<%BANNER%>

Taxonomic Revision of the Genus Acanthocobitis (Teleostei

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Taxonomic Revision of the Genus Acanthocobitis (Teleostei Nemacheilidae) with Recognition of the Genus Paracanthocobitis (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae) and the Description of Four New Species
Physical Description:
1 online resource (113 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Singer, Randal Anthony
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.S.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Zoology, Biology
Committee Chair:
Page, Larry M
Committee Members:
Kawahara, Akito
Smith-Vaniz, William Farr

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
acanthocobitis -- asia -- cypriniformes -- ichthyology -- nemacheilidae -- taxonomy
Biology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Zoology thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
Morphological variation was studied in populationsreferred to the loach genus Acanthocobitis(Nemacheilidae).  Two-hundred thirty-two individuals wereexamined across the range of thegenus, including specimens of all recognized species.  Paracanthocobitiswas recognized as a genus and distinguishedfrom Acanthocobitis in having anemarginate or truncate (vs. pointed) caudal fin; patch (vs. no patch) ofadipose tissue on anterior end of lateral line; 9-15 (vs. 17-19) brancheddorsal-fin rays, and a rounded (vs. more triangular-shaped) head. Acanthocobitis is monotypic, containing only A. pavonacea.  Twelve species of Paracanthcobitis are recognized, including seven species currentlyin Acanthocobitis: P. botia, P. mandalayensis, P. mooreh, P. pictilis,P. rubidipinnis, P. urophthalma, and P.zonalternans; P. mackenzieiremoved from synonymy; and four new species: P. abutwebi, P. adelaideae, P. linypha, and P. maekhlongensis.  Allspecies are diagnosed and distributions mapped. A key is provided for identification.
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Randal Anthony Singer.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local:
Adviser: Page, Larry M.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID:
UFE0045968:00001

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Taxonomic Revision of the Genus Acanthocobitis (Teleostei Nemacheilidae) with Recognition of the Genus Paracanthocobitis (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae) and the Description of Four New Species
Physical Description:
1 online resource (113 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Singer, Randal Anthony
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.S.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Zoology, Biology
Committee Chair:
Page, Larry M
Committee Members:
Kawahara, Akito
Smith-Vaniz, William Farr

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
acanthocobitis -- asia -- cypriniformes -- ichthyology -- nemacheilidae -- taxonomy
Biology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Zoology thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
Morphological variation was studied in populationsreferred to the loach genus Acanthocobitis(Nemacheilidae).  Two-hundred thirty-two individuals wereexamined across the range of thegenus, including specimens of all recognized species.  Paracanthocobitiswas recognized as a genus and distinguishedfrom Acanthocobitis in having anemarginate or truncate (vs. pointed) caudal fin; patch (vs. no patch) ofadipose tissue on anterior end of lateral line; 9-15 (vs. 17-19) brancheddorsal-fin rays, and a rounded (vs. more triangular-shaped) head. Acanthocobitis is monotypic, containing only A. pavonacea.  Twelve species of Paracanthcobitis are recognized, including seven species currentlyin Acanthocobitis: P. botia, P. mandalayensis, P. mooreh, P. pictilis,P. rubidipinnis, P. urophthalma, and P.zonalternans; P. mackenzieiremoved from synonymy; and four new species: P. abutwebi, P. adelaideae, P. linypha, and P. maekhlongensis.  Allspecies are diagnosed and distributions mapped. A key is provided for identification.
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Randal Anthony Singer.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local:
Adviser: Page, Larry M.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID:
UFE0045968:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 TAXONOMIC REVISION OF THE GENUS Acanthocobitis (TELEOSTEI: NEMACHEILIDAE) WITH RECOGNITION OF THE GENUS Paracanthocobitis (TELEOSTEI: NEMACHEILIDAE) AND THE DESCRIPTION OF FOUR NEW SPECIES By RANDAL ANTHONY SINGER A THESI S PRESENTED TO TH E GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERS I TY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2013

PAGE 2

2 2013 Randal Anthony Singer

PAGE 3

3 To my family for all their love and support

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Funding for this study provided by the All Cypriniformes Species Inventory project funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation (DEB 1022720). I thank Dr. Lawrence Page for guidance and direction on this project, and for editorial review during the writing process. I would also like to thank Dr. William SmithVaniz and Dr. Akito Kawahara for guidance and review on my committee. For specimen loans I would like to thank the following people: Dave Catania (CAS), Rob Robins (UF), Jeff Williams (USNM), Doug Nelson (UMMZ), Florian Wicker (SMF), Kelvin Lim (ZRC), Mary Burridge (ROM), Karsten Hartel (MCZ), Andy Bentley (KU), Peter Bartsch (ZMB), Uli Schliewen and Dirk Neumann (ZSM), Patrice Pruvost (MHNH), and Chaiwut Grudpan (UMNF). I would also like to thank Steven Grant for use of his photos, information regarding fishes, and his groundwork on the group. I thank Jesse Grosso for providing help with composing maps and georeferencing localities. I thank Dr Daniel Lumbantobing for assisting in the osteology analysis and guidance. I thank Zachary Randall for assistance with photography and formatting. Rob Robins for help with editing and guidance in research process. I thank Bill Eschmeyer for his extensive work on the Catalog of Fishes, which provided a great deal of information for this study. Lastly, I would like to thank my wife Corie Singer and my daughter Adelaide Singer for support and patience during my research and studies.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 4 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 8 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 9 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 11 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 12 Taxonomic History .................................................................................................. 12 Natural History ........................................................................................................ 13 MATERIALS AND METHODS ...................................................................................... 15 Institutional Abbreviations for Material Examined ................................................... 16 Material Examined .................................................................................................. 17 Acanthocobitis pavonacea ................................................................................ 17 Paracanthocobitis abutwebi, n.sp. .................................................................... 17 Paracanthocobitis adelaideae, n.sp. ................................................................. 18 Paracanthocobitis botia .................................................................................... 18 Paracanthocobitis linypha, n.sp. ....................................................................... 18 Paracanthocobitis mackenziei .......................................................................... 19 Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis, n.sp. ........................................................ 22 Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis .................................................................... 22 Paracanthocobitis mooreh ................................................................................ 23 Paracanthocobitis pictilis .................................................................................. 23 Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis .......................................................................... 23 Paracanthocobitis urophthalma ........................................................................ 24 Paracanthocobitis zonalternans ....................................................................... 24 SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS .......................................................................................... 28 Genus Acanthocobitis ............................................................................................. 28 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 28 Description ....................................................................................................... 28 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 29 Remarks ........................................................................................................... 29 Acanthocobitis pavonacea (McClelland, 1839) ....................................................... 30 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 30 Description ....................................................................................................... 30 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 31 Genus Paracanthocobitis ........................................................................................ 31 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 31

PAGE 6

6 Description ....................................................................................................... 32 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 32 Paracanthocobitis abutwebi n.sp. .......................................................................... 32 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 33 Description ....................................................................................................... 33 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 34 Etymology ......................................................................................................... 34 Paracanthocobitis adelaideae, n.sp. ....................................................................... 34 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 34 Descript ion ....................................................................................................... 35 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 35 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 35 Etymology ......................................................................................................... 36 Paracanthocobitis botia (Hamilton, 1822) ............................................................... 36 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 37 Description ....................................................................................................... 37 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 38 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 38 Remarks ........................................................................................................... 38 Paracanthocobitis linypha, n.sp. ............................................................................. 39 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 39 Description ....................................................................................................... 39 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 40 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 40 Etymology ......................................................................................................... 40 Paracanthocobitis mackenziei (Chaudhuri, 1910) ................................................... 41 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 41 Description ....................................................................................................... 41 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 42 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 42 Remarks ........................................................................................................... 42 Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis n.sp. ............................................................... 44 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 44 Description ....................................................................................................... 44 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 45 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 45 Remarks ........................................................................................................... 45 Etymology ......................................................................................................... 46 Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis (Rendahl 1948) ................................................. 46 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 46 Description ....................................................................................................... 46 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 47 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 47 Paracanthocobitis mooreh (Sykes, 1839) ............................................................... 47 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 48 Description ....................................................................................................... 48

PAGE 7

7 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 49 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 49 Remarks ........................................................................................................... 49 Paracanthocobitis pictilis (Kottela t 2012) ................................................................ 50 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 50 Description ....................................................................................................... 50 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 50 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 51 Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis (Blyth 1860) ............................................................ 51 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 52 Description ....................................................................................................... 52 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 52 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 52 Paracanthocobitis urophthalma (Gnther, 1868) .................................................... 53 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 53 Description ....................................................................................................... 53 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 54 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 54 Paracanthocobitis zonalternans (Blyth 1 860) .......................................................... 54 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................... 55 Description ....................................................................................................... 55 Comparison ...................................................................................................... 55 Distribution ....................................................................................................... 56 Remarks ........................................................................................................... 56 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................. 105 KEY TO SPECIES OF PARACANTHOCOBITIS ........................................................ 107 LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 110 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................... 113

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis abutwebi (N=35). ............................................................................................................... 93 3 2 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis adelaideae (N=8). ................................................................................................................. 94 3 3 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis botia (N=10). ...... 95 3 4 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis linypha (N=10). ............................................................................................................... 96 3 5 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis mackenziei (N=46). ............................................................................................................... 97 3 6 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis (N=12). ..................................................................................... 98 3 7 M orphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis (N=23). ............................................................................................................... 99 3 8 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis mooreh (N=30). ............................................................................................................. 100 3 9 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis pictilis (N=16). 101 3 10 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis (N=11). ............................................................................................................. 102 3 11 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis urophthalma (N=5). ............................................................................................................... 103 3 12 Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis zonalternans (N=26). ............................................................................................................. 104

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3 1 Acanthocobitis longipinnis ZMB, 4795 Holotype, ventral view .......................... 57 3 2 Acanthocobitis longipinnis Lateral view of head, showing suborbital ................. 58 3 3 Head shapes in Acant hocobitis and Paracanthocobitis A) Acanthocobitis ......... 59 3 4 Lateral views of Acanthocobitis type specimens A) Acanthocobitis ................... 60 3 5 A) Cobitis pavonacea SMF 9091, paralectotype, 121 mm SL female, ............... 61 3 6 Distribution of Acanthocobitis pavonacea .......................................................... 62 3 7 Para canthocobitis maekhlongensis, UF 182864,58.9 mm SL. Ventral ............... 63 3 8 Paracanthocobitis mackenziei, KU 40459, 51.5 mm SL male, lateral ................. 64 3 9 Suborbital process shapes in Paracanthocobitis. A) Suborbital flap on P. .......... 65 3 10 Bones supporting the suborbital flap. LE (yellow) = lateral ethmoid; IO ............. 66 3 11 Paracanthocobitis abutwebi UMMZ 208646, holotype, 46.1 mm SL ................. 67 3 12 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis abutwebi ........................................................ 68 3 13 Paracanthocobitis adelaideae. A) adult color pattern, USNM 378387, ............... 69 3 14 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis adelaideae ..................................................... 7 0 3 15 Paracanthocobitis botia. A) BMNH 1889.2.1.15621571, neotype, 45.3 ............. 71 3 16 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis botia. .............................................................. 72 3 17 Paracanthocobitis linypha. A) USNM 378387, holotype, 34.9 mm SL ................ 73 3 18 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis linypha. ........................................................... 74 3 19 A) Paracanthocobitis mackenziei KU 29159, 67.1 mm SL male. B) .................. 75 3 20 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis mackenziei .................................................... 76 3 21 Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis. A) UF 182864, holotype ............................ 77 3 22 Comparison of key morphological differences in Paracanthocobitis ................... 78 3 23 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis ............................................ 79

PAGE 10

10 3 24 Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis. A) Specimen from Irrawaddy River .............. 80 3 25 Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis. Juvenile color pattern, UF 1811110, ............ 81 3 26 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis ............................................... 82 3 27 Paracanthocobitis mooreh. Lateral view, MCZ 52380, 44.4 mm SL ................... 83 3 28 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis mooreh ........................................................... 84 3 29 Paracanthocobitis pictilis A) UF 172927, 71.4 mm SL male. B) ........................ 85 3 30 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis pictilis ............................................................ 86 3 31 Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis Lateral view, ZRC 43570, 55.5 mm SL ............. 87 3 32 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis .................................................... 88 3 33 Paracanthocobitis urophthalma. Lateral view, BMNH 1864.7.11, ....................... 89 3 34 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis urophthalma. .................................................. 90 3 35 Paracanthocobitis zonalternans A) ZSM 27468, neotype, 33.1 mm SL ............. 91 3 36 Distribution of Paracanthocobitis zonalternans .................................................. 92

PAGE 11

11 A bstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science TAXONOMIC REVISION OF THE GENUS Acanthocobitis (TELEOSTEI: NEMACHEILIDAE) WITH RECOGNITION OF THE GENUS Paracanthocobitis (TELEOSTEI: NEMACHEILIDAE) AND THE DESCRIPTION OF FOUR NEW SPECIES By Randal Anthony Singer August 2013 Chair: Lawrence M. Page Major: Zoology M orphological variation was studied in populations referred to the loach genus Acanthocobitis (Nemacheilidae) Two hundred thirty two individuals were examined across the range of the genus, including specimens of all recognized species Paracanthocobitis was recognized as a genus and distinguished from Acanthocobitis in having an emarginate or truncate (vs. pointed) caudal fin; patch (vs. no patch) of adipose tissue on anterior end of lateral line; 915 (vs. 1719) branched dorsal fin rays, and a rounded (vs. more triangular shaped) head. Acanthocobitis is monotypic, containing only A. pavonacea Twelve species of Paracanthcobitis are recognized, including seven species currently in Acanthocobitis : P. botia, P. mandalayensis, P. mooreh, P. pictilis, P. rubidipinnis, P. urophthalma, and P. zonalternans; P. mackenz i ei r emoved from synonymy; and four new species: P. abutwebi, P. adelaideae, P. linypha, and P. maekhlongensis All species are diagnosed and distributions mapped. A key is provided for identification.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Taxonomic History In 1861, Pet ers described the genus Acanthocobitis and designated Acanthocobitis longipinnis, a new species from the Ganges River basin in India, as the type species. Menon (1987) recognized Acanthocobitis longipinnis as a junior synonym of Cobitis botia Hamilton 182 2, a species allocated to Nemacheilus by Shrestha (1978), therein placing Acanthocobitis longipinnis in the synonymy of Nemacheilus botia. Acanthocobitis as a subgenus of Noemacheilus Kuhl & van Hasselt 1823 ( a synonym o f Nemacheilus Bleeker 1863) following which Menon (1987) placed Cobitis mooreh Sykes 1839, C. rubidipinnis Blyth 1860, C. urophthalmus Gnther 1868, and C. zonalternans Blyth 1860 in Nemacheilus Kottelat (1989,1990) recognized Acanthocobitis as a genus a nd placed N. botia, N. rubidipinnis and N. zonalternans in Acanthocobitis Pethiyagoda (1991) subsequently recognized Nemacheilus urophthalmus as a species of Acanthocobitis Menon (1999) retained the name Noemacheilus for all species of Acanthocobitis, noting that the latter was better treated as a subgenus of Nemacheilus rather than as a genus. However, this classification has not been widely accepted. Grant (2007) proposed the name Paracanthocobitis as a subgenus of Acanthocobitis after observing the holotype of A. longipinnis and finding it to be morphologically quite distinct from A. botia. Grant also distinguished A. longipinnis from species he placed in Para canthocobitis in having a pointed caudal fin, slender body, long dorsal fin and greenish coloration These distinctions were based on observations of the type specimen of A. longipinnis and live individuals in aquari a He named Cobitis

PAGE 13

13 zonalternans as the type species of the subgenus Paracanthocobitis In the same paper, Grant examined the type specimens for Cobitis pavonacea McClelland 1839 and determined them to be identifiable as A. longipinnis making A. longipinnis a junior synonym of A. pavonacea. Kottelat (2012) described Acanthocobitis pictilis as a new species, and elevated Nemacheilus rubidipinnis mandalayensis from subspecies to species and placed it and Nemacheilus mooreh in Acanthocobitis In his remarks, he referenced Grant (2007), but did not recognize the validity of the subgenus Paracanthocobitis stating that a proper taxonomic study had not been done. A subsequent publication by Kottelat (2012), that included treatments for all loaches of the world, did not recognize the subgenus Paracanthocobitis However, it did recognize A. longipinnis as incertae sedis and A. pavonacea as a possible species The objectives of this study are to examine the morphological and geographical variation in species referred to the Acanthocobitis Paracanthocobitis is recognized as a genus, and four new species of Paracanthocobitis are described. Natu ral History The recorded range of Paracanthocobitis extends from Pakistan in the Indus River basin to western Thailand in the Mae Khlong River basin. Most species of Paracanthocobitis can be found in slow to moderateflowing water in piedmont areas where m ountains meet the lowlands. The preferred substrate is small to medium sized rocks and gravel, with some species preferring areas with leaf litter. Color patterns vary from species to species, but generally consist of a brown to yellow body with brown bar s, blotches, spots and stripes. All members of this genus have a spot or ocellus on the caudal peduncle, which might act as a false eye to deter predators.

PAGE 14

14 In Paracanthocobitis secondary sexual dimorphism is present in the form of a suborbital flap or a s uborbital groove in males. Additionally, females have deeper bodies, shorter pectoral fins, and suborbital grooves in some species Breeding males have tubercles on the head and pelvic fins Breeding in this genus has not been observed in nature. Breeding t ime can be inferred to be during the rainy season (typically, January March ) as w ild captured specimens of Acanthocobitis during this time have bright red fin coloration, and females are gravid. Some species of Paracanthocobitis are popular in the aquarium trade, and breeding has been observed in captivity. Paracanthocobitis botia, P rubidipinnis and P zonalternans have all been bred in captivity. They seem to prefer to breed over small gravel, and fry associate with aquatic vegetation. There appears to be no published information on the diet of Acanthocobitis The presence of highly papillated lips and a subterminal mouth suggests that they, similar to most loaches, feed by searching through the substrate for food. Examinations of stomach contents have revealed larval chironomids and ephemeropterans.

PAGE 15

15 CHAPTER 2 MATERIALS AND METHODS Measurements and counts follow Kottelat (19 90) with the exception that dorsal fin and anal fin counts include the last branched ray as a separate ray included in the count, rather than denoting it as . Counts and measurements were taken on up to 10 specimens from each sample (specimens from one locality and date) Juveniles (specimens less than 25 mm SL) were excluded from examination because of potential ontogenetic chang es in body shape Measurements were made to the nearest 0.1 mm using digital calipers and a Leica M80 dissection microscope All measurements are given in millimeters (mm) Two hundred thirty two individuals were examined, including specimens of all 12 species of Paracanthocobitis and one species of Acanthocobitis Individuals of P. pictilis and P. maekhlongensis were cleared and stained following Armbruster (in litt.), a modification of Potthoff (1984) and Taylor and van Dyke (1985) Photographs were tak en of preserved specimens us ing a Visionary Digital (Palmyra, Virginia) with Canon 40D and 5D cameras and edited using Adobe Photoshop CS 5.1 Geographic c oordinates were determined using maps and Google E arth. Maps were constructed using Arc GIS 3.3 and A dobe Photoshop CS3. Fieldwork was conducted in Thailand using backpack electroshockers, seines and dipnets. Specimens were euthanized in MS 2222, preserved in 10% formalin, and transferred to 70% ethanol for storage. Live color photos were taken when poss ible using a Canon Powershot digital camera. Species were recognized using the Phylogenetic Species Concept. A species is the smallest diagnosable cluster of individual organisms within which there is a parental ancestry and descent (Cracraft 1987).

PAGE 16

16 Ins titutional Abbreviations for Material Examined Institutional abbreviations follow Eschmeyer and Fricke (2012) and are defined below. ANSP: Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, U.S.A AUM: Auburn University Natural History Museum, Auburn, Alabama, U.S .A BMNH Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom CAS : California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California, U.S.A. KU: University of Kansas Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center, Division of Ichthyology, Lawrence, Kansas, U .S.A. MCZ: Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Ichthyology Department, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A. NIFI: National Inland Fisheries Institute, Fish Taxonomy Division, Bangkok, Thailand. NRM: Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet, Department of Vert ebrate Zoology, Ichthyology Section, Stockholm, Sweden. ROM: Royal Ontario Museum, Department of Natural History, Toronto. SMF: Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum, Abteilung Marine Zoologie, Sektion Ichthyologie, Frankfurt am Main, Hessen, Germ any. UF: University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, U.S.A. UMMZ: University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, U.S.A. UMNF: Ubon Ratchathani University Ichthyology Collection, Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand. USNM: Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History, Department of Vertebrate Zioology, Division of Fishes, Washington D.C., U.S.A.

PAGE 17

17 ZMB: Humboldt Universitt, Museum fr Naturkunde, Zoologisches Museum, Vertebraten (Wirbekltiere), Ichthyologie, Berlin, Germany Material Examined Acanthocobitis pavonacea INDIA: BRAHMAPHUTRA DRAINAGE : SMF 68 (1; 95 mm SL) Assam (26.436147, 92.910461); SMF 9070 (1; 101.6 mm SL) Assam ( same coordinates as SMF 68 ); SMF 9090 9091 (1; 106.8 mm SL) Assam same locality as SMF 68; SMF 9091 9092 (1;121.1 mm SL) Assam same locality as SMF 68 INDIA: GANGES DRAINAGE: ZMB 4795 (1ex.) (25.393661, 86.429443) Paracanthocobitis abutwebi, n.sp. BANGLADESH: MEGHNA BASIN: UMMZ 208782 (39, 10 ex; 40.7 53.3 mm SL) Piyain Gang River at Songram Punji, 1.5 mi downstream from India (25.183, 89.983); UF 178719 (3; 24.133.0 mm SL) Dhaka, Jamuna River Drainage at Dhaleswari River, Nandakhali Ferry Ghat (23.799417, 90.24594); UF 178050 (2; 50.250.9 mm SL) Sunamgari Danio Site (no coordinates); PARATYPES UF 172474 (2; 37.948.8 mm SL) Sylhet, Changerkhal River (24.95439, 91.7438); CAS 227857 (1; 66.1 mm SL) canal/swamp in Tongvar Haor; UMMZ 208626 (9; 35.552.0 mm SL) Sylhet (N Sylhet) Piyain Gang River at Songram Punji, 1/4 mi downstream from Indian border (25.101145, 91.754265); HOLOTYPE UMMZ 208646 (5; 39.551.0 mm SL) Sylhet, Rangapani Khal (creek), 4 mi NNW of Jaintiapur on Sylhet Shillong HWY (25.140001, 92.056103); CAS 233500 (2; 34.635.6 mm SL) Sylhet Ganges River Drainage Nur Nody Stream upstream from Lubha River at Nihalpur Village (25.03615, 92.30607); CAS 227855 (1; 50.8 mm SL) same locality as CAS 233500; AUM 50461 (1; 24.9 mm SL) Savar Dhaka, Dhaleswari River Drainage, Dhaleswari River, ferry ghat near Nanda

PAGE 18

18 Khali (Balu Ghat); UF 172551 (1; 50.8 mm SL) N Sylhet, Kanka River by road to Jaintiapur from Sylet (24.99072222, 92.06019444); Paracanthocobitis adelaid e ae, n.sp. BURMA: IRRAWADDY BASIN: HOLOTYPE to be removed from USNM 378387 (7; 45.951.4 mm SL) Kha Wan, Kha Wan stream (25.085599, 96 .96991 ); PARATYPES to be removed from USNM 378393 ( 1 ; 2 8 2 mm SL) Mayen stream (25.355, 97.063) Paracanthocobitis botia INDIA: BRAHMAPUTRA BASIN: NEOTYPE: BMNH 1889.2.1.15621571 (10; 37.157.7 mm SL) Assam (26.598351, 92.909546) ; BMNH 1889.2.1.15811582 (2; 51.955.4 mm SL) Bengal (25.712021, 89.769287); UMMZ 244583 (1; 19.9 mm SL), India, West Bengal Dolong River tributary of Mansai River vic. of Shildanga ( 26.22 1628, 90.72784). Paracanthocobitis linypha n.sp. BURMA: IRRAWADDY BASIN: PARATYPES : CAS 88918 (10; 38.842.9 mm SL) Sagaing Division, Kalemyo fish markets (23.189521, 94.073045); HOLOTYPE : to be removed from USNM 378387 (1; 34.9 mm SL), Kha Wan, Kha Wan stream (25.085599, 96.96991); ex USNM 378384 (20, 10 ex; 29.936.3 mm SL) Nan Kwe Chaung (20.502602, 96.361713); e x USNM 372168 (1; 21.3 mm SL) Kachin, HpaLap stream of Nam Chim Chaung, of Nankwe Chaung, NW of Myitkyina (25.52666667, 97.37916667); USNM 378400 (58, 10 ex; 29.234.4 mm SL) Nan Kwe Chaung (20.502602, 96.361713); USNM 378406 (1; 36.6 mm SL) Nanmate stream (25.38416667, 97.01055556); USNM 372182 (1; 22.5 mm SL) Kachin State, Nankwe Chaung, W of Myitkyina, on both sides of highway bridge (25.3322, 97.28); ex. USNM 378393 (4; 23.9 26.4 mm SL) Mayen stream (25.355, 97.06333333).

PAGE 19

19 Paracanthocobitis mackenziei BANGLADESH: MEGHNA BASIN: UF 176610 (3; 37.9 48.8 mm SL), Dhaka, Jamuna River Drainage at Dhaleswari River, Nandakhali Ferry Ghat (23.799416666666, 90.2459444444444); AUM 50621 (1; 47.9 mm SL), Sylhet, Sunamganj River drainage, Sunamganj River/floodplain (25.070051, 91.407423). INDIA:INDUS BASIN: MCZ 18690 (3; 36.5 37.4 mm SL), Haryana plains, 70 mi SW of Amballa (29.609282, 76.18721); BMNH 1932.2.20.30 (3; 39.958.1 mm SL), Jubbulpore (Jabbalpur) (32.776883, 74.92527); CAS 41295 (6; 4757.4 mm SL), Punjab, Kangra Valley (32.161663, 76.294098). INDIA: CENTRAL INDIA: BMNH 1889.2.1.1590 (Lectotype of Nemacheilus aureus), (1; 31.9 mm SL), Jabbulpore, India (23.104997, 79.93475); BMNH 1889.2.1.15771580 (4; 38.643.2 mm SL), Al lahabad (25.423957, 81.85); BMNH 1889.2.1.1576 (1; 41.3 mm SL), Loodianah (30.993503, 75.839882). INDIA: GANGES BASIN: BMNH 1867.5.12.44 (1; 56.0 mm SL), Morar River near Geralior (26.265526, 78.062689); CAS 32369 (2; 34.938.6 mm SL), Bisrampau C.P. (Connaught Place) (28.646607, 77.264242); CAS 34744 (2; 49.559.6 mm SL), Rewa, Damgarh (Ramgarh?) taken by Nerbudda Survey (23.64075, 85.520096); CAS 41294 (3 ex.) Bihar, Bishrampur, (former Central Province), (27.58283333, 84.714); CAS 32369 (2; 34.938.6 mm SL), New Delhi, Bisrampau (Bisrampur?), near CP (Connaught Place) (28.646607, 77.264242); MCZ 4253 (1; 45.3 mm SL), Haridwar (29.964585, 78.188468). INDIA: MAHANADI RIVER BASIN: CAS 61839 (10; 41.8 58.8 mm SL), Orissa State, fish market at Sone Pur (21.15 4157, 83.879728).

PAGE 20

20 NEPAL: GANGES BASIN: KU 28527 (1; 35 mm SL), Sapari/Sunsari, just upstream from Koshi River Barrage (26.52499952, 86.93499756); KU28570 (5; 2340mm SL), Saptari/Sunsari, just downstream from Koshi River Barrage (26.5182991, 86.9266968); K U 28588 (2; 55 68mm SL), Sunsari, associated seepage at Koshi Tappu Wildlife Refuge (26.62330055, 87.03330231); KU 28620 (5; 4466mm SL) Sunsari Bhantabari Seepage at Bhantabari (26.5249996, 86.9732971); KU 28631 (1; 54mm SL), Rautahat/Sarlahi, at Raj Marg highway (27.10000038, 85.48329926); KU 28648 (8; 2952mm SL), Dang Rajpur, at Rajpur (27.8432999, 82.5633011); KU 28665 (4; 3546mm SL), Kanchanpur Brahamadev at Brahamadev (29.08169937, 80.14170074); KU 28681 (3; 3344mm SL), Kanchanpur confluence o f 3 rivers (Chaudhar, Bahuni, Gobraiya), at Royal Suklaa Phantaa Wildlife Reserve (28.7166996, 80.1999969); KU 28715 (3; 4350mm SL), Kanchanpur Mahendranagar At Raj Marg highway, 9km E of Mahendranagar (28.9517002, 80.2549973 ); KU 28734 (1; 41mm SL), Kailali Waters of Kailali district along RajMarg highway (28.7000008, 80.9000015); KU 28759 (1; 60mm SL), Bardiya/Kailali Chisapani at Chisapani (28.64170074, 81.28170013); KU 28810 (1; 44mm SL), Banke Bhurigaon at Madhuwaa/Kanchanpur (28.0699997, 81.8467026); KU 28821 (3; 4957mm SL), Nawalparasi Tribentighat at Tribentighat above barrage (27.4491997, 83.9216995); KU 28891 (1; 55mm SL), Chitwan/Nawalparasi at Kanahaa river confluence (27.48329926, 83.94000244); KU 28907(9; 3658mm SL), Chitwan/Nawalparasi at Gharial Conservation Project Camp (27.55830002, 84.12000275); KU 28924 (5; 4258mm SL), Chitwan/Nawalparasi, just downstream from Lamichaur Military Camp (27.58169937, 84.13670349); KU 28942 (1; 55mm SL), Chitwan/Nawalparasi at Amaltarighat

PAGE 21

21 (27.55330086, 84.11329651); KU 28964 (1; 54mm SL), Nawalparasi at Pier No. 13 (27.41670036, 83.85669708); KU 29077 (2; 4850mm SL), Tanahun Khairenitar at Khairenitar (28.0333004, 84.0667038); KU 29138 (4; 5764mm SL), Jhapa, Bhadrapur(26.53829956, 88.10169983); KU 29159 (2; 6775mm SL), lam Mai Khola at Mai Khola (26.8850002, 87.928299); KU 29180 (1; 55mm SL), Jhapa at Raj Marg highway (26.6583004, 87.8700027 ); KU 29190 (2; 4547mm SL), Morang, Belbari (26.65999985, 87.41169739); KU 29466 (2; 3551mm SL), Bardiya at Chapang (28.3567009, 81.71330261); KU 40585 (1; 48.1 mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, Rapti River upstream from confluence w/ Lothar on border of Chitwan Nat. Park (27.56255556, 84.70475); KU 40367 (1; 42.4 mm SL), Mechi, Jhapa, Mechi River at Karkarvitta, at bridge crossing at border with India (26.64597222, 88.16230556); KU 40575 (1; 43.5 mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, Lothar River at bridge crossing highway through Piple Village (27.58819444, 84.73313889); KU 40408 (1; 39.3 mm SL), Mechi, Jhapa, Biring River at highway (26.64183333, 87.93730556); KU 40433 (1; 29.3 mm SL), Kosi, Morang, Lohandra River at Belbari town (26.66288889, 87.40813889); KU 40616 (3; 42.645.0 mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, Narayani River at Narayanghat picinic spot (27.69547222, 84.40994444); KU 40600 (12; 23.433.4 mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, Khair Khola at bridge crossing highway E of Ratnanagar Town (27.61841667, 84.53266667); KU 40594 (10; 15.826.6 mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, Sim Pani Ghol (stream?) at Sim Pani Village (27.58283333, 84.714) ; KU 40459 (41, 10 ex. 37.772.5 mm SL), Kosi, Sunsari, Koshi River diversion, 1km N of highway, around 2 km before bridge crossing Koshi (26.60402778, 87.02411111); KU 40630 (6; 27.746.8mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, Budrapti Kohla at Bachauli 3 Baghmara (27.549246, 84.51236); KU

PAGE 22

22 40507 (8; 32.463.1mm SL), Beri, Bardiya, mainstem of Karnali River, downstream of Chisapani (28.6332222, 81.27511111); KU 40647 (5; 21.945.3 mm SL), Narayani, Chitwan, tributary of the Rapti River, Chitwan National Park (27.5724166 7, 84.49638889); KU 40489 (9; 40.852.7mm SL), Kosi, Sunsari, Sunsari River at Inarua (26.61072222, 87.12744444). Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis, n.sp. THAILAND: MAE KHLONG BASIN: UF 176571 (3; 54.457.7 mm SL) Kanchanaburi, Mae NamKwae, Huay Ban Rai (14o4248.7N, 98o3125.3E); HOLOTYPE UF 182864 (2; 56.458.9 mm SL) Kanchanaburi, Thong Pha Phum, Ban Rai, NW of Huai Khayeng close to SW side of reservoir, off road 327 (14o4125N, 98o3116E); UF 176387 (1; 58 mm SL) Kanchanaburi, Mae Nam Kwae (14o4510 N, 98o302E); UF 176542 (1; 54.2 mm SL) Kanchanaburi, Huay Pak Kok (14o4049N, 98o3138E); UF 176437 (1; 51.6 mm SL) Kanchanburi, Mae Name Kwae, Huay Ban Rai (14o439.6N, 98o3021E); PARATYPES UMMZ 209462 (4; 61.375 mm SL)Kanchanaburi Kwai Yai River (14.227113,99.233551) Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis BURMA: IRRAWADDY DRAINAGE: ex. USNM 378387 (3; 45.9 51.4 mm SL) Kha Wan, Kha Wan stream (25.085599, 96.96991); ex. USNM 372168 (1; 42.3 mm SL) Kachin, HpaLap stream, of Nam Chim Chaung, of Nankwe Chaung, NW of Myitkyina (25.52666667, 97.37916667); USNM 378384 (4; 50.564.2 mm SL) NanKwe Chaung (20.502602, 96.361713); CAS 88890 (4; 61.9 88.4 mm SL) Kachin, from Myitkyina Market (25.382495, 97.403297); USNM 378409 (4; 45.761.4 mm SL) Nanmate stream (25 .38416667, 97.01055556); USNM 344646 (3; 69.682.4 mm SL) Kachin Irrawaddy

PAGE 23

23 drainage, Nankwe stream, 10 mi SW of Myitkyina along main N S road (25.33361111, 97.28083333). THAILAND: WANG RIVER DRAINAGE: UF 181110 (14, 7 ex.; 34.460.5mm SL) Lampang, Mae N am Wang Nam Mae Pan, bridge on Hwy 4025 1 km E of Ban Thung Pong (18.78194444, 98.49111111) THAILAND: PING RIVER DRAINAGE: UMMZ 209453 (5; 41.865.9 mm SL) Chiang Mai Province (18.795, 99.008056) Paracanthocobitis mooreh INDIA: KRISHNA RIVER BASIN: CAS 3 2619 (4; 34.237.1 mm SL), Maharashtra, Deolali (19.470153, 74.620242) ; MCZ 52384 (10 of 22 ex.; 34.947.8 mm SL), Vithal Wadi River, Poona (18.392972, 74.002419) ; MCZ 52380 (11; 40.250.5 mm SL), Poona, Mula River near Chintamani Temple, Theur (18.522585, 74.041486); BMNH 1889.2.1.15871589 (3; 43.248.3 mm SL), Poona(18.53789, 73.865723) ; MCZ 52377 (1; 44.7 mm SL,) Khadakwasle Dam (18.433333, 73.766667). INDIA: KAVERI RIVER BASIN: BMNH 1870.5.2.17 18 (2; 40.741.0 mm SL). Wynaad (11.423326, 76.24423). G odavari Paracanthocobitis pictilis BURMA: ATARAN BASIN : UF 172927 (5; 59.072.1 mm SL; 1 cleared and stained, 76.4 mm SL), Ataran drainage, from aquarium fish dealer, Kamphol Udonmritthiruj, in Pathumithani; UNMF P 07667 (52, 11 ex: 5581.2 mm SL), Kraeng Tor waterfall, Pyathony Su Mon State (15.3884, 98.298281). Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis BURMA: IRRAWADDY BASIN: CAS 89008 (1; 62.5 mm SL) Mandalay fish markets (21.981255, 96.056099); CAS 231702 (1; 62.2 mm SL), Mandalay/Sagaing

PAGE 24

24 Division, Irrawaddy Riv er, 2 km upstream of upper bridge in Sagaing (21.889854, 95.998821); CAS 231849 (1; 58.5 mm SL), Mandalay Division, Mandalay, Irrawaddy River upstream of Mandalay (22.036639, 96.034813); CAS 231517 ( 1; 48.5 mm SL), Irrawaddy River, near Ywar Thit Gyi, dow nstream from Mandalay ( 21.912 95.7741) ; CAS 231687 ( 2; 55.957.5 mm SL), Irrawaddy River, near Amarapura, downstream from Mandalay (21.90265, 96.00985) ; ZRC 43570 (1; 55.5 mm SL) Bago, Irrawaddy (from fish dealer) (17.433855, 96.484566); BMNH 1893.2.16.5 2 (1; 71.2 mm SL) Mandalay (21.987622, 96.039505). BURMA: ATARAN BASIN: USNM 378401 (3; 46.462.7 mm SL) Kawkareik market (Hlaing Bwe River?), (16.507529, 98.244152) Paracanthocobitis urophthalm a SRI LANKA: KALU GANGA BASIN: CAS 41298 (1; 45.9 mm SL), "Sri Lanka" from Colombo museum 1940 ; CAS 30147 (1; 29.1 mm SL), Ratnapura (6.691887, 80.369568); BMNH 1981.1.21.320 (1; 33.4 mm SL), Gin Ganga, Upper Nanikita Ela (6.369894, 80.480118); BMNH 1864.7.11.3536 9, syntypes of Nemacheilus urophthalmus (2; 45.8 48.8 mm SL), South Ceylon (6.087642, 80.184202). Paracanthocobitis zonalternans BANGLADESH: MEGHNA BASIN: UMMZ 208629 (1 ex.), Sylhet (N Sylhet), Piyain Gang River at Songram Punji, 1/4 mi downstream from Indian border (25.101145, 91.754265); ex CAS 2335 00 (1 ex.), Sylhet, Ganges River Drainage, Nur Nody stream, upstream from Lubha River, at Nihalpur Village (25.03615, 92.30607); UMMZ 208629 (1 ex.), UMMZ 208784 (17 ex.), Sylhet (N Sylhet), Piyain Gang River at Songram Punji, 1.5m downstream from India border, Surma (Meghna) drainage (25.18333333, 89.98333333).

PAGE 25

25 BURMA: IRRAWADDY BASIN: CAS 34752 (2 ex.). 9 mi NW of Hlegu, Ngamoeyeik Creek (17.218528, 96.200695); CAS 32368 (13 ex.). Irrawaddy River/drainage. near Indaw (In Daw?), Chaung and Karnaing (24.225 52, 96.143146); USNM 288452 (26 ex.). THAILAND: SALWEEN BASIN: Mae Hong Son Province, 5 km W of Mae sariang (Salaeng?), (18.157772, 97.886098); USNM 378390 (1 ex.) ,Yin Monetan of Naung Cho township, Northern Shan State (22o148N, 96o3959E); USNM 3721 82 (1 ex.), Kachin State, Nankwe Chaung, W of Myitkyina, on both sides of highway bridge (25o1956N, 97o1648E); USNM 378439 (~75; 31.539.7 mm SL), Kayin stream, near Sittallang River, E of Taungoo (18.939088, 96.454711); ZRC 43453 (10 ex.), Shan State, Ma Gawe River, along Kalaw Thazi Hwy between Mandalay and Nampantet (21.396819, 96.244812); UF 30191 (2 ex.), Gyobu Reservoir, 9 km N of Taik Kyi Taik Kyi township, Rangoon (16.831276, 96.25); USNM 378397 (2 ex.), Mandalay Division, Irrawaddy drainage, aritificial pond in Toegyi Village, near Pyin Oo Lwin on the road Mandalay Hsipaw (21.97666667, 96.39). MALAYSIA: MALAY PENINSULA: MCZ 47226 (1 ex.), Satun Malay Peninsula,, Boripatra River, on road from Satun to Hat Tai. (6.814626, 99.974098); ZRC 41103 ( 1 ex.), Perlis Sintok Pdg. Senai Rd. (6.456424,100.490949); ZRC 46671 (3 ex.), Kedah Kg. Tandop about 67 mi from Baling on road to Weng (5.665334, 100.901245). THAILAND: MAE KHLONG BASIN: ANSP 179829 (2 ex.), Ulong River, tributary of Mae Nam Khwae Noi, at route 323 bridge, 510 km from Thong Pha Phum (14.782518, 98.669386); UF 176449 (35 ex.), Kanchanaburi, Mae Nam Khwae, Huay Ban Rai (14.71933333, 98.50583333); UF 176554 (23 ex.), same locality as UF

PAGE 26

26 176449; UMMZ 209461 (7 ex.), Kanchanaburi, Kwai Yai R iver (14.227113, 99.233551); ZRC 42002 (2 ex.), Ratchaburi Prov., Suan Pheng Dist., Suan Pheng Waterfall (13.524024, 99.239007); ROM 48972 (2 ex.), Ranong Province, N of Bang Kaeo, off highway 4 close to border of Burma (10.25, 98.75); UF 182821 (13 ex.), Kanchanaburi, Thong Pha Phum, near Rt. 3272 (14.69027778, 98.52111111); NIFI 3087 (4 ex.), Kanchanaburi, Thong Pha Phum Huay Ulong (14.759777, 98.638315) THAILAND: PENINSULAR THAILAND: UF 182833 (4 ex.), near Phang Nga, off Rt. 4090 (8.571416667, 98.41783333); UF 183331 (2 ex.), Nakhon Si Thammarat, near Rt. 4015 (8.348861111, 99.6921111); UMMZ 238962 (2 ex.), Phuket, Nam Tok Ton Sai (8.026255, 98.363285); ZRC 45717 (8 ex.), Phuket, H.H. Tan, field # THH0006 (7.957237, 98.316936); ZRC 42198 (3 ex.), Ranong, Khlong Phrae, Sai Ban Kraeo Noi (Bang Kaeo?), km 8 on rd. branching E. 32 km of Ranong on route to Kra Buri (10.183836, 98.719597); ZRC 42016 (1 ex.), Prachaup Khiri Khan, Thaup Sakae District W of Ang Thong (11.44855556, 99.48283333); ZRC 42184 (8 ex. ), Ranong stream, N of Khura Buri, 100 km S of Ranong (9.199376, 98.412724); ZRC 41974 (5 ex.), Ranong King, Amphae Suk Sam Lan (Ran?), Ton Koi Waterfall (9.353185, 98.429385); SMF 3966 (holotype of Noemacheilus phuketensis ), Phuket Island, off the west co ast of the south peninsula Thailand (7.991918, 98.342628); SMF 3967 (paratype of Noemacheilus phuketensis ), (1 ex.), same locality as SMF 3966; SMF 4244 (paratype of Noemacheilus phuketensis ) (1 ex.), same locality as SMF 3966. THAILAND: SALWEEN BASIN: ZSM 27468 (Neotype of Cobitis zonalternans, 33.1 mm SL), Huay Me Charno, 4 km south of Amphoe Mae Romat on rd. 1085; CAS 35775 (6 ex.), Nam Mesarieng, near Mesarieng (Mae Sariang), northern Thailand

PAGE 27

27 (18.151316, 97.934432) ; CAS 35776 (2 ex.), same locality as CAS 35775; CAS 36042 (2 ex.), same locality as CAS 35775; NIFI 00874 (14; 28.032.5 mm SL), Tak Province, Huai Mae Kamui, Aunphae, Tha Song Yang (17.230005, 98.229046); NIFI 02181 (2; 27.027.1 mm SL), Surat Thani Province, Suratthani Tapi Basin, Khlong Sok at Ban Kheng Sok (8.90678, 98.522415); NIFI 01435 (13 ex.), Kanchanaburi, Khao Noi (13.966887, 99.589834) ; NIFI 02057 (7 ex.), same locality as NIFI 01435; NIFI 6393 (1 ex.), Mae Hong Son Province, Mae Sanga River (18.238482, 97.960739) ; ZRC 41258 (8 ex.), Tak, Salween Basin, Mae Nam Moi, S of Phop Phra (16o1725N, 98o4220.4E); ROM 51139 (5 ex.). Tak Province, N of Mae Charao (16.9667, 98.5667).

PAGE 28

28 CHAPTER 3 SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS Genus Acanthocobitis Acanthocobitis Peters 1861:712. Typespecies: A. lo ngipinnis Peters 1861 by monotypy. Diagnosis Member of Nemacheilidae. Distinguished from all other genera in family except Paracanthocobitis in having the lower lip with a large papillated pad on either side of a medial interruption; upper lip with two to five rows of papillae and continuous with lower lip (Fig.3 1) ; conspicuous black spot with white outline on upper half of caudal fin base. Acanthocobitis is distinguished from Paracanthocobitis in having a pointed (vs. emarginate or truncate) caudal fin; enlarged, fleshy rostral barbels (Fig. 3 1) ; absence of patch of adipose tissue on anterior end of lateral line; long dorsal fin (> 33% of SL with 1719 branched rays vs. 915 in Paracanthocobitis ), triangular shaped (vs. rounded) head (Fig.3 3) and verti cally (vs. horizontally) oriented suborbital flap (Fig.32). Acanthocobitis is monotypic containing only A pavonacea. Description Heavily papillated lips; oval shaped ocellus; ossified suborbital flap in male oriented vertically; 56 concentric rows of spots in dorsal fin; 1011 transverse bands in caudal fin; lateral line complete; axillary pelvic lobe absent; color pattern variable with 1820 thin saddles continuing down side to below lateral line, small spots sometimes between saddles and bars; spots and dashes on head and opercle, interrupted stripe from orbit to tip of snout. Branched dorsal fin rays 1719; branched pectoral fin rays 12-

PAGE 29

29 13; branched pelvic fin rays 8; branched anal fin rays 6; branched caudal fin rays 9+8 or 9+9. Distribution Acant hocobitis is known from the Ganges and Brahmaputra river basins of northern India and Bangladesh. Remarks Menon (1987) treated Acanthocobitis longipinnis type species of Acanthocobitis, as a synonym of Acanthocobitis botia. Grant (2007) suggested that A longipinnis was a valid species distinct enough to be placed in its own subgenus, and placed all other species of Acanthocobitis in a new subgenus, Paracanthocobitis with type species Cobitis zonalternans Blyth 1860 Differences separating A canthocobitis from Paracanthocobitis included caudal fin shape (pointed), suborbital flap orientation and size (vertical and enlarged), and body shape (slender). The same characters described by Grant (2007) were observed in the present study as were other characters s eparating Acanthocobitis from Paracanthocobitis : enlarged fleshy rostral barbels and lack of a patch of adipose tissue on the lateral line. The two subgenera of Grant are treated herein as genera. After observing types of Acanthocobitis longipinnis and C obitis pavonacea, Grant (2007) suggested that A longipinnis from the Ganges River basin is a junior synonym of A pavonacea from the Brahmaputra River basin. The type specimens of both nominal species were observed in the present study and found to be in poor condition (Fig. 3 4 3 5 ) The synonymy proposed by Grant (2008) will be upheld until, and if, fresh material is collected and the two forms can be diagnosed.

PAGE 30

30 Acanthocobitis pavonacea (McClelland, 1839) Cobitis pavonacea McClelland 1839 Asiatic Researches v.19 (pt 2) 305, 437, pl.52 (fig 1) Assam, India Brahmaputra Basin. Acanthocobitis longipinnis Peters 1861, Monatsberichte der Kniglichen Preuss[ischen] Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 712 Ganges River, India Noemacheilus pavonaceaus Menon 1987 The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleostei Cobitoidea. Part 1. Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. i x + 1 259. Acanthocobitis pavonacea. A new subgenus of Acanthocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19. Diagnosis See account for Acanthocobitis. Description B ody deepest under dorsal fin or predorsally ; head triangular shaped when viewed laterally; dorsal fin long ( > than 33% of SL) ; caudal fin lanceolateshaped with 1213 transverse bands; male with ossified suborbital process; lateral line complete; ro stral barbels thick and fleshy; axillary pelvic lobe absent; branched dorsal fin rays 1719, branched pectoral fin rays 1213; branched caudal fin rays 8+8 or 9+8. M aximum SL = 121.1 mm female. Color pattern consisting of thin bars, much narrower than interspaces, extending from dorsum to below lateral line until distal extremity of dorsal fin, then touching venter post dorsal, sometimes with small spots between. Head covered in irregular shaped blotches, with interrupted stripe, broken in center extending from orbit to top of snout.

PAGE 31

31 Distributio n Acanthocobitis pavonacea is known from n ortheastern India in the Ganges R iver basin and w estern Assam, India, in the Brahmaputra River basin (Fig.36). Genus Paracanthocobitis Paracanthocobitis Grant 2007:3. Type species: Cobitis zonalternans Blyth, 1860 by original designation. Diagnosis Member of Nemacheilidae. Distinguished from all other genera in family except A canthocobitis in having heavily papillated lips, upper lip with three to five rows of papillae and continuous with lower lip pads (Fig. 3 7) ; conspicuous black spot with white outline on upper half of caudal fin base. Paracanthocobitis is distinguished from Acanthocobitis in having an emarginate or truncate (vs. pointed) caudal fin; rostral barbels uniform in size; patch of adipose tissue on anterior end of lateral line (Fig. 38); 9 15 branched dorsal fin rays (1719 in Acanthocobitis ), rounded (vs. triangular shaped) head. Paracanthocobitis has a horizontally oriented suborbital process formed from a fusion of the lateral ethmoid and the first infraorbital (Fig. 3 10). In adult males of some species of Para canthocobitis there is a free fleshy extension called the suborbit al flap on the lateral ethmoid. In other species there is no free flap. Instead, the skin covering the lateral ethmoid is fused dorsally and posteriorly but not ventrally, creating a suborbital groove. A well defined suborbital groove, visibly associated with the lateral ethmoid, is found only in adult males. However, in species with a groove, the females often have a shallower, less well defined groove, and the lateral ethmoid is not visible (Fig. 3 9)

PAGE 32

32 Description Heavily papillated lips; dark circular or sliver shaped caudal spot with light outline; suborbital flap or groove in male; 36 concentric rows of spots in dorsal fin, 23 in anal fin; 411 transverse bands in caudal fin; lateral line complete or incomplete; axillary pelvic lobe present or absent; color pattern variable intraspecifically; all species with dark spots and blotches on head and opercle, uninterrupted stripe from orbit to tip of snout; nasal cavity significantly larger (at least twice as large) than naris. Branched dorsal fin rays 1015; branched pectoral fin rays 1013; branched pelvic fin rays 8; branched anal fin rays 67; branched caudal fin rays 9+8 or 9+9. Distribution Paracanthocobitis is known from eastern Pakistan in the upper Indus basin, east to Cambodia and Laos in the Mek ong basin (Rainboth 2013) The northern limit of the range is the Ganges River basin in Nepal, with the southern limit in peninsular Sri Lanka and Malaysia. Paracanthocobitis abutwebi n.sp. Holotype UMMZ 208646 (46.1 mm SL male) Sylhet, Bangladesh, Rangapani Khal (creek), 4 mi NNW of Jaintiapur on Sylhet Shillong HWY (25.140, 92.056) W Rainboth, A Rahman, and S Ahmed, 19February 1978. Paratypes UF 172474 (2; 37.9 48.8 mm SL) Sylhet, Bangladesh, Changerkhal River (24.954, 91.744), RL Mayden, 05December 2007.

PAGE 33

33 Diagnosis (Fig. 3 11, Table 31) Paracanthocobitis abutwebi differs from all other Paracanthocobitis in having combination of complete lateral line; color pattern of alternating large and small dark spots along lateral line, small dark dorsal sad dles, speckled pattern on upper side between dorsal saddles; 45 dark bands in caudal fin of adult; and 67 anal fin rays; axillary pelvic lobe absent. Description Body depth more or less uniform, slightly deeper at dorsal fin origin; b ranched dorsal fin r ays 1213 (usually 12); branched pectoral fin rays 1013; branched pelvic fin rays 8 ; branched anal fin rays 67 (usually 7); branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse bands in caudal fin 45; suborbital flap in male; a xillary pelvic lobe absent; lateral li ne complete with 87 103 pores Maximum SL = 53.3 mm female. Color pattern consisting of 10 13 small dorsal saddles not extending to lateral line and becoming closer together towards the head sometimes with small spots or dashes inbetween. Ten16 dark spot s along lateral line, spots not extending onto venter. Speckled pattern on upper side and sometimes extending onto lateral line. Comparison Paracanthocobitis abutwebi can be distinguished from all other Paracanthocobitis except P. botia P. urophthalm a, P. linyph a and P. mooreh in not having an axillary pelvic lobe. Paracanthocobitis abutwebi differs from P. linyph a and P. mooreh in having a complete lateral line, and differs from P. urophthalma in not having dark bars on the side that extend across the lateral line onto the venter with narrower

PAGE 34

34 interspaces. Paracanthocobitis abutwebi differs from P. botia in having alternating large and small dark spots along the lateral line and a speckled pattern on upper side, 45 (vs. 6 7) dark bands on the caudal fi n in the adult, and 67 (usually 7, vs. 6 in P. botia ) anal fin rays. Distribution Paracanthocobitis abutwebi is known from the Meghna and lower Brahmaputra and Ganges river drainages of Bangladesh (Fig. 3 12) Etymology Named for Professor Abu Tweb Abu Ahmed for his contributions to the study of hillstream fishes of Bangladesh. Paracanthocobitis adelaideae, n.sp. Holotype USNM 378387 (50.6 mm SL male) Kha Wan, Kha Wan stream, Myanmar (25.0856, 96.970), R. Britz, 02 April 2003. Paraty pes ex. USNM 378393 (1; 28.2 mm SL) Mayen stream, Myanmar (25.355, 97.063), R. Britz, 02April 2003. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 13, Table 32) Paracanthocobitis adelaideae differs from other Paracanthocobitis in having complete lateral line, axillary pelvic lobe, 12 dorsal rays, and presence of a free suborbital flap in males, dark dark brown dorsal saddles connected to large squarish blotches on side along and below lateral line. Caudal spot irregular shaped and located more dorsally; head wide (interorbital 33.3 % of SL).

