Search

The lowland region of Sumatra Barat has received little attention in previous biodiversity studies. Past studies have mainly focused on highland habitat and conservation areas. However, many populations of Cyrtodactylus in the lowland habitats of Sumatra Barat were not correctly identified. A phylogenetic tree based on the NADH dehydrogenase subunit 2 (ND2) gene showed that the lowland Sumatran population is the sister group of the Malaysian lowland species, C. semenanjungensis, together nesting within the agamensis group. The genetic divergence within the Sumatra Barat population is 0–4.2% and 18.3–20% to C. semenanjungensis. Further examination of morphological characters revealed that they differed from the sister clade and other Sumatran Cyrtodactylus members by a unique combination of characters such as absence of tubercle on brachium, presence of tubercle on ventrolateral fold, 32–41 paravertebral tubercles, 38–46 ventral scales, enlarged femoral scales, presence of precloacofemoral pores and 22–23 subdigital lamellae under fourth toe. Based on the morphological and molecular evidence, the lowland Sumatran population is herein described as a new species, increasing the number of species in Sumatra to seven. More comprehensive and intensive sampling efforts would most likely yield further discoveries in the group of Sumatran Cyrtodactylus in the near future.

Boiga multomaculata septentrionalis ssp. nov. Northern Polymorphic Asian Cat Snake urn:lsid:zoobank.org: act: 439A42EE-0B42-4063-B04A-E18B14FA6023 1931 Boiga multomaculata indica Mell: 213 [partim]. 1943 Boiga ochracea walli Smith: 349 [partim]. Geographic Distribution. As currently known, B. m. septentrionalis is distributed in northern Myanmar (Kachin state and Sagaing Region) and NE India (Assam and Nagaland), but is probably more widespread and based on the documented pattern of geographic distribution we have referred an adult male specimen from southern China (CAS 242550 from Yunnan Province) tentatively to this subspecies, pending genetic confirmation. Holotype. CAS 241272, an adult male from Indawgyi Lake Wildlife Sanctuary (25.30347, 96.35417; 235 m a.s.l.), vicinity Kyang Kyar village, Moenyin Township, Myitkyina District, Kachin State, Myanmar, collected on 20 July 2008 by J.A. Wilkinson, J. V. Vindum, S.L. Oo, K. T. Kyaw, and M. Win. Original field tag MHS 25921. Paratypes (3). CAS 241150, an adult female from Indawgyi Lake Wildlife Sanctuary (25.30347, 96.35417; 235 m a.s.l.), E of Nat Mouk Kan village, Moenyin Township, Myitkyina District, Kachin State, Myanmar, collected on 14 July 2008 by G.O.U. Wogan, J.A. Wilkinson, J. V. Vindum, A.K. Shein. CAS 241550, an adult female from Indawgyi Lake Wildlife Sanctuary (25.17869, 96.29156; 270 m a.s.l.), vicinity of Lwe Mon village, Moenyin Township, Myitkyina District, Kachin State, Myanmar, collected on 26 July 2008 by J.A. Wilkinson, K. T. Kyaw, and J. V. Vindum. SMF 106288 (formerly CAS 239222), an adult male from Linpha village (25,80489, 95,52667; 140 m a.s.l.), Hkanti Township, Hkanti District, Sagaing Region, Myanmar, collected on 10 September 2006 by K.S. Lwin, S.L. Oo, and A.K. Shein. Diagnosis. A subspecies of Boiga multomaculata that differs from the other two subspecies (i.e., B. m. multomaculata and B. m. ochracea) by mean pairwise genetic distances of 3.3–5.8% (ND4) and 3.7–6.5% (CYTB), respectively. It further differs from B. m. multomaculata by having on average more ventral scales in both sexes (males 227.7±5.19, females 228.8± 1.71 in B. m. septentrionalis versus males 214.4±8.06, females 217.1± 9.50 in B. m. multomaculata), by having on average more subcaudal scales in both sexes (males 99.1±5.82, females 97.3± 2.06 in B. m. septentrionalis versus males 94.5±5.33, females 89.8± 4.13 in B. m. multomaculata), and by having both blotched and patternless individuals (versus only blotched specimens in Boiga m. multomaculata). It further differs from B. m. ochracea by having on average fewer ventral scales in females (228.8± 1.71 in B. m. septentrionalis versus 238.9± 6.30 in B. m. ochracea). Description of the holotype (Figs. 14 and 15). Adult male, indicated by fully developed everted hemipenes; 1/1 loreal, wider than high; nasal scale partly divided below the naris; 1/1 preocular; 1/1 supraocular; 2/2 postoculars; 2 prefrontals; 2/2 anterior and 3/2 posterior temporals; supralabials 8/8, 3 rd –5 th supralabials entering eye; 11/11 infralabials, first five in contact with anterior chin shields; dorsal scales in 19-19-15 rows, smooth with single or paired apical pits on body and single to triple apical pits on dorsocaudal scales; vertebral scale row distinctly enlarged; two preventrals and 226 ventrals; cloacal plate entire; subcaudal scales 92, paired. Body slender; tail long (TL/SVL 0.235); SVL 578 mm; TL 136 mm; head length measured from tip of snout to posterior edge of mandible 18.1 mm, head width 10.5 mm; diameter eye 3.4 mm; distance anterior border eye to tip of snout 4.9 mm. Dentition. Maxillary bone with 11/11 prediastemal teeth, followed by a distinct diastema which is 40% longer than the socket of the last prediastemal tooth and followed by two distinctly enlarged, grooved and posteriorly bent postdiastemal teeth. Prediastemal teeth slightly decrease in size posteriorly, the anterior three distinctly posteriorly hooked, the following with less pronounced curvature. On the left side, prediastemal teeth number two, four, six, eight and ten, and first postdiastemal loose. On the right side, prediastemal teeth one, three, five, seven and nine, and first postdiastemal tooth loose. Medial to each maxillary tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Palatine bone with 6/6 posteriorly strongly curved teeth, shorter that the prediastemal teeth and slightly decreasing in size posteriorly. Tooth three six loose on left side. Teeth two, four and six loose on the right side. Lateral to each palatine tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Pterygoid bone with 11/12 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than the palatine tooth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Teeth two, five, seven and 10 loose on left side. Teeth one, three, five, 10 and 12 loose on right side. The posterior 63% of the pterygoid bone are without teeth. Mandibular bone with 18/17 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than maxillary teeth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Medial to each mandibular tooth is a single replacement tooth in different growth stages. Teeth one, three, five, seven, nine, 11, 13 and 15 loose on left and right side. Tooth 17 missing on right side. Coloration after about 13 years preservation in 70% ethanol was recorded as follows: Dorsal ground color Smoke Gray (Color 266) with Natal Brown (49) mottling on scales and with 62 Sepia (286) blotches that have a paler (Grayish Olive 274 suffused with Smoke Gray 266) center and a white to Pale Buff (1) border. Dorsal scale reduction formula. [table omitted] Variation. Paratypes agree well with the holotype in general appearance, morphometrics and scalation (Table 1). Most paratypes are blotched as is the holotype. An exception is SMF 106288 (formerly CAS 239222) that has no blotches but exhibits 58 indistinct transverse dark bars composed of dark edges of adjacent dorsal scales. Variation in dentition. Ten to 12 prediastemal teeth followed by a distinct diastema and two enlarged grooved postdiastemal teeth; five to six palatine, seven to 12 pterygoid, and 16 to 19 dental teeth. Variation in live coloration and pattern. Two color morphs, blotched and unicolored are known. The blotched morph resembles the color and pattern of brownish individuals of the nominate subspecies. The unicolored morph (Fig. 16) resembles the unpatterned morph of B. m. ochracea. An intermediate color variation is known from Nagaland, NE India (WII-AD 856), which resembles the ground coloration of the unicolored morph but shows a Raw Umber (280) postocular stripe, faint dark dorsal had pattern similar to that of the nominate subspecies and an irregular strippled Raw Umber (280) pattern forming broken bands along dorsal body and tail. Etymology. The species epithet is formed from the Latin words septentrio (= “north”) and the suffix - alis (to form an adjective) and refers to the geographic distribution of this taxon. Boiga m. septentrionalis has the most northern distribution of the subspecies of B. multomaculata. Natural History. The holotype of B. m. septentrionalis was collected at 19:30 hrs. in bamboo, about 2 m above ground. The paratypes were all collected at night when Boiga is active. At the time of capture, the air temperature was 26.1–28.2°C and the relative air humidity was recorded as 81–96%.

