Cyrtodactylus thathomensis NAZAROV, PAUWELS, KONSTANTINOV, CHULISOV, ORLOV & POYARKOV, 2018
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Cyrtodactylus thathomensis?
|Higher Taxa||Gekkonidae, Gekkota, Sauria, Squamata (lizards: geckos)|
|Common Names||Lao: Ki Chiem Thathom|
Thai: Tuk Khai Thathom
English: Thathom Bent-toed Gecko
Russian: Tatomskiy Krivopalyi Gekkon
French: Cyrtodactyle de Thathom
|Synonym||Cyrtodactylus thathomensis NAZAROV, PAUWELS, KONSTANTINOV, CHULISOV, ORLOV & POYARKOV 2018|
|Distribution||Laos (Xiangkhoang Province)|
Type locality: north-western slope of a limestone hill (N18◦59′48.9′′, E103◦ 35′ 30.6′′ ; alt. 271 m a.s.l.) near Ban (=Village) Thathom, Xiangkhoang Province, Laos
|Types||Holotype: ZMMU R-14919-1 (Figure 3); an adult male, collected on 14 May 2008 by E. L. Konstantinov and A. S. Chulisov. Paratypes: ZMMU R-15384 and ZISP 29731; two adult females from the same locality|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis: Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. can be distinguished from all other congeneric species by its medium body size (maximal known SVL 75.5 mm); dorsal tubercles in 14–18 rows at midbody; midbody scale rows 30–36 across belly between ventrolateral skin folds; a continuous series of 10–12 pore-bearing (male) or pitted (females), enlarged precloacal scales, separated by a diastema from a series of enlarged femoral scales bearing 18 or 19 pores (male) or 1–9 pits (females) on each femur; absence of precloacal groove; transversely enlarged median subcaudal scales; and four dark dorsal bands between limb insertions.|
Comparison with congeneric species: Synoptic tables comparing the main morphological characters of Lao Cyrtodactylus with the species known from adjacent regions were provided by Teynié & David (2014: 471–472) and Luu et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2016c). Among these species, we are comparing hereafter Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. with all congeneric species found within a 500-km radius from its type-locality (a radius far superior to any maximal distance between two localities known for any species in the Indochinese Region, Thailand and Myanmar, cf. maps provided by Ellis & Pauwels, 2012; Nazarov et al., 2014: Figure 1; Grismer et al., 2015: Figure 1 – considering that Cyrtodactylus intermedius is a species complex composed of at least six species, loc. cit.: 114; Nguyen et al., 2014, 2017: Figure 1).
By its possession of transversely enlarged subcaudals, the new species is readily distinguished from Cyrtodactylus angularis ( Smith, 1921), C. buchardi David, Teynié & Ohler, 2004, C. cryptus Heidrich, Rösler, Vu, Böhme & Ziegler, 2007, C. jarujini, C. papilionoides Ulber & Grossmann, 1991, C. pseudoquadrivirgatus Rösler, Nguyen, Vu, Ngo & Ziegler, 2008, and C. vilaphongi Schneider, Nguyen, Le, Nophaseud, Bonkowski & Ziegler, 2014. The possession of enlarged femoral scales separates Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. from C. bobrovi Nguyen, Le, Pham, Ngo, Hoang, Pham & Ziegler, 2015, C. buchardi, C. chauquangensis Hoang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Hoang & Dau, 2007, C. cryptus, C. otai Nguyen, Le, Pham, Ngo, Hoang, Pham & Ziegler, 2015, C. pageli, C. pseudoquadrivirgatus, C. spelaeus Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Nguyen, Milto, Martynov, Konstantinov & Chulisov, 2014, C. vilaphongi and C. wayakonei Nguyen, Kingsada, Rösler, Auer & Ziegler, 2010.
The presence of precloacal and femoral pores separated by a diastema in male Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. distinguishes this species from C. angularis, C. bansocensis, C. bobrovi, C. buchardi, C. calamei, C. chanhomeae Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003, C. chauquangensis, C. cryptus, C. cucphuongensis Ngo & Chan, 2011, C. darevskii, C. hinnamnoensis, C. jaegeri, C. jarujini, C. khammouanensis, C. lomyenensis, C. martini Ngo, 2011, C. multiporus, C. otai, C. pageli, C. papilionoides, C. phongnhakebangensis, C. pseudoquadrivirgatus, C. puhuensis Nguyen, Yang, Le, Nguyen, Orlov, Hoang, Nguyen, Jin, Rao, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang, 2014, C. roesleri, C. rufford, C. sommerladi, C. soudthichaki, C. spelaeus, C. vilaphongi and C. wayakonei. Cyrtodactylus teyniei was described based on a single female holotype. Teynié & David (2014) reported the first known male; it showed precloacal and femoral pores, but they did not mention if the femoral and precloacal pored scales were separated by a diastema or not. It should be noted that, while in the male holotype of Cyrtodactylus bansocensis the precloacal and femoral pore-bearing scales are separated by a diastema, they are not in the male paratype (Luu et al., 2016c).
