Copeoglossum margaritae HEDGES & CONN, 2012
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Copeoglossum margaritae?
Copeoglossum margaritae
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Scincidae, Mabuyinae (Mabuyini), Scincoidea, Sauria, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | |
| Synonym | Copeoglossum margaritae HEDGES & CONN 2012: 79 Mabuya nigropunctata — MIRALLES et al., 2005:833 (part) Mabuya nigropunctata — RIVAS et al., 2005:349 (part) Mabuya nigropunctata — MIRALLES et al., 2009:609 (part) Mabuya nigropunctata — UGUETO & RIVAS, 2010:208 (part) |
| Distribution | Venezuela (Margarita Island) Type locality: 3 km NE La Asuncion, Margarita Island, Nueva Esparta, Venezuela (11° 03' N, 63° 51' W, 410 m) |
| Reproduction | |
| Types | Holotype: USNM 217141, an adult female, in February, 1967. Collector unrecorded. Field number SVP 12355 (Smithsonian Venezuelan Project). Paratypes (n = 2). Margarita Island, Venezuela. MHNLS 3401–02, Cerro Copey (Collected in 1953 by Felipe Martín). Photographs examined. Copeoglossum margaritae is known from only 3 specimens. |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis: Copeoglossum margaritae sp. nov. is characterized by (1) maximum SVL in males, not available; (2) SVL of holotype female, 118.8 mm; SVL of unsexed paratype MHNLS 3401 (probably female), 121 mm; (3) snout width, 2.93% SVL; (4) head length, 17.1% SVL; (5) head width, 12.6% SVL; (6) ear length, 1.14% SVL; (7) toe-IV length, 9.06% SVL; (8) prefrontals, two (n = 3); (9) supraoculars, four (n = 3); (10) supraciliaries, six (n = 3); (11) frontoparietals, two (n = 3); (12) supralabial below the eye, six (n = 2) or seven (n = 1); (13) nuchal rows, one (n = 2); (14) dorsals, 53–55 (n = 3); (15) ventrals, 66 (n = 2); (16) dorsals + ventrals, 119–120 (n = 2); (17) midbody scale rows, 30–31 (n = 2); (18) finger-IV lamellae, 15–16 (n = 2); (19) toe-IV lamellae, 16–17 (n = 2); (20) finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae, 32–33 (n = 2); (21) supranasal contact, N (n = 3); (22) prefrontal contact, N (n = 3); (23) supraocular-1/frontal contact, N (n = 3); (24) parietal contact, N (n = 2); (25) pale middorsal stripe, N (n = 3); (26) dark dorsolateral stripe, N (n = 3); (27) dark lateral stripe, Y (n = 3); (28) pale lateral stripe, Y (n = 3); and (29) palms and soles, dark (n = 3); data based on holotype unless indicated (Tables 3–5). Within the Genus Copeoglossum, C. margaritae sp. nov. differs from all other species by having a higher number of ventral scales (66 versus 54–65 in other species), a larger body size (121 mm maximum SVL versus 100–113 mm maximum SVL), and chin spotting (absent in the other species). It differs from C. arajara (Rebouças- Spieker 1981), additionally, in having more finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae (32–33 versus 26), more supraciliaries (six versus 3–5), and dark palms and soles (pale in C. arajara). It differs from C. aurae sp. nov., additionally, by having a longer supraocular-2 scale (supraocular-2/supraocular-1 length ratio 0.75–0.88 in C. margaritae sp. nov. versus 0.38–0.69 C. aurae sp. nov.) (Fig. 27) and in having a shorter toe-IV (9.06% SVL versus 10.1–12.7% SVL). It differs from C. nigropunctatum, additionally, in having a narrower frontonasal scale (frontonasal width/length 1.20–1.26 (n = 3) versus 1.30–2.03 in C. nigropunctatum; Fig. 26), by lacking supranasal contact (in contact in 94% of C. nigropunctatum), and by having a high number (32–33) of finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae (versus 94% of C. nigropunctatum with fewer than 32 lamellae). It differs from C. redondae sp. nov., additionally, by having a longer supraocular-2 scale (supraocular-2/supraocular-1 length ratio 0.75–0.88 in C. margaritae sp. nov. versus 0.58 in C. redondae sp. nov.; Fig. 27), more finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae (32–33 versus 29), and a smaller ear (ear length 1.14% SVL versus 2.42% in C. redondae sp. nov.). Unfortunately we had to temporarily remove additional information as this was scraped by multiple AI companies who sell that data to their customers. These details, e.g. detailed descriptions or comparisons (about 85 characters) are available for collaborators and contributors. Please contact us for details. |
| Comment | Abundance: only known from its original description (Meiri et al. 2017). |
| Etymology | The species name (margaritae) is a feminine genitive singular noun and refers to the distribution of the species on the island of Margarita. |
| References |
|
| External links |