Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis Cuvier, 1829, with Priority over Platycephalus longispinis Macleay, 1884 (Actinopterygii: Scorpaeniformes: Platycephalidae)

Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis 183 © 2013 The Japanese Society of Systematic Zoology Species Diversity 18: 183–192 Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis Cuvier, 1829, with Priority over Platycephalus longispinis Macleay, 1884 (Actinopterygii: Scorpaeniformes: Platycephalidae) Hisashi Imamura Laboratory of Marine Biology and Biodiversity (Systematic Ichthyology), Faculty of Fisheries Sciences, Hokkaido University, 3-1-1 Minato-cho, Hakodate, Hokkaido 041-8611, Japan E-mail: [email protected] (Received 30 April 2013; Accepted 29 August 2013) The taxonomic status of Platycephalus grandispinis Cuvier, 1829 was investigated. Although the holotypes of P. grandispinis and Platycephalus longispinis Macleay, 1884 closely resemble each other, having several characters in common (e.g., 14 second dorsal and anal fin rays, ca. 80 lateral line scales, the interorbit much narrower than the orbital diameter, no distinct interopercular flap, the supraoccipital with a ridge, and the lower preopercular spine much longer than the upper), they differ in the development of the skinny sensory tubes of the preopercle, which are more numerous and better developed in the former. After a detailed examination of the two holotypes and specimens referable to P. grandispinis and P. longispinis from southwestern to southeastern Australia, it was determined that these two nominal species are synonyms. Furthermore, the skinny sensory tubes tend to become more well developed with growth and to show a geographic cline, such a cline in any feature being recognized in the Platycephalidae for the first time. A cline was also recognized in the suborbital width, with a tendency for a greater width in the western population than the eastern. This study provides a detailed redescription of P. grandispinis, which has priority over P. longispinis. Key Words: Platycephalidae, synonym, Platycephalus grandispinis, Platycephalus longispinis, cline, Australia. Introduction Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes (1829) described a platycephalid fish, Platycephalus grandispinis Cuvier, 1829, based on a single specimen without locality data (Fig. 1). Since the original description, no researcher has paid any attention to the taxonomic status of this species. Macleay (1884) described another platycephalid fish, Platycephalus longispinis Macleay, 1884, on the basis of a single specimen collected from Port Jackson, New South Wales, Australia (Fig. 2). The holotypes of these two nominal species closely resemble each other, having such characters in common as 14 second dorsal and anal fin rays, ca. 80 lateral line scales, the interorbit much narrower than the orbital diameter, no distinct interopercular flap, the supraoccipital with a ridge, and the lower preopercular spine much longer than the upper, usually nearly reaching the posterior margin of the opercle. However, the two holotypes differ from each other in the degree of development of the skinny sensory tubes of the preopercle: the former has well developed tubes covering the cheek region except for its anterior portion (Fig. 3A), but the latter has only a few, poorly developed tubes with slight dorsal extensions (Fig. 3B). Inasmuch as the two specimens are similar in length (212 mm vs 233 mm in standard length, respectively), this difference cannot be explained merely as change with growth in a single species. A detailed examination of the two holotypes and 44 non-type specimens from across southern Australia identical with them has shown that the skinny sensory tubes indeed tend to become more developed with growth and also show a geographic cline. A cline was also recognized in suborbital width. I conclude that all 46 specimens belong to a single species. The purposes of this study are to demonstrate the synonymy of P. grandispinis and P. longispinis, the former having