You can sponsor this page

Haplochromis mentatus Regan, 1925

Upload your photos and videos
Google image
Image of Haplochromis mentatus
No image available for this species;
drawing shows typical species in Cichlidae.

Classification / Names Common names | Synonyms | Catalog of Fishes(genus, species) | ITIS | CoL | WoRMS | Cloffa

Teleostei (teleosts) > Cichliformes (Cichlids, convict blennies) > Cichlidae (Cichlids) > Pseudocrenilabrinae
Etymology: Haplochromis: Greek, Haploos = single + Greek, chromis = a fish, perhaps a perch (Ref. 45335);  mentatus: Specific name probably derived from the Latin 'mentum' for 'chin'; probably referring to the protruding lower jaw (Ref. 126312).
More on author: Regan.

Environment: milieu / climate zone / depth range / distribution range Ecology

Freshwater; benthopelagic. Tropical; 0° - 1°S

Distribution Countries | FAO areas | Ecosystems | Occurrences | Point map | Introductions | Faunafri

Africa: endemic to Lake Edward system (Ref. 126312).

Size / Weight / Age

Maturity: Lm ?  range ? - ? cm
Max length : 11.5 cm TL male/unsexed; (Ref. 4983)

Short description Identification keys | Morphology | Morphometrics

Dorsal spines (total): 15 - 16; Dorsal soft rays (total): 9 - 10; Anal spines: 3; Anal soft rays: 8 - 9; Vertebrae: 30 - 32. Diagnosis: Species with a piscivorous morphology; body shallow, body depth 29.0-32.3% of standard length; snout very acute in dorsal and lateral views; outer oral teeth few and large, number of upper outer teeth 28-46; vertebrae many, 30-32; dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank (Ref. 126312). Amongst piscivorous species from the Lake Edward system, Haplochromis mentatus differs from H. latifrons by the combination of a longer dorsal fin base, dorsal-fin base 50.3-54.2% of standard length vs. 47.2-50.1%; a weakly vs. strongly prominent premaxillary pedicel; a steeper sloping lower jaw side, 30-45° vs. 25-30°; and absence vs. presence of a well-defined mid-lateral band (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. rex and H. aquila by the combination of a longer caudal peduncle, caudal peduncle length 15.7-17.5% of standard length vs. 13.5-16.2%; a gentler sloping snout, 30-35° vs. 35-50°; and dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank vs. cream-coloured with an orange operculum, or light grey with a black head, respectively; further from H. rex by a lower number of infraorbital cheek scales, 3-4 vs. 5-6, rarely 4 or 7; further from H. aquila by smaller eyes, eye diameter 25.4-29.9% of head length vs. 30.0-31.5% (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. simba by the combination of a broader interorbital area, interorbital width 51.3-61.0% of head width vs. 45.5-50.4%; a larger number of outer upper jaw teeth, 28-46 vs. 22-31; absent to weakly prominent vs. strongly prominent premaxillary pedicel and mentum; and dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank vs. yellow with an orange anterior part of flank (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. glaucus by the combination of a longer caudal peduncle, caudal peduncle length 15.7-17.5% of standard length vs. 13.4-16.1%; a narrower lower pharyngeal bone, lower pharyngeal width 83.6-85.7% of lower pharyngeal length vs. 93.3-95.1%; a slightly shorter pre-pectoral distance, 33.1-38.2% of standard length vs. 36.4-39.4%; and dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank vs. uniformly blue (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. kimondo and H. quasimodo by the combination of a narrower head, head width 39.4-42.3% of head length vs. 42.0-48.1%; and dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank vs. grey dorsally and yellow or blue-black ventrally; further from H. kimondo by a very acute vs. blunt snout, and a gentler sloping snout, 30-35° vs. 40-50°; further from H. quasimodo by a shallower body, body depth 27.2-30.1% of standard length vs. 33.5-41.7% (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. falcatus by the combination of a shorter predorsal distance, 33.3-36.4% of standard length vs. 36.9-41.1%; a shorter head, head length 33.4-37.0% of standard length vs. 36.6-39.6%; straight to weakly recurved vs. strongly recurved outer oral teeth, a steeper lower jaw side, 30-45° vs. 15-25°; absence vs. presence of well-defined mid-lateral and dorsal-lateral bands (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. curvidens and H. pardus by the combination of a deeper lacrimal, 18.1-20.9% of head length vs. 16.0-18.3%; and smaller eyes, eye diameter 25.4-29.9% of headclength vs. 29.4-34.1%; further from H. pardus by dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank vs. speckled to uniformly black (Ref. 126312). It differs from H. squamipinnis by the combination of large vs. small outer oral teeth and a smaller number of outer upper jaw teeth, 28-46 vs. 46-71; a shallower body, body depth 29.0-32.3% of standard length vs. 32.4-39.3%; absence vs. presence of minute scales on proximal part of dorsal fin; and dominant males yellow-green with a red anterior part of flank vs. uniformly slate blue (Ref. 126312).

