Presence of Carasobarbus Sublimus (Coad & Najafpour, 1997)

Zoology and Ecology

ISSN: 2165-8005 (Print) 2165-8013 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tzec20

Presence of Carasobarbus sublimus (Coad & Najafpour, 1997) in the upper reaches of Shatt al- Arab River, Basrah, Iraq

Abdul-Razak M. Mohamed, Abdulla N. Abood & Laith A. Jawad To cite this article: Abdul-Razak M. Mohamed, Abdulla N. Abood & Laith A. Jawad (2017): Presence of Carasobarbus sublimus (Coad & Najafpour, 1997) in the upper reaches of Shatt al- Arab River, Basrah, Iraq, Zoology and Ecology, DOI: 10.1080/21658005.2016.1272833

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21658005.2016.1272833

Published online: 02 Jan 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tzec20

Download by: [Laith A. Jawad] Date: 02 January 2017, At: 08:02 Zoology and Ecology, 2017, 27: 30-34. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/21658005.2016.1272833

Presence of Carasobarbus sublimus (Coad & Najafpour, 1997) in the upper reaches of Shatt al-Arab River, Basrah, Iraq

Abdul-Razak M. Mohameda, Abdulla N. Abooda and Laith A. Jawadb adepartment of Fisheries and Marine Resources, college of agriculture, University of Basrah, Basrah, Iraq; bFlat Bush, Manukau, auckland, new Zealand

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY The first record of Carasobarbus sublimus from the upper reaches of the Shatt al-Arab River is Received 20 May 2016 reported based on 7 specimens (119–170 mm TL) collected from the area 60 km south of Qurna accepted 9 december 2016 City, where the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers merge. This species has not been recorded from KEYWORDS Iraq although it is a native species to neighbouring Iran. Morphometric and meristic data are new record; cyprinidae; Iraq; provided in addition to a set of new characters introduced for the first time in the present study carasobarbus comparing C. sublimus with a similar species C. luteus. A possible explanation for the presence of C. sublimus in Iraqi waters is given.

Introduction 1997). It is characterised by the presence of two pairs of barbels; 27–29 scales in the lateral line, 12 scales around Members of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 the least circumference of the caudal peduncle; last belong to the cypriniform family Cyprinidae. They unbranched dorsal fin ray about as long as the head; inhabit still water of springs, streams, lakes, reservoirs, narrow mouth; spatulate lower jaw with median lobe on gravel pits and pools (Coad 2010). They are found the lower lip (Coad and Najafpour 1997; Borkenhagen across southwest Asia and northwest Africa. In Levant, and Krupp 2013). Mesopotamia, southern Iran, western and south-western Recently, specimens of cyprinid fish have been Arabian Peninsula and northern Morocco, these species obtained from the upper reaches of the Shatt al-Arab are found in major river systems, where they are consid- River. These specimens belong to one species resem- ered to be an essential commercial commodity to the bling in their features the cyprinid species C. sublimus. locals in these areas (Borkenhagen and Krupp 2013). The objectives of the current study are to (1) record for Members of the genus Carasobarbus are characterised the first time the presence ofCarasobarbus sublimus from by medium size with an ossified, smooth last unbranched the Iraqi waters and (2) describe and compare the fish dorsal fin ray; 9 or 10 branched dorsal fin rays and6 specimens obtained with C. luteus. branched anal fin rays; large, shield shaped scales; the lateral line with 25–39 scales; and 1 or 2 pairs of barbels present (Borkenhagen and Krupp 2013). Machordom Materials and methods and Doadrio (2001), Gorshkova, Gorshkov, and Golani In February 2016, a catch of cyprinid specimens (n = 7, (2002), Leggatt and Iwama (2003) and Tsigenopoulos, 119–170 mm TL) was recorded from the upper reaches of Kasapidis, and Berrebi (2010) have suggested that the the Shatt al-Arab River at Dair City, 60 km south of Qurna members of the genus Carasobarbus are evolutionarily City, where the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers merged hexaploid. The genus comprises a total of 9 valid spe- (Figure 1). The specimens were collected using a gillnet cies (Eschmeyer and Fong 2012): Carasobarbus apoensis, and electroshock (Astra, D. C. at 300–400 V, 3–5 Amp). C. canis, C. chantrei, C. exulatus, C. fritschii, C. harterti, C. The fishing activities were supervised and managed by kosswigi, C. luteus and C. sublimus. the first and second author and made available to the Carasobarbus sublimus was originally described from third author for further examination. All fish specimens Iran, Rūdkhāneh-ye A’lā near Pol-e Tīghen (N31°23′30″, were measured and examined at the laboratories of the E49°53′0″) by Coad and Najafpour (1997), and several spec- Department of Fisheries and Marine Resources (DFMR), imens were collected from the same area subsequently College of Agriculture, University of Basrah, Basrah, Iraq. (Esmaeili et al. 2006; Borkenhagen and Krupp 2013). The Morphometric and meristic characters were recorded distribution of this species is confined to the A’la River following Borkenhagen and Krupp (2013) and Coad in Khuzestan Province in Iran (Coad and Najafpour and

