Abstract
A molecular phylogeny of Planaltina, including the three previously described species and an undescribed species, is presented. The monophyly of the genus, included in Diapomini, is strongly supported. Its sister group, the remaining Diapomini, includes only species without modified caudal-fin squamation in the present analysis (species of Diapoma with caudal organs were not sampled). Creagrutus is sister to Planaltina plus remaining Diapomini instead of Planaltina being sister to Creagrutus plus Diapomini, as a previous analysis had suggested. Species of Planaltina form two clades: P. britskii plus the new species, with low support (< 50%); and P. myersi plus P. glandipedis, with higher support. Planaltina is rediagnosed from all Characidae based on the morphology of the caudal organ, the absence of a humeral spot and the presence of a complete lateral line. Comments on the caudal-fin squamation of Diapoma and Lepidocharax burnsi, on the type-series of L. burnsi and on the geographic distribution of Planaltina and Lepidocharax species are provided. Finally, a formal description of the aforementioned new species and a novel identification key to Planaltina are presented.
Highlights
The past ten years brought several advancements to the understanding of the characid phylogeny
This paper aims to investigate the relationships of Planaltina based on a molecular phylogenetic analysis, including the new species, in order to test its monophyly, permitting the proposition of a revised diagnosis of the genus
Partial sequences of the mitochondrial genes 16SrRNA and Cytochrome b (CytB) and the nuclear genes recombination activating gene 1 (Rag1), recombination activating gene 2 (Rag2) and myosin heavy chain 6 cardiac muscle alpha (Myh6) were amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with the primers listed in S1 File
Summary
The past ten years brought several advancements to the understanding of the characid phylogeny. Much work was directed to the Stevardiinae (as defined by Thomaz et al [1]), with highly diverging results. Data sources included the traditional external morphology and osteology [2, 3], and histology [4, 5] and DNA [1, 6, 7]. Available phenotypic studies [5, 8] seem to have overestimated resemblance between caudal organs in the former members of the Glandulocaudinae (sensu Weitzman & Menezes [8]), masking their now-evident polyphyly [1, 7].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
