CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 454

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Interrelationships of the ostariophysan fishes (Teleostei)

FINK, SARA V., FINK, WILLIAM L.·1981·Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
DOI 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1981.tb01575.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The history of ostariophysan classification is summarized and it is noted that traditional concepts of relationships have never been supported by characters found to be unique to the taxa. We present a new hypothesis of relationships among four of the five major ostariophysan lineages: Cypriniformes, Characiformes, Siluroidei, and Gymnotoidei (Otophysi). Cypriniforms are the sister-group of the remaining three (Characiphysi), and characiforms are the sister-group of siluroids plus gymnotoids (Siluriformes). Placement of the Gonorynchiformes as the sister-group of the Otophysi is supported by additional evidence. Each of the five lineages is monophyletic. Analysis was concentrated upon species thought to be the least specialized within each lineage; choices of these species are discussed. Chanos is determined to be a relatively primitive gonorynchiform morphologically and the sister-guoup of all other Recent members of the order. Opsariichthys and Zacco are found to be morphologically primitive cypriniforms. We propose that a monophyletic group comprising the Citharinidae and Distichodontidae forms the sister-group of all other characiforms. Within the two families, Xenocharax is the least specialized. We suggest that Hepsetus, the erythrinids, and the ctenoluciids are more derived than the distichodontids and citharinids, and may form a monophyletic group within the characiforms. The traditional hypothesis that Diplomystes is the primitive sister-group of all Recent siluroids…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1981.tb01575.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 83

  1. ALEXANDER, 1962, The structure of the Weberian apparatus in theCyprini, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 139, 4, 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1962.tb01839.x · DOI
  2. ALEXANDER, 1964, The structure of the Weberian apparatus in the Siluri, Proceeding of the Zoological Society of London, 112, 419, 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1964.tb04507.x · DOI
  3. ALEXANDER, 1966a, Structure and function in the catfish, Journal of Zoology, 148, 88, 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1966.tb02943.x · DOI
  4. ALEXANDER, 1966b, The functions and mechanisms of the protrusible upper jaws of two species of cvprinid fish, Journal of Zoology, 149, 288, 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1966.tb04050.x · DOI
  5. BAMFORD, 1948, Cranial development of Galeichthys felis, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 118, 364, 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1948.tb00383.x · DOI
  6. BARDACH, 1974, Chemoreception in Marine Organisms: 49-104.
  7. BENNETT, 1970, Comparative physiology: electric organs, Annual Review of Physiology, 32, 471, 10.1146/annurev.ph.32.030170.002351 · DOI
  8. BENNETT, 1971a, Fish Physiology, 5, 357
  9. BENNETT, 1971b, Fish Physiology, 5, 493
  10. BERTMAR, 1969, Epibranchial organs in lower teleostean fishes-an example of structural adaptation, International Review of General and Experimental Zoology, 4, 1, 10.1016/B978-0-12-368104-1.50005-5 · DOI
  11. BOULENGER, 1910, The Cambridge Satural History, 7, 541
  12. BRIDGE, 1893, III. Contributions to the anatomy of fishes. -II. The air-bladder and Weberian ossicles in the siluroid fishes, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 184, 65, 10.1098/rstb.1893.0003 · DOI
  13. BRIGGS, 1979, Ostariophysan zoogeography: an alternative hypothesis, Copeia, 1979, 111, 10.2307/1443735 · DOI
  14. CHARDON, 1968, Anatomie comparee de ľappareil de Weber et des structures connexes chez les Silmilonnes, Annales de Musée Royale de ľAfrique Centrale, Serie in 8°, Sciences Zoologiques, 169, 1
