Cnemaspis rajgadensis, Sayyed & Cyriac & Pardeshi & Sulakhe, 2021
|
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/evolsyst.5.62929 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:30DCC409-5E6F-4460-B64F-33C9E9F74EB8 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E4F61F55-8716-4BF3-9951-7728B24056EF |
|
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:E4F61F55-8716-4BF3-9951-7728B24056EF |
|
treatment provided by |
|
|
scientific name |
Cnemaspis rajgadensis |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Cnemaspis rajgadensis sp. nov. Figs 1 View Figure 1 , 2 View Figure 2 , 3 View Figure 3 , 4 View Figure 4 , 5 View Figure 5 , 6 View Figure 6 , 7 View Figure 7 , Tables 1, 3, 2, 4, 5
Type material.
Holotype: India • ♂, adult; Rajgad fort, Pune District , Maharashtra State; 18°14'46N, 73°40'55E; 1324 m a.s.l.; 27 Sept. 2020; Amit Sayyed leg.; BNHS 3100 View Materials GoogleMaps .
Paratypes: India • 2 ♀, adults; same data as for holotype; Abhijit Nale, Kiran Ahire and Mahesh Bandgar leg.; BNHS 3101 View Materials , 3102 View Materials GoogleMaps .
Diagnosis.
A small-sized Cnemaspis with adult SVL < 27 mm,; 7-7 supralabials; 6-7 infralabials; dorsal scales heterogeneous with small, granular, weakly keeled scales, intermixed with randomly arranged, weakly keeled, slightly larger tubercles; conical and spine-like tubercles absent on either side of the flanks but a row of enlarged tubercles present on the lower flanks; dorsal paravertebral scales 80-92; mid-dorsal scales 62-67; ventral surface of neck, pectoral, abdominal region, under limbs, and tail weakly keeled; mid-ventral scales 123-141; ventral scales across mid-body 28-29; subdigital lamellae under fourth digit of manus 15, under fourth digit of pes 18; males with 3 femoral pores and absence of precloacal pores; dorsal scales of tail granular, weakly keeled, roughly same in size and shape to those on mid-body dorsum, gradually becoming larger, flattened, blunt, sub-imbricate posteriorly, intermixed with whorls of slightly enlarged, strongly keeled tubercles; scales on ventral aspect of original tail imbricate, weakly keeled, without a series of enlarged sub-caudal scales, roughly same in size of those on dorsal tail; a single enlarged postcloacal spur on each side.
Comparisons.
Cnemaspis rajgadensis sp. nov. differs from all other Indian species of Cnemaspis by having the following suite of characters: dorsal scales heterogeneous (vs. homogeneous in C. adii Srinivasulu et al., 2015, C. assamensis Das & Sengupta, 2000, C. boiei Gray, 1842, C. indica Gray, 1846, C. jerdonii Theobald, 1868, C. kolhapurensis Giri et al., 2009, C. littoralis Jerdon, 1853, C. mysoriensis Jerdon, 1853, C. nilagirica Manamendra et al., 2007, C. palakkadensis Sayyed et al., 2020, C. zacharyi Cyriac et al., 2020); conical and spine-like tubercles absent on flanks (vs. conical or spine-like tubercles on the flanks in C. amboliensis Sayyed et al., 2018, C. anandani Murthy et al., 2019, C. assamensis , C. flaviventralis Sayyed et al., 2016, C. goaensis Sharma, 1976, C. gracilis , C. jerdoni , C. koynaensis Khandekar et al., 2019, C. littoralis , C. monticola Manamendra et al., 2007, C. mysoriensis , C. nilagirica , C. otai , C. rishivalleyensis Agarwal et al., 2020, C. stellapulvis Khandekar et al., 2020); presence of only femoral pores (vs. presence of femoral and precloacal pores in C. adii , C. agarwali Khandekar, 2019, C. amboliensis , C. andersonii Annandale, 1905, C. australis Manamendra et al., 2007, C. bangara Agarwal et al., 2020, C. goaensis , C. gracilis Beddome, 1870, C. graniticola Agarwal et al., 2020, C. monticola , C. otai Das & Bauer, 2000, C. rishivalleyensis , C. shevaroyensis Khandekar et al., 2019, C. thackerayi Khandekar et al., 2019, C. wicksii Stoliczka, 1873, C. yelagiriensis Agarwal et al., 2020, C. yercaudensis Das & Bauer, 2000; presence of only precloacal pores in C. aaronbaueri Sayyed et al., 2019, C. avasabinae Agarwal et al., 2020, C. anamudiensis Cyriac et al., 2018, C. beddomei Theobald, 1876, C. maculicollis Cyriac et al., 2018, C. nairi Inger et al., 1984, C. ornata Beddome, 1870; no femoral or precloacal pores in C. assamensis and C. boiei ; a continuous series of precloacal femoral pores in C. kolhapurensis ); SVL less than 27 mm (vs. ≥ 40 in C. aaronbaueri , C. anamudiensis , C. anandani , C. bangara , C. beddomei , C. chengodumalaensis Cyriac et al., 2020, C. graniticola , C. heteropholis Bauer, 2002, C. kolhapurensis , C. kottiyoorensis Cyriac & Umesh, 2014, C. maculicollis , C. magnifica Khandekar et al., 2020, C. nairi , C. nilagirica , C. ornata , C. sisparensis Theobald, 1876, C. thackerayi , C. wynadensis Beddome, 1870, C. yelagiriensis , C. zacharyi ).
C. rajgadensis sp. nov. closely resembles members of the Cnemaspis girii and Cnemaspis flaviventralis clade, all of which are small-sized species (SVL < 40 mm), have heterogeneous mid-dorsal scales, 2-5 femoral pores in males and having median subcaudals not enlarged. However, the new species can be differentiated from members of the Cnemaspis girii clade by its higher number of ventral scales (28-29) across mid-body (vs. 22-24 in C. amba , 26-28 in C. girii , 20-26 in C. koynaensis , 26-27 in C. limayei and 26-27 in C. mahabali ), absence of spine-like tubercles on flanks (vs. presence of spine-like tubercles in C. koynaensis ), presence of enlarged tubercles row on lower flanks (vs. absence of tubercles on lower flanks of C. girii , C. limayei , C. mahabali ), and by the weakly keeled ventral scales (vs. smooth in all members of the Cnemaspis girii clade except C. mahabali ).
The new species can be differentiated from C. ajijae and C. flaviventralis by its adult size (< 27 mm SVL vs. > 30 mm in C. ajijae and C. flaviventralis ); short and wider than long head [HL 16.6% of SVL, HW 110.6% of HL] (vs. elongated in C. flaviventralis [HL22% of SVL, HW 81.8% of HL]); small eyes [ED 11.4% of HL] (vs. larger eyes in C. flaviventralis [ED 18.9% of HL] and C. ajijae [ED 21.6% of HL]); short snout [ES 68.7% of HL] (vs. long snout in C. ajijae [ES 82.4% of HL]); short and broad trunk [TW 61.5% of TRL](vs. slender in C. ajijae [TW 50.8% of TRL]). C. rajgadensis sp. nov. can also be differentiated by the weakly keeled ventral scales as opposed to the smooth scales in C. ajijae and C. flaviventralis .
Description of the holotype.
Adult male generally in good state of preservation, albeit slightly dehydrated (Fig. 1A, B View Figure 1 ). SVL 25.7 mm, head short (HL/ SVL 0.16), wide (HW/ HL 1.1), not depressed (HD/ HL 0.67), distinctly larger from neck. Loreal region slightly inflated, canthus rostralis not prominent. Snout slightly longer than half of head length (ES/ HL 0.67); scales on snout and canthus rostralis small, round, weakly keeled, juxtaposed, slightly larger than those on forehead and interorbital region; occipital and temporal region with much smaller, weakly keeled, granular scales (Fig. 2A View Figure 2 ). Eye small (ED/ HL 0.17), with round pupil; supraciliaries not elongate. Tympanum deep, ear-opening very small (EOD/ HL 0.04); eye to ear distance much longer then diameter of eye ( ET / EOD 11.5). Rostral much wider (1.1 mm) than high (0.4 mm), incompletely divided dorsally by a strongly developed rostral groove; single enlarged supranasal on each side, twice in the size of postnasals, separated from each other by triangular enlarged single internasal scales; rostral in contact with supralabial I, nasal, supranasal and internasal; nostrils small, oval, bordered by postnasals, supranasal and rostral; two rows of small scales separate the orbit from the supralabials (Fig. 2C View Figure 2 ). Mental enlarged, subtriangular, not pointed posteriorly, wider (1.5 mm) than long (0.9 mm); two pairs of postmentals, inner pair slightly large, separated by single large scale, postmentals bordered posteriorly by eight smaller, rounded scales; gular scales granular, slightly raised; throat scales keeled to weakly keeled, flat(Fig. 2B View Figure 2 ). Supralabials up to angle of jaw seven on the right and left side; supralabial I largest, slightly decreasing in size posteriorly; infralabials up to angle of jaw seven on the right and left side; infralabial I and II equal in size. Canthal region with 13 scales on both sides; supraciliaries separated by 27 scales at midorbit. Body relatively short, trunk less than half of SVL (TRL/ SVL 0.38) without ventrolateral folds. Dorsal scales small, granular, weakly keeled, intermixed with randomly arranged, weakly keeled, slightly larger tubercles which increase in size towards the lower flanks and are more pronounced towards the posterior end (Fig. 1C View Figure 1 ); dorsal paravertebral scales 80; number of mid-dorsal scales 62; conical and spine-like tubercles absent on either side of the flanks, (Fig. 1E View Figure 1 ). Granular scales on nape weakly keeled, slightly smaller than those on paravertebral rows, smaller still on occiput. Scales on ventral surface of neck, chest, arm, pes and tail weakly keeled; mid-ventral scales 123, mid-body scales 29 across the ventral between the lowest rows of dorsal scales (Fig. 1D View Figure 1 ); three femoral pores on each thigh (Fig. 2D View Figure 2 ),separated by 25 poreless scales; precloacal pores absent; forelimbs moderately long, slender; dorsal scales of brachium weakly keeled, slightly raised; scales of forearm weakly keeled, imbricate, smaller than those on brachials; ventral scales of brachium smooth, rounded, juxtaposed, smaller than those on forearm; scales beneath forearm, weakly keeled, flat, juxtaposed, slightly raised; palmar scales smooth, juxtaposed, raised; claws slightly recurved; dorsal scales of thigh and tibia weakly