Search

The conservation status of all known New Zealand reptile taxa was reassessed using the New Zealand Threat Classification System (NZTCS). A full list is presented, along with a statistical summary and brief notes on the most important changes. This list replaces all previous NZTCS lists for reptiles.

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a "Green List of Species" (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species' progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species' viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species' recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.

Oligosoma roimata sp. nov. Figure 3 Sphenomorphus pseudornatus: McCann 1955 (in part): 76-7, 110 - 11, 125. Cyclodina ornata: Hardy 1977 (in part): 261 - 64. Cyclodina sp. 3: Jewell 2008: 112. Oligosoma ornatum: Chapple et al. 2009 (in part): 472, 485. Holotype. Aorangi Island, Poor Knights (35 �� 28 ���S, 174 �� 44 ���E), NMNZ RE001626# 32 (adult male) (coll. G.S. Hardy, November 1973). (Figure 3). Paratypes (4 specimens). Aorangi Island, Poor Knights (35 �� 28 ���S, 174 �� 44 ���E), NMNZ RE003723 (S 78) (male) (coll. Coll. A.H. Whitaker, December 1964); Aorangi Island, Poor Knights (35 �� 28 ���S, 174 �� 44 ���E), NMNZ RE001626# 29 (female), NMNZ RE001626# 30 (male), NMNZ RE001626# 31 (male) (coll. G.S. Hardy, November 1973). Diagnosis. Oligosoma roimata sp. nov. can be distinguished from other Oligosoma species through a combination of characters. The clearly visible orange iris separates the species from all other Oligosoma except O. aeneum, O. levidensum, O. hardyi, O. townsi, O. oliveri, O. macgregori, O. whitakeri, O. striatum, O. homalonotum, and O. ornatum. The unbroken subocular scale row separates O. roimata sp. nov. from O. striatum, O. homalonotum.and O. hardyi. Oligosoma roimata sp. nov. has a prominent teardrop marking under the eye, and a moderately large ear opening, which separates it from O. aeneum, O. levidensum and O. hardyi which lack this marking and have small ear openings. Oligosoma townsi midbody scale count of ��� 38 does not overlap with O. roimata sp. nov.. The maximum SVL of 62 mm (Whitaker 1968) is much less than that of O. oliveri (105.6 mm), the ear opening is smaller than in O. oliveri and most O. oliveri specimens have two primary temporals (Chapple et al. 2008 a), whereas O. roimata sp. nov. always has one. There is minimal overlap between O. roimata sp. nov. and O. whitakeri in midbody and no overlap in ventral scale counts with O. whitakeri having a higher range for both indices (Hardy 1977). Oligosoma roimata sp. nov. lacks the yellow and orange colouration of many O. whitakeri specimens (Hardy 1977). Oligosoma whitakeri generally has dark blotches on the ventral surface, whereas it is unmarked or lightly marked in O. roimata sp. nov.. Colour pattern distinguishes O. roimata sp. nov. from O. macgregori and there is no overlap in midbody or ventral scale counts between these two species. The ear opening is slightly smaller than in O. ornatum and the maximum SVL is much less than O. ornatum (84.0 mm). Description of Holotype. Body elongate, squarish in cross-section; limbs moderately well-developed, pentadactyl. Lower eyelid with a large, sometimes divided opaque central scale, bordered anteriorly and posteriorly by relatively large scales. Snout moderately blunt. Nostril centred just below middle of nasal, not touching bottom edge of nasal. Supranasals absent. Rostral broader than deep. Frontonasal broader than long, not separated from frontal by prefrontals meeting in midline. Frontal longer than broad, shorter than frontoparietal and interparietal together, in contact with 2 anteriormost supraoculars. Supraoculars 4, the second largest. Preoculars 2, the upper one larger. Frontoparietals distinct, larger than interparietal. A pair of parietals meeting behind interparietal and bordered posteriorly by a pair each of nuchals and temporals, also in contact with interparietal, frontoparietal, fourth supraocular and 2 postoculars. Loreals 2, similar size; anterior loreal in contact with first and second supralabial, posterior loreal, prefrontal, frontonasal and nasal; posterior loreal in contact with second and third supralabial, first subocular, upper and lower preocular, prefrontal and anterior loreal. Supralabials 7, the sixth largest. Infralabials 6, several of them equal in size; fifth supralabial below centre of eye. Mental broader but shallower than rostral. Suboculars series continuous. Postmental larger than mental. Chinshields 3 pairs. One primary temporal. Dorsal scales largest, weakly striate. Ventral scales smooth. Subdigital lamellae smooth. Ear opening round, moderately large, with no projecting granules. Forelimbs shorter than hindlimbs. Adpressed limbs almost meeting in adult. Digits short, sub-cylindrical. Third front digit shorter than the fourth. Measurements (in Millimeters; Holotype with the Variation Shown in the Type Series in Parentheses): SVL 57.0 (mean 57.0, range 48.5���63.6), HL 8.3 (mean 8.7, range 8.1���9.2), HW 6.1 (mean 6.1, range 6.4���6.5), AG 31.0 (mean 28.3, range 21.7���33.2), SF 23.9 (mean 23.0, range 21���24.8), S-E 11.7 (mean 11.3, range 9.6���12), EF 12.9 (mean 12.1, range 10.5���13.5), and TL incomplete (no specimens with intact tails). Scalation (Holotype with the Variation Shown in the Type Series in Parentheses): Upper ciliaries 7 (mean 6, range 6-7); lower ciliaries 11 (mean 10, range 10���11); nuchals 1 pair (mean 1 pair, range 1 - 1 pairs); midbody scale rows 34 (mean 33, range 32���34); ventral scale rows 68 (mean 69, range 65���72); subdigital lamellae 24 (mean 22, range 21���24); supraciliaries 7 (mean 7, range 7 - 7); suboculars 9 (mean 9, range 8���9). Frontonasal never separated from frontal by prefrontals meeting in midline. Anterior loreal in contact with first and second supralabial. Posterior loreal in contact with second and third supralabial. Supralabials 7, the sixth largest. Infralabials 6. One primary temporal. Third front digit usually shorter than the fourth. Maximum SVL 63.6 mm. Ratios for morphological measurements (�� SD): AG/SF 1.23 �� 0.14; SE/EF 0.94 �� 0.05; HL/HW 1.41 �� 0.05. Colouration. Dorsal surface light brown to very dark brown, with irregular dark and light flecks or blotches, shading into white ventral surface (Figure 4). A white, black-edged ���tear-drop��� under eye, although this may be indistinct in some animals. Well marked pale dorsolateral stripe from near tip of snout to near midpoint of body, thereafter broken up by brown patches. Throat, chin and belly lightly speckled. There do not appear to be sexually dimorphic colour patterns. Juvenile colouration is unknown. Etymology. From the Maori ��� roimata ��� = ���tears���, referring to the teardrop marking under the eyes. The suggested common name is the Aorangi skink. Habitat and life history. Oligosoma roimata sp. nov. is known only from the Poor Knights Islands, which are an island chain just over 20 km NE of the northern North Island. They consist of two large islands (larger than 1 km 2) and several smaller islands and rock stacks. In total, the group is approximately 2.8 km 2 in area. The Poor Knights Islands are administered by the Department of Conservation as a Nature Reserve. The islands are unique in that they have never been invaded by