identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
0384230AFFF0FFD28747FAC8FBBBFE65.text	0384230AFFF0FFD28747FAC8FBBBFE65.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Dna	<div><p>2.3 | PCR amplification and DNA sequencing</p><p>For the specimens fixed in ethanol, DNA was extracted from caudalfin clips using the Macherey and Nagel NucleoSpin 96 Tissues kit following the manufacturer's instructions on an Eppendorf epMotion 5075 robot.</p><p>A mitochondrial fragment of the COI gene (650 base pair [bp]) was amplified using the tailed fish specific primers VF2-t1 5 0 - TGTAAAACGACGGCCAGTCAACCAACCACAGACATTGGCAC-3 0; Fis hF2-t1 5 0 -TGTAAAACGACGGCCAGTCGACTAATCATAAAGATATCG GCAC-3 0; Fishr2-t1 5 0 -CAGGAAACAGCTATGACACTTCAGGGTGAC CGAAGAATCAGA-3 0 (Ward et al., 2005); Fr1d-t1 5 0 -CAGGAAACAG CTATGACACCACAGGGTGTCCGARAAYCARAA-3 0 (Ivanova et al., 2007). DNA was amplified using PCR in a final volume of 20 μL containing 2 μL of buffer, 1 μL of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), 1 μL of bovine albumin serum (BAS), 0.8 μL of deoxynucleotide triphosphates, 0.32 μL of each forward and reverse primer, 0.06 μL of Taq DNA polymerase (Qiagen), 2 μL of DNA, and water. DNA was amplified using a thermal cycler (T100TM Thermal Cycler) after 2 min of denaturation at 94 C followed by 55 cycles (30s, 94 C; 45 s, 54 C; 1 min, 72 C). Successful PCRs were selected on ethidium bromide–stained agarose gels. Sanger sequencing was performed in both directions by Eurofins (http://www.eurofins.fr) using M13 tail primers M13F (21) 5 0 -TGTAAACGACGGCCAGT-3 0; M13R (27) 5 0 -CAGGAAACAGC- TATGAC-3 0 (Messing, 1983).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0384230AFFF0FFD28747FAC8FBBBFE65	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Haÿ, Vincent;Mennesson, Marion I.;Carpentier, Camille;Dahruddin, Hadi;Sauri, Sopian;Limmon, Gino;Wowor, Daisy;Hubert, Nicolas;Keith, Philippe;Lord, Clara	Haÿ, Vincent, Mennesson, Marion I., Carpentier, Camille, Dahruddin, Hadi, Sauri, Sopian, Limmon, Gino, Wowor, Daisy, Hubert, Nicolas, Keith, Philippe, Lord, Clara (2025): Phylogeography of Microphis retzii (Bleeker, 1856) and Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854) in the Pacific. Journal of Fish Biology 106 (2): 602-620, DOI: 10.1111/jfb.15981, URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.15981
0384230AFFF4FFD88747FA0DFE90FAEA.text	0384230AFFF4FFD88747FA0DFE90FAEA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microphis brachyurus	<div><p>3.1 | M. brachyurus</p><p>3.1.1 | Phylogeography</p><p>A total of 91 sequences (480 bp) were successfully generated and aligned. Ten haplotypes (H1–H10) were identified, including seven unique haplotypes observed in a single individual (H2, H3, H4, H5, H7, H8, and H9) (Figure 2; Table S1).</p><p>The haplotype network for M. brachyurus has two main haplogroups separated by five nucleotide substitutions (Figure 2a). Haplogroup 1, composed of haplotypes H1–H9, includes individuals from Papua New Guinea (New Britain), Indonesia (Borneo), Solomon Islands (Kolombangara and Isabel), Japan (Okinawa), and New Caledonia. Haplogroup 1 presents a star-like topology, with a central haplotype (H1) shared by several individuals from most sampling sites and radiating into eight haplotypes separated by a single or two mutations from H1. Haplogroup 2 is composed of one unique haplotype H10 carried by individuals from French Polynesia (Tahiti) only. There are no shared haplotypes between the two haplogroups.</p><p>The different sampling sites of M. brachyurus were grouped into two large geographical areas to match the spatially nested design of the AMOVA: WPO and CPO (Figure 2b), corresponding to the two haplogroups mentioned earlier. Hd and π are higher in the WPO zone (Hd = 0.667; π = 0.927) compared to the CPO zone (Hd = 0.117; π = 0.117). The values of Fu's F and Tajima's D are significantly negative for the WPO region (Table 2).</p><p>The spatial genetic structuring of M. brachyurus observed in Figure 2 is supported by a high and statistically significant Φst value (0.914) between CPO and WPO zones (p &lt;0.05). The average genetic distance between and within CPO and WPO was calculated from the uncorrected p-distances matrix with a value of 1.26% between regions and low genetic distances on average within regions, that is, 0.17%–0% (Table 3).</p><p>3.1.2 | MOTUs delimitation and phylogenetic analysis</p><p>DNA-based species delimitation methods resulted in congruent delimitation schemes with two MOTUs for sPTP and ASAP, and one MOTU for mPTP and sGMYC (Figure 3, Table S2). mGMYC were not</p><p>Geographical areas N Fst Hd h π</p><p>WPO 44 0.913 0.667 2 0.927 CPO 47 0.916 0.117 10 0.117</p><p>T A B L E 2 Molecular diversity indices Fu's F Tajima's D</p><p>for Microphis brachyurus .</p><p>6.083 1.557</p><p>0.521 0.791</p><p>Note: Significant values (p -value &lt;0.05) are indicated in bold.</p><p>Abbreviations: CPO, Central Pacific Ocean; F and D, neutrality tests; Fst, intra-zone differentiation parameter; Hd, haplotype diversity; h, number of haplotypes; π, nucleotide diversity; N, number of individuals sampled; WPO, West Pacific Ocean.</p><p>WPO CPO</p><p>WPO 0.17</p><p>CPO 1.26 0</p><p>Note: Intra-zone divergences are presented in bold.</p><p>available for this dataset; the Markov chain failed to run for the multiple threshold version of GMYC with splits. The final consensus scheme consisted of two MOTUs in the Pacific area: one for the West Pacific (Indonesia, Japan, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, and Solomon Islands) and one for the Central Pacific (French Polynesia). These two MOTUs were assigned to the same nominal species, M. brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854), according to the low genetic divergence (1.26%) (Table 3). The Bayesian gene tree, based on the MOTUs recognized here, suggests a recent diversification of the M. brachyurus mitochondrial lineages (Figure 3). Among the 10 haplotypes, 2 lineages are recognized within M. brachyurus, one is restricted to the Central Pacific (H 10 in French Polynesia) and one is shared in the West Pacific area (H1–H9 from Japan to New Caledonia) with a most recent common ancestor (MRCA) dated around 0.43 MYA (95% HPD: 0.1754 – 0.759) (Figure 3).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0384230AFFF4FFD88747FA0DFE90FAEA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Haÿ, Vincent;Mennesson, Marion I.;Carpentier, Camille;Dahruddin, Hadi;Sauri, Sopian;Limmon, Gino;Wowor, Daisy;Hubert, Nicolas;Keith, Philippe;Lord, Clara	Haÿ, Vincent, Mennesson, Marion I., Carpentier, Camille, Dahruddin, Hadi, Sauri, Sopian, Limmon, Gino, Wowor, Daisy, Hubert, Nicolas, Keith, Philippe, Lord, Clara (2025): Phylogeography of Microphis retzii (Bleeker, 1856) and Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854) in the Pacific. Journal of Fish Biology 106 (2): 602-620, DOI: 10.1111/jfb.15981, URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.15981
0384230AFFFAFFD88747FAC8FAE7F92D.text	0384230AFFFAFFD88747FAC8FAE7F92D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microphis retzii	<div><p>3.2 | M. retzii</p><p>3.2.1 | Phylogeography</p><p>An alignment of a total of 30 sequences (605 bp) was obtained. Fourteen haplotypes (H1–H14) were identified, including seven unique haplotypes represented by a single individual H1, H4, H5, H6, H8, H11, and H12 (Figure 4; Table S1).</p><p>The haplotype network of M. retzii showed three distinct haplogroups separated from each other by several mutations and reconstructed haplotypes (Figure 4a). Haplogroups 1 and 2 are separated from each other by 23 mutations and one hypothetical haplotype. Haplogroups 1 and 3 are separated from each other by 16 mutations and one hypothetical haplotype. Haplogroups 2 and 3 are separated from each other by 39 mutations and two hypothetical haplotypes. Haplogroup 1, composed of haplotypes H1–H5, includes individuals from Maluku islands (Ambon and Ceram), Sulawesi, and Papua. Haplogroup 2 is composed of haplotypes H6–H12, which includes individuals from the Sunda Shelf (Bali and Java) and Lesser Sunda islands (Lombok). Finally, haplogroup 3, composed of haplotypes H13 and H14, includes individuals from the North Pacific (Taiwan and China) .</p><p>The different localities sampled for M. retzii were partitioned in three large geographical areas, including NPO, WI (Maluku Islands, Sulawesi, and Papua), EI (Sunda Shelf) (Figure 3b). Hd is highest for EI (0.8) and lowest for NPO (0.6). π is highest for NPO (3) and lowest for WI (0.836) (Table 4). Fu's F and Tajima's D tests were not significant (Table 4).