Enteromius mimus, Ewaso Nyiro barb

You can sponsor this page

Enteromius mimus (Boulenger, 1912)

Ewaso Nyiro barb
Uploaden van uw Foto's en video's
Afbeeldingen | Google afbeelding
Image of Enteromius mimus (Ewaso Nyiro barb)
Enteromius mimus
Afbeelding van NMK

Classificatie / Namen Lokale namen | Synoniemen | Catalog of Fishes(Genus, Soort(en)) | ITIS | CoL | WoRMS | Cloffa

> Cypriniformes (Carps) > Cyprinidae (Minnows or carps) > Smiliogastrinae
Etymology: Enteromius: Greek, enteron = intestine + Greek, myo, mys = muscle (Ref. 45335)mimus: The specific epithet 'mimus' means 'imitator', a reference to the 'striking resemblance' to Enteromius neglectus (Ref. 127947).
More on author: Boulenger.

Environment: milieu / Klimaatzone / Diepte / distribution range Ecologie

; zoet water benthopelagisch. Tropical; 5°N - 5°S

Verspreiding Landen | FAO regio's | Ecosystemen | Voorkomen | Verspreidingskaart | Introducties | Faunafri

Africa: Northern Ewaso Nyiro below the falls and Tana River system, Kenya (Ref. 52331, 127947).

Grootte / Gewicht / Leeftijd

Maturiteit: Lm ?  range ? - ? cm
Max length : 4.6 cm SL mannelijk / geslacht onbekend; (Ref. 127947)

Korte beschrijving Determinatiesleutels | Morfologie | Morfometrie

Dorsale stekels (totaal) : 0; Dorsale zachte stralen (totaal) : 10 - 11; Anale stekels: 0; Anale zachte stralen: 8 - 9. Diagnosis: Enteromius mimus belongs to the group of species of Enteromius with a flexible last unbranched dorsal fin ray that lacks serrations along its posterior edge (Ref. 127947). Enteromius mimus can easily be distinguished from the other species of this group from the East Coast and Nilo-Sudan ichthyofaunal regions by the following combinations of characteristics: a complete lateral line vs. an incomplete lateral line in E. atkinsoni, E. pumilus, E. serengetiensis, E. tongaensis and E. toppini; two pairs of barbels vs. one pair in E. pseudotoppini, and no barbels in E. anema and E. profundus; one to three dark spots on the flanks, which sometimes fuse into a mid-lateral line in preserved specimens, starting posterior to the operculum vs. a dark line running from the tip of the snout to the caudal fin base in E. bifrenatus and E. yongei, and a thin dark line from the beginning of the operculum to the caudal fin base in E. viviparus; 11-12 scales around the caudal peduncle vs. 8 in E. leonensis, 9-10 in E. venustus, and 10 in E. magdalenae and E. yeiensis; 24-27 lateral line scales vs. 30 in E. lineomaculatus, and 31 in E. innocens; 3.5-4.5 scales between the dorsal fin base and the lateral line vs. 5.5 in E. unitaeniatus and 6 in E. usambarae; 3-4 scales between the lateral line and the pelvic fin vs. 2 in E. trispilopleura, and 2-2.5 in E. neglectus; 7-8 branched dorsal fin rays vs. 9 in E. quadripunctatus; a body depth which is larger than the head length vs. a body depth which is equal to the head length in E. nigeriensis; a smaller snout length, 4.1-7.1% of standard length vs. 7.1-10.1% in E. radiatus (Ref. 127947). It differs from E. perince by a combination of a lower number of lateral line scales, 24-27 vs. 29-30, a lower number of scales between the dorsal fin base and lateral line, 3.5-4.5 vs. 5.5, a lower number of scales around the caudal peduncle, 11-12 vs. 14, a smaller interorbital width, 6.3-8.3% of standard length vs. 9.8-10.2%, a larger pre-pectoral distance, 26.0-29.0% of standard length vs. 23.1-24.5%, a lower minimum caudal peduncle depth, 11.1-14.0% of standard length vs. 15.0-16.4%, a lower maximum caudal peduncle depth, 12.9-16.5% of standard length vs. 17.7-19.4%, and a smaller anal fin base length, 7.3-8.7% of standard length vs. 8.5-9.6% (Ref. 127947). It differs from E. stigmatopygus by a combination of a smaller pre-pectoral distance, 26.0-29.0% of standard length vs. 29.1-33.1%, and a larger anal fin length, 18.0-19.7% of standard length vs. 12.6-17.4% (Ref. 127947). Enteromius mimus differs from E. alberti by a lower number of lateral line scales, 24-27 vs. 27-34, a larger pre-anal distance, 68.4-74.8% of standard length vs. 65.1-73.0%, a smaller post-anal distance, 16.3-19.3% of standard length vs. 16.3-24.2%, a larger body depth, 26.5-34.3% of standard length vs. 21.7-31.2%, a larger head depth, 17.8-21.8% of standard length vs. 15.1-19.0%, and a larger pelvic fin length, 18.2-22.4% of standard length vs. 15.0-20.9% (Ref. 127947). Specimens from E. mimus differ from the specimens of the population of E. cf. mimus from the Lake Edward system by a lower number of scales between the origin of the dorsal fin and the lateral line, 3.5-4.5 vs. 3.5-4.5, a larger pelvic fin length, 18.2-22.4% of standard length vs. 14.4-21.3%, a smaller snout length, 4.1-7.1% of standard length vs. 4.6-8.3%, a smaller interorbital width, 6.3-8.3% of standard length vs. 6.9-9.9%, a larger post-dorsal distance, 34.8-40.4% of standard length vs. 31.0-39.9%, and a larger anal fin length, 18.0-19.7% of standard length vs. 14.4-21.8% (Ref. 127947).


