Classification / Names
Common names | Synonyms | Catalog of Fishes(genus, species) | ITIS | CoL | WoRMS | Cloffa
Teleostei (teleosts) >
Cichliformes (Cichlids, convict blennies) >
Cichlidae (Cichlids) > Pseudocrenilabrinae
Etymology: Orthochromis: Greek, ortho = straight + Greek, chromis = a fish, perhaps a perch (Ref. 45335); kimpala: The species name kimpala refers to the local name for this species: "Kimpala" in the Sanga language; a noun in apposition (Ref. 122085).
Environment: milieu / climate zone / depth range / distribution range
Ecology
Freshwater; benthopelagic; pH range: 8.0 - 8.7. Tropical; 21°C - 27°C (Ref. 122085)
Africa: Kalule Nord River, tributary of Lualaba River in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Ref. 122085).
Size / Weight / Age
Maturity: Lm ? range ? - ? cm
Max length : 8.5 cm SL male/unsexed; (Ref. 122085)
Short description
Identification keys | Morphology | Morphometrics
Dorsal spines (total): 15 - 16; Dorsal soft rays (total): 10 - 11; Anal spines: 3; Anal soft rays: 8 - 10; Vertebrae: 28 - 30. Diagnosis: Orthochromis kimpala can be readily distinguished from all species currently placed in Orthochromis, except O. torrenticola, by presence of eggspot-like maculae on anal fin; further, it is distinguished from Malagarasi-Orthochromis species, including O. sp. “Igamba”, by having more scale rows on cheek, 3-4 vs. 0 or 0-1 in case of O. mazimeroensis and O. rubrolabialis (Ref. 122085). Furthermore, O. kimpala differs from O. luichensis, O. malagaraziensis, O. mazimeroensis, O. mosoensis and O. rubrolabialis by having more scales between upper lateral line and dorsal-fin origin, 6-7 vs. 4-5; additionally, it has fewer dorsal-fin spines than O. luichensis, O. malagaraziensis, and O. rubrolabialis, 15-16 vs. 17-19 (Ref. 122085). Moreover, it differs from O. rubrolabialis by having more total gill rakers, 11-12 vs. 8-9, and by position of pterygiophore supporting last dorsal-fin spine, vertebral count 14-16 vs. 17-19; from O. mazimeroensis by having more abdominal vertebrae, 14-15 vs. 12-13; from O. mosoensis by having more scales in horizontal line on operculum, 3 vs. 0-1 (Ref. 122085). Orthochromis kimpala is distinguished from O. kasuluensis, O. rugufuensis and O. unvinzae by having fewer dorsal-fin spines, 15-16 vs. 17-20; from O. kasuluensis and O. rugufuensis by having more scales on the horizontal line on operculum, 3 vs. 1-2; from O. Kasuluensis and O. uvinzae by having fewer scales in upper lateral line, 20-22 vs. 23-25, and fewer total vertebrae, 28-30 vs. 31-33; moreover, it differs from O. uvinzae by having fewer horizontal line scales, 27-29 vs. 30-32, and by position of pterygiophore supporting last dorsal-fin spine, vertebral count 14-16 vs. 18-19 (Ref. 122085). It can be distinguished from O. kalungwishiensis, O. luongoensis, O. polyacanthus, and O. torrenticola by having fewer dorsal-fin spines, 15-16 vs. 17-20; further from O. kalungwishiensis, O. luongoensis, and O. torrenticola by fewer horizontal line scales, 27-29 vs. 30-32, and fewer total vertebrae, 28-30 vs. 31-33; from O. luongoensis and O. torrenticola by fewer caudal vertebrae, 13-16 vs. 17-18; from O. torrenticola by having fewer anal-fin spines, 3 vs. 4; moreover, it is distinguished from O. torrenticola and O. polyacanthus by position of pterygiophore supporting last anal-fin spine, vertebral count 14-15 vs. 16-17 (Ref. 122085). It is distinguished from O. stormsi by having fewer total gill rakers, 11-12 vs. 13-15 (Ref. 122085). It differs from Schwetzochromis neodon by having more scale rows on cheek, 3-4 vs. 1-2, fewer horizontal line scales, 27-29 vs. 30-31, more circumpeduncular scales, 16 vs. 12, fewer inner series of teeth, 2-3 vs. 4-6; it differs from Haplochromis snoeksi by having fewer horizontal line scales, 27-29 vs. 30-31, fewer scales on upper lateral line, 20-22 vs. 23, more abdominal vertebrae, 14-15 vs. 13, and fewer caudal vertebrae, 13-16 vs. 17, more anal-fin rays, 8-10 vs. 5-6, and more total gill rakers, 11-12 vs. 9; from Haplochromis bakongo by having more scales between upper lateral line and dorsal-fin origin, 6-7 vs. 3-5; from Haplochromis moeruensis by having more upper procurrent caudal-fin rays, 6-7 vs. 5, and more total caudal-fin rays, 26-27 vs. 28-29; from Haplochromis vanheusdeni by having more scale rows on cheek, 3-4 vs. 0-2 (Ref. 122085). It is distinguished from Orthochromis mporokoso by more scales between upper lateral line and dorsal-fin origin, 6-7 vs. 4-5; from O. katumbii by having fewer horizontal line scales, 27-29 vs. 30-31, and by more scales between upper lateral line and dorsal-fin origin, 6-7 vs. 4-5; from O. gecki by having more series of scales on cheek, 3-4 vs. 0-2; from O. indermauri by having more series of scales on cheek, 3-4 vs. 1-2, and by fewer dorsal-fin spines, 15-16 vs. 17-18 (Ref. 122085).
Found in a river which has a rocky bottom with some patches of sand and gravel, about 5-8 meters wide and on average about 50 cm deep (Ref. 122085). The species appears to be benthic-reophilic (Ref. 122085).
Life cycle and mating behavior
Maturities | Reproduction | Spawnings | Egg(s) | Fecundities | Larvae
Schedel, F.D.B., E.J.W.M.N. Vreven, B. Katemo Manda, E. Abwe, A. Chocha Manda and U.K. Schliewen, 2018. Description of five new rheophilic Orthochromis species (Teleostei: Cichlidae) from the Upper Congo drainage in Zambia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Zootaxa 4461(3):301-349. (Ref. 122085)
IUCN Red List Status (Ref. 130435)
Threat to humans
Harmless
Human uses
Fisheries:
Tools
Special reports
Download XML
Internet sources
Estimates based on models
Phylogenetic diversity index (Ref.
82804): PD
50 = No PD50 data [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).
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).
