Hypsilurus ornatus MANTHEY & DENZER, 2006
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Hypsilurus ornatus?
Hypsilurus ornatus
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Agamidae (Amphibolurinae), Sauria, Iguania, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | |
| Synonym | Hypsilurus ornatus MANTHEY & DENZER 2006: 30 |
| Distribution | Papua New Guinea (Southern Highlands Province) Type locality: Village Didessa, Mt. Bosavi (6°35’S 142°50’E), Southern Highlands Province; Papua New Guinea; |
| Reproduction | oviparous |
| Types | Holotype: ZSM 122/1979, adult female |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis: Medium sized, robust, long–tailed species with homogeneous dorsal scalation and a nearly continuous vertebral crest. A strongly enlarged plate below the tympanum, as well as a less strongly enlarged scales near the angle of the mouth; a row of enlarged submaxillaries present; anterior edge of the gular pouch without enlarged scales.Hypsilurus ornatus similar to H. binotatus and H. tenuicephalus, as well as H. papuensis. Hypsilurus ornatus differs from binotatus and tenuicephalus in showing a broader head HW/SVL 0.155 (vs. < 0.143), HW/HL 0.611 (vs. < 0.592), as well as the presence of dorsal bands (vs. absent); additionally from binotatus by a larger tympanum, T/E 1.15 (vs. ≤ 1.0) and from tenuicephalus by a nearly continuous vertebral crest (vs. with clear indentation near the nape); papuensis by a nearly continuous vertebral crest (vs. clearly discontinuous near the nape), additionally from p. papuensis and p. longicauda by a larger number of scales between infralabials and the row of enlarged submaxillaries 4 (vs. 2–3), as well as by the presence of only one plate below the tympanum (vs. > 3) and from papuensis ssp. A by a broader head HW/SVL 0.155 (vs. < 0.14), HW/HL 0.611 (vs. < 0.57) and by a larger tympanum T/E > 1.1 (vs. < 1.0); auritus, geelvinkianus, modestus, nigrigularis, magnus and bruijnii by the presence of a plate below the tympanum (vs. absent) and additionally from auritus, geelvinkianus, and nigrigularis by the presence of enlarged submaxillaries (vs. absent); schultzewestrumi and hikidanus by a smooth anterior edge of the gular pouch without enlarged scales (vs. saw–toothed edge with enlarged scales), as well as from schultzewestrumi by the absence of strongly enlarged gulars (vs. present) and significantly smaller plates below the tympanum; godeffroyi, macrolepis, longii and schoedei by a single isolated enlarged scale below the tympanum (vs. an indistinctly limited area of several or numerous enlarged scales); boydii, spinipes and dilophus by a homogeneous dorsal scalation (vs. heterogeneous) and a longer tail TL/SVL > 2.9 (vs. < 2.3) (Manthey & Denzer 2006: 30). |
| Comment | Abundance: only known from the type specimen (Meiri et al. 2017). |
| Etymology | Named after the conspicuous colourful spot on the sides (Lat. ornatus = adorned, decorated). |
| References |
|
| External links |