The presence or absence of Rogadius asper (Cuvier 1829) in Australia (Scorpaeniformes: Platycephalidae)
The presence or absence of Rogadius asper (Cuvier 1829) in Australia (Scorpaeniformes: Platycephalidae)
复制标题
澳大利亚是否存在 Rogadius asper (Cuvier 1829)（蝎形目：扁头鱼科）
DOI：
10.1007/s10228-018-0654-3
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
H.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Imamura;H.
对颈头类Rogadius Asper的原始描述(Cuvier在Cuvier和Valenciennes 1829年)是基于从日本采集的单个标本。最近从日本南部，朝鲜，东中国海，台湾，越南(芽庄)和澳大利亚北部(例如，Shao和Chen 1987；Lee和Joo 1998；Imamura等人)报告了本种。2006年；Paxton等人。2006)。广泛分布的Rogadius PrisTiger(Cuvier在Cuvier和Valenciennes 1829年)，从台湾到澳大利亚北部和马达加斯加，包括菲律宾、安达曼海、阿曼湾和红海(例如，Knapp 1999；Vilasri等人)。2015年；木村等人。2017)，被许多作者错误地识别为R.Asper，因为它具有独特的分类特征，即两者都存在强大的顺行腹前棘突。在Imamura等人(2006)的研究之前，对分离它们有用的字符并不为人所知。虽然第三种，最近被描述的来自索马里的Rogadius fehlmanni Knapp 2012，也有强壮的顺向前棘，但它与R.Asper和R.PrisTiger可分开，因为它有两个或更多的眼前刺(与后两个中的一个)。错误识别的例子包括Knapp(1979)，以及GloerFeet-Tarp和Kailola(1984)和Sainsbury等人(1985)，他们分别记录了来自亚丁湾和澳大利亚北部的R.Asper的标本。但是，从照片和描述来看，它们的标本似乎是R.PrisTiger，因为它们具有R.PrisTiger的尾鳍着色，特征是在尾鳍上有一个宽的暗色或黑色的近边缘带和一条浅的基本带(vs.尾鳍上有4-5个不规则的微黑带，包括在鳍的基础上的带，或者在R.Asper中的基础微黑带和随机排列的黑点；另见Imamura等人)。2006)。此外，CSIRO标本(英联邦科学和工业研究组织，霍巴特)CA4022，Sainsbury等人的R.Asper的凭证(1985年)，也可被鉴定为R.PrisTiger，有55行身体鳞片向前和向下倾斜高于侧线(R.PrisTiger中的51-61对R.Asper中的66-76；Imamura等人；Imamura等人)。2006)。虽然Imamura等人(2006年)认为来自越南芽庄的R.Asper的标本代表了当时该种的最南端的记录，但Paxton等人(2006)保留了R.Asper和R.PrisTiger的名字作为在澳大利亚分布的种，正如Paxton和Hanley(1989)一样。我最近参观了澳大利亚的五家主要博物馆和一家机构[北领地美术馆，达尔文(NTM)和昆士兰博物馆，布里斯班(QM)；维多利亚，墨尔本(NMV)和西澳大利亚博物馆，珀斯(WAM)；澳大利亚博物馆，悉尼(AMS)和CSIRO，2018年6月]，并检查了所有收藏在澳大利亚的被标记为R.Asper的标本(尽管一些标本可能是借来的，因此不会被检查)。总共检查了76个标本[CSIRO有6个标本，NMV有3个标本，NTM有17个标本，QM有50个标本，但Asper在AMS和WAM没有澳大利亚标本]，其中大多数在尾鳍后面有一条宽的暗色(可变的，棕色、淡棕色、灰白色或淡灰色)带，与棱镜虎(图1)相同。尽管4个标本[QM I.18404(未测量)中的3个标本中的2个；QM I.19706(未测量)中的9个标本中的1个；QM I.19673,108.0 mm SL]由于损坏而缺乏完整的尾鳍，但剩余的尾部基部有一浅灰色或浅棕色带，因此被鉴定为R.PrisTiger(与R.Asper中的微黑带相比)。相比之下，6个标本(NTM的4个标本中的4个是…)
The original description of platycephalid Rogadius asper (Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes 1829) was based on a single specimen collected from Japan. The species has been recently reported from southern Japan, Korea, East China Sea, Taiwan, Vietnam (Nha Trang) and northern Australia (eg, Shao and Chen 1987; Lee and Joo 1998; Imamura et al. 2006; Paxton et al. 2006). The widespread Rogadius pristiger (Cuvier in Cuvier and Valenciennes 1829), occurring from Taiwan to northern Australia and Madagascar, including the Philippines, Andaman Sea, Gulf of Oman and Red Sea (eg, Knapp 1999; Vilasri et al. 2015; Kimura et al. 2017), has been misidentified as R. asper by many authors, because of a distinctive taxonomic character, a strong antrorse preopercular spine that is present in both. Characters useful for separating them had not been well known prior to the study by Imamura et al.(2006). Although a third species, the recently described Rogadius fehlmanni Knapp 2012 from Somalia, also has the strong antrorse preopercular spine, it is separable from R. asper and R. pristiger in having two or more preocular spines (vs. one in the latter two)]. Examples of misidentifications include Knapp (1979), and Gloerfelt-Tarp and Kailola (1984) and Sainsbury et al.(1985), who recorded specimens of R. asper from the Gulf of Aden and northern Australia, respectively. However, judging from photographs and descriptions, their specimens appear to be R. pristiger, as they have the caudal fin coloration of R. pristiger, characterized by a broad dusky or black submarginal band and a light basal band on the caudal fin (vs. caudal fin with 4–5 irregular blackish bands including that on the base of the fin, or a basal blackish band and randomly arranged blackish spots posteriorly in R. asper; see also Imamura et al. 2006). In addition, the CSIRO specimen (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Hobart) CA4022, a voucher of R. asper of Sainsbury et al.(1985), is also identifiable as R. pristiger in having 55 body scale rows slanting forwardly and downwardly above the lateral line (51–61 in R. pristiger vs. 66–76 in R. asper; Imamura et al. 2006). Although Imamura et al.(2006) regarded specimens of R. asper from Nha Trang, Vietnam, as representing the southernmost records of the species at that time, Paxton et al.(2006) retained the names of R. asper and R. pristiger as species distributed in Australia, as had Paxton and Hanley (1989). I recently visited five major museums and one institution in Australia [Art Galleries of the Northern Territory, Darwin (NTM) and Queensland Museum, Brisbane (QM) in Nov. 2016; Museums Victoria, Melbourne (NMV) and Western Australian Museum, Perth (WAM) in Nov. 2017; and Australian Museum, Sydney (AMS) and CSIRO in June 2018] and examined all specimens labeled as R. asper collected in Australia deposited in their collections (although some specimens may have been on loan and would therefore not have been examined). In total, 76 specimens [6 specimens at CSIRO, 3 at NMV, 17 at NTM and 50 at QM, but no Australian specimens of R. asper at AMS and WAM] were examined, most of which had a broad dusky (variably, brownish, pale brownish, grayish or pale grayish) band on the caudal fin posteriorly, identical to R. pristiger (Fig. 1). Although four specimens [2 of 3 in QM I. 18404 (unmeasured); 1 of 9 in QM I. 19706 (unmeasured); QM I. 19673, 108.0 mm SL] lacked a complete caudal fin owing to damage, the remaining caudal bases had a grayish or pale brownish band and were therefore identified as R. pristiger (vs. blackish band in R. asper). In contrast, six specimens (4 of 4 in NTM …