Discussion Unlike the neighbouring Iran, where 3 species of the genus Carasobarbus are living (C. kosswigi, C. luteus and C. sublimus), there are two species in Iraq (C. kosswigi and C. luteus) (Coad 2010; Borkenhagen and Krupp 2013). Therefore, the present record will add another species of Carasobarbus to the freshwater fish fauna of Iraq. Borkenhagen and Krupp (2013) have used a set of characters by which the closely related species can be diagnosed. Among these characters is the shape of the scales. They used scales taken from the anterior part of the body above the lateral line. They based their comparison on the pattern of stria- tion present in the posterior part of the scales. Scales on the fish body showed wide variation in their shape if they were taken from different body regions (Jawad 2005a, 2005b; Jawad and Al-Jufaili 2007). Also, they differed in their shape even from the same body region. Thus, scales from more than one body region and more scales from the same body region need to be compared in order to Figure 1. Map showing capture point of Carasobarbus sublimus get a profound comparison. in Shatt al-arab River, Basrah, Iraq. The morphometric and meristic characters of C. sublimus shown in Table 1 concur with those given by Borkenhagen and Krupp (2013) for this species and fall Najafpour (1997) and are given in Table 1. C. luteus and in the same range given for these characters by Coad C. sublimus were compared morphologically (Figures 2 and Najafpour (1997) and Esmaeili et al. (2006). Such and 3, Table 2). The specimens were deposited in the fish agreement indicated that our specimens are C. sublimus. collection of DFMR. The future molecular analysis will confirm the identity of these specimens; until then our specimens will be called Results C. sublimus. Morphologically, C. luteus is very close to C. sublimus, The following set of morphological characters was and to make sure that our specimens are not C. luteus, observed in the specimens collected: absence of nuchal a set of characters were deemed from the description hump; maximum body depth at the anterior edge of given for C. luteus and C. sublimus by Coad and Najafpour the dorsal fin or slightly anterior to it; head ventral pro- (1997), Esmaeili et al. (2006) and Borkenhagen and file straight, while dorsal convex; snout broadly elon- Krupp (2013) to compare between C. luteus and our gated (Figures 2 and 3); narrow and inferior mouth with specimens. C. sublimus can be diagnosed by the shape thick lips and lower jaw spatulate in shape (Figure 4); of the mouth (Figures 4–6). In addition, ten more charac- two pairs of well-developed barbels; eyes nearer to the ters were inferred from the specimens examined in the opercle than the mouth; ventral side of the head broad present study. These characters have not been used in and follows the shape of the lower jaw and snout; line the identification of species of Carasobarbus (Table 2), passing through the mouth also passes through the and two of them facilitated the separation of C. luteus centre of the eye; anterior origin of the dorsal fin well from our specimens. Such characters were approved to in front of that of the pelvic fin; line passing through be good taxonomic criteria to separate species of other the anterior origin of the pelvic fin and mouth passes fish groups (Clements, Jawad, and Stewart 2000). through the middle of the base of the pectoral fin; In addition to the differences in pharyngeal teeth pectoral, ventral and anal fins long (Figures 2 and 3); formula between C. luteus and C. sublimus (Coad and 5 scales above the lateral line and 3.5 scales below; Najafpour 1997; Borkenhagen and Krupp 2013), there are the pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.4–5.3.2, 2.3.4–5.3.1 differences in the shape of their pharyngeal bone (Table2 , or 3.3.4–4.3.3; body with silvery with hyaline fins; back Figures 7 and 8). Zeng and Liu (2011) suggested several slightly dark and the scales have dark pigments on their morphological characters for the pharyngeal bone and hind margin; yellow to orange pectoral, ventral and anal teeth to separate species of Gobioninae, Cyprinidae. fins have a yellow to orange shading, which is most These characters are also proved to separate C. luteus obvious with fins folded back; dorsal and caudal fins from our specimen, C. sublimus. According to Zeng and grey or hyaline. Liu (2011), the size of the teeth area of the pharyngeal ZOOLOGY AND ECOLOGY 32 Table 1. Morphometric and meristic characters of Carasobarbus sublimus collected from the upper reaches of Shatt al-arab River, Basrah, Iraq: aFl, anal fin length; aFBl, anal fin base length; dB , body depth; BW, body width; cPd, caudal peduncle depth; cPl, caudal peduncle length; dBFl, dorsal fin base length; dFl, dorsal fin length; dE , eye diameter; Fl, fork length; Hd, head depth; Hl, head length; Id, interorbital distance; ldFB, length of dorsal fin base; MW, mouth width; PPBl, posterior barbel length; PaFl, preanal fin length; PdFl, predorsal fin length; PFl, pectoral fin length; PPFl, prepectoral fin length; PVFl, preventral fin length; lS , standard length; Snl, snout length; Tl, total length; UJl, upper jaw length; VFl, ventral fin length (n = 7).