priority, and to redescribe P. grandispinis, the former having priority, and to redescribe P. grandispinis, as a detailed description of the species has not previously been given. In addition, this represents the first record of a geographic cline in the family Platycephalidae. Materials and Methods Counts and measurements were generally made according to Imamura (2012) and were routinely taken from the left side. However gill rakers, defined as depressible bony elements, not including tooth plates, were counted on the right side. Anterior small, isolated dorsal fin spines appear before a plus sign in counts. Counts of pectoral fin rays are expressed as “upper unbranched rays+ middle branched rays+ lower unbranched rays= total rays”. Measurements were made with calipers to the nearest 0.1 mm. Orbital diameter was measured from the orbit’s anteroventral to posteromedial margins, which is the longest distance in many species of Platycephalus Bloch, 1795. Interorbital width was measured at the mesial portion to the center of the eye. Ter25 November 2013 DOI: 10.12782/sd.18.2.183 184 Hisashi Imamura minology of head spines follows Knapp et al. (2000). Institutional acronyms are from Eschmeyer (1998). Standard and head lengths are abbreviated as SL and HL, respectively. Australian States are abbreviated as follows: New South Wales (NSW); Queensland (Qld); South Australia (SA); Victoria (Vic); and Western Australia (WA). In this study, specimens examined are provisionally categorized as representing western, southern, and eastern populations (Fig. 4) for a comparison of geographic variation. Fig. 2. Lateral (upper) and dorsal (lower) views of Platycephalus longispinis, AMS I.16355-001, 233 mm SL, holotype, outside Port Jackson, NSW, Australia. Fig. 1. Lateral (upper) and dorsal (lower) views of Platycephalus grandispinis, MNHN 6844, 212 mm SL, holotype, locality and date for collection unknown. Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis 185 Results and Discussion In a detailed examination of the specimens referable to Platycephalus grandispinis or P. longispinis, the skinny sensory tubes of the preopercle proved to become better developed with growth in each of the three populations (compare Fig. 5A and 5B, 5C and 5D, and 5E and 5F). In addition, the western population tended to show greater development of sensory tubes than the eastern population. For example, among the former, WAM P.28613-011 (157 mm SL, from King George Sound, ca. 118°E) has sensory tubes covering the posterior half of the cheek region (Fig. 5A) whereas WAM P.28614-002 (207 mm SL, also from King George Sound) has tubes covering most of the cheek region except for its anterior portion (Fig. 5B). In contrast, among specimens of the eastern population, AMS E.1604 (177 mm SL, from Fraser Island, ca. 153°E, larger than WAM P.28613011) has poorly developed sensory tubes, covering only the lower margin of the cheek region (Fig. 5E), and CSIRO H4216 (260 mm SL, from Newcastle, ca. 151°E, larger than WAM P.28614-002) has tubes covering only the lower half of the posterior portion of the cheek region (Fig. 5F). Specimens of the southern population display an intermediate condition (Fig. 5C, D). Although AMS I.20194-015 (159 mm SL, from the Investigator Strait, ca. 138°E) has poorly developed sensory tubes, distributed similarly to those in the above-mentioned eastern AMS E.1604 (c.f. Fig. 5C, E), the former specimen is smaller than the latter. The former seems likely to have attained a further developed condition by the time it reached ca. 177 mm SL. Although only eight specimens of the southern population (one each from the western and central coasts of the Great Australian Bight, ca. 127°E and ca. 130°E, and six from the Investigator Strait, ca. 137–138°E) were examined in this study, and no detail comparison could be performed among them, a geographic trend was also recognized in this population. CSIRO CA3689 (230 mm SL, from the western coast of the Bight) has well developed sensory tubes covering the whole cheek region (Fig. 6). This is