taxonID	type	description	language	source
C7177A2F3621BAAD6ADCD2E979B94318.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Medium-sized cyprinids with an ossified, smooth last unbranched dorsal-fin ray; 9 or 10 branched dorsal-fin rays and 6 branched anal-fin rays; large, shield- shaped scales with numerous parallel radii; the lateral line with 25 to 39 scales; the pharyngeal teeth hooked at their tips, their count being 2.3.5 - 5.3.2 or 2.3.4 - 4.3.2; 1 or 2 pairs of barbels present. Carasobarbus species are evolutionarily hexaploid (Machordom and Doadrio 2001, Gorshkova et al. 2002, Leggatt and Iwama 2003, Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010).	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
CCF50C165DDDB936BA448F927FD63931.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. One pair of barbels, usually 10 branched rays in the dorsal fin, 27 to 32 scales in the lateral line, usually 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle, last unbranched ray of dorsal fin shorter than head.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
CCF50C165DDDB936BA448F927FD63931.taxon	description	Description. The body depth is comparatively low and a nuchal hump is present in adults but not developed in juveniles. The height of the caudal peduncle is relatively low (Table 1). The dorsal and ventral fins are usually positioned behind the middle of the body. The head is elongate with a straight or slightly concave dorsal profile. The ventral profile of the head is slightly convex. (Figs 1, 2). The head length is about equal to the body depth. The mouth is broad and terminal or slightly sub-terminal with one pair of barbels (Fig. 3, Table 2). Only one out of 65 specimens had two pairs of barbels and in one specimen a single anterior barbel was present. The eyes are in the anterior half of the head and slightly protuberant. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin and its base are rather short. It usually has four unbranched and 10 branched rays (Table 3). The last unbranched ray is considerably shorter than the head (Fig. 4), weakly ossified, and its distal part is flexible. The anal fin has three unbranched and six branched rays (Table 4). Pectoral and ventral fins are relatively short (Table 1). Carasobarbus apoensis has 27 to 32 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), usually 4.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), 3.5 or 4.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5 - in 12 specimens, - 5.3.2 in two specimens and 1.3.5 - in one specimen. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Live colouration is golden with olive fins. The upper side is darker than the belly (Fig. 2). In ethanol-preserved specimens the upper side is dark, the belly yellow and the fins are grey or yellow (Fig. 1). Juveniles have a dark lateral spot on the caudal peduncle. The maximum length observed in the material examined is 288 mm SL. Carasobarbus apoensis differs from all congeners, except Carasobarbus luteus, by having one rather than two pairs of barbels. For a comparison with Carasobarbus luteus populations see below. Distribution. Carasobarbus apoensis occurs in the Al Ḩijaz mountain range in wadis draining either inland or towards the Red Sea (Fig. 7). It is endemic to Saudi Arabia.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
7460EC610DCD9A0B17FEF921F1A27450.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Two pairs of barbels, 29 to 35 scales in the lateral line and usually 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle, last unbranched ray of dorsal fin shorter than head.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
7460EC610DCD9A0B17FEF921F1A27450.taxon	description	Description. The body is low. A nuchal hump is present in adults but absent in juveniles. The largest body depth is at the origin of the dorsal fin. The head is long, rather low and fairly narrow with straight dorsal and convex ventral profile (Figs 8, 9). The head length approximately equals the body depth. The mouth is terminal or slightly subterminal. Two pairs of barbels are present (Table 2). The lips are smooth and thin (Fig. 3). The eyes are at the end of the anterior half of the head. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. Pectoral, ventral, dorsal and anal fins are comparatively short (Table 1). The dorsal fin usually has four unbranched and 10 branched rays (Table 3). The last unbranched ray is ossified and its distal part is flexible. It is usually markedly shorter than the head (Fig. 4). The anal fin usually has three unbranched and six branched fin rays (Table 4). There are 29 to 35 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), usually 4.5 or 5.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), usually 4.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and usually 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5 - 5.3.2 in 23 specimens, 2.3.3 - 5.3.2 in one specimen, 2.3.5 - in one specimen and - 5.3.2 in one specimen. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Live specimens are silvery to bronze coloured. The posterior third of the body and the fins are distinctly yellow in many specimens (Fig. 9). Ethanol-preserved specimens are brownish yellow and the back is only slightly darker than the rest of the body (Fig. 8). The fins are brownish yellow. Juveniles have a dark lateral spot on the caudal peduncle. Carasobarbus canis differs from Carasobarbus apoensis and Carasobarbus luteus in having two pairs of barbels vs. one, from Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus sublimus in having a crescent-shaped lower lip without median lobe vs. a spatulate lower lip with median lobe, from Carasobarbus exulatus in modally having 10 branched dorsal-fin rays vs. nine and from Carasobarbus chantrei, Carasobarbus fritschii and Carasobarbus harterti in modally having 10 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 14 or 16.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
