DOCSLIB.ORG

Actinopterygian Relationships IV Biology of Fishes 10.11.12

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Actinopterygian Relationships IV Biology of Fishes 10.11.12 Actinopterygian Relationships IV Biology of Fishes 10.11.12 Overview Presentation Topics Review (Actinopterygian Relationships III) Actinopterygian Relationships IV : Percomorpha Actinopterygian Relationships Actinopterygian Relationships Actinopterygian Relationships Paracanthopterygii (cods, anglers, cavefishes, relatives) Acanthopterygii (spiny-finned fishes) - Mugilomorpha (mullets) - Atherinomorpha (silversides, flyingfishes, liverbearers and rel.) -Percomorpha (perch-shaped fishes) Acanthopterygii Actinopterygian Relationships Acanthopterygii (spiny-finned fishes) Most diverse group of bony fishes; ~15,000 species Two major synapomorphies Ascending process – dorsal extension of premaxilla Most highly developed pharyngeal dentition and function based on new muscle and bone attachments Ctenoid scales Physoclistous gas bladder 2 dorsal fins (1 spiny-rayed, 1 soft-rayed) Pelvic and anal fin spines Pelvic fins forward, pectoral fins laterally positioned Acanthopterygii Actinopterygian Relationships Acanthopterygii (spiny-finned fishes) Most advanced fishes, dominate shallow productive habitats of marine and many freshwater environments Controversial phylogeny (follow Nelson 2006) Actinopterygian Relationships Paracanthopterygii (cods, anglers, cavefishes, relatives) Acanthopterygii (spiny-finned fishes) - Mugilomorpha (mullets) - Atherinomorpha (silversides, flyingfishes, liverbearers and rel.) -Percomorpha (perch-shaped fishes) pumpkinseed sunfish Actinopterygian Relationships Actinopterygian Relationships Percomorpha (“perch-shaped” fishes) Most advanced clade of fishes ~13,000 species; primarily marine, many successful freshwater Primary synapomorphy is anteriorly placed pelvic girdle attached to pectoral girdle directly or via ligament Pelvic fin with anterior spine and 5 soft rays (typically) Percomorpha (basal groups) Stephanoberyciformes (whalefishes) Beryciformes (squirrelfishes) Zeiformes (dories) Gasterosteiformes (sticklebacks, seahorses) Synbranchiformes (swamp eels) Scorpaeniformes (scorpionfishes, sculpins, relatives) Percomorpha Percomorpha (basal groups) whalefishes dories squirrelfishes swamp eels seahorses, sticklebacks scorpionfishes, sculpins Percomorpha Stephanoberyciformes (whalefishes) ~75 species Deepsea marine fishes Primitive percomorphs, more caudal fin rays (18-19) than other percomorphs (typically 17) Percomorpha Beryciformes (squirrelfishes) ~144 species Nocturnal marine fishes Large eyes, head; also primitive caudal fin ray number (18- 19) Includes commercially important orange roughy (mature in 20-30 years, live past 150 years) Percomorpha Zeiformes (dories) ~75 species Primitive marine percomorphs Protrusible mouths Not well-classified in percomorpha based on morphologies Percomorpha Gasterosteiformes (sticklebacks, seashorses) ~280 species, primarily marine, small fishes Dermal armor plates, small mouths Sticklebacks very intensely studied (behavior, physiology, ecology, evolution) Unique reproductive behavior – “pregnant males” Percomorpha Synbranchiformes (swamp eels) ~100 species Primarily freshwater, eel-like fishes Air-breathers Lack most fins, in some cases all fins Invasive species from pet trade Percomorpha Scorpaeniformes (scorpionfishes, sculpins, relatives) ~1500 species, primarily marine fishes Phylogenetic placement in percomorpha debated Many lack scales, possess numerous spines Venomous lionfishes and stonefishes Freshwater sculpins Lumpfish (Cyclopterus) is most advanced Percomorpha (advanced groups) Perciformes (perch-like fishes) Pleuronectiformes (flatfishes) Tetraodontiformes (puffers, triggerfishes, relatives) Percomorpha Percomorpha (advanced groups) Perciformes Pleuronectiformes Tetraodontiformes triggerfish yellow perch parrotfish flounders & halibuts ocean sunfish Percomorpha Perciformes (perch-like fishes) Largest order of vertebrates – 160 families and over 10,000 species; more than 2/3 of all fishes Rapid evolution ~20 million years Marine (gobies, wrasses, seabasses) and freshwater success (cichlids, croakers, perches/darters) Some of the most recognizable fishes Perciformes Percomorpha Pleuronectiformes (flounders, halibuts, relatives) Asymmetrical morphology – both eyes on one side of head Teeth, scales, fins, pigmentation differ between sides Benthic, carnivorous, primarily marine; ~680 species Important food fishes Percomorpha Tetraodontiformes (puffers, triggerfishes, relatives) “four teeth”; many lack true teeth (possess modified jaw bone) Most derived fishes, reduced bones, fins, morphology; ~360 species Trigger mechanism in trigger/filefishes Cartilaginous elements re-evolved (“come full circle”) tetraodotoxin .