Parma, Günther, 1862

Tang, Kevin L., Stiassny, Melanie L. J., Mayden, Richard L. & DeSalle, Robert, 2021, Systematics of Damselfishes, Ichthyology & Herpetology 109 (1), pp. 258-318 : 283

Parma .

— The scalyfins comprise ten large herbivorous species confined mainly to the temperate and subtropical waters around Australia and New Zealand (Allen, 1975a, 1987a; Allen and Hoese, 1975; Allen and Larson, 1979). Allen and Hoese (1975) noted some resemblance to the monotypic Hypsypops but were wary that any similarity could ‘‘be the result of convergence due to environmental similarities.’’ Their caution was warranted because, although they are in the same subfamily, these two genera are not sister taxa, with Hypsypops sister to Similiparma and Parma sister to all other microspathodontines except Mecaenichthys ( Fig. 1 ). In prior phylogenetic studies, sampling for the genus has been limited, including two species at most ( P. microlepis and P. oligolepis ). Even though it is assumed to be a natural grouping, recent studies (e.g., Cowman and Bellwood, 2011; Litsios et al., 2012a, 2012b; Frédérich et al., 2013; Rabosky et al., 2013, 2018; DiBattista et al., 2016; Mirande, 2016; Gaboriau et al., 2018; Delrieu-Trottin et al., 2019) have been unable to recover a monophyletic Parma . This may be due to irregularities in the 12S and 16S sequences of Parma oligolepis extracted from KU T3096 (M. W. Westneat, pers. comm.), which has been widely used ( Tang, 2001; Jang-Liaw et al., 2002; Tang et al., 2004; Cowman and Bellwood, 2011; Litsios et al., 2012a, 2012b; Frédérich et al., 2013; Rabosky et al., 2013, 2018; Mirande, 2016; Gaboriau et al., 2018; Delrieu-Trottin et al., 2019). That same sample was sequenced for this study, but 12S and 16S data were omitted. Our phylogeny recovers a monophyletic Parma with strong branch support (100% bootstrap; Fig. 1 ). The errant placement of P. oligolepis seen previously is not repeated herein.

Figures

FIG. 1. The phylogenetic relationships of damselfishes (Teleostei: Pomacentridae): (A) outgroup taxa; (B) subfamilies Microspathodontinae and Glyphisodontinae; (C) subfamily Chrominae; (D) subfamily Pomacentrinae (part I); (E) subfamily Pomacentrinae (part II). The phylogeny is based on the maximum-likelihood topology with the best log likelihood score (ln L ¼ –45,4518.728) recovered from ten independent maximum-likelihood analyses of a data matrix composed of 462 taxa and 6,865 nucleotides. Bootstrap values from 1,000 ultrafast replicates are displayed for each node