636 Records of the Indian Mitseuvi. [Vol. XXII, 



been described from the same continent by Nichols and Griscom 

 (1917). Vaillant (1902) described a new species, D. borneensis, 

 from Borneo ; this was referred to the genus Garra by Fowler 

 (1905) and again placed in the genus Discogitafliiis by Weber and 

 Beaufort (1916). Pellegrin in 1905 gave the name of D. rothschildi 

 to a species from Abyssinia ; this Boulenger in 1909 regarded as 

 doubtfully synonymous with D. dcmheensis. Regan in 1909 and 

 1914 described two new species, one from Yunnan and the other 

 from Waziristan respectively. Jenkins (1909), after having ex- 

 amined the specimens in the Indian Museum, preferred to call allot 

 them D. lainta and in 1910 he also referred a fish from Baluchistan 

 to the same species. In 1912 Garman described a new species, 

 G. imhcrba, from Western Syechuan, China. He referred it to a 

 new subgenus of Garra, which he termed Ageneiogarra. This 

 subgenus he distinguished from the two others recognised by 

 Bleeker (1863) by the absence of barbels. Zugmayer (1913) hesi- 

 tatingly referred his examples from Pishin in Baluchistan to two 

 species, D. lanita and D. variabilis ; while Chaudhuri in the same 

 year recorded D. lamta from the Abor Hills. Annandale (1913), 

 when writing notes on the fishes of the Lake of Tiberias, recog- 

 nised at least four races of D. lanita and in Chaudhuri's paper he 

 pointed out that the Abor examples might represent the Assa- 

 mese race nasiitus of McClelland ; in two more recent papers ( 1919) 

 he recognised many Indian forms to be specifically distinct. Jor- 

 dan and Evermann (1917), when urging the revival of old names, 

 pointed out that Garra is a valid genus, and Rao (1920) has 

 quite recently described certain fishes from Mysore under this 

 generic name. Still more recently Annandale and myself (1920) 

 discussed the advisability of recognising both Garra and Discog- 

 nathtis on certain anatomical grounds. Prashad (1919) described 

 a new species from the Kangra X'alley, Punjab, and in 1920 I out- 

 lined the evolution of Garra from the allied Cyprinid genera. 



The chequered history of the genus Garra, characterised by 

 the presence of a mental disc behind the lower jaw, has resulted 

 from various causes. The greatest confusion has, however, 

 centred round Garra lamta of which a short and inadequate descrip- 

 tion without a figure was given in An account of the Fishes of the 

 Ganges by Hamilton Buchanan, An illustration of a species with 

 the disc-character well marked occurs among the manuscript 

 drawings of this author, now preserved in the library of the 

 Asiatic Society of Bengal ; it is labelled Cyprinus godyari. Both 

 godyari and lamta are local names of the same fish in the Bhagal- 

 pur and Gorakhpur districts respective!}', and it is clear from a 

 remark on page 103 of Day's volume on the fisheries and botany 

 of Bengal (in Hunter's Statistical Account of Bengal, 1877) that 

 the two names refer to the same species. Day, who is quoting 

 from a manuscript of Hamilton Buchanan, saj's, " The Godiyari 

 of the Bhagalpur list is here called lamta." 



There has also been some confusion as to the exact localities 



