Families of Cobitoidea
Moderator: LoachForumModerators
- Bagrus dude
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:14 pm
Families of Cobitoidea
Šlechtová, V, J Bohlen & HH Tan, 2007. Families of Cobitoidea (Teleostei; Cypriniformes) as revealed from nuclear genetic data and the position of the mysterious genera Barbucca, Psilorhynchus, Serpenticobitis and Vaillantella. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44: 1358–1365.
There is now a Vaillantellidae.
There is now a Vaillantellidae.
- The.Dark.One
- Posts: 340
- Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:56 pm
- Location: Castleford, England
- Bagrus dude
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:14 pm
- Bagrus dude
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:14 pm
- Martin Thoene
- Posts: 11186
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 5:38 am
- Location: Toronto.....Actually, I've been on LOL since September 1998
Nope. They used to be in the same family (this is what I meant), but now Botia's are expelled into Botiidae, see the link above.Martin Thoene wrote:Pangio never were Botia. The two families were and still are under Cobitidae.
Martin.
This again groups together the former Botia genus but on the family level. At least, Botia, Yasuhikotakia and Syncrossus are now back together. While not mentioned, I'm guessing that Chromobotia is also there...we need to see the actual paper to confirm this and see what else was shifted and why
This rearrangement seems very logical, unlike the current setup where very similar Botine genus existed on the same level of hierarchy as Pangio's or Misgurnus.
- Martin Thoene
- Posts: 11186
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 5:38 am
- Location: Toronto.....Actually, I've been on LOL since September 1998
- Bagrus dude
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:14 pm
- Martin Thoene
- Posts: 11186
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 5:38 am
- Location: Toronto.....Actually, I've been on LOL since September 1998
- Bagrus dude
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:14 pm
The answer to that question is in an earlier paper.
Uggh, any chance of getting it? It should be in the library but I would not get there for a week...Bagrus dude wrote:I domikev wrote:Does anyone have the paper?
This new classification, if it holds, undoes his wrongdoings....LMAO.Oh yeah. I read it again. Now it's clear as mud.
Kottelat's going to throw his teddy in the corner....I can see it now
Still, there are some things that remain unclear. For instance, why the Rosies are not in Yasuhikotakia... and why Yasuhikotakia is not divided as was argued in the Jan genetics paper.
-
- Posts: 14252
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:41 pm
- Location: British Columbia
Thanks, HH, for muddying our waters!
As the loach book enters layout stage, we must inform them of some shuffling. Then, upon its much anticipated, long overdue, and god-it's-killing-me release, it will be accurate for six months and then they'll shift the nomenclature again...
Still, this is extremely timely information, and we all owe you thanks.
MM.
As the loach book enters layout stage, we must inform them of some shuffling. Then, upon its much anticipated, long overdue, and god-it's-killing-me release, it will be accurate for six months and then they'll shift the nomenclature again...
Still, this is extremely timely information, and we all owe you thanks.
MM.
Your vantage point determines what you can see.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 340 guests