12 research outputs found
Tetragonopterus anostomus Silva & Benine, 2011, new species
No full textTetragonopterus anostomus, new species Table 1, Figs. 1–2 Holotype. MZUSP 108957, 45.4 mm SL, Brazil: Goiás state, Nova Crixás, rio Preto, rio Araguaia basin, S 14 ° 22 ’ 18 ” W 050° 39 ’ 13 ”, 26 jul. 2005, L. S. Souza, M. R. S. Melo, C. C. Chamon, and L. M. Sousa. Paratypes. MZUSP 89295, 5, 34.8 –41.0, mm SL. Collected with holotype. LBP 7687, 17, 34.6–38.9, 2 c&s, 32.5 –34.0 mm SL, Brazil: Goiás, Cocalinho, Lagoa marginal of rio Araguaia, rio Araguaia basin, S 14 ° 22 ’ 36 ” W 50 ° 40 ’08.4”, sep. 2009, J. Senhorini. Diagnosis. Tetragonopterus anostomus is distinguished from congeners by having a superior mouth (vs. terminal mouth) with relatively smaller and numerous teeth in the inner row of premaxilla (5–7 vs. always 5, respectively) and dentary (5 vs. 4, respectively), and by the number of gill rakers on the lower limb (18–19 vs. 12–14 respectively) of the first branchial arch. Additionally, T. anostomus is distinguished from congeners by having a comparatively enlarged maxilla (see Fig. 2 for complete comparison). Tetragonopterus anostomus is also distinguished from T. argenteus by the number of predorsal scales (8 vs. 12–17, respectively); from T. rarus by the absence of dark stripes on the lateral surface of the body (vs. presence), and from T. carvalhoi by having a rounded spot vs. a lozenge-shaped spot on caudal peduncle. Description. Morphometric data of holotype and paratypes are summarized in Table 1. Body compressed, moderately elongated in lateral view. Greatest depth on dorsal-fin origin. Preventral and predorsal area keeled. Dorsal profile slightly convex between tip of snout and vertical through midhalf of orbit; slightly concave from this point to end of occipital process; convex from this point to base of dorsal-fin origin; slightly convex at limits of dorsal and adipose fins. Ventral profile: smoothly convex from snout to slightly behind pectoral-fin origin; convex from that point to anal-fin origin; straight until base of anal fin. Caudal peduncle with dorsal and ventral profiles nearly concave. Snout shorter than orbital diameter. Superior mouth. Upper and lower jaw with similar size. Maxilla straight, aligned at angle of approximately 90 degrees to longitudinal body axis. Premaxilla with two-tooth rows. Both inner and outer rows with relatively small teeth, Outer row with 4 * (3), 5 (11), 6 (10) and 7 (1), tricuspid teeth with central cusp slightly longer. Inner row with 5 (4), 6 (19) and 7 * (2) tricuspid and pentacuspid teeth with central cusp twice as long and broader than other cusps. Maxilla with 2 (8), 3 * (8), 4 (9) conic to tricuspid teeth. Dentary with 5 * (13) or 6 (12) tricuspid and pentacuspid anteriormost teeth, followed by 10–11 (2 c&s) smaller conical teeth with similar size, all backward inclined. Dorsal-fin rays ii, 9 * (25). First unbranched ray smaller than second one. Dorsal-fin origin anterior to middle body; distal border elongated. Dorsal-fin pterygiophores 10 (2 c&s). Anal-fin rays v, 26 (1) v, 27 * (4), v, 28 (3), v, 29 (8) and v, 30 (9); anterior rays usually slightly longer than posterior ones. Anal-fin origin at vertical through base of nine or ten branched dorsal-fin rays. Anal-fin pterygiophores 28–29 (2 c&s). Pelvic-fin rays i, 7 * (25). Pelvic-fin origin anterior to vertical line through dorsal-fin origin; distal border elongated; tip reaching anal-fin origin. Pectoral-fin i, 11 (1) i, 12 * (16), i, 13 (7) and i, 14 (1). Caudal fin forked, with i,17,1 rays (2 c&s). Dorsal procurrent rays 13–14 (2 c&s) and ventral procurrent rays 9 (2 c&s). Cycloid scales large. Lateral line complete and distinctly ventrally curved anteriorly. Scales in longitudinal series 29 (4), 30 (3), 31 (12) and 32 * (6). Scale rows between dorsal-fin origin and lateral line 6 (13) and 7 * (12); scale rows between lateral line and pelvic-fin origin 3 * (15) and 4 (10). Scale rows around caudal peduncle 12 (7), 13 * (14) and 14 (4). Anal fin base with one scale row, caudal-fin with scales covering part of the lobes. Precaudal vertebrae 8 (2 c&s), intermediate vertebrae 2 (2 c&s) and caudal vertebrae 16 (2 c&s). Supraneural 3 (2 c&s). Lower gill-rakers on first arch 17 * (8), 18 (10) and 19 (04); upper gill-rakers on first arch 11 * (22). deviation. Sexual dimorphism. Bony hooks on anal and pelvic fins, a sexually dimorphic feature widespread among Characiformes (Malabarba & Weitzman, 2003) and known for T. chalceus (Ricardo et al., 1998), were not observed in T. anostomus. Color in alcohol. General body color yellowish. Dorsal portion of head and body dark pigmented. Dorsolateral portion of body with few points of chromatophores on distal edges of scales, scales of ventrolateral portion without pigmentation. Two conspicuous vertical dark marks on humeral region. Anterior humeral mark more evident than posterior humeral mark. Anterior humeral mark, located over four horizontal scales row above lateral line, posterior humeral mark very poor, with cromatophores very scattered. Caudal peduncle with a rounded dark spot. Silver stripe in the medial region of the body, going from the top edge of the opercule to the caudal peduncle. Anal, pelvic, and dorsal fin hyaline, with chromathophores concentrated at the ends of the rays. Adipose fin hyaline. Opercular and infra-orbitals bones silver. Distribution. Known from the type locality, rio Preto, State of Goiás, Nova Crixás, and lagoa marginal at the municipality of Cocalinho, Mato Grosso, rio Araguaia basin, central Brazil (Fig. 3). Etymology. The specific epithet is a compound name derived from Greek ano-, meaning upward, above; and stoma, meaning mouth, in reference to the position of the mouth. Discussion. Tetragonopterus anostomus is easily distinguishable from known congeners as described in the Diagnosis. This new species can be included in the T. chalceus group, which includes species with seven to nine predorsal scales. Among the 15 nominal species of Tetragonopterus listed as species inquirendae in Characidae by Lima et al. (2003), T. sawa Castelnau was originally described from rio Crixás, rio Araguaia basin, near the type locality of T. anostomus. Eigenmann (1917) recognized T. sawa as a junior synonym of T. argenteus, a species with 12 to 16 predorsal scales, although neither types nor topotypes were listed by that author as examined material. Eigenmann (1917) redescribed T. argenteus as bearing 12 to 16 predorsal scales, and highlighted that this species “can always be readily distinguished” from T. chalceus, T. gibbosus, and T. huberi “by its great depth and two vertical bars” with no mention of the predorsal scales as a diagnostic character. We were able to examine a photograph of the holotype of T. sawa (MNHN A. 9819) and, even though it was not possible to confirm the number of predorsal scales, it does have a deep body and a terminal mouth (Fig. 2), which promptly distinguishes Castelnau’s species from T. anostomus. These characters also distinguish T. anostomus from Tetragonopterus huberi Steindachner, T. rufipes Valenciennes, and T. schomburgkii Valenciennes, nominal species actually related to the genus. Even though both T. argenteus and T. chalceus were identified as also occurring in the upper rio Araguaia, only T. chalceus was sampled with T. anostomus from its known area of occurrence (see comparative material). A lot (MZUSP 89295) with both species mixed may be indicative that these species probably school together. Tetragonopterus anostomus and T. chalceus present a very similar, if not identical, overall body color pattern, which would result in a quite homogeneous and mixed school of fishes. If one considers that these fishes school together, among other hypotheses, for reducing the risk of predation (Chivers et al., 1995; Magurran, 1990), such an interaction between closely related and similar species would possibly be more efficient since it produces larger and more cohesive schools. Considering such an interaction, T. anostomus has marked modifications in the jaw, teeth (Fig. 2), and gillraker morphology in comparison not only with the sympatric