Phylogenetics, classification, and biogeography of the treefrogs.

Zootaxa 4104(1):. 1–109.
ISSN: 1175-5326 (print edition; ISSN: 1175-5334 (online edition). http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4104.1.1.

Abstract:

A phylogenetic analysis of sequences from 503 species of hylid frogs and four outgroup taxa resulted in 16,128 aligned sites of 19 genes. The molecular data were subjected to a maximum likelihood analysis that resulted in a new phylogenetic tree of treefrogs. A conservative new classification based on the tree has (1) three families composing an unranked taxon, Arboranae, (2) nine subfamilies (five resurrected, one new), and (3) six resurrected generic names and five new generic names. Using the results of a maximum likelihood timetree, times of divergence were determined. For the most part these times of divergence correlated well with historical geologic events. The arboranan frogs originated in South America in the Late Mesozoic or Early Cenozoic. The family Pelodryadidae diverged from its South American relative, Phyllomedusidae, in the Eocene and invaded Australia via Antarctica. There were two dispersals from South America to North America in the Paleogene. One lineage was the ancestral stock of Acris and its relatives, whereas the other lineage, subfamily Hylinae, differentiated into a myriad of genera in Middle America.

Auszug:

“Hyla infrafrenata” Günther is a highly enigmatic species. Molecular data (99% bootstrap support) clearly place it in Nyctimystes, whereas morphologically it is like Litoria in having a orizontal pupil and no reticulations on the palpebral membrane (Tyler 1968). Furthermore, unlike species of Nyctimystes, it breeds in ponds and has pigmented eggs that hatch into tadpoles with small  anteroventral mouths (Anstis 2013).Last, it is the only pelodryadid known to have a chromosome complement of 2n = 24 (Menzies & Tippet 1976). The taxonomic position  of  this  species  awaits  more data and further interpretation to determine if it belongs in Litoria, Nyctimystes, or in its own genus; if the latter, the generic name Sandyrana Wells and Wellington is available

The identity of the South African toad Sclerophrys capensis Tschudi, 1838 (Amphibia, Anura).

PeerJ 4(e1553): 1–13.

Abstract:

The toad species Sclerophrys capensis Tschudi, 1838 was erected for a single specimen from South Africa which has never been properly studied and allocated to a known species. A morphometrical and morphological analysis of this specimen and its comparison with 75 toad specimens referred to five South African toad species allowed to allocate this specimen to the species currently known as Amietophrynus rangeri. In consequence, the nomen Sclerophrys must replace Amietophrynus as the valid nomen of the genus, and capensis as the valid nomen of the species. This work stresses the usefulness of natural history collections for solving taxonomic and nomenclatural problems.

The amphibian tree of life.

Frost, Darrel R.; Grant, Taran.; Faivovich, Julián.; Bain, Raoul H.; Haas, Alexander.; Haddad, Celio F. B.; De Sa, Rafael O.; Channing, A.; Wilkinson, Mark.; Donnellan, Stephen C.; Raxworthy, Christopher J.; Campbell, Jonathan A.; Blotto, Boris L.; Moler, Paul.; Drewes, Robert C.; Nussbaum, Ronald A.; Lynch, John D.; Green, David M.; Wheeler, Ward C.

Bulletin of the AMNH ; no. 297

URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2246/5781
Supplemental Material: http://dx.doi.org/10.5531/sd.sp.13

Zusammenfassung:

