Liolaemus bibronii (BELL, 1843)
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Liolaemus bibronii?
Liolaemus bibronii
Find more photos by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Liolaemidae, Iguania, Sauria, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | E: Bibron's Tree Iguana |
| Synonym | Proctotretus bibronii BELL 1843: 6 Rhytidodeira bibroni — GIRARD 1858: 198 Liolaemus bibronii — BOULENGER 1885: 146 Liolaemus bibronii — MÜLLER & HELLMICH 1938 Liolaemus bibronii — PETERS et al. 1970: 180 Liolaemus bibronii — SCHULTE et al. 2000 Liolaemus (Liolaemus) bibronii — PINCHEIRA-DONOSO & NÚÑEZ 2005: 207 Liolaemus bibronii — SCROCCHI et al. 2010: 79 Liolaemus bibronii — EDWARDS et al. 2022 |
| Distribution | Argentina (Patagonia, Mendoza, San Juan [HR 27: 87], Rio Negro [HR 32: 276], Santa Cruz, Chubut), Chile Type locality: "Port Desire"; “Puerto Deseado, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina)” fide PINCHEIRA-DONOSO et al. 2008. |
| Reproduction | Oviparous |
| Types | Holotype: BMNH xxi.81a (renumbered 1946.8.5.68) (type status unclear fide P. Campbell, pers. comm., March 2019) |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis: Liolaemus bibronii is a small (Max SVL 53.72 mm) slender species, member of the L. alticolor– bibronii group. It is a member of this group, because it exhibits the corresponding character states proposed by Quinteros (2012, 2013). As a member of the L. alticolor–bibronii group, L. bibroni differs in colour pattern from the species of the L. belli group Gray, 1845, L. chillanensis Müller & Hellmich, 1932, L. elongatus Koslowsky 1896, L. kriegi Müller & Hellmich, 1939, L. leopardinus Müller & Hellmich, 1932, L. monticola Müller & Hellmich, 1932, L. nigromaculatus (Wiegmann, 1834) and L. pictus Duméril & Bibron, 1837 groups. Some members of the L. gravenhorsti Gray, 1845 and L. robertmertensi groups show dorsolateral stripes, but those species differ from those of the L. alticolor–bibronii group in the maximum SVL (65 mm in those two groups, and 60 in L. alticolor–bibronii group). The members of the L. alticolor–bibronii group also have well-devolved neck folds, which are absent in some species of the L. robertmertensi and L. gravenhorsti groups. Liolaemus bibronii is geographically isolated (>2000 km) from L. alticolor Barbour, 1909, L. aparicioi Ocampo et al., 2012, L. bitaeniatus Laurent, 1982, L. chaltin Lobo & Espinoza, 2004, L. chavin, L. chungara Quinteros et al., 2014, L. incaicus Lobo et al., 2007, L. pachacutec, L. pagaburoi Lobo & Espinoza, 1999, L. paulinae Donoso Barros, 1961, L. puna Lobo & Espinoza, 2004, L. ramirezae Lobo & Espinoza, 1999, L. tacnae Shreve, 1941, L. variegatus Laurent, 1984, L. walkeri, L. wari and L. yanalcu Martinez Oliver & Lobo, 2002, which are distributed in Bolivia, Peru and northern Argentina and Chile. Despite that, we include comparisons of L. bibronii and these species. A vertebral line in dorsum is evident in L. bibronii, but is absent in L. bitaeniatus and L. incaicus. Males of L. chavin, L. pachacutec, L. wari and L. walkeri exhibit a partial or total ventral melanism, which is absent in L. bibronii. Dorsal scales of body show an evident mucron in L. bibronii, which distinguishes it from L. alticolor, L. chavin, L. pachacutec, L. paulinae and L. tacnae (without mucron). Temporal scales are smooth in L. bibronii, while they are weakly keeled in L. alticolor, L. chaltin, L. chungara, L. incaicus, L. pagaburoi, L. pyriphlogos Quinteros, 2012, L. ramirezae, L. variegatus and L. yanalcu, and markedly keeled in L. aparicioi, L. bitaeniatus and L. variegatus. Neck scales are laminar and smooth in L. bibronii, a character state that distinguishes it from L. alticolor and L. yanalcu (laminar and weakly keeled), from L. aparicioi, L. bitaeniatus, L. chaltin, L. incaicus, L. pagaburoi, L. paulinae, L. puna, L. pyriphlogos, L. ramirezae and L. variegatus, (laminar and keeled), and from L. chungara (exhibits both granular and laminar scales). Liolaemus abdalai, L. araucaniensis Müller & Hellmich, 1932, L. curicencis Müller & Hellmich, 1938, L. cyaneinotatus, L. exploratorum Cei & Williams, 1984, L. fuscus, L. gracilis, L. lemniscatus, L. sanjuanensis, L. saxatilis, L. tandiliensis Vega et al., 2008 and L. yalguaraz are distributed in central and southern Argentina and Chile. The presence of a vertebral line in L. bibronii distinguishes this taxon from L. abdalai, L. exploratorum, L. fuscus, L. lemniscatus Gravenhorst, 1838, L. sanjuanensis and L. saxatilis (which lack a vertebral line). Paravertebral spots are evident in L. bibronii, which distinguishes this taxon from L. fuscus and L. gracilis (paravertebral spots absent). Dorsal scales of body show an evident mucron in L. bibronii, differing from L. tandiliensis (without mucron) and from L. yalguaraz (tiny mucron). Number of scales around midbody are larger in L. bibronii (45–52) than in L. abdalai and L. gracilis (33–44). Also, the numbers of scales of the neck distinguish L. bibronii (30–33) from L. abdalai, L. gracilis, L. lemniscatus, L. saxatilis and L. tandiliensis (20–29) and from L. exploratorum (34–41). The surface of the head is smooth in L. bibronii, being slightly rugose in L. exploratorum, and rugose in L. lemniscatus and L. saxatilis. Temporal scales are smooth in L. bibronii, differing from L. abdalai, L. curicensis, L. exploratorum, L. fuscus, L. tandiliensis and L. yalguaraz (slightly keeled) and from L. cyaneinotatus, L. lemniscatus, L. sanjuanensis, L. saxatilis (keeled). Moreover, neck scales of L. bibronii are smooth, unlike L. abdalai, L. curicensis (some scales are keeled), L. cyaneinotatus, L. fuscus, L. lemniscatus, L. sanjuanensis, L. saxatilis and L. tandiliensis (keeled neck scales). Males of L. bibronii are bigger (53.42–53.72 mm) than males of L. abdalai, L. fuscus, L. lemniscatus and L. saxatilis (max. SVL 52 mm) and smaller than males of L. exploratorum and L. curicencis (min. SVL 54 mm). Females of L. bibronii (45.6–49.8 mm) are larger than females of L. abdalai (max. SVL 40 mm) and L. fuscus (max. SVL 44 mm), and smaller than L. gracilis (min. SVL 52 mm). Liolaemus bibronii has a set of character states that differs from the three new species described by Quinteros et al 2019: L. sp. from Ojos de Agua, L. sp. from Comallo and L. sp. from Malargüe. The contact between nasal and rostral is broad in L. bibronii and narrow in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua. In L. bibronii, the nasal scale is separated from the canthal by one scale, whereas in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua, there are two scales between nasal and canthal. There are five scales between frontal and supercilliaries in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua, while there are four in L. bibronii. In specimens of L. bibronii the fourth supralabial never contacts the subocular scale, whereas in 60% of specimens of L. sp. from Ojos de Agua the fourth supralabial contacts the subocular scale. Colour patterns are similar between L. bibronii and L. sp. from Ojos de Agua, but some differences do exist. Paravertebral spots are line-shaped in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua, while they are rounded in L. bibronii. In the head dorsum of specimens of L. bibronii, there exists a black line surrounding the interparietal scale, which is absent in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua. The ventral surface of the tail is immaculate in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua, while L. bibronii has black to grey spots on the ventral surface of the tail. Table 4 summarizes the main statistical differences between L. bibronii and the three new species described. Lengths of first, second and third toes are smaller in L. bibronii than in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua. On the other hand, the length of the fourth toe in L. bibronii is larger than in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua. Tibia length is larger in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua than in L. bibronii. Number of infradigital lamellae of the second finger is larger in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua than in L. bibronii. The number of infradigital lamellae on first, second, third and fourth toes is smaller in L. bibronii than in L. sp. from Ojos de Agua. There is one scale between nasal and canthal in L. bibronii, while there are two scales in L. sp. from Malargüe. In L. bibronii, there are five scales between frontal and supercilliaries, whereas in L. sp. from Malargüe there are six or seven scales. The number of supercilliaries is larger in L. sp. from Malargüe (Average) than in L. bibronii (5–6). Liolaemus sp. from Malargüe exhibits enlarged scales in the anterior edge of the auditory meatus, whereas in L. bibronii these scales are absent. The number of scales that form the circumorbital semicircle is larger in L. sp. from Malargüe (Average) than in L. bibronii (average). The subocular scale in L. bibronii is white (lighter than loreal region), having the same colour as the loreal region in L. sp. from Malargüe. Paravertebral spots are rounded in L. bibronii, whereas in L. sp. from Malargüe, these spots are merged forming a longitudinal stripe. In L. bibronii, there exists a black line surrounding the interparietal scale, which projects forward to the frontonasals; his is absent in L. sp. from Malargüe. The subocular scale is white (lighter than the loreal region) in L. bibronii, whereas in L. sp. from Malargüe, the subocular scale shows the same colour as the loreal region. Snout– vent length is larger in L. bibronii than in L. sp. from Malargüe. The length of the fifth finger is smaller in L. bibronii than in L. sp. from Malargüe. The length of the fourth toe is larger in L. sp. from Malargüe than in L. bibronii. The head length is larger in L. sp. from Malargüe than in L. bibronii. The head in L. bibronii is wider than in L. sp. from Malargüe. Tibia length is larger in L. sp. from Malargüe than in L. bibronii. The number of neck and gular scales is larger in L. bibronii than in L. sp. from Malargüe. The number of infradigital lamellae of L. bibronii is lower than in L. sp. from Malargüe. There is one scale between nasal and canthal scale in L. bibronii, whereas in L. sp. from Comallo there are two scales. In L. bibronii, four scales separate frontal from supercilliaries, there being five in L. sp. from Comallo. The absence of enlarged scales in the anterior margin of the auditory meatus distinguishes L. bibronii from L. sp. from Comallo, which exhibits enlarged scales. The number of scales of circumorbital semicircles is lower in L. bibronii than in L. sp. from Comallo (average, respectively). An antegular fold is evident in L. sp. from Comallo, whereas this fold is absent in L. bibronii. The fourth supralabial scale never contacts the subocular scale in L. bibronii, whereas in L. sp. from Comallo, that contact exists in some specimens (90%). In the dorsal region of the head there is a black line surrounding the interparietal scale, which projects forward to frontonasals in L. bibronii, whereas it is absent in L. sp. from Comallo. Paravertebral spots are rounded in L. bibronii, being irregularly shaped in L. sp. from Comallo. The ventral region of the tail exhibits spots in L. bibronii, but is spotless in L. sp. from Comallo. The number of scales around the midbody is larger in L. sp. from Comallo than in L. bibronii. Neck and gular scales are more numerous in L. sp. from Comallo than in L. bibronii. The number of infradigital lamellae on the second finger is lower in L. bibronii than in L. sp from Comallo. The number of infradigital lamellae of the second, third and fourth toes is lower in L. bibronii than in L. sp from Comallo (from Quinteros et al. 2019). |
| Comment | see also Bull. Zool. Nomencl., Case 2976. Hybridization: Liolaemus gracilis appears to hybridize with L. bibronii. |
| Etymology | Named after Gabriel Bibron (1806-1848), French zoologist. |
| References |
|
| External links |