introduced mammalian predators. The exception is Aorangi Island, onto which Maori introduced feral pigs from stock obtained from European ships toward the end of the eighteenth century. The pigs were extirpated in 1936. Consequently, the Poor Knights Islands support a diverse range of reptile species, which can attain extremely high densities compared to mainland populations. The islands are now known to have three endemic lizard species; Oligosoma roimata sp. nov., the Poor Knights gecko (Dactylocnemis sp.) and Hardy���s skink (O. hardyi). They also support populations of marbled skink (O. oliveri) which have a highly distinctive morphology, egg-laying skink (O. suteri (Boulenger, 1906)), moko skink (O. moco (Dumeril & Bibron, 1839)), shore skink (O. smithi (Gray, 1845)) and Duvaucel���s gecko (Hoplodactylus duvaucelii (Dumeril & Bibron, 1836)). Oligosoma roimata sp. nov. is most abundant in flax and scrub on the fringes of the islands. It appears to favour dense ground cover. It is most active at dawn and dusk and appears to be mainly insectivorous (Whitaker 1968). The species is currently listed in the New Zealand Threat Classification System as Naturally Uncommon (Hitchmough et al. 2013); however, since population densities appear to be sparse and several recent surveys have failed to detect any animals (Trent Bell, pers. comm.; R. Parrish, pers. comm.), the species may warrant an enhanced conservation status., Published as part of Patterson, Geoff B., Hitchmough, Rod A. & Chapple, David G., 2013, Taxonomic revision of the ornate skink (Oligosoma ornatum; Reptilia: Scincidae) species complex from northern New Zealand in Zootaxa 3736 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3736.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/222434

Genus Oligosoma Girard, 1857, Published as part of Patterson, Geoff B., Hitchmough, Rod A. & Chapple, David G., 2013, Taxonomic revision of the ornate skink (Oligosoma ornatum; Reptilia: Scincidae) species complex from northern New Zealand in Zootaxa 3736 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3736.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/222434

Synonymy of O. aeneum Tiliqua ornata: Gray 1843: 202. Hinulia ornata: Gray 1845 a: 77. Hinulia ornate: Gray 1845 b: 7. Mocoa smithi: Gray, 1845 a: 82 (in part). Gray, 1867: 4 (in part). Buller, 1871: 6 (in part). Hutton, 1872: 168 (in part). McCann, 1955: 97 (in part). Fawcett & Smith, 1971: 135 (in part). Cyclodina aenea: Girard, 1857: 196. Girard, 1858: 236���237, 239, pl. xxvi, fig. 9���16 (in part). Troschel, 1859: 61. Gunther, 1875: 13. Robb, 1973: 297. Hombronia undosa: Girard, 1857: 196. Girard, 1858: 240���242. Gunther, 1875: 13. Boulenger, 1887: 209. Eulamprus ornatus: Fitzinger 1861: 403. Lampropholis smithii: (Gray): Fitzinger, 1861: 403. Jouan, 1869: 294 (in part). Lampropholis (Mocoa) smithi (Gray): Hochstetter, 1863: 429 (in part). Hochstetter, 1867: 163 (in part). Euprepes smithii (Gray): Steindachner, 1869: 47 (in part). Euprepes ornatus: Steindachner 1869: 49. Mocoa zealandica (Gray): Gunther, 1875: 13, pl. 7, fig. 4 (in part). Lygosoma smithii (Gray): Boulenger, 1887: 274 (in part). Werner, 1895: 21 (in part). Hutton, 1904: 39 (in part). Hutton & Drummond, 1904: 351, 354, 381 (in part). Boulenger, 1906: 370 (in part). McCann, 1955: 75 ���76, 97 (in part). Lygosoma aeneum (Girard): Boulenger, 1887: 275. Werner, 1895: 21. Werner, 1901: 387. Hutton, 1904: 39 (in part). Hutton & Drummond, 1904: 351, 354, 381. Boulenger, 1906: 371. Martin, 1929: 164. Lygosoma ornatum: Boulenger 1887: 317. Lygosoma (Liolepisma) micans: Werner, 1895: 21. Liolepisma aeneum (Girard): Lucas & Frost, 1897: 265, 278 ��� 