"The evidentiary basis of the currently accepted classification of living amphibians is discussed and shown not to warrant the degree of authority conferred on it by use and tradition. A new taxonomy of living amphibians is proposed to correct the deficiencies of the old one. This new taxonomy is based on the largest phylogenetic analysis of living Amphibia so far accomplished. We combined the comparative anatomical character evidence of Haas (2003) with DNA sequences from the mitochondrial transcription unit H1 (12S and 16S ribosomal RNA and tRNA[superscript Valine] genes, [approximately equal to] 2,400 bp of mitochondrial sequences) and the nuclear genes histone H3, rhodopsin, tyrosinase, and seven in absentia, and the large ribosomal subunit 28S ([approximately equal to] 2,300 bp of nuclear sequences; ca. 1.8 million base pairs; x [arithmetic mean] = 3.7 kb/terminal). The dataset includes 532 terminals sampled from 522 species representative of the global diversity of amphibians as well as seven of the closest living relatives of amphibians for outgroup comparisons. The primary purpose of our taxon sampling strategy was to provide strong tests of the monophyly of all 'family-group' taxa. All currently recognized nominal families and subfamilies were sampled, with the exception of Protohynobiinae (Hynobiidae). Many of the currently recognized genera were also sampled. Although we discuss the monophyly of genera, and provide remedies for nonmonophyly where possible, we also make recommendations for future research. A parsimony analysis was performed under Direct Optimization, which simultaneously optimizes nucleotide homology (alignment) and tree costs, using the same set of assumptions throughout the analysis. Multiple search algorithms were run in the program POY over a period of seven months of computing time on the AMNH Parallel Computing Cluster. Results demonstrate that the following major taxonomic groups, as currently recognized, are nonmonophyletic: Ichthyophiidae (paraphyletic with respect to Uraeotyphlidae), Caeciliidae (paraphyletic with respect to Typhlonectidae and Scolecomorphidae), Salamandroidea (paraphyletic with respect to Sirenidae), Leiopelmatanura (paraphyletic with respect to Ascaphidae), Discoglossanura (paraphyletic with respect to Bombinatoridae), Mesobatrachia (paraphyletic with respect to Neobatrachia), Pipanura (paraphyletic with respect to Bombinatoridae and Discoglossidae/Alytidae), Hyloidea (in the sense of containing Heleophrynidae; paraphyletic with respect to Ranoidea), Leptodactylidae (polyphyletic, with Batrachophrynidae forming the sister taxon of Myobatrachidae + Limnodynastidae, and broadly paraphyletic with respect to Hemiphractinae, Rhinodermatidae, Hylidae, Allophrynidae, Centrolenidae, Brachycephalidae, Dendrobatidae, and Bufonidae), Microhylidae (polyphyletic, with Brevicipitinae being the sister taxon of Hemisotidae), Microhylinae (poly/paraphyletic with respect to the remaining non-brevicipitine microhylids), Hyperoliidae (para/polyphyletic, with Leptopelinae forming the sister taxon of Arthroleptidae + Astylosternidae), Astylosternidae (paraphyletic with respect to Arthroleptinae), Ranidae (paraphyletic with respect to Rhacophoridae and Mantellidae). In addition, many subsidiary taxa are demonstrated to be nonmonophyletic, such as (1) Eleutherodactylus with respect to Brachycephalus; (2) Rana (sensu Dubois, 1992), which is polyphyletic, with various elements falling far from each other on the tree; and (3) Bufo, with respect to several nominal bufonid genera. A new taxonomy of living amphibians is proposed, and the evidence for this is presented to promote further investigation and data acquisition bearing on the evolutionary history of amphibians. The taxonomy provided is consistent with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1999). Salient features of the new taxonomy are (1) the three major groups of living amphibians, caecilians/Gymnophiona, salamanders/Caudata, and frogs/Anura, form a monophyletic group, to which we restrict the name Amphibia; (2) Gymnophiona forms the sister taxon of Batrachia (salamanders + frogs) and is composed of two groups, Rhinatrematidae and Stegokrotaphia; (3) Stegokrotaphia is composed of two families, Ichthyophiidae (including Uraeotyphlidae) and Caeciliidae (including Scolecomorphidae and Typhlonectidae, which are regarded as subfamilies); (4) Batrachia is a highly corroborated monophyletic group, composed of two taxa, Caudata (salamanders) and Anura (frogs); (5) Caudata is composed of two taxa, Cryptobranchoidei (Cryptobranchidae and Hynobiidae) and Diadectosalamandroidei new taxon (all other salamanders); (6) Diadectosalamandroidei is composed of two taxa, Hydatinosalamandroidei new taxon (composed of Perennibranchia and Treptobranchia new taxon) and Plethosalamandroidei new taxon; (7) Perennibranchia is composed of Proteidae and Sirenidae; (8) Treptobranchia new taxon is composed of two taxa, Ambystomatidae (including Dicamptodontidae) and Salamandridae; (9) Plethosalamandroidei new taxon is composed of Rhyacotritonidae and Xenosalamandroidei new taxon; (10) Xenosalamandroidei is composed of Plethodontidae and Amphiumidae; (11) Anura is monophyletic and composed of two clades, Leiopelmatidae (including Ascaphidae) and Lalagobatrachia new taxon (all other frogs); (12) Lalagobatrachia is composed of two clades, Xenoanura (Pipidae and Rhinophrynidae) and Sokolanura new taxon (all other lalagobatrachians); (13) Bombinatoridae and Alytidae (former Discoglossidae) are each others' closest relatives and in a clade called Costata, which, excluding Leiopelmatidae and Xenoanura, forms the sister taxon of all other frogs, Acosmanura; (14) Acosmanura is composed of two clades, Anomocoela (5 Pelobatoidea of other authors) and Neobatrachia; (15) Anomocoela contains Pelobatoidea (Pelobatidae and Megophryidae) and Pelodytoidea (Pelodytidae and Scaphiopodidae), and forms the sister taxon of Neobatrachia, together forming Acosmanura; (16) Neobatrachia is composed of two clades, Heleophrynidae, and all other neobatrachians, Phthanobatrachia new taxon; (17) Phthanobatrachia is composed of two major units, Hyloides and Ranoides; (18) Hyloides comprises Sooglossidae (including Nasikabatrachidae) and Notogaeanura new taxon (the remaining hyloids); (19) Notogaeanura contains two taxa, Australobatrachia new taxon and Nobleobatrachia new taxon; (20) Australobatrachia is a clade composed of Batrachophrynidae and its sister taxon, Myobatrachoidea (Myobatrachidae and Limnodynastidae), which forms the sister taxon of all other hyloids, excluding sooglossids; (21) Nobleobatrachia new taxon, is dominated at its base by frogs of a treefrog morphotype, several with intercalary phalangeal cartilages--Hemiphractus (Hemiphractidae) forms the sister taxon of the remaining members of this group, here termed Meridianura new taxon; (22) Meridianura comprises Brachycephalidae (former Eleutherodactylinae + Brachycephalus) and Cladophrynia new taxon; (23) Cladophrynia is composed of two groups, Cryptobatrachidae (composed of Cryptobatrachus and Stefania, previously a fragment of the polyphyletic Hemiphractinae) and Tinctanura new taxon; (24) Tinctanura is composed of