial proposal was met with some critical reviews, and some ichthyologists just felt that the project was too large to be completed. But James C. Tyler solicited the advice of many reviewers, including foreign ichthyologists, and did recommend funding of a project to build databases for the genera of fishes and corresponding literature; had it not been for Tyler's efforts, the project would have failed. Once it was demonstrated that the project was feasible, two additional grants provided for publication of the "Genera 1990" and the building of the species databases. A small supplemental grant from the National Science Foundation allowed the prominent Russian ichthyologist Nik Parin to visit San Francisco and work with us on clarifying eastern European localities and in translating Russian. A grant from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, arranged with the assistance of Keiichi Matsuura, Hitoshi Osaki, and Edward O. Murdy allowed me to visit Japanese collections. In-house funds from the California Academy of Sciences provided support for Natalia Chernova, and Academy director funds provided salary for Douglas Long. Additional contributions were by the H&N Fish Company and Mrs. Lois B. Lippincott.

So many person helped in this many-year project that it is not possible to tell in a short space how each person contributed. However, there is a list of persons who were very important to the project, and I want to acknowledge them with some explanation. I am indebted to Nik Parin who photocopied much early literature in Russian, and then was able to visit the California Academy of Sciences and work with me on translations (especially of type localities). Natalia Chernova provided extensive information on type specimens in the collection in St. Petersberg (ZISP), and also provided some literature. Collection managers or curators at several very large collections were especially helpful, often sending extensive lists, corrections and comments to me; these include Marie-Louise Bauchot (MNHN), Eugenia Bohlke (ANSP), M. Norma Feinberg (AMNH), Karsten Hartel (MCZ), Mary Ann Rogers (FMNH), David G. Smith (USNM). Other collection managers and curators at many other collections assisted, and their names appear below. Keiichi Matsuura kindly made arrangements for my visit to Japanese collections. Melvin Wilson maintains a list of eastern Pacific species, and he pointed out many errors to me that he found in our database. Don McAllister provided initial support that was very useful. Rainer Froese (ICLARM) provided many electronic searches that revealed discrepancies, and continued to support the project in many ways. David Catania (CAS collection manager) was the person who made the computers work when then failed, and assisted in many ways. Eileen Mathias (ANSP) provided library research prior to visits in Philadelphia. A second group of people at the California Academy of Sciences, including technicians, librarians, computer people, curators, and others, provided much help: Pennington Ahlstrand, Susan Campanelli, Doris Cantou, Larry Currie, Roy Eisenhardt, Raymond Engeszer, Jon Fong, Evelyn Handler, Tomio Iwamoto, Patrick Kociolek, Alan Leviton, Anne Malley, Kattie Martin, Gabby Mascardo, John McCosker, Terresa Meikle, Tom Moritz, Michael Pope, Wojciech Pulawski, Adam Schriff, Lesley Segedy, Patty Shea-Diner, Pearl Sonoda, Frank Talbot, Jens Vindum, and fellow curators at the Academy. We are grateful to Alan Leviton, Editor of Scientific Publications, for his advice on many matters. Richard Thunes, assisted by Robert Craft, arranged for printing of the work. Barbara Carlson designed the covers and the prepublication announcements. The CD-ROM was prepared by Rainer Froese, Maria Palomeres and staff of ICLARM (International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management), Makati City, Philippines. We are grateful to Susana Ferraris and Dr. Tuan Hoang for their patience and support.

