Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis, Schneider, Nicole, Phung, Trung My, Le, Minh Duc, Nguyen, Truong Quang & Ziegler, Thomas, 2014

Schneider, Nicole, Phung, Trung My, Le, Minh Duc, Nguyen, Truong Quang & Ziegler, Thomas, 2014, A new Cyrtodactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Khanh Hoa Province, southern Vietnam, Zootaxa 3785 (4), pp. 518-532 : 521-529

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3785.4.2

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:E03B1389-367A-485C-B16C-B6E0AE2A7286

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6132768

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B5BA30-B031-D041-FF28-F95EFB5EFC37

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis
status

sp. nov.

Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov.

( Figs. 2 View FIGURE 2 , 3 View FIGURE 3. A )

Holotype. IEBR A.2013.104, adult male, collected by T. M. Phung on 12 June, 2011, from Cuc Dong Cape, Ninh Hoa District, Khanh Hoa Province, Vietnam.

Paratypes. VNMN A.2013.18, adult male, ZFMK 95513, adult female, ZFMK 95514 subadult male and ZFMK 95515, subadult female, collected on 12 June, 2011, IEBR A.2013.105, adult female and VNMN A.2013.19, adult female, collected on 2 September, 2011, the same data as the holotype.

Diagnosis. Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. is distinguished from the remaining bent-toed geckos by a combination of the following characters: maximum SVL 65.9 mm; 16–19 dorsal tubercle rows; 41–44 ventral scales at midbody; 5 or 6 precloacal pores in males, 4–6 pitted precloacal scales in females; no femoral pores; 6–13 enlarged precloacal scales; 5–9 enlarged femoral scales; no transversally enlarged subcaudals; dorsal pattern consists of irregular dark bands.

Description of the holotype. Adult male with a total length of 147.2 mm (SVL 65.9 mm, tail broken, TL 81.3 mm); rostral Y-shaped, wider than high (RW 2.3 mm, RH 1.7 mm, RW/RH 1.35), medially with a straight, vertical rostral suture, in contact with nasorostral, nare and first supralabial on each side, medially in contact with internasal; mental wider than rostral (MW 2.9 mm); supralabials 9; infralabials 8; supralabials separated from orbit by 3 or 4 rows of granular scales; nares in contact with rostral, nasorostral, supranasal, two postnasals, and first supralabial; internasal single; snout scales larger than head scales; scales between fifth supralabials 53; scales between anterior corner of eyes 57; interorbital region with small round, convex scales; scales in postorbital region distinctly smaller (ca. half the size) than snout scales, posteriorly increasing in size, irregular in shape; postorbital region with enlarged tubercles in 5 or 6 rows on each side; pupil vertical; spinous ciliaria 9/10, posterior ones more developed; ear opening vertical, oval; mental triangular, in contact with two postmentals and the first infralabial on each side; postmentals surrounded by four granular scales, of which two outer ones distinctly enlarged, and first infralabial on each side; gular scales granular.

Dorsal scales small, twice the size of head scales between the eyes; dorsal tubercles in 18 longitudinal rows at midbody; dorsal surface of body with tubercles; dorsal tubercles surrounded by 9–12 dorsal scales, separated from each other by 2–4 scales; lateral body folds slightly developed, without tubercles; ventral scales round, slightly arched, imbricated, 3 or 4 times larger than gular and throat scales, three times larger than dorsals; ventral scales in 42 rows; midbody scales rows 116; scales between mental and cloacal slit 183; dorsal surface of limbs with tubercles, more developed on hind limbs; enlarged femoral scales 6 on each side, two series of three enlarged scales separated by two granular scales on right hind limb, outer enlarged femoral scale separated by six granular scales from other enlarged femoral scales on left hind limb; fingers and toes free of webbing; relative finger lengths I <II <V <IV <III, relative toe lengths I <II <III <V <IV; claw sheathed by two scales; subdigital lamellae: finger I 10 or 11 (including 3 basally broadened lamellae), finger II 13 (4), finger III 15 (4), finger IV 17 (4–5), finger V 12 or 13 (3–4), toe I 10 or 11 (3–4), toe II 14 or 15 (4), toe III 17 (5), toe IV 18–20 (7), toe V 17–18 (6); precloacal depression absent; precloacal pores 6; pore-bearing scales posteriorly surrounded by nine enlarged scales, arranged in a diamond shape; adjoining scales continuously decreasing in size; two postcloacal tubercles on each side, well developed; hemipenis not everted; original tail without distinct whorls; dorsal surface covered by 14 rows of tubercles, each row with 4 or 5 tubercles, tubercles absent in distal part of tail; median row of subcaudals not transversally enlarged.