a much more highly developed condition than in AMS I.20194015 (236 mm SL, from the Investigator Strait), in which the tubes cover the lower half of the posterior portion of the cheek region, with some tubes nearly reaching the upper margin of the cheek (Fig. 5D), despite the former being the smaller specimen. The condition in this larger fish was also less developed than in CSIRO H5316-01 (213 mm SL, from the central of coast of the Bight), in which the sensory tubes cover only the posterior half of the cheek region. No distinct geographic difference was recognized within either the western and eastern population, although some exceptional examples of variation among similar-sized specimens were found in both. For example, in AMS I.12306 (260 mm SL, from Doubtful Islands, WA, 119°E) the tubes cover the posterior and lower portions of the cheek region, a less developed state than in WAM P.28614-002 (207 mm SL, from King George Sound, WA, ca. 118°E) (Fig. 5B). A geographic trend was also found in suborbital width, although a distinct difference was not detected among each of the three populations. Specimens of the western population usually have a slightly greater suborbital width than those of the eastern population for comparable SL, although partial overlap is recognized between them: suborbital width (SW)=7.5–11.4% HL, SW= −2.5971+ 0.04449 SL, R=0.98309 in the western population vs 6.3–11.3% HL (9.0% in holotype of P. longispinis), SW= −2.7768+ 0.04095 SL, R=0.95059 in the eastern population (Fig. 7). Although the slope of the regression line for specimens of the southern population is greater than those for other populations Fig. 3. Ventrolateral views of cheek region. A, Platycephalus grandispinis, MNHN 6844, 212 mm SL, holotype; B, Platycephalus longispinis, AMS I.16355-001, 233 mm SL, holotype. Arrows indicate skinny sensory tubes arising from preopercle. Fig. 4. Map showing sampling localities of Platycephalus grandispinis. 1, western population; 2–4, southern population (2 and 3 from Great Australian Bight, 4 from Investigator Strait); 5, eastern population; H, holotype of P. longispinis. 186 Hisashi Imamura (7.5–10.3% HL, SW= −3.8395+ 0.049515 SL, R=0.98807), which may be due to the low number of specimens, the line is situated between those of the eastern and western populations. Suborbital width in the southern population considerably overlaps with those in the two other populations. In sum, both the skinny sensory tubes of the cheek region and the suborbital width vary with growth and also geographically between the three populations and these features cannot separate P. grandispinis and P. longispinis clearly. No other remarkable differences, which could be regarded as interspecific variation, were recognized in counts, proportional measurements, and other characters between the two species (Table 1). Platycephalus grandispinis and P. longispinis are therefore regarded as conspecific, the former being a Fig. 5. Ventrolateral views of cheek region in Platycephalus grandispinis. A, WAM P.28613-011, King George Sound, WA; B, WAM P.28614–002, King George Sound; C, AMS I.20194-015, Investigator Strait, SA; D, AMS I.20194-015, Investigator Strait; E, AMS E.1604, Fraser Island, Qld; F, CSIRO H4216-01, from Newcastle, NSW. Fig. 6. Ventrolateral view of cheek region in Platycephalus grandispinis, CSIRO CA3689, 230 mm SL, western coast of Great Australian Bight, SA, Australia. Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis 187 senior synonym of the latter, and the recognized differences are interpreted as a clinal variability in P. grandispinis. The type locality of P. grandispinis was not stated in the original description (Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes 1829; see also Eschmeyer et al. 1998). As was mentioned above, the holotype (212 mm SL) has well developed fleshy sensory tubes of the preopercle, covering the cheek region except for its anterior portion (Fig. 3A). A similar condition is also found in WAM P.28614–002 (Fig. 5B), which has a similar SL (207 mm SL) to the holotype and belongs to the western population. In addition, the holotype has a relatively high suborbital width (10.0% HL), which is similar to that in the western population (Fig. 7). Accordingly, when considering the geographic variation and change with growth, the type locality of P. grandispinis is inferred to be in the area, from which the western population is known between Shark Bay (ca. 25°S) and the Doubtful Islands (ca. 120°E) (Fig. 4). Taxonomic Accounts Platycephalus grandispinis Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1829 [English name: Longspine Flathead] (Figs 1–3, 5–6, 8–9) Platycephalus grandispinis Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1829: 242 (type locality: unknown). Platycephalus longispinis Macleay, 1884: 170 (type locality: outside Port Jackson, NSW, Australia); McCulloch 1929: 401; Coleman 1980: 108, an unnumbered color fig.; Hutchins and Thompson 1983: 78, fig. 111; Hutchins and Swainston 1986: 127, fig. 199; May and Maxwell 1986: 276, an unnumbered fig.; Paxton and Hanley 1989: 469; Knapp 1991: 29, tab. 3; Kuiter 1993: 102, one unnumbered fig.; Hoese et al. 2006: 942; Imamura 2006: 305, tab. 1; Gomon, 2008: 517, fig. 12. Longitrudis longispinis: Whitley 1931a: 327; Whitley 1931b: 159; Whitley 1964: 57. Material examined. Holotype: MNHN 6844, 212 mm SL, locality unknown. Other type: AMS I.16355-001, 233 mm SL, holotype of Platycephalus longispinis Macleay, 1884, outside Port Jackson, NSW, Australia (33°50′S, 151°20′E), 91 m depth, 1884. Non-types (44 specimens, 120–286 mm SL, from southeastern to southwestern Australia): AMS E.1604, 177 mm SL, Fraser Island, Qld (25°38′S, 153°20′E), coll. Endeavour; AMS E.2312, 189 mm SL, Doubtful Islands, WA (34°37′S, 119°58′E), coll. Endeavour; AMS E.2424, 216.9 mm SL, Investigator Strait, SA (35°37′S, 137°45′E), coll. Endeavour; AMS I.11020, 175 mm SL, off Boomerang Hill, Fraser Island, Qld (25°20′S, 153°17′E), 27 m depth, 29 June 1910; AMS I.12305, 178 mm SL, AMS I.12306, 260 mm SL, Doubtful Islands, WA (34°S, 119°E), 37–46 m depth, 30 November 1911; AMS I.12395, 136 mm SL, Investigator Strait, SA (35°25′S, 137°22′E), 1912, coll. Endeavour; AMS I.41259001, 3 specimens, 180–204 mm SL, southeast of Harrington, NSW (31°52′S, 152°42′E), 50 m depth, 29 March 2002; AMS I.16887-001, 7 specimens, 120–190 mm SL, Jervis Bay, NSW (35°03′S, 150°44′E), 16–24 m depth, 22 September 1971; AMS I.19832-001, 2 specimens, 191–212 mm SL, 6 km off Whale Beach, Sydney, NSW (33°39′S, 151°23′E), 55 m depth, 10 October 1976; AMS IB.2750, 179 mm SL, off Point Lookout, Qld (27.4°S, 153.5°E); AMS I.20194-015, 4 of 6 specimens, 159–236 mm SL, Investigator Strait, SA (35°20′S, 137°50′E), 20 m depth, 14 March 1978; CSIRO CA3689, 230 mm SL, Great Australian Bight, WA (32°30′S, 126°43′E), 36.0 m depth, 1 December 1981; CSIRO H531601, 213 mm SL, Great Australian Bight, SA (31°49′S, 130°45′E–31°50′S, 130°45′E), 54 m depth, 14 May 2000; CSIRO H4216-01, 260 mm SL, south of Newcastle, NSW (33°04′S, 151°44′E), 33 m depth, 26 March 1996; NMV A3395, 250 mm SL, eastern Bass Strait, Vic (37°51′06″S, 149°09′00″E), 15.5 m depth, 15 September 1983; NMV A29360-011, 204 mm SL, northeast of Rottnest Island, WA (31°56′45″–31°56′08″S, 115°28′03″–115°30′49″E), 20–34 m depth, 9 April 2006; WAM P.16495-001, 4 of 11 specimens, 153–193 mm SL, Rottnest Island, WA (32°00′S, 115°30′E); WAM P.22181-001, 1 of 2 specimens, 164 mm SL, Cockburn Sound, WA (32°11′S, 115°43′E), 25 September 1972; WAM P.27009-002, 286 mm SL, Perth, WA (31°30′S, 115°35′E), 16 November 1980; WAM P.27450-001, 244 mm SL, West End, WA (32°00′S, 115°30′E), 30 December 1981; WAM P.277219-007, 162 mm SL, WA (28°48′S, 114°03′E), 22 Nov. 1980; WAM P.28613-011, 157 mm SL, King George Sound, WA (35°01′S, 117°57′E), 14–18 m depth, 4 March 1986; WAM P.28614-002, 2 specimens, 201–207 mm SL, King George Sound, WA (35°03′S, 117°57′E), 50 m depth, 4 March 1986; WAM P.31696-002, 146 mm SL, Dorre Island, Shark Bay, WA (25°01.48′S, 113°17.53′E), 26 November Fig. 7. Relationship of suborbital width (% HL) and standard length (mm) in Platycephalus grandispinis. Open circle, solid triangle, and open square: western, eastern, and southern populations, respectively; solid square, holotype of P. grandispinis; H, holotype of P. longispinis. 188 Hisashi Imamura 1997; WAM P.32269-002, 123 mm SL, Cape Peron North, Shark Bay, WA (25°30.604′S, 113°33.913′E–25°31.115′S, 113°33.937′E), 12.6–13.2 m depth, 2 October 2002; WAM P.32278-008, 128 mm SL, Cape Peron North, Shark Bay, WA (25°23.667′S, 113°26.082′E–25°23.097′S, 113°26.057′E), 16.9–16.7 m depth, 3 October 2002; QM I.32902, 148 mm SL, east of Fraser Island, Qld (25°26′S, 153°15′E), 30.2 m depth, 21 April 2001. Diagnosis. A species of Platycephalus with the following combination of characters: 14 second dorsal and anal fin rays; 73–82 lateral line scales; 19–26 total gill rakers; interorbit becoming wider with growth, narrower than orbital diameter; no distinct interopercular flap (sometimes a small flap or weak convexity present); supraoccipital with a ridge; lower preopercular spine much longer than upper, usually extending nearly to posterior margin of opercle, length ratio of lower:upper spines 1.9–3.3 : 1, this ratio tending to become smaller with growth; absence of large canine teeth on anteromedial portion of upper jaw; head and body without small dark dots; and posteroventral portion of caudal fin with a blackish or dark-brownish marking. Description. Counts and proportional measurements as given in Table 1. Below, data ranges for all specimens presented first, followed by value for holotype (in parentheses). Body depressed, mostly covered with ctenoid scales, but some cycloid scales on undersurface. Interorbital, occipital, postorbital, and opercular regions scaled; snout and area anteroventral to eye naked (including holotype) or scaled; lower half of suborbital region naked. Head moderately flattened; its length 2.8–3.4 (2.9) in SL. Snout slender; its length 3.4–3.9 (3.5) in HL, longer than orbital diameter. Upper surface of eye without papillae. Iris lappet triangular, simple, and well expanded dorsally, and small, simple, and weakly convex ventrally (Fig. 9). Interorbital width 8.1–14.5 (11.4) Table 1. Comparison of counts and proportional measurements of Platycephalus grandispinis. Holotype Holotype of P. longispinis Non-types MNHN 6844 AMS I.16355-001 n=44 SL (TL) (mm) 212 (—) 233 (—) 120 (142)–286 (332) Counts: First dorsal fin rays I+VII I+VII I+VI–VII (usually VII) Second dorsal fin rays 14 14 13–14 (usually 14) Anal fin rays 14 14 14 Pectoral fin rays 2+11+8=21 ?+?+8=21 2–3+9–12+6–9=20–22 Pelvic fin rays I, 5 I, 5 I, 5 Branched caudal fin rays 12 — 12–13 (usually 12) Pored scales in lateral line (with spine) 81 (2) 79 (2) 73–82 (1–3, usually 2) Scale rows above lateral line slanting downward and backward 91 — 86–98 Gill rakers 5+16=21 6+18=24 4–7+14–19=19–26 Proportional measurements (% SL): HL 34.0 31.5 29.1–35.3 Predorsal length 33.8 32.9 29.3–34.4 Length of first dorsal fin base 18.6 18.2 14.8–20.4 Length of second dorsal fin base 34.2 34.8 33.6–37.6 Length of anal fin base 36.5 37.6 35.7–42.0 Snout length 9.6 9.4 8.0–9.9 Orbital diameter 7.5 6.7 6.0–8.2 Upper jaw 11.9 10.9 9.8–12.7 Lower jaw 17.3 15.8 14.1–17.7 Interorbital width 3.0 3.0 2.2–4.1 Suborbital width 3.4 2.8 2.0–3.8 Postorbital length 17.2 15.8 14.9–18.0 Pectoral fin length 15.8 — 12.9–17.0 Pelvic fin length — — 20.8–25.5 Caudal fin length 16.6 — 13.6–18.4 Proportional measurements (% HL): Snout length 28.3 29.7 25.8–29.8 Orbital diameter 22.2 21.1 18.8–25.0 Upper jaw 35.1 34.7 31.7–36.9 Lower jaw 50.9 50.1 47.1–51.9 Interorbital width 8.7 9.4 6.9–12.3 Suborbital width 10.0 9.0 6.3–11.4 Postorbital length 50.5 50.1 48.5–54.4 Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis 189 Fig. 8. Lateral (upper) and dorsal (lower) views of Platycephalus grandispinis, CSIRO H4216-01, 233 mm SL, outside Port Jackson, NSW, Australia. Fig. 9. Dorsal view of head (left) and lateral view of iris lappet on left eye (right) in Platycephalus grandispinis, CSIRO H4216-01, 260 mm SL, south of Newcastle, NSW, Australia. LA, lachrymal spines; LO, lower opercular spine; PA, parietal spine; PO, postocular spine; POC, preocular spine; POP, preopercular spines; PT, posttemporal spine; PTE, pterotic spines; RS, ridge on supraoccipital (with spine); SC, supracleithral spine; SO, supraocular spines; ST, supratemporal spine; UO, upper opercular spine. 