Research Article |
Corresponding author: Carlos A. García-Alzate ( caturog@gmail.com ) Academic editor: Devin Bloom
© 2017 Carlos A. García-Alzate, Alexander Urbano-Bonilla, Donald C. Taphorn.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
García-Alzate CA, Urbano-Bonilla A, Taphorn DC (2017) A new species of Hyphessobrycon (Characiformes, Characidae) from the upper Guaviare River, Orinoco River Basin, Colombia. ZooKeys 668: 123-138. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.668.11489
|
Hyphessobrycon klausanni sp. n. is described from small drainages of the upper Guaviare River (Orinoco River Basin) in Colombia. It differs from all congeners by having a wide, conspicuous, dark lateral stripe extending from the anterior margin of the eye across the body and continued through the middle caudal-fin rays, and that covers (vertically) three or four horizontal scale rows. It also differs by having an orange-yellow stripe extending from the anterosuperior margin of the eye to the caudal peduncle above the lateral line in life. It differs from all other species of Hyphessobrycon that have a similar dark lateral stripe: H. cyanotaenia, H. loretoensis, H. melanostichos, H. nigricinctus, H. herbertaxelrodi, H. eschwartzae, H. montogoi, H. psittacus, H. metae, H. margitae, H. vanzolinii, and H. peruvianus in having only three or four pored scales in the lateral line, 21 to 24 lateral scales and six teeth in the inner premaxillary row. Hyphessobrycon klausanni differs from H. loretoensis in having seven to eight maxillary teeth (vs. three to four) and in having a longer caudal peduncle (12.4–17.0% SL vs. 4.6–8.0% SL). Additionally Hyphessobrycon klausanni can be distinguished from the other species of Hyphessobrycon with a dark lateral stripe from the Orinoco River Basin (H. metae and H. acaciae) in having two teeth in the outer premaxillary row (vs. three to four) and 10 branched pectoral–fin rays (vs. 11 to 12). It further differs from H. metae by the length of the snout (17.6–22.8% HL vs. 9.9–15.2% HL) and by the length of the caudal peduncle (12.4–17.0% SL vs. 7.3–11.8% SL).
Hyphessobrycon klausanni sp. n. es descrita de pequeños drenajes del alto río Guaviare (cuenca del río Orinoco) en Colombia. Se diferencia de todos los congéneres por tener una amplia franja lateral oscura lateral que se extiende desde el margen anterior del ojo a través del cuerpo y se continúa hasta la base de la aleta caudal y que cubre (verticalmente) tres o cuatro escamas laterales, además difiere por tener una franja de color naranja-amarillo que se extiende desde el margen anterosuperior del ojo hasta el pedúnculo caudal por encima de la línea lateral en vida. Se diferencia de H. cyanotaenia, H. loretoensis, H. melanostichos, H. nigricinctus, H. herbertaxelrodi, H. eschwartzae, H. montogoi, H. psittacus, H. metae, H. margitae, H. vanzolinii, y H. peruvianus por tener solo 3 a 4 escamas con poros en la línea lateral, 21 a 24 escamas laterales y 6 dientes en la fila interna del premaxilar. Hyphessobrycon klausanni se diferencia de H. loretoensis por presentar 7 a 8 dientes maxilares (vs. 3 a 4) y la longitud del pedúnculo caudal (12.4–17.0% LE vs. 4.6–8.0% LE). Además se puede distinguir de las demás especies con banda lateral oscura presentes en la cuenca del rio Orinoco (H. metae y H. acaciae) por tener dos dientes en la fila externa del premaxilar (vs. 3 a 4) y 10 radios ramificados en la aleta pectoral (vs. 11 a 12), además se separa de H. metae por la longitud de hocico (17.6–22.8% LC vs. 9.9–15.2% LC) y por la longitud del pedúnculo caudal (12.4–17.0% LE vs. 7.3–11.8% LE).
