Diporiphora lalliae STORR, 1974
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Diporiphora lalliae?
|Higher Taxa||Agamidae (Amphibolurinae), Sauria, Iguania, Squamata (lizards)|
|Common Names||E: Northern deserts dragon, Lally's Two-line Dragon|
|Synonym||Diporiphora lalliae STORR 1974|
Diporiphora lalliae — COGGER 1983
Diporiphora lalliae — COGGER 2000: 330
Diporiphora lalliae — SMITH et al. 2011
Diporiphora lalliae — MELVILLE et al. 2019: 42
|Distribution||Australia (Northern Territory, South Australia, Western Australia)|
Type locality: Langey Crossing, in 17° 39’ S, 123° 34’ E, W. A.
|Types||Holotype: WAM R23020 (originally given erroneously as R23030)|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis. Body size moderately large (to 62 mm SVL) with very long tail (2.6–3.4 × SVL). Gular, post-auricular and scapular folds present. Small scales in axilla but usually not granular. Homogeneous dorsal scales between pale dorsolateral lines that usually lack raised scales in outer row, providing little demarcation between dorsal and lateral scales. Pre- cloacal pores 4; femoral pores 0 (Melville et al. 2019: 42).|
Comparison to other species. Diporiphora lalliae is sympatric with D. magna, D. gracilis sp. nov. and D. granulifera sp. nov. in the northern parts of its range, occurring in similar habitats and is superficially similar in appearance. However, D. lalliae can be distinguished from these species by the presence of a gular fold, which is unique in the D. bilineata species group (Table 2). The distribution of D. lalliae also overlaps with D. sobria, from which it can be distinguished in having single canine teeth on each side of upper jaw and lacking femoral pores. In the southern Kimberley region, D. lalliae can be distinguished from D. pindan in having a gular fold and strong post-auricular and scapular folds (Melville et al. 2019: 43).
|Comment||Similar species: This species has previously been confused with numerous other species owing to its generalised appearance.|
Phylogeny: D. lalliae appears to be paraphyletic with respect to D. magna (SMITH et al. 2011). However, no taxonomic decisions have been made yet.
Distribution: for a map see Melville et al. 2019: 41 (Fig. 14).