T. chalceus, but with all known congeners. These modifications are intimately associated to feeding habits (Clabaut et al., 2007), and may represent ecomorphological adaptations for food acquisition within a distinct and less competitive niche. Body size is also related to food acquisition in fishes (Clabaut et al., 2007) and, as a consequence, differences in this trait may be indicative of exploitation of different niches. In fact, T. anostomus seems to be smaller than T. chalceus, considering that the largest known specimen of T. anostomus does not exceed 45.3 mm SL. Although absolute body size values are not informative, as it may represent straightforward observations of different developmental stages, gonadal analysis indicated that a specimen of T. anostomus (MZUSP 89295) with 38.0 mm SL is a mature female. According to Ricardo et al. (1998), males and females of T. chalceus have their first maturation at no less than 48.0 to 63.0 mm SL. More comprehensive studies on interspecific interactions may shed light on our understanding of the evolution of the group (e.g. Alexandrou et al., 2011). Comparative material. Tetragonopterus argenteus: Venezuela: Bolivar: Caicara del Orinoco, rio Orinoco: LBP 3058, 2,61.0– 81.2; LBP 3059, 1, 57.1. Brazil: Maranhão: LBP 5535, 1, 74.4, Balsas, rio Balsas. Acre: LBP 185, 2, 71.2–72.5, Rio Branco, rio Acre; MZUSP 50301, 3, 81.8–88.5, Colocação Volta Grande, rio Grande. Mato Grosso; Aripuanã: NUP 3381, 5, 62.9 –82.0; NUP 7189, 2 55.6–57.6; Nova Brasilândia: NUP 10768, 1, 101.0, rio Manso, rio Paraguai; Rosário Oeste: NUP 10758, 17, 24.2–44.5, rio Cuiabá, rio Paraguai; Chapada dos Guimarães: NUP 4092, 3, 65.1–87.6, rio Cuiabá, rio Paraguai; LBP 3967, 1, 59.5, Cuiabá, rio Mutuca; LBP 4633, Paconé, rio Paraguai. Goiás; Aragarças; LBP 1832, 1, 68.9, rio Araguaia. Mato Grosso do Sul; Coxim: LBP 1476, 7, 27.4– 42.5, rio Paraguai; LBP 1776, 4, 81.3–97.8, rio Paraguai; Aquidauna: LBP 3758, 20, 50.4–66.7, rio Paraguai; Cáceres: LBP 8442, 3, 51.8–63.9, rio Paraguai; LBP 5108, 1, 67.6, rio Paraguai. Paraná: NUP 7341, 1, 110.9, Foz do Iguaçu, rio Paraná; Peru: MZUSP 26393, 10, 40.8–67.5, Pucallpa, rio Ucayali. Tetragonopterus chalceus: Brazil. Amapá: MZUSP 35008, 6, 59.3–95.5, rio Cupuxi. Pará: MZUSP 92777, 5, 70.4 –100.0, Santarém, lago do Maiacas, rio Amazonas; MZUSP 35006, 8, 48.5–54.7; Itabuna, rio Tapajós; MZUSP 35017, 5, 47.9–82.4, São Luís, rio Tapajós. Tocantins: Ananás, rio Tocantins: NUP 8202, 8, 34.43–53.31; NUP 9034, 1, 54.6. Roraima: MZUSP 35004, 36, 43.2–85.7, Rio Branco, rio Branco. Mato Grosso; Cocalinho: LBP 8773, 1, 54.2, MZUSP 89182, 5, 37.6–47.7. Goiás: Nova Crixás, rio Preto: MZUSP 89295, 4, 45.8–53.7; Minaçu: MZUSP 54091, 9, 59.7–67.1; Aruanã: MZUSP 91160, 3, 30.7–50.9, rio Araguaia. Bahia: MZUSP 90886, 6, 55.9 –61.0 Iaçu, rio Paraguassú, rio São Francisco. Minas Gerais: LBP 10294, 20, 70.7–92.8, São Roque de Minas, rio São Francisco. LBP 10394 12, 58.6 –76.0, Buritizeiro, rio São Francisco; MZUSP 47352, 3, 31.6–34.2, Manga, rio Japoré. Tetragonopterus carvalhoi: Brazil, Amapá, Laranjal do Jari, rio Jarí: LBP 5376, 30, 30.3–42.7; LBP 5306, 7 paratypes, 36.7–47.1. Tetragonopterus rarus: Suriname: rio Marowjine: MZUSP 99689, 1, 73.7,. Brazil: Pará, Alto Pará do Oeste, rio Amazonas: MZUSP 88029, 1, 86.6. Tetragonopterus sp: Brazil: Amapá: Laranjal do Jarí, rio Jarí: MZUSP 101472, 10 71.4–79.9,; MZUSP 101714, 12, 67.7–84.3, MZUSP 101755, 3, 56.2 –66.0;. Pará: MZUSP 99499, 11, 67.1–78.2 Jacarecangá, rio Teles Pires, rio Tapajós. Tocantins: MZUSP 97933, 6, 57.2 –61.0, Alta do Tocantins, rio do Sono. Mato Grosso: MZUSP 91950, 18, 46.0– 78.1, Paranatinga, rio Xingu. LBP 1585, 6, 49.3–62.5, Barra do Garças, rio das Garças, rio Araguaia; Cocalinho: LBP 8857, 1, 56.1, lagoa da Montaria, rio Araguaia; LBP 7830, 1, 51.3, rio Araguaia; São Féliz do Araguaia: LBP 4011, 3, 58.5–59.4, Lago Morto, rio Araguaia; LBP 3981, 2, 42.2–44.8, Lagoa Fazenda Taboca, rio Araguaia. Goiás: Aragarças, rio Araguaia: LBP 5751, 6, 51.1–55.7; LBP 1629, 2, 58.7–62.5.Published as part of Silva, Gabriel S. C. & Benine, Ricardo C., 2011, A new species of Tetragonopterus Cuvier, 1816 (Characiformes, Characidae, Tetragonopterinae) from the upper rio Araguaia, Central Brazil, pp. 50-56 in Zootaxa 2911 on pages 51-55, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20238
Hyphessobrycon otrynus Benine & Lopes, 2008, new species
No full textHyphessobrycon otrynus new species (Table 1, Figs. 1–4) Holotype. USNM 349418, 30.1 mm SL. Venezuela, Portuguesa, río Portuguesa drainage, río Las Marias, at Quebrada Seca, aproximatelly 45 min upstream by car from Highway 5, 22 km NNW Guanare. J. Armbruster and O. Leon. 28 Feb. 1998 (fig. 1). Paratypes. All from Venezuela. USNM 392814, 29.7mm SL (same data as holotype); LIRP 6040, 8 specimens, 21.5–25.7 mm SL, and 2 specimens C&S, 24.0– 24.2 mm SL, Caño Falcon, río Portuguesa, J. N. Baskin. 24 Nov. 1974. Diagnosis. This species is distinguished from all other known congeners, except for H. diancistrus, by the presence of two very large bony hooks (in adult males) curving dorsally on each side of anal fin, and caudalfin rays black at distal third of their length (distal tips of caudal-fin rays hyaline). Hyphessobrycon otrynus is promptly distinguished from H. diancistrus by possessing iv, 19–21 anal fin rays, versus iv, 14 anal-fin rays in the latter. Adult males of H. otrynus are also distinguished from H. diancistrus by presenting very small analfin hooks, lacking from the latter species. Moreover, in H. otrynus, the very large bony hooks are located on the fourth or fifth segments of the last unbranched anal-fin ray and on the fifth segment of the first branched anal-fin ray, whereas in H. diancistrus the bony hooks are located on the first and third segments of the last unbranched and first branched anal-fin rays. Among small characins, Hyphessobrycon otrynus is most similar to Moenkhausia bonita and Hemigrammus marginatus, from which it differs in having a naked caudal-fin (vs. a scaled caudal-fin), by presenting two large hooks on anal-fin of adult males (not observable in latter species), and ii, 8 dorsal-fin rays (vs. ii, 9 dorsalfin rays). Hyphesssobrycon otrynus is also distinguished from M. bonita in having an incompletely pored lateral line (vs. completely pored lateral line). Description. Morphometric data for Hyphessobrycon otrynus are summarized in Table 1. Body fusiform. Greatest body depth at dorsal-fin origin. Dorsal profile of head straight or slightly convex. Dorsal profile of body slightly convex from posterior tip of supraoccipital spine to dorsal-fin origin, straight or slightly convex and posteroventrally slanted along dorsal-fin base, straight or slightly convex from end of dorsal-fin base to end of adipose-fin, and slightly concave along caudal peduncle. Ventral body profile convex from anterior tip of lower jaw to caudal-peduncle origin, slightly concave along caudal peduncle. Pelvic region transversally flattened, more so proximal to pelvic-fin insertion, becoming somewhat obtuse toward anal-fin origin. Mouth terminal. Jaws equal or lower jaw slightly longer than upper jaw. Most posterior margin of maxilla trespassing vertical through anterior margin of orbit. Premaxillary teeth in two rows; outer tooth row with 3 (4), 4 * (6) conical to tricuspid teeth, midcentral cusps longer than others; inner tooth row with 5 tri to pentacuspid teeth in all specimens, midcentral cusps longer than others. Maxillary with 0 (2) and 1 *(8) conical tooth. Dentary with 4 tri to pentacuspid teeth followed by a smaller tricuspid one, and a short series of small conical teeth in all specimens (fig. 2). Palatine and pterygoid bones toothless. Frontals contact each other at their anterior one-fifth and at epiphyseal bar. Parietal bones completely separated by frontal-parietal fontanel. Infraorbital series well ossified. Nostrils closer to anterior orbital margins than to each other. Supraoccipital process short, its posterior tip not reaching the vertical through posterior margin of opercle. Dorsal-fin rays ii, 8 in all specimens. Pectoral-fin rays i, 10,i in all specimens. Distal tip of pectoral fin