identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
4021879B5C52EE21FF44953DFEEEFE96.text	4021879B5C52EE21FF44953DFEEEFE96.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microgobius urraca	<div><p>Microgobius urraca sp. nov.</p><p>Dark-finned sand goby (Figures 1,2)</p><p>Material examined: Holotype: AMNH 255033, field number JVT-03-238, 69.4 mm SL, female, east of Isla Raya, Panama (Pacific), 7.3966o, -80.2991o, trawled specimen, collected by J.L. Van Tassell and D.R. Robertson, R/V Urraca, 20 June 2003, 12 m, sand substrate.</p><p>Paratypes: AMNH 255034, field number JVT-03-208, GenBank accession number JX139737 (partial cytochrome c oxidase I sequence), 62.2 mm SL, male, north of Isla Secas near main land, Panama (Pacific), 8.1435o, -81.8775o, trawled specimen, collected by J.L. Van Tassell and D.R. Robertson, R/V Urraca, 16 June 2003, 15- 18 m, sand and leaf litter substrate; USNM 404510, field number JVT-03-210, 59.8 mm SL, male, north of Islas Secas, Panama (Pacific), 8.1135o, -81.8336o, trawled specimen, collected by J.L. Van Tassell and D.R. Robertson, R/V Urraca, 16 June 2003, 20 m, sand and leaf litter substrate.</p><p>Diagnosis. The new species is morphologically similar to M. erectus, but differs from that species in possessing fewer lateral scale rows, lacking a patch of ctenoid scales under the pectoral fin, having unpigmented epaxial myosepta, a distinct oval-shaped dark blotch on the first dorsal fin, and possessing three blue-white stripes on a dark caudal fin. Differences in both the number and type of scales, dorsal and anal fin ray counts, the poor development of a fleshy dorsal crest, and overall color pattern further distinguish this species from the remaining eastern Pacific congeners.</p><p>Description. Morphometric data and summary of meristics given in Table 1. Counts of the holotype indicated by an asterisk, followed by number of specimens with each count in parentheses.</p><p>Median and paired fins: first dorsal VII*(3); first dorsal spines not highly filamentous, free tips of spines extending only a short distance beyond interspinal membrane; second dorsal I,14*(3); anal I,14*(3); second dorsal and anal fin rays extending slightly posterior to origin of caudal fin rays when laid flat; pectoral rays 21(1), 22*(1), 23(1); pectoral fin length 17.3–20.2 % SL; caudal fin long and lanceolate, 35.3–40.0 % SL; segmented caudal rays 17*(2); branched caudal rays 15*(2); pelvic fin I,5*(3); pelvic fins united to form oval-shaped disk with welldeveloped frenum; pelvic frenum with smooth posterior margin.</p><p>Scales: trunk covered with cycloid scales; predorsal region, cheek, operculum, pectoral fin base and pelvic fin base without scales; pre-anal region with small embedded cycloid scales; scales on anterior and ventral portions of trunk small, partially imbedded, and in irregular rows, becoming larger and arranged in distinct rows dorsally and posteriorly; no small patch of ctenoid scales beneath pectoral fin; lateral scale rows 67*(1), 75(1), 76(1); transverse scale rows 15*(1), 17(1), 18 (1).</p><p>ABLE 1. Microgobius urraca morphometrics and counts. Measurements are in % SL.</p><p>Holotype Paratype Paratype</p><p>Catalog Number AMNH 255033 AMNH 255034 USNM 404510 Field number JVT-03-238 JVT-03-208 JVT-03-210 Sex female male male SL (mm) 69.4 62.2 59.8 Eye diameter 6.23 6.27 6.05 Upper jaw length 10.2 12.86 12.2 Head length 22.1 23.33 22.4 Post orbital length 10.95 10.93 11.2 Depth at DI origin 15.85 15.51 16.3 Least caudal peduncle depth 8.07 8.84 7.85 Pectoral fin length 18.7 17.25 20.2 Caudal fin length 35.3 38.7 40</p><p>Snout length 4.7 5.86 5.2</p><p>Interorbital width 3.2 3.4 3.7</p><p>Patch of ctenoid scales under pectoral fin absent absent absent</p><p>Head: head length 22.1–23.3 % SL; mouth angled upwards at approximately 45–55 from horizontal; upper jaw length 10.2–12.9 % SL; teeth in upper jaw in two to three rows near symphysis, becoming two distinct rows near midpoint of premaxilla, terminating as single row near end of upper jaw; teeth in lower jaw two to three rows anteriorly near symphysis, becoming a single row near midway of dentary; teeth in outer row of both jaws enlarged, elongate and with slightly curved canines; tongue bilobed with deep medial notch; eye diameter 6.1–6.3 % SL; interorbital width 3.2–3.7 % SL; snout short, 4.7–5.9 % SL; low fleshy dorsal crest anterior to first dorsal fin in both sexes; anterior nare on short erect tube; posterior nare small, adjacent to head pore B’; gill rakers 5+16; epibranchials present.</p><p>Genitalia: female papillae unpigmented, short and bulbous; papilla in males unpigmented, slightly elongate and conical.