You are here » home advanced search Mabuya guadeloupae

Mabuya guadeloupae HEDGES & CONN, 2012

Can you confirm these amateur observations of Mabuya guadeloupae?

Add your own observation of
Mabuya guadeloupae »

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

Higher TaxaScincidae, Mabuyinae, Scincoidea, Sauria, Squamata (lizards) 
Subspecies 
Common NamesGuadeloupe Skink 
SynonymMabuya guadeloupae HEDGES & CONN 2012: 104
Eumeces mabouia — DUMÉRIL & BIBRON, 1839:646 (part)
Mabouya cepedii — GRAY, 1845:95 (part)
Mabuya mabouia — BARBOUR, 1914:321 (part)
Mabuya sp. indet. — BARBOUR, 1930:105
Mabuya mabouia — BARBOUR, 1935:129 (part)
Mabuya mabouya mabouya — DUNN, 1936:544 (part)
Mabuya mabouia — BARBOUR, 1937:147 (part)
Mabuya mabouia — UNDERWOOD, 1963:83 (part)
Mabuya mabouya mabouya — SCHWARTZ & THOMAS, 1975:141 (part)
Mabuya mabouya mabouya — MACLEAN et al., 1977:38 (part)
Mabuya mabouya mabouya — SCHWARTZ & HENDERSON, 1988:150 (part)
Mabuya mabouya mabouya — SCHWARTZ & HENDERSON, 1991:457 (part)
Mabuya bistriata — POWELL et al., 1996:82 (part)
Mabuya bistriata — MALHOTRA & THORPE, 1999:84 (part)
Mabuya sloanii — MAYER & LAZELL, 2000:883 (part)
Mabuya mabouya — BREUIL, 2002:267 (part)
Mabuya mabouya — MIRALLES, 2005:49 (part)
Mabuya mabouya — HENDERSON & POWELL, 2009:292 (part) 
DistributionGuadeloupe (Basse-Terre)

Type locality: Guadeloupe" (no specific locality, but assumed to be Basse-Terre).  
Reproduction 
TypesHolotype: FMNH 213, an adult female, "Guadeloupe" (no specific locality, but assumed to be Basse-Terre; see Remarks), collected by Charles B. Cory in ca. 1892.
Paratypes (n = 2). Guadeloupe. FMNH 212, an adult female with same data as holotype; FMNH 214, an adult male, "Guadeloupe" (no specific locality), collected by W. W. Brown, Jr, in 1892. 
DiagnosisDiagnosis. Mabuya guadeloupae sp. nov. is characterized by (1) maximum SVL in males, 94.3 mm; (2) maximum SVL in females, 106 mm; (3) snout width, 2.63–2.99% SVL; (4) head length, 16.4–17.3% SVL; (5) head width, 11.6–12.0% SVL; (6) ear length, 1.28–1.82% SVL; (7) toe-IV length, 8.77–9.72% SVL; (8) prefrontals, two; (9) supraoculars, three; (10) supraciliaries, four; (11) frontoparietals, two; (12) supralabial below the eye, five; (13) nuchal rows, one; (14) dorsals, 60–63; (15) ventrals, 67–70; (16) dorsals + ventrals, 128–133; (17) midbody scale rows, 32–34; (18) finger-IV lamellae, 14; (19) toe-IV lamellae, 18–21; (20) finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae, 32–35; (21) supranasal contact, N; (22) prefrontal contact, N; (23) supraocular-1/frontal contact, Y; (24) parietal contact, Y; (25) pale middorsal stripe, Y; (26) dark dorsolateral stripe, Y (short, a thin line on nape); (27) dark lateral stripe, Y; (28) pale lateral stripe, Y; and (29) palms and soles, dark (Tables 3–5).

Within the Genus Mabuya, M. guadeloupae sp. nov. and the other three species inhabiting Guadeloupe and its islets (M. cochonae sp. nov., M. desiradae sp. nov., and M. grandisterrae sp. nov.), here placed in the M. guadeloupae sp. nov. species group, have a similarly-proportioned frontonasal scale that distinguishes them from other species in the genus (Fig. 34). Species in the M. guadeloupae sp. nov. species group have a longer frontonasal compared with M. montserratae sp. nov. (frontonasal length/head length 0.176–0.199 versus 0.165– 0.168) and a shorter frontonasal compared with other species in the genus (0.176–0.199 versus 0.205–0.239 in M. dominicana, M. hispaniolae sp. nov., and M. mabouya). In addition, M. guadeloupae sp. nov. differs from M. dominicana by having a shorter, wider supranasal scale (supranasal length/supranasal width 3.17–3.29 versus 4.57–6.57 in M. dominicana; Fig. 35). It differs from M. hispaniolae sp. nov. and M. montserratae sp. nov. in having a longer supraciliary-2 (supraciliary-2/supraciliary-3 length ratio 2.06–2.40 versus 1.39–1.66; Fig. 36). It differs from M. mabouya in having a narrower head (11.6–12.0% SVL versus 12.1–14.9% SVL), shorter toe (toe- IV length 8.77–9.72% SVL versus 10.2–12.5% SVL), dark dorsolateral and pale lateral stripes (absent in M. mabouya), and well-defined dorsolateral stripes (weakly-defined in M. mabouya).
Mabuya guadeloupae sp. nov. differs from M. cochonae sp. nov. in having a shorter head (16.4–17.3% SVL versus 18.7–19.1% SVL), a narrower head (11.6–12.0% SVL versus 12.8–13.1% SVL), a larger ear (ear length 1.28–1.82% SVL versus 1.02–1.12% SVL), a shorter toe (toe-IV length 8.77–9.72% SVL versus 11.1–11.6% SVL), more digital lamellae (finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae 32–35 versus 29–31), lack (versus presence) of supranasal contact, a shorter anterior loreal scale (1.28–1.36% SVL versus 2.26–2.47% SVL; Fig. 37A), a shorter interloreal suture (0.64–0.85% SVL versus 0.91–1.03% SVL; Fig. 37B), a shorter suture length between the upper secondary temporal and the parietal scale (1.68–1.98% SVL versus 2.12–2.29% SVL; Fig. 37C), a shorter supralabial-7 (1.36–1.44% SVL versus 1.68–1.87% SVL; Fig. 37D), and a pattern consisting of dark dorsolateral stripes and well-defined pale lateral and dorsolateral stripes (versus no dark dorsolateral stripes or well-defined pale lateral stripes). Mabuya guadeloupae sp. nov. differs from M. desiradae sp. nov. in having a shorter head (16.4–17.3% SVL versus 18.5–19.0% SVL), a narrower head (11.6–12.0% SVL versus 13.6% SVL), a shorter toe (toe-IV length 8.77–9.72% SVL versus 10.2–10.4% SVL), a shorter anterior loreal scale (1.28–1.36% SVL versus 1.70–1.99% SVL; Fig. 37A), a shorter interloreal suture (0.64–0.85% SVL versus 0.92–1.07% SVL; Fig. 37B), a shorter supralabial–7 scale (1.36–1.44% SVL versus 1.65–1.81% SVL; Fig. 37D), and a pattern consisting of dark dorsolateral stripes and well-defined pale lateral and dorsolateral stripes (versus no well-defined dark or pale dorsolateral stripes or pale lateral stripes in M. desiradae sp. nov., only weakly defined pale dorsolateral stripes). Mabuya guadeloupae sp. nov. differs from M. grandisterrae sp. nov. in having a narrower head (11.6–12.0% SVL versus 12.5–13.9% SVL), a shorter toe (toe-IV length 8.77–9.72% SVL versus 10.2–12.8% SVL), a higher supraciliary-2/supraciliary-3 length ratio (2.06–2.40 versus 1.67–1.79; Fig. 36), a shorter interloreal suture (0.64– 0.85% SVL versus 0.90–1.16% SVL; Fig. 37B), a shorter supralabial-7 scale (1.36–1.44% SVL versus 1.62–2.00% SVL; Fig. 37D), and a pattern consisting of dark dorsolateral stripes and well-defined pale lateral and dorsolateral stripes (versus no well-defined dark or pale dorsolateral stripes or pale lateral stripes in M. grandisterrae sp. nov.) [HEDGES & CONN 2012].
 
CommentConservation: extremely rare and possibly extinct. No living individual of any of these species has been seen in recent decades (Hedges et al. 2016).

Conservation: Critically Endangered and possibly extinct (CR A2ace).

Abundance: only known from its original description (Meiri et al. 2017). 
EtymologyThe species name (guadeloupae) is a feminine genitive singular noun, referring to the distribution of the species on Guadeloupe. In the past, the name "Guadeloupe" was used synonymously with Basse-Terre, where the type material was probably collected and the island where the species is thought to be endemic. 
References
  • Hedges, S.B. & Conn, C.E. 2012. A new skink fauna from Caribbean islands (Squamata, Mabuyidae, Mabuyinae). Zootaxa 3288: 1–244 - get paper here
  • Meiri, Shai; Aaron M. Bauer, Allen Allison, Fernando Castro-Herrera, Laurent Chirio, Guarino Colli, Indraneil Das, Tiffany M. Doan, Frank Glaw, Lee L. Grismer, Marinus Hoogmoed, Fred Kraus, Matthew LeBreton, Danny Meirte, Zoltán T. Nagy, Cristiano d 2017. Extinct, obscure or imaginary: the lizard species with the smallest ranges. Diversity and Distributions - get paper here
 
External links  
Is it interesting? Share with others:


Please submit feedback about this entry to the curator