slightly trespasses vertical through pelvic-fin insertion. Adipose fin present. Pelvic-fin rays i, 7 in all specimens; when adpressed, its tip reaches base of second branched anal-fin ray. Anal-fin rays v, 19 (6) or 21 *(4). Principal caudal-fin rays i, 17,i. Caudal-fin forked. Scales cycloid, with few radii along posterior border. Lateral line incomplete, pored scales 8 * (2), 9 (1), 12 (3). Lateral series of scales including lateral-line pored scales 31 *(3), 32 (3). Scale rows between dorsal-fin origin and lateral line 5; scale rows between lateral line and pelvic-fin origin 3. Scale sheath along anal-fin base in a single series of 4 scales, extending posteriorly up to fourth branched anal-fin ray. First gill arch with 13 (4), 14 *(5) gill rakers on ventral limb and 7 (1), 8 *(9) on dorsal limb. Total vertebrae 33, supraneurals 5 (fig. 3). Sexual dimorphism. Adult males with two very large, dorsally curved hooks on both sides of anal fin, somewhat buried in thick tissue; anterior hook longest, being a process of the fifth (last unbranched) anal-fin ray; posterior hook being a process of sixth (first branched). Small hooks are located on the distal segments of most anterior anal-fin rays, more concentrated on the segments of the posterior branch of each hooked ray (figs. 3, 4). All small hooks are backward pointed and varying in number from one to four per ray segment. One individual also presented a somewhat more developed hook on each side of the second and third branched anal-fin rays. Color in alcohol. Overall coloration pale yellow. A dark stripe extending along horizontal septum, more intense from vertical passing through the origin of the second scale most anterior to dorsal fin. Median dorsal scale row, from nape to dorsal caudal-fin origin, densely scattered with dark chromatophores. Anterior to dorsal-fin end, scales of second and third scale rows ventral to median dorsal scale row posteriorly emarginated by dark chromatophores, with pigment concentration diminishing downward. From dorsal-fin end to adiposefin origin, scales of row immediately ventral to median dorsal scale row posteriorly emarginated by dark chromatophores. Very few chromatophores scattered on opercle. Lateral line sensorial canals bordered by few dark chromatophores. Limits of caudal epaxial and hipoaxial, and anal-fin inclinator muscle masses, partially outlined by dark chromatophores (see fig. 1). Caudal peduncle with a somewhat horizontal lozenge-shaped black blotch that faint toward distal tips of middle caudal-fin rays. Head with a dense field of dark chromatophores in region just posterior to epiphyseal bar. Sparsely scattered dark chromatophores anterior to epiphyseal bar. A dense patch of dark chromatophores dorsal to snout, between and surrounding area of nostrils, premaxillary bones and dorsal portion of maxillary bones. A dense patch of dark chromatophores on symphyseal area of dentary bones. A thin line of dark chromatophores bordering orbits. Remainder of head pale yellowish white. Dorsal fin with scattered dark pigments bordering rays along their length. Anal fin with scattered dark pigments bordering fin rays, more concentrated along its proximal and distal length, resulting in a somewhat clearer medial area in few individuals. Adipose fin with scattered dark chromatophores along its area, except for its distal one third, which is hyaline. Paired fins hyaline with scattered dark pigments, more concentrated on intermembranes of unbranched ray. Midregion of both caudal-fin lobes with a field of dark chromatophores. Tips and base of both lobes of caudal fin hyaline (fig. 1). Distribution. Known only from tributaries of the río Portuguesa, río Orinoco drainage, Venezuela (fig. 5). Etymology. The specific epithet otrynus is from the Greek meaning spur, in reference to the two very large spur-like hooks (processes of last unbranched and first branched anal-fin rays). Comments. According to Ellis (in Eigenmann, 1918), Hyphessobrycon is distinguished from Hemigrammus only by presenting a naked caudal fin in opposition of the scaled caudal fin in the last genus. However, Weitzman (1977) affirmed that these genera cannot be distinguished either phylogentically or typologically as separate taxa because, as Böhlke (1955) pointed out, there are species which are intermediate in their caudalfin squamation. Even so, this author recognized his new species as belonging to Hyphessobrycon rather than Hemigrammus, employing a practical, typological procedure (amount of caudal-fin squamation), and based on the traditional definitions of these genera provided by Ellis (in Eigenmann, 1918). Hyphessobrycon otrynus shares with H. diancistrus the identical color pattern and the presence of two large hooks on each side of the caudal fin, which are indicative of a close relationship. Thus, we follow Weitzman (1977) in recognizing this new species in the genus Hyphessobrycon, emphasizing the putatively close relationship between these species. Weitzman (1977) discussed that large anal-fin hooks are known in other species of Hyphessobrycon and Hemigrammus and cited Hemigrammus occelifer as an example, but emphasized that its unique and fairly large hook on each side of the anal fin, along with the several morphometric and meristic differences, indicate that there is no phylogenetic or typological proximity between H. occelifer and his H. diancistrus. Moenkhausia ceros Eigenmann (1908) was described as having the third anal-fin ray of males provided with a large retrorse hooks on each side. Examination of the holotype of M. ceros confirmed that this species can be promptly distinguished from H. otrynus by presenting a single developed bony hook on each side of the anal fin (vs. two large bony hooks), by presenting a complete lateral line (vs. incomplete), and by a distinct caudal-fin color pattern, with the middle rays of caudal fin black pigmented instead of the black blotched caudal-fin lobes, as observed in the latter species. The occurrence of two large anal-fin hooks was discussed by Weitzman (1977) as being restricted to Tyttobrycon hamatus and Hyphessobrycon diancistrus. Notwithstanding this comment, this author enumerated several distinguishing features between these species and stated that sharing anal-fin hooks is most likely a case of convergence. Hyphessobrycon otrynus displays a reduction to the number of the two anterior unbranched plus eight branched dorsal-fin rays, considering that the usual characid dorsal-finray count is two anterior unbranched rays plus nine branched rays (Malabarba & Weitzman, 2003). The presence of two branched plus eight unbranched dorsal-fin rays is only scarcely distributed among individuals of a few species of Hyphessobrycon (e.g. Hyphessobrycon eilyos). Malabarba & Weitzman (2003) hypothesized that eight branched dorsal-fin rays and four teeth in the inner row of the premaxillary bones are synapomorphies for a group of characids that they termed Clade A. This clade is formed by the subfamily Glandulocaudinae and the genera Cyanocharax, Attonitus, Boehlkea, Bryconacidnus, Bryconamericus, Caiapobrycon, Ceratobranchia, Creagrutus, Hemibrycon, Hypobrycon, Knodus, Microgenys, Monotocheirodon, Odontostoechus, Othonocheirodus, Piabarchus, Piabina, Rhynobrycon, and Rhinopetitia. Comparisons with representative species of Clade A revealed no further similarities among these species and H. otrynus, and the common presence of only eight branched dorsal-fin rays is most likely homoplastic, possibly indicating the paedomorphic nature of this reduction in H. otrynus. Comparative material examined. Bryconamericus straemineus, LBP 4978, Creagrutus varii, LIRP 4342, holotype. Hemigrammus marginatus, LBP 268. Hyphessobrycon diancistrus, MZUSP 13179, paratype, Moenkhausia ceros, MCZ 49161, holotype. Piabina argentea LBP 3886.Published as part of Benine, Ricardo C. & Lopes, Guilherme A. M., 2008, A new species of Hyphessobrycon (Characiformes: Characidae) from río Portuguesa, río Orinoco basin, Venezuela, pp. 61-68 in Zootaxa 1747 on pages 62-67, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18168
Ctenobrycon oliverai Benine, Lopes & Ron, 2010, new species
