Sisoridae Bleeker, 1858

Alfred W. Thomson & Lawrence M. Page, 2006, Genera of the Asian Catfish Families Sisoridae and Erethistidae (Teleostei: Siluriformes)., Zootaxa 1345, pp. 1-96: 23-25

publication ID

z01345p001

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/339904FE-5107-AAC4-77ED-C37E2FC576E7

treatment provided by

Thomas

scientific name

Sisoridae Bleeker, 1858
status

 

Sisoridae Bleeker, 1858 

In contrast to erethistids, sisorids lack a prominent posterior coracoid process on the pectoral girdle. When present, the coracoid process is only detectable as a small nub at the base of the pectoral fin, and is never long and prominent as in erethistids. Amblycipitids differ from sisorids in possessing a cuplike fold of skin in front of the pectoral fin; sisorids lack the fold of skin. Akysids, including Parakysidae  of Roberts, 1989 (de Pinna 1996), differ from sisorids in having the nostrils on each side of the head widely separated, and a barbel on each posterior nostril. Sisorids have nostrils close together, separated by a nasal barbel (except nasal barbel absent in Sisor  ZBK  , nostrils separated by a flap of skin).

Osteological traits used by de Pinna (1996) to diagnose Sisoridae  from other Asian catfishes included lateral ethmoid with narrow lateral extensions directed posteriorly alongside lateral margin of frontals (coded as missing in all Sisorini  ), extra cartilaginous element anterior to last basibranchial (reversed in Nangrina  and Glyptosternina  ; convergent in Parakysinae  and Luguviini  , sensu de Pinna (1996)), distal tip of os suspensorum closely linked and/or adpressed to ventral process of complex centrum, and posterior portion of Weberian lamina with lateral extension alongside anterior margin of parapophysis of fifth vertebra.

Following are diagnoses and descriptions of valid genera of Sisoridae  , with lists of included species and their geographic distributions. Diagnostic traits are summarized in Tables 3-7. In identifying external traits to diagnose genera, it is useful to start with the four major clades diagnosed by de Pinna (1996) (Table 3), and then to examine traits within each of these major clades (Tables 4-7).