Redescription and osteology of Hyphessobrycon compressus (Meek) (Teleostei: Characidae), type species of the genus

Abstract

The type-species of Hyphessobrycon is redescribed and its osteology provided. Hyphessobrycon compressus is distinguished from its congeners by the 41-48 (mode 45) scales in the longitudinal series; 7-9 (mode 9) scales rows between the dorsal-fin origin and the lateral line, and absence of predorsal scales. Additional useful characters include the lack of spots on the body, a dorsal fin with a black spot, and an anal fin with two large, conspicuous hooks, and several other small hooks. Hyphessobrycon milleri is proposed as a junior synonym of H. compressus. The osteology of H. compressus is discussed in detail together with comments about phylogenetic relationships of Hyphessobrycon sensu stricto.A espécie-tipo de Hyphessobrycon é redescrita, junto com sua descrição osteológica. Hyphessobrycon compressus é distinguido dos seus congêneres por possuir 41-48 (moda 45) escamas na série longitudinal, 7-9 (moda 9) séries de escamas entre a origem da nadadeira dorsal e a linha lateral, e pela ausência de escamas pré-dorsais. Caracteres adicionais úteis incluem a ausência de máculas no flanco, nadadeira dorsal com mácula preta e nadadeira anal com dois ganchos ósseos grandes e conspícuos e vários outros pequenos. Hyphessobrycon milleri é proposto como sinônimo júnior de H. compressus. A osteologia de H. compressus é discutida em detalhe, junto com comentários sobre as relações filogenéticas de Hyphessobrycon sensu stricto.

A new species of Hyphessobrycon Durbin from northeastern Brazil: evidence from morphological data and DNA barcoding (Characiformes, Characidae)

“…The morphological data was based on both examined material (see Comparative material examined) and the literature (e.g., Géry 1977, Géry and Uj 1987, Costa and Géry 1994, Plaquete et al 1996, Weitzman and Palmer 1997, Zarske 2008, Hein 2009, Carvalho 2011, Lima et al 2013, Zarske 2014, Carvalho and Malabarba 2015, Carvalho et al 2017). The data obtained by this method are presented in the diagnosis section of results.…”

“…It is widely distributed along the river basins of the Neotropical region, from southern Mexico to the La Plata River basin in northeastern Argentina (Carvalho and Malabarba 2015, Teixeira et al 2015, Garcia-Alzate et al 2017), with highest diversity in the Amazon basin (Miquelarena and López 2006, Lima et al 2013, Bragança et al 2015, Carvalho and Malabarba 2015, Marinho et al 2016, Carvalho et al 2017, Moreira and Lima 2017). …”

“…In addition, some artificial species groups of Hyphessobrycon were proposed based on the combination of character states (e.g., Weitzman and Palmer 1997, Zarske 2014, García-Alzate et al 2008a, b, 2013, Carvalho and Malabarba 2015) relying mainly on coloration patterns. However, in many cases, it is not possible to assign without reasonable doubt to which group a particular species belongs (Bragança et al 2015).…”

“…After that, Carvalho (2011) and Carvalho and Malabarba (2015) proposed the group named Hyphessobrycon sensu stricto , diagnosed by the position of Weberian apparatus upward horizontal through dorsal margin of operculum, presence of a black blotch on dorsal fin and the absence of a midlateral black stripe on body, with a more restricted composition than the “rosy tetra clade” sensu Weitzman and Palmer (1997), comprising: H. compressus (Meek, 1904), H. bentosi Durbin, 1908, H. copelandi Durbin, 1908, H. epicharis Weitzman & Palmer, 1997, H. eques (Steindachner, 1882), H. erythrostigma (Fowler, 1943), H. georgettae Géry, 1961, H. haraldschultzi Travassos, 1960, H. hasemani Fowler, 1913, H. khardinae Zarske, 2008, H. megalopterus (Eigenmann, 1915), H. micropterus (Eigenmann, 1915), H. minor Durbin, 1909, H. pulchripinnis Ahl, 1937, H. pyrrhonotus Burgess, 1993, H. rosaceus Durbin, 1909, H. roseus (Géry, 1960), H. simulatus (Géry, 1960), H. socolofi Weitzman, 1977, H. sweglesi (Géry, 1961), H. takasei Géry, 1964 and H. werneri Géry & Uj, 1987. Other species recently referred to the “rosy tetra clade” such as Hyphessobrycon dorsalis Zarske, 2014, H. jackrobertsi Zarske, 2014, H. paepkei Zarske, 2014 and H. pando Hein, 2009 share these traits, but their taxonomic status is uncertain (Carvalho and Malabarba 2015).…”

“…Other species recently referred to the “rosy tetra clade” such as Hyphessobrycon dorsalis Zarske, 2014, H. jackrobertsi Zarske, 2014, H. paepkei Zarske, 2014 and H. pando Hein, 2009 share these traits, but their taxonomic status is uncertain (Carvalho and Malabarba 2015). The key point is that the remaining species of Hyphessobrycon included in the other groups will probably need to be assigned to other genera or new genera ( Hyphessobrycon sensu lato ) (Carvalho and Malabarba 2015). …”