Search

Key to Upper Paraná basin species of Imparfinis 1. 11−12 gill rakers on first ceratobranchial; conspicuous longitudinal dark stripe along flank; first dorsal-fin ray longer or approximately of same length of second ray........................................................ I. schubarti 1’. 5−7 gill rackers on first ceratobranchial; inconspicuous longitudinal dark stripe along flank; first dorsal-fin ray shorter than second ray;.......................................................................................... 2 2. Orbital diameter 11.8−19.9% in HL; caudal peduncle depth 8.0−12.2% in SL................................. I. mirini 2’ Orbital diameter 20.0− 25.5 in HL; caudal peduncle depth 5.3−7.6 in SL.......................................... 3 3. 39−40 vertebrae, 7−8 gill rackers on first ceratobranchial, body uniformly colored.......................... I. piperatus 3’. 38 vertebrae, 5−6 gill rackers on first ceratobranchial, body mottled colored............................... I. lepturus

Imparfinis lepturus, new species (Fig. 3; Table 4) urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 057B59BB-CADB-4EEF-9F44-6ED11BC85520 Holotype. MZUSP 127602, 44.9 mm SL, Brazil, Goiás, Aporé, Upper Paraná River basin, rio Corrente, 18°30’50.7”S 52°05’46.4”W, 15 Jul 2022, J. Crispim, L. Reia, G.S.C. Silva. Paratypes. Brazil, Goiás, Aporé: LBP 25732, 16, 22.6−44.1 mm SL, 1 c&s (39.5 mm SL), Upper Paraná River basin, rio Corrente, 18°30’50.7”S 52°05’46.4”W, 28 Nov 2017, R. Devidé, B. Melo, C. Araya, G.S.C. Silva. LBP 32018, 12, 31.9−51.3 mm SL, 2 c&s (30.9−39.3 mm), same data as the holotype. Diagnosis. Imparfinis lepturus differs from its congeners by having a mottled colored body, with concentrated chromatophores forming patches of black pigmentation (Fig. 3 and 6) (vs. uniformly counter-shaded). Additionally, the new species differs from trans-Andean species by absence of a short extension of the pectoral, dorsal, and upper caudal-fin rays (vs. presence in I. usmai and I. nemacheir), by having six gill rakers on the first ceratobranchial (vs. 10-11 in I. spurrelii), 38 vertebrae (vs. 39−40 in I. usmai, 42 in I. lineatus, 42−43 in I. timana, 45 in I. spurrellii). The new species differs from Amazon species by having 38 vertebrae (vs. 39−40 in I. munduruku, 40 in I. hasemani, 41 in I. cochabambae, 43−44 in I. longicauda), by having six gill rackers on the first ceratobranchial (vs. 15 in I. cochabambae), by absence of a short extension of the pectoral, dorsal, and upper caudal-fin rays (vs. present in I. guttatus). The new species differs from I. piJpersi from Sipaliwini River and from I. minutus from S„o Francisco River by having longer maxillary barbel, reaching pelvic-fin origin (vs. not surpassing distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), from I. minutus from S„o Francisco River by having 38 vertebrae (vs. 41), from I. mishky from Uruguai and lower Paraná basins by having 38 vertebrae (vs. 41), six gill rackers on first ceratobranchial (vs. nine), and maxillary barbel only reaching pelvic-fin origin (vs. surpassing pelvic-fin origin). Finally, the new species differs from its congeners from the Upper Paraná basin by having three irregular rows of teeth on premaxilla (vs. 5-6 in I. mirini, I. piperatus, and I. schubarti); by having 38 vertebrae (vs. 39−40 in I. piperatus; 40−41 in I. schubarti), by having six gill rackers on first ceratobranchial (vs. 7−8 in I. mirini and 11 in I. schubarti), a greater eye diameter 21.3−26.3% of HL (vs. 11.8−19.9% in I. mirini), by smaller caudal peduncle depth 6.6−7.6% of SL (vs. 8.0−12.2% in I. mirini; 10.0−12.3% of SL in I. schubarti), by having the first dorsal-fin ray shorter than the second (vs. longer or approximately of same length that second ray in I. schubarti), by having the lower caudal-fin lobe darker (vs. both lobes hyaline in I. mirini and I. piperatus), and by absence of dark strip along flank (vs. presence of conspicuous longitudinal dark stripe in I. schubarti). Description. Morphometric data are summarized in Table 4. Head slightly convex in lateral view. Snout short and rounded in dorsal view. Lateral profile of head slightly convex from snout tip to occipital region. Eyes large and elliptical, dorsolaterally positioned, just anterior to midpoint of head. Mouth subterminal. Upper jaw longer than lower jaw. Premaxilla and dentary with three irregular rows of small conic teeth. Maxillary barbel reaching posterior end of dorsal-fin base, when outstretched. Outer mental barbel longer than inner barbel. Outer mental barbel reaching posterior end of pectoral-fin base when outstretched. Inner mental barbel reaching the origin of pectoral-fin base when outstretched. Branchiostegal membrane free, supported by seven rays and joined to isthmus only at anteriormost point. Six gill rakers along anterior margin of first ceratobranchial. Greatest body width at cleithral region, progressively narrowing anteriorly towards snout tip and posteriorly towards caudal fin. In lateral view, body depressed and convex in shape from end of head to dorsal-fin origin; slightly concave from dorsal-fin origin to adipose-fin origin; straight from adipose-fin origin to caudal peduncle. In lateral view, ventral profile straight and descending from snout tip to opercular region; slightly convex from opercular region to pelvic-fin origin; straight from that point to anal-fin origin; slightly concave from that point to origin of lower procurrent caudal-fin rays. Precaudal vertebrae 12 (seven supporting pleural ribs) and caudal vertebrae 26, total vertebrae 38. Pectoral fin with one simple and eight branched rays. Pelvic fin i,5. First pelvic-fin ray shorter, second, third and fourth branched rays longer. Dorsal-fin i,6. Dorsal-fin unbranched ray slightly convex. First basal radial inserted in vertebra 7 and last basal radial anterior to neural spine of vertebra 12. Adipose fin long (22.6−26.7% of SL). Anal fin iv,8. Caudal skeleton composed of a plate formed by parhypural + hypurals 1 and 2 in lower lobe, upper lobe plate formed by hypurals 3 and 4 fused, hypural 5 free, and pleurostile fused to compound centrum. Caudal fin with i,8+9,i principal rays. Upper and lower caudal-fin lobes approximately symmetrical. Six to seven procurrents rays in dorsal and ventral lobes. Color in alcohol. Background color of body yellowish dorsolaterally and white ventrolaterally. Irregular dark-brown patches formed by concentrated melanophores along lateral portion of body. Head yellowish. Five conspicuous dark brown saddles along dorsal portion of body: first just after head, second at dorsal-fin origin, third at insertion of last dorsal-fin rays; fourth at mid-point between dorsal and adipose fins. Anterior and posterior region at insertions of adipose fin densely darkly pigmented. Humeral region with a large dark blotch. All fins hyaline. Distribution and habitat. The new species is only known from the rio Corrente, Upper Paraná River basin at the municipality of Aporé, in Goiás state, Brazil (Fig. 1a). Specimens were captured in fast-water habitat, associated with marginal vegetation (Fig. 4). Etymology. The specific epithet lepturus is from Greek lepto meaning slender, and oura meaning tail, in reference to the depressed caudal peduncle. An adjective.

Imparfinis lineatus (Bussing, 1970). Pigmy Catfish; Barbudito. Distribution: Global: Middle America; southern Costa Rica, Pacific drainages; Costa Rica: Tr (Pacific), 80��� 980 m.a.s.l., Pri, Pot. Occurrence and conservation status: End, EN. References: Bussing (1987: 103, as Nannorhamdia lineata ���synonym; 1998: 144, as N. lineata ���synonym; brief description, including illustrations and an identification key, information on distribution, with a map, and ecology) and Angulo et al. (2013: 993; listed, including taxonomic information and distributional data)., Published as part of Angulo, Arturo, 2021, New records and range extensions to the Costa Rican freshwater fish fauna, with an updated checklist, pp. 1-72 in Zootaxa 5083 (1) on page 30, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5083.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/5800630

Imparfinis minutus (Lütken, 1874b) Figure 3B Geographic distribution: Upper São Francisco, upper Paraná, Paraíba do Sul and Ribeira de Iguape river basins., Published as part of de Brito, Victor & Buckup, Paulo Andreas, 2019, The fish fauna of the upper Piraí drainage, a transposed mountain river system in southeastern, Brazil, pp. 235-247 in Check List 15 (1) on page 242, DOI: 10.15560/15.1.235, {"references":["Lutken CF (1874 b) Siluridae novae Brasiliae centralis a clarissimo J. Reinhardt in provincia Minas-geraes circa oppidulum Lagoa Santa, praecipue in flumine Rio das Velhas et affluentibus collectae, secundum caracteres essentiales, breviter descriptae. Oversigt over det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs Forhandlinger 1874 (1): 29 - 36."]}

