Homologies of the caudal fin rays of Pleuronectiformes (Teleostei)
Descriptions of pleuronectiform caudal fin rays, which vary considerably in composition, have been based on phenotypes (branched, segmented, and unsegmented). To provide a more precise background to the phylogeny, the homologies of the caudal fin rays are considered. The distinction between "pr...
Saved in:
Published in | Ichthyological research Vol. 48; no. 3; pp. 231 - 246 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
25.08.2001
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Descriptions of pleuronectiform caudal fin rays, which vary considerably in composition, have been based on phenotypes (branched, segmented, and unsegmented). To provide a more precise background to the phylogeny, the homologies of the caudal fin rays are considered. The distinction between "principal rays" and "procurrent rays," determined from their correspondence with those of generalized percomorphs, is adopted. Also, the composition of these rays and their associated muscles are compared within the pleuronectiforms. Estimated "principal ray" numbers are 17 (Psettodidae, Citharidae, Paralichthyidae, Bothidae), 15-18 (Scophthalmidae), 16-23 (Pleuronectidae), and fewer than 17 (Tephrinectes, Poecilopsettidae, Rhombosoleidae, Samaridae, Achiropsettidae, Achiridae, Soleidae, Cynoglossidae). The number of "procurrent rays" in each lobe are 3 or 4 (Psettodidae), 3 (Citharoides, Paracitharus, Lepidoblepharon [Citharidae]), 2 (Citharus, Brachypleura [Citharidae], Tephrinectes, Poecilopsettidae, Soleidae), 1 (Pleuronectidae, Rhombosoleidae, Samaridae, Achiropsettidae), 1 or absent (Scophthalmidae, Paralichthyidae), or consistently absent (Bothidae, Achiridae, Cynoglossidae). New characters of potential usefulness in phylogenetic consideration of the Pleuronectiformes, including the hypochordal longitudinalis, interradialis between the outermost "principal" and medialmost "procurrent rays" and "pseudo-interradialis" (newly identified muscle), are proposed and their phylogenetic significance considered. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1341-8998 1616-3915 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s10228-001-8141-6 |