78 Records of the Indian Museum. [VoL. XVIII, t919.] 
D. nasutus. Possibly it is D. macrochiy (McClelland), but the 
figure of the head is unfinished and shows very little detail. The 
figure is labelled ‘‘ Cyprinus godyari’’ in Buchanan’s handwrit- 
ing. ‘The species figured is not the D. lamta of Day’s Fishes of India 
and of subsequent authors. If we are to accept Day’s identifica- 
tion on this occasion, the D. lamta of his later works will have to 
receive some other name; but the only point in favour of this is 
the fact that Buchanan himself was of the opinion that the 
Lamta of the Gorakhpur district was identical with the Godiyari 
of the Bhagalpur district (of. cit., p.103). Considering the 
universal confusion of species that has followed, it is by no means 
improbable that Buchanan himself did not distinguish them 
clearly and that his Cyprinus lamta was, as I have suggested else- 
where, a composite group rather than a single species. It must 
be remembered that Day, who had himself collected different 
forms of Discognathus in the Bhavani River (where at least four 
quite distinct species occur), failed in the end to recognize their 
diversity. The only way in which the point can be settled is by a 
thorough ichthyological survey of the small streams of the Bhagal- 
pur and Gorakhpur districts. 
July atst, 1919. 