280. Liolepisma smithii (Gray): Lucas & Frost, 1897: 265, 277 (in part). Liolepisma micans (Werner): Lucas & Frost, 1897: 279. Homolepida ornatum: Lucas & Frost 1897: 265, 279. Homolepida ornata: Burt & Burt 1932: 536. Lygosoma (Leiolopisma) aeneum (Girard): Smith, 1937: 223. Lygosoma (Leiolopisma) smithi (Gray): Smith, 1937: 223 (in part). Leiolopisma aenea (Girard): Mittleman, 1952: 21. Leiolopisma smithii (Gray): Mittleman, 1952: 30 (in part). Sphenomorphus ornatus: Mittleman, 1952: 27. Lygosoma moco Dume��ril & Bibron: Hard, 1954: 145���146. Leiolopisma aeneum (Girard): McCann, 1955: 76 ���77, 79, 102, pl. xiv, figs. 6���9. McCann, 1956: 50. Barwick, 1959: 331���332, 340, 346 ��� 348, 365 ��� 348, 346���348, 365 ��� 367, 376, 378. Sharell, 1966: 77. Fitch, 1970: 83. Porter, 1972: 403. Schipper, 1972: 57. Towns, 1972: 95���99, 102 ��� 103. Robb, 1973: 297. Greer, 1974: 16. Morrison et al., 1974: 22. Rawlinson, 1974: 94. Robb, 1974: 687. Bull & Whitaker, 1975: 241. Hicks et al., 1975: 211. Gill, 1976: 143���144. Whitaker, 1976: 9. Leiolopisma ornatum: McCann 1955 (in part): 76 -7, 80. Robb, 1977: 304���306 (in part). Sphenomorphus pseudornatus: McCann, 1955: 76 ���77, 110��� 111, 125, fig. 14 (in part). Natusch, 1967: 246 (in part). Whitaker, 1968: 623, 628���631, 634 ��� 635, 644���646, 648 ��� 650 (in part). Whitaker, 1970: 99. Forster and Forster, 1971: 132 (in part). Towns, 1971: 62, fig. 2. Towns, 1972: 95���99, 102 ��� 104, figs. 2, 3a���c (in part). Towns and Hayward, 1973: 94 ���95, 97. Whitaker, 1973: 122���130 (in part). Robb, 1974: 683, 689 (in part). Towns, 1974 b: 156 (in part). Towns, 1974 a: 217, 219, 223 (in part). Robb, 1975: 447 (in part). Hicks et al., 1975: 210��� 212. Sphenomorphus pseudornatum: McCann, 1955 (in part): 79. McCann, 1956: 50 (in part). Schipper, 1972: 58 (in part). Sphenomorphus pseudornata: McCann, 1955: 97 (in part). Leiolopisma ornata: McCann 1955 (in part): 109, 127. Leiolopisma pseudornatum: Greer 1974: 4, 14, 16 -17, 35. Leiolopisma pseudornatus (McCann): Robb, 1975: 483 (in part). Cyclodina aenea: Hardy, 1977: 264 ���266, fig. 2 b, c, 18, 19, 39 (in part). Cyclodina aenea: Wells and Wellington, 1985: 63. Oligosoma aeneum Chapple et al. 2009: 485. Several previous authors have suggested that Oligosoma ornatum might represent a species complex. Although Hardy (1977) noted that O. ornatum exhibited little morphological variation throughout most of its range, he highlighted that individuals from the Three Kings Islands had very high midbody scale counts, and that animals from the Poor Knights Islands had unusually high lamellae counts compared to individuals from the remainder of the distribution. Jewell (2008) considered these morphological differences to be sufficient to warrant the recognition of both the Three Kings Islands populations and the Poor Knights Islands populations as being taxonomically distinct from O. ornatum. A molecular study, using mitochondrial DNA sequence data, provided support for the taxonomic distinctiveness of the Poor Knights Islands populations, but the Three Kings Islands populations were found to group within one of the three subclades identified within O. ornatum (Chapple et al. 2008 c). In this study we use morphological analyses to conduct a taxonomic revision of the O. ornatum species complex, and describe only the Poor Knights Islands population as a new species., Published as part of Patterson, Geoff B., Hitchmough, Rod A. & Chapple, David G., 2013, Taxonomic revision of the ornate skink (Oligosoma ornatum; Reptilia: Scincidae) species complex from northern New Zealand in Zootaxa 3736 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3736.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/222434

