Abstract: In order to understand in detail the morphological characteristics and the differences between the population and the records,according to the GB/T 18654.3-2008,the morphological characteristics of Distoechodon compressus of the three waters in Liancheng County,Fujian Province,China were detected,the results were compared with the records of "Biology and Breeding of Distoechodon compressus","Fishes of Fujian" and "Fish of Chinese Cyprinidae". The results showed that:1)The main external morphological characteristics of Distoechodon compressus in Liancheng were body length,lateral flat,abdomen round,no ventral edges. The head was small,the eye was big,the snout was obviously prominent. Two rows of mandibular teeth,lower mouth,transverse crack,the mandible had a well developed cuticle margin. The gill rakes were short and thin,closely arranged,gill rake number 90~113. Small scales,lateral line scales 71~86. The dorsal fin was strong and smooth. The gluteal fin had two unbranched fin rays. caudal fin deep fork shape,the tail handle was longer. Deep black back,silver abdomen,the front and back edge of the gill cover had 1 orange stripe,and the body side had more than 10 black spot stripes. The dorsal and caudal fins were gray and black,caudal fin edge was black,pectoral fin and pelvic fin were red orange or orange,the pterygiophore was orange and the edge was gray and white. The gluteal fin was pale yellow.The pterygiophore were yellow and white. 2)There were some differences between the main morphological characteristics and the literature records:(1)The gluteal fins had two fin rays that did not branch;(2)Each fin rays were darker in colour,among them,the color of tail fin changed from red to black or yellow,the color of pectoral fin and pelvic fin turned yellow from red to orange,the gluteal fin changed from yellow to white;(3)The number of lateral scales exceeded the recorded range of 68~74,67~72;(4)The number of gill rakes exceeded the records of 94~103,94~97 of the literature. The main reasons for the difference were:(1)The geographical location difference of the sample fish;(2)Environmental changes in water quality;(3)Genetic variation;(4)Sample fish specification difference;(5)Lack of food;(6)Differences in color descriptions among authors of the literature.