Coloration in life: Top of head light brown; each side with a dark stripe, from between tip of snout and eye, running below the eyes and connecting with the other band at the neck, stripe on right side not clear, blurred between eye and neck; irregular dark blotches on dorsal surface of the head indistinct; eyelids with green cast; ciliaria bright yellow; iris marbled in black and metallic-yellow; dorsal surface of body light brown with irregular transverse dark brown bands; dark bands between limb insertions four, two inner ones in irregular shape, consisting of blotches and small bands; a median dark spot just behind the neck band; five or six blotches in one row on each side from neck to hind limbs; flanks without dark bands or blotches; dorsal pattern of limbs consisting of a mixture of light and dark brown; dorsal tail with seven dark brown bands or broad blotches on a light brown ground; ventral surface of body solid light beige, with ventral side of tail being slightly darker.

Color in preservative (70 % ethanol): The overall color scheme is somewhat less pronounced, slightly fades in alcohol. Main characteristics are still clearly visible, the slight green cast of the eyelids and the bright yellow color of the ciliaria are not visible, but have the same bright brown color compared to remaining parts of the head.

Variation. The paratype series largely corresponded with the description of the holotype. For measurements, scalation, and color pattern variation see Tables 2, 3 and Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3. A . ZFMK 95515 has, in contrast to the holotype and the other paratypes, distinct whorls on the dorsal surface of tail. Transverse body bands individually vary in intensity (darker bands versus lighter bands) and shape (continuously developed body bands versus interrupted or irregularly shaped body bands). Sexual dimorphism was also discernible in terms of hemipenial swellings at the under tail base in adult males, the enlarged precloacal scales are distinctly larger in males (even in the subadult male) and the precloacal pores in females are indistinct, like pitted scales.

Comparisons. Comparisons are based on the original descriptions or descriptions provided in broader faunal and taxonomic publications (e.g., Smith 1920, 1921, 1935; Ulber & Grossmann 1991; Darevsky & Szczerbak 1997; Bauer 2002, 2003; Bauer et al. 2002, 2003, 2009; David et al. 2004, 2011; Pauwels et al. 2004, 2013, 2014; Nguyen S.N. et al. 2006, 2013; Hoang et al. 2007; Orlov et al. 2007; Nazarov et al. 2008; Ngo 2008; Ngo & Bauer 2008; Rösler & Glaw 2008; Rösler et al. 2008; Geissler et al. 2009; Mahony 2009; Ngo & Chan 2010; Ngo & Pauwels 2010; Ngo et al. 2008, 2010, 2011; Nguyen T.Q. et al. 2010; Sumontha et al. 2010; Schneider et al. 2011; Grismer et al. 2012; Nazarov et al. 2012; Ziegler et al. 2010, 2013; Luu et al. 2014; Pauwels & Sumontha 2014).

Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. can be distinguished from all the Vietnamese congeners as follows: The new species has no transversally enlarged subcaudal scales and thus differs from the following species: C. badenensis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky, 2006 , C. bichnganae Ngo & Grismer, 2010 , C. caovansungi Orlov, Nguyen, Nazarov, Ananjeva & Nguyen, 2007 , C. chauquangensis Hoang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Hoang & Dau, 2007 , C. condorensis ( Smith, 1920) , C. cucphuongensis Ngo & Chan, 2011 , C. eisenmanae Ngo, 2008 , C. grismeri Ngo, 2008 , C. hontreensis Ngo, Grismer & Grismer, 2008 , C. huongsonensis Luu, Nguyen, Do & Ziegler, 2011 , C. intermedius ( Smith, 1917) , C. kingsadai , C. martini Ngo, 2011 , C. nigriocularis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky, 2006 , C. paradoxus ( Darevsky & Szczerbak, 1997) , C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler, Rösler, Herrmann & Vu, 2002 , C. phuquocensis Ngo, Grismer & Grismer, 2010 , C. roesleri Ziegler, Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen, Vu, Dang, Dinh & Schmitz, 2010 , C. takouensis Ngo & Bauer, 2008 , C. thochuensis Ngo & Grismer, 2012 , and C. yangbayensis . The following species have femoral pores, which are lacking in Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov.: C. huynhi (3–8) and C. dati Ngo, 2013 (3–4). Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. has enlarged femoral scales which are absent in C. cryptus . Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. can be distinguished from C. thuongae Phung , van Schingen, Ziegler & Nguyen, 2014 by having more precloacal pores in males (5–6 vs. 0–1).

From the representatives of the C. irregularis complex, Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. differs as follows (only characters are mentioned, which are not listed in Table 4): from C. bidoupimontis by lacking a dark neckband and tail bands which are distinctly broader; from C. bugiamapensis by having fewer dorsal tubercle rows (16–19 vs. 20–24), additionally, the dorsal pattern of Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. consists of irregular dark bands vs. transverse bands formed by dark spots in C. bugiamapensis ; from C. cattienensis by having more enlarged precloacal scales in most specimens (8–21 vs. 6–13); from C. irregularis by lacking a thickened tail base that shows very large triple-edged knobs and forms 3–5 pronounced semi-rings of tail segments, additionally, the dorsal pattern of Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. differs from the pattern of C. irregularis (banded vs. blotched); from C. phuocbinhensis by having irregular dark bands vs. two dark brown stripes or blotches on dorsum; from C. pseudoquadrivirgatus by the absence of enlarged lateral tubercles (vs. present), the presence of enlarged femoral scales (vs. absent), and by having uniformly bright colored limbs versus striped or mottled limbs in C. pseudoquadrivirgatus ; from C. taynguyenensis by the presence of enlarged femoral scales (vs. absent) and by having irregular dark bands (vs. irregular blotches bordered by light brown edges); from C. ziegleri by having fewer dorsal tubercle rows (16–19 vs. 20–24).

FIGURE 5.

From other congeners from the Indochinese region, the new species differs as follows: Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. has 4–6 precloacal pores in both sexes and thus differs from the following species, which have distinctly lower or higher precloacal pore counts: C. aequalis Bauer, 2003 (9), C. annandalei Bauer, 2003 (11–12), C. ayeyarwadyensis Bauer, 2003 (10–28), C. brevidactylus Bauer, 2002 (8), C. chrysopylos Bauer, 2003 (10), C. consobrinus ( Peters, 1871) (9–11), C. erythrops Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha Niyomwan, Panitvong, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya,, 2009 (9), C. gansi Bauer, 2003 (16–29), C. interdigitalis Ulber, 1993 (14), C. pulchellus (8), C. russelli Bauer, 2003 (15), C. slowinskii Bauer, 2002 (9–11), C. sumonthai Bauer, Pauwels & Chanhome, 2002 (2), C. teyniei David, Nguyen, Schneider & Ziegler, 2011 (14 in the single known specimen, an adult female), C. tigroides Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003 (8–9), and C. wakeorum Bauer, 2003 (12).

Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. lacks a series of precloacal-femoral or precloacal and femoral pores, which is present in the following Cyrtodactylus species: C. auribalteatus Sumontha, Panitvong & Deein, 2010 (6 precloacal pores + 4–5 femoral pores), C. brevipalmatus ( Smith, 1923) (7–10+6–7), C. chanhomeae Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003 (32–34 precloacal-femoral pores), C. consobrinoides ( Annandale, 1905) (26), C. dumnuii Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya, 2010 (5–6+6), C. feae ( Boulenger, 1893) (32), C. jarujini Ulber, 1993 (42–54), C. lekaguli Grismer, Wood, Quah, Anuar, Muin, Sumontha, Ahmad, Bauer, Wangkulangkul, Grismer & Pauwels, 2012 (31–43), C. lomyenensis Ngo & Pauwels, 2010 (39–40), C. phuketensis Sumontha, Pauwels, Kunya, Nitikul, Samphantamit & Grismer, 2012 (33–36), C. tamaiensis ( Smith, 1940) (40), and C. variegatus ( Blyth, 1859) (32).

The following Cyrtodactylus species differ from Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. by the absence of precloacal pores in both sexes: C. buchardi David, Teynié & Ohler, 2004 , C. guakanthanensis Grismer, Belabut, Quah, Chan, Wood & Hasim, 2014 , C. sanook Pauwels, Sumontha, Latinne & Grismer, 2013 and C. thirakhupti Pauwels, Bauer, Sumontha & Chanhome, 2004 . Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. has no transversally enlarged subcaudals and thus differs from C. angularis ( Smith, 1921) , C. jaegeri Luu, Calame, Bonkowski, Nguyen & Ziegler, 2014 , C. khelangensis Pauwels, Sumontha, Panitvong & Varaguttanonda, 2014 , C. oldhami ( Theobald, 1876) , C. pageli Schneider, Nguyen, Schmitz, Kingsada, Auer & Ziegler, 2011 , C. samroiyot Pauwels & Sumontha, 2014 , and C. surin Chan-Ard & Makchai, 2011 . Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. has 41–44 ventral scales at midbody and thus differs from C. mandalayensis Mahony, 2009 (32), C. papilionoides Ulber & Grossmann, 1991 (30–34), and C. wayakonei Nguyen, Kingsada, Rösler, Auer & Ziegler, 2010 (31–35). Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis sp. nov. differs from C. quadrivirgatus by having generally more ventral scales (40– 44 vs. 40), by having more precloacal pores in males (5–6 vs. 4), and the presence of enlarged femoral scales (vs. absent in C. quadrivirgatus ).

Etymology. The specific epithet is referring to the type locality of the new species. As common names we propose Cucdong Bent-toed Gecko (English) and Thach sung ngon cuc dong (Vietnamese).

Distribution. The new species is currently known only from the type locality in Cuc Dong Cape, Ninh Hoa District, Khanh Hoa Province, southern Vietnam ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 ).

Ecological notes. The type series of Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis was found at night time, on granitic stones, at elevations between 5 and 50 m a.s.l. The surrounding habitat was mixed secondary forest of small prickly shrubs and species of the families Annonaceae , Dipterocarpaceae , Ebenaceae , and Fabaceae (Fig. 5).

VNMN

Vietnam National Museum of Nature

ZFMK

Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Chordata

Class

Reptilia

Order

Squamata

Family

Gekkonidae

Genus

Cyrtodactylus

Loc

Cyrtodactylus cucdongensis

Schneider, Nicole, Phung, Trung My, Le, Minh Duc, Nguyen, Truong Quang & Ziegler, Thomas 2014
2014
Loc

C. guakanthanensis

Grismer, Belabut, Quah, Chan, Wood & Hasim 2014
2014
Loc

C. jaegeri

Luu, Calame, Bonkowski, Nguyen & Ziegler 2014
2014
Loc

C. khelangensis

Pauwels, Sumontha, Panitvong & Varaguttanonda 2014
2014
Loc

C. samroiyot

Pauwels & Sumontha 2014
2014
Loc

C. dati

Ngo 2013
2013
Loc

C. sanook

Pauwels, Sumontha, Latinne & Grismer 2013
2013
Loc

C. thochuensis

Ngo & Grismer 2012
2012
Loc

C. lekaguli

Grismer, Wood, Quah, Anuar, Muin, Sumontha, Ahmad, Bauer, Wangkulangkul, Grismer & Pauwels 2012
2012
Loc

