2019
DOI: 10.1643/ci-19-226
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Taxonomic Revision of Sturisomatichthys Isbrücker and Nijssen, 1979 (Loricariidae: Loricariinae), with Descriptions of Three New Species

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

2
15
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ghazzi [ 36 ] carried out a morphology-based phylogeny including eight valid species of Sturisoma sensu lato , plus five undescribed species, and found a monophyletic Sturisoma including only cis-Andean species, plus S . kneri (= Sturisomatichthys kneri ), which was found here not to belong to Sturisoma , a conclusion in agreement with those of Covain et al [ 15 ], and Londoño-Burbano and Reis [ 90 ]. Ghazzi [ 36 ] used 20 characters to support that clade [ 36 ]; 12 of which were analyzed here (see [ 36 ] for the list of Synapomorphies, and Character Description).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Ghazzi [ 36 ] carried out a morphology-based phylogeny including eight valid species of Sturisoma sensu lato , plus five undescribed species, and found a monophyletic Sturisoma including only cis-Andean species, plus S . kneri (= Sturisomatichthys kneri ), which was found here not to belong to Sturisoma , a conclusion in agreement with those of Covain et al [ 15 ], and Londoño-Burbano and Reis [ 90 ]. Ghazzi [ 36 ] used 20 characters to support that clade [ 36 ]; 12 of which were analyzed here (see [ 36 ] for the list of Synapomorphies, and Character Description).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Rapp Py-Daniel [ 28 ] did not include Cteniloricaria in her analysis. The genus was described by Isbrücker and Nijssen [ 65 ], and since then, treated as synonym of Harttia [ 28 , 39 , 62 , 86 , 94 – 96 ], or as valid [ 1 , 10 , 15 , 17 , 25 , 65 , 66 , 87 , 90 , 97 , 98 , this study].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 3 more Smart Citations