Imparfinis 1. Body very elongate; adipose-fin base very long, extending to caudal fin, its length about half the stardard length, several times longer than anal-fin base; head depressed .............................................................. I. borodini 1’. Body not elongate; adipose-fin base short, not extending to caudal fin, its length contained several times in stardard length, about the same as that of anal-fin base; head not depressed.............................................................. 2 2. Dark-brown inconspicuous longitudinal band along flank; first dorsal-fin ray approximately the same size as the second................................................................. I. mirini 2’. Dark-brown conspicuous longitudinal band along flank; first dorsal-fin ray shorter than the second............................................................................................ I. schubarti, Published as part of Ota, Renata Rúbia, Deprá, Gabriel de Carvalho, Graça, Weferson Júnio da & Pavanelli, Carla Simone, 2018, Peixes da planície de inundação do alto rio Paraná e áreas adjacentes: revised, annotated and updated, pp. 1-111 in Neotropical Ichthyology 16 (2) on pages 67-68, DOI: 10.1590/1982-0224-20170094, http://zenodo.org/record/3678395

Imparfinis schubarti (Gomes, 1956) Fig. 21 Body elongated; greatest body depth contained 5.1 to 5.3, head depth 6.9 to 7.4 and caudal peduncle depth 8.4 to 9.0 times in SL; head length 4.8 to 5.3, anal-fin base length 6.4 to 7.0, adipose-fin base length 4.7 to 5.6 and maxillarybarbel length 2.4 to 2.7 times in SL; snout length 2.2 to 2.4, horizontal orbital diameter 3.4 to 4.5 and least interorbital width 3.6 to 3.8 times in HL. Mouth terminal; premaxilla and dentary with several diminute and viliform teeth. Dorsal fin with 7, pectoral fin with 8-11, pelvic fin with 6 and anal fin with 11-14 rays. Ground color beige; few scaterred dark-brown on body, except on ventral regdion of head and abdominal region; dark-brown transverse bars on dorsum; dark-brown conspicuous longitudinal stripe along lateral line. Yellowish or hyaline fins (Graça, Pavanelli, 2007). Maximum standard length. 70.4 mm (Graça, Pavanelli, 2007). Distribution. Upper rio Paraná basin., Published as part of Ota, Renata Rúbia, Deprá, Gabriel de Carvalho, Graça, Weferson Júnio da & Pavanelli, Carla Simone, 2018, Peixes da planície de inundação do alto rio Paraná e áreas adjacentes: revised, annotated and updated, pp. 1-111 in Neotropical Ichthyology 16 (2) on page 69, DOI: 10.1590/1982-0224-20170094, http://zenodo.org/record/3678395, {"references":["Pavanelli CS, Graca WJ, Zawadzki CH, Britski HA, Vidotti AP, Avelino GS, Verissimo S. Fishes from the Corumba Reservoir, Paranaiba River drainage, upper rio Parana basin, State of Goias, Brazil. Check List. 2007; 3 (1): 58 - 64."]}

Imparfinis borodini Mees, Cala, 1989 Fig. 21 Body elongated; greatest body depth contained 8.0, head depth 10.1 and caudal peduncle depth 14.4 times in SL; head length 4.0, anal-fin base length 8.8, adipose-fin base length 2.9 and maxillary-barbel length 4.8 times in SL; snout length 3.0, horizontal orbital diameter 5.7 and least interorbital width 4.5 times in HL. Mouth terminal; premaxilla and dentary with several diminute teeth. Dorsal fin with 7, pectoral fin with 8, pelvic fin with 6 and anal fin with 8 rays. Ground color pale brown; dark-brown transverse bars on dorsum; dark-brown inconspicuous longitudinal stripe along lateral line. Maximum standard length. 105.0 mm. Biological data. Lives in streams with sand, silt and pebbles (Sarmento-Soares et al., 2016). Distribution. Upper rio Paraná, rio São Francisco and rio Tocantins basins., Published as part of Ota, Renata Rúbia, Deprá, Gabriel de Carvalho, Graça, Weferson Júnio da & Pavanelli, Carla Simone, 2018, Peixes da planície de inundação do alto rio Paraná e áreas adjacentes: revised, annotated and updated, pp. 1-111 in Neotropical Ichthyology 16 (2) on page 68, DOI: 10.1590/1982-0224-20170094, http://zenodo.org/record/3678395, {"references":["Sarmento-Soares LM, Bristki HA, Anjos M, Zanata AM, Martins- Pinheiro RF, Barreto MG. First record of genus Imparfinis from a northeastern coastal Brazilian river basin: I. borodini Mees & Cala, 1989 in Rio de Contas, Bahia. Check List [serial on the internet]. 2016 [cited 2016 Dec 08]; 12 (1): 1832. Available from: http: // dx. doi. org / 10.15560 / 12.1.1832"]}

Imparfinis mirini Haseman, 1911 Fig. 21 Body elongated; greatest body depth contained 5.1 to 5.3, head depth 7.7 to 8.0 and caudal peduncle depth 9.4 to 10.0 times in SL; head length 5.0 to 5.4, anal-fin base length 6.3 to 6.8, adipose-fin base length 4.6 to 4.8 and maxillary-barbel length 2.5 to 2.6 times in SL; snout length 1.9 to 2.4, horizontal orbital diameter 6.0 to 6.3 and least interorbital width 2.5 to 2.6 times in HL. Mouth terminal; premaxilla and dentary with several diminute and viliform teeth. Dorsal fin with 7, pectoral fin with 8-11, pelvic fin with 6 and anal fin with 11-14 rays. Ground color pale yellow; dark-brown transverse bars on dorsum; dark-brown inconspicuous longitudinal stripe along lateral line. Yellowish fins (Graça, Pavanelli, 2007). Maximum standard length. 64.4 mm (Graça, Pavanelli, 2007). Distribution. Upper rio Araguaia and upper Paraná basins (Eschmeyer et al., 2017)., Published as part of Ota, Renata Rúbia, Deprá, Gabriel de Carvalho, Graça, Weferson Júnio da & Pavanelli, Carla Simone, 2018, Peixes da planície de inundação do alto rio Paraná e áreas adjacentes: revised, annotated and updated, pp. 1-111 in Neotropical Ichthyology 16 (2) on page 68, DOI: 10.1590/1982-0224-20170094, http://zenodo.org/record/3678395, {"references":["Pavanelli CS, Graca WJ, Zawadzki CH, Britski HA, Vidotti AP, Avelino GS, Verissimo S. Fishes from the Corumba Reservoir, Paranaiba River drainage, upper rio Parana basin, State of Goias, Brazil. Check List. 2007; 3 (1): 58 - 64.","Eschmeyer WN, Fricke R, van der Laan R, editors. Catalog of fishes: genera, species, references [Internet]. San Francisco: California Academy of Science; 2017 [updated 2017 Jan 31; cited 2017 Feb 24]. Available from: http: // researcharchive. calacademy. org / research / ichthyology / catalog / fishcatmain. asp"]}

Pimelodella taenioptera Miranda Ribeiro, 1914 and Imparfinis schubarti (Gomes, 1956) are two of the most common fish species in Bodoquena Plateau streams, Paraguay basin. These species have benthic habits and subaquatical observations suggested that they present differentiation in their preference for mesohabitat types. Pimelodella taenioptera shows preference for slow waters, such as pools, while I. schubarti is associated to riffles. In this study we investigated if the known patterns of mesohabitat use of P. taenioptera and I. schubarti can be predict by their ecomorphological and trophic traits. We described the dietary habits and ecomorphological attributes of P. taenioptera and I. schubarti individuals, captured in the Parque Nacional da Serra da Bodoquena (PNSB), Mato Grosso do Sul state, central Brazil. Pimelodella taenioptera presented a more generalist diet, consuming a total of 23 different food items. Imparfinis schubarti have a diet based exclusively on aquatic insects. The ecomorphological analysis revealed that the species differed in relation to five morphological traits associated to habitat use (p

Five Imparfinis mirini and one Imparfinis minutus populations were studied using basic cytogenetic and molecular techniques. Cytogenetic analysis showed that I. mirini individuals presented the same diploid number 2n=58 (FN=116). However, they presented two distinct karyomorphs: karyomorph A (36m+18sm+4st) for the Mogi-Guaçu and Paranapanema basin populations, and karyomorph B (42m+12sm+4st) for the Tietê basin populations. I. minutus populations from the Paraíba do Sul basin presented a karyotype identical to karyomorph A of I. mirini. C-banding also presented distinct patterns, with a greater amount of heterochromatin, most of which was pericentromeric and interstitial for karyomorph A I. mirini and I. minutus. There was a minor amount of heterochromatin in karyomorph B, most of which was terminal and interstitial. Simple and interstitial nucleoli organizer regions were located in the biggest metacentric pair of the complement in all populations with GC-rich nature, and this location was confirmed by the fluorescent in situ hybridization technique with 18S ribosomal DNA with 5S rDNA synteny. In molecular analysis by DNA barcoding, two other populations from the Tietê basin were added. The phylogram showed that the populations were more related to the intrabasin. Cytogenetic resemblance among specimens from distinct basins may be the result of either recent convergence or ancestral feature retention not followed by mutations in mitochondrial DNA.

