Eremias montana RASTEGAR-POUYANI & RASTEGAR-POUYANI, 2001
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Eremias montana?
Eremias montana
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Lacertidae, Eremiadinae, Sauria, Lacertoidea, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | E: Mountain racerunner |
| Synonym | Eremias (Eremias) montanus RASTEGAR-POUYANI & RASTEGAR-POUYANI 2001 Eremias novo RASTEGAR-POUYANI & RASTEGAR-POUYANI 2006 Eremias (Eremias) montana — SINDACO & JEREMČENKO 2008 Eremias montanus — PYRON & BURBRINK 2013 Eremias nova — ŠMÍD et al. 2014 Eremias montanus — MOZAFFARI et al. 2016 |
| Distribution | W Iran (Kermanshah Province) Type locality: upland regions of the Zagros mountains, 60 km NE of city of Kermanshah (47° 5’ E, 34° 52’ N), Kermanshah Province, W Iran, about 1800 m elevation novo: Iran (Zagros Mountains); Type locality: upland area (about 2700 m elevation)surrounded by the Zagros Mountains, about 21 km southwest of the city of Hamedan, Hamedan Province, western Iran. |
| Reproduction | oviparous |
| Types | Holotype: RUZM (Razi University Zoological Museum, fide Nasrullah Rastegar, pers. comm., 12 June 2019), only a field number is given in the original description: P198. Type: RUZM 96T-104T (not explicitely called holotype) (Razi University Zoological Museum) [novo] |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis and comparison: A small-sized lacertid, maximum snout-vent length (SVL)= 57.2mm, tail length = 95mm, with 13-14 longitudinal and 27-28 transverse rows of ventral plates, slightly converging posteriorly; with 63-67 small, granular scales across middle of dorsum. A species belonging to the subgenus Eremias: subocular reaches mouth edge; one frontonasal; two supraoculars which are not completely separated from frontal and frontoparietals; distance between the femoral pores being narrow; color pattern "striped"; inhabitant of steppe and mountain-steppe landscapes (Szczerbak, 1974: 83). On the other hand, it differs from all other species of its relevant subgenus based on having several distinguishing characters; the color pattern is distinctive and it is distinguishable from all other species in this character i. e., dorsum uniformly dark-brown without spots and ocelli, interrupted by five light longitudinal stripes; the vertebral stripe bifurcating on the nape, two paravertebrals on each side; a broad dorso-lateral stripe containing one or two regularly arranged light spots (different from the other Eremias species in this character); Furthermore, it differs from each species of the typical subgenus in the following character combinations (Bischoff and Bohme, 1980; Bohme and Szczerbak, 1991; Rastegar-Pouyani and Nilson, 1997; Szczerbak, 1974): From Eremias nigrolateralis Rastegar-Pouyani and Nilson, 1997 in having a much smaller size, lack of separation of the third pair of submaxillary shields by granular scales (0% versus 100%), lower count of gulars (23-24 versus 41-42), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 0%), reach of femoral pores to the knee (100% versus 0%), and distinct differences in color pattern. From Eremias persica Blanford, 1874 in having a smaller size, lower count of gulars (23-24 versus 28-38), the absence of distinctly keeled upper caudal scales (100% versus 75%), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 4%) and distinct differences in color pattern. From E. velox (Pallas, 1771) in having a smaller size, in the absence of distinctly keeled upper caudal scales (100% versus 0%), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 5%) and in color pattern. From E. strauchi Kessler, 1878 in having a smaller size, the absence of distinctly keeled upper caudal scales (100% versus almost 0%), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 9%) and in color pattern. From E. lalezharica Moravec, 1994 in having variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 0%), higher count of dorsals (63-68 versus 54-59), no contact of gulars with the second pair of submaxillary shields, lack of a small scale between prefrontals, and distinct differences in color pattern. From E. afghanistanica Bohme and Szczerbak, 1991 in a much higher count of dorsal scales (63-68 versus 44-46), lower count of gulars (23-24 versus 25-28), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 0%), and in color pattern. From E. nikolskii Bedriaga, 1905 in a higher count of dorsals (63-68 versus 45-59), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 8%), and in color pattern. From E. regeli Bedriaga, 1905 in a higher count of dorsals (63-68 versus 43-61), higher number of scales in the 9th-10th caudal annulus (27-28 versus 17-25), the absence of distinctly keeled upper caudal scales (100% versus 0%), variable number of submaxillary shields (33% versus 3%), and in color pattern. (RASTEGAR-POUYANI & RASTEGAR-POUYANI 2001) Additional details (5158 characters) are available for collaborators and contributors. Please contact us for details. |
| Comment | Distribution: See map in SMID et al. 2014 for distribution in Iran. |
| Etymology | Named after its apparent restriction to the the upland and mountainous steppes of the NE Kermanshah province, Iran. |
| References |
|
| External links |