</p><p>Sensory papillae and head pores (Figure 2): two interorbital canals anteriorly, joining posteriorly to become single interorbital canal at point in line with midpoint of eye; oculoscapular pores B’, D(s), F, G, H’ present; posterior canal (typically between pores K’ and L’) absent; preopercular pores M’, O’ present; sensory papillae on head in transverse pattern with three vertical rows below eye; transverse papillae row b beginning at vertical through midpoint of pupil, extending posteriorly, ending well short of posterior margin of preopercle; transverse papillae row d long, beginning anterior one third ofeye, extending posteriorly, ending well short of posterior margin of preopercle; papillae row n continuous across dorsal midline; papillae row x1 continuous from above pore F to above base of pectoral fin.</p><p>Vertebral skeleton: precaudal vertebrae 11; caudal vertebrae (including terminal element) 16; dorsal fin pterygiophore formula 3(221110); two anal fin pterygiophores preceding first haemal arch.</p><p>Pigmentation (based on freshly collected specimens unless otherwise noted): head brownish grey, with an indistinct silvery blotch at the lower corner of the operculum; iris creamy yellow; body uniformly light brownishgrey (pale grey to yellow in preservation); anterior half of trunk with four or five narrow, wavy, diffuse pale vertical “ Y ” shaped bars; epaxial myosepta unpigmented; first dorsal fin with a light grey-brown base, pale grey outer half, those two color areas separated by a conspicuous, horizontal oval blackish blotch across the center of the fifth to seventh spines; second dorsal fin darker posteriorly than anteriorly, with a dark grey base, grey-brown distal half, those two zones separated by a narrow blue-white stripe (stripe not apparent in preservation); anterior third of anal fin dark grey basal on basal quarter and paler grey on distal three-quarters; the posterior two-thirds of the fin is uniformly dark grey; caudal fin very dark, nearly black, with two blue-white stripes along its entire length above midline and one blue-white stripe below midline; pelvic and pectoral fins uniformly light grey; abdominal region pale; prepelvic region lightly pigmented with scattered melanophores; gular region pale.</p><p>Habitat. Microgobius urraca was collected in depths ranging from 12–20 m over sand or sand and leaf litter bottoms. In collections where leaf litter was present this species was collected with several specimens of Ptereleotris carinata and M. erectus . Microgobius urraca may be a burrowing species (see Discussion section below).</p><p>Distribution. Known only from the Pacific coast of western Panama (Figure 3)</p><p>Etymology. The specific epithet urraca is in reference to the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute’s research vessel the Urraca, which served the institute between 1994–2007. Microgobius urraca was collected on one of the many expeditions throughout the tropical eastern Pacific and Caribbean by the R/V Urraca, which contributed a wealth of information on fish diversity in the tropical Americas. The species name is to be treated as a noun in apposition. The common name “dark-finned sand goby is given in reference to the greyish-black second dorsal, anal and caudal fins and the sandy habitat over which it occurs.</p><p>Comparisons. Microgobius urraca differs from all other eastern Pacific species of Microgobius except M. erectus in having counts of I, 14 in both the second dorsal and anal fins (all other species typically have ≥ 15 rays in the second dorsal and anal fins). Microgobius urraca is most similar morphologically to M. erectus, but differs in possessing a higher lateral scale count (67–76 vs ≤ 48 in M. erectus), scales entirely cycloid and not easily lost, a dark blotch on the first dorsal fin (vs a pale/dusky fin with dark distal margin in female M. erectus), and in having unpigmented epaxial myosepta (darkly pigmented in preserved specimens of M. erectus). The absence of ctenoid scales under the pectoral fin further distinguishes M. urraca from M. erectus, M. cyclolepis, M. curtus, M. crocatus, M. miraflorensis, and M. tabogensis . Like most species of Microgobius, M. urraca can also be distinguished from its congeners by color patterns in life. No other species of Microgobius possesses a prominent sooty blotch on the first dorsal fin, dark grey anal and second dorsal fins, and a blackish caudal fin with three blue-white stripes. Microgobius urraca replaces M. brevispinis as the largest species in the genus (69.4 mm SL vs 64.6 mm SL, maximum size of M. brevispinis, SIO62-719)</p><p>Discussion. Birdsong (1981) reported M. erectus from mud and broken shell bottoms from 15– 30 m. Many M. erectus were collected from the 2003 Urraca Panama expedition, several of which were collected with M. urraca in a trawl over sand and leaf litter (field number JVT-03-210, AMNH 255301 and field number JVT-03-209, AMHH 255297) and others were collected over sand and mud. Nearly all M. erectus specimens from these collections had lost most of their scales and fins were severely damaged. The ease at which scales were lost and the delicate fin membranes of M. erectus led Birdsong (1981) to conclude that M. erectus, unlike many other Microgobius species, likely did not burrow. Although the specimens of M. erectus collected in 2003 were heavily damaged, the specimens of M. urraca from the same trawls had not lost scales and fins were more or less intact. Following Birdsong’s rationale, it is possible that the partially imbedded nature of the scales and the integrity of the fins in M. urraca indicate a burrowing lifestyle. Burrowing behavior may also explain why, despite heavy sampling effort, so few specimens of M. urraca were collected in trawls in comparison to M. erectus, which were common in trawls in the same area.