</p><p>The spatial genetic structuring of M. retzii observed in Figure 3 is supported by high and statistically significant (p &lt;0.05) Φst values between each zone (Table 5). The highest Φst value (0.964) is observed between WI and EI, and the lowest Φst value (0.906) is observed between EI and NPO. The percentages of divergence between the populations of the three zones vary between 3.3% and 5.1% (x genetic distance), with shallow divergence among populations ranging from 0.2% to 0.4% (Table 6).</p><p>3.2.2 | MOTUs delimitation and phylogenetic analysis</p><p>DNA-based species delimitation methods resulted in congruent delimitation schemes with three MOTUs for mPTP, sGMYC, and ASAP and four MOTUs for sPTP and mGMYC (Figure 5; Table S2). The final consensus scheme consisted of three MOTUs in Southeast Asia: one for EI (Ceram, Ambon, Sulawesi, Papua), one for WI (Lombok, Bali, Java), and one for the NPO (China, Taiwan). These three MOTUs were assigned to one nominal species M. retzii (Bleeker, 1856) . However, the main pair-wise divergences between these MOTUs are relatively high, between 3.3% and 5.1% (Table 6). The Bayesian gene tree, based on the MOTUs recognized here, suggests a diversification of M. retzii MOTUs around 1.8 MYA (Figure 5). Among the 14 haplotypes recognized within M. retzii, three lineages are observed: one is restricted to EI (H1–H5) with an MRCA dated around 0.42 MYA (95% HPD: 0.166 –0.7217); one is restricted to the NPO (H13 and H14) with a MRCA dated around 0.27 MYA (95% HPD: 0.0503 –0.5411); and one is restricted to WI (H6–H12) with an MRCA dated around 0.33 MYA (95% HPD: 0.1237 –0.5862) (Figure 5).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0384230AFFFAFFD88747FAC8FAE7F92D	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Haÿ, Vincent;Mennesson, Marion I.;Carpentier, Camille;Dahruddin, Hadi;Sauri, Sopian;Limmon, Gino;Wowor, Daisy;Hubert, Nicolas;Keith, Philippe;Lord, Clara	Haÿ, Vincent, Mennesson, Marion I., Carpentier, Camille, Dahruddin, Hadi, Sauri, Sopian, Limmon, Gino, Wowor, Daisy, Hubert, Nicolas, Keith, Philippe, Lord, Clara (2025): Phylogeography of Microphis retzii (Bleeker, 1856) and Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854) in the Pacific. Journal of Fish Biology 106 (2): 602-620, DOI: 10.1111/jfb.15981, URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.15981
0384230AFFFBFFDB8747FA2FFEEEFAEA.text	0384230AFFFBFFDB8747FA2FFEEEFAEA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker 1854)	<div><p>4.1 | M. brachyurus, a widespread species</p><p>M. brachyurus haplotype network revealed two distinct mitochondrial haplogroups: one in the CPO (French Polynesia) and the other in the WPO (Figure 2a,b). There are no haplotypes shared by individuals from these two areas, suggesting reduced connectivity among maternal lineages of the French Polynesia and the WPO, a hypothesis confirmed by the high and significant Φst value between these two areas (0.914), showing a deep genetic structuring. The isolation of the mitochondrial lineages of the French Polynesian populations was previously observed in other widespread amphidromous species in the Indo-Pacific, such as the fish species Sicyopterus lagocephalus (Pallas, 1770) (Lord et al., 2012) and Eleotris fusca (Forster, 1798) (Mennesson et al., 2018) or the prawn Macrobrachium lar (Fabricius, 1798) (Castelin et al., 2013) . The duration of the marine phase in teleosts has traditionally been used as a proxy of species’ dispersal abilities; a species with high dispersal capacities (i.e., long marine phase) tends to have a wider geographic range than those with low dispersal potential (Kinlan &amp; Gaines, 2003). For instance, Stenogobius genivittatus (Valenciennes, 1937) widely distributed in the Indo-Pacific, Awaous guamensis (Valenciennes, 1937) largely distributed over the Pacific Ocean, or S. lagocephalus (Pallas, 1770) widely distributed in the Indo-Pacific exhibit marine phase durations of 135 ± 9.2 days (Radtke et al., 1988), 161 ± 5.7 days (Radtke et al., 1988), and 199 ± 33 days (Hoareau et al., 2007), respectively. In the case of M. brachyurus, this duration was estimated to be 38.6 ± 13.1 days (Haÿ et al., 2023b) and may be considered relatively short in comparison to other amphidromous species in the Indo-Pacific region. However, the duration of this marine phase is not always an accurate proxy of their dispersal capacity, which can vary between species with the marine stage of similar duration. For instance, Sicyopterus sarasini (De Beaufort, 1915) spends 76.9 ± 3.9 days at sea, but it is endemic to New Caledonia (Lord et al., 2010). Along