Diapoma pyrrhopteryx, Menezes & Weitzman, 2011
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1590/S0031-10492011000500001 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/78618792-FFCD-A542-6E9F-FE3BEB3C89F4 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Diapoma pyrrhopteryx |
status |
sp. nov. |
Diapoma pyrrhopteryx View in CoL , new species
Figs. 33-39 View FIGURE 33 View FIGURE 34 View FIGURE 35 , Table 4
Specimens examined: All specimens from Brazil.
Holotype: MCP 44104 View Materials , male, SL 51 mm, rio do Peixe , tributary of rio Uruguai, Concórdia, Santa Catarina, 27°28’S, 51°53’W. GoogleMaps
Paratypes: MCP 12982 View Materials , 8 View Materials (SL 38-49 mm), collected with holotype GoogleMaps ; MCP 13368 View Materials , 8 View Materials (SL 25-56 mm), rio Pelotas , tributary of rio Uruguai, Anita Garibaldi, Rio Grande do Sul, 27°47’51”S, 51°16’42”W GoogleMaps ; MCP 44141 View Materials , 22 View Materials (SL 29-56 mm) , MZUSP 104323 View Materials , 2 View Materials (C&S), rio Canoas , tributary of rio Uruguai, road between Tupitinga and Celso Ramos, Santa Catarina, 27°35’11”S, 51°22’48”W GoogleMaps .
Diagnosis: Diapoma pyrrhopteryx is morphologically most similar to D. speculiferum , both species sharing the posterior elongation of opercle and subopercle. This feature distinguishes it from D. terofali and D. thauma . Diapoma pyrrhopteryx differs from D. speculiferum in the presence of red fins in live males (versus fins pale to yellowish in live males of D. speculiferum ), the longer snout, 21.3-24.5% of head length, Fig. 27 View FIGURE 27 (versus, 17-21.4% of head length, in D. speculiferum ) and the maxillary teeth pentacuspid, Fig. 37 View FIGURE 37 (versus maxillary teeth tricuspid in D. speculiferum , Fig. 29 View FIGURE 29 ).
Description: Morphometrics presented in Table 4.
Body comparatively large (SL 29-56 mm), larger than that of D. speculiferum . General body and head shapes, dorsal and ventral body profiles, mouth shape, position of fin origins and extension of maxilla as in D. speculiferum .
Dorsal fin ii, 8 in all specimens, n = 41. Posteriormost ray unbranched in all specimens, n = 41. Adipose fin present. Unbranched anal-fin rays iv or v, usually iv, branched rays 24-30 (29), 36.4, n = 41. Well-developed anal-fin lobe including anterior unbranched rays and 9-10 branched rays. Anal fin of males with bilateral hooks on last unbranched ray and anterior 10 branched rays, distributed as in Fig. 38 View FIGURE 38 . Pectoral-fin rays i, 9-11 (11), 10 (unbranched pectoral-fin ray i, in all specimens), n = 41. Posterior tip of longest pectoral-fin rays extending slightly beyond pelvic-fin origin in all specimens. Pelvic-fin rays i, 6, n = 41, last pelvic-fin rays unbranched but counted as branched. Sexually mature males with hooks on pelvic
78 MENEZES, N.A. & WEITZMAN, S.H.: REVIEW OF DIAPOMA AND DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW SPECIES FROM SOUTHERN BRAZIL
fin, distributed as in fig. 39. A mature male ( MZUSP 104323, SL 52 mm) has 7 hooks on fifth, 3 on sixth and no hooks on remaining branched or unbranched rays. Distal tip of longest pelvic-fin rays falling slightly short or just extending to origin of anal fin.
