Análise filogenética de Hypoptopomatinae com ênfase em Microlepidogaster Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1889 (Siluriformes: Loricariidae)
Carregando...
Data
2022-11-25
Autores
Frisoni, Wellington Junio Marques
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Microlepidogaster foi descrito originalmente por Eigenmann & Eigenmann 1889, considerado por um longo tempo como sinônimo-júnior de Otocinclus. Posteriormente, ocorreram diversos eventos envolvendo o gênero, desde inclusões de espécies a realocações. Com a descrição de novas espécies, as relações filogenéticas envolvendo o gênero mostram-se incertas. Portanto, com base nas evidências do problema taxonômico, o presente estudo teve como objetivo principal analisar filogeneticamente Hypoptopomatinae com ênfase em Microlepidogaster. Como objetivos específicos, buscou-se testar a monofilia do gênero e sua relação com os demais representantes da subfamília; construir diagnoses para suas espécies; avaliar e comentar os caracteres que têm sido utilizados para estabelecer relações entre os Hypoptopomatinae. Adicionalmente, foi elaborada uma chave para identificação das espécies pertencentes ao gênero. A análise filogenética foi realizada com base em 123 caracteres morfológicos, analisados em 105 táxons terminais, no qual o grupo interno é representado por todas as espécies de Microlepidogaster descritas até o momento, assim como os demais representantes de Hypoptopomatinae. Como grupo externo, foram incluídas representantes das outras seis subfamílias de Loricariidae (sensu Pereira & Reis, 2017): Delturinae, Lithogeninae, Loricariinae, Hypostominae e Neoplecostominae. As análises resultaram em 12 árvores igualmente parcimoniosas, com as quais foi construído um cladograma de consenso estrito, em que Microlepidogaster não resulta como um grupo natural, na qual a relação strictu sensu inclui apenas (Microlepidogaster dimorpha + M. perforata). Além do mais, Microlepidogaster arachas e M. longicolla mostram-se mais relacionadas a Microlepidogaster dimorpha e M. perforata. Em contrapartida, Microlepidogaster discontenta, M. discus e M. negomata caem em posições mais relacionadas a outros Hypoptopomatinae e longe de Microlepidogaster sensu stricto.
Microlepidogaster was originally described by Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1889 and regarded for a long time as a junior synonym of Otocinclus. Subsequently, there were several events involving the genus, from inclusions of species to relocations. With the description of new species, phylogenetic relationships involving the genus are uncertain. Therefore, based on the evidence of the taxonomic problem, the present study had as its main objective to analyze hypoptopomatinae phylogenetically with an emphasis on Microlepidogaster. As specific objectives, we sought to test the monophyly of the genre and its relationship with the other representatives of the subfamily; build diagnoses for their species; evaluate and comment on the characters that have been used to establish relationships between Hypoptopomatinae. Additionally, a key was elaborated to identify the species belonging to the genus. Phylogenetic analysis was performed based on 123 morphological characters, analyzed in 105 terminal taxa, in which the internal group is represented by all Microlepidogaster species described so far, as well as the other representatives of Hypoptopomatinae. Representatives of the other six subfamilies of Loricariidae (sensu Pereira & Reis, 2017) were included: Delturinae, Lithogeninae, Loricariinae, Hypostominae, and Neoplecostominae. The analyses resulted in 12 equally parsimonious trees, with which a cladogram of strict consensus was constructed, in which Microlepidogaster does not result as a natural group, in which the strictu sensu relationship includes only (Microlepidogaster dimorpha + M. perforata). What's more, Microlepidogaster arachas and M. longicolla are more related to Microlepidogaster dimorpha and M. perforata. In contrast, Microlepidogaster discontenta, M. discus, and M. negomata fall into positions more related to other Hypoptopomatinae and away from Microlepidogaster sensu strictu.
Microlepidogaster was originally described by Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1889 and regarded for a long time as a junior synonym of Otocinclus. Subsequently, there were several events involving the genus, from inclusions of species to relocations. With the description of new species, phylogenetic relationships involving the genus are uncertain. Therefore, based on the evidence of the taxonomic problem, the present study had as its main objective to analyze hypoptopomatinae phylogenetically with an emphasis on Microlepidogaster. As specific objectives, we sought to test the monophyly of the genre and its relationship with the other representatives of the subfamily; build diagnoses for their species; evaluate and comment on the characters that have been used to establish relationships between Hypoptopomatinae. Additionally, a key was elaborated to identify the species belonging to the genus. Phylogenetic analysis was performed based on 123 morphological characters, analyzed in 105 terminal taxa, in which the internal group is represented by all Microlepidogaster species described so far, as well as the other representatives of Hypoptopomatinae. Representatives of the other six subfamilies of Loricariidae (sensu Pereira & Reis, 2017) were included: Delturinae, Lithogeninae, Loricariinae, Hypostominae, and Neoplecostominae. The analyses resulted in 12 equally parsimonious trees, with which a cladogram of strict consensus was constructed, in which Microlepidogaster does not result as a natural group, in which the strictu sensu relationship includes only (Microlepidogaster dimorpha + M. perforata). What's more, Microlepidogaster arachas and M. longicolla are more related to Microlepidogaster dimorpha and M. perforata. In contrast, Microlepidogaster discontenta, M. discus, and M. negomata fall into positions more related to other Hypoptopomatinae and away from Microlepidogaster sensu strictu.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Sistemática, Cascudinhos, Osteologia, Região Neotropical, Systematics, Osteology, Neotropical Region