Boiga multomaculata Dipsas multomaculata was described by Heinrich Boie’s elder brother Friedrich (1789–1870), in Latin and German (Boie 1827), and published in the year of Heinrich’s death. It has been suggested that Friedrich Boie attributed his description to H. Boie’s (1823 –1825) “Erpétologie de Java ” (Wallach et al. 2014). The latter work was never published and names proposed therein are considered unavailable for the purposes of nomenclature, according to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999; ICZN 2012), hereafter referred to as “the Code”. However, F. Boie does not actually cite his brother’s unpublished work in his D. multomaculata species account. Rather he cites the Prussian-born Dutch pharmacist and botanist Caspar Georg Carl Reinwardt (1773–1854), yet no Reinwardt 1825 paper describing this taxon exists and it must be assumed that F. Boie was the person who introduced this binomen. Since Boie does attribute the taxon name to Reinwardt the degree of his involvement must therefore be determined. If Reinwardt just contributed the name with the specimen the citation would be Dipsas multomaculata F. Boie, 1827, but if he contributed both the name and a description of sorts, then the citation should be Dipsas multomaculata Reinwardt in F. Boie, 1827 (Aaron Bauer, pers. comm.). It would appear that the first scenario is correct (see also David & Vogel 1996:21). Thus, the author citation is F. Boie, 1827 not Reinwardt in F. Boie, 1827 because F. Boie attributes the name to Reinwardt but not the description. Schlegel (1826:238) also attributes the description of Dipsas multomaculata to Reinwardt when he writes „Gen. DIPSAS Laur. Cuo, Esp. …… Col. multimaculatus (sic) Reinw. N. esp. …” There is nothing in F. Boie’s account to suggest he referred to his brother’s unpublished manuscript for his description of D. multomaculata. However, the comparison of H. Boie´s manuscript part for “ Dipsas multimaculata ” and Friedrich Boie’s (1827) text on “[Dipsas] multomaculata ”, which we regard as the original description, shows, that the latter is a verbatim copy of H. Boie´s manuscript with the exception of the different spelling of the species name and the reference to images which depict this species in earlier classical works. The primary types of this taxon have been stated to be unlocated (Nguyen et al. 2009; Uetz et al. 2019), as deposited in “RMNH” (Iskandar & Colijn 2002) or listed with incorrect quantity, syntype composition, and collectors (Wallach et al. 2014). They are actually present in the collection of the Naturalis Biodiversity Center (formerly Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Histoire, Leiden, Netherlands) and have been examined by one of the authors (FT). The enquiries in Leiden by FT and MOS revealed that H. Boie wrote his manuscript between 1823 and 1825, i.e., before his departure for Java. However, this also means that the material he and Macklot collected on Java between June 1826 and September 1827 (= RMNH 978a+b) was not available to him when he wrote his manuscript. Thus, material used for the description must have already been in the Leiden collection. Therefore, only material that was previously collected by Kuhl and van Hasselt or Reinwardt would have been available to him and are very likely the specimens listed under RMNH 979. The material collected by H. Boie and Macklot (RMNH 978a+b) could never have been part of the type series of D. multomaculata because F. Boie (1827) added nothing new to his brother’s text. It has to be noted that the order of the inventory numbers does not relate to the order of accession into the Leiden collection. A specimen (i.e., ZMB 2642) in the collection of the Museum für Naturkunde Berlin very likely also belonged to the original type series of D. multomaculata. According to a letter dated “Leyden, 2 nd April 1825 ” (preserved in the Dept. of Historical Research of Berlin Museum, Acta Sign. ZM, Dr. Temminck, Leyden, 1818), Heinrich Boie wrote to Martin Hinrich Carl Lichtenstein (1780–1857, Director of the ZMB at that time) and offered him beside many other specimens from Java under list number “38” a specimen of “ Dipsas multimaculata ” for the price of 1 [Reichsthaler]. The same specimen appeared with the same number and same price in a list written by Lichtenstein documenting the arrival of the objects with the following title [translation by us]: „List of the objects sent by Mr. Temminck from Leyden and arrived at the Museum [Berlin] on 9 March 1826 “. These hitherto unnoticed documents suggest that the specimen of D. multomaculata offered by H. Boie to the Berlin Museum in April 1825 must have belonged to the original type series and was probably collected by Kuhl and Van Hasselt and available to H. Boie when he worked on his manuscript. In addition, the scalation values of ZMB 2642 are within the variation given by H. Boie in his manuscript. The main reason why this specimen has not been considered as a type specimen so far is probably the fact that it is linked only to Coenraad Jacob Temminck (director of the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden and treasurer of the Dutch East India Company) who is cited as the donor in the Berlin Museum inventory catalogue and no one had previously evaluated the associated correspondence. Only RMNH 979 (a jar which contains six specimens) and the specimen later sent to the Zoologisches Museum Berlin were available for H. Boie’s manuscript. Of the six specimens under RMNH 979 only specimen b, d, e and f (all females) fit the scalation data of H. Boie (manuscript) and F. Boie (1827). Thus, in our opinion, the extant syntype series of D. multomaculata F. Boie 1827 consists of ZMB 2642 and four out of the six specimens listed under RMNH 979. The German naturalists Heinrich Boie (1794–1827) and Heinrich Christian Macklot (1799–1832) visited Java between December 1825 and September 1827. Esther Dondorp (Senior Collection Manager) and Karien Lahaise (Naturalis archivist) informed MOS that according to an unpublished manuscript by Marinus Hoogmoed “ H. Boie and Macklot arrived in Java on 6 June 1826. On December 28, 1826 they travelled to Krawang (Tjikao) [now Karawang, a town in West Java regency, Tjikao, now Ci Kao, is a watercourse south of Karawang]. H. Boie died on 4 September 1827 ”. Thus, the dates that both were working in Java together and collected these specimens may therefore be defined more accurately as 6 June 1826 to 4 September 1827. The two were in the employ of the Rijksmuseum voor Natuurlijke Historie (RMNH), as part of the Natuurkundige Commissie voor Nederlandsche Indie (Commission for Natural Sciences of the East Indies). In all documents (letters and manuscript) from H. Boie’s hand and publications based on H. Boie’s manuscript or written notifications by him (e.g., Schlegel 1826 and 1827) the spelling “ multimaculata ” is used exclusively. This also applies to the Leiden catalogue entries. Although this is to be taken as a clear expression of his will, we have to accept Friedrich Boie´s (1827) “ multomaculata ”, since the latter is responsible for the valid introduction of the name in the sense of the Code, Art. 50.1. This is also in line with the statements of David & Vogel (1996:21). Numerous authors erroneously referred to this species as Dipsas multimaculatus or D. multimaculata (e.g., Duméril et al. 1854b; Duméril et al. 1854a; Theobald 1868b; Boulenger 1890), and this misspelling of multomaculata as multimaculatus would continue when Boulenger (1896) placed the rear-fanged Asian cat snakes into the resurrected Dipsadomorphus, and even when they were transferred to Boiga by Smith (1923). In recent years most authors have been careful to use F. Boie’s correct spelling Boiga multomaculata. A number of obscure names have been proposed as synonyms of B. multomaculata. Wallach et al. (2014) suggested Coluber aldrovandi Merrem, 1820, to be a synonym of this taxon. However, reading Merrem´s description (1820:125) it becomes obvious that it is not even a Boiga because some of the main characters noted by Merrem, e.g., keeled scales, head pointedly rounded, and the absence of a loreal scale are not characteristic for this genus. Also the values for ventrals (121) and subcaudals (49) of Merrem´s aldrovandi are far outside the range of B. multomaculata (see Table 1). Their action to declare Dipsas multomaculata a nomen protectum with priority over “ Coluber aldrovandi ” is therefore obsolete. Furthermore, Merrem´s taxon was not described in the combination with the genus name Coluber but with „ Natrix “. The name “ Natrix sturmii ” is based on an unpublished manuscript dated around 1825 by Johann Georg Wagler (1800–1832) (pers. comm. Van Wallach 17 March 2022) and is considered nomen ineditum because it was not been properly published according to the Code. Rudolf Emil Mell (1878–1970) was a German school-teacher and amateur naturalist collector working in China in the early 20 th Century. He returned to Germany in May 1921 and later proposed several subspecies of B. multomaculatus (Mell 1931), i.e., B. m. hainanensis, B. m. indica, and B. m. sikiangensis but these taxa have been considered synonyms of B. multomaculata since their inception (e.g., Pope 1935; Bourret 1936; Smith 1943). Whereas the syntypes of B. m. sikiangensis are known (i.e. ZMB 49427, 50879, 52642), no type material is known to exist for B. m. hainanensis or B. m. indica. The type localities of B. m. hainanensis (“Hainan”) and B. m. sikiangensis (“Kwangtung (Hongkong)”) are more precise than the one given for B. m. indica (“continental India ”), especially since continental India at that time included Sikkim, Assam, Bengal (including today’s Bangladesh), Burma (Myanmar), and Pakistan. The various author’s copies of this publication that Mell distributed, including the one in the departmental herpetological library at Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut, contain a handwritten correction of B. m. hainanensis to “ sikiangensis Mell”. Presumably, the author had a change of mind regarding his taxon name, but this has no nomenclatorial relevance. As far as we know, Mell never corrected it formally in a subsequent publication and the introduction of the name hainanensis must be regarded as valid published in the sense of the Code. At the time of writing Mell’s subspecies were not listed in the Reptile Database (Uetz et al. 2022)., Published as part of Köhler, Gunther, Charunrochana, Panupong Thammachoti, Mogk, Linda, Than, Ni Lar, Kurniawan, Nia, Kadafi, Ahmad Muammar, Das, Abhijit, Tillack, Frank & O'Shea, Mark, 2023, A taxonomic revision of Boiga multomaculata (Boie, 1827) and B. ochracea (Theobald, 1868), with the description of a new subspecies (Squamata, Serpentes, Colubridae), pp. 151-193 in Zootaxa 5270 (2) on pages 152-154, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5270.