“…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).…”