Carasobarbus
| Notice: | This page is derived from the original publication listed below, whose author(s) should always be credited. Further contributors may edit and improve the content of this page and, consequently, need to be credited as well (see page history). Any assessment of factual correctness requires a careful review of the original article as well as of subsequent contributions.
If you are uncertain whether your planned contribution is correct or not, we suggest that you use the associated discussion page instead of editing the page directly. This page should be cited as follows (rationale):
Citation formats to copy and paste
BibTeX: @article{Borkenhagen2013ZooKeys339, RIS/ Endnote: TY - JOUR Wikipedia/ Citizendium: <ref name="Borkenhagen2013ZooKeys339">{{Citation See also the citation download page at the journal. |
Ordo: Cypriniformes
Familia: Cyprinidae
Name
Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 – Wikispecies link – Pensoft Profile
- Carasobarbus Karaman 1971[1]: 230; type species: Systomus luteus Heckel, 1843, by original designation, also by monotypy.
- Kosswigobarbus Karaman 1971[1]: 239; type species: Cyclocheilichthys kosswigi Ladiges, 1960, by original designation, also by monotypy.
- Pseudotor Karaman 1971[1]: 229; type species: Barbus fritschii Günther, 1874, by original designation.
Diagnosis
Medium-sized cyprinids with an ossified, smooth last unbranched dorsal-fin ray; 9 or 10 branched dorsal-fin rays and 6 branched anal-fin rays; large, shield-shaped scales with numerous parallel radii; the lateral line with 25 to 39 scales; the pharyngeal teeth hooked at their tips, their count being 2.3.5-5.3.2 or 2.3.4-4.3.2; 1 or 2 pairs of barbels present.
Carasobarbus species are evolutionarily hexaploid (Machordom and Doadrio 2001[2], Gorshkova et al. 2002[3], Leggatt and Iwama 2003[4], Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010[5]).
Remarks and discussion
‘Barbus’ grypus, Mesopotamichthys sharpeyi and ‘Barbus’ reinii from the Middle East have five branched rays in the anal fin. The hexaploid species from Africa (Labeobarbus and Varicorhinus), which are the sister group to Carasobarbus and the other species from the Middle East (Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010[5], KB unpublished), have five branched rays in the anal fin. The Asian species (Tor and Neolissochilus) are sister group to the species from Africa and the Middle East (Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010[5], KB unpublished) and have five branched rays in the anal fin. By application of the parsimony principle the possession of six branched anal-fin rays is a synapomorphy of the genus Carasobarbus. The possession of nine to 10 branched rays in the dorsal fin is synapomorphic for Carasobarbus, because the closely related Middle-Eastern species ‘Barbus’ grypus, Mesopotamichthys sharpeyi and ‘Barbus’ reinii as well as many African hexaploids have the plesiomorphic state of eight branched rays in the dorsal fin. However, in some African species the number of branched dorsal-fin rays is increased convergently. These two synapomorphies establish Carasobarbus as a monophyletic group. Analyses of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene confirm the monophyly of this genus (Durand et al. 2002[6], Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010[5], KB unpublished data). Colli et al. (2009)[7] found Carasobarbus to be monophyletic in their maximum likelihood analysis but not in their neighbour joining analysis. ‘Barbus’ grypus Heckel, 1843 is the sister taxon of the genus Carasobarbus (Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010[5]).
Out of the generic names Barbellion, Barbus, Barynotus, Capoeta, Carasobarbus, Cyclocheilichthys, Kosswigobarbus, Labeobarbus, Luciobarbus, Pseudotor, Puntius, Systomus, Tor, and Varicorhinus that were used for this taxon − or its parts − by previous authors, only Carasobarbus, Kosswigobarbus and Pseudotor are available for the genus in question. All other generic names have not been considered, because their type species are not closely related to the species under discussion here (Durand et al. 2002[6], Tsigenopoulos et al. 2010[5], KB unpublished data) or do not share the characters mentioned above. Carasobarbus, Kosswigobarbus and Pseudotor are subjective synonyms. They all were established in the same publication (Karaman 1971[1]) and thus none of them has priority. We, acting as First Reviser, select Carasobarbus to have priority in accordance with article 24.2 of the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 2012[8]). Thus Carasobarbus is the valid name for this genus.
Within the genus, several species share characters that are potentially synapomorph and elucidate sister group relations. Carasobarbus fritschii and Carasobarbus harterti both have pharyngeal bones with four teeth in the medial row. This character is probably synapomorph, because all other congeners have five teeth in the medial row. This group corresponds to Pseudotor. Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus sublimus share the possession of a spatulate lower jaw and a median lobe on the lower lip. The spatulate lower jaw is synapomorph, because no congener and no other closely related species shares this character. The close phylogenetic relationship between Carasobarbus kosswigi and Carasobarbus sublimus is confirmed by genetic analysis (Borkenhagen et al. 2011[9]). These two species correspond to Kosswigobarbus.
Taxon Treatment
- Borkenhagen, K; Krupp, F; 2013: Taxonomic revision of the genus Carasobarbus Karaman, 1971 (Actinopterygii, Cyprinidae) ZooKeys, 339: 1-53. doi
Other References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Karaman M (1971) Süßwasserfische der Türkei. 8. Teil: Revision der Barben Europas, Vorderasiens und Nordafrikas. Mitteilungen aus dem Hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut 67: 175-254.
- ↑ Machordom A, Doadrio I (2001) Evolutionary history and speciation modes in the cyprinid genus Barbus. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B - Biological Sciences 268(1473): 1297-1306. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1654
- ↑ Gorshkova G, Gorshkov S, Golani D (2002) Karyotypes of Barbus canis and Capoeta damascina (Pisces, Cyprinidae) from the Middle East. Italian Journal of Zoology 69(3): 191-194. doi: 10.1080/11250000209356459
- ↑ Leggatt R, Iwama G (2003) Occurrence of polyploidy in the fishes. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 13(3): 237-246. doi: 10.1023/B:RFBF.0000033049.00668.fe
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 Tsigenopoulos C, Kasapidis P, Berrebi P (2010) Phylogenetic relationships of hexaploid large-sized barbs (genus Labeobarbus, Cyprinidae) based on mtDNA data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 56(2): 851-856. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2010.02.006
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 Durand J, Tsigenopoulos C, Ünlü E, Berrebi P (2002) Phylogeny and biogeography of the family Cyprinidae in the Middle East inferred from cytochrome b DNA - Evolutionary significance of this region. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 22(1): 91-100. doi: 10.1006/mpev.2001.1040
- ↑ Colli L, Paglianti A, Berti R, Gandolfi G, Tagliavini J (2009) Molecular phylogeny of the blind cavefish Phreatichthys andruzzii and Garra barreimiae within the family Cyprinidae. Environmental Biology of Fishes 84(1): 95-107. doi: 10.1007/s10641-008-9393-z
- ↑ ICZN (2012) International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature.Fourth Edition. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature. http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/
- ↑ Borkenhagen K, Esmaeili H, Mohsenzadeh S, Shahryari F (2011) The molecular systematics of the Carasobarbus species from Iran and adjacent areas, with comments on Carasobarbus albus (Heckel, 1843). Environmental Biology of Fishes 91(3): 327-335. doi: 10.1007/s10641-011-9787-1
