SPECIES SPECIFICITY OF CHOCOLATE MAHSEER (NEOLISSOCHILUS HEXAGONOLEPIS) AND MALAYSIAN MAHSEER (NEOLISSOCHILUS SOROIDES)


135 / 0

Authors

  • DEBAJIT SARMA
  • SUMAN SANWAL
  • GHANSHYAM NATH JHA
  • P. C. MAHANTA

https://doi.org/10.47780/jifsi.43.2.2011.118323

Abstract

Ultrastructure of tip of the barbell and arrangement of scales were studied for differentiation of two similar looking Mahseer. The microstructural arrangement of scales of Neolissochilus hexagonolepis, below the focus, was smooth with the presence of spherical structures on the surface. In case of Neolissochilus soroides the micro-structural arrangement was coble shaped. The larval mark between the two species in respect to their size, arrangement, completeness and relative spacing of circuli showed differences. The surface scanning electron micrographs of tip of the barbell of N. hexagonolepis showed thick filamentous structures, while that of N. soroides was compartment like.

Key words: Neolissochilus hexagonolepis, N. soroides, ultrastructure, scale, barbel.

References

Antoni L and Hugo A. 1997. Quanitative differences in the chemoreceptor systems in the barbells of two species of Mullidae (Mullus surmuletus and M. barbatus) with different bottom habitat, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 150 : 57-64.

DeLamater, E. D. and Courtenay, W. R. , Jr. 1974. Fish scales as seen by scanning electron microscopy. Florida Scientist , Biol. Sci., 37 : 141–149.

Dey, S., Basu Bawl, T. S., Roy, B. and Dey, D. 1989. A new rapid method of air drying for scanning electron microscopy using tetramethylsilane. J. Microscopy. 156 (2) : 259-261.

Di Cenzo, V. J. and Sellers, K. K. 1998. Proceeding of the Annual Conference of Southeast Association of Fisheries and Wildlife Agencies. 52 : 104-110.

Hollander R. R. 1986. Microanalysis of scales of Poecilid fishes. Copeia 1 : 86-91.

Irina N. G., Anca N. N. and Vasile, V., 2011. SEM investigations regarding skin micromorphology and modification induced by bacterial infections in Cyprinus carpio and Salmo trutta fario. Int. J. Energy Environ. 5 (2) : 274-281.

Kapoor, B. G., Evans, H. E. and Pervzner, R. A. 1975. The alimentary canal and digestion in teleosts. Adv. Mar. Biol. 13 : 109-239.

Kaur, N. and Dua, A. 2004. Species specificity as evidenced by scanning electron microscopy of fish scales. Curr. Sci. 87 (5) : 692-696.

Khemiri, S., Meunier, F. J., Laurin, M. and Zylberberg, L. 2001. -Morphology and structure of the scales in the Gadiformes (Actinopterygii: Teleostei: Paracanthopterygii) and a comparison tothe elasmoid scales of other Teleostei. Cah. Biol. Mar. 42 : 345-362.

McClelland, J. 1939. Indian Cyprinidae. Asia Res. 19 (2) : 262-450.

Menon, A. G. K. 1994. Criteria for determining the status of threatened categories of Indian freshwater fishes. In P. V. Dehadrai, P. Das and S.R.Verma (eds), Threatened Fishes of India, Natcon Publ., 04, Muzaffarnagar (U.P.), pp 1-5.

Scott A. B., Bruce, D. B. and Marc D. 2000. Standard fish sampling guidelines for Washington state ponds and lakes Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 28p.

Takashi, H. 1982. An atlas of fish histology normal and pathological features. Kodansha Ltd. Tokyo, Japan, 1 : 2-6.

Talwar, P. K. and Jhingran A. G. 1991. Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries. (Vol. 1&2). Oxford and IBH publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 1158 p.

Tandon, K. K. and Johal, M. S. 1993. Mineral composition of different regions of the scale of an endangered fish, Tor putitora using energy dispersive x-ray microanalysis technique. Curr. Sci., 65 (7) :

-573.

Zar J.H. 1999. Biostatistical Analysis. 4th edition. Prentice- Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 929 p.

Downloads

Submitted

2021-11-26

Published

2021-11-27

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

SARMA, D., SANWAL, S., JHA, G. N., & MAHANTA, P. C. (2021). SPECIES SPECIFICITY OF CHOCOLATE MAHSEER (NEOLISSOCHILUS HEXAGONOLEPIS) AND MALAYSIAN MAHSEER (NEOLISSOCHILUS SOROIDES). Journal of the Inland Fisheries Society of India, 43(2), 27-32. https://doi.org/10.47780/jifsi.43.2.2011.118323