CLIOLA 139 



to 4.1 in length, broad and flat above and little tapered forward, the muzzle 

 very blunt: width of head 1.5 to 1.7 in its length; interorbital space 2.3 to 

 2.8, nearly flat; eye small, circular, entirely within upper half of head, 3.2 

 to 4; nose longer than eye, 2.9 to 3.3 in head; mouth rather small, terminal, 

 oblique, tip of upper lip about on a level with inferior margin of orl^it; maxil- 

 lary 2.9 to 3.6 in head, not reaching orbit; jaws equal; isthmus about half 

 diameter of eye. Teeth 4-4, with grinding surface and shght hook; intestine 

 about equal to length of head and body; peritoneum silvery with a few small 

 and scattering dark specks. Dorsal fin low, its longest ray 1.4 to 1.9 in head, 

 usually less than the head's width; dorsal rays 1-8, the first little more than 

 half the length of the second, thickly covered with flesh in spring males; 

 insertion of dorsal nearly directly over ventrals and about equidisl^ant between 

 snout and base of caudal; anal rays 7; pectorals reaching little more than 

 3^ to ventrals; ventrals in both males and females usually reaching to vent, 

 but always falling short of anal. Scales 6 to 8, 39 to 44, 4 or 5, usually 7-4 

 above and below; 21 to 27 rows before dorsal; lateral line complete, but 

 slightly decurved in front of ventrals. 



This fish, though often confounded with Pimephales notatus, 

 differs sharply from it in its more obhque mouth and in the dis- 

 tribution of the dark punctulations on the scales, the entire sur- 

 face of the scales of the upper half of the body being more or less 

 dusted with dark specks in Cliola, while in P. notatus the scales 

 are very distinctly dark-edged. It will scarcel}^ be confused with 

 P. promelas, which has the mouth smaller and lips (except in 

 males) thinner, and the lateral line to a greater or less degree 

 imperfect. If at any time external differences fail, it may be 

 separated with ease from either species by its generic characters. 



This little species, although one of our minor minnows, only 

 two or three inches long, is one of the most abundant in the larger 

 rivers of the state — the fifth on our list in order of frequency in 

 rivers of the first class. This feature of its distribution is deriv- 

 able also from our map of the state showing the distribution of 

 the 116 localities from which our 194 collections of the species 

 have been made. It occurs with still greater frequency in the 

 smaller rivers and the creeks, more abundantly in the former, 

 however, than in the latter. From lakes and ponds it has been 

 taken by us only 28 times in 591 collections. Its preference for 

 a rapid current (coefficient, 2.46) and a clean bottom (2.04) is also 

 especially pronounced. Professor Hay likewise reports, in his 

 list of the lampreys and fishes of Indiana, that this species 

 appears to prefer clear streams. It is generally distributed from 

 Ohio to Georgia, the Dakotas, Iowa, Arkansas and Texas, and 

 the Rio Grande. It has occurred to us much the most abun- 

 dantly in the streams of the Kaskaskia and the Wabash basins, 