Imparfinis mishky sp. n. is described from the río Paraná and río Uruguay basins in Argentina. Imparfinis mishky sp. n. is distinguished from other species of the genus by the following combination of characters: pectoral-fin spine with smooth anterior and posterior margins; caudal fin deeply forked with dorsal lobe longer than ventral lobe; adipose fin not reaching caudal fin; body with six dark saddles across the dorsum, and without a mid-lateral band. It was found inhabiting well oxygenated, neutral pH, flowing waters, with sandy or cobble covered bottom., Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo

Were analysed cytogenetically 53 specimens of Imparfinis aff. schubarti of the basin of the Tibagi river (Parana ´,Brazil). The diploid number of 58 chromosomes was observed and a karyotype of 28M+28SM+2ST with a fundamental number (FN) of 116. The nucleolus organizer regions (NORs) were studied by means of AgNO3 and CMA3 staining, as well as by FISH using an 18S rDNA probe. NORs were found to be located at the interstitial po- sition on the long arm of the first metacentric chromosome pair, corresponding to a secondary constriction observed in the conventional staining. AgNO3 and CMA3 evidenced a size heteromorphism between the NORs of the homolo- gous chromosomes. However, after FISH no difference was observed in the size of the homologous NORs. The first M pair. showed a pale C-banding in the pericentromeric region.

Imparfinis borodini Mees & Cala, 1989 is recorded in low population abundance in the upper Paraná, Tocantins and São Francisco river drainages according to the scientific literature and available collection data, but it has not been previously recorded from a coastal Brazilian river. Herein, the geographic range of this species is extended to the Rio de Contas basin in northeastern Brazil. This represents the first record in a coastal system. Additionally, I. borodini was captured in the middle Rio São Francisco at Barreiras. Both new records are the first from Bahia state, Northeastern Brazil.

Imparfinis timana, new species Fig. 1 Holotype. IAvH-P 10696, 74.2 mm SL, Colombia, Departamento del Huila, Municipio Palestina, r��o Guarapas, in the mouth of quebrada La Quebradona, small tributary of upper r��o Magdalena basin, 01��45���49���N 76��05���05���W, 1350 m asl, 17Aug 2005, J.A. Maldonado- Ocampo, J. Bogot��-Gregory, F. Villa-Navarro & A. Ortega-Lara. Paratypes. Colombia: r��o Magdalena basin: Departamento del Huila: CZUT-IC 2389, 4, 29.6-46.8 mm SL, collected with the holotype. IAvH-P 7062, 5, 51.0-72.0 mm SL, collected with the holotype. IAvH-P 7061, 9, 54.7-76.6 mm SL (2 CS, 62.7-76.2 mm SL), IMCN 1203, 1 CS, 62.5 mm SL, MBUCV-V-33735, 3, 47.9-68.8 mm SL (1 CS, 47.9 mm SL), Municipio Palestina, quebrada La Quebradona, in the mouth of r��o Guarapas, 01��45���51���N 76��05���21���W, 1350 m asl, same date and collectors as the holotype. IAvH-P 7067, 36, 42.4-57.2 mm SL (1 CS, 42.4 mm SL), IMCN 2003, 2, 51.6-60.7 mm SL, Municipio Pitalito, r��o Guarapas, Tasajera, 01��51���25���N 76��02���34.2���W, 1320 m asl, same date and collectors as the holotype. Diagnosis. This species is distinguished from all trans-Andean species of the genus (I. lineatus, I. nemacheir, I. spurrellii, and I. usmai) by its longer adipose-fin (24.6-31.3% in SL vs. 17.2-18.6% in I. lineatus; 19.0-21.8% in I. nemacheir; 21.1- 22.9% in I. spurrellii; 21.1-27.0% in I. usmai) and longer analfin base (12.4-15.5% in SL vs. 10.9-11.7% in I. lineatus; 9.6- 13.1% in I. nemacheir; 11.5-12.0 % in I. spurrellii; 10.8-14.5% in I. usmai). Imparfinis timana can be differentiated from all trans-Andean species, except I. lineatus, by having 5-6 gill rakers on the first ceratobranchial (vs. 7-8 in I. nemacheir and I. usmai; 10-11 in I. spurrellii); 42-43 vertebrae (vs. 38-40 in I. nemacheir; 45 in I. spurrellii; 39-40 in I. usmai) and greater caudal peduncle depth (7.1-8.7% in SL vs. 5.3-6.9% in I. nemacheir; 7.0-7.2% in I. spurrellii; 5.6-7.8% in I. usmai). Imparfinis timana is distinguished from I. nemacheir and I. spurrellii, by a greater interorbital width (29.4-38.1 % in HL vs. 28.2-30.5% in I. nemacheir; 23.6-24.3% in I. spurrellii). Imparfinis timana is further recognized from I. lineatus by its shorter predorsal length (30.7-36.9% in SL vs. 36.0-37.9%); by the longer maxillary barbel (exceeding end of pectoral-fin, maxillary barbel length: 32.3-45.0% in SL vs. extending to half length of pectoral fin, 24.0-32.6%), and by the upper caudal fin lobe longer than lower lobe (lower caudal fin lobe length/ upper caudal fin lobe length: 0.73-0.93 times) vs. both lobes approximately symmetrical (0.93-0.96 times). Imparfinis timana also differs from I. nemacheir by having the first ray of dorsal and pectoral fins shorter than the second ray of the respective fin (vs. longer and extended as a filament projected beyond the margin in both fins); shorter maxillary barbels (not surpassing the pelvic-fin base vs. surpassing the pelvic-fin base) and shorter caudal-fin lobes (upper caudal-fin lobe length: 21.9-28.0% in SL vs. 38.2-52.1%; lower caudal-fin lobe length: 18.4-23.8% in SL vs. 28.6-32.3%). Imparfinis timana is readily distinguished from all cis-Andean congeners as follows: from I. borodini by having a deeper head (1.6-1.9 times in HL vs. ca. 2.2 times, obtained from holotype picture), longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic fin vs. slightly beyond pectoral-fin base), fewer vertebrae (42-43 vs. 49-54), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 12-13), pelvic-fin origin at or slightly posterior to mid-distance of dorsal-fin base (vs. at vertical or slightly anterior to dorsal-fin origin), shorter adipose fin (3.19- 4.06 times in SL vs. 2.67 times), fewer total anal-fin rays (11-13 vs. 14-15), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 (vs. vertebra 30-31), caudal fin deeply forked (vs. caudal fin obliquely truncated with upper end longer and prolonged in a pointed tip), and more branched caudal-fin rays (7+8 vs. 6+6); from I. cochabambae (Fowler, 1940) by having fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 15), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 41), pectoral-fin distal tip not reaching pelvic-fin origin (vs. surpassing pelvic-fin origin), longer adipose fin (3.19-4.06 times in SL vs. 4.12 times), and lower caudal-fin lobe rounded (vs. pointed); from I. guttatus by having fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 14), longer adipose fin (3.19-4.06 times vs. ca. 5.65 times, obtained from holotype picture), both caudal-fin lobes similarly pigmented (vs. lower caudal-fin lobe darker), and hypural 5 partially fused at base with 3+4 (vs. free); from I. hasemani by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. not surpassing pectoral-fin distal margin), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 40), fewer pleural ribs (9 vs. 10) and longer adipose-fin (24.6-31.3% in SL vs. 20.9-21.6%, obtained from measurements in Steindachner, 1915); from I. hollandi by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic fin vs. not surpassing pectoral-fin distal margin), fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 9), fewer vertebrae (42-43 vs. 52-53), fewer pleural ribs (9 vs. 11), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 12), pelvic-fin origin at or slightly posterior to mid-distance of dorsal-fin base (vs. at vertical or slightly posterior to dorsal-fin origin), adipose fin free from caudal fin (vs. continuous), fewer total anal-fin rays (11-13 vs. 14-15), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 (vs. vertebra 29-30), caudal fin deeply forked (vs. obliquely truncated, with upper end prolonged), and more branched caudal-fin rays (7+8 vs. 6+5-6); from I. longicauda by having a longer head (4.22-5.1 times in SL vs. 6 times or more), and insertion of first dorsalfin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 8); from I. microps Eigenmann & Fisher, 1916 by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. not extending beyond posterior margin of branchiostegal membrane), fewer branchiostegal rays (7-8 vs. 9), more gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 4-5), fewer vertebrae (42-43 vs. 46-47), more pleural ribs (9 vs. 8), more branched pectoral-fin rays (8-9 vs. 7), more posterior pelvic-fin origin (at or slightly posterior to mid-distance of dorsal-fin base vs. anterior to dorsal-fin origin), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 15), fewer branched anal-fin rays (7-8 vs. 9), anal-fin origin at vertical through adipose-fin origin (vs. anterior), insertion of first analfin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 (vs. vertebra 26), and more branched caudal-fin rays (7+8 vs. 6+6); from I. minutus by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. not surpassing distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 41), more pleural ribs (9 vs. 8), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 8-9), and longer adipose fin (3.19-4.06 times in SL vs. 4.7 times); from I. mirini by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. scarcely beyond distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 38-40), adipose-fin posterior end extending more posteriorly than distal margin of adpressed anal fin (vs. approximately at same level), and upper caudalfin lobe longer than lower lobe (vs. both caudal-fin lobes equal in length); from I. mishky by having fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 9), fewer branched rays on lower lobe of caudalfin (8 vs. 9), longer and deeper caudal peduncle (19.3-25.6% in SL and 7.1-8.7%, respectively vs. 17.7-20.1% and 6.4-7.8%), and greater interorbital width (29.4-38.1% in SL vs. 18.5-23.1%); from I. peruanus by having a shorter predorsal distance (2.71- 3.25 times in SL vs. 2.6 times), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 9), adipose-fin origin at vertical through anal-fin origin (vs. anterior), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 (vs. vertebra 25), PH fused with 1+2 (vs. PH free); from I. pijpersi by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. not surpassing distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), longer caudal peduncle (19.3-25.6% in SL vs. 16.1%), shorter caudal peduncle depth (7.1-8.7% in SL vs. 11.0%), and longer adipose fin (24.6-31.3% in SL vs. 13.1%); from I. piperatus by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. reaching distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 37), more pleural ribs (9 vs. 8), and insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 (vs. vertebra 20); from I. pristos by having a larger size (maximum SL: 76.7 mm vs. 38 mm, value from Bockmann & Guazelli, 2003), shorter head (4.2-5.1 times in SL vs. 3.4-3.7), longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. not surpassing distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), more gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 4-6), more vertebrae (42- 43 vs. 33-35), more pleural ribs (9 vs. 6), insertion of first dorsalfin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 6), longer adipose fin (3.19-4.06 times in SL vs. 5.0- 5.6 times), more branched anal-fin rays (7-8 vs. 5-6), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 (vs. vertebra 17-18), upper caudal-fin lobe longer than lower lobe (vs. both caudal-fin lobes equal in length), and more branched rays on caudal fin (7+8 vs. 6+7); from I. pseudonemacheir Mees & Cala, 1989 by having a larger size (maximum SL: 76.7 mm vs. 48.1 mm), shorter maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. reaching posterior end of analfin base), fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 11-14), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 35-36), first ray of dorsal and pectoral fins shorter than the second ray of the respective fin (vs. longer and extended as a filament projected beyond the margin in both fins), pectoral-fin distal end not reaching pelvic-fin origin (vs. reaching or surpassing pelvic-fin base), longer adipose fin (3.19-4.06 times in SL vs. 4.5-5.0 times), anal-fin origin at the same level of adipose-fin origin (vs. posterior), distal margin of adpressed anal fin anterior to adipose-fin posterior end (vs. posterior), upper caudal-fin lobe longer than lower lobe (vs. both caudal-fin lobes equal in length), and sides of body without distinct markings (vs. four irregular dark patches); from I. schubarti by having longer maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. reaching or scarcely beyond distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8 vs. 11-16), fewer vertebrae (42-43 vs. 39-40), longer adipose-fin base (24.6-31.3% in SL vs. 18.7-22.6%), and shorter preanal length (62.2-70.6% in SL vs. 71.0-74.7%); and from I. stictonotus by having shorter maxillary barbels (reaching pelvic-fin base vs. extending to first half of adipose-fin base), more vertebrae (42-43 vs. 34-38), more pleural ribs (9 vs. 6-8), first ray of dorsal and pectoral fins shorter than the second ray of the respective fin (vs. longer and extended as a filament projected beyond the margin in both fins), pectoral-fin distal end not reaching pelvic-fin origin (vs. reaching or surpassing pelvic-fin base), more branched anal-fin rays (7-8 vs. 6), both caudal-fin lobes similarly pigmented (vs. lower lobe darker than upper lobe), and sides of body without distinct markings (vs. four irregular dark patches). Description. Morphometric data given in Table 1. Small heptapterid catfish (largest specimen 76.7 mm SL), with elongated body, triangular in cross-section at dorsal-fin origin, progressively more laterally compressed to tail region. Dorsal profile slightly convex from snout tip to dorsal-fin origin, slightly concave just posterior to dorsal-fin base to adipose-fin origin, straight and descending along adiposefin base, then ascending along caudal peduncle. Ventral profile of head straight, slightly convex along abdomen, then straight to anal-fin origin and slightly descending along caudal peduncle. Head conical and depressed, dorsally covered by thin skin. Snout short and broadly rounded. Mouth subterminal. Premaxillary teeth conical and pointed arranged in rectangular band with 4-5 irregular rows. Dentary with four irregular rows of teeth. Barbels dorsoventrally flattened. Maxillary barbels generally extending to pelvic-fin base, but reaching anal fin in some juvenile specimens. Anterior portion of maxillary barbel in shallow groove. Bases of outer and inner mental barbels aligned. Outer mental barbels surpass pectoral-fin base. Inner mental barbels reach pectoral-fin origin. Eye dorsolateral in position. Orbital margin not free, but delimited by shallow groove, more conspicuous along dorsal rim. Anterior naris tubular. Posterior naris rounded, slightly closer to anterior ocular margin than to anterior naris, bordered by low fleshy margin, with notch in posterior border. Nares disposed in trapezoidal arrangement.Anterior internarial width slightly shorter (mean % in HL: 15.2) than posterior internarial width (mean % in HL: 19.4). Branchiostegal membrane free, supported by 7-8 rays and joined to isthmus only at anteriormost point. Gill rakers on first gill arch eight, 5-6 arranged on anterior margin of ceratobranchial, one on cartilage between ceratobranchial and epibranchial, and 1-2 on epibranchial. Lateral line canal complete, extending to basal portion of interradial membrane of middle caudal-fin rays. Supraorbital pore S1 medially adjacent to anterior naris. S2+I2 midway between anterior and posterior nares, at end of posteriorly directed membranous tubule originating from commissure connecting supraorbital and infraorbital canals, closer to supraorbital canal. S3 posteriorly adjacent to posterior naris and S4 located approximately at mid-distance between posterior naris and eye margin and at level of medial border of posterior naris. Both S3 and S4 originating from anterior and posterior ends of bifurcated lateral membranous branch with T-shape. S7 located dorsomedial and posterior to eye, originating from short membranous tubule running posteriorly. S8 (corresponding to parietal branch), posteromedial to eye. Parietal branch running posteriorly on frontal bone, and ending close to articular suture with parietosupraoccipital bone. Infraorbital pore I1 laterally adjacent to anterior naris, just between naris and maxillary barbel base. I3 posterior to maxillary barbel base. I4 at vertical through anterior eye margin. I5 at vertical through posterior eye margin. I6 posterior to eye at end of short ventroposterior membranous tubule. Preoperculomandibular canal with 11 pores. Dentary with seven pores. Submental pores (PM1) paired and last mandibular pore (PM7) at level of articulation between anguloarticular and quadrate bones. Preopercle with three pores. Anterior pore (PM8) originating between subpreopercle and preopercle. Middle pore (PM9) originating from membranous tubule passing above interopercle and posterior pore (PM10) from membranous tubule passing above ventral portion of opercle. Last preopercular pore (PO1+PM11) at end of membranous branch dorsal to dorsal edge of opercle, close to articulation between opercle and hyomandibula. PO2 corresponding to pterotic branch, located dorsal to dorsoposterior corner of opercular margin. Axillary branch (LL1) ventral, running posterior to extrascapular. Accessory branch (PO3) dorsal to lateral line canal, ending approximately at axilar pore level. Precaudal vertebrae 12 and caudal vertebrae 30-31, totaling 42-43 vertebrae. First hemal spine on vertebra 16-17. Pleural ribs nine.Anus approximately at mid-length of pelvic fin, closer to pelvic-fin base than anal-fin origin. Urogenital papilla separated from anus by distance approximately equivalent to length of papilla. Pectoral fin i,8-9. Basal portion of simple ray ossified, distal portion soft and segmented. First and second branched rays longest. Distal margin of pectoral fin straight. Pelvic fin i,5. First pelvic-fin ray thick and shortest, second and third branched rays longest. Pelvic-fin origin at or slightly posterior to mid-distance of dorsal-fin base. Dorsal fin lacking spinelet (i.e. first lepidotrichium), with one simple (second lepidotrichium), and six branched rays. Dorsal fin triangular, second ray longest. Supporting fin elements represented by seven proximal and six distal radials. Last two branched rays articulating separately with last two pterygiophores. First proximal radial inserted posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 and last proximal radial inserted anterior to neural spine of vertebra 13.Adipose fin low, its maximum height at mid-length, and longer than anal fin, with free posterior lobe. Adipose-fin origin at vertical through anal-fin origin. Anal fin with 2-3 procurrent rays, associated with first proximal radial, two simple rays and 7-8 branched rays. Anal-fin distal margin rounded. Anal fin supported by 10 proximal and nine distal radials. First proximal radial posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23-24 and last proximal radial anterior to hemal spine of vertebra 30-31. Caudal fin deeply forked with i,7+8,i principal rays. Upper caudal-fin lobe pointed and longer than lower lobe. Lower caudal-fin lobe rounded. Dorsal procurrent caudal-fin rays 13-16, located posterior to vertebrae PU 5 -PU 6. Last 2-3 rays segmented. Ventral procurrent caudal-fin rays 13-15, located posterior to vertebrae PU 6 -PU 7. Last 2-3 rays segmented. Caudal skeleton PH, 1+2, 3+4 partially fused at base with 5. Long epural present. Coloration in alcohol. Body brownish on dorsal and lateral surfaces, and ventral region cream. Conspicuous, dark midlateral stripe, extending from posterior margin of opercle to caudal-fin origin. Dorsal surface of maxillary barbel pigmented. Outer mental barbel scarcely pigmented at basal portion. Inner mental barbel light-colored. Parieto-supraoccipital region densely pigmented. Dark blotch on opercle. Four dark saddles in dorsum, first saddle crossing predorsal region, second saddle just in front of dorsal-fin origin, third saddle on posterior half of dorsal-fin base, and last saddle between, Published as part of Ortega-Lara, Armando, Milani, Nadia, DoNascimiento, Carlos, Villa-Navarro, Francisco & Maldonado-Ocampo, Javier Alejandro, 2011, Two new trans-Andean species of Imparfinis Eigenmann & Norris, 1900 (Siluriformes: Heptapteridae) from Colombia, pp. 777-793 in Neotropical Ichthyology 9 (4) on pages 778-782, DOI: 10.1590/S1679-62252011000400009, http://zenodo.org/record/5070744

Key to the trans-Andean and Central-American species of Imparfinis 1. Maxillary barbels reaching to or exceeding pelvic-fin origin....................................................................................... 2 1’. Maxillary barbels not reaching pelvic-fin origin................ 4 2. First ray of dorsal fin longer than second ray; maxillary barbel surpassing pelvic-fin base....................................... 3 2’. First ray of dorsal fin shorter than second ray; maxillary barbel reaching pelvic-fin origin (reaching anal-fin origin in some juvenile specimens)......................... I. timana (Figs. 1, 5g; río Guarapas, upper río Magdalena basin) 3. First ray of dorsal fin projecting beyond fin margin as a long filament (length of first dorsal-fin ray: 29.2-33.1% in SL); pectoral fin surpassing pelvic-fin origin; lower caudal-fin lobe pointed, with lower branch of lowermost branched ray longer than upper branch, and extended as a filament............... ............................................ I. nemacheir (Figs. 5 b-d; río Atrato, río Magdalena and lago de Maracaibo basins) 3’. First ray of dorsal fin not projected as a long filament (length of first dorsal-fin ray: 19.1-23.2% in SL); pectoral fin not reaching pelvic-fin origin; lower caudal-fin lobe rounded in specimens longer than 30 mm SL, with both branches of lowermost branched ray approximately equal in length.................................................................. I. usmai (Figs. 3, 4, 5a; río Patía, río Cauca and río Magdalena basins) 4. Maxillary barbel extending to half the length of pectoral fin, adipose-fin length: 17.2-18.6% in SL................. I. lineatus (Fig. 5h; streams in Pacific versant of northern Costa Rica) 4’. Maxillary barbel extending to end of pectoral fin, adiposefin length:21.1-22.9% in SL.................................... I. spurrellii (Fig. 5e; río San Juan basin)

Two new species of Imparfinis are described from the trans-Andean region of Colombia. Imparfinis timana is diagnosed by having longer anal fin base (12.4-15.5% in SL), in combination with long adipose fin (24.6-31.3% in SL), 5-6 gill rakers on the first ceratobranchial, 42-43 vertebrae and additional measurements. Imparfinis usmai is distinguished by the combination of first ray of dorsal fin longest, but not projected as a long filament, long adipose fin (21.1-27.0% in SL), maxillary barbel exceeding pelvic-fin base, 39-40 vertebrae, upper caudal-fin lobe pointed and longer than lower lobe, lower lobe rounded, 7-8 gill rakers on the first ceratobranchial, as well as additional measurements. Imparfinis timana is only known from río Guarapas, a small tributary of the upper course of the río Magdalena. Imparfinis usmai is broadly distributed in the upper basin of ríos Cauca and Magdalena, and in the lower Patía river basin. The restricted distribution of I. nemacheir to trans-Andean drainages (Atrato, Magdalena, and Lago de Maracaibo) is also discussed. Duas novas espécies do gênero Imparfinis são descritas da região transandina da Colômbia. Imparfinis timana é diagnosticada por possuir as nadadeiras adiposa e anal compridas (24,6-31,3% e 12,4-15,5% no CP, respectivamente), 5-6 rastros branquiais no primeiro ceratobranquial, 42-43 vértebras, além de outros caracteres de morfometria. Imparfinis usmai é diferenciada pela combinação do primeiro raio da nadadeira dorsal longo, mas não projetado como um filamento comprido, nadadeira adiposa longa (21,1-27,0% na CP), barbilhões maxilares ultrapassando a base da nadadeira ventral, 39-40 vértebras, lóbulo superior da nadadeira caudal pontiagudo e mais longo que o lóbulo inferior, lóbulo inferior arredondado, 7-8 rastros branquiais no primeiro ceratobranquial e outros caracteres de morfometria. Imparfinis timana é conhecida somente para o rio Guarapas, pequeno tributário da bacia do alto rio Magdalena. Imparfinis usmai é amplamente distribuída nas bacias dos rios Cauca, Magdalena e Patía. A distribuição restrita de I. nemacheir nas bacias da região transandina (Atrato, Magdalena e Lago de Maracaibo) é discutida.