  15. DARLINGTON, 1957, Zoogeography: the Geographical Distribution of Animals.
  16. ďAUBKNTON, 1961, Morphologie du crâne de Cromeria nilotica occidentalis Daget, Bulletin de ľInstitut ďAfrique Noire, (A), 21, 134
  17. EIGENMANN, 1909, The fresh water fishes of Patagonia and an examination of the ArchiplataArchhelenis theory, Reports of the Princeton University Expeditions to Patagonia, 1896-1899,3, Zoology, 3, 225
  18. FINK, 1981, Ontogeny and phylogeny of tooth attachment modes in actinopterygians, Journal of Morphology, 167, 167, 10.1002/jmor.1051670203 · DOI
  19. FINK, 1979, Central Amazonia and its fishes, Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 62A, 13, 10.1016/0300-9629(79)90738-2 · DOI
  20. GOODRICH, 1958, Studies on the Structure and Development of Vertebrates.
  21. GOSLINE, 1971, Functional Morphology and Classification ofTeleostean Fishes., 10.1515/9780824885311 · DOI
  22. GOSLINE, 1973, Considerations regarding the phylogeny of cypriniform fishes, with special reference to structures associated with feeding, Copeia, 1973, 761, 10.2307/1443076 · DOI
  23. GOSLINE, 1975a, The palatine-maxillary mechanism in cat-fishes, with comments on the evolution and zoogeography of modern siluroids, Occasional Papers, California Academy of Sciences, 120, 1
  24. GOSLINE, 1975b, A reexamination of the similarities between the freshwater fishes of Africa and South America, Mémoires du Muséum National ďHisloire Naturelle, Paris, (A), 88, 146
  25. GREENWOOD, 1970, Skull and swimbladder connections in fishes of the family Megalopidae, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 19, 121, 10.5962/p.314186 · DOI
  26. GREENWOOD, 1973, Interrelationships of Fishes: 307-332.
  27. GREENWOOD, 1977, Notes on the anatomy and classification of elopomorph fishes, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 32, 65
  28. GREENWOOD, 1966, Phyletic studies of teleostean fishes, with a provisional classification of living forms, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 131, 339
  29. HENNIG, 1966, Phylogenetic Systematics.
  30. HOWES, 1976, The cranial musculature and taxonomy of the characoid fishes of the tribes Cynodontini and Characini, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 29, 201
  31. HOWES, 1980, The anatomy, phylogeny and classification of bariliine cyprinid fishes, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 37, 129
  32. JORDAN, 1923, A classification of fishes, including families and genera as far as known, Stanford University Publications, University Series, Biological Sciences, 3, 79
  33. KINDRED, 1919, The skull of Amiurus, Illinois Biological Monographs, 5, 3
  34. KIRSCHBAUM, 1975, Sur la differentiation des électrorécepteurs chez Marcusenius sp. (Mormyrides) et Eigenmannia virescens (Gymnotides), poissons électriques à faible décharge, Compte Rendu Hebdomadaire des Séances de ľAcadémie des Sciences, (D), 281, 419
  35. KORRINGA, 1970, A new gymnotoid fish from the Rio Tocantins, Brazil, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, (4), 38, 265
  36. LENGLET, 1974, Contribution a ľétude ostéologique des Kneriidae, Annales de la Société Royale Zoologique de Belgique, 103, 51
  37. LUNDBERG, 1975a, The fossil catfishes of North America. Papers on Paleontology, University of Michigan, Claude W., Hibbard Memorial Volume 2, 11
  38. LUNDBERG, 1975b, Homologies of the upper shoulder girdle and temporal region bones in catfishes (Order Siluriformes), with comments on the skull of the Helogeneidae, Copeia, 1975, 66, 10.2307/1442407 · DOI
  39. LUNDBERG, 1969, The caudal skeleton of the catfishes, Order Siluriformes, American Museum Novilates., 2399, 1
  40. LUNDBERG, 1970, A new catfish from the Eocene Green River Formation, Wyoming, Journal of Paleontology, 44, 451
  41. MAGO-LECCIA, 1978, Los peces de la familia Sternopygidae de Venezuela., Acta Scientifica Venezolana, 29, 1
  42. MAGO-LECCIA, 1978, The taxonomic status of Rhabdolichops troscheli (Kaup, 1856), and speculations on gymnotiform evolution, Environmental Biology of Fishes, 3, 379, 10.1007/BF00000530 · DOI
  43. MEUNIER, 1978, Etude anatomique et histologique du squelette axial de Eigenmannia virescens (Rhamphichthyidae, Gymnotoidei), Acta Zoologica, Stockholm, 59, 215, 10.1111/j.1463-6395.1978.tb01036.x · DOI
  44. NELSON, 1967, Epibranchial organs in lower teleostean fishes, Journal of Zoology, 153, 71, 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1967.tb05031.x · DOI
  45. NOVACEK, 1976, Early biogeographic history of Ostariophysan fishes, Copeia, 1976, 1, 10.2307/1443767 · DOI
  46. PATTERSON, 1975a, The braincase of pholidophorid and leptolepid fishes, with a review of the actinopterygian braincase, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, (B), 269, 275, 10.1098/rstb.1975.0001 · DOI
  47. PATTERSON, 1975b, The distribution of Mesozoic freshwater fishes, Mémoires du Muséum National ďHisloire Naluretic, Paris, (A), 88, 156
  48. PATTERSON, 1977, Major Patterns in Vertebrate Evolution: 579-643.
  49. PATTERSON, 1977, Review of ichthyodectiform and other Mesozoic teleost fishes and the theory and practice of classifying fossils, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 158, 81
  50. PFEIFFER, 1977, The distribution of fright reaction and alarm substance cells in fishes, Copeia, 1977, 653, 10.2307/1443164 · DOI
  51. RAMASWAMI, 1952a, Skeleton of cyprinoid fishes in relation to phylogenetic studies. II. The systematic position ol Psilorhynchus McClelland, Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India, 18, 141
  52. RAMASWAMI, 1952b, Skeleton of cyprinoid fishes in relation to phylogenetic studies. III. The skull and other skeletal structures of homalopterid fishes, Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India, 18, 495
  53. RAMASWAMI, 1952c, Skeleton of cyprinoid fishes in relation to phylogenetic studies. IV. The skull and other skeletal structures of gastromyzonid fishes, Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India, 18, 519
  54. RAMASWAMI, 1953, Skeleton of cyprinoid fishes in relation to phylogenetic studies. V. The skull and the gasbladder capsule of the Cobitidae, Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India, 19, 323
  55. RAMASWAMI, 1955, Skeleton of cyprinoid fishes in relation to phylogenetic studies. VI. The skull and Weberian apparatus in the subfamily Gobioninae (Cyprinidae), Acta Zoologica, Stockholm, 36, 127, 10.1111/j.1463-6395.1955.tb00377.x · DOI
  56. REGAN, 1911a, The classification of the teleostean fishes of the order Ostariophysi.- 1. Cyprinoidea, Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (8), 8, 13, 10.1080/00222931108692993 · DOI
  57. REGAN, 1911b, The classification of the teleostean fishes of the order Ostariophysi. - 2. Siluroidea, Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (8), 8, 553, 10.1080/00222931108693067 · DOI
  58. REGAN, 1922, The distribution of the fishes of the order Ostariophysi, Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde, Amsterdam, 22, 203, 10.1163/26660644-02201028 · DOI
  59. REINHARDT, 1852, Om Svömmeblaeren hos Familien Gymnotini, Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra den naturhistoriske Forening i Kjobenhavn, 9, 135
  60. REINHARDT, 1854, Ueber die Schwimmblase in der Familie Gymnotini, Archiv für Naturgeschichte, 20, 169
  61. RIDEWOOD, 1905a, On the cranial osteology of the fishes of the families Osteoglossidae, Pantodontidae, and Phractolaemidae, Journal of the Linnean Society of London, 29, 252, 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1905.tb00041.x · DOI
  62. RIDEWOOD, 1905b, On the skull of Gonorhynchus greyi, Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (7), 15, 361, 10.1080/03745480509443060 · DOI
  63. ROBERTS, 1969, Osteology and relationships of characoid fishes, particularly the genera Hepsetus, Salminus, Hoplias, Ctenolucius, and Acestrorhynchus, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, (4), 36, 391
  64. ROBERTS, 1972, Ecology of fishes in the Amazon and Congo basins, Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 113, 117