New taxon, Neotropical Ichthyology, Guaviare River, diversity
Nuevo taxón, Ictiología Neotropical, río Guaviare, diversidad
Hyphessobrycon Durbin, 1908, with 147 valid species (
Twenty-two species of Hyphessobrycon have been identified from the different hydrographic drainages in Colombia (
Fishes were captured using seines and were preserved in situ in 10% formalin and later stored in 70% ethanol. Counts and measurements follow
Hyphessobrycon acaciae: COLOMBIA, Meta:
UARC-IC 539, 23.1 mm SL, male, Colombia, Meta, Mapiripán County, upper Guaviare River drainage, Caño Claro, 03°07'05.1"N; 72°30'14.8"W; 209 masl; Paratypes. UARC-IC 540, five, 22.1–24.2 mm SL, collected with holotype; UARC-IC 541, two CS, 20.2–22.3 mm SL, collected with holotype; UARC-IC 542, eight, 20.1–23.3 mm SL, Mapiripán county, upper Guaviare River drainage, Caño La División, 03°07'05.8"N; 72°32'36.7"W, 209 masl; UARC-IC 543, two, 25.1–28.4 mm SL, El Castillo County, upper Guaviare River drainage, Caño Hondo, 03°33'08.6"N; 73°47'17.9"W, 209 masl; UARC-IC 544, six, 22.1–23.4 mm SL, Mapiripán County, upper Guaviare River drainage, Caño División 2, 03°07'03.3"N; 72°32'32.5"W, 221 masl; MPUJ 7857, eight, 25.4–31.4 mm SL, El Castillo County, Caño Hondo, upper drainage of Guaviare River, 03°33'08.6"N; 73°47'17.9"W.
Hyphessobrycon klausanni sp. n. can be diagnosed from all other species of Hyphessobrycon, except of H. cyanotaenia, H. loretoensis, H. melanostichos, H. nigricinctus, H. herbertaxelrodi, H. eschwartzae, H. montogoi, H. psittacus, H. metae, H. margitae, H. vanzolinii and H. peruvianus, by having a wide, conspicuous, dark lateral stripe extending from the anterior margin of the eye across the head and body and continuing through the middle caudal-fin rays to their tips. It differs from the species excepted above in having a wider lateral stripe that covers three or four horizontal scale rows (vs. stripe covering just one or two scales rows); in having an orange-yellow stripe extending from the anterodorsal margin of the eye to the caudal peduncle above the dark lateral stripe in life (vs. red lateral stripe extending from the anterodorsal margin of the eye to the caudal peduncle above the dark lateral stripe in live H. heterorhabdus, H. amapaensis, H. eschwartzae and H. montagi); by having fewer pored lateral line scales (three to four vs. five to10); fewer lateral scales (21 to 24 vs. 29 to 34); and in having more teeth on the inner premaxillary row (six vs. five). It differs from H. loretoensis in having seven to eight maxillary teeth (vs. three to four) and in having a longer caudal peduncle (12.4–17.0% SL vs. 4.6–8.0% SL). Additionally Hyphessobrycon klausanni can be distinguished from the other species of Hyphessobrycon with a dark lateral stripe from the Orinoco River Basin (H. metae and H. acaciae), in having: two teeth in the outer premaxillary row (vs. three to four see Fig.
Morphometric data shown in Table
Morphometric and meristic data of Hyphessobrycon klausanni sp. n. Standard length given in mm. Mean given in parentheses. SD = Standard deviation.