C. phuketensis

Sumontha, Pauwels, Kunya, Nitikul, Samphantamit & Grismer 2012
2012
Loc

C. cucphuongensis

Ngo & Chan 2011
2011
Loc

C. huongsonensis

Luu, Nguyen, Do & Ziegler 2011
2011
Loc

C. martini

Ngo 2011
2011
Loc

C. teyniei

David, Nguyen, Schneider & Ziegler 2011
2011
Loc

C. pageli

Schneider, Nguyen, Schmitz, Kingsada, Auer & Ziegler 2011
2011
Loc

C. surin

Chan-Ard & Makchai 2011
2011
Loc

C. bichnganae

Ngo & Grismer 2010
2010
Loc

C. phuquocensis

Ngo, Grismer & Grismer 2010
2010
Loc

C. roesleri

Ziegler, Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen, Vu, Dang, Dinh & Schmitz 2010
2010
Loc

C. auribalteatus

Sumontha, Panitvong & Deein 2010
2010
Loc

C. dumnuii

Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya 2010
2010
Loc

C. lomyenensis

Ngo & Pauwels 2010
2010
Loc

C. wayakonei Nguyen, Kingsada, Rösler, Auer & Ziegler, 2010

Nguyen, Kingsada, Rosler, Auer & Ziegler 2010
2010
Loc

C. erythrops

Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha Niyomwan, Panitvong, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya 2009
2009
Loc

C. mandalayensis

Mahony 2009
2009
Loc

C. eisenmanae

Ngo 2008
2008
Loc

C. grismeri

Ngo 2008
2008
Loc

C. hontreensis

Ngo, Grismer & Grismer 2008
2008
Loc

C. takouensis

Ngo & Bauer 2008
2008
Loc

C. caovansungi

Orlov, Nguyen, Nazarov, Ananjeva & Nguyen 2007
2007
Loc

C. chauquangensis

Hoang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Hoang & Dau 2007
2007
Loc

C. badenensis

Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky 2006
2006
Loc

C. nigriocularis

Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky 2006
2006
Loc

C. buchardi David, Teynié & Ohler, 2004

David, Teynie & Ohler 2004
2004
Loc

C. thirakhupti

Pauwels, Bauer, Sumontha & Chanhome 2004
2004
Loc

C. aequalis

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. annandalei

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. ayeyarwadyensis

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. chrysopylos

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. gansi

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. russelli

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. tigroides

Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels 2003
2003
Loc

C. wakeorum

Bauer 2003
2003
Loc

C. chanhomeae

Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels 2003
2003
Loc

C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler, Rösler, Herrmann & Vu, 2002

Ziegler, Rosler, Herrmann & Vu 2002
2002
Loc

C. brevidactylus

Bauer 2002
2002
Loc

C. slowinskii

Bauer 2002
2002
Loc

C. sumonthai

Bauer, Pauwels & Chanhome 2002
2002
Loc

C. paradoxus (

Darevsky & Szczerbak 1997
1997
Loc

C. interdigitalis

Ulber 1993
1993
Loc

C. jarujini

Ulber 1993
1993
Loc

C. papilionoides

Ulber & Grossmann 1991
1991
Loc

C. tamaiensis (

Smith 1940
1940
Loc

C. brevipalmatus (

Smith 1923
1923
Loc

C. angularis (

Smith 1921
1921
Loc

C. condorensis (

Smith 1920
1920
Loc

C. intermedius (

Smith 1917
1917
Loc

C. consobrinoides (

Annandale 1905
1905
Loc

C. feae (

Boulenger 1893
1893
Loc

C. oldhami (

Theobald 1876
1876
Loc

C. consobrinus (

Peters 1871
1871
Loc

C. variegatus (

Blyth 1859
1859
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF