Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Maza-Benignos,Mauricio de la
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Lozano-Vilano,Ma. de Lourdes, García-Ramírez,María Elena
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Neotropical ichthyology (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252015000400673
Resumo: ABSTRACT In the present response paper, the article entitled "Morphometric variation of the Herichthys bartoni (Bean, 1892) species group (Teleostei: Cichlidae): How many species comprise H. labridens (Pellegrin, 1903)?" by Mejía et al . 2015 is critically reviewed. The current review pinpoints some of the more conspicuous conceptual inconsistencies and fundamental errors found in the study by Mejía et al . (2015), It is contended that the authors fail to provide any new insights into the complex biogeography and evolutionary history of the Nosferatu and Herichthys genus groups, and that while results of their Cox1 molecular analysis are comparable to those by De la Maza-Benignos et al . (2015), the conclusions of the two studies are not comparable. In addition, it is contested that, whereas the designation of genus Nosferatu by De la Maza-Benignos et al . (2015) was found on the principles of the biological and phylogenetic species concepts, the rejection of the genus by Mejía et al . (2015) is solely based "on the presence of (overlapping) morphometric characters" between genera. The assumption by Mejía et al . (2015),that because their geometric morphometrics analysis failed to provide separation of species, then Nosferatu genus does not correspond to a valid taxon; and their suggesting geometric morphometrics "as useful tool to discriminate species, because it allows to propose diagnostic characters" were not supported by their results. While Mejía et al . present some interesting thoughts on the systematics of Nosferatu , they unfortunately fail to provide any data that can be objectively assessed as relevant to motivate any changes in the current taxonomy.
id SBI-1_623f336d2b361e13e198a6735dceb6b2
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1679-62252015000400673
network_acronym_str SBI-1
network_name_str Neotropical ichthyology (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistenciesCox 1GeneraGeometric morphometricsMonophyly requirementParaphyleticSpecies conceptsABSTRACT In the present response paper, the article entitled "Morphometric variation of the Herichthys bartoni (Bean, 1892) species group (Teleostei: Cichlidae): How many species comprise H. labridens (Pellegrin, 1903)?" by Mejía et al . 2015 is critically reviewed. The current review pinpoints some of the more conspicuous conceptual inconsistencies and fundamental errors found in the study by Mejía et al . (2015), It is contended that the authors fail to provide any new insights into the complex biogeography and evolutionary history of the Nosferatu and Herichthys genus groups, and that while results of their Cox1 molecular analysis are comparable to those by De la Maza-Benignos et al . (2015), the conclusions of the two studies are not comparable. In addition, it is contested that, whereas the designation of genus Nosferatu by De la Maza-Benignos et al . (2015) was found on the principles of the biological and phylogenetic species concepts, the rejection of the genus by Mejía et al . (2015) is solely based "on the presence of (overlapping) morphometric characters" between genera. The assumption by Mejía et al . (2015),that because their geometric morphometrics analysis failed to provide separation of species, then Nosferatu genus does not correspond to a valid taxon; and their suggesting geometric morphometrics "as useful tool to discriminate species, because it allows to propose diagnostic characters" were not supported by their results. While Mejía et al . present some interesting thoughts on the systematics of Nosferatu , they unfortunately fail to provide any data that can be objectively assessed as relevant to motivate any changes in the current taxonomy.Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia2015-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252015000400673Neotropical Ichthyology v.13 n.4 2015reponame:Neotropical ichthyology (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia (SBI)instacron:SBI10.1590/1982-0224-20150066info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMaza-Benignos,Mauricio de laLozano-Vilano,Ma. de LourdesGarcía-Ramírez,María Elenaeng2015-12-16T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1679-62252015000400673Revistahttp://www.ufrgs.br/ni/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||neoichth@nupelia.uem.br1982-02241679-6225opendoar:2015-12-16T00:00Neotropical ichthyology (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia (SBI)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
title Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
spellingShingle Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
Maza-Benignos,Mauricio de la
Cox 1
Genera
Geometric morphometrics
Monophyly requirement
Paraphyletic
Species concepts
title_short Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
title_full Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
title_fullStr Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
title_full_unstemmed Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
title_sort Response paper: Morphometric article by Mejía et al. 2015 alluding genera Herichthys and Nosferatu displays serious inconsistencies
author Maza-Benignos,Mauricio de la
author_facet Maza-Benignos,Mauricio de la
Lozano-Vilano,Ma. de Lourdes
García-Ramírez,María Elena
author_role author
author2 Lozano-Vilano,Ma. de Lourdes
García-Ramírez,María Elena
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Maza-Benignos,Mauricio de la
Lozano-Vilano,Ma. de Lourdes
García-Ramírez,María Elena
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Cox 1
Genera
Geometric morphometrics
Monophyly requirement
Paraphyletic
Species concepts
topic Cox 1
Genera
Geometric morphometrics
Monophyly requirement
Paraphyletic
Species concepts
description ABSTRACT In the present response paper, the article entitled "Morphometric variation of the Herichthys bartoni (Bean, 1892) species group (Teleostei: Cichlidae): How many species comprise H. labridens (Pellegrin, 1903)?" by Mejía et al . 2015 is critically reviewed. The current review pinpoints some of the more conspicuous conceptual inconsistencies and fundamental errors found in the study by Mejía et al . (2015), It is contended that the authors fail to provide any new insights into the complex biogeography and evolutionary history of the Nosferatu and Herichthys genus groups, and that while results of their Cox1 molecular analysis are comparable to those by De la Maza-Benignos et al . (2015), the conclusions of the two studies are not comparable. In addition, it is contested that, whereas the designation of genus Nosferatu by De la Maza-Benignos et al . (2015) was found on the principles of the biological and phylogenetic species concepts, the rejection of the genus by Mejía et al . (2015) is solely based "on the presence of (overlapping) morphometric characters" between genera. The assumption by Mejía et al . (2015),that because their geometric morphometrics analysis failed to provide separation of species, then Nosferatu genus does not correspond to a valid taxon; and their suggesting geometric morphometrics "as useful tool to discriminate species, because it allows to propose diagnostic characters" were not supported by their results. While Mejía et al . present some interesting thoughts on the systematics of Nosferatu , they unfortunately fail to provide any data that can be objectively assessed as relevant to motivate any changes in the current taxonomy.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-12-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252015000400673
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252015000400673
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1982-0224-20150066
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Neotropical Ichthyology v.13 n.4 2015
reponame:Neotropical ichthyology (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia (SBI)
instacron:SBI
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia (SBI)
instacron_str SBI
institution SBI
reponame_str Neotropical ichthyology (Online)
collection Neotropical ichthyology (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Neotropical ichthyology (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia (SBI)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||neoichth@nupelia.uem.br
_version_ 1752122181776572416