Thamnodynastes phoenix FRANCO, TREVINE, MONTINGELLI & ZAHER, 2017
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Thamnodynastes phoenix?
|Higher Taxa||Colubridae (Dipsadinae), Colubroidea, Caenophidia, Alethinophidia, Serpentes, Squamata (snakes)|
|Synonym||Thamnodynastes phoenix FRANCO, TREVINE, MONTINGELLI & ZAHER 2017|
Thamnodynastes sp. 2 – FRANCO & FERREIRA, 2003
Thamnodynastes sp. 2 – HAMDAN & LIRA DA SILVA 2012
Thamnodynastes sp. 2 – COELHO et al. 2013
Thamnodynastes sp. – GUEDES et al. 2014
|Distribution||Brazil (Alagoas, Bahia, Ceará, Paraíba, Pernambuco, Piauí, Rio Grande do Norte, Sergipe, Minas Gerais, Goiás, Tocantins)|
Type locality: Brazil, Pernambuco, municipality of Petrolina, 09°19’29.00” S, 40°32’50.00” W, 389 m above sea level, Campus Ciências Agrárias, Universidade Federal do Vale do São Francisco (UNIVASF
|Types||Holotype: IBSP 87527, adult male collected by Leonardo de Barros Ribeiro on 4 November 2011 (Figs 1 and 2). Paratypes (N = 12): Brazil: Alagoas: UHE Xingó (9°37’25” S, 37°47’54”W): MZUSP 10875 (former CHESF 3455), adult female, no collector information; and MZUSP 10878 (former CHESF 3723), adult male, no collector informa- tion; Bahia: municipality of Guanambi (14°12’ S, 42°46’ W): IBSP 54904, adult male, collected by Guanambi city hall, 17 August 1992; municipality of Queimadas (10°58’40’’ S, 39°37’26’’ W): MZUSP 10775, adult female, collected by Miguel T. Rodrigues, October 1991; Ceará: Serra do Ba- turité (4°23’48.8’’ S, 39°01’28.3’’ W): MZUSP 21180, young female, collected by Natália Rizzo Friol et al., 27 Octo- ber 2012; Pernambuco: municipality of Floresta (7°23’20’’ S, 38°46’26’’ W): MFCH 1897 (former LPE 1275), adult fe- male, no collector information, 23 May 2009; municipal- ity of Salgueiro (8°04’00’’ S, 39°06’00’’ W): MFCH 1887 (former NCA 822), young male, no collector information, 19 May 2009; UHE Itaparica (9°08’37” S 38°18’43” W): IBSP 52127, adult female, collected by CHESF Company, 20 August 1988; Piauí: Estação Ecológica Uruçuí-Una (8°38’ S, 44°56’ W): MZUSP 18146, adult female, and MZUSP 18147, adult male, collected by Hussam Zaher et al., 17– 30 January 2001; municipality of Piracuruca, Parque Na- cional das Sete Cidades (4°5’59” S, 41°42’50” W): MPEG 23344, adult male, no collector information, 7 September 2005; Tocantins: municipality of Palmeiras do Tocantins (6°36’49’’ S, 47°32’46’’ W): MZUSP 19105 (former EST 14460), adult male, collected on UHE Estreito by Systemae Naturae Consultoria Ambiental, 3 November 2011; mu- nicipality of Mateiros, Pares do Jalapão, Posto das Dunas (10°22’40’’ S, 46°40’30’’ W): MNRJ 15196, adult female, col- lected by A. Chagas, 14 June 2007.|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis: Thamnodynastes phoenix sp. n. differs from all other species of the genus by the following combination of characters: 19/19/15 dorsal rows with smooth scales; maximum SVL 495 mm; maximum TL 136 mm; ventral scales 133 to 159; subcaudals 40 to 66; coloration of the ventral portion of the head extremely spotted with dark-brown dots, infralabials and chin shields with a white centre. Darkening intensifies on the infralabial borders, outlining a clear contrast of lateral and dark margins (Fig. 2). Two pairs of non-continuous longitudinal dark ventral stripes, darker at the transition of the venter and the lateral sides, with a more conspicuous black spot on the apex of each ventral scale; tip of the tail lighter than the overall body coloration without blotches or dots, almost white in juvenile specimens.|