Biologie     Verklarende woordenlijst (bv. epibenthic)

Levenscyclus en paargedrag Maturiteit | Voortplanting | Paaien | Eieren | Fecunditeit | Larven

Hoofdreferentie Upload uw referenties | Referenties | Coördinator | Medewerkers

Maetens, H., M. Van Steenberge, J. Snoeks and E. Decru, 2020. Revalidation of Enteromius alberti and presence of Enteromius cf. mimus (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae) in the Lake Edward system, East Africa. Eur. J. Taxon. 700:1-28. (Ref. 127947)

Status op de Rode Lijst van het IUCN (Ref. 130435: Version 2025-1)

  Niet bedreigd (LC) ; Date assessed: 31 January 2006

CITES

Not Evaluated

CMS (Ref. 116361)

Not Evaluated

Gevaar voor de mens

  Harmless





Gebruik door de mens

Visserij: van geen belang
FAO - Publication: search | FishSource |

Meer informatie

Trofische ecologie
Food items (preys)
Dieetsamenstelling
Voedselconsumptie
Food rations
Predatoren
Ecologie
Ecologie
Home ranges
Population dynamics
Groeiparameters
Max. ages / sizes
Length-weight rel.
Length-length rel.
Lengtefrequenties
Massaconversie
Rekrutering
Abundantie
Life cycle
Voortplanting
Maturiteit
Maturity/Gills rel.
Fecunditeit
Paaien
Spawning aggregations
Eieren
Ontwikkeling van de eieren
Larven
Larvale populatiedynamiek
Verspreiding
Landen
FAO regio's
Ecosystemen
Voorkomen
Introducties
BRUVS - Videos
Anatomy
Kieuwoppervlak
Brain
Otolith
Physiology
Body composition
Nutrients
Zuurstofverbruik
Zwemtype
Zwemsnelheid
Visual pigments
Fish sound
Diseases & Parasites
Toxicity (LC50s)
Genetica
genoom
Genetica
Heterozygosity
Erfelijkheid
Human related
Aquaculture systems
Aquacultuurprofielen
Kweeklijnen
Ciguatera cases
Stamps, coins, misc.
Outreach
Medewerkers
Referenties
Referenties

Tools

Speciale rapporten

Download XML

Internetbronnen

AFORO (otoliths) | Aquatic Commons | BHL | Cloffa | Websites from users | Bekijk FishWatcher | CISTI | Catalog of Fishes: Genus, Soort(en) | DiscoverLife | ECOTOX | FAO - Publication: search | Faunafri | Fishipedia | Fishtrace | GloBI | Google Books | Google Scholar | Google | IGFA World Record | OneZoom | Open Tree of Life | Otolith Atlas of Taiwan Fishes | PubMed | Reef Life Survey | Socotra Atlas | TreeBase | Tree of Life | Wikipedia: ga naar, zoek | Zoological Record

Estimates based on models

Fylogenetische diversiteitsindex (Ref. 82804):  PD50 = 0.5000   [Uniqueness, from 0.5 = low to 2.0 = high].
Bayesian length-weight: a=0.01175 (0.00447 - 0.03086), b=3.01 (2.78 - 3.24), in cm total length, based on LWR estimates for this (Sub)family-body shape (Ref. 93245).
Trofisch niveau (Ref. 69278):  3.0   ±0.3 se; based on size and trophs of closest relatives
Weerstandsvermogen (Ref. 120179):  Hoog, minimale populatieverdubbelingstijd minder dan 15 maanden (Preliminary K or Fecundity.).
Fishing Vulnerability (Ref. 59153):  Low vulnerability (10 of 100). 🛈