Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 January 2014 | 6(1): 5417–5418 Response Comments on part of 2002). But the grass carp is known the articles by Knight et al. (2013a,b) published in by the name, Hullu gende. Certainly, JoTT ‘Katladi’ never finds a mention in the published literature on H. pulchellus. ISSN N. Basavaraja The English translation of Hullu Online 0974–7907 Print 0974–7893 gende is grass carp which is given to Department of Aquaculture, Karnataka Veterinary, and Fisheries Sciences University, College of Fisheries, Mangalore, Karnataka 575002, India H. pulchellus due to its preference to OPEN ACCESS [email protected], [email protected] feed on aquatic vegetation, including terrestrial grass (David et al. 1970; David & Rahman 1975, 1982). The captive stock of H. pulchellus maintained in Comments on Knight et al. 2013a; 5(13): 4734–4742. our college farm is being fed with napier grass which is The authors reported that they have observed very well accepted apart from artificial (floating) feed. Hypselobarbus pulchellus specimens with a lateral line Day (1878) had placed P. pulchellus and P. dobsoni scale count (Llsc) of 32–35+1–2, which means that the as separate species. Since H. pulchellus (described in Llsc varied between 32 and 37, with the highest count Shrivana’s report) and H. dobsoni have identical fin (37) being clearly observed in Image 3, Fig. A as reported formula and Llsc and distribution, they are known to be by Knight et al. (2013a). As against this, the Llsc observed synonyms (David 1963). in the same species, Barbodes () pulchellus by Day The pinkish-white (or somewhat black) lateral band (1870, 1878) is only 30–32, never more than 32. Scores that runs from the eye/opercula to the caudal fin of Day’s of H. pulchellus specimens (collected during several specimen (P. pulchellus) is found only in wild adult male, surveys from the Tunga and Bhadra rivers and Anjanapura but not in female which exhibits silvery-white colour reservoir, which are the major natural habitat of this spp.) (images attached). The Llsc also remains same, i.e., 30– observed by us (images of P. pulchellus attached) indicate 31. that the Llsc is consistently 30–31 which is in conformity There is also no record of collection of H. pulchellus with that described by Day and the same can be found from the South Canara region since 1940 (Rema Devi in the report of Shrivana (2013). The range of Llsc is 5 & Ali 2011). However, it has been reported from the (37–32) which seems to be not a typical taxonomic west-flowing Kali and Sharavathi rivers and east-flowing characteristic for this species since Llsc is an important Krishna and its tributaries (David et al. 1969; David et al. quantitative trait heritable from parent to offspring 1970; David & Rahman 1975, 1982). as reported by Nenashev (1970) in common carp (a Since most of the morphological characters described cyprinid) and hence is under genetic control rather than by the authors do not match with those of H. pulchellus, environmental control. Hence it should not show that that species is unlikely to be H. pulchellus. much variation within a species. Jayaram (1999) observed It will be great if this taxonomic ambiguity is resolved a Llsc of 27–32 and inferred that P. pulchellus, P. dobsoni soon. and P. jerdoni are synonymous. Devi & Ali (2011) have also expressed similar opinion. It is not clear as to how Comments on Knight et al. 2013b; 5(17): 5194–5201. many specimens were used in their study and why no The paper reports that the authors have rediscovered specimens from other repositories were compared. Hypselobarbus pulchellus based on the specimens The local name, i.e., ‘Haragi’ or ‘Hullu gende’ (also) is collected from Sita River, South Canara, Karantaka. But referred to H. pulchellus as reported earlier (Anonymous the scepticism still remains as one major identifying character, apart from others, does not match with that of the previously described is lateral line scale count (Llsc), with the authors reporting the presence of DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3899.5417-8 Date of publication: 26 January 2014 (online & print) 32–34+1–2 Llsc, while the scale count of the image (1A) Manuscript details: Ms # o3899 | Received 01 January 2014 shows 37, which is confounding and contradictory (Knight Citation: Basavaraja, N. (2014). Comments on Hypselobarbus pulchellus part of the articles by Knight et al. (2013a,b) published in JoTT. Journal of Threat- et al. 2013b). On the other hand, the Llsc observed by Day ened Taxa 6(1): 5417–5418; http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3899.5417-8 (1870, 1878) is only 30–32, never more than 32. Jayaram Copyright: © Basavaraja 2014. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in any medium, reproduc- (1999) recorded a Llsc of 27–32 in P. pulchellus, while tion and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the Jayaram et al. (1982), as quoted by the authors, found source of publication. 30–35 scale count, contradicting Day’s observations. It is

