Jump to content


Nothonotus microlepidus


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_TomNear_*

Guest_TomNear_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 03:03 PM

N. micropedidus from the Cumberland

Attached Files

  • Attached File  Nmcl.jpg   110.09KB   0 downloads


#2 Guest_farmertodd_*

Guest_farmertodd_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 04:41 PM

N. micropedidus from the Cumberland


Great pics Tom! Next trip, I'm hitting the Collins and Caney. I've looked them over too many times to get to Alabama or even Florida. With the price of gas, I think I'll just focus myself around the Barrens and consequent adjacent features :)

I'm curious about your use of Nothonotus... Has this been resolved among enough of those holding out against elevating the subgenus? Do you have any citations for me to catch up on?

Thanks!
Todd

#3 Guest_Skipjack_*

Guest_Skipjack_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 04:51 PM

I also was curious about that.

#4 Guest_TomNear_*

Guest_TomNear_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 05:15 PM

It has not been resolved. However, I am in favor of a 'rank-free' taxonomy for darters. I think that the evidence for monophyly of Etheostoma is weak, but Nothonotus is rock-solid. Also, most of the large (number of species) darter subgenera are probably not monophyletic.

So the jury is still out, but is not difference of opinion fun? Don't let the names throw you off, a Nothonotus is a Nothonotus. Do we really learn anything about it's evolution by considering it a genus or subgenus?

Good luck in the field! We are doing the Ozarks, Western Gulf Slope and Mobile this summer.

#5 Guest_farmertodd_*

Guest_farmertodd_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 06:58 PM

Yeah, there's no question in my mind they're unique. I'd prefer it actually, but yes, it's just an opinion.

Any chance you're tying the Ozarks on to ASIH? Couple of us are roving about the week after :) We were looking into a 3 day float on the upper ST. Francis, Black or Current.

Todd

#6 Guest_AC-Editor_*

Guest_AC-Editor_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 08:17 PM

> N. micropedidus

You mean N. microlepidus?

I stared at that name in disbelief until I realized it may be a typo.

Chris Scharpf
NANFA HQ

#7 Guest_TomNear_*

Guest_TomNear_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 May 2007 - 08:32 PM

Indeed a typo.

#8 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 May 2007 - 12:40 PM

Since the taxonomy started to foster a bit of a discussion, which has been lacking for a while here, I thought I'd try and keep it going a bit with some thoughts that were evoked when I was reading this.

Could the absence of monophly in Etheostoma (or anything really) be a result of basal/primitive members being extinct (at the genus and subgenus level for this topic)? Therefore, the incomplete tree would give the appearance of a polyphyletic group when in reality if sequences from these hypothetical darters were available the base of the tree would form. With many N.A. fish not being collected prior to the 19th Centry would it not be likely to think some species have been lost, especially a "primitive" member that may have been wide ranging in the yet to be explored Interio Basin and/or big river? We already know that harelip suckers and whiteline topminnows were lost in the 19th Century. The paper is eluding me, but there is evidence (very logical when you think about it too) that freshwater mussel declines and extinctions began as a result of agriculture and logging from native americans in the 17th (?) Century. With the landscape changes that followed European settlement, during that huge gap of time that preceds N.A. ichthyology, it seems likely that at least a few species have been lost in that time frame.

Matt

#9 Guest_TomNear_*

Guest_TomNear_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 May 2007 - 01:28 PM

Including data from extinct species can inpact the results of a phylogenetic analysis. These observations come from analyses of morphological data that includes data scored from extinct and extant spcies. A good example at the species-level is Oncorhynchus and other clades in Salmonidae. One of the best examples at the level of major clades is a study published in 1988 that includes morphological data on extinct and extant tetrapod lineages.

However, the extinction of a basal lineage that is sister to all of the other surviving lineages should not effect estimating the surviving lineages as monophyletic. In cases where inclusion of extinct lineages has changed the results of phylogenetic analysis, the extinct lineages tend to be nested in an intermediate position phylogenetically, relative to the extant lineages.

There are many different ways that we recover a phylogeny that is different from the history. Hybridizaton, rapid origin and diversification of the extant lineages (hard to recover the short times of sharred ancestry), and the bad luck of ancestrally shared genetic variation.

#10 Guest_factnfiction101_*

Guest_factnfiction101_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 May 2007 - 05:34 AM

I like that fish better than the others that you have posted. The picture of the Cherry Darter is also a favorite.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users