Holotype | Paratypes | SD | |
---|---|---|---|
Standard length | 23.1 | 20.1–28.4 (22.2) | 1.2 |
Total length | 27.5 | 25.8–29.3 (27.5) | 0.9 |
Percentages of SL | |||
Body depth | 29.4 | 29.4–35.1 (32.5) | 1.5 |
Snout-dorsal fin distance | 50.2 | 49.7–56.5 (53.7) | 2.5 |
Snout-pectoral fin distance | 32.0 | 25.7–33.6 (30.2) | 2.2 |
Snout-pelvic fin distance | 44.2 | 42.8–53.7 (47.7) | 3.5 |
Snout-anal fin distance | 57.1 | 57.1–69.2 (62.0) | 3.3 |
Dorsal fin-hypural distance | 47.2 | 47.1–53.5 (50.4) | 2.0 |
Dorsal-fin length | 29.9 | 29.2–35.0 (31.9) | 2.1 |
Pectoral-fin length | 38.5 | 35.0–45.0 (39.2) | 3.1 |
Pelvic-fin length | 26.0 | 23.2–29.9 (25.9) | 2.1 |
Caudal peduncle depth | 21.2 | 17.5–24.5 (20.8) | 2.2 |
Caudal peduncle length | 15.2 | 15.1–20.9 (17.9) | 1.8 |
Head length | 22.5 | 20.3–25.3 (21.5) | 1.3 |
Dorsal-anal fin distance | 10.0 | 8.7–12.7 (10.0) | 1.1 |
Dorsal-pectoral fin distance | 15.2 | 12.2–17.0 (14.4) | 1.2 |
Anal-fin length | 28.6 | 27.2–31.3 (29.6) | 1.5 |
Percentages of HL | |||
Snout length | 18.2 | 17.6–22.8 (20.4) | 1.8 |
Orbital diameter | 36.4 | 30.1–45.0 (37.9) | 4.9 |
Postorbital distance | 39.4 | 36.6–53.1 (43.5) | 4.3 |
Maxilla length | 39.4 | 23.9–49.2 (35.6) | 7.4 |
Interorbital distance | 39.4 | 29.5–41.5 (25.8) | 3.4 |
Mandible superior distance | 27.3 | 22.5–30.4 (26.4) | 2.5 |
MERISTICS | |||
Lateral scales | 24 | 20–24 | |
Pored lateral-line scales | 4 | 3–4 | |
Scales from lateral line to dorsal fin | 5 | 5 | |
Scales from lateral line to anal fin | 4 | 4 | |
Scales from lateral line to pelvic fin | 3 | 3 | |
Predorsal scales | 9 | 9–10 | |
Dorsal-fin rays | ii, 9 | ii, 9 | |
Anal-fin rays | iii, 20 | iii, 19–20 | |
Pelvic-fin rays | ii, 7 | ii, 7 | |
Pectoral-fin rays | ii, 10 | ii, 10 |
Head and snout long, jaws equal, mouth terminal, lips soft and flexible, outer row of premaxillary teeth not exposed. Premaxilla with long, sharp lateral process over ethmoids, with two rows of teeth: the external row with one (2) or two* (23), all tricuspid; inner row with six* (25) tricuspid teeth the gradually diminish in size away from symphysis. Maxillary long and narrow, posterior margin straight, anterior margin convex, ventral margin reaching anterior border of third infraorbital, with seven* (10) or eight (15) tricuspid and conical teeth. Dentary with convex ventral margin, four (25) frontal multicuspid teeth followed by six* (15) or eight (10) smaller conical teeth (Fig.
Scales cycloid. Lateral line with three (10) or four* (15) pored scales. Lateral scale series with 21 (10), 22 (6) or 24* (9) scales, including those with pores. Transverse scales rows five* (25) between dorsal-fin origin and lateral line, not including the predorsal series just in front of first dorsal-fin ray. Four (25) horizontal scale rows from anal-fin origin to lateral line. Three (25) horizontal scale rows between pelvic-fin origins and lateral line. Predorsal scales nine*(18) or 10 (7). Five scales in single row along anterior anal-fin base. Fin rays: Dorsal ii, 9 (25). Anal iii, 19 (18) or 20* (7). Pelvic ii, 7 (25). Pectoral ii, 10 (25). Caudal 10+10 (2) principal and 10 (2) procurrent. Caudal fin bifurcate, upper and lower lobes similar in size, pointed. Total vertebrae 32–33.
Males have hooks on anal-fin and pelvic–fin rays. Anal fin with pair of rows of eight to ten small hooks along third simple ray followed by two to eight pairs of hooks on first to fifth branched rays. Pelvic fins with two to ten pairs of hooks on branched rays, located above internal branch of ray, each segment of branched rays with pair of hooks.
Opercular and humeral spots absent. Dorsal part of head and body to dorsal fin dark brown, then yellow on sides and light yellow ventrally. Base color divided by conspicuous, wide (three to four horizontal scale rows), dark lateral stripe from anterior margin of eye through middle caudal-fin rays. Pectoral, pelvic and anal fins hyaline. Dorsal, anal and caudal fins with dark margins. Anal fin with dark pigment concentrated on interradial membranes.
Body greenish-yellow, predorsal area orange-yellow, preventral area silvery-yellow, upper and lower margins of eye red and black respectively, dorsal area of head orange-yellow, ventral area greenish-yellow with great concentration of melanophores on infraorbitals, preopercle and opercle. Wide, black, lateral stripe from anterior part of eye along sides through middle caudal-fin rays, covering at least half of body height near midbody. Iridescent orange stripe present above black stripe from eye to upper caudal-fin lobe. Lower lobe of caudal fin with orange iridophores at bases of rays. Bases of dorsal-fin rays orange, base of caudal and pelvic fins greenish–yellow. Adipose fin light orange (Fig.
Research leading to the discovery and recognition of this species was partially funded by Mr. Klaus-Peter Lang from Oberhausen, Germany. To commemorate the 80th birthday of his mother, this species is dedicated to and named for his father “Klaus” and his mother “Anni”.
Principal component analysis (PCA) detected morphological differences among Hyphessobrycon klausanni and H. acaciae, H. mavro, H. metae and H. niger. For the first component, upper jaw length, postorbital length and dorsal-pectoral fin distance were the most important variables. For the second component, orbital diameter, caudal peduncle length and snout length were most important. The first component explained 43.71% of total variation, and combined with the second this rose to 85.78% (Fig.
Eigenvalue for principal components (PC) between Hyphessobrycon klausanni sp. n., H. acaciae, H. mavro, H. metae and H. niger.
PC | Eigenvalue | Percentage variance |
---|---|---|
1 | 742.872 | 43.712 |
2 | 715.071 | 42.076 |
3 | 143.989 | 8.4725 |
4 | 0.887396 | 5.2216 |
5 | 0.0177261 | 0.1043 |
6 | 0.012861 | 0.075676 |
7 | 0.0106605 | 0.062728 |
8 | 0.00831635 | 0.048935 |
9 | 0.00719985 | 0.042365 |
10 | 0.00544939 | 0.032065 |
11 | 0.00483203 | 0.028432 |
12 | 0.00454893 | 0.026767 |
13 | 0.00389345 | 0.02291 |
14 | 0.00330895 | 0.01947 |
15 | 0.00202874 | 0.011937 |
16 | 0.00152486 | 0.0089725 |
17 | 0.00134239 | 0.0078988 |
18 | 0.00118167 | 0.0069531 |
19 | 0.00103976 | 0.0061181 |
20 | 0.00091383 | 0.0053771 |
21 | 0.000677078 | 0.003984 |
22 | 0.000411058 | 0.0024187 |
23 | 0.000201424 | 0.0011852 |
Eigenvector for first four principal components (PC) between Hyphessobrycon klausanni sp. n., H. acaciae, H. mavro, H. metae and H. niger. Abbreviations same as Table
