You are here » home advanced search Hemidactylus lanzai

Hemidactylus lanzai ŠMÍD, MAZUCH, NOVÁKOVÁ, MODRY, MALONZA, ABDIRAHMAN-ELMI, CARRANZA, AND MORAVEC, 2020

Can you confirm these amateur observations of Hemidactylus lanzai?

Add your own observation of
Hemidactylus lanzai »

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

Higher TaxaGekkonidae, Gekkota, Sauria, Squamata (lizards: geckos) 
Subspecies 
Common Names 
SynonymHemidactylus lanzai ŠMÍD, MAZUCH, NOVÁKOVÁ, MODRY, MALONZA, ABDIRAHMAN-ELMI, CARRANZA, AND MORAVEC 2020
Hemidactylus isolepis — BOULENGER 1896: 213
Hemidactylus isolepis — BOULENGER 1897: 277 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — CALABRESI 1923: 151
Hemidactylus isolepis — LOVERIDGE 1923: 844
Hemidactylus isolepis — PARKER 1936: 601
Hemidactylus isolepis — LOVERIDGE 1947: 105 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — DREWES 1972: 5
Hemidactylus isolepis — LANZA 1983: 203 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — LANZA 1990: 415 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — SPAWLS & ROTICH 1997: 64
Hemidactylus isolepis — SPAWLS et al. 2002: 87
Hemidactylus isolepis — LARGEN & SPAWLS 2006: 46 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — LARGEN & SPAWLS 2010: 298 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — RÖSLER 2015: 14 (in part)
Hemidactylus isolepis — SPAWLS et al. 2018: 89
Hemidactylus sp. 10 — ŠMÍD et al. 2013: 3
Hemidactylus sp. 10 — ŠMÍD et al. 2013: 81
Hemidactylus sp. 10 — GARCIA-PORTA et al. 2016: 3
Teratolepis isolepis — PARKER 1942: 35 
DistributionEthiopia

Type locality: Ethiopia, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region, 30 km SW of Arbore village, western bank of Chew Bahir Lake (4.844°N, 36.737°E, 628 m elevation)  
Reproduction 
TypesHolotype: NMP 6V 75857, adult male, 14 July 2014, collected by T. Mazuch and K. Kadlečková.
Paratypes: NMP6V 74448, subadult, Kenya, Marsabit County, Gas (3.065°N, 36.831°E, 460 m), September 2004, collected by D. Modrý. NMP6V 74449, NMP6V 74451/1–3, adult male (NMP6V 74451/1) and three sub-adults, Kenya, Marsabit County, 20 km E of Lake Turkana (2.532°N, 36.822°E, 760 m), September 2004, collected by D. Modrý. NMP6V 74450/1–3, one juvenile (74450/3) and two subadults, Kenya, Marsabit County, Kalacha, (3.136°N, 37.426°E, 375 m), September 2004, collected by D. Modrý. NMP6V 75656–75657, subadults, Kenya, Marsabit County, Korante Plain (1.977°N, 37.033°E, 920 m), September 2004, collected by D. Modrý. NMP6V 75743, adult female, Ethiopia, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region, 36 km E of Omorate on road to Turmi (4.739°N, 36.331°E, 565 m), 11 April 2016, collected by F. Kovařík. NMP75858, adult female, Ethiopia, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region, 23 km SE of Turmi (4.87°N, 36.648°E, 1133 m), 6 July 2013, collected by P. Novák and V. Trailin. MorphoBank picture numbers for the holotype, paratypes and 16 of the 36 referred specimens are provided in Supplemental Table S1. 
DiagnosisDiagnosis. A species of the African radiation of the arid clade of Hemidactylus (sensu ŠMÍD et al. 2013a) with the following morphological characteristics: (1) small size, SVL 29.6–41.0 mm in males, 34.1–42.4 mm in females; (2) moderately robust head, head depth 42–54% of head length, head width 68–81% of head length; (3) relatively short tail, tail length 103.8–116.2% of SVL; (4) uppermost nasals mostly in broad contact (exceptionally in point contact or separated); (5) large anterior postmentals in contact with the first and second infralabials, less frequently with the first infralabial alone; (6) seven to nine supralabials; (7) five to eight infralabials; (8) absence of enlarged dorsal tubercles; (9) dorsal scales homogeneous, smooth, and imbricate; (10) absence of tail segments or whorls; (11) subcaudals slightly enlarged or heterogeneous in size, imbricate; (12) 4–7 lamellae under the first finger, 6–9 lamellae under the fourth finger, 4–7 lamellae under the first toe, and 9–12 lamellae under the fourth toe; (13) four to eight precloacal pores in males; (14) presence of lateral postanal tubercles; (15) in life pinkish to pale brownish dorsally with irregular dark-brown spots and smaller white spots; the white spots are usually confined to several (up to five) adjoining scales, whereas the dark-brown spots are larger and tend to coalesce into transverse bands. Both dark and white dorsal spots present also on limbs, hands, and tail. A narrow dark-brown stripe runs from nostril across the eye to temporal area and is bordered from above by a pale stripe. A conspicuous dark brown triangular spot present on snout (Fig. 6 in ŠMÍD et al. 2019). Venter white or pinkish.