No full text<i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i>, new species <p>Table 1, Figs. 1–2</p> <p> <b>Holotype.</b> MZUSP 50130, 54.4 mm SL, río Apure, West of Ciudad de Apure, State of Apure, Venezuela. 28 January 1982. O. Costillo <i>et al.</i></p> <p> <b>Paratypes.</b> MZUSP 27979, 15, 38.7 – 55.8 mm SL, collected with the holotype. LBP 3061, 11, 43.8 – 54.6, 1 C&S, 50.3 mm SL, Rio Orinoco, Ciudad de Caicara del Orinoco, 07°38’11.6” N, 66°19’04.2”. State of Bolívar, Venezuela. 0 3 October 2005. A. Granado & C. Oliveira.</p> <p> <b>Diagnosis.</b> <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i> is distinguished from all congeners and <i>Psellogrammus kennedyi</i> by the number of scale rows between dorsal-fin origin and lateral line (14 – 15 <i>vs.</i> 11 – 13 in <i>C. spilurus</i>; 11 – 12 in <i>C. alleni</i> and <i>P. kennedyi</i>). <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i> is further distinguished from <i>C. alleni</i> by the number of humeral blotches (one <i>vs</i>. two, respectively). The following characters may be usefull in distinguishing <i>C. oliverai</i> from congeners: greatest body depth (48.0–58.3% of SL <i>vs</i>. 41.3–53.0 in <i>C. spilurus</i>; 41.1–51.0% of SL in <i>C. alleni</i>; 42.4–50.5% of SL in <i>P. kennedyi</i>).</p> <p> <b>Description.</b> Morphometric data for <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i> are summarized in Table 1. Deep bodied. Greatest body depth at dorsal-fin origin. Dorsal profile of head concave. Dorsal profile of body strongly convex from tip of supraoccipital spine to dorsal-fin origin, dorsal-fin base posteroventrally slanted, straight or slightly convex from posterior terminus of dorsal-fin base to end of adipose fin, and concave along caudal peduncle. Ventral body profile convex from tip of lower jaw to anal-fin origin, anal-fin base posterodorsally slanted, concave along caudal peduncle. Prepelvic region transversally flattened, more so proximal to pelvic-fin insertion. Postpelvic region transversally flattened proximal to pelvic-fin insertion becoming somewhat obtuse toward anal-fin origin.</p> <p>holotype N paratypes</p> <p>Limits mean Standard length (mm) 55.4 28 39.4–59.9 50.1 Percentage of head length</p> <p>Snout length 25.2 28 21.5–26.9 24.5 Upper jaw length 35.6 28 34.6–39.8 36.3 Horizontal orbital diameter 38.6 28 37.7–43.1 40.6 Least interorbital width 41.6 28 37.4–42.8 40.2 Mouth terminal. Maxillary not surpassing vertical through anterior margin of orbit. Premaxillary teeth in to rows; outer row with 3 (2), 4* (25), 5 (1) tricuspid teeth, midcentral cusps longer than others; inner tooth row with 5* (27), 6 (1) teeth with 3 to 6 cusps, midcentral cusps longer than others. Maxillary with 1* (27) or 2 (1) pentacuspidate teeth. Dentary with 5 teeth with 3 to 5 cusps usually midcentral cusps longer than others, followed by 1 to 3 small teeth, with 1 to 3 cusps (Fig. 2).</p> <p>Nostrils closer to anterior orbital margins than to each other. Supraoccipital process elongate, its tip surpasses the vertical through origin of pectoral fin.</p> <p>Dorsal-fin rays ii,9. Pectoral-fin rays i,11 (3), i,12* (17), i,13 (8). Tip of pectoral fin exceed anterior half of length of adpressed pelvic fin. Adipose fin well developed. Pelvic-fin rays i,7, when adpressed, its tip extends up to first branched ray of anal fin. Anal-fin rays iv, 39 (2), 40 (1), 41 (1), 42 (2), 43 (8), 44 (7), 45 (3*), 46 (1). Principal caudal-fin rays i,17,i. Caudal fin forked.</p> <p>Spinoid scales. Lateral line complete, 51 (1), 52 (2*), 53 (3), 54 (2), 55 (2), 56 (5), 58 (1). Scale rows between dorsal-fin origin and lateral line 14 (17*), 15 (7), scale rows between lateral line and pelvic-fin origin 11 (11*), 12 (13). Circumpeduncular scale rows 18 (1*), 19(5), 20 (2), 21 (1). Scale sheath along anal-fin base in a single series, extending posteriorly between 33–42* branched anal-fin ray.</p> <p>First gill arch with 14* (12), 15 (3), 16 (1) on upper limb and 8* (11), 9 (5) on lower limb. Total vertebrae 32, supraneurals 4.</p> <p> <b>Sexual dimorphism.</b> No secondary sexually dimorphic feature, such as bony hooks on anal and pelvic fins, were observed in <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i>.</p> <p> <b>Color in alcohol.</b> Overall coloration yellowish. Mid-dorsal line darker. Scattered small dark chromatophores on dorsal surface of head from upper lip to tip of supraoccipital spine. Infraorbitals, preopercle, and opercle retaining guanine. Lower lip well delimited by dark chromatophores. Small dark chormatophores delineating inferior margin of eyes. Ventral portion of head with very few dark chromatophores, more concentrated on branchiostegal rays.</p> <p>Wedge-shaped humeral mark extending horizontally from fourth to sixth scale posterior to opercle and vertically from the first to seventh scale series above lateral line. A two scales-deep silver midlateral stripe extending on portion of body beginning at vertical through the first branched dorsal-fin ray, with stripe narrowing posteriorly up to a vertical oval-shaped dark spot on terminus of caudal peduncle. Limits of the erector/depressor muscles of the anal fin outlined by dark chromatophores.</p> <p>Dorsal fin with scattered small dark chromatophores uniformly distributed in its interradial membrane; second unbranched dorsal-fin ray dark pigmented with chromatophores distributed along its whole extension; first branched dorsal-fin ray with dark pigments restricted to its distal half; further dorsal-fin rays hyaline. Anal fin with few dark chromatophores uniformly distributed in its interradial membrane in most specimens; anal-fin hyaline or with very few sparsely distributed dark chromatophores in few specimens. Caudal fin with small chromatophores sparsely distributed in its interradial membrane. Adipose fin hyaline or with small chromatophores, more concentrated in its distal half. Pectoral fins with small chromatophores homogeneously distributed along the unbranched ray; small chromatophores in the distal half of the first six branched rays; interradial membrane hyaline. Pelvic fin hyaline.</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> Known from the río Orinoco and río Apure, río Orinoco basin, Venezuela (Fig. 3).</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> The specific name is in honor of Claudio de Oliveira, the collector of the new species and a great contributor to our knowledge of Neotropical Ichthyology.</p> <p> <b>Multivariate analysis.</b> The results of the size-free canonical variate analysis revealed that <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i> can be discriminated from <i>C. alleni</i>, <i>C. spilurus – hauxwellianus</i> and from <i>P. kennedyi</i> in the first and second canonical variate axis that explains 68.23% and 23.22% of the total variance of the data, respectively (Fig. 4; Table 2). <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i> and <i>C. alleni</i> have greater anal fin-length, least interorbital width, and eye to origin of dorsal-fin distance (higher positive values of CV1, p<0.05) than that found in <i>C. spilurus-hauxwellianus</i> and <i>Psellogrammus kennedyi</i>. These last species in turn present higher snout to dorsal-fin origin distance than <i>C. oliverai</i> and <i>C. aleni</i> (higher negative value of CV1, p<0.05). In addition, <i>C. oliverai</i> could be discriminated from the other three species on the second canonical axis, based on higher body depth (higher positive values of CV2, p<0.05) whereas, <i>C. spilurus-hauxwellianus</i>, <i>C. alleni</i> and <i>P. kennedyi</i> presented greater head depth and head length than <i>C. oliverai</i> (higher negative value of CV2, p<0.05).</p> <p> <b>Discussion.