Phylogeography of the genus Chondrostoma Agassiz, 1835 (Teleostei: Leuciscidae) in Anatolia, as inferred from mitochondrial DNA analysis

Turcichondrostoma, a new genus for the Leuciscidae (Teleostei: Cypriniformes) from Southwestern Anatolia

“…The results of study of Çiftci et al . (2020) also indicate that C. fahirae (new genus T. fahirae ) are distinctly differentiated from the genus Chondrostoma based on genetic results. Çiftci et al .…”

“…Çiftci et al . (2020) stated that C. fahirae can be defined as a member of the genus Protochondrostoma in their results. Nonetheless, according to morphological, osteological and molecular results of this study, the genus Turcichondrostoma can be easily distinguished from the genus Protochondrostoma .…”

“…In the results of their study Çiftci et al . (2020) stated that the C. fahirae species is positioned between the Central European and Iberian clusters. Contrary to Çiftci et al .’s (2020)results, according to phylogenetic tree results of this study, C. fahirae (new genus T. fahirae ) is positioned at the outermost of the groups of Chondrostoma and is also clearly recovered with high posterior probability (PP:1.0) and strongly‐supported bootstrap (BP:100%) values.…”

“…(2010) and Çiftci et al . (2020) to the fact that the analysed data sets are not the same. There was no agreement between the results of analyses using the Cytb gene alone (Çiftci et al ., 2020; Doadrio & Carmona, 2004; Hrbek et al ., 2004; Perea et al ., 2010) and the results of analyses with multiple gene regions (Robalo et al ., 2007; the present study).…”

“…Subsequently, Çiftci et al . (2020) investigated the phylogeny of Chondrostoma species of Anatolian and Mesopotamian based on the mtDNA Cytb gene and as a result, they redefined the nasus and regium lineage groups. In addition, according to the analysis results, they stated that the C. fahirae is not included in these two lineage groups (nasus and regium) and reported species in between the Iberian genera and Central European species.…”