the same line, Sicyopterus japonicus (Tanaka, 1909) is endemic to Taiwan and southern Japan despite a very long marine phase duration of 163.7 ± 12.8 days (Shen &amp; Tzeng, 2008). However, S. japonicus is the only temperate species of Sicydiinae goby, its life cycle is also controlled by seasonality as opposed to tropical species. Therefore, abiotic factors can also explain this isolation of the Polynesian mitochondrial lineage from the rest of the Pacific. The different currents encountered by planktonic individuals during the marine dispersal phase may explain this particular distribution of populations (Abdou et al., 2015). Indeed, the Southern Equatorial Current (SEC), the Southern Equatorial Countercurrent (SECC), and the Marquesas Countercurrent (MCC) disperse organisms in different ways; SEC tends to transport individuals sporadically from the Polynesian zone to other West Pacific islands, whereas SECC and MCC tend to limit this transport (Gaither et al., 2010) (Figure 6). Seabed topography can also act as a barrier to dispersal between these two geographical areas (Planes &amp; Fauvelot, 2002). The presence of the Tonga and Kermadec trenches in northern New Zealand over 10,000 m deep could limit the movement of larvae. The combined action of these different factors, biotic (short marine phase, migratory behavior of individuals at sea) and abiotic (bathymetry, large geographic distance between EPO and WPO) would therefore have caused this lack of connectivity between populations of M. brachyurus from the WPO and EPO (French Polynesia), a trend previously observed among coral reef fishes (Hubert et al., 2017).</p><p>This isolation of the mitochondrial lineages reflects a relatively recent event of colonization of French Polynesia, as the most recent common ancestor between WPO and CPO haplotypes is dated around 0.3 MYA (Figure 3). Indeed, there is only an average of 1% of genetic divergence between these two populations for the partial COI. This genetic divergence is below the 3% threshold defined by some authors (Dettaï et al., 2011) to consider two different species based on the COI barcode fragment. Therefore, we consider M. brachyurus as a unique species in the Pacific zone, with distinct populations in West and Central Pacific. However, if the geographic isolation of French Polynesia persists, these divergences may lead to geographic isolation and evolutionary divergence between these two sets of populations. Dawson (1979) considered M. brachyurus as a species complex for which the global distribution could allow it to be divided into four subspecies: M. brachyurus brachyurus distributed from Sumatra to the Society Islands; M. brachyurus millepunctatus distributed from Sri Lanka to the coasts of East Africa; M. brachyurus aculeatus distributed from the coasts of West Africa; and M. brachyurus lineatus distributed from the Caribbean islands on the western coasts of South America from Panama to Brazil. Although no morphological differences were identified by Dawson between these different species/subspecies, deep genetic divergences (&gt; 20%) were observed within this complex (Stiller et al., 2022). A large-scale phylogeographic study would then allow to highlight phylogeographic patterns, infer</p><p>NPO</p><p>East Indonesia</p><p>West Indonesia</p><p>N</p><p>5</p><p>15</p><p>10</p><p>Fst Hd h π Fu's F Tajima's D</p><p>0.941 0.6 2 3 3.526 1.685</p><p>0.949 0.8 7 1143 0.216 0.301</p><p>0.951 0.69 14 0,836 0.116 0.627</p><p>Note: Significant values (p -value &lt;0.05) are indicated in bold.</p><p>Abbreviations: N, number of individuals sampled; NPO, North Pacific Ocean; Fst, intra-zone differentiation parameter; Hd, haplotype diversity; h, number of haplotypes; π, nucleotide divers; F and D, neutrality tests.</p><p>NPO East Indonesia West Indonesia</p><p>NPO</p><p>East Indonesia 0.906</p><p><a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=0.964&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=0.952" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 0.964/lat 0.952)">West</a> Indonesia 0.952 0.964</p><p>Note: Significant values (p -value &lt;0.05) are presented in bold. Abbreviation: NPO, North Pacific Ocean.</p><p>East Indonesia West Indonesia NPO</p><p>East Indonesia 0.4</p><p>West Indonesia 4.44 0.2</p><p>NPO 3.3 5.1 0.4</p><p>Note: Intra-zone divergences are presented in bold.