Teleostei (teleosts) >
Cypriniformes (Carps) >
Cyprinidae (Minnows or carps) > Smiliogastrinae
Etymology: Enteromius: Greek, enteron = intestine + Greek, myo, mys = muscle (Ref. 45335); mimus: The specific epithet 'mimus' means 'imitator', a reference to the 'striking resemblance' to Enteromius neglectus (Ref. 127947).
More on author: Boulenger.
Environment: milieu / climate zone / depth range / distribution range
Ecology
Freshwater; benthopelagic. Tropical; 5°N - 5°S
Africa: Northern Ewaso Nyiro below the falls and Tana River system, Kenya (Ref. 52331, 127947).
Size / Weight / Age
Maturity: Lm ? range ? - ? cm
Max length : 4.6 cm SL male/unsexed; (Ref. 127947)
Short description
Identification keys | Morphology | Morphometrics
Dorsal spines (total): 0; Dorsal soft rays (total): 10 - 11; Anal spines: 0; Anal soft rays: 8 - 9. Diagnosis: Enteromius mimus belongs to the group of species of Enteromius with a flexible last unbranched dorsal fin ray that lacks serrations along its posterior edge (Ref. 127947). Enteromius mimus can easily be distinguished from the other species of this group from the East Coast and Nilo-Sudan ichthyofaunal regions by the following combinations of characteristics: a complete lateral line vs. an incomplete lateral line in E. atkinsoni, E. pumilus, E. serengetiensis, E. tongaensis and E. toppini; two pairs of barbels vs. one pair in E. pseudotoppini, and no barbels in E. anema and E. profundus; one to three dark spots on the flanks, which sometimes fuse into a mid-lateral line in preserved specimens, starting posterior to the operculum vs. a dark line running from the tip of the snout to the caudal fin base in E. bifrenatus and E. yongei, and a thin dark line from the beginning of the operculum to the caudal fin base in E. viviparus; 11-12 scales around the caudal peduncle vs. 8 in E. leonensis, 9-10 in E. venustus, and 10 in E. magdalenae and E. yeiensis; 24-27 lateral line scales vs. 30 in E. lineomaculatus, and 31 in E. innocens; 3.5-4.5 scales between the dorsal fin base and the lateral line vs. 5.5 in E. unitaeniatus and 6 in E. usambarae; 3-4 scales between the lateral line and the pelvic fin vs. 2 in E. trispilopleura, and 2-2.5 in E. neglectus; 7-8 branched dorsal fin rays vs. 9 in E. quadripunctatus; a body depth which is larger than the head length vs. a body depth which is equal to the head length in E. nigeriensis; a smaller snout length, 4.1-7.1% of standard length vs. 7.1-10.1% in E. radiatus (Ref. 127947). It differs from E. perince by a combination of a lower number of lateral line scales, 24-27 vs. 29-30, a lower number of scales between the dorsal fin base and lateral line, 3.5-4.5 vs. 5.5, a lower number of scales around the caudal peduncle, 11-12 vs. 14, a smaller interorbital width, 6.3-8.3% of standard length vs. 9.8-10.2%, a larger pre-pectoral distance, 26.0-29.0% of standard length vs. 23.1-24.5%, a lower minimum caudal peduncle depth, 11.1-14.0% of standard length vs. 15.0-16.4%, a lower maximum caudal peduncle depth, 12.9-16.5% of standard length vs. 17.7-19.4%, and a smaller anal fin base length, 7.3-8.7% of standard length vs. 8.5-9.6% (Ref. 127947). It differs from E. stigmatopygus by a combination of a smaller pre-pectoral distance, 26.0-29.0% of standard length vs. 29.1-33.1%, and a larger anal fin length, 18.0-19.7% of standard length vs. 12.6-17.4% (Ref. 127947). Enteromius mimus differs from E. alberti by a lower number of lateral line scales, 24-27 vs. 27-34, a larger pre-anal distance, 68.4-74.8% of standard length vs. 65.1-73.0%, a smaller post-anal distance, 16.3-19.3% of standard length vs. 16.3-24.2%, a larger body depth, 26.5-34.3% of standard length vs. 21.7-31.2%, a larger head depth, 17.8-21.8% of standard length vs. 15.1-19.0%, and a larger pelvic fin length, 18.2-22.4% of standard length vs. 15.0-20.9% (Ref. 127947). Specimens from E. mimus differ from the specimens of the population of E. cf. mimus from the Lake Edward system by a lower number of scales between the origin of the dorsal fin and the lateral line, 3.5-4.5 vs. 3.5-4.5, a larger pelvic fin length, 18.2-22.4% of standard length vs. 14.4-21.3%, a smaller snout length, 4.1-7.1% of standard length vs. 4.6-8.3%, a smaller interorbital width, 6.3-8.3% of standard length vs. 6.9-9.9%, a larger post-dorsal distance, 34.8-40.4% of standard length vs. 31.0-39.9%, and a larger anal fin length, 18.0-19.7% of standard length vs. 14.4-21.8% (Ref. 127947).
Life cycle and mating behavior
Maturities | Reproduction | Spawnings | Egg(s) | Fecundities | Larvae
Maetens, H., M. Van Steenberge, J. Snoeks and E. Decru, 2020. Revalidation of Enteromius alberti and presence of Enteromius cf. mimus (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae) in the Lake Edward system, East Africa. Eur. J. Taxon. 700:1-28. (Ref. 127947)
IUCN Red List Status (Ref. 130435)
Threat to humans
Harmless
Human uses
Tools
Special reports
Download XML
Internet sources
Estimates based on models
Phylogenetic diversity index (Ref.
82804): PD
50 = 0.5000 [Uniqueness, from 0.5 = low to 2.0 = high].
Bayesian length-weight: a=0.01000 (0.00244 - 0.04107), b=3.04 (2.81 - 3.27), in cm total length, based on all LWR estimates for this body shape (Ref.
93245).
Trophic level (Ref.
69278): 3.0 ±0.3 se; based on size and trophs of closest relatives
Resilience (Ref.
120179): High, minimum population doubling time less than 15 months (Preliminary K or Fecundity.).
Fishing Vulnerability (Ref.
59153): Low vulnerability (10 of 100).
