1966
DOI: 10.26515/rzsi/v64/i1-4/1966/161530
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Catelogue of the Fishes Figured in Day's "Fishes of India" and Deposited in the Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta. Part I. Pleuronectiformes, Tetraodontiformes, Lophiiformes Batrachoidiformes and Beloniformes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thryssa mystax : Whitehead (1969): 276, pl. 3c (Malabar, India); Whitehead (1972): 231, figure 54 (in part: Bombay [currently Mumbai], Canara [Kanara], Madras [Chennai], and Waltair [Visakhapatnam], India and Ceylon [Sri Lanka]); Misra (1976): 140 (India); Talwar and Kacker (1984): 201, text‐figure 89 (India); Whitehead et al (1988) (in part): 438 (India); De Bruin et al (1994): 193 (Sri Lanka).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thryssa mystax : Whitehead (1969): 276, pl. 3c (Malabar, India); Whitehead (1972): 231, figure 54 (in part: Bombay [currently Mumbai], Canara [Kanara], Madras [Chennai], and Waltair [Visakhapatnam], India and Ceylon [Sri Lanka]); Misra (1976): 140 (India); Talwar and Kacker (1984): 201, text‐figure 89 (India); Whitehead et al (1988) (in part): 438 (India); De Bruin et al (1994): 193 (Sri Lanka).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, T. mystax (based on Whitehead et al, 1988 and Wongratana et al,'s 1999 T. mystax ) is ranked as Least Concern because there are no major threats for the species (Di Dario & Munroe, 2020). However, T. mystax is abundantly caught and thought to be the largest proportion of total catches of species of Thrissina in India (Talwar & Kacker, 1984; Whitehead et al, 1988). Moreover, T. porava and T. valenciennesi are also caught abundantly and frequently landed on markets (Sirimontaporn, 1984; Wongratana et al, 1999; Matsunuma, 2011; White et al, 2013: all shown as T. mystax ); all three species can be considered to be actively used as marine resources and always under threat of overfishing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 (Madras [currently Chennai], Tamil Nadu State, India [suggested BMNH 1868.10.25.27 as “putative neotype”; see Remarks]); Whitehead, 1972: 235, fig. 59: (in part: specimens collected from Porto Novo [currently Parangipetta, Tamil Nadu State], Madras [Chennai, Tamil Nadu State], and Waltair [Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh State], India [incorrectly included Engraulis kempi Chaudhuri, 1916, Engraulis rambhae Chaudhuri, 1916, Engraulis scratchleyi Ramsay and Douglas-Ogilby, 1886, and Thryssa gautamiensis Babu Rao, 1971, in synonymy]); Talwar and Kacker, 1984: 200, text-fig. 88 (in part: Pakistan to Indian coasts [incorrectly included T. gautamiensis Babu Rao, 1971, in synonymy]); Ramaiyan and Pandian, 1976: 517 (Porto Novo [Parangipettai], Tamil Nadu State, India); Whitehead et al, 1988: 435, unnumbered fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%