You can sponsor this page

Labeotropheus chirangali Pauers & Phiri, 2023

Envoyez vos Photos et vidéos
Images Google
Image of Labeotropheus chirangali
No image available for this species;
drawing shows typical species in Cichlidae.

Classification / Names Noms communs | Synonymes | Catalog of Fishes(Genre, Espèce) | ITIS | CoL | WoRMS | Cloffa

> Cichliformes (Cichlids, convict blennies) > Cichlidae (Cichlids) > Pseudocrenilabrinae
Etymology: Labeotropheus: Latin, labeo = one who has large lips + Greek, tropaion = defeat, a memorial of a fighting war, trophy; because of their specialized teeth were such an obvious feeding adaptation (Ref. 45335)chirangali: Chirangali is the Chichewa word for beacon, referring to the navigational beacon present on Mphanga Rocks (Ref. 128773).

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

; eau douce benthopélagique. Tropical

Distribution Pays | Zones FAO | Écosystèmes | Occurrences | Point map | Introductions | Faunafri

Africa: Malawi,

Taille / Poids / Âge

Maturity: Lm ?  range ? - ? cm
Max length : 11.2 cm SL mâle / non sexé; (Ref. 128773)

Description synthétique Clés d'identification | Morphologie | Morphométrie

Épines dorsales (Total) : 18 - 19; Rayons mous dorsaux (Total) : 8 - 9; Épines anales: 3; Rayons mous anaux: 7 - 9. Diagnosis: Labeotropheus chirangali differs from the robust Labeotropheus, except L. chlorosiglos and L. candipygia, due to its slender body, 26.6-33.2% of standard length vs. 35.2-41.6% in L. fuelleborni, 33.8-41.5% in L. aurantinfra, 35.2-41.5% in L. obscurus, 37.4-40.6% in L. alticodia and 34.3-42.0% in L. artatorostris; it has a slenderer body than L. chlorosiglos and L. candipygia, although its range of body depth partially overlaps with those of these species, 31.9-34.7% in L. chlorosiglos and 31.9-38.6% in L. candipygia (Ref. 128773). There are additional morphometric differences between L. chirangali and both L. chlorosiglos and L. candipygia, although some of the ranges overlap; it differs from both L. chlorosiglos and L. candipygia by shorter distances between the tip of the snout and the origin of the dorsal fin, 28.4-32.7% of standard length vs. 31.2-34.4% in L. chlorosiglos and 32.2-36.8% in L. candipygia, between the origin of the dorsal fin and the origin of the anal fin, 32.2-51.5% of standard length vs. 51.3-54.6% in L. chlorosiglos and 47.6-54.0% in L. candipygia, and between the origin of the dorsal fin and the attachment of the pelvic fins, 28.6-33.4% of standard length vs. 33.0-36.0% in L. chlorosiglos and 32.7-38.8% in L. candipygia; additionally, L. chirangali has a greater width between the opercular tabs, 15.1-17.8% of head length vs. 14.7-15.7% in L. chlorosiglos (Ref. 128773). Labeotropheus chirangali differs from the other slender-bodied Labeotropheus primarily due to the nuptial colouration of the males; male L. chirangali have a dark blue head, flank, and ventrum, and the scales in this region may have small ochreous-orange highlights; above this extensive dark blue patch, male L. chirangali have a bright sky-blue dorsum; this pigmentation extends onto the dorsal fin; the tips of the dorsal fin are yellow, as is the trailing edge of this fin; the anal fin and the pelvic fins are the same bright sky blue as the dorsal fin (Ref. 128773). Many of the morphometric and meristic values of L. chirangali overlap with those of the other slender Labeotropheus, although there are some distinctions; it differs from L. trewavasae due to a larger snout pad, 13.6-19.4% of head length vs. 10.3-14.2%, a wider lower jaw, 39.0-49.5% of head length vs. 34.7-43.9%, fewer rows of teeth in the lower jaw, 3-5 vs. 5-6, and more infraorbital neuromasts, 14-38 vs. 8-25; it differs from L. simoneae due to a greater rostral length, 39.2-47.6% of head length vs. 34.3-43.0%, a larger snout pad, 13.6-19.4% of head length vs. 9.5-15.9%, and fewer overlapping lateral line scales, 0-3 vs. 4-5; finally, L. chirangali differs from L. rubidorsalis due to a smaller distance between the tip of the snout and the origin of the dorsal fin, 28.4-32.7% of standard length vs. 31.4-35.0%, a greater distance between the insertion of the dorsal fin and the attachment of the pelvic fins, 54.1-58.8% of standard length vs. 49.5-55.1%, a smaller preorbital depth, 23.4-28.4% of head length vs. 26.6-32.9%, a larger snout pad, 13.6-19.4% of head length vs. 10.3-14.2%, and a greater number of ceratobranchial gill rakers, 7-10 vs. 5-8 (Ref. 128773).

