Spondylurus fulgidus (Cope 1862) Hedges, S. Blair & Conn, Caitlin E., 2012

Hedges, S. Blair & Conn, Caitlin E., 2012, A new skink fauna from Caribbean islands (Squamata, Mabuyidae, Mabuyinae) 3288, Zootaxa 3288 (1), pp. 1-244 : 154-158

Spondylurus fulgidus (Cope 1862) comb. nov.

Jamaican Skink

( Figs. 54D , 55D , 63 )

Lacerta mabouya —Shaw, 1802:287 (part).

Scincus sloanii — Daudin, 1803:287 (part).

Scincus sloanei — Fitzinger, 1826:23 (part).

Tiliqua sloanii —Gray, 1831:70 (part).

Tiliqua sloanii —Gray, 1838:293 (part).

Eumeces sloanii — Duméril & Bibron, 1839:639 (part).

Mabouya sloanei — Gray, 1845:94.

Mabouya agilis — Gosse, 1849:307 (part).

Mabouya agilis — Gosse, 1851:75 (part).

Mabuia fulgida — Cope, 1862:185 (new lectotype designation: USNM 5759 collected on Jamaica, no specific locality, by Charles Baker Adams in 1844–49) .

Euprepes spilonotus —Peters, 1864:50 (part).

Eupr[epes] spilonotus — Peters, 1871:400.

Euprepes (Mabuia) spilonotus — Peters, 1876:708 (part).

M[abuya] spilonotus — Stejneger, 1904:609.

Mabuia sloanii — Barbour, 1910:299 (part).

Mabuya spilonota — Barbour, 1914:320.

Mabuya spilonota — Barbour, 1930:105.

Mabuya mabouya sloanii — Dunn, 1936:544 (part).

Mabuya mabouia — Barbour, 1937:147 (part).

Mabuya spilonotus — Grant, 1940:111.

Mabuya spilonotus — Murray, 1949:128.

Mabuya spilonota — Cochran, 1961:126.

Mabuya spilonota — Horton, 1973:85.

Mabuya mabouya sloanei — Schwartz & Thomas, 1975:141 (part).

Mabuya mabouya mabouya — MacLean et al., 1977:6 (part).

Mabuya mabouya sloanei — Schwartz & Henderson, 1988:151 (part).

Mabuya mabouya sloanei — Schwartz & Henderson, 1991:457 (part).

Mabuya bistriata — Powell et al., 1996:82 (part).

Mabuya sloanii — Mayer & Lazell, 2000:883 (part).

Mabuya sloanii —Miralles, 2005:49 (part).

Mabuya sloanii — Henderson & Powell, 2009:293 (part).

Material examined (n = 35). Jamaica. USNM 5759 (lectotype), an adult female, Charles B. Adams, no specific locality (date of collection inferred to be either 1844–45 or 1848–49; see Remarks ) ; UMMZ 53306–09 , UMMZ 92371 A–D , USNM 572081–85 (paralectotypes), same locality data as lectotype ; ANSP 13597–99 , " Dr. Slocum," donated by Cope (no additional collection information available) ; BMNH RR 1966.315 – 316 , " Mr. Fraser," Bluefields (before 1887) ( Boulenger 1887) ; BMNH 52.1.21.6–7, P. H. Gosse, no specific locality (1844–46) ; MCZ R-6053, S. Garman, Kingston (1880; date indicated by Grant, 1940) ; MCZ R-7344A–C, T. Barbour, Beacon Hill, Bath, St. Thomas Parish , 1909 ; ZMH R 09298, “Riise,” "St. Thomas" (in error), accessioned 1877. The following were collected by Chapman Grant at Portland Point : MCZ R-45195–96 (18 April 1937) , MCZ R-45197 (31 January 1938) , UMMZ 85862 (January 1938) , UMMZ 85861 (22 April 1937) , UMMZ 239601–04 (22 April 1937) .

Material not examined (n = 7). Jamaica. MNHN 2904 (paralectotype; Brygoo 1985), exchanged from ANSP in ca. 1862, presumably same collecting data as lectotype ; SMNS 1261 , A. C. Günther , no specific locality or date ; USNM 108311–313 , Portland Point (1922–1938; no collector information available) ; USNM 117674 , Portland Ridge (19 August 1941; no collector information available) ; YPM HERR.000857, A. Petrunkevitch, Malvern, St. Elisabeth Parish (no collection date available) .

