Abstract
Abstract Several recent notes prove that taxonomic relations of close relative animal groups (species complexes or cryptic species) can be revealed by the combined use of genetic and morphologic methodologies. At the same time scarce information can be found about how phylogeny, population origin, and sexual dimorphism affect the morphometric features of these species. In our present work, we performed simultaneous phylogenetic and morphological studies on the taxonomically still questionable Carpathian stream dwelling gudgeons (Cyprinidae, Gobio) by using two different methodologies (distance based and geometric morphometry). Our results were in correspondence with the previous findings, showing the presence of three phylogenetically more or less distinct groups in the area. The results of the whole-body geometric and the traditional, distance-based morphometry reflected the extent of phylogenetic differences. While the results of geometric scale morphometry did not correspond with the genetic subdivisions. Results of three way PERMANOVA analyses showed that the phylogenetic effects on morphometry is less considerable as the population origin or the sexual dimorphism at these cyprinid taxa. Our investigation contributed to the better understanding of the taxonomy of fish stocks in the Carpathian Basin, and to their conservation, but additional investigations will be needed to clarify the exact taxonomic position of the gudgeons (’Gobio sp1’) dominating the eastern part of the studied drainage.
Highlights
It has long been known that the vast majority of species can consist of phenotypically closely related entities or form species complexes (Mayr, 1948; Winterbottom et al, 2014; Victor, 2015)
On the basis of the results of the phylogenetic analyses, the sequences of the 102 individuals were classified into eight haplotypes (H01-H08), which were deposited in the GenBank with the following accession numbers: om222046-53
The gms did not showed any congruence with the results of phylogenetic works, whilst the gmb and dbm verified the phylogenetic subdivisions of individuals
Summary
It has long been known that the vast majority of species can consist of phenotypically closely related entities (cryptic species) or form species complexes (Mayr, 1948; Winterbottom et al, 2014; Victor, 2015) This intraspecific variability is considered as the cornerstone of evolution (Coyne et al, 1998; Pfenninger et al, 2007); it provides an important segment of global biodiversity. While molecular methods provide adequate information on the phylogenetic differences of these newly discovered groups or species, there is much less information available about how the revealed genetic differences get to fixation in a population, if they manifest at all, in the phenotype in general. In some cases it is still questionable if there are any tangible phenotypic features, which would reflect the phylogenetic differences of the newly described entities (species or subspecies)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