190 Hisashi Imamura in HL, becoming wider with growth but always less than orbital diameter. Spines and ridges weakly developed on top and side of head (Fig. 9). Nasal lacking spines. Lachrymal usually with two (including holotype), rarely three or four antrorse spines. Preorbital spine absent. Single preocular spine present. Suborbital spines usually absent (including holotype); one suborbital spine sometimes present below posterior margin of eye; one suborbital spine rarely present below middle of eye. Supraorbital ridge weakly serrated posteriorly. Single postorbital spine usually present (including holotype), rarely two spines present or spines absent. Pterotic ridge usually with single spine (including holotype), rarely entirely smooth or with two spines. Frontal ridges lacking spines. Parietal usually with single spine, rarely with two spines or spines absent (including holotype). Supraoccipital with single ridge on midline, usually ending in spine posteriorly, rarely lacking spine (including holotype). Supratemporal and posttemporal usually lacking spines (including holotype), but sometimes with single spine. Supracleithrum with single spine. Preopercle with two spines; lower spine much longer than upper, usually not quite reaching posterior margin of opercle (including holotype), rarely just reaching it or extending slightly beyond it; length ratio of lower:upper spines 1.9–3.3 : 1 (unmeasured), this ratio tending to become smaller with growth (Fig. 10); upper lacking supplementary spine. Opercle with two indistinct spines, lacking prominent ridge. Interopercular flap usually absent (as in holotype), sometimes small flap or weak convexity present; margin of interopercle smooth. Maxilla extending beyond anterior margin of eye; length 2.7–3.2 (2.8) in HL. Teeth in bands on jaws and palatine, and in V-shaped patch on vomer; tooth band on upper jaw lacking distinct notch anteromedially. Upper jaw with some small, moderate, or large conical teeth, or small canine teeth (moderate conical teeth) anteromedially; remainder of jaw with small conical and/or villiform teeth (small conical teeth). Lower jaw teeth arranged in narrow band; innermost row formed by small or moderate conical teeth (moderate teeth); other teeth villiform or small conical (small conical). Palatine teeth villiform or small conical (villiform) to small or moderate conical (small), irregularly arranged in two to five rows (three rows), tending to become larger medially; tooth row number tending to increase with growth. Anterior vomerine teeth villiform or small conical (small conical), irregularly arranged in one to three (one) rows; posterior vomerine teeth moderate and/or large conical (large conical) in two to four (three) rows, becoming larger posteriorly; anterior and posterior row numbers tending to increase with growth. Lip margins without papillae. Skinny sensory tubes arising from suborbitals undeveloped, not extending to cheek region (Figs 5–6). Tubes arising from preopercle tending to develop with growth and to show geographic cline (see discussion above): in western population from Great Australian Bight, SA, to Shark Bay, WA, extending anterodorsally and dorsally with growth (including holotype), well developed and mostly completely covering this region in largest specimen; in eastern population from Fraser Island, Qld, to Jervis Bay, NSW, extending dorsally with growth, moderately developed and only covering lower half of this region in largest specimen (Figs 5–6). Pored scales in lateral line each with one exterior opening posteriorly; opening in most pored scales directed posteroventrally, but in several scales posterodorsally. First dorsal fin originating posterior to opercular margin. First and second dorsal fins narrowly separated. Pectoral fin rounded posteriorly, length 5.9–7.8 (6.3) in SL. Posterior tip of pelvic fin situated between anus and second anal fin ray; length 3.9–4.8 (broken) in SL. Caudal fin slightly concave posteriorly; length 5.4–7.4 (6.0) in SL. Color in alcohol.—Color considerably faded in holotype, retaining only white spots on dorsal surface of body, pale brown spots on first and second dorsal, pectoral, and pelvic fins, and brownish spots on dorsal portion and dusky marking on posteroventral portion of caudal fin (Fig. 1). In non-types (Fig. 8), head and body pale brown, with scattered small brown and sometimes white spots (but without small dark dots) dorsally, paler ventrally. Dorsal surface of body with or without narrow brownish bands. Lateral side of body with brownish and/or grayish spots tending to persist in preservative. First and second dorsal fins with small brown or dark brown spots. Pectoral and pelvic fins pale brown, with small brown or dark brown spots; those on pectoral fin tending to form narrow bands; ventral margin of pectoral fin and outer margin of pelvic fin paler. Anal fin pale. Caudal fin with brown or pale brown spots dorsally; posteroventral portion of caudal fin with single irregular, blackish or dark-brownish marking; posterior margin of caudal fin pale. Distribution. Known from southwestern to southeastern Australia, ranging from Shark Bay, WA (ca. 25°S), to Fraser Island, Qld (ca. 25°S), across SA, Vic, and NSW (e.g., Hutchins and Thompson 1983; Kuiter 1993; Hoese et al. Fig. 10. Relationship of length ratio of lower:upper preopercular spines and standard length (mm) in Platycephalus grandispinis (solid circles) and P. bassensis (open circles). H, holotype of P. lon - gispinis. Validity of Platycephalus grandispinis 191 2006; this study) (Fig. 4). Comparison. In addition to Platycephalus grandispinis, the following seven species of the genus Platycephalus are known usually to have 14 second dorsal and anal fin rays: Platycephalus aurimaculatus Knapp, 1987, Platycephalus bassensis Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1829, Platycephalus caeruleopunctatus McCulloch, 1922, Platycephalus conatus Waite and McCulloch, 1915, Platycephalus laevigatus Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1829, Platycephalus richardsoni Castelnau, 1872, and Platycephalus speculator Klunzinger, 1872 (e.g., Knapp, 1991; Imamura, 2006). Of these seven species, P. longispinis is most similar to P. bassensis in having the lower preopercular spine much longer than the upper, usually extending nearly to the posterior margin of the opercle, the posteroventral portion of the caudal fin with a blackish or dark-brownish marking, no large canine teeth on the anteromedial portion of the upper jaw, and a distinct interopercular flap. The present species differs from P. bassensis in having a ridge on the supraoccipital, usually ending in a spine (vs both ridge and spine absent) and in having no small, dark dots on the dorsal surface of the head and body (vs many such dots). The utility of the supraoccipital ridge as a taxonomic character separating P. grandispinis and P. bassensis is demonstrated for the first time in this study. The number of total gill rakers is also helpful to separate the two species, although a partial overlap is recognized between them (19–26 in P. grandispinis vs 17–20 in P. bassensis). Gomon (2008) considered P. grandispinis (as P. longispinis) to be separable from P. bassensis in having the lower preopercular spine 2–3.5 times as long as the upper (vs up to twice as long as the upper). It was newly shown in the present study that the length ratio of the lower:upper spines is 1.9–3.3 : 1 and tending to become smaller with growth in P. grandispinis, but it is 1.6–2.2 and tending to become larger with growth in P. bassensis (Fig. 10). Only specimens of P. grandispinis with a ratio of more than 2.2 : 1 are distinguishable from P. bassensis using this character. Comparative material. Platycephalus bassensis (22 specimens, 114–418 mm SL, from