PC 1 | PC 2 | PC 3 | PC 4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
SL | 0.036926 | 0.11125 | 0.053717 | 0.15823 |
TL | 0.014453 | 0.11428 | 0.12973 | 0.1757 |
Bd | 0.0014034 | 0.2336 | 0.19898 | 0.10276 |
Sndorsalfin | 0.035809 | 0.15093 | 0.19889 | 0.077996 |
Snpectoralfin | -0.029764 | 0.12309 | 0.14127 | -0.055979 |
Snpelvicfin | 0.00039923 | 0.17469 | 0.19359 | -0.035305 |
Snanalfin | 0.10796 | 0.19393 | 0.084414 | -0.03285 |
Dorfinhyp | -0.049318 | 0.15887 | 0.12493 | 0.34098 |
Doranafin | 0.020214 | 0.22269 | -0.017732 | 0.24495 |
Dorpecfin | 0.16087 | 0.1257 | 0.18137 | 0.021098 |
Dfl | -0.042492 | 0.088703 | -0.12982 | 0.0055815 |
Pecfl | -0.17901 | 0.13165 | -0.31013 | 0.37798 |
Pelfl | 0.016911 | 0.3717 | 0.12014 | -0.010603 |
Anfl | -0.12234 | 0.20629 | -0.10574 | 0.209 |
CDP | 0.15708 | 0.24308 | 0.21375 | 0.093422 |
CPL | -0.69393 | 0.34328 | -0.0388 | -0.34286 |
HL | -0.016057 | 0.13764 | -0.11393 | 0.29254 |
SnL | -0.11936 | 0.32028 | 0.22983 | -0.24192 |
ED | -0.043155 | -0.076829 | 0.19662 | 0.4488 |
PostOL | 0.54766 | 0.26111 | -0.013493 | -0.21286 |
ML | 0.044176 | 0.24261 | -0.56997 | 0.079634 |
IW | 0.17908 | 0.1701 | -0.10416 | -0.15303 |
UJL | 0.22414 | 0.23888 | -0.40194 | -0.10821 |
Hyphessobrycon klausanni lives in shallow (0.30–1.5 m) well-oxygenated (6.39–7.68 mg/l) streams with transparent waters flowing (0.063 m/s) over different types of substrates (rocks, sand, gravel and decomposing organic material). The temperature range was narrow, 25.5–26°C but pH varied from moderately acidic to basic (6.47–8.7). Hyphessobrycon klausanni was found near shore among aquatic vegetation, tree roots and fallen logs. Other species found at the sites included: Hemigrammus barrigonae, Ctenobrycon spilurus, Tyttocharax metae, Moenkhausia oligolepis, M. chrysargyrea, M. lepidura, Chrysobrycon guahibo, Ochmacanthus orinoco, Farlowella vittata, Ancistrus triradiatus, Centromochlus reticulatus and Anablepsoides sp. Stomach content analysis (n = 4) revealed a diet of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates: Coleoptera (Dytiscidae), Ephemeroptera, Hymenoptera (Formicidae), larvae of Chironomidae and others not identified due to the degree of fragmentation.
Although in our opinion the artificial groupings based on pigmentation patterns proposed by
Rapid taxonomic description of the many as yet unnamed fish species of the Neotropical ichthyological biodiversity is urgently needed given the accelerated rate of extirpation caused by human impacts in many aquatic ecosystems in the Orinoco River Basin. The loss of habitat for fish species is caused by many different human activities such as dam construction, urban water pollution, mining, poor agricultural and animal husbandry practices, the introduction of non-native species and overfishing (Barletta et al. 2012). The Guaviare River drainage in Colombia is an area of high priority for conservation (
We are grateful for the support of the Biology Program, University of Atlántico (UA). We thank Javier Maldonado-Ocampo and Saúl Prada-Pedreros (MPUJ), Gustavo Casas Andreu and Hector Espinoza (IBUAM-P), Carlos Alberto Santos De Lucena (MCP), Francisco Provenzano (MBUCV-V), Hernan Ortega (MUSM), Janeth Muñoz Saba and Jaime Aguirre (ICMNH), Mark Sabaj Pérez (ANSP), David Werneke (