Advertisement

Paleontological Journal

, Volume 45, Issue 1, pp 83–89 | Cite as

The new family Caucasichthyidae (Pisces, Perciformes) from the Eocene of the North Caucasus

  • A. F. Bannikov
  • G. Carnevale
  • N. V. Parin
Article

Abstract

Caucasichthys kumaensis gen. et sp. nov., a representative of a new monotypic perciform family Caucasichthyidae, from the Middle Eocene (Bartonian, Kuma Horizon) of the North Caucasus (Gorny Luch locality) is described. The new family is characterized by elongated body, strong preopercular spine in adults, absence of supraneurals, large pelvic fins, long caudal peduncle, and anal fin longer at the base than soft dorsal fin. Scales vary from cycloid to spinoid on different parts of the body. Caucasichthys shares a number of apomorphic features with members of certain percoid families, most notably the Priacanthidae. However, because of its unique combination of features, the new family cannot be properly placed within any existing perciform suborder and it is placed incertae sedis among the Perciformes.

Keywords

Teleostei Perciformes new taxa Middle Eocene North Caucasus 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    E. H. Ahlstrom, J. L. Butler, and B. Y. Sumida, “Pelagic Stromateoid Fishes (Pisces, Perciformes) of the Eastern Pacific: Kinds, Distributions and Early Life Histories and Observations on Five of These from the Northwest Atlantic,” Bull. Mar. Sci. 26(3), 285–402 (1976).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D.-S. Baciu and A. F. Bannikov, “New Stromateoid Fishes (Perciformes, Stromateoidei) from the Lower Oligocene of Romania,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 44(3), 162–170 (2004) [J. Ichthyol. 44 (3), 199–207 (2004)].Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. F. Bannikov, “Morphology and Phylogeny of Fossil Stromateoid Fishes (Perciformes),” Geobios, Mém. Spec., No. 19, 177–181 (1995).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. F. Bannikov, “A New Genus and Species of Putative Centrolophid Fish (Perciformes, Stromateoidei) from the Eocene of Bolca, Northern Italy,” Boll. Mus. Civ. Stor. Natur. Verona. Geol. Paleontol. Preist. 24, 37–46 (2000).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. F. Bannikov, “A New Middle-Eocene Marine Percoid (Perciformes, Percoidei) from the Northern Caucasus,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 42(6), 725–730 (2002) [J. Ichthyol. 42 (9), 695–700 (2002)].Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. F. Bannikov, Fossil Vertebrates of Russia and Adjacent Countries: Fossil Acanthopterygian Fishes (Teleostei, Acanthopterygii) (GEOS, Moscow, 2010) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. F. Bannikov, G. Carnevale, and W. Landini, “A New Early Miocene Genus of the Family Sciaenidae (Teleostei, Perciformes) from the Eastern Paratethys,” CR Palevol. 8(6), 535–544 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. F. Bannikov and N. N. Parin, “The List of Marine Fishes from Cenozoic (Upper Paleocene-Middle Miocene) Localities in Southern European Russia and Adjacent Countries,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 37(2), 149–161 (1997) [J. Ichthyol. 37 (2), 133–146 (1997)].Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. F. Bannikov and J. C. Tyler, “A New Species of the Luvarid Fish Genus Avitoluvarus (Acanthuroidei, Perciformes) from the Eocene of the Caucasus in Southwest Russia,” Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 114(3), 579–588 (2001).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. F. Bannikov and J. C. Tyler, “A New Species of the Genus Aulorhamphus (Gasterosteiformes: Aulorhamphidae) from the Eocene of the Caucasus in Southwestern Russia,” Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 119(1), 143–149 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. S. Berg, “Classification of Fishes, both Recent and Fossil,” Ezhegodn. Zool. Muz. Akad. Nauk SSSR 5, 87–517 (1940).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. R. David, “Miocene Fishes of Southern California,” Spec. Pap. Geol. Soc. Am. 43, 1–193 (1943).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Doiuchi, T. Sato, and T. Nakabo, “Phylogenetic Relationships of the Stromateoid Fishes (Perciformes),” Ichthyol. Res. 51, 202–212 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    K. Fujita, The Caudal Skeleton of Teleostean Fishes (Tokai Univ. Press, Tokyo, 1990).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. L. Haedrich, “The Stromateoid Fishes: Systematics and a Classification,” Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harv. Univ. 135(2), 31–139 (1967).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    H. Imamura, S. M. Shirai, and M. Yabe, “Phylogenetic Position of the Family Trichodontidae (Teleostei: Perciformes), with a Revised Classification of the Perciform Suborder Cottoidei,” Ichthyol. Res. 52, 264–274 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    G. D. Johnson, “Percoidei: Development and Relationships,” in Ontogeny and Systematics of Fishes (Allen, Lawrence, 1984), pp. 464–498.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. D. Johnson, “Percomorph Phylogeny: Progress and Problems,” Bull. Mar. Sci. 52(1), 3–28 (1993).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    G. D. Johnson and C. Patterson, “Percomorph Phylogeny: A Survey of Acanthomorphs and a New Proposal,” Bull. Mar. Sci. 52(1), 554–626 (1993).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. D. Mooi and G. D. Johnson, “Dismantling the Trachinoidei: Evidence of a Scorpaenoid Relationship for the Champsodontidae,” Ichthyol. Res. 44, 143–176 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. V. Nazarkin and O. S. Voskoboinikova, “New Fossil Genus and Species of Trichodontidae and the Position of This Family in the Order Perciformes,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 40(6), 725–742 (2000) [J. Ichthyol. 40 (9), 687–703 (2000)].Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. S. Nelson, Fishes of the World, 4th ed. (John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken-New Jersey, 2006).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. D. Roberts, “Comparative Morphology of Spined Scales and Their Phylogenetic Significance in the Teleostei,” Bull. Mar. Sci. 52(1), 60–113 (1993).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Borissiak Paleontological InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Scienze della TerraUniversità degli Studi di TorinoTorinoItaly
  3. 3.Shirshov Institute of OceanologyRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations