Panolopus lapierrae SCHOOLS & HEDGES, 2024
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Panolopus lapierrae?
Panolopus lapierrae
We have no photos, try to find some by Google images search: 
| Higher Taxa | Diploglossidae, Diploglossa, Anguimorpha, Sauria, Squamata (lizards) |
| Subspecies | |
| Common Names | |
| Synonym | Panolopus lapierrae SCHOOLS & HEDGES 2024: 174 Diploglossus curtissi diastatus — SCHWARTZ 1964:42 (part) Celestus curtissi diastatus — SCHWARTZ & HENDERSON 1988:98 (part) Celestus curtissi diastatus — SCHWARTZ & Henderson, 1991:371 (part) Celestus curtissi diastatus — HEDGES et al., 2019:17 (part) Celestus curtissi — SCHOOLS & HEDGES 2021:230 (part) |
| Distribution | Haiti Type locality: 11.8 km w of Ça Soleil, (19.46955, -72.77713; ca. 100 m). |
| Reproduction | |
| Types | Holotype. ANSP 38578, an adult male, collected by S. Blair Hedges, Richard Thomas, Nicholas Plummer, and Manuel Leal on 11 June 1991. Paratypes (n=4). HAITI. Artibonite. KU 226257–8, 7.6 mi w Ça Soleil, 14 July 1978; KU 226261, 7.6 mi w Ça Soleil, 17 July 1978; SBH 192407, 11.8 km w of Ça Soleil, 6 November 1991. |
| Diagnosis | Diagnosis: Panolopus lapierrae sp. nov. has (1) a dorsal pattern of absent/dots in chevrons, (2) head markings absent/present, (3) markings in the longitudinal paramedian area absent/present, (4) dots arranged in bars in the lateral band absent/present, (5) an adult SVL of 72.6–88.3 mm, (6) ventral scale rows, 90–98, (7) midbody scale rows, 33–38, (8) total lamellae on one hand, 38–47, (9) total strigae on ten scales, 228–231, (10) relative length of all digits on one hindlimb, 24.3–30.9 %, (11) relative distance between the angled subocular and mouth, 0.620– 0.725 %, (12) relative eye length, 2.88–3.67 %, (13) relative forelimb length, 18.5–20.6 %, (14) relative ear width, 0.929–1.58 %, (15) relative rostral height, 1.86–2.06 %, (16) relative head length, 17.0–18.7 %, (17) relative mental width, 1.92–1.94 %, (18) relative postmental width, 2.68–3.58 %, (19) relative cloacal width, 8.55–8.81 %, (20) relative prefrontal width, 4.73–4.75 %, (21) relative largest supraocular width, 1.91–2.77 %, (22) relative longest finger length, 4.49–4.55 %, (23) relative distance between the ear and eye, 7.78–8.43 %, (24) relative head width, 77.7–78.1 %, (25) relative frontal width, 77.6–79.0 %, (26) relative nasal height, 1.06–1.09 %, (27) relative angled subocular height, 0.838–0.978 %, (28) relative distance between the eye and naris, 5.21 %, (29) relative canthal iii length, 1.54–1.86 %, (30) relative angled subocular width, 2.71 %, and (31) relative nasal length, 1.81 %. The species stem time is 1.53 Ma and no data are available to estimate the species crown time (Fig. 4). Panolopus lapierrae sp. nov. has a smaller relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55) than most other species of the genus. From Panolopus aenetergum, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the dorsal pattern (absent/dots in chevrons versus irregular dots) and the ventral scale rows (90–98 versus 80–86). From P. aporus, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative prefrontal width (4.73–4.75 versus 4.18–4.53), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 4.57–5.72), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 61.7–75.1), and the relative nasal width (1.81 versus 1.56–1.78). From P. chalcorhabdus, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative length of digits on one hindlimb (24.3–30.9 versus 31.3–36.0), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.29–6.97), the relative head width (77.7–78.1 versus 65.0–76.3), and the relative width of canthal iii (1.54–1.86 versus 1.98–2.05). From P. costatus, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the midbody scale rows (33–38 versus 39–43), the total lamellae on one hand (38–47 versus 49–58), the total strigae on ten scales (228–231 versus 158–217), the relative length of digits on one hindlimb (24.3–30.9 versus 31.5–37.8), the relative cloacal width (8.55–8.81 versus 7.27– 8.51), the relative prefrontal width (4.73–4.75 versus 3.97–4.67), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.53–6.66), the relative head width (77.7–78.1 versus 68.3–76.8), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 56.2– 67.4), and the relative nasal width (1.81 versus 1.58–1.74). From P. curtissi, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. the relative distance between angled subocular and mouth (0.620–0.725 versus 0.393–0.587), the relative prefrontal width (4.73–4.75 versus 3.96–4.68), the relative distance between the ear and eye (7.78–8.43 versus 5.36–7.71), and the relative distance between the eye and naris (5.21 versus 4.02–5.03). From P. diastatus, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative distance between angled subocular and mouth (0.620–0.725 versus 0.00–0.614), the relative cloacal width (8.55–8.81 versus 7.15–8.06), the relative prefrontal width (4.73–4.75 versus 3.74–4.61), the relative head width (77.7–78.1 versus 69.4–74.8), the relative distance between the eye and naris (5.21 versus 4.06–4.94), and the relative nasal width (1.81 versus 1.41–1.77). From P. emys, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the adult SVL (72.6–88.3 versus 99.0–113), the total strigae on ten scales (228–231 versus 238–311), the relative rostral height (1.86–2.06 versus 2.10–2.37), the relative prefrontal width (4.73–4.75 versus 3.99–4.36), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.15–5.83), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 67.7–74.5), and the relative distance between the eye and naris (5.21 versus 4.37–5.19). From P. hylonomus, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the total strigae on ten scales (228–231 versus 169–222), the relative head width (77.7–78.1 versus 73.8–76.4), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 64.0–74.5), the relative distance between the eye and naris (5.21 versus 4.03–4.98), and the relative width of canthal iii (1.54–1.86 versus 1.95–2.03). From P. lanceolatus sp. nov., we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative postmental width (2.68–3.58 versus 2.36–2.66), the relative prefrontal width (4.73–4.75 versus 3.97–4.55), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 4.76–6.36), the relative distance between the ear and eye (7.78–8.43 versus 6.45–7.70), the relative head width (77.7–78.1 versus 68.0–77.6), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 63.1–72.1), and the relative distance between the eye and naris (5.21 versus 4.58–5.05). From P. leionotus, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 4.58–6.10). From P. marcanoi, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 4.75–6.68), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 59.0–73.0), and the relative angled subocular height (0.838–0.978 versus 0.505–0.793). From P. melanchrous, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the adult SVL (72.6–88.3 versus 93.2–124), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.76–7.09), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 61.3–71.4), and the relative nasal height (1.06–1.09 versus 0.897–0.952). From P. neiba, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.61– 6.66), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 63.3–74.0), and the relative distance between the eye and naris (5.21 versus 4.51–5.01). From P. nesobous, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the dorsal pattern (absent/dots in chevrons versus irregular dots/dots in series), the total lamellae on one hand (38–47 versus 50–59), the total strigae on ten scales (228–231 versus 155–222), the relative length of digits on one hindlimb (24.3–30.9 versus 35.1), the relative forelimb length (18.5–20.6 versus 23.3–25.1), the relative rostral height (1.86–2.06 versus 2.26–2.38), the relative mental width (1.92–1.94 versus 1.96–2.18), the relative cloacal width (8.55–8.81 versus 8.11–8.21), the relative largest supraocular width (1.91–2.77 versus 2.85–3.11), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 6.19–6.33), the relative head width (77.7–78.1 versus 71.2–76.4), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 60.8–63.5), the relative nasal height (1.06–1.09 versus 1.12–1.14), the relative angled subocular height (0.838– 0.978 versus 0.669–0.750), and the relative width of canthal iii (1.54–1.86 versus 2.01–2.12). From P. oreistes, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative length of digits on one hindlimb (24.3–30.9 versus 31.2–40.1), the relative mental width (1.92–1.94 versus 1.54–1.90), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.27–7.23), the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 61.6–76.9), and the relative nasal width (1.81 versus 1.37–1.65). From P. psychonothes, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the relative cloacal width (8.55–8.81 versus 7.56–8.53), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 4.89–5.81), the relative nasal height (1.06–1.09 versus 1.12–1.32), and the relative angled subocular width (2.71 versus 2.01–2.44). From P. saonae, we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the adult SVL (72.6–88.3 versus 90.9–98.3) and the relative rostral height (1.86–2.06 versus 2.15–2.46). From P. semitaeniatus sp. nov., we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the total strigae on ten scales (228–231 versus 174–204), the relative forelimb length (18.5–20.6 versus 21.3–23.8), the relative ear width (0.929–1.58 versus 1.90–2.30), the relative rostral height (1.86–2.06 versus 2.41–2.63), the relative cloacal width (8.55–8.81 versus 8.08–8.23), the relative longest finger length (4.49–4.55 versus 5.17–6.05), the relative head width (77.7– 78.1 versus 58.8–63.8), and the relative frontal width (77.6–79.0 versus 63.6–76.5). From P. unicolor sp. nov., we distinguish P. lapierrae sp. nov. by the midbody scale rows (33–38 versus 40), the total lamellae on one hand (38–47 versus 48), and the total strigae on ten scales (228–231 versus 144). (Schools & Hedges 2024) Additional details (628 characters) are available for collaborators and contributors. Please contact us for details. |
| Comment | Distribution: for a map see Schools & Hedges 2024: 134 (Fig. 50) Synonymy: from SCHOOLS & HEDGES 2024. |
| Etymology | Named after the region of Lapierre, Artibonite Department, Haiti. |
| References |
|
| External links |