Apterygocampus epinnulatus

Animalia/Chordata/Syngnathiformes/Syngnathidae/Apterygocampus

At a glance

Occurrence records5

Data sources8

Biological traits6

DNA specimens1

eDNA detections1

Sources8 archives

Databases and archives Apterygocampus epinnulatus's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation3 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility5 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI1 eDNA detections↗

BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics1 specimens↗

Open Tree of LifeOpenTreephylogeny backbone↗

WikidataWikimedia Foundationstructured facts↗

Catalogue of LifeCOLtaxonomy↗

On this page5 sections

Every layer below draws on the sources above — open one to explore it, or use ← → to move between tabs.

NarrativeWikipediaarticle

Traits & measurements1 literature sources6 traits

Occurrence & distributionGBIF5 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 1 countries1 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD1 specimens

01Narrative

Apterygocampus epinnulatus is a species of pipefish native to the Pacific Ocean where it occurs around the countries of the Philippines, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. This species grows to a length of 3 cm SL. This species is the only known member of its genus.

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

SourcesFishBase

Size & morphology1

Body length3 cm

Habitat & environment2

Habitat saltwateryes

Habitat zonedemersal

Other traits3

Depth max10 m

Depth min3 m

Vulnerability10

05DNA & barcoding1 specimens

A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Apterygocampus epinnulatus has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens1

BINs1

Marker genes1

eDNA detections1

Countries1

Marker genes sequenced

★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.

COI-5P

animal barcode

08Occurrence & distribution

Record type5 records

Wild obs. + sensor4

Museum / vouchered1

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO20 km²

Wildobservation + sensor

Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.

Coordinate accuracy100% within 1 km

≤100 m 1≤1 km 3

4 georeferenced

Open the mapobservation + sensor4

Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence

Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.

Coordinate accuracy

no georeferenced coordinates · 1 records without

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1

Wildobservation + sensor

Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.

09Environmental DNA1 detections

Where the DNA of Apterygocampus epinnulatus was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.

Signal

Detections DNA found1

Studies independent surveys1

Countries1

Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections

Where its DNA was found

0 of 1 detections have coordinates

Open the map1 country0

How strong is each trace?

DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.

Modelled climatemodelled

−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C

Temperature median26.6 °C 26.6–26.6

Seasonal swing summer↔winter3.20 °C

Max temp (day)27.4 °C

Min temp (night)25.8 °C

Precipitation360 mm/mo

Air humidity63.5 %

Vapour deficit1,267 Pa

Cloud cover42.1 %

CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 1 detection point · median with p10–p90 · reflects where sampling happened, not only the true niche

How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.