7460EC610DCD9A0B17FEF921F1A27450.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Carasobarbus canis occurs in the Jordan River system (Fig. 7). There are only few records from coastal rivers of the Mediterranean Sea (Na ẖal Na'aman and Na ẖal Yarqon). A recent treatment of the inland water fish communities of Israel does not report Carasobarbus canis from coastal rivers (Goren and Ortal 1999). The population in the Azraq Oasis was introduced by humans (Krupp and Schneider 1989). Since the year 2000 this species was not found in Azraq (Hamidan 2004) and the population may have disappeared due to drought. Records from the Tigris-Euphrates system (Banister 1980) are based on misidentifications.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
5FC48501101EA6F2184A7DA9E92EC2FF.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Two pairs of barbels, 31 to 38 scales in the lateral line and usually 14 to 16 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle, last unbranched dorsal-fin ray equal to or shorter than head.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
5FC48501101EA6F2184A7DA9E92EC2FF.taxon	description	Description. The body is comparatively high-backed and laterally compressed in mid-sized specimens but low-backed and almost cylindrical in large specimens. In large specimens a pronounced nuchal hump is present, in smaller specimens it is only weakly developed or absent. The maximum body depth is at the origin of the dorsal fin. The head is short and blunt with a convex ventral profile and a slightly convex to straight dorsal profile (Figs 10, 11). The mouth is terminal or slightly sub-terminal with two pairs of short barbels (Table 2). The body depth is usually greater than the head length (Fig. 12). The eyes are slightly protuberant and lie at the end of the anterior half of the head. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin usually has four unbranched and nine to 11 branched rays (Table 3). The last unbranched ray is ossified but not very thick and flexible in its distal part. It is usually shorter than the head (Fig. 4). The anal fin usually has three unbranched and five or six branched rays (Table 4). There are 31 to 38 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), 4.5 to 6.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), four to six scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and 12 to 16 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5 - 5.3.2 in two specimens, 2.3.5 - in 11 specimens, - 5.3.2 in two specimens and 1.3.5 - in one specimen. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Small live specimens are silvery; larger specimens are silvery or bronze coloured and sometimes have yellow pectoral and ventral fins (Fig. 11). Small ethanol-preserved specimens are silvery with a somewhat darker back and a salmon pink hue. Juveniles have a dark lateral spot on the caudal peduncle. Ethanol-preserved adults are yellow-brown and the back is only slightly darker than the rest of the body (Fig. 10). The maximum length observed in the material examined is 385 mm SL. Carasobarbus chantrei differs from Carasobarbus apoensis, Carasobarbus canis, Carasobarbus exulatus, Carasobarbus luteus and Carasobarbus sublimus in having 31 to 38 scales in the lateral line vs. 27 to 32, 29 to 35, 26 to 32, 25 to 33 and 27 to 29 respectively and modally 14 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 12. It differs from Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus sublimus in having a crescent-shaped lower lip without median lobe vs. a spatulate lower lip with median lobe and from Carasobarbus exulatus, Carasobarbus fritschii and Carasobarbus harterti in modally having 10 branched dorsal-fin rays vs. nine.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
5FC48501101EA6F2184A7DA9E92EC2FF.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Carasobarbus chantrei occurs in the Orontes river drainage system (Fig. 7). Two juvenile specimens where collected in Nahr Marqīyah, a coastal river in Syria. This species had never before been reported from this location (Krupp 1985 a) and it has most likely been introduced by humans. Two potential records from Nahr Quwayq (MNHN A- 3861, MGHN 3554) are discussed in Krupp (1985 a, c). Locality data for MHNL 3554 are ambiguous (Krupp 1985 a). The locality for MNHN A- 3861 is given as " Syria, Aleppo " in Krupp (1985 a) and considered to be from Nahr Quwayq. The collection database of the MNHN gives " Origine: Syrie, localite: Alep, Milieu: Continent, Bassin hydrologique: Asi, Cours d'eau: Asi " as locality. As these data are contradictory, it is likely that the specimens do not come from the Nahr Quwayq, but from the Orontes (= Asi) and Carasobarbus chantrei does probably not occur in the Nahr Quwayq. A record from the Ceyhan Nehri (Krupp 1985 c) is not backed by specimens. Records from the Tigris-Euphrates basin are misidentified Carasobarbus luteus (Krupp 1985 a, Krupp and Schneider 1991) and the specimen from Balikligoel at Sanliurfa in Turkey (SMF 12966) is probably mislabelled or was introduced there (Krupp 1985 a). It is not included in the map.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
