Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus CHOMDEJ, SUWANNAPOOM, PAWANGKHANANT, PRADIT, NAZAROV, GRISMER & POYARKOV, 2020
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus?
Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Gekkonidae, Gekkota, Sauria, Squamata (lizards: geckos) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | E: Tak bent-toed Gecko Thai: Tuk kai tak |
| Synonym | Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus CHOMDEJ, SUWANNAPOOM, PAWANGKHANANT, PRADIT, NAZAROV, GRISMER & POYARKOV 2020 |
| Distribution | Thailand (Tak) Type locality: limestone rocks at the entrance to the Tham Sri Fah Cave, Mae Sot District, Tak Province, Thailand (16.602162°N, 98.712481°E WGS; 710 m in elevation |
| Reproduction | |
| Types | Holotype. AUP 00696 (Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Phayao (Phayao, Thailand), adult male, collected on August 3, 2019, at 21:00 hrs by S. Chomdej, C. Suwannapoom and P. Pawangkhanant. Paratypes. Nine specimens, including the paratypes AUP-00688–90 (three adult males), and AUP-00691–93 and AUP-0097 (four adult females) bear the same collecting data as the holotype; AUP-00698, an adult male, was collected on August 3, 2019, at 20:00 hrs by S. Chomdej, C. Suwannapoom and P. Pawangkhanant from granite rocks near the Tha Ra Rak waterfall, Mae Sot District, Tak Province, Thailand (16.569339° N, 98.694566° E WGS; 610 m in elevation); ZMMU R-16626 (field No. NAP-06637) was collected on November 13, 2016, at 20:00 hrs by N.A. Poyarkov and P. Pawangkhanant from granite rocks near the Tha Ra Rak waterfall, Mae Sot District, Tak Province, Thailand (16.569339° N, 98.694566° E WGS; 610 m in elevation). |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis. Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus sp. nov. differs from all species in the C. sinyineensis group by having the combination of nine supralabials; seven infralabials; 34–38 paravertebral tubercles; 17–20 longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles; 28–30 ventral scales ventral scales; seven expanded subdigital lamellae on the fourth toe; 11 or 12 unmodified subdigital lamellae on the fourth toe; 18 or 19 total subdigital lamellae on the fourth toe; 27–34 enlarged femoral scales; a total of 10–12 pore-bearing femoral scales in males; 8–11 enlarged precloacal scales; 7–9 pore-bearing precloacal scales in males; three rows of enlarged post-precloacal scales; approximately 4–7 broken to hour glass shaped dorsal body bands; 10–12 light-colored caudal bands (n=2); 11–13 dark-colored caudal bands (n=2); raised and strongly keeled dorsal tubercles that extend beyond base of tail; enlarged femoral and precloacal scales nearly the same size and continuous; pore-bearing femoral and precloacal scales not continuous; medial subcaudals two to three times wider than long and extending onto lateral side of tail; iris green; nuchal loop lacking an anterior azygous notch, and bearing a jagged posterior border; dorsal bands bearing paravertebral elements, generally equal in width than interspaces, bearing lightened centers, edged with white tubercles; dark markings in dorsal interspaces; light caudal bands in adults bearing dark-colored markings; light-colored caudal bands not encircling tail; and mature regenerated tail not spotted (Table 5 in CHOMDEJ et al. 2020). Color pattern (Fig. 5, Fig. 6A). Dorsal ground color of head, body, limbs, and tail yellowish-brown; top of head and rostrum nearly unicolor, bearing areas of slightly darker, diffuse irregularly shaped markings; nuchal loop jagged posteriorly, divided medially, bearing two posterior projections; triangular occipital band composed of three dark oval-shaped blotches; approximately five dark hour glass shaped body bands with paravertebral elements bearing lightened centers and edged with whitish tubercles extend from the shoulder to the presacral region; lighter colored interspaces between bands bear darker markings; whitish tubercles scattered on flanks; sacral and postsacral bands continue onto the tail to form 13 black caudal bands that are wider than the 12 light-colored caudal bands; light-colored caudal bands bear dark markings and do not encircle tail; limbs bear distinct, dark-colored irregularly shaped markings; gular scales bearing only two or three black stipples; black stippling in throat, pectoral region, and anterior portion of belly more dense; anterior one-half of subcaudal region light-colored, posterior one-half bearing faint whitish mottling (CHOMDEJ et al. 2020). Variation. The dorsal color pattern in the type series is highly variable. The body bands are often so irregularly shaped it is difficult to accurately assess how many there are. Paratypes AUP-00688, AUP-00692–93, and AUP 00698 have well-defined generally oval-shaped paravertebral components to their dorsal bands that are separated on the midline of the body (Fig. 6B,E). Whereas the banding pattern of the holotype and paratypes AUP-00689–91, 00697–98 are generally more irregularly shaped (Fig. 6). Paratypes AUP-00689, 00691–93, 00698 and ZMMU R-16626 have partially regenerated tails (Fig. 6). Additional variation in meristic and mensural characters are presented in Table 6 in CHOMDEJ et al. 2020. Comparisons. Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus sp. nov. (n=10) differs from various combinations of all other species except C. naungkayaingensis in clade 2 of the C. sinyineensis group in having statistically different mean values across 1–5 of the nine scale characters. These differences are summarized in Tables 4 and 5 and visualized in Figure 4 and do not need to be written out here. Cyrtodactylus amphipetraeus sp. nov. is not the sister species of C. naungkayaingensis (Fig. 2) and differs from it by a 7.0% uncorrected pairwise sequence divergence. As noted above, the jagged dorsal bands of C. naungkayaingensis are not wider than the interspaces whereas the broken to hour glass-shaped dorsal bands of C. amphipetraeus sp. nov. are wider than the interspaces and it has a maximum SVL of 93.4 mm and a green iris whereas C. naungkayaingensis has a maximum SVL 66.9 mm and a reddish iris. Additional differences between C. amphipetraeus sp. nov., C. doisuthep, and the species of clade 1 are listed in Table 5. in CHOMDEJ et al. 2020. |
| Comment | |
| Etymology | The specific epithet amphipetraeus is a Latinized adjective in nominative singular, derived from Greek amphi or ἀμφί (meaning of both kinds) and petra or πέτρα (for rock). The species name is given in reference to the remarkable natural history of this species which inhabits both limestone and granite rocks. |
| References |
|
| External links |