Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 21, Issue 10, pp 2443–2452 | Cite as

Delimiting priorities while biodiversity is lost: Rio’s seasonal killifishes on the edge of survival

Original Paper


The coastal plains of the Rio de Janeiro State, south-eastern Brazil, have been considered an important hotspot of aplocheiloid killifish diversity. A conservation status assessment based on 17 years of field studies directed to record habitat decline indicates that five species of seasonal killifish, Leptolebias marmoratus, Nematolebias papilliferus, Notholebias cruzi, Notholebias fractifasciatus and Ophthalmolebias constanciae, distributed among three areas of endemism, are on the edge of survival. Conservation priority, focusing on five remnant isolated locations where those species occur, was evaluated on the basis of the phylogenetic diversity content of each location established through a phylogenetic base containing data on relationships of 118 cynolebiasine species, including all species endemic to Rio. Data on species diversity for each area and data on morphological uniqueness were subsequently compared and discussed. The Barra de São João pool, in the São João-Cabo Frio area, habitat of Nematolebias whitei, No. cruzi, O. constanciae, concentrates the highest value for conservation proposal, followed by the Inoã pool, in the Maricá area, habitat of Ne. papilliferus and No. fractifasciatus. However, in case of the Barra de São João pool being effectively preserved, it is recommended to concentrate efforts to preserve the Cava swamp as a second priority, since although the latter location showing the lowest individual value, Cava swamp and Barra de São João pool together sum a higher phylogenetic diversity index by preserving more distinct cynolebiasine lineages.


Atlantic forest Conservation assessment Conservation prioritization Cyprinodontiformes Killifishes 


Seasonal killifishes were first collected and described for the coastal plains of Rio de Janeiro State, south-eastern Brazil, between 1934 and 1942 (Ladiges 1934a, b; Faria and Muller 1937; Miranda-Ribeiro 1939; Myers 1942). A total of 12 nominal species, corresponding to six species today considered valid (Leptolebias marmoratus, L. opalescens, L. splendens, Nematolebias whitei, Notholebias minimus, and Ophthalmolebias constanciae, according to present classification proposals, e.g. Costa 2008, 2010) were found in temporary pools formed during the rainy seasons, usually between November and December, and between March and April in that region. These pools dry in periods of the year with lowest levels of rains and high evaporation rates, between January and February and between July and August, when resistant eggs buried in the pool substrate undergo embryonic diapause (e.g. Costa 2009).

Due to the intense colours and long unpaired fins in males, those species were just after descriptions commercially explored as aquarium fishes, but the seasonal life style was poorly understood at that time and consequently those species were never well established in aquaria. The most popular species were L. marmoratus, L. opalescens, and L. splendens, three miniature species (reaching about 30 mm of total length) inhabiting pools of a forested area close to a road only 30 km N of the Rio de Janeiro City. However, as early as 1950, current collectors noted that all the three species disappeared after those forests were removed due to the urban expansion of Rio satellite towns (Hugo de Souza and Lopes and Antenor de Carvalho, personal communication). Since the 1970s some Rio’s killifishes have sporadically appeared in lists of threatened species, but without accurate data (Costa 1984).

In more recent years, other four seasonal killifish species (Leptolebias citrinipinnis, Nematolebias papilliferus, Notholebias cruzi and Notholebias fractifasciatus, according to the present classification) have been described from the Rio coastal plains (Costa 1988, 2002a; Costa et al. 1988), which has been considered an important hotspot of aplocheiloid killifish diversity by concentrating a great number of endemic species and more phylogenetic basal taxa of different lineages than any other tropical area of South America and Africa (Costa 2009). However, whereas Leptolebias opalescens and L. splendens may be already extinct, not found since 1981 and 1987, respectively, despite intensive field efforts, the remaining species are severely threatened with extinction (Costa 2002b, 2009). The present paper focuses on five species herein considered on the edge of survival (L. marmoratus, N. papilliferus, N. cruzi, N. fractifasciatus and O. constanciae) inhabiting three areas of endemism diagnosed by Costa (2009) (São João-Cabo Frio, Maricá, and Guanabara Bay area). The objective is to provide a conservation status assessment based on habitat decline data obtained from 27 years of continuous field study, evaluating the levels of conservation priority for each area on the basis of its phylogenetic diversity content.

