Euspondylus maculatus TSCHUDI, 1845
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Euspondylus maculatus?
|Higher Taxa||Gymnophthalmidae (Cercosaurinae), Sauria, Gymnophthalmoidea, Squamata (lizards)|
|Common Names||E: Spotted Sun Tegus|
|Synonym||Euspondylus maculatus TSCHUDI 1845: 161|
Ecpleopus (Euspondylus) maculatus — PETERS 1862: 206
Ecpleopus (Proctoporus) Fraseri O’SHAUGHNESSY 1879: 296
Euspondylus maculatus — PETERS & DONOSO-BARROS 1970: 121
Euspondylus maculatus — KÖHLER 2003
|Distribution||Peru (Puno, Madre de Dios), S Ecuador|
Type locality: Peru; specified as vicinity of Moyobamba, Peru, by TSCHUDI (1846: 43).
|Types||Syntypes: unlocated (fide TORRES-CARVAJAL 2001)|
|Comment||Synonymy that of PETERS & DONOSO-BARROS 1970 (who cite O’SHAUGHNESSY 1897, which seems to be a typo).|
Type species: Euspondylus maculatus TSCHUDI 1845 is the type species of the genus Euspondylus TSCHUDI 1845.
Taxonomy (genus): The taxonomy of Euspondylus is problematic due to the unclear generic diagnosis and species assignations with members of the genus Proctoporus. According to the traditional generic diagnosis by Peters and Donoso-Barros (1970), Euspondylus is characterized by the presence of anterior nasal scales separated by rostral and frontonasal scales, and prefrontal and dorsal scales that are not granular, whereas Proctoporus lacks prefrontal scales and has either keeled or striated dorsal scales. Köhler and Lehr (2004) recognized much variation in the presence of prefrontal scales in Euspondylus spinalis from Peru, and suggested that the presence versus absence of prefrontal scales is not a determining character for the separation of Proctoporus and Euspondylus, questioning the separation of the two genera. Doan and Castoe (2005) separated two genera from Proctoporus: Riama and Petracola;
The definition of Euspondylus has always been vague (Uzzell 1973), but was generally considered to be similar to Proctoporus but possessing prefrontal scales (Doan 2003; Köhler & Lehr 2004), which Proctoporus species, until the recent new combinations, did not (Goicoechea et al. 2012). Now that this distinction between the two genera has been removed, unique diagnostic characters for Euspondylus do not exist and it is possible that all Euspondylus species may belong within Proctoporus (Goicoechea et al. 2012) or that some species are more closely allied to Anadia Gray (Kok & Rivas 2011, Doan & Adams 2015).
Distribution: Probably also in Bolivia (fide LANGSTROTH 2005). Note that Chavez et al. 2017 restricted the range of E. maculatus to the area around the type locality in Puno; other populations were assigned to Euspondylus sp. 1 and Euspondylus sp. 2. However, these have not been named yet and their ranges not defined, hence we leave the range of maculatus as is for the time being.