Although many ichthyologists helped with specific inquiries or provided literature, a few spent considerable time reviewing families in their area of specialty, and these include Eugenia Bohlke, Doug Hoese, Ronald Fricke, William Smith-Vaniz, Thomas Fraser, A huge fourth group assisted in many ways, from providing literature, pointing out errors, giving valuable suggestions and advice, reviewing family list printouts, doing library work, assisting with our visits to their museums, etc. Many of these people assisted during my trips to gather information on type specimens. Others assisted Carl Ferraris in obtaining literature and information. And others provided help to Mysi Hoang and to Doug Long. Many other people not listed below have continued to provide their publications or reprints to the California Academy of Sciences. For the ones listed, we wish space would permit mention of how each assisted us, but we are grateful to each and every one for their help in the project. These are: Arturo Acero P., Eric Ahlander, Nancy Ailes, Rachael Alexander, Gerald Allen, Kunio Amaoka, M. Eric Anderson, William D. Anderson, Anatoly Andriashev, John Armbruster, Gloria Arratia, Reeve Bailey, Vanni Balma, Hans Bath, P. Banarescu, Adam Ben-Tuvia, J. J. Bertoletti, Veronica Birdsong, Heiko Bleher, M. Boeseman, N. G. Bogutskaya, Eugenia Bohlke, A. Bonfitto, Enrico Borgo, Dianne Bray, Michele Bruni, George Burgess, Warren Burgess, Matt Callahan, Patrick Campbell, Jim Cambray, Emily Capuli, Barbara Carlson, Kent Carpenter, Christian Carpine, Martin Cavalluzzi, Yin-Rui Chen, Barry Chernoff, Brian Coad, Daniel Cohen, Bruce Collette, Leonard Compagno, E. Conde, George Constantz, Paul Cooper, Oliver Crimmen, Kevin Cummings, Katherin Davidson, Sean Davidson, Eddy Derijst, Atsushi Doi, Neil Douglas, Hiromitsu Endo, Ray Engeszer, Lanea Eschmeyer, Lisa Eschmeyer, David Eschmeyer, R. Falconi, Vladimir Fedorov, Bo Fernholm, Samantha Fenton, Lloyd Findlay, William Fink, Thomas Fraser, Ronald Fricke, Daniel Fromm, Pam Fuller, Li Ga, M. Geerts, Carter Gilbert, Anthony Gill, Daniel Golani, Martin Gomon, Ofer Gon, Menachem Goren, Graduate students Hokkaido University, Terry Gosliner, Alistair Graham, Darah Granato, David Greenfield, Terry Greenfield, Joel Hallan, Andrea Hathaway, Philip Heemstra, Harro Hieronimus, Horacio Higuche, Tinya Hoang, Tinyee Hoang, Douglas Hoese, Jean Huber, Alexander Hully, Jean-Claude Hureau, Barry Hutchins, Kenskay Imai, Isaac Isbrucker, Minoru Ishida, Benoit Jadoul, Robert Jenkins, Jeff Johnson, David Kavanaugh, Patricia Kailola, Noel Kemp, Tim Kingston, Cindy Klepadlo, Maurice Kottelat, Friedhelm Krupp, Sven Kullander, Helen Larson, Peter Last, Meridith Lane, Kenneth Lazara, Robert Lea, Jeffrey Leis, Steve Leipertz, Si-Zhong Li, Mark Lieby, Yoshihiko Machida, Douglas Markle, Eileen Mathias, Keiichi Matsuura, Robert McDowall, Mark McGrouther, Nigel Merrett, Marcello Michelangeli, P. J. Miller, Julie Morris, Bruce Mundy, Thomas Munroe, Prachya Musikasinthron, Edward Murdy, Fumihito Muto, Tetsuji Nakabo, Reiko Nakamura, Izumi Nakamura, Kazuhiro Nakaya, Douglas Nelson, Gareth Nelson, Joseph Nelson, Jorgen Nielsen, Han Nijssen, Steven Norris, Osamu Okamura, John Olney, Lars van den Hoek Ostende, K. van Egmond, Hans Paepke, Laurence Page, Sun-Xing Pang, Lynne Parenti, Paolo Parenti, Verlejean Parker, Miguel Parrent, John Paxton, Nuno Costa Pereira, Alan Peterson, Rohan Pethiyagoda, Paulo Petry, Frank Pezold, Theodore Pietsch, Torsten Plosch, Michela Podesta, William Poly, Stuart Poss, Gardella Primo, Graham Proudlove, Richard Pyle, Russel Rak, Peter Rask, John Randall, William Richards, Doinna Righi, Clive Roberts, Tyson Roberts, C. Richard Robins, Robert Robins, Marion Roodzant, Robert Rofen, Nina Root, Richard Rosenblatt, Mark Sabaj, Kazuo Sakamoto, Scott Schaefer, Gento Shinohara, Hiroshi Senou, Darrell Siebert, Erwin Schraml, K. T. Shao, Boris Sheiko, Diana Shih, Gento Shinohara, Valentina Sideleva, Anders Silfvergrip, Terry Sim, Andrew Simons, Robin Sinn, Paul Skelton, David G. Smith, William Smith-Vaniz, Victor Springer, Wayne Starnes, David Stein, Melanie Stiassny, Bernard Stote, Arnold Suzumoto, Kevin Swagel, Elizabeth Swan, Miriam Tam, Neal Teitler, John Terry, Guy Teugels, Bruce Thompson, Roscoe Thompson, Sean Thompson, Monica Toledo-Piza, James Tyler, Alfred Ufermann, K. van Egmond, Jim van Tassell, Stefano Vanni, Ann Vari, Richard Vari, C. Vidthayanon, G. A. Volkova, H. J. Walker, Mark Warren, Priscilla Watson, Mark Westneat, Alwyne Wheeler, Sarah Whitman, Jeff Williams, Jim Williams, K. E. Witte, Anne-Marie Woolger, Mamoru Yabe, Tina Yanchis, Uwe Zajonz.

In addition, it is appropriate to list the persons who assisted in the preparation of the 1990 "Genera", and the Acknowledgments section from that work is presented below:

Acknowledgment from the 1990 "Genera"

A computer project like this one could not have been done without programmers. I was fortunate to work with two able and innovative computer programmers and biologists: Barbara Weitbrecht through 1988, followed by David Boughton. Alan Leviton, the Academy's "computer person," and Richard Robertson, Precision Software Products, also were very helpful with computer aspects of the project. Mysi Dang Hoang and Yves Barbero assisted with the final printouts of text. Richard Thunes was the broker for printing. The project also could not have been done without support from the National Science Foundation, and I am grateful to James C. Tyler for funding the initial grant (NSF BSR 8416085) and to James Edwards for the second award (NSF 8801702).

Others at the California Academy of Sciences who assisted were librarian technician Patti Shea-Diner and, for data input, Frances Bertetta, Pamela Donegan, Jon Fong, Melissa Gibbs, Lezlie Skeetz, and Geraldine Stockfleth. Others at the Academy who assisted in a number of ways, including finding new descriptions of genera, helping with references, and providing encouragement were Frank Almeda, Eric Anderson, David Catania, W. I. Follett, Jon Fong, Roy Eisenhardt, Terry Gosliner, Mysi Dang Hoang, Tomio Iwamoto, John McCosker, Lynne Parenti, Pearl Sonoda, Tyson Roberts, Frank Talbot, and Jens Vindum. Original literature needed to proof the original descriptions came from several sources. The Department of Ichthyology library at the Academy, including the important David Starr Jordan and Stanford reprint library, the reprint libraries of George S. Myers and W. I. Follett, and my own library combined contained about 75% of the literature used. The main library at the California Academy of Sciences was used extensively, and Patti Shea-Diner, Pearl Sonoda, and Lillian Dempster were the major retrievers of references from this source. I thank Tom Moritz, head librarian, for his assistance and interest in the project; also especially Brian Lym, who researched and secured many interlibrary loans, and to Lesley Segedy, Richard Pallowick, and Doris Cantou of the library staff. Visits by me to other libraries and persons assisting included The Australian Museum, Sydney (John Paxton, Tony Gill, Mark McGrouther), the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia (William Smith- Vaniz, Eugenia Bohlke, William Saul, Carol Spawn, Marsha Gross, and especially William Giglioli), and the Smithsonian Institution (Richard Vari, David Steere, Jr.). I also wish to acknowledge the many ichthyologists who exchanged or sent reprints, and the librarians who assisted with interlibrary loans.

I am grateful to Joseph T. Gregory, University California, Berkeley, who is preparing with me a database on genera of fishes based on fossils. We had many discussions that were helpful in the preparation of the present Catalog. Margaret Hinson and Cheryl Zello helped with preparation of generic reference cards at Michigan from the Zoological Record, and Robert Miller added some names to the card system at Ann Arbor. The Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies of the University of Michigan provided the initial funding for the card system maintained at Michigan. Through the efforts of Eugenia Bohlke at Philadelphia, I was able to obtain a copy of Fowler's manuscript for the unpublished portions of his "Fishes of the World." Also from Philadelphia, it was arranged through William Smith-Vaniz that Fowler's file cards of taxa of genera and species (up to about 1905) were transferred to the California Academy of Sciences. Don E. McAllister, National Museums of Canada, contemporaneously was building a computer database of genera and species of Recent fishes, and he and I had many useful discussions about the present project. He also sent various printouts from his database, and comparison resulted in location of some missed genera. Dan Walton and Richard Longmore, Australian Biological Resources Study, provided an important reference and encouragement. The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, through the executive secretary P. K. Tubbs, gave permission to quote extensively from the Code in Appendix A.

A number of persons aided in the preparation of generic accounts or in the placement of genera in the classification, or they provided assistance in the development of the classification used in Part II, or assisted by providing literature or other advice. For this kindness I thank Eric Anderson, Gloria Arratia, Marie-Louise Bauchot, Robert Behnke, David Bellwood, Stanley Blum, Eugenia Bohlke, Peter Castle, Tony Gill, Carl Ferraris, Jr., W. I. Follett, Dannie Hensley, Tomio Iwamoto, David G. Johnson, Patricia Kailola, Maurice Kottelat, Sven Kullander, Robert Lea, John Lundberg, John McCosker, G. F. Mees, Thomas Munroe, Wayne Palsson, Lynne Parenti, Paolo Parenti, John Paxton, Theodore Pietsch, Stuart Poss, John Randall, Tyson Roberts, Richard and Kathy Robins, David G. Smith, William Smith-Vaniz, Victor Springer, Kenneth Tighe, James Tyler, Stanley Weitzman, Jeffrey Williams, Peter Whitehead, Richard Vari.

Finally, although the final product has mistakes, it has far fewer than it would have had without comments from reviewers. Paul Eschmeyer edited early drafts of Appendix A and the Introduction. The Academy's Publications Committee sought a critique of the overall work from five ichthyologists with extensive experience in publishing and editing ichthyological papers. The comments made by them were provided to me; for their important suggestions I thank Bruce Collette, Phillip Heemstra, John Paxton, Richard Robins, and William Smith-Vaniz.