Amphignathodontidae (Gastrotheca and Flectonotus, another fragment of the polyphyletic Hemiphractinae) and Athesphatanura new taxon; (25) Athesphatanura is composed of Hylidae (Hylinae, Pelodryadinae, and Phyllomedusinae, and excluding former Hemiphractinae, whose inclusion would have rendered this taxon polyphyletic) and Leptodactyliformes new taxon; (26) Leptodactyliformes is composed of Diphyabatrachia new taxon (composed of Centrolenidae (including Allophryne) and Leptodactylidae, sensu stricto, including Leptodactylus and relatives) and Chthonobatrachia new taxon; (27) Chthonobatrachia is composed of a reformulated Ceratophryidae (which excludes such genera as Odontophrynus and Proceratophrys and includes other taxa, such as Telmatobius) and Hesticobatrachia new taxon; (28) Hesticobatrachia is composed of a reformulated Cycloramphidae (which includes Rhinoderma) and Agastorophrynia new taxon; (29) Agastorophrynia is composed of Bufonidae (which is partially revised) and Dendrobatoidea (Dendrobatidae and Thoropidae); (30) Ranoides new taxon forms the sister taxon of Hyloides and is composed of two major monophyletic components, Allodapanura new taxon (microhylids, hyperoliids, and allies) and Natatanura new taxon (ranids and allies); (31) Allodapanura is composed of Microhylidae (which is partially revised) and Afrobatrachia new taxon; (32) Afrobatrachia is composed of Xenosyneunitanura new taxon (the 'strange-bedfellows' Brevicipitidae (formerly in Microhylidae) and Hemisotidae) and a more normal-looking group of frogs, Laurentobatrachia new taxon (Hyperoliidae and Arthroleptidae, which includes Leptopelinae and former Astylosternidae); (33) Natatanura new taxon is composed of two taxa, the African Ptychadenidae and the worldwide Victoranura new taxon; (34) Victoranura is composed of Ceratobatrachidae and Telmatobatrachia new taxon; (35) Telmatobatrachia is composed of Micrixalidae and a worldwide group of ranoids, Ametrobatrachia new taxon; (36) Ametrobatrachia is composed of Africanura new taxon and Saukrobatrachia new taxon; (37) Africanura is composed of two taxa: Phrynobatrachidae (Phrynobatrachus, including Dimorphognathus and Phrynodon as synonyms) and Pyxicephaloidea; (38) Pyxicephaloidea is composed of Petropedetidae (Conraua, Indirana, Arthroleptides, and Petropedetes), and Pyxicephalidae (including a number of African genera, e.g. Amietia (including Afrana), Arthroleptella, Pyxicephalus, Strongylopus, and Tomopterna); and (39) Saukrobatrachia new taxon is the sister taxon of Africanura and is composed of Dicroglossidae and Aglaioanura new taxon, which is, in turn, composed of Rhacophoroidea (Mantellidae and Rhacophoridae) and Ranoidea (Nyctibatrachidae and Ranidae, sensu stricto). Many generic revisions are made either to render a monophyletic taxonomy or to render a taxonomy that illuminates the problems in our understanding of phylogeny, so that future work will be made easier. These revisions are: (1) placement of Ixalotriton and Lineatriton (Caudata: Plethodontidae: Bolitoglossinae) into the synonymy of Pseudoeurycea, to render a monophyletic Pseudoeurycea; (2) placement of Haideotriton (Caudata: Plethodontidae: Spelerpinae) into the synonymy of Eurycea, to render a monophyletic Eurycea; (3) placement of Nesomantis (Anura: Sooglossidae) into the synonymy of Sooglossus, to assure a monophyletic Sooglossus; (4) placement of Cyclorana and Nyctimystes (Anura: Hylidae: Pelodryadinae) into Litoria, but retaining Cyclorana as a subgenus, to provide a monophyletic Litoria; (5) partition of 'Limnodynastes' (Anura: Limnodynastidae) into Limnodynastes and