Search

Ameivula ocellifera (Spix, 1825) Tejus ocellifer Spix, 1825: 23. Cnemidophorus ocellifer – Peters 1877: 414. Ameivula ocellifera – Harvey et al. 2012: 93 (type species of Ameivula). Cnemidophorus hygomi Reinhardt & Lütken, 1862: 231 (namebearing type: holotype, ZMB 4335. Type locality: “ Maruim ”, state of Sergipe, Brazil). Heterochresonymy Tej[us] murinus (non Seps murinus Laurenti, 1768) – Boie 1826: 120 (partim). — Fitzinger 1827: 747 (partim). Seps murinus (non Seps murinus Laurenti, 1768) – Wagler 1830: 154 (partim). Teius (Ameiva) vulgaris (non Ameiva vulgaris Lichtenstein, 1823) – Gray 1831: 29 (partim). Cnemidophorus murinus (non Seps murinus Laurenti, 1768) – Duméril & Bibron 1839: 107 (partim). Cnemidophorus lacertoides (non Cnemidophorus lacertoides Duméril & Bibron, 1839) – Reinhardt & Lütken 1862: 146. TYPE MATERIAL. — Original name-bearing types. Brazil • 2 syntypes; “ Bahia ”; ZSM 111/0 and a second unlabeled specimen, both lost. Neotype (here designated). Brazil • 1 ♂; Parque das Dunas; 12°55’3”S, 38°19’12”W; 20 m a.s.l.; municipality of Salvador, state of Bahia; R. Marques, M. L. T. Oliveira, N. J. L. Santos, and M. S. Bonfim leg.; 15.VII.2018; ZUFMS-REP 04144. ORIGINAL TYPE LOCALITY. — “ Bahia ”. TYPE LOCALITY (BY NEOTYPE DESIGNATION). — Parque das Dunas, 12°55’3”S, 38°19’12”W, 20 m a.s.l., municipality of Salvador, state of Bahia, Brazil (Fig. 3). ETYMOLOGY. — The specific name ocellifera (masculine ocellifer) means “bearing little eyes”. It derives from the Latin ocellus (diminutive of oculus, i.e., “small eye”) and fero (“to carry”, “to bear”), in reference to the series of small bluish ocelli between the fore and hindlimbs. DESCRIPTION OF THE NEOTYPE Morphometry and lepidosis Adult male in good condition; no evident scar or damage (Figs 4; 5). Tail whole; small longitudinal incision on left thigh due to muscle sample collection. Snout-vent length, 61.08 mm; trunk length, 30.36 mm; tail length, 133.59 mm; head length, 18.53 mm; head width, 10.25 mm; head height, 8.41 mm; humeral length, 6.48 mm; forelimb length, 19.4 mm; femur length, 13.03 mm; tibia length, 12.68 mm; foot length, 22.10 mm; hindlimb length, 47.81 mm (Fig. 4). Head distinct from neck (Fig. 5), longer than wide (head length/head width, 1.80); head length/snout-vent length, 0.30. Trunk elongate (trunk length/ snout-vent length, 0.49); tail long, about 2.2 × snout-vent length. Snout moderately pointed. Rostral and frontonasal separated by pair of anterior nasals (Figs 4; 5, see details in Appendices 1; 2). Nostril anterior to and in contact with nasal suture. Posterior nasals contact pair of prefrontals. Prefrontal on each side separated from first supraciliary by loreal and first supraocular. Loreal, single, large, almost high as long, in contact with posterior nasal, prefrontal, first supraocular, first supraciliary, first and second suboculars, and third and fourth supralabials. Frontal entire, lacking ridges; posterior suture of frontal aligns with first half of third supraocular. Frontoparietals, two. Parietals, four (a pair on each side). Interparietal subequal in size to each flanking pair of parietals. Occipitals (c. 45) irregular, variable in size, larger than dorsals on first row, immediately posterior to them. Temporals irregular in size. Four enlarged supratemporals in longitudinal row behind supraciliaries. Supratemporals separated from parietals by occipitals. Circumorbitals reaching posterior border of first supraocular. Supraoculars, four on each side, 3 rd > 2 nd > 1 st > 4 th; first supraocular entire, contacting second supraocular, loreal, prefrontal, frontal, and first supraciliary; second to fourth supraoculars separated from supraciliaries by one row of lateral supraocular granules. Supraciliaries, five on each side; first supraciliary in contact with first subocular. Supralabials, six on each side, third largest. Infralabials, five on each side; third to sixth separated from chinshields by row of granules. Chinshields, four on each side; first pair with suture through almost their length. Gular region divided in two: anterior gular region with rounded and larger scales, in 20 irregular transverse rows; posterior gular region covered by smaller scales in 15 transverse rows. Interangular and intertympanic sulci absent; interauricular crease present. Dorsal and lateral head scales juxtaposed and smooth. Dorsals round, smooth, and sub-imbricate; 176 dorsals along mid-dorsum, from nape to base of tail; 88 around midbody. Ventrals smooth, wider than long, imbricated, in eight longitudinal rows and 26 transverse rows. Preanal plate with three enlarged scales (a central and two posterior scales), surrounded by seven smaller scales.Scales on base of tail rectangular, smaller than ventrals, in transverse rows; scales around tail, 28, longer and narrower posteriorly; tail scales keeled dorsally, smooth ventrally. Scales on flanks granular, round, smooth, sub-imbricate. Forelimbs with large, smooth, imbricate scales on dorsal surface of upper arms and anterodorsal forearms; elsewhere scales small and granular. Scales in the dorsal region of the forearm enlarged, in two longitudinal rows. Hindlimbs with large, smooth, imbricate scales on anteroventral surface of thighs and ventral surface of lower legs; elsewhere, scales small and granular; enlarged prefemoral scales, 10. Femoral pores in continuous row along each thigh; seven pores on right side and eight pores on left side. Abdominal pores, one on each side. Lamellae under fourth finger, 16 on each side; under fourth toe, 27 on each side. Fifth toe shortened. Tibiotarsal spurs absent. Coloration in life Dorsal parts of head, body, limbs, and tail medium brown (Fig. 3A). Lateral parts of the head light brown. Belly and ventral parts of the head, limbs, and tail, uniform creamy white. Vertebral stripe absent. Paravertebral field enlarged, light brown, bordered on both sides by lighter paravertebral stripes that run from nape to base of tail (see details in Appendix 1). Paravertebral stripes separated from dorsolateral stripe on each side by dark brown dorsolateral field, from nape to first third of tail. Dorsolateral stripe creamy white, from nape to first third of tail, separated from upper lateral stripe by upper lateral field. Upper lateral field with irregular black spots that tend to fuse anteriorly and series of small and irregularly spaced bluish ocelli (7-21 scales diameter) between fore and hindlimbs; ocelli close to hindlimbs in brown to greenish-yellow background; blue coloration along upper lateral stripe in some anterior caudal scales. Upper lateral stripe from subocular scales to first third of tail, creamy white anteriorly, light brown and greenish-yellow in middle of trunk, creamy white posterior to hindlimbs. Upper lateral stripe separated from creamy white lower lateral stripe by lower lateral field, enlarged anterior to forelimbs. Lower lateral stripe short, from below ear to axilla. Lower lateral field irregularly black-spotted, interspersed with whitish-blue ocelli (8-16 scales diameter) surrounded by greenish-yellow scales between fore and hindlimbs; some enlarged lateral scales and some outermost ventral scales blue. Color in ethanol Head brownish dorsally, brownish-white laterally, and bluishwhite ventrally. Dorsum brownish, stripes bluish-white, fields dark brown or black (except paravertebral field light gray), and ocelli faded bluish-white. Belly bluish-white. Ventral aspect of forelimbs and hindlimbs immaculate. Dorsal aspect of tail like in life, although faded, including few blue scales close to the base of tail. Ventral aspect of tail immaculate (Fig. 4). COMPARISON WITH OTHER AMEIVULA SPECIES The following characters (see Table 2 and Table 3) distinguish A. ocellifera from its congeners (data in parentheses). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. abalosi in having 82-141 scales around midbody (75-98), 26-38 subdigital lamellae under fourth toe (24-31), and whitish blue ocelli (light-blue or whitish green ocelli). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. apipensis in having 14-28 femoral pores (12-17), 26-38 subdigital lamellae under fourth toe (24-27), vertebral stripes absent (present), whitish-blue ocelli (no ocelli), and immaculate throat (yellow). Although the description of A. apipensis indicates an intertympanic sulcus (absent in A. ocellifera), the figures available indicate the contrary, i.e., the absence of such structure in A. apipensis. Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. cipoensis in having 13-20 subdigital lamellae under fourth finger (12-14), 26-38 subdigital lamellae under fourth toe (21-24), lower lateral stripes broken (absent), whitish-blue ocelli (yellow-greenish ocelli), and hindlimb spots present (absent). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. confusioniba in having paravertebral and dorsolateral fields present (absent), paravertebral and lower lateral stripes present (absent), whitish-blue ocelli (bright yellow ocelli), and hindlimb spots present (absent). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. jalapensis in having eight longitudinal rows of ventral scales (6-8), 14-28 femoral pores (10-16), 172- 248 dorsal scales (200-250), 35 gular scales (41-64), larger body size (maximum SVL, 56 mm), vertebral stripe absent (broken), upper and lower lateral fields spotted (uniform), whitish-blue ocelli (no ocelli), hindlimb spots present (absent), and immaculate throat (lime-green). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. mumbuca in having eight longitudinal rows of ventral scales (6-8), 172-248 dorsal scales (194-271), 26-38 subdigital lamellae under fourth toe (24-32), 35 gular scales (38-49), larger body size (maximum SVL, 59 mm in males), lower lateral fields spotted (uniform), and whitish-blue ocelli (whitish-blue spots only in males). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. nativo in having 25-31 transverse rows of ventral scales (29-32), vertebral stripe absent (present), paravertebral fields present (absent), paravertebral and lower lateral stripes present (absent), upper and lower lateral fields spotted (uniform), whitish-blue ocelli (no ocelli), hindlimb spots present (absent), immaculate throat (light blue), and bisexual (only females). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. nigrigula in having 21-30 scales around tail (27-32), whitish-blue ocelli (bright turquoise ocelli), hindlimb spots present (absent), and throat region immaculate (black). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. pyrrhogularis in having 172-248 dorsal scales (192- 255), 21-30 scales around tail (23-33), vertebral stripe absent (present in juveniles and females), whitish-blue ocelli (light blue or greenish-blue ocelli), and immaculate throat (orange in adult males). Ameivula ocellifera differs from A. xacriaba in having 26-38 subdigital lamellae under fourth toe (23-28), 35 gular scales (41-52), paravertebral stripes present (absent), whitish-blue ocelli (bright green ocelli), and hindlimb spots present (absent). Although the description of A. xacriaba indicates an intertympanic sulcus (absent in A. ocellifera), the figures available reveal the contrary, i.e., the lack of such structure, but with an interauricular crease in A. xacriaba. Less marked differences between species can be found in Table 2 and Table 3. A. ocellifera Character Neotype A. abalosi A. apipensis A. cipoensis A. confusioniba A. jalapensis A. mumbuca A. nativo A. nigrigula A. pyrrhogularis A. xacriaba VESabsentabsentpresentabsentabsentpresent,absentpresentabsentpresent (juveniles absentbrokenand females)PVFpresentpresentpresentpresentabsentpresentpresentabsentpresentpresentpresent(juveniles)PVSpresentpresent (faint)presentpresentabsentpresent,present, brokenabsentpresentpresentabsentbroken(juveniles)DLFpresentpresentpresentpresentabsentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresent(juveniles)DLSULFULSLLFLLSLASHLSTHRSEDpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresent, brokenpresentpresentpresentpresent(occasionally)(juveniles)spottedspottedspottedspottedspotteduniformuniform or spotteduniformspottedspottedspottedpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentspotteduniform orspottedspotteduniform oruniformuniformuniformspottedspottedspottedspottedspottedpresent, broken presentpresentabsentabsentpresent,present, brokenabsentpresentpresent, brokenpresentbrokenwhitish-light blue orirregulars light yellow-greenishbright yellowabsentbluish-white spotsabsentbright turquoiselight blue orbright greenblue ocelliwhitish-green spotsocelli alternating ocelli(males)ocelligreenish-blueocellialternatinggreen ocelli(no ocellus)with irregularocelli (adults),with irregularalternatingalternatingblack spotstan ocelliblack spotswith irregular with black(juveniles)black spotsspotspresentpresentpresentabsentabsentabsentmostly presentabsentabsentpresentabsent(frequently)immaculatepearly whiteyellowwhiteimmaculatelime-greenimmaculatelight blueblackorange (adultwhitemales)n/aabsentpresentpresent (bellyabsentabsentpresentpartheno-present (stripes present (stripespresent (flanks(occasionally)(juveniles)spottedspottedspottedspottedspotteduniformuniform or spotteduniformspottedspottedspottedpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentpresentspotteduniform orspottedspotteduniform oruniformuniformuniformspottedspottedspottedspottedspottedpresent, broken presentpresentabsentabsentpresent,present, brokenabsentpresentpresent, brokenpresentbrokenwhitish-light blue orirregulars light yellow-greenishbright yellowabsentbluish-white spotsabsentbright turquoiselight blue orbright greenblue ocelliwhitish-green spotsocelli alternating ocelli(males)ocelligreenish-blueocellialternatinggreen ocelli(no ocellus)with irregularocelli (adults),with irregularalternatingalternatingblack spotstan ocelliblack spotswith irregular with black(juveniles)black spotsspotspresentpresentpresentabsentabsentabsentmostly presentabsentabsentpresentabsent(frequently)immaculatepearly whiteyellowwhiteimmaculatelime-greenimmaculatelight blueblackorange (adultwhitemales)n/aabsentpresentpresent (bellyabsentabsentpresentpartheno-present (stripes present (stripespresent (flanks(dorsolateralyellow in males,(anteriormost lightgeneticabsent inbarely visiblebright greenfields darkbluish-white inareas bluish in(onlymales)and fieldsin adultbrown infemales; ocellimales and whitishfemales)partially fademales,adult males,from fore- toin females; loweraway in adultbright yellowbright greenhindlimbs inlateral fieldsmales)in adultin females)males, 2-3 ocelligenerally withfemales)proximal tobluish-white spotsthe forelimb inin males, uniformfemales)in half of thefemales) DISTRIBUTION The current known geographic range of Ameivula ocellifera is in the southeastern portion of the Caatinga (states of Pernambuco, Alagoas, Sergipe, and Bahia) and part of the Atlantic Forest of eastern Bahia (including Salvador, its type locality), Sergipe, and Alagoas (Arias et al. 2018). The identity of populations from central and north Caatinga (Paraíba, Rio Grande do Norte, Ceará, and Piauí) is under revaluation, and may reveal a distinct taxon in the near future. Records attributed to A. ocellifera in northern Brazil (Rondônia, Pará, and Tocantins), midwestern Brazil (Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Goiás, Distrito Federal, Minas Gerais, and São Paulo), and northeastern Brazil (Maranhão) (Costa et al. 2022) represent candidate species close to A. ocellifera (e.g. “W-Ce clade” in Arias et al. 2018) or probably misidentifications., Published as part of Oliveira, Eliana F., Costa, Henrique C., São-Pedro, Vinícius A., Marques, Ricardo, Santana, Diego J., Colli, Guarino R., Mesquita, Daniel O. & Costa, Gabriel C., 2022, On the type locality of Ameivula ocellifera (Spix, 1825) (Squamata, Teiidae), with a neotype designation, pp. 475-491 in Zoosystema 44 (19) on pages 482-487, DOI: 10.5252/zoosystema2022v44a19, http://zenodo.org/record/7245521, {"references":["SPIX J. B. R. 1825. - Animalia nova sive species novae Lacertarum, quas in itinere per Brasiliam annis MDCCCXVII-MDCCCXX jussu et auspiciis Maximiliani Josephi I. Bavariae regis suscepto, Typis Franc. Seraph. Hubschmanni, Monachii. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5117","PETERS W. 1877. - Herpetologische Notizen. I. Uber die von Spix in Brasilien gesammelten Eidechsen des Koniglichen Naturalien- Kabinets zu Munchen. Monatsbericht der Koniglich-Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1877: 407 - 414.","HARVEY M. B., UGUETO G. N. & GUTBERLET JR. R. L. 2012. - Review of teiid morphology with a revised taxonomy and phylogeny of the Teiidae (Lepidosauria: Squamata). Zootaxa 3459: 1 - 156. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3459.1.1","REINHARDT J. & LUTKEN C. 1862 \" 1861 \". - Bidrag til Kundskab om Brasiliens Padder og Krybdyr. Forste Afdeling Padderne og Oglerne. Videnskabelige meddelelser fra den Naturhistoriske forening i Kjobenhavn 1861: 143 - 242.","BOIE H. 1826. - Bemerkungen uber die von Herrn von Spix abgebildeten brasilianischen Saurier. Isis von Oken 18 (1): 117 - 120.","FITZINGER L. 1827. - Recension des Spixischen Eidechsenwerkes. Isis von Oken 20: 741 - 750.","WAGLER J. 1830. - Naturliches System der Amphibien, mit vorangehender Classification der Saugthiere und Vogel, ein Beitrag zur vergleichenden Zoologie. Munchen, Stuttgart und Tubingen, vi + 354 p. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 58730","GRAY J. E. 1831. - A synopsis of the species of the Class Reptilia, in Griffith E. & Pidgeon E. (eds) The animal kingdom arranged in conformity with its organisation. Whittaker, Treacher and Co., London, 1 - 110. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 45021","DUMERIL A. M. C. & BIBRON G. 1839. - Erpetologie Generale on Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Tome 5. Librairie Encyclopedique de Roret, Paris, 854 p. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 45973","CABRERA M. R. 2012. - A new species of Cnemidophorus (Squamata, Teiidae) from the South American Chaco. The Herpetological Journal 22 (2): 123 - 131.","ARIAS F. J., RECODER R., ALVAREZ B. B., ETHCEPARE E., QUIPILDOR M., LOBO F. & RODRIGUES M. T. 2018. - Diversity of teiid lizards from Gran Chaco and western Cerrado (Squamata: Teiidae). Zoologica Scripta 47 (2): 144 - 158. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / zsc. 12277","ARIAS F. J., CARVALHO C. M., ZAHER H. & RODRIGUES M. T. 2014 a. - A new species of Ameivula (Squamata, Teiidae) from Southern Espinhaco Mountain Range, Brazil. Copeia 2014 (1): 95 - 105. https: // doi. org / 10.1643 / CH- 13 - 037","ARIAS F. J., CARVALHO C. M., RODRIGUES M. T. & ZAHER H. 2011 a. - Two new species of Cnemidophorus (Squamata: Teiidae) from the Caatinga, Northwest Brazil. Zootaxa 2787: 37 - 54. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 2787.1.3","COLLI G. R., GIUGLIANO L. G., MESQUITA D. O. & FRANCA F. G. R. 2009. - A new species of Cnemidophorus from the Jalapao region, in the central Brazilian Cerrado. Herpetologica 65 (3): 311 - 327. https: // doi. org / 10.1655 / 08 - 049 R 1.1","COLLI G. R., CALDWELL J. P., COSTA G. C., GAINSBURY A. M., GARDA A. A. & MESQUITA D. O. 2003 a. - A new species of Cnemidophorus (Squamata, Teiidae) from the Cerrado biome in central Brazil. Occasional Papers of the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History 14: 1 - 14.","ROCHA C. F. D., BERGALLO H. G. & PECCININI- SEALE D. 1997. - Evidence of an unisexual population of the Brazilian whiptail lizard genus Cnemidophorus (Teiidae), with description of a new species. Herpetologica 53 (3): 374 - 382.","ARIAS F. J., CARVALHO C. M., RODRIGUES M. T. & ZAHER H. 2011 b. - Two new species of Cnemidophorus (Squamata: Teiidae) of the C. ocellifer group, from Bahia, Brazil. Zootaxa 3022 (1): 1 - 21. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3022.1.1","ARIAS F. J., TEIXEIRA M., RECODER R., CARVALHO C. M., ZAHER H. & RODRIGUES M. T. 2014 b. - Whiptail lizards in South America: a new Ameivula (Squamata, Teiidae) from Planalto dos Gerais, Eastern Brazilian Cerrado. Amphibia-Reptilia 35 (2): 227 - 242. https: // doi. org / 10.1163 / 15685381 - 00002948","COSTA H. C., GUEDES T. B. & BERNILS R. S. 2022 \" 2021 \". - Lista de Repteis do Brasil: padroes e tendencias. Sociedade Brasileira de Herpetologia, 10 (3): 110 - 279. https: // doi. org / 10.5281 / zenodo. 5838950"]}

Animal colouration plays a key role in inter and intraspecific interactions, pre-eminently in mate signalling. When multiple types of colouration occur within sexes it is possible that they show alternative reproductive strategies. In lizards, most colouration studies do not incorporate how colour is perceived by conspecifics. Here, we used unbiased colour analysis methods (spectrophotometry and visual modelling) to test for sexual dimorphism and within male dichromatism in the Striped Lava Lizard. We found that males express two distinct colourations that are different from females in several dorsal and ventral body regions. Our results showed UV reflection at the throat, an important body region for signalling. Ventral patches, the coloured badge seen in adult males of Tropidurus spp, have two distinct colour classes within males (Y and B males). Morphs are best discriminated by blue and yellow chroma, and brightness. Body size had little influence on colouration, suggesting that colour may be linked to inheritance rather than growth. Our study clearly shows sexual dichromatism and the existence of colour morphs in this species. Moreover, morph differences in colouration are perceptible by conspecifics. These differences are not only between ventral patches, but also in other body parts such as the dorsum, previously considered as cryptic by human observers. We suggest that colouration at the ventral patches and throat might play a role in intraspecific interactions. Patches increase colour intensity during breeding season and are likely to be costly by pigment-based expression, whereas throat’s UV reflection might have a cost infringed by conspicuousness.

We investigate the role of ecology and phylogeny in the association between lizard abundance and microhabitat variables in an Amazon rain forest site. Using pitfall trap arrays, we collected data from 349 individuals belonging to 23 lizard species. After accounting for spatial autocorrelation and using a canonical correspondence analysis (CCA), we found that lizard captures were significantly associated with microhabitat variables, which accounted for 48 percent of the observed variation. Furthermore, a canonical phylogenetic ordination (CPO) indicated that microhabitat variables are more important in determining the distribution of lizard species than phylogenetic relationships among species. Termite nests, canopy openness, and tree circumference were strongly associated with the number of captures of certain lizard species. Our results confirm autecology studies of individual lizard species for which data are available. We suggest that maintaining heterogeneous forested microhabitats should be a central goal for sustaining a high lizard biodiversity in Amazon rain forests.

Map of the bioregions, path models, and distribution of the correlation coefficients (betwwen maximum clade age and richness).

Distribution data, phylogenetic data, and estimation of the evolutionary (time, rate, and dispersal), ecological (productivity and temperature), and climatic stability predictors.

Map of the bioregions, path models, and distribution of the correlation coefficients (betwwen maximum clade age and richness).

Map of the bioregions, path models, and distribution of the correlation coefficients (betwwen maximum clade age and richness).

Distribution data, phylogenetic data, and estimation of the evolutionary (time, rate, and dispersal), ecological (productivity and temperature), and climatic stability predictors.