Ichthyological Research

, Volume 55, Issue 2, pp 148–161 | Cite as

Phylogeny of the family Congiopodidae (Perciformes: Scorpaenoidea), with a proposal of new classification

  • Nozomi Ishii
  • Hisashi ImamuraEmail author
Full Paper


The phylogenetic relationships of the family Congiopodidae are inferred based on morphological characters. The monophyly of this family is supported by 13 unambiguous apomorphic characters, including four autapomorphies among the superfamily Scorpaenoidea. The Congiopodidae shares 26 apomorphic characters with other scorpaenoid taxa, and these characters are considered to also support the monophyly of the family. Upon completion of the phylogenetic analysis using the characters in 39 transformation series, it was assumed that the family is unambiguously supported by five characters (and also by three and one characters when ACCTRAN and DELTRAN are used, respectively) and is branched into two major clades, including Congiopodus and Alertichthys plus Zanclorhynchus, respectively. Based on the phylogenetic relationships, a new classification, recognizing two subfamilies (Congiopodinae and Zanclorhynchinae) in the family Congiopodidae, is proposed. The genus Perryena, that was recently inferred being closely related to the Tetrarogidae (although many authors included it in the Congiopodidae), is provisionally placed into the Congiopodidae as incertae sedis.


Phylogeny Congiopodidae New classification Congiopodinae Zanclorhynchinae 



We express our sincere thanks to K. Nakaya and M. Yabe (HUMZ) for providing us with important comments. W. J. Richards (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center) also kindly provided valuable comments and correction of the English. We also sincerely thank M. E. Anderson (SAIAB) and M. McGrouther (AMS) for providing materials, and also the latter for information on the X-ray films used by Mandrytsa (2001).


  1. Eschmeyer WN (1998) Part IV. Genera in a classification. In: Eschmeyer WN (ed) Catalog of fishes, vol 3. Calif Acad Sci, San Fransisco, pp 2449–2499Google Scholar
  2. Greenwood PH, Rosen DE, Weitzman SH, Myers GS (1966) Phyletic studies of teleostean fishes, with a provisional classification of living forms. Bull Amer Mus Nat Hist 131:339–456Google Scholar
  3. Günther A (1880) Report on the shore fishes procured during the voyage of H. M. S. Challenger in the years 1873–1876. In: Report on the scientific results of the voyage of H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873–76. Zool Rep Challenger Shore Fishes vol 1, pp 1–82, pls 1–32Google Scholar
  4. Imamura H (1996) Phylogeny of the family Platycephalidae and related taxa (Pisces: Scorpaeniformes). Spec Div 1:123–233Google Scholar
  5. Imamura H (2004) Phylogenetic relationships and new classification of the superfamily Scorpaenoidea (Actinopterygii: Perciformes). Spec Divers 9:1–36Google Scholar
  6. Imamura H, Yabe M (1998) Osteological development of the lumpfish, Inimicus japonicus (Pisces: Scorpaeniformes). Ichthyol Res 45:53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ishida M (1994) Phylogeny of the suborder Scorpaenoidei (Pisces: Scorpaeniformes). Bull Nansei Nat Fish Res Inst 27:1–112Google Scholar
  8. Leviton AE, Gibbs RH Jr, Heal E, Dawson CE (1985) Standards in herpetology and ichthyology: Part I. Standard symbolic codes for institutional resource collections in herpetology and ichthyology. Copeia 1985:802–832Google Scholar
  9. Lloris D, Rucabado J (1991) Ictiofauna del canal Beagle (Tierra de Fuego), aspectos ecológicos y análisis biogeográfico. Publ Espec Inst Esp Oceanogr No 8, MadridGoogle Scholar
  10. Mandrytsa SA (2001) Seismosensory system and classification of scorpionfishes (Scorpaeniformes: Scorpaenoidei). Perm State Univ Press, PermGoogle Scholar
  11. Moreland JM (1960) A new genus and species of congiopodid fish from southern New Zealand. Rec Dominion Mus 3:241–246Google Scholar
  12. Nelson JS (1976) Fishes of the world. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Nelson JS (2006) Fishes of the world. 4th ed. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Paulin CD, Moreland JM (1979) Congiopodus coriaceus, a new species of pigfish, and a redescription of C. leucopaecilus (Richardson), from New Zealand (Pisces: Congiopodidae). N Z J Zool 6:601–608Google Scholar
  15. Paxton JR, Hoese DF, Allen GR, Hanley JE (1989) Zoological catalogue of Australia. vol 7. Pisces. Petromyzonidae to Carangidae. Aust Govern Publ Serv, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  16. Perry G (1810–1811) Ichthyology. In: Arcana; or The Museum of Natural History: containing the most recent discovered objects... London. unnum ppGoogle Scholar
  17. Poss GS (1994) Family Congiopodidae. In: Gomon M F, Glover JCM, Kuiter RH (eds) The fishes of Australia’s south coast. Flora and Fauna of South Australia Handbooks Committee. State Printer, Adelaide, pp 525–526Google Scholar
  18. Springer VG, Johnson GD (2004) Study of the dorsal gill-arch musculature of teleostome fishes, with special reference to the Actinopterygii. Bull Biol Soc Wash (11):i–vi+1–260, 205 plsGoogle Scholar
  19. Swofford DL (2002) PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  20. Waite ER (1922) Description of a new Australian fish of the genus Congiopodus. Rec S Aust Mus 2:215–217Google Scholar
  21. Whitley GP (1940) Illustrations of some Australian fishes. Aust Zool 9:397–428, pls 30–31Google Scholar
  22. Whitley GP (1952) Two new scorpion fishes from Queensland. Rec Aust Mus 23:25–28Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Ichthyological Society of Japan 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Marine Biology and Biodiversity (Systematic Ichthyology), Graduate School of Fisheries SciencesHokkaido UniversityHokkaidoJapan
  2. 2.GifuJapan
  3. 3.Fisheries Science CenterThe Hokkaido University MuseumHokkaidoJapan

Personalised recommendations