Oligosoma ornatum (Gray, 1843) Figure 2 Sphenomorphus pseudornatum: McCann 1955 (part): 79. (?) Cyclodina ornata: Hardy 1977: 261 - 64. Cyclodina pseudornata: Robb 1986: 92, 108, 110, 112. Cyclodina sp. 4: Jewell 2008: 114. Oligosoma ornatum: Chapple et al. 2009: 472, 485. Neotype: Manakau, 12 km south of Levin (40 �� 42 ���S, 175 �� 29 ���E), NMNZ RE002457 (S 912) (adult male) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, September 1971). (Figure 2). Specimens examined (48 specimens). Castaway Valley, Great Island, Three Kings Islands (34 �� 9 ���S, 172 �� 9 ���E), NMNZ RE004440 (S 798) (adult female) (coll. F.M. Climo, November 1971); South West Island, Three Kings Islands (34 �� 10 ���S, 172 �� 5 ���E), NMNZ RE004881 (S 1244) (male) (coll. J.A. Bartle, January 1976); Track to summit, Great Island, Three Kings Islands (34 �� 9 ���S, 172 �� 9 ���E), NMNZ RE004439 (S 797) (female) (coll. F.M. Climo, November 1970); Castaway Valley, Great Island, Three Kings Islands (34 �� 9 ���S, 172 �� 9 ���E), NMNZ RE004441 (S 799) (male) (coll. F.M. Climo, November 1970); Tasman Valley, Great Island, Three Kings Islands (34 �� 9 ���S, 172 �� 9 ���E), NMNZ RE004946 (S 1309) (male) (coll. G. Kuschel, November 1970); North East Island, Three Kings Islands (34 �� 8 ���S, 172 �� 10 ���E), NMNZ RE001598# 1 (female), NMNZ RE001598# 2 (male), NMNZ RE001598# 3 (male), NMNZ RE001598# 4 (female), NMNZ RE001598# 5 (female), (coll. R. Dell and F.M. Climo, February 1974); Mt Camel, Houhora, Northland (34 �� 49 ���S, 173 �� 9 ���E), NMNZ RE004579 (S 939) (male), NMNZ RE004581 (S 941) (male) (coll. A.H.Whitaker, May 1972); Matapia Island, Northland (34 �� 36 ���S, 172 �� 47 ���E), NMNZ RE006121 (FT 3113) (male) (coll. P. Anderson, May 1993); West Bay, Hen Island, Hen and Chickens Group (35 �� 53 ���S, 174 �� 42 ���E), NMNZ RE003863 (S 221) (female), (coll. A.H. Whitaker, January 1968); Marotiri (Lady Alice) Islands, Hen and Chickens Group. (35 �� 53 ���S, 174 �� 42 ���E), NMNZ RE004492 (S 851) (male), (coll. A.H. Whitaker, March 1971); Hen Island, Hen and Chickens Group (35 �� 53 ���S, 174 �� 42 ���E), NMNZ RE006124 (FT 583) (male) (coll. I. McFadden, February 1989); Lady Alice Island, Hen and Chickens Group (35 �� 53 ���S, 174 �� 42 ���E), NMNZ RE006125 (FT 594) (female) (coll. A. Cree, February 1989); Hen Island, Hen and Chickens Group (35 �� 53 ���S, 174 �� 42 ���E), NMNZ RE000321 (male) (coll. H. Hamilton, December 1924); Old Woman Cove, Hen Island, Hen and Chickens Group (35 �� 53 ���S, 174 �� 42 ���E), NMNZ RE003864 (S 222) (male) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, January 1968); Summit Track, Little Barrier Island. (36 �� 13 ���S, 175 �� 03���E), NMNZ RE004834 (S 1196) (male) (coll. J. Watt, March 1974); Mangere, Auckland (36 �� 58 ���S, 174 �� 47 ���E), NMNZ RE001631 (male), NMNZ RE001625# 21 (female), NMNZ RE001625# 22 (female), NMNZ RE001625# 23 (female), NMNZ RE001625# 24 (male), NMNZ RE001625# 25 (female), NMNZ RE001625# 26 (female), NMNZ RE001625# 27 (male) (coll. G.S. Hardy, January 1970); Devonport, Auckland. (36 �� 49 ���S, 174 �� 47 ���E), NMNZ RE006122 (FT 188) (female) (coll. R. A. Hitchmough, November 1987); Great Barrier Island (36 �� 05���S, 175 �� 21 ���E), NMNZ RE001629# 45 (female), NMNZ RE001629# 46 (male) (coll. G.S. Hardy, December 1974); Tryphena, Great Barrier Island (36 �� 18 ���S, 175 �� 29 ���E), NMNZ RE002041 (male) (coll. D. Towns January 1985); 2 km N. of Leigh, Northland. (36 �� 18 ���S, 174 �� 18 ���E), NMNZ RE003865 (S 223) (female) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, January 1968); Devonport, Auckland (36 �� 49 ���S, 174 �� 46 ���E), NMNZ RE003980 (S 338) (female) (coll. D. Waddington, January 1969); Moturoa Islands, Northland (34 �� 47 ���S, 173 �� 20 ���E), NMNZ RE003831 (S 189) (male) (coll. R. Falla, January 1968); Mt Mangere Auckland (36 �� 58 ���S, 174 �� 47 ���E), NMNZ RE004470 (S 828) (male) (coll. E. Nichols, May 1970); Pouawa-Tirihau Bridge, 16 km N of Gisborne (38 �� 37 ���S, 178 �� 10 ���E), NMNZ RE004307 (S 665) (male) (coll. T. Jewell, July 1970); Groper Rock, Mokohinau Islands (35 �� 55 ���S, 175 �� 06���E), NMNZ RE004798 (S 1160) (male) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, November 1973); Kelburn, Wellington (41 �� 17 ���S, 174 �� 46 ���E), NMNZ RE003751 (S 106) (male) (coll. D. Castle, January 1964); Korokoro, Lower Hutt, (41 �� 12 ���S, 174 �� 51 ���E), NMNZ RE004087 (S 445) (female) (coll. G Woodward, July 1969); Mt Curl, Marton District (39 �� 57 ���S, 175 �� 26 ���E), NMNZ RE004225 (S 583) (female) (coll. M. Meads, February 1969); Mt Curl, Marton District (39 �� 57 ���S, 175 �� 26 ���E), NMNZ RE004835 (S 1197) (female), (coll. M. Meads, June 1972); Rata, Rangitikei (40 �� 00���S, 175 �� 31 ���E), NMNZ RE003647 (S 2) (female) (coll. T. Brown, April 1966); Johnsonville (41 �� 13 ���S, 174 �� 48 ���E), NMNZ RE005160 (S 1525) (male) (coll. J. Boyd October 1976); Mt Curl, Marton District (39 �� 57 ���S, 175 �� 26 ���E), NMNZ RE004171 (male) (coll. M. Meads December 1968); Black Rock Stn, 10 km NE Masterton, Wairarapa (40 �� 54 ���S, 175 �� 43 ���E), NMNZ RE004844 (S 1206) (female) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, March 1972); Reikorangi, Waikanae (40 �� 52 ���S, 175 �� 03���E), NMNZ RE004528 (S 887) (female) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, November 1971); Waiopehu Reserve, Levin (40 �� 38 ���S, 175 �� 19 ���E), NMNZ RE003750 (S 105) (female) (coll. A.H. Whitaker, March 1967); Kapiti Island (40 �� 52 ���S, 174 �� 55 ���E), NMNZ RE004732 (female) (coll. B.D. Bell, Nov. 1972). Diagnosis. Oligosoma ornatum can be distinguished from other Oligosoma species through a combination of characters. The orange iris clearly visible in living animals separates the species from all other Oligosoma except O. aeneum, O. levidensum (Chapple et al, 2008), O. hardyi (Chapple et al, 2008), O. townsi (Chapple et al, 2008), O. oliveri (McCann, 1955), O. macgregori (Robb, 1975), O. whitakeri (Hardy, 1977), O. striatum (Buller, 1871), O. homalonotum (Boulenger, 1906), and O. roimata sp. nov.. The unbroken subocular scale row separates O. ornatum from O. striatum, O. homalonotum and O. hardyi. Oligosoma ornatum has a prominent teardrop marking under the eye, and a moderately large ear opening, which separates it from O. aeneum, O. levidensum and O. hardyi which lack this marking and have small ear openings. Oligosoma townsi midbody scale count of ��� 38 does not overlap with O. ornatum. The maximum SVL is much less than that of O. oliveri (105.6 mm) and the AG/SF ratios are quite different (Chapple et al. 2008 a). There is minimal overlap between O. ornatum and O. whitakeri in midbody and ventral scale counts with O. whitakeri having a higher range for both indices (Hardy 1977). O. ornatum lacks the yellow and orange colouration of many O. whitakeri specimens (Hardy 1977). O. whitakeri generally has dark blotches on the ventral surface, whereas it is often lightly speckled in O. ornatum. Oligosoma whitakeri has a longer tail (TL/ SVL: 1.32; Hardy 1977) compared to O. ornatum (TL/SVL: 1.14). Colour pattern distinguishes O. ornatum from O. macgregori and there is no overlap in midbody counts between these two species. The ventral colouration of O. ornatum which is usually flushed with orange, red, pink