Seriously Fish
AdminAccount
AdminAccount

Hyphessobrycon vilmae

Géry, 1966

On this page13 sections
Wild individuals from the rio Juruena, Brazil.
Wild individuals from the rio Juruena, Brazil.Fernando Dagosta

Quick facts

Length
30mm SL1.2in SL
Tank base
60 × 30cm24 × 12in
Temp
20–26°C68–79°F
pH
5.0–7.0
Hardness
1–12dGH

Difficulty6 of 6 measures

Easy

More bars, more demanding.

Space
modest tank
Water
tap water
Temp
unfussy
Temperament
peaceful
Social
shoal
Compatibility
community tank

Choice of décor is not especially critical although it tends to show better colouration when maintained in a well-furnished set-up with live plants and a dark substrate. A natural-looking arrangement might consist of a soft, sandy substrate with wood roots and bran...

Etymology

Hyphessobrycon: from the Ancient Greek υπελάσσων (hyphesson), meaning 'of lesser stature', and used as a prefix in this case, plus the generic name Brycon.

vilmae: named in honour of Vilma Schultz, wife of Harald Schultz (1909-1966), ethnographer and fish collector who collected the type specimen.

Distribution

Appears to be endemic to the upper rio Tapajós basin in Amazonas and Mato Grosso states, Brazil.

Type locality is 'upper Arinos-Juruena basin, Brazil'.

Habitat

Other species inhabiting the upper Tapajós region include Hyphessobrycon heliacus, H. scutulatus, Nannostomus eques and N. digrammus.

Aquarium size

Standard length
30mm SL1.2in SL
Aquarium base
60 × 30cm24 × 12in
Volume
~54litres~14US gal

An aquarium with base dimensions of 60 ∗ 30 cm24 ∗ 12 in or equivalent should be the smallest considered.

Maintenance

Choice of décor is not especially critical although it tends to show better colouration when maintained in a well-furnished set-up with live plants and a dark substrate.

A natural-looking arrangement might consist of a soft, sandy substrate with wood roots and branches placed such a way that plenty of shady spots are formed.

The addition of dried leaf litter would further emphasise the natural feel and with it the growth of beneficial microbe colonies as decomposition occurs.

These can provide a valuable secondary food source for fry, whilst the tannins and other chemicals released by the decaying leaves will aid in simulating a blackwater environment.

Leaves can be left in the tank to break down fully or removed and replaced every few weeks.

This species seems to do best under relatively dim lighting and plant species from genera such as Microsorum, Taxiphyllum, Cryptocoryne or Anubias are recommended since they will grow under such conditions, and a few patches of floating vegetation may also prove effective.

Water conditions

Temperature
20–26°C68–79°F
pH
5.0–7.0
Hardness
1–12dGH

These boxes carry affiliate links and we may earn a commission. What they recommend comes from each profile’s own figures, never chosen by hand or paid for.

Diet

Probably an opportunistic omnivore by nature feeding on aquatic invertebrates, fallen fruit and suchlike.

In the aquarium it is easily-fed but the best condition and colours offer regular meals of small live and frozen foods such as bloodworm, Daphnia, and Artemia alongside good quality dried flakes and granules, at least some of which should include additional plant or algal content.

Behaviour and compatibility

Generally peaceful making it an ideal resident of the well-researched community aquarium.

It is perhaps best-maintained alongside similarly-sized characids, gasteropelecids, lebiasinids, smaller callichthyid or loricariid catfishes and non-predatory, medium-sized cichlids.

Try to buy a mixed-sex group of at least 8-10 specimens, include other schooling fishes to provide security, and you'll be rewarded with a more natural-looking spectacle.

Sexual dimorphism

Adult males are slightly more intensely-coloured when in good condition while females tend to grow a little larger and be rounder in shape, especially when gravid.

Reproduction

Egg-scatterer exhibiting no parental care.

Notes

This species is occasionally-traded as 'chocolate neon tetra' and has been considered to be a member of the putative ‘H. heterorhabdus-group’ of closely-related species within the genus as proposed by Géry (1977). This originally comprised around 15 members characterised by a 'longitudinal pattern' consisting of a thin, usually dark, lateral body stripe, but has since been modified on a number of occasions.

Most recently, Lima et al. (2014) proposed a putatively monophyletic H. heterorhabdus-group containing only three species; Hyphessobrycon heterorhabdus, H. amapaensis, and H. eschwartzae. These all possess: a well-defined, elongate humeral blotch which is continuous with a dark, well-defined midlateral stripe that becomes blurred towards the caudal peduncle; a longitudinal red stripe extending along the body above the midlateral line; upper half of the eye red.