663F8DA410D4577D4E4BBE019993F644.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Dorsal fin with 9 branched rays in most specimens; last unbranched ray of dorsal fin as long as or longer than head; 2 pairs of barbels; 26 to 32 scales in the lateral line and usually 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
663F8DA410D4577D4E4BBE019993F644.taxon	description	Description. The body is not particularly high backed and the maximum body depth is at the origin of the dorsal fin or slightly in front of it (Fig. 13). A nuchal hump is present in adult specimens (Fig. 14) but absent in juveniles (Fig. 15). The caudal peduncle is slender. The head profile is convex ventrally and straight dorsally. The body depth is about the same as the head length (Fig. 12). In specimens below 100 mm SL, the head is rather narrow, in larger specimens it becomes wider. The mouth is subterminal and comparatively narrow. Two pairs of barbels are present (Table 2), the posterior one is rather long. The eyes are at the end of the anterior half of the head and slightly protuberant. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin is long and usually has four unbranched and eight to 10 branched rays (Table 3). The last unbranched ray is strongly ossified and only the tip is flexible. Its length is about the same as the head length (Fig. 4). The anal fin is long, usually has three unbranched and five or six branched rays (Table 4). There are 26 to 32 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), 4 to 5.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), 3.5 to five scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and 10 to 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5 - 5.3.2 in one specimen, 2.3.5 - in 16 specimens, - 5.3.2 in one specimen and 2.3.4 - in one specimen. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). In live specimens and freshly preserved specimens the back and the sides are grey to golden, the belly is yellowish white and the fins are sometimes golden to orange (Fig. 15). Preserved specimens have a dark back and a lighter belly, the fins are whitish or greyish. Juveniles have a dark spot on the sides of the caudal peduncle. The maximum length observed in the material available is 288 mm SL. Carasobarbus exulatus differs from all congeners, except Carasobarbus fritschii and Carasobarbus harterti in modally having nine instead of 10 branched dorsal-fin rays. It differs from Carasobarbus fritschii and Carasobarbus harterti in modally having 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 16 and in having 26 to 32 scales the lateral line vs. 30 to 39 and 31 to 38 respectively.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
663F8DA410D4577D4E4BBE019993F644.taxon	distribution	Distribution. This species is endemic to Yemen and occurs in Wadī Ḩaḑramawt / Wadī al Masīlah and its pleistocene tributaries (Banister and Clarke 1977, Krupp 1983 a, Fig. 7). It is also known from Sadd Ma'rib (Al-Safadi 1995), a dam lake at 15 ° 23 ' 46 " N, 45 ° 14 ' 37 " E and Wadī Ḩajr (14 ° 02 ' 42 " N, 48 ° 40 ' 27 " E), where they are " found throughout the whole year and are distributed all over the stream " (Attaala and Rubaia 2005). Locality data for BMNH 1976.4.7: 332 - 333 is given as " Wadi Maran, E. Yemen " (Banister and Clarke 1977), which is most likely Wadī Marran [13 ° 53 ' 51 " N, 46 ° 05 ' 14 " E], representing the westernmost record of this species that is backed by specimens.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
663F8DA410D4577D4E4BBE019993F644.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Carasobarbus exulatus was described from Wadī Ḩaḑramawt and Wadī Maran in Yemen and placed in Barbus (Banister and Clarke 1977). Later it was transferred to Carasobarbus (Ekmekci and Banarescu 1998).	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
149A115C7F61FF48EA563F9A6F1108C2.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Two pairs of barbels, 30 to 39 scales in the lateral line and 14 to 20 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; dorsal fin usually shorter than anal fin and more than 15 % of its last unbranched ray flexible, dorsal profile of the head convex.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
149A115C7F61FF48EA563F9A6F1108C2.taxon	description	Description. The body is of moderate height and sometimes has a small nuchal hump in larger specimens. The head is round with a convex dorsal profile and convex or straight ventral profile (Figs 16, 17). The head length is shorter than the body depth (Fig. 12), the mouth is inferior with two pairs of barbels (Table 2). The lower lip is crescent shaped and sometimes weakly keratinised. The eyes are in the anterior half of the head. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin is short and weakly ossified and more than 15 % of the length of its last unbranched ray is flexible. Its last unbranched ray is about as long as the head (Fig. 4). It usually has four unbranched and seven to 10 branched rays (Table 3). The anal fin usually has three unbranched and five or six branched rays (Table 4). Its length is rather variable in adult specimens. It reaches the base of the caudal fin in some specimens. Carasobarbus fritschii has 30 to 39 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), usually 5.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), usually 4.5 or 5.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7), and 14 to 20 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.4 - 4.3.2 in two specimens, 2.3.4 - in one specimen and - 4.3.2 in eight specimens. Pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Live specimens are silvery and usually have a dark longitudinal band above the lateral line. Fins are hyaline to slightly orange (Fig. 17). Ethanol-preserved specimens are yellow-brown, the back is usually distinctly darker than the belly and flanks. The maximum length observed in the material available is 180 mm SL. Carasobarbus fritschii differs from all congeners except Carasobarbus exulatus and Carasobarbus harterti in having nine instead of 10 branched dorsal-fin rays. It differs from Carasobarbus exulatus in having 30 to 39 scales in the lateral line vs. 26 to 32 and modally 16 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 12. It differs from Carasobarbus harterti in having a convex dorsal head profile and a last unbranched dorsal-fin ray that is weakly ossified and flexible for more than 15 % of its length vs. a straight dorsal head profile and a strongly ossified last unbranched dorsal-fin ray that is flexible in less than 15 % of its length.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
149A115C7F61FF48EA563F9A6F1108C2.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Carasobarbus fritschii is widespread and abundant in Northern and Central Morocco (Fig. 18). It occurs in the Oued al Maleh, Oued Bou Regreg, Oued Igrounzar, Oued Moulouya, Oued Oum er Rbia, Oued Sebou and Oued Tennsift drainage systems, and in numerous small coastal rivers. Most records are from Morocco, but one specimen is from the Oued Kiss in Algeria.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
149A115C7F61FF48EA563F9A6F1108C2.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Carasobarbus fritschii was described from the Oued Ksob as a member of the genus Barbus (Guenther 1874). The same author described Barbus rothschildi from the Oued Oum er Rbia (Guenther 1901). It is a junior synonym of Carasobarbus fritschii. One year later Guenther (1902) described Barbus riggenbachii from Oued Oum er Rbia and Oued Talmest. It is a junior synonym of Carasobarbus fritschii. In the same year Capoeta atlantica and Capoeta waldoi were described from Oued Nfis (Boulenger 1902). These two species were placed into Capoeta, based on the keratinised lower lip that occurs in some specimens of Carasobarbus fritschii. Both are junior synonyms of Carasobarbus fritschii. Barbus paytonii was described from Oued Oum er Rbia (Boulenger 1911). It is a junior synonym of Carasobarbus fritschii. In the same publication Boulenger transferred Capoeta waldoi to the genus Barbus. The junior synonyms listed above were described, based on slight differences in mouth and lower lip shape or the degree of ossification of dorsal-fin rays. Sample sizes were usually very small. The examination of a large number of specimens revealed high variability and a continuous distribution of these characters. Boulenger (1919) transferred all species to the genus Barbus subgenus Labeobarbus, based on the possession of scales with parallel radii and an unserrated last unbranched dorsal-fin ray. Pellegrin (1919) listed the species in the genus Barbus but later (Pellegrin 1921, 1939) accepted the subgenus Labeobarbus. Pellegrin (1939) synonymised Barbus riggenbachi with Barbus rothschildi and did not list Capoeta atlantica. Karaman (1971) created the genus Pseudotor and synonymised Capoeta atlantica and Capoeta waldoi with Pseudotor fritschii fritschii. Fowler (1976) accepted all previously described species and transferred Capoeta atlantica and Capoeta waldoi to the genus Varicorhinus. Berrebi (1981) used the genus Barbus subgenus Labeobarbus and found no relevant differences between Barbus fritschii and Barbus paytonii in his morphometric and biochemical analysis. El Gharbi et al. (1993) highlighted the African distribution of the subgenus Labeobarbus. Doadrio (1994) and Tsigenopoulos et al. (2010) used Labeobarbus. Subsequent authors used the genus Barbus (Azeroual et al. 2000, Machordom and Doadrio 2001, Leggatt and Iwama 2003, Colli et al. 2009) or the provisional genus ' Barbus ' (Borkenhagen et al. 2011). We transfer this species to the genus Carasobarbus, based on the possession of a smooth last unbranched dorsal-fin ray, modally nine branched dorsal-fin rays, six branched rays in the anal fin and shield-shaped scales with numerous parallel radii. Analysis of molecular genetic characters (Durand et al. 2002, Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010, KB unpublished data) support this decision. The name of this species is frequently misspelled " Barbus fritschi ". The ' Catalog of Fishes' lists SMF 636 and SMF 952 as types for Carasobarbus fritschii (Eschmeyer 2011). Both lots where collected by K. v. Fritsch and J. Rein in Oued Ksob in 1872, together with the types of ' Barbus ' reinii Guenther, 1874, Luciobarbus nasus (Guenther, 1874) and the syntypes of Carasobarbus fritschii. SMF 636 contains seven specimens: one Luciobarbus nasus, one Luciobarbus ksibi (Boulenger, 1905), one ' Barbus ' reinii and four Carasobarbus fritschii. SMF 952 contains eight specimens: two ' Barbus ' reinii and six Carasobarbus fritschii. In the original description Guenther (1874) did not state the number of type specimens on which he based the description of Carasobarbus fritschii, but in the same paper he described Luciobarbus nasus (as Barbus nasus), based on two specimens and ' Barbus ' reinii, based on three specimens. It is likely that Guenther never saw the lots SMF 636 and SMF 952, because all syntypes of Luciobarbus nasus and ' Barbus ' reinii are in the BMNH. The collectors, K. v. Fritsch and J. Rein probably deposited these samples immediately in the SMF and we conclude that SMF 636 and SMF 952 are not part of the type series of Carasobarbus fritschii.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
