The family Mugilidae comprises mainly coastal marine species that are widely distributed in all tropical, subtropical and temperate seas. Mugilid species are generally considered to be ecologically important and they are a major food resource for human populations in certain parts of the world. The taxonomy and systematics of the Mugilidae are still much debated and based primarily on morphological characters. In this study, we provide the first comprehensive molecular systematic account of the Mugilidae using phylogenetic analyses of nucleotide sequence variation at three mitochondrial loci (16S rRNA, cytochrome oxidase I, and cytochrome b) for 257 individuals from 55 currently recognized species. The study covers all 20 mugilid genera currently recognized as being valid. The family comprises seven major lineages that radiated early on from the ancestor to all current forms. All genera that were represented by two species or more, except Cestraeus, turned out to be paraphyletic or polyphyletic. Thus, the present phylogenetic results generally disagree with the current taxonomy at the genus level and imply that the anatomical characters used for the systematics of the Mugilidae may be poorly informative phylogenetically. The present results should provide a sound basis for a taxonomic revision of the mugilid genera. A proportion of the species with large distribution ranges (including Moolgarda seheli, Mugil cephalus and M. curema) appear to consist of cryptic species, thus warranting further taxonomic and genetic work at the infra-generic level.

BackgroundCichlid fishes have been the subject of increasing scientific interest because of their rapid adaptive radiation which has led to an extensive ecological diversity and their enormous importance to tropical and subtropical aquaculture. To increase our understanding of chromosome evolution among cichlid species, karyotypes of one Asian, 22 African, and 30 South American cichlid species were investigated, and chromosomal data of the family was reviewed.ResultsAlthough there is extensive variation in the karyotypes of cichlid fishes (from 2n = 32 to 2n = 60 chromosomes), the modal chromosome number for South American species was 2n = 48 and the modal number for the African ones was 2n = 44. The only Asian species analyzed, Etroplus maculatus, was observed to have 46 chromosomes. The presence of one or two macro B chromosomes was detected in two African species. The cytogenetic mapping of 18S ribosomal RNA (18S rRNA) gene revealed a variable number of clusters among species varying from two to six.ConclusionsThe karyotype diversification of cichlids seems to have occurred through several chromosomal rearrangements involving fissions, fusions and inversions. It was possible to identify karyotype markers for the subfamilies Pseudocrenilabrinae (African) and Cichlinae (American). The karyotype analyses did not clarify the phylogenetic relationship among the Cichlinae tribes. On the other hand, the two major groups of Pseudocrenilabrinae (tilapiine and haplochromine) were clearly discriminated based on the characteristics of their karyotypes. The cytogenetic mapping of 18S ribosomal RNA (18S rRNA) gene did not follow the chromosome diversification in the family. The dynamic evolution of the repeated units of rRNA genes generates patterns of chromosomal distribution that do not help follows the phylogenetic relationships among taxa. The presence of B chromosomes in cichlids is of particular interest because they may not be represented in the reference genome sequences currently being obtained.

The family Loricariidae, with about 683 species, is one the largest fish families in the world. The subfamily Hypostominae was recently reviewed and is now divided in five tribes. With the main objective of contributing to a better understanding of the relationships of the members of the subfamily Hypostominae, cytogenetic analyses were conducted in seven species (three Hypostomini, three Pterygoplichthini and two Ancistrini) from Brazil and Venezuela. In Pterygoplichthini, all species show 2n = 52 chromosomes. In Hypostomini Hypostomus ancistroides has 2n = 68, H. regani 2n = 72 and Hypostomus goyazensis 2n = 72 chromosomes. In Ancistrini Ancistrus n. sp. 1 has 2n = 39/40 with a sex chromosome system of the type XX/X0, which is a novelty for neotropical fishes, and Ancistrus n. sp. 2 has 2n = 52 chromosomes. Six species have single Ag-NORs and two multiple Ag-NORs. The possible cytogenetic relationships among the species of Hypostominae are discussed.

One of the most relevant topics in the biology of invasion concerns the genetic changes that occur subsequent to a species invasion, an issue of particular focus among conservation biologists. Colonizing a novel environment presents a genetic challenge to invading species because such species surely have not experienced the selective pressures presented by the environment. Here we ask, by what mechanisms and processes do alien species genetically naı¨ve to their new environment, become successful invaders? We attempt to resolve this paradox by considering the interplay between an invader's ability to modify its new environment, and genetic modifications imposed by the new environment. We postulate that epigenetic adaptations, and adaptive mutations are likely play a role in enhancing invasion success.

Molecular phylogenetic studies are very scarce for the Mugilidae family; the present analysis using DNA sequences of the mitochondrial 16S rRNA and cytochrome b genes is the first study involving Brazilian mugilids. The results corroborate the monophyly of Mugil and are elucidative for the taxonomy of Brazilian mugilids. Mugil curema is clearly divided into two genetically distinct taxa, M. curema type I being closer related to Mugil hospes and the true M. curema (type II) grouping significantly with M. incilis. The results also suggest that Mugil liza and Mugil platanus should be treated as a single species or even populations of Mugil cephalus.

The identification of the lebranche mullet in the western south Atlantic has long been problematical. In most recent works either Mugil liza Valenciennes and M. platanus Günther, 1880 or M. liza and M. cephalus Linnaeus, 1758 were recognized from the region and more rarely the occurrence of only one species has been proposed but without sufficient morphological, biochemical or molecular data to allow the designation of the taxonomically appropriate name. Analysis of meristic and morphometric data taken from samples collected from Venezuela to Argentina, clearly indicates that there is only one species of lebranche mullet in the Caribbean Sea region and the Atlantic coast of South America and that Mugil liza is the appropriate name. The comparison of the combined data from all the samples of M. liza with the data taken from one sample of M. cephalus that originated in the Mediterranean, the possible locality from which type specimens were collected (Eschmeyer and Fricke, 2009), revealed significant differences indicating that they are different species. It is also suggested that individuals from the western north Atlantic identified as M. cephalus might represent a population of M. liza in this region.

The original description of Mugil gaimardianus has created various taxonomic problems in the past since the description is ambiguous and the type specimen is apparently lost. The name M. gaimardianus could not be reliably applied to any known species and was suppressed by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) (Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 51: 286–287, 1994). Nevertheless, karyological evidence has shown that there is a species of mullet in Venezuelan coastal waters that does not conform to the description of any other mullet from the Western Central Atlantic and has the feature of a red eye that was often used by earlier authors to define nominal M. gaimardianus. The purpose of this study was to make a morphological description of these unusual specimens, provide a morphological diagnosis from other species of Mugil present in the Caribbean and Western Central Atlantic and establish a valid name for the species.

No abstract