Biology     Glossary (e.g. epibenthic)

Found in offshore areas, mostly in shallow waters (Ref. 126312). Based on its morphology, most probably a piscivorous species (Ref. 126312).

Life cycle and mating behavior Maturities | Reproduction | Spawnings | Egg(s) | Fecundities | Larvae

Mouthbrooding by females.

Main reference Upload your references | References | Coordinator : Kullander, Sven O. | Collaborators

Vranken, N., M. Van Steenberge, A. Heylen, E. Decru and J. Snoeks, 2022. From a pair to a dozen: the piscivorous species of Haplochromis (Cichlidae) from the Lake Edward system. Eur. J. Taxon. 815:1-94. (Ref. 126312)

IUCN Red List Status (Ref. 130435)

  Least Concern (LC) ; Date assessed: 22 August 2021

CITES

Not Evaluated

CMS (Ref. 116361)

Not Evaluated

Threat to humans

  Harmless





Human uses

FAO - Publication: search | FishSource |

More information

Trophic ecology
Food items
Diet compositions
Food consumptions
Food rations
Predators
Ecology
Ecology
Population dynamics
Growths
Max. ages / sizes
Length-weight rel.
Length-length rel.
Length-frequencies
Mass conversions
Recruitments
Abundances
Life cycle
Reproduction
Maturities
Fecundities
Spawnings
Spawning aggregations
Egg(s)
Egg developments
Larvae
Larval dynamics
Distribution
Countries
FAO areas
Ecosystems
Occurrences
Introductions
BRUVS - Videos
Anatomy
Gill areas
Brains
Otoliths
Physiology
Body compositions
Nutrients
Oxygen consumptions
Swimming type
Swimming speeds
Visual pigment(s)
Fish sounds
Diseases / Parasites
Toxicities (LC50s)
Genetics
Genetics
Electrophoreses
Heritabilities
Human related
Aquaculture systems
Aquaculture profiles
Strains
Ciguatera cases
Stamps, coins, misc.
Outreach
Collaborators
Taxonomy
Common names
Synonyms
Morphology
Morphometrics
Pictures
References
References

Tools

Special reports

Download XML

Internet sources

AFORO (otoliths) | Aquatic Commons | BHL | Cloffa | BOLDSystems | Websites from users | Check FishWatcher | CISTI | Catalog of Fishes: genus, species | DiscoverLife | ECOTOX | FAO - Publication: search | Faunafri | Fishipedia | Fishtrace | GenBank: genome, nucleotide | GloBI | Google Books | Google Scholar | Google | IGFA World Record | MitoFish | Otolith Atlas of Taiwan Fishes | PubMed | Reef Life Survey | Socotra Atlas | Tree of Life | Wikipedia: Go, Search | World Records Freshwater Fishing | Zoobank | Zoological Record

Estimates based on models

Phylogenetic diversity index (Ref. 82804):  PD50 = 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):  3.3   ±0.4 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).