Eight in one

[Silurus]

Shao, W-H, J-L Cheng and E Zhang, 2021. Eight in one: hidden diversity of the bagrid catfish Tachysurus albomarginatus s. l. (Rendhal, 1928) widespread in lowlands of South China. Frontiers in Genetics 12:713793.

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that species diversity is underestimated in the current taxonomy of widespread freshwater fishes. The bagrid species T. albomarginatus s.l. is mainly distributed in the lowlands of South China as currently identified. A total of forty localities (including the type locality), which covers most of its known range, were sampled. Molecular phylogenetic analyses based on concatenated mtDNA and nuclear genes recover nine highly-supported lineages clustering into eight geographic populations. The integration of molecular evidence, morphological data and geographic distribution demonstrates the delineation of T. albomarginatus s.l. as eight putative species. Four species, namely T. albomarginatus, T. lani, T. analis and T. zhangfei sp. nov. and the T. similis complex are taxonomically recognized herein. Moreover, T. zhangfei sp. nov. comprises two genetically distinct lineages with no morphological and geographical difference. This study also reveals aspects of estimation of divergence time, distribution and ecological adaption within the T. albomarginatus group. The unraveling of the hidden species diversity of this lowland bagrid fish highlights the need for not only the molecular scrutiny of widely distributed species of South China, but also for the adjustment of current biodiversity conservation strategies to protect the largely overlooked diversity of fishes from low elevation rapids.

[Silurus]

A quick note that this paper is now published.

[lfinley58]

Hi HH.
Thanks for posting a note on the availability of this open access paper.
I have a couple of questions that you can no doubt answer: On page 17, under the "Supplementary Material" section is the following note - "...ventral view of Tachysurus nicholsi sp. nov.,...". It is listed as being "138.2 mm SL." (the same length as the newly described species T. zhangfei). This is obviously in error, so, do you know if this had been considered as the name of the new species? Also, would this name now become unavailable (nomen something or the other) due to this obvious goof-up?
As always, thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Lee

[Silurus]

The first version of the manuscript I reviewed lacked taxonomic conclusions (i.e. had no new species descriptions), so I can’t really answer the question.

But it turns out the nomenclatural act is not registered with ZooBank, so the name is unavailable.

[lfinley58]

HH - thanks for the follow-up. I guess, from what you say, that there is a bit of a mess for the authors to straighten out.
Lee