or yellow is different from the white venter of O. roimata sp. nov.. Description of Neotype. Body elongate, squarish in cross-section; limbs moderately well-developed, pentadactyl. Lower eyelid with a large, opaque central scale, bordered anteriorly and posteriorly by relatively large scales. Snout blunt. Nostril centred just below middle of nasal, not touching bottom edge of nasal. Supranasals absent. Rostral broader than deep. Frontonasal broader than long, not separated from frontal by prefrontals meeting in midline. Frontal longer than broad, similar in length to frontoparietal and interparietal together, in contact with 2 anteriormost supraoculars. Supraoculars 4, the second largest. Preoculars 2, the upper one larger. Frontoparietals distinct, larger than interparietal. A pair of parietals meeting behind interparietal and bordered posteriorly by a pair each of nuchals and temporals, also in contact with interparietal, frontoparietal, fourth supraocular and 2 postoculars. Loreals 2, posterior one the larger; anterior loreal in contact with first and second supralabial, posterior loreal, prefrontal, frontonasal and nasal; posterior loreal in contact with second and third supralabial, first subocular, upper and lower preocular, prefrontal and anterior loreal. Supralabials 7, the sixth largest. Infralabials 6, several of them equal in size; fifth supralabial below centre of eye. Mental broader but shallower than rostral. Suboculars series continuous. Postmental larger than mental. Chinshields 3 pairs. Two primary temporals. Dorsal scales largest, weakly striate. Ventral scales smooth. Subdigital lamellae smooth. Ear opening round, moderately large, with no projecting granules. Forelimbs shorter than hindlimbs. Adpressed limbs not meeting in adult. Digits short, sub-cylindrical. Third front digit shorter than the fourth. Measurements (in Millimeters; Neotype with the Variation Shown in the Specimens Examined in Parentheses): SVL 65.2 (mean 62.3, range 40.0��� 80.5), HL 10.5 (mean 9.0, range 6.6���10.8), HW 6.8 (mean 6.4, range 4.7���7.6), AG 32.0 (mean 31.9, range 19.4���47.8), SF 26.0 (mean 23.9, range 16.4���28.8), S-E 12.3 (mean 11.5, range 8.1���13.6), EF 14.7 (mean 12.7, range 7.7���16.5), and TL unknown (not intact) (mean 65.1; N = 6). Scalation (Neotype with the Variation Shown in the Specimens Examined in Parentheses): Upper ciliaries 8 (mean 7, range 5-10); lower ciliaries 11 (mean 10, range 8���13); nuchals 1 pair (mean 1 pair, range 0���2 pairs); midbody scale rows 32 (mean 32, range 28���36); ventral scale rows 74 (mean 74, range 60���88); subdigital lamellae 18 (mean 19, range 15���26); supraciliaries 7 (mean 7, range 7-8); suboculars 8 (mean 8, range 7���11). Frontonasal seldom separated from frontal by prefrontals meeting in midline. Anterior loreal in contact with first and second supralabial, occasionally in contact with second only. Posterior loreal usually in contact with second supralabial only, occasionally in contact with second and third supralabial. Supralabials 7 (usual) or 8, the sixth or seventh largest. Infralabials 5 or 6 (usual). One, occasionally two primary temporals. Third front digit usually as long as the fourth. Maximum SVL 80.5 mm. Six specimens had intact tails (TL/SVL = 1.14). Ratios for morphological measurements (�� SD): AG/SF 1.33 �� 0.16; SE/EF 0.91 �� 0.08; HL/HW 1.42 �� 0.09. Colouration. Dorsal surface light brown to very dark brown, with irregular dark and light flecks or blotches. Dark brown line passing from near tip of snout through upper part of eye to above and forward of ear. Posterior to ear a dark brown band of varying width extends above forelimb becoming less distinct