DOCSLIB.ORG

Arius (Pisces : Siluriformes : Arfidae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arius (Pisces : Siluriformes : Arfidae) Proc, Indian Acad. SCi. (Anim. Sci.), Vol. 91, Number l, January 1982, pp. 79-98. ~ Printed in India. Some biometric studies of certain closely related species of the genus Arius (Pisces : Siluriformes : Arfidae) J R DHANZE and K C JAYARAM Zoological Survey of India, 27 J L Nehru Road, Calcutta 700 016, India MS received 6 March 1981 ; revised 17 August 1981 Abstract. The marine catfish genus Arius of the family Ariidae comprisrng 21 species have been divided into six complexes and three groups based on interspecific relationships and morphometric affinities. In this paper the maculatus complex of four species, viz., Arius maculatus, Arius arius, Arius gagora and Arius jella has been critically examined in respect of a selected list of 20 morphological characters based on examination of a large series of examples collected first hand bY the authors. The samples have been statistically analysed, and the range of variation in respect of each character as exhibited by each species has been delineated. The probability significance test has been made to establish the interspecific relationship. Keywords. Biometric study; Arius species; Ariidae, 1. Introd1lCtioQ The genus Arius Valenciennes, 1840 forms a commercially important group of marine catfishes comprising 21 species from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka. Most of the species are marine often entering estuarine waters and occasionally even in freshwaters such as A. acutirostris, A. burmanicus and A. gagora etc. About 80% of the total catfish landing in our country is of Arius species. Despite the economic value of these fishes, the taxonomic identity of most of the species is in a state of confusion. The main reason for such ambi­ guity is because earlier workers depended mainly on one or two characters which were highly variable interspecifically if not associated with the changes in growth or sex. Day (1877, 1889) gave a comprehensive account of 23 species by using the anal fin counts, relative head length and eye diameter as diagnostic characters, besides the shape and size of teeth bands on the palate. Weber and de Beaufort (1913) also utilised the dentition pattern, besides the shape of the occipital process for separating the species of this genus. Smith (1945)considered the dentition pattern as one ofthe very important taxonomic character and stated, "the most important character for separating the species are teeth." Chandy (1954) framed a key mainly based on the dentition pattern on the palate, for the identification of Arius species present in the NZC of ZSI, Calcutta. Subsequent ichthyologists also relied upon this character (Munro, 1955 ; Smith, 1962; Wongratana and Bathia, 1974 ; Misra, 1976). Taylor (1978) adopted the length of the median 79 80 J R Dhanze and K C Juyarani longitudinal groove on the head, the shape of the bony shield for separating Arius species of western central Atlantic (Fishing Area 31). It may b e seen that for separating the various species of Arius the pattern of teeth patches on the palate still remains to be an unavoidable necessity. How­ ever, it may be indicated that whereas the basic contour, the number and posi­ tion of the patches remain constant, the size, number and nature of the teeth themselves vary highly and alter considerably with age and growth. Earlier ichthyologists seem to be unaware of this fact and established species like A. serratus Day, A. malabaricus Day, A. satparanus Chaudhuri for such variants which are invalid (Jayaram and Dhanze 1978a~ 1981). Based on the number and contour of the patches we have placed the 21 species of Arius in six complexes under three groups. The constituent species of each complex are closely interrelated and some may even prow later either to be synonyms or subspecies. In this paper 'maculatus' complex which has four species (A. maculatus, A. arius, A. gagora and A. jella) (Text-figures 1A~H), have been analysed to determine their interspecific affinities and systematic status. 