Opisthodon to render monophyletic genera; (6) placement of Adenomera, Lithodytes, and Vanzolinius (Anura: Leptodactylidae) into Leptodactylus, to render a monophyletic Leptodactylus; (7) partition of 'Eleutherodactylus' (Anura: Brachycephalidae) into Craugastor, 'Eleutherodactylus', 'Euhyas', 'Pelorius', and Syrrhophus to outline the taxonomic issues relevant to the paraphyly of this nominal taxon to other nominal genera; (8) partition of 'Bufo' (Anura: Bufonidae) into a number of new or revived genera (i.e., Amietophrynus new genus, Anaxyrus, Chaunus, Cranopsis, Duttaphrynus new genus, Epidalea, Ingerophrynus new genus, Nannophryne, Peltophryne, Phrynoidis, Poyntonophrynus new genus; Pseudepidalea new genus, Rhaebo, Rhinella, Vandijkophrynus new genus); (9) placement of the monotypic Spinophrynoides (Anura: Bufonidae) into the synonymy of (formerly monotypic) Altiphrynoides to make for a more informative taxonomy; (10) placement of the Bufo taitanus group and Stephopaedes (as a subgenus) into the synonymy of Mertensophryne (Anura: Bufonidae); (11) placement of Xenobatrachus (Anura: Microhylidae: Asterophryinae) into the synonymy of Xenorhina to render a monophyletic Xenorhina; (12) transfer of a number of species from Plethodontohyla to Rhombophryne (Microhylidae: Cophylinae) to render a monophyletic Plethodontohyla; (13) placement of Schoutedenella (Anura: Arthroleptidae) into the synonymy of Arthroleptis; (14) transfer of Dimorphognathus and Phrynodon (Anura: Phrynobatrachidae) into the synonymy of Phrynobatrachus to render a monophyletic Phrynobatrachus; (15) placement of Afrana into the synonymy of Amietia (Anura: Pyxicephalidae) to render a monophyletic taxon; (16) placement of Chaparana and Paa into the synonymy of Nanorana (Anura: Dicroglossidae) to render a monophyletic genus; (17) recognition as genera of Ombrana and Annandia (Anura: Dicroglossidae: Dicroglossinae) pending placement of them phylogenetically; (18) return of Phrynoglossus into the synonymy of Occidozyga to resolve the paraphyly of Phrynoglossus (Anura: Dicroglossidae: Occidozyginae); (19) recognition of Feihyla new genus for Philautus palpebralis to resolve the polyphyly of ''Chirixalus''; (20) synonymy of 'Chirixalus' with Chiromantis to resolve the paraphyly of 'Chirixalus'; (21) recognition of the genus Babina, composed of the former subgenera of Rana, Babina and Nidirana (Anura: Ranidae); (22) recognition of the genera Clinotarsus, Humerana, Nasirana, Pelophylax, Pterorana, Pulchrana, and Sanguirana, formerly considered subgenera of Rana (Anura: Ranidae), with no special relationship to Rana (sensu stricto); (23) consideration of Glandirana (Anura: Ranidae), formerly a subgenus of Rana, as a genus, with Rugosa as a synonym; (24) recognition of Hydrophylax (Anura: Ranidae) as a genus, with Amnirana and most species of former Chalcorana included in this taxon as synonyms; (25) recognition of Hylarana (Anura: Ranidae) as a genus and its content redefined; (26) redelimitation of Huia to include as synonyms Eburana and Odorrana (both former subgenera of Rana); (27) recognition of Lithobates (Anura: Ranidae) for all species of North American 'Rana' not placed in Rana sensu stricto (Aquarana, Pantherana, Sierrana, Trypheropsis, and Zweifelia considered synonyms of Lithobates); (28) redelimitation of the genus Rana as monophyletic by inclusion as synonyms Amerana, Aurorana, Pseudoamolops, and Pseudorana, and exclusion of all other former subgenera; (29) redelimitation of the genus Sylvirana (Anura: Ranidae), formerly a subgenus of Rana, with Papurana and Tylerana included as synonyms"--P. 8-10.

