Liolaemus pyriphlogos QUINTEROS, 2012
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Liolaemus pyriphlogos?
Liolaemus pyriphlogos
Find more photos by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Liolaemidae, Iguania, Sauria, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | |
| Synonym | Liolaemus pyriphlogos QUINTEROS 2012 Liolaemus alticolor alticolor — RAMIREZ PINILLA & LAURENT 1996:13 (part.) |
| Distribution | Argentina (Jujuy) Type locality: Vicinity of Laguna Leandro, Humahuaca Department, 4278 m, 23°01’50’’S, 65°14’46.8’’W, Jujuy Province, Argentina. |
| Reproduction | |
| Types | Holotype: FML 18199, male |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis: A small (56.8 mm maximum SVL), slender Liolaemus belonging to the alticolor–bibronii group. Liolaemus pyriphlo- gos is geographically isolated from L. araucaniensis, L. bibronii, L. curicencis, L. exploratorum, L. fuscus, L. gracilis, L. lemniscatus, L. saxatilis, and L. tandiliensis. The number of scales around midbody (39–47 vs. 50–76) and the number of ventral scales (74–90 vs. 95–115) distinguish L. pyriphlogos from L. araucaniensis. The upper temporal scales are weakly keeled in L. pyriphlogos (Fig. 4), markedly keeled in L. lemniscatus and L. saxatilis, and smooth in L. araucaniensis, L. bibronii, and L. gracilis. The neck scales are keeled in L. pyriphlogos, and smooth in L. bibronii, L. exploratorum, and L. gracilis. Specimens of L. gracilis lack paravertebral spots, which are present in L. pyriphlogos. Those spots are line-shaped and parallel to the body axis in L. pyriphlogos, whereas the shape of the paravertebral spots differs in L. bibronii and L. exploratorum (rounded), L. fuscus (irregular), L. lemniscatus (rectangular), L. saxatilis (line shaped, but perpendicular to body axis), and L. tandiliensis (triangular). The vertebral line is present in L. pyriphlogos, but absent in L. exploratorum, L. lemniscatus, and L. saxatilis. Liolaemus pyriphlogos sp. nov. differs from L. alticolor in its larger body size (51.5 vs. 46.9 mm SVL, respectively), the number of dorsal scales between occiput and thighs (45.9 vs. 41.9, respectively), the num- ber and surface of dorsal scales of head (14.0 and smooth in the former vs. 12.2 and slightly rugose in the latter), and throat coloration (spots or line segments present in both sexes of the new species, whereas these markings usually are only present in males of L. alticolor). In comparison with L. puna, the species with the most-similar morphology, the new species almost always (90.7%, n 5 53) has keeled or slightly keeled neck scales, whereas in L. puna only 19.3% (n 5 83) of individuals exhibit this character state. In L. puna, only 21.9% (n 5 32) of males have the same color pattern as females (vertebral line, dorsolateral stripes, and line marks in the paravertebral field), whereas in L. pyriphlogos most males (75.9%, n 5 29) have the same pattern as females. Moreover, L. puna has almost twice as many scale organs on the postrostral than L. pyriphlogos (mean 5 6.1; SD 5 1.25 vs. mean 5 3.4; SD 5 1.34, respectively), and fewer (t 5 27.74, df 5 116; P , 0.01) dorsal head scales (12.2; n 5 55 vs. 14.0; n 5 63, respectively). The new species exhibits sexual dimorphism in size, whereas in L. puna, males and females do not differ in SVL. Males of L. pyriphlogos are larger than males of L. puna (n 5 30 in L. puna and n 5 27 in L. pyriphlogos; t 5 2.47, df 5 55; P 5 0.03). Liolaemus pyriphlogos also differs from other members of the L. alticolor group in mean SVL: L. tacnae (47.0 mm) and L. variegatus (57.0 mm). The higher number of scales around the midbody (48.4) distinguishes the new species from L. bitaeniatus (41.8), L. incaicus (40.5), L. pagaburoi (42.0), L. ramir- ezae (42.1), and L. variegatus (40.0). Liolae- mus pyriphlogos has smooth or slightly keeled upper temporals, unlike L. bitaeniatus, L. pagaburoi, and L. variegatus, which have keeled temporals. The surface of the dorsal head scales is smooth in L. pyriphlogos but distinctly rugose in L. bitaeniatus and L. variegatus. The number of dorsal head scales (14.0) is higher in L. pyriphlogos than in L. chaltin (11.9), L. incaicus (11.8), L. pagaburoi (11.3), and L. ramirezae (10.8). The throat in both sexes of L. pyriphlogos has spots, which distinguishes that species from L. pagaburoi, L. variegatus, and L. walkeri (only males exhibit throat coloration), and from L. bitae- niatus, L. chaltin, L. ramirezae, and L. yanalcu (throat is immaculate in both sexes). A vertebral line is present in most males (,90%) and all females of the L. pyriphlogos, but it is absent in L. bitaeniatus, L. tacnae, L. variegatus, and L. incaicus. Females of L. pyriphlogos lack precloacal pores, whereas a proportion of females of L. bitaeniatus (41%), L. incaicus (17%), L. ramirezae (94.1%), L. variegatus (77%), and L. yanalcu (19%) have them [QUINTEROS 2012]. |
| Comment | |
| Etymology | The epithet pyriphlogos comes from Greek and means flaming. Males of L. pyriphlogos exhibit a red bright color in the lateral field, so the name means flaming Liolaemus. |
| References |
|
| External links |