1CDC01322A10AC251F77F62CE279BA62.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Two pairs of long barbels; 31 to 38 scales in the lateral line and 13 to 17 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; dorsal fin longer than anal fin and less than 15 % of the length of its last unbranched ray is flexible, dorsal profile of the head straight.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
1CDC01322A10AC251F77F62CE279BA62.taxon	description	Description. The body is of moderate height and without a nuchal hump. The head is triangular with almost straight dorsal and ventral profile (Figs 19, 20). The head length is shorter than the body depth (Fig. 12). The mouth is subterminal with two pairs of long barbels (Table 2). The eyes are in the anterior half of the head and relatively big. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin is long and strongly ossified and less than 15 % of the length of its last unbranched ray is flexible. Its last unbranched ray is as long as or longer than the head (Fig. 4). It usually has four unbranched and nine branched rays (Table 3). The anal fin usually has three unbranched and six or seven branched rays (Table 4). It does not reach the caudal fin origin. Carasobarbus harterti has 31 to 38 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), usually 5.5 or 6.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), 4.5 to 6.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and 13 to 17 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is - 4.3.2 in four specimens examined. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Live specimens are silvery with an olive tinge and orange fins (Fig. 20). Ethanol-preserved specimens are yellow-brown, the back is darker than the belly and flanks. The maximum length observed in the material examined is 250 mm SL. Carasobarbus harterti differs from all congeners except Carasobarbus exulatus and Carasobarbus fritschii in having nine rather than 10 branched dorsal-fin rays. It differs from Carasobarbus exulatus in having 31 to 38 scales in the lateral line vs 26 to 32 and modally 16 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 12. It differs from Carasobarbus fritschii in having a straight dorsal head profile and a last unbranched dorsal-fin ray that is strongly ossified and flexible for less than 15 % of its length vs. a convex dorsal head profile and a last unbranched dorsal-fin ray that is weakly ossified and flexible for more than 15 % of its length.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
1CDC01322A10AC251F77F62CE279BA62.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Carasobarbus harterti occurs in the rivers of the Oued Oum er Rbia and Tennsift drainage systems in Morocco (Fig. 18).	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
1CDC01322A10AC251F77F62CE279BA62.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Carasobarbus harterti was described from Oued Oum er Rbia as Barbus harterti (Guenther 1901). Some authors placed this species in the genus Barbus subgenus Labeobarbus (Boulenger 1919, Pellegrin 1921) while others continued using the genus Barbus (Pellegrin 1919, 1939). Karaman (1971) synonymised it with Carasobarbus fritschii, but regarded it as a distinct subspecies. He incorrectly synonymised Barbus rothschildi, Barbus riggenbachi and Barbus paytonii with this subspecies and placed it in his newly erected genus Pseudotor. Subsequent authors did not accept Karaman's proposal and continued using Barbus (Fowler 1976, El Gharbi et al. 1993, Azeroual et al. 2000, Leggatt and Iwama 2003, Colli et al. 2009, Borkenhagen et al. 2011) or proposed using Labeobarbus (Doadrio 1994, Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010). We transfer this species to the genus Carasobarbus, based on the possession of a smooth last unbranched dorsal-fin ray, nine branched dorsal-fin rays, six branched rays in the anal fin and shield-shaped scales with numerous parallel radii. Analysis of molecular genetic characters (Durand et al. 2002, Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010, KB unpublished data) support this decision.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
172EB0233D61E16171EFC009AC764B55.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Two pairs of barbels; 32 to 38 scales in the lateral line, usually 14 to 16 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; last unbranched dorsal-fin ray markedly longer than head; mouth narrow, lower lip spatulate and median lobe present.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
172EB0233D61E16171EFC009AC764B55.taxon	description	Description. Body moderately high, laterally compressed and without a nuchal hump. The greatest body depth is at the point of the origin of the dorsal fin. The ventral profile of the head is straight, its dorsal profile has a slight to pronounced hump near the nostrils (Figs 21, 22). The head is short and narrow. The mouth is inferior. The maximum body depth is bigger than the head length (Fig. 12). The lips are comparatively thick and the lower jaw is narrow with a sharp horny sheath and a median lobe. The two pairs of barbels (Table 2) are stout and the anterior pair is quite long. The eyes are rather high in the middle of the head and rather small. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin is long and usually has four unbranched and nine or 10 branched rays (Table 3). The last unbranched ray is long and well ossified; only the tip is flexible. It is considerably longer than the head (Fig. 4). The anal fin usually has three unbranched rays and six branched rays (Table 4). Its base is long. The bases of the dorsal and anal fin have a sheath of scales. There are 32 to 38 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), 5.5 to seven scales above the lateral line (Table 6), 4.5 to 6.