new Cyprinoid Fishes from Mysore. 53 



kangrcB may perhaps be considered as a variety of lamtn, I 

 propose to treat kangra as synonymous with lamta. It is 

 needless to observe that the other differences in the measure- 

 ments must be due to conditions of preservation, food, and 

 maturity of the specimens. The formula of rays and scales 

 for kangroB is almost the same as for lamta *. 



2. Garra jerdonia, Day. 



1^78. Di^cor/natJius jerdoni, Day, Fish lud. Text. ii. p. i528. 



1V)09. Discof/nathnsjerdoni, Jenkins, Rec. Iiid. Mrs. vol. iii. p. 291. 



1919. Discot/natkus jerdoni, Anuandale, Rec. Ind. Mas. vol. xvi, 



p. 132. 

 1919-. Discognathus jerdoni, Annandale, Rec. Ind. Mus. vol. xvii. p. 73, 



pi. ix. figs, 1, 2, and pi. xi. fig. 3. 



My specimens oi jerdonia have been taken chiefly in the 

 rapidly running waters of the Cauvery, both in the Mysore 

 State and Coorg. Havino^ examined a fairly large collec- 

 tion of this species, I think it is impossible to maiutain with 

 Giinther that it is identical with lamta. As Dr. Annandale 

 proposes to discuss this and the following species in his 

 forthcoming paper, I content myself here with recording 

 their occurrence in Mysore, hoping for a future opportunity 

 for offering such remarks on them as may be called for. 



3. Garra stenorhgnchia, Jerdon. 



1849. Gonorhynclius stenorhytichuSf Jerdon, Mad. Journ. Lit. Sci. 



p. 310. 

 1919. Discognathus stenorhgnehus, Annandale, Rec. Ind. Miis. vol. xvii. 



pi. ix. fig. 3, pi. xi. fig. 4. 



Jerdon^'s accoimt of this species, obtained in the Bhavani 

 River (foot of the Nilgiri Hills) and the streams of ^lalabar, 

 is absolutely brief. ]My specimens, which were obtained 

 from the rocky pools in the Cauvery (Scriugapatara), show 

 a relatively larger internasal protuberance studded with 

 spiny mucous pores, the upper lip thick and suctorial, the 

 iipper surface of the head proportionately much broader, and 

 a greatly enlarged mental disk. 



* I have, since writing the above, noticed that l<(tngr(?, Prashad, is 

 regarded bv Dr. Annandale (1919, o;7.«Y. p. 74) as a subspecies of jW-a'ort/. 

 "This form seems to be no more than a local race of D. Jerdoni. Day, 

 distinguished by its longer head and smaller eye." I consider, for tlie 

 reasons given above, that it is more correct to treat it as a subsjieciea of 

 I unit a. 