</b> Eigenmann (1927:330–336), in the first revisionary study after the original description of the genus, recognized <i>Ctenobrycon hauxwellianus</i> (Cope), from Amazon basin; <i>C. spilurus</i> (Valenciennes), from Venezuela and Suriname; and <i>C. multiradiatus</i> (Steindachner), from Amazon basin and possibly Paraguay basin. This author diagnosed <i>C. hauxwellianus</i> from <i>C. spilurus</i> uniquely by the average of the body depth (2.0 times in SL versus 2.5 times in SL, respectively). Eigenmann, however, was not sure about the validity of <i>C. multiradiatus</i>, since he considered that the diagnostic characters used by Steindachner could be purely individual variations and also pointed out that the forms from Paraguay were most likely <i>Astyanax alleni</i> Eigenmann & MacAtee, or <i>A. pelegrini</i> Eigenmann or even <i>Psellogrammus kennedyi</i> Eigenmann. Géry (1977), reallocated <i>Astyanax alleni</i> in <i>Ctenobrycon</i> but, due to the great overlap in the characters, named the subspecies <i>C. spilurus spilurus</i>, <i>C. spilurus hauxwellianus</i>, and <i>C. spilurus alleni</i>. Besides, this author also cited <i>C. multiradiatus</i> and <i>C. correntinus</i> as valid, but argued that these were probably synonyms of <i>C. hauxwellianus</i> and <i>Astyanax pelegrini</i>, respectively. Notwithstanding the syntypes of <i>C. spilurus</i> and <i>C. hauxwellianus</i> are inadequately preserved, which further hinders the process of delineating these species, we herein recognized <i>C. hauxwellianus</i> (Cope, 1870) as a junior synonym of <i>C. spilurus</i> (Vallenciennes), based on the examination of the comparative lots of <i>Ctenobrycon</i>, which did reveal a substantial overlap for all morphometric and meristic characters, not supporting the diagnostic characters presented by Eigenmann (1927) for <i>C. spilurus</i> and <i>C. hauxwellianus</i>. <i>Ctenobrycon alleni</i>, however, could be easily distinguished from congeners by presenting two humeral blotches versus a single one, a condition already described by Britski, 2007.</p> <p> Taking into account this great overlap in characters, a given count that falls totally out of the known range of <i>Ctenobrycon</i> is strong evidence that it is related to a different species. From the 235 examined comparative specimens, all of them presented up to 13 scale rows above the lateral line (<i>vs.</i> 14 –15 in <i>C. oliverai</i>). Moreover, no comparative material from río Orinoco drainage has more than 12 scale rows above lateral line, which enhance our decision of considering this species as new rather than a population which would only widen the variation range observed for <i>Ctenobrycon spilurus</i>. The results of the multivariate analysis corroborate our hypothesis showing statistically significant evidences which discriminate <i>Ctenobrycon oliverai</i> from <i>C. spilurus</i> and <i>Psellogrammus kennedyi</i>.</p> <p> Lima <i>et al.</i> (2003) listed <i>Tetragonopterus correntinus</i> Holmberg, <i>T. gibbicervix</i>, Pelegrin, <i>T. multiradiatus</i> Steindachner and <i>Astyanax pelegrini</i> Eigenmann as <i>species inquirendae</i> in <i>Ctenobrycon</i>. Nonetheless, Mirande <i>et al.</i> (2006) considered both <i>Tetragonopterus correntinus</i> and <i>Astyanax pellegrini</i>, species of <i>Astyanax</i> rather than <i>Ctenobrycon</i>, since these do not display the spinoid scales, which promptly separate these taxa from our new species (that presents spinoid scales). According to Mirande’s (2010) examinations, the scales of the belly of <i>Psellogrammus kennedyi</i> have simple flattened serrations restricted to the margin of the scales similar to that of crenate scales in the classification of Roberts (1993). However, our examinations indicated that the form of the scales of the belly in both <i>Ctenobrycon</i> and <i>Psellogrammus</i> species are, in fact, spinoid, with acute projections not restricted to the margin of the scales (Fig. 5).</p> <p> Examination of images of three syntypes of <i>Tetragonopterus gibbicervix</i>, made it clear that this species presents 12 scale rows above lateral line, which distinguishes it from our new species (that presents 14–15 scale rows above lateral line).</p> <p> Géry (2006) affirmed that <i>Tetragonopterus multiradiatus</i> Steindachner is a junior synonym of <i>C. hauxwellianus</i>, but did not expose the reasons for considering so, nor de he mention the paper where this new combination was proposed, if it exists at all. Considering that the syntypes of <i>Tetragonopterus multiradiatus</i> are possibly lost (see Lima <i>et al.</i>, 2003), not much information can be retrieved but from Steindachner’s original description and putative topotypes. The eight examined specimens from the type locality (MZUSP 27765, município de Tefé, AM, Brazil) presented one tooth in the maxillary bone, 45 to 49 scales in the lateral line, and 11 to 12 scale rows above lateral line and 9 to 10 scale rows below lateral line, perfectly fitting with <i>C. hauxwellianus</i> (= <i>C. spilurus</i>), according to the key presented by Eigenmann. In fact, none of the herein examined morphotypes of <i>Ctenobrycon</i> presented toothless maxillaries and 41–42 lateral line scales as described for <i>T. multiradiatus</i> by Steindachner (1876) and, thus, there are not enough elements to assure that <i>C. multiradiatus</i> is a junior synonym of <i>C. spilurus</i> or even if it is a species of <i>Ctenobrycon</i>, if we consider that no mention was made on the presence of spinoid scales in <i>C. multiradiatus</i>, be it in its original description or elsewhere.</p> <p> <b>Comparative material.</b> <i>Ctenobrycon alleni</i>: LIRP 3786 (n=1), Brasil, Mato Grosso do Sul, Porto Manga, rio Paraguai; MZUSP 54023 (34) (1 C&S), Paraguai, Concepcion, Puerto Itacua, rio Paraguai; <i>Ctenobrycon spilurus</i>: Brazil: MZUSP 5156 (28), Roraima, Surumu, rio Surumu; MZUSP 5601 (22), Pará, Oriximiná, rio Trombetas, Lago Parú; Amazonas: LIRP 4999 (21) (3 C&S), Janauari, Lago Terra Preta; LIRP 4965 (10), Janauaca, Lago Castanho; LIRP 4985 (2), Camaleão, Ilha de Marchantaria, rio Amazonas; MZUSP 27765 (8), Tefé, baixo rio Japurá; MZUSP 54495 (8), Equador, Napo, rio Yasuní; Brazil, Acre, Cruzeiro do Sul, rio Moa: LBP 4047 (4), (1 C&S) LBP 4151 (2), rio Japiim: LBP 4095 (20); Peru, Ucayali, Província de Coronel Portilho, rio Ucayali: MZUSP 25996 (1); MZUSP 26242 (8); Suriname, Paramaribo: ANSP 137053 (3); Venezuela, Guárico: MCP 15138 (5), Camaguán, río Portuguesa; MZUSP 74698 (3), San Fernando, río Guárico; Bolívar, Caicara Del Orinoco: LBP 2232 (11), (2 C&S), río Orinoco; LBP 2222 (2), Laguna de Castilleros; <i>Psellogrammus kennedyi</i>: LBP 3220 (24) (3 C&S), Brasil, Mato Grosso, Nobres, rio Cuiabazinho, Lagoa Marginal; <i>Tetragonopterus alleni</i>: FMNH 52634, paratype, Brasil, Mato Grosso, Corumbá. <i>Tetragonopterus gibbicervix</i>: NMW 57516, syntype, Brazil, Amazonas, Teffé (photo), MNHN 1909-182, paratype (photo); MNHN 1909-320/321, 2 paratypes (photos); <i>Tetragonopterus hauxwellianus</i>: ANSP 8138-8142, 5 paratypes, Pebas, Peru. <i>Tetragonopterus spilurus</i>: MNHN 5341, syntype (photo).</p>Published as part of <i>Benine, Ricardo C., Lopes, Guilherme A. M. & Ron, Ernesto, 2010, A new species of Ctenobrycon Eigenmann, 1908 (Characiformes: Characidae) from the río Orinoco basin, Venezuela, pp. 59-67 in Zootaxa 2715</i> on pages 60-66, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/199703">10.5281/zenodo.199703</a>
In vivo evaluation of the therapeutic effect of Streptococcus thermophilus isolated from camel milk on intestinal disorders
No full textThis study aimed to isolate, select, and evaluate lactic acid bacteria possessing probiotic properties. Isolates obtained from camel milk from El-Oued region in Algeria were investigated for their potential effect on intestinal disorders in Wistar rats. The results relating to the selection of probiotic strains confirm that one strain, identified as Streptococcus thermophilus exhibited the best probiotic activity, with an important tolerance to different degrees of pH and to bile salts, and a remarkable antibacterial activity and resistance to antibiotics. During in vivo studies, the administration of isolated lactic acid bacteria was evaluated after inducing intestinal disorders in rats. The microscopic observations of the histological section of the intestine showed an almost complete disappearance of the damages in the intestinal structure. The haematological parameters were in agreement with the results of the histological sections.