Materials and methods

Conservation status assessment is based on detailed exploratory field surveys (1984–1986, 1998–2001, 2005–2011), as well as sporadic visits in periods between surveys. Geographic distances, vegetation and distribution of land use were estimated both on the field and using satellite images available in Google Earth ( Areas of occupancy were primarily determined in the field, directly measuring the limits of the flooded area inhabited by seasonal killifishes during the peak of wet seasons. Determination of habitat limits was supported by the occurrence of amphibious and aquatic plants typical of seasonal killifish habitat in the Rio de Janeiro coastal plains (Bove et al. 2002). Data on habitat and collections between 1941 and 1950 were obtained from personal communication by seasonal fish collectors of that time (Hugo de Souza Lopes and Antenor de Carvalho) and copies of letters written by Thomas White deposited in Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Criteria to establish categories of vulnerability are those described by IUCN (2010). Assessments focused on criterion B (geographic range), since criteria A, C and D (quantitative data about population reduction, size and decline) were not applicable to seasonal killifishes, which have one or two generations by year with natural higher levels of fluctuation; and, criterion E (probability of extinction in the wild) that could not be accurately calculated by factors acting in extinction occurring irregular and unexpectedly, depending on several momentary factors (social, economic, cultural) not easily measurable.

Conservation priority was evaluated on the basis of the phylogenetic content of isolated habitats (swamps and pools), following the method firstly described by Vane-Wright et al. (1991), in which conservation priority is inferred from the topology of a phylogenetic tree, prioritization favoring basal taxa not belonging to speciose lineages. Habitats analysed were all those containing critically endangered species of seasonal killifishes endemic to Rio de Janeiro state. The phylogenetic background used in the analysis was extracted from phylogenetic trees focusing on different clades and levels of the whole aplocheiloid killifish subfamily Cynolebiasinae (Costa 1988, 2006a, 2008, 2010), thus encompassing phylogenetic resolution at the species level for all lineages, with a total of 118 species, representing 91.5 % of all species of the subfamily. A primary information value i was calculated on the basis of the number of phylogenetic statements involved for each terminal taxon (i.e. number of nodes between tree root and the taxon), which was used to establish the basic phylogenetic weight Q value determined for each taxon (Q i  = Σi/i j , where j is each analysed taxon). The final index W is calculated as W = Q j /Q min (see supplementary Appendix 1 for list of species and their respective values). This method focusing on nodes of trees was preferred over other current methods focusing on branch length (e.g. Faith 1992, 1994; Crozier 1992; Redding and Mooers 2006), which may be only accurately applied on molecular phylogenetic trees, not still available for cynolebiasine killifishes.


Conservation status assessment

São João-Cabo Frio area

Ophthalmolebias constanciae (synonyms: Cynolebias constanciae, Simpsonichthys constanciae) (Fig. 1a). Median size species, reaching about 50 mm SL, found in temporary pools inserted in areas with open coastal vegetation, between the town of Rio das Ostras and the village of Botafogo (Costa 2007). The pools are shallow, about 0.50 m as maximum depth, and have water yellow, slightly acidic (pH 5.5–6.5), and dense aquatic and amphibious vegetation (Costa 1995, 2009). Often sympatric to Nematolebias whitei, and endangered species (Costa 2009) and No. cruzi (see below).
Fig. 1

Seasonal killifishes (males) endemic to the coastal plains of Rio de Janeiro state. a Ophthalmolebias constanciae; b Notholebias cruzi; c Nematolebias papilliferus; d Notholebias fractifasciatus; e Leptolebias marmoratus; f Nematolebias whitei

Considering all the locations inhabited O. constanciae recorded between 1984 and the present, it is estimated that its minimum area of occupancy at the beginning of the study period was about 56,500 m2. Between 1984 and 1992, O. constanciae was easily found in a swampy area near to the road RJ-106, about 10,000 m2 containing five interconnected seasonal pools in the town of Barra de São João. This area was entirely destroyed between 1993 and 2000, and it is now an urban extent of the town. Three other temporary pools inhabited by O. constanciae first found between 1994 and 1998, also disappeared under the same circumstances before 2000.