2. Materials and methods The material for this study is based on 430 specimens collected by the authors during extensive survey tours of the entire eastern. coast and ~ part of southwest 1: A \'. -\' '·:;'i:::·:;·:;;::::!:'i;:~~f:i·l· H Text Figure 1 A.-A. maculatus (dorsal view of head). B.-A. maculatus (dentition). C.-A. gagora (dorsal view of hcadj .; D.-A. gagora (dentition). E.-A. arius (dorsal view of hoad). F.-A. arius (dentition), G.-A. [ella (dorsal view). H. A. jela (dzntition). (Figures A-E, G and H, after Chandy, 1953, Figure F-after Chaudhuri 1916). Biometric studies of the genus Arius 81 coast of India. The specimens presen t in the National Zoological Collections of the Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, have also been examined. Fresh material of species SUC]1 as A. jella and A. maculatus were collected and studied by the second author (KC1) during the FAO consultation, Cochin in 1980. A total of 45 characters were mensurated and of which 20 alone are selected for the statistical analysis. All the measurements were taken with dial calipers to the nearesthalfof a millimeter for the size range upto 150 mm and by measuring tape abcve this size. Taxonomic characters are generally found to intergrade or overlap between closely related species when a large series of specimens are studied. The reliability or otherwise of such characters are to be evaluated. Different methods of measuring intergradation 01' divergence have been proposed (Davenport and Blankinship, 1898; Pearl, 1930; Ginsburg, 1938 ; Simpson and Roe, 1939 ; Amadon, 1949 ; Snedecor, 1956; and Simpson et at 1960). Methods deviced tby Simpson et al (op. ca.) for the comparison of two populations irr-espective of heir taxonomic identity seems to be useful here. The "Student's z-test " to determine the probability value at 95~ confidence intervals have been applied. Before deducing any ilUm<'lical conclusion, a hypothesis was set forth that all the specimens of different populations examined belong to a same species, and the univers .lly used rejection value of 5 per cent was chosen as a criteria for the rejection of tris hypothesis. However, the estabIisf-ment of the significance of a difference between two species by numerical derivation is not in itselfa zoological conclusion. Thus the numerical expressions for each character were further compared or rather standaridized by employing geometrical expressions proposed by Dice and Leraas (1936), and later on adopted with some modification by Hubbs and Perlmutter (1942), Pillay (1951), Hubbs (1952), and WiEterbottom (1980). In this method, for each character the range, mean, one standard deviation and one standard error on each side of the mean were delineated on the graph. The degree of overlap or sepal', tion of the standard deviations in respect of the arithmetic mean of each species Was determined. 3. Results Tables 1-6 and graphs 1-20 present the biometric comparison of the four species with each other for ell the 20 characters selected. 3. 