“…The authors also observed secondary modifications on the dorsal fin within clade A characids, especially in Glandulocaudini and Stevardiini. Additional variation on the number of branched dorsal fin rays within clade A characids was also reported in the literature: some species has ≤8 branched rays [ii+ 7–8: Attonitus bounties (Vari & Ortega, 2000), Bryconamericus arilepis (Román‐Valencia et al , 2008 a ), B. yokiae (Román‐Valencia, 2003 c ), Cyanocharax lepiclastus (Malabarba & Weitzman, 2003), Planaltina myersi (Menezes et al , 2003), Knodus longus (Zarske & Géry, 2006) and K. moenkhausii (Ferreira, 2007); ii+ 6–8: B. tolimae (Román‐Valencia, 2004) and B. caucanus (Román‐Valencia, 2003 a ); ii+ 6–7: B. carlosi (Román‐Valencia, 2003 d ); ii+ 7: B. charalae (Román‐Valencia, 2005), B. cismontanus (Román‐Valencia, 2003 a ) and B. galvisi (Román‐Valencia, 2000)]; others species present ≥8 branched rays [ii+ 8–9: P. britskii (Menezes et al , 2003), B. gonzalezoi (Román‐Valencia, 2002), B. macrophthalmus (Román‐Valencia, 2003 b ) and B. peruanus (Román‐Valencia, 2003 a ); ii+ 8–10: B. dahlia (Román‐Valencia, 2000)]. Given the variation observed here, a more comprehensive analysis of the number of dorsal fin rays in other clade A characids genera of Malabarba & Weitzman (2003) is necessary for a better understanding of the significance of this character as a putative synapomorphy for the group.…”