PAGE 35

35 Description B ody depth wider predorsally than post dorsally; branched dorsal fin r ays 12; branched pectoral fin rays 1012 (usually 11); branched pelvic fin rays 8 ; branched anal fin rays 6; branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse bands in caudal fin 45; suborbital flap present in male; a xillary pelvic lobe present; lateral line complete with 7288 p ores Maximum SL= 51.4 mm female. Color pattern consisting of a heavily pigmented wave or m shaped pattern sometimes appearing in juveniles as a checkerboard along the l ateral line (Fig. 3 13) Dorsal is considerably darker than ventral. Caudal spot irregular shaped and located more dorsally than laterally. Head pigmented with spots, dashes or large dark blotches. Comparison Paracanthocobitis adelaideae is distinguished f rom P. mooreh, P. zonalternans and P. linyph a in having a complete lateral line. It is differentiated from P. mandalayensis P. maekhlongensis and P. pictilis in having a suborbital flap (vs. suborbital groove) in males. It is differentiated from P. boti a P. urophthalm a and P. abutwebi in having an axillary pelvic lobe. P aracanthocobitis adelaideae and P rubidipinnis differ in number of branched dorsal rays (12 in P. adelaideae and 14 15 in P. rubidipinnis ). P aracanthocobitis adelaideae is distinguishe d from P. mackenziei in having large squarish blotches on side along and below lateral line vs. small dark blotches on side just below lateral line, a greater interorbital width (33.3% vs 28.3% SL), and in a dorsally positioned, irregular shaped caudal spo t. Distribution Paracanthocobitis adelaideae is known from the Irrawaddy River drainage of northern Burma (Fig. 314)

PAGE 36

36 Etymology Named for Adelaide Singer, the daughter of the author. She was born during the revision. Paracanthocobitis botia (Hamilton, 1 822) Cobitis botia Hamilton, F., 1822:350, 394, An account of the fishes found in the river Ganges; northeastern Bengal. No types known. Cobitis bilturio Hamilton, F., 1822:358, 395, An account of the fishes found in the river Ganges ; Brahmaputra River [at Goalpara], India. No types known. Cobitis turio Hamilton, F., 1822:358, 395, An account of the fishes found in the river Ganges; Brahmaputra River at Goalpara, India. No types known. Cobites (Acoura) argentata Swainson, W., 1839:310, The natural history and classification v. 2; Based on Ham. 358. No. 10 -which is Hamilton 1822:358, "10th Species. -Cobitis turio ." Unneeded replacement name for Cobitis turio Hamilton 1822. Cobitis bimucronata McClelland, J., 1839:304, 435, Pl. 51 (fig. 4), Asiatic Researches v. 19 (pt 2); northeastern Bengal. Based on Hamilton manuscript drawings (Menon 1987:141). Cobitis gibbosa McClelland, J., 1839:304, 436, Pl. 52 (fig. 7b), Asiatic Researches v. 19 (pt 2); Brahmaputra River [at Goalpara], India. Unneeded replacement name for Cobitis turio Hamilton 1822.

PAGE 37

37 Cobitis ocellata McClelland, J., 1839:304, 436, Pl. 51 (fig. 6), Asiatic Researches v. 19 (pt 2); Brahmaputra River [at Goalpara], India. No types known. Unneeded replacement name for Cobitis bilturio Hamilton 1822. Cobitis arenata Valenciennes, A., in Jacquemont 1840:, Pl. 15 (fig. 1), Voyage dans l'Independant les annes 1828 1832; India. Holotype: MNHN 0000 3811. Nemacheilus botia. Shrestha 1978:37, Fish fauna of Nepal. Journal of Natural History Museum Tribhuvan University v. 5 (14): 3343. Acanthocobitis botia. Kottelat, M., 1990:28, Indochinese nemacheilines. A revision of nemacheiline loaches (Pisces: Cypriniformes) of Thailand, Burma, Laos, Cambodia and southern Viet Nam. Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, Mnchen. 1262. Acanthocobitis (Paracanthocobitis) botia Grant, S., 2007, A new subgenus of Acanthocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 15, Table 33) Paracanthocobitis botia is distinguished from other species of Paracanthocobitis by the combination of complete lateral line; large, dark patch on opercle; suborbital flap not terminally attached in male, axillary pelvic lobe absent Color pattern with small dorsal saddles and 810 dark blotches, some connect ed by pigment, along and just below lateral line. Description B ody depth slightly increasing from head to dorsal fin origin then decreasing to caudal peduncl e; branched dorsal fin rays 11 12; branched pectoral fin rays 10 11;

PAGE 38

38 branched pelvic fin rays 8; branched anal fin rays 6; branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse rows of spots in dorsal fin45 (usually 5); dark bands in caudal fin 5 7 (usually 5); male with suborbital flap; axillary pelvic lobe absent; lateral line complete with 83100 pores. Maximu m SL= 57.7 mm female. Color pattern with 810 dark spots along side just below lateral line. Head covered in medium to large spots with large dark patch on opercle. Small dorsal saddles narrower than, or equal to, interspaces not extending to lateral line. Irregular pigmentation between saddles and lateral line. Ocellus and caudal spot extending onto caudal fin. Comparison Paracanthocobitis botia differs from all other species of Paracanthocobitis except P. urophthalm a P. abutwebi, P. mooreh and P. linyph a by the absence of an axillary pelvic lobe. P aracanthocobitis mooreh and P. linyph a can be distinguished by the presence of an incomplete lateral line. Paracanthocobitis urophthalma differs in having bars on side of body that extend from dors um to vent or. P aracanthocobitis abutwebi differs from P. botia in having 1116 spots along the lateral line (vs. 810) sometimes with a speckled pattern along lateral line, 45 bands in the caudal fin (vs. 57), and 67 (usually 7) anal fin rays. Distribution Paracant hocobitis botia is kn own from the mainstem, and possibly tributaries of the Brahmaputra River, in Assam, India (Fig. 3 16) Remarks Paracanthocobitis botia has been the most widely used name for species of Paracanthocobitis The original description of Co bitis botia by Hamilton (1822) states

PAGE 39

39 that it was found in rivers of n ortheastern Bengal ; no types are known. After a review of a m ap of The British Indian Empire from the Imperial Gazetteer of India (1909) and a map of The Bengal Presidency at its full est extent in 1858 it can be said with confidence that n ortheastern Bengal is located in what is modernday Assam, India, in the Brahmaputra basin A specimen from BMNH 1889.2.1.15621571 is here selected as the neotype (Fig. 3 15) Paracanthocobitis linypha n.sp. Holotype USNM 378387 (34.9 mm SL male) Kha Wan, Kha Wan stream, Myanmar (25.0856, 96.970) ), R. Britz, 02 April 2003. Paratypes CAS 88918 (10; 38.842.9 mm SL) Sagaing Division,Myanmar Kalemyo fish markets (23.190, 94. 073), CJ Ferraris, D Catania, U Myint Pe, 25April 1996. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 17, Table 34) Paracanthocobitis linypha can be distinguished from all other Paracanthocobiti s in having a color pattern consisting of thin 1014 dark bars much narrower than interspaces sometimes alterna ting between a shorter and longer bar, incomplete lateral line not extending past distal extremity of pelvic fin; axillary pelvic lobe absent. Description Body depth widest under dorsal fin; branched dorsal fin rays 1112; branched pectoral fin rays 101 2; branched pelvic fin rays 8 ; branched anal fin rays 6 7 (usually 6); branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse bands in caudal fin 57; suborbital flap

PAGE 40

40 present in male; a xillary pelvic lobe absent; lateral line incomplete with 22 42 pores Maximum SL = 42 .9 mm male. Color pattern consisting of 101 4 small, dark triangular saddles connecting to bars along lateral side that extend from the upper side to lower side and alternating back and forth between long bars that extend past lateral line to shorter line or dash not extending past lateral line. Interspaces much larger than stripes. Pigment on dorsal portion of head darker than ventral. Comparison Paracanthocobitis linypha can be distinguished from all Paracanthocobitis except P. zonalternans and P. mooreh in having an incomplete lateral line extending at most to the distal extremity of pelvic fin. P aracanthocobitis linyph a differs from P. zonalternans in not having an axillary pelvic lobe. It differs from P. mooreh in having a color pattern consisting of alternating bars rather than a spotted pattern along lateral line. Distribution Paracanthocobitis linypha is known from the Irrawaddy drainage in northern Burma (Fig. 3 18) Etymology From the Latin noun linyphus (m) (linen weaver). The narrow bars on the side of this species is reminiscent of a sewing needle in motion.

PAGE 41

41 Paracanthocobitis mackenziei ( Chaudhuri 1910) Nemachilus mackenziei Chaudhuri, B. L., 1910:183, Records of the Indian Museum (Calcutta) v. 5 (pt 3); northern India (s everal localities). Syntypes: (11) ZSI F2017/1 (1), 41704171 (2), 4172/14173/1 (2). Nemacheilus botia. Shrestha 1978:37, Fish fauna of Nepal. Journal of Natural History Museum Tribhuvan University v. 5 (14): 3343. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 19, Table 35) Paracanthocobitis mackenzie i is distinguished from all other Paracanthocobitis in having complete lateral line, axillary pelvic lobe, and thin dark dorsal saddles connected to small dark blotches on side just below lateral line. Description Large size (adults reaching over 70 mm SL) ; body deeper predorsally than post dorsally; branched dorsal fin rays 1213 (usually 12); branched pectoral fin rays 1012 (usually 11); branched pelvic fin rays 8 ; branched anal fin rays 6 7 (usually 6); branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse bands in caudal fin 57; suborbital flap present in male; a xillary pelvic lobe present; lateral line complete with 80100 pores Maximum SL= 75.1 mm female. Color pattern consists of 11 13 thin dorsal saddles that connect to blotches along lateral line forming a zig zag pattern dipping below the lateral line. Pattern variable in this species with some having larger zig zag pattern, disconnected saddles, or long s shaped saddles that extend below lateral line.

PAGE 42

42 Comparison Paracanthocobitis mackenziei is distinguis hed from P. mooreh, P. zonalternans and P. linyph a in having a complete lateral line. It is differentiated from P. mandalayensis P. maekhlongensis and P. pictilis in not having a suborbital groove in the male. P aracanthocobitis mackenziei is differentiated from P. botia P. urophthalm a P. linypha, P. mooreh and P. abutwebi in having an axillary pelvic lobe. P aracanthocobitis mackenziei and P rubidipinnis differ in their number of branched dorsal fin rays (1213 in P. mackenziei and 1415 in P. rubidipin nis ). It differs from P. adelaideae in having a narrower interorbital width (28.3 % vs 33.3 % SL), and small dark blotches on side just below lateral line vs. large squarish blotches on side along and below lateral line. Distribution Paracanthocobitis mac kenziei is the most widely distributed species of Paracanthocobitis, and is known from the Ganges River basin of Nepal and northern India, the Meghna River basin in eastern Bangladesh, the Mahanadi River basin in eastern India, Narmada River basin in centr al India, and the upper Indus River basin of northern India and eastern Pakistan (Fig. 3 20) Remarks Nemachilus mackenziei was described by Chaudhuri in 1910 from several localities in the Ganges River basin in the modern states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in northern India. The description g a ve detailed information about color and other morphological characteristics of the type specimens, including presence of a suborbital flap in male, complete lateral line, 5 or fewer bands in the dorsal fin, 6 bands in the caudal fin, and a color pattern on the body consisting of black patches and spots

PAGE 43

43 interspersed irregularly with 1213 wedgeshaped blackish brown, inverted conelike markings some of which extend below the lateral line and are unattached from one another. The description also noted that this pattern varied among individuals. Although this species was treated as a synonym of Paracanthocobitis botia (Hamilton) by Menon (1987) and subsequent authors, it is distinct and resurrected from the synonymy of P. b otia Nemacheilus aureus was described by Day (1872) from specimens collected at Jabbalpr ( Jabalpur on modern maps), India. Day noted that the specimens he examined from September 1871, had an incomplete lateral line and "were full of ova." Whitehead an d Talwar (1976) suggested that BMNH 1889.2.1.158790 and ZSI 2574 are syntypes of N. aureus, and tha t the specimens at ZSI are lost BMNH 1889.2.1.158789 consists of three specimens from Poonah (now Pune), India. All three have an incomplete lateral line ending approximately above the origin of the pelvic fin, and the two largest have been dissected and ova are visible. BMNH 1889.2.1.1590 contains one specimen from Jabbalpr; it has not been dissected and has a later al line extending to the caudal fin bas e. Given that one lot (BMNH 1889.2.1.158789) contains specimens with the characters described by Day, and the other (BMNH 1889.2.1.1590) is from the locality cited, it seems likely that Day included all of these specimens in the description as suggested by Whitehead and Talwar (1976) Although Day mentions a suborbital flap in N. aureus none is present in the specimens at BMNH A flap must have been present on ZSI 2574, now lost. With an incomplete lateral line, 1112 dorsal fin rays, and dark spots and blotches on the side of the body, specimens from Pune (BMNH 1889.2.1.158789) are

PAGE 44

44 referable to P. mooreh. Pune is on the Bhima River in the Krisha River basin about 100 km southeast of Mumbai. The one specimen from Jabalpur (BMNH.2.1.1590) has a complete lateral line, vertical bars on the side, and is here selected as the lectotype of Nemacheilus aureus and is treated as incertae sedis given that the specimen is faded and sufficient characters to diagnose its identity are not present. Jabalpur is in the state of Madhya Pradesh on the Narmada River, which flows into the Arabian Sea at Bharuch. Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis, n.sp. Holotype UF 182864 (58.9 mm SL female) Kanchanaburi Province, Thailand, Thong Pha Phum, Ban Rai, N W of Huai Khayeng close to SW side of reservoir, off road 327 (14o4125N, 98o3116E), R Plongsesthee, R Singer, Z Martin, and Z Randall, 31December 2011. Paratypes UMMZ 209462 (4; 61.375 mm SL)Kanchanaburi Province, Thailand, Kwai Yai River (14.227, 99.234), J Karnasuta, March1975. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 21, Table 36) P aracanthocobitis maekhlongensis differs from all other Paracanthocobitis in having a suborbital groove in males, complete lateral line,1314 branched dorsal fin rays, and color pattern consisting of dorsal saddles connecting to oval shaped spots along lateral line. Description Body deepest at nape, gradually decreasing to caudal peduncle; branched dorsal fin rays 1314; branched pectoral fin rays 1213 (usually 12); branched pelvic fin

PAGE 45

45 rays 8 ; branched anal fin r ays 7; branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse bands in caudal fin 78; suborbital groove in adult male; a xillary pelvic lobe present; lateral line complete with 95 108 pores Maximum SL = 75 mm male. Color pattern consisting of 12 13 dark brown triangular shaped dorsal saddles; saddles wider than interspaces, most have light colored spot in center. Sliver or oval shaped blotches in between each saddle and along the lateral line. Pectoral and pelvic fin base with red band and red coloration in dorsal an d caudal fins. Top of head dark with a well defined interorbital stripe. Dark, round caudal peduncle spot. Comparison Paracanthocobitis maekhlong ensis differs from all other Paracanthocobitis exc ept P. pictilis and P. mandalayensis in having a suborbital g roove in males. P aracanthocobitis maekhlong ensis can be differentiated from P. mandalayensis in having 1314 (vs. 12) dorsal fin rays. Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis differs from P. pictilis in not having enlarged dorsal pterygiophores and neural spines (Fig. 3 22) and a round (vs. sliver shaped) caudal spot. Additionally, P. pictilis has 6 (vs. 7) anal fin rays, and a shorter head (6.5% vs 9.8% SL in P. maekhlong ensis ) Distribution Paracanthocobitis maekhlong ensis is known from the Mae Khlong River bas in, Kanchanaburi Province, Thailand (Fig. 3 23) Remarks Kottelat 2012 described P pictilis from the Ataran River basin of Burma and the Mae Khlong River basin of Thailand. However, the Mae Khlong population is easily distinguished from that in the Ataran basin. The type locality for P. pictilis is in the

PAGE 46

46 Ataran, and specimens identified as P. pictilis from the Mae Khlong by Kottelat (2012) are P. maekhlongensis Etymology Named for the Mae Khlong River in western Thailand, where this species appears to be endemic. Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis (Rendahl 1948) Nemacheilus rubidipinnis mandalayensis Rendahl, 1948, Die Swasserfische Birmas. I. Die Familie Cobitidae. Arkiv fr Zoologi v. 40 A (no. 7): 1116. Holotype: NRM 13179 Nemac heilus rubidipinnis mandalayensis Menon, 1987, The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleostei Cobitoidea. Part 1. Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. i x + 1 259, Pls. 116. Acanthocobitis mandalayensis Kottelat, 2012, Acanthocobitis pictilis a new species of loach from Myanmar and Thailand (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Zootaxa No. 3327: 4552. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 24, Table 37) A species of Paracanthocobitis distinguished from congeners in having a long suborbital groove, 1112 branched dorsal rays, long caudal fin ( ~ 22.9% of SL) and 710 dark bands on caudal fin. Description B ody deepest at nape; branched dorsal fin rays 1112; branched pectoral fin rays 1113; branched pelvic fin rays 7 8 ; branched anal fin rays 6 7 ; branched caudal fin

PAGE 47

47 rays 9+9 ; transverse rows of spots in dorsal fin 6 7 ; transverse bands in caudal fin 8 10 ; axillary pelvic lobe present; lateral line complete with 67103 pores. Maximum SL= 88.4 mm male. Color pattern changes ontogenetically with juveniles having thin dorsal s addles that extend just beyond the lateral line and connect to spots along lateral line (Fig. 3 25) As the fish matures the saddles recede from the lateral line leaving oval or squareshaped blotches wider than or equal to interspaces. Dorsum much darker than below lateral line, with small saddles narrower than interspaces. Comparison Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis differs from all other Paracanthocobitis except P. pictilis and P. maekhlong ensis in having a suborbital groove in males. Paracanthocobitis pictilis and P. maekhlong ensis differ from P. mandalayensis in having 1314 dorsal rays and lack the dark dorsal pigmentation with small saddles Distribution Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis is known from the Irrawaddy drainage of northeastern Burma, and the Wang and Ping rivers in the Chao Phraya River basin of northwestern Thailand (Fig. 3 26) Paracanthocobitis mooreh (Sykes, 1839) Cobitis mooreh Sykes 1839, On the fishes of the Deccan. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of Lond on 1838 (pt 6): 157 165. No type known. Nemacheilus sinuatus Day, 1870, Notes on some fishes from the western coast of India. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1870 (pt 2): 369374 [16]

PAGE 48

48 Nemacheilus moreh. Menon, 1987, The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleostei Cobitoidea. Part 1. Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. i x + 1 259. Noemacheilus moreh. Talwar & Jhingran, 1991, Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries. In 2 vols. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta. v. 1 2: i xvii + 36 unnumbered + 11158, 1 pl, 1 map. [V. 1, i liv + 1 541, 1 map; v. 2, i xxii + 5431158, 1 pl.]. Acanthocobitis moreh. Jayaram, 1999, The Freshwater fishes of the Indian region. Narendra Publishing Hous e, Delhi, xxvii+1 551. Acanthocobitis mooreh Kottelat, 2012, Acanthocobitis pictilis a new species of loach from Myanmar and Thailand (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Zootaxa No. 3327: 4552. Holotype: MHNG 2727.066 Acanthocobitis (Paracanthocobitis) mooreh. Grant, 2007, A new subgenus of Acanthocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 27, Table 38) A species of Paracanthocobitis distinguished from other Paracanthocobitis in having an incomplete lateral line ending at the origin of the pelvic fin, lack of axillary pelvic lobe, 45 transverse bands in caudal fin, and a color pattern consisting of spots that become farther apart from anterior to posterior. Description B ody depth wider predorsally than post dorsally; branched dorsal f in ra ys 11 12 (usually 12); branched pectoral fin rays 1112; branched pelvi cfin rays 8; branched anal fin rays 6 7 (usually 6); branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse rows of spots in

PAGE 49

49 dorsal fin 3 5; transverse bands in caudal fin 4 5; male with suborbital flap; a xillary pelvic lobe absent or rarely rudimentary ; lateral line incomplete, ending at pelvic fin origin with 2839 pores Maximum SL= 50.5 mm f emale. Color pattern consists of a series of small spots along lateral line, equal to or narrower than interspaces, becoming more distant towards caudal peduncle. Smaller spots interspaced irregularly inbetween lateral line spots. Wedgeshaped dorsal saddles, narrower than interspaces, occasionally with irregular blotches inbetween. Comparison Paracanthocobitis mooreh differs from all other Paracanthocobitis except P. zonalternans and P. linyph a in having an incomplete lateral line. P aracanthocobitis mooreh differs from P. linyph a in having spots along the lateral line versus alternating bars. It is diffe rentiated from P. zonalternans in having 12 vs.10 dorsal fin rays, and P. zonalternans has a well defined axillary pelvic lobe where P. mooreh usually lacks one. Distribution Paracanthocobitis mooreh is found in the Godavari, Krishna, and Kaveri river bas ins of western and southern India (Fig. 3 28) Remarks Nemacheilus sinuatus Day, 1870 was described from Wynaad (now Wayanad) on the Bhavani River in the Kaveri River basin, Karnataka, India Although this locality is much further south than other known localities for P. mooreh the two syntypes of N. sinuatus (BMNH 1870.5.2.1718; Whitehead & Talwar 1976:157) are assignable to P. mooreh.

PAGE 50

50 Paracanthocobitis pictilis (Kottelat 2012) Acanthocobitis pictilis Kottelat, 2012, Acanthocobiti s pictilis a new species of loach from Myanmar and Thailand (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Zootaxa No. 3327: 4552. Holotype: MHNG 2727.066 Diagnosis Para canthocobitis pictilis can be distinguished from all other Paracanthocobitis in having the combination o f a small, sliver shaped ocellus on the caudal peduncle and a suborbital groove in males. Description (Fig. 3 29, Table 39) B ody depth deeper pre dorsally than post dorsally; branched dorsal fin rays 1314 (usually 13); branched pectoral fin rays 1113 (usually 13); branched p elvic fin rays 8; branched anal fin rays 6; branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transverse rows of spots in dorsal fin 4 6 ; transverse bands in caudal fin 8 11; males with suborbital groove; axillary pelvic lobe present; lateral line complete with 9497 pores M aximum SL= 81.2 mm female. Color pattern consisting of 1215 thin dorsal saddles lacking a stripe of pigmentation in the center, and not extending below lateral line. Lateral line with numerous speckles and dashes above and below the lateral line. Top of h ead dark with a well defined interorbital stripe. Spot on caudal peduncle small and sliver shaped. Comparison Paracanthocobitis pictilis differs from all other Paracanthocobitis except P. maekhlongensis and P. mandalayensis in having a suborbital groove in males. P aracanthocobitis pictilis can be differentiated from P. maekhlongensis and P.

PAGE 51

51 mandalayensis in having small spots and speckles along the lateral line (vs. large oval or squareshaped spots) and having a sliver shaped ocellus on the caudal peduncle. Paracanthocobitis maekhlong ensis can be further differentiated from P. pictilis in not having enlarged dorsal pterygiophores and neural spines (F ig .3 22) 7 (vs. 6) anal fin rays, and a longer snout ( 9.8% vs 6.5 % SL ). Distribution Paracanthocobitis pictilis is known from the Ataran River drainage in eastern Burma extending to Chedi Sam Ong, Three Pagoda Pass (Fig. 3 30). Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis (Blyth 1860) Cobitis rubidipinnis Blyth, E., 1860:170, Report on some fishes received chiefly from the Sitang River and its tributary streams, Tenasserim Provinces. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal v. 29 (2):138174. Neotype: NRM 13743 (see Kottelat 1990:35). Cobitis semizonata Blyth, E., 1860, same reference as for Cobitis rub idipinnis Neotype: NRM 13743 (see Kottelat 1990:35). Nemacheilus rubidipinnis Menon, A. G. K., 1987, The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleostei Cobitoidea. Part 1. Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. i x + 1 259. Acanthocobitis rubidipinnis Kottelat, M. 1990, Indochinese nemacheilines. A revision of nemacheiline loaches (Pisces: Cypriniformes) of Thailand, Burma, Laos, Cambodia and southern Viet Nam. Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, Mnchen. 1262. Neotype: NRM 13743. Acanthocobitis (Paracanthocobitis) rubidipinnis Grant, S., 2007, A new subgenus of Acanthocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19.

PAGE 52

52 Diagnosis (Fig. 3 31, Table 310) Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis is distinguished from congeners by having a combination of 14 15 branched dorsal fin rays complete lateral line, suborbital flap in male, and round dark spot on caudal peduncle. Description Body slender; branched dorsal fin rays 14 15 ; branched pectoral fin rays 1112; branched pelvic fin rays 8, branch ed anal fin rays 6 7 (usually 7); branched caudal fin rays 9+9; 46 transverse rows of spots in dorsal fin; transverse bands in caudal fin 6 8 ; male with suborbital flap; a xillary pelvic lobe present ; lateral line complete with 90110 pores. Maximum SL=71. 2 mm f emale. Color pattern consisting of 1315 well defined dorsal saddles extending onto side as dar bars almost to lateral line. Squarish dark spots just below lateral line narrower than interspaces; some connected to dark bars. Fins with red tint in lif e Comparison Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis differs from all species of Paracanthocobitis exc ept P. pictilis and P. maekhlong ensis, in having 14 15 (usually 15) branched dorsal fin rays vs. 1013 in all other species Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis diffe r s from P. pictilis and P. maekhlongensis by the presence of a terminally unattached suborbital flap in the male (vs. suborbital groove). In addition, P. pictilis has a sliver shaped ocellus on the caudal fin base; the caudal spot is round in P. rubidipinnis Distribution Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis is known from the Irrawaddy and Ataran River basins in Burma (Fig. 3 32)

PAGE 53

53 Paracanthocobitis urophthalma (Gnther, 1868) Nemachilus urophthalmus Gnther, 1868, Catalogue of the fishes in the British Museum. Catalogue of the Physostomi, containing the families Heteropygii, Cyprinidae, Gonorhynchidae, Hyodontidae, Osteoglossidae, Clupeidae thru Halosauridae, in the collection of the British Museum. v. 7: i xx + 1 512. Syntypes: BMNH 1864.7.11.35 36 Noemacheilus urophthalmus Talwar & Jhingran, 1991, Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries. In 2 vols. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta. v. 1 2: i xvii + 36 unnumbered + 11158, 1 pl, 1 map. [V. 1, i liv + 1 541, 1 map; v. 2, i xxii + 543 1158, 1 pl. Also reprinted, Balkema, Rotterdam, 1992.] Acanthocobitis urophthalmus Pethiyagoda, 1991, Freshwater fishes of Sri Lanka. The Wildlife Heritage Trust of Sri Lanka, Colombo. i xiii + 1 362. Acanthocobitis (Paracanthoc obitis) urophthalmus Grant, 2007, A new subgenus of Acanthocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19. Diagnosis (Fig. 3 33, Table 311) Paracanthocobitis urophthalm a can be distinguished from all other species of Paracanthocobitis in having dark bars on side of body that extend from dors um to vent er, bars wider than interspaces; axillary pelvic lobe absent. Description B ody deeper before dorsal fin narrowing to caudal peduncle; branched dorsal fi n rays 1213; branched pectoral fin rays1012; branched pelvic fin rays 8, branched anal fin rays 6; branched caudal fin rays 9+9; transvers e rows of spots in dorsal fin 46; transverse bands in caudal fin 5 7; males with suborbital flap; axillary pelvic lobe

PAGE 54

54 absent; lateral line complete or reaching at least to anal fin origin with 5971 pores Maximum SL= 48.8 mm male. Comparison Paracanthocobitis urophthalm a is differentiated from all other species of Paracanthocobitis in having dark bars wider than interspaces that extend from dorsum to vent er Distribution Paracanthocobitis urophthalm a is endemic to the Kalu Ganga basin on the island of Sri Lanka (Fig. 3 34) Paracanthocobitis zonalternans (Blyth 1860) Cobitis zonalternans Blyth, 1860, Report on some fishes received chiefly from the Sitang River and its tributary streams, Tenasserim Provinces. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal v. 29 (no. 2):138174. Neotype: ZSM 27468. Nemacheilus zonalternans Menon, 1987, The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleost ei Cobitoidea. Part 1. Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. i x + 1 259, Pls. 116. Noemacheilus phuketensis Klausewitz, 1957, Neue Swasserfische aus Thailand. Senckenbergiana Biologica v. 38 (nos 3/4):193204, Pls. 17, 17a, 18. Holotype: SMF 3966. Acanthocobitis zonalternans Kottelat, 1990, Indochinese nemacheilines. A revision of nemacheiline loaches (Pisces: Cypriniformes) of Thailand, Burma, Laos, Cambodia and southern Viet Nam. Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, Mnchen. 1262. Acanthocobitis (Par acanthocobitis) zonalternans Grant, 2007, A new subgenus of Acanthocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19.

