Diploderma menghaiense LIU, HOU, WANG, ANANJEVA & RAO, 2020

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

Higher Taxa	Agamidae (Draconinae), Sauria, Iguania, Squamata (lizards)
Subspecies
Common Names	E:Menghai Mountain Lizard Chinese: Mìng Ha?i Pân Xî, Meng Hai Long Xi (勐海龙蜥)
Synonym	Diploderma menghaiense LIU, HOU, WANG, ANANJEVA & RAO 2020 Japalura varcoae — ZHAO & JIANG 1966: 129 Japalura yunnanensis — YANG et al 1980: 263 Japalura varcoae — KOU & ZHANG 1987: 362 Japalura yunnanensis — JIANG 1992: 31 Japalura varcoae — YANG 1993: 135 Japalura yunnanensis — ZHAO & YANG 1997: 169 – 170 Japalura varcoae — ZHAO et al. 1999: 128 – 131 Japalura yunnanensis — ZHAO 1999: 131 – 133 Japalura yunnanensis — HE & ZHOU 2002: 166 Japalura varcoae — HE & ZHOU 2002: 166 Japalura varcoae — LI et al 2005: 74 Japalura varcoae — YANG 2008: 202 Japalura yunnanensis — YANG 2008: 202 – 203 Japalura yunnanensis — MANTHEY & DENZER 2012: 39 Japalura varcoae — LIU & YANG 2015: 377 Japalura varcoae — ZHANG et al 2019: 116 Japalura varcoae — LIU & MA 2019: 135 Diploderma yunnanense — WANG 2019: 492
Distribution	China (Yunnan) Type locality: on the border with Xiding Zone of Menghai Natural Nature Reserve (21°54;18’’ N 100°00’18’’ E, 1968 m a.s.l. elevation), Xiding Township, Menghai County, Xishuangbanna Prefecture, Yunan Province, China.
Reproduction
Types	Holotype: KIZ-2019067, adult male, collected on 14 July, 2019 by Shuo Liu. Paratypes: KIZ-2019068-69 (adult females), KIZ-2019071 (adult male), L0030 (adult male), collecting data the same as for holotype; HM-2015001-2 (adult males) and HM-2015003-4 (adult females), collected in 28 July, 2015 by Mian Hou, Jian Wang, and Axel Hernandez in Menghun Town (21°48’22’’ N 100°27’46’’ E, 1742 m a.s.l. elevation), Menghai County, Xishuangbanna Prefecture, Yunan Province, China (Fig. 4).
Diagnosis	Diagnosis. Tympanum concealed; gular pouch distinct; tail long, TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL; 9 scales including the first supralabials contacted the rostral; T4S 26 – 31; nuchal crest strongly developed; coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow; chin region white, scales of gular region white with orange edges and interstitial skin of gular region orange; background color of body yellowish white in males and green or light brown in females; males with a pair of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward and downward on the lateral of the anterior half of body (Table 3 in Liu et al. 2020). Sexual dimorphism. Males and females of D. menghaiense, differ by 1) gular fold absent as opposed to distinct; 2) the cloaca and the base of tail is distinctly enlarged as opposed to relatively slender; 3) nuchal crest distinctly enlarged as opposed to almost uniform as other dorsal crests scales; 4) have bright and broad yellow lateral stripes as opposed to light and narrow whitish stripes; 5) ventral color pale white as opposed to green (Fig. 8 in Liu et al. 2020). Comparisons. The most obvious differences between Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. and other congeners of the genus Diploderma as below: Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. batangense by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabials contacted the rostral as opposed to 7; 2) nasals separated from rostral by one small scale as opposed to 2; 3) 6 – 8 supralabials as opposed to 10 – 11; 4) 7 – 9 infralabials as opposed to 10 – 12; 5) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to eye; 6) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding two times; 7) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 8) gular spot orange as opposed to bluish gray or watchet blue; 9) background color of body yellowish white in males and green or light brown in females as opposed to dark brown and grayish brown; 10) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Li et al., 2001; Wu et al., 2005). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. brevicauda by having the following combination of characters: 1) nasals separated from rostral by one small scale as opposed to two; 2) nasals contact with first supralabial as opposed to not contact; 3) with gular pouch as opposed to absent; 4) MD 30 – 34 as opposed to 34 – 38; 5) T4S 26 – 31 as opposed to 16 – 20; 6) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding 1.5 times; 7) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist with smooth edge on the lateral body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis with much zigzag lower edge (Manthey et al., 2012). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. brevipes by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales contacted the rostral as opposed to 7; 2) 6 – 8 supralabials as opposed to 10 – 11; 3) with gular pouch as opposed to without; 4) nuchal crest include 8 scales and developed as opposed to 6 – 7 and weakly; 5) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to not reach; 6) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 7) black stripes from posterior edge of orbit downward to the corner of mouth as opposed to absent; 8) background color of body yellowish white in males as opposed to bluish green; 9) males with a pair of continuous yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward on the waist as opposed to interrupted yellow strips to the crotch (Gressitt, 1936; Ota, 1989b; Shang and Lin, 2001; Shang et al., 2009). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. chapaense by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales contacted the rostral as opposed to 8; 2) MD 30–34 as opposed to 35–41; 3) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the middle area of orbit without claw; 4) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.0 – 2.5; 5) gular spot orange as opposed to yellow; 6) males with a pair of continuous yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward on the waist as opposed to interrupted yellow strips to the crotch (Bourret, 1937; Ota and Weidenhöfer, 1992; Wang et al., 2018a). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. drukdaypo by having the following combination of characters: 1) the first supralabial contacts with nasals as opposed to separated by 1 scale; 2) 6 – 8 supralabials as opposed to 9 – 10; 3) 7 – 9 infralabials as opposed to 9–10;4)TAL2.4–2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding 1.75 times; 5) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on lateral side of body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Wang et al., 2019a). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. dymondi by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales contacted the rostral as opposed to 8; 2) tympanum concealed as opposed to completely naked; 3) gular pouch distinct as opposed to absent; 4) MD 30 – 34 as opposed to 41 – 51; 5) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to oral cavity bluish black and tongue light flesh color; 6) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on lateral side of body as opposed to parallel green strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Boulenger, 1906; Deng and Jiang, 1988; Wang et al., 2019c). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. fasciatum by having the following combination of characters: 1) nasals separated from rostral by one small scale as opposed to one large scale; 2) gular pouch distinct as opposed to absent; nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 7; 3) dorsal crest developed as opposed to very indistinct; 4) HLLGSVL more than 73% as opposed to not exceeding 69%; 5) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding 1.8 times; 6) background color of body yellowish white in males as opposed to green or dark green; 7) male with a pairs of yellow strips on lateral body as opposed to without lateral strips (Mertens, 1926; Smith, 1935; Hu and Zhao, 1966; Ota, 2000; Ananjeva et al., 2007). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. flaviceps by having the following combination of characters: 1) rostral separated from nasals by one scale as opposed to two; 2) 6 – 8 supralabials and the first one or two contact with nasals as opposed to 9 – 10 and not contact; 3) 7 – 9 infralabials as opposed to 10 – 12; 4) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 9 – 10; 5) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the posterior edge of orbit; 7) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding 2 times; 7) gular spot orange as opposed to dark reticulated pattern; 8) males with a pair of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist of lateral side of body as opposed to a pair of horizontal yellow strips (Barbour and Dunn, 1919; Smith, 1935; Zhao et al., 1999; Zhao, 2003; Manthey et al., 2012). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. grahami by having the following combination of characters: 1) the first one or two supralabials contact with nasals as opposed to the first supralabial contacts or does not contact; 2) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 6; 3) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding 2 times; 4) with a pair of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on lateral side of body as opposed to absent (Stejneger, 1924; Zhao, 2003). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. hamptoni by having the following combination of characters: 1) HL 1.56 – 1.63 times of HW as opposed to 1.5; 2) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 6; 3) gular scales almost equal to ventrals as opposed to distinctly smaller, only about 50% size of ventrals; 4) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the posterior edge of orbit; 5) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.2 times; 6) dark streaks absent on throat as opposed to with dark streaks; 7) male with yellow strips on lateral body as opposed to white (Smith, 1935). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. iadinum by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabial contacted the rostral as opposed to 8; 2) the first supralabial contacts with nasals as opposed to not contact; 3) MD30–34 as opposed to 35–46; 4) T4S 26–31 as opposedto19–25; 5) TAL 2.4–2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 1.73 – 1.98; 6) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 7) gular region unstriped with orange gular spot as opposed to some dark stripes and bluish gular spot; 8) background color of body yellowish white in males as opposed to emerald; 9) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to parallel bluish-green strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Wang et al., 2016). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. laeviventre by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabial contacted the rostral as opposed to 6; 2) the first supralabial contacts with nasals as opposed to not contact; 3) MD30–34 as opposed to 57–59; 4) T4S 26–31 as opposed to 22 – 26; 5) scale texture of ventral scales strongly keeled as opposed to smooth; 6) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not reach two times; 7) gular region unstriped as opposed to vermiculate; 8) males with a pair of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to waist on the lateral body as opposed to a pair of horizontal yellow strips (Wang et al., 2016). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. luei by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabial contacted the rostral and separated with nasals by one small scale as opposed to 11 and contact; 2) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 10; 3) MD30 – 34 as opposed to 43; 4) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the central area of orbit without claw; 5) T4S 26 – 31 as opposed to 25 – 26; 6) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 7) gular region unstriped with orange gular spot as opposed to powderblue with yellowish green patterns; 8) background color of body yellowish white in males as opposed to bluish green; 9) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side body as opposed to four broad light yellowish green spots on the lateral side of body (Ota et al., 1998; Shang and Lin, 2001; Shang et al., 2009). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. makii by having the following combination of characters: 1) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 7; 2) dorsal crest includes 43 scales as opposed to 41; 3) T4S 26–31 as opposed to 22–23; 4) TAL 2.4–2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.24 times; 5) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 6) gular region unstriped as opposed to having black vermiculations; 7) background color of body yellowish white in males as opposed to green; 8) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to four transvers bands (Ota, 1989a; Shang and Lin, 2001; Shang et al., 2009). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. micangshanense by having the following combination of characters: 1) the first supralabial contacts with nasals as opposed to no contact; 2) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the neck; 3) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.09 – 2.31 times; 4) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 5) background color of body green in females as opposed to brown or grayish brown; 6) male with a pairs of smooth edged yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to a pair of horizontal yellow strips with zigzag edge (Song, 1987; Li et al., 2000; Gao and Qing, 2001; Zhao, 2003). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. ngoclinense by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabial contact the rostral as opposed to 6; 2) the first supralabial contacts with nasals as opposed to no contact; 3) gular pouch distinct as opposed to absent; nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 7; 4) dorsal crest includes 43 scales as opposed to 54–56;5) T4S26–31 as opposed to 24– 26; 6) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 1.74 – 2.39 times (Ananjeva et al., 2017). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. polygonatum by having the following combination of characters: 1) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 9; 2) T4S 26 – 31 as opposed to 22 – 23; 3) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.1 times; 4) gular region white as opposed to yellow; 5) background color of body yellowish white in males as opposed to green; 6) the lateral strips of male from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist as opposed to groin (Hallowell, 1861; Stejneger, 1907; Van Denburgh, 1912; Ota, 1991, 2003; Kuo et al., 2007; Shang and Lin, 2001; Shang et al., 2009). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. slowinskii by having the following combination characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabials contacted the rostral as opposed to 4; 2) tympanum concealed as opposed to completely naked; 3) gular pouch developed as opposed to inconspicuous; 4) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 11; 5) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 6) black stripes from posterior edge of orbit downward to the corner of mouth as opposed to absent; 7) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to parallel green or bluish-green strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Rao et al., 2017). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. splendidum by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabial contacted the rostral as opposed to 8; 2) 7 – 9 infralabials as opposed to 10; 3) dorsal crest includes 43 scales as opposed to 57; 4) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the nasals; 5) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 6) gular region white, unstriped and with an orange gular spot as opposed to grayish white, marbled with few dark patterns and without colored gular spot; 7) black stripes from posterior edge of orbit downward to the corner of mouth as opposed to absent; 8) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to parallel green or green, bluish-green strips or blue strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Barbour and Dunn, 1919; Zhao, 2003). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. swild by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabial contacted the rostral and separated from nasals by one scale as opposed to 7 and 2; 2) the first one or two pairs of supralabial contact with nasals as opposed to not contact; 3) tympanum concealed as opposed to naked; 4) dorsal crest includes 43 scales as opposed to 40; 5) MD30 – 34 as opposed to 35–44; 6) T4S 26–31 as opposed to 23– 28; 7) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.2 – 2.3 times; 8) gular region white, unstriped with an orange gular spot as opposed to pale white, marbled with several dark flecks and without colored gular spot; 9) male with a pairs of yellow strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to parallel green strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis (Wang et al., 2019c). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. swinhonis by having the following combination of characters: 1) rostral separated with nasals by one scale as opposed to touched; 2) 6 – 8 supralabials as opposed to 10; 3) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 7; 4) TAL 2.4–2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2–2.4 times; 5) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 6) gular region white, unstriped with a orange gular spot as opposed to gray, marbled with some white spots and without colored gular spot (Stejneger, 1898, 1910; Ota, 1988, 1991; Shang and Lin, 2001; Kuo et al., 2007; Shang et al., 2009). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. varcoae by having the following combination characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabials contacted the rostral as opposed to 7; 2) the first one or two pairs of supralabial contact with nasals as opposed to not contact or the first pair slight contact; 3) tympanum concealed as opposed to naked; 4) the fourth toe with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the area between tympanum and neck; 5) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to not exceeding 2 times; 6) gular region unstriped with an orange gular spot as opposed to marbled with some short dark stripes and without colored gular spot; 7) the ventral side of trunk in male grayish white as opposed to fresh yellow; 8) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist with smooth lateral side of body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis with much zigzag edge (Boulenger, 1918; Smith, 1935; Zhao et al., 1999; Yang and Rao, 2008). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. vela by having the following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales including the first supralabials contacted the rostral as opposed to 7 – 8; 2) nasals separated from rostral by one scale as opposed to two; 3) the first one or two pair of supralabials contact with nasals as opposed to not contact; 4) 7 – 9 infralabials as opposed to 9 – 11; 5) nuchal crest includes 8 scales as opposed to 9; 6) MD30–34 as opposed to 42–51; 7) TAL 2.4–2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 1.9 – 2.1 times; 8) gular region white, unstriped with an orange gular spot as opposed to grayish white, marbled with some dark stripes and without colored gular spot; 9) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist with smooth lateral side of body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis with zigzag edge (Wang et al., 2015). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. yulongense by having following combination of characters: 1) 9 scales ncluding the first supralabials contacted the rostral as opposed to 6 – 7; 2) nasals separated from rostral by one scale as opposed to 2–3; 3) 6–8 supralabials with the first one or two pair contacted with nasals as opposed to 8 – 10 and not contact; 4) MD30–34 as opposed to 35–44; 5) T4S 26–31 as opposed to 20–26; 6) TAL 2.4–2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.2 – 2.3 times; 7) gular spot orange as opposed to green; 8) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist with smooth lateral body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis with zigzag edge (Manthey et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2017) Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. yunnanense by having the following combination of characters: 1) the first two pairs of chin shields contact with infralabials as opposed to only the first pair contact; 2) MD30–34 as opposed to 39–46; 3) the fourth toe includes claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the area between orbital and nasals; 4) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 2.8 – 3.0 times; 5) the area of gular spot white with orange interstitial skin and the edge of scales as opposed to completely orange; 6) an enlarged black band from the posterior edge of orbit extended to anterior edge of tympanic as opposed to absent; 7) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist on the lateral side of body as opposed to reach the groin (Anderson, 1878; Smith, 1935; Zhao et al., 1999; Yang and Rao, 2008; this study). Diploderma menghaiense sp. nov. differs from D. zhaoermii by having the following combination of characters: 1) nasals separated from rostral by one scale as opposed to two; 2) 6 – 8 supralabials as opposed to 9 – 10; 3) the first one or two pairs of supralabials contact with nasals as opposed to not contact; 4) the fourth toe of male with claw reaching angle of mouth when hindlimbs adpressed forward as opposed to reaching the middle area of eye; 5) TAL 2.4 – 2.8 times of SVL as opposed to 1.7 – 2.1 times; 6) coloration of oral cavity and tongue vitelline yellow as opposed to light flesh color; 7) gular spot orange as opposed to green; 8) an enlarged black band from the posterior edge of orbit extended to anterior edge of tympanic as opposed to absent; 9) male with a pairs of strips from the posterior area of shoulder downward to the waist with smooth lateral side of body as opposed to parallel strips from the posterior area of shoulder backward to the pelvis with zigzag edge (Gao and Hou, 2002; Zhao et al., 1999; Zhao ed., 2003).
Comment
Etymology	The specific epithet refers to the Menghai County where the new species was discovered.
References	He X. R. and Zhou X. Q. 2002. The fauna and geographical regionalization of reptiles in Yunnan Province. [in Chinese] Sichuan J. Zool., 21(3): 161 – 169 Li Z. J., Cao G. H., Zhou F., Jiang W. G., and Hu J. S. 2005. A report on amphibians and reptiles of Nabanhe National Nature Reserve in Yunnan,Ý in: Zhou K. Y. and Ji X. (eds.), Herpetologica Sinica X. [in Chinese] Jilin People’s Publishing House, Changchun, pp. 68 – 75 Liu F. and Yang S. H. (eds.), 2015. A Comprehensive Scientific Investigation of Naban River Watershed National Nature Reserve. [in Chinese] Yunnan Publishing Group Corporation, Yunnan Science and Technology Press, Kunming, China Liu G. L. and Ma J. (eds.) 2019. Menghai County Nature Reserve of Xishuangbanna. [in Chinese] Yunnan Publishing Group Corporation, Yunnan Science and Technology Press, Kunming, China Liu, Shuo; Mian Hou, Jian Wang, Natalia Borisovna Ananjeva, Dingqi Rao 2020. A New Species of Diploderma (Squamata: Sauria: Agamidae) from Yunnan Province, China. Russian Journal of Herpetology 27 (3): 127-148 - get paper here MANTHEY, U. & W. DENZER 2012. Bemerkungen zur Verbreitung von Japalura yunnanensis ANDERSON, 1878 (Squamata: Agamidae: Draconinae). Sauria 34 (2): 35-40 - get paper here Wang K, Lyu ZT, Wang J, Qi S, Che J 2022. Updated Checklist and Zoogeographic Division of the Reptilian Fauna of Yunnan Province, China. Biodiversity Science 30 (4): 21326, 1–31 - get paper here Yang D. H. (ed.), 1993. Fauna of Xishuangbanna. [in Chinese] Yunnan Univ. Publishing Co. Ltd., Kunming, China Yang D. T., Su C. Y., and Li S. M. 1980. A preliminary study on reptiles in southern Yunnan. [in Chinese with English abstract] Acta Zool. Sinica, 26(3): 262 – 265 Zhang L., Zong C. M., Yang K. F., and Wang Q. Y. 2019. Preliminary survey and faunal analysis of amphibians and reptiles in Menghai Nature Reserve. [in Chinese with English abstract]. Forest Invent. Plan., 44(3): 114 – 119 Zhao E. M. and Jiang Y. M. 1966. A survey and checklist of Yunnan reptiles. [in Chinese] Chinese J. Zool. 8(3): 127 – 130 Zhao E. M., Zhao K., Zhou K. Y. 1999. Fauna Sinica, Reptilia, Vol. 2, Squamata, Lacertilia. [In Chinese] Beijing: Science Press, 394 pp Zhao, E & Yang, D. 1997. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Hengduan Mountain Region. [in Chinese] Science Press, Beijing, 303 pp.
External links	National Center for Biotechnology Information Google images

Is it interesting? Share with others:

Please submit feedback about this entry to the curator