Tarentola protogigas JOGER, 1984
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Tarentola protogigas?
|Higher Taxa||Phyllodactylidae, Gekkota, Sauria, Squamata (lizards: geckos)|
|Subspecies||Tarentola protogigas hartogi JOGER 1993|
Tarentola protogigas protogigas JOGER 1984
|Synonym||Tarentola rudis protogigas JOGER 1984|
Tarentola delalandii var. rudis — BOULENGER 1906
Tarentola delalandii — LOVERIDGE 1947
Tarentola rudis rudis — SCHLEICH 1984
Tarentola borneensis protogigas — JOGER 1984: 100
Tarentola rudis protogigas — JOGER 1993
Tarentola gigas protogigas — KLUGE 1993
Tarentola (Makariogecko) rudis protogigas — RÖSLER 2000: 117 ?
Tarentola (Makariogecko) rudis protogigas — CARRANZA et al. 2000
Tarentola protogigas protogigas — VASCONCELOS et al. 2012: 353
Tarentola rudis hartogi JOGER 1993
Tarentola borneensis protogigas — JOGER 1984
Tarentola rudis protogigas — JOGER 1993
Tarentola (Makariogecko) rudis hartogi CARRANZA et al. 2000
Tarentola protogigas hartogi — VASCONCELOS et al. 2012: 354
|Distribution||Cape Verde Islands|
hartogi: Brava, Rombo (Cape Verde Islands); Type locality: Cima Island, Rombos group – central plateau, in sandy area under shrub of Malvaceae.
protogigas: Fogo (Cape Verde Islands); Type locality: Fogo (Cape Verde Islands) Map legend:
- Region according to the TDWG standard, not a precise distribution map.
NOTE: TDWG regions are generated automatically from the text in the distribution field and not in every cases it works well. We are working on it.
|Types||holotype: ZSM 01/145/81, Fogo, unknown locality; paratypes: ZSM 02/145/1981, Fogo, unknown locality; BMNH 1906.3.30.28-29; MCNG C.E. 28149|
Holotype: RMNH [hartogi]
|Comment||MORPHOBANK M46037–M46055 (protogigas)|
MORPHOBANK M46056–M46091 (hartogi)
Joger (1984) treated "rudis" and "gigas" as semi-species within one species which, because of the priority rule, had to be named "borneensis" Gray, 1845. Schleich (1984, 1987) did not accept it and considered "rudis" and "gigas" as separated species. The name "borneensis" is no longer valid by decision of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in 1990 (opinion 1585; Carranza et al. 2000), as applied for by Schleich in 1988 (Joger 1993) [fide Filipe Sousa (pers. comm.)].
Diagnosis (protogigas): Medium to large-sized gecko [maximum SVL 98.5 mm (Schleich, 1987); 71.9 mm on average, see Appendix 2]; eye/ear opening ratio averages 1.69; ear–eye/eye–snout distance ratio averages 0.75. Eight to 12 supralabials; seven to nine infralabials; ten to 13 enlarged lamellae under the 4th finger; 144–181 midbody scales (Joger, 1984b); conical to apical promi- nent dorsal tubercles with a narrow central keel (Fig. 5D4), especially on the sacral region, with 12–15 transverse rows and 15–21 longitudinal rows; several enlarged tubercles between the eye and the ear opening. Grey, brownish to yellowish dorsal pattern with a series of four (sometimes five) light middorsal patches, each preceded by a more indistinct and lighter W-shaped dark mark, usually connected by a light middorsal line (Figs 6D3–5 and 7D3–5); golden- yellowish grey ventral parts; dark spots on the labials, sometimes creating an alternating light and dark pattern; eye iris grey with an indistinct broad horizontal dark area.
It differs from T. bocagei, T. fogoensis, T. darwini, T. substituta, T. raziana, T. caboverdiana, and T. nico- lauensis by having prominent conical dorsal tubercles, enlarged tubercles between the eye and ear opening and a different dorsal pattern (Fig. 6), and from T.gigas by the presence of a narrow well- marked central keel, especially on the sacral region. It also differs from T. gigas by having important mor- phological, bioacustical, ecological, and behavioural differences. It differs from T. boavistensis, T. rudis, and Tarentola from Maio by its yellower ventral col- oration. It also differs from T.rudis by a higher number of scales around midbody and interorbital scales [18–21 versus 16–19 (Joger, 1984b)], by having four to five more indistinct and lighter W-shaped dorsal bands (Fig. 6), fader spots on the labials and less contrasted eye iris coloration (Fig. 7). It differs from Tarentola from Maio by a higher number of scales and lamellae under the fifth toe [22–26 versus 19–21, rarely 22 (Joger, 1984b)] and interorbital scales [19–21 versus 16–18 (Joger, 1984b)].
Diagnosis (protogigas protogigas): Large-sized gecko [maximum SVL 98.5 mm (Schleich, 1987), 80.0 mm on average, Appendix 2]. It differs from T. protogigas hartogi by its longer SVL, its less yellowish and more marbled ventrum, and more distinct W-shaped dorsal marks (Fig. 6).
Diagnosis (protogigas hartogi): Medium to large-sized gecko (maximum SVL 77.0 mm; 63.8 mm on average, Appendix 2). It differs from T. protogigas protogigas by a shorter SVL, more yellowish ventral coloration, and less distinct W-shaped dorsal marks on adults.
|Etymology||T. rudis hartogi was named in honor of the collector, J. C. Den HARTOG. The name T. rudis protogigas refers to the intermediate differentiation degree of this subspecies between rudis of Santiago and gigas of Branco and/or gigas of Raso.|