Sedercypris, Skelton & Swartz & Vreven, 2018
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2018.410 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5687609 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038DB87E-FFD5-FFC3-7A9C-FA44FCE62788 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Sedercypris |
status |
gen. nov. |
Sedercypris gen. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:09567CC9-7FF0-4054-BD36-CCCB26AB7F7D
Barbus Daudin, 1805: 58 View in CoL ( Barbus calidus Barnard, 1938 ; Barbus erubescens Skelton, 1974 ).
‘ Pseudobarbus ’ – Yang et al. 2015: 99.
Type species
Sedercypris calidus ( Barnard, 1938) gen. et comb. nov. ( Fig. 10D View Fig. 10 ).
Included species
Sedercyprus calidus ( Barnard, 1938) ( Fig. 10D View Fig. 10 ), distributed in the Clanwilliam Olifants River system, and Sedercypris erubescens (Skelton, 1974) , endemic to the Twee River, a tributary of the Doring branch of the Clanwilliam Olifants River system.
Diagnosis
Species of Sedercypris gen. nov. are distinct from all other southern African tetraploid genera in the combination of having six or seven branched rays in the anal fin (vs five – or six in Cheilobarbus capensis ), and a red base to the fins (only Pseudobarbus also has a red base to the fins). The genus is further distinguished from Cheilobarbus in overall body size (adults ± 150 mm SL vs> 150 mm SL); from Namaquacypris gen. nov. by fewer pre-dorsal vertebrae (11–14 vs 13–15) the position of the dorsal fin (in advance of the origin of the anal fin vs to over the origin of the anal fin), a difference in mouth position (terminal vs inferior), in not having a membrane between the inner pelvic rays and the body (vs presence of such a membrane Namaquacypris gen. nov.); from Amatolacypris gen. nov. in number and size of barbels ( Sedercypris gen. nov. with two pairs of well developed barbels that equal the orbit diameter vs one pair that is less than half an orbit diameter), in the number and size and shape of the infraorbitals (five, all slender in Sedercypris gen. nov. vs four, 3rd and 4th broad in Amatolacypris gen. nov.); and from Pseudobarbus in a serrated unbranched dorsal-fin ray ( Pseudobarbus has a simple unbranched dorsal-fin ray), the position of the mouth (terminal vs subterminal) and the absence of strong sexual dimorphism (vs sexual dimorphism with males having conical tubercles on the head, body and fins and larger fins compared to females).
Etymology
Endemic to and named for the Sederberg (Cedarberg), Western Cape, South Africa, a Cape Fold mountain range in which rise streams and rivers tributary to the Olifants River system. The Afrikaans spelling of Sederberg is adopted for the name to avoid the possible confusion with the genus Cheilobarbus when the genus name is abbreviated to an initial in text. Masculine.
Description
The genus Sedercypris gen. nov. includes medium sized (adults <120 mm SL) tetraploid cyprinine species from southern Africa with radiately striated scales; mouth terminal, lips slender, two pairs of well-developed simple oral barbels, pharyngeal bones with three rows of hooked teeth, formula 2,3,5 or 4-4 or 5,3,2; a simple s-folded intestine about equal to the SL in length; dorsal fin positioned over or behind the origin of the pelvic fins, with the last simple ray bony with posterior margin weakly or strongly serrated and 8 branched rays; anal fin with six or seven branched rays; mature adults with bright red flashes at the bases of fins. Breeding adults develop small erupted nuptial tubercles scattered over head dorsum and anterior body, single rows over anterior pectoral rays. Breeding takes place in male dominated nuptial schools over creviced rock faces.
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
SubFamily |
Cyprininae |
Tribe |
Smiliogastrini |
Sedercypris
Skelton, Paul H., Swartz, Ernst R. & Vreven, Emmanuel J. 2018 |
Barbus
Daudin, 1805 : 58 |