Imparfinis usmai, new species Fig. 3 Holotype. IMCN 4812, 83.4 mm SL, Colombia, Departamento del Tolima, Municipio Coello, vereda Potrerillo, quebrada Potrerilla, tributary of río Coello, río Magdalena basin, 04°16’57.9”N 75°01’53.8”W, 13 Jan 2007, A. Ortega-Lara & F. Villa-Navarro. Paratypes: Colombia: río Cauca basin: Departamento del Cauca: IMCN 168, 9, 62.6-88.4 mm SL, Municipio Suarez, río Cauca, km 21 in the road to Suárez, 03°25’N 76°40’W, 10 Sep 2002,A. Ortega- Lara. IMCN 2301, 7, 48.1-84.9 mm SL, Municipio Santander de Quilichao, río Quinamayó, road to La Balsa, 03°25’N 76°35’W, 26 Jun 2002, A. Ortega-Lara. IMCN 2439, 7, 37.5-75.6 mm SL, Municipio Santander de Quilichao, mouth of río Quinamayó in río Cauca, 03°25’N 76°38’W, 23 Jul 2002, A. Ortega-Lara. IMCN 3842, 10, 40.6-73.3 mm SL, Municipio Caloto, río Japio, at Hacienda Japio, road to Miranda, 03°01’N 76°24’W, 7 Oct 2004, A. Ortega- Lara. IMCN 3914, 8, 47.5-89.3 mm SL (1 CS, 82.5 mm SL), Municipio Guachené, río Palo, at the bridge of Guachené, 03°07’N 76°22’W, 17 Jun 2002, A. Ortega-Lara. Departamento del Valle del Cauca: CZUT-IC 1158, 2, 51.3-55.3 mm SL, río Cauca, 25 Jun 2002, A. Ortega-Lara. IMCN 1164, 2, 23.0- 79.5 mm SL, Municipio Cartago, río La Vieja, feeder of irrigation district, 04°45’39.4”N 75°53’63.2”W, 990 m asl, 18 Jul 2002, S. Usma, L. Meza, B. Arias, W. Arias & C. Araque. IMCN 1166, l, 37.2 mm SL, same locality and collectors as IMCN 1164, 24 Jun 2002. IMCN 1179, 5, 48.8- 92.6 mm SL, MBUCV-V-30943, 2, 71.3-89.1 mm SL (1 CS, 89.1 mm SL), MBUCV-V-35640, 88.7 mm SL, same locality and collectors as IMCN 1164, 21 Aug 2002. IMCN 1176, 7, 53.9-86.8 mm SL (2 CS, 53.9-85.8 mm SL), MBUCV-V-33734, 3, 61.1-73.7 mm SL (1 CS, 61.1 mm SL), Municipio Cartago, río La Vieja, sector Piedras de Moler, road to Alcalá, 04°42’32.6”N 75°51’36”W, 1100 m asl, 18 Jul 2002, same collectors as IMCN 1164. IMCN 1178, 3, 48.5 -75.0 mm SL, same locality as IMCN 1176, 24 Jun 2002, S. Usma, L. Meza, B. Arias, W. Arias & C. Araque. IMCN 1180, 1, 72.8 mm SL, Municipio Cartago, río La Vieja, at the airport, 4°47’18.9”N 75°55’71.0”W, 980 m asl, 18 Jul 2002, same collectors as IMCN 1164. IMCN 3277, 1 CS, 76.3 mm SL, Municipio Jamundí, río Cauca, sector El Hormiguero, 02°42’25”N 76°41’37”W, Mar 2003, A. Ortega-Lara. IMCN 3278, 1 CS, 64.5 mm SL, Municipio Ansermanuevo, río Chanco, sector Hacienda Arauca, 04°47’50”N 75°59’42”W, 920 m asl, 18 Mar 2002, A. Ortega-Lara. Departamento del Quindío: IMCN 1170, 3, 67.5-83.2 mm SL (1 CS, 67.5 mm SL), Municipio Armenia, río Quindío, Tarapacá, 04°23’74”N 75°45’94.9”W, 1130 m asl, 22 Aug 2002, S. Usma, L. Meza, B. Arias W. Arias & C. Araque. Departamento de Risaralda: IAvH-P 7160, 4, 55.0- 70.7 mm SL, IMCN 3373, 8, 33.3-85.6 mm SL, Municipio La Virginia, río Risaralda, downstream of mouth of río Mapa, 04°55’N 75°51’W, 24 Feb 2005, A. Ortega-Lara. Río Magdalena basin: Departamento del Tolima: CZUT-IC 91, 1, 84.9 mm SL, Municipio Coello, vereda Potrerillo, quebrada Potrerilla, tributary of río Coello, 04º16’57.9”N 75º01’53.8”W, 21 Mar 2003, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga-Upegui, N. Briñez- Vasquez & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 214, 4, 63.3-88.9 mm SL, same locality and collectors as CZUT-IC 91, 2 May 2003. CZUT- IC 98, 15, 60.9-100.8 mm SL (1 CS, 60.9 mm SL), Municipio Coello, quebrada Gualanday, 04°18’17.5”N 75°02’01”W, 9 May 2003, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga-Upegui, N. Briñez- Vasquez & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 184, 10, 70.8-90.5 mm SL, Municipio Coello, río Coello, 50 m downriver from feeder of irrigation district USOCOELLO, Inspección de Gualanday, 04°16’50.3”N 75°01’50.7”W, 28 Mar 2003, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga-Upegui, N. Briñez-Vasquez & F. Villa- Navarro. CZUT-IC 637, 3, 65.7-89.2 mm SL, same locality and collectors as CZUT-IC 184, 20 Sep 2003. CZUT-IC 792, 4, 65.9- 96.3 mm SL, same locality and collectors as CZUT-IC 184, 27 Jul 2003. CZUT-IC 229, 3, 82.8-92.7 mm SL, same locality as CZUT- IC 184, 2 May 2003, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga- Upegui, N. Briñez-Vasquez & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 874, 30, 57.0- 85.7 mm SL, río Tetuán, 03°45’N 75°20’W, 5 Oct 2003, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga-Upegui, N. Briñez-Vasquez & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 892, 8, 20.9-90.8 mm SL, same locality as CZUT-IC 874, 6 Jun 2003, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga-Upegui, N. Briñez-Vasquez & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 1053, 1, 70.8 mm SL, río Anchique, 03º34’34.8”N 75º07’13”W, 21 Mar 2004, A. Ortega-Lara, L. García-Melo, P. Zúñiga-Upegui, N. Briñez-Vasquez & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 1155, 5, 28.8-51.3 mm SL, quebrada Silletero, tributary of río Cauca, 10 Feb 2004, A. Ortega-Lara. CZUT-IC 1158, 2, 50.6 -56.0 mm SL, río Cauca, 21 Jun 2002, A. Ortega-Lara. CZUT-IC 1345, 11, 31.5-44.2 mm SL, mouth of río Amoya, 03º40’23.7”N 75º23’24.5”W, 8 Feb 2005, L. García-Melo, N. Briñez-Vasquez, D. Castro-Roa, M. Herrada-Yara & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 1379, 2, 53.3-57.2 mm SL, Municipio Chaparral, cuevas de Tuluni, vereda Tuluni, 03º38’52.2”N 75º27’24.5”W, 9 Jan 2005, L. García-Melo, N. Briñez-Vasquez, D. Castro-Roa, M. Herrada-Yara & F. Villa-Navarro. CZUT-IC 1419, 2, 41.2-49.5 mm SL, CZUT-IC 1431, 10, 45.8-76.5 mm SL, Municipio Chaparral, quebrada Tuluni, vereda Tuluni, 03º39’08.9”N 75º29’05”W, 10 Feb 2005, L. García-Melo, N. Briñez-Vasquez, D. Castro-Roa, M. Herrada-Yara & F. Villa-Navarro. IMCN 3847, 7, 25.1-96.4 mm SL, MBUCV-V-33736, 4, 60.3-89.7 mm SL (1 CS, 60.3 mm SL), collected with the holotype. Non-type material. Colombia: río Patía basin: Departamento del Cauca: FMNH 58131, 2, 61.2-68.9 mm SL, río Telembí, downstream from Barbacoas, lower basin tributary of río Patía. Río Cauca basin: Departamento del Valle del Cauca: FMNH 58129, 3, 67.2-78.7 mm SL, río Cauca at Cali. FMNH 58132, 8, 32.3-40.8 mm SL, Cali, 1010 m asl. IMCN 2475, 1, 35.2 mm SL, Municipio Cartago, río La Vieja, sector Piedras de Moler, road to Alcalá, 04°42’32.6”N 75°51’36”W, 1100 m asl. IMCN 2635, 4, 61.2-69.6 mm SL, MunicipioAnsermanuevo, río Cañaveral, to Ansermanuevo, La Virginia. MCZ 35873, 2, 30.6-36.8 mm SL, upper río Cauca. Departamento del Quindío: IMCN 2394, 2, 38.3-59.8 mm SL, Municipio Armenia, río Quindío, Tarapacá, 04°23’74”N 45°45’94.9”W, 1130 m asl. Diagnosis. This species is distinguished from congeneric trans-Andean species by having the first ray of dorsal fin longest and slightly projected or not beyond dorsal-fin margin, length of first dorsal-fin ray: 19.1-23.2% in SL (vs. slightly shorter than second ray in I. lineatus, 14.0-17.6%; I. spurrellii, 16.0-17.6%; and I. timana, 16.3-21.0%; or extended as a conspicuous and long filament beyond fin margin in I. nemacheir, 29.2-33.1%); and by the intermediate long upper caudal-fin lobe (24.4-39.2% in SL vs. 22.7-26.0% in I. lineatus; 38.2-52.1% in I. nemacheir; 22.8-26.5% in I. spurrellii; 21.9- 28.0% in I. timana). Imparfinis usmai differs from all trans- Andean species, except I. nemacheir, by having a longer maxillary barbel (40.3-63.8% in SL vs. 24.0-32.6% in I. lineatus; 32.1-35.2% in I spurrellii; 32.3-45.0% in I. timana), and by the number of vertebrae (39-40 vs. 42 in I. lineatus; 45 in I. spurrellii; 42-43 in I. timana). Specimens of Imparfinis usmai exceeding 30 mm SL, are readily distinguished from all trans- Andean species, except I. timana, by having an upper caudalfin lobe pointed and longer than lower lobe, and a lower lobe rounded, with both branches of lowermost branched ray approximately equal in length (vs. both lobes rounded and approximately symmetrical in I. lineatus and I. spurrellii; both lobes pointed, with lower branch of lowermost branched ray longer than upper branch, and extended as a filament in I. nemacheir). Imparfinis usmai can be recognized from I. lineatus and I. nemacheir by the longer adipose-fin (21.1- 27.0% in SL vs. 17.2-18.6% in I. lineatus; 19.0-21.8% in I. nemacheir). Imparfinis usmai is further distinguished from I. lineatus and I. timana by its shorter caudal peduncle depth (5.6-7.8% in SL vs. 8.1-8.4% in I. lineatus; 7.1-8.7% in I. timana). Imparfinis usmai is further recognized from I. spurrellii and I. timana by having 7-8 gill rakers on the first ceratobranchial (vs. 10-11 in I. spurrellii; 5-6 in I. timana). Imparfinis usmai can also be distinguished from I. spurrellii by its greater interorbital width (27.8-36.3% in HL vs. 23.6-24.3% in I. spurrellii). Specimens of Imparfinis usmai exceeding 30 mm SL