Journal of Ichthyology

, Volume 47, Issue 8, pp 566–578 | Cite as

The osteology of Bathysphyraenops symplex and the diagnosis of the Howellidae (Perciformes: Percoidei) family

  • A. M. ProkofievEmail author


The osteology is described of Bathysphyraenops simplex, and its close relationship is demonstrated with genera Howella and Pseudohowella. These three genera should be classified into separate family Howellidae characterized by the specific structure of the bones of the infraorbital series, the absence of the hyomandibular process of metapterygoideum, and the reduction of the anterior plate of hyomandibulare, the absence of contact of pterygiophores of the 1st and 2nd dorsal fins, presence in front of the second dorsal fin of a free pterygiophore having no distal element, 16 caudal vertebrae, the characteristic structure of scales, and some other characters. The osteological distinctions of Bathysphyraemops simplex from Howella sherborni found for the first time are small and the author believes that some of them may make a case of interspecies variation within these genera. The revised diagnosis of the family Howellidae is presented. The status of the fossil genera Synagropoides and Cottopsis is discussed. They may become representatives of this family.


Posterior Edge Anterior Plate Sensory Canal Tooth Plate Trunk Vertebra 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    E. H. Ahlstrom, J. L. Butler, and B. Y. Sumida, “Pelagic Stromateoid Fishes (Pisces, Perciformes) of the Eastern Pacific: Kinds, Distribution 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.
    C. Arambourg, “Résultats scientifiques de la Mission C. Arambourg en Syrie et en Iran (1938–1939). II. Les poissons oligocénes de l’Iran,” Notes Mém. Moyen-Orient 8, 9–210 (1967).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. F. Bannikov, “New Data on Late Paleocene Marine Percoids (Perciformes) of Turkmenistan,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 40(5), 593–599 (2000) [J. Ichthyol. 40 (8), 564–570 (2000)].Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. F. Bannikov, “A New Middle-Eocene Marine Percoid (Perciformes, Persoidei) from the Northern Caucasus,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 42(6), 725–730 (2002) [J. Ichthyol. 422 (9), 695–700 (2000)].Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. I. Fedoryako, “Materials on the Taxonomy and Distribution of ‘Oceanic Cheilodipteridae’,” Tr. Inst. Okeanol. Akad. Nauk SSSR 104, 156–190 (1976).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. H. Fraser, “Comparative Osteology of the Shallow Water Cardinal Fishes (Perciformes: Apogonidae) with Reference to the Systematics and Evolution of the Family,” Ichthyol. Bull. J.L.B. Smith Inst. Ichthyol., No. 34 (1972).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Gaudant, “Sur la présence de Chandidae (Poissons téléostéens, Percoidei) dans le Cénozoïque européen,” C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Ser. 2 304(20), 1249–1252 (1985).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. W. Mead and J. E. De Falla, “New Oceanic Cheilodipterid Fishes from the Indian Ocean,” Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 134(7), 261–274 (1965).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. D. Mooi and A. C. Gill, “Association of Epaxial Musculature with Dorsal-Fin Pterygiophores in Acanthomorph Fishes, and Its Phylogenetic Significance,” Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus., London (Zool.) 61(2), 121–137 (1995).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. A. Moore, K. E. Hartel, J. E. Craddock, and J. K. Galbraith, “An Annotated List of Deepwater Fishes from Off the New England Region, with New Area Records,” Northeastern Nat. 10(2), 159–248 (2003).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. D. Ogilby, “Additions to the Fauna of Lord Howe Island,” Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. Wales, 23,Part 4, 730–745 (1898).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O. Otero, “Anatomy, Systematics and Phylogeny of Both Recent and Fossil Latid Fishes (Teleostei, Perciformes, Latidae),” Zool. J. Linnean Soc. 141(1), 81–133 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. E. Parr, “Deepsea Berycomorphi and Percomorphi from the Waters Around the Bahama and Bermuda Islands,” Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 3(8), 1–51 (1933).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. Priem, “Poisson fossiles de Perse,” Ann. Hist. Nat. Paris Paléontol. 1, 1–25 (1908).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. M. Prokofiev, “The Late Paleocene Fish Fauna of Turkmenistan,” in 2nd EAVP Meeting, 19th–24th of July, 2004, Brno, Czech Republic. Abstracts of Papers and Posters with Program, Excursion Guidebook (Brno, 2004), p. 39.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. M. Prokofiev, Morphology of Howella sherborni (Perciformes, Percoidei) with Comparative Remarks on Families Acropomatidae, Erigonidae, and Arogonidae (Sputnik+, Moscow, 2006) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. M. Prokofiev, “Osteology and Some Other Morphological Characters of Howella sherborni with Discussion of the Taxonomic Position of the Genus (Perciformes, Percoidei),” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 47(4), 437–450 (2007).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    K. Sasaki, “Phylogeny of the Family Sciaenidae, with Notes on Its Zoogeography (Teleostei, Perciformes),” Mem. Fac. Fish. Hokkaido Univ. 36(1/2), 1–137 (1989).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. K. Sychevskaya and A. M. Prokofiev, “A New Acanthopterygian Family—Asianthidae (Perciformes) from the Upper Paleocene of Turkmenistan,” Vopr. Ikhtiol. 43(1), 5–20 (2003) [J. Ichthyol. 43 (1), 1–15 (2003)].Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    T. Ueno and T. Kubota, “On the Occurrence of the Deep-Sea Percoid Fish Howella in Japan,” Jpn. J. Ichthyol. 17(3), 117–120 (1970).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Severtsov Institute of Ecology and EvolutionRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations