Nothobranchius cardinalis, Cardinal Nothobranchius : fisheries

You can sponsor this page

Nothobranchius cardinalis Watters, Cooper & Wildekamp, 2008

Cardinal Nothobranchius
را بارگذاری کني تصاوير و فيلم ها
Pictures | تصوير گوگل
Image of Nothobranchius cardinalis (Cardinal Nothobranchius)
Nothobranchius cardinalis
Picture by Valdesalici, S.

رده بندی / Names اسامي عام | مترادف | Catalog of Fishes(جنس, گونه ها) | ITIS | CoL | WoRMS | Cloffa

> Cyprinodontiformes (Rivulines, killifishes and live bearers) > Nothobranchiidae (African rivulines)
Etymology: Nothobranchius: Greek, nothos = false + Greek, brangchia = gill (Ref. 45335);  cardinalis: The name cardinalis is in reference to the striking, dominantly red coloration of males; from the Latin cardinalis", meaning principal, chief or essential, from which the ecclesiastical title of cardinal was derived; the name as applied here is an allusion to the blood-red vesture worn by cardinals (Ref. 74420).

Environment: milieu / climate zone / depth range / distribution range بوم شناسي

; آب شيرين سطح زی. Tropical

پراكنش كشورها | مناطق سازمان خوار و بار جهاني (FAO) | Ecosystems | ظهور | Point map | معرفي | Faunafri

Africa: Mbwemkuru River, Tanzania (Ref. 74420).

Size / Weight / سن

Maturity: Lm ?  range ? - ? cm
Max length : 2.7 cm SL جنس نر / بدون خواص جنسي; (Ref. 74420); 2.3 cm SL (female)

توصيف مختصر ريخت شناسي | ريخت ستجي بوسيله انداره گيري

خارهاي باله پشتي (کل): 0; شعاع نرم باله پشتي (کل): 15-16; خارهاي باله مخرجي 0; شعاع نرم باله مخرجي: 13 - 14. Diagnosis: The color pattern of males of Nothobranchius cardinalis and N. rubripinnis have some features that are quite similar: red snout; red pectoral, anal, and caudal fins; and narrow black marginal band to the caudal fin (Ref. 74420). There are, however, some consistent differences: the anal fin of N. rubripinnis has a blue-green background color with red rays and red spots that form irregular transverse bands, especially apparent in the outer, posterior part of the fin, while the anal fin of N. cardinalis is almost a solid red; the pectoral and ventral fins of N. cardinalis are a solid red, whereas in N. rubripinnis these fins are not as intensely coloured and have a translucent quality; the background iridescent blue-green body colour of N. rubripinnis is dominant and the red scale margins are relatively narrow, while in N. cardinalis the red scale margins are much wider, resulting, in some specimens in a dominantly red body; N. rubripinnis always shows a strongly developed, rearward-pointing, chevron pattern on the posterior part of the body, due to the arrangement and slightly increased width of the red scale margins, while in N. cardinalis it is very weakly developed and barely discernible (Ref. 74420). The principal difference in colour pattern of the females of N. cardinalis and N. rubripinnis is the strong and consistent presence of a rearward-pointing chevron pattern on the rear part of the body of N. rubripinnis, which is most strongly developed on the caudal peduncle and is due to enhanced, dark gray scale margins; on females of N. cardinalis the scale margins on the rear part of the body are pale gray and narrow, and may, in some specimens only, form an almost indiscernible chevron pattern on the caudal peduncle (Ref. 74420). The principal differences in colour pattern of males of N. annectens when compared to N. cardinalis are: the main body colour of N. annectens is iridescent blue with golden yellow scale margins; in the rear half of the body there is a strongly developed rearward-pointing chevron pattern caused by red scale margins to every second to fourth row of scales, while the scale margins on N. cardinalis are red, wide, and uniform across the body and, if a chevron pattern is present at all, it is barely discernible; the caudal fin of N. annectens is red with a broad black, vertical, marginal bar, quite different to the relative narrow marginal band shown by N. cardinalis; the pectoral ad ventral fins of N. annectens are pale yellow, whereas on N. cardinalis they are a bright solid red; the anal fin of N. annectens is pale blue, grading out into pale yellow in some populations, while the anal fin of N. cardinalis is almost completely red (Ref. 74420). In contrast to both N. cardinalis and N. rubripinnis, N. annectens lacks the light blue or white margin to the dorsal fin; in N. annectens the dorsal fin margin, if present at all, is always red (Ref. 74420). Although there is some small overlap in the ranges of some characters, males of N. cardinalis differ morphologically from those of N. rubripinnis by: a lesser snout length, 7.1-7.6% of standard length vs. 8.0-9.4%; a lesser snout to eye end length, 17.3% of standard length vs. 17.6-18.9%; a lesser head length, 28.6-32.4% of standard length vs. 31.4-38.3%; a lesser caudal peduncle depth, 13.1-14.3% of standard length vs. 14.2-15.4%; a lesser caudal peduncle length, 19.8-22.9% of standard length vs. 23.1-25.7%; a greater body width, 17.3-19.5% of standard length vs. 12.9-16.7%; a lesser body depth, 30.1-31.6% of standard length vs. 31.1-35.8%; and a greater body length, 67.5-71.4% of standard length vs. 63.5-68.6% (Ref. 74420). Morphological characteristics of the female of N. cardinalis compared to those of N. rubripinnis are less distinctive: a greater body width, 18.7% of standard length vs. 13.2-18.8%; a lesser interorbital width, 7.7% of standard length vs. 8.3-13.5%; a shorter snout to eye end length, 16.4% of standard length vs. 16.5-17.4%; a lesser caudal peduncle depth, 10.8% of standard length vs. 11.6-13.2%; and a shorter anal fin base, 12.6% of standard length vs. 14.1-15.1% (Ref. 74420). The males of N. cardinalis differ in morphology from those of N. annectens by: a greater body width, 17.3% of standard length vs. 14.1-15.0%; a lesser predorsal length, 55.3-57.9% of standard length vs. 56.0-66.7%; a lesser preanal length, 58.2-60.5% of standard length vs. 59.2-66.9%; a lesser number of anal fin rays, 13-14 vs. 15-16; a greater number of scales on the side of the body at the ventral fin position, 12 vs. 11; and a greater number of scales around the caudal peduncle, 16 vs. 14 (Ref. 74420). The morphological characteristics of the female of N. cardinalis compared to those of N. annectens are more distinctive than for the male: a greater body length, 69.0% of standard length vs. 65.3%; a lesser body depth, 28.3% of standard length vs. 28.5-32.3%; a lesser interorbital width, 7.7% of standard length vs. 11.1-12.7%; a lesser snout length, 5.1% of standard length vs. 5.7-7.9%; a greater preanal length, 67.0% of standard length vs. 59.6-67.3%; a greater prepelvic length, 53.7% of standard length vs. 46.8-53.1%; a lesser caudal peduncle depth, 10.8% of standard length vs. 12.1-14.4%; and a lesser number of anal fins rays, 14 vs. 15-16 (Ref. 74420).

زيست شناسي     واژه نامه (بعنوان مثال epibenthic)

Nothobranchius cardinalis is found in residual, ephemeral pools, which would dry up completely on a seasonal basis; except for some grasses on the banks that hung over into the water, the pool of the type locality was devoid of vegetation of any sort; the substrate comprised a thick layer of very fine, soft, black mud (Ref. 74420). Eggs deposited in the substrate by the adult fish survive therein through the dry season, experiencing numerous phases of development with intervening diapauses; the eggs then hatch at the onset of the following rainy season (Ref. 74420).

Life cycle and mating behavior بلوغ | تولید مثل | تخم ریزی | تخم ها | Fecundity | توزاد ( لارو)

Eggs deposited in the substrate by the adult fish survive in the seasonal pool through the dry season, experiencing numerous phases of development with intervening diapauses; the eggs then hatch at the onset of the following rainy season (Ref. 74420).

مآخذ اصلی Upload your references | مراجع | هماهنگ كننده | همكاران

Watters, B.W., B.J. Cooper and R.H. Wildekamp, 2008. Description of Nothobranchius cardinalis spec. nov. (Cyprinodontiformes: Aplocheilidae), an annual fish from the Mbwemkuru River basin, Tanzania. J. Am. Killifsh Ass. 40(5&6):129-145. (Ref. 74420)

وضعيت در فهرست قرمز IUCN (Ref. 130435)


CITES

Not Evaluated

CMS (Ref. 116361)

Not Evaluated

خطر برای انسان ها

  Harmless





استفاده انسانی

ماهي گيري – شيلات:
FAO - Publication: search | FishSource |

اطلاعات بيشتر

كشورها
مناطق سازمان خوار و بار جهاني (FAO)
Ecosystems
ظهور
معرفي
Stocks
بوم شناسي
عادت غذايي
اقلام غذايي
مصرف غذايي
سهمیه
اسامي عام
مترادف
سوخت و ساز
شکارچیان
سم شناسي بوم زيستي
تولید مثل
بلوغ
تخم ریزی
Spawning aggregation
Fecundity
تخم ها
نمو تخم
Age/Size
رشد
طول - وزن
طول - طول
نوسانات طولی
ريخت ستجي بوسيله انداره گيري
ريخت شناسي
توزاد ( لارو)
پويايي لاروي
بازسازی
فراواني
BRUVS
مراجع
آبزي پروري
نمايه آبزي پروري
نژادها
ژنتيك
Electrophoreses
وارث
بيماري ها
فرآوری
Nutrients
Mass conversion
همكاران
عکس ها
Stamps, Coins Misc.
صداها
سيگواترا
سرعت
نوع شناگری
منطقه آبششي
Otoliths
مغزها
بینایی

ابزارها

گزارش های ويژه

بارگيری XML

منابع اينترنتي

AFORO (otoliths) | Aquatic Commons | BHL | Cloffa | BOLDSystems | Websites from users | فيش واچر را ببينيد | CISTI | Catalog of Fishes: جنس, گونه ها | DiscoverLife | ECOTOX | FAO - Publication: search | Faunafri | Fishipedia | Fishtrace | GenBank: ژنوم, نوکلئوتيد | GloBI | Google Books | Google Scholar | Google | IGFA World Record | MitoFish | Otolith Atlas of Taiwan Fishes | PubMed | Reef Life Survey | Socotra Atlas | Tree of Life | Wikipedia: برو, جستجو | World Records Freshwater Fishing | Zoobank | Zoological Record

Estimates based on models

Phylogenetic diversity index (Ref. 82804):  PD50 = 0.5000   [Uniqueness, from 0.5 = low to 2.0 = high].
Bayesian length-weight: a=0.01096 (0.00449 - 0.02680), b=2.92 (2.71 - 3.13), in cm total length, based on LWR estimates for this (Sub)family-body shape (Ref. 93245).
Trophic level (Ref. 69278):  3.1   ±0.4 se; based on size and trophs of closest relatives
Fishing Vulnerability (Ref. 59153):  Low vulnerability (10 of 100).