Article history: Received 27 April 2024; Revised 12 September 2024; Accepted 13 October 2024; Available online 10 December 202
Moenkhausia justae Eigenmann 1908
No full textMoenkhausia justae Eigenmann, 1908 (Figs. 8 a–b, 9 b, Table 2) Moenkhausia justae Eigenmann 1908: 102. Type locality: “Uncertain in Amazon, Brazil ”. Diagnosis. Moenkhausia justae is distinguished from M. jamesi, M. ischyognatha, M. alesis and M. sthenosthoma by the number of teeth in the maxilla (one tooth with five cusps vs an edentulous maxilla in the last four) and by the number of cusps on the fourth dentary tooth (six vs three to five in the last four) (Fig. 9 b). Moenkhausia justae is further distinguished from M. ischyognatha and M. sthenosthoma by the number of scale rows between lateral line and dorsal-fin origin (eight vs seven in the last two). Additionally, it differs from M. ischyognatha by its greater head depth (34.9–40.2 % in SL vs 29.3–32.6 in SL in the last three). It also differs from M. jamesi by the number of scale rows between lateral line and the midventral scale series (seven to eight vs six scale rows in M. jamesi). Description. Morphometric data summarized in Table 2. Largest specimen examined 56.9 mm SL. Body compressed and deep. Greatest body depth slightly anterior to or at dorsal-fin origin. Dorsal profile of head slightly convex; straight to slightly concave along the occipital spine; slightly convex to convex from tip of supraoccipital spine to end of dorsal-fin base; straight to slightly convex from end of dorsal fin up to end of adipose fin; caudal peduncle concave in dorsal and ventral margins; ventral profile slightly convex from tip of snout to end of anal fin. Mouth terminal. Maxilla only reaching the vertical through anterior margin, and not trespassing anterior third of second infraorbital. Premaxillary teeth in two rows. Inner row with five tetracuspidate (symphyseal) or pentacuspidate teeth with median cusp pronounced, the first two or three teeth from the symphysis with cusps arranged in a pronounced arch when examined from a ventral view; outer row with four to five pentacuspidate teeth; one pentacuspidate tooth on maxilla. Dentary bearing four*(52) or five (15) penta to heptacuspidate teeth with central cusp longest followed by two to four distinctly small conical or tricuspidate teeth. Fourth dentary tooth with six to seven cusps. First two or three dentary teeth from the symphysis with cusps arranged in a pronounced arch when examined from a dorsal view. Moenkhausia jamesi (n= 73) Moenkhausia justae (n= 75) Dorsal-fin rays ii, 9. Pectoral-fin rays i, 11 (3), 12 *(46), 13 (18). Tip of pectoral fin extends slightly beyond anterior insertion of pelvic fin. Pelvic-fin rays i, 7, tip of adpressed pelvic fin not reaching anal fin. Anal-fin rays iv, 28 *(12), 29 (25), 30 (21), 31 (9). Caudal fin forked with i,9,8,i. Scales cycloid. Lateral line with 35 (2), 36 *(12), 37 (35), 38 (17) perforated scales; Scale rows between lateral line and dorsal-fin origin 7 (21) 8 *(45). Scale rows between lateral line and midventral scale series 7 (60), 8 *(7). Circumpeduncular scale rows 13 (2), 14 *(8), 15 (21), 16 (25), 17 (6), 18 (3). Scale sheath along anal-fin base 7–21, in one series, covering base of anteriormost rays. Small scales covering proximal two-third of caudal-fin lobes. First gill arch with 11 (6), 12 (40), 13 (10) gill rakers on lower limb and 8 (20), 9 (34), 10 (6) on upper limb. Total vertebrae 32. Supraneurals 4. Color in alcohol. Overall coloration slightly silvery or yellow tan. Field of few dark chromatophores on upper lip and maxilla. Infraorbital and opercular series silvery due to the presence of guanine pigmentation. Dark chromatophores more densely concentrated along entire dorsal midline. Sparsely spread dark chromatophores dorsal of horizontal skeletogenous septum. Dark line over horizontal skeletogenous septum. Conspicuous silver midlateral stripe extending from posterior margin of opercle to base of median caudal fin-rays. In some individuals, silver stripe is not preserved. Irregularly shaped humeral mark located over fourth to eight lateral-line scales and extending vertically over four-five horizontal scale rows above and over one-two horizontal scale rows below lateral line. Paired fins and anal fin hyaline. Round dark spot at the base of the caudal-fin rays formed by few chromatophores. Adipose with very few dark chromatophores (Figs. 8 a–b). Distribution. Moenkhausia justae occurs along Rio Amazonas basin and the middle and lower Rio Araguaia, and appears to be restricted in Amazon lowlands area, as defined by Lima & Ribeiro (2011) (Fig. 4). Remarks. Lima et al. (2003) briefly discussed that the proposition of Eschmeyer et al. (1998) indicating that the type locality of M. justae could be Rio Paraiba do Norte, João Pessoa, Paraíba was undisclosed and that recent collections at João Pessoa and other sites in northeastern Brazil did not reveal specimens that could be assigned to this species. Although the type locality of M. justae was not provided at the original description (Eigenmann 1908), this author, in 1917, stated that the single (type) specimen of M. justae “came with others from Dr. Justa through Major Coutinho and was probably found in the neighborhood of Manaos”. In fact, an image of the catalogue book of the Museum of Comparative Zoology (available at: http://ids.lib.harvard.edu/ids/view/ 36195367?buttons=y) indicates that the locality of M. justae is “Prob. Manaos” (= probably Manaus). According to Lima et al. (2003), this should be considered as uncertain, but with strong evidence it is around Manaus, AM, Brazil. We identified M. justae from two major tributaries of the Rio Solimões, Rio Japurá and Rio Branco (tributary of Rio Negro), reinforcing the idea of Manaus as its type locality rather than João Pessoa, PB. Material examined. Type: MCZ 21014, holotype, 45.2 mm SL, Brasil, J. M. S. Coutinho, 02-Ago 1865. MZUSP 55752,12, 38.7 –49,5 mm SL, Brasil, Roraima, Rio Branco, near to Viruá; 1 ° 14 ’ 59 ”S, 61 ° 50 ’ 22 ”W, J.N. Baskin 8 Dec 1993. Non-types: MZUSP 103127, 18, 42.8–49.7 mm SL, Amazonas, Japurá, Rio Japurá, Acanauaí, 01° 50 ’00”S, 66 ° 36 ’00”W, Expedição Permanente à Amazônia, 30 Nov–02 Dec 1997. MZUSP 55752, 12, 39.4– 49.2 mm SL, Roraima, Rio Branco, near to Viruá, J. N. Baskin, 0 8 Dec 1993. MCP 19661,6, 53.2 –60.0 mm SL, Brasil, Pará Santarém, Rio Curuatinga, R.B. Oliveira, 0 1 Nov 1996. MCP 20546, 16, 51.9–63.4 mm SL, Brasil, Pará, Rio Tapajós, Alter do Chão, 02° 31 ’00”S, 54 ° 57 ’00”W, R.B. Oliveira, 0 3 Dec 1997. NUP 8106, 3 of 5, 54.5 – 56.0 mm SL, Tocantins, Xambioá; Ribeirão Xambioá, tributary of Rio Araguaia, Rio Tocantins-Araguaia system, 06° 24 ’ 27 ”S, 48 ° 36 ’ 54 ”W, Gerpel, 22 Mar 2009. NUP 8136, 2 of 3, 47.7–55.1 mm SL, Tocantins, Xambioá, Rio Araguaia, tributary of Rio Tocantins, Rio Tocantins-Araguaia system; 06° 11 ’ 11 ”S, 48 ° 26 ’ 20 ”W; Gerpel, 0 9 Jul 2009. INPA 21489, 9, 32.1–51.5 mm SL, Caseara, Parque Estadual do Cantão, E.G. Ferreira, J. A. Zuanon & G. M. Santos, May 2000.Published as part of Petrolli, Marina G. & Benine, Ricardo C., 2015, Description of three new species of Moenkhausia (Teleostei, Characiformes, Characidae) with the definition of the Moenkhausia jamesi species complex, pp. 401-420 in Zootaxa 3986 (4) on pages 413-416, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3986.4.1, http://zenodo.org/record/23489
The Remedial Effect of Ziziphus lotus Extract against Oxidative Stress Induced by Deltamethrin Pesticide in Rats
No full textاختبرت هذه الدراسة الخصائص المضادة للأكسدة للمركبات الطبيعية المستخلصة من نبات السدر(Ziziphus lotus) الطبي، الذي استُخدم تقليديًا لعلاج اضطرابات الكبد ومقاومة التغيرات البيوكيميائية التي يُحدثها مبيد الحشرات دلتامثرين في الجرذان. شملت التجربة 30 جرذًا ذكرًا من نوع ويستر ألبينو، تم تعريضهم لمبيد دلتامثرين (7 ميكرولتر/كغ/يوم). بعد ذلك، تم إعطاء الجرذان مستخلصًا مائيًا من نبات السدر بثلاث جرعات مختلفة (100، 200، و400 مغ/كغ/يوم) عبر التغذية الأنبوبية. بعد 33 يومًا من العلاج، تم التضحية بالجرذان وجمع عينات الدم لتحليل المصل البيوكيميائي. كما تم حفظ أنسجة الكبد لتقييم التأثيرات مضادات الأكسدة. أظهرت النتائج أن عملية الاستخلاص المائي أنتجت 20%، مع تركيز عالٍ من البوليفينولات بلغ 0.142± 12.04 مغ مكافئ حمض الجاليك لكل ملليلتر من المستخلص. علاوة على ذلك، أظهر اختبار DPPH أن مستخلص السدر أبدى نشاطًا مضادًا للأكسدة بشكل كبير، حيث بلغت قيمة IC50=0.62 ± 0.146 ميكروغرام/ملل. أظهرت نتائج النشاط المضاد للأكسدة في الجسم الحي أنه في المجموعة المعرضة لدلتامثرين، انخفض وزن الجسم، بينما زادت مستويات أنزيمات الأسبارتات ترانساميناز (AST) والألانين ترانساميناز (ALT) والفوسفاتاز القلوي (ALP) والأميليز ألفا والكوليسترول والكرياتينين واليوريا (p < 0.05 مقابل مجموعة الشاهد)، مما يشير إلى وجود سمية كلوية وكبدية. كما انخفضت مستويات بيروكسيد الدهون (GSH) للدفاعات المضادة للأكسدة وزادت تركيزات المالونديالديهيد (MDA). أدى العلاج بمستخلص السدر بجرعاته الثلاثة إلى تحسين بعض وظائف الكبد والكلى وزيادة وزن الجسم. كما أثبتت وجود المركبات الثانوية في مستخلص السدر أن لها أنشطة بيولوجية كبيرة ومثيرة للاهتمام، بما في ذلك خصائص مضادة للأكسدة قوية في الاختبارات المخبرية وفي الجسم الحي.This study investigated the antioxidant properties of natural compounds derived from the medicinal plant Ziziphus lotus, traditionally used for treating liver disorders. The research focused on its potential to mitigate biochemical alterations induced by the pesticide Deltamethrin in rats. Thirty male Wistar albino rats were exposed to Deltamethrin (7 μl/kg/day), after which they received aqueous extract of Ziziphus lotus at three different doses (100, 200, and 400 mg/kg/day) via oral gavage. After 33 days of treatment, the animals were sacrificed, and blood samples were collected for serum biochemical analysis. Liver tissues were preserved for assessment of antioxidant activity. The extraction process yielded 20%, with a high polyphenol content of 12.04 ± 0.142 mg AGE/mL (Gallic Acid Equivalents per millilitre of extract). The DPPH assay confirmed strong antioxidant potential of the extract, with an IC₅₀ value of 0.62 ± 0.146 μg/mL. In vivo results showed that Deltamethrin exposure led to significant reductions in body weight and increases in serum levels of Aspartate Transaminase (AST), Alanine Transaminase (ALT), Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), alpha-amylase, cholesterol, creatinine, and urea (p < 0.05 vs. control), indicating hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity. Additionally, antioxidant defence markers such as reduced glutathione (GSH) were diminished, while malondialdehyde (MDA) levels increased, reflecting enhanced lipid peroxidation. Treatment with Ziziphus lotus extract at all three doses ameliorated several liver and kidney function markers and restored body weight. The presence of bioactive secondary metabolites in the extract contributed to its significant biological activities, notably its potent antioxidant effects demonstrated both in vitro and in vivo
Traditional Herbal Remedies from Algeria for Treating Digestive Disorders
No full textDue to their efficiency in many treatments, the employment of herbal remedies has retained its importance for leading a human life. Traditional knowledge is passed from one generation to the next, which is protected. This research aimed to analyze traditional herbal remedies used in treating digestive disorders by El-Oued people (Southeastern Algeria). The research was conducted from September 2021 to June 2022. One hundred individuals, including thirty plant vendors, were selected from different regions. Personal interviews and questionnaires were employed to collect the data. SPSS version 20 and Microsoft Office Excel 2007 were used to organize the data and conduct the descriptive statistics analysis. This investigation enabled the discovery of 40 species in 16 families and different genres. Lamiaceae, with 22.5 % plants, were the most used sources for the treatment, and 54 % of herbs were spontaneous species. The use of seeds at 21 %, dry parts at 92 % and infusion method at 48 % was most commonly used in herbal remedies preparations. The participants cited Trigonella tibetana, Juniperus communis, and Punica granatum as sources of digestive disorders treatment. El-Oued region has an extremely high number of herbal remedy species, which suggests that the region\u27s traditional medicine serves as a source of knowledge about medicinal plants for treating digestive disorders and illnesses associated with them.
