Redescription of Bryconamericus rubropictus (Berg) n. comb. (Ostariophysi, Characidae) and reference to its secondary sexual dimorphism

Abstract

River, Salta, Argentina, was transkrredto the icnnsAstyan& ~ai;d & Girardwithou~ comments by Eigenmann. Based on the study of type specimens and more extensive material, the species is redeseribed. The species Dossesses the combination ofcharacters that are ~urrentlv used to define the nenusIlrveona,nericus Eirenmann. anal and dorsal fins are lonnerin rnalesthan in fcmales. Brvconamericus rnbro~ictus seems to be closelv related to B, thornasi Fowler. Both species mainly share the enlarged anal fm of inales with a strongly convex distal border. Bryconanericus rubropietus dlilbrs from B. thornasi by the presence of 14 scales around caudal ueduncle (vs. 16). more teeth on smaller ~osterior dentam series (6-9 vs. 3-6) and some ma~uhometrie values. A lectotype is designated for T. rubropictus.

On the lectotype designation of Bryconamericus rubropictus (Berg) (Characiformes, Characidae, Stevardiinae)

“…In the other type lot MACN-ict 5170, two female specimens were found (55.5 and 59.0 mm L S ; Figure 1d,e) with dried body and faded pigmentation. Therefore, mainly based on the comparison between the size and sex reported by Braga (2000) and our observed data (59.1 vs. 59.7 mm L S , male), we inferred that the specimen that must be treated as the lectotype of B. rubropictus is the male of 59.7 mm L S (MACN-ict 5165; Figure 1a). The value of 51.9 mm L S reported for the lectotype by Braga (2000: 149) is considered here as a mistake, because the other male specimen in the lot is clearly smaller (44.3 mm L S ).…”

“…Lectotype of T. rubropictus by Braga (2000). MACN-ict 5165, male, 59.7 mm L S (Figure 1a), Río Molinos, Salta (ex Los Andes, in part), c. It is worth mentioning that the lectotype was not cited in CLOFFSCA (Lima et al, 2003) or Argentinean freshwater fish lists (L opez et al, 2003;Mirande & Koerber, 2015) published after the redescription by Braga (2000). Moreover, the lectotype designation of B. rubropictus (Braga, 2000) is not updated in Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes (Fricke et al, 2023).…”

“…MACN-ict 5165, male, 59.7 mm L S (Figure 1a), Río Molinos, Salta (ex Los Andes, in part), c. It is worth mentioning that the lectotype was not cited in CLOFFSCA (Lima et al, 2003) or Argentinean freshwater fish lists (L opez et al, 2003;Mirande & Koerber, 2015) published after the redescription by Braga (2000). Moreover, the lectotype designation of B. rubropictus (Braga, 2000) is not updated in Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes (Fricke et al, 2023). Since then, the lectotype specimen remained undistinguishable and unlabelled within the fish type collection in MACN-ict, mixed with two paralectotypes (now as MACN-ict 12718), waiting to be located.…”

“…First, the lectotype was not catalogued and labelled separately after the redescription had been published, and as a consequence, the specimen remained preserved undistinguishably from the remaining paralectotypes. Second, given the absence of a photograph or an unambiguous illustration of the lectotype accompanying the designation, the data associated with the specimen presented by Braga (2000) can also correspond to other specimens in the lot. Additionally, Braga (2000) presented an illustration that cannot be unambiguously associated with the type specimen.…”

“…Second, given the absence of a photograph or an unambiguous illustration of the lectotype accompanying the designation, the data associated with the specimen presented by Braga (2000) can also correspond to other specimens in the lot. Additionally, Braga (2000) presented an illustration that cannot be unambiguously associated with the type specimen.…”