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Field Guide to the Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida
    Field Guide to the Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida Schofield, P. J., J. A. Morris, Jr. and L. Akins Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for their use by the United States goverment. Pamela J. Schofield, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey Florida Integrated Science Center 7920 NW 71st Street Gainesville, FL 32653 [email protected] James A. Morris, Jr., Ph.D. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research 101 Pivers Island Road Beaufort, NC 28516 [email protected] Lad Akins Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF) 98300 Overseas Highway Key Largo, FL 33037 [email protected] Suggested Citation: Schofield, P. J., J. A. Morris, Jr. and L. Akins. 2009. Field Guide to Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 92. Field Guide to Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida Pamela J. Schofield, Ph.D. James A. Morris, Jr., Ph.D. Lad Akins NOAA, National Ocean Service National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 92. September 2009 United States Department of National Oceanic and National Ocean Service Commerce Atmospheric Administration Gary F. Locke Jane Lubchenco John H. Dunnigan Secretary Administrator Assistant Administrator Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................ i Methods .....................................................................................................ii
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny Classification Additional Readings Clupeomorpha and Ostariophysi
    Teleostei - AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education http://www.accessscience.com/content/teleostei/680400 (http://www.accessscience.com/) Article by: Boschung, Herbert Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Gardiner, Brian Linnean Society of London, Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, United Kingdom. Publication year: 2014 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.680400 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.680400) Content Morphology Euteleostei Bibliography Phylogeny Classification Additional Readings Clupeomorpha and Ostariophysi The most recent group of actinopterygians (rayfin fishes), first appearing in the Upper Triassic (Fig. 1). About 26,840 species are contained within the Teleostei, accounting for more than half of all living vertebrates and over 96% of all living fishes. Teleosts comprise 517 families, of which 69 are extinct, leaving 448 extant families; of these, about 43% have no fossil record. See also: Actinopterygii (/content/actinopterygii/009100); Osteichthyes (/content/osteichthyes/478500) Fig. 1 Cladogram showing the relationships of the extant teleosts with the other extant actinopterygians. (J. S. Nelson, Fishes of the World, 4th ed., Wiley, New York, 2006) 1 of 9 10/7/2015 1:07 PM Teleostei - AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education http://www.accessscience.com/content/teleostei/680400 Morphology Much of the evidence for teleost monophyly (evolving from a common ancestral form) and relationships comes from the caudal skeleton and concomitant acquisition of a homocercal tail (upper and lower lobes of the caudal fin are symmetrical). This type of tail primitively results from an ontogenetic fusion of centra (bodies of vertebrae) and the possession of paired bracing bones located bilaterally along the dorsal region of the caudal skeleton, derived ontogenetically from the neural arches (uroneurals) of the ural (tail) centra.
