Search

Ahaetulla flavescens (Wall, 1910) comb. nov. Figs 1–9; Tables 2–5 Dryophis prasinus flavescens Wall, 1910: 834. Dryophis prasinus indicus Mell, 1931: 119–219. (by implication). Dryophis prasina – Günther 1858: 159 (part). Tragops prasinus – Günther 1864: 364. — Theobald 1876: 191. Dryophis prasinus – Boulenger 1890: 369; 1896: 180 (part). Dryophis prasinus ‘forma typica’ (non H. Boie in F. Boie, 1827) – Wall 1909a: 354; 1909b: 898; 1910: 834. Dryophis prasinus flavescens (nec Smith, 1914) – Wall 1910: 834. Differential diagnosis A species of Ahaetulla inhabiting Northeast India, defined by the following combination of characters: dorsal scales in 15:15:11–13 smooth rows (vs 13 midbody rows of keeled scales in Proahaetulla Link, 1807); rostral appendage absent (vs present in the A. nasuta group and A. pulverulenta groups); presence of a pair of white ventrolateral stripes throughout the body (vs absence of ventrolateral stripes in the A.pulverulenta group); dorsum usually greenish (vs usually brownish in both sexes in the A. pulverulenta and A. laudankia groups; usually brown in females, in A. anomala (Annandale, 1906), A. perrotetii (Duméril & Bibron, 1854), A. dispar (Günther, 1864) and A. travancorica Mallik, Srikanthan, Pal, D’Souza, Shanker & Ganesh, 2020); crown uniform and unpatterned (vs crown with black markings and reticulations in A. anomala, A. laudankia Deepak, Narayanan, Sarkar, Dutta & Mohapatra, 2019 and A. fasciolata); ventrals 194–200 (vs A. nasuta and A. pulverulenta groups); subcaudals 155–168 (vs A. perrotetii, A. dispar and A. travancorica); cloacal scale paired (vs entire in A. mycterizans and A. fasciolata); supralabials entire (vs 3 rd –4 th supralabials horizontally divided in A. fronticincta); nasals not in contact with one another (vs in contact with one another above rostral in A. fronticincta); upper snout surface flat to mildly depressed (vs convex in A. mycterizans); 8.2–10% divergent in ND4 and 6.5–9.5% in Cytb gene from the SE Asian populations of A. prasina sensu lato. Etymology A Latin adjective, derived from Latin verb ‘ flavesco / flavescre ’, meaning ‘turning to yellow’ / ‘becoming yellow’, referring to the yellowish colouration of the type specimens in life (see Wall 1910). Type material Lectotype (designated herein) INDIA • ♀; “ Lakimpur, Assam, Northeast India ”; 27°13′40.8″ N, 94°6′28.8″ E; unknown date; Maj. F. Wall leg.; NHMUK (= BMNH) 1908.6.23.58. Paralectotype INDIA • ♀; same collection data as for lectotype; NHMUK (= BMNH) 1908.6.23.59. Other examined material (2 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀) INDIA – Meghalaya • 1 ♀; Shillong; unknown date; maj. F. Wall leg.; BNHS 1975 (green dorsum); BNHS • 1 ♂; Tura, Garo Hills; unknown date; H.W. Wells; BNHS 1978 (green dorsum); BNHS. – Assam • 1 ♂; North Lakimpur; unknown date; maj. F. Wall leg.; BNHS 1976 (buff dorsum); BNHS. – Arunachal Pradesh • 1 ♀; Janakamukh, Abor Hills; 10 Jun. 1912; 32, Sikh pioneers of Indian Museum; BNHS 1979 (green dorsum); BNHS. Description Lectotype (Figs 3, 5) MEASUREMENTS (in mm). Body elongated, tapering anteriorly and posteriorly, slightly compressed laterally, slightly narrower at mid-body, mid-body width 7.5, flatter on ventral side. Total length 1335.0; snout to vent length 840.0. Head wider than the neck, head length 27.5, elongated anteriorly; slightly wider, head width 13.2; slightly depressed, head depth 11.6. Eyes lateral, circular in shape with oval with horizontal pupil; horizontal eye diameter 5.1 and vertical eye diameter 3.7; interorbital distance 7.4. Snout acuminate, canthus rostralis prominent; eye to snout distance 11.6, sub-equal to head width; eye to nostrils distance 8.0, inter-narial distance 5.4. Tail elongated, complete, tail length 495.0, relative tail length 37.0%. SCALATION. Dorsal scales smooth, without any keels; dorsal scales are generally even-sized, comparatively smaller which are close to vent and the anterior end of body. Paravertebral scales broader than other dorsal scale rows, with rounded posterior margin.Anterior scale rows 15 (on neck): mid-body scale rows 15 (at mid-body): posterior scale rows 13 (near vent), arranged in oblique series. Ventrals 206, angulate laterally, preventrals 3; cloacal scales slightly enlarged, paired; subcaudals 168, pairs. Rostral deep and wider at its base; distinctly visible and narrowly grooved in dorsal aspect, without nasal appendage, projects beyond tip of lower jaw when viewed from below. Nasal slightly elongated, laterally oriented, contacting anteriorly with the rostrum on each side. Nostrils distinct, rounded, laterally oriented, situated on posterior surface of the nasal scale on each side. Internasals paired, contacting each other at midline, anteriorly contacting rostral, posteriorly contacting prefrontal and contacting nasal laterally on each side. Loreals two, subequal in size, anterior set of loreals contacting internasals on both sides, posterior loreal contacting anterior on right side. On left side, posterior loreal separated from anterior by 2 nd, 3 rd supralabials and lower edge of prefrontal contact. Supraocular single, enlarged, broader posteriorly, roughly triangular in dorsal aspect on each side. Preocular single, broad, reaching upper surface of head and contacting prefrontal and frontal on each side; on anterior side contacting the posterior parts of loreals. Fourth supralabial divided horizontally (Fig. 5). Postoculars two, upper one larger in size, contacting supraocular above and lower postocular below; lower postocular contacting 6 th supralabial below on each side. Prefrontal paired, roughly rectangular in shape, contacting frontal posteriorly. Frontal single, roughly bell-shaped, situated in middle of two supraoculars, contacting parietal scales posteriorly. Parietal scales paired, large, much wider, roughly pointed posteriorly and sub-equal to supraocular scales in size. Each parietal scale, anteriorly contacting supraocular, fairly touching upper postocular, laterally in contact with upper temporals, posteriorly in contact with three small scales on each side. Temporals 2+2 on both sides; posterior set contacting three comparatively large sized scales on both sides. Supralabials 9 on both sides, 4 th –6 th contacting the eye and 7 th being the largest. Mental small, much wider than long, subtriangular in shape, wedged between 1 st pair of infralabials. Two pairs of genials; anterior set sub-equal to posterior set; both longer than broad; both pairs are in long midline contact. Infralabials 9, 11; 1 st infralabial on each side elongate compared to the rest, medially contacting each other; 1 st –4 th infralabials contacting anterior set of genials; 4 th and 5 th infralabials contacting posterior pair of genials. COLOURATION IN ETHANOL. Body overall greyish-brown to olive brown, a few small, pale yellowish patches along the trunk. Head mostly faded with grey or bluish grey colour; rostral, upper and lower labials faded grey to off-white, inter-scale colouration on anterior body black white; posteriorly at few places brownish white. Venter cream to light shades of grey; off-white ventrolateral stripe present from neck up to tail tip. Paralectotype (Fig. 4) Total length 1006.0; snout to vent length 631.0; tail length 375.0; relative tail length 37.2%; head length 28.5; head width 10.9; head depth 10.0.; eye diameter 5.5; eye snout tip distance 10.6; eye nostril distance 7.2; interorbital distance 9.9. Anterior scale rows 15; mid-body scale rows 15; posterior scale rows 13; ventrals 203; pre-ventrals 3; cloacal scale 1; subcaudals 155 pairs; supralabials 9 (4 th –5 th touching eye); infralabials 9 (1 st –5 th touching genials); loreal 3; preocular 1; postoculars 2; temporals 2+2; dorsum brownish-green; venter of a lighter shade as dorsum; chin, throat and labials dirty white. Variation (Table 4; also see Wall 1910) The examined non-type specimens agree well with the type specimens and show the following intraspecific variations: MEASUREMENTS (in mm). Total length 1059–1141; snout to vent length 679–768; tail length 373–380; head length 25.6–29.2; head width 9.5–9.6; head depth 7.0–7.1; horizontal eye diameter 4.5–4.6; vertical eye diameter 2.4–3.1; eye to nostrils distance 7.0–8.3; eye to snout tip distance 9.7–10.5; internarial distance 3.5–5.2; interorbital distance 7.3–9.1; mid-body width 7.1–7.7; internasal length 3.5–3.9; prefrontal length 3.6–5.7; frontal length 6.8–8.7; parietal length 5.3–7.3. SCALATION. Ventrals 197–200; pre-ventrals 3; supralabials 8 or 9; infralabials 8 or 9; anterior scale row 15; mid-body scale row 15, posterior scale row, 11–13; subcaudals, 155–183. BNHS 1975 has 3 loreals on each side and single pre-subocular, contacting 4 th supralabial below and preocular above. COLOURATION IN LIFE (Figs 6–7). Usually verdant green above, with fluorescent green on the ventral side. A pair of creamy white ventrolateral stripes extends from near neck up to the tip of the tail. Labials, chin and mental region whitish to cream coloured. Inter-scalar skin with alternating black and white ragged bands. Iris yellowish-green with black horizontal pupil. On occasions, body overall yellowish-brown, with minute black dots along the trunk. Venter cream to light brown, flanked on either side by off-white ventrolateral stripes from neck up to tail tip. Distribution and natural history Ahaetulla flavescens comb. nov. is currently known from four Northeast Indian states: Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Mizoram and Meghalaya (Fig. 8) (Wall 1910; Ahmed et al. 2009). This species was perhaps first recorded in Northeast India, under the name A. prasinus auctorum by Cantor (1847) who mentioned specimens from Bengal and Assam. The following localities were subsequently reported for this taxon, under the name A. prasina: Bengal (Günther 1858, 1864), Eastern Himalayas, Sikkim, Katchar, Naga, Jaintea and Khasi hills, (Theobald 1876), Darjeeling, Cherrapunji, Duffla hills, Naga hills, Sibsagar and Cachar (Sclater 1891), Eastern Himalayas, Assam and Bengal (Boulenger 1890, 1896). Wall (1906, 1909a, 1909b) recorded this species from near Darjeeling and Jalpaiguri in Assam. Judging by the geographic continuity and lack of morphological differences, we hypothesise that populations inhabiting other parts of Northeast India and immediately neighbouring areas of other countries could represent A. flavescens. Like other members of this group, A. flavescens is a diurnal, arboreal species inhabiting the wet hill forest tracts of Northeast India (Whitaker & Captain 2004; Ahmed et al. 2009). It is reported to be live-bearing, as Whitaker & Captain (2004) state “females bear 4-10 live young [in] May-June”, without reference to any country. However, Wall (1910) reported three “eggs” inside a type specimen that was collected in March–April. Given the current knowledge on the reproduction of members of this genus (Das 2002; Whitaker & Captain 2004; Wallach et al. 2014), we hypothesise that Wall was probably referring to the caul or outer amniotic layer encapsuling the embryos of viviparous snake species. Wall (1910) also reported the presence of a gecko in its gut content. Based on our primary field observations, A. flavescens is somewhat temperamental with some individuals becoming defensive when restrained, displaying their open-mouth gape and striking forwards with a jerky motion. Comments Das & Chaturvedi (1998) remarked that Dryophis prasinus flavescens Wall, 1910 was described based on six syntypes. We clarify here that Wall only included the three buff-coloured snakes as part of the type series, whereas the green-coloured specimens were termed “forma typica”. Das & Chaturvedi (1998) remarked that BNHM (= BNHS) 1976, a buff-coloured specimen from Lakimpur, Assam is an extant syntype. Wall (1910) reported a ventral range of 200–209 including preventrals and 155–174 subcaudals, whereas the ventral count of BNHS 1976 is 183, clarifying that it is not a syntype. Das & Chaturvedi (1998) commented that other syntypes may in fact exist, without mentioning any repository. Our investigation proved that they are in London, registered as NHMUK (= BMNH) 1908.6.23.58–59 (Fig. 6). Apart from congruence in locality, collector and sex of the snakes, the ventral and subcaudal counts also match well. Wall (1910) reported 205 ventrals for both snakes and 155, 167 subcaudals, whereas we counted 203, 206 ventrals (+ 1 to 3 preventrals) and 155, 168 subcaudals. Wall (1910) gave measurements for only one of his syntypes from Lakhimpur, total length 5’7’’ (= 1701 mm), tail length 1’7.5’’ (= 495 mm). The tail length of the lectotype (NHMUK 1908.23.6.58) matched fully, although its total length was only 1335 mm. Above all, Wall (1910) stated that 4 th supralabial is divided on the right side, which completely matches with the NHMUK (= BMNH) 1908.23.6.58 specimen. Lastly, Das & Chaturvedi (1998) stated that Smith (1943) erroneously credited the taxon authorship of Dryophis prasinus flavescens to Smith (1915; sic, for 1914) and the type locality was given as Trang Pen, Siam. We further add that Smith’s treatment and usage of this nomen was only a chresonym, when he followed Wall’s subspecies arrangement upon finding a buff variety in Siam, i.e., Thailand (see our chresonymy for unambiguity). In essence, we here demonstrate that the first two buff-coloured female snakes Wall dealt with while describing A. flavescens are indeed NHMUK (= BMNH) 1908.6.23.58–59. Here, we clarify the confusions about the identity of the type specimens, rediscover and redescribe the type specimens, prove the specific distinction of this nominal taxon and resurrect it as a valid species. Hence, we evoke Art.74.7 of the Code (ICZN 1999) and designate NHMUK (= BMNH) 1908.6.23.58 as the lectotype of Dryophis prasinus flavescens Wall, 1910. The chosen lectotype is the larger of the two type specimens, has characters that enable its unambiguous recognition, has precise provenance data and is deposited in a scientific institution of permanent record., Published as part of Srikanthan, Achyuthan N., Adhikari, Omkar Dilip, Mallik, Ashok Kumar, Campbell, Patrick D., Bhatt, Bharat Bhushan, Shanker, Kartik & Ganesh, Sumaithangi Rajagopalan, 2022, Taxonomic revaluation of the Ahaetulla prasina (H. Boie in F. Boie, 1827) complex from Northeast India: resurrection and redescription of Ahaetulla flavescens (Wall, 1910) (Reptilia: Serpentes: Colubridae), pp. 120-148 in European Journal of Taxonomy 839 (1) on pages 133-142, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.839.1937, http://zenodo.org/record/7195192, {"references":["Wall F. 1910. Notes on snakes collected in upper Assam. Part II. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 19: 825 - 845. https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / item / 28012 page / 939 / mode / 1 up","Mell R. 1931. List of Chinese snakes. Lingnan Science Journal 8 [1929]: 199 - 219.","Gunther A. C. L. G. 1858. Catalogue of Colubrine Snakes in the Collection of the British Museum, Vol. 4. Printed by order of Trustees, London, UK. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 13272","Gunther A. C. L. G. 1864. The Reptiles of British India. The Ray Society, London, UK. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5012","Theobald W. 1876. Descriptive Catalogue of the Reptiles of British India. The Indian Museum, Calcutta. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5483","Boulenger G. A. 1890. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor & Francis, London, UK. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5490","Boulenger G. A. 1896. Catalogue of the Snakes in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol. III, Containing the Colubridae (Opisthoglyphae and Proteroglyphae), Amblycephalidae and Viperidae. British Museum (Natural History), London, UK. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 8316","Boie F. 1827. Bemerkungen uber Merrem's Versuch eines Systems der Amphibien, 1. Lieferung: Ophidier. Isis von Oken 20 (6): col. 508 - 566. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 26453570 [accessed 24 Aug. 2022].","Wall F. 1909 a. Notes on snakes from the neighbourhood of Darjeeling. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 19 (2): 337 - 357. https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 33733","Wall F. 1909 b. Notes on snakes collected in the Jalpaiguri district. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 19 (3): 897 - 700. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 220519 [accessed 1 Jul. 2022].","Mallik A. K., Srikanthan A. N., Pal S. P., D'Souza P. M., Shanker K. & Ganesh S. R. 2020. Disentangling vines: a study of morphological crypsis and genetic divergence in vine snakes (Squamata: Colubridae: Ahaetulla) with the description of five new species from Peninsular India. Zootaxa 4874 (1): 1 - 62. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4874.1.1","Deepak V., Narayanan S., Sarkar V., Dutta S. K. & Mohapatra P. P. 2019. A new species of Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (Serpentes: Colubridae: Ahaetullinae) from India. Journal of Natural History 53 (9 - 10): 497 - 516. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222933.2019.1589591","Ahmed F., Das A. & Dutta S. K. 2009. Amphibians and Reptiles of Northeast India: A Photographic Guide. Aaranyak, Guwahati, India.","Cantor T. E. 1847. Catalogue of reptiles inhabiting the Malay Peninsula and the Islands. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 16 (2): 897 - 952. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5057","Sclater W. L. 1891. List of Snakes in the Indian Museum. Printed by order of Trustees of Indian Museum, The Indian Museum, Calcutta, India. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 8746","Wall F. 1906. A popular treatise on the common Indian snakes. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 17 (1): 1 - 9. https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 24098","Whitaker R. & Captain A. 2004. Snakes of India - The Field Guide. Draco Books, India.","Das I. 2002. Photographic Guide to Snakes and other Reptiles of India. New Holland Publishers, UK.","Wallach V., Williams K. L. & Boundy J. 2014. Snakes of the World: A Catalogue of Living and Extinct Species. Taylor and Francis, CRC Press.","Das I. & Chaturvedi N. 1998. Catalogue of the herpetological types in the collection of the Bombay Natural History Society. Hamadryad 23 (2): 150 - 156.","Smith M. A. 1943. The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma, including the whole of the IndoChinese Sub-Region. Reptilia and Amphibia, Vol. 3 (Serpentes). Taylor and Francis, London."]}

David, Patrick, Campbell, Patrick D., Deuti, Kaushik, Hauser, Sjon, Luu, Vinh Quang, Nguyen, Truong Quang, Orlov, Nikolai, Pauwels, Olivier S. G., Scheinberg, Lau- Ren, Sethy, Priyadarsi Girija Sankar, Smits, Ton, Teynié, Alexandre, Vogel, Gernot (2022): On the distribution of Gonyosoma prasinum (Blyth, 1854) and Gonyosoma coeruleum Liu, Hou, Ye Htet Lwin, Wang & Rao, 2021, with a note on the status of Gonyosoma gramineum Günther, 1864 (Squamata: Serpentes: Colubridae). Zootaxa 5154 (2): 175-197, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5154.2.4

The genus Cyrtodactylus has recently been classified phylogenetically into several clades, subclades, groups, and some into Sri Lankan Cyrtodactylus. Certain complexes from the Indian subcontinent have been assigned to the “C. triedrus group”. This group is comprised of medium-sized species (SVL 50.6–105.7 mm) and are composed of five major species complexes: fraenatus, triedrus, deccanensis, jeyporensis, and collegalensis. Among these complexes, the latter four are composed of ground and litter dwelling species, which were previously assigned to the genus Geckoella; and is currently being treated as a subgenus. Cyrtodactylus triedrus, an endemic species of Sri Lanka, has long been considered a widely distributed single species in this part of the world. Based on morphological and phylogenetic evidences, we demonstrate that C. (G.) triedrus is not a single species, but a species complex. We also describe a new species that is restricted to intermediate savanna-mixed dry lowland forested habitats. Furthermore, we resurrect Geckoella punctata, assign it to the genus Cyrtodactylus and designate a lectotype that we redescribe. The genetic divergence across species of the C. triedrus clade varies between 11–26% in the studied fragment of the mitochondrial NADH dehydrogenase subunit 2 gene. The molecular phylogeny of the ground dwelling radiation of the subgenus Geckoella indicates deep splits between the Indian species and Sri Lankan endemic C. (G.) triedrus sensu stricto, and between Indian dry and wet zone clades. Cyrtodactylus (G.). triedrus is restricted to the moist or submontane forests in the Central highlands of Sri Lanka and is redescribed herein based on its holotype. http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank:org:pub:3B37037C-EE9F-4011-BEC9-47E1F3BB6779

Eutropis innotata (Blanford, 1870) (Figs. 4, 5; Table 3) Euprepes innotatus Blanford, 1870 Euprepes innotatus ��� Theobald 1876 Mabuia innotata ��� Boulenger 1887, 1890 Mabuya innotata ��� Smith 1935, Tikader & Sharma 1992, Sharma 2002 Mabuya innotatus (sic.)��� Das 1996, Chandra & Gajbe 2005 Eutropis innotata ��� Mausfeld et al. 2002, Mausfeld & Schmitz 2003, Rao et al. 2010, Srinivasulu et al. 2014, 2016, Deuti et al. 2020 Holotype. Adult male, NHMUK 1946.8.19.2, tail broken, SVL 54.7 mm, collected from ���Pem Ganga Valley, S.E. Ber��r ��� (= Penganga Valley of Godavari River Basin, Yavatmal District, Maharashtra), India, by Dr. W. T. Blanford, date unknown [Note: the locality is recorded in the museum registry as ���Godavery Valley���]. Diagnosis. A species of Eutropis inhabiting parts of the Deccan plateau, characterised as follows: morphologically most similar to E. dissimilis in body colouration, but lacks vertebral striping (a pair of black and white vertebral stripes in E. dissimilis); five keels on the mid dorsal scales (two), a nuchal pair (absent). In addition, E. innotata is similar to E. bibronii and E. nagarjunensis by having a transparent disc on the lower eyelid, but is distinguishable from those two species by having no vertebral stripes (present), and having 32���34 midbody scale rows (28���30 in E. bibronii), 56���60 ventrals (less than 52 ventrals), 45���50 paravertebrals (less than 41), 14���18 lamellae beneath the forth toe (20���24 in E. nagarjunensis), a single pair of smooth nuchals (two pairs of keeled nuchals), smooth temporals (keeled in E. bibronii), and absence of postnasal scale (present). Furthermore, E. innotata can be distinguished from any other known Eutropis species by having the following combination of characters: adult SVL of 54.7 mm, absence of mid dorsal longitudinal stripes, five keels on the mid dorsal scales, a smooth nuchal pair, three pre-auricular lobules, a transparent disc on the lower eyelid, 32���34 midbody scale rows, 56���60 ventrals, 45���50 paravertebrals, 14���18 lamellae beneath forth toe, absence of postnasal scale, and smooth temporal scales. Redescription of holotype. Head moderately large, HL 23.3% of SVL, narrow, HW 55.8% of HL, HW 13.0% of SVL, indistinct from neck; snout short, ES 31.8% of HL, ES 57.1% of HW, slightly convex in lateral profile; rostral shield large, hemispherical, distinctly visible from above, posterior margin of midpoint rounded; frontonasal slightly contacting rostral; frontonasal wide, lateral border narrowly touching first loreal; prefrontals widely separated, contacting frontal and frontonasal, length equals frontonasal length, laterally contacting both loreal scales, posterior border contacting first supraciliary, first supraocular and frontal; frontal large, longer than wide, rounded posteriorly, length slightly shorter than frontoparietals and interparietal combined; frontoparietals two, in contact, longer than interparietal; parietals large and completely separated by interparietal, contacting pretemporal scales anterolaterally; all head scales smooth; single pair of smooth nuchals, overlapping middorsally. Nostril large and placed posterior of nasal; supranasal single, slightly in contact; loreals two, anterior contacting nasal, supranasal, frontonasal, prefrontal, posterior loreal, and first and second supralabials; posterior loreal longer than anterior loreal in the longitudinal axis, contacting prefrontal, first supraciliary, preocular, anterior presubocular, second and third supralabials; presuboculars two; eye large, ED 25.9% of HL; eye diameter greater than eye���tympanum distance, TYE 92.4% of ED, pupil rounded; interorbital distance broad; postoculars two, small; supraoculars four, all wide, second longest in the longitudinal axis and widest in the transverse axis, 1 st supraocular in contact with prefrontal, 2 nd in contact with frontal and frontoparietal, 3 rd in contact with frontoparietal, 4 th in contact with frontoparietal and parietal; supraciliaries seven; eyelid moveable, lower eyelid covered with a transparent disc. Supralabials seven (eight on right side), fifth largest and at the mid orbit position, and contacting granular scales of lower eyelid; temporals smooth, single pretemporal; two primary temporals, secondary temporals three; infralabials six; ear opening large, approximately one third ED, deep, nearly round; three tiny pre-auricular lobules on anterior tympanum, below two larger and prominent. Mental large; postmental single, large; two pairs of chin shield, each pair separating in midline by gular scales, first chinshield in contact with second and third infralabial scales, the second pair in contact with third and fourth infralabials. All dorsal scales are slightly quinquecarinate (three keels prominent) but varies from three to five keels along the body; all scales slightly imbricate; body slender, elongate; midbody scale rows 33; paravertebral scales 50; ventrals 58; preanal scales enlarged, four. Forelimbs short, hind limbs relatively long, FEL 19.4% of SVL, TBL 11.1% of SVL; thigh longer, TBL 57.0% of FEL; dorsal surfaces of fore and hind limbs slightly tricarinate; subdigital lamellae of toe IV: 17; relative length of fingers IV> III> II> V> I; those of toes IV> III> V> II> I. Tail broken (89.0 + 8.4 mm), median scale row of subcaudals subequal. Coloration. After more than 150 years in preservative, dorsal head, body and tail light olive green, limbs light brown; a white dorsolateral stripe starting over the eye to the shoulder level, disappearing afterwards; another similar white stripe below beginning at supralabials and ending at the shoulder, these stripes with brown margins, and the area in between these stripes dark brown visible as a lateral band, fading after shoulder level; rest of the dorsum uniform without any colour patterns or vertebral stripes, a few rows of anterior body scales with darker margins; venter white, except limbs which are brownish. The live colouration is unknown, except for the colour description provided by Rao et al. (2010), who stated ���Overall colouration of the skink was light golden brown, dorsal side without vertebral markings or streaks. A black dorso-lateral stripe between the eyes and base of the tail present, and the same was bordered by white line, which gradually faded posteriorly. Venter of the specimen was yellowish-white���. In addition, Deuti et al. (2020) provided a colour image of a live individual of this species from Yavatmal, Maharashtra, but the white margin of the black dorso-lateral stripe is not as prominent as in the holotype specimen. Distribution and habitat. Eutropis innotata is only known from five localities (seven sightings) since its description in 1870 (Fig. 5). Among these, four sightings (including collected specimens) were made recently: specimens, ZSI/R 284 and 1078 were collected in 1994, specimen ERMR-45a collected in 2002 [not examined by us, reported in Rao et al. (2010)], and the recent photograph in Deuti et al. (2020). Based on the reported localities of this species, it occurs in dry deciduous forests and scrublands. The predicted distribution range of this species is much wider than its known locations, especially in the south-central parts of the Deccan plateau (see under the habitat prediction). Conservation status. The current conservation status of this species is Data Deficient (DD), which was correctly determined a decade ago (Sept 2010), but with the suggestion that this species may occur in many more localities than was known at the time (Srinivasulu & Srinivasulu 2013). The application of the IUCN Red List criteria (IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee 2019) with the updated distribution data shows that E. innotata is restricted to an area of occupancy (AOO) of 175 km 2 recorded from seven localities within a 325,000 km 2 extent of occurrence (EOO). Given the extent of occurrence, the widespread distribution of dry deciduous forests and scrubland habitats, and the wide range of habitat predictions, E. innotata should be considered as a ���Least Concern��� (LC) species. Also, we opine that the reason for low reporting rates of this species is due to it being overlooked. The low reporting rate for E. innotata seems more likely to be due to the dorsum colour pattern exactly resembling that of E. carinata (see Fig. 4 and Discussion). Within the known distributional range of E. innotata, there are many protected areas such as Gundla Brameshwaram Sanctuary (Andhra Pradesh); Kanha National Park, Pench National Park (Madhya Pradesh); Yavatmal Wildlife Sanctuary, Melghat Tiger Reserve, Bhimashankar Jyothirlinga Wildlife Sanctuary (Maharashtra); and Amarkantak-Achanakmar Wildlife Sanctuary (Chhattisgarh). While we do not deny the on-going habitat degradation outside protected areas, the conditions appear stable inside protected areas (Malavia et al. 2010; Reddy et al. 2015). Recent studies on the conservation status of the habitat as a whole reveal degradation threats that are not as alarming as they might be (Agarwala et al. 2016; Neelakantan et al. 2019; Sahu et al. 2008; Yadav et al. 2012), largely due to it being the stronghold of a tiger population (Joshi et al. 2013; Sharma et al. 2013). Therefore the rate of habitat destruction across the entire species range would be insufficient to indicate a population decline of>30% over the last 3 generations (i.e. the threshold for consideration under Criterion A). Also we believe that there are more than 1,000 individuals within the predicted geographic range, and therefore it doesn���t qualify under Criterion D. As we do not have the population decline information to consider Criterion C, at the moment, our description relates mostly to Criterion B., Published as part of Thasun Amarasinghe, A. A., Ganesh, S. R., Patel, Harshil, Deuti, Kaushik, Campbell, Patrick D., Palot, M. Jafer, Karunarathna, Suranjan, Abinawanto, A. & Supriatna, Jatna, 2021, Taxonomy and predicted distribution of a rare Indian skink, Eutropis innotata (Blanford, 1870) (Reptilia: Scincidae) with the redescription of its holotype, pp. 577-592 in Zootaxa 4981 (3) on pages 582-586, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4981.3.8, http://zenodo.org/record/4921601, {"references":["Blanford, W. T. (1870) Notes on some Reptilia and Amphibia from Central India. The Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 39, 335 - 376.","Theobald, W. (1876) Descriptive catalogue of the reptiles of British India. Thacker, Spink & Co., Calcutta, 238 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5483","Boulenger, G. A. (1887) Catalogue of the Lizards in the British Museum (Natural History), Volume III: Lacertidae, Gerrhosauridae, Scincidae, Anelytropsidae, Dibamidae, Chamaeleontidae. Taylor and Francis, London, 575 pp.","Boulenger, G. A. (1890) The Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor and Francis, London, 541 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 57017","Smith, M. A. (1935) The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma, Reptiles and Amphibia. Vol. II Sauria. Taylor and Francis, London, 440 pp.","Tikader, B. K. & Sharma, R. C. (1992) Handbook of Indian lizards. Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, 250 pp.","Sharma, R. C. (2002) The Fauna of India and the Adjacent Countries - Reptilia Vol. II (Sauria). Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, India, 430 pp.","Das I. (1996) Biogeography of the Reptiles of South Asia. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida, 87 pp.","Chandra, K. & Gajbe, U. P. (2005) An inventory of herpetofauna of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Zoos' Print, 20, 1812 - 1819. https: // doi. org / 10.11609 / JoTT. ZPJ. 1087.1812 - 9","Mausfeld, P., Schmitz, A., Bohme, W., Misof, B., Vrcibradic, D. & Rocha, C. F. D. (2002) Phylogenetic affinities of Mabuya atlantica Schmidt, 1945, endemic to the Atlantic Ocean archipelago of Fernando de Noronha (Brazil): necessity of partitioning the genus Mabuya Fitzinger, 1826 (Scincidae: Lygosominae). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 241, 281 - 293. https: // doi. org / 10.1078 / 0044 - 5231 - 00081","Mausfeld, P. & Schmitz, A. (2003) Molecular phylogeography, intraspecific variation and speciation of the Asian scincid lizard genus Eutropis Fitzinger, 1843 (Squamata: Reptilia: Scincidae): Taxonomic and biogeographic implications. Organisms Diversity & Evolution, 3, 161 - 171. https: // doi. org / 10.1078 / 1439 - 6092 - 00068","Rao, K. T., Javed, S. M. M. & Srinivasulu, C. (2010) First report of Eutropis innotata (Blanford, 1870) (Reptilia: Scincidae) from Nallamalai Hills, Andhra Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa, 2, 666 - 669. https: // doi. org / 10.11609 / JoTT. o 2087.666 - 9","Srinivasulu, C., Srinivasulu, B. & Molur, S. (2014) The Status and Distribution of Reptiles in the Western Ghats, India. Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP). Wildlife Information Liaison Development Society, Coimbatore, 148 pp.","Srinivasulu, C., Srinivasulu, B., Srinivasulu, A. & Seetharamaraju, M. (2016) No longer supple? Molecular phylogeny suggests generic reassignment of Lygosoma ashwamedhi (Sharma, 1969) (Reptilia: Scincidae). Zootaxa, 4127 (1), 135 - 148. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4127.1.7","Deuti, K., Raha, S., Bag, P., Debnath, S., Srikanthan, A. N. & Chandra, K. (2020) Skinks of India. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, 383 pp.","Srinivasulu, C. & Srinivasulu, B. (2013) Eutropis innotata. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013, e. T 172653 A 1359830 (accessed 17 April 2021)","IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee (2019) Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 14. Prepared by the Standards and Petitions Subcommittee, IUCN, Gland. [program]","Reddy, C. S., Rajashekar, G., Krishna, P. H., Jha, C. S. & Dadhwal, V. K. (2015) Multi-source and multi-date mapping of deforestation in Central India (1935 - 2010) and its implication on standing phytomass carbon pool. Ecological Indicators, 57, 219 - 227. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. ecolind. 2015.05.003","Agarwala, M., DeFries, R. S., Qureshi, Q. & Jhala, Y. V. (2016) Changes in the dry tropical forests in Central India with human use. Regional Environmental Change, 16, 5 - 15. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 10113 - 015 - 0903 - 1","Neelakantan, A., DeFries, R. & Krishnamurthy, R. (2019) Resettlement and landscape-level conservation: corridors, humanwildlife conflict, and forest use in Central India. Biological Conservation, 232, 142 - 151. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. biocon. 2019.01.033","Sahu, P. K., Sagar, R. & Singh, J. S. (2008) Tropical forest structure and diversity in relation to altitude and disturbance in a Biosphere Reserve in Central India. Applied Vegetation Science, 11, 461 - 470. https: // doi. org / 10.3170 / 2008 - 7 - 18537","Yadav, P. K., Kapoor, M. & Sarma, K. (2012) Land use land cover mapping, change detection and conflict analysis of Nagzira- Navegaon Corridor, Central India using geospatial technology. International Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS, 1, 90 - 98.","Joshi, A., Vaidyanathan, S., Mondol, S., Edgaonkar, A. & Ramakrishnan, U. (2013) Connectivity of tiger (Panthera tigris) populations in the human-influenced forest mosaic of central India. PloS One, 8, e 77980. https: // doi. org / 10.1371 / journal. pone. 0077980","Sharma, S., Dutta, T., Maldonado, J. E., Wood, T. C., Panwar, H. S. & Seidensticker, J. (2013) Forest corridors maintain historical gene flow in a tiger metapopulation in the highlands of central India. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280, 20131506. https: // doi. org / 10.1098 / rspb. 2013.1506"]}

Hydrosaurus celebensis (Peters, 1872) Chresonymy: Lophura amboinensis (G��nther 1873: 168) Lophura amboinensis (part) (Boulenger 1885: 402; Meyer 1887: 6; Casto de Elera 1895: 417; de Rooij 1915: 128) Lophura amboinensis var celebensis (Weber 1890: 160, 167) Hydrosaurus amboinensis (part) (Wermuth 1967: 64) Hydrosaurus cf. amboinensis (Koch 2012: 149) Hydrosaurus sp. [Sulawesi] (Siler et al. 2014: 102) Hydrosaurus celebensis (Siler et al. 2014: 104) Type: Holotype ZMB 7393, adult male, collected by A. B. Meyer in 1870. Type locality: ��� Ufer des Flusses von Posso in der Bai von Tomini��� (= banks of the Poso river in the Bay of Tomini), Central Sulawesi, Indonesia (Figure 8). Description of holotype: See above. Diagnosis: Large species, exceeding 1000 mm in total length, possibly 1200 mm (assuming TL/SVL = 2.4, a complete tail of holotype amounts to 864 mm); largest specimen examined, holotype SVL 360 mm, TL 580 mm (TL/SVL = 1.61), part of the tail missing; complete specimen, MZB Lac271, SVL 233 mm, TL 563 mm (TL/SVL = 2.42). Head, neck, gular region and shoulder completely black; a row of enlarged flat, sometimes conical scales on either side of the neck; nuchal and dorsal crests continuous; a group of dirty white enlarged flat scales on the anterior part of the dorsum; few (Intraspecific Variation: The number of enlarged scales along the neck varies from three to five. Equally, the number of enlarged scales on the dorsum varies in the anterior group from two to