5417 Comments on Knight et al. (2013a,b) Basavaraja

ƵŶůŝŬĞůLJƚŚĂƚƚŚĞ>ůƐĐǁŝůůƐŚŽǁĂǁŝĚĞǀĂƌŝĂƟŽŶ;ϯϮʹϯϳͿ ǁŝƚŚŝŶŽŶĞƉŽƉƵůĂƟŽŶĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ^ŝƚĂZŝǀĞƌ͘ǀĞŶŝŶ ƚŚĞĚƌLJƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶŽĨĂLJ͕ŝƚŝƐŽŶůLJϯϬʹϯϭ;/ŵĂŐĞϭͿĂŶĚ ŶŽƐĐĂůĞƐĂƉƉĞĂƌƚŽŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶůŽƐƚĂƐĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƚŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌƐ͛ ĂƐƐƵŵƉƟŽŶƚŚĂƚƐŽŵĞƐĐĂůĞƐŵŝŐŚƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶůŽƐƚĚƵƌŝŶŐ ŚĂŶĚůŝŶŐ͘  ,ĞŶĐĞ͕ ŽŶůLJ ƚŚĞ ĂLJ͛Ɛ ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƟŽŶ ŵĂLJ ďĞ ĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĂƐĂƵƚŚĞŶƟĐĂŶĚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƐŚŽƵůĚďĞƚŚĞďĂƐŝƐ ĨŽƌ ƌĞƐŽůǀŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƚĂdžŽŶŽŵŝĐ ĂŵďŝŐƵŝƚLJ͘  DŽƌĞŽǀĞƌ͕ ƚŚĞ ĂƵƚŚŽƌƐ ŚĂǀĞ ŐŝǀĞŶ ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƟŽŶ ŽĨ ƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶ ƉĞƌƚĂŝŶŝŶŐ only to Sita River, per se they have collected specimens ĨƌŽŵ dƵŶŐĂ ĂŶĚ EĞƚƌĂǀĂƟ ƌŝǀĞƌƐ͘  ^ƵƌƉƌŝƐŝŶŐůLJ͕ ƚŚĞ ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƟŽŶŽĨƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶƐĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚĨƌŽŵdƵŶŐĂZŝǀĞƌŝƐŶŽƚ ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĞĚ͘/ƚǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶďĞƩĞƌŝĨƚŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌƐŚĂĚ ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĞĚĂƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶǁŝƚŚϯϮ>ůƐĐ͘ ŶŽƚŚĞƌ ŬĞLJ ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ ƚŚĂƚ ƐŚŽǁƐ ĂŶŽŵĂůLJ ŝƐ ƚŚĞ shape of lateral line and the size of scales. Whereas the ĂLJ͛Ɛ ƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶ ƐŚŽǁƐ Ă ƐůŝŐŚƚůLJ ĐƵƌǀĞĚ ůĂƚĞƌĂů ůŝŶĞ ĂŶĚ ůĂƌŐĞƌƐĐĂůĞƐ͕ƚŚĞŝŵĂŐĞϭĚĞƉŝĐƚƐĂŶĞĂƌƐƚƌĂŝŐŚƚůĂƚĞƌĂů ^ĐŝĞŶĐĞƐ͕^ĞĐƟŽŶͲ͕ϯϯ͗ϮϲϯͲϮϴϲ͘ ůŝŶĞǁŝƚŚŵƵĐŚƐŵĂůůĞƌƐĐĂůĞƐ͘ ĂǀŝĚ͕͘ΘD͘&͘ZĂŚŵĂŶ;ϭϵϳϱͿ͘ Studies on some aspects of feeding and breeding of WƵŶƟƵƐƉƵůĐŚĞůůƵƐ;ĂLJͿĂŶĚŝƚƐƵƟůŝƚLJŝŶĐƵůƚƵƌĂďůĞ dŚĞƉƌĞƐĞŶĐĞŽĨƚŚĞůĂƚĞƌĂůďĂŶĚŝƐĂŶŽƚŚĞƌŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ ǁĂƚĞƌƐ͘Journal of Inland Fisheries Society of India;ϳͿ͗ϮϮϱʹϮϯϴ͘ ŬĞLJ ƚŚĂƚ ŚĞůƉƐ ŝŶ ƐƉĞĐŝĞƐ ŝĚĞŶƟĮĐĂƟŽŶ͘  dŚĞ ƉŝŶŬŝƐŚͲ ĂǀŝĚ͕ ͘ Θ D͘&͘ ZĂŚŵĂŶ ;ϭϵϴϮͿ͘ džƉĞƌŝŵĞŶƚĂů ŽďƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶƐ ŽŶ feeding of WƵŶƟƵƐƉƵůĐŚĞůůƵƐ;ĂLJͿĂŶĚƵƟůŝƚLJŽĨƚŚĞƐƉĞĐŝĞƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ ǁŚŝƚĞ ůĂƚĞƌĂů ďĂŶĚ ƚŚĂƚ ƌƵŶƐ ĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĞ ŽƉĞƌĐůĞ ƚŽ ƚŚĞ ĞƌĂĚŝĐĂƟŽŶŽĨĂƋƵĂƟĐƉůĂŶƚƐ͘Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences ĐĂƵĚĂůĮŶŝƐǀĞƌLJƉƌŽŵŝŶĞŶƚŝŶĂLJ͛ƐƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶ͕ďƵƚŝƐŶŽƚ ϭϲ͗ϴϱͲϵϱ͘ ĐŽŶƐƉŝĐƵŽƵƐ;ƚŚŽƵŐŚůŝǀĞƐƉĞĐŝŵĞŶͿŝŶƚŚĞĮƐŚĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚ ĂǀŝĚ͕͕͘E͘'͘^͘ZĂŽΘD͘&͘ZĂŚŵĂŶ;ϭϵϳϬͿ͘A note on the herbivorous feeding of WƵŶƟƵƐƉƵůĐŚĞůůƵƐ;ĂLJͿ͘Journal of Inland Fisheries Society ŝŶƚŚĞƉĂƉĞƌ͘^ŝŵŝůĂƌďĂŶĚŝƐĂůƐŽĂĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŝƐƟĐĨĞĂƚƵƌĞ of India;ϮͿ͗ϭϱϵʹϭϲϬ͘ of adult male of P. pulchellusĂƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚĞĂƌůŝĞƌ;ĂǀŝĚ ĂǀŝĚ͕͕͘͘s͘'ŽǀŝŶĚ͕<͘s͘ZĂũĂŐŽƉĂů͕W͘ZĂLJΘZ͘<͘ĂŶĞƌũĞĞ;ϭϵϲϵͿ͘ Θ ZĂŚŵĂŶ ϭϵϳϱ͕ ϭϵϴϮ͖ ĂǀŝĚ Ğƚ Ăů͘ ϭϵϲϵ͕ ϭϵϳϬͿ ĨƌŽŵ >ŝŵŶŽůŽŐLJ ĂŶĚ ĮƐŚĞƌŝĞƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ dƵŶŐĂďŚĂĚƌĂ ZĞƐĞƌǀŽŝƌ͘ /&Z/͕ ĂƌƌĂĐŬƉŽƌĞ͘ƵůůĞƟŶϭϯ͗ϭϴϴƉƉ͘ ƚŚĞdƵŶŐĂďŚĂĚƌĂZŝǀĞƌ͕ďƵƚŶŽƚŝŶĨĞŵĂůĞǁŚŝĐŚĞdžŚŝďŝƚƐ ĂLJ͕&͘;ϭϴϳϬͿ͘EŽƚĞƐŽŶƐŽŵĞĮƐŚĞƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞǁĞƐƚĞƌŶĐŽĂƐƚŽĨ/ŶĚŝĂ͘ ƐŝůǀĞƌLJͲǁŚŝƚĞĐŽůŽƵƌǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ>ůƐĐďĞŝŶŐϯϬͲϯϭ;ŝŵĂŐĞƐŽĨ WƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ^ĐŝĞŶƟĮĐ DĞĞƟŶŐƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ŽŽůŽŐŝĐĂů ^ŽĐŝĞƚLJ ŽĨ male and female P. pulchellus ĂƩĂĐŚĞĚͿ͘  dŚŝƐ ŵĞĂŶƐ Ă LondonϮ͗ϯϲϵʹϯϳϰ͘ ĂLJ͕&͘;ϭϴϳϴͿ͘ The of India; Being a Natural History of the Fishes ĮƐŚǁŝƚŚĂůĂƚĞƌĂůďĂŶĚ͕ĐƵƌǀĞĚůĂƚĞƌĂůůŝŶĞĂŶĚϯϬʹϯϭ>ůƐĐ Known to Inhabit the Seas and Fresh Waters of India, Burma, and ŚĂƐďĞƩĞƌĐŚĂŶĐĞƐŽĨďĞŝŶŐŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌH. pulchellus Ceylon.YƵĂƌŝƚƐĐŚ͕>ŽŶĚŽŶ͕ŝͲdždž͕ϱϱϯʹϳϳϴ͕ƉůƐ͘ϭϯϵʹϭϵϱ͘ ƌĂƚŚĞƌ ƚŚĂŶ ƚŚĞ ŽŶĞ ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚ Ă ďĂŶĚ͕ ďƵƚ ǁŝƚŚ ϯϮʹϯϳ Ğǀŝ͕<͘Z͘Θ͘ůŝ;ϮϬϭϭͿ͘ Hypselobarbus pulchellus͘/Ŷ͗/hEϮϬϭϯ͘/hE ZĞĚ >ŝƐƚ ŽĨ dŚƌĞĂƚĞŶĞĚ ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐ͘ sĞƌƐŝŽŶ ϮϬϭϯ͘ϭ͘ фǁǁǁ͘ŝƵĐŶƌĞĚůŝƐƚ͘ ůĂƚĞƌĂůůŝŶĞƐĐĂůĞƐ͘dŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌƐĐůĂŝŵƚŚĂƚƚŚĞůĂƚĞƌĂůďĂŶĚ ŽƌŐх͘ŽǁŶůŽĂĚĞĚŽŶϯϬKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϯ͘ is absent in H. dobsoni and H. jerdoni. :ĂLJĂƌĂŵ͕ <͘͘ ;ϭϵϵϵͿ͘ The Freshwater Fishes of the Indian Region. dŚĞŵŽƌƉŚŽŵĞƚƌŝĐ͕ŵĞƌŝƐƟĐĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌĚĂƚĂĨƵƌŶŝƐŚĞĚ EĂƌĞŶĚƌĂWƵďůŝƐŚŝŶŐ,ŽƵƐĞ͕EĞǁĞůŚŝ͕ϱϱϭƉƉ͘ :ĂLJĂƌĂŵ͕<͕͘͘d͘sĞŶŬĂƚĞƐǁĂƌůƵΘD͘͘ZĂŐƵŶĂƚŚĂŶ;ϭϵϴϮͿ͘A Survey ;dĂďůĞϭͿŝƐŽŶůLJƐĞĐŽŶĚĂƌLJ͘/ŶǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞĂďƐĞŶĐĞŽĨƐƵĐŚ of the Cauvery River System with a Major Account of its Fish Fauna. data for P. pulchellus described by Day, this data is useful to ZĞĐŽƌĚƐŽĨƚŚĞŽŽůŽŐŝĐĂů^ƵƌǀĞLJŽĨ/ŶĚŝĂ͕KĐĐĂƐŝŽŶĂůWĂƉĞƌEŽ͘ϯϲ͘ ϭϭϱƉƉнϭϮƉůƐ͘ ĚŝīĞƌĞŶƟĂƚĞďĞƚǁĞĞŶƚŚĞƚŚƌĞĞƐƉĞĐŝĞƐŽĨHypselobarbus, <ŶŝŐŚƚ͕ :͘͘D͕͘ ͘ ZĂŝ Θ Z͘<͘W͘ ͛ƐŽƵnjĂ ;ϮϬϭϯĂͿ͘ ZĞͲĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƟŽŶ ŽĨ but not for the rediscovery of H. pulchellus;ĂŶĞŶŝŐŵĂƟĐ ,LJƉƐĞůŽďĂƌďƵƐ ůŝƚŚŽƉŝĚŽƐ ;dĞůĞŽƐƚĞŝ͗ LJƉƌŝŶŝĚĂĞͿ͕ ďĂƐĞĚ ŽŶ ŝƚƐ ďĂƌďͿ͘ ƌĞĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌLJ ĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĞ tĞƐƚĞƌŶ 'ŚĂƚƐ͕ /ŶĚŝĂ͕ ǁŝƚŚ ŶŽƚĞƐ ŽŶ ,͘ thomassi. Journal of Threatened Taxaϱ;ϭϯͿ͗ϰϳϯϰͲϰϳϰϮ͖ŚƩƉ͗ͬͬĚdž͘ĚŽŝ͘ /Ŷ ǀŝĞǁ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ůĂĐŬ ŽĨ ĐůĂƌŝƚLJ ŽŶ ƚŚĞ ŝĚĞŶƟƚLJ ŽĨ H. ŽƌŐͬϭϬ͘ϭϭϲϬϵͬ:Ždd͘ŽϯϲϬϮ͘ϰϳϯϰͲϰϮ pulchellus, the authors need to take a relook at the paper <ŶŝŐŚƚ͕ :͘͘D͕͘ ͘ ZĂŝ Θ Z͘<͘W͘ ͛ƐŽƵnjĂ ;ϮϬϭϯďͿ͘ Rediscovery of on rediscovery of H. pulchellus and provide more concrete Hypselobarbus pulchellus, an endemic and threatened barb ;dĞůĞŽƐƚĞŝ͗ LJƉƌŝŶŝĚĂĞͿ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ tĞƐƚĞƌŶ 'ŚĂƚƐ͕ ǁŝƚŚ ŶŽƚĞƐ ŽŶ ,͘ ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶƚŽƐƵďƐƚĂŶƟĂƚĞƚŚĞŝƌĐůĂŝŵ͘ dobsoni and H. jerdoni. Journal of Threatened Taxa ϱ;ϭϳͿ͗ ϱϭϵϰʹ ϱϮϬϭ͖ŚƩƉ͗ͬͬĚdž͘ĚŽŝ͘ŽƌŐͬϭϬ͘ϭϭϲϬϵͬ:Ždd͘Žϯϲϴϲ͘ϱϭϵϰͲϮϬϭ ZĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐ EĞŶĂƐŚĞǀ͕'͘͘;ϭϵϳϬͿ͘,ĞƌŝƚĂďŝůŝƚLJŽĨƐŽŵĞŵŽƌƉŚŽůŽŐŝĐĂů;ĚŝĂŐŶŽƐƟĐͿ ƚƌĂŝƚƐŝŶZŽƉƐŚĂĐĂƌƉ͘/Ŷ͗<ŝƌƉŝĐŚŶŝŬŽǀ͕s͘^͘;ĞĚ͘Ϳ͘^ĞůĞĐƟǀĞďƌĞĞĚŝŶŐŽĨ ĂƌƉĂŶĚ/ŶƚĞŶƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶŽĨ&ŝƐŚƌĞĞĚŝŶŐŝŶWŽŶĚƐ. Israel Programme ŶŽŶLJŵŽƵƐ;ϮϬϬϮͿ͘Freshwater and Marine Fishes of Karnataka. Society ĨŽƌ^ĐŝĞŶƟĮĐdƌĂŶƐůĂƟŽŶƐ͕:ĞƌƵƐĂůĞŵ͕/ƐƌĂĞů͘ ĨŽƌĚǀĂŶĐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨƋƵĂĐƵůƚƵƌĞ͕ĂŶŐĂůŽƌĞ͕ϮϭϰƉƉнϰϬƉůƐ͘ ^ŚƌŝǀĂŶĂ͕Z͘;ϮϬϭϯͿ͘ƌĂLJŽĨŚŽƉĞĨŽƌƌĂƌĞĮƐŚ͘ĞĐĐĂŶ,ĞƌĂůĚ;^ƉĞĐƚƌƵŵ ĂǀŝĚ͕ ͘ ;ϭϵϲϯͿ͘ ^ƚƵĚŝĞƐ ŽŶ ĮƐŚ ĂŶĚ ĮƐŚĞƌŝĞƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ 'ŽĚĂǀĂƌLJ ĂŶĚ ^ƚĂƚĞƐĐĂŶͿĚĂƚĞĚϭϴ:ƵŶĞϮϬϭϯ͘ <ƌŝƐŚŶĂƌŝǀĞƌƐLJƐƚĞŵƐͲWĂƌƚ/͘WƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐƐŽĨƚŚĞEĂƟŽŶĂůĐĂĚĞŵLJŽĨ

dŚƌĞĂƚĞŶĞĚdĂdžĂ ϱϰϭϴ Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 January 2014 | 6(1): 5417–5418