differs from all cis-Andean congeners, except I. microps, I. mirini, I. mishky, and I. piperatus, by having a forked caudal fin, with upper lobe longer and pointed, and lower lobe rounded (vs. both caudal-fin lobes pointed). Imparfinis usmai is further distinguished from I. borodini and I. hollandi by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. not exceeding pectoral-fin distal margin), fewer vertebrae (39-40 vs. 49-54), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 12-13), pelvic-fin origin at or slightly posterior to mid-distance of dorsal-fin base (vs. at vertical or slightly displaced from dorsalfin origin), fewer total anal-fin rays (12-13 vs. 14-15), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23 (vs. vertebra 29-31), caudal fin deeply forked (vs. caudal fin obliquely truncated with upper end prolonged), and more branched caudal-fin rays (7+8 vs. 6+5-6); additionally I. usmai is distinguished from I. borodini by having a shorter adipose fin (3.70-4.74 times in SL vs. 2.67 times); and from I. hollandi by having fewer pleural ribs (8-9 vs. 11), and adipose fin free from caudal fin (vs. continuous). Imparfinis usmai is recognized from I. pseudonemacheir and I. stictonotus by having shorter maxillary barbels (not reaching adipose-fin origin vs. extending to first half of adipose-fin base or beyond), more vertebrae (39-40 vs. 34-38), and sides of body without distinct markings (vs. four irregular dark patches); additionally I. usmai is distinguished from I. pseudonemacheir by having a larger size (maximum SL: 100.8 mm vs. 48.1 mm), fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8-10 vs. 11-14), distal margin of adpressed anal fin anterior to adipose-fin posterior end (vs. posterior), upper caudal-fin lobe longer than lower lobe (vs. both caudal-fin lobes equal in length); and from I. stictonotus by having more branched anal-fin rays (7-8 vs. 6), both caudalfin lobes similarly pigmented (vs. lower lobe darker than upper lobe). Imparfinis usmai can be differentiated from remaining cis-Andean congeners as follows: from I. cochabambae by having fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8-10 vs. 15), and fewer vertebrae (39-40 vs. 41); from I. guttatus by having fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8-10 vs. 14), longer adipose fin (3.70-4.74 times vs. ca. 5.65 times, obtained from holotype picture), and both caudal-fin lobes similarly pigmented (vs. lower caudal-fin lobe darker); from I. hasemani by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. not exceeding pectoral-fin distal margin), and fewer pleural ribs (8-9 vs. 10); from I. longicauda by having a longer head (4.08- 5.15 times in SL vs. 6 times or more), and insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 8); from I. microps by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. not extending beyond posterior margin of branchiostegal membrane), fewer branchiostegal rays (6-7 vs. 9), more gill rakers on first gill arch (8-10 vs. 4-5), fewer vertebrae (39-40 vs. 46-47), more branched pectoral-fin rays (9 vs. 7), more posterior pelvic-fin origin (at or slightly posterior to mid-distance of dorsal-fin base vs. anterior to dorsal-fin origin), insertion of first dorsalfin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 15), fewer branched anal-fin rays (7-8 vs. 9), anal-fin origin posterior to adipose-fin origin (vs. anterior), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23 (vs. vertebra 26), and more branched caudal-fin rays (7+8 vs. 6+6); from I. minutus by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. not exceeding distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), fewer vertebrae (39-40 vs. 41), and insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 8-9); from I. mirini by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. scarcely beyond distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), adipose-fin posterior end extending more posteriorly than distal margin of adpressed anal fin (vs. approximately at same level), and upper caudal-fin lobe longer than lower lobe (vs. both caudal-fin lobes equal in length); from I. mishky by having fewer branched rays on lower lobe of caudal fin (8 vs. 9), shorter anal-fin base (10.8-14.5% in SL vs. 13.1-16.3%), longer caudal peduncle (19.8-25.3% in SL vs. 17.7-20.1%), and greater interorbital width (27.8-36.3% in SL vs. 18.5-23.1%); from I. peruanus by having a shorter predorsal distance (2.75-3.37 times in SL vs. 2.6 times), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 9), and insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23 (vs. vertebra 25); from I. pijpersi by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. not exceeding distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), longer caudal peduncle (19.8-25.3% in SL vs. 16.1%), shorter caudal peduncle depth (5.6-7.8% in SL vs. 11.0%), and longer adipose fin (21.1-27.0% in SL vs. 13.1%); from I. piperatus by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. reaching distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), more vertebrae (39-40 vs. 37), and insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23 (vs. vertebra 20); from I. pristos by having a larger size (maximum SL: 100.8 mm vs. 38.0 mm, value from Bockmann & Guazelli, 2003), shorter head (4.08-5.15 times in SL vs. 3.4- 3.7), longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. not exceeding distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), more gill rakers on first gill arch (8-10 vs. 4-6), more vertebrae (39-40 vs. 33-35), more pleural ribs (8-9 vs. 6), insertion of first dorsal-fin pterygiophore posterior to neural spine of vertebra 7 (vs. vertebra 6), longer adipose fin (3.70-4.74 times in SL vs. 5.0- 5.6 times), more branched anal-fin rays (7-8 vs. 5-6), insertion of first anal-fin pterygiophore posterior to hemal spine of vertebra 23 (vs. vertebra 17-18), upper caudal-fin lobe longer than lower lobe (vs. both caudal-fin lobes equal in length), and more branched rays on caudal fin (7+8 vs. 6+7); and from I. schubarti by having longer maxillary barbels (surpassing pelvic-fin base vs. reaching or scarcely beyond distal tip of adpressed pectoral fin), fewer gill rakers on first gill arch (8-10 vs. 11-16), longer adipose fin base (21.1-27.0% in SL vs. 18.7- 22.6%), and shorter preanal length (63.1-71.4% in SL vs. 71.0- 74.7%). Description. Morphometric data given in Table 1. Small heptapterid catfish (largest specimen 100.8 mm SL), with elongated body, triangular in cross-section at dorsal-fin origin, progressively more laterally compressed to tail region. Dorsal profile slightly convex from snout tip to dorsal-fin origin, slightly concave just posterior to dorsal-fin base to adiposefin origin, straight and descending along adipose-fin base, then ascending along caudal peduncle. Ventral profile of head straight, slightly convex along abdomen, then straight to analfin origin and slightly descending along caudal peduncle. Head conical and depressed, dorsally covered by thin skin. Snout short and broadly rounded. Mouth subterminal. Premaxillary teeth conical and pointed arranged in rectangular band with 4-5 irregular rows. Dentary with 4-5 irregular rows of teeth. Barbels dorsoventrally flattened. Maxillary barbels surpassing pelvic-fin base. Anterior portion of maxillary barbel in shallow groove, extending below eye. Bases of outer and inner mental barbels aligned. Outer mental barbels surpass pectoral-fin base. Inner mental barbels reach pectoral-fin origin. Eye dorsolateral in position. Orbital margin not free, but delimited by shallow groove, more conspicuous along dorsal rim. Anterior naris tubular. Posterior naris triangular, slightly closer to anterior ocular margin than to anterior naris, bordered by low fleshy margin, restricted to anterolateral rim. Nares disposed in trapezoidal arrangement. Anterior internarial width slightly shorter (mean % in HL 17.5) than posterior internarial width (mean % in HL 21.6). Branchiostegal membrane free, supported by 6-7 rays and joined to isthmus only at anteriormost point. Gill rakers on first gill arch 8-10, 7-8 arranged on anterior margin of ceratobranchial, one on cartilage between ceratobranchial and epibranchial and 0-1 on epibranchial. Lateral line canal complete, extending to basal portion of interradial membrane of middle caudal-fin rays. Supraorbital pore S1 medially adjacent to anterior naris. S2+I2 between anterior and posterior nares, slightly closer to posterior naris, at end of posteriorly directed membranous tubule originating from commissure connecting supraorbital and infraorbital canals, closer to supraorbital canal. S3 jus

