iSiS Records of the Indian Miiscwii. [Vol. XXII. 



Hamilton Buchanan's' eighth subgenus ''Cabdio" of his Cy- 

 priiius should be revived in place of Rohtee or not, as it includes 

 Cyprinus {Cabdio) cotio which is now regarded as a Rohtee. On a 

 careful analysis of the subject, however, I find that Cabdio can 

 not replace Rohtee because the forms assigned to Cabdio by Ha- 

 milton Buchanan include species which have subsequently been 

 assigned to' several genera and Sykes (1841) was the first to 

 separate some species, in practice if not in theory, for in describ 

 ing Rohtee ogilbii he observes as follows: — "The Rohtee h&s the 

 appearance of Cltipanodon chanpole of Dr. Hamilton ; also of Cy- 

 prinus devario in the outline of the body ; and were it proper to 

 consider it a Cyprinus, which its armed back-fin renders impossible, 

 it would be placed in Dr. Hamilton's eighth subgenus ' Cabdio.' " 

 Sykes in making the above remark ignored the fact that Hamilton 

 Buchanan's Cyprinus cotio had a spine of this nature. Further, 

 of the four species included under Rohtee by Sykes, two viz. Rohtee 

 pangut and Rohtee ticto are now invariably referred to the genus 

 Barbus, while of the other two belonging to Rohtee (s s ) neither 

 was known to Hamilton Buchanan. From the statements of the 

 two authors it is clear, therefore, that Cyprinus cotio is congeneric 

 with Rohtee, Sykes, which may stand for these and other similar 

 species. I am highly indebted to Dr. N. Annandale and Dr. B. I,. 

 Chaudhuri for valuable suggestions on this point. 



Rohtee alfrediana (C. and V.) 



iSS<). Osti'obi-.inia dlfrediaiia. N'inci^iierra, op. cit., p. ^^n>. 

 The specimens of this species were collected in Khurda and 

 Thaubal stream ; the longest is 109 mm. in length. In young 

 individuals the body is less deep and an indistinct black band is 

 usually present behind the gill cover. 



Rohtee belangeri (C. and V.). 



iSSy. Osteobriuna belnngen, N'iiuigULira. o/>. cit.. [i. :;iS. 



This species is distinguished from the rest included in the 

 c^enus Rohtee by the fact that the whole of the abdominal edge 

 is sharp, whereas in others it is sharp behind the ventrals but flat 

 and rounded in front of them. Moreover, the pharyngeal teeth in 

 this species are armed with tubercles on their crowns ; this char- 

 acter is shared by R. ogilbii. 



It will not he out of place to make some observations on the 

 nature of the pharyngeal teeth here. In a former paper by An- 

 nandale and myself ^ a reference was made to the occurrence of 

 loose teeth in the muscles surrounding the pharyngeal bones. 

 Having had the opportunity to dissect a large number of fish for 

 these teeth, I find the loose teeth fairly common. In R. belan- 



• Hamilton Buchanan, "An account 0/ flie Fishes in the Gnnge.s." pp. ^^^,1, 

 and 39_' ( 1822). 



'"^ .-\nnandale and Hora, h'ec. 1 lul . Miis., Will, p. i(>${^H)2oi 