Comparisons. The new species can be distinguished from its sister species, H. isolepis, by the following characters: smaller size (SVL 29.6–42.4 mm vs. 32.0–48.9 mm), narrower, pointier and less bulky head, short free distal phalanges of digits (vs. moderately long); original tail narrow and smoothly tapering (vs. slightly swollen behind cloaca); and color pattern (white patches of dorsal scales randomly distributed in H. lanzai vs. forming clear white transverse bands in H. isolepis; the dark stripe running from snout across the eye is well delineated and bordered by a pale stripe from above in H. lanzai vs. the dark temporal stripe irregular and its edges poorly defined in H. isolepis; a distinct dark spot in the middle of the snout in H. lanzai vs. pale top of the snout in H. isolepis). Morphological differences between H. lanzai and the rest of the species of the African radiation of the arid clade of Hemidactylus follow (the most prominent morphological characters given for each species; see also Table 2): from H. afarensis, H. barbierii, H. bavazzanoi, H. citernii, H. foudaii, H. puccionii, H. sinaitus, and H. tropidolepis by the absence of dorsal tubercles (vs. tubercles present); from H. barbouri, H. laevis, H. somalicus, and H. squamulatus by having dorsal scales homogeneous in size (vs. heterogeneous); from H. funaiolii and H. klauberi by having dorsal scales smooth (vs. dorsal scales keeled); from H. megalops by having dorsal scales imbricate (vs. dorsal scales granular); from H. albopunctatus, H. curlei, and H. ophiolepoides by not having distinctly enlarged subcaudal scales (vs. subcaudals enlarged); from H. modestus by a lower number of precloacal pores (4–8 vs. 14–15); from H. ophiolepis by having a pair of conspicuous lateral postanal tubercles (vs. tubercles inconspicuous). 
CommentPublication date: while the paper gives the volume as 33 (2019), the fine print on page 45 says “Published on 13 March 2020”.

Distribution: See map in Smid et al. 2020: 32 (Fig. 3). 
Etymology 
References
  • Šmíd, Jiří, Mazuch, Tomáš, Nováková, Lucie, Modrý, David, Malonza, Patrick K., Abdirahman Elmi, Hassan Sh, Carranza, Salvador & Moravec, Jiří 2020. Phylogeny and Systematic Revision of the Gecko Genus Hemidactylus from the Horn of Africa (Squamata: Gekkonidae). Herpetological Monographs 33 (1): 26-47 [paper says 2019 on title page, but the fine print on page 45 says “Published on 13 March 2020] - get paper here
 
External links  
Is it interesting? Share with others:


Please submit feedback about this entry to the curator