4.5 Article

Why several when one can unite them all? Integrative taxonomic revision of Indo-Pacific freshwater pipefish (Nerophinae)

期刊

ZOOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
卷 198, 期 4, 页码 923-956

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlad007

关键词

Microphis; molecular phylogeny; new species; phylogenetic mapping; phylogenetics; species redescription; Syngnathidae; taxonomy

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The family Syngnathidae is intriguing, with most species found in marine coastal waters, but about 30 species inhabit rivers on Indo-Pacific tropical islands. Freshwater pipefish within the family have been under-studied, and the taxonomy of Nerophinae is still uncertain. This study demonstrates the importance of integrative taxonomy in redefining higher taxa, using a combination of molecular, morphological, and ecological data.
The family Syngnathidae (seahorses, sea dragons and pipefishes) is a fascinating group. Species are mostly distributed in marine coastal waters, but about 30 species inhabit Indo-Pacific tropical island rivers. There are currently six freshwater genera of Nerophinae (trunk-brooders): Belonichthys, Coelonotus, Doryichthys, Lophocampus, Microphis and Oostethus. Unlike other Syngnathidae, freshwater pipefish have been little studied; the taxonomy of Nerophinae is unclear and only based on morphomeristic data. The purpose of our study is to undertake a revision of this group based on an integrative taxonomy approach. By combining molecular data from four mitochondrial markers (5415 bp), morphomeristic data with a character mapping study and ecological data, we now recognize a single genus as valid, Microphis, as opposed to the six previously accepted. Our results also reveal one new candidate species, Microphis nicoleae sp. nov., and the resurrection of two others: Microphis torrentius and Microphis vaillantii. This study shows the relevance of integrative taxonomy for higher taxa delineation, using data integration by congruence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据