Conspectus cobitidum - Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research

42 miles east of Paotow [Baotou, 40°40'N 109°50'E];
holotype: AMNH 8412; noun in apposition, indeclinable)
? Barbatula toni kirinensis Tchang, 1932a: 115, fig. 2 (China:
Kirin [= Jilin Province]; holotype: ZMFIB 7931; adjective,
-is, -is, -e)
Taxonomic notes. The identity of N. nudus Bleeker (1864c)
is not clear; authors have placed it as a senior synonym of
either B. toni (Dybowski, 1869; sensu lato) or Triplophysa
stolickai (Steindachner, 1866). In the last 30 years Chinese
and Korean authors (e.g. Zhu, 1989: 29; Wang et al., 2001:
168; Kim, 1997: 283) have used the name B. nuda for the
B. toni of earlier authors and B. nuda became the same catchall
name (see under B. toni). The type locality of B. nuda is
usually listed as Mongolia. Indeed, Bleeker (1864c: 13) indicated
the type locality as Mongolia, which at that time could
have meant present-day Mongolia, or Nei Mongol and Xinjiang
provinces of China, or some other place in northern
China. But on p. 14, he wrote "described from a single specimen
and brought from China by the missionary David". This
holotype still exists (MNHN 1450, Bertin & Estève, 1948:
98); I examined it in the early 1980s, before I became familiar
with the East Asian Barbatula; since then, I have not had
an opportunity to compare it side by side with Chinese,
Mongolian or Korean material identified as B. nuda. Nevertheless,
it is not conspecific with B. toni as recognised here
(restricted to upper Amur drainage).
The specimen was collected by Armand David (27 September
1826–10 November 1900; for a biography, see Boutan,
1993). David was a catholic missionary and stayed in
China from 1862 to 1874 and visited various areas of the
country. He travelled in 'southern Mongolia' [now in Nei
Mongol Province of China] for the first time in 1866 (David,
1867–1868; Scott, 2004: 70). As Bleeker described
B. nuda in 1864, the specimen had been collected earlier.
But, at that time Mongolia was a complex entity. A Greater
Mongolia was administered as Outer Mongolia [now more
or less corresponding to Mongolia], Inner Mongolia [now
more or less corresponding to Nei Mongol] and a number of
leagues (former Mongolian administrative units) and banners
(Mongolian/Chinese military and administrative units)
in various adjacent provinces of China. The provinces, leagues
and banners were overlapping but the limits of their
respective jurisdictions were not always identical.
David's first travel, in 1862, was a brief visit of the area
of Siwantze, 25 km northeast of Kalgan [Zhangjiakou,
40°49'N 114°53'E, 160 km northwest of Beijing]. Although
in then Zhili Province, Zhangjiakou was seat of the military
commander of the Eight Banners of Chahar, part of Greater
Mongolia. Siwantze is Xiwanzi [40°58'25"N 115°16'22"E],
now in Chongli County in Hebei Province. In the catholic
administration, Siwantze was the see of a diocese (an administrative
unit), at David's time called the Apostolic Vicariate
of Mongolia. It was reasonable for a catholic missionary
to label material from Xiwanzi as from 'Mongolia'.
In 1863, David explored the mountains bordering the west
of the plain of Beijing; this cannot be called 'Mongolia'. In
1864, David travelled in Jehol, north-east of Beijing (map
in David, 1875), and this was too late to have material arrived
in MNHN and described by Bleeker in 1864. Jehol is
a former Chinese province that included part of today's He-
THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2012
79
bei, Shanxi and Nei Mongol Provinces. This excludes
present-day Mongolia as the type locality and suggest that
the holotype originates from the area of Xiwanzi.
Bleeker (1864c) explicitly stated that his description of
N. nudus was based on a specimen 115 mm TL in MNHN.
Fang (1941: 253) commented that MNHN has four specimens
labelled "Nemacheilus nudus, Blkr.; Mongolie: Abbé
David, 1863; fishes that live in the high valleys". Fang mentioned
that two of these specimens are the "types" of N. nudus
(MNHN 1450); the other two he described as N. bertini
(then MNHN 3800, now MNHN 3800 and B.2640). The
two specimens in MNHN 1450 are the holotype and a nontype
specimen of N. nudus (now possibly MNHN 3813).
Herzenstein (1888: 21), Rendahl (1933: 46) and Prokofiev
(2003a: 703) discussed ZISP 4471 received from MNHN
as N. nudus from Sichuan. Fang (1941: 253) explained that
this specimen had been taken from a jar labelled "Nemacheilus
nudus Blkr.; Sse-chuan Occid.; R. P. A. David, 1870–
58". He described the remaining 11 specimens (MNHN 6287)
as Nemacheilus angeli.
I have examined a number of samples previously identified
as B. nuda from northern China (see Kottelat, 2006:
53). They represent several species of Barbatula and Triplophysa;
at some localities two species occur in sympatry.
Names are probably available for some of them (see synonymy),
but others are apparently still undescribed. Without
access to more material from more localities it is not possible
to clarify how many species are involved and what are
their diagnostic characters, so as to determine which is the
real B. nuda.
10.4.9 Barbatula oreas (Jordan & Fowler, 1903)
Orthrias oreas Jordan & Fowler, 1903: 769, fig. 2 (type locality:
Japan: Hokkaido: Chitose, in Iburi; holotype: "the
museum at Sapparo"; noun in apposition, indeclinable)
10.4.10 Barbatula potaninorum (Prokofiev, 2007)
Orthrias potaninorum Prokofiev, 2007a: 65, fig. 18 (type
locality: "China ? (exact location not given on label; according
to the itinerary of the expedition - Northern China,
Gan’su Province at the border with Mongolia, upper
part of the Edzin-Gol River system - Fig. 23)" [China ?:
Gansu: Edsin-Gol [Ejin, Ejina He, Eiin, Hei-He, Ruo-
Shui; a river flowing north to endorheic Gaxun Nuur (Juyan
Lake), 42°25'20"N 100°40'07"E]]; holotype: ZISP
"8121" [erroneous]; noun in genitive, indeclinable)
10.4.11 Barbatula quignardi (Bacescu-Mester, 1967)
Noemacheilus barbatulus quignardi Băcescu-Mester, 1967:
359, figs. 1, 5c–d (type locality: France: Le Lez stream
near Montpellier; holotype: MGAB 77; noun in genitive,
indeclinable)
Nemacheilus barbatulus forma hispanica Băcescu-Mester,
1967: 369, fig. 6a–b (infrasubspecific, name not available;
locality: Spain: Nervion River at Durango / Tajo River)
Nemacheilus barbatulus hispanica Lelek, 1987: 256 (available
by indication to Băcescu-Mester, 1967; type locality:
Spain: Nervion River at Durango / Tajo River; syntypes:
MGAB [11, material used by Băcescu-Mester,
1967: 369]; adjective, -us, -a, -um)