PAGE 55

55 Diagnosis (Fig. 3 35, Table 312) A species of Paracanthocobitis distinguished from congeners in having an incomplete lateral line ending ne ar dorsal fin origin, 911 branched dorsal fin rays, 6 anal fin rays, and 45 transverse bands on the caudal fin. Description Body depth nearly uniform with some individuals being deeper bodied predorsally than post dorsally; branched dorsal fin rays 101 1; branched pectoral fin rays 1213; branched pelvic fin rays 8; branched anal fin rays 6; branched caudal fin rays 9 +8 or 9+9 (usually 9+8); transverse bands in caudal fin 46; suborbital flap present in male; a xillary pelvic lobe present ; lateral line in complete, reaching at most to dorsal fin origin with fewer than 50 pores Maximum SL= 39.7 mm female. Color pattern variable, with dark spots along lateral line sometimes mediated by a lateral stripe covering spots; dorsal pattern ranging from large to small dorsal saddles. Combinations of patterns the aforementioned patterns can be present amoung individuals within a population. Pigment on dorsal portion of head darker than on ventral portion. Comparison Paracanthocobitis zonalternans differs from all other Paracanthocobitis except P. mooreh and P. linyph a in having an incomplete lateral line. Paracanthocobitis zonalternans differs from P. mooreh and P. linyph a in having an axillary pelvic lobe and 1011 (vs. 12) dorsal fin rays.

PAGE 56

56 Distribution Paracanthocobi tis zonalternans is known from several drainages in Bangladesh, Burma, Thailand, and Peninsular Malaysia including the Brahmaputra, Meghna, Irrawaddy, Salawin, and Mae Khlong. The known range extends from Peninsular Malaysia north to northern Burma. It is not found in the Chao Phraya basin and the western extent of its range is in northwestern Bangladesh (Fig. 3 36) Remarks Given the large geographic distribution, habitat variation, variability of color pattern across geographic ranges, and morphometric di fferences, it is likely that P zonalternans is a species complex with several undescribed species.

PAGE 57

57 Figure 31. Acanthocobitis longipinnis. ZMB, 4795, Holotype, ventral view showing mouth morphology Photograph by Peter Bartsch.

PAGE 58

58 Figure 32. A canthocobitis longipinnis. Lateral view of head, showing suborbital flap, ZMB 4795, holotype. Photograph by Peter Bartsch.

PAGE 59

59 Figure 33. Head shapes in Acanthocobitis and Paracanthocobitis. A) Acanthocobitis pavaonacea, live. B) Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis, live.

PAGE 60

60 Figure 34. Lateral views of Acanthocobitis type specimens. A) Acanthocobitis longipinnis ZMB 4795, holotype. B) radiograph of A. longipinnis, ZMB 4795, holotype. C) Cobitis pavonacea, SMF 68, lectotype, 95 mm SL female.

PAGE 61

61 Figure 35. A) A. pavonacea, live (photo by Steven Grant). B) Cobitis pavonacea, SMF 9091, paralectotype, 121 mm SL female, preserved.

PAGE 62

62 Figure 36. Distribution of Acanthocobitis pavonacea.

PAGE 63

63 Figure 37. Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis, UF 182864,58.9 mm SL. Ventral view of head, showing mouth morphology.

PAGE 64

64 Figure 38. Paracanthocobitis mackenziei, KU 40459, 51.5 mm SL male, lateral view. A) patch of adipose tissue on anterior end of lateral line. B) Close up of adipose patch.

PAGE 65

65 Figure 39. Suborbital process shapes in Paracanthocobitis. A) Suborbital flap on P. adelaideae, USNM 378387, 62.7mm SL male. B) Suborbital groove on P. mandalayensis, CAS 88890, 87.8 mm SL male.

PAGE 66

66 Figure 310. Bones supporting the suborbital flap. LE (yellow) = lateral ethmoid; IO 1 ( blue) = infraorbital 1.

PAGE 67

67 Figure 311. Paracanthocobitis abutwebi UMMZ 208646, holotype, 46.1 mm SL male.

PAGE 68

68 Figure 312. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis abutwebi

PAGE 69

69 Figure 313. Paracanthocobitis adelaideae. A) adult color pattern, USNM 378387, holotype, 50.6 mm SL male. B) juvenile color pattern, USNM 378393, paratype, 28.5 mm SL.

PAGE 70

70 Figure 314. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis adelaideae.

PAGE 71

71 Figure 315. Paracanthocobitis botia. A) BMNH 1889.2.1.15621571, neotype, 45.3 mm SL male. B) BMNH 1889.2.1.15621571, 57.7 mm SL female.

PAGE 72

72 Figure 316. Distribution of Para canthocobitis botia.

PAGE 73

73 Figure 317. Paracanthocobitis linypha. A) USNM 378387, holotype, 34.9 mm SL male. B) CAS 88918, paratype, 42.9 mm SL female.

PAGE 74

74 Figure 318. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis linypha

PAGE 75

75 Fi gure 319. A) Paracanthocobitis mackenziei, KU 29159, 67.1 mm SL male. B) Nemacheilus aureus, BMNH 1889.2.1.1590, lectotype, 31.9 mm SL female.

PAGE 76

76 Figure 320. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis mackenziei

PAGE 77

77 Figure 321. Paracanthocobiti s maekhlongensis. A) UF 182864, holotype 58.9 mm SL female, preserved. B) ex UF 182864, paratype 56.4 mm SL female, live.

PAGE 78

78 Figure 322. Comparison of key morphological differences in Paracanthocobitis pictilis and P. maekhlongensis. A) P. pictilis showing enlarged pterygiophores and dorsal neural spines, UF 172927, 76.4 mm SL male. B) P. pictilis showing sliver shaped caudal spot, UNMF P 07667, 81.2 mm SL female. C) P.maekhlongensis showing normal pterygiophores and dorsal neural spines, UF 176571, 54.4 mm SL female. D) P. maekhlongensis showing circular caudal spot, UF 182864, holotype, 58.9 mm SL female.

PAGE 79

79 Figure 323. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis

PAGE 80

80 Figure 324. Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis. A) Specimen from Irrawaddy River basin, USNM 344646, 81.1 mm SL female. B) Specimen from Wang River basin, UF 181110, 60.5 mm SL male.

PAGE 81

81 Figure 325. Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis. Juvenile color pattern, UF 1811110, 24.5 mm SL.

PAGE 82

82 Figure 326. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis

PAGE 83

83 Figure 327. Paracanthocobitis mooreh. Lateral view, MCZ 52380, 44.4 mm SL male.

PAGE 84

84 Figure 328. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis mooreh

PAGE 85

85 Figure 329. Paracanthocobitis pictilis. A) UF 172927, 71.4 mm SL male. B) UNMF P 07667, 79.5 mm SL male.

PAGE 86

86 Fi gure 330. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis pictilis

PAGE 87

87 Figure 331. Paracanthocobiti s rubidipinnis. Lateral view, ZRC 43570, 55.5 mm SL female.

PAGE 88

88 Figure 332. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis

PAGE 89

89 Figure 333. Paracanthocobitis urophthalma. Lateral view, BMNH 1864.7.11, syntype, 48.8 mm SL male.

PAGE 90

90 Figure 334. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis urophthalma.

PAGE 91

91 Figure 335. Paracanthocobitis zonalternans. A) ZSM 27468, neotype, 33.1 mm SL male. B) ZRC 41258, topotype, 36.1 mm SL male.

PAGE 92

92 Figure 336. Distribution of Paracanthocobitis zonalternans

PAGE 93

93 Table 31. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis abutwebi (N=35). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 12 13 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 10 13 12 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 7 7 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 80 103 89.56.53 Morphometrics Standard length 31.4 53.3 % of standard length Predorsal length 40.2 47.4 42.90.17 Head le ngth 17.5 22.1 19.30.11 Snout length 5.5 10.0 8.10.01 Pre pelvic length 45.5 50.9 48.10.013 Pre anal length 69.1 80.7 76.10.021 Body depth (@D1) 12.6 18.0 15.40.012 Caudal peduncle depth 9.8 13.2 11.10.007 Pectoral fin length 17.1 24.4 19.90.018 Pelvic fin length 13.6 19.9 17.00.013 % of head length Eye diameter 24.7 40.9 32.310.03 Interorbital width 20.1 35.4 27.40.034

PAGE 94

94 Table 32. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis adelaideae (N=8). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 12 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 10 12 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore c ount 72 88 78.86.06 Morphometrics Standard length 45.9 51.4 % of standard length Predorsal length 45.8 49.6 48.00.13 Head length 19.6 22.3 21.10.01 Snout length 9.1 10.8 9.60.01 Pre pelvic length 52.3 54.9 53.50.01 Pre anal length 77.8 80.8 79.20.01 Body depth (@D1) 18.4 20.7 19.80.01 Caudal peduncle depth 11.3 13.4 12.70.008 Pectoral fin length 19.8 23.5 22.00.012 Pelvic fin length 16.8 19.2 17.90.01 % of head length E ye diameter 23.6 29.6 26.00.02 Interorbital width 28.4 36.5 33.30.03

PAGE 95

95 Table 33. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis botia (N=10). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 11 12 12 Branc hed pectoral fin rays 10 11 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 83 100 925.36 Morphometrics Standard length 37.1 57.7 % of standa rd length Predorsal length 45.7 50.7 48.10.17 Head length 18.7 21.0 19.80.01 Snout length 7.8 9.0 8.50.004 Pre pelvic length 48.6 56.4 52.10.03 Pre anal length 76.0 80.7 78.40.01 Body depth (@D1) 12.6 18.4 14.70.02 Caudal p eduncle depth 10.5 12.5 11.90.01 Pectoral fin length 16.5 24.3 20.60.02 Pelvic fin length 14.5 16.6 15.60.01 % of head length Eye diameter 28.1 35.3 31.10.02 Interorbital width 23.2 31.1 26.30.03

PAGE 96

96 Table 34. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis linypha (N=10). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 11 12 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 10 12 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 7 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 20 42 27.56.17 Morphometrics Standard length 26.1 42.9 % of standard length Predorsal length 40.4 50.7 46.50.03 Head length 18.8 22.9 20.60.01 Snou t length 6.0 9.0 7.90.01 Pre pelvic length 47.6 54.1 50.80.02 Pre anal length 72.7 79.7 76.90.02 Body depth (@D1) 13.7 18.5 16.10.02 Caudal peduncle depth 7.9 12.4 10.40.01 Pectoral fin length 17.5 21.8 22.00.02 Pelvic fin length 15.5 18.0 17.60.01 % of head length Eye diameter 24.0 30.9 31.40.04 Interorbital width 24.1 35.3 30.40.04

PAGE 97

97 Table 35. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis mackenziei (N=46). Character Range Mean%SD Mer istics Branched dorsal fin rays 12 13 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 10 12 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 7 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 73 101 85.17.99 Morph ometrics Standard length 28.8 72.7 % of standard length Predorsal length 40.2 49.1 45.30.02 Head length 18.2 23.3 20.70.01 Snout length 7.1 11.1 9.50.01 Pre pelvic length 45.1 54.3 50.90.02 Pre anal length 66.7 80 .3 77.00.02 Body depth (@D1) 11.9 21.5 17.60.02 Caudal peduncle depth 8.5 13.9 12.10.01 Pectoral fin length 18.0 24.9 21.30.02 Pelvic fin length 13.3 18.7 16.40.01 % of head length Eye diameter 21.4 31.8 27.80.03 Inte rorbital width 21.4 33.9 28.30.03

PAGE 98

98 Table 36. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis maekhlongensis (N=12). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 13 14 14 Branched pectoral fin rays 12 13 12 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 7 7 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 94 108 99.14.19 Morphometrics Standard length 51.6 75 % of standard length Predorsal leng th 42.8 47.6 44.10.01 Head length 19.4 20.9 20.30.004 Snout length 9.0 10.5 9.80.004 Pre pelvic length 49.1 53.2 50.80.01 Pre anal length 74.3 80.6 77.40.02 Body depth (@D1) 14.6 18.4 17.30.01 Caudal peduncle depth 11.3 13.3 1 2.40.01 Pectoral fin length 16.9 20.7 18.80.01 Pelvic fin length 15.5 16.9 16.30.003 % of head length Eye diameter 20.5 26.1 23.30.01 Interorbital width 24.5 32.9 30.00.02

PAGE 99

99 Table 37. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis mandalayensis (N=23). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 11 12 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 11 13 12 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 7 6 Branched caudal fi n rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 80 103 87.27.37 Morphometrics Standard length 41.8 88.4 % of standard length Predorsal length 43.3 48.3 45.20.01 Head length 18.7 24.7 20.70.01 Snout length 8.0 10.8 9.40.01 Pre pelvic length 47.8 54.6 50.80.02 Pre anal length 74.1 81.2 77.10.02 Body depth (@D1) 14.4 19.2 17.40.02 Caudal peduncle depth 10.6 12.9 12.10.01 Pectoral fin length 15.4 22.9 19.60.02 Pelvic fin length 14.2 20.4 16. 60.01 % of head length Eye diameter 18.4 30.8 23.20.03 Interorbital width 24.9 36.3 29.90.03

PAGE 100

100 Table 38. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis mooreh (N=30). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Bran ched dorsal fin rays 11 12 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 11 12 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 7 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 25 39 33.84.89 Morphometrics Standar d length 34.2 50.5 % of standard length Predorsal length 44.5 49.3 46.50.01 Head length 19.6 22.3 20.90.01 Snout length 7.8 10.1 9.00.01 Pre pelvic length 52.0 54.3 53.10.01 Pre anal length 76.4 82.5 79.10.02 Body dep th (@D1) 15.2 21.4 19.20.02 Caudal peduncle depth 10.9 13.5 12.70.01 Pectoral fin length 17.8 21.6 20.00.01 Pelvic fin length 14.9 17.9 16.10.01 % of head length Eye diameter 26.8 30.0 28.20.01 Interorbital width 18.2 3 0.0 25.20.04

PAGE 101

101 Table 39. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis pictilis (N=16). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 13 14 13 Branched pectoral fin rays 11 13 13 Branched pelvic fin ra ys 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 94 98 96.21.64 Morphometrics Standard length 55.0 81.2 % of standard length Predorsal length 39.8 42.7 41.10.01 Head length 16.0 20.1 17.70.01 Snout length 5.3 10.1 7.40.02 Pre pelvic length 35.5 50.8 47.60.01 Pre anal length 75.1 78.7 77.30.02 Body depth (@D1) 9.1 16.7 13.20.02 Caudal peduncle depth 7.1 13.2 9.60.01 Pectoral fin length 12.7 19.4 16.30.02 Pelvic fin length 9.5 17.8 12.90.01 % of head length Eye diameter 21.1 25.8 24.10.02 Interorbital width 23.9 33.1 27.50.03