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7896950, {"references":["Boie, F. (1827) Bemerkungen uber Merrem's Versuch eines Systems der Amphibien. Marburg, 1820 1 te Lieferung, Ophidier. Isis von Oken, Jena, 20, 508 - 566.","Boie, H. (1823 - 1825) Erpetologie de Java. (unpublished manuscript deposited in Naturalis, Leiden, the Netherlands, snake section contains 30 pages).","Wallach, V., Williams, K. L. & Boundy, J. (2014) Snakes of the World: a Catalogue of Living and Extinct Species. Taylor and Francis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, xxvii + 1237.","ICZN (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Available from http: // www. nhm. ac. uk / hosted-sites / iczn / code.","ICZN (2012) Amendment of Articles 8, 9, 10, 21 and 78 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature to expand and refine methods of publication. ZooKeys, 219, 1 - 10. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 219.3994","David, P. & Vogel, G. (1996) The Snakes of Sumatra: An Annotated Checklist and Key with Natural History Notes. Eidtion Chimaira, Frankfurt, 259 pp.","Schlegel, H. (1826) Notice sur l'erpetologie de I'ile de Java; par M Boie (ouvrage manuscrit). Bulletin des Sciences Naturelles et de Geologie, 9, 233 - 240.","Nguyen, V. S., Ho, T. C. & Nguyen, Q. T. (2009) Herpetofauna of Vietnam. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt, 768 pp.","Uetz, P., Cherikh, S., Shea, G., Ineich, I., Campbell, P. D., Doronin, I. V., Rosado, J., Wynn, A., Tighe, K. A., McDiarmid, R., Lee, J. L., K ˆ hler, G., Ellis, R., Doughty, P., Raxworthy, C. J., Scheinberg, L., Resetar, A., Sabaj, M., Schneider, G., Franzen, M., Glaw, F., B ˆ hme, W., Schweiger, S., Gemel, R., Couper, P., Amey, A., Dondorp, E., Ofer, G., Meiri, S. & van Wallach (2019) A global catalog of primary reptile type specimens. Zootaxa, 4695 (5), 438 - 450. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4695.5.2","Iskandar, D. T. & Colijn, E. (2002) A checklist of Southeast Asian and New Guinean reptiles I. Serpentes. Biodiversity Conservation Project, Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Bandung.","Dumeril, A., Bibron, G. & Dumeril, A. (1854 b) Erpetologie Generale on Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Tome 9. Roret / Fain et Thunot, Paris. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 118797","Dumeril, A., Bibron, G. & Dumeril, A. (1854 a) Erpetologie Generale on Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Tome 7. Roret / Fain et Thunot, Paris, xvi + 780. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 118797","Theobald, W. (1868 b) Catalogue of the reptiles of British Birma, embracing the provinces of Pegu, Martaban, and Tenasserim; with descriptions of new or little-know species. Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology), 10, 4 - 67. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / j. 1096 - 3642.1868. tb 02007. x","Boulenger, G. A. (1890) The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor and Francis, London, United Kingdom, xviii + 541. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 100797","Boulenger, G. A. (1896) Catalogue of the Snakes in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol. III. Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History), London, United Kingdom, xiv + 727.","Smith, M. A. (1923) On a collection of reptiles and batrachians from the island of Hainan. The Journal of the Natural History Society of Siam, 6.","Mell, R. (1931) List of Chinese snakes. Lingnan Science Journal, 8, 199 - 219.","Pope, C. H. (1935) The reptiles of China. Turtles, crocodilians, snakes and lizards. Natural History of Central Asia Vol. 10, New York, 604 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 12104","Bourret, R. (1936) Les Serpents de l'Indochine. Imprimerie Henri Basuyau & Cie., Toulouse.","Smith, M. A. (1943) The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma, including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Subregion. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III. - Serpentes. Taylor & Francis, London, 583 pp.","Uetz, P., Freed, P. & Hosek, J. (2022) The Reptile Database. Available from http: // www. reptile-database. org (accessed 6 February 2022)"]}

Boiga multomaculata ochracea (Theobald, 1868), comb. nov. Tawny Asian Cat Snake 1868 Dipsas ochracea Theobald: 53. 1868 Dipsas ochraceus Günther: 425. 1931 Boiga multomaculata indica Mell: 213 [partim]. 1943 Boiga ochracea walli Smith: 349 [partim]. Geographic distribution: Most of Myanmar (except for the northern portion of the country), northeastern India (Mizoram), Bangladesh, Thailand north of 18° N latitude, and northern Laos (own observation; Smith 1943; Whitaker & Captain 2004; Ahmed et al. 2009; Das 2010; Hasan et al. 2014; Wallach et al. 2014; Chan-ard et al. 2015; Lalremsanga & Lalronunga 2017; Lalremsanga et al. 2018; Hmar et al. 2020). Type material.The description of Dipsas ochracea is based on two specimens from “ Rangoon ” and “Maulmain”, but the two syntypes are not located and must be regarded as lost (see Introduction). In agreement with Art. 72.2 and Art. 75 of the Code, we here designate BMNH 1946.1.2.60 (formerly BMNH 68.4.3.16) (Figs. 11 and 12) as neotype of Dipsas ochracea Theobald, 1868 to ensure stability and universality by specifying a single name-bearer for this nominal taxon. With the selected specimen, which at the same time represents one of the syntypes of Dipsas ochraceus Günther, 1868, we preserve the original connection and exchange between Günther and Theobald with respect to the nearly simultaneous description and naming of an ochraceous colored Asian cat snake taxon from southern Burma. By selection of the neotype and in accordance with Art. 76.3 of the Code, the type locality is “ Pegu ”, replacing the ‘corrected’ type locality by Wallach et al. (2014:106), which includes two different divisions in southern Myanmar. Neotype. BMNH 1946.1.2.60 (formerly BMNH 68.4.3.16), an adult female from “ Pegu ” [Bago, Bago Region, Myanmar, approx. 17.32°N, 96.47°E], collected by William Theobald and donated to the BMNH collection in spring 1868. Description of the neotype. Adult female, indicated by the absence of hemipenes; 1/1 loreal, wider than high; nasal scale completely divided; 1/1 preocular; 1/1 supraocular; 2/2 postoculars, upper not reaching onto top of head; 2 prefrontals; 2/2 anterior and 4/3 posterior temporals; supralabials 8/8, 3 rd –5 th supralabials entering eye; 12/11 infralabials, first five in contact with anterior chin shields; dorsal scales in 19-19-15 rows, smooth with paired tiny apical pits on body and paired or triple apical pits on dorsocaudal scales; vertebral scale row significantly enlarged; one preventral and 237 ventrals; cloacal plate entire; 98 paired subcaudal scales. Body slender; tail long (TL/SVL 0.239); SVL 889 mm; TL 212 mm; head length measured from tip of snout to posterior border of parietals 18.3 mm, head length measured from tip of snout to posterior edge of mandible 23.8 mm, head width 15.5 mm; diameter eye 4.2 mm; distance anterior border eye to tip of snout 7.3 mm. Dentition. Maxillary bone with 11/10 prediastemal teeth, followed by a distinct diastema which is 68% longer than the socket of the last prediastemal tooth and followed by two distinctly enlarged, grooved and posteriorly bent postdiastemal teeth. Prediastemal teeth slightly decrease in size posteriorly, the anterior three distinctly posteriorly hooked, the following with less pronounced curvature. On the left side, prediastemal teeth number one, three, five, seven, nine, 11, and second postdiastemal loose. On the right side, prediastemal tooth six broken, teeth one, three, five, and seven and second postdiastemal tooth loose. Medial to each maxillary tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Palatine bone with 6/6 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter that the prediastemal teeth and slightly decreasing in size posteriorly. Second tooth on left side broken. Teeth one, three and five loose on right side. Lateral to each palatine tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Pterygoid bone with 10/9 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than the palatine tooth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Teeth one, three, five, seven and nine loose on left side. Teeth one, three, five, seven and eight loose on right side. The posterior 58% of the pterygoid bone are without teeth. Mandibular bone with 18/17 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than maxillary teeth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Medial to each mandibular tooth is a single replacement tooth in different growth stages. Tooth two broken, teeth one, three, four, 15 and 17 loose on left side. Teeth one, three, nine, 12 and 14 loose on right side. The neotype of B. m. ochracea coloration after approximately 150 years preservation in ca. 70% ethanol was recorded as follows: Dorsal ground color of head body and tail with intact “Oberhäutchen” uniform Drab (Color 19), body parts without “Oberhäutchen” uniform Light Lavender (201); interstitial skin Fawn Color (258); venter of head, body and tail same color as described for dorsal body. Dorsal scale reduction formula. [table omitted] Variation. Individuals of this subspecies are either blotched or immaculate whereas specimens with an intermediate color pattern have not been reported yet (Fig. 13). For variation in morphometrics and scalation see Table 1. Variation in dentition. Ten to 13 prediastemal teeth followed by a distinct diastema and two enlarged grooved postdiastemal teeth; six palatine, eight to 13 pterygoid, and 15 to 18 dental teeth. Variation in live coloration and pattern. Two color morphs, blotched and unicolored are known. The blotched morph resembles the color and pattern of brownish individuals of the nominate subspecies. Dorsal ground color of the unicolored morph Pale Cinnamon (Color 55) to Dark Salmon Color (59), interstitial skin Pale Neutral Grey (296), posterior supralabials and infralabials Chamois (84) with Dark Salmon Color (59) edges. Venter of head, body and tail Pale Buff (1). Iris Light Chrome Orange (76) or Dark Salmon Color (59), pupil Sepia (286). Natural History. Boiga m. ochracea is mostly arboreal, crepuscular and nocturnal. It is known to inhabit different forest types, parks and gardens and agricultural land like banana plantations in lowlands, mid hills and submontane regions, from around 10 m up to 1884 m a.s.l. It is reported to feed on birds and their eggs, and lizards (our observations; Whitaker & Captain 2004; Mahony et al. 2009; Das 2010; Hasan et al. 2014)., Published as part of Köhler, Gunther, Charunrochana, Panupong Thammachoti, Mogk, Linda, Than, Ni Lar, Kurniawan, Nia, Kadafi, Ahmad Muammar, Das, Abhijit, Tillack, Frank & O'Shea, Mark, 2023, A taxonomic revision of Boiga multomaculata (Boie, 1827) and B. ochracea (Theobald, 1868), with the description of a new subspecies (Squamata, Serpentes, Colubridae), pp. 151-193 in Zootaxa 5270 (2) on pages 174-177, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5270.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7896950, {"references":["Smith, M. A. (1943) The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma, including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Subregion. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III. - Serpentes. Taylor & Francis, London, 583 pp.","Whitaker, R. & Captain, A. (2004) Snakes of India. The field guide. Draco Books, Chennai, 479 pp.","Ahmed, M. F., Das, A. & Dutta S. K. (2009) Amphibians and Reptiles of Northeast India. A photographic Guide. Aaranyak, Guwahati, India.","Das, I. (2010) A field guide to the reptiles of South-East Asia. New Holland Publishers (UK) Ltd., London, 376 pp.","Hasan, M., Islam, M. M., Kuramoto, M., Kurabayashi, A. & Sumida, M. (2014) Description of two new species of Microhyla (Anura: Microhylidae) from Bangladesh. Zootaxa, 3755 (5), 401 - 418. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3755.5.1","Wallach, V., Williams, K. L. & Boundy, J. (2014) Snakes of the World: a Catalogue of Living and Extinct Species. Taylor and Francis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, xxvii + 1237.","Lalremsanga, H. T. & Lalronunga, S. (2017) Mizoram Rul Chanchin [Snakes of Mizoram] [in Mizo]. Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Network (BIOCONE), Aizwal, 132 pp.","Lalremsanga, H. T., Sailo, S. & Chinliansiama, H. (2018) Diversity of snakes (Reptilia: Squamata) and role of environmental factors in their distribution in Mizoram, Northeast India. Advances in Environmental Chemistry, 265 - 268.","Hmar, G. Z., Muansanga, L., Biakzuala, L., Lalrinsanga, R. & Lalremsanga, H. T. (2020) Inventory survey on the ophidian fauna of Reiek Community Reserved Forest, Mamit district, Mizoram, India. Journal of Environmental Biology, 41, 821 - 826. https: // doi. org / 10.22438 / jeb / 41 / 4 (SI) / MS _ 1906","Gunther, A. (1868) Sixth account of new species of snakes in the British Museum. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (4) 1, 425. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222936808695725","Mahony, S., Hasan, K., Kabir, M. & Ahmed, M, & Hossain, K. (2009) A catalogue of amphibians and reptiles in the collection of Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Hamadryad, 34, 80 - 94."]}

Boiga multomaculata multomaculata (Boie, 1827) Ocellated Asian Cat snake 1931 B. multomaculata hainanensis Mell: 213. 1931 B. multomaculata sikiangensis Mell: 213. Geographic distribution. As currently known, B. m. multomaculata is distributed across Thailand south of 17° N latitude, central and southern Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, southern China (including Hainan) and on the Indonesian islands of Java, Bali, and probably Sumatra (Zhao & Adler 1993; David & Vogel 1996; Nguyen et al. 2009; Das 2010; Chan-ard et al. 2015). There are a number of incorrect listings of this taxon. An erroneous Singapore record goes back to Cantor and led to B. multomaculata being listed for West Malaysia, too. The absence of B. multomaculata on Malayan Peninsula was already clarified by Smith (1930:63–64). For Sulawesi, Borneo, Singapore (West Malaysia) no reliable records are available or no vouchers are preserved in any collection. However, various authors still listed some of these implausible localities in very recent literature and in databases. David & Vogel (1996) report the presence of B. multomaculata on Sumatra but there are no references that provide a reliable record for the taxon from this island. Most probably the inclusion of Sumatra is based on a misinterpretation of a paper from Franz Werner (1900) about a collection from Sumatra purchased by Schneider. This paper includes a table with species that occur on Sumatra set against adjacent regions/islands. In this table B. multomaculata is listed, but not for Sumatra! It is possible someone reading the title of Werner’s paper and seeing B. multomaculata listed, came to the incorrect conclusion that it was present. Type material. The description of Dipsas multomaculata is based on an unknown number of specimens. Our research has revealed that specimens from the collections in Leiden and Berlin can be attributed to the original syntype series (see Introduction). In agreement with Art. 74.7 of the Code, we here designate RMNH. RENA 979b (Figs. 8 and 9) as lectotype of Dipsas multomaculata Boie, 1827 to introduce a standard of application for the species group name multomaculata Boie with a single name-bearer. Lectotype. RMNH. RENA 979 b, an adult female from Java, collector and date of collection not stated in RMNH inventory catalogue. Paralectotypes. RMNH. RENA 979 d an adult female, RMNH. RENA 979 e a subadult female, RMNH 979 f a juvenile female, and ZMB 50879 an adult female, same collecting data as for the lectotype. Description of the lectotype. Adult female, indicated by the absence of hemipenes; 1/1 loreal, wider than high; nasal scale completely divided; 1/1 preocular; 1/1 supraocular; 2/2 postoculars, upper not reaching onto top of head; 2 prefrontals; 2/1 anterior and 2/2 posterior temporals; supralabials 8/8, 3 rd –5 th supralabials entering eye; 11/11 infralabials, first four in contact with anterior chin shields; dorsal scales in 19-19-15 rows, smooth with single tiny apical pits on body and single or paired apical pits on dorsocaudal scales; vertebral scale row significantly enlarged; no preventral; 214 ventrals; cloacal plate entire; 89 paired subcaudal scales. Body slender; tail long (TL/SVL 0.243); SVL 592 mm; TL 144 mm, head length measured from tip of snout to posterior border of parietals 14.2 mm, head length measured from tip of snout to posterior edge of mandible 18.8 mm, head width 11.1 mm; diameter eye 3.3 mm; distance anterior border eye to tip of snout 5.2 mm. Dentition. Maxillary bone with 11/11 prediastemal teeth, followed by a distinct diastema which is 65% longer than the socket of the last prediastemal tooth and followed by two distinctly enlarged, grooved and posteriorly bent postdiastemal teeth. Prediastemal teeth slightly decrease in size posteriorly, the anterior two distinctly posteriorly hooked, the following with less pronounced curvature. On the left side, prediastemal teeth number five, seven, nine, 11, and second postdiastemal loose. On the right side, prediastemal teeth two, four, five, and second postdiastemal tooth loose. Medial to each maxillary tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Palatine bone with 6/6 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter that the prediastemal teeth and slightly decreasing in size posteriorly. Tooth one broken, teeth two, four and six loose on left side. Tooth three broken, teeth two, four and six loose on the right side. Lateral to each palatine tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Pterygoid bone with 12/12 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than the palatine tooth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Teeth one, three, four, five and 12 loose on left side. Teeth three, four, five and nine loose on right side. The posterior 60% of the pterygoid bone are without teeth. Mandibular bone with 17/17 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than maxillary teeth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Medial to each mandibular tooth is a single replacement tooth in different growth stages. Teeth two, four and six loose on left side. Teeth two, four, six, eight and 10 loose on right side. Coloration after approximately 200 years preservation in ca. 70% ethanol was recorded as follows: Dorsal ground color Tawny Olive (Color 17) with Natal Brown (49) mottling on scales and with 62 dorsolateral pairs of Sepia (279) colored blotches on body that have a paler (Amber 51 suffused with Smoke Gray 266) center and a white to Pale Buff (1) border; dorsolateral body blotches separated by a Pale Buff (1) vertebral interspace; below the dorsolateral row of blotches an alternating row of smaller, irregularly shaped blotches with the same coloration; dorsal head with same ground color as dorsal body and a V-shaped Sepia (279) marking open towards the neck, starting from the inner posterior edges of the internasals and ending at the level of the last third of the last supralabial; an oval marking on the neck partly inside the bifurcation of the V-shaped element and with the same coloration as described for the body blotches; a Sepia (279) colored postocular stripe ending at the angle of the mouth; edges of posterior upper labials and edges of infralabials Sepia (279). Venter Cream Color (12) with Tawny Olive (17) colored alternating irregular shaped spots; ventral head Cream Color (12) without prominent markings. Dorsal scale reduction formula. [table omitted] Variation. Paralectotypes and additional examined material agree well with the lectotype in general appearance, morphometrics and scalation (Table 1). Variation in dentition. Nine to 13 prediastemal teeth followed by a distinct diastema and two enlarged grooved postdiastemal teeth; six to seven palatine, eight to 12 pterygoid, and 17 to 19 dental teeth. Variation in live coloration and pattern. Only a blotched morph is known (Fig. 10). The dorsal ground color can vary from Pale Neutral Gray (color 296) to True Cinnamon (260), blotches on body Dark Grayish Brown (284) to Sepia (286), edged Smoky White (261) or Cream White (52). Iris may vary, in accordance with the dorsal ground color, from Pale Neutral Gray (color 296) to Medium Neutral Grey (299) or from Orange-Rufous (56) to True Cinnamon (260), with black Sepia (286) pupil. Ventral head and throat Smoky White (261), rest of venter can vary from Pale Neutral Gray (296) to Cream White (52) with small Pale Neutral Grey (296) or Cinnamon (255) spots. Natural History. Boiga m. multomaculata is arboreal and nocturnal and known to inhabit different forest types, agricultural land and gardens from near sea level up to 1600 m above sea level (a.s.l.), where it is found in bushes, bamboo groves and trees. It is reported to feed on birds and lizards. The reproduction is oviparous with clutch sizes of four to eight eggs. The total length of hatchlings vary from 195 to 200 mm (Mell 1922; Pope 1935; Manthey & Grossmann 1997; McKay 2006; Das 2010; Chan-ard et al. 2015). Kopstein (1938) reported amphigonia retardata for populations from Java with additional ovipositions of uniquely fertilized females after two and eight months, respectively., Published as part of Köhler, Gunther, Charunrochana, Panupong Thammachoti, Mogk, Linda, Than, Ni Lar, Kurniawan, Nia, Kadafi, Ahmad Muammar, Das, Abhijit, Tillack, Frank & O'Shea, Mark, 2023, A taxonomic revision of Boiga multomaculata (Boie, 1827) and B. ochracea (Theobald, 1868), with the description of a new subspecies (Squamata, Serpentes, Colubridae), pp. 151-193 in Zootaxa 5270 (2) on pages 170-173, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5270.