GILBERT: FISHES OF THE SUBGENUS LUXILUS


the types (ANSP 2835-2839) are in extremely poor condition, the
bodies having become too decomposed as to be of aid in recognition.
The heads, including the pharyngeal teeth are still intact, as are most
of the fins. The head is deep in all specimens, in no case does the
lower jaw project notably beyond the upper, and there is no sign of
a black band on any dorsal fin. As all the above characters are indica-
tive of Notropis chrysocephalus, I regard Hybopsis lacertosus Cope
as a synonym of that species.
 DIAGNOSIS. A subspecies of N. chrysocephalus distinguished from
N. c. isolepis by: Slightly smaller scales, those in anterior dorso-lateral
series (13) 14 to 16 (19); circumferential scales (23) 26 to 29 (32); sum
of anterior dorso-lateral and circumferential scales (38) 40 to 45 (48);
predorsal and anterior dorso-lateral scale rows more crooked and un-
even; anterior dorso-lateral stripes crooked, more poorly defined, and
not uniformly parallel (figure 15B); pigment usually present on chin
and gular region (figure 9B often absent in specimens from Tennessee
drainage).
 DESCRIPTION. Fin ray and scale row counts and body proportions
were taken on varying numbers of specimens. These appear in tables
6 and 9 through 15. Characters mentioned in the description of
Notropis chrysocephalus and in the diagnosis are not repeated in the
following paragraph:
 Arrangement of circumferential scales above and below lateral
line (11-2-10) 12-2-12 to 14-2-13 (15-2-15); dorso-lateral scale pockets
darkest around edges which, with the intensification of pigment
caused by the overlapping scales, results in three crooked, fairly
well-defined parallel stripes running lengthwise along dorso-lateral
part of back; side of body silvery-bronze with a deep rose-red in breed-
ing males; breast and belly silvery with little or no pink in breeding
males; branchiostegals colorless, with a decided rosy wash under-
lain with gray in breeding males; distal third or fourth of dorsal, cau-
dal, anal, and pelvic fins pink in breeding females, deep pink to red
in breeding males, except for extreme distal edges which are white;
outer fifth of pectoral fin rosy, distal edge white in nuptial males;
basal two-thirds of dorsal fin normally pallid, with a pinkish blush in
nuptial males; basal two-thirds to three-fourths of anal, pelvic, pec-
toral, and caudal fins pallid.
 VARIATION. Relatively little morphological variation occurs in this
 subspecies. Populations containing individuals with slightly smaller
 scales are found throughout the range, but the resultant high counts
 fall well within the normal range of variation for the species and pose
 no nomenclatural problem. A series of 35 specimens from the Coosa


1964