1. A. maculatus vs. A. arius It is seen that excepting the head length, in respect of all other characters the two species have a probability of less than 0 '1% and are significantly different (table 1). From the graphs XIV-XVI, XVIII, XX, Dice diagram A and Bin each, it is seen that the mean of each population as well as standard deviation (S) diverge to a considerable degree, thereby justifying the separate specific status of A. maculatus and A. arius. Both the species have a single large oval patch of teeth on each side of the palate (tex t-figure 1 B, F). Further, the two species can be morpho­ logics lly distinguished by the size and position of the eye The eye diameter is 1&-50% ill Ai maculatus vs. 21·40% in A. arius in the hear: length; 33·30% lS 45·60% i.i the interorbital width and 57·35% vs. 63·30% in snout length, QC Table 1. Biometrical comparison of various morphometric data for A. macula/us vs, A, arius from different localities of east and west IV coast of India, 67 s",Jccimens of A_ macula/us (Thunberg) 81 specimens of A. arius (Hamilton) ------------------ <...., Range Mean X1±SX 8, Range Mean x,±sx S. t P ::tl LHjTL % 18' 60-25' 00 21-1238±'23 1,7656 18'87-24-32 20-7239± -18 1 '3642 1'3796 10--20% ~b ,;:, HBjTL % 15'13-21'58 18' 3448±' 28 1- 9319 13-52-21'50 16-3244± '19 J '4744 6-4097 <0'1% ~ 26' 7961 ± -28 2-0935 24,65-·29'il8 26'6695± -18 1'3996 <60·70% LHjSL % 23-29-30-12 0'4185 '",." HE/SL % 18'75-26'97 n 9738± -28 2'0858 17'77-26'23 21' 0027 ± -21 1'6385 5'7282 <0')% ::> 7280 )'00% :::, PDL/SL ~~ 32-41-39-44 36'3168±'Z3 1- 35-2$-40'45 37'0227± '20 I' J529 - 2-6251 "---. PALj5L % 66,67-75'00 (i9'6174±-~1 2-)284 63-93-73-08 69'8702± '29 2'278 - 0-6025 <0-1% ='\ PPL/SL % 21 '72-30'~S ;~5'9972::!: '36 2"7055 22-40-27'41 24'707&± '1& 1'3965 - 3'28J7 0'1% ') 4,1754 61' 6339± - 3'9983 - 2-5670 <1'00% WDFjWAF % 50'00-/2'22 59'7017±'55 52' 59-69' 70 51 0..... WH/LH % 63'16-84' 09 n'8778±'6,1 ~, 8220 62,60-78' 57 70,1412± '45 3' 51167 3-5376 <0-1% 2 § HH/LH ~~ 55' 26-71' 59 65' 4108± -57 4'2906 52'00-70'00 60' 6015±1' 26 4-7358 5'4483 <0'1% LSjLH % 28: OO~37' 25 32' 3725±'29 2-1.60J 30'00-37'00 33-8687± '21 1-6373 - 4'2560 <0'1% § BDjLH % 14' 7l-22' 22 13'4687±-21 J-5800 16'00-26'67 21' 3634± ' 29 2' 2268 - 7-9n6 <0'1% INwjLH ~~ 17-91-23'86 2.1-2597±'20 1-5291 15' 29-21-77 lS'2822± '18 \ -4063 11'0167 -.o1'/'0 IOWjLH % ,H' 19-67' 39 56'1914±-67 4'5746 41'07-52:75 47'0943± '43 2-7251 12-8595 <0'\ 'io BDjLS % 39'47-66'67 57'3725±'82 6' 2239 43, 24-77 -78 63'3336±J '07 8'3560 4'3693 <0'\% INW/LS % 54-55-76- 67 {'5'9427±-aO
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Training Manual Series No.15/2018
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CMFRI Digital Repository DBTR-H D Indian Council of Agricultural Research Ministry of Science and Technology Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Department of Biotechnology CMFRI Training Manual Series No.15/2018 Training Manual In the frame work of the project: DBT sponsored Three Months National Training in Molecular Biology and Biotechnology for Fisheries Professionals 2015-18 Training Manual In the frame work of the project: DBT sponsored Three Months National Training in Molecular Biology and Biotechnology for Fisheries Professionals 2015-18 Training Manual This is a limited edition of the CMFRI Training Manual provided to participants of the “DBT sponsored Three Months National Training in Molecular Biology and Biotechnology for Fisheries Professionals” organized by the Marine Biotechnology Division of Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI), from 2nd February 2015 - 31st March 2018. Principal Investigator Dr. P. Vijayagopal Compiled & Edited by Dr. P. Vijayagopal Dr. Reynold Peter Assisted by Aditya Prabhakar Swetha Dhamodharan P V ISBN 978-93-82263-24-1 CMFRI Training Manual Series No.15/2018 Published by Dr A Gopalakrishnan Director, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (ICAR-CMFRI) Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute PB.No:1603, Ernakulam North P.O, Kochi-682018, India. 2 Foreword Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI), Kochi along with CIFE, Mumbai and CIFA, Bhubaneswar within the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and Department of Biotechnology of Government of India organized a series of training programs entitled “DBT sponsored Three Months National Training in Molecular Biology and Biotechnology for Fisheries Professionals”.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Article (PDF)