</p><p>The phylogenetic relationship between M. urraca, the morphologically similar M. erectus, and other Microgobius species remain unclear. Birdsong (1981) struggled greatly to generate even a broad phylogenetic hypothesis for the genus, noting inconsistent patterns of shared characters across species, difficulty in determining ancestral/derived character states, and complex and contradicting patterns of sexual dimorphism (i.e. female conditions in one species are the male conditions in other species, while yet other species are sexually monomorphic). The only phylogenetic hypothesis to date was a molecular phylogeny of the Gobiosomatini based on mtDNA by Rüber et al. (2003) which contained 6 named (plus one unidentified) Microgobius species. Although more than half of the known named species of Microgobius were missing from this study the relationships shown were statistically robust and can provide a temporary framework for assessing the evolution and distribution of some morphological characters. When several morphological characters (i.e. predominant scale type, presence/ absence of a patch of ctenoid scales under pectoral fin, second dorsal/anal fin counts, filamentous dorsal spines, presence/absence of a dorsal crest, head pores) are mapped onto the phylogeny of Rüber et al. (2003), many character states appear to have either arisen or been lost more than once, to which the overall confusion alluded to by Birdsong (1981) may be attributed. A comprehensive phylogenetic analysis that includes all 15 currently recognized species of Microgobius and incorporates morphological characters and additional molecular data (including nuclear loci) would help clarify the interspecific relationships of this diverse group.</p><p>continued. curtus emblematicus brevispinnis</p><p>continued.</p><p>crocatus miraflorensis tabogensis Ocean Pacific Pacific Pacific Distribution El Salvador to Ecuador West coast southern Baja California West coast of Baja</p><p>(Bahia Magdalene), central eastern California(n. Bahia</p><p>Gulf of California to northern Peru Magdalena), to Peru</p><p>(Puerto Pizarro)</p><p>Habitat mangrove slough with estuarine species, mud to silty sand mangrove ares with mud-</p><p>muddy detritus bottom bottom sand bottoms continued.</p><p>continued.</p><p>thalassinus carri gulosus Ocean Atlantic Atlantic Atlantic</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/4021879B5C52EE21FF44953DFEEEFE96	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tornabene, Luke;Van, James L.;Robertson, Ross	Tornabene, Luke, Van, James L., Robertson, Ross (2012): Microgobius urraca (Teleostei: Gobiidae), a new species of goby from the tropical eastern Pacific. Zootaxa 3447: 41-55, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.212312
4021879B5C58EE26FF4496CCFFCAFD8F.text	4021879B5C58EE26FF4496CCFFCAFD8F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microgobius	<div><p>Key to the Pacific species of Microgobius</p><p>The following key to the Pacific species of Microgobius is largely based on diagnostic characters described by Birdsong (1981). Additional diagnostic pigmentation characters have been included in the key and photographs of freshly collected specimens of all Pacific Microgobius are included here to assist with identification of fresh material (Figures 4–6). A more comprehensive comparison of morphological features across the entire genus, summarizing data from Birdsong (1981) and data from additional material examined here (Appendix I), is given in Table 2.</p><p>1a. Second dorsal fin elements I,15 or fewer (rarely I,16); anal fin elements I,15 or fewer (rarely I,16); scales mostly cycloid... 2</p><p>1b. Second dorsal fin elements I,16 or more (rarely I,15); anal fin elements I,16 or more (rarely I,15); scales cycloid or ctenoid. 5</p><p>2a. Second dorsal fin elements I,14 or fewer; anal fin elements I,14 or fewer.......................................... 3</p><p>2b. Second dorsal fin elements I,15 (rarely I,14 or I,16); anal fin elements I,15 (rarely I,16)..............................4</p><p>3a. No patch of ctenoid scales under pectoral fin base; all scales on body cycloid, lateral scales 67–76; epaxial myosepta not darkly pigmented; caudal fin blackish, with three blue-white stripes, an oval blackish blotch on rear of first dorsal fin.......................................................................................................... M. urraca</p><p>3b. Patch of ctenoid scales under pectoral fin base; patch of 10–22 weakly ctenoid scales sometimes present immediately below first and second dorsal fin, remaining scales cycloid, lateral scales less than 48; epaxial myosepta darkly pigmented in preserved specimens; body in life silvery brown in both sexes (pale in preservation), fins grey or silvery........... M. erectus</p><p>4a. Preopercular sensory canal with three pores; lateral scale rows less than 60; pectoral rays 22–24; a prominent crescentic to ovoid dark blotch on shoulder below anterior of dorsal fin; anterior half of second dorsal fin of females often with a blue-white diagonal streak; no distinct rows of spots on first dorsal fin; no pale or blue vertical bars on body of females... M. cyclolepis</p><p>4b. Preopercular sensory canal with two pores; lateral scale rows more than 60; pectoral rays 20–21; dark spot on body below anterior dorsal spines indistinct; both sexes with two to four rows of prominent orange spots along both dorsal fins, spots dark in preservation; female often with pale or blue vertical bars both before and after pectoral fin base in life (bars less apparent in preservation); male with front half of body and head behind eye densely spotted with orange (not apparent in preservation)................................................................................................ M. curtus</p><p>5a. Scales entirely cycloid, no ctenoid patch beneath pectoral fin; pectoral fin short, usually 18–24% of SL; both sexes with low, fleshy dorsal crest..................................................................................... 6</p><p>5b. Patch of ctenoid scales present beneath pectoral fin; remaining scales cycloid or ctenoid; pectoral fin long, usually 23–27% of SL; fleshy dorsal crest absent in males, present or absent in females.............................................. 7</p><p>6a. Dorsum with a row of four or five dashes (short, thin dark lines) along the dorsal fin base (sometimes with four or five dark saddles below them), sometimes a diffuse dark blotch on shoulder below front dorsal spines; caudal fin of both sexes with an oblique red stripe across lower half (not apparent in preservation); about four enlarged, caninoid teeth in outer row of each dentary; second dorsal fin elements usually I,16; anal fin elements usually I,16.......................... M. emblematicus</p><p>6b. Dorsum without dark dashes or saddles; males with a dark bar on shoulder bordered posteriorly with blue or yellow in life, and often with a short iridescent blue stripe below posterior half of second dorsal and two large round yellow spots above anal fin; an iridescent yellow bar with a blue anterior border on shoulder in living females; about six or seven enlarged, caninoid teeth in outer row of each dentary; second dorsal fin elements usually I,17; anal fin elements usually I,17........... M. brevispinis</p><p>7a. A dark spot (sometimes diffuse) or bar present on body below origin of first dorsal fin; second dorsal fin elements usually I,16; anal fin elements usually I,16; no elongate iridescent blue blotch on body above and before anus....................... 8</p><p>7b. No dark spot or bar on body below origin of first dorsal fin; second dorsal fin elements I,16–17; anal fin elements usually I,17; in life, both sexes with an elongate iridescent blue blotch on upper belly above and before anus, and the ventral edge of the caudal fin yellow (lost in preservation); male with anal and pelvic fins bordered in yellow in life, female with a yellow stripe along base of anal fin in life.................................................................... M. crocatus</p><p>8a. Each dentary with about 15–20 teeth in outer row; fleshy dorsal crest absent in both sexes; often with a dark vertical bar on shoulder, and sometimes one to five faint vertical bars on trunk behind shoulder bar in preservation (due to the poor quality of our photos, life color patterns cannot be accurately defined)........................................ M. miraflorensis</p><p>8b. Each dentary with about seven to nine teeth in outer row; fleshy dorsal crest well developed in females; both sexes with a diffuse dark spot on body below origin of first dorsal fin; in life, both sexes with a series of four or five large iridescent blue spots along mid flank, another series of two or three iridescent blue spots along side of belly beneath pectoral fin (spots lost in preservation).................................................................................. M. tabogensis</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/4021879B5C58EE26FF4496CCFFCAFD8F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tornabene, Luke;Van, James L.;Robertson, Ross	Tornabene, Luke, Van, James L., Robertson, Ross (2012): Microgobius urraca (Teleostei: Gobiidae), a new species of goby from the tropical eastern Pacific. Zootaxa 3447: 41-55, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.212312
