Castelnau 1878b : 51 Engraulis nasutus F. L. de Castelnau’s Norman River fishes housed in the Macleay Museum, University of Sydney Gill, Anthony C. Russell, Barry C. Nelson, Gary Zootaxa 2018 2018-08-16 4459 3 565 574 6F8X7 Castelnau 1878 Castelnau 1878 [151,572,1199,1225] Actinopterygii Engraulidae Engraulis GBIF Animalia Clupeiformes 6 571 Chordata species nasutus      Engraulis nasutus  Castelnau 1878b: 51( typelocality, Norman River).  Castelnau (1878b)described  Engraulis nasutuson the basis of an unspecified number of specimens from the Norman River. He noted that “I have seen only one adult specimen seven inches long, but I have a small specimen preserved in spirits, which is silvery with the upper parts of a light brown, fins yellow”. This suggests he had at least two specimens.  Identification of the species has been problematic. Macleay (1879) considered it to be a valid species of  Engraulis, stating (p. 367): “This species is described by Count Castelnau […] from one adult specimen, 7 incheslong, sent to him from the Norman River, Gulf of Carpentaria. Its special distinguishing character seems to be a strong longitudinal ridge along the top of the head.” Macleay’s mention of a single specimen is curious, given that there are two specimens in MAMU(see below). Ogilby (1910)considered  E. nasutusto be a valid species of  Anchovia Jordan& Evermann in  Jordan(1895), and compared it with his new species  A. aesturia. It is unlikely that Ogilby saw typematerial of  E. nasutus, as all of his comparative data for the species is identical to that in Castelnau’s original description. McCulloch (1929a)regarded  E. nasutusas a valid species of  Anchoviella Fowler (1911), but did not indicate whether he had examined the syntypes. Whitley (1964) considered both  E. nasutusand  A. aestuariato be valid species of  Thrissina  Jordan& Seale (1925). Whitehead et al.(1988) tentatively placed  E. nasutusin the synonymy of  Thryssa hamiltoni( Gray 1835), which was followed also by Wongratana et al.(1999). Paxton et al.(2006) listed it as incertae sedisin the Engraulidae, and as a possible synonym of  Thryssa hamiltoni.They noted (p. 317): “ syntypeswhereabouts unknown.” There are two specimens in the Macleay Museum ( MAMUF.1194; Figures 6–7), measuring 99.5 and 104.5 mmSL (TL not determinable owing to caudal-fin damage). They correspond to an index card stating “  Engraulis nasutus, Cast.[…] 2 sp.6″ Norman R., N. Australia”. The specimens have the following characters (where two counts are presented, the first is from the 99.5 mmSL specimen): predorsal scutes 1; abdominal scutes sharply keeled, 14 prepelvic + 9 postpelvic = 23 total; maxilla relatively short, reaching to posterior border of preopercle; anal-fin rays 34 (iv,30; anterior ray tips damaged in 104.5 mmSL specimen); total dorsal-fin rays 13; uppermost pectoral-fin ray not filamentous; teeth in jaws fine and conical, not canine-like; lower gill rakers 25 (checked in 104.5 mmSL specimen only). This combination of characters is unique among engraulids to the species currently called  Thryssa aestuaria( Ogilby 1910). According to Paxton et al.(2006), there are three other species of  Thryssaknown from the Gulf of Carpentaria:  T. hamiltoni,  T. scratchleyi( Ramsay & Ogilby 1886)and  T. setirostris( Broussonet 1782). The MAMUspecimens differ from  T. hamiltoniin having fewer prepelvic scutes (14 vs 15–20) and more lower gill rakers (25 vs 11–15); from  T. scratchleyiin having fewer abdominal scutes (14 prepelvic + 9 postpelvic vs 19 + 12) and more lower gill rakers ( 18–23 in  T. scratchleyi); and from  T. setirostrisin having a much shorter maxilla (reaching to preopercle edge vs to at least tip of pectoral fins), fewer abdominal scutes (16–18 + 9– 10 = 25–28 in  T. setirostris) and more lower gill rakers ( 10–12 in  T. setirostris). We regard the specimens in MAMU F.1194 as syntypes of  Engraulis nasutus Castelnau, 1878, and identical to  Anchovia aestuaria Ogilby, 1910.  Engraulis nasutusthus is a subjective senior synonym of  A. aestuaria. We here follow Eschmeyer et al.(2018, and references therein) in recognising  Thryssa Cuvier (1829)rather than  Thrissina Jordan & Seale (1925)( Kottelat 2013) as the correct generic name for  Thryssa nasutus.  Pusey et al.(2017)recorded only a single engraulid from freshwaters of northern Australia,  Thryssa scratchleyi.  Thryssa nasutais known only from estuarine and marine areas (Whitehead et al.1988, Wongratana et al.1999); presumably the syntypes of  E. nasutuswere collected from the lower, estuarine reaches of the Norman River. 1917413287 [151,862,1306,1328] Norman River 6 571 1 holotype