    A KEY FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE CATFISHES OF THE GENUS TACHYSURUS LA CEPEDE, WITH A CATALOGUE OF THE SPECIMENS IN THE COLLECTION OF'THE INDIAN MUSEUl\l (ZOOIJ. SURV.). By MARY CHANDY, Department of Zoology, University of Delhi, Delhi. CONTENTS. Pa.20 Introduotion • 1 Key to the Indian species of the genus Tach.ysuru8 La Cepede 2 Catalogue of the Indian species of Tachysuru8 • 3 Geographical and Ecological Distribution (If the Indian species • • 18 INTRODUCTION. This paper is based on the collections of fishes in the Indian Museum of the genus Tachysurus, family Tachysuridae, order Siluroidea (Nema­ tognathi) and is one of the series of " Notes on the Siluroid Fishes of India, Burma and Ceylon", inaugurated by Dr. S. L. Hora. While working at the Zoologioal Survey of India as M;useum and Reference Collection Officer of the Central Marine Fisheries Research in 1947, Dr. -Hora, Director, Zoological Survey of India, suggested to me, to take up the study of a marine group, material of whioh is available in the collections of the Indian Museum, for the purpose of acquainting myself with the procedure and practice of fish-taxonomy. Accordingly, the genus Tachysurus, speoies of which constitute the most important marine Siluroids, from the commercial and economic points of view, was chosen. Since Day's work (1877) no attempt has been made to bring up-to-date the systematics and distrihution of the speoies in this genus. As the majority of the species are well-known, I have only attempted to give ,a key for identification, synonymy of eaoh speoies, with important notes on taxonomy and distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Check List of the Freshwater Fishes of Uruguay (CLOFF-UY)
    Ichthyological Contributions of PecesCriollos 28: 1-40 (2014) 1 Check List of the Freshwater Fishes of Uruguay (CLOFF-UY). Thomas O. Litz1 & Stefan Koerber2 1 Friedhofstr. 8, 88448 Attenweiler, Germany, [email protected] 2 Friesenstr. 11, 45476 Muelheim, Germany, [email protected] Introduction The purpose of this paper to present the first complete list of freshwater fishes from Uruguay based on the available literature. It would have been impossible to review al papers from the beginning of ichthyology, starting with authors as far back as Larrañaga or Jenyns, who worked the preserved fishes Darwin brought back home from his famous trip around the world. The publications of Nion et al. (2002) and Teixera de Mello et al. (2011) seemed to be a good basis where to start from. Both are not perfect for this purpose but still valuable sources and we highly recommend both as literature for the interested reader. Nion et al. (2002) published a list of both, the freshwater and marine species of Uruguay, only permitting the already knowledgeable to make the difference and recognize the freshwater fishes. Also, some time has passed since then and the systematic of this paper is outdated in many parts. Teixero de Mello et al. (2011) recently presented an excellent collection of the 100 most abundant species with all relevant information and colour pictures, allowing an easy approximate identification. The names used there are the ones currently considered valid. Uncountable papers have been published on the freshwater fishes of Uruguay, some with regional or local approaches, others treating with certain groups of fishes.