Phylogeography And Systematic Revision Of The Egyptian Cobra (Serpentes: Elapidae: Naja Haje) Species Complex, With The Description Of A New Species From West Africa.

Zootaxa. 2236. 1-25. 10.5281/zenodo.190424.

Abstract:

We use a combination of phylogenetic analysis of mtDNA sequences and multivariate morphometrics to investigate the phylogeography and systematics of the Egyptian cobra (Naja haje) species complex. Phylogenetic analysis of mitochondrial haplotypes reveals a highly distinct clade of haplotypes from the Sudano–Sahelian savanna belt of West Africa, and that the haplotypes of Naja haje arabica  form the sister group of North and East African N. h. haje. Multivariate morphometrics confirm the distinctness of the Arabian populations, which are consequently recognised as a full species, Naja arabica Scortecci. The Sudano-Sahelian populations are also found to represent a morphologically distinct taxon, and thus a separate species, which we describe as Naja senegalensis sp. nov. The new species differs from all other members of the N. haje complex by a combination of colour pattern and scalation characteristics (especially higher numbers of scale rows around the neck), and the possession of a unique clade of mtDNA haplotypes. The distribution of the new species includes savanna areas of West Africa, from Senegal to western Niger and Nigeria.

Phylogeography And Systematic Revision Of The Egyptian Cobra (Serpentes: Elapidae: Naja Haje) Species Complex, With The Description Of A New Species From West Africa (PDF Download Available).

Full text available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228655725_Phylogeography_And_Systematic_Revision_Of_The_Egyptian_Cobra_Serpentes_Elapidae_Naja_Haje_Species_Complex_With_The_Description_Of_A_New_Species_From_West_Africa [accessed Oct 4, 2017].

Coalescent Species Delimitation in Milksnakes (Genus Lampropeltis) and Impacts on Phylogenetic Comparative Analyses.

Systematic Biology (63) 2: 231–250. 01.03.2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syt099

Abstract:

Both gene-tree discordance and unrecognized diversity are sources of error for accurate estimation of species trees, and can affect downstream diversification analyses by obscuring the correct number of nodes, their density, and the lengths of the branches subtending them. Although the theoretical impact of gene-tree discordance on evolutionary analyses has been examined previously, the effect of unsampled and cryptic diversity has not. Here, we examine how delimitation of previously unrecognized diversity in the milksnake (Lampropeltis triangulum) and use of a species-tree approach affects both estimation of the Lampropeltis phylogeny and comparative analyses with respect to the timing of diversification. Coalescent species delimitation indicates that L. triangulum is not monophyletic and that there are multiple species of milksnake, which increases the known species diversity in the genus Lampropeltis by 40%. Both genealogical and temporal discordance occurs between gene trees and the species tree, with evidence that mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) introgression is a main factor. This discordance is further manifested in the preferred models of diversification, where the concatenated gene tree strongly supports an early burst of speciation during the Miocene, in contrast to species-tree estimates where diversification follows a birth–death model and speciation occurs mostly in the Pliocene and Pleistocene. This study highlights the crucial interaction among coalescent-based phylogeography and species delimitation, systematics, and species diversification analyses.

Species delimitation in the continental forms of the genus Epicrates (Serpentes, Boidae) integrating phylogenetics and environmental niche models.

PLoS One. 2011; 6(9): e22199.
Published online 2011 Sep 2. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0022199

Abstract:

Until recently, the genus Epicrates (Boidae) presented only one continental species, Epicrates cenchria, distributed in Central and South America, but after a taxonomic revision using morphologic characters five species were recognized: E. cenchria, E. crassus, E. maurus, E. assisi, and E. alvarezi. We analyzed two independent data sets, environmental niche models and phylogeny based on molecular information, to explore species delimitation in the continental species of this genus. Our results indicated that the environmental requirements of the species are different; therefore there are not evidences of ecological interchangeability among them. There is a clear correlation between species distributions and the major biogeographic regions of Central and South America. Their overall distribution reveals that allopatry or parapatry is the general pattern. These evidences suggest that habitat isolation prevents or limits gene exchange among them. The phylogenetic reconstruction showed that the continental Epicrates are monophyletic, being E. alvarezi the sister species for the remaining two clades: E. crassus-E. assisi, and E. maurus-E. cenchria. The clade grouping the continental Epicrates is the sister taxon of the genus Eunectes and not of the Caribbean Epicrates clade, indicating that the genus is paraphyletic. There is a non-consistent pattern in niche evolution among continental Epicrates. On the contrary, a high variation and abrupt shifts in environmental variables are shown when ancestral character states were reconstructed on the sequence-based tree. The degree of genetic and ecological divergence among continental Epicrates and the phylogenetic analyses support the elevation to full species of E. cenchria, E. crassus, E. maurus, E. assisi, and E. alvarezi.

