The Berried Clubby Molt & Moss
Menu

Open this record in the complete research map

Morphology or taxonomy Adjacent biological evidence

A revision of the Caridina serrata species group, with descriptions of five new species (Crustacea: Decapoda: Caridea: Atyidae)

Cai and Ng, 1999. Journal of Natural History 33(11): 1603-1638.

Open the source

This record is a claim boundary, not a quality badge. Evidence class and species relationship describe what was studied. They do not make the result universal, complete or automatically applicable to a home aquarium.

Source taxon as published
Caridina serrata species group, including Lam Tsuen material previously reported as Neocaridina serrata
Environment
Museum and field-collected freshwater shrimp material from southern China, including Lam Tsuen River and other Hong Kong localities
Life stages
preserved and freshly collected taxonomic specimens, male, female, ovigerous and juvenile material depending on lot
Reviewed
2026-08-12

What was studied

Study shape: Published descriptions, neotypes and re-examined material were compared using rostral formula, stylocerite, pereiopod, pleopod and other morphological characters across the Caridina serrata group.

Experimental unit: Examined specimen and collection lot; the Lam Tsuen conclusion used later material from the same river population, including Dudgeon-collected lots, rather than a reported re-examination of every animal sampled for the 1985 population study

Endpoints: taxonomic diagnosis, genus placement, species reassignment, morphological distinction, locality record.

Claim boundary

What it can support: The Lam Tsuen population published by Dudgeon in 1985 and 1987 as Neocaridina serrata was reassigned to Caridina cantonensis. The revision also concluded that neither C. cantonensis nor C. serrata belongs in Neocaridina because the distal half of the male first pleopod lacks the Neocaridina condition.

What it cannot support: The revision does not make every aquarium animal sold as C. cantonensis taxonomically verified, resolve all later Caridina species-group relationships or convert Dudgeon field results into captive care guidance. It did not re-run the 1985 population study, and its reassignment does not establish temperature, lifespan, maturity, clutch or abundance rules for N. davidi.

Publication status audit

Canonical DOI outside query result

The record has a canonical DOI but did not appear in the broad Neocaridina query. It requires DOI-specific or alternative-registry status review before any no-update statement.

Metadata snapshot reviewed 2026-08-12. Inspect the method, unmatched queue and limitations.

Correction impact

If this source boundary changes, these are the known downstream consumers. The list distinguishes scientific re-review from generated parity and historical follow-up.

Editorial review required (13)

This curated wording or synthesis must be reconsidered when the source boundary changes. A passing generator test cannot decide the new scientific meaning.

  • Colour proves the species or purity of a line Curated claim check
    The exact claim trace uses this record as direct support: Shows that specimen-based taxonomic revision can overturn a historical genus label.
  • anatomy decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • breeding decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • growth decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • species decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • temperature decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • A published species name is evidence context, not permanent identity Curated evidence comparison
    The bounded reconciliation and unresolved question use this record in an explicit comparison.
  • anatomy practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • breeding practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • growth practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • species practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • temperature practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • round1-taxonomy-identity Curated first-round reviewer assignment
    The frozen reviewer scope or consequential-failure check uses this record through the assigned claim trace or comparison and must be reconsidered before invitation or response.

Generated from governing registry (25)

This surface derives from a governing registry and should update with it, but release tests must still prove parity and routing.

Historical record needs follow-up decision (1)

Do not silently rewrite history. Decide whether the prior change record remains accurate and publish a new correction or scope note when needed.

Inspect the corpus-wide propagation audit.

How this record is classified

Morphology or taxonomy: Anatomy, specimen identification or taxonomic relationships were studied with stated methods. A trade name or photograph cannot replace those methods.

Adjacent biological evidence: The source studied another organism or a broad biological group. The inference to Neocaridina must remain explicit.

Topics: Species and taxonomy, Wild populations, Anatomy

Critically appraise this source without a score

These questions fit this record's morphology or taxonomy role. They are prompts, not automatic judgments. Open the original source to answer them.

  1. Identity and provenance: How were the organism, population, stock and life stage identified and sourced? A published name or seller label can hide a taxonomic, population or life-stage transfer.
  2. Independent unit: What unit was independently assigned or sampled, and how many units support each comparison? Animal counts do not create independent replication when animals share a vessel, site, family or treatment history.
  3. Comparison and context: What was the actual comparator, allocation process, environment, duration and material condition? A result has meaning only against the comparison and conditions that produced it.
  4. Endpoint and measurement: Which endpoint was measured, with what method, unit, timing, resolution and decision rule? One endpoint cannot silently become survival, welfare, diagnosis, reproduction or long-term population performance.
  5. Denominators and missingness: Are starting counts, exclusions, losses, missing observations and analysis denominators reconciled? Unreported or changing denominators can alter the apparent direction, precision and applicability of a result.
  6. Transfer boundary: What is the nearest tempting aquarium claim that this source design cannot establish? Direct evidence can still be narrow, and adjacent evidence can be useful only while the inference remains visible.
  7. Examined material: Which specimens, localities, sexes, stages, types or sequence accessions were actually examined? A diagnosis applies to examined material and methods, not automatically to a trade-line photograph.
  8. Diagnostic characters: Which characters or loci distinguish the taxon, and were alternatives explicitly compared? Color alone may be variable, convergent or unrelated to the diagnostic character.
  9. Name history: Were synonyms, historical combinations, type material and later revisions checked? An older title can describe a population that later work placed in another taxon.
  10. Consumer identification limit: Can the required character or method be observed reliably in an ordinary live-animal image? A valid taxonomic method may still be unavailable to a keeper examining one photograph.

Read the complete appraisal framework.

Where it is used

Where this result is compared

These governed comparisons show why this record can appear to conflict with another result without electing a winner or hiding unresolved uncertainty.

Reuse the reviewed citation boundary

Download CSL-JSON or download RIS. Both retain this record's support, limitation and review note.

Challenge a transcription, interpretation or missing boundary. A challenge changes the record only after editorial review.