as it proceeds towards tip of tail. This band is broken up by light blotches. Lateral surface usually lighter in colour than dorsum, lessening in intensity towards ventral surface. Usually blotched with dark and light along lateral body wall. No striping on limbs, which follow dorsal and ventral body colouring. Ventral surface red, orange, pink, yellow, white or cream, often lightly speckled with black compared with throat and chin. Fawcett (1970) interpreted the red colouration as sexual in nature; it is absent in immature animals. Throat and chin sometimes strongly mottled in appearance. A white, black-edged ���tear-drop��� under eye on fifth and sixth supralabial. Upper and/or lower jaws may have denticulate markings. Juvenile colouration is similar to adult except for the belly colour. Habitat and life history. Oligosoma ornatum is known from throughout most of the North Island (BioWeb Herpetofauna database 2011), but there are no records from altitudes over 600 metres. It also occurs on several island groups off the coast of the North Island, including Little Barrier and Great Barrier Islands, the Hen and Chickens group and the Three Kings islands. It lives among leaf litter, under rocks and logs, or in dense vegetation in man-made and natural environments. One individual was recently found among the roots of a pine tree about 0.5m below the ground in Wellington. It is mostly active at dawn or dusk, seldom emerging far from cover, but will sun-bask near the entrance to its retreat. Young are born in January-February. The life-history was studied by Porter (1987) and Fawcett (1964, 1970). Fawcett found the maximum SVL for his animals was 80 mm. Females matured after their second hibernation when about 19���20 months of age and 60���65 mm SVL; males matured when 15���16 months of age and 50���55 mm SVL. The maximum SVL recorded for this species is 84 mm and maximum weight (for the same animal) was 11.5 g (R. Romijn, pers. comm.). Oligosoma ornatum is currently listed in the New Zealand Threat Classification System as At Risk (Hitchmough et al. 2013)., Published as part of Patterson, Geoff B., Hitchmough, Rod A. & Chapple, David G., 2013, Taxonomic revision of the ornate skink (Oligosoma ornatum; Reptilia: Scincidae) species complex from northern New Zealand in Zootaxa 3736 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3736.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/222434

The New Zealand Government’s Department of Conservation facilitates assessment of the threat status of all species of New Zealand’s fauna, flora, and fungi on a regular basis. Fungi have been included in these assessments since 2002, and this has stimulated renewed research and awareness of fungal conservation. Assessment has centred mainly on macrofungi and obligate species on threatened plants. Currently, 49 fungal species are listed in the highest threat category (Nationally Critical), 16 species in lower threat categories, and about 1440 species as Data Deficient. In a complementary initiative, the Department is prioritising long-term recovery plans of all species of New Zealand’s threatened taxa that are in decline through evaluation of methodology, feasibility, and cost. This work includes the fungi. To support this work, recent studies have applied molecular techniques to seek new records of Data Deficient fungal species to more accurately define their threat status.

Patterson, Geoff B., Hitchmough, Rod A., Chapple, David G. (2013): Taxonomic revision of the ornate skink (Oligosoma ornatum; Reptilia: Scincidae) species complex from northern New Zealand. Zootaxa 3736 (1), DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3736.1.2