Acheilognathus striatus (Family: Cyprinidae), a newbitterling species from the lower Yangtze River, China

Qing Yang & Bangxi Xiong & Qiongying Tang &

Huanzhang Liu

Received: 2 July 2009 /Accepted: 7 April 2010 /Published online: 21 April 2010# Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract A new species of bitterling, Acheilognathusstriatus sp. nov., is described on the basis of 57specimens collected from the lower Yangtze River inJiangxi Province, China. It can be distinguished fromall congeners by the following combined characters: apair of relatively long barbels, slightly longer thanhalf of eye diameter; dorsal fin with three simple and8–9 branched fin rays, anal fin with three simple and7–8 branched fin rays; a black longitudinal stripe onbody from the base of caudal peduncle, distinctlyreaching anteriorly to the vertical line from the originof dorsal fin, broader in males than in females; a scaledistance between the longitudinal stripe and lateralline below the origin of dorsal fin; dorsal and anal finmargined with black band in males.

Keywords Cypriniformes . Acheilognathinae .

Morphological characters . New species . Taxonomy.

Yangtze River

Introduction

The subfamily Acheilognathinae, belonging to Cypri-nidae, Cypriniformes, are small and deep-bodied fishesthat inhabit a wide variety of lowland habitats like lakes,lowland rivers and slow-flowing streams (Lelek 1987).They mainly occur in the East and Southeast Asia withthe exception of Rhodeus amarus and Rhodeuscolchicus, which occur in Europe (Berg 1949; Lelek1987; Arai and Akai 1988; Bogutskaya and Komlev2001). For a long time, bitterling has attracted greatscientific interests, mainly due to their unique repro-ductive strategy that includes spawning into the gillcavity of living clams (Smith et al. 2004).

Based on the morphological characters and karyo-types, the subfamily Acheilognathinae was grouped intothree genera (Acheilognathus, Rhodeus and Tanakia)by Arai and Akai (1988), and Nelson (2006) alsoratified this viewpoint. Despite the fact that the firstbitterling species was described more than a centuryago, the number of species in this subfamily is still adisputable problem because of the difficulties inunambiguously diagnosis and inter-changing speci-mens between countries. Currently, about 60 knownspecies are considered as valid according to Fishbase(Froese and Pauly 2009), with 30 in China, 14 inJapan, 18 in Korea, 14 in Laos and Vietnam, and 2 inEurope.

The genus Acheilognathus is the most species-richgenus in Acheilognathinae. The genus Acheilognathus

Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341DOI 10.1007/s10641-010-9645-6

Q. Yang : B. XiongCollege of Fisheries, Huazhong Agricultural University,Hubei, Wuhan 430070, People’s Republic of China

Q. Yang :Q. Tang :H. Liu (*)The Key Laboratory of Aquatic Biodiversity andConservation of Chinese Academy of Science,Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences,Hubei, Wuhan 430072, People’s Republic of Chinae-mail: hzliu@ihb.ac.cn

was established by Bleeker in 1860 with Acheilogna-thus melanogastar as the type species, which can bedistinguished from the other two genera of Acheilog-nathinae by the following characters: complete orincomplete lateral line; barbels absent or present;branched dorsal fin rays 8–18, branched anal fin rays7–14; number of branched dorsal fin rays minusnumber of branched anal fin rays (br. D minus br.A), −1 to 5; serration of pharyngeal teeth developed;two white transverse bands on dorsal fin rays in bothmales and females; diploid chromosome number, 42 or44; wing-like yolk sac projection not developed (Araiand Akai 1988; Lin 1998). Accompanied with thedescription of Acheilognathus binidentatus (Wang et al.2001), Acheilognathus fasciodorsails (Nguyen andNgo 2001) and Acheilognathus imfasciodorsails(Nguyen and Ngo 2001), it has included 39 validspecies (Froese and Pauly 2009) and still existedconsiderable hidden species diversity.

In 2004 and 2009, 57 specimens were collectedfrom the lower Yangtze River in Jiangxi Province,China. The specimens resembled Acheilognathusmeridianus mostly by sharing body shape, the numberof branched dorsal and anal fin rays, and a longitu-dinal stripe on body distinctly reaching anteriorly tothe vertical line from the origin of dorsal fin.However, they differed from A. meridianus in theending of the longitudinal stripe and black marginalband on the anal fin in male. After seriouslycomparison, it was found that the species wassufficiently different from any described species inthe subfamily Acheilognathinae and should be recog-nized as a new species belonging to the genusAcheilognathus. The purpose of this study is to makea precise morphological description on this newspecies and establish a valid name for it.

Materials and methods

In the present study, all the examined samples wereidentified following Arai and Akai (1988), Lin(1998), and deposited in the Institute of Hydrobiolo-gy, Chinese Academy of Science (IHCAS). All theorganisms were preserved in alcohol with the exclu-sion of Acheilognathus elongatus and Acheilognathusbrevicaudatus, which were in 5% formalin because ofthe lack of alcoholic specimens. Some similar specieswere compared with the new species by examining

the specimens or consulting the descriptions in thereferences while the materials were not available.

Measurements were made point to point with dialcalipers and data recorded to tenths of a millimeter.Counts and measurements were made on the left sideof specimens whenever possible, following themethods of Hubbs and Lagler (2004). Additionalmeasurements, viz. predorsal, prepectoral, prepelvicand preanal length, were taken from the anterior-mosttip of the snout to, the dorsal-, pectoral-, pelvic- andanal-fin origins, respectively. In the tables and text,sub-units of the head are presented as proportions ofhead length (HL). Head length and measurements ofbody parts are given as proportions of standard length(SL). Caudal peduncle depth is given as proportionsof caudal peduncle length. Osteological characterswere observed on soft X-ray photographs followingthe methods described in Zhao et al. (2002). Vertebraewere counted including the Weberian complex,abdominal vertebrae, and caudal vertebrae (the termi-nal pleurostyle was included). The data for thelatitude and longitude of each locality was inferredfrom the internet. The number of specimens with agiven meristic count was indicated in parenthesesafter the count. All values for the holotype wereindicated by asterisks (*) in the text.

Results

Acheilognathus striatus sp. nov. (Figs. 1 and 2)

Holotype

IHCAS 04116, 54.3 mm standard length (SL), male,the lower Yangtze River, Wuyuan County, JiangxiProvince, China (29º25’N, 117º83’E), April, 2004.

Fig. 1 Acheilognathus striatus sp. nov., holotype, IHCAS04116, 54.3 mm SL

334 Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341

Paratypes

IHCAS 04111–04115, IHCAS 04117–04122, 40.8–56.1 mm SL,11 speciemens, male, IHCAS 04123–04134, 39.6–53.1 mm SL,12 speciemens, female;the same locality and collection date as theholotype; IHCAS 0805402, IHCAS 0805404–0805405, IHCAS 0805407, IHCAS 0805409–0805412, IHCAS 0805414–0805415, IHCAS0805417, IHCAS 0805419, IHCAS 0805422,IHCAS 0805428, IHCAS 0805432–0805434,46.9–61.1 mm SL, 17 speciemens, male, IHCAS0805401, IHCAS 0805406, IHCAS 0805408,IHCAS 0805413, IHCAS 0805416, IHCAS0805418, IHCAS 0805420–0805421, IHCAS0805423–0805427, IHCAS 0805429–0805431,41.9–49.1 mm SL, 16 speciemens, female, samelocality as the holotype, April, 2009.

Diagnosis

The new species can be distinguished from allcongeners by the following combined characters: apair of relatively long barbels, slightly longer thanhalf of eye diameter (barbels 59.8–67.2% of eyediameter); dorsal fin with three simple and 8 (54*)-9 (3) branched fin rays, anal fin with three simpleand 7 (7)-8 (50*) branched fin rays; a blacklongitudinal stripe on body from the base of caudalpeduncle, distinctly reaching anteriorly to thevertical line from the origin of dorsal fin, broaderin males than in females; a scale distance betweenthe longitudinal stripe and lateral line below theorigin of dorsal fin; dorsal and anal fin marginedwith black band in males.

Description

Counts and proportional measurements are given inTable 1. Body elongate, compressed, with the greatest

depth at the origin of dorsal fin. Head a little small,compressed, its length longer than its depth. Snoutrather short, very slightly obtuse. Eye moderatelylarge, supero-lateral; its diameter longer than length ofsnout, but short than interorbital width. Mouthinferior, small, only reaching anteriorly to a verticalline from the anterior margin of orbit. Nostrils closerto the anterior margin of orbit than to snout. A pair ofrelatively long barbels, slightly longer than halfdiameter of eye.

The last simple fin ray much stronger than thefirst branched fin ray on the dorsal and anal fin(Fig. 3). The br. D minus br. A 0 (47*)-1 (10).Dorsal fin about midway between snout tip andcaudal base. Anal fin similar to dorsal fin in shape,but shorter than the dorsal fin, also shorter than thedistance between the base ending of anal fin and thebase of caudal peduncle; its origin about opposite tothe base of second or third dorsal branched fin ray.Pelvic fin inserted vertically below the origin ofdorsal or anteriorly. The end of pectoral fin notreaching the origin of pelvic fin with 2 (22)-3 (35*)scales distance. Caudal fin forked.

Scales large, disposing in longitudinal series, andslightly smaller on the edge of body and chest.Lateral line complete, moderately straight along themiddle of caudal peduncle. Vertebrae 4+14+16 (14)−17 (6*). Number of the abdominal vertebrae 14 inA. striatus according to our counting. Pharyngealteeth in one row, 5-5 in formula, no serrated (Fig. 4).Gill rakers on external side of first gill arch 12 (12)-13 (8). An ovipositor developed in female duringApril (Fig. 5). Therefore, we concluded the breedingseason of A. striatus was from March to June.

Coloration in life

The body is whitish with brown on the edge ofthe chest, caudal peduncle and pectoral fin.There is a blue longitudinal stripe on the bodyfrom the base of the caudal peduncle, reachinganteriorly to the vertical line from the origin ofdorsal fin in males, or similarly to the longitu-dinal stripe in females. The simple fin ray of thepelvic fin is white, margined with a black bandon the dorsal and anal fin and inner part with atransverse red row in males, while only somebrownish pigments present on the fin membraneof females.

Fig. 2 Acheilognathus striatus sp. nov., living colour pattern,IHCAS 0805410, 50.2 mm SL, male, from Wuyuan County,Jiangxi Province, China, April, 2009

Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341 335

Tab

le1

Meristic

coun

tsandprop

ortio

nalmeasurementsof

Acheilogn

athu

sstriatus

sp.no

v.andsimilarspecies

A.striatus

n=57

holotype

A.meridianus

n=15

A.imberbis

n=15

A.elongatus

n=15

A.cyanostig

maa

A.brevicaudatus

n=15

A.majusculusb

A.yamatsutaec

A.lanchiensisd

A.barbatulus

n=15

SL(m

m)

39.6–61.1

(47.9±4.6)

50.8

52.5–6

7.8

(60.8±6.1)

41.5–50.0

(46.8±

2.3)

42.0–5

6.0

(51.9±4.2)

–39.9–4

9.3

(43.5±3.2)

52.1–1

00.4

45.0–7

6.8

46–51

43.9–6

6.3

(53.5±

2.8)

HL(m

m)

8.3–

12.9

(10.3±

1.1)

11.0

11.4–16.4

(13.6±

1.7)

10.2–12

(11.0±0.6)

11.0–1

5.5

(13.2±

1.3)

–9.8–11.8

(10.6±0.7)

––

–10.7–1

4.9

(12.3±0.8)

dorsal-fin

rays

iii-8(54)-9(3)

(8.1±0

.2)iii-8

iii-9(7)-10(8)

(9.5±0.5)

iii-9(15)

(9.0±0.0)

iii-11(4),

12(6),13(5)

(12.0±0.8)

iii-8

iii-10(5),

11(7),12(3)

(10.9±0.7)

iii-8-9

iii-8

ii-9

iii-10(1),11

(3),

12(10),13(1)

(11.7±0.3)

anal-fin

rays

iii-7(7)-8(50)

(7.9±0.3)

iii-8

iii-8(7)-9(8)

(8.5±0.5)

iii-9(8)-10(7)

(9.5±0.5)

iii-10(9)-11(6)

(10.4±0.5)

iii-8-9

iii-8(8),

9(5),10(2)

(8.6±0.7)

iii-8

iii-8

ii-8-9

iii-8(1),9(12),10(1),

11(1)(9.1±0

.6)

pectoral-fin

rays

i-11(37)-12(20)

(11.4±0.5)

i-12

i-12(3),13

(5),

14(4),15(3)

(13.5±

1.1)

i-11(3),

12(6),13(6)

(12.2±

0.8)

i-12(6),

13(6),14(3)

(12.8±0.8)

–i-12(6),

13(6),14(3)

(12.8±0.8)

iii-15-16

––

i-12(1),13(7),14

(5),15(1),16(1)

(13.6±0.8)

pelvic-fin

rays

i-6(23)-7(34)

(6.6±0.5)

i-7

i-7(15)

(7.0±0.0)

i-6(7)-7(8)

(6.6±0.5)

i-6(8)-7(7)

(6.5±0.5)

–i-6(7),7(8)

(6.5±0.5)

iii-8

––

i-6(6),7(9)

(6.6±0.5)

%SL

Bodydepth

31.0–36.8

(33.8±

1.4)

31.1

29.3–3

6.8

(32.5±

2.0)

31.2–34.5

(32.9±

1.0)

27.7–3

3.4

(30.6±

1.8)

30.0

30.9–3

4.1

(32.2±

0.9)

29.0–3

6.3

–33.3

34.5–4

7.6

(36.9±

1.7)

Headlength

19.4–23.0

(21.5±0.9)

21.6

17.0–2

4.1

(22.0±

2.1)

22.0–24.9

(23.5±0.9)

23.1–2

8.3

(25.5±

1.6)

25.0

22.3–2

6.3

(24.1±

1.1)

23.2–2

5.6

–24.0–3

3.3

20.8–2

6.3

(23.2±

1.2)

Predorsal

length

43.4–55.1

(49.4±

2.9)

51.4

45.6–5

1.3

(48.5±

1.5)

43.2–49.4

(46.8±

1.5)

48.4–5

2.4

(50.5±

1.3)

–51.1–5

4.9

(53.1±

1.2)

51.4–5

5.8

––

45.6–5

6.7

(52.8±

2.4)

Prepectoral

length

18.3–26.1

(21.4±

1.6)

22.1

21.0–2

6.3

(23.1±

1.5)

22.4–23.9

(23.2±

0.5)

22.4–2

6.1

(24.3±

1.2)

–23.7–2

7.9

(25.9±

1.2)

22.1–2

5.6

––

19.5–2

5.4

(23.2±

1.5)

Prepelvic

length

37.9–46.4

(41.7±

2.0)

41.7

39.6–4

8.7

(45.2±

2.2)

41.7–45.2

(43.8±

1.2)

40.9–4

5.7

(42.8±

1.6)

–43.3–4

9.2

(46.4±

1.8)

46.7–5

0.1

––

38.6–4

9.2

(43.1±

2.1)

Preanal

length

57.6–69.2

(61.3±

2.6)

62.1

60.1–6

5.5

(62.9±

1.5)

57.8–62.6

(60.5±

1.6)

57.9–6

3.1

(59.9±

1.7)

–58.9–6

3.0

(60.8±

1.2)

63.5–6

7.2

––

58.1–6

8.4

(62.8±

2.4)

Caudalpeduncle

depth

10.0–14.9

(12.1±

1.1)

13.5

10.0–1

2.5

(11.4±0.9)

11.0–1

3.8

(12.3±0.9)

9.2–11.9

(10.4±0.9)

10.0

10.5–1

3.9

(12.0±

1.1)

11.4–1

2.9

––

10.9–1

6.1

(13.0±0.9)

Caudalpeduncle

length

21.0–29.5

(25.7±

1.8)

23.7

18.6–2

3.2

(21.3±

1.3)

22.4–25.4

(24.0±0.9)

20.2–2

3.8

(21.7±

1.1)

25.0

19.5–2

5.0

(22.9±

1.6)

19.0–2

2.6

–25.3–2

6.0

15.9–2

1.3

(18.6±

2.1)

%HL

Snout

length

20.3–33.1

(25.6±

2.9)

30.7

24.1–3

4.6

(27.8±

2.6)

22.8–30.0

(27.1±

2.3)

21.6–2

7.0

(25.0±

1.9)

27.0

23.7–3

2.1

(27.6±

2.6)

31.1–3

6.5

28.6–3

9.2

33.3

23.3–3

2.3

(27.2±

2.1)

Orbitaldiam

eter

31.3–43.9

(36.6±

2.9)

39.8

27.8–4

0.6

(33.7±3.4)

30.2–35.7

(32.8±

1.7)

30.2–3

7.4

(33.6±

2.6)

–31.5–3

9.1

(34.6±

2.5)

23.7–3

2.5

26.4–3

2.1

33.3

25.0–3

8.5

(33.1±

2.3)

Interorbitalwidth

36.7–49.6

(42.5±3.1)

42.6

32.4–4

4.1

(38.3±

2.9)

30.0–40.2

(35.8±

2.2)

26.2–3

4.9

(31.3±

2.4)

–34.8–4

3.5

(39.1±

2.8)

34.2–4

0.4

––

37.0–5

0.0

(43.1±

32.8)

%Caudalpeduncle

length

–

336 Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341

Coloration in alcohol

Body color is faded to yellowish with golden on thedorsal part. A black longitudinal stripe on the bodyfrom the base of caudal peduncle, reaching anteriorlyto the vertical line from the origin of dorsal findistinctly, broader in males than in females; a scaledistance between the longitudinal stripe and lateralline below the origin of dorsal fin. White spots on thedorsal fin rays forming two transverse bands. Dorsaland anal fin margined with black band in males. Theedge of the simple pelvic fin ray has a white band onsome specimens.

Sexual dimorphism

During breeding season, males have distinct nuptialcolours. The body is whitish with the edge of chest,caudal peduncle and pectoral fin brown; dorsal andanal fin margined with a black band while the innerpart is marked with a transverse red row. Femaleshave a developed ovipositor in the breeding season.

Distribution

Presently only known from upper part of Le’anRiver, around Wuyuan County, Jiangxi Province,China (Fig. 6). Le’an River drains into the PoyangLake, which in turn flows into lower reaches of theYangtze River. The total length of the river is279 km, covering a drainage area of 8534 km2. Thewater temperature varies between 5–31°C within oneyear, and the pH varies between 4.5 and 7.4.Wuyuan County is located at the upper part of Le’anRiver, where the water is shallow (approximately0.97–2.94 m), and the width is approximately 40–90 m (Huang 2005). In the genus Acheiognathus, A.T

able

1(con

tinued)

A.striatus

n=57

holotype

A.meridianus

n=15

A.imberbis

n=15

A.elongatus

n=15

A.cyanostig

maa

A.brevicaudatus

n=15

A.majusculusb

A.yamatsutaec

A.lanchiensisd

A.barbatulus

n=15

Caudalpeduncle

depth

36.0–59.3

(47.6±6.2)

57.1

52.1–5

8.7

(55.2±

2.0)

46.3–55.0

(50.8±

2.8)

42.5–4

9.8

(47.3±

2.3)

–47.7–5

7.3

(51.4±

2.9)

52.2–6

7.7

42.4–6

6.2

–58.8–7

6.9

(67.1±

4.1)

Lateral-linescales

34–3

735

34–3

834–3

836–38

3834–36

37–40

36–38

34–36

33–37

Predorsal

scales

12–1

414

13–1

413–1

414–18

–16–19

––

12–13

12–15

Scalesaround

caudal

peduncle

13–1

414

1414

14–

14–

––

14

Scalesabovelaterallin

e5.55.5

5.5

5.5

6.5

65.5–6

6–7

5–7

5–5.5

5.5

Scalesbelow

laterallin

e3.53.5

3.5

34

44.5

4.5

3.5–4

34.5

aFrom

Jordan

andTho

mpson

(191

4),somedata

have

been

conv

ertedto

fitthetable

bFrom

Kim

andYang(199

8),somedata

have

been

conv

ertedto

fitthetable

cFrom

Kim

andYang(199

8),Son

gandKwon

(199

4)andMori(192

8),somedata

have

been

conv

ertedto

fitthetable

dFrom

Herre

andLin

(193

6),somedata

have

been

conv

ertedto

fitthetable

The

meanandSD

(stand

arddeviation)

arein

parentheses.Boldrepresentsthedifference

betweenAcheilogn

athu

sstriatus

sp.no

v.andsimilarspecies

Fig. 3 Second and third simple rays and first branched ray ofdorsal (A) and anal (B) fin of Acheilognathus striatus sp. nov.,paratype, IHCAS 0805417, 51.8 mm SL, male

Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341 337

meridianus and A. macropterus co-occur with A.striatus in Wuyuan County, Jiangxi Province.

Ecological notes

Acheilognathus striatus usually inhabits slow flowingwater with sandy and rock-pebble substrates.

Etymology

The specific epithet striatus (from the Latin striae)meaning stripe, refers to the prominent character ofbroad longitudinal stripe on body. It is to be treated asa noun in apposition.

Discussion

The affiliation of the new species to Acheilognathus issupported in the possession of the following charac-ters: complete lateral line, a pair of barbels slightlylonger than half diameter of eye, dorsal fin with threesimple and 8-9 branched fin rays, anal fin with threesimple and 7-8 branched fin rays, white spots ondorsal fin rays forming two transverse bands, dorsaland anal fin margined with black band in males (Araiand Akai 1988; Lin 1998).

In the light of references, 39 valid species of thegenus Acheilognathus have been recognized in theworld thus far with 21 valid species in China, 12 inKorea, 6 in Japan and 11 in Vietnam and Laos (Choiet al. 1990; Froese and Pauly 2009). Whether or notthe black longitudinal stripe on body from the base ofcaudal peduncle reaches anteriorly to the vertical linefrom the origin of dorsal fin is a significantinterspecific diagnostic feature. As shown in Fig. 1,a prominent character of A. striatus is the blacklongitudinal stripe on body from the base of caudalpeduncle reaching anteriorly to the vertical line fromthe origin of dorsal fin distinctly. Among the speciesin the genus Acheilognathus, the new species sharesthis character with seven species: A. meridianus, A.imberbis, A. elongatus, A. brevicaudatus, A. cyanos-tigma, A. yamatsutae and A. majusculus. Therefore,we mainly compared A. striatus with these sevenspecies as follows (Tables 1 and 2).

Acheilognathus meridianus (Wu 1939) is knownfrom Guangdong and Guangxi Province in China. Ithas elongate body shape, a pair of barbels slightlyshorter than diameter of eye, 9–10 branched dorsal finrays and 8-9 branched anal fin rays. These featuresoverlap with A. striatus. However, A. striatus can beseparated from A. meridianus by black marginal bandon the anal fin (vs. colorless in A. meridianus) inmales. And the longitudinal band on body of A.meridianus terminates with a spot in the end abovethe lateral line in males (vs. not ending in a spot in thepresent new species) (Fig. 7).

Acheilognathus imberbis (Gunther 1868), which isdistributed in the Yangtze River and Yellow River,possesses 9 branched dorsal fin rays. It differs from A.striatus in barbels (absent or short protuberance in A.imberbis vs. slightly more than half diameter of eye inA. striatus), the number of branched anal fin rays (9-10 in A. imberbis vs. 7-8 in A. striatus), scales below

Fig. 5 Acheilognathus striatus sp. nov. in the breeding season,paratype, IHCAS 0805413, 47.9 mm SL, female

Fig. 4 Pharyngeal teeth ofAcheilognathus striatus sp.nov., paratype: photograph(A) of partial pharyngealteeth; drawing (B) of wholepharyngeal teeth

338 Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341

lateral line (3 in A. imberbis vs. 3.5 in A. striatus) andmarginal band on the anal fin (colorless in A. imberbisvs. black in A. striatus) in males.

Acheilognathus elongatus brevicaudatus (Chenand Li 1987) was a subspecies originally. Froeseand Pauly (2009) updated A. brevicaudatus as a validspecies. Acheilognathus striatus is distinguished fromA. brevicaudatus by having 8-9 branched dorsal finrays (vs. 10-12 in A. brevicaudatus), 12-14 predorsalscales (vs. 16-19 in A. brevicaudatus), 3.5 scalesbelow lateral line (vs. 4.5 in A. brevicaudatus) and 2-3 scales distance between the end of pectoral fin andthe origin of pelvic fin (vs. nearly reaching the originof pelvic fin in A. brevicaudatus). Acheilognathusstriatus is different from A. elongatus by 8-9branched dorsal fin rays (vs. 11-13 in A. elongatus),7-8 branched anal fin rays (vs. 10-11 in A. elongatus),head length 19.4-23.0% SL (vs. 23.1-28.3% SL in A.elongatus), interorbital width 36.7-49.6% HL (vs.26.2-34.9% HL in A. elongatus), 5.5 scales abovelateral line (vs. 6.5 in A. elongatus), 3.5 scales belowlateral line (vs. 4 in A. elogatus) and 2-3 scalesdistance between the end of pectoral fin and the originof pelvic fin (vs. nearly reaching the origin of pelvicfin in A. elongatus).

Acheilognathus cyanostigma (Jordan and Fowler1903) is only distributed in Japan. Acheilognathusstriatus differs from it in 34-37 lateral-line scales (vs.38 in A. cyanostigma), barbels slightly longer thanhalf diameter of eye (vs. nearly obsolete in A.cyanostigma) and having black marginal band onthe anal fin (vs. a broad white margin in A.

cyanostigma) in males. In addition, the longitudinalstripe on body ends in a black spot as large as pupil inA. cyanostigma (Jordan and Thompson 1914).

Both Acheilognathus yamatsutae (Mori 1928) andA. majusculus (Kim and Yang 1998) are endemicspecies to Korea. Achelognathus striatus distin-guishes from A. yamatsutae in longer barbels (overhalf of eye diameter A. striatus vs. under half of eyediameter in A. yamatsutae), and from A. majusculusin having 11-12 branched pectoral fin rays (vs. 15-16in A. majusculus), 6-7 branched pelvic fin rays (vs.8 in A. majusculus), head length 19.4-23.0% SL (vs.23.2-25.6% SL in A. majusculus), preplevic length37.9-46.4% SL (vs. 46.7-50.1% SL in A. majusculus),5.5 scales above lateral line (vs. 6-7 in A. majusculus)and 3.5 scales below lateral line (vs. 4.5 in A.majusculus). Besides, A. striatus also has noticeabledifference from the two species in black marginalband on the anal fin (vs. broad whitish marginal band)in males.

Besides these seven species mentioned above, inAcheilognathus barbatulus (Gunther 1873), the blacklongitudinal stripe on body of some specimens fromthe base of caudal peduncle reaches anteriorly to thevertical line from the origin of dorsal fin indistinctly,whereas A. striatus is different from A. barbatulus inhaving 8-9 branches dorsal fin rays (vs. 10-13 in A.barbatulus), barbels slightly longer than half of eyediameter (vs. absent or very short in A. barbatulus),3.5 scales below lateral line (vs. 4.5 in A. barbatulus),2-3 scales distance between the end of pectoral finand the origin of pelvic fin (vs. nearly reaching the

Fig. 6 The distribution ofAcheilognathus striatus sp.nov. (▲)

Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341 339

origin of pelvic fin in A. barbatulus) and blackmarginal band on the anal fin (vs. colorless in A.barbatulus) in males.

Acanthorhodeus lanchiensis (Herre and Lin 1936),also with the black longitudinal stripe on bodyreaching anteriorly to the vertical line from the originof dorsal fin distinctly, was recognized as a synonymof Tanakia himantegus (Gunther 1868) according toLin (1998). Acheilognathus striatus can be distin-guished from A. lanchiensis by a shorter head (19.4-23.0% SL in A. striatus vs. 24.0-33.3% SL in A.lanchiensis), a shorter snout (20.3-33.1% HL in A.striatus vs. 33.3% HL in A. lanchiensis), 2-3 scalesdistance between the end of pectoral fin and the originof pelvic fin (vs. nearly reaching the origin of pelvicfin in A. lanchiensis) and 3.5 scales below lateral line(vs. 3 in A. lanchiensis).

As mentioned above, A. striatus can be distin-guished from all the existing species in the Acheilog-nathinae grounding on remarkable morphologicalcharacters. Thus the status of the present new speciescan be forcibly confirmed.

Comparative materials

Acheilognathus meridianus IHCAS 04201-04203 (3),IHCAS 04206-04215 (10), 52.5-66.8 mm SL, Zhu-jiang River basin: Yangshuo County, Guangxi Prov-ince, July, 2003; IHCAS 04204-04205 (2), 56.8–67.8 mm SL, Yangtze River basin: Wuyuan County,Jiangxi Province, May, 2006.

Acheilognathus imberbis IHCAS 04216-04230 (15),41.5-50.0 mm SL, Yangtze River basin: Wuhan City,Hubei Province, March, 2005.

Acheilognathus brevicaudatus IHCAS 04246-04260(15), 39.9-49.3 mm SL, Xingyun Lake: YunnnanProvince, June, 1957.

Fig. 7 Acheilognathus meridianus, IHCAS 04205, 67.8 mmSL

Tab

le2

Com

parisonof

selected

morph

olog

ical

characters

ofAcheilogn

athu

sstriatus

sp.no

v.andsimilarspecies

Characters

A.striatus

A.meridianus

A.imberbis

A.elongatus

A.cyanostig

ma

A.brevicaudatus

A.majusculus

A.yamatsutae

A.lanchiensis

A.barbatulus

The

length

ofbarbels

slightly

longer

than

half

diam

eter

ofeye

slightly

shorter

than

diam

eter

ofeye

absent

orshort

protuberance

absent

nearly

obsolete

absent

slightly

longer

than

half

diam

eter

ofeye

underhalf

ofeye

diam

eter

extendingto

beneath

thefrontmarginof

thepupil,or

toapoint

below

itsmiddle

absent

orvery

short

The

distance

between

theendof

pectoral

finandtheorigin

ofpelvic

fin

2-3scales

distance

2-4scales

distance

2-4scales

distance

nearly

reaching

theorigin

ofpelvic

fin

2-4scales

distance

nearly

reaching

theorigin

ofpelvic

fin

2-3scales

distance

2-3scales

distance

nearly

reaching

the

origin

ofpelvic

fin

nearly

reaching

theorigin

ofpelvic

fin

The

colorof

marginal

band

ontheanal

fin

inmale

black

colorless

colorless

broadblack

marginalband

broadwhite

margin

black

broadwhitish

marginalband

broad

whitish

marginal

band

–colorless

The

endof

the

longitu

dinalband

onbody

inmale

notending

inaspot

term

inating

with

aspot

intheend

notending

inaspot

notending

ina

spot

ending

ina

blackspot

aslargeas

pupil

notending

ina

spot

notending

ina

spot

notending

inaspot

notending

inaspot

notending

ina

spot

340 Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341

Acheilognathus elongatus IHCAS 04261-04275 (15),42.0-56.0 mm SL, Dianchi: Yunnan Province, April,1963.

