欢迎访问《渔业研究》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

渔业研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (6): 629-634.DOI: 10.14012/j.cnki.fjsc.2020.06.011

• 论文与报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

连城扁圆吻鲴群体主要形态特征分析

林炳明   

  1. 龙岩市水产技术推广站
  • 收稿日期:2020-11-05 修回日期:2020-11-26 出版日期:2020-12-25 发布日期:2021-01-07
  • 通讯作者: 林炳明
  • 基金资助:
    福建省科技星火计划项目

Analysis of main morphological characteristic of Distoechodon compressus in Liancheng

  • Received:2020-11-05 Revised:2020-11-26 Online:2020-12-25 Published:2021-01-07

摘要: 为详细了解连城扁圆吻鲴地理种群的形态特征及其与文献记载的差异,按照GB/T 18654. 3—2008的规定,对连城县3个水域的扁圆吻鲴进行了形态特征检测,将检测结果与 《扁圆吻鲴的生物学及其养殖》《福建鱼类志》《中国鲤科鱼类志》作比较。形态分析结果 表明,1)连城扁圆吻鲴主要外部形态特征:体长形,侧扁,腹部圆,无腹棱。头小,眼较大,吻部明显突出。下颌齿2行,口下位,横裂,下颌有很发达的角质缘。鳃耙短且扁薄,排列紧密,鳃耙数90~113。鳞小,侧线鳞71~86。背鳍硬刺粗壮而光滑。臀鳍有2条不分支鳍条。尾鳍深叉形,尾柄较长。体背部深黑色,腹部银白,鳃盖前后缘各有1条桔黄色斑 纹,体侧有10多条黑斑条纹。背、尾鳍灰黑色,尾鳍边缘黑色。偶鳍基部桔红或桔黄色,鳍条桔黄色,边缘灰白色。臀鳍淡黄色,鳍条黄白色。2)主要外部形态特征与文献记载的存在一定差异。差异主要表现在:⑴臀鳍不分支鳍条数为2,而文献记载为3 ;⑵各鳍条颜色较暗淡,其中,尾鳍从红变黑灰或黄灰,偶鳍从红变黄或桔黄,臀鳍从黄变黄白;⑶侧线鳞数超出68~74、67~72的记载范围;⑷鳃耙数超出94~103、94~97的记载范围。分析形成差异的主要原因有:⑴种群的地理位置差异;⑵水质环境变化;⑶遗传多样性变异;⑷样本鱼规格差异;⑶食物多寡;(6)文献作者对颜色的描述差异等。

Abstract: In order to understand in detail the morphological characteristics and the differences between the population and the records,according to the GB/T 18654.3—2008,the morphological characteristics of Distoechodon compressus of the three waters in Liancheng County,Fujian Province,China were detected,the results were compared with the records of “ Biology and Breeding of Distoechodon compressus”,“ Fishes of Fujian” and“ Fish of Chinese Cyprinidae”. The results showed that:1) The main external morphological characteristics of Distoechodon compressus in Liancheng were body length,lateral fat,abdomen round,no ventral edges. The head was small, the eye was big,the snout was obviously prominent. Two rows of mandibular teeth,lower mouth, transverse crack, the mandible had a well developed cuticle margin. The gill rakes were short and thin,closely arranged, gill rake number 90?113. Small scales,lateral line scales 71?86. The dorsal fin was strong and smooth. The gluteal fin had two unbranched fin rays. caudal fin deep fork shape,the tail handle was longer. Deep black back,silver abdomen, the front and back edge of the gill cover had 1 orange stripe,and the body side had more than 10 black spot stripes. The dorsal and caudal fins were gray and black, caudal fin edge was black, pectoral fin and pelvic fin were red orange or orange,the pterygiophore was orange and the edge was gray and white. The gluteal fin was pale yellow. The pterygiophore were yellow and white. 2) There were some differences between the main morphological characteristics and the literature records:1) The gluteal fins had two fin rays that did not branch; 2) Each fin rays were darker in colour,among them, the color of tail fin changed from red to black or yellow, the color of pectoral fin and pelvic fin turned yellow from red to orange, the gluteal fin changed from yellow to white; 3 ) The number of lateral scales exceeded the recorded range of 68 ~74, 67 ~72; 4) The number of gill rakes exceeded the records of 94~103,94~97 of the literature. The main reasons for the difference were:1) The geographical location difference of the sample fish;2 ) Environmental changes in water quality; 3 ) Genetic variation;4) Sample fish specification difference; 5) Lack of food; 6) Differences in color descriptions among authors of the literature.