Morphology Data of Jupiaba paranatinga
Identification keys
Abnormalities
Main Ref. Netto-Ferreira, A.L., A.M. Zanata, J.L.O. Birindelli and L.M. Sousa, 2009
Appearance refers to
Bones in OsteoBase

Sex attributes

Specialized organs
Different appearance
Different colors
Remarks Bony hooks on fins or other dimorphic characters absent in all examined specimens of Jupiaba paranatinga

Descriptive characteristics of juvenile and adult

Striking features
Body shape lateral short and / or deep
Cross section
Dorsal head profile
Type of eyes
Type of mouth/snout
Position of mouth
Type of scales
Diagnosis

Jupiaba paranatinga is distinguished from J. acanthogaster, J. atypindi, J. keithi, J. maroniensis, J. meunieri, J. minor, J. pinnata and J. poekotero by having teeth with central cusp distinctly larger than lateral cusps and dentary teeth abruptly decreasing in size posteriorly (vs. teeth cusps similar in size and dentary teeth decreasing gradually posteriorly). Jupiaba paranatinga differs from J. abramoides, J. anteroides, J. apenima, J. asymmetrica, J. pirana, J. polylepis, J. poranga, J. potaroensis, J. yarina, and J. zonata by having 34–35 lateral line scales (vs. 39–66). The new species can be distinguished from J. iasy and J. mucronata by having two vertically elongated humeral blotches, the first and most conspicuous encompassing the scales 3 to 6 of the lateral line series (vs. one longitudinally elongated humeral blotch in J. mucronata and one vertically elongated humeral blotch encompassing the first 5 to 7 lateral line scales in J. iasy). Jupiaba paranatinga differs from J. elassonaktis, J. essequibensis, and J. scologaster by the presence of a conspicuous caudal spot at the end of caudal peduncle, extending over 8–10 median caudal-fin rays (vs. caudal spot absent in J. scologaster and inconspicuous in J. elassonaktis and J. essequibensis). The new species is further distinguished from J. scologaster by its lower number of branched anal-fin rays (18–20 vs. 21–22) and relatively lower body depth (31.3–35.5% vs. 34.9–42.1%), from J. essequibensis by its larger orbital diameter (43.7–46.9% vs. 38.5–44.0%), and from J. elassonaktis by various morphometric characters, including lower body depth (31.1–33.5% vs. 37.7–38.9%), longer caudal peduncle (12.1–13.0% vs. 10.4–11.2%), narrower interorbital distance (27.2–29.3% vs. 32.2–33.5%), and longer upper jaw (38.9–41.1% vs.

35.0–37.6%) (Ref. 82468).

Ease of Identification

Meristic characteristics of Jupiaba paranatinga

Lateral Lines Interrupted: No
Scales on lateral line
Pored lateral line scales
Scales in lateral series
Scale rows above lateral line
Scale rows below lateral line
Scales around caudal peduncle
Barbels
Gill clefts (sharks/rays only)
Gill rakers
on lower limb
on upper limb
total
Vertebrae
preanal
total

Fins

Dorsal fin(s)

Attributes
Fins number
Finlets No. Dorsal   
Ventral  
Spines total
Soft-rays total
Adipose fin

Caudal fin

Attributes

Anal fin(s)

Fins number
Spines total
Soft-rays total

Paired fins

Pectoral Attributes  
Spines     
Soft-rays   
Pelvics Attributes  
Position    
Spines     
Soft-rays   
Back to Search
Comments & Corrections
cfm script by eagbayani, 17.10.00, php script by rolavides, 13/03/08 ,  last modified by sortiz, 06.27.17