62 Mr. C. E,. Narayan Rao 07i 



Locality. — These loaches have been obtained in the Kiver 

 Thuuga, Shimoga Town, Mysore State, South India. 



Genus Nemachilichthys. 



It is rather doubtful whether the species called by Sykes 

 Cobitis I'upjjelli^ is identical with Day's Nemachilichthys 

 riieppellif. The type of this species, described by Day, is in 

 the Indian Museum, and is not in a condition for a detailed 

 examination. One has to supplement therefore very largely 

 from his figure, which, however, is a protograph. Sykes 

 gives the following formula for his C. ruppelli: — 



(1) D. 13 (1/12). P. 12. V. 8. A. 8. C. 19; and 



(2) D. 13 (2/11). P. 13. V. 8. A. 7 (2/5). C. 19, is 

 Day's diagnosis. 



The coloration of Sykes's figure has nothing whatever to 

 do with Day's rueppelli, though his description is quite 

 different. It is further mentioned by Sykes tliat his species 

 is nearly cylindrical, scaleless, not much thicker than a 

 large goose-quill, and from two or three inches long. Day's 

 specimen is slightly under three inches, and does not fit in 

 with the above description. Sykes mentions that the dorsal 

 fin in his specimen of rupj)elli is longer than any except the 

 caudal, and in Day's specimen it is certainly shorter than 

 the anal also. Then, the tail-fin in C. ruppelli J is described 

 as " rather notched than forked," while in Day's type it is 

 deeply forked. I have for these reasons some hesitation in 

 regarding that Day was correct in thinking that Cobitis 

 rvppelli is identical with N. rueppelli. 



8. Nemachilichthys shimogensis, sp. n. 

 (PI. II. figs. 5, 5 a, 5 b.) 



D. 14 (2/12). P. 12-13. V. 8. A. 7 (2/5). C. 20. 



The dorsal profile in front of the dorsal fin is horizontal 

 up to the upper margin of the eyes, and the profile of the 

 head in front of the eyes is a steep incline. The upper 

 surface of the body is, in fresh and well-preserved specimens, 

 excavated b}^ two trough-like depressions, the anterior 

 between the dorsal fin and the occiput, and the posterior one 

 from the dorsal fin to the end of caudal peduncle. On the 



* 1841. Sykes, Trans. Zool. Soc. p. 366, pi. Ixiv. fig. 1. 



t 1878. Day, Fish. Ind. p. 612, pi. clvi. fig. 7. 



X Sykes's ruppelli may be some local variety of Cobitis cilh(j-is (should 

 be bilturi) H. 13. or Cobitis botiiis H. B. (Fish Ganges, pp. 350, 394), for 

 Sykes himself ncknowledges close affinity between his Mureh {ruppelli) 

 and Ilauiilton and Buchanan's bilturi. 