</p><p>connectivity of these different groups on a global scale, and define more precisely their taxonomic status. We therefore corroborate Dawson's (1979) findings.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0384230AFFFBFFDB8747FA2FFEEEFAEA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Haÿ, Vincent;Mennesson, Marion I.;Carpentier, Camille;Dahruddin, Hadi;Sauri, Sopian;Limmon, Gino;Wowor, Daisy;Hubert, Nicolas;Keith, Philippe;Lord, Clara	Haÿ, Vincent, Mennesson, Marion I., Carpentier, Camille, Dahruddin, Hadi, Sauri, Sopian, Limmon, Gino, Wowor, Daisy, Hubert, Nicolas, Keith, Philippe, Lord, Clara (2025): Phylogeography of Microphis retzii (Bleeker, 1856) and Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854) in the Pacific. Journal of Fish Biology 106 (2): 602-620, DOI: 10.1111/jfb.15981, URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.15981
0384230AFFF9FFDD8747FAC8FE62FA72.text	0384230AFFF9FFDD8747FAC8FE62FA72.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microphis retzii (Bleeker 1856)	<div><p>4.2 | M. retzii, a species complex?</p><p>The haplotype network obtained for M. retzii revealed three distinct haplogroups: one in EI (Ceram/ Ambon / Papua / Sulawesi, haplogroup 1), one in WI (Bali / Java /Lombok, haplogroup 2), and one in the NPO (China and Taiwan, haplogroup 3) (Figure 4), and no haplotypes are shared between these three haplogroups. This phylogeographic pattern suggests at least distinct mitochondrial divergences among these sets of populations as a result of limited connectivity between these regions. It is currently unknown if M. retzii is amphidromous. Haÿ et al. (2023b) have validated an amphidromous life cycle for Microphis nicoleae, a closely related species to M. retzii, with a relatively short marine phase of 19.7 ± 5.8 days. However, it is important to note that the life cycle of a taxon is not fixed and can vary. The loss of amphidromy is quite common in fish species or populations (Liao et al., 2020; Murase &amp; Iguchi, 2019) and has already been observed in freshwater pipefish (Lord et al., 2024). The marked genetic structuring of these three lineages could be partly explained by biotic factors, such as life-cycle variations (i.e., facultative amphidromy or short marine duration), which limit dispersal and enhance geographic isolation.</p><p>These three lineages are found in different areas in Southeast Asia, which is divided into several biogeographic subregions (or hotspots), of which three are represented here: the Sunda Shelf (represented by haplogroup 2), Wallacea (represented by haplogroup 1), and Philippines (represented by haplogroup 3) (Woodruff, 2010) (Figure 4). These subregions present complex biogeographical histories, leading to major vicariance events (Hutama et al., 2016; Lohman et al., 2011). Indeed, genetic structuring can be significantly impacted by biogeography and environmental conditions; rapid changes during the geological history of a region can create barriers to dispersal, which in turn limits gene flow (Lohman et al., 2011; Sholihah et al., 2021a; Sholihah et al., 2021b; Wibowo et al., 2023). Several events on the scale of geological time have caused successive interruptions of connectivity in Southeast Asia. For example, sea-level fluctuations during the glacial cycles of the Pleistocene (2.7 MAY– 11,700 years) have led to the establishment of geographical barrier by connecting Borneo, Sumatra, and Java to the mainland, a process that happened repeatedly during the late Pleistocene (Sholihah et al., 2021a; Sholihah et al., 2021b; Woodruff, 2010). Moreover, the Makassar Strait (known as Wallace's line), between the Sunda Shelf and Wallacea, although known to serve as a marine barrier to the dispersal of land animals to Borneo and Sulawesi, could be involved as a dispersal barrier to marine organisms and therefore lead to the genetic isolation of amphidromous species. For instance, sharp genetic breaks were described for populations of the mantis shrimp Haptosquilla pulchella among these oceanographic regions, suggesting that Wallace's line has a role in shaping species distribution and population structure (Barber et al., 2000). Murphy and Austin (2005) also suggested a possible effect of Wallace's line on Macrobrachium rosenbergii, a freshwater prawn, for which strong genetic divergences are observed between the Australian and Thai populations. Therefore, oceanic currents in Southeast Asia could be involved in the