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Barcoding of Freshwater Fishes in Matang, Malaysia
    UPTEC X 15 007 Examensarbete 30 hp Juni 2015 DNA barcoding of freshwater fishes in Matang, Malaysia Anna Fogelström Bioinformatics Engineering Program Uppsala University School of Engineering UPTEC X 15 007 Date of issue 2015-06 Author Anna Fogelström Title (English) DNA barcoding of freshwater fishes in Matang, Malaysia Title (Swedish) Abstract DNA barcoding is a fairly recently developed method for species identification at the molecular level, often using a short DNA sequence from the mitochondrial genome. In this study DNA barcoding was applied to establish a framework at University of Malaya for rapid and efficient identification of freshwater fish of Malaysia instead of relying on morphological techniques that require high level of taxonomical knowledge and field experience. The results, when applying the established framework, indicate that the interspecific divergences calculated for our target group are clearly greater than intraspecific variations within the group, i.e. a barcode gap seems to exist. Indications are hence that cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 sequences as barcodes could be effective tools for rapid identification of freshwater fishes and results could provide a good start for researchers at University of Malaya to start build a reference library of barcode sequences. Keywords DNA barcoding, freshwater fish, COI, coxI, BOLD, mitochondrial DNA, Supervisors Amir F Merican University of Malaya Scientific reviewer Mikael Thollesson Uppsala University Project name Sponsors Language Security English Classification ISSN 1401-2138 Supplementary bibliographical information Pages 53 Biology Education Centre Biomedical Center Husargatan 3 Uppsala Box 592 S-75124 Uppsala Tel +46 (0)18 4710000 Fax +46 (0)18 471 4687 DNA barcoding of freshwater fishes in Matang, Malaysia Anna Fogelström Populärvetenskaplig sammanfattning DNA streckkodning (DNA barcoding) har under det senaste decenniet skördat framgång som en effektiv metod för att snabbt artbestämma biologiskt material med hjälp av DNA.
    [Show full text]
  • ARIID Ariu 20 1983 FAO SPECIES IDENTIFICATION SHEETS FAMILY
    click for previous page ARIID Ariu 20 1983 FAO SPECIES IDENTIFICATION SHEETS FAMILY: ARIIDAE FISHING AREA 51 (W. Indian Ocean) Arius arius Hamilton, 1822 OTHER SCIENTIFIC NAMES STILL IN USE: Arius buchanani Day, 1878 Tachysurus arius (Hamilton, 1822) VERNACULAR NAMES: FAO : En - Threadfin sea catfish Fr - Mâchoiron fouet Sp - Bagre filamentoso NATIONAL: DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERS: Dorsal profile of head as a steep slope to first dorsal fin base; 3 pairs of barbels around mouth, the maxillary pair extending to pectoral fins; head shield rugose and granulated from level of posterior margin of orbit; supraoccipital process as long as broad at base, with a median keel, its hind end concave; median longitudinal groove shallow, not reaching to supraoccipital process posteriorly; predorsal plate cresent shaped; premaxillary band of teeth in upper jaw 4 to b (usually 5) times as long as broad, mandibulary band of teeth in lower jaw curved and narrowly interrupted; palate teeth (on roof of mouth) globular, in a single large irregularly ovate patch on each side, not fully formed, with an irregular, anteriorly concave inner edge. First: dorsal fin and pectoral fins each with a strong serrated spine, first dorsal fin ray usually prolonged as a long filament; total anal fin with 20 to 22 rays. Colour: bluish dark to steel grey, the dorsal filament and fin tips tinged with black. Preserved material lighter on bark and sides, posterior margin of pectorals and first dorsal fin black, adipose fin with a well defined black spot. dorsal view of head DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERS OF SIMILAR SPECIES OCCURRING IN THE AREA: Arius jella: anal fin rays 17 or 18 median longitudinal groove maxillary (20 to 22 in A.
