Liolaemus antonietae TRONCOSO-PALACIOS, ESQUERRÉ, URRA, DÍAZ, CASTRO-PASTENE & RUIZ, 2018
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Liolaemus antonietae?
Liolaemus antonietae
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Liolaemidae, Iguania, Sauria, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | E: Antonieta’s lizard S: Lagarto de Antonieta |
| Synonym | Liolaemus antonietae TRONCOSO-PALACIOS, ESQUERRÉ, URRA, DÍAZ, CASTRO-PASTENE & RUIZ 2018 Liolaemus monticola chillanensis — TORRES-PÉREZ et al. 2009: 635 Liolaemus chillanensis — ESCOBAR-HUERTA et al. 2015: 95 Liolaemus sp. Chillán — TRONCOSO-PALACIOS et al. 2016: 127 Liolaemus chillanensis — MEDINA et al. 2017: 238 |
| Distribution | Chile (Biobío Region) Type locality: Termas de Chillán, Biobío Region, Chile (36°54'S,71°24'W, 1766 m). |
| Reproduction | Viviparous |
| Types | Holotype: SSUC Re 697, male (Fig. 8A-B). Collected by J. Troncoso-Palacios, H. Díaz and F.A. Urra. January 9, 2014. Paratypes: SSUC Re 695-96, 698-99 (Fig. 8C-G), male, female, male, female, respectively. Same data as the holotype. SSUC Re 700, male. Laguna del Huemul, Shangrila, Biobío Region, Chile (36°52'S, 71°28'W, 1955 m). Collected by F.A. Urra. December 2014. |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis: Here we provide a diagnosis in regards of all species in the L. elongatus clade plus Liolaemus chillanensis - previously confused with L. antonietae - and L. monticola - which has a similar color pattern. Liolaemus antonietae is a medium size Liolaemus (max. SVL = 77.6 mm), with many midbody scales (86-98; 91.5 ± 3.8), lateral dark band, absence of dorsal melanism or black ventral color. The males have precloacal pores and it is the only member of the L. elongatus clade that can exhibit arboreal behavior. Liolaemus antonietae differs from L. chillanensis because this species has olive- brown or bluish-brown dorsal color, olive or bluish ventral color and lacks precloacal pores, whereas L. antonietae never has olive or bluish coloration and the males have precloacal pores. Liolaemus antonietae resembles L. monticola in that both species have a brown dorsal color and dark lateral band. However, phylogenetic evidence shows that L. monticola does not belong in the L. elongatus- kriegi complex (Fig. 4). Moreover, L. monticola is smaller (max. SVL = 65.6 mm) and has fewer midbody scales (54-66) than L. antonietae (max. SVL = 77.6 mm; midbody scales = 86-98). Liolaemus antonietae is closely related to L. antumalguen, but is smaller (max. SVL = 77.6 mm vs. max. SVL = 107.8 mm) and has more midbody scales (86-98 vs. 72-82, Table 3). Moreover, L. antumalguen has black ventral coloration, and several specimens have black transversal dorsal spots or a very melanic dorsal coloration, whereas L. antonietae has whitish or gray ventral coloration and totally lacks black transversal dorsal spots. Liolaemus antonietae has more midbody scales (86-98 vs 76-90), and is larger (max. SVL = 77.6 mm vs max. SVL = 69.9 mm) than L. scorialis. Dorsal coloration in L. scorialis is noticeably darker than in L. antonietae, with a marked dark occipital band, which is absent in L. antonietae. Liolaemus antonietae differs from L. carlosgarini because this latter species features a yellowish brown dorsal coloration and a conspicuous dark occipital band, traits absent in L. antonietae. All males of L. antonietae have precloacal pores, whereas only 50% of L. carlosgarini males have precloacal pores. Liolaemus curis has a yellowish dorsal coloration accompanied by black transversal dorsal spots or an overall melanic dorsal coloration, and less midbody scales (68-76) than L. antonietae (Table 3). Liolaemus antonietae is smaller (max. SVL = 77.6 mm vs. max. SVL = 90.7 mm) than L. choique, and although we have no data of L. choique for statistical analysis, the midbody scale count ranges show almost no overlap (86-98 vs. 74-88, Table 1). Also, L. choique has yellowish or black dorsal coloration, whereas L. antonietae has light brown dorsal coloration. Liolaemus antonietae differs from L. elongatus because this last features a marked occipital and lateral bands or dorsal melanism, whereas only some specimens of L. antonietae have an inconspicuous occipital band and no specimen has dorsal melanism. The dorsal pattern of Liolaemus antonietae resembles the pattern of L. smaug. However, males of L. antonietae have light brown dorsum, whereas males of L. smaug have a bright golden yellow dorsal color. Females and males of L. antonietae have white dots on the dorsum, a trait only found on males of L. smaug. Liolaemus antonietae differs from L. janequeoae, because the latter species does not feature any dorsal pattern apart of few black or white dots and is smaller than L. antonietae (max. SVL 66.9 vs 77.6 mm). Liolaemus antonietae differs from L. leopardinus, because it lacks the leopard-like dorsal spots on dorsum and tail present in L. leopardinus. Liolaemus antonietae is smaller (max. SVL = 77.6 mm) than L. crandalli (max. SVL = 93.4 mm), but both exhibit a similar color pattern. However, L. crandalli has blackish dorsal head coloration, which is light brown in L. antonietae. According to the phylogenetic analysis of Avila et al. (2015) this species is the sister taxon of L. smaug + L. choique, whereas in our phylogeny L. antonietae is not closely related to L. smaug or L. choique. Although we have no scale count data of L. burmeisteri to perform a statistical analysis, the midbody (70-81) and ventral scale count ranges (99-110) show no overlap with L. antonietae (86- 98, 118-131, respectively). Additionally, almost all specimens of L. burmeisteri lack a dorsal pattern, whereas L. antonietae always features a dorsal pattern (vertebral line, paravertebral dark spots and white dots). |
| Comment | Habitat: mostly arboreal, basking on fallen trunks and on trees up approximately 4 m high. Few specimens were observed basking on rocks. |
| Etymology | This species is named after Antonieta Labra Lillo, a prominent Chilean herpetologist who has made significant contributions to the eco-physiology and behavior of lizards, especially to the study of the influence of chemical signals on their behavior. She has also edited the book “Herpetología de Chile”, which had a great impact on the Chilean herpetology. |
| References |
|
| External links |