Acheilognathus barbatulus IHCAS 04276-04290(15), 43.9-66.3 mm SL, Yangtze River basin: WuhanCity, Hubei Province, March, 2008.

Acknowledgements Our thanks go to Yu Zeng and FengkuiZhan for assistance with the collection management. MingjunCai kindly prepared for radiographing the specimen. We wouldlike to express our deepest appreciation to Jinming Wu andJianli Chen for specimen photographs. Funding support camefrom the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC40432003), the Cypriniformes Tree of Life (CToL) projectfunded by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSFEF-0431326) and the key project of Chinese Academy of Sciences(KZCX1-YW-08-01).

References

Arai R, Akai Y (1988) Acheilognathus melanogaster, asenior synonym of A. moriokae, with a revision of thegenera of the subfamily Acheilognathine (Cyprini-formes, Cyprinidae). Bull Natl Sci Mus Tokyo Ser A14:199–213

Berg LS (1949) Freshwater Fishes of the U.S.S.R. and AdjacentCountries, 4th Ed. Moscow-Leningrad. Izd Acad NauskSSSR 2:469–925

Bogutskaya NG, Komlev AM (2001) Some new data tomorphology of Rhodeus sericeus (Cyprinidae: Acheilog-nathinae) and a description of a new species, Rhodeuscolchicus, from west Transcaucasia. Proc Zool Inst287:81–97

Chen YR, Li ZY (1987) Notes on cyprinid fishes of thesubfamily Acheilognathinae from Yunnan China withdescription of a new subspecies. Zool Res 8:61–67

Choi KC, Jeon SR, Kim IS et al (1990) Coloured illustrationsof the freshwater fishes of Korea (in Korean with Englishabstract). Hyangmun Sa, Seoul, Korea

Froese R, Pauly D (2009) FishBase. World Wide Webelectronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org. Accessed15 May 2009

Gunther A (1868) Catalogue of the fishes in the BritishMuseum. 7:268–277

Gunther A (1873) Report on a collection of fishes from China.Ann Mag nat Hist 12:239–250

Herre AW, Lin SY (1936) Fishes of the Tsien TangRiver system. Bull Chekiang Prov Fish Exp Sta2:13–37

Huang XP (2005) Study on Water Environmental Capacity andTotal Control of the Le’An River. Dissertation, Universityof Nanchang

Hubbs CL, Lagler KF (2004) Fishes of the Great Lakes Region.The University of Michigan Press

Jordan DS, Fowler HW (1903) A review of the cyprinoid fishesof Japan. Proc U S Natn Mus 26:811–862

Jordan DS, Thompson WF (1914) Record of the fishesobtained in Japan in 1911. Mem Carneg Mas 6:205–313

Kim IS, Yang H (1998) Acheilognatbus majusculus, a newbitterling (Pisces, Cyprinidae) from Korea, with revisedkey to species of the genus Acheilognathus of Korea.Korean J Biol Sci 2:27–31

Lelek A (1987) Freshwater Fishes of Europe, vol 9. ThreatenedWshes of Europe, Aula Verlag

Lin RD (1998) Subfamily Acheilognathinae. In: Chen YY (ed)Fauna Sinica, Osteichthyes. Cypriniformes II. SciencePress, Beijing, pp 413–454

Mori T (1928) On the fresh water fishes from the Yalu River,Korea, with descriptions of new species. J Chosen NatHist Soc 6:54–70

Nelson JS (2006) Fishes of the world. John Wiley and Sons,Inc. New York. 4th edition. 601 pp

Nguyen VH, Ngo SV (2001) Freshwater fishes of VietNam.Volume I. Family Cyprinidae: 1–622

Song HB, Kwon OK (1994) Geographic Variation of Achei-lognathus yamatsutae from Korea and a MorphologicalComparison with A. cyanostigma from Japan. Korean JLimnology 27:127–135

Smith C, Reichard M, Jurajda P et al (2004) The reproductiveecology of the European bitterling (Rhodeus sericeus). JZool Lond 262:107–124

Wang SA, Wang ZM, Li GL et al (2001) The fauna of Hebei,China. Pisces: 1–366

Wu XW (1939) On the fishes of Li-Kiang. Sinensia 10:117Zhao YH, Zhang CG, Peng JX (2002) Methods of making

transparent skeleton and X-ray photography of fish (inChinese with English abstract). In: Lin Q, Zhang CG, JinHN (eds) Proceedings of the conference, China BiologicalCollections for the 21st Century. China Science andTechnology Press, Beijing, pp 298–301

Environ Biol Fish (2010) 88:333–341 341