Specimens of Imparfinis schubarti (Gomes, 1956) collected in the Piumhi river drainage, state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, were studied cytogenetically. The river was diverted from the Rio Grande Basin into the São Francisco basin in the early 1960s. All individuals presented 2n = 58 chromosomes, including 18 metacentric, 34 submetacentric and six subtelocentric chromosomes. A secondary constriction was observed in the interstitial region of the long arm of the largest chromosome pair, coinciding with the NOR. A single conspicuous heterochromatic block located in the largest pair of metacentric chromosomes was observed, adjacent to the secondary constriction. A detectable 18S rDNA probe hybridization region occurs in only one chromosome pair and is synthenic with the marking obtained with 5S rDNA probe. These results fit the cytogenetic pattern previously described for the genus Imparfinis Eigenmann & Norris, 1900.

We studied a specialised assemblage of sand-dwelling fish species from a streamlet in central Amazonia. The five sanddwelling species comprised 15.2 % of the total number in the streamlet (33 species). Two of the sand-dwellers are daytime foragers, Characidium cf. pteroides (Crenuchidae) and Stauroglanis gouldingi (Trichomycteridae), whereas three ones are night-time foragers, Gymnorhamphichthys rondoni (Rhamphichthyidae), "Imparfinis" pristos and Mastiglanis asopos (Heptapteridae). With the exception of C. cf. pteroides, the remainder species bury in the sand during their resting period. All five species bear a cryptic, sand-colour pattern, and some are translucent, traits which we regard as advantageous both for evasion from predators and for approaching prey (for the daytime foragers). All five species are microphagous carnivores and their foraging tactics range from generalised sit-and-wait (C. cf. pteroides) to active searching for interstitial prey (G. rondoni). A unique "drift-trap" system made up by the extended barbels and filamentous first pectoral-fin rays is employed by M. asopos. We regard the small size and low number of vertebrae (which is functionally expressed by fast displacements in the sand) as additional features advantageous to explore the sand habitat, allowing diving quickly in the substrate to evade predators and to forage for small prey in sand interstices or plant debris. The relationship between morphological and behavioural characters suited to life in sandy substrates is examined under the perspective of the current phylogenies for each group of psammophilous fishes here studied. The mapping of these characters demonstrates that not all of them evolved specifically for strict psammophily. Instead, some of them may represent the final step of a transformation series or synapomorphies of higher hierarchical levels. Several characters linked to psammophily, such as small body, large eyes, and scarce pigmentation are probably paedomorphic traits. We consider that the little variable specific composition of fish sand-dwelling assemblages and the wide (although patchy) geographical distribution of their species in the Amazon are due to the widespread occurrence and low complexity of this specialised habitat. The pre-existence of benthic habits, small size, and the broad distribution of rivers with sandy beds, mainly in the Amazon and Orinoco basins, possibly played a determinant role in the origin and diversification of psammophilous assemblages among freshwater fishes in South America. Estudamos uma comunidade especializada de espécies de peixes psamófilos de um igarapé na Amazônia central. As cinco espécies psamófilas correspondem a 15.2 % do número total estimado de espécies do igarapé (33 espécies). Duas das espécies psamófilas são forrageadores diurnos, Characidium cf. pteroides (Crenuchidae) e Stauroglanis gouldingi (Trichomycteridae), ao passo que três são forrageadores noturnos, Gymnorhamphichthys rondoni (Rhamphichthyidae), "Imparfinis" pristos e Mastiglanis asopos (Heptapteridae). Com exceção de C. cf. pteroides, as demais espécies ficam enterradas na areia durante seus períodos de repouso. Todas as cinco espécies apresentam padrão de colorido críptico na areia e algumas são translúcidas, características consideradas vantajosas tanto para evasão de predadores como para aproximação às presas (no caso dos forrageadores diurnos). Todas as espécies são carnívoras micrófagas e suas táticas de forrageamento variam de tocaia e espreita (C. cf. pteroides) a procura ativa de presas intersticiais (G. rondoni). Uma tática peculiar de caça ("armadilha-de-deriva"), com uso de barbilhões estendidos e primeiros raios da nadadeira peitoral filamentosos, é empregada por M. asopos. Consideramos que o tamanho pequeno e o baixo número de vértebras (funcionalmente expresso por deslocamentos rápidos) são caracteres adicionais vantajosos para explorar o hábitat arenoso, permitindo o enterramento rápido na areia para evadir dos predadores ou capturar as pequenas presas nos interstícios arenosos ou restos vegetais. As relações entre os caracteres morfológicos e comportamentais adequados à vida em substrato arenoso são analisadas sob a perspectiva das filogenias de cada grupo de peixes psamófilos aqui estudados. O mapeamento destes caracteres demonstra que nem todos evoluíram especificamente para a psamofilia estrita. Ao contrário, alguns podem representar o estágio final de uma série de transformação ou sinapomorfias de níveis hierárquicos mais elevados. Vários caracteres relacionados à psamofilia, como corpo pequeno, olhos grandes, pigmentação escassa, são provavelmente atributos pedomórficos. Consideramos que a composição específica pouco variável das comunidades psamófilas e a distribuição geográfica ampla de suas espécies (embora pontual) são devidas à estabilidade e à baixa complexidade deste hábitat especializado. A pré-existência de hábitos bentônicos, pequeno tamanho e a ampla distribuição de rios com leitos arenosos, principalmente nas bacias dos rios Amazonas e Orenoco, possivelmente tiveram um papel preponderante na origem e diversificação das assembléias de peixes psamófilos na ictiofauna de água doce da América do Sul.

Imparfinis minutus ANSP- 172122 (9 ex. Alc.), Published as part of Carlos Donascimiento & John G. Lundberg, 2005, Myoglanis aspredinoides (Siluriformes: Heptapteridae), a new catfish from the R��o Ventuari, Venezuela., pp. 37-49 in Zootaxa 1009 on page 47

Submitted by Vitor Silverio Rodrigues (vitorsrodrigues@reitoria.unesp.br) on 2014-05-27T11:21:01Z No. of bitstreams: 0Bitstream added on 2014-05-27T14:29:23Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 2-s2.0-33645506679.pdf: 213272 bytes, checksum: 476636f95c1ff9fdc8c6d962a4bd8efc (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2014-05-27T11:21:01Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2004-01-01 The ichthyofauna of ribeirão Grande microbasin that runs through one of the few remaining fragments of Atlantic Forest (in Mantiqueira mountain range, Valley of Paraíba) was studied. Fish samples were obtained with an electric fishing powered by a maximum capacity generator of 155 V and 60-Hz alterning current, gill-nets and traps. In three collecting days, during July/2001, October/2001, January/2002 and April/2002, 2865 fishes were sampled. These fishes belonged to 12 families, 23 genera and 37 species. The species were more abundant between the piedmont and the plain of the Valley of Paraíba. The Characidium, Trichomycterus genera and the Imparfinis minutus species presented only one ovary or testis and no swim bladder. The ecological significance of morphological features in stream mountain fishes was used to predict the niche adaptation for those conditions, towards K-strategy. Departamento de Zoologia Instituto de Biociências Universidade Estadual Paulista, Av. 24 A, 13506-900, Rio Claro, Sao Paulo Departamento de Zoologia Instituto de Biociências Universidade Estadual Paulista, Av. 24 A, 13506-900, Rio Claro, Sao Paulo

Made available in DSpace on 2022-04-29T08:42:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 1997-01-01 The cytogenetic analysis of 21 specimens of Imparfinis mirini showed the presence of 2n = 58 chromosomes in animals of both sexes. The basic karyotype consists of 22 metacentric and 34 submetacentric chromosomes plus one homomorphic pair (M/M) in males and one heteromorphic pair (M/SM) in females. Ag-NORs were located interstitially on the long arms of the largest metacentric pair and differences were frequently found concerning NOR size in the homologues. I. mirini presents a relatively large quantity of constitutive heterochromatin located in pericentromeric, interstitial and telomeric positions in several chromosome pairs. The occurrence of a heteromorphic chromosome pair in females was demonstrable by the presence of one extra C-banded segment added to the long arm of the W chromosome. The occurrence of detectable heteromorphism involving the sex chromosomes among fishes is discussed. Departamento de Morfologia Institute de Biociências Câmpus de Botucatu, 18618-000, Botucatu, SP