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