Proposed synonymy for Micropogonias altipinnis (Günther 1864), Micropogonias ectenes (Jordan & Gilbert 1882), and Micropogonias megalops (Gilbert 1890)

Abstract

Within the Sciaenidae family, the genus Micropogonias is composed of three recognized species along the Pacific coast of Mexico: Micropogonias altipinnis, M. ectenes, and M. megalops. These species exhibit overlapping diagnostic characters, which make species identification difficult. This study ties morphological differences (meristic, morphometry of body, and otolith) with DNA sequences (CO1 and 16S fractions of mtDNA and 28S of nDNA) among Micropogonias species in the Pacific. Meristic analysis showed a latitudinal variation among the three species in the number of rays, the number of gill rakers, and length of the longest spine of the dorsal fin. Discriminant analysis of morphometric characters (body and otolith) showed three morphological entities (p < 0.001). However, the mean genetic divergences among the three species with partial sequences of mtDNA (CO1 and 16S), and nuclear (28S) were lower than those reported at the interspecific level (>2%). Genetic results suggest that the three species are one species and that the differences in meristics and morphometry could be the result of phenotypic plasticity or incipient speciation. In this sense, M. ectenes and M. megalops are proposed as junior synonyms of M. altipinnis.

Molecular identification and first morphological description of theColoradosnapperLutjanus colorado(Perciformes: Lutjanidae) larvae

“…A fraction of COI was capable of discriminating among L. colorado larvae and the other seven lutjanid species that shared the same distribution within the GC with intraspecific <1% (Avise, 2000) and interspecific >2% genetic divergences (Hebert et al ., 2003; Johns & Avise, 1998). Similar intraspecific and interspecific genetic divergences have been reported in Albulidae (Diaz‐Viloria et al ., 2017), Sciaenidae (Camacho‐Gastelum et al ., 2017; Sanchez‐Pinedo et al ., 2018) and Scombridae (Ochoa‐Muñoz et al ., 2018).…”

“…In this regard, the use of standard mitochondrial sequences, such as the cytochrome oxidase subunit I (DNA barcode in animals), has become a very effective tool to discriminate between species (Ahern et al, 2018;Hebert et al, 2003;Ward et al, 2005). The use of DNA barcoding in conjunction with morphological descriptions of larval stages has already been carried out with various species in the GC, such as Totoaba macdonaldi (Gilbert, 1890) and Cynoscion reticulatus Günther, 1864 (Díaz-Viloria et al, 2013),…”