Intensive field studies combining searches in satellite images and detailed field inspections since 2005 indicated that O. constanciae is restricted to three locations. The first location is a seasonal pool within a cow pasture, close to the road RJ-106, near the village of Botafogo, in Cabo Frio Municipality (22°43′59″S 42°2′30″W). The pool occupies an area about 36,000 m2, but O. constanciae is rare, with a few individuals found in a small part of the pool, about 100 m2, with denser amphibious vegetation. This pool may be the same sampled by Thomas White in 1941, according to a sketch attached to a letter of 22 May 1942 sent to George Myers, deposited in Smithsonian Institution, Washington).

The second one is a temporary pool in Barra de São João (22°34′34″S 41°59′10″W). The area was severely modified in recent years, its surface being reduced from about 2,400 m2 in 2000, to about 100 m2 after 2008. Although most of the typical vegetation disappeared and the water is now polluted, the species is still abundant in this habitat.

The third location is a temporary pool close to the sea in the town of Rio das Ostras (22°54′44″S 42°43′10″W). Until recently, this was the best preserved location, when the pool occupied about 4,200 m2, the water was clear, and dense typical vegetation sheltered an abundant population of O. constanciae. Between 2010 and the present, the area bas been prepared for construction of beach houses, and consequently, a greater part of the pool was drained, some walls were built to delimit house areas, and the original vegetation was removed or burned. In November 2011, the flooded area had already been reduced to 1,400 m2, but the species was found in a single small pool about 50 m2 isolated by walls.

The reduction of the estimated minimum area of occupancy of about 56,500 m2 in 1984 to about 250 m2 at the present (Table 1) indicates that O. constanciae is a critically endangered species (IUCN criteria B2bii, iv).
Table 1

Area of occupancy and habitat loss of five critically endangered seasonal killifish species from three areas of endemism in the coastal plains of Rio de Janeiro state




HL (%)

São João-Cabo Frio area

 O. constanciae

56,500 m2

250 m2


 Notholebias cruzi

20,000 m2

100 m2


Maricá area

 Nematolebias papilliferus

106,500 m2

658 m2


 Notholebias fractifasciatus

106,900 m2

658 m2


Guanabara Bay area

 L. marmoratus

19,5 km2

1,9 km2


HL habitat loss, MPAO minimum past area of occupancy, PAO present area of occupancy. See text for details about area localization

Notholebias cruzi (synonyms: Cynolebias cruzi, Leptolebias cruzi) (Fig. 1b). A miniature species, reaching about 30 mm of total length, known only from some temporary pools in the São João River floodplains, where it is sympatric with O. constanciae (see above) and Ne. whitei. As described for O. constanciae, No. cruzi was a common species in seasonal swamps close to road RJ-106 between 1984 and 1992, being formally described during this period (Costa 1988). It was particularly abundant in a swamp about 10,000 m2, which was destroyed between 1993 and 2000. From a former area of occupancy estimated as having about 20,000 m2 in 1984, today it remains only 100 m2 of one pool (22°34′34″S 41°59′10″W) among all pools from where the species has been recorded. However, no individual has been found since 2002 (Costa 2009). The species is herein considered as critically endangered (IUCN criteria B2bii-iv), but may be already extinct, although the pool still contains a dense population of O. constanciae (see Barra de São João pool above) and some individuals of Ne. whitei are sporadically recorded.

Maricá area

Nematolebias papilliferus (synonyms: none) (Fig. 1c). Median-sized species, reaching about 65 mm SL, it is endemic to the Maricá Lagoon basin, occurring in seasonal pools similar to those described for O. constanciae above. Recorded in field studies since 1984, but first described 8 years after (Costa 2002a). The region originally consisted of dense rain forest areas alternating with places of open vegetation and extensive flooded areas, as described by the naturalist Maximilian zu Wied-Neuwied (1820). In 1984, the flooded areas were reduced and there was no vestige of the former forests, except for some remnants on the top of neighbouring hills. Always sympatric to No. fractifasciatus (see below).