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7896950, {"references":["Boie, F. (1827) Bemerkungen uber Merrem's Versuch eines Systems der Amphibien. Marburg, 1820 1 te Lieferung, Ophidier. Isis von Oken, Jena, 20, 508 - 566.","Zhao, E. - M. & Adler, K. (1993) Herpetology of China. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles (Contributions to Herpetology, 10), Oxford, OH, 522 pp.","David, P. & Vogel, G. (1996) The Snakes of Sumatra: An Annotated Checklist and Key with Natural History Notes. Eidtion Chimaira, Frankfurt, 259 pp.","Nguyen, V. S., Ho, T. C. & Nguyen, Q. T. (2009) Herpetofauna of Vietnam. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt, 768 pp.","Das, I. (2010) A field guide to the reptiles of South-East Asia. New Holland Publishers (UK) Ltd., London, 376 pp.","Smith, M. A. (1930) The Reptilia and Amphibia of the Malay Peninsula from the Isthmus of Kra to Singapore including the adjacent islands (A supplement to Dr. G. A. Boulenger's Reptilia and Batrachia, 1912). Bulletin of the Raffles Museum, 3, i - xviii + 1 - 149.","Werner, F. (1900) Reptilien und Batrachier aus Sumatra, gesammelt Herrn Gustav Schneider jr. im Jahre 1897 - 98. Zoologische Jahrbucher. Abtheilung fur Systematik, Geographie und Biologie der Thiere, 13, 479 - 508, pl. 31 - 35.","Mell, R. (1922) Beitrage zur Fauna sinica I. Die Vertebraten Sudchinas, Feldlisten und Feldnoten der Sauger, V ˆ gel, Reptilien, Batrachier. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte A, 88, 1 - 134.","Pope, C. H. (1935) The reptiles of China. Turtles, crocodilians, snakes and lizards. Natural History of Central Asia Vol. 10, New York, 604 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 12104","Manthey, U. & Grossmann, W. (1997) Amphibien und Reptilien Sudostasiens. Natur und Tier Verlag, Munster, 512 pp.","McKay, J. L. (2006) A field guide to the amphibians and reptiles of Bali. Krieger Publishing Co, Malabar FL, vii + 138.","Kopstein, F. (1938) Ein Beitrag zur Eierkunde und zur Fortpflanzung der Malaiischen Reptilien. Bulletin of the Raffles Museum, 14, 81 - 167, pl. vi - xxvii."]}

Boiga stoliczkae (Wall, 1909) Stoliczka´s Asian Cat Snake 1909 [Dipsadomorphus] stoliczkae Wall: 155. Geographic distribution. In the west from central Nepal (ca. 83°51’E) through Darjeeling, Sikkim and Bhutan to Arunachal Pradesh and Assam in northeastern India (north and west of the Brahmaputra valley) (own observation; Wall 1909; Smith 1943; Fleming, JR. & Fleming, SR. 1974; Kramer 1977; Ahmed & Dasgupta 1992; Bauer & Günther 1992; Gruber 2002; Shah & Tiwari 2004; Whitaker & Captain 2004; Sanyal & Gayen 2006; Agarwal et al. 2010; Purkayastha 2013; Wallach et al. 2014; Das et al. 2016; Wangyal & Das 2021). Type material. Wall (1909:155) mentioned that he has examined 39 specimens of this new species from the “neighbourhood of Darjiling” (Darjeeling, West Bengal state, India), which is characterised by having 21 [midbody] scale rows, 218–252 ventrals and 100–119 subcaudals. He did not specify particular specimens by inventory number and with the exception of the British Museum (Natural History) he does not mention any other collection in which the type material could be deposited. However, it is documented through his publications (e.g., Wall 1909; 1921) that he examined for his studies not only his own material but beside specimens from the British Museum also material from various collections in India (e.g., BNHS Mumbai, ZSI Kolkata, and St. Joseph’s College in Darjeeling). After his retirement in 1925 he presented parts his own collection, including type specimens, to the British Museum (Natural History) in London (Smith 1951). Based on information provided by Andrew Stimson, Curator of Herpetology at the BMNH, Kramer (1977:735) was the first to mention inventory numbers for the type material of D. stoliczkae and regarded a series of eight specimens, i.e., BMNH 72.4.17.119, 72.4.17.386, BMNH 74.4.1193–94, BMNH 94.12.31.55, and 1909.3.13 –15 as syntypes. The two specimens mentioned by Wall (1909) and already considered by him as doubtful with respect to the locality “ Burma “, refer to BMNH 74.4.1193–1194 and were presented by R.H. Beddome (see also Introduction, and Wall 1908:714 footnote; Wall 1910:791 footnote). All aforementioned specimens are also marked as syntypes in the inventory ledger of the herpetological collection of the BMNH, now NHM London. However, some other specimens must also be regarded as part of the original series of D. stoliczkae, since they came from “Darjeeling“ and where part of Wall´s donation to the collection in London, registered in 1930, viz. BMNH 1930.5.8.648–649, 1930.5.8.650, and 1930.5.5.651. Thus, the material in the NHM London alone represents only a portion of the original specimens examined by Wall. Therefore, we also consider specimens in Indian collections as potential type material of D. stoliczkae that could have been available to Wall if the temporal context, locality, and morphological characters are consistent with those in his original description. Putative syntypes that fit Wall’s diagnosis, were collected in the “neighbourhood of Darjiling”, and which were already in the respective collection prior to 1909 include BNHS 1772 from “Tindharia” (~ 20 km southeast of Darjeeling), and ZSIK 7869, 7873, 7878, 8476 and 11367 all from “Darjeeling”. In agreement with Art. 74.7 of the Code, we here designate BMNH 94.12.31.55 (Figs. 17 and 18) as lectotype of Dipsadomorphus stoliczkae Wall, 1909 to introduce a standard of application for the species group name stoliczkae Wall by a single name-bearer. Lectotype. BMNH 94.12.31.55 (Figs. 17 and 18), an adult male from “ Darjeeling ” (West Bengal state, India), presented by William Thomas Blanford. Paralectotypes. BMNH 72.4.17.119 and 72.4.17.386, both females from „Darjeeling“, presented by T.C. Jerdon; BMNH 74.4.1193–1194, both females from „ Burma “ [in error, most probably from the Eastern Himalayas], presented by R.H. Beddome; BMNH 1909.3.13 –15, halfgrown, one female and two with unknown sex; BMNH 1930.5.8.648–649, two skulls, 1930.5.8.650, genitals, and 1930.5.5.651, three vertebrae, all from „ Darjeeling “ collected and presented by F. Wall; BNHS 1772, a female from „Tindharia, Darjeeling“, collector unknown; ZSIK 7869, male, 7873, 7878, 8476 and 11367 all females from „Darjeeling“ collected and presented by British botanist George Alexander Gammie (1864–1935). Description of the lectotype. Adult male, indicated by the presence of hemipenes; 1/1 loreal, wider than high; nasal scale completely divided; 1/1 preocular; 1/1 supraocular; 2/2 postoculars, upper not reaching onto top of head; 2 prefrontals; 2/2 anterior and 2/3 posterior temporals; supralabials 8/8, 3 rd –5 th supralabials entering eye; 11/11 infralabials, first four in contact with anterior chin shields; 21 dorsal scales in 19-19-15 rows, smooth with single tiny apical pits on body and single or paired apical pits on dorsocaudal scales; vertebral scale row significantly enlarged; no preventral; 235 ventrals; cloacal plate entire; 111 paired subcaudal scales. Body slender; tail long (TL/ SVL 0.282); SVL 740 mm; TL 209 mm; head length measured from tip of snout to posterior border of parietals 16.5 mm, head length measured from tip of snout to posterior edge of mandible 21.8 mm, head width 13.0 mm; diameter eye 3.9 mm; distance anterior border eye to tip of snout 5.2 mm. Maxillary bone with 10/11 prediastemal teeth, followed by a very distinct diastema which is 125% longer than the socket of the last prediastemal tooth and followed by two distinctly enlarged, grooved and posteriorly bent postdiastemal teeth. Prediastemal teeth slightly decrease in size posteriorly, the anterior two distinctly posteriorly hooked, the following with less pronounced curvature. On the left side, prediastemal teeth number one, three, five and seven missing, teeth six and eight broken, tooth nine and first postdiastemal tooth loose. On the right side, prediastemal teeth two, four, six, eight, 10 and first postdiastemal tooth loose. Medial to each maxillary tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Palatine bone with 6/6 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter that the prediastemal teeth and slightly decreasing in size posteriorly. Anterior two teeth missing on left side. Tooth two missing on the right side. Lateral to each palatine tooth is a single replacement tooth at different growth stages. Pterygoid bone with 10/10 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than the palatine tooth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Teeth two, four, six and eight loose on left side. Teeth two, four, six, seven and nine loose on right side. The posterior 49% of the pterygoid bone are without teeth. Mandibular bone with 17/17 posteriorly curved teeth, shorter than maxillary teeth, gradually decreasing in size posteriorly. Medial to each mandibular tooth is a single replacement tooth in different growth stages. Teeth one and two broken, teeth two, four, six, seven, nine, 11, 13 and 15 loose, and tooth 16 missing on left side. Teeth two, four, six, eight and nine loose, teeth 11, 13, and 15 missing on right side. Coloration after about 130 years preservation in ca. 70% ethanol was recorded as follows: Dorsal ground color Cinnamon-Drab (Color 50) with Sepia (286) interstitial skin; dorsal head with same ground color as dorsal body, upper and lower labials Light Buff (2). Venter of head, body and tail Light Buff (2) without markings. Dorsal scale reduction formula. – 10+V(147) 3+4(152) – 8+V(192) (10)21 ----------- 20 ------------- 19 ----------- 17 ------------ 16 ------------ 15(235). 3+4(142) – 3+4(152) 8+V(187) – Variation. Paralectotypes and additional examined material agree well with the lectotype in general appearance, morphometrics and scalation (Table 1). Variation in dentition. Nine to 14 prediastemal teeth followed by a distinct diastema and two enlarged grooved postdiastemal teeth; five to eight palatine, nine to 15 pterygoid, and 15 to 21 dental teeth. Variation in live coloration and pattern. Only a unicolored morph is known (Fig. 19). The dorsal ground color may vary from Cinnamon (255) or Cinnamon-Rufous (31) to Tawny (60) in adults or Gem Ruby (65) in young individuals. Rarely a faint Cinnamon Brown (43) streak is running from the posterior border of the eye to the angle of the mouth. In some individuals a small faint banded dorsal body pattern is visible, which is caused by the Medium Neutral Grey (298) interstitial skin. Lower half of supralabials, infralabials, throat and first third of ventral body Pale Buff (1) or Chamois (84), rest of venter and tail Yellow Ocher (14) or Tawny Olive (17). Iris resembling the dorsal ground color of body and can vary from Cinnamon (255) to Gem Ruby (65); pupil Sepia (286). Natural History. Boiga stoliczkae is mostly semiarboreal, crepuscular and nocturnal. It is known to inhabit open forest types, agricultural land, human habitations, and gardens, where it is found on low vegetation, bushes and walls. The altitudinal distribution ranges from lowlands, mid hills and submontane regions, from around 85 m up to 2000 m a.s.l. It is reported to feed on birds, their eggs, lizards, snakes (Trachischium fuscum), and small rodents (our observations; Shaw et al. 1941; Greene 1989; Tillack 1999; Gruber 2002; Jha & Thapa K. 2002; Shah & Tiwari 2004; Nepali & Singh 2020; Pradhan 2021)., Published as part of Köhler, Gunther, Charunrochana, Panupong Thammachoti, Mogk, Linda, Than, Ni Lar, Kurniawan, Nia, Kadafi, Ahmad Muammar, Das, Abhijit, Tillack, Frank & O'Shea, Mark, 2023, A taxonomic revision of Boiga multomaculata (Boie, 1827) and B. ochracea (Theobald, 1868), with the description of a new subspecies (Squamata, Serpentes, Colubridae), pp. 151-193 in Zootaxa 5270 (2) on pages 180-183, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5270.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7896950, {"references":["Wall, F. (1909) Remarks on some forms of Dipsadomorphus. Records of the Indian Museum, 3, 151 - 155. https: // doi. org / 10.26515 / rzsi / v 3 / i 2 / 1909 / 163268","Smith, M. A. (1943) The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma, including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Subregion. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III. - Serpentes. Taylor & Francis, London, 583 pp.","Kramer, E. (1977) Zur Schlangenfauna Nepals. Review Suisse de Zoologie, 84, 721 - 761. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 91420","Ahmed, S. & Dasgupta, G. (1992) Reptilia. In: Gosh, A. K. (Ed.), Zoological Survey of India, State Fauna Series 3, Fauna of West Bengal. Part 2, Calcutta, pp. 1 - 65.","Bauer, A. M. & Gunther, R. (1992) A preliminary report on the reptile fauna of the Kingdom of Bhutan with the description of a new species of scincid lizard. Asian Herpetological Research, 4, 23 - 36. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 6178","Gruber, U. (2002) Family Colubridae (colubrid snakes). In: Schleich, H. H. & Kastle, W. (Eds.). Amphibians and Reptiles of Nepal. A. R. G. Gantner Verlag, Ruggell, pp. 803 - 950.","Shah, K. B. & Tiwari, S. (2004) Herpetofauna of Nepal: A conservation companion. IUCN Nepal, Kathmandu, viii + 237.","Whitaker, R. & Captain, A. (2004) Snakes of India. The field guide. Draco Books, Chennai, 479 pp.","Sanyal, D. P. & Gayen, N. C. (2006) Reptilia. In: Alfred, J. (Ed.). Zoological Survey of India. State Fauna Series 13. Part 1. Fauna of Arunachal Pradesh., Kolkata, pp. 247 - 284.","Agarwal, I., Mistry, V. K. & Athreya, R. (2010) A preliminary checklist of the reptiles of Eaglenest Wildlife Sanctuary, West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Russian Journal of Herpetology, 17, 81 - 93.","Purkayastha, J. (2013) An amateur's guide to reptiles of Assam. EBH Publishers, Guwahati, 146 pp.","Wallach, V., Williams, K. L. & Boundy, J. (2014) Snakes of the World: a Catalogue of Living and Extinct Species. Taylor and Francis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, xxvii + 1237.","Das, A., Sharma, P., Surendran, H., Nath, A., Gosh, S., Dutta, D., Mondol, J. & Wangdi, Y. (2016) Additions to the herpetofauna of Royal Manas National Park, Bhutan, with six new country records. Herpetology Notes, 9, 261 - 278.","Wangyal, J. T. & Das, I. (2021) A guide to the reptiles of Bhutan. Bhutan Ecological Society, Thimphu, 109 pp.","Wall, F. (1921) Ophidia Taprobanica or the snakes of Ceylon. H. R. Cottle, Government Printer, Colombo, 581 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 53694","Smith, M. A. (1951) Frank Wall, 1868 - 1950. Copeia, 1951, 113 - 114. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 1437539","Wall, F. (1908) A popular treatise on the common Indian snakes, Part VIII. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 18, 711 - 735.","Wall, F. (1910) A popular treatise on the common Indian snakes, Part XII. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 19, 775 - 792.","Shaw, G. E., Shebbeare, E. O. & Barker, P. E. (1941) The snakes of northern Bengal and Sikkim, Part IX. Journal of the Darjeeling Natural History Society, 15, 60 - 68.","Greene, H. W. (1989) Ecological, evolutionary, and conservation implications of feeding biology in old world cat snakes, genus Boiga (Colubridae). Proceedings of the California Academy of Science, 46, 193 - 207.","Tillack, F. (1999) Das Portrait: Boiga ochracea stoliczkae. Sauria, 21, 1 - 2.","Nepali, P. B. & Singh, N. B. (2020) Documentation of herpetofaunal diversity in Nawalparasi district, Nepal. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology, 41, 56 - 70.","Pradhan, A. (2021) Boiga ochracea, Tawny Cat Snake, Diet. Herpetological Review, 52, 147."]}

Boiga ochracea In 1868 the description of Dipsas ochraceus was published by the German zoologist Albert Karl Ludwig Gotthilf Günther (1830–1914), then an assistant at the British Museum (Natural History) tasked with identifying 2,000 snake specimens in the collection. In his brief description of this species Günther (1868: 425), wrote: “We have received this new snake from Mr. Theobald, who named it “, thereby attributing the authorship to William Theobald (1829– 1908), a naturalist attached to the British Geological Survey of India. To complicate matters, Theobald (1868:53) also published a description of Dipsas ochracea, in Latin and English, in the same year. The Reptile Database (Uetz et al. 2022) suggested that Theobald’s paper was published prior to Günther’s paper, pointing out that Günther referred to Theobald in his paper, but without providing a published source. The editors may have assumed that Günther had access to Theobald’s already published paper, thereby attributing authorship to Theobald, 1868. Wallach et al. (2014) were of the contrary opinion and proposed that the first description of D. ochraceus appeared in the Günther paper, and the authorship should therefore read “Theobald in Günther, 1868 ”. This question over the priority of authorship can only be resolved by determining which of these two papers was published first. Günther published his description in the Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 4, volume 1, number 6, which was published on 1st June 1868 (Evenhuis 2003; F. Tillack unpubl. obs.). Theobald published his account in the Journal of the Linnean Society of London (Zoology), volume 10, number 41. The year of publication is often given as 1868 (Smith 1943; Wallach et al. 2014; Uetz et al. 2022) but the situation is somewhat unclear. Following its title, Theobald’s paper reads “By W. Theobald. Jun., Geological Survey of India. Communicated by G. Busk, Esq., Sec. L.S. [Read November 7, 1867.]”. The paper was therefore presented orally at a meeting of the Linnean Society of London in late 1867, but that does not constitute “published” according to the Code. According to the title page of the journal, volume 10 was not published until 1870 (Theobald 1868b) which would seem to give priority to Günther’s 1868 paper, but this was not the actual date of publication of Theobald’s paper. According to the archives of the Linnean Society of London “pages 4–67 of Volume 10 of the Journal of the Linnean Society of London (Zoology) were issued on 30 May 1868. The reason the front page is dated 1870 (May 20th) is because that is when the title and contents page were finished, ready for the rest of the journal to be bound” (Vida Milovanovic, Linnean Society of London, pers. comm.; F. Tillack unpubl. obs.). Therefore, Theobald’s description takes precedence over Günther’s paper, by two days, and the correct citation should be Theobald (1868). Amongst the distinguishing characteristics of D. ochraceus, Günther documented 19 dorsal scale rows, 239–242 ventral scales, and 100 subcaudal scales. His description was based on the two specimens obtained from Theobald, the largest of which he measured at 44 inches (1.12 m), and both of which, he reports, were collected at Pegu (now Bago, 17°19′ N, 96°28 E), central Myanmar. Theobald’s description differs in a number of respects from that of Günther. He states that he personally collected the first specimen at Rangoon (now Yangon, 16°48′ N, 96°09 E), and that his second specimen was collected by Colonel David Browne, at Maulmain (=Moulmein, now Mawlamyine, 16°29′ N, 97°38′ E) in the Tenasserim Region (now Tanintharyi Region, southern Myanmar). He also measured the first specimen at fully nine inches (229 mm) shorter than the measurement provided by Günther, and finally, Theobald reports that both specimens exhibited dorsal scale counts of 19 on the neck, 17 on the body, and 15 near the tail, in contrast to the dorsal count of 19 provided by Günther, presumably taken at midbody, and a count supported by Boulenger (1896) and Stimson (see later). Given the reported differences in localities, collectors and description, there is no doubt that the two authors described their species using different specimens. However, regarding the reported differences in the number of dorsal scale rows at midbody, it has to be noted that many Boiga have a rather chaotic dorsal scale row reduction which can go up and down more than three times within a range of only 10 corresponding ventral scales “at midbody”. Furthermore, the measured midbody can be different from the midbody position determined by counting half the number of ventrals. Both Günther’s