Scales cycloid, with few radii (5-10) on exposed field on body and more numerous (20-30) on enlarged scale bordering pouch opening. Lateral line incomplete, with 10-22 (11), 13.4, n = 35 perforated scales on anterior segment, followed by 1-20 (18), 11.8, n = 41 non-perforated scales and a posterior segment with 6-26 (6), 13.5, n = 35 perforated scales in most specimens. Lateral series scales 36-42 (37), 38.45, n = 36. Predorsal scales 13-15 (13), 13.7, n = 41. Horizontal scale rows from dorsal-fin origin to anal-fin origin 9-11(10), 10, n = 41. Horizontal scale rows around caudal peduncle 13-14(14), 13.9, n = 35.
Premaxillay teeth in two rows ( Fig. 37 View FIGURE 37 ), outer row with 2-5(4), n = 35, n = 41 tricuspid teeth, inner row with 4-5(4), 4.3, n = 41 pentacuspid teeth. Maxillary ( Fig. 37 View FIGURE 37 ) with 3-6(5), 4, n = 41 anterior quadricuspid to pentacuspid teeth. Dentary ( Fig. 37 View FIGURE 37 ) with 4-5(5), 4.3, n = 41 anterior quadricuspid to pentacuspid teeth and 4-10 (7), n = 41 tricuspid teeth, posteriormost teeth with vestigial cusps. Total number of gill rakers on first gill arch 12-14 (14), 13.4, n = 40. Branchiostegal rays in two cleared and stained specimens 4, 3 originating from anterior ceratohyal and 1 rays from posterior ceratohyal.
Color in alcohol: Identical to that of D. speculiferum as described above. Lateral body stripe mostly obscured by guanine with black line along its length inconspicuous.
Color in life: A male specimen ( Fig. 34 View FIGURE 34 ) preserved soon after capture ( MCP 44377) had body silvery with upper part of dorsal-fin red mixed with yellow and separated from its basal dark portion by a whitish longitudinal stripe. Uppermost and lowermost caudal-fin rays red. Marginal posterior portion of caudal fin pale to yellowish and remaining area of fin with scattered dark chromatophores. Adipose fin red. Anteroventral portion of anal fin red, and contrasting with remaining portion of anterior whitish area of lobe. Remaining portion of anal-fin area yellow and marginal posterior area of fin dark. Posterior two thirds of pelvic fin red mixed with yellow, anterior third whitish. Posterior portion of pectoral fin yellowish, with upper posterior marginal portion of fin with red chromatophores. Very conspicuous dark humeral blotch present along with dark blotch on caudal peduncle, extending posteriorly to anterior portion of median caudal-fin rays. Female from the same lot ( Fig. 34 View FIGURE 34 ) had body pale with yellowish areas especially distributed over dorsal part of body. All fins yellowish especially adipose, upper part of dorsal, dorsal and ventral rays of caudal and posterior part of anal fins. Humeral dark blotch, dark blotch on caudal peduncle and lateral body stripe inconspicuous.
Sexual dimorphism, reproductive mode and gonad anatomy: Pelvic- and anal-fin hooks are present only in males of D. pyrrhopteryx , but their number and arrangement on both fins are different from those in D. speculiferum (compare Figs. 31 and 32 View FIGURE 32 with Figs. 38 View FIGURE 38 and 39 View FIGURE 39 ). Several morphometric characters in table 4 show significant statistical differences between males and females (values of p in bold), but when submitted to regression analysis none of them revealed significant differences between sexes. As in D. speculiferum no significant statistical differences was detected in opercular extensions of males and females. Histological sections could not be done through the ovary of mature females of this species.
Distribution: This species has been collected to date in the rio Canoas basin or tributaries flowing into this basin that belongs to the rio Uruguay basin in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil ( Fig. 16 View FIGURE 16 ).
Etymology: The species name, pyrrhopteryx , from the Greek words “pyrrho” meaning red and “pteryx” meaning fin is in reference to the red fin colors of the fish when alive.
Remarks: Specimens ( MCP 44377, 2, 65.4 mm, and 72.5 mm SL) from rio Passo Fundo, tributary of rio Uruguai, Rio Grande do Sul, (approximately 27°48’S, 52°35’W) used to get color pictures have all the morphological features of the type specimens.
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.