curve

1991 Parenti Phylogenetic reorganization of Cyprinodontiform fishes "Within the Cyprinodontiforms, fusion of the hypural plates into a so-called hypural fan (following the terminology of Rosen, 1964) occurs within several monophyletic groups of genera (e.g., fig. 2F). There is just one epural which mirrors in shape and position the autogenous parhypural. There are no separate ural centra. The hypochordal musculature is also absent (Rosen, 1964). This formation of a symmetrical caudal fin in unique among teleost fishes." (Emph. mine - RJS) 2004 hhmi Evolution's Mirror in a Fish's Spines "Kingsley and his colleagues found such an animal in the threespine stickleback fish. These small fish typically live in the ocean but breed in coastal streams. After the last ice age ended some 11,000 years ago, populations of sticklebacks rapidly colonized newly formed freshwater streams and lakes - through a process known as adaptive radiation. The many stickleback populations underwent disparate and parallel evolutionary changes, among them partial or complete loss of their pelvic spines. These spines are thought to protect the fish from being devoured by predators. As Kingsley points out, however, pelvic spines may be a disadvantage if the fish live in environments that have very low calcium levels available for building the skeletal structures, or in locations with many large predatory insects that hunt sticklebacks by grabbing hold of the spines. “Although vastly different morphologies have evolved in different stickleback populations, they have evolved recently enough that you can still take those different populations, cross them and actually let the genetics of the trait guide you to the underlying events that have controlled the process,” said Kingsley." 2015 Costa The caudal skeleton of extant and fossil cyprinodontiform fishes (Teleostei: Atherinomorpha): comparative morphology and delimitation of phylogenetic characters The caudal skeleton of teleost fishes of the order Cyprinodontiformes is described and compared on the basis of 394 extant and eight fossil species, supporting delimitation of 21 phylogenetic characters, of which 13 are firstly reported. The Cyprinodontiformes are unambiguously diagnosed by the presence of a single, blade-like epural, and by principal caudal-fin rays continuous on upper and lower hypural plates. Monophyly of the suborder Cyprinodontoidei is supported by the widened neural and hemal spines of the preural centrum 3 and presence of a spine-like process on the stegural, and monophyly of the Aplocheiloidei by the absence of radial caudal cartilages. A keel-shaped lateral process on the compound centrum supports monophyly of the Nothobranchiidae. Some characters of the caudal skeleton in combination to other osteological features indicate the cyprinodontiform fossil genus †Prolebias to be a paraphyletic assemblage; †P. aymardi, †P. delphinensis and †P. stenoura, the type species of the genus, all from the Lower Oligocene of Europe, possibly are closely related to recent valenciids; †“P.” meridionalis from the Upper Oligocene of France is an incertae sedis cyprinodontid; and, †“P”. cephalotes, †“P”. egeranus and †“P”. malzi from the Upper Oligocene-Lower Miocene of Europe are closely related to poeciliids, probably closely related to the recent African genus Pantanodon due to they sharing unique derived features of pelvic fin, branchial arches and jaws.

2021 Sabaj Towards a complete classification of the Neotropical thorny catfishes (Siluriformes: Doradidae) Mark Henry Sabaj and Mariangeles Arce H. We propose a revised classification of Doradidae based on phylogenetic analyses of sequence data for one nuclear (rag1) and two mitochondrial (co1, 16s) genes, and corroborated by caudal-fin morphology. The molecular dataset comprises 174 doradid specimens representing all 31 valid genera, 83 of the 96 valid extant species and 17 species-level taxa that remain undescribed or nominally unassigned. Parsimony and Bayesian analyses of molecular data support six major lineages of doradids assigned here to three nominal subfamilies (Astrodoradinae, Doradinae, Wertheimerinae) and three new ones (Acanthodoradinae, Agamyxinae, Rhinodoradinae). The maximum parsimony topology of Doradidae was sensitive to ingroup density and outgroup age. With the exceptions of Astrodoradinae and Doradinae, each subfamily is diagnosed by caudal-fin characteristics. The highest degree of fusion among skeletal elements supporting the caudal fin is observed in Acanthodoradinae and Aspredinidae, lineages that are sister to the remaining doradids and aspredinoids (i.e., Auchenipteridae + Doradidae), respectively. Fusion among caudal-fin elements tends to be higher in taxa with rounded, truncate or emarginate tails and such taxa typically occupy shallow, lentic habitats with ample structure. Caudal-fin elements are more separated in taxa with moderately to deeply forked tails that occupy lotic habitats in medium to large river channels 2021 Thieme Development of the caudal-fin skeleton reveals multiple convergent fusions within Atherinomorpha Abstract Background The caudal fin of teleosts is a highly diverse morphological structure and a valuable source of information for comparative analyses. Within the Atherinomorpha a high variation of conditions of the caudal-fin skeleton can be found. These range from complex but basal configurations to simple yet derived configurations. When comparing atherinomorph taxa, it is often difficult to decide on the homology of skeletal elements if only considering adult specimens. However, observing the development of caudal-fin skeletons allows one to evaluate complex structures, reveal homologies and developmental patterns, and even reconstruct the grundplan of the examined taxa. Results We studied the development of the caudal-fin skeleton in different atheriniform, beloniform and cyprinodontiform species using cleared and stained specimens. Subsequently we compared the development to find similarities and differences in terms of 1) which structures are formed and 2) which structures fuse during ontogeny. For many structures, i.e., the parhypural, the epural(s), the haemal and neural spines of the preural centra and the uroneural, there were either no or only minor differences visible between the three taxa. However, the development of the hypurals revealed a high variation of fusions within different taxa that partly occurred independently in atheriniforms, beloniforms and cyprinodontiforms. Moreover, comparing the development of the ural centra exposed two ways of formation of the compound centrum: 1) in atheriniforms and the beloniforms Oryzias and Hyporhamphus limbatus two ural centra develop and fuse during ontogeny while 2) in cyprinodontiforms and Exocoetidae (Beloniformes) only a single ural centrum is formed during ontogeny. Conclusions We were able to reconstruct the grundplan of the developmental pattern of the caudal-fin skeleton of the Atheriniformes, Beloniformes and Cyprinodontiformes as well as their last common ancestors. We found two developmental modes of the compound centrum within the Atherinomorpha, i.e., the fusion of two developing ural centra in atheriniforms and beloniforms and the development of only one ural centrum in cyprinodontiforms. Further differences and similarities for the examined taxa are discussed, resulting in the hypothesis that the caudal-fin development of a last common ancestor to all atherinomorphs is very much similar to that of extant atheriniforms. 2024 Oliver African cichlid fishes: morphological data and taxonomic insights from a genus-level survey of supraneurals, pterygiophores, and vertebral counts (Ovalentaria, Blenniiformes, Cichlidae, Pseudocrenilabrinae) Here, I provide the first survey in cichlids of the considerable variation in numbers of vertebrae, supraneurals and dorsal- and anal-fin supports (pterygiophores), as well as the patterns with which the pterygiophores insert between the neural or haemal spines. The study includes some 1700 specimens of nearly 400 cichlid species. Focusing on the largest subfamily, the African cichlids or Pseudocrenilabrinae, the survey furnishes data from species in all but one of its 166 genera. Limited data from species in the other cichlid subfamilies (Etroplinae, Ptychochrominae and Cichlinae) and from the related leaffishes, Polycentridae, are also presented. Key examples of pterygiophore insertion patterns from throughout the range of variation are illustrated and discussed. Detailed analytical tables and all raw data are provided in supplementary files. A bizarre specialisation in Cyprichromis is noted, evidently for the first time. Uniquely in this Lake Tanganyikan genus, five to seven anal pterygiophores are abdominal in position, located anterior to the anal fin and inserting toward or between successive pairs of pleural ribs. Taxonomic changes: The most speciose tribe of African cichlids, currently known as Haplochromini, is correctly called Pseudocrenilabrini. Based chiefly on the molecular phylogenetic findings of other workers, I propose four pseudocrenilabrine subtribes, one occurring in rivers and three endemic to Lake Malawi. I also re-assign the Lake Tanganyikan tribe Tropheini as another subtribe of Pseudocrenilabrini, in line with numerous molecular studies placing tropheines firmly within this tribe. The remaining genera of Pseudocrenilabrini remain incertae sedis in this tribe pending clarification of their phylogenetic relationships. The character complex here surveyed is a promising source of taxonomically and phylogenetically informative characteristics distinguishing or uniting cichlid taxa at multiple hierarchical levels, from species through subfamily. This reference set of novel character data can also provide information for palaeontological studies of African cichlids. These attributes are skeletal features potentially available for study in well preserved fossils and may help determine their correct taxonomic placement.