You are here » home advanced search search results Cyrtodactylus soudthichaki

Cyrtodactylus soudthichaki LUU, CALAME, NGUYEN, BONKOWSKI & ZIEGLER, 2015

Can you confirm these amateur observations of Cyrtodactylus soudthichaki?

Add your own observation of
Cyrtodactylus soudthichaki »

We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: Google images

Higher TaxaGekkonidae, Gekkota, Sauria, Squamata (lizards: geckos) 
Subspecies 
Common NamesE: Soudthichak’s Bent-toed Gecko
Laotian: Soudthichak’s Ki Chiem 
SynonymCyrtodactylus soudthichaki LUU, CALAME, NGUYEN, BONKOWSKI & ZIEGLER 2015 
DistributionC Laos (Khammouane)

Type locality: Khun Don region (17°33.731’N, 104°52.360’E, elevation 167 m elevation) within Phou Hin Poun NPA, Khammouane Province, central Laos. Map legend:
Type locality - Type locality.
 
Reproduction 
TypesHolotype. VFU R.2015.18, adult male, collected during night time between 19:00 and 21:00 on 4 April 2015 by V. Q. Luu and T. Calame.
Paratypes. IEBR A.2015.34, adult female and NUOL R-2015.5, subadult male, bearing the same data as the holotype. 
CommentDiagnosis. The new species can be distinguished from all other members of the genus Cyrtodactylus from the mainland Indochina region by a combination of the following characters: adult SVL 69.2–70.0 mm; dorsal head and neck with dark blotches; nuchal loop present; dorsum with five brown bands between limb insertions; 19 or 20 irregular rows of dorsal tubercles; 32 or 33 ventral scale rows; ventrolateral folds present with distinct tubercles; dorsal surface of hind limbs with tubercles; 29 precloacal and femoral pores in a continuous row in males, precloacal pores absent in the female; enlarged femoral and precloacal scales present; 4 or 5 postcloacal tubercles; subcaudals transversely enlarged.

Sexual dimorphism. The female differs from the males by the absence of femoral and precloacal pores (versus 29 pores in males) and the absence of hemipenial swellings at the tail base (see Tables 1, 2 in LUU et al. 205).