Morphometric characters (in mm), indices and meristic characters Range Mean ± SD Total length (Tl) 119–170 151.3 ± 19.41 Standard length (Sl) 95–140 122.2 ± 16.77 % in Tl 79.8–82.4 81.4 ± 16.78 Fork length (Fl) 108–150 134.0 ± 16.21 % in Tl 90.8–88.2 89.5 ± 16.31 Body depth (Bd) 31.1–45.4 39.8 ± 5.7 % in Sl 31.2–34.7 32.6 ± 1.2 Body width (BW) 15.5–22.2 19.9 ± 2.4 % Sl 15.2–17.4 16.3 ± 0.9 Head length (Hl) 27.4–31.45 30.1 ± 1.6 % Sl 22.4–28.8 24.9 ± 2.5 Head depth (Hd) 18.5–23.8 21.3 ± 1.8 % Hl 66.6–76.0 70.8 ± 3.5 Head width (HW) 15.0–18.9 17.9 ± 1.5 % Hl 54.6–61.1 59.2 ± 2.4 Snout length (Snl) 6.9–8.8 8.0 ± 0.8 % Hl 23.3–28.1 26.5 ± 1.9 Interorbital distance (Id) 9.4–12.5 11.7 ± 1.2 % Hl 34.4–40.9 38.6 ± 2.3 Eye diameter (Ed) 8.74–9.67 9.3 ± 0.3 % Hl 29.8–33.1 30.9 ± 1.2 Upper jaw length (UJl) 4.9–5.9 5.5 ± 0.4 % Hl 17.6–19.0 18.2 ± 0.6 Mouth width (MW) 19.2–24.0 21.5 ± 2.2 % Hl 5.1–5.5 5.3 ± 0.2 Posterior barbel length (PBl) 4.6–6.52 5.5 ± 0.7 % Hl 15.7–21.1 18.4 ± 1.9 Predorsal length (PdFl) 50.8–70.2 63.5 ± 7.3 % Sl 50.1–53.5 52.1 ± 1.5 dorsal fin base length (dFBl) 18.6–24.6 21.9 ± 2.2 % Sl 16.3–22.1 18.1 ± 2.6 dorsal fin length (dFl) 23.7–33.4 29.4 ± 3.7 % Sl 21.2–29.1 24.3 ± 2.7 anal fin length a( Fl) 24.2–31.0 28.2 ± 2.4 % Sl 21.2–25.4 23.3 ± 1.6 Preanal length (PaFl) 72.8–107.1 94.2 ± 12.6 % Sl 75.8–79.4 77.2 ± 1.3 anal fin base length a( FBl) 10.0–13.8 12.5 ± 1.4 % Sl 8.9–12.2 10.3 ± 1.1 Pectoral fin length (PFl) 20.8–34.4 27.7 ± 5.0 % Sl 20.3–25.5 22.6 ± 1.7 Ventral fin length (VFl) 19.3–26.0 23.8 ± 12.3 % Sl 17.8–20.8 19.6 ± 1.2 caudal peduncle length (cPl) 12.8–18.6 15.5 ± 2.3 % Sl 11.7–13.5 12.7 ± 0.7 caudal peduncle depth (cPd) 11.5–16.5 14.4 ± 1.8 % Sl 11.4–12.1 11.8 ± 0.3 number of spiny rays in dorsal fin 3–3 – number of branched dorsal fin rays 9–10 – number of branched pectoral fin rays 16–16 – number of branched ventral fin rays 9–9 – number of spiny rays in anal fin 3–3 – number of branched anal fin rays 7–7 – number of scales in lateral line 27–29 – number of scales above lateral line 4.5–4.5 – number of scales below lateral line 4.0–5.0 – number of scales between lateral line and ventral fins 3.0–3.0 – number of scales around caudal peduncle 12–12 – number of gill rakers 10–13 – number of predorsal fin scales 8.5–9.0 – number of scales between anal and ventral fins 6–7 – number of scales between pectoral and ventral fins 8–9 – number of pharyngeal teeth 2.3.4–5.3.2, 2.3.5–5.3.2, 2.3.4–5.3.2, 2.3.4–5.3.1 – 33 A.-R. M. MOHAMED ET AL. bone of both species in question is large (large area when The geography of the lower reaches of Mesopotamia, the ratio between the length of the pharyngeal bone/ where the marshes are located, showed that a group dentulous portion ≥ 0.51). The area of the teeth of C. of marshes known as Al-Hawizeh falls in both the Iraqi luteus (0.63) is with a higher ratio value than in our spec- and the Iranian territories (UNEP 2010). This means imen, C. sublimus (0.58). that fishes living in this marsh have a freedom of mov- ing across the borders between the two countries. Coad and Najafpour (1997), Esmaeili et al. (2006) and Borkenhagen and Krupp (2013) have shown that the area where C. sublimus is distributed is the vicinity of the Al-Hawizeh marsh or near to it. This means that individuals of C. sublimus found their way further to the west and entered the Shatt al-Arab River. The movement of individuals of this species can fall under the term of local migration (not man-made introduction), a movement that has been suggested by Esmaeili et al. (2006) for this species. If our specimens confirm their

Figure 2. Carasobarbus sublimus, 135 mm total length, caught by a gillnet at the upper reaches of Shatt al-arab River, Basrah, Iraq.

Figure 3. Carasobarbus luteus, 146 mm total length, caught by Figure 4. Front view of the mouth and snout: (a) Carasobarbus a gillnet at the upper reaches of Shatt al-arab River, coast of the luteus, 146 mm Tl;( B) Carasobarbus sublimus, 135 mm Tl. city of Basrah, Iraq.

Table 2. comparison of Carasobarbus luteus and C. sublimus based on a new set of morphological characters introduced in the present study and those given by coad and najafpour (1997) and Borkenhagen and Krupp (2013).

Carasobarbus luteus Carasobarbus sublimus 1. line passing through the mouth also passes through the centre of the eye 1. line passing through the mouth also passes through the lower edge of (New) the eye 2. anterior origin of the dorsal fin is well in front of that of the pelvic fin 2. anterior origin of the dorsal fin is opposite to that of the pelvic fin (New) 3. line passing through the anterior origin of the pelvic fin and mouth also 3. line passing through the anterior origin of the pelvic fin and mouth also passes through the middle of the base of the pectoral fin (New) passes through the lower edge of the pectoral fin base 4. area from the anterior end of the dorsal fin base to the mouth is straight 4. area from the anterior end of the dorsal fin base to the mouth is convex 5. Ventral profile of the head is convex 5. Ventral profile of the head is almost straight 6. Mouth terminal 6. Mouth inferior to subterminal 7. There are 25 to 33 scales in the lateral line 7. There are 27 to 29 scales in the lateral line 8. Pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.5–5.3.2, 2.3.4–5.3.2, 2.3.5–4.3.2, 2.3.5–5.3.3, 8. Pharyngeal teeth count is 2.3.4–5.3.2, 2.3.4–5.3.1 or 3.3.4–4.3.3 1.3.5–5.3.2, 2.3.5 or 2.3.4 9. anal fin is short not reaching the base of the caudal fin 9. anal fin is long reaching or passing the origin of the caudal fin 10. Snout is slightly pointed (New) 10.Snout is broadly elongated 11. Eyes are nearer to the mouth 11. Eyes are nearer to the operculum 12. Ventral side of the head is narrow (New) 12. Ventral side of the head is broad 13. There are 3.5 to 6 scales above the lateral line and 3 to 5.5 scales below 13. There are 5 scales above the lateral line and 3.5 scales below the lateral the lateral line line 14. one pair of barbels 14. Two pairs of barbels 15. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd teeth of the teeth rows are turning toward the 15. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd teeth of the teeth rows are more straight than medial side (New) turning to the medial side 16. The gape at the teeth area is wide(New) 16. The gape at the teeth is narrow 17. The 5th tooth of the 1st row, if present, is straight (New) 17. The 5th tooth is curved 18. Teeth are of conical, coarsely compressed and compressed types(New) 18. Teeth are of coarsely compressed type only 19. The base of the teeth area is slightly curved (New) 19. The base of the teeth area is reasonably curved ZOOLOGY AND ECOLOGY 34 identity as C. sublimus, then the above-mentioned possibility to be present in the lower reaches of Mesopotamia can apply.

Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References Borkenhagen, K., and F. Krupp. 2013. “Taxonomic Revision of Figure 5. Side view of the mouth and snout: (a) Carasobarbus the Genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, sublimus, 146 mm Tl; (B) Carasobarbus luteus, 135 mm Tl. Cyprinidae).” ZooKeys 339: 1–53. Clements, K. D., L. A. Jawad, and A. L. Stewart. 2000. “The New Zealand Triplefin Grahamina Signata (Teleostei; Tripterygiidae): A Junior Synonym of G. gymnota from Tasmania.” Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 30: 373–383. Coad, B. W. 2010. Freshwater Fishes of Iraq. Pensoft Ser. Faunist. Vol. 93, 274. Moscow: Pensoft Publishers. Coad, B. W., and N. Najafpour. 1997. “Barbus sublimus, a New Species of Cyprinid Fish from Khuzestan Province, Iran.” Ichthyological Exploration of Freshwater 7: 273–278. Eschmeyer, W. N., and J. D. Fong. 2012. Species of Fishes by Family/ Subfamily. On-line version dated, 25 November 2016. Esmaeili, H. R., A. Teimori, Z. Gholami, and F. Hosseinie. 2006. “Range Extension of Barbus sublimus Coad and Najafpour, 1997 (Actinopterygii: Cyprinidae) and Its Sympatric Species in Southwest of Iran.” Iranian Journal of Animal Biosystematics 2: 19–24. Gorshkova, G., S. Gorshkov, and D. Golani. 2002. “Karyotypes of Barbus canis and Capoeta damascina (Pisces, Cyprinidae) from the Middle East.” Italian Journal of Zoology 69: 191–194. Jawad, L. A. 2005a. “Comparative Scale Morphology and Squamation Patterns in Tripleﬁns (Pisces: Teleostei: Perciformes: Tripterygiidae).” Tuhinga 16: 137–168. Jawad, L. A. 2005b. “Comparative Morphology of Scales of Four Figure 6. Ventral view of the head: (a) Carasobarbus luteus, Teleost Fishes from Sudan and Yemen.” Journal of Natural 146 mm Tl; (B) Carasobarbus sublimus, 135 mm Tl. History 39: 2643–2660. Jawad, L. A., and S. Al-Jufaili. 2007. “Scale Morphology of Greater Lizardfish,Saurida tumbil (Bloch, 1795) (Pisces: Synodontidae).” Journal of Fish Biology 70: 1185–1212. Leggatt, R. A., and G. K. Iwama. 2003. “Occurrence of Polyploidy in the Fishes.” Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 13: 237–246. Machordom, A., and I. Doadrio. 2001. “Evolutionary History and Speciation Modes in the Cyprinid Genus Barbus.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 268: 1297–1306. Tsigenopoulos, C. S., P. Kasapidis, and P. Berrebi. 2010. “Phylogenetic Relationships of Hexaploid Large Sized Barbs (Genus Labeobarbus, Cyprinidae) Based on MtDNA Data.” Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 56: 851–856. Figure 7. Pharyngeal bone of Carasobarbus sublimus, 135 mm Tl. UNEP. 2010. Support for Environmental Management of the Iraqi Marshlands 2004–2009. Nairobi: UNEP. Zeng, Y., and Huanzhang Liu. 2011. “The Evolution of Pharyngeal Bones and Teeth in Gobioninae Fishes (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) Analyzed with Phylogenetic Comparative Methods.” Hydrobiologia 664: 183–197.

Figure 8. Pharyngeal bone of C. luteus, 146 mm Tl.