Its banded dorsal pattern separates Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. from C. buchardi, C. jarujini, C. multiporus, C. pseudoquadrivirgatus, C. spelaeus and C. teyniei, which show blotched patterns. Additional differences distinguishing the new species from Cyrtodactylus jarujini include its smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 90 mm in C. jarujini) and a lower total number of pores in males (47 vs. 52–54). Additional differences with Cyrtodactylus multiporus include the new species’ much smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 98 mm in C. multiporus) and a much lower total number of pores in males (47 vs. 58–60). From Cyrtodactylus teyniei the new species differs also by its smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 89.9 mm in C. teyniei), generally lower number of midbody scale rows across belly between ventrolateral folds (30–36 vs. 36–38), and a much lower total number of pores in males (47 vs. 58).
Among the remaining species living within the 500-km radius of its type-locality, Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. can be differentiated from C. auribalteatus Sumontha, Panitvong & Deein, 2010 by its much smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 98.1 mm), lower DorTub (14–18 vs. 22–24), lower Ven (30–36 vs. 38–40), and higher FemPo on each side (18 or 19 vs. 4 or 5) and PreclPo (10 vs. 6) in males; from C. bichnganae Ngo & Grismer, 2010 by its much smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 99.9 mm), much higher EnlFemSc on each side (20–22 vs. 11–13), and much higher FemPo on each side in males (18 or 19 vs. 9); from C. doisuthep Kunya, Panmongkol, Pauwels, Sumontha, Meewasana, Bunkhwamdi & Dangsri, 2014 by its smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 90.5 mm), lower DorTub (14–18 vs. 19 or 20), presence of femoral pores (vs. pits) in males, higher PreclPo (10 vs. 6), and 4 (vs. 5 or 6) dark bands between limb insertions; from C. dumnuii Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya, 2010 by its generally lower DorTub (14–18 vs. 18–22), its lower Ven (30–36 vs. 40), and much higher FemPo on each side (18or19vs. 6or7)andPreclPo(10vs. 5or6)inmales; from C. huongsonensis Luu, Nguyen, Do & Ziegler, 2011 by its by its smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 89.8 mm), lower Ven (30–36 vs. 41–48), higher PreclPo (10 vs. 6) and much higher FemPo on each side (18 or 19 vs. 7–10) in males, and its discontinuous (vs. continuous) nuchal loop; from C. interdigitalis Ulber, 1993 by its generally lower DorTub (14–18 vs. 18–22), its lower Ven (30–36 vs. 37–42), much higher FemPo on each side (18 or 19 vs. 9) and lower PreclPo (10 vs. 14) in males, and absence (vs. presence) of webbing; from C. intermedius ( Smith, 1917) by its lower Ven (30–36 vs. 40–50) and much higher EnlFemSc on each side (20–22 vs. 6–10); from C. inthanon Kunya, Sumontha, Panitvong, Dongkumfu, Sirisamphan & Pauwels, 2015 by its generally lower DorTub (14–18 vs. 18–20), and much higher FemPo on each side (18 or 19 vs. 6) and PreclPo (10 vs. 5) in males; from C. khelangensis Pauwels, Sumontha, Panitvong & Varaguttanonda, 2014 by its much smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 95.3 mm), and much higher FemPo on each side (18or19Povs. 6or7PoorPi)andPreclPo(10vs. 2–5) in males; from C. kunyai Pauwels, Sumontha, Keeratikiat & Phanamphon, 2014 by its much higher FemPo on each side (18 or 19 vs. 5 or 6) and PreclPo (10 vs. 3) in males; and from C. soni Le, Nguyen, Le & Ziegler, 2016 by its much smaller SVL (75.5 vs. 103.0 mm), higher DorTub (14–18 vs. 10–13), lower Ven (30–36 vs. 41–45), and much higher FemPo on each side (18 or 19 vs. 6–8) and PreclPo (10 vs. 6 or 7) in males.
Besides differentiating Cyrtodactylus thathomensis sp. nov. from all congeneric species found within a 500-km radius, its combination of characters presented in the Diagnosis allows to unambiguously separate it from all species found in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam (see, among other references in the literature cited, Bauer, 2003; Connette et al., 2017; Grismer et al., 2012; Le et al., 2016; Mahony et al., 2009; Mahony, 2009; Panitvong et al., 2014; Pauwels & Sumontha, 2014; Pauwels et al., 2014, 2016; Sumontha et al., 2014, 2015).
|Etymology||The specific epithet “thathomensis” is a Latinized toponymic adjective, referring to the type locality of the new species, Ban Thathom.|