southeastern Australia): MNHN 1437, holotype, 233 mm SL; AMS A.16458, 242 mm SL; AMS A.16459, 274 mm SL; AMS E.4953, 267 mm SL; AMS E.5457, 358 mm SL; AMS I.6274, 272 mm SL; AMS I.7541, 401 mm SL; AMS I.7542, 324 mm SL; AMS I.12794, 197 mm SL; AMS I.12796, 1 of 2 specimens, 176 mm SL; AMS I.14150–14151, 2 specimens, 114–201 mm SL; AMS I.17561-001, 155 mm SL; AMS I.19832-004, 212 mm SL; AMS I.20194-050, 2 specimens, 213–218 mm SL; AMS I.34823-001, 303 mm SL; CSIRO A741, 137 mm SL; CSIRO CA3690, 283 mm SL; NSMT-P 112668, 418 mm SL; NMV A29215-018, 215 mm SL; QM I.22312, 368 mm SL. Acknowledgments I express my sincere thanks to J. Johnson (QM) for critically reading a draft manuscript and providing important comments on it. I am also grateful to A. Graham (CSIRO), M. F. Gomon and D. Bray (NMV), J. Johnson (QM), K. Matsuura and G. Shinohara (NSMT), M. McGrouther, S. Readers, and H. Amanda (AMS), G. Moore and S. Morrison (WAM), P. Pruvost and R. Causse (MNHN), and other staff of fish sections of the mentioned museums for providing the opportunity to examine specimens. This study was partly supported by “Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Asian Core Program—Establishment of Research and Education Network on Coastal Marine Science in Southeast Asia”. References Coleman, N. 1980. Australian Sea Fishes. South of 30°S. Doubleday Australia Pty. Ltd., Lane Cove, New South Wales, 302 pp. Cuvier, G. and Valenciennes, A. 1829. Histoire Naturelle des Poissons. Vol. 4. F. G. Levault, Paris-Strasbourg, xxvi+2+518 pp. Eschmeyer, W. N. 1998. Collection abbreviations. Pp. 16–22. In: Eschmeyer, W. N. (Ed.) Catalog of Fishes. Vols. 1–3. California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco. Eschmeyer, W. N., Ferraris, C. J., Hoang, M. D. and Long, D. J. 1998. Part 1. Species of fishes. Pp. 25–1820. In: Eschmeyer, W. N. (Ed.) Catalog of Fishes. Vols 1–3. California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco. Gomon, M. F. 2008. Platycephalidae. Pp. 515–521. In: Gomon, M. F., Bray, D. J. and Kuiter, R. H. (Eds) Fishes of Australia’s Southern Coast. Reed New Holland, Chatswood, New South Wales. Hoese, D. F., Bray, D. J., Paxton, J. R. and Allen, G. R. 2006. Fishes. Pp. i–xxi+671–1472. In: Beesley, P. L. and Wellas, A. (Eds) Zoological Catalogue of Australia. Vol. 35, Part 2. ABRS & CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria. Hutchins, B. and Thompson, M. 1983. The Marine and Estuarine Fishes of South-Western Australia. Western Australian Museum, Perth, 103 pp. Hutchins, B. and Swainston, R. 1986. Sea Fishes of Southern Australia. Complete Field Guide for Anglers and Divers. Swainston Publishing, Perth, 180 pp. Imamura, H. 2006. Rediagnosis of the Marbled flathead, Platycephalus marmoratus (Actinopterygii: Teleostei: Platycephalidae), with comments on the composition of the type series. Species Diversity 11: 296–306. Imamura, H. 2012. Redescription of Platycephalus angustus Steindachner 1886 (Teleostei: Platycephalidae), a valid flathead in northern Australia and New Guinea. Ichthyological Research. DOI: 10.1007/s10228-012-0319–6 (also appeared in Ichthyological Research 60: 112–121). Knapp, L. W. 1991. Platycephalus chauliodous, a new flathead fish from the eastern Indian Ocean (Teleostei: Platycephalidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 104: 23–29. Knapp, L. W., Imamura, H. and Sakashita, M. 2000. Onigocia bimaculata, a new species of flathead fish (Scorpaeniformes: Platycephalidae) from the Indo-Pacific. Special Publication of the J. L. B. Smith Institute of Ichthyology (64): 1–10. Kuiter, R. H. 1993. Coastal Fishes of South-Eastern Australia. Crawford House Press Pty Ltd, Bathurst, New South Wales, xxxi+437 pp. Macleay, W. 1884. Notices of new fishes. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 9: 170–172. May, J. L. and Maxwell, J. G. H. 1986. Field Guide to Trawl Fish from Temperate Waters of Australia, Revised Edition. CSIRO Division of Fisheries Research, Hobart, 492 pp. McCulloch, A. R. 1929. Check list of the fishes recorded from Australia.