syntypes, an adult female with an SVL 889 + 212 TL = 1101 mm total length and an adult male with an SVL 611 + TL 149 = 760 mm total length, are housed in the collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BMNH 1946.1.2.60–61). As far as we are aware, the two types of D. ochracea Theobald are unlocated. They were not listed by Theobald (1868a), nor in Sclater (1891) or in Das et al. (1998). Some time ago one of us (AD) checked the collection in ZSI, Kolkata, but found no specimens marked as type for Theobald´s ochracea and none of the specimens examined by him agreed with Theobald’s description or locality. During the late 19th Century the British Museum (Natural History) received five further specimens of D. ochracea from Myanmar, i.e., two specimens (BMNH 74.4.29.1193–1194) from Myanmar, reportedly collected by the British army officer and naturalist Richard Henry Beddome (1830–1911), and three specimens (BMNH 89.2.25.37–39) from Bhamo, in Kachin State, northern Myanmar, collected by the Italian naturalist Leonardo Fea (1852–1903). Ferdinand Stoliczka (1838–1874) was a Austrian paleontologist and naturalist who worked in India during the mid 19th Century, but died of altitude sickness during a Himalayan expedition. He exhibited a considerable interest in snakes and in 1870 he reported on five specimens from the Andaman Islands which he attributed to the taxon Dipsas hexagonotus Blyth, 1855 (Stoliczka 1870). In the late 19th Century the Anglo-Belgian zoologist George Albert Boulenger (1858–1937), was Günther’s assistant at the British Museum (Natural History) and the person now tasked with the continued cataloguing of the herpetological collection. In 1890 he resurrected the genus Dipsadomorphus Fitzinger, 1843, for the African, Asian, and Australasian cat snakes previously included in the genus Dipsas (Boulenger 1890; Boulenger 1896) and he synonymised Günther’s Dipsas ochraceus with Blyth’s older Dipsadomorphus hexagonatus. Adopting this new classification, the British physician and herpetologist Major Frank Wall (1868–1950) examined Blyth’s Dipsas hexagonotus type specimen (ZSIK 8048), from “Cherrapunji, Khasi Hills, Assam ” [= Sohra, East Khasi Hills district, Meghalaya state, India] and reidentified it as a juvenile Dipsadomorphus cyaneus, now Boiga cyanea (Duméril, Bibron and Duméril, 1854) (Wall 1909). He also examined the four adult specimens in Stoliczka’s Andaman Dipsas hexagonotus, which exhibited a dorsal scale count of 21, and included them in the syntype series of his new species Dispadomorphus andamanensis, now Boiga andamanensis. The remaining specimen from Stoliczka’s Andaman series reportedly possessed 19 dorsal scale rows, but Wall commented that its description was imperfect and the specimen itself appeared to be lost. Further, Wall (1909) recognized that the mainland D. hexagonotus material he had available appeared to represent two different taxa. Five of the BMNH specimens (BMNH 1946.1.2.60–61, 89.2.25.37–39) from Myanmar, and a further nine specimens he had personally collected, all possessed 19 dorsal scale rows, 221–245 ventrals and 89–107 subcaudals which complied with the description of D. hexagonotus, and to which he applied that name, citing Stoliczka’s missing Andaman specimen as the holotype. It is curious that he sought to conserve the name “ hexagonotus ”, as Dipsadomorphus hexagonotus, by transferring it from Blyth’s holotype, now known to be a juvenile D. cyaneus, to Stoliczka’s missing and incompletely described juvenile. Fortunately, this move is illegal according to the Code (Smith 1943), meaning the name is unavailable and D. hexagonotus remains synonymized with D. cyaneus. The Myanmar population with 19 dorsal scale rows should therefore be known as D. ochracea. Two further Myanmar specimens available to Wall (BMNH 74.4.19.1193–94) exhibited a dorsal count of 21, which was more akin to that obtained from Himalayan specimens. These two specimens were reportedly collected in Myanmar, well within the range of those specimens attributed by Wall to D. hexagonotus. However, they were collected by Beddome, and Wall had already voiced criticism regarding the accuracy of Beddome’s record keeping. In the case of these two specimens he suggested that they could have easily come from “the hills to the west or north of Burma, the fauna of which closely agrees with that of the Eastern Himalayas”. Furthermore, Smith (1943) stated that Beddome never visited Burma, and therefore the long-accepted collection locality for these two specimens must be treated as extremely suspect. Similarly, a specimen of “ Boiga ochracea ” donated by Beddome to the Museum of Comparative Zoology (i.e., MCZ R-3886) is said to come from “Madras” [Chennai] at the southeast coast on India. However, the given locality is far outside the distribution limits of this group and our reexamination revealed that this specimen is a B. stoliczkae which very likely originated from the eastern Himalayas. Wall (1909) also examined 39 specimens from the Darjeeling area of West Bengal, India, which exhibited 21 dorsal scale rows, 218–252 ventrals, and 100–119 subcaudals. To this series he added a further three Darjeeling specimens in the British Museum (Natural History). Two of these (BMNH 72.4.17.119, 72.4.17.386) were collected by the British naturalist and physician Thomas Caverhill Jerdon (1811–1872), while the third specimen (BMNH 94.12.31.55) was collected by the British geologist and naturalist William Thomas Blanford (1832–1905). Finding this Eastern Himalayan taxon without a name, Wall (1909) proposed Dipsadomorphus stoliczkae, “the first reference of it having been made by Stoliczka”. Annandale (1909) discussed Wall’s (1909) paper on the forms of Dipsadomorphus, and criticizes the, in his opinion, difficult delimitation of the species introduced by Wall, particular with regard to Boiga ceylonensis, but also to other species of this genus, and considered Wall’s new species merely as forms of one species, i.e., of B. ceylonensis. Cope (1860) resurrected the name Boiga Fitzinger, 1826 and designated Coluber irregularis as type species. In 1902 the Norwegian-American zoologist Leonard Hess Stejneger (1851–1943) described a new species of rear-fanged snake from Taiwan (then Formosa), and in so doing also resurrected the genus Boiga Fitzinger, 1826 from obscurity as a senior synonym for Dipsadomorphus, the generic name it would replace for the remainder of the 20th Century. The two taxa under discussion here would therefore become Boiga ochracea (Theobald, 1868), with 19 dorsal scale rows, from NE India south and east of the Brahmaputra valley across Bangladesh to Myanmar, and B. stoliczkae (Wall, 1909), with 21 dorsal scale rows, from the Eastern Himalayas, but including Beddome’s two “Burmese” specimens. From all that we now know and have examined, B. ochracea does not occur on the Andaman or Nicobar Islands, that material being referred to Boiga andamanensis (Wall, 1909). This assumption is also confirmed by the recent studies of Chandramouli (2022: 321), who removes B. ochracea from the list of snake species occurring on the Andaman Islands. It has to be noted that B. andamanensis usually has 21 midbody DSR, rarely 19, but in preservation the coloration looks like “ ochracea ”, particular in the red color morph, a possible reason for the confusion. The next author to take a look at this group of snakes was the British physician and herpetologist Malcolm Arthur Smith (1875–1958). In 1941 he used for the first time the combination Boiga ochracea walli (as a nomen nudum) and applied this name to populations from the Andaman and Nicobar islands, and Burma. A few years later Smith (1943) synonymized B. stoliczkae with B. ochracea, stating: “The name hexagonatus must become a synonym of cyanea, and the next one available is Günther’s ochracea. The type has 21 scale rows and is therefore the Himalayan form, and the locality (Pegu) from which it is said to have come is in no doubt an error. Beddome, from whom the specimen came, was never in Burma, and his localities have been shown to be incorrect on many occasions.” Smith (1943) defined his eastern Himalayan B. ochracea ochracea as exhibiting 21-21-17 dorsal rows, 223–252 ventrals, and 100–119 subcaudals, and described the populations of B. ochracea from “ Burma, south of lat. 25°; Tenasserim; the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.”, with 19-19-15 dorsal rows, 221–246 ventrals, and 89–107 subcaudals, as a new subspecies, formally named B. ochracea walli. On the BMNH ledger and on the jar labels, the BMNH specimens collected by Leonardo Fea at Bhamo, Myanmar, (i.e., BMNH 89.3.25.37–39) are declared as syntypes. However, this does not constitute a type selection according to the Code and is therefore not a valid syntype designation because it is not following the principles of typification. Smith (1943) did not cite any type material from his B. ochracea walli in its original description. Therefore, all specimens available to Smith at the time of the description of B. ochracea walli constitute the syntypes, not just the three specimens subsequently labeled as “ syntypes ” in the BMNH collection. The list of potential syntypes of Smith’s B. ochracea walli obviously includes specimens present at BMNH at the time but it is known that Smith travelled in South and Southeast Asia and visited all the main collections there in the preparation of his “Fauna of British India ” series, the third, Serpentes, volume of which was ready to go to print in 1938 (delayed until 1943 due to WWII). He examined material from the collections in Bombay, Calcutta, Paris (Smith 1943:v–vi), Vienna (Smith 1928) and Berlin (pers. data FT, he was in contact with Mell and arranged specimen loans with ZMB), and also loans from different US museums and from Leiden and Colombo (Smith 1943). So it cannot be ruled out that specimens from these collections are also putative syntypes of Smith´s B. o. walli. Wallach et al. (2014) treated walli as full species and mentioned that this taxon is based on a single name-bearing type specimen, but they provided no inventory number for that specimen. According to Art. 72.4.1 of the Code (“The type series of a nominal speciesgroup taxon consists of all the specimens included by the author in the new nominal taxon (whether directly or by bibliographic reference) …”, we suggest that in the case of B. ochracea walli at least the following specimens belong to the original syntype series: BMNH 1946.1.2.60–61 from Pegu (at the same time syntypes of Dipsas ochraceus Günther), BMNH 89.3.25.37–39 from Bhamo, and specimens from the Andamans and Nicobars, at least from the BMNH collection which were available to Smith. Smith appears to have made a number of errors that had a considerably impact on the nomenclature and proposed distributions of these taxa. 1) It was Theobald, not Günther, who first described ochracea in 1868. 