Both Ne. papilliferus and No. fractifasciatus (see below) were common species, between 1984 and 1995, in the seasonal swamps near the village of Inoã (22°55′18″S 42°55′39″W), close to the road Amaral Peixoto (road RJ-106). At that time, the Inoã swamp occupied an area of about 105,000 m2, but it was gradually reducing while the number of houses around increased. The area was mainly disturbed after the widening of the road in 2002, but the destroying process is not finished yet. In November 2011, the swamp was restricted to an area of 658 m2, where Ne. papilliferus is now a rare fish. Nematolebias papilliferus was also found in another swamp, about 1,500 m2, near the town of Maricá, about 11 km E of the first location (22°55′18″S 42°55′39″W), but the whole swamp was destroyed after the road widening in 2002. As a consequence of the great habitat decline (Table 1), Ne. papilliferus is considered a critically endangered species (IUCN criteria B2bii-iv).

Notholebias fractifasciatus (synonyms: Cynolebias fractifasciatus, Leptolebias fractifasciatus) (Fig. 1d). A small species (reaching about 30 mm of total length), it has been found sympatric to Ne. papilliferus both in Inoã and Maricá swamps (see above). It was also recorded to a small temporary pool (400 m2) near the town of Itaipuaçu, about 6 km SW of Inoã (22°58′6″S 42°57′31″W), where it is sympatric to L. citrinipinnis, but the latter pool recently disappeared. It is still a common species in the Inoã swamp, the last known location. Herein considered as a critically endangered species (IUCN criteria B2bii-iv).

Guanabara bay area

Leptolebias marmoratus (synonyms: Cynopoecilus marmoratus, Cynolebias marmoratus, Cynopoecilus sicheleri, Cynolebias zingiberinus) (Fig. 1e). A small species (about 30 mm of total length), member of a clade in which all species inhabit shallow seasonal channels (about 0.30 m deep) with acidic water (pH 3.5–5.0) adjacent to streams within dense rain forest (Costa and Lacerda 1988; Costa 2002b, 2008). Species of this group are often broadly widespread along the floodplains of those streams. According to old collectors (Hugo de Souza and Lopes and Antenor de Carvalho, personal communication), the species was common in its habitat until 1944. Since 1934 it was often collected as an ornamental fish near the present town of Imbariê, Estrela River basin, together L. opalescens and L. splendens, but the three species abruptly disappeared just after the original forest being removed. Intensive field studies between 1984 and 1998 were unsuccessful to find L. marmoratus again in the Estrela River basin. However, in 2000 it was found in a similar habitat about 22 km west from the former locality (22°39′30″S 43°25′46″W), situated near the village of Cava, in the floodplains of the Iguaçu River, constituting another isolated basin draining into the north-western corner of the Guanabara bay (Costa 2002c). Previously, L. opalescens had been recorded to the latter locality (Cruz and Peixoto 1983), but not after 1981.

Combining data provided by collectors (Hugo de Souza and Lopes and Antenor de Carvalho, personal communication; texts and sketches made by Thomas White in unpublished letters written on 14 December 1941 and 22 May 1942 to George Myers, deposited in Smithsonian Institution, Washington) with present satellite images it is possible to determine the exact location where L. marmoratus was collected in the past (22°38′16″S 43°16′13″W). Adding information about river basin topology and relief, vegetation and habitat species preference, a past minimum area of occupancy of about 19.5 km2 is proposed for the Imbariê forest swamps. Using a similar approach, a minimum area of occupancy of about 3.2 km2 is estimated for the Cava forest swamp, consequently assuming a total past area of occupancy of about 22.7 km2.

In Cava swamp, L. marmoratus is found in a rain forest fragment, about 1.9 km2, close to the Iguaçu River, which is strongly polluted at the present, but all records were restricted to a small portion of the forest, about 600 m2. However, some parts of that forested area are still inaccessible, thus assuming the whole flooded forest as the present area of occupancy (Table 1). Thus the species is here considered as a critically endangered species (criteria B2bii-iv), although it has not been found in most recent surveys.

Conservation priorities

Among the five locations inhabited by critically endangered species, the Barra de São João pool concentrates the highest value for conservation proposal (Table 2). It has a higher value of phylogenetic diversity than the other locations by the occurrence of three seasonal killifish species (Ne. whitei, No. cruzi, O. constanciae) with relatively high W values, instead of two species as in other locations, even when comparing to the two other pools of the São João-Cabo Frio area, from which N. cruzi was never recorded. The second highest value is found in the Inoã pool, which is inhabited by basal species of the two main lineages, Ne. papilliferus a basal species for the tribe Cynolebiasini (Costa 2006b, 2010) and No. fractifasciatus a basal taxon for the tribe Cynopoecilini (Costa 2008), in contrast to other habitats containing two representatives of the same lineage. The lowest value is exhibited by the Cava swamp, even including the occurrence of L. opalescens, not recorded to this area since 1981 (Cruz and Peixoto 1983). The two species found in Cava swamp, L. marmoratus and L. opalescens, are members of the same genus, Leptolebias, which is not basal in its lineage, the tribe Cynopoecilini (Costa 2008).
Table 2

W values for locations inhabited by critically endangered species of seasonal killifishes endemic to Rio de Janeiro coastal plains in three areas of endemism

Area of endemism and location

Individual W values

W total

São João-Cabo Frio area

 Rio das Ostras pool

6.7, 3.3


 Barra de São João pool

6.7, 3.3, 5.0


 Botafogo pool

6.7, 3.3


Maricá area

 Inoã pool

6.7, 5.0


Guanabara Bay area

 Cava swamp

2.9 (2.9)

2.9 (5.8)

Values in parentheses refer to L. opalescens, species not found since 1981, possibly extinct


Species herein reported may be extinct in a few years, since their habitats are being intensely and quickly destroyed, remaining today only small remnants of their natural habitat, with habitat losses varying between 90.3 and 99.6 % in the last decades (Table 1; see also reports under “Results” section). Resources for conservation proposals are often insufficient to cover a large extent of threatened species, thus decisions about priorities have been a necessary step for implementation of well structured conservation policies (e.g. May 1990; Vane-Wright et al. 1991; Isaac et al. 2007). Priority assessments based on attributes related to vulnerability have been commonly used as indicative of taxon conservation worthy, which is commonly expressed by attributes including endemism (e.g. geographic range), population size, habitat fragmentation, and indicators of historical decline (e.g. IUCN 2010). Therefore, species most at risk of extinction should have highest priority. However, with the increasing process of biodiversity loss especially in tropical countries (e.g. Wilson 1985; Brook et al. 2006), many species have been quickly incorporated to lists of endangered species, making necessary to analyse other criteria, among which indexes of phylogenetic diversity have been considered most relevant by considering the evolutionary history of taxa (e.g. Williams et al. 1994; Vázquez and Gittleman 1998; Posadas et al. 2001; Thomas 2008).

The top five list of endangered killifishes species of south-eastern Brazil, herein presented, comprises members of a single, but highly diverse subfamily (Cynolebiasinae), with 129 valid species in 12 genera (e.g. Costa 2008, 2010). The results indicate that, using the phylogenetic diversity Index W for conservation priority assessment, the Barra de São João pool deserves the highest conservation value. Its higher value is attributed to it being the habitat of three endangered seasonal killifishes, among which two are basal taxa in their lineages (see “Results” section). In addition, the importance of this area could also been stated using more subjective features about taxon distinctiveness. Besides O. constanciae constituting the only member of its genus occurring in south-eastern Brazil (e.g., Costa 2007), this species greatly differs from congeners and species of closely related genera by osteological features (peculiar morphology of angulo-articular and dentary teeth, as described by Costa 2006b). In addition, O. constanciae is the only species in the genus with long filamentous fin rays in males, as well as the male colour pattern consisting of body sides golden with rows of rounded black blotches (Fig. 1a) is unique among aplocheiloid killifishes, which could be further regarded as unique aesthetic attributes.