isolation of lineages on each side of Wallace's lines like the Indonesian Throughflow current passing in the Makassar Strait (Godfrey, 1996), thus reducing the connectivity between these two subregions. Isolation of the NPO population (Taiwan and China) can also be influenced by a combination of currents present in this area. The presence of the Kuroshio Current (Figure 6), on the western side of the NPO basin, could act as a dispersal barrier and promote lineage diversification or population differentiation, as it has been observed in some marine organisms and the gobioid Periophtalmus modestus (He et al., 2015) . Iida et al. (2010) have also shown the important role of the Kuroshio Current to maintain the population structure in the amphidromous goby S. japonicus from Taiwan to northern Japan, thus limiting the range of this species to the islands of the North Pacific. The isolation of the different lineages of M. retzii may have been influenced by these past and current barriers.</p><p>1.8</p><p>1.6</p><p>1.4</p><p>1.2</p><p>1</p><p>0.8</p><p>0.6</p><p>0.4</p><p>0.2</p><p>0</p><p>Time</p><p>(</p><p>MYA</p><p>)</p><p>Considering our results, what is the taxonomic status of these different lineages? Compared to M. brachyurus, mitochondrial MRCA for M. retzii lineages is relatively more ancient and was dated around 1.8 MYA (Figure 5). However, these divergence age estimates should be considered with caution, as the existence of discontinuous gene flow and divergent mitochondrial lineages within the complex may violate the assumptions of the phylogenetic reconstructions of haplotypes presented here (i.e., the lack of genetic structuring). The percentages of divergence between individuals from the three geographical areas are relatively high, ranging from 3.3% between NPO (China and Taiwan) and WI to 5.1% between WI and EI (Table 6), with high and significant Φst values (Table 5). These results suggest that the three mitochondrial haplogroups of M. retzii represent closely related species as follow: (i) M. retzii (Bleeker, 1856) (type locality: Manado, Sulawesi, Indonesia) present in Sulawesi, Ceram, Ambon, and in Papua (haplogroup 1) (ii) M. cf. 1 retzii present in WI on the islands of Java, Bali, and Lombok (haplogroup 2), and (iii) M. cf. 2 retzii present in the North Pacific, China, and Taiwan (haplogroup 3). Each of these mitochondrial lineages is therefore restricted to limited geographical areas. These results were expected as endemism is high in this region (Parenti, 2011). Endemism between various close islands of the Indo-Pacific and Indonesia has already been observed (De Mazancourt et al., 2020; Dwiyanto et al., 2021; Haÿ et al., 2021; Jamonneau et al., 2024; Keith et al., 2015; Lord et al., 2012; Wibowo et al., 2023). Indonesian ichthyofauna hosts several radiations of morphologically similar species, and the use of molecular approaches allows us to uncover hidden diversity, including either cryptic or unnamed taxa (Hubert et al., 2015; Kottelat &amp; Lim, 2021; Sholihah et al., 2021a; Sholihah, Delrieu-Trottin, Sukmono, et al., 2021b; Utami et al., 2022). The species of this complex are morphologically very similar, but their differentiation, based on genetics and geography, constitutes strong argument in favor of elevating them to the species level. These results warrant a taxonomic revision of M. retzii in Indonesia based on the analysis of nuclear markers, including more specimens and more localities (especially in Borneo, Sulawesi, and the Philippines), and a detailed examination of their morphological characters to revalidate or describe these two potentially new taxa from Java/Bali and from China / Taiwan. This work is in progress.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0384230AFFF9FFDD8747FAC8FE62FA72	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Haÿ, Vincent;Mennesson, Marion I.;Carpentier, Camille;Dahruddin, Hadi;Sauri, Sopian;Limmon, Gino;Wowor, Daisy;Hubert, Nicolas;Keith, Philippe;Lord, Clara	Haÿ, Vincent, Mennesson, Marion I., Carpentier, Camille, Dahruddin, Hadi, Sauri, Sopian, Limmon, Gino, Wowor, Daisy, Hubert, Nicolas, Keith, Philippe, Lord, Clara (2025): Phylogeography of Microphis retzii (Bleeker, 1856) and Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854) in the Pacific. Journal of Fish Biology 106 (2): 602-620, DOI: 10.1111/jfb.15981, URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.15981
