Liolaemus tandiliensis VEGA, BELLAGAMBA & LOBO, 2008
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Liolaemus tandiliensis?
|Higher Taxa||Liolaemidae, Iguania, Sauria, Squamata (lizards)|
|Synonym||Liolaemus tandiliensis VEGA, BELLAGAMBA & LOBO 2008|
|Distribution||Argentina (Buenos Aires Province: Tandilia Mountain Range)|
Type locality: “Sierra Los Difuntos, Partido General, Pueyrredón, Buenos Aires Province, Argentina (37 ̊53’30”S; 57 ̊50’30”W)".
|Types||Holotype: MLP (Univ. Nac. Mar del Plata) No. 0561.|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis. Liolaemus tandiliensis is a small, slender, Liolaemus morphologically similar to small forms of the alticolor group (sensu Lobo and Espinoza, 1999, 2004) that may be distinguished from all other members of this group with the exception of L. gracilis, L. saxatilis, L. sanjuanensis, L. robermertensi, L. chiliensis and L. nitidus in having lateral nuchal scales that are keeled and imbricate and lacking longitudinal and antegular folds. Adittionally, L. tandiliensis differs from L. saxatilis, L. sanjuanensis, L. robermertensi, L. chiliensis and L. nitidus except L. gracilis in having a differentiated auricular scale and two or three enlarged scales on the anterior margin of ear. The new species can be distinguished from the similar species L. gracilis, in the following characters: narrow, light (cream, whitish, yellowish) dorsolateral stripes in L. gracilis less evident or absent in L. tandiliensis; dorsolateral stripes in L. gracilis bordered medially by a thin black line absent in L. tandiliensis; small and segmental paravertebral spots present in L. tandiliensis, absent in L. gracilis; large black spots on the flanks (sometimes nearly completely fused) present in L. tandiliensis, absent in L. gracilis (Fig. 1); ventral scales of L. gracilis are without pigmentation and ventral surfaces (throat, neck, chest, and abdomen) are whitish, grayish-plumb in L . tandiliensis; 70% of L. tandiliensis have keeled or slightly keeled temporal scales, keeled in 6% of L. gracilis; auricular scale more often differenti- ated in L. gracilis (94%) than in L. tandiliensis (41%); mean number of dorsal head scales and infradigital lamellae of the 4th. toe of hand in L. tandiliensis significantly greater than in L. gracilis; mean number of enlarged supraocular scales, neck scales and scales between frontal and superciliaries significantly smaller than in L. gracilis (Table 1); and L. tandiliensis with a significantly longer snout– vent length and head width but significantly smaller maximum body width and tail length than L. gracilis (Table 2 in VEGA et al. 2008).|