876 



DR. GIJNTHER ON BARBUS BEAVANI. 



[Dec. 3, 



in C. chagunio. Mr. Day states that in the drawing in the Calcutta 

 Library, " the rostral barbels are delineated as long as the eye, and 

 the maxillary slightly longer'' (I.e. p. 637). The real state of the 

 matter may be seen in the following woodcut, prepared from a 

 tracing of that drawing : — the rostral barbels are. considerably 

 longer than, and the maxillary twice as long as, the eye. 



Fig. 1. 



Head of Barbus beavani. 



After having corrected this matter of fact, I proceed now to an 

 examination of the question of the relations between Barbus beavani 

 and Cyprinus chagunio, the examination of which I deferred until I 

 had seen the drawing (I.e. p. 764). 



1 . I have uo doubt that the drawing represents Barbus beavani, 

 with which it agrees in every essential point, especially also in the 

 number of the dorsal rays, viz. three undivided and eight divided rays. 



2. It is equally certain that it was not intended for the fish de- 

 scribed as Cyprinus chagunio, for the following reasons : — 



a. Hamilton describes the barbels as minute. I will readily 

 admit that he has used this term somewhat vaguely. Generally, 

 barbels described by him as minute are minute, shorter than the 

 eye. Cyprinus calbasu (B.H. p. 297, pi. 2, fig. 83) has barbels of 

 about the same length as B. beavani ; and those he describes as 

 " short," distinguishing between a longer and shorter pair. On the 

 other hand, he describes the barbels of C. dero also as minute 

 (p. 278, pi. 22. fig. 78), in which species they are represented as 

 much longer thau the eye. 



b. Cyprinus chagunio is described by Hamilton as having " twelve 

 rays in the fin of the back ;" " nine rays are branched, and the last 

 of them is divided to the root." But the drawing represents only 

 eight branched rays, the last being divided (see fig. 2), as is the case 

 in B. beavani. 



