This species is distinguished from all its congeners of the M. pictus group, except M. nigromarginatus, by having an oblique chevron-like bars interrupted, mainly on the midline of the flank in males (vs. bars continuous, vestigial, irregular or presence of longitudinal rows of red dots on the side of the body; never bars interrupted on the midline of the body); differs from all other species in the M. pictus species group, except M. planaltinus, M. leali, M. pictus, by having a rounded dorsal fin (vs. slight pointed or pointed dorsal fin); differs from M. amambaiensis, M. apiamici, M. egens, M. faucireticulatus, M. ivinhemensis, M. lealiby a higher caudal-fin ray count 32-33 (vs. 28-31); differs from M. egens, M. faucireticulatus, M. leali, M. litteratus, M. rutilicaudus, M. formosensis by the position of the anal-fin origin between the pleural ribs of 15th and 16th vertebrae (vs. 13th and 15th vertebrae); differs from M. apiamici, M. egens, M. faucireticulatus, M. pictus, M. polychromus, M. proximus by the dorsal-fin origin at a vertical through the base of the 8th anal-fin ray (vs. vertical through base of 7th or 9th-10th anal-fin ray); differs from M. amambaiensis, M. egens, M. faucireticulatus, M. ivinhemensis, M. planaltinus, M. polychromus, M. nigropunctatus, M. ofaie, M. formosensis by the origin of dorsal-fin between neural spines of 18th and 19th vertebrae (vs. 19th and 22th); differs from M. egens, M. faucireticulatus, M. leali, M. litteratus, M. scalaris, M. vittatus, M. linearis, M. proximus by the tip of pelvic fin reaching the urogenital papilla in males (vs. reaching 1st to 4th anal fin ray). Also, another interesting diagnostic character is the presence of 8 rays in the pelvic fin in about 35% of the analysed specimens (vs. 5-7 rays, never 8 rays present in the pelvic fin) (Ref. 119399).