Keywords: Herbal remedies, Digestive disorders, Medicinal plants, Interviews
Therapeutic Potential of Traditional Medicinal Plants from Algeria for Treatment of Liver Diseases
No full textيتمثل هدف دراستنا في التحقيق العرقي النباتي للنباتات الطبية التقليدية التي يستخدمها الناس لعلاج أمراض الكبد في ولاية الوادي، جنوب شرق الجزائر. تم استخدام المقابلات والاستبيانات الشخصية لجمع البيانات. حيث أجريت مقابلات مع 156 مشارك، معظمهم في سن 50. سمحت دراسة النباتات الطبية لعلاج أمراض الكبد باكتشاف 78 نوعًا نباتي من 41 عائلة وأجناس نباتية مختلفة، بما في ذلك 52٪ من النباتات الطبية الموجودة في البرية. تم استخدام حوالي 77٪ من النباتات في المقام الأول في حالتها الجافة لتحضير العلاج. حيث كانت طريقة التغلية هي طريقة التحضير الأكثر استخدامًا، واستشهد 70٪ من المشاركين بـ Zizyphus lotus (L.) Lam. و Silybum marianum L. و Atriplex halimus L. كمصادر لعلاج أمراض الكبد. لقد كشف هذا التحقيق أن العديد من الأشخاص في منطقة البحث لا يزالون يعتمدون على العلاجات العشبية لعلاج اضطرابات الكبد. من ناحية أخرى، تقدم هذه الدراسة بيانات أساسية عن النباتات الطبية والتي ستكون بمثابة نقطة انطلاق للبحوث المستقبلية المكثفة.The objective of our study is to conduct an ethnobotanical investigation of traditional medicinal plants used by people in El-Oued state, southeast Algeria, for the treatment of liver diseases. We collected data through personal interviews and questionnaires. In total, we conducted interviews with 156 respondents, the majority of whom were aged 50 or older. Our study of medicinal plants used for treating liver diseases led to the discovery of 78 species from 41 families and various genera, including 52% of medicinal plants found in the wild. Approximately 77% of these plants were primarily used in dried form for remedy preparation. The most commonly employed preparation method was decoction. Interestingly, 70% of the participants mentioned Zizyphus lotus (L.) Lam., Silybum marianum L., and Atriplex halimus L. as sources for treating liver illnesses. This investigation revealed that many people in the research region still rely on herbal remedies to treat liver disorders. Moreover, the present study provides valuable ethnobotanical data on medicinal plants, serving as a foundational resource for future extensive research in this field
Osteology of Dastilbe crandalli Jordan, 1910 (Ostariophysi, Gonorynchiformes) from the Crato formation, lower Cretaceous of the Araripe Basin, with a discussion of the Taxonomic History of the Genus
No full textDastilbe Jordan, 1910 é um gênero fóssil da família Chanidae do Eocretáceo encontrado em formações sedimentares na região Nordeste do Brasil, que, historicamente, contém cinco espécies, incluindo a espécie-tipo Dastilbe crandalli. Fósseis associados ao gênero são bastante comuns e bem preservados, frequentemente ocorrendo esqueletos completos e algumas vezes tecidos moles. Mesmo com a abundância de material e realização de diversos estudos, a monofilia deste grupo ainda é debatida. Com a justificativa de que é impossível distinguir espécies devido a polimorfia dos caracteres de interesse e de que não há diferenças significativas entre os fósseis de diferentes formações, foi concluído por mais de um autor que Dastilbe seria um gênero monotípico e todas as outras espécies nominais seriam sinônimos de D. crandalli. Tal conclusão pode ser questionada ao se levar em conta que outras espécies previamente sinonimizadas (D. minor e D. moraesi) com a espécie-tipo vieram a ser alocadas em táxons distintos em trabalhos recentes. Neste trabalho, revisamos os fósseis anteriormente associados a Dastilbe elongatus, usando morfometria tradicional e análise osteológica para descrever tão detalhadamente quanto possível Dastilbe da Fm. Crato, possibilitando comparações mais refinadas em pesquisas futuras. Esta revisão anatômica foi baseada em um grande número de espécimes fósseis.Dastilbe Jordan, 1910 is a fossil genus of the family Chanidae from the Early Cretaceous found in sedimentary formations in the Northeast region of Brazil, which historically contains five species, including the type species Dastilbe crandalli. Fossils associated with the genus are common and well-preserved, often occurring in complete skeletons and sometimes soft tissues. Despite the abundance of material and the realization of several studies, the monophyly of this group is still debated. With the justification that it is impossible to distinguish species due to the polymorphism of the characters of interest and that there are no significant differences between fossils from different formations, it has been concluded by more than one author that Dastilbe would be a monospecific genus and all other species would be synonyms of D. crandalli. This conclusion can be questioned when considering that other species previously synonymized (D. minor and D. moraesi) with the type species came to be allocated to their own taxa in recent works. This work reviews the fossils previously associated with Dastilbe elongatus, using traditional morphometrics and osteological analysis to adequately describe Dastilbe from the Crato Formation, allowing for more refined comparisons in future studies. This anatomical review was based on a large number of fossil specimens.Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)CNPq: 131546/2022-
Gymnocorymbus bondi Fowler 1911
No full textGymnocorymbus bondi (Fowler, 1911) Fig. 10, Table 3 Phenacogaster bondi Fowler, 1911: 419. Type locality: “Corisal, Venezuela ”. Moenkhausia profunda Eigenmann, 1912. Type locality: “Cloaca trenches, Issorora Rubber Plantation” (Guyana). Gymnocorymbus socolofi Géry, 1964: 25. Type locality: “about 200 miles east of Bogotá, Colombia, in the upper Río Meta drainage”. Diagnosis. Gymnocorymbus bondi is distinguished from all congeners by the number of gill rakers on lower limb of the first branchial arch (11–12 vs. 13–16 in congeners). Gymnocorymbus bondi differs from G. ternetzi and G. flaviolimai by the number of scale rows covering the base of the anal fin (2–4 vs. 5–6, respectively); by the shape of the distal margin of the anal fin (straight vs. strongly convex, respectively; Fig. 10); and by the number of pelvicfin rays (i, 7 vs. i, 6, respectively). It further differs from G. ternetzi by the form of the teeth in the inner premaxillary tooth row (with four to five cusps vs. three cusps, respectively; Figs. 7–8); by the overall color pattern (lack of a dense field of dark chromatophores spread homogeneously over the posterior one half of the body vs. the presence of such pigmentation, respectively) and by the shape of the first humeral mark (the presence of a wider densely pigmented region above the lateral line vs. the absence of such pigmented region, respectively; Fig. 6). Description. Morphometric data for Gymnocorymbus bondi are summarized in Table 3. Deep body with greatest body depth at dorsal-fin origin. Dorsal profile of head concave. Dorsal profile of body strongly convex from tip of supraoccipital spine to dorsal-fin origin. Dorsal-fin base posteroventrally slanted. Profile straight or slightly convex from posterior terminus of dorsal-fin base to end of adipose fin, and concave along caudal peduncle. Ventral profile of body convex from tip of lower jaw to anal-fin origin, anal-fin base posterodorsally slanted, and concave along caudal peduncle. Prepelvic region transversally flattened, more so proximate to pelvicfin insertion. Postpelvic region transversally flattened proximate to pelvic-fin insertion, becoming somewhat obtuse toward anal-fin origin. Supraoccipital process elongate; tip extends beyond vertical through posterior margin of opercle. Mouth terminal. Maxillar extending beyond vertical through anterior margin of orbit nearly to vertical through middle of orbit. Premaxillary teeth in two rows; outer row with four tricuspidate teeth with central cusps longest; inner tooth row with five teeth with four cusps (in the asymmetrical symphyseal tooth) or five cusps with central cusps longest. Maxillar with one pentacuspidate teeth. Dentary bearing five teeth with five cusps; central cusps usually longest, followed by one to three small teeth, with one to three cusps. Dorsal-fin rays ii, 9. Pectoral-fin rays i, 11 (10) or i, 11,i* (67). Tip of pectoral fin extends beyond mid-length of adpressed pelvic fin. Adipose fin present. Pelvic-fin rays i, 7; tip of adpressed fin reaching first branched anal-fin ray. Anal-fin rays iv, 32 (15), 33 * (23), 34 (21), 35 (13) or 36 (5). Caudal fin forked. Principal caudal-fin rays i, 17,i. Scales cycloid. Lateral line complete, 34 (13), 35 * (26) or 36 (35). Scale rows between lateral line and dorsalfin origin 7 (4), 8 * (60) or 9 (9). Scale rows between lateral line and pelvic-fin origin 7 (2), 8 * (62), 9 (1) or 10 (1). Scale rows around caudal peduncle 14 (2) or 15 * (21). Scales in sheath along anal-fin base in 2–4 series; sheath extending posteriorly to around 27 th or 28 th branched anal-fin ray. Moenkhausia profunda, and Gymnocorymbus socolofi; * = holotype. N P. bondi * M. profunda * G. socolofi * Range Mean Percentage of head length Snout length 85 25.8 27.6 24.6 22.7–29.6 25.2 Upper jaw length 78 37.3 – – 34.2–41.8 38.7 Horizontal orbital diameter 85 39.4 42.7 39.1 39.3–43.4 41.0 Least interorbital width 85 37.3 39.2 33.8 32 - 6–42.3 36.0 First gill arch with 9 * (55) gill rakers on upper limb and 11 * (52) or 12 (3) gill rakers on lower limb. Total vertebrae 33 *, supraneurals 4 or 5 * (observed in holotype via radiograph). Color in alcohol. Overall coloration yellow tan. Field of dark chromatophores covers both lips and dorsal over third of maxilla. Infraorbital and opercular series silvery due to the presence of guanine pigmentation. Vertical dark stripe as wide as pupil crossing the eye. Dark chromatophores more densely concentrated along entire dorsal midline. Sparse field of dark chromatophores dorsal of horizontal skeletogenous septum continuous with second humeral mark. Two conspicuous vertical dark humeral marks, anteriormost more conspicuous. Anterior humeral mark located over second to fourth lateral-line scales and extending vertically over five horizontal scale rows above and four to five horizontal scale rows below lateral line. Posterior humeral mark located over ninth to twelfth lateral line scales and extending vertically over six horizontal scale rows above and four to five horizontal scale rows below lateral line. Dorsal halves of both humeral marks wider and more densely pigmented; dorsal, anal, and caudal fins more densely pigmented along distal margins. Paired fins and caudal fin with few dark dispersed chromatophores, more so on unbranched rays. Adipose fin sparsely pigmented, more so along its dorsal border (Fig. 10). Sexual dimorphism. Mature males of Gymnocorymbus bondi (LBP 2274) were identified through direct observation of their gonads. These specimens did not demonstrate small bony hooks on the anterior anal-fin rays, a secondary sexually dimorphic character often found in many species in the Characidae (Malabarba & Weitzman 2003).The absence of bony hooks in mature males can be additionally used to diagnose G. bondi from all congeners. Distribution. Gymnocorymbus bondi is endemic from the Río Orinoco basin in Colombia and Venezuela (Fig. 9). Phillip et al. (2013) listed G. bondi in their checklist of fishes from Trinidad and Tobago. However, we were unable to examine those vouchers in order to confirm that report. Moenkhausia profunda was described probably from the Aruka river, an independent river close to the border of Guyana and Venezuela. Remarks. Examinations of type specimens of Phenacogaster bondi Fowler, 1911 (holotype, ANSP 37863 and paratype, ANSP 37864) and Gymnocorymbus socolofi Géry, 1964 (holotype, USNM 198646) leaded Lima et al. (2003) (section of Gymnocorymbus written by the first author) to conclude that they constitute the same species, and the new combination, G. bondi (Fowler, 1911), was then formally proposed. Examination of holotype of Moenkhausia profunda (FMNH 53717) evidenced it is a junior synonym of G. bondi instead of G. thayeri, as proposed by Géry (1972). Material examined. Types: ANSP 37863, holotype of Phenacogaster bondi, 33.5 mm SL, Corisal, Venezuela, 27 Feb 1911, F.E. Bond & S. Brown. ANSP 37864, paratype of P. bondi, 29.9 mm SL, collected with the holotype. USNM 198646, holotype of Gymnocorymbus socolofi, 52.2 mm SL, Colombia, Río Manacacias into upper Río Meta at Restrepo, circa 200 miles E of Bogotá, Jun 1963, R. Socolof. ANSP 139711, paratype of G. socolofi, 26.1 mm SL, collected with holotype. FMNH 53717, holotype of Moenkhausia profunda, 39.0 mm SL, Issorora rubber plantation, probably from the Aruka river, Guyana, E. S. Shideler. Non-types: 110 specimens, 84 measured (25.1 –53.0 mm SL). Venezuela: ANSP 141571, 25, 25.1–43.7 mm SL, Bolivar, isolated lagoon 200 yd N of Jabillal. ANSP 159884, 2, not measured, caño 15.1 km E of Río Parguaza ferry crossing on Caicara-Puerto Ayacucho highway. ANSP 159885, 6, 1 c&s, 37.6-48.9 mm SL, Río Guacamayo, 100 to 600 m below bridge at crossing Caicara, Río Orinoco. ANSP 159889, 9, 34.3–51.6 mm SL, Morichal Merecure, 3.5 km E of Río Caura and 1.0 km N of Caicara. ANSP 159890, 14, 28.5–40.8 mm SL, Bolivar, flooded pasture along Caicara -Puerto Ayacucho highway, 33 km from E end of highway to Colombia. ANSP 161048, 2, not measured, Río Agua Blanca, Orinoco. ANSP 165453, 22, not measured, Apure, S. Fernando Apure, flooded savannah, Río Apure, Río Orinoco. LBP 2274, 3, 29.0– 50.6 mm SL, Bolívar, Caicara del Orinoco, Río Caño (Pelo Ojo), 7 ° 32 ’ 22.4 ”N 66 °08’ 29.2 ”W. LBP 2281, 2, 26.5–28.5 mm SL, Bolívar, Caicara del Orinoco, Río Orinoco, 7 ° 30 ’01.2”N 66 °08’ 14.4 ”W. LBP 2296, 1, 32.3 mm SL, Bolívar, Caicara del Orinoco, Río Orinoco, 7 ° 39 ’06.3”N 66 ° 10 ’ 34.2 ”W. MZUSP 96436, 3, 26.6–51.4 mm SL, Bolívar, Caicara del Orinoco, Río Orinoco, 7 ° 32 ’ 22.2 ”N 66 °08’ 29 ”W. FMNH 100148, 2, 40.2– 42.5 mm SL, Guárico, Río Portuguesa, Laguna Los Noreles Caño Falcón, Río Orinoco. MCZ 59648, 1, 29.6 mm SL, Delta Amacuro, Río Pena. MCZ 92879, 1, 32.4 mm SL, Guárico, Llanos, Caño Falcón, Río Portuguesa, Río Orinoco. USNM 260628, 8, 36.8–42.7 mm SL, Apure, Caño Caicara, where crossed by bridge on road from Montecal. Colombia: LBP 18665, 1, 38.4 mm SL, Guaviare-Meta, Río Cunimía, Río Guaviare, Río Orinoco, 3 ° 10 ’30.0”N 73 ° 39 ’41.0”W. LBP 18736, 2, 39.6–43.1 mm SL, Vista Hermosa-Meta, Caño Cunimia, Río Guaviare, Río Orinoco, 3 ° 10 ’28.0”N 73 ° 39 ’ 43 ”. NRM 41441, 10, 1 c&s, 31.2 –53.0 mm SL, Laguna Santa Clara, tributary to Río Ocoa, ca. 5 km S of Villavicencio, 4 ° 04’ 11.6 ”N 73 ° 41 ’ 38 ” (approximately).Published as part of Benine, Ricardo C., Melo, Bruno F., Castro, Ricardo M. C. & Oliveira, Claudio, 2015, Taxonomic revision and molecular phylogeny of Gymnocorymbus Eigenmann, 1908 (Teleostei, Characiformes, Characidae), pp. 1-28 in Zootaxa 3956 (1) on pages 10-14, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3956.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/28845
