Four new Hypancistrus

Post by **Silurus** » 23 Feb 2007, 22:23

Armbruster, JW, NK Lujan & DC Taphorn, 2007. Four new Hypancistrus (Siluriformes: Loricariidae) from Amazonas, Venezuela. Copeia 2007: 62?79.

Abstract

Hypancistrus contradens, H. debilittera, H. furunculus, and H. lunaorum are described based on specimens from the upper Río Orinoco of southern Venezuela. Hypancistrus furunculus differs from other Hypancistrus based on color pattern: distinct dark oblique stripes ending at posterior insertion of dorsal fin and vertical bands in caudal fin (vs. oblique stripes ending at end of caudal fin in H. zebra and thin, indistinct, light-colored bands and vermiculations on a dark background in H. debilittera) and color pattern dark with white spots in H. contradens, H. inspector, and H. lunaorum. Hypancistrus contradens and H. lunaorum differ from H. inspector by having the dorsal fin reaching the adipose fin when adpressed (vs. not reaching), having spots on the head the same size as the body or spots absent (vs. spots smaller on head) and by usually having 22?23 mid-ventral plates (vs. 24); and from H. debilittera, H. furunculus, and H. zebra by lacking bars, saddles, or stripes on the body and bands in the fins. Hypancistrus lunaorum differs from H. contradens by having white spots on the body smaller than nasal aperture diameter (vs. white spots larger than the nasal aperture diameter).

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 23 Feb 2007, 22:43

FWIW, these are L201, L129, L199 and L339.

Jools

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 24 Feb 2007, 01:00

Am I the only one on pc that is confused by this announcement?

I read this as 4 new species similar to the 4 L numbers cited in some respects but are not synonomous. Do I understand this correctly?

Post by **Silurus** » 24 Feb 2007, 01:06

The 4 L numbers quoted by Jools correspond to the 4 new species.

contradens=L201
debilittera=L129
furunculus=L199
lunaorum=L339

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 24 Feb 2007, 12:17

Is there a pdf available anywhere?

alga · Post by **alga** » 24 Feb 2007, 14:54

Is the new name for L-201 from the type locality? It seems I remember some confusion between the early descriptions of L-201 and L-102. Where L-201 has the black edged fins which would be L-102. Just curious. Makes the name fit a little better "contradens"

If it is from the locality description then L-102 is actually L-201 which is H. contradens???

Post by **Silurus** » 24 Feb 2007, 15:01

The type locality of H. contradens is the Rio Ventuari. Isn't L102 ?

the name contradens has nothing to do with the fin coloration and everything to do with the teeth.

alga · Post by **alga** » 24 Feb 2007, 15:36

Yes, 102 is inspector, but there was some confusion a while ago and the name inspector was moved from 201 to 102, where it belongs. Many people have 201's and call them inspector because of how the names used to be, not many people have 102's. This to me brings up some confusion/contradiction due to the numbers also being "similar". I had a good idea the name contradens had little to do with the contradiction/confusion around theses two fish but the name contradens sounded like it summed things up, and thus the

in my post. I'm sure the dentition is way more important than the fin coloration but I don't have the paper yet.

So, 102 = inspector and 201 = contradens.

HaakonH · Post by **HaakonH** » 24 Feb 2007, 18:42

Hypancistrus lunaorum differs from H. contradens by having white spots on the body smaller than nasal aperture diameter (vs. white spots larger than the nasal aperture diameter).

Perhaps this indicates that L136 will be described as 3 species too when the time comes?

Yann · Post by **Yann** » 25 Feb 2007, 13:15

Hi!!!

Well actually L136 might be described as one species...

let me explain... if you have a pair of the b variation, the fry will show a range of pattern that will fit the 3 possibilities with most young being of the A and B variation...

Cheers
Yann

HaakonH · Post by **HaakonH** » 25 Feb 2007, 14:05

Yann, thaks for clearing that out

I was wondering about that actually! I just received a mix of the a and b varieties, so the question came to mind.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 25 Feb 2007, 19:11

I am a bit confused about Figure 1 in the paper.

The top image of "H. inspector" clearly shows H. contradens according to Armbruster's definition on page 66.

The spots are the same size on the head as the body, and are not joined to form bands on the caudal fin.

There is also no black margins to the dorsal and caudal fins (not mentioned).

Is this anything to do with the mix up with some of the paratype specimens of H. inspector being H. contradens (page 68.), or is it a typo, or am I just being thick?

Yann · Post by **Yann** » 26 Feb 2007, 19:00

Hi!

Yeap... it is a typo, an error of writting... clearly show H contradens...

the pictures was taken by Mar Sabaj during one of their last trip in venezuela and after the description of H inspector...and was labelled as H sp on the website...
definitaley a typo

Cheers
Yann