The second highest value was designated to the Inoã pool. However, having first ensured the conservation of species inhabiting the Barra de São João pool, it would be more desirable to give preference to preserve the Cava swamp, since the two species inhabiting the Inoã pool (Ne. papilliferus, Fig. 1c, and No. fractifasciatus, Fig. 1d) are sister close taxa to two species found in the Barra de São João pool (Ne. whitei, Fig. 1f, and No. cruzi, Fig. 1b, respectively). Therefore, even the Cava swamp having a lower W value, the parallel preservation of Cava swamp and Barra de São João pool, would achieve a higher phylogenetic diversity index by conserving more independent lineages (e.g. Faith 1992, 1994) than preserving simultaneously Barra de São João and Inoã pools. In addition, one of the species occurring in the Cava swamp, L. marmoratus, exhibits a high degree of morphological uniqueness. It is the only species among rivulids, in which the caudal fin is lanceolate and asymmetrical in males (Costa 2002c), with the dorsal portion rounded and the ventral straight (Fig. 1e). The colour pattern of flank (dark brown background with horizontal rows of golden spots) and caudal fin (ventral white stripe) in males (Fig. 1e) are also unique among rivulids (Costa 2002c).


This study supports the critically endangered status for five species of seasonal killifishes endemic from the coastal plains of Rio de Janeiro State—L. marmoratus, Ne. papilliferus, No. cruzi, No. fractifasciatus and O. constanciae. In fact, all those species may be considered on the edge of survival due to the much reduced area they occupy today, combined to the lack of policies to preserve them. In this context, conservation priorities are tentatively established while extinction is imminent. Combining contained phylogenetic diversity and morphological uniqueness, the Barra de São João pool and the Cava swamp are indicated as the habitats having higher conservation priority.



I am especially grateful to Claudia Bove and Bruno Costa for help in numerous field studies. Thanks are due to Carlos Cruz for providing copies of old letters and pictures deposited in Smithsonian Institution, Washington. This study was funded by CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico—Ministério de Ciência e Tecnologia) and FAPERJ (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro).

Supplementary material

10531_2012_301_MOESM1_ESM.doc (157 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 157 kb)


