Hemidactylus longicephalus BOCAGE, 1873
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Hemidactylus longicephalus?
|Higher Taxa||Gekkonidae, Gekkota, Sauria, Squamata (lizards: geckos)|
|Synonym||Hemidactylus longicephalus BOCAGE 1873|
Hemidactylus longiceps O’SHAUGHNESSY 1873 (nomen nudum)
Hemidactylus bocagii BOULENGER 1885: 125 (nom. nov. pro H. longiceps)
Hemidactylus mabouia var. molleri BEDRIAGA 1892
Hemidactylus hecqui BOULENGER 1901 (fide LOVERIDGE 1947)
Hemidactylus steindachneri TORNIER 1902 (fide LOVERIDGE 1947)
Hemidactylus heequi BOCAGE 1903: 63 (ex errore)
Hemidactylus longicephalus — SCHMIDT 1919: 445
Hemidactylus hecqui — WITTE 1933
Hemidactylus longicephalus — LOVERIDGE 1947
Hemidactylus longicephalus — KLUGE 1993
Hemidactylus longicephalus — RÖSLER 2000: 87
Hemidactylus longicephalus — CERIACO et al. 2014
Hemidactylus longicephalus — CERIACO et al. 2020: 33
|Distribution||Angola (Bengo, Kwanza Sul, Kwanza Norte, Luanda, Benguela), W Democratic Republic of the Congo (Zaire), Cameroon; São Tomé, Principé, Central African Republic, Namibia|
Type locality: Capangombe and Catumbella, Angola.
Neotype locality: Kawa Camp, Kissama National Park (-9.18303°, 13.37063°, 136 m), Luanda Province, Republic of Angola
|Types||Neotype: CAS 263575 (field number MCZ A-36523; Fig. 15; Table 4), adult male, collected by Luis M.P. Ceríaco, Mariana P. Marques, Philip Pastor and John Cavagnaro on 13 June 2016, designated by Ceríaco et al. 2020: 38. Original holotype lost, was MB (Museu Bocage) (probably lost in fire 1978).|
Neotype: CAS 219293 (field number CAS-RCD 14215; Fig. 18; Table 4) adult male collected in Coast road south of Shipwreck Cove (0.38739° N, 6.59492° E; 28 m), Lobata District, São Tomé Island, Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe, collected by R.E. Stoelting on 3 May 2001, designated by Ceríaco et al. 2020: 42 [molleri]
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis. A medium sized Hemidactylus, maximum snout-vent length 54.8 mm (Fig. 14). Dorsal pholidosis heterogeneous, with 16–18 irregularly arranged longitudinal rows of subtrihedral, striated, moderately keeled tubercles. Two well-developed pairs of postmentals, the inner pair slightly longer than the outer pair, about two size of the mental, and in broad contact behind the mental. ventrolateral folds distinct, about 30–34 scale rows across venter. Six or seven divided scansors beneath first digit of both manus and pes, seven or eight beneath fourth digit of manus, nine or ten (rarely eight) beneath the fourth digit of pes. Males with 4–11 precloacal-femoral pores in a continuous series. Original tail slightly cyclotetragonal, strongly spinose; dorsal scales on tail slightly larger than dorsals of body, striated, imbricate, with a longitudinal series of two enlarged, strongly keeled, striated, pointed tubercles on either side of the median dorsal furrow. Subcaudal scales small and imbricate, about one fifth of tail width. Dorsum greyish with a series of sometimes incomplete dark-brown transverse markings from occiput to sacrum, sometimes bordered by a thin cream-colored stripe extending from behind the eyes to the insertion of the forelimbs; tail with distinct alternating light and dark bands.|
Comparison with West and Central African congeners. Hemidactylus longicephalus is readily distinguished from H. kamdemtohami and H. richardsonii by its lack of basal digital webbing; from H. matschiei by having spiny tubercles on the dorsum and tail and having small subcaudal scales; and from H. steindachneri by lacking a longitudinal row of keeled tubercles on the ventrolateral border of the flanks. It is distinguished from H. echinus by lacking both paired rows of tubercles on the ventral surface of the tail and a double row of enlarged spines on the lateral surface of the tail, and from H. ansorgii by having a bulkier, more compact body (versus dorsoventraly flattened and slender) and by having enlarged keeled tubercles on the body and tail (versus small and indistinct tubercles). It may be distinguished from H. pseudomuriceus by having small subcaudal scales (versus large) and it differs from H. muriceus by having a higher number of dorsal tubercle rows (16–18 versus 7–12 in H. muriceus). It is distinguished from H. hecqui in not having the nostrils in contact with the first supralabial.
Among its Angolan congeners Hemidactylus longicephalus differs from H. benguellensis in having fewer precloacal-femoral pores (6–11 versus 23–33); from H. bayonii in having more dorsal tubercle rows (16–18 versus 14–16) and by its larger maximum size (SvL 54.8 versus. 36.2 mm); and from H. mabouia by having small subcaudal scales (versus enlarged plate-like subcaudals covering most of tail base in width) and a smaller number of precloacal-femoral pores (6–11 versus. 28–39). See new species accounts for comparisons with these taxa.
|Comment||Synonymy after KLUGE 1993. See also Ceríaco et al. 2020: 33.|
Distribution: Not listed for Tanzania by BROADLEY & HOWELL 1991. Not in East Africa (i.e. Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi fide S. Spawls, pers. comm., 28 June 2018).
As link to this species use URL address:
without field 'search_param'. Field 'search_param' is used for browsing search result.