Diagnosis. Spondylurus fulgidus is characterized by (1) maximum SVL in males, 77.0 mm; (2) maximum SVL in females, 84.8 mm; (3) snout width, 2.21–3.73% SVL; (4) head length, 16.3–20.9% SVL; (5) head width, 11.0– 14.1% SVL; (6) ear length, 1.46–2.83% SVL; (7) toe-IV length, 9.07–12.9% SVL; (8) prefrontals, two; (9) supraoculars, four; (10) supraciliaries, five; (11) frontoparietals, two; (12) supralabial below the eye, five (25%), six (67%), seven (8%); (13) nuchal rows, two (68%), three (32%); (14) dorsals, 52–58; (15) ventrals, 55–65; (16) dorsals + ventrals, 108–120; (17) midbody scale rows, 28–32; (18) finger-IV lamellae, 12–16; (19) toe-IV lamellae, 14–19; (20) finger-IV + toe-IV lamellae, 27–35; (21) supranasal contact, N; (22) prefrontal contact, Y (52%), N (48%); (23) supraocular-1/frontal contact, Y (48%), N (52%); (24) parietal contact, Y; (25) pale middorsal stripe, Y; (26) dark dorsolateral stripe, Y; (27) dark lateral stripe, Y; (28) pale lateral stripe, Y; and (29) palms and soles, dark ( Tables 3–5).

Within the Genus Spondylurus , S. fulgidus is separated from S. caicosae sp. nov., S. haitiae sp. nov., S. lineolatus , S. magnacruzae sp. nov., S. martinae sp. nov., S. powelli sp. nov., S. semitaeniatus , S. sloanii , and S. spilonotus by having a higher number of supraciliaries (five versus 3–4 in those other species). It differs from S. culebrae sp. nov., S. haitiae sp. nov., S. macleani , S. martinae sp. nov., S. monitae sp. nov., S. powelli sp. nov., and S. spilonotus by having a lower number of combined dorsals and ventrals (108–120 versus 121–134 in those other species). From S. anegadae sp. nov., S. culebrae sp. nov., S. monae sp. nov., S. monitae sp. nov., S. semitaeniatus , and S. sloanii , it is distinguished by having a lower dark dorsolateral stripe width/middorsal stripe width ratio (0.115 –0.759 versus 0.874–3.79 in those other species). It is separated from S. haitiae sp. nov. and S. lineolatus by having a longer head (16.3–20.9% SVL versus 12.9–15.8% SVL in those other species). It differs from S. pale lateral stripes continuous to the hindlimbs (versus dark lateral stripes with paler spots and irregular pale lateral stripes that are discontinuous or absent at the hindlimbs in S. caicosae sp. nov. and no lateral stripes in S. macleani ; Fig. 55B, D, G ). It differs from S. turksae sp. nov. in having fewer dorsals (52–58 versus 59–63) and longer toes (toe-IV length 9.07–12.9% SVL versus 7.05–8.90% SVL). It is separated from S. anegadae sp. nov., S. culebrae sp. nov., S. monae sp. nov., and S. nitidus by having a higher number of supraciliaries (five versus 3–4 in 93–95% of specimens belonging to those other species).

Description of lectotype ( Fig . 63A–C). An adult female in good state of preservation, with injury to anterior dorsum and with an abdominal slit. SVL 58.4 mm; tail broken near tip, not measured; HL 12.2 mm; HW 7.85 mm; SW 1.87 mm; EL 1.63 mm; and toe-IV length 7.04 mm; ear-opening large in size and oval; toe length in the following order: I <II = V <III <IV.

Head scalation. Rostral wider than high, contacting first supralabials, nasals and supranasals. Paired supranasals not in median contact, contacting anteriormost loreal. Frontonasal diamond-shaped, wider than long, laterally in contact with anterior loreal scale. A pair of quadrilateral prefrontals, separated medially, and in contact with frontonasal, both anterior and posterior loreals, first supraciliary, first and second supraoculars, and frontal. Frontal hexagonal, oblong, in contact with the second supraoculars and paired frontoparietals. Frontoparietals also in contact with parietals and interparietal. Interparietal tetragonal (near-triangular), semi-lanceolate, separated from nuchals by parietals; parietal eye distinct. Parietals in contact with upper secondary and tertiary temporal scales (near contact with primary temporal). Four supraoculars, the second one being the largest. Five supraciliaries, approximately equal in length. Nostril in posterior part of the nasal. A small postnasal, bordered by supranasal, anterior loreal and first supralabial. Anterior and posterior loreals rectangular. Two upper preoculars and two lower preoculars. Seven supralabials, the fifth being the widest and forming the lower border of the eyelid. Five moderately enlarged scales behind eye comprising the postoculars; similar to temporal scales but smaller. One primary temporal, two secondary temporals, and three tertiary temporals; all imbricate, smooth, cycloid, not distinctly delimited from the scales on the nape and the sides of the neck. Seven infralabials. Mental scale wider

