Mabuya parviterrae HEDGES, LORVELEC, BARRÉ, BERCHEL, COMBOT, VIDAL & PAVIS, 2016
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Mabuya parviterrae?
|Higher Taxa||Scincidae, Mabuyinae, Scincoidea, Sauria, Squamata (lizards)|
|Common Names||E: Petite Terre Skink|
F: Scinque de la Petite Terre
|Synonym||Mabuya parviterrae HEDGES, LORVELEC, BARRÉ, BERCHEL, COMBOT, VIDAL & PAVIS 2016|
Mabuya mabouya mabouya — LORVELEC et al. 2000: 37 (part)
Mabuya mabouya — BREUIL 2002: 267 (part).
Mabuya mabouya — LORVELEC et al. 2007: 141 (part)
Mabuya mabouya — LORVELEC 2011: 1 (part)
Mabuya desiradae — HEDGES & CONN 2012: 97 (part)
Mabuya cf. desiradae — LORVELEC et al. 2012: 11 (part)
Mabuya desiradae — HEDGES 2014: 327 (part)
Mabuya desiradae — ANGIN & GOMÈS 2015: 1 (part)
|Distribution||Guadeloupe (Îles de la Petite Terre)|
Type locality: dry stone wall near the middle of Terre de Bas, Îles de la Petite Terre, Guadeloupe (16.1714, -61.1207, 5 m),
|Types||Holotype: MNHN-RA-2015.0059 (by original designation), an adult female, collected by Nicolas Barré on 22 April 2015. Additional specimen tag SBH 274765. Paratypes: (n = 4) MNHN-RA-2015.0060–0063, fully-developed fetuses taken from the holotype (Fig. 3E–F). Additional specimen tags SBH 274766–769 (respectively).|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis. Mabuya parviterrae sp. nov. is characterized by (1) maximum SVL in males, 101 mm (released adult, possibly a male); (2) maximum SVL in females, 103 mm; (3) snout width, 3.28–3.36% SVL; (4) head length, 16.3–17.0% SVL; (5) head width, 11.8% SVL; (6) ear length, 1.11–1.59% SVL; (7) toe-IV length, 9.44–9.69% SVL; (8) prefrontals, two; (9) supraoculars, three; (10) supraciliaries, four; (11) frontoparietals, two; (12) supralabial below the eye, five (80%) or six (20%); (13) nuchal rows, one; (14) dorsals, 56–60; (15) ventrals, 65–68; (16) dorsals + ven- trals, 123–126; (17) midbody scale rows, 32–34; (18) finger-IV lamellae, 13–14; (19) toe-IV lamellae, 16–17; (20) finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae, 29–31; (21) supranasal contact, Y; (22) prefrontal contact, N; (23) supraocular-1/frontal contact, Y; (24) parietal contact, Y (60%) or N (40%); (25) pale middorsal stripe, N; (26) dark dorsolateral stripe, N; (27) dark lateral stripe, Y; (28) pale lateral stripe, N; and (29) palms and soles, dark. Sample size six (includes released adult) for all characters except those size-related (characters 3–7), where only the adult holotype and released adult (possibly a male) were scored.|
Within the genus Mabuya, the species from Guadeloupe and its islets are placed in the M. guadeloupae Species Group: M. cochonae, M. desiradae, M. grandisterrae, and M. guadeloupae. Mabuya parviterrae sp. nov. can be added to this group. All five species have a similarly-proportioned frontonasal scale that distinguishes them from other species in the genus (Hedges & Conn 2012: fig. 34). They have a relatively longer frontonasal compared with M. montserratae (frontonasal length/head length 17.6–20.4% versus 16.5–16.8%) and a shorter frontonasal com- pared with other species in the genus (20.5–23.9% in M. dominicana, M. hispaniolae, and M. mabouya). In addition, M. parviterrae sp. nov. differs from M. dominicana in having a shorter, wider supranasal scale (supranasal length/ supranasal width 2.92–3.13 versus 4.57–6.57 in M. dominicana; Hedges & Conn 2012: fig. 35), in lacking a well-de- fined pale lateral stripe (present in 84% of M. dominicana), and it is probably a larger species: 103 and 101 mm SVL in the only adults of M. parviterrae versus a maximum of 101 mm SVL in 55 adults of M. dominicana (Hedges & Conn 2012) where (in M. dominicana) males average 81.4 mm SVL (n = 25) and females average 88.8 mm SVL (n = 20) (Hedges & Conn 2012). It is further separated from M. hispaniolae by having a shorter head (HL/SVL 16.3–17.0% versus 17.7–19.2% in M. hispaniolae), a shorter 4th toe (T4L/SVL 9.44–9.69% versus 10.7–11.1% in M. hispaniolae), in having supranasal contact (lacking in M. hispaniolae) and in lacking well-defined lateral and pale dorsolateral stripes (such stripes are present and well-defined in M. hispaniolae). It is distinguished from M. mabouya by having a shorter frontonasal (noted above) and a shorter 4th toe (T4L/SVL 9.44–9.69% versus 10.2–12.5% in M. mabouya). It differs from M. montserratae by having a relatively longer frontonasal (noted above), a shorter head (HL/SVL 16.3–17.0% versus 17.1–18.6% in M. montserratae), and a narrower head (HW/SVL 11.8% versus 12.3–13.2% in M. montserratae).
From the other species of the Mabuya guadeloupae Species Group, M. parviterrae sp. nov. differs from M. cochonae (n = 2) in having a shorter head (HL/SVL 16.3–17.0% versus 18.7–19.1% in M. cochonae), a shorter 4th toe (T4L/SVL 9.44–9.69% versus 11.1–11.6% in M. cochonae), fewer ventrals (65–68 versus 70), and fewer dorsals + ven- trals (123–126 versus 128–132). Mabuya parviterrae sp. nov. differs from M. grandisterrae (n = 5) in having a shorter head (HL/SVL 16.3–17.0% versus 17.2–19.8% in M. grandisterrae), a higher supraciliary-2/supraciliary-3 length ratio (2.13–2.29 versus 1.67–1.79 in M. grandisterrae), and a shorter 4th toe (T4L/SVL 9.44–9.69% versus 10.2–12.8% in M. grandisterrae). Mabuya parviterrae sp. nov. differs from M. guadeloupae (n = 3) in having fewer dorsals + ventrals (123–126 versus 128–133), fewer 4th toe lamellae (16–17 versus 18–21 in M. guadeloupae), supranasal contact versus no contact in M. guadeloupae, and a different color pattern (tan ground color with weakly developed pale dorsolateral and dark lateral stripes versus medium brown ground color with bold pale dorsolateral and dark lat- eral stripes in M. guadeloupae).
Mabuya parviterrae sp. nov. differs from M. desiradae (n = 4), the species with which it was initially con- fused, in having a shorter head (HL/SVL 16.3–17.0% versus 18.0–19.0% in M. desiradae), a shorter 4th toe (T4L/ SVL 9.44–9.69% versus 10.2–11.0% in M. desiradae), fewer dorsals (56–60 versus 61–63), fewer dorsals + ventrals (123–126 versus 130–134), dark palms and soles versus pale palms and soles in M. desiradae (both species have dark pigment below digits), little or no distinction of dark lateral band in posterior half of body versus distinct band in posterior half of body in M. desiradae; evident in preserved specimens and photos of other individuals (Paré and Lorvelec 2012; Gomès and Ibéné 2013; Métaireau 2014). The coloration difference in palms and soles of the two species (Fig. 4) was in all individuals, including those preserved in ethanol and for similar lengths of time.
|Comment||Abundance: only known from its original description (Meiri et al. 2017).|
Synonymy: The validity of this species has been challenged by Miralles et al. 2017 who considered it as indistinguishable from and thus as a synonym of M. desiradae. This in turn has been challenged by Hedges et al. 2019.
|Etymology||The species name (parviterrae) means ‘small land’ in Latin and is a feminine genitive singular noun, referring to the distribution of the species on Îles de la Petite Terre.|