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and (12) 14 to 16 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5 - 5.3.2 in seven specimens, 2.3.5 - in one specimen and - 4.3.2 in one specimen. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Live specimens are silvery. The back is darker than the belly, which is almost white (Fig. 22). Fixed specimens are yellow-brown and some have a darker back. Carasobarbus kosswigi differs from all congeners, except Carasobarbus sublimus, by having a spatulate lower jaw with a median lobe on the lower lip vs. a crescent-shaped lower jaw and a lower lip without median lobe. It differs from Carasobarbus sublimus by having 32 to 38 scales in the lateral line vs. 27 to 29 and modally 14 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 12 and by having a longer and more ossified last unbranched ray in the dorsal fin.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
172EB0233D61E16171EFC009AC764B55.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Carasobarbus kosswigi occurs in the Euphrates-Tigris system (Fig. 7).	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
172EB0233D61E16171EFC009AC764B55.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Carasobarbus kosswigi was described from the Batman Cayi and placed in the genus Cyclocheilichthys (Ladiges 1960). Karaman erected the new genus Kosswigobarbus for this species (Karaman 1971). Coad gave a detailed re-description of this species and transferred it to the genus Barbus (Coad 1982). Kosswigobarbus was revalidated (Ekmekci and Banarescu 1998) and sometimes used as a subgenus of Barbus (Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010). Later the species was placed in Carasobarbus (Borkenhagen et al. 2011). Carasobarbus kosswigi is paraphyletic with respect to Carasobarbus sublimus (Borkenhagen et al. 2011).	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
450422802F92D17542C4951DA963F58C.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. One pair of barbels; 25 to 33 scales in the lateral line, and typically 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; last unbranched ray of the dorsal fin about as long as the head or slightly shorter.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
450422802F92D17542C4951DA963F58C.taxon	description	Description. Specimens from Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband basin were excluded from this species description (see below). The dorsal profile is convex up to the origin of the dorsal fin and a nuchal hump is present in specimens longer than about 100 mm SL. This species has a high back and caudal peduncle (Figs 23, 24). The ventral profile of the head is convex, its dorsal pro file is almost straight to convex and has a hump near the nostrils in juvenile specimens. The mouth is sub-terminal. The barbels are short and stout. The maximum body depth is usually greater than the head length (Fig. 12). Usually one pair of barbels is present, but about 10 % of the specimens have two pairs of barbels (Table 2). The eyes are at the back of the anterior half of the head. They are big and slightly protuberant. The morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin usually has four unbranched and eight to 11 branched rays (Table 3). In specimens from the Tigris-Euphrates drainage system the last unbranched ray of the dorsal fin is strong with only the tip being flexible and it is about as long as the head. It is shorter and less ossified in Iranian populations (Fig. 4). The anal fin usually has three unbranched rays and five to seven branched rays (Table 4). There are 25 to 33 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), 3.5 to 6 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), 3 to 5.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and 10 to 13 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5 - 5.3.2 in 26 specimens, 2.3.4 - 5.3.2 in two specimens, 2.3.5 - 4.3.2 in one specimen, 2.3.5 - 5.3.3 in one specimen, 1.3.5 - 5.3.2 in one specimen, 2.3.5 - in one specimen and 2.3.4 - in one specimen. The pharyngeal teeth are hooked at their tips (Fig. 6). Live specimens are silvery to olive and sometimes have yellowish fins (Fig. 24). Ethanol-preserved specimens are light yellowish brown to grey. In most cases the back is darker than the rest of the body. Some of the lighter coloured specimens have a salmon hue, others are silvery. The fins are yellowish brown to grey. Juveniles have a dark spot on the sides of the caudal peduncle. Carasobarbus luteus from Ḩelleh, Kol, Maharlū and Mand populations: The last unbranched ray of the dorsal fin is shorter and less well ossified. It is pronouncedly shorter than the head (Fig. 4). The mouth is wider and the body is not as high-backed as in specimens from the Tigris-Euphrates system (Fig. 12). Carasobarbus luteus from Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband basin: In this population all specimens examined had two pairs of barbels (Table 2). The anterior pair is longer than in specimens from Tigris-Euphrates system with two pairs. The last unbranched ray in the dorsal fin is considerably shorter than the head (Fig. 4) and comparatively weak. Compared with specimens from Tigris-Euphrates system, the dorsal and ventral fins tend to be slightly further away from the head. The head is longer and the body not as high backed as in specimens from Tigris-Euphrates system (Fig. 12). The general body shape (Fig. 25) resembles that of Carasobarbus apoensis and Carasobarbus canis. Some of the gill rakers are y-shaped in the largest specimen examined. Carasobarbus luteus, except the population from Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband, differs from all congeners, except Carasobarbus apoensis, in having one instead of two pairs of barbels. It differs from Carasobarbus apoensis, Carasobarbus canis, Carasobarbus chantrei, Carasobarbus fritschii, Carasobarbus harterti and Carasobarbus kosswigi in modally having 28 scales in the lateral line vs. 30, 32, 34, 34, 34 and 33 respectively. It differs from Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus sublimus in having a crescent-shaped lower lip without median lobe vs. a spatulate lower lip with median lobe and from Carasobarbus exulatus, Carasobarbus fritschii and Carasobarbus harterti in modally having 10 rather than nine branched dorsal-fin rays. All populations, except the one from Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband differ from Carasobarbus apoensis in having a shorter head and a higher back. The population from Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband is very similar to Carasobarbus apoensis in body shape, but differs in having two as compared to one pair of barbels.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
450422802F92D17542C4951DA963F58C.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Carasobarbus luteus has a much greater range than any of its congeners and its distribution area is fragmented, resulting in several isolated populations. It is widespread all over the Tigris-Euphrates drainage system, and occurs in the rivers of south-western Iran (Fig. 7). The Nahr al Quwayq population, from one of the sites of the type locality, is probably extirpated due to drought and pollution (Krupp 1980, Krupp 1983 b). There are only few, mostly older, records from the Orontes (Krupp 1985 c, Krupp 1987). During recent fieldwork Carasobarbus luteus was not found there. Because Carasobarbus chantrei is still widespread and abundant in many parts of the Orontes, it is unlikely that Carasobarbus luteus disappeared due to habitat degradation. It might have been driven out by competition with Carasobarbus chantre i or records were based on misidentifications or mislabelled specimens. One specimen (NMW 10827) is reported from Damascus. Because Carasobarbus luteus does not occur in the Damascus basin and it is highly unlikely that it ever occurred there, the origin of this specimen is unclear.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
450422802F92D17542C4951DA963F58C.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Carasobarbus luteus was described as Systomus luteus by Heckel (1843). Heckel (1843) listed Orontes, Tigris, Aleppo and Mosul as type localities. As all but one of the type specimens are either from the Tigris-Euphrates system or from the Nahr al Quwayq and Aleppo is located on the Nahr al Quwayq and not on the Orontes, Heckel may have confused these two rivers. One of the type specimens (NMW 10827) is from " Damascus " and can not be attributed to any of the relevant drainage systems. By designating NMW 54253: 2 as lectotype we fix the Tigris near Mosul as type locality for Systomus luteus. The same confusion exists for the type localities of Systomus albus, which was also described from Tigris and Orontes in the same publication. A few years later Systomus albus var. alpina was described from the Daryacheh-ye Parīshan (Heckel 1847). These three taxa where later synomymised and placed in the genus Barbus (Guenther 1868). Sauvage (1882, 1884) accepted Carasobarbus luteus and Carasobarbus albus as valid species and transferred them to the genus Barynotus. Later, both species where synonymised again and transferred to the genus Barbus, subgenus Puntius (Misra 1947) or the genus Puntius (Menon 1956). Ladiges (1960) synonymised both species under the name Barynotus albus. Because Guenther (1868) had previously selected luteus as the valid species name, he is to be considered the first revising author and Ladiges' action is not valid. Kaehsbauer (1963) lists the species under two different generic names: Barbus (as Barbus luteus) and Systomus (as Systomus albus var. alpina). Karaman (1971) erected the new genus Carasobarbus for this species. This met mixed acceptance. While some authors accepted the new taxonomic position (e. g. Wossughi 1978, Bianco and Banarescu 1982, Ahmed et al. 1984, Naama and Muhsen 1986), others did not embrace it (e. g. Banister and Clarke 1977, Krupp 1985 a, c, Coad 1995, Coad 1996) until the revision by Ekmekci and Banarescu (1998). Fowler (1976) placed Carasobarbus luteus in the genus Barbellion. Tsigenopoulos et al. (2010) used Barbus subgenus Carasobarbus. Barbus parieschanica was described from Daryacheh-ye Parīshan (Wossughi et al. 1983). In the same publication the species name is also spelled B. parschanica, but Barbus parieschanica is probably the intended spelling (Coad 1995). Coad (1995) as the first revising author fixed Barbus parieschanica as the correct original spelling. Barbus parieschanica is a synonym of Carasobarbus luteus. The ' Catalog of Fishes' lists RMNH 2463 as possible syntype of Systomus luteus and RMNH 2464 of Systomus albus var. alpina (Eschmeyer 2011). We did not examine these specimens. We do not think that the population at Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband should be elevated to specific rank, because the number of specimens available is too low. We provisionally consider it an atypical population of Carasobarbus luteus that might have been affected by bottleneck effects and accelerated morphological change, due to the restricted size and extreme conditions (high salinity and temperature) of its habitat. It would be very interesting to collect more samples for morphological studies and molecular sequence analysis. In spite of some morphometric differences, Carasobarbus luteus populations of Tigris-Euphrates system and Iran belong to the same species (Borkenhagen et al. 2011); specimens from Rūdkhaneh-ye Naband were not included in that study. Carasobarbus luteus and Carasobarbus apoensis are closely related to each other (KB, unpublished data) and Carasobarbus apoensis might be the ecologically specialised sister species of Carasobarbus luteus, that is adapted to the environmental conditions of the wadi ecosystems of the Al Ḩijaz mountains.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