Body and limb scalation. Two rows of nuchal scales, both paired. Other scales on nape similar to dorsals. On lateral sides of neck, scales slightly smaller. Dorsal scales cycloid, imbricate, smooth, 54 in a longitudinal row; ventrals similar to dorsals; 60 in a longitudinal row; 28 scales around midbody. No distinct boundaries between dorsals, laterals and ventrals. Scales on tail and limbs similar to dorsals, except smaller on limbs. Palmar and plantar regions with small tubercles, subequal in size and delimited by a surrounding region of flatter scales. Subdigital lamellae smooth, single, 13 under finger-IV and 14 under toe-IV. Fingers and toes clawed.

Pattern and coloration. Dorsal ground color medium brownish-green with only a few small dark brown spots, distributed on body. Dark dorsolateral stripes present, narrow (0.75 mm), dark brown, extending from top of head to first third of body. Dark lateral stripes present, dark brown, extending from behind eye to last third of body where they fade towards the hindlimb. Pale middorsal stripe present, wide (4.06 mm), brownish-green, extending from top of head to first third of body. Pale dorsolateral stripes present, whitish, extending from tip of snout to first third of body. Pale lateral stripes present, whitish, extending from below ear to midbody where they fade toward the hindlimb, bordered below by darker pigment. Forelimbs and hindlimbs with distinct barring, darker on forelimbs. Ventral surface of body without pattern. Palmar and plantar surfaces medium or dark brown. No information is available on color in life of the holotype.

Variation. In coloration and scalation, most specimens resembled the holotype ( Tables 4–5). The most distinctive pattern features that we noticed were the pale and dark lines outlining the top of the snout, the wide middorsal pale (tannish) stripe, and the almost zebra-like limb barring. Gosse (1849) described the color in life: "Head, neck and fore-part of back reddish brown, bronzed; a broad band of black runs from the muzzle on each side, enclosing the eye, and passing down to the hind-leg; this band is bounded, both above and below, by a band of yellowish white, gradually becoming obsolete between the fore- and hind-leg; each of these pale bands is again bounded by a line of black, more or less interrupted or maculate, the superior of which extends along the tail; lower back and tail, greenish brown; whole under-parts greenish white, silvery; upper surface of the limbs and feet black, with pale confluent spots. The whole animal reflects a metallic glass. There is no appreciable difference in the sexes." Gosse also made a color illustration of the Jamaican skink, published 100 years later by Murray (1949). Grant (1940) described color in life, also noting the brown (bronze) to greenish (gray-green) transition, from anterior to posterior. He noted the venter was gray and the legs and toes were "finely checkered" in black, brown, and bluish-gray, with palms and soles dark brown.

Distribution. This species is distributed on Jamaica, where all records have come from near the southern coast of the island ( Fig. 9A ).

Ecology and conservation. Sloane (1725) noted and figured the species, but he also confused it with other species in his observations. The English naturalist Philip Henry Gosse (1810–1888) collected skinks in Jamaica during 1844–46 and wrote about their habits ( Gosse 1849; 1851). His specimens are in the BMNH. Gosse's observations were made prior to the introduction of the mongoose, which occurred in 1872. In stark contrast to their rarity now, Gosse (1849) found the skinks to be abundant and "most numerous in the lowlands, and on the gently-sloping hills of moderate elevation that form the characteristic feature of the southern side of that beautiful island. The fences there are largely composed of 'dry-wall,' built of rough unhewn stones, without cement. On these walls the Mabouya may be seen crawling, and often lying quite still in the sunshine; when alarmed it darts with lightning-like rapidity into one of the crevices which abound in all parts of such a structure. Indeed it rarely ventures far from some refuge of this kind, and I presume that the facilities for instant retreat afforded by these pervious walls are the chief cause of its preference for them. It is scarcely ever seen on the ground, except when avoiding danger; nor on the trunk or branches of trees or shrubs; but in the concavity of a pinguin leaf ( Bromelia pinguin Linnaeus ) it is occasionally observed to lie, basking in the sun" ( Gosse 1849).

Sixty years later, Barbour's (1910) experiences were much different. "This little skink..is now one of the rarer members of the island fauna. Along with the other ground-inhabiting creatures of the lowlands near the coast this has been preyed upon extensively by the mongoose. About Kingston we procured three examples, and these were the only ones seen during our stay on the island." Later ( Barbour 1930a), he remarked that "it has lately been shown to feed on sphaerodactyls."

Grant (1940), in discussing mabuyine skinks in Jamaica, noted "this genus and Alsophis , throughout the Antilles where the writer has collected, has suffered from the mongoose more than any other reptile. It was gratifying to find Mabuya abundant on Portland Point where the very porous, hard limestone offers effective

The only observations of Spondylurus fulgidus in recent years have been in a restricted portion of the Hellshire Hills, where it is uncommon and considered the "last stronghold" of the species, and rarely in one or two other locations along the south coast ( Wilson 2011). In contrast to Gosse's claim that it does not climb trees, it has been observed climbing tree trunks ( Fig. 63D ). Whether that represents selection for individuals that can escape the mongoose or just a behavior not observed by Gosse is unknown. One of us (S.B.H.) has spent, cumulatively, approximately four months surveying reptiles and amphibians throughout Jamaica, including many potential dry forest habitats on the south coast, but has never encountered the species. Likewise, no museum specimens could be identified with collection dates later than 1941, despite intensive survey work by herpetologists during the latter half of the 20th century. A study of the mongoose in the Hellshire Hills revealed that the skink comprised 10% of its diet ( Lewis et al. 2011), which is an alarming amount of predation pressure on a species already close to extinction. Cats, rats, and mice have been mentioned as additional potential predators, besides the mongoose (B. Wilson, personal communication; Grant 1940). Natural forests in Jamaica have been severely depleted ( World Resources Institute 2008) because of agriculture, bauxite mining, tourism, and urbanization, and threats to natural habitats continue even in protected areas.

Based on IUCN Redlist criteria ( IUCN 2011), we assess the conservation status of Spondylurus fulgidus as Critically Endangered (CR A2ace). It faces a primary threat from the introduced mongoose, which has led to its near-extinction. Secondary threats include habitat destruction from agriculture and urbanization, and predation from other introduced mammals, including black rats. Studies are needed to determine the health and extent of remaining populations, and threats to the survival of the species. Captive breeding programs should be undertaken, because eradication of introduced mammalian predators is not possible on Jamaica. It has been suggested that the species could be introduced to the Goat Islands of Jamaica, to afford survival away from the mongoose ( Wilson 2011).

Reproduction. Gosse (1849) discussed reproduction in this species on Jamaica, noting that he found several (three?) fetuses in a female killed on February 11th and five in another killed on 29th of April. One small adult female (UMMZ 85861, 67 mm SVL) collected at Portland Point, 22 April 1937, has three developing young, as was noted by Grant (1940).

Etymology. The etymology was not provided in the original description. However, the species name ( fulgidus ) is a Latin feminine singular adjective meaning shining or brilliant, likely referring to the dorsal coloration of this species, described as "metallic" and "cupreous" (Cope 1862).

Remarks. Charles Baker Adams (1814–1853), malacologist and collector of the type series, spent winters of 1844–45 and 1848– 49 in Jamaica ( Fletcher & Young 1927), thus constraining the collection date of the lectotype and paralectotypes. Coincidentally, Adams' field work in Jamaica overlapped with that of the Gosse (1844–46).

Figures

FIGURE 9. Map showing the distribution of mabuyine skinks occurring on islands in the central, southern, and western Caribbean region. See Fig. 1 for location of the islands. The islands and species are: (A) Jamaica (Spondylurus fulgidus; hollow circle = specimen not examined); (B) Hispaniola (Spondylurus haitiae sp. nov., circle; Mabuya hispaniolae sp. nov., triangle; Spondylurus lineolatus, squares); (C) Turks and Caicos Islands (Spondylurus caicosae sp. nov., circles; Spondylurus turksae sp. nov., triangles; hollow triangle is Cotton Cay record (see text); (D) Margarita (Copeoglossum margaritae sp. nov.); and (E) Roatán (Marisora roatanae sp. nov.).

FIGURE 54. Head scalation in species of the Genus Spondylurus (left, side view; right, dorsal view). (A) S. anegadae sp. nov. (UMMZ 80583, holotype); (B) S. caicosae sp. nov. (AMNH R-80126, holotype); (C) S. culebrae sp. nov. (UMMZ 73823,

FIGURE 55. Representative patterns in species of the Genus Spondylurus (top, dorsal view; bottom, side view). (A) S. anegadae sp. nov.; (B) S. caicosae sp. nov.; (C) S. culebrae sp. nov.; (D) S. fulgidus; (E) S. haitiae sp. nov.; (F) S. lineolatus; (G) S. macleani; (H) S. magnacruzae sp. nov.; (I) S. martinae sp. nov.; and (J) S. monae sp. nov.

FIGURE 63. Spondylurus fulgidus, from Jamaica. (A–C) USNM 5759, lectotype, "Jamaica" (no specific locality). (D) uncataloged, Hellshire Hills (live individual, photographed by J. Burgess, January, 2009).