    [Show full text]
  • Arius Manillensis Fig
    click for previous page Siluriformes: Ariidae 1827 Order SILURIFORMES ARIIDAE (= TACHYSURIDAE) Sea catfishes (fork-tailed catfishes) by P.J. Kailola iagnostic characters: Medium to large fishes (to 180 cm); body elongate, robust. Head conical to Drounded, depressed. A bony shield covering part of dorsal surface of head, well visible beneath thin skin in most species, concealed by thick skin and muscle tissue in others; smooth, rugose, striate, or granular; in most species, posterior portion (= supraoccipital process) of bony shield extends backwards to meet the predorsal (nuchal) plate. A dorsomedian groove or “fontanel” often apparent, extending from nostrils to supraoccipital process. Eye usually free, rarely covered by skin, and not free in its orbit. Front and rear nostrils close together on each side of snout; rear (posterior) nostril more or less covered by a flap of skin. Mouth terminal to inferior; teeth fine, wedge-shaped, conical and sharp, or granular. Jaw teeth arranged into narrow and broad bands; teeth on palate (= roof of mouth), when present, grouped into large and small patches (patches may be reduced in brooding male fish); teeth sometimes present on parasphenoid bone. Mouth surrounded by 2, 4, or 6 barbels: 1 pair of maxillary barbels (absent in Batrachocephalus), 1 pair of mandibulary barbels (absent in Bagre and Osteogeneiosus), and 1 pair of mental barbels (absent in Batrachocephalus and Osteogeneiosus). Gill membranes joined together, attached to isthmus anteriorly, and with posterior margin free or attached to isthmus (gill openings therefore variously wide or restricted). Branchiostegal rays 5 to 7. Total gill rakers on anterior aspect of first arch ranging from about 9 to more than 50; rakers always present along posterior aspect of third and fourth arches, sometimes on first and second arches.
    [Show full text]
  • Tachysurus Atroplumbeus Fowler, 1931 / None. FAO Names: En - Softhead Sea Catfish; Fr - Mâchoiron Petit-Gueule; Sp - Bagre Tumbeló
    click for previous page 846 Bony Fishes Arius rugispinis Valenciennes, 1840 Frequent synonyms / misidentifications: Arius rugispinnis Valenciennes, 1840; Hexanematichthys rugispinis (Valenciennes, 1840); Tachysurus atroplumbeus Fowler, 1931 / None. FAO names: En - Softhead sea catfish; Fr - Mâchoiron petit-gueule; Sp - Bagre tumbeló. premaxillary and palatine tooth patches Diagnostic characters: Head flattened above; exposed head shield well visible, rugose, short, not extend- ing forward to eyes, its supraoccipital process long, moderately narrow, and tapering posteriorly; predorsal plate short, crescent-shaped. Snout long, rounded transversely.Mouth inferior. Teeth on palate villiform in 2 small rounded to elliptical patches widely separated from each other.Three pairs of barbels (1 maxillary and 2 mental) around mouth, the maxillary barbels reaching to pectoral fins. No gill rakers on rear surfaces of first 2 arches; total number of anterior gill rakers on first arch 14 to 17; anterior gill rak- ers on second arch 16 to 20.Dorsal fin with a strong, serrated, erectile spine.A large well-developed adipose fin present. Pectoral fins with a strong, serrated, erectile spine; soft rays in pectoral fins 11 or 12. Number of vertebrae free from Weberian complex 48 to 51. Colour: grey to reddish brown above, lighter below. Size: Maximum 45 cm; common to 30 cm. Habitat, biology,and fisheries: Found chiefly in turbid waters of estuaries and in coastal waters around river mouths.Feeds heavily on crabs, am- phipods, and shrimps;gonads develop at sizes of 12 cm or less; 54 eggs, each 10 mm in a 27 cm fe- male; in eastern Venezuela reproduction seems to occur during the dry season.