seven. At midbody and near the base of the tail there are typically only one or two enlarged scales. One male from Pattunuang had the midbody group split into two groups of two scales giving the impression of a crossband. While the ventral scales in H. ce- lebensis are typically smaller than the dorsal scales, a photograph (courtesy of J. McGuire) of the specimen (tissue sample JAM 6859) from Desa Jelaja, Southwest Sulawesi, used in the phylogenetic analysis conducted by Siler et al. (2014) shows that the size of the ventral scales appear to be larger than or equal to the size of the dorsal scale size. Sexual dimorphism: Adult males of H. celebensis have a considerably higher dorsal sail and a more developed nasal crest than in females. In general, the colouration and pattern is more contrasted in males while females appear to be duller in colour. Typically males of H. celebensis are black and yellow (or light orange) spotted whereas in females the spotted pattern is less pronounced consisting of an olive-brown, greyish ground colour with black spots in the Pattunuang population and rather greenish with light spots in the Palopo population. The colour of the head and anterior part of the neck is black in males while it is dark brown or grey with white speckles in females. Comparisons: Hydrosaurus celebensis differs from H. amboinensis by the possession of the following characters: a group of strongly enlarged, flat scales on the anterior part of the dorsum. The colour on the dorsum is yellowish (vs. yellowish green in male H. amboinensis and green in females). Head, limbs and tail of male H. celebensis are completely or nearly completely black whereas both sexes in H. amboinensis have an entirely black marbled body. Additionally, the gular scales of H. amboinensis are round and irregular in size, while those of H. celebensis are minute and decreasing in size from the mental towards the onset of the gular pouch. H. celebensis differs from H. weberi in its general colour and pattern on the dorsum which is yellowish with black dots (vs. grey green in weberi). H. celebensis differs from H. weberi and H. microlophus by less pronounced enlarged (i.e. armour-like) scales at the front of the forelimbs. In H. celebensis the nuchal and dorsal crests are continuous, while they are separated by considerably smaller scales on the neck in H. weberi. Biology: H. celebensis was observed in a variety of habitats. In particular, the habitat of H. celebensis in the Pattunuang canyon differs from that in Bantimurung and near Palopo. The Pattunuang river is very stony and during the rainy season flows at a rapid pace. Its riverbank vegetation mainly consists of trees and only a few bushes. In Bantimurung specimens of H. celebensis were spotted in certain places where H. microlophus (see above) was not found. H. celebensis inhabited more inaccessible areas with dense vegetation on the banks and was often seen on branches above the water. Near Palopo H. celebensis inhabited an area near a slow flowing river without stones or rocks. Most of the individuals were found sitting in dense, low vegetation. Some of the subadults were spotted on thin branches above the water. In some places they were also spotted high up in trees where adults could be seen resting on branches. An adult female carrying eggs could also be observed in Pattanuang towards the end of March. Distribution: H. celebensis is endemic to Sulawesi. It appears to inhabit the northern part of South Sulawesi, Central Sulawesi and South East Sulawesi (Figure 8). The populations in Pattunuang and Bantimurung (South Sulawesi) are possibly a result of recent introductions according to a local source (A. Siady Hamzah, Universitas Hasanuddin, Makassar, UNHAS, pers. comm.) and information on the website of the Bantimurung-Bulusaraung National Park by Taufik Ismail (2013). See also the Discussion below. Comparison between live specimens of H. microlophus and H. celebensis. Based on available photographs of live specimens from Sulawesi both species can be further distinguished by pholidosis, colouration and pattern. While some of the pictured specimens (mostly males) can be directly assigned to H. celebensis (Peters, 1872) because they have a near identical appearance to that of the type specimen, others were quite difficult to identify and could only be assigned through inference to H. microlophus. In particular, juveniles within the presumed H. microlophus populations possess the same arrangements of groups of enlarged dorsal scales as the type specimen. All adults within the same populations also show these characteristic groups of enlarged lateral scales and we therefore consider these specimens as belonging to H. microlophus. Specimens in various developmental stages of H. microlophus, were observed near Bantimurung, Bengo-Bengo / Camba and Rompegading on the southwestern peninsula of Sulawesi (Figure 8). Figure 7 depicts a juvenile specimen from Rompegading displaying the characters described by Bleeker (1860). In particular the arrangement, size and shape of the enlarged dorsal scales fit well with the type specimen. Since the adult specimens of the southwestern peninsula differ vastly from both the holotype and live specimens of H. celebensis, hence we conclude that they represent H. microlophus. Adult males (and most females) from these populations have a much more pronounced scalation on the dorsum. The enlarged scales on the dorsum of the adults are strongly keeled and have a tetrahedral appearance (vs. near flat and only slightly keeled in H. celebensis). In males these scales are black in colour and whitish to yellow in females. An additional feature seen in adult H. microlophus are the strongly enlarged scales on the anterior part of the forelimbs. This character very much resembles the description by Barbour (1911) for H. weberi who compared it to a piece of ���armour���. The ground colour of adult H. microlophus males is generally dirty yellow, with the upper parts of the head, extremities and enlarged dorsal scales blackish. The gular region is yellowish. Adult females show a very different colouration (Figure 3F); the general dorsal ground colour is grey to dark grey or nearly black, while the enlarged scales are light. We did not observe or find a preserved adult male specimen with such a colouration nor did we find a female specimen with dark enlarged scales as described above. The colouration of some subadult females is very similar to that observed in juvenile specimens of both sexes (i.e., grey with cream coloured enlarged scales). The change in colour and development of the shape of the scales from one that is less to one that is more pronounced appears to be in line with ontogenetic development since only adult specimens show sexual dichromatism. A second distinct phenotype (Figures 3 C & D) was photographed in the south of South Sulawesi (in the valley of the Pattunuang river and in Bantimurung) in the vicinity of a H. microlophus population and in the north of the Southwestern peninsula near Palopo (Figure 8). Males of these populations agree completely with the holotype of H. celebensis (see Figure 4B). They only have a few enlarged scales interspersed on the dorsum and their dorsal colouration is a pattern which is black and yellow spotted with white enlarged scales dorsolaterally. This particular colouration was observed during the dry season. During the wet season several males, but not all, displayed an even richer colouration, showing contrasts with the yellow coloured scales switching to a bright orange yellow colour. Head, gular region and extremities were completely black. Typically, females were slightly duller in colouration and less rich in contrast. Unfortunately, we were not able to find a juvenile within these populations that we could refer unambiguously to H. celebensis. In both Pattunuang and Palopo where populations of H. celebensis were found, almost all juveniles had more or less slightly marked crossbands of enlarged scales. In particular, we found that the juveniles of Pattunuang agreed with the general characteristics described for the type of H. microlophus. Both in Pattunuang and Palopo adult microlophus have not been observed but in Pattunuang it is probable that they are in contact with celebensis because the next localities of microlophus are only ca. 7 km (Bantimurung) resp. about 10 km (Bengo-Bengo) away., Published as part of Denzer, Wolfgang, Campbell, Patrick D., Manthey, Ulrich, Gl��sser-Trobisch, Andrea & Koch, Andr��, 2020, Dragons in neglect: Taxonomic revision of the Sulawesi sailfin lizards of the genus Hydrosaurus Kaup, 1828 (Squamata, Agamidae), pp. 275-301 in Zootaxa 4747 (2) on pages 290-292, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4747.2.3, http://zenodo.org/record/3694804, {"references":["Peters, W. (1872) Uber einige von Hrn Dr. A. B. Meyer bei Gorontalo und auf den Togian-Inseln gesammelte Amphibien. Monatsberichte der koniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1872, 581 - 585.","Gunther, A. (1873) Notes on some reptiles and batrachians obtained by Dr. Bernhard Meyer in Celebes and the Philippine Islands. Proceedings of the Zoological Society London, 1873, 165 - 172.","Boulenger, G. A. (1885) Catalogue of the Lizards in the British Museum (Nat. Hist.) I. Geckonidae, Eublepharidae, Uroplatidae, Pygopodidae, Agamidae. Trustees of the British Museum, London, 450 pp.","Meyer, A. B. (1887) Verzeichnis der von mir in den Jahren 1870 - 1873 im ostindischen Archipel gesammelten Reptilien und Batrachier. Abhandlungen und Berichte des Koniglichen Zoologischen und Anthropologisch-Ethnographischen Museums zu Dresden, 2, 1 - 16.","de Rooij, N. (1915) The Reptiles of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. I. Lacertilia, Chelonia, Emydosauria. E. J. Brill, Leiden, xiv + 384 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5069","Weber, M. (1890) Reptilia from the Malay Archipelago. I. Sauria, Crocodilidae, Chelonia. In: Weber, M. (Ed.), Zoologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in Niederlandisch Ost-Indien. E. J. Brill, Leiden, pp. 159 - 177. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 52289","Wermuth, H. (1967) Liste der rezenten Amphibien und Reptilien. Agamidae. Das Tierreich, 86, i-xiv + 1 - 127.","Koch, A. (2012) Discovery, Diversity, and Distribution of the Amphibians and Reptiles of Sulawesi and its Offshore Islands. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt a. M., 374 pp.","Siler, C. D., Lira-Noriega, A. & Brown, R. M. (2014) Conservation genetics of Australasian sailfin lizards: Flagship species threatened by coastal development and insufficient protected area coverage. Biological Conservation, 169, 100 - 108 https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. biocon. 2013.10.014","Ismail T (2013) Available from: http: // www. tn-babul. org / index. php? option = com _ content & view = article & id = 511: hydrosaurusseperti-dinosaurus-yah & catid = 49: artikel & Itemid = 1 (last accessed 12 January 2019)","Barbour, T. (1911) New lizards and a new toad from the Dutch East Indies, with notes on other species. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 24, 15 - 22."]}

Hydrosaurus microlophus (Bleeker, 1860) Chresonymy: Istiurus microlophus (Bleeker 1860a: 80, 1860b: 85) Istiurus amboinensis (part) (Bleeker 1860b: 85) Lophura amboinensis (part) (Boulenger 1885: 402; Casto de Elera 1895: 417; de Rooij 1915: 128) Lophura amboinensis var. celebensis (Weber 1890: 160, 167) Hydrosaurus amboinensis (part) (Wermuth,1967: 64) Type: Holotype NHMUK 1863.12.4.35, juvenile, collected by P. Bleeker, 1855. Type locality: Makassar (= Ujung Pandang), Southwest Sulawesi, Indonesia (Figure 8). Description of holotype: See above. Diagnosis: Large species exceeding 1000 mm in total length; largest specimen, SMF 35996, SVL = 325mm, TL = 745mm (TL/SVL = 2.29), tip of the tail missing; complete specimen, MZB Lac 5870, SVL 131 mm, TL 315 mm (TL/SVL = 2.4) [Remark: The MVZ database gives 370 mm as tail length]. Head black; sometimes with yellowish colour around the eyes, the same on the lower half of the neck and in front of the shoulders as well as in the gular region; nuchal region black; a group of enlarged conical or pyramidal scales on either side of the neck; nuchal and dorsal crests continuous; in males, the sides of the body are dirty yellow with three groups of enlarged conical or pyramidal scales, often forming a triangular shape, between fore and hindlimbs that decrease in size ventrally to form transverse bands, the largest scales being black in colour; adult females are black with yellow enlarged scales; some females (presumably subadults or non-reproducing specimens) and juveniles typically grey with the groups of enlarged scales being whitish in colour; yellow ventrally, limbs on the upper side black and on the underside yellow (grey in subadults and juveniles); scales under fourth and fifth toes initially flat or singly keeled; tail black with some irregular yellow markings; sail dirty yellow to light brown with black stripes. Allocation of adult museum specimens to Hydrosaurus microlophus. The preserved type material is only represented by a single specimen each. In the case of H. celebensis we located additional adult voucher specimens that match the holotype of this species (see Appendix 1). However, we were not able to locate any juvenile specimens that can be assigned unambiguously to H. celebensis. However, in the case of H. microlophus the holotype is a juvenile and corresponding adult specimens present in museum collections had to be inferred as belonging to this species following morphological comparison. The main diagnostic characters for assignment of adult specimens to H. microlophus is the presence of groups of enlarged, strongly keeled scales dorsolaterally and the highly variable number of enlarged scales on the sides of the neck (��� 3 up to eleven) as well as their shape and arrangement. The Senckenberg collection holds three specimens (SMF 35996 -98) from Sulawesi without precise locality or collector details. These specimens were received in 1930 from the Zoological Society Frankfurt and determined under the curatorship of Robert Mertens as H. amboinensis microlophus. All three specimens agree well with the characters outlined as specific for the H. microlophus type (i.e., enlarged dorsal scales in groups, ventral scales equal or larger than dorsal scales, 10/11 supra- and infralabials, respectively). Therefore, we consider the Senckenberg material adult representatives of H. microlophus (see also below for a comparison of live specimens). Two of these specimens lack parts of their tails but one has a nearly complete tail (SVL = 325mm, TL = 745mm, with only the tip of the tail missing according to G. K��hler [SMF, pers. comm.], TL/SVL = 2.3). Currently the specimens, although kept in the same jar, are not individually numbered. For clarity we consider the nearly complete specimen as SMF 35996, the specimen measuring SVL = 295mm, TL = 90mm as SMF 35997 and the one measuring SVL = 333mm, TL = 220 mm as SMF 35998. Gaulke (1989) examined these specimens and concluded that they were conspecific with H. (cf.) pustulatus unaware that the Philippine populations of Hydrosaurus constituted a species complex (Siler et al. 2014). A comparison with the juvenile type shows that the enlarged dorsal scales have a much more pronounced keel in adults and that these may exhibit a conical or near pyramidal shape. In the juvenile holotype the enlarged dorsal scales are white while they appear to be brown (SMF 35997), dark brown or black (SMF 35996 and SMF 35998) in the preserved adults. This is in contrast to the black and yellow speckled dorsal colouration in H. celebensis. Additionally, the enlarged dorsal scales in H. celebensis are typically light coloured or even white. A comparison between the type specimen of H. celebensis and an adult H. microlophus specimen (SMF 35996) is shown in Figure 5. Bleeker (1860b) reported specimens from ���Boni��� as Istiurus (= Hydrosaurus) amboinensis. There is a dried specimen at Naturalis (ZMA 12611) that was previously housed in the collection of the Tropeninstituut Amsterdam, and subsequently transferred to the ZMA collection (now at Naturalis). Boni (or Bone State) was a former sultanate on the east coast of the southwestern arm of Sulawesi near Danau (=Lake) Tempe. The specimen has enlarged conical, near pyramidal scales on either side of the neck and two groups of similar scales on the back. As its dorsal scalation matches that of H. microlophus and the locality record falls within the range of this species it should be classified as such. Intraspecific Variation: One variable character is the number of enlarged scales on either side of the neck. The enlarged scales along the neck are sometimes arranged in a single row and sometimes intermixed with slightly smaller ones forming a group (picture collection AGT). The number of enlarged scales varies from three to eleven. The lateral groups of enlarged body scales consist of 10 to 20 scales, with the anterior most group having the highest number of scales. Typically there are three groups of enlarged scales between the fore and hindlimbs. One specimen (picture collection AGT) contains a group of three enlarged scales between the midbody and the onset of the tail group. Sexual dimorphism: Adult males of H. microlophus have a considerably higher dorsal sail and a typically more pronounced nasal crest than do females, although we also observed some females with a well-developed nasal crest. In addition, males and females show a clear sexual dimorphic colouration (dichromatism, see above). Thus, in female specimens the groups of enlarged scales are whitish/yellowish coloured on a dark grey to nearly black dorsal ground colour while male specimens typically show a dirty yellow dorsal colouration with the groups of enlarged scales being black or brown in colour. Comparisons: H. microlophus differs from H. amboinensis by the possession of the following characters: grossly enlarged scales near the onset of the forelimbs; strongly enlarged conical or pyramidal scales in groups forming dorsolateral bands (all of these characters are either not or only slightly developed in H. amboinensis). Furthermore, H. microlophus differs from H. amboinensis in colouration (yellowish green in male H. amboinensis and green in females with black marbling in both sexes vs. dirty yellow dorsal colouration with the groups of enlarged scales being dark coloured in male H. microlophus, plus dark dorsal colouration with the groups of enlarged scales being whitish/yellowish in female H. microlophus together with the top of the head and neck being black and the throat being yellow in colour in both sexes) they also possess a nasal crest (absent in H. amboinensis, see Figure 6a). Most noticeably, the males of H. microlophus differ in their pattern from the males of H. celebensis the latter having complete or near complete black heads, limbs and tails. H. microlophus differs from H. weberi in general colouration and pattern, the latter being grey green. H. microlophus differs from H. celebensis and H. weberi by having groups of enlarged (black in males, white or yellow in females) conical and pyramidal scales on the dorsum. In every case the number of scales in the major groups of enlarged scales is larger than that in H. celebensis. In H. microlophus the nuchal and dorsal crests are continuous, while they are separated by considerably smaller scales on the neck in H. weberi. Biology: H. microlophus appears to prefer open freshwater habitats mostly surrounded by high trees. We observed this species mainly on stony or rocky ground. In Bantimurung specimens were seen in a river with large boulders and low vegetation on the banks. Remarkably, this site was near the entrance of the Bantimurung National Park that is highly frequented by many visitors. Some specimens even occurred near a busy building site. Near Bengo-Bengo six specimens (one male and five females) were observed on a tree. It appeared as if this assemblage had a harem structure with the single male being the dominant individual. According to locals and own observations, individuals living close to human settlements are often seen in trees during the dry season to escape the hunting dogs. In contrast, during the rainy season a more terrestrial behaviour is observed. Individuals or groups of sailfin lizards of different ages are mainly seen on riverbanks and flee into the river when disturbed. We observed several specimens of all age groups living together within a relatively small range especially in the dry season. The semiaquatic habitat was shared with Varanus togianus, a potential predator of juvenile Hydrosaurus. Distribution: H. microlophus is endemic to Sulawesi. It appears to be restricted to Southwest Sulawesi, the bordering southern part of Central Sulawesi and possibly also inhabits parts of West Sulawesi (Figure 8). See also the Discussion below., Published as part of Denzer, Wolfgang, Campbell, Patrick D., Manthey, Ulrich, Gl��sser-Trobisch, Andrea & Koch, Andr��, 2020, Dragons in neglect: Taxonomic revision of the Sulawesi sailfin lizards of the genus Hydrosaurus Kaup, 1828 (Squamata, Agamidae), pp. 275-301 in Zootaxa 4747 (2) on pages 286-290, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4747.2.3, http://zenodo.org/record/3694804, {"references":["Bleeker, P. (1860 a) Reptilien van Makassar. Natuurkundig Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch-Indie, 22, 80 - 81.","Bleeker, P. (1860 b) Reptilien van Boni. Natuurkundig Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch-Indie, 22, 81 - 85.","Boulenger, G. A. (1885) Catalogue of the Lizards in the British Museum (Nat. Hist.) I. Geckonidae, Eublepharidae, Uroplatidae, Pygopodidae, Agamidae. Trustees of the British Museum, London, 450 pp.","de Rooij, N. (1915) The Reptiles of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. I. Lacertilia, Chelonia, Emydosauria. E. J. Brill, Leiden, xiv + 384 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5069","Weber, M. (1890) Reptilia from the Malay Archipelago. I. Sauria, Crocodilidae, Chelonia. In: Weber, M. (Ed.), Zoologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in Niederlandisch Ost-Indien. E. J. Brill, Leiden, pp. 159 - 177. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 52289","Wermuth, H. (1967) Liste der rezenten Amphibien und Reptilien. Agamidae. Das Tierreich, 86, i-xiv + 1 - 127.","Gaulke, M. (1989) Einige Bemerkungen uber die philippinische Segelechse Hydrosaurus pustulatus (Eschscholtz, 1829). Herpetofauna, Weinstadt, 11 (62) 6 - 12.","Siler, C. D., Lira-Noriega, A. & Brown, R. M. (2014) Conservation genetics of Australasian sailfin lizards: Flagship species threatened by coastal development and insufficient protected area coverage. Biological Conservation, 169, 100 - 108 https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. biocon. 2013.10.014"]}