ICHTHYOLOGY. 
19 
^4th) Erom tlie west of Yarkand to the Pamir Seh/izothorax, Schizopygopsis and 
Diptychus, all forms fonnd in Turkestan or adjacent regions, and likewise 
Nemacheilus were obtained. 
The foregoing species constitute the fish-collection made in the cold and inhospitable 
regions traversed by the Mission; and they are of interest for the purpose of ascertaining 
what are the chief characteristics of the fish-fauna, and what relationship it bears to those of 
contiguous Asiatic regions, so far as such have been ascertained. 
In this inquiry it will be necessary to take a survey of the fishes of Afghanistan, 
Western Turkestan, and Hindustan, before proceeding further respecting those of Tibet and 
Yarkand or Eastern Turkestan. 
Most of our knowledge of the fishes of Afghanistan is due to the labours of Griffith, 
who remarked :•—“ The characteristic forms of Afghan fish are doubtless the small-scaled 
Barbi and Oreini; and these far exceed the others in number .... The fish are as distinct 
from the Indian forms as the plants are .... By characteristic I do not mean that these 
forms are limited to Afghanistan, because they occur perhaps to an equal extent in the 
Himalayas, to the streams of which those of Afghanistan approximate more or less in the 
common features of rapids and bouldery beds.” 
Having crossed the high range of mountains separating Afghanistan from the plains of 
Western Turkestan, he found “ a great change in the fish to occur, and Salmonidce 1 seem to 
take the precedence of the Gyprinidce. A species of trout abounds in the Bamean Biver and 
up its small tributaries, derived from the Moh-i-Baba, to an altitude of about 11,000 feet. 
A species of Barbus with small scales is likewise common in the Bamean Biver” 3 (Cal. 
Journ. Nat., Hist., ii. p. 565). 
He observes that Indian species were in the majority in the Cabul river (a tributary of 
the Indus) at Peshawur; and in accordance with the facility or the reverse of access from the 
plains did he find a predominance of Indian or Afghan forms. 3 
The nature of the fishes of Afghanistan appears to be much as follows:—Absence of 
Acantliopterygian or spiny-rayed families, except the spineless and widely distributed Ophio- 
cephalus gachua, Ham. Buch., and the spiny eel, Mastacembelus armatus, Lacep., so common 
in the East from the plains to the summits of mountains. Eew Siluroids, but perhaps a 
Gallichor us and Amblyceps. Numerous Cyprinoids which appear to belong to the following 
genera— Or emus , Schizothorax, Bungia , from near Herat, Barilius, and a Loach 
\? Nemacheilus), perhaps JDiscognathus and Barbus. 
The fullest account we possess of the fishes of Western Turkestan is that lately given 
by Messier, from which I have extracted the following:— 
Acanthoptebygii. Berea fluviatilis, Linn., obtained exclusively from the Jaxartes and 
some of its tributaries. P. schrencldi , Kess., from Lake Balkash. Lucioperca sandra, Cuv., 
from the Jaxartes. Go this spinulosus. Mess., very rare in Turkestan, two specimens from 
Mho j end. 
None of these spiny-rayed fishes were captured at so south a latitude as Mashghar. Out 
of the four species three came from the Jaxartes or its tributaries, the other from Lake Balkash. 
1 This remark appears to have been a little too strong, as he only found one species of Salmo ; probably it was very abundant. 
2 The stuffed type presented to the British Museum from the Indian Museum seems to have been lost or destroyed. 
3 Griffith states that the Cabul Biver at Jellalabad presents us with two or three small-scaled Barbi (? Schizothorax) and Oreini 
together with certain tropical forms, as the Mahasir ( Barbus) and a Silurus very like, if not identical with, the Poftah 
v Silurus afganci). Also the same river at Lalpur possesses a fish, I believe, identical with the Nepoora of Assam ( Laleo ) and 
a GonorhyncJius (—Discognathus). Griffith also mentions a Loach-like Sihirus from near Jubraiz {? Amblyceps). 
