Crotaphytus antiquus AXTELL & WEBB, 1995
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Crotaphytus antiquus?
|Higher Taxa||Crotaphytidae, Iguania, Sauria, Squamata (lizards)|
|Common Names||E: Venerable Collared Lizard|
S: Cachorón de Coahuila
|Synonym||Crotaphytus antiquus AXTELL & WEBB 1995|
Crotaphytus antiquus — FLORES-VILLELA & CANSECO-MÁRQUEZ 2004
|Distribution||Mexico (S Coahuila)|
Type locality: 2.1 km N-1.7 km E Vizcaya (25° 46' 04" N, 103° 11' 48" W, elevation 1100 ± m) in the Sierra Texas, Coahuila, México.
|Types||Holotype: UTEP 15900.|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis: Crotaphytus antiguucs can be distinguished from all other Crotaphytus by the presence of gravid coloration that is limited to the anterior 15 to 50 percent of the portion of the abdomen between the forelimb and hindlimb insertions and a much larger total number of white reticulations that enclose melanic pigments. Crotaphytus antiquus can be distinguished further from C. reticulatus on the basis of its postfemoral mite pockets, sexual dichromatism of the dorsal color pattern such that females have much more subdued coloration than males, and the presence of paired, melanic mucrons on the distal subcaudal scales. It can be distinguished from all Crotaphytus except C. nebrius and western populations of C. collaris by its small melanic inguinal patches (patches absent in C. reticulatus, patches much larger and extending onto the ventral surface of the abdomen in C. bicinctores, C. dickersonae,C.grismeri,C.insularis,andC.vestigium. It can be distinguished further from all Crotaphytus except C. reticitlatus by its dorsal pattern composed of a white, net-like reticulum, some of which enclose melanic pigments. It can be distinguished further from all other Crotaphytus except C. reticulatus and C. insularis by the the weakly defined collar markings of females. It can be distinguishedfurtherfromC.collarisbyitsventrallycomplete anterior collar marking in adult males. It can be distinguished further from C. collaris and C. nebrius by the presence in adult males of black pigments extending from the gular fold anteriorly into the central gular area. From C. dickersonae. C. bicinctores,C.grismeri,C.insularis,andC.vestigium, it can be distinguished further by its round, rather than laterally compressed, tail that lacks a white dorsal vertebral stripe (present in adult males of the latter five species). Finally, from C. bicinctores, C. grismeri,C.insularis,and C.vestigiurn,C.antiquus can be distinguished by its black buccal lining.|
In addition to the characters listed above, C. antiquus can usually be distinguished from all other Crotaphytus (with the possible exception of C. dickersonae)on the basis of a series of scales that either completely separates or nearly separates the supraorbital semicircles. In nine of 16 C. antiquus, the supraorbital semicircles are separated by a row of small scales, while in six of 16 specimens, a single pair of scales is in contact, and in one specimen, two scales are in contact. In all other Crotaphytus except C. dickersonae, at least two scales of the supraorbital semicircles were in contact and this was a relatively rare condition (more than two scales in contact in six of eight C. bicinctores, 26 of 27 C. collaris. four of four C. grismeri, 15 of 20 C.insularis, nine of ten C. nebrius, eight of eight C. reticulafus,and six of seven C. vestigium). Croraphytus dickersonae is considered most similar with respect to this character to C. antiquus only because one specimen had one pair of scales of the semicircle in narrow contact and three of four additional specimens had two scales in contact. Thus, the prevalent condition of C. antiquus (supraorbital semicircles completely separated by a row of scales) was not observed in any other species of Crotaphytus, although the condition may very well occur in C. dickersonae given a larger sample size. Thus, C. antiquus and other Crotaphytus overlap but little with respect to this feature (McGuire 1996: 69).
|Etymology||From the latin antiquus, meaning old or of antiquity. The name was chosen by the authors because it "incorporates (their) interpretation regarding the probable ancientness of the lizard." (McGuire 1996: 69).|