Capoeta aculeata (Valenciennes, 1844)

Freyhof, Jörg, Yoğurtçuoğlu, Baran, Jouladeh-Roudbar, Arash & Kaya, Cüneyt, 2025, Handbook of Freshwater Fishes of West Asia, De Gruyter : 116

Capoeta aculeata

Common name. Largescale scraper.

Diagnosis. Distinguished from other species of Capoeta in Iranian Tigris and endorheic basins by: ● 36–44 total lateral-line scales / ○ 14–15 predorsal scales / ○ one pair of barbels / ○ flank beige, golden or brown without small black spots, juveniles and some adults with large black blotches / ○ last unbranched dorsal ray soft or moderately ossified, with small serrae / ○ usually 8½ branched dorsal rays / ○ 16–17 circumpeduncular scale rows / ○ 6–8, usually 7 scale rows between dorsal origin and lateral line / ○ 5–8, usually 6 scales between anal origin and lateral line / ○ 4–7, usually 5–6 scales between pelvic origin and lateral line / ○ 17–22 gill rakers / ○ 38–39 total vertebrae. Size up to 370 mm SL.

Distribution . Iran: Tigris drainage, endorheic Kor and Esfahan basins. Qom, Qareh Chai, Jaj, Khar, Ab-e Kamar drainages in Lake Namak basin. Hable, Nam and Bidvaz drainages in Western Kavir basin.

Habitat. Streams, rivers, and springs with moderately fastto slow-flowing water. From reservoirs, they migrate to rivers to spawn.

Biology. Feeds on detritus, periphyton, and occasionally small invertebrates.

Conservation status. LC.

Remarks. Capoeta aculeata had been described from Iran without details of type locality. Capoeta bergi , described from the Lake Namak basin, was treated as a synonym. Capoeta alborzensis was described from the Lake Namak basin based on the assumption that the type locality of C. aculeata is in Kor basin and C. bergi is not an available name. No type material of C. aculeata was examined for that study. Later research identified the populations from the Lake Namak basin as C. aculeata and treated C. gracilis from the Esfahan basin and C. macrolepis from the Tigris and endorheic Kor as valid species. Again no type material was examined. We consider C. aculeata , C. macrolepis , C. gracilis , C. bergi , and C. alborzensis as conspecific as they are very closely related, with an COI distance <1 %, and none of morphological characters proposed to distinguish them could be confirmed.

Further reading. Coad & Krupp 1994 (re-validation); Jouladeh-Roudbar et al. 2015b (distribution); Ghanavi et al. 2016 (phylogeny); Jouladeh-Roudbar et al. 2016a (description as C. alborzensis ); Zareian et al. 2017 (phylogeny, morphology); Jouladeh-Roudbar et al. 2020 (distribution as C. alborzensis ); Coad 2021a (biology, morphology).

Figures

Capoeta aculeata

Distribution