PAGE 102

102 Table 310. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis (N=11). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 14 15 15 Branched pectoral fin rays 11 12 12 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 7 7 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line po re count 90 110 96.86.38 Morphometrics Standard length 46.4 71.2 % of standard length Predorsal length 39.1 46.6 42.60.02 Head length 16.4 21.8 20.30.01 Snout length 6.9 10.9 9.00.01 Pre pelvic length 43.4 52.4 47.60.03 Pre anal length 71.3 80.8 76.00.03 Body depth (@D1) 12.5 17.4 16.00.01 Caudal peduncle depth 9.6 12.8 11.60.01 Pectoral fin length 15.8 22.1 18.90.02 Pelvic fin length 15.2 17.9 16.30.01 % of head length Eye diameter 18.1 30.6 23.70.03 Interorbital width 22.0 32.3 27.10.03

PAGE 103

103 Table 311. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis urophthalma (N=5). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 12 13 12 Branched pectoral fin rays 10 11 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched anal fin rays 6 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 59 71 65.36.02 Morphometrics Standard length 29.1 48.8 % of standard length Predorsal length 44.0 47.2 45.40.01 Head length 19.9 22.5 21.40.01 Snout length 9.0 11.1 10.00.01 Pre pelvic length 50.5 53.8 52.30.01 Pre anal length 74.9 78.0 76.90.01 Body depth (@D1) 18.2 22.7 19.60 .02 Caudal peduncle depth 12.4 13.5 13.00.003 Pectoral fin length 20.4 23.4 21.80.01 Pelvic fin length 15.8 20.9 18.70.02 % of head length Eye diameter 28.2 35.0 30.70.02 Interorbital width 23.8 28.1 26.20.02

PAGE 104

104 Table 312. Morphometric data and meristic counts for Paracanthocobitis zonalternans (N=26). Character Range Mean%SD Meristics Branched dorsal fin rays 10 11 11 Branched pectoral fin rays 10 13 11 Branched pelvic fin rays 8 8 Branched a nal fin rays 6 7 6 Branched caudal fin rays 9+9 9+9 Lateral line pore count 40 49 44.5 Morphometrics Standard length 26.7 39.7 % of standard length Predorsal length 39.0 50.0 46.40.02 Head length 18.9 25.0 21.70.01 Snout length 7.8 10.6 8.80.01 Pre pelvic length 46.6 5 55.9 50.50.02 Pre anal length 74.0 81.2 77.80.02 Body depth (@D1) 14.5 25.0 18.60.03 Caudal peduncle depth 11.1 13.8 13.00.01 Pectoral fin length 17.3 26.1 21.90.01 Pelvic fin length 16.3 21.5 19.70.01 % of head length Eye diameter 26.0 41.0 30.90.03 Interorbital width 27.0 42.6 36.40.03

PAGE 105

105 CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION Acanthocobitis contains only A. pavonacea a species restricted to the Brahmaputra and Ganges river basins of northern India and Bangladesh. Although A. longipinnis is considered to be a synonym of A. pavonacea the only available specimen is the poorly preserved holotype. It is possible that the collection of fresh material may allow t he two forms to be diagnosed from one another. Prior to this revision, seven species of Paracanthocobitis P. botia P. mandalayensis P. mooreh, P. pictilis P. rubidipinnis P urophthalma, and P. zonalternans were recognized, although geographic distri butions of most were uncertain. Paracanthocobitis mackenziei considered a synonym of P. botia by several authors, including Menon (1987) and Kottelat (1990), was removed from synonymy, and three new species were described from material previously identifi ed as P. botia : P abutwebi, P. adelaideae, and P. linypha. Populations recently described as P. pictilis (Kottelat 2012) were found to be based on specimens of two species, with P. pictilis restricted to the Ataran River basin of Burma, and a new species, P. maekhlongensis in the Mae Khlong basin of Thailand. With the completion of this revision, the number of recognized species within Paracanthocobitis is 12. A key for identification of species of Paracanthocobitis appears below. From the material examined, Paracanthocobitis can be divided into three morphological, and perhaps monophyletic, species groups: the P. botia group (with a free suborbital flap in the adult male), the P. zonalternans group (small, with 10 or fewer dorsal rays), and the P. mandalayensis group (with a suborbital groove in the adult male) group. Species within the P. botia group are: P. abutwebi P. adelaideae, P.

PAGE 106

106 linypha, P. mooreh, P. rubidipinnis and P. urophthalma. This group occurs in India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Burma. The P. mandalayensis group includes: P. maekhlongensis P. mandalayensis and P. pictilis and is restricted to Burma and western Thailand. Paracanthocobitis zonalternans is the only species within the P. zonalternans species group, but is highly variable and likely contains undescribed species. A phylogenetic analysis will be necessary to confirm the monophyly of these groups.

PAGE 107

107 APPENDIX KEY TO SPECIES OF PARACANTHOCOBITIS 1a. Lateral line incomplete, reaching at most to dist al extremity of pelvic fin; free suborbital flap in male. .....................2 1b. Lateral line complete or at least reaching anal fin origin; suborbital flap or groove i n male.. .. ...... 2a. 10 or fewer branched dorsal fin rays; lateral line ending at distal extremity of dorsal fin........ Paracanthocobitis zonalternans 2b. 1113 branched dorsal fin rays; lateral line ending past distal extremity of dorsal fin........... .....................................................................................................3 3a. 1220 alternating long and short bars (much narrower than interspaces) extending above and below lateral line, sometimes connected to triangular dorsal saddles; 57 dark bands on caudal fin ......Paracanthocobitis linypha, n.sp. 3b. 1214 small triangular dorsal saddles disconnected from spots, varying in size, along the lateral line; 45 (usually 4) dark bands on caudal fin; ocellus on caudal pedunc le extends onto caudal fin; dark patch on opercle ........ Paracanthocobitis mooreh 4a. Large, dark bands from dorsum to venter ....... Paracanthocobitis urophthalma 4b. Blotches, spots, or speckles along lateral li ne; ... ............5 5a. Axillary pelvic lobe absent.. ......6 5b. Axillary pelvic lobe present.................7 6a. 1013 small dorsal saddles; 1016 larger spots alternating with smaller spots along lateral l ine; 4 5 (usually 4) dark bars on caudal fin; 67 (usually

PAGE 108

108 7) branched anal fin rays .... Paracanthocobitis abutwebi, n.sp. 6b. 810 dark spots along side just below lateral line, narrowing ventrally without well defined spots between; 57 (usually 5) dark bars on caudal fin; 6 branched anal fin rays............................. ................................................... Paracanthocobitis botia 7a. Small, dark triangular dorsal saddles connecting ventrally to thick, wavelike pattern form ed by connected blotches along lateral line, forming more of a checkerboard pattern in juvenile. .... Paracanthocobitis adelaideae, n.sp. 7b. Color pattern on side not a wavelike pattern formed by connected, dark blotches along lateral line ... ..............8 8a. Sliver shaped caudal spot; adult male with suborbital groove .... Paracanthocobitis pictilis 8b. Round caudal spot; adult male with suborbital flap or groove. ...9 9a. 1213 branche d dorsal fin rays; 67 (usually 6) branched anal fin rays; dorsal saddles irregular, no central light area ......10 9b. 1315 branched dorsal fin rays; 67 (usually 7) branched anal fin rays; dorsal saddles uniform with a central light spot or line .1 10a. Suborbital flap in male; curved dorsal saddles connected to blotches along lateral line, sometimes forming a prominent zigzag pattern on dorsal surface; 67 dark bands on caudal fin............ ............................ Paracanthocobitis mackenziei 10b. Suborbital groove in male; small dorsal saddles disconnected from large spots along lateral line (sometimes connected in juvenile); 5 7 dark bands on caudal fin......... ... Paracanthocobitis mandalayens is 11a. Suborbital groove in male; 1314 (usually 13) branched dorsal fin rays;

PAGE 109

109 dorsal saddles much wider dorsally than ventrally, dorsal portion of saddles wider than interspaces; irregular pigment between saddles ...... Paracanthocobiti s maekhlongensis, n.sp. 11b. Suborbital flap in male; 1415 (usually 15) branched dorsal fin rays; dorsal saddles more uniform in shape with interspaces similar in size to saddles; no pigment between saddles .. Paracanthocobitis rubidipinnis

PAGE 110

110 LIST OF R EFERENCES Blyth, E. 1860 Report on some fishes received chiefly from the Sitang River and its tributary streams, Tenasserim Provinces. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal v. 29 (no. 2): 138174. Cracraft, J. 19 87. Species concepts and the ontolog y of evolution. Biology and philosophy (2.3):329346. Day, F. 1872 Monograph of Indian Cyprinidae. Parts 46. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal v. 41 (pt 2, nos 14): 1 29, 171 198; 318326. Grant, S. 2007 (29 Oct.) A new subgenus of Acant hocobitis Peters, 1861 (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyofile No. 2: 19. Gnther, A. 1868 (14 Mar.) Catalogue of the fishes in the British Museum. Catalogue of the Physostomi, containing the families Heteropygii, Cyprinidae, Gonorhynchidae, Hyodontidae, Osteoglossidae, Clupeidae,... [thru]... Halosauridae, in the collection of the British Museum. v. 7: i xx + 1 512. Hamilton, F. 1822 An account of the fishes found in the river Ganges and its branches. Edinburgh & London. i vii + 1 405. Jacquemon t, V. 1835 44 Voyage dans l'Inde pendant les annes 1828 1832, publi sous les auspices de M. Guizot, Ministre de l'instruction publique. Journal. 4 vols. text, 2 vols. Atlas. Paris. (18351844). Jayaram K. 1999, The Freshwater fishes of the Indian r egion. Narendra Publishing House, Delhi, xxvii+1551. Klausewitz, W. 1957 (1 Apr.) Neue Swasserfische aus Thailand. Senckenbergiana Biologica v. 38 (nos 3/4): 193204. Kottelat, M. 2012 (29 May) Acanthocobitis pictilis a new species of loach f rom Myanmar and Thailand (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Zootaxa No. 3327: 4552.

PAGE 111

111 Kottelat, M. (1990) Indochinese nemacheilines: A revision of nemacheiline loaches (Pisces: Cypriniformes) of Thailand, Burma, Laos, Cambodia and southern Vietnam Germany : Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil. Kottelat, M. (1989) Zoogeography of the fishes from Indochinese inland waters with an annotated check list. Bulletin Zologisch Museum, Universiteit van Amsterdam 12, 155. McClelland, J. 1839 Indian Cyprinidae. Asiatic Researches v. 19 (pt 2): 217471, Pls. 3761. Menon, A. G. K. 1987 (May) The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleostei Cobitoidea. Part 1. Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. i x + 1 259. Peters, W. (C. H.) 1861 ber zwei neue Gattungen von Fischen aus dem Ganges. Monatsberichte der Kniglichen Preuss[ischen] Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1861: 712713. Pethiyagoda, R. 1991 Freshwater fishes of Sri Lanka. The Wildlife Heritage Trust of Sri Lanka, Colombo. i xiii + 1 362. Potthoff, T 1984. Clearing and staining techniques. In: Moser, H.G. (Ed.) Ontogeny and Systematics of Fishes. Special publication American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, vol. 1. Allen Press, Lawrence, KS, USA, pp. 3537. Rainboth, W. J., Vidthayanon, C., & Dinh Yen, M. (2012). Fishes of the greater mekong ecosystem with species list and photographic atlas (1st ed.). Ann Arbor, Michigan: Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan. p. 68. Rendahl, H. 1948 Die Swasserfische Birmas. I. Die Familie Cobitidae. Arkiv fr Zoologi v. 40 A (no. 7): 1116. Swainson, W. 1839 On the natural history and classification of fishes, amphibians, & reptiles, or monocardian animals. Spottiswoode & Co., London. v. 2: i vi + 1 448. Sykes, W. H. 1839 On the fishes of the Deccan. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1838 (pt 6): 157165.

PAGE 112

112 Talwar, P. K. and A. G. Jhingran 1991 Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries. In 2 vols. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta. v. 1 2: i xvii + 36 unnumbered + 11158, 1 pl, 1 map. [V. 1, i liv + 1 541, 1 map; v. 2, i xxii + 543 1158. Taylor, W R., van Dyke, G.C. 19 85. Revised procedures for staining and clearing small fishes and other vertebrates for bone and cartilage study. Cybium 9: 107119. Whitehead, P.J. P. and P.K. Talwar 1976. Francis Day (18291889) and his collections of Indian fishes. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Historical Series v. 5 (no.1):1189.

PAGE 113

113 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Randal A. Singer was born in Ft. Myers, Florida. The first of two children born to his parents, Randy enjoyed frequent fishing trips with his father and summers on the Mississippi gulf coast with his uncle that began his lifelong interest in fis hes. Randy graduated from the University of Georgia in 2008 with a B.S. in ecology as a part of the inaugural class from the first standalone school of Ecology in the world. Upon graduating, Randy began working as a technician for the Georgia Museum of Natural History Ichthyology Collection and the Jacqueline Mohan lab, focusing on the effects of climate change on fine root growth in trees. During this time, Randys eyes were opened to the wonders of the world of deepsea fishes when he participated in the 2010 NOAA MAR ECO cruise to the midAtlantic Ridge. Following the completion of his positions at UGA, Randy moved to Gainesville, Florida, to work for the Florida Museum of Natural History Ichthyology Collection. On May 21st, 2011 Randy married Corie Ritc hie in the mountains of Cleveland Georgia. In the same year, Randy began work on his masters d egree in zoology at the University of Florida focusing on fish taxonomy, during which time he frequently conducted fieldwork in Southeast Asia relevant to this t hesis. On October 9th 2012, Randys daughter Adelaide C. Singer was born. With the love and support of his famil y, Randy went on to finish his masters degree in the summer of 2013. Going forward, Randy hopes to continue work with deepsea fishes, hopefull y in close proximity to a museum of natural history, enjoy time with his family, and explore and describe the wonderful diversity of the worlds fishes.