Phylogeny and Classification of Heptapteridae (Pimelodoidea)
Le résumé fourni par la source
Heptapteridae is a family of three-barbeled catfish with 237 valid species, currently classified into 23 genera and distributed in the Neotropical region. They range from southern Mexico to the Pampas of Argentina, encompassing cis- and Trans-Andean drainages. Despite being identified as monophyletic in previous morphological and molecular phylogenies and playing a significant role in Neotropical ichthyological diversity, identifying family members (and most genera and species) requires osteological data, and its most species-rich genera ( Heptapterus, Imparfinis, Pimelodella , and Rhamdia ) have a confusing taxonomic history. Heptapteridae systematics is not yet fully resolved, and several currently recognized genera are artificial groupings lacking a phylogenetic diagnosis. This work addresses heptapterids’ diversity and presents a hypothesis of relationships based on morphological data. The matrix comprises 263 characters, encompassing external morphology, osteology, musculature, laterosensory canals, and color patterns, among others, from 128 heptapterid species in 22 valid genera. In a parsimony phylogenetic analysis, Heptapteridae was recovered as monophyletic, and it is divided into two subfamilies: Rhamdiinae and Heptapterinae (composed of two tribes: Brachyglaniini and Heptapterini). The genera Cetopsorhamdia, Chasmocranus, Heptapterus, Imparfinis, Leptorhamdia, Pimelodella , and Rhamdia , as currently recognized, were recovered as non-monophyletic, indicating the need to describe at least nine new genera to encompass their diversity.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Phylogeny and Classification of Heptapteridae (Pimelodoidea)
- Date Crossref
- 05/09/2025
- Éditeur
- CRC Press
- Type
- book-chapter
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.