BULLETIN FLORIDA STATE MUSEUM


rays 14 to 16 (17), usually 15; vertebrae 40 to 42, usually 41; back
dark olive; pockets of some scales along side of body with dark pig-
ment, forming a few vertical crescent-shaped bars; breast, belly, and
side metallic-silvery, with a rosy hue in breeding males; prominent
gray-blue mid-dorsal stripe present; snout and upper lip red in breed-
ing males; lower fins white; nuptial tubercles weakly developed, pres-
ent in both sexes, but better developed in males; tubercles present
on upper surface of pectoral fin and on side and tip of snout, absent
from rest of head and back; females metallic-silvery, with only traces
of red markings.
 VARIATION. Hildebrand (1932: 63-64) compared the holotype of
Notropis brimleyi Bean (USNM 50601) with specimens of N. cocco-
genis, and concluded that differences in appearance of the lower jaw
in these two forms (projecting in coccogenis, included in brimleyi)
warrant specific separation. His conclusions are not substantiated
by the present study; examination of many individuals of coccogenis
reveals that the supposed differences fall within the normal range of
variation of the species.
 Sexual dimorphism is less pronounced than in some Luxilus forms.
Males are usually large, with most individuals over 100 mm long
belonging to this sex, although one of the largest examples reported
by Outten (1957: 75) was a female. During the breeding season males
are more brightly colored than females, particularly as regards the
red on the snout and side of the body. Although nuptial tubercles
are present in both sexes, they are somewhat better developed in
adult males.
 DISTRIBUTION. The center of distribution of Notropis coccogenis
is in the upper half of the Tennessee River system in eastern Ten-
nessee, western North Carolina, northern Georgia and western Vir-
ginia, with a relict population present in the Tennessee system of
western Alabama. It occurs in the headwaters of the Savannah River
in North and South Carolina (Pickens, 1928: 30), of the Catawba
River in North Carolina, and (one record) of the New River in north-
western North Carolina (USNM 162281). Its presence in the Catawba
and New systems may possibly be due to introduction. Its apparent
absence from the upper Elk drainage in south-central Tennessee is
possibly due to inadequate collecting.
 Contrary to numerous accounts (Jordan and Evermann, 1896a;
Jordan and Evermann, 1896b), N. coccogenis is not known from the
Cumberland River system in Kentucky. Specimens recorded by Wool-
man (1892: 283) from the Big Sandy River of Kentucky have not been
located, and from the known distribution this record is probably in


Vol. 8