keeled, imbricate, slightly raised; ventral scales of thigh and tibia flat, imbricate; subtibial scales weakly keeled, imbricate; plantar scales smooth, juxtaposed, raised; digits long with an inflected joint; subdigital lamellae unnotched; lamellae beneath first phalanges slightly widened; slight interdigital webbing (Fig. 2E, F View Figure 2 ); subdigital lamellae on finger I: 9, finger II: 12, finger III: 15, finger IV: 15, finger V: 12; toe I: 8, toe II: 13, toe III: 18, toe IV: 18 and toe V: 18. Relative length of digits, fingers: IV (2.4 mm) > III (2.2 mm) > V (2.1 mm) > II (1.9 mm) > I (1.6 mm); toes: IV (4.3 mm) > III (3.5 mm) > V (3.3 mm) > II (2.3 mm) > I (1.0 mm).Tail entire and original, cylindrical, moderately slender, flattened beneath, slightly longer than snout-vent length (TL/ SVL 1.0) (Fig. 3A, B View Figure 3 ). Dorsal scales at tail granular, weakly keeled, roughly same in size and shape to those on mid-body dorsum, gradually becoming larger, flattened, blunt, subimbricate posteriorly, intermixed with slightly enlarged, strongly keeled tubercles forming whorls; scales on ventral aspect of original tail imbricate, weakly keeled, without a series of enlarged sub-caudal scales, roughly same in size of those on dorsal tail; scales on tail base slightly smaller, imbricate and smooth, a single enlarged postcloacal spur on each side.
Colouration in life
(Fig. 4A, B View Figure 4 ). Dorsal ground colour of head, body, limbs, and tail light brown to greyish-brown; head with dark-brown marking, supralabials yellow, infralabials brown, supraciliaries brownish-yellow, brille dusty-orange, iris orange coloured, pupil black; dark brown patch between orbit and nostril, dark-brown markings on temporal and occiput; dark-brown triangular mark surrounded by brown dorsally between the forelimb insertion; dorsum with five brown and white diffused vertebral blotches, from forelimb insertion to hind-limb insertion along with yellow scattered dark small blotches on lateral sides of the body; dorsum of forelimb and hind-limb with alternating dark-brown bands with some yellowish blotches; digits with alternating dark-brown and yellow markings; dorsum of original portion of tail with alternating dark-brown and whitish markings; postcloacal spur yellow; ventral surface of body, limbs, and tail off-white, surrounded with mottled brown. Females are dull in overall colouration on dorsal body, ventral surface of body, limbs, and tail white.
Colouration in preservative
(Fig. 1A, B View Figure 1 ). Dorsum of the body, limbs and tail with brown to greyish-brown which turns into dark brown, white and yellow markings in life turns into grey in preservation; ventral side of head, body white, tail greyish-white.
Etymology.
The species epithet is derived from the Rajgad fort of Pune District, Maharashtra, India, from where the type series was collected. Rajgad is a hill fort and historical place, which was the capital of the Maratha Empire under the rule of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj for almost 26 years during the 17th century. Previously known as Murumdev, Rajgad fort is located around 60 km to the south-west of Pune and about 15 km west of Nasrapur village in the range of northern Western Ghats.
Suggested common name.
Rajgad Dwarf Gecko
Distribution.
Currently, Cnemaspis rajgadensis sp. nov., is known from only its type locality - Rajgad fort, Pune District , Maharashtra .
Natural history.
The new species was found on the walls of old stone structure of Rajgad fort (Fig. 5 View Figure 5 ). Rajgad fort is a hill fort situated about 1324 m above the sea level in the Pune district of Maharashtra, India. All the specimens were found active during the evening around 18.30 hrs. at one meter above ground on the rock wall and old man-made structures of the fort, they are uncommon as we encountered only three individuals during our field survey. Both the female specimens collected during our survey were gravid and had two developing eggs each, suggesting that September, when these specimens were collected, falls within the reproductive period of the species. The new species is rupicolous and has currently been observed only on rock structures. Although we were unable to find individuals in the surrounding shrub forest, we presume that the species may also be found in rocky outcrops in the surrounding region. The surrounding area of the fort is covered with grass land slopes and shrub Strobilanthes callosa with few large trees. The types were found sympatrically with Cyrtodactylus deccanensis ( Günther), Hemidactylus maculatus Dumeril & Bibron and Hemidactylus cf. murrayi Gleadow.
| HL |
Houghton Lake Wildlife Research Station |
| ET |
East Texas State University |
| V |
Royal British Columbia Museum - Herbarium |
| BNHS |
Bombay Natural History Society |
| IO |
Instituto de Oceanografia da Universidade de Lisboa |
| R |
Departamento de Geologia, Universidad de Chile |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.