Biologie     Glossaire (ex. epibenthic)

Life cycle and mating behavior Maturité | Reproduction | Frai | Œufs | Fécondité | Larves

Référence principale Upload your references | Références | Coordinateur : Kullander, Sven O. | Collaborateurs

Pauers, M.J. and T.B. Phiri, 2023. Six new species of Labeotropheus (Cichliformes: Cichlidae) from the Malawian shore of Lake Malawi, Africa. Ichthyology & Herpetology 111(2):264-292. (Ref. 128773)

Statut dans la liste rouge de l'IUCN (Ref. 130435: Version 2024-2)


CITES

Not Evaluated

CMS (Ref. 116361)

Not Evaluated

Menace pour l'homme

  Harmless





Utilisations par l'homme

Pêcheries: sans intérêt
FAO - Publication: search | FishSource |

Plus d'informations

Trophic ecology
Éléments du régime alimentaire
Composition du régime alimentaire
Consommation alimentaire
Food rations
Prédateurs
Ecology
Écologie
Population dynamics
Paramètres de croissance
Max. ages / sizes
Length-weight rel.
Length-length rel.
Fréquences de longueurs
Mass conversion
Recrutement
Abondance
Life cycle
Reproduction
Maturité
Maturity/Gills rel.
Fécondité
Frai
Spawning aggregations
Œufs
Développement de l'œuf
Larves
Dynamique des populations larvaires
Distribution
Pays
Zones FAO
Écosystèmes
Occurrences
Introductions
BRUVS - Videos
Anatomy
Surface branchiale
Brain
Otolith
Physiology
Body composition
Nutrients
Consommation d'oxygène
Type de nage
Vitesse de nage
Visual pigments
Fish sound
Diseases & Parasites
Toxicity (LC50s)
Genetics
Génétique
Heterozygosity
Héritabilité
Human related
Aquaculture systems
Profils d'aquaculture
Souches
Ciguatera cases
Stamps, coins, misc.
Outreach
Collaborateurs
Taxonomy
Noms communs
Synonymes
Morphologie
Morphométrie
Images
References
Références

Outils

Articles particuliers

Télécharger en XML

Sources Internet

AFORO (otoliths) | Aquatic Commons | BHL | Cloffa | BOLDSystems | Websites from users | FishWatcher | CISTI | Catalog of Fishes: Genre, Espèce | DiscoverLife | ECOTOX | FAO - Publication: search | Faunafri | Fishipedia | Fishtrace | GenBank: génôme, nucléotide | GloBI | Google Books | Google Scholar | Google | IGFA World Record | MitoFish | Otolith Atlas of Taiwan Fishes | PubMed | Reef Life Survey | Socotra Atlas | Arbre de Vie | Wikipedia: aller à, chercher | World Records Freshwater Fishing | Zoobank | Zoological Record

Estimates based on models

Phylogenetic diversity index (Ref. 82804):  PD50 = No PD50 data   [Uniqueness, from 0.5 = low to 2.0 = high].
Bayesian length-weight: a=0.01445 (0.00674 - 0.03099), b=2.99 (2.82 - 3.16), in cm total length, based on LWR estimates for this (Sub)family-body shape (Ref. 93245).
Niveau trophique (Ref. 69278):  3.4   ±0.4 se; based on size and trophs of closest relatives
Résilience (Ref. 120179):  Haut, temps minimum de doublement de population inférieur à 15 mois (Preliminary K or Fecundity.).
Fishing Vulnerability (Ref. 59153):  Low vulnerability (10 of 100).