The lizards of the Anolis equestris complex in Cuba.

Stud. Fauna Curaçao and Carib. Is. 39 (134):1-86.

Aus der Einleitung:

NOBLE & HASSLER (1935) named Anolis luteogularis from a long series from western Cuba. This species
was relegated to subspecific status under A. equestris by BARBOUR & SHREVE (1935), who also named A. e. hassleri from the Isla de Pinos (based upon two specimens) and A. e. noblei from eastern Cuba (based upon three specimens) SCHWARTZ (1958) named A. e. thomasi from Camagüey Province and later (1964) reviewed the status of the species in Oriente Province, naming A. e. smallwoodi, A. e. palardis, A. e. baracoae, A. e. galeifer, and A. e. saxuliceps. As presently understood, there are ten subspecies of A. equestris throughout Cuba and the Isla de Pinos. Comments by SCHWARTZ (1964) indicated that there were several Oriente specimens which did not agree with the concepts of the subspecies defined by him and suggested that there was still a great deal to be learned about the distribution and variation in A. equestris at least in Oriente, the physiographically and ecologically most diverse of the Cuban provinces.

... The discovery of two “subspecies” (equestris and luteogularis) occurring syntopically in the same wooded area suggested that perhaps the entire complex needed serious restudy and revision. ... Additional material, in the United States National Museum, indicates that sympatry between equestris and luteogularis occurs elsewhere but has gone unrecognized until now.

... Our final arrangement, which fits the facts as presently demonstrated, is that “Anolis equestris” is a composite of five species: A. luteogularis, A. equestris, A. noblei, A. smallwoodi, and A. baracoae. The rationale for this division will be discussed in detail in the present paper.

A new bush anole (Iguanidae, Polychrotinae, Polychrus) from the upper Marañon basin, Peru, with a redescription of Polychrus peruvianus (Noble, 1924) and additional information on Polychrus gutturosus Berthold, 1845.

ZooKeys 141 : 79–107, doi: 10.3897/zookeys.141.1678.

Abstract:

We herein describe a new colorful species of Polychrus with a conspicuous sexual dimorphism from the dry forest of the northern portion of Región de La Libertad, Peru. The new species differs from all other Polychrus species, in that this species has very small dorsal scales and thus a higher number of scales around midbody and in the middorsal line from behind the occipital scales to the level of the posterior edge of the thigh. Furthermore, we redescribe Polychrus peruvianus whose original description is short and lacks information on intraspecific variation and sexual dimorphism. Also, we add some information on intraspecific variation and ecology of Polychrus gutturosus. Finally, we synonymize Polychrus spurrelli Boulenger with Polychrus gutturosus.

A phylogenetic analysis and taxonomy of iguanian lizards (Reptilia: Squamata).

University of Kansas. Museum of Natural History. Miscellaneous Publication. Nr. 81.
65 Seiten, 24 s/w-Abbildungen oder Landkarten.
University of Kansas, Lawrence KS 1989, ISBN 0-89338-033-4.

Taxonomic checklist of chameleons (Squamata: Chamaeleonidae).

Vertebrate Zoology 65 (2): 167-246

Abstract:

Due to their often brilliant colours, diurnal activity, and fascinating behaviours there is a long lasting high demand for chameleons in the pet trade. Accordingly, the international trade of most chameleon genera is regulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Floras (CITES). In order to facilitate operating and control of these regulations by national and international nature conservation authorities an updated taxonomic checklist of the family Chamaeleonidae (202 species plus 23 subspecies in 12 genera) is provided. A comparison with the last taxonomic checklist published in 1997 (132 species plus 39 subspecies in six genera) demonstrates the enormous progress in chameleon taxonomy and systematics in recent years. Although a substantial number of the currently accepted taxa are well defined, the taxonomy of several species and subspecies is in need of revision and many new species both from Africa and Madagascar still await their scientific description.

glaw-biblio