Short Communication Reclassification of Lepadogaster candollei based on molecular and meristic evidence with a redefinition of the genus Lepadogaster F. Almada a,b,c, * , M. Henriques d , A. Levy a , A. Pereira a , J. Robalo a , V.C. Almada a a Unidade de Investigac ßa ˜o em Eco-etologia, Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Rua do Jardim do Tabaco 34, 1149-041 Lisboa, Portugal b Instituto de Oceanografia, Faculdade de Cie ˆncias da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal c Universidade Luso ´ fona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Campo Grande 376, 1749-024 Lisboa, Portugal d Parque Natural da Arra ´ bida, Instituto da Conservac ßa ˜o da Natureza, Prac ßa da Repu ´ blica, 2900 Setu ´ bal, Portugal Received 24 January 2007; revised 11 May 2007; accepted 22 May 2007 Available online 9 June 2007 1. Introduction Several characteristics of the Gobiesocidae, such as the fact that they are small cryptic fishes, could explain the scarcity of studies on these species when compared with other rocky littoral fish families. In the last few years differ- ent authors described several new gobiesocid species (Hutchins, 1991; Briggs, 1993, 2001; Hofrichter and Patz- ner, 1997). Additionally, some ecological and behavioural studies have also been published (Gonc ßalves et al., 1998; Hofrichter and Patzner, 2000). However, the taxonomy of the subfamily Lepadogastrinae, which is restricted to the Eastern Atlantic, Mediterranean and the Black Sea, is still based on the works of Canestrini (1864), Ninni (1933), and Briggs (1955). Canestrini (1864) divided these fishes in three genera: Gouania, Lepadogaster, and Mirb- elia. He distinguished these genera according to the fact that the dorsal and anal fins are separated from the caudal fin by a distinct gap in Mirbelia, while they are broadly connected in Lepadogaster and continuous in Gouania. In other words species such as Lepadogaster candollei (Risso, 1810), Diplecogaster bimaculata (Bonnaterre, 1788) and Opeatogenys gracilis (Canestrini, 1864) were included in the genus Mirbelia. Chambanaud (1925) and Ninni (1933), based on a con- tinuous or non-continuous fin criterion reclassified the Lepadogastrinae as Gouania or Lepadogaster, respectively, placing Mirbelia as a synonym of Lepadogaster. Subsequently Fraser-Brunner (1938) described the genus Diplecogaster and Briggs (1955) maintained the genus Mirbelia as a synonym of Lepadogaster. Briggs (1955) also provided an extensive revision of the phylogeny and biogeography of the family Gobiesocidae and he clearly admitted that the relationships within the Gobiesocidae subfamilies are more difficult to assess than the relationships among subfamilies. Nelson (2006) did not consider tribes or subfamilies within the gobiesocids. Traditionally, according to Briggs (1955, 1957, 1986, 1990) and Hofrichter and Patzner (1997), the subfamily Lepadogas- trinae comprises six genera and thirteen species: Apletodon den- tatus, A. incognitus, A. pellegrini, Diplecogaster bimaculata, D. megalops, D. ctenocrypta, Gouania willdenowi, Lecanogaster chrysea, L. candollei, L. lepadogaster (with two subspecies: L. l. lepadogaster and L. l. purpurea), L. zebrina, Opeatogenys gracilis and O. cadenati. However, the species D. ctenocrypta is based on the description of a single specimen (Briggs, 1955) and should therefore be considered with caution. Henriques et al. (2002) showed recently that L. zebrina is a population of L. lepadogaster from Madeira Archipelago. These authors also concluded, based on molecular, mor- phological and ecological data, that L. l. lepadogaster and L. l. purpurea should be considered two different spe- cies and not subspecies as was frequently proposed (e.g. Briggs, 1986). They also noted that L. purpurea and L. lep- adogaster form a well supported monophyletic group markedly divergent from L. candollei, an observation that had already been advanced by Briggs (1955). Ecological and behavioural differences between L. candollei and the remaining Lepadogaster were also stressed by other authors (Gonc ßalves et al., 1998; Hofrichter and Patzner, 2000). These findings led us to reassess the taxonomic status of L. candollei. 1055-7903/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2007.05.021 * Corresponding author. Address: Unidade de Investigac ßa ˜o em Eco- etologia, Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Rua do Jardim do Tabaco 34, 1149-041 Lisboa, Portugal. Fax: +351 217 515 590. E-mail address: frederico.almada@ulusofona.pt (F. Almada). www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 46 (2008) 1151–1156