2) The ochracea type specimens (plural not singular) were recorded by Günther, as having come from Pegu (= Bago), but Theobald’s syntypes were collected from Rangoon (= Yangon) and Maulmain (= Mawlamyine). Regardless of any confusion over precise localities, the two syntypes described by Theobald and the two other described by Günther were collected in southern Myanmar, not the eastern Himalayas or northern Myanmar. 3) Günther recorded the dorsal scale rows of these two specimens as 19, while Theobald reports 19-17-15 rows, but neither author reported a count of 21 for these specimens. 4) Beddome was responsible for collecting the two specimens reported as from “Burma”, not the two specimens from Pegu, and it is this locality that is now doubted by most authors, and it was these two specimens that exhibited 21 dorsal scale rows at midbody. Not all authors accepted Smith’s synonymy of stoliczkae with B. ochracea, i.e., Kramer (1977) who reported that Andrew Stimson (BMNH) had checked the syntypes of Günther´s D ochraceus (BMNH 1946.1.2.60–61) and confirmed their dorsal scale counts as 19, and that they were collected in southern Myanmar and therefore he did not synonymise stoliczkae with ochracea, but rather recognized it as the eastern Himalayan-northern Burmese subspecies B. ochracea stoliczkae. It has to be noted here that all material examined by Kramer and determined by himself as B. o. stoliczkae was misidentified. Our re-examination (by FT) revealed that FMNH 131957 is Boiga multifasciata and FMNH 152584 is Boiga trigonata. Gruber in Schleich & Kästle (2002) recognized all three subspecies: B. o. ochracea from Darjeeling, Sikkim, Assam, Bhutan and Bangladesh; B. o. stoliczkae from Nepal, and B. o. walli as characterized by Smith (1943) from southern Myanmar and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, but they did not provide any characteristics to distinguish between the three taxa. Therefore, there appears to be a great deal of confusion over the nomenclature and distribution of the various populations of B. ochracea, largely caused by Smith’s misinterpretation of the data and some recent authors (e.g., Das 2010; Wallach et al. 2014) largely followed Smith’s (1943) erroneous concept of this group. As a consequence of what is stated above, we consider Boiga walli to be a synonym of B. ochracea, and we elevate B. stoliczkae again to species level, distinct from B. ochracea. To summarize the current situation, Boiga ochracea should be the taxon with 19-19-15 or 13 dorsal scale rows, cream to beige color without any pattern, from NE India south and east of the Brahmaputra valley across Bangladesh to Myanmar. Boiga multomaculata should, Published as part of Köhler, Gunther, Charunrochana, Panupong Thammachoti, Mogk, Linda, Than, Ni Lar, Kurniawan, Nia, Kadafi, Ahmad Muammar, Das, Abhijit, Tillack, Frank & O'Shea, Mark, 2023, A taxonomic revision of Boiga multomaculata (Boie, 1827) and B. ochracea (Theobald, 1868), with the description of a new subspecies (Squamata, Serpentes, Colubridae), pp. 151-193 in Zootaxa 5270 (2) on pages 154-159, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5270.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7896950, {"references":["Gunther, A. (1868) Sixth account of new species of snakes in the British Museum. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (4) 1, 425. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222936808695725","Uetz, P., Freed, P. & Hosek, J. (2022) The Reptile Database. Available from http: // www. reptile-database. org (accessed 6 February 2022)","Wallach, V., Williams, K. L. & Boundy, J. (2014) Snakes of the World: a Catalogue of Living and Extinct Species. Taylor and Francis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, xxvii + 1237.","Evenhuis, N. L. (2003) Publication and dating of the journals forming the Annals and Magazine of Natural History and the Journal of Natural History. Zootaxa, 385, 1 - 68. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 385.1.1","Smith, M. A. (1943) The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma, including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Subregion. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III. - Serpentes. Taylor & Francis, London, 583 pp.","Theobald, W. (1868 b) Catalogue of the reptiles of British Birma, embracing the provinces of Pegu, Martaban, and Tenasserim; with descriptions of new or little-know species. Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology), 10, 4 - 67. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / j. 1096 - 3642.1868. tb 02007. x","Boulenger, G. A. (1896) Catalogue of the Snakes in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol. III. Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History), London, United Kingdom, xiv + 727.","Theobald, W. (1868 a) Catalogue of reptiles in the Museum of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Extra Number, vi + 82 pp., Appendix i - iii. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5477","Sclater, W. L. (1891) List of snakes in the Indian Museum. Trustees of the Indian Museum, Calcutta, 79 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 8746","Das, I., Dattagupta, B. & Gayen, N. C. (1998) History and catalogue of reptile types in the collection of the Zoological Survey of India. Journal of South Asian Natural History, 3, 121 - 172.","Stoliczka, F. (1870) Observations on some Indian and Malayan Amphibia and Reptilia. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Ser. 4. 6, 105 - 109. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222937008696209","Boulenger, G. A. (1890) The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor and Francis, London, United Kingdom, xviii + 541. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 100797","Wall, F. (1909) Remarks on some forms of Dipsadomorphus. Records of the Indian Museum, 3, 151 - 155. https: // doi. org / 10.26515 / rzsi / v 3 / i 2 / 1909 / 163268","Annandale, N. (1909) Major Wall on some forms of Dipsadomorphus. Records of the Indian Museum, 3, 281 - 282. https: // doi. org / 10.26515 / rzsi / v 3 / i 3 / 1909 / 163284","Cope, E. D. (1860) Catalogue of the Colubridae in the Museum of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, with notes and descriptions of new species. Part 2. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 12, 241 - 266.","Fitzinger, L. I. (1826) Neue Classification der Reptilien nach ihren Naturlichen Verwandtschaften. Nebst einer Verwandtschafts- Tafel und einem Verzeichnisse der Reptilien-Sammlung des K. K. Zoologischen Museum's zu Wien. J. G. Heubner, Wien, 66 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 4683","Chandramouli, R. S. (2022) Snake fauna of the Andaman Islands, Bay of Bengal - A review of species richness, taxonomy, distribution, natural history and conservation status. Zootaxa, 5209 (3), 301 - 331. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 5209.3.1","Smith, M. A. (1928) The status of some recently described genera and species of snakes. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 1, 494 - 497. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222932808672813","Kramer, E. (1977) Zur Schlangenfauna Nepals. Review Suisse de Zoologie, 84, 721 - 761. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 91420","Schleich, H. H. & Kastle, W. (Eds.) (2002) Amphibians and Reptiles of Nepal. A. R. G. Gantner Verlag, Ruggell, 1201 pp.","Das, I. (2010) A field guide to the reptiles of South-East Asia. New Holland Publishers (UK) Ltd., London, 376 pp."]}

Among the six species of Cyrtodactylus occurring in Sumatra, two species were described based on non-Sumatran type series, C. consobrinus and C. quadrivirgatus. The latter species was described originally from Thailand thus the wider distribution in Sumatra should be clarified taxonomically. Cyrtodactylus quadrivirgatus from Sumatra Barat was examined using both morphology and the Natrium Dehydrogenase Subunit 2 (ND2) gene to clarify its taxonomic status and phylogenetic placement. It was found that these specimens form a sister clade to all other species of the sworderi group from Peninsular Malaysia and the genetic distance ranges from 20–24.3%. This subset is herein described as a new species. The new species is readily distinguished from C. quadrivirgatus and other Sumatran species by a combination of characters: small size SVL 37.5–53.78 mm; longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles 16–19; paravertebral tubercles 31–41; ventral scales 32–43; 24–49 enlarged precloacal and femoral scales; precloacal pores rarely present; no precloacal depression; two postcloacal tubercles on each side; 14–19 subdigital lamellae on forth toe; 9–15 supralabial scales; 9–12 infralabial scales; three or four internasal scales; and 3–6 gular scales that border the first pair of postmental scales. This work underscores the importance of clarifying widely distributed species for taxonomic validation.

Cyrtodactylus marmoratus is originally described based on the specimen from Java. Due to the marbled body colour pattern and the similarity in morphology, many specimens from outside of Java have been identified as C. marmoratus. The ongoing research, both molecular and morphological studies, showed that C. marmoratus is restricted to Java. The taxonomic status of specimens labelled as C. marmoratus from outside Java remains unresolved. Here, we study the morphometric and meristic of Javan, Sumatran, and Kalimantan Cyrtodactylus which were labelled as C. marmoratus to reveal their taxonomic status. We examined 11 morphometric and 19 meristic characters in 51 specimens at Museum Zoologicum Bogoriense (MZB) originally from, Java, Sumatra, and Kalimantan labelled as C. marmoratus as well as other recognized species. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) results show that C. marmoratus from Java differs from previous specimens which labelled as C. marmoratus from Sumatra and Kalimantan. The PCA results also show that C. marmoratus from Martabe differs from C. marmoratus Java which is supported by statistical analysis on interorbital, HeadW, HeadD, tubercle on the ventrolateral fold, dorsal tubercle and ventral scales. We hypothesized that Cyrtodactylus from Martabe is a suspected undescribed species-await formal description, and overall molecular analyses are needed for future study.