Eremias isfahanica RASTEGAR-POUYANI, HOSSEINIAN, RAFIEE, KAMI, RAJABIZADEH & WINK, 2016
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Eremias isfahanica?
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search:
|Higher Taxa||Lacertidae, Eremiadinae, Sauria, Lacertoidea, Squamata (lizards)|
|Synonym||Eremias isfahanica RASTEGAR-POUYANI, HOSSEINIAN, RAFIEE, KAMI, RAJABIZADEH & WINK 2016|
|Distribution||Iran (Ghomishloo National Park)|
Type locality: 54 km northwest of Isfahan city, near Hassanije village within the Ghomishloo National Park (32.84° N, 51.10° E; 1200 m elevation)
|Types||Holotype: SUHC 3012, male, collected during August 2009 by S. Rafiei. Paratypes. Four males (SUHC 3008, 3009, 3013, 3014) and two females (SUHC 3016, 3017) were collected from the same locality as the holotype.|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis. Eremias isfahanica sp. nov. is different from most morphologically similar species within the subgenera Eremias and Aspidorhinus as follows: It can be distinguished from E. suphani by lacking the extension of gular scales in contact with the second inframaxillary scales (Fig. 3C). It can be distinguished from E. lalezharica by having fewer gular scales (NGS, 27–33 versus 33–40), additional inframaxillaries (five versus four), and higher number of femoral pores (NFP, 18–23 versus 16–18). It can be distinguished from E. papenfussi by having higher number of gular scales (NGS, 27–33 versus 24–28) and collar scales (NCS, 12–15 versus 10–12). It can be distinguished from E. montana by having fewer mid-dorsum scales (NDS, 55–63 versus 63–67), additional transverse rows of ventral plates (NVS, 30–31 versus 27–28), and gulars (NGS, 27–33 versus 23–25). It can be distinguished from E. velox by having higher number of mid-dorsum scales (NDS, 55–63 versus 46–56) and the absence of a lateral dark-margined blue ocellus.|
|Comment||Habitat: wide desert area that consists of small scattered shrubs, and the habitat is a sub-mountainous region extending to the mountains. Overgrazing is the most important destructive factor in the area because the region has low plant diversity.|
Abundance: only known from its original description (Meiri et al. 2017).
|Etymology||The epithet isfahanica was attained from the species locality (Isfahan Province, Central Iran).|
Is it interesting? Share with others:
As link to this species use URL address:
without field 'search_param'. Field 'search_param' is used for browsing search result.