This pattern is different to that presented by several members of Géry's H. heterorhabdus group, such as H. vilmae, H. cachimbensis, and H. stegemanni, which possess a continuous, solid dark lateral stripe on the body and no obvious humeral blotch, but is similar to that of Géry's H. agulha group. The latter contained species with a colour pattern comprising "lower half of the body dark, especially above anal fin; usually a horizontally elongate humeral spot, more or less united with the assymetrical, broad band", and included H. agulha, H. loretoensis, H. peruvianus, H. metae, and H. herbertaxelrodi.

Hyphessobrycon was raised by Durbin in Eigenmann (1908) as a subgenus of Hemigrammus, differing from the latter by the absence of scales on the caudal-fin.

The grouping was revised by Eigenmann (1918, 1921) while Géry (1977) created artificial groups of species based on colour pattern, and these definitions are still widely used today, e.g., the H. agulha group, the H. heterohabdus group, etc. These cannot be considered to represent monophyletic assemblages, however, and their concepts continue to be redefined.

Weitzman & Palmer (1997) hypothesised the existence of a monophyletic assemblage within the genus based on colour pattern and male fin morphology that they termed the ‘rosy tetra clade’, with one of the characters supporting its monophyly being presence of a prominent dark marking on the dorsal-fin. This assemblage, plus other morphologically similar species, is considered to represent Hyphessobrycon sensu stricto by some authors, with the remaining species included in a much-expanded H. heterohabdus group.

Others have proposed conflicting, typically more restricted, views of both the genus and/or its constituent species groups, and significant confusion remains. What is clear is that, as currently recognised, Hyphessobrycon is a polyphyletic lineage containing several genera.

The process of splitting it up has already started, and Malabarba et al. (2012) revalidated the genus Ectrepopterus Fowler, previously considered a synonym of Hyphessobrycon. They also analysed its relationships within the Characidae in the context of Mirande's (2010) previous work, but included the type species, H. compressus, for the first time in such a study. The results demonstrated that H. compressus is more closely-related to 'rosy tetra' representatives such as H. eques, H. pulchripinnis, and H. socolofi than other members of the genus including H. anisitsi, H. bifasciatus, H. elachys, H. herbertaxelrodi, and H. luetkeni.

References

  1. Reis, R. E., S. O. Kullander and C. J. Ferraris, Jr. (eds) (2003). Check list of the freshwater fishes of South and Central America. CLOFFSCA. EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre, i-xi + 1-729
  2. Calcagnotto, D., S. A. Schaefer, and R. DeSalle (2005). Relationships among characiform fishes inferred from analysis of nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 36(1), 135-153
  3. Oliveira, C. A., G. S. Avellino, K. T. Abe, T. C. Mariguela, R. C. Benine, G. Orti, R. P. Vari, and R. M. Corrêa e Castro (2011). Phylogenetic relationships within the speciose family Characidae (Teleostei: Ostariophysi: Characiformes) based on multilocus analysis and extensive ingroup sampling. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11(1), 275-300
  4. Géry, J. (1966). Hyphessobrycon vilmae sp. nov., a new tetra from the upper Juruena, Brazil, with keys to the heterorhabdus-like species. Ichthyologica, the Aquarium Journal 37(2), 63-70
  5. Weitzman, S. H. and L. Palmer (1997). A new species of Hyphessobrycon (Teleostei: Characidae) from the Neblina region of Venezuela and Brazil, with comments on the putative `rosy tetra clade'. Ichthyological Exploration of Freshwaters 7(3), 209-242
  6. Zarske, A. (2014). Zur Systematik einiger Blutsalmler oder "Rosy Tetras" (Teleostei: Ostariophysi: Characidae). Vertebrate Zoology 64(2), 139-167
  7. Lima, F. C. T., D. P. Coutinho and W. B. Wosiacki (2014). A new Hyphessobrycon (Ostariophysi: Characiformes: Characidae) from the middle Amazon basin, Brazil. Zootaxa 3872(2), 167-179
  8. Mirande, J. M. (2010). Phylogeny of the family Characidae (Teleostei: Characiformes): from characters to taxonomy. Neotropical Ichthyology 8(3), 385-568
  9. Malabarba, L. R., V. A. Bertaco, F. R. Carvalho & T. O. Litz. (2012). Revalidation of the genus Ectrepopterus Fowler (Teleostei: Characiformes), with the redescription of its type species, E. uruguayensis. Zootaxa 3204, 47-60

Distribution

Profile completeness22 of 24

92% complete

Missing: a common name, water condition notes.