    [Show full text]
  • ARIID Ariu 2 1983 (=ARIID Ari 2) (Fishing Areas 57/71) FAO SPECIES IDENTIFICATION SHEETS FAMILY: ARIIDAE FISHING AREA 51 (W
    click for previous page ARIID Ariu 2 1983 (=ARIID Ari 2) (Fishing Areas 57/71) FAO SPECIES IDENTIFICATION SHEETS FAMILY: ARIIDAE FISHING AREA 51 (W. Indian Ocean) Arius maculatus (Thunberg, 1792) OTHER SCIENTIFIC NAMES STILL IN USE: Arius falcarius Richardson. 1844 Taehysurus maculatus (Thunberg, 1792) VERNACULAR NAMES: FAO : En - Spotted catfish Fr - Machoiron tacheté Sp - Bagre manchado NATIONAL: DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERS: Dorsal profile of head as a steep slope to first dorsal fin base; 3 pairs of barbels around mouth, the maxillary pair extending to pectoral fin base (but becoming shorter in older specimens); head shield rugose and granulated from middle of or near posterior margin of orbit to supraoccipital process; supraoccipital process longer than broad at base with a median keel, its hind end nearly straight; median longitudinal groove deep, long, reaching base of supra- occipital process; predorsal plate V-shaped; premaxillary band of teeth on upper jaw 4 to 6 times as long as broad, mandibulary band of teeth on lower jaw deeply curved and narrowly interrupted; palate teeth granular or molarlike. in a single large, fully elliptical or semioval patch on each side (size of patch may vary greatly with age, in juveniles the granular teeth are few and sparse, the patch small and far behind the jaws). First dorsal fin and pectoral fins each with a strong spine, first dorsal fin ray often produced into a long filament; total anal fin rays 19 to 22. Colour: dark brown above, sides grey and belly whitish with dorsal view of head dusky spots, the whole body with a bright sheen.
    [Show full text]
  • Corydoras Arcuatus) Ecological Risk Screening Summary
    Skunk Corydoras (Corydoras arcuatus) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, July 2014 Revised, February 2016, November 2017 Web Version, 6/26/2018 Photo: Hung-Jou Chen. Licensed under Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 2.0. Available: https://www.flickr.com/photos/hung-jou_chen/5479397338/in/photolist-bdZxnp-6VCo4D- bdZyRx-cGum27-cWnDUQ-6VCo3p-dXrxfD-7wFX52-4dNv5x-8DAU5p-7eS2Ku-7RVp2j- 4Hz6iS-5CDn5E-UBcd7-UBcD7-6NBtKF-vCdKeM-9mckVU. (July 30, 2014). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Froese and Pauly (2014): “South America: Upper Amazon River basin.” 1 From Britto et al. (2009): “In this area, Corydoras arcuatus shows the largest range of distribution, with records from several tributary river basins of the Rio Solimões system (e.g., Río Caquetá, Río Napo, Rio Purus, Rio Tefé, Río Ucayali, Río Yavari; Nijssen and Isbrücker, 1980[b], 1986; Castro, 1987; Britto, 2007; Fig. 4, circles [in source material]).” Status in the United States From Vijayakumar et al. (2012): “Observed the sound production in catfish, Corydoras arcuatus and C. reticulatus from US waters.” [More specific location information was not given.] Means of Introductions in the United States No further information was found pertaining to the potential population that was mentioned by Vijayakumar et al. (2012). No other records of introduction in the United States were found. Remarks No additional remarks. 2 Biology and Ecology Taxonomic Hierarchy and Taxonomic Standing According to Eschmeyer et al. (2017), Corydoras arcuatus Elwin
    [Show full text]
  • (Hamilton, 1822) from Hooghly-Matlah Estuary, West Bengal
    Indian Journal of Geo Marine Sciences Vol. 50 (04), April 2021, pp. 302-309 Growth, mortality and stock assessment of Arius arius (Hamilton, 1822) from Hooghly-Matlah estuary, West Bengal B B Chirwatkara, S K Das*,a, D Bhaktab, T S Nagesha & S Beheraa aDepartment of Fisheries Resource Management, Faculty of Fishery Sciences, WBUAFS, Chakgaria, Kolkata, West Bengal – 700 094, India bICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Monirampore, Kolkata, West Bengal – 700 120, India *[E-mail: [email protected]] Received 03 January 2018; revised 09 August 2020 The growth, mortality, and stock assessment of Arius arius were estimated based on monthly length-frequency analysis data collected from the Hooghly-Matlah estuary of West Bengal, India from April 2017 to March 2018. The estimated -1 growth parameters were as L∞ = 278 mm, K = 0.97 yr , and t0 = -0.0889 years. The different mortality coefficients Z, M, and F were obtained as 5.25 yr-1, 1.79 yr-1, and 3.46 yr-1, respectively. The calculated exploitation ratio (E) was found as 0.66, and the M/K value as 1.845 indicating overexploitation of the fish. The recruitment was found throughout the year with two peaks and the value of Lc was found at 56.00 mm. The estimated virtual population analysis (VPA) indicated that the highest fishing mortality (F) of 3.4499 was observed at the 190-200 mm length class, followed by 3.2393 from the 180-190 mm length class. The fishery was found at the overexploitation level and measures are needed to regulate it for promoting its sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • Revision of Genus Steindachneridion (Siluriformes: Pimelodidae)
    Neotropical Ichthyology, 3(4):607-623, 2005 Copyright © 2005 Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia Revision of genus Steindachneridion (Siluriformes: Pimelodidae) Julio Cesar Garavello After several years collecting in the type-localities and studying representative samples of genus Steindachneridion Eigen- mann & Eigenmann, 1919 from Brazilian and foreign museums, a taxonomic revision of the Recent species of the genus is presented, including the description of a new species from the rio Iguaçu, above the great falls. Steindachneridion species are large sized fishes, reaching 1000 mm total length or more, and sharing some anatomical characters that, at least tentatively, support the monophyly of the genus. In addition to the general features found in the Pimelodidae, the species S. amblyurum (Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1888), S. parahybae (Steindachner, 1877), S. doceanum (Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1889), S. scrip- tum (Miranda Ribeiro, 1918), S. punctatum (Miranda Ribeiro, 1918), and S. melanodermatum, new species, share the shape of the vomer tooth plates, six to eight branched rays in the dorsal-fin, and a low number of gill-rakers. All species, except fossil ones, are redescribed and a key for their identification is provided. Após vários anos coletando nas localidades tipo e estudando amostras representativas de museus brasileiros e estrangeiros, é apresentada uma revisão taxonômica das espécies Recentes do gênero Steindachneridion Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1919, incluindo a descrição de uma espécie nova da bacia do rio Iguaçu, acima das Cataratas do Iguaçu. Em comum, os adultos de todas as espécies apresentam grande porte, até 1000 mm ou mais de comprimento padrão e compartilham alguns caracteres anatômicos discutidos neste estudo, que pelo menos preliminarmente suportam o monofiletismo do gênero.
    [Show full text]
  • Hardhead Catfish Ariopsis Felis Contributor: Pearse Webster
    Hardhead Catfish Ariopsis felis Contributor: Pearse Webster DESCRIPTION Taxonomy and Basic Description Ariopsis felis is one of two species of marine catfish, both in the family Ariidae, common to coastal South Carolina estuarine and marine waters. The common name, hardhead catfish, is derived from the presence of a hard, bony plate extending rearward toward the dorsal fin from a line between the catfish’s eyes. The head is moderately flattened with the upper jaw forming a broad arc. One thread-like barbel is located on either side of the mouth just above the rear corners and two pairs of white barbels are located on the chin. The three forward-most fins (two pectoral and the first dorsal) possess very stout, but sharp, serrated spines which contribute to this animal’s poor reputation. The rear dorsal fin is fleshy and black, unlike the other fins, which are membranous and translucent. The back of this fish is generally silvery with blue, green or brownish tones, while the belly is generally white. The hardhead catfish has been reported at sizes up to 70 cm (27 inches) (Acero 2002) but is more commonly found at sizes up to 36 cm (14 inches) in South Carolina’s coastal waters (pers. obs.). The second species, Bagre marina, the gafftopsail catfish, is readily distinguished from the hardhead by long threadlike extensions from its dorsal and pectoral fins and more strap like, rather than rounded, barbels extending from the upper jaw. Status The hardhead catfish currently has no special protection under state or federal regulation. On occasion, mass mortalities of this species have been observed along the Gulf coast and it appears to be a declining species in South Carolina.
    [Show full text]