1919-] N. Annandale : Bombay Streams Fauna. 135 



I have not the material to attempt a revision of the Mahseer 

 group, specimens of which are difficult to preserve in large series 

 on account of their size, but two species have recentlj^ come to 

 my notice which it seems justifiable to rescue from the oblivion of 

 synonymy as they possess differential characters of a marked 

 nature and likely to be constant. These species are Barbtis puii- 

 tora (Ham. Buch.) and Barbus mussullah, Sykes. That Hamilton's 

 mossul and Jerdon's hamiltonii differ in some respects from the 

 forma typica of Barbus tor the collection in the Indian Museum 

 provides abundant evidence, while specimens from the upper Kistna 

 seem to differ from any of these ; but the question whether the 

 differences should be considered specific or merely racial must be 

 left to be answered with more extensive experience. 



Another group of species in which confusion exists so far as 

 the Indian forms are concerned is that popularly called Carnatic 

 Carp, It is, indeed, doubtful how far this designation has an^^ 

 scientific basis, for certain species so called have no more than a 

 distant resemblance to Barbus carnations (Jerdon). 



I have nothing particular to say about the species of Barbus 

 {B. malabaricus , B. kolus and B. ticto) that I obtained at Medha 

 myself, but Mr. Mclver has sent me specimens of three species 

 from the Kistna near Satara that are of considerable interest. 

 Two of these may be called Mahseer, while the third is known 

 locally as the Carnatic Carp. 



Barbus tor (Ham. Buch.). 



(Plate III, figs. 3, 3a). 



It is not yet possible to discuss the races or species of the 

 Mahseer, of which six or seven probably exist in different parts of 

 the Indian Empire, in a satisfactory manner. Specimens sent 

 me from the Kistna River near Satara by Mr. Mclver certainly 

 differ both from the north Indian and the south Indian forms 

 and probably represent an undescribed race, which has only 3, 

 rows of scales above the lateral line and 12(3/9) dorsal fin-rays. 

 Mr. Mclver informs me that it grows to a large size. 



Barbus mussullah, Sykes. 

 (Plate III, figs. 4, 4^). 



1841. Barbus mussullah, Sykes, Trans. Zool. .>oc., London II, p. 356, 

 pi. Ixi, fi^. 4. 



Sykes's description of this fish is inadequate and his figure 

 inaccurate, but he refers to and illustrates one trivial but appa- 

 rently constant character that gives me confidence in identifying 

 specimens sent by Mr. Mclver. This character is the presence 

 under the eye of a group of small tubercles not confined to one 

 sex and visible with the aid of a lens in quite young fish. 



A more important differential character, not recognized by 

 Sykes but shown in his figure, is, however, to be found in the 