F4658135B40C2623F5C37E68F4E2553A.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Two pairs of barbels; 27 to 29 scales in the lateral line, 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; last unbranched dorsal-fin ray about as long as the head; mouth narrow, lower jaw spatulate and median lobe present on lower lip.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
F4658135B40C2623F5C37E68F4E2553A.taxon	description	Description. A nuchal hump is not developed. The maximum body depth is at the anterior end of the dorsal fin base. The ventral profile of the head is almost straight; the dorsal profile is convex and evenly curved (Figs 26, 27). The maximum body depth is greater than the head length (Fig. 12). The mouth is inferior, narrow, the lips are thick and the lower jaw is spatulate with a horny sheath and a median lobe on the lower lip. The two pairs of barbels (Table 2) are well developed. The eyes are at the posterior end of the anterior half of the head. Some morphometric characters are summarised in Table 1. The dorsal fin usually has four unbranched and nine or 10 branched rays (Table 3). The last unbranched ray of the dorsal fin is weakly ossified and about as long as the head (Fig. 4). The anal fin usually has three unbranched and six branched rays (Table 4) and its base is surrounded by a sheath of scales. Pectoral, ventral and anal fins are longer than in all other Carasobarbus species (Table 1). There are 27 to 29 scales in the lateral line (Table 5), 4.5 or 5.5 scales above the lateral line (Table 6), 3.5 to 5.5 scales below the lateral line (Table 7) and 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle (Table 8). The scales are shown in Fig. 5. The pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.4 - 5.3.2, 2.3.4 - 5.3.1 or 3.3.4 - 4.3.3 (Coad and Najafpour 1997). The pharyngeal bones available were too small for photography but are very similar to those of Carasobarbus kosswigi (Fig. 6). Live specimens from Rūdkhaneh-ye Fahlīan are silvery with hyaline fins (Fig. 27). Live specimens from Rūdkhaneh-ye A'la are silvery with a slightly darker back, the scales have dark pigments on their hind margin; pectoral, ventral and anal fins have a yellow to orange hue, which is most obvious with fins folded back; dorsal and caudal fins are grey or hyaline (Coad and Najafpour 1997). Ethanol-preserved specimens are yellowish brown with a somewhat darker back and juveniles have a dark spot on the sides of the caudal peduncle. Carasobarbus sublimus differs from all congeners, except Carasobarbus kosswigi, by having a spatulate lower jaw with a median lobe on the lower lip vs. a crescent shaped lower jaw and a lower lip without median lobe. It differs from Carasobarbus kosswigi by having 27 to 29 scales in the lateral line vs. 32 to 38 and modally 12 scales around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle vs. 14 and by having a shorter and less ossified unbranched last dorsal-fin ray.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
F4658135B40C2623F5C37E68F4E2553A.taxon	distribution	Distribution. This species is known from Rūdkhaneh-ye A'la, Rūdkhaneh-ye Fahlīan and possibly Rūdkhaneh-ye Kashgan (see discussion) in south-western Iran (Fig. 7).	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
F4658135B40C2623F5C37E68F4E2553A.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Carasobarbus sublimus was described in the genus Barbus and aligned with Carasobarbus apoensis, Carasobarbus canis, Carasobarbus chantrei, Carasobarbus exulatus, Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus luteus in the original description (Coad and Najafpour 1997). Coad recommends the use of the genus Kosswigobarbus for this species (Coad 2011). It was transferred to Carasobarbus, based on morphological characters and close genetic relationship (Borkenhagen et al. 2011). Locality data for CMNFI 79 - 0277 is not beyond doubt, because this lot was mentioned as Carasobarbus kosswigi in the original description of Carasobarbus sublimus (Coad and Najafpour 1997). According to morphometric and meristic characters (scales in lateral line, above lateral line and around the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; length of dorsal, pectoral, ventral and anal fin) this specimen is within the range of Carasobarbus sublimus and outside the range of Carasobarbus kosswigi. It might be an aberrant specimen or it might have been accidentally swaped with CMNFI 1995 - 0010 (a specimen of similar size from the same locality as the types of Carasobarbus sublimus). We had no opportunity to examine CMNFI 1995 - 0010. Though we think it is unlikely that Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus sublimus occur sympatrically, for the time being we consider it to be a possible record of Carasobarbus sublimus from the Rūdkhaneh-ye Kashgan.	en	Borkenhagen, Kai, Krupp, Friedhelm (2013): Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 339: 1-53, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.339.4903