Comparisons. In the following we compare the new species with its congeners from Laos and neighbouring countries from the mainland Indochina region, including Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand based on examination of specimens (see Appendix) and data obtained from the literature (Luu et al. 2014; Nazarov et al. 2014; Nguyen et al. 2014; Panitvong et al. 2014; Pauwels et al. 2014; Pauwels & Sumontha 2014; Schneider et al. 2014; Sumontha et al. 2015) (see Table 3).
Morphologically, Cyrtodactylus soudthichaki sp. nov. closely resembles C. jaegeri Luu, Calame, Bonkowski, Nguyen & Ziegler and C. roesleri Ziegler, Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen, Vu, Dang, Dinh & Schmitz in overall coloration and pattern. However, the new species can be distinguished from C. jaegeri by having fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 44 in C. jaegeri), more dorsal tubercle rows on body (19–20 versus 15–17 in C. jaegeri) and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (present in C. jaegeri), and from C. roesleri by having transverse dorsal bands between limb insertions with indentations in the posterior part of dorsal bands at the vertebral region (versus without indentations in C. roesleri) (see Ziegler et al. 2010), fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 34–40 in C. roesleri), more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 20–28 in C. roesleri), and the absence of femoral pores in the female (present in C. roesleri). For further distinguishing characters see Table 4 and Fig. 4. Cyrtodactylus soudthichaki sp. nov. has enlarged subcaudals, which are absent in the following species: C. bidoupimontis Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Phung, Nguyen, Hoang & Ziegler, C. buchardi David, Teynié & Ohler, C. bugiamapensis Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Phung, Nguyen, Hoang & Ziegler, C. cattienensis Geissler, Nazarov, Orlov, Böhme, Phung, Nguyen & Ziegler, C. cucdongensis Schneider, Phung, Le, Nguyen & Ziegler, C. cryptus Heidrich, Rösler, Vu, Böhme & Ziegler, C. huynhi Ngo & Bauer, C. irregularis (Smith), C. phuocbinhensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop, Macculloch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang, C. pseudoquadrivirgatus Rösler, Vu, Nguyen, Ngo & Ziegler, C. quadrivirgatus Taylor, C. ranongensis Sumontha, Pauwels, Panitvong, Kunya & Grismer, C. taynguyenensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop, Macculloch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang, C. thuongae Phung, van Schingen, Ziegler & Nguyen, C. vilaphongi, and C. ziegleri Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen & Ho.
The new species has femoral and precloacal pores in males and thus differs from the following species which do not possess such pores in males: C. angularis (Smith), C. badenensis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky, C. chauquangensis Hoang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Hoang & Dau, C. cucphuongensis Ngo & Chan, C. eisenmanae Ngo, C. grismeri Ngo, C. martini Ngo, C. nigriocularis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky, C. oldhami (Theobald), C. pageli Schneider, Nguyen, Schmitz, Kingsada, Auer & Ziegler, C. paradoxus (Darevsky & Szczerbak), C. puhuensis Nguyen, Yang, Le, Nguyen, Orlov, Hoang, Nguyen, Jin, Rao, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang, C. saiyok Panitvong, Sumontha, Tunprasert & Pauwels, C. samroiyot Pauwels & Sumontha, C. sanook Pauwels, Sumontha, Latinne & Grismer, C. spelaeus, C. sumonthai Bauer, Pauwels & Chanhome, C. teyniei, C. wayakonei, C. thirakhupti Pauwels, Bauer, Sumontha & Chanhome.
The new species differs from C. astrum Grismer, Wood, Quah, Anuar, Muin, Sumontha, Ahmad, Bauer, Wangkulangkul, Grismer & Pauwels by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 108.3 mm), and fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 31–38); from C. auribalteatus Sumontha, Panitvong & Deein by having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 38–40), and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 10–11); from C. bichnganae Ngo & Grismer by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 95.3–99.9 mm), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (versus present); from C. brevipalmatus (Smith) by having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 35–44), more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 22), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in females (versus present); from C. caovansungi Orlov, Nguyen, Nazarov, Ananjeva & Nguyen by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 90.4–94.0 mm), having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 38–44), and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 15); from C. chanhomeae Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels by having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 36–38), fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 32), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (versus present); from C. darevskii by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 84.6–100.0 mm), having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 38–46), and fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 38–44); from C. dumnuii Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 76.2–84.2 mm), having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 40), and femoral and precloacal pores in a continuous row in males (versus discontinuous row); from C. erythrops Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Panitvong, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 78.4 mm), having more ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 28), and femoral and precloacal pores in a continuous row in males (versus discontinuous row); from C. huongsonensis Luu, Nguyen, Do & Ziegler by having fewer ventral scale rows (21–23 versus 41–48), more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 21–23), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (versus present); from C. interdigitalis Ulber by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 80.0 mm), having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 37–42), and a slightly lower number of femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 30–32); from C. intermedius (Smith) by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 85.0 mm) and by having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 40–50); from C. jarujini Ulber by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 90.0 mm) and having fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 52–54); from C. khammouanensis by having fewer ventral scales (32–33 versus 32–38) and fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 40–44); from C. khelangensis Pauwels, Sumontha, Panitvong & Varaguttanonda by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 72.8–95.3 mm in C. khelangensis), femoral and precloacal pores in a continuous row in males (versus discontinuous row), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (versus present); from C. kingsadai Ziegler, Phung, Le & Nguyen by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 94.0 mm), having fewer ventral scales (32–33 versus 39–46), and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 0–16); from C. lekaguli Grismer, Wood, Quah, Anuar, Muin, Sumontha, Ahmad, Bauer, Wangkulangkul, Grismer & Pauwels and C. lomyenensis in having fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 30–36 in C. lekaguli and 39–40 in C. lomyenensis), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (versus present in C. lekaguli and C. lomyenensis); from C. multiporus by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 98.0 mm), having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 39–43), and fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 58–60); from C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler, Rösler, Herrmann & Vu by its smaller size (SVL reaching 70.0 mm versus 96.3 mm), having fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 32–42), and the absence of femoral and precloacal pores in the female (versus present); from C. takouensis Ngo & Bauer by its smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 74.7–81.1 mm), having fewer ventral scales (32–33 versus 39–40) and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 3–6); from C. tigroides Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels by having a smaller size (SVL 69.2–70.0 mm versus 74.3–83.2 mm) and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 21); and from C. yangbayensis Ngo & Chan by having fewer ventral scale rows (32–33 versus 39–46) and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (29 versus 4–14). 
EtymologyThis species is named in honour of Mr. Sisomphone Soudthichak, from the Natural Resources and Environment Department of Khammouane Province, Laos, who provided great support for our field research in Laos since 2013. 
References
  • Kwet, A. 2016. Liste der im Jahr 2015 neu beschriebenen Reptilien. Terraria-Elaphe 2016 (3): 56-67 - get paper here
  • LUU, VINH QUANG; THOMAS CALAME, Truong QUang Nguyen, MICHAEL BONKOWSKI & THOMAS ZIEGLER 2015. A new species of Cyrtodactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from the limestone forest of Khammouane Province, central Laos. Zootaxa 4058 (3): 388–402
 
External links  
Is it interesting? Share with others:

As link to this species use URL address:

http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/species?genus=Cyrtodactylus&species=soudthichaki

without field 'search_param'. Field 'search_param' is used for browsing search result.



Please submit feedback about this entry to the curator