  65. ROBERTS, 1973, Interrelationships of Fishes: 373-395.
  66. ROSEN, 1973, Interrelationships of Fishes: 397-513.
  67. ROSEN, 1970, Origin of the Weberian apparatus and the relationships of the ostariophvsaii and gonorvnchilorm fishes, American Museum Novilates, 2428, 1
  68. SAGEMEHL, 1885, Beiträge zur vergleichenden Anatomie der Fische. III. Das Cranium der Characiniden nebst allgemeinen Bemerkungen über die mil einem Weber'schen Apparat versehenen Phvsostomenfamilien, Morphologisches Jahrbuch, 10, 1
  69. SIMPSON, 1978, Speciation patterns in the Amazonian forest biota, Annual Review of Ecology and Syslematics., 9, 497, 10.1146/annurev.es.09.110178.002433 · DOI
  70. SWINNERTON, 1903, The osteology of Cromeria nilotica and Gataxias attenuatus, Zoologischejahrbücher, 18, 58
  71. SZABO, 1974, Handbook of Sensory Physiology, 3, 13
  72. TAKAHASI, 1925, On the homology of the cranial muscles of the cypriniform fishes, Journal of Morphology, 40, 1, 10.1002/jmor.1050400102 · DOI
  73. TARLING, 1980, Gondwanaland revisited, Nature, London, 284, 15, 10.1038/284015b0 · DOI
  74. TAYLOR, 1967, An enzyme method of clearing and staining small vertebrates, Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 122, 1, 10.5479/si.00963801.122-3596.1 · DOI
  75. THYS VAN DEN AUDENAERDE, 1961, Ľanatomie de Phraclolaemus ansorgei Boulenger et la position svstématique des Phractolaemidae, Annates de Musée Royal de ĽAfrique Centrale, Serie in 8°, Sciences Zoologiaues, 103, 99
  76. VARI, 1979, Anatomy, relationships and classification of the families Citharinidae and Distichodontidae (Pisces, Characoidea), Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 36, 261, 10.5962/bhl.part.3608 · DOI
  77. WATSON, 1939, The development of the Weberian ossicles and anterior vertebrae in the goldfish, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, (B), 127, 452, 10.1098/rspb.1939.0034 · DOI
  78. WEBER, 1820, De aure et auditu hominis et animalium. Pars I. De aure animalium aquatilium
  79. WEITZMAN, 1962, The osteology of Brycon meeki, a generalized characid fish, with an osteological definition of the family, Stanford Ichthyological Bulletin, 8, 1
  80. WEITZMAN, 1964, Osteology and relationships of South American characid fishes of subfamilies Lebiasininae and Erythrininae with special reference to subtribe Nannostomina, Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 116, 127, 10.5479/si.00963801.116-3499.127 · DOI
  81. WEITZMAN, 1975, A revision of the South American fishes of the genus Nannostomus Gunther (Family Lebiasinidae), Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 186, 1, 10.5479/si.00810282.186 · DOI
  82. WILEY, 1970, Breeding tubercles and contact organs in fishes: their occurrence, structure, and significance, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 143, 143
  83. WINTERBOTTOM, 1974, A descriptive synonomy of the striated muscles of the Teleostei, Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 125, 225

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 454

Metadata

Authors
FINK, S. V., & FINK, W. L.
Venue
Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
1981-08
Volume
72
Issue
4
Pages
297-353
ISSN
0024-4082
DOI
10.1111/j.1096-3642.1981.tb01575.x
Cited by
454
References
0
Language
en
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1 (tdm, 12449 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review