    [Show full text]
  • New Insights on the Sister Lineage of Percomorph Fishes with an Anchored Hybrid Enrichment Dataset
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 110 (2017) 27–38 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev New insights on the sister lineage of percomorph fishes with an anchored hybrid enrichment dataset ⇑ Alex Dornburg a, , Jeffrey P. Townsend b,c,d, Willa Brooks a, Elizabeth Spriggs b, Ron I. Eytan e, Jon A. Moore f,g, Peter C. Wainwright h, Alan Lemmon i, Emily Moriarty Lemmon j, Thomas J. Near b,k a North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, NC, USA b Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology and Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA c Program in Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA d Department of Biostatistics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06510, USA e Marine Biology Department, Texas A&M University at Galveston, Galveston, TX 77554, USA f Florida Atlantic University, Wilkes Honors College, Jupiter, FL 33458, USA g Florida Atlantic University, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, Fort Pierce, FL 34946, USA h Department of Evolution & Ecology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA i Department of Scientific Computing, Florida State University, 400 Dirac Science Library, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA j Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, 319 Stadium Drive, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA k Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA article info abstract Article history: Percomorph fishes represent over 17,100 species, including several model organisms and species of eco- Received 12 April 2016 nomic importance. Despite continuous advances in the resolution of the percomorph Tree of Life, resolu- Revised 22 February 2017 tion of the sister lineage to Percomorpha remains inconsistent but restricted to a small number of Accepted 25 February 2017 candidate lineages.
    [Show full text]
  • Acanthopterygii, Bone, Eurypterygii, Osteology, Percomprpha
    Research in Zoology 2014, 4(2): 29-42 DOI: 10.5923/j.zoology.20140402.01 Comparative Osteology of the Jaws in Representatives of the Eurypterygian Fishes Yazdan Keivany Department of Natural Resources (Fisheries Division), Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, 84156-83111, Iran Abstract The osteology of the jaws in representatives of 49 genera in 40 families of eurypterygian fishes, including: Aulopiformes, Myctophiformes, Lampridiformes, Polymixiiformes, Percopsiformes, Mugiliformes, Atheriniformes, Beloniformes, Cyprinodontiformes, Stephanoberyciformes, Beryciformes, Zeiformes, Gasterosteiformes, Synbranchiformes, Scorpaeniformes (including Dactylopteridae), and Perciformes (including Elassomatidae) were studied. Generally, in this group, the upper jaw consists of the premaxilla, maxilla, and supramaxilla. The lower jaw consists of the dentary, anguloarticular, retroarticular, and sesamoid articular. In higher taxa, the premaxilla bears ascending, articular, and postmaxillary processes. The maxilla usually bears a ventral and a dorsal articular process. The supramaxilla is present only in some taxa. The dentary is usually toothed and bears coronoid and posteroventral processes. The retroarticular is small and located at the posteroventral corner of the anguloarticular. Keywords Acanthopterygii, Bone, Eurypterygii, Osteology, Percomprpha following method for clearing and staining bone and 1. Introduction cartilage provided in reference [18]. A camera lucida attached to a Wild M5 dissecting stereomicroscope was used Despite the introduction of modern techniques such as to prepare the drawings. The bones in the first figure of each DNA sequencing and barcoding, osteology, due to its anatomical section are arbitrarily shaded and labeled and in reliability, still plays an important role in the systematic the others are shaded in a consistent manner (dark, medium, study of fishes and comprises a major percent of today’s and clear) to facilitate comparison among the taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosomal Evolution in Large Pelagic Oceanic Apex Predators, the Barracudas (Sphyraenidae, Percomorpha)
    Chromosomal evolution in large pelagic oceanic apex predators, the barracudas (Sphyraenidae, Percomorpha) R.X. Soares1, M.B. Cioffi2, L.A.C. Bertollo2, A.T. Borges1, G.W.W.F. Costa1 and W.F. Molina1 1Departamento de Biologia Celular e Genética, Centro de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Campus Universitário, Natal, RN, Brasil 2Departamento de Genética e Evolução, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brasil Corresponding author: W.F. Molina E-mail: [email protected] Genet. Mol. Res. 16 (2): gmr16029644 Received February 14, 2017 Accepted March 8, 2017 Published April 20, 2017 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.4238/gmr16029644 Copyright © 2017 The Authors. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) 4.0 License. ABSTRACT. Sphyraena (barracudas) represents the only genus of the Sphyraenidae family and includes 27 species distributed into the tropical and subtropical oceanic regions. These pelagic predators can reach large sizes and, thus, attracting significant interest from commercial and sport fishing. Evolutionary data for this fish group, as well its chromosomal patterns, are very incipient. In the present study, the species Sphyraena guachancho, S. barracuda, and S. picudilla were analyzed under conventional (Giemsa staining, C-banding, and Ag- NOR) and molecular (CMA3 banding, and in situ hybridization with 18S rDNA, 5S rDNA, and telomeric probes) cytogenetic methods. The karyotypic patterns contrast with the current phylogenetic relationships proposed for this group, showing by themselves to be distinct among closely related species, and similar among less related ones. This indicates homoplasic characteristics, with similar karyotype patterns Genetics and Molecular Research 16 (2): gmr16029644 R.X.
    [Show full text]
  • Percomorph Phylogeny: a Survey of Acanthomorphs and a New Proposal
    BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 52(1): 554-626, 1993 PERCOMORPH PHYLOGENY: A SURVEY OF ACANTHOMORPHS AND A NEW PROPOSAL G. David Johnson and Colin Patterson ABSTRACT The interrelationships of acanthomorph fishes are reviewed. We recognize seven mono- phyletic terminal taxa among acanthomorphs: Lampridiformes, Polymixiiformes, Paracan- thopterygii, Stephanoberyciformes, Beryciformes, Zeiformes, and a new taxon named Smeg- mamorpha. The Percomorpha, as currently constituted, are polyphyletic, and the Perciformes are probably paraphyletic. The smegmamorphs comprise five subgroups: Synbranchiformes (Synbranchoidei and Mastacembeloidei), Mugilomorpha (Mugiloidei), Elassomatidae (Elas- soma), Gasterosteiformes, and Atherinomorpha. Monophyly of Lampridiformes is justified elsewhere; we have found no new characters to substantiate the monophyly of Polymixi- iformes (which is not in doubt) or Paracanthopterygii. Stephanoberyciformes uniquely share a modification of the extrascapular, and Beryciformes a modification of the anterior part of the supraorbital and infraorbital sensory canals, here named Jakubowski's organ. Our Zei- formes excludes the Caproidae, and characters are proposed to justify the monophyly of the group in that restricted sense. The Smegmamorpha are thought to be monophyletic principally because of the configuration of the first vertebra and its intermuscular bone. Within the Smegmamorpha, the Atherinomorpha and Mugilomorpha are shown to be monophyletic elsewhere. Our Gasterosteiformes includes the syngnathoids and the Pegasiformes
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Barcoding on Cardinalfishes (Apogonidae) of Thoothukudi Coast
    Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(8): 1293-1306 International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 8 Number 08 (2019) Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.808.153 DNA Barcoding on Cardinalfishes (Apogonidae) of Thoothukudi Coast R. Rajeshkannan1*, J. Jaculine Pereira2, K. Karal Marx3, P. Jawahar2, D. Kiruthiga Lakshmi2 and Devivaraprasad Reddy4 1Dr. M.G.R. Fisheries College and Research Institute, Ponneri – 601204, India 2Fisheries College and Research Institute, Thoothukudi – 628008, India 3Institute of Fisheries Post Graduate Studies, OMR Campus, Vanniyanchavadi–603103, India 4Fisheries, Y.S.R. Horticulture University, Andhra Pradesh, India *Corresponding author ABSTRACT Cardinalfishes belongs to the family, Apogonidae is cryptic in nature that often shows taxonomic ambiguity through conventional taxonomy. It is globally accepted that mitochondrial DNA marker i.e., Cytochrome C Oxidase (COI) can be used to resolve these taxonomic uncertainties. In the present study, the DNA barcode was developed using COI K e yw or ds marker for the two species of cardinalfishes (Archamia bleekeri and Ostorhinchus fleurieu) Apogonids, DNA collected from Thoothukudi coast. Results showed that the distance values between the barcoding, two species are higher than that of within the species. The Cytochrome C Oxidase subunit Cardinalfishes, Gulf of I (COI) gene showed more number of transitional pairs (Si) than transversional pairs (Sv) Mannar, Tuticorin, Conservation with a ratio of 2.4. The average distance values between A. bleekeri and O. fleurieu were 3.825, 4.704, 5.145, 7.390, 8.148, 7.187 and distance values among the A.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology, Stock Status and Management Summaries for Selected Fish Species in South-Western Australia
    Fisheries Research Report No. 242, 2013 Biology, stock status and management summaries for selected fish species in south-western Australia Claire B. Smallwood, S. Alex Hesp and Lynnath E. Beckley Fisheries Research Division Western Australian Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories PO Box 20 NORTH BEACH, Western Australia 6920 Correct citation: Smallwood, C. B.; Hesp, S. A.; and Beckley, L. E. 2013. Biology, stock status and management summaries for selected fish species in south-western Australia. Fisheries Research Report No. 242. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. 180pp. Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Fisheries Western Australia. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Department of Fisheries Western Australia does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication. Fish illustrations Illustrations © R. Swainston / www.anima.net.au We dedicate this guide to the memory of our friend and colleague, Ben Chuwen Department of Fisheries 3rd floor SGIO Atrium 168 – 170 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000 Telephone: (08) 9482 7333 Facsimile: (08) 9482 7389 Website: www.fish.wa.gov.au ABN: 55 689 794 771 Published by Department of Fisheries, Perth, Western Australia. Fisheries Research Report No. 242, March 2013. ISSN: 1035 - 4549 ISBN: 978-1-921845-56-7 ii Fisheries Research Report No.242, 2013 Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seven “Super Orders” • 7) Superorder Acanthopterygii • ‘Three ‘Series’ • 1) Mugilomorpha – Mullets – 66 Species, Economically Important; Leap from Water.??
    • Superorder Acanthopterygii • Mugilomorpha – Order Mugiliformes: Mullets • Atherinomorpha ACANTHOPTERYGII = Mugilomorpha (mullets) + – Order Atheriniformes: Silversides and rainbowfishes Atherinomorpha (silversides) + Percomorpha – Order Beloniformes: Needlefish, Halfbeaks, and Flyingfishes – Order Cyprinodontiformes: Killifishes,plays, swordtails + ricefishes (Medaka) • Series Percomorpha – ?Order Stephanoberciformes: Pricklefish, whalefish – ?Order Bercyformes: Squirrelfishes, redfishes, Pineapple fishes, flashlight fishes, Roughies, Spinyfins, Fangtooths – ?Order Zeiformes: Dories, Oreos, . – Order Gasterosteiformes: Pipefish and seahorses, sticklebacks – Order Synbranchiformes: Swampeels – Order Scorpaeniformes: Scorpianfish – Order Perciformes: Many many – Order Pleuronectiformes: Flounders and soles – Order Tetraodontiformes: Triggers and puffers etc Acanthopterygii Phylogeny – Johnson and Wiley Seven “Super Orders” • 7) Superorder Acanthopterygii • ‘Three ‘Series’ • 1) Mugilomorpha – mullets – 66 species, economically important; leap from water.?? 1 Seven “Super Orders” Seven “Super Orders” • 7) Superorder Acanthopterygii - 3 ‘Series’ • 2) Atherinomorpha – Surface of water. • 7) Superorder Acanthopterygii – 13,500 • a) Atheriniformes - silversides, rainbow fish, species in 251 families. 285 spp.; • b) Beloniformes = needlefishes, flying fishes, include Medakas (ricefish Oryzias - used in 3) Percomorpha 12,000 species with labs; first to have sex in space); and anteriorly placed pelvic girdle that is • c) Cyprinodontiformes = Poeciliids
    [Show full text]
  • Inner Workings: Reeling in Answers to the “Freshwater Fish Paradox”
    INNER WORKINGS Reeling in answers to the “freshwater fish paradox” INNER WORKINGS Amy McDermott, Science Writer Some 500 species of cichlid fish dart through the turbid and freshwater environments seems paradoxical—and in- yellowish waters of East Africa’s Lake Victoria; little insec- deed, has been labeled the “freshwater fish paradox.” tivores fin over the pebbles near shore, while larger Ichthyologists working in the 1970s first theorized that predatory species cruise deeper water. Although the freshwater fish might evolve faster, driving up their rela- oceans are the evocative epicenters of fish biodiversity tive diversity, because they live in geographically frag- worldwide, freshwater streams, rivers, and lakes like mented tributaries with more opportunities for evolution Victoria actually hold just as much fish diversity. Of by isolation than in continuous seas (3, 4). the roughly 30,000 known fish species, about half live But new research by evolutionary biologist Eliz- in freshwater (1). The longstanding question is why. abeth Miller, now a postdoc at the University of Most biologists expect the vast oceans to be more Oklahoma in Norman, and others suggests there’s diverse—as a general rule, larger areas tend to contain more nuance to the story. Rates of fish evolution in more species (2). With some 97% of Earth’swatervolume salt and freshwater may not be so different after all. locked up in the sea, and just 0.0093% in habitable fresh- Some species, most prominently the fast-evolving water, the even split of fish species richness between marine cichlids, may account for the perceived discrepancy. The explosive adaptive radiation of cichlids—such as the colorful male and drab female of the species Lithochromis rufus native to Lake Victoria—could help explain the comparable diversity of freshwater and saltwater fishes.
    [Show full text]
  • From Scales to Armour: Scale Losses and Trunk Bony Plate Gains in Ray
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.09.288886; this version posted September 9, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 1 From scales to armour: scale losses and trunk bony plate gains in ray- 2 finned fishes 3 Alexandre Lemopoulos1, Juan I. Montoya-Burgos1,2,3 4 1. Department of Genetics and Evolution. University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland 5 2. iGE3 institute of Genetics and Genomics of Geneva 6 3. E-mail: [email protected] ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9080-9820 7 Article type : Letter 8 Running title: Tegument cover transitions along actinopterygian evolution 9 Keywords: Tegument, actinopterygians, gene network, skeleton evolution, functional 10 innovation, ancestral state, phylogeny 11 12 Abstract 13 Actinopterygians (ray-finned fishes) are the most diversified group of vertebrates and are 14 characterized by a variety of protective structures covering their tegument, the evolution of 15 which has intrigued biologists for decades. Paleontological records showed that the first 16 mineralized vertebrate skeleton was composed of dermal bony plates covering the body, 17 including odontogenic and skeletogenic components. Later in evolution, the exoskeleton of 18 actinopterygian's trunk was composed of scale structures. Although scales are nowadays a 19 widespread tegument cover, some contemporary lineages do not have scales but bony 20 plates covering their trunk, whereas other lineages are devoid of any such structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Geography and Life History Traits Account for the Accumulation of Cryptic Diversity Among Indo-West Pacific Coral Reef Fishes
    Vol. 583: 179–193, 2017 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published November 16 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12316 Mar Ecol Prog Ser OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Geography and life history traits account for the accumulation of cryptic diversity among Indo-West Pacific coral reef fishes Nicolas Hubert1,*, Agnès Dettai2, Patrice Pruvost3, Corinne Cruaud4, Michel Kulbicki5, Robert F. Myers6, Philippe Borsa5 1Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD), UMR 226, Institut des sciences de l’évolution de Montpellier (ISEM), CNRS/IRD/UM/CIRAD, Montpellier, France 2Muséum national d’histoire naturelle (MNHN), Institut de systématique et evolution (ISYEB), MNHN/CNRS/EPHE/UPMC-UMR 7205, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France 3Muséum national d’histoire naturelle (MNHN), UMR 207, Biologie des organismes et écosystèmes aquatiques (BOREA), MNHN/CNRS/UPMC/IRD, Paris, France 4Genoscope, CEA, DRF, IG, Evry, France 5Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD), UMR 250 Ecologie marine tropicale des océans Pacifique et Indien/LabEx Corail, Nouméa, New Caledonia 6Seaclicks/Coral Graphics, Wellington, FL, USA ABSTRACT: Indo-West Pacific coral reef fishes form speciose ecological communities. A biogeo- graphically meaningful interpretation of diversity patterns in this region requires accurate inven- tories of species. Previous studies have suggested that biogeographic scenarios for Indo-West Pacific coral reef fishes are compromised by an unacknowledged yet substantial amount of cryptic diversity. DNA barcoding, the use of a mitochondrial gene as an internal species tag for species identification, has opened new perspectives on global biodiversity. The present study, based on the largest DNA barcode reference library produced to date for Indo-West Pacific coral reef fishes, sheds new light on the extent of cryptic diversity and its evolutionary origin.
    [Show full text]