Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
A Revision of the Hawaiian Lizardfishes of the Genus Synodus with Descriptions of Four New Species
|Title:||A Revision of the Hawaiian Lizardfishes of the Genus Synodus with Descriptions of Four New Species|
|Authors:||Waples, Robin S.|
Randall, John E.
|Publisher:||University of Hawaii Press|
|Citation:||Waples RS, Randall JE. 1988. A revision of the Hawaiian lizardfishes of the genus Synodus with descriptions of four new species. Pac Sci 42(3-4): 178-213.|
|Abstract:||The Hawaiian lizard fishes of the genus Synodus are reviewed; 4
new species are described (bringing to 12 the number known from Hawaii), and
the range of S. capricorn is Cressey and Randall is extended to the Northern
Hemisphere. It is also determined that the name Synodus variegatus (Lacepede)
properly applies to the species commonly known as S. englemani Schultz. Synodus
dermatogenys Fowler is the oldest available name for the species that has been
known as S. variegatus. Gill-raker counts are used as diagnostic characters for
the first time with synodontids, and color slides and observations of fresh
specimens revealed species-specific pigmentation patterns, many of which typically
disappear with preservation. The key includes all known lizardfishes from
Hawaii (genera Saurida, Synodus, Tra chinocephalus).
Synodus amaranthus sp. nov. is similar to S. dermatogenys but differs in having
barred pelvic fins; more gill rakers; and greater head length, orbit diameter, and
pectoral fin length. SynodusJalcatus sp. nov. and S .janus sp. nov. have the high
vertebral and lateral-line scale counts typical of S. ulae Schultz and S. capricornis,
but have fewer gill rakers and different nasal flaps. Synodus lobeli sp. nov. is
closest to S. indicus (Day), a species known only from the Indian Ocean and the
Philippines, but has a shorter head, lower modal number of dorsal fin rays, and
lacks the two dark marks found on the opercle of the latter species.
Electrophoretic data are presented for the seven species (binotatus, dermatogenys,
doaki, Jalcatus, ulae, usitatus, and variegatus) for which fresh or
frozen material was available. Each of these species could be separated from all
others on the basis of multiple fixed allelic differences, and this facilitated
unambiguous identification of morphologically similar species. Discriminant
function analysis, with functions derived for groups identified by electrophoretic
phenotype, was used in the identification of specimens that could not be sampled
|Appears in Collections:||Pacific Science Volume 42, Numbers 3-4, 1988|
Please contact email@example.com if you need this content in an alternative format.
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.