  1. Bove CP, Gil ASB, Moreira CB, Anjos RFB (2002) Hidrófitas fanerogâmicas de ecossistemas aquáticos temporários da planície costeira do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Acta Bot Brasílica 17:119–135Google Scholar
  2. Brook BW, Bradshaw CJA, Koh LP, Sodhi NS (2006) Momentum drives the crash: mass extinction in the tropics. Biotropica 38:302–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Costa WJEM (1984) A ameaça de extinção de peixes anuais raros do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, gênero Cynolebias Steindachner, 1876. Bol Fund Brasil Cons Nat 19:164–166Google Scholar
  4. Costa WJEM (1988) Sistemática e distribuição do complexo de espécies Cynolebias minimus (Cyprinodontiformes, Rivulidae), com a descrição de duas espécies novas. Rev Brasil Zool 5:557–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Costa WJEM (1995) Pearl killifishes, the Cynolebiatinae: systematics and biogeography of the neotropical annual fish subfamily. TFH, Neptune CityGoogle Scholar
  6. Costa WJEM (2002a) The neotropical seasonal fish genus Nematolebias (Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae: Cynolebiatinae): taxonomic revision, with description of a new species. Ichthyol Explor Freshw 13:41–52Google Scholar
  7. Costa WJEM (2002b) Peixes anuais brasileiros: diversidade e conservação. Editora UFPR, CuritibaGoogle Scholar
  8. Costa WJEM (2002c) Leptolebias marmoratus (Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae: Cynolebiatinae): rediscovery and redescription of a rare, miniaturized forest dwelling seasonal fish from southeastern Brazil. Ichthyol Explor Freshw 13:379–384Google Scholar
  9. Costa WJEM (2006a) Taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships among species of the seasonal, internally inseminating, South American killifish genus Campellolebias (Teleostei: Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae), with the description of a new species. Zootaxa 1227:31–55Google Scholar
  10. Costa WJEM (2006b) Descriptive morphology and phylogenetic relationships among species of the Neotropical annual killifish genera Nematolebias and Simpsonichthys (Cyprinodontiformes: Aplocheiloidei: Rivulidae). Neotrop Ichthyol 4:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Costa WJEM (2007) Taxonomic revision of the seasonal South American killifish genus Simpsonichthys (Teleostei: Cyprinodontiformes: Aplocheiloidei). Zootaxa 1669:1–134Google Scholar
  12. Costa WJEM (2008) Monophyly and taxonomy of the Neotropical seasonal killifish genus Leptolebias (Teleostei: Aplocheiloidei: Rivulidae), with the description of a new genus. Zool J Linn Soc 153:147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Costa WJEM (2009) Peixes aploqueilóideos da Mata Atlântica brasileira: história, diversidade e conservação/Aplocheiloid fishes of the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: history, diversity and conservation. Museu Nacional UFRJ, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  14. Costa WJEM (2010) Historical biogeography of cynolebiasine annual killifishes inferred from dispersal-vicariance analysis. J Biog 37:1995–2004Google Scholar
  15. Costa WJEM, Lacerda MTC (1988) Identité e redescription de Cynolebias sandrii et de Cynolebias fluminensis (Cyprinodontiformes, Rivulidae). Rev Fr Aquariol 14:127–132Google Scholar
  16. Costa WJEM, Lacerda MTC, Tanizaki K (1988) Description d’une nouvelle espèce de Cynolebias des plaines côtieres du Brésil sud-oriental (Cyprinodontiformes, Rivulidae). Rev Fr Aquariol 15:21–24Google Scholar
  17. Crozier RH (1992) Genetic diversity and the agony of choice. Biol Conserv 61:11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cruz CAG, Peixoto OL (1983) Novo peixe anual do estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (Pisces, Cyprinodontidae). Arq Univ Fed Rural do Rio de Janeiro 6:89–93Google Scholar
  19. Faith DP (1992) Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol Conserv 61:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Faith DP (1994) Genetic diversity and taxonomic priorities for conservation. Biol Conserv 68:69–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Faria A, Muller H (1937) Especies da familia Cyprinodontidae, Genero Cynopoecilus, constatadas em aguas do Brasil. Rev Naval (Março 1937):98–99Google Scholar
  22. Isaac NJB, Turvey ST, Collen B, Waterman C, Baillie JEM (2007) Mammals on the EDGE: conservation priorities based on threat and phylogeny. PLoS ONE 2:e296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000296 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. IUCN (2010) Guidelines for using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, version 8.1. Standards and Petitions Subcommittee of the IUCN Species Survival Commission [updated at Accessed 2 Sept 2011]
  24. Ladiges W (1934a) Cynopoecilus marmoratus Ladiges. Das Aquarium 1934:73–74Google Scholar
  25. Ladiges W (1934b) Tropische Zierfische. Aquarium Hamburg, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  26. May RM (1990) Taxonomy as destiny. Nature 347:129–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miranda-Ribeiro P (1939) Alguns novos dados ictiológicos da nossa fauna. Bol Biol 4:358–363Google Scholar
  28. Myers GS (1942) Studies on South American fresh-water fishes I. Stanford Ichthyol Bull 2:89–114Google Scholar
  29. Posadas P, Miranda-Esquivel DR, Crisci JV (2001) Using phylogenetic diversity measures to set priorities in conservation: an example from southern South America. Conserv Biol 15:1325–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Redding DW, Mooers AO (2006) Incorporating evolutionary measures into conservation prioritization. Conserv Biol 20:1670–1678PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thomas GH (2008) Phylogenetic distributions of British birds of conservation concern. Proc R Soc B 275:2077–2083PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vane-Wright RI, Humphries CJ, Williams PH (1991) What to protect? Systematics and the agony of choice. Biol Conserv 55:235–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vázquez DP, Gittleman JL (1998) Biodiversity conservation: does phylogeny matter? Curr Biol 8:R379–R381PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wied-Neuwied APM (1820) Reise nach Brasilien in den Jahren 1815 bis 1817. Heinrich Ludwig Bronner, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  35. Williams PH, Gaston KJ, Humphries CJ (1994) Do conservationists and molecular biologists value differences between organisms in the same way? Biodivers Lett 2:67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wilson EO (1985) The biological diversity crisis: a challenge to science. Issues Sci Tech 2:20–29Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratório de Sistemática e Evolução de Peixes Teleósteos, Instituto de BiologiaUniversidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations