Brycon vonoi , Lima, Flávio C. T., 2017
treatment provided by
Brycon vonoi new species
Diagnosis. Brycon vonoi can be diagnosed from all remaining cis-andean Brycon species, with the exception of B. stolzmanni , B. coxeyi , B. coquenani , B. vermelha , B. insignis , B. howesi , B. dulcis , B. ferox , B. opalinus , and B. nattereri by possessing a color pattern consisting in a humeral blotch and a caudal peduncle blotch, without body stripes or other obvious color markings on caudal and anal-fins (vs. body stripes and caudal/anal fin color markings present; see Fig. 5View FIGURE 5). Brycon vonoi can be distinguished from B. ferox , B. vermelha , B. insignis , B. howesi , B. coquenani , and B. dulcis by possessing a slightly acute head profile (vs. a distinctly acute head profile). Brycon vonoi can be distinguished from Brycon stolzmanni and B. coxeyi by the absence of a patch of dark pigmentation on the opercle (vs. dark patch of pigmentation present on opercle). Brycon vonoi can be additionally distinguished from B. insignis , B. howesi , B. coquenani , and B. vermelha by possessing a fifth infraorbital bone about as wide as high (vs. fifth infraorbital bone wider than high; see Fig. 6View FIGURE 6). Brycon vonoi can be additionally distinguished from B. dulcis by possessing a clear overall color pattern (vs. darkened overall body color). Brycon vonoi can be distinguished from B. nattereri by possessing lateral line tubules mostly simple (vs. tubules with 2–5 branches), caudal peduncle blotch not extending into middle caudal-fin rays (vs. caudal peduncle blotch extending into middle caudal-fin rays), and roughly V-shaped blotch on outer caudal-fin rays present (vs. outer caudal-fin rays clear, without dark pigmentantion). Brycon vonoi can be distinguished from B. opalinus by presenting an acute, pointed snout (vs. obtuse, rounded snout) and a longer upper jaw length (45.1–51.4 % of HL, mean 49.5, vs. 38.7–48.3 of HL, mean 42.9).
Description. Morphometric data are presented in Table 11. Middle-sized species, largest examined specimen 278.0 mm SL. Body moderately slender. Largest body height slightly ahead of dorsal-fin origin. Dorsal body profile slightly convex from upper lip margin to vertical through anterior naris, slightly concave from latter point to basis of supraoccipital process, moderately convex from latter point to dorsal-fin origin, straight along dorsal-fin basis, and straight to slightly convex from dorsal-fin basis to adipose-fin origin. Dorsal profile of caudal peduncle slightly concave. Ventral profile slightly convex from lower lip to pelvic-fin insertion, straight to slightly convex from this point to anal-fin origin and approximately straight along anal-fin base. Ventral profile of caudal peduncle slightly concave.
Head profile slightly acute anteriorly, mouth terminal. Jaws isognathous to slightly anisognathous, premaxillary projecting slightly relative to dentary in some specimens, leaving outer row of premaxillary teeth exposed when mouth is closed. Maxillary long, extending posteriorly to anterior third to middle of pupil. Adipose eyelid well developed. Premaxillary teeth in three rows; teeth of third row largest. Five (1), 6 (8), 7 (7), 8 (2), 9 (6), 10 (1), or 11 (2) tricuspidate teeth in outer series. Three (3), 4 (11), 5 (10), or 6 (2) tri- to tetracuspidate teeth in second, inner premaxillary row, plus 2 (2), 3 (12) or 4 (12) tricuspidate teeth between the first and third rows. Two teeth in third premaxillary row, medial teeth largest, symphyseal teeth smaller, slightly tilted towards each other, both pentacuspidate. Maxillary with distal portion distinctly expanded and rounded in profile. Seventeen to 27 maxillary teeth, slightly smaller than teeth of first premaxillary row, anterior teeth tricuspidate, posterior teeth unicuspidate. Dentary with 9(2), 10 (2), 11 (3), 12 (1), or 14 (2) teeth in main series. Anterior four dentary teeth assymetrical, considerably larger and bulkier than remaining teeth, penta- to hexacuspidate, each with central cusp distinctly larger than remaining cusps. Remaining dentary teeth progressivelly smaller, tetra-, tri- to unicuspidate. Inner (lingual) series consisting of a small, single unicuspid symphyseal tooth, situated immediately posterior to symphyseal dentary teeth of main series, plus row of 25–31 small, unicuspidate teeth, originating on lingual crest of dentary replacement trench at the level of third main series dentary teeth.
Scales cycloid. Lateral line complete, from supracleithrum to caudal-fin base. Forty-five (3), 46 (4), 47 (13), 48 (6), or 49 (2) scales in lateral line series. Laterosensory tube generally simple, deflected upwards in the first 5–6 scales, downwards in the remaining lateral-line scales. Larger specimens (> 230 mm SL) with with tubules bifurcated in some scales. Horizontal scale rows between dorsal-fin origin and lateral line 6 (1), 7 (16) or 8 (11). Horizontal scale rows between lateral line and pelvic-fin 4 (22) or 5 (6). Circumpeduncular scales 14 (1), 15 (2), 16 (14), 17 (9), or 19 (1).
Dorsal-fin rays ii, 9. Dorsal fin origin slightly ahead of middle of SL. First dorsal-fin pterygiophore inserting behind neural spine of 13th (1) or 14th (1) vertebra. Anal-fin rays iii (not including first, small unbranched ray only visible in the cs specimen), 20(1), 21 (7), 22 (12), 23 (4), or 25 (3). First anal-fin pterygiophore inserting behind haemal spine of 23th (2) vertebra. Last unbranched and anterior 4–5 branched anal-fin rays longer, remaining rays progressively shorter towards anal-fin end. Anal fin displaying numerous (c. 25–30 per fin-ray main branch) middle-sized hooks on last unbranched and posterior main branch of branched rays 11–23, associated with dense, gelatinous tissue in 7 specimens (MZUSP 58297, 1, 210.6 mm SL; MZUSP 93815, 2, 195.2– 192.3 mm SL; ZUEC 10746, 1, 189.6 mm SL; MCP 49962, 1, 194.1 mm SL; MCNIP 1595, 1, 193.4 mm SL; MCNIP 1596, 1, 182.6 mm SL), one of which (MZUSP 58297) a female (see “Sexual dimorphism”, below). A single hook per ray segment. Sheath of scales covering basis of anal-fin rays composed of two scale rows, lower scale row formed by 20–23 rectangular scales. Pectoral-fin rays i, 10 (2), 11 (8), or 12 (17). Pelvic-fin rays typically i, 7, one specimen i, 8. Main caudal-fin rays 10/9. Caudal fin forked, lobes rounded.
Four branchiostegal rays, three on anterior ceratohyal and one on posterior ceratohyal. First branchial arch with 11 (1), 13 (1), or 16 (1) lower, 1 at angle, and 11 (1), 12 (1), or 13 (1) upper gill rakers. Vertebrae 43 (2). Supraneurals 10 (1) or 11 (1).
Coloration in alcohol. Overall body coloration clear. Top of head, snout, supraorbital, sixth infraorbital, and dorsal portion of body grayish to brownish. Second, third, fourth, and fifth infraorbitals, and opercle silvery. Dentary, maxillary, gular area and lower portion of body light brown. Lateral portion of body clear, with a silvery hue. Humeral blotch present, moderately conspicuous, approximately rounded in shape, situated immediately above lateral line, its anterior margin at level of second, extending longitudinally to posterior margin of fourth lateral line scales, and vertically less than one scale high. Large, little to moderately conspicuous, oval-shaped caudal peduncle blotch, extending along 5–6 last lateral-line scales. Rayed fins clear, with dark chromatophores scattered over the interradial membranes. Caudal-fin with a poorly discernible, roughly V-shaped blotch, formed by dark pigmentantion situated on outer caudal-fin rays. Adipose fin light-grey to light-brown.
Color in life. The holotype (MZUSP 58297), a year and a half after being collected (September 1999), still retained orange blotches at the centre of the scales from the two horizontal scale rows situated below lateral line scale row, anterior to insertion of pelvic fins.
Sexual dimorphism. Seven specimens (MZUSP 58297, 1, 210.6 mm SL; MZUSP 93815, 2, 195.2– 192.3 mm SL; ZUEC 10746, 1, 189.6 mm SL; MCP 49962, 1, 194.1 mm SL; MCNIP 1595, 1, 193.4 mm SL; MCNIP 1596, 1, 182.6 mm SL) displayed anal-fin hooks. One of these specimens (MZUSP 93815, 192.3 mm SL) was dissected and is a male, with well-developed testicles. On other hand, the specimen MZUSP 58297 is a female, presenting oocytes at the urogenital opening. Another obviously mature female specimen, presenting oocytes at the urogenital opening (MZUSP 93815, 278.0 mm SL) does not present fin hooks. Fin hooks are generally regarded as being a dimorphic feature, present only in males ( Malabarba & Weitzman, 2003). In fact, data for other Brycon species examined in the present study confirm this view. Consequently, the occurrence of anal-fin hooks in the mature female specimen MZUSP 58297 should be considered an abnormal condition.
Etymology. The specific name honors our dear colleague and friend Volney Vono (1961–2011), who was the first ichthyologist to collect the new species and who brought it to the attention of the author.
Common names. “ Piabanha ” (V. Vono, O.T. Oyakawa, pers. comm.).
Distribution. Only known, and apparently endemic from the rio Pardo basin, a small coastal drainage situated at Minas Gerais and Bahia states, immediately north from the rio Jequitinhonha basin, eastern Brazil ( Fig. 32View FIGURE 32).
Conservation. The original Atlantic forest which formerly covered most of the rio Pardo basin was historically largely replaced by pastureland and crops. There is a hydroelectric dam (Machado Mineiro dam) build in the middle rio Pardo that very likely has affected adversely the species. Unfortunately, more hydroelectric dams are being planned for the rio Pardo basin. Brycon vonoi is being artificially bred at a fish hatchery situated at the Machado Mineiro hydroelectric dam. Probably, as almost all remaining eastern brazilian Brycon species, the species is threatened with extinction, though it is necessary to obtain additional field data to ascertain its current conservation status.
Remarks. There is an old lot ( MCZAbout MCZ 2416) said to have been collected at the “rio Una” by “ A. de Lacerda. Antônio de Lacerda was an amateur brazilian naturalist resident at Salvador, Bahia, who assisted N. Dexter and S.V.R. Thayer from the Thayer Expedition during their stay at that city ( Dick, 1977: 6; Agassiz & Agassiz, 1975: 93). The lot MCZAbout MCZ 2416 was collected previously (1864) to the Thayer Expedition, presumably at the rio Una which lies at the city of Valença, where Lacerda’s family owned a cottom mill industry. This locality lies considerably to the north (~ 220 km) from the mouth of the rio Pardo, the type-locality of Brycon vonoi . These specimens are similar to Brycon vonoi and are herein provisionally considered to be conspecific to this species. More collecting in the coastal rivers of central and northern Bahia are, however, necessary to understand the taxonomical status of Brycon populations in the area (see also “Remarks” of Brycon devillei and B. opalinus ).
Material examined. Holotype: MZUSPAbout MZUSP 58297View Materials (1, 210.6 mm SL): Brazil, Minas Gerais, Taiobeiras, rio Pardo, Fazenda Tabatinga , c. 15°43’S 42°14’W; V. Vono, 17 Feb 1998.GoogleMaps
Paratypes. Brazil, Minas Gerais, rio Pardo basin. MZUSPAbout MZUSP 104020View Materials (1, 151.0 mm SL): same data as holotypeGoogleMaps . MZUSPAbout MZUSP 83434View Materials (3, 149.2–232.0 mm SL): Berizal, rio Pardo , c. 15°35'S, 41°44'W; B.P. Nogueira & M.F.G. Brito, 23 Jun 2000GoogleMaps . MCNIP 1595 (2, 178.6– 193.4 mm SL); ZUEC 10746 (2, 166.0– 189.6 mm SL); ANSP 200241 (1, 165.0 mm SL); MCP 49962 (1, 194.1 mm SL); MNRJAbout MNRJ 45957View Materials (1, 164.0 mm SL): Águas Vemelhas, rio Pardo, immediatelly below Machado Mineiro hydroeletric dam, 15°31'25''S, 41°30'26''W; T.C. Pessali et al., 15 Feb 2015GoogleMaps . MZUSP 93815 (17, 82.1–278.0 mm SL, 2 cs, 84.9–92.8 mm SL): Águas Vermelhas, CEMIG fish hatchery (stocked from specimens collected at the rio Pardo), UHE Machado Mineiro , 15°31’19’’S, 41°30’18’’W; O.T. Oyakawa, J.L. Birindelli & L.M. Sousa, 16 Apr 2007GoogleMaps . MZUSPAbout MZUSP 108439View Materials (1, 124.6 mm SL): Ninheira, Rio Pardo, UHE Machado Mineiro , 15°31’S, 41°31’W; WGoogleMaps . A. Meireles, March 2011. MCNIP 1596 (11, 103.0– 182.6 mm SL) ; ZUEC 10747 (4, 105.1– 113.7 mm SL): Ninheira, CEMIG fish hatchery (stocked from specimens collected at the rio Pardo), UHE Machado Mineiro , 15°31’19’’S, 41°30’18’’W; T.C. Pessali et al., 14 Feb 2015.GoogleMaps
Additional material (not typical). UFMG uncat. (1, 221.6 mm SL): same data as holotype. MCZ 2416 (2, 200.0– 260.5 mm SL): Bahia, “Rio Una” [c. 13°22’S, 39°5’W; see Remarks, above]; A. de Lacerda, 18 March 1864.
|Standard length (SL)||210.6||17||96.3–278.0||-|
|Percentages of standard length|
|Depth at dorsal-fin origin||30.9||26||25.4–31.3||28.4|
|Snout to dorsal-fin origin||52.0||27||49.7–55.0||52.5|
|Dorsal-fin base length||10.2||27||10.2–14.0||12.1|
|Posterior terminus of dorsal fin to adipose fin||24.4||27||20.9–24.8||22.7|
|Posterior terminus of dorsal fin to hypural joint||33.5||27||33.2–39.6||37.3|
|Snout to pelvic-fin insertion||50.6||27||47.4–52.1||49.9|
|Snout to anal-fin origin||71.1||26||65.8–74.3||66.7|
|Anal-fin base length||21.3||26||21.3–26.2||23.9|
|Caudal peduncle length||12.1||27||11.1–14.9||13.8|
|Caudal peduncle depth||9.3||27||8.0–12.4||8.8|
|Percentages of head length|
|Upper jaw length||50.4||27||43.9–51.4||49.0|
|Horizontal eye diameter||25.2||27||22.7–28.9||26.2|
|Least interorbital width||38.5||27||32.7–44.3||38.6|
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.