Sistemática de Piabina Reinhardt, 1867 (Ostariophysi: Characidae)
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2016-02-29
Autores
Santos, Ana Cláudia dos [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
A sistemática de Piabina Reinhardt, 1867 tem sido questionada recentemente. Espécies novas e possíveis sinônimos (e.g., Astyanax paranahybae) foram sugeridos para o gênero e a espécie-tipo, Piabina argentea, foi considerada recentemente um complexo de espécies. Diante dessas hipóteses realizamos uma revisão sistemática, incluindo análises taxonômica, filogenética e discriminante, compreendendo as espécies válidas e as supostamente novas (Capítulo I). Foi possível reconhecer quatro morfotipos intraespecíficos com base em caracteres morfológicos [Piabina argentea sensu stricto, Piabina sp. A (sensu Cardoso), Piabina sp. ‘nordeste’ e Piabina sp. ‘tiete’]. No entanto, observou-se elevada sobreposição nos caracteres morfológicos entre os morfotipos, corroborado pela análise discriminante (DAPC). Caracteres filogenéticos homoplásticos foram recobrados para as espécies e morfotipos de Piabina, encontrados em politomia no gênero. A sobreposição de caracteres morfológicos e a ausência de caracteres filogenéticos robustos às espécies e aos morfotipos impossibilitam o reconhecimento inequívoco destes como unidades biológicas distintas. Assim, Piabina é considerada um gênero monotípico, com P. anhembi e Astyanax paranahybae como sinônimos juniores de P. argentea. Piabina argentea é semelhante a outros Stevardiinae, principalmente algumas espécies de Bryconamericus e Creagrutus. Equívocos na identificação da espécie em coleções científicas motivaram a elaboração de uma chave para identificação de Stevardiinae da bacia do alto rio Paraná. A chave, que inclui 15 espécies de estevardiíneos, é uma ferramenta útil à identificação correta das espécies, especialmente as relacionadas filogeneticamente à P. argentea (Capítulo II).
Recently, the systematic of Piabina Reinhardt, 1867 has been questioned. New species and possible synonyms (e.g., Astyanax paranahybae) were suggested to the genus and the type species, Piabina argentea, was recently considered as a complex of different species. In view of these new hypothesis, we performed a systematic review with taxonomic, phylogenetic, and discriminant data, including all valid species and the species reported as new of Piabina (Chapter I). We identified four intraspecific morphotypes based on morphological characters [Piabina argentea sensu stricto, Piabina sp. A (sensu Cardoso), Piabina sp. ‘nordeste’ e Piabina sp. ‘tiete’]. However, it was observed a significant overlapping of taxonomic characters among the morphotypes, posteriorly corroborated by the discriminant analysis (DAPC). We found homoplastics phylogenetic characters to species and morphotypes of Piabina, arranged in politomy in the genus. The overlapping of morphological characters and the lack of robust phylogenetic characters do not allow us to recognize these taxa as distinct biological units. Thus, Piabina was considered a monotipic genus, with P. anhembi and Astyanax paranahybae as junior synonyms of P. argentea. Piabina argentea is similar to other species of Stevardiinae, mainly some Bryconamericus and Creagrutus species. Mistakes in Piabina identification observed in scientific collections motivated the elaboration of an identification key to the Stevardiinae from the upper Paraná River basin. The key included 15 Stevardiinae species and represents a helpful tool to identify species correctly, especially the species phylogenetic related to P. argentea (Chapter II).
Recently, the systematic of Piabina Reinhardt, 1867 has been questioned. New species and possible synonyms (e.g., Astyanax paranahybae) were suggested to the genus and the type species, Piabina argentea, was recently considered as a complex of different species. In view of these new hypothesis, we performed a systematic review with taxonomic, phylogenetic, and discriminant data, including all valid species and the species reported as new of Piabina (Chapter I). We identified four intraspecific morphotypes based on morphological characters [Piabina argentea sensu stricto, Piabina sp. A (sensu Cardoso), Piabina sp. ‘nordeste’ e Piabina sp. ‘tiete’]. However, it was observed a significant overlapping of taxonomic characters among the morphotypes, posteriorly corroborated by the discriminant analysis (DAPC). We found homoplastics phylogenetic characters to species and morphotypes of Piabina, arranged in politomy in the genus. The overlapping of morphological characters and the lack of robust phylogenetic characters do not allow us to recognize these taxa as distinct biological units. Thus, Piabina was considered a monotipic genus, with P. anhembi and Astyanax paranahybae as junior synonyms of P. argentea. Piabina argentea is similar to other species of Stevardiinae, mainly some Bryconamericus and Creagrutus species. Mistakes in Piabina identification observed in scientific collections motivated the elaboration of an identification key to the Stevardiinae from the upper Paraná River basin. The key included 15 Stevardiinae species and represents a helpful tool to identify species correctly, especially the species phylogenetic related to P. argentea (Chapter II).
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Astyanax paranahybae, Diversidade, Stevardiinae, Taxonomia, Variação morfológica, Diversity, Stevardiinae, Taxonomy, Morphological variation