Comparisons: Thamno dynastes phoenix sp. n. differs from T. chimanta, T. duida, T. lanei, T. marahuaquensis, T. pallidus and T. sertanejo by having 19 scale rows at midbody (versus 17 in all others) (Roze 1958, Gorzula & Ayarzagüena 1996, Myers & Donnellly 1996) (Table 2). It further differs from T. almae, T. ceibae, T. chaquensis, T. dixoni, T. hypoconia, T. paraguanae and T. cf. nattereri by the general pattern of coloration and smooth dorsal scales (versus slightly or strongly keeled in all the above) (Franco & Ferreira 2002, Bailey & Thomas 2007); from T. chaquensis (in parenthesis) it also differs by the smaller size, with maximum SVL 495 mm (maximum SVL 577 mm), fewer subcaudals, 45– 66 for males and 40–60 for females (55–73 subcaudals for males, 48–65 for females), and infralabials more intensely pigmented, outlining a white centre on each infralabial (dark pigmentation not as conspicuous and not outlining a white centre on each infralabial). Thamnodynastes phoenix differs from T. corocoroensis by its characteristic colour pattern and by its slightly higher counts of ventral scales, from 133 to 159, and nine infralabials (132 ventrals and eight infralabials in T. corocoroensis, Gorzula & Ayarzagüena 1996); it differs from T. gambotensis and T. ramonriveroi by the smaller counts of subcaudals (61–75 for males, and 55–73 for females of T. gambotensis; and 59–77 for males, and 52–70 for females of T. ramonriveroi) (Table 2), and also by the pattern of ventral coloration, with two to four inconspicuous brown longitudinal ventral stripes that disappear on the first half of the tail (versus two to four well defined and continuous longitudinal ventral stripes in T. gambotensis, and five darker conspicuous longitudinal stripes in T. ramonriveroi, evident throughout the tail). It differs from T. longicaudus by its darker general coloration and 19/19/15 rows of dorsal scales (versus 19/19/13 and five to six dark anterior dorsal blotches; Franco et al. 2003); from T. rutilus by the absence of a red mark on the sixth supralabial (versus present); from T. cf. nattereri by its smaller size (versus maximum SVL 577 mm), fewer ventral scales (159–167 ventrals for males, and 142–160 for females of T. cf. nattereri), and also by its gular region intensely pigmented, forming white blotches on the centre of infralabials and chinshields (slightly pigmented or immaculate); from T. strigatus by its immaculate oral mucosa and by the darker background coloration of the labials, without distinct oval blotches on the supra and infralabials (versus with a black stain enclosing tongue sheath and black oral palate, light background colour of labial scales, with distinct darker blotches present on the margin of every supralabial and infralabial); and from T. yavi for its bigger size and different pattern of coloration (maximum SVL 260 mm, and darker background colour with brown dorsal coloration with black scales scattered along the body, without white blotches, in T. yavi Myers & Donnelly, 1996) (Table 2).
Thamnodynastes phoenix is very much alike to T. para guanae from northwestern Venezuela (Paraguaná Peninsula) and northern Colombia, which shares the intensely pigmented gular, mental and infralabial region, also with infralabials with a lighter centre, contrasting with dark borders. However, the new species can be distinguished from T. paraguanae (in parenthesis) by the more robust hemipenis, with evident spines on the hemipenial body that increase slightly in size towards the base (very slender hemipenis with reduced spines on a long hemipenial body); for its slightly smaller size (maximum SVL 550 mm), and lower subcaudal counts (55–72 subcaudals for males and 53–65 for females) (Table 2).
As link to this species use URL address:
without field 'search_param'. Field 'search_param' is used for browsing search result.