amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

Published in the United States of America

2011-2012 • VOLUME 5 • NUMBER 1

AMPHIBIAN & REPTILE

ISSN: 1083-446X

elSSN: 1525-9153

Editor

Craig Hassapakis

Berkeley, California, USA

Associate Editors

Raul E. Diaz Howard O. Clark, Jr. Erik R. Wild

University of Kansas, USA Garcia and Associates, USA University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, USA

Assistant Editors

Alison R. Davis Daniel D. Fogell

University of California, Berkeley, USA Southeastern Community College, USA

Editorial Review Board

David C. Blackburn Bill Branch Jelka Crnobrnja-Isailovc

California Academy of Sciences, USA Port Elizabeth Museum, SOUTH AFRICA IBISS University of Belgrade, SERBIA

C. Kenneth Dodd, Jr. Lee A. Fitzgerald Adel A. Ibrahim

University of Florida, USA Texas A&M University, USA Ha’il University, SAUDIA ARABIA

Harvey B. Lillywhite

University of Florida, USA

Peter V. Lindeman

Edinboro University of Pennsylvania, USA

Jaime E. Pefaur

Universidad de Los Andes, VENEZUELA

Jodi J. L. Rowley

Australian Museum, AUSTRALIA

Julian C. Lee

Taos, New Mexico, USA

Henry R. Mushinsky

University of South Florida, USA

Rohan Pethiyagoda

Australian Museum, AUSTRALIA

Peter Uetz

Virginia Commonwealth University, USA

Rafaqat Masroor

Pakistan Museum of Natural History, PAKISTAN

Elnaz Najafimajd

Ege University, TURKEY

Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani

Razi University, IRAN

Larry David Wilson

Institute Regional de Biodiversidad, USA

Allison C. Alberts

Zoological Society of San Diego, USA

Michael B. Eisen

Public Library of Science, USA

Russell A. Mittermeier

Conservation International, USA

Advisory Board

Aaron M. Bauer

Villanova University, USA

James Hanken

Harvard University, USA

Robert W. Murphy

Royal Ontario Museum, CANADA

Walter R. Erdelen

UNESCO, FRANCE

RoyW. McDiarmid

USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USA

Eric R. Pianka

University of Texas, Austin, USA

Antonio W. Salas

Environment and Sustainable Development, PERU

Dawn S. Wilson

AMNH Southwestern Research Station, USA

Joseph T. Collins

University of Kansas, USA

Honorary Member

Carl C. Gans

(1923 - 2009 )

Cover : The Iranian spider- tailed horned viper ( Pseudocerastes urarachnoides ), an outstanding viper, ambushing for prey in its natural habitat, in

Ilam province, western Iran. The viper coloration is confused with its background and hard to see. While ambushing for prey the bird prey (spe-

cies of Lanius ) is observing the snake’s tail, near the head, and the tail propels like a tarantula on the move. The bird is attracted to the “tarantula”

and is suddenly caught by the viper and held until its venom kills. The case, a very specialized behavior for attracting prey, is a kind of fatal

mimicry. Many biological and ecological aspects of the viper including conservation status, exact distribution, reproductive strategy, annual

cycles, molecular systematics, and population genetics are unknown but being investigated by Behzad Fathinia, Razi University, Kermanshah,

Iran. Photograph: Behzad Fathinia.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation — Worldwide Community-Supported Herpetological Conservation (ISSN: 1083-446X; elSSN: 1525-9153)

is published by Craig Hassapak i s/4 mphibian & Reptile Conservation as full issues at least twice yearly (semi-annually or more often depend-

ing on needs) and papers are immediately released as they are finished on our website; http://amphibian-reptile-conservation.org; email: arc.

publ isher@gmail .com

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation is published as an open access journal. Please visit the official journal website at: http://amphibian-reptile-

conservation.org

Instructions to Authors : Amphibian & Reptile Conservation accepts manuscripts on the biology of amphibians and reptiles, with emphasis on

conservation, sustainable management, and biodiversity. Topics in these areas can include: taxonomy and phylogeny, species inventories, distri-

bution, conservation, species profiles, ecology, natural history, sustainable management, conservation breeding, citizen science, social network-

ing, and any other topic that lends to the conservation of amphibians and reptiles worldwide. Prior consultation with editors is suggested and

important if you have any questions and/or concerns about submissions. Further details on the submission of a manuscript can best be obtained

by consulting a current published paper from the journal and/or by accessing Instructions for Authors at the Amphibian and Reptile Conservation

website: http://amphibian-reptile-conservation.org/submissions.html

Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1): i.

Editorial

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation continues to publish

relevant topical issues for herpetological conservation

including those on the countries of Iran ( this issue), Sri

Lanka (following issue), and general interest papers on

the biodiversity and sustainability of amphibian and rep-

tilian species worldwide. Other issues currently publish-

ing papers are on the topics of: Conservation Breeding

Programs, Giant Salamanders, and our first Global issue

(No. 1) for papers (all issues dated 2012-2013) that do

not fit a topical issue. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation

will continue to release new papers as they are completed

through 2013 on these subjects.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation is experiencing

tremendous growth and this is due to the hard work and

recent additions of many new editors and advisors. Among

these important additions are Howard Clark as our new

graphic designer who has shown unmatched commitment

and expertise in developing Amphibian & Reptile Con-

servation into a major herpetological publication.

The future is bright for Amphibian & Reptile Conser-

vation that specializes in producing papers of relevance

and impact toward perpetuating herpetological biodiver-

sity. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation will continue to

publish the best in papers that present information dis-

tinguished by numerous full- color photographs, excellent

graphic design, and a superior distributional network. We

aim for the widest global readership through open access

publishing and supported by our large social networks.

As the readership of Amphibian & Reptile Conserva-

tion increases, we extend an open invitation for those who

see our vision of producing and publishing Amphibian

& Reptile Conservation as a major contributor to her-

petological conservation and our ever expanding global

audience to support this vision.

Craig Hassapakis, Editor, Publisher, and Founder

Howard O. Clark, Jr., Associate Editor

August 201 2 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e48

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the

original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1): ii.

Guest Editorial: Iran Issue

When most people think of Iran, they envision a hot, dry

land. Although much of the central area of the country fits

this concept, Iran has a great geographical diversity and

a corresponding floral and faunal diversity as well. Ow-

ing to the many geographically and ecologically distinct

regions, a high percentage of the small animal species, in-

cluding amphibians and reptiles, are limited, or endemic,

to these areas. Because there is a long tectonic history of

southwestern Asia, a result of collisions of Eurasia with

the African and Indian plates and the near closing of the

Tethys Sea, the region is a crossroads of distributions of

the faunas, especially at the generic level, of animals orig-

inating in these three geographic realms. These genera

have diverged during the periods of mountain and high

plateau uplift and subsequent erosion to plains of great

soil diversity, from course pebbles to aeolian deposits of

sand and loess. Changes in elevation and changes in cli-

mate have created both barriers to and reconnections of

faunal distributions. This paleogeographic dynamism has

resulted in the greatest faunal diversity within the western

Palearctic Realm.

Although the first accounts attempting to describe

and catalog the Iranian fauna according to modern bio-

systematic principles took place during the mid-to-late

nineteenth century, the number of species described, as

well as interpretations of their evolutionary relationships

has grown steadily. With the spread of greater scientific

education in Iran and consequently, the growing number

of zoologists, the twenty-first century has already seen a

flowering of renewed interest in herpetological studies

among those in a position to carry out long-term studies

in ecology, and to initiate scientific approaches to conser-

vation and wildlife management.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

Some additional cultural and economic changes have

strongly influenced the development of interest in wild-

life and conservation in Iran. The growth of an educated

middle class, along with access to modem field vehicles,

cameras, climbing gear, GPS, etc., has created a genera-

tion of outdoor sportspersons with an appreciation and

respect for nature. For example, there are now excellent

photographs available of most categories of animals.

The papers in the current issue reflect something of

the variety of herpetological projects being carried out

currently by Iranian herpetological specialists. Few of the

papers here can be characterized as conventional “con-

servation studies” investigating the broader issues of

herpetological conservation. However, to be meaningful

conservation studies require descriptive data of species

and habitats, species distribution, and syntopy, and these

are the kinds of studies represented in this issue (Iran) of

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation.

As in most countries, conservation efforts for amphib-

ians and reptiles are incidental to conservation of larger

species of wildlife, for which protected areas are desig-

nated. Throughout the history of western cultures, rep-

tiles and amphibians have been reviled and persecuted. In

Iran, the Zoroastrians were persistent destroyers of these

animals, which were regarded as associated with the dark

and evil force of nature. Neither Islam nor Christianity

held them in much higher regard. Only lately have they

been seen as integral units in ecological systems.

Steven C. Anderson, Guest Editor

August 201 2 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e52

of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in

any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):1 -6.

Distribution of Hemidactylus geckos (Reptilia:

Gekkonidae) in Fars Province, Southern Iran

ALI GHOLAMIFARD 1 AND NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI 2

1 Department of Biology, College of Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz 71454, IRAN

2 Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Razi University, Kermanshah 67149, IRAN

Abstract . — During extensive field work on the reptiles of Fars Province, Iran from November 2007

to September 2010, a total of 18 specimens of Hemidactylus, belonging to three species, were col-

lected. In April 2010 a single specimen of H. turcicus, with two additional specimens in September

2010, were collected from different urban areas close to a mountainous region in the city of Varavi,

25 km from the city of Lamerd, in southwestern region of Fars Province.

Key words. Lizard, Hemidactylus, distribution, Fars Province, southern Iranian Plateau

Citation: Gholamifard, A. and Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 2011. Distribution of Hemidactylus geckos (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) in Fars Province, Southern Iran.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):1-6(e19).

Introduction

The genus Hemidactylus Oken, 1817 comprises about

100 described species and is one of the most speciose

genera of the second most species-rich lizard family in

the world, Gekkonidae, as well as one of the most widely

distributed genera of geckos (Carranza and Arnold 2006;

McMahan and Zug 2007; Sindaco et al. 2009; Javed et

al. 2010). These geckos are distributed over large parts

of Africa, Mediterranean Europe, southern Asia, Ocea-

nia, and tropical America, with the main center of spe-

ciation in Somalia and its adjoining areas (Carranza and

Arnold 2006; Sindaco et al. 2007, 2009; Giri and Bauer

2008). Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Eritrea host more

than 40 species of Hemidactylus, most of which are en-

demics (Sindaco et al. 2007, 2009; Spawls and Largen

2010). However, the great majority of Hemidactylus

species have relatively small distributions confined to

southern Asia and Africa, with only eight species namely

H. brookii, H. bowringii, H. flaviviridis, H. frenatus, H.

garnotii, H. persicus, H. mabouia, and H. turcicus colo-

nizing most of the geographical extent of this genus (Car-

ranza and Arnold 2006; Giri and Bauer 2008; Javed et

al 2010). The gekkotan fauna of Iran includes about 45

species (Anderson 1999; Rastegar-Pouyani et al., 2008).

Among these, Iran hosts four species of Hemidactylus

geckos including: H. persicus J. Anderson, 1872; H.

turcicus (Linnaeus 1758); H. flaviviridis Ruppell, 1840;

and H. robustus Hey den, 1827 (Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

2008). Fars Province (Fig. 1) has one of the most diverse

climates in southern Iran and is of great significance in

Correspondence. 2 Email: nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

terms of amphibian and reptilian fauna owing to geo-

graphical and zoogeographical features. After carrying

out field work in various regions of Fars Province, we

aim here to update the knowledge of the genus Hemidac-

tylus in this region and report our findings.

Materials and methods

The province of Fars covers a land area of about 125,000

km 2 (7.6% of total area of Iran) and is located between

latitudes 27°-31°N and longitudes 50°-55°E. The region

is bordered to the north by Esfahan and by Kohgiluyeh

and Boyer Ahmad Provinces, to the south by Hormozgan

Province, to the west by Bushehr Province, and to the east

by Yazd and Kerman Provinces. The elevational range in

this province extends from 4050 m in the northern parts

(Boll Mountain) to about 450 m in the southern parts,

with a mean of 1491 m. The mean yearly precipitation

ranges from 150 mm to 1200 mm. This survey was car-

ried out from November 2007 to September 2010. The

material collected during this survey consists of 18 speci-

mens of Hemidactylus which are now deposited in the

Collection of the Biology Department of Shiraz Univer-

sity (CBSU), Iran (see material examined). The collected

specimens were kept at low temperature (0°C), fixed in

75% ethanol, and then identified using valid identifica-

tion keys (Leviton et al. 1992; Anderson 1999; Rastegar-

Pouyani et al. 2006). In April 2010, during our field work

on the herpetofauna of southern regions of Fars Province,

a single specimen of Hemidactylus turcicus (Fig. 2) was

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | el 9

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 001

Gholamifard and Rastegar-Pouyani

N

Shir??

• Hemidactylus persicus

■ Hemidactylus flaviviridis

• Hemidactylus turcicus

Figure 1. Location of Fars Province on the Iranian Plateau. The black circle, red quadrangular and blue polygon indi-

cate the previous and new locality records for H. persicus, H. flaviviridis, and H. turcicus, respectively.

Figure 2. One of the three collected specimens of Hemidactylus turcicus from southwestern regions of Fars Province.

Figure 3. A specimen of H. persicus with autotomized

tail from Shiraz, the capital of Fars Province.

Figure 4. A new specimen of H. flaviviridis from south-

west of Fars Province.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | el 9

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

002

Distribution of Hemidactylus geckos

Table 1 . List of the previous (*) and new locality records of Hemidactylus in Fars Province.

Species

Locality

Coordinates

Hemidactylus persicus

Fork, Darab Township

28°17'04.1'

" N, 55°13'24.1" E; ele. 897 m

Hemidactylus persicus

Jahrom, Jahrom Township

28°57' N, 53°57' E, ele. 1050 m

Hemidactylus persicus

Shiraz, Shiraz Township

29°37' N, 52°32' E, ele. 1500 m

Hemidactylus persicus

Kazeroon, Kazeroon Township

29°37'6"

N, 51°39'30" E, ele. 860 m

Hemidactylus persicus*

Koohe Gorm Non Hunting Area,

Jahrom Township

Zareian et al. 2010

Hemidactylus flaviviridis *

Ghaleh Seied, approximately 25 km

northwest of the Parishan Lake,

Kazeroon Township

29°36T5'

' N, 51°32'51" E; ele. 900 m

Hemidactylus flaviviridis

Varavi, Mohr Township

27°27'58.36'

7 N, 53°03'45.03" E; ele. 447 m

Hemidactylus turcicus

Varavi, Mohr Township

27° 28'2 1.12

" N, 53° 03'00.20"E; ele. 421m

Hemidactylus turcicus

Varavi, Mohr Township

27° 28'02.38

" N, 53° 02'55.52"E; ele. 421 m

collected from the city of Varavi, 25 km from the city

of Lamerd, and 15 km from the city of Mohr. The col-

lected specimen was found active at night on the wall of

a house near to a mountainous area. In September 2010,

two additional specimens of H. turcicus were collected

at midday in a house depot, approximately one km from

the previous record. These two specimens were relatively

active during midday, though they were fully active at

night.

Results and discussion

Previous and new records of Hemidactylus in Fars Prov-

ince are given in (Table 1). The newly collected speci-

mens were identified as H. turcicus (Fig. 2), H. persicus

(Fig. 3), and H. flaviviridis (Fig. 4). Among the collected

material three specimens of H. turcicus are reported for

the first time from Fars Province. So far, 14 species of

gekkotan lizards have been reported from Fars Province.

Of these, three species belonging to the genus Hemidac-

tylus (Rastegar-Pouyani et al. 2006, 2008; Gholamifard

et al. 2009, 2010) which are as follows:

Hemidactylus persicus Anderson, 1872.

Persian gecko

The type locality of H. persicus is Iran but no exact local-

ity was given. According to Smith (1935) the type speci-

men is from Shiraz in Fars Province (Anderson 1999).

This species is distributed in Coastal eastern Arabia north

to southern Iran and Iraq, east to Sind and Wazirestan,

Pakistan. In Iran it is known from Ilam, Khuzestan, Cha-

harmahal and Bakhtiari, Kohgiluyeh and Boyer Ahmad,

Fars, Bushehr, Hormozgan, Kerman, and Sistan and

Baluchistan Provinces (Leviton et al. 1992; Anderson

1999; Rastegar-Pouyani et al. 2006, 2007). Hemidacty-

lus persicus has been collected from five different locali-

ties in Fars Province (Table 1). The northernmost records

are from Shiraz and the southernmost records from Forg

(Darab Township), close to Hormozgan Province. Ac-

cording to our data, it seems that of the three species, H.

persicus has the largest distribution range of any Hemi-

dactylus species in Fars Province.

Hemidactylus flaviviridis Ruppell 1840.

Yellow-bellied house gecko

The type specimen of H. flaviviridis is from Massawa Is-

land, Eritrea (Anderson 1999). The yellow-bellied house

gecko, has been reported occurring from the northeastern

African and Arabian shores of the Red Sea and around

the coast of Arabia and Iran, across Pakistan, eastern Af-

ghanistan and northern India to West Bengal and south

to the vicinity of Bombay (Anderson 1999). In Iran, H.

flaviviridis has already been reported from the coastal

towns and villages of southern Baluchistan, Kerman,

Fars, and Khuzestan Provinces (Anderson 1999). Ac-

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | el 9

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 003

Gholamifard and Rastegar-Pouyani

cording to the new provincial divisions, Rastegar-Pouy-

ani et al. (2006) reported this species from the towns and

villages of coastal provinces, including: Sistan and Balu-

chistan, Hormozgan, Bushehr and Khuzestan. Recently,

Gholamifard et al. (2010) recorded H. flaviviridis from

Fars Province and completed the distribution range in

the southern belt of the Iranian Plateau. The previously

recorded specimens of H. flaviviridis are from “Ghaleh

Seied,” approximately 25 km northwest of Parishan

Lake in Kazeroon Township, western Fars Province

(Fig. 1) (Gholamifard et al. 2010). In the present work,

a single specimen of H. flaviviridis was photographed

(Fig. 4) (not collected) on the walls of a house (syntopic

with Cyrtopodion scabrum ), near a mountainous area

northeast of the city of Varavi (Mohr Township), in the

southwestern region of Fars Province (Fig. 1). This new

locality is about 300 km northwesterly from the only pre-

viously published record for Fars.

Hemidactylus turcicus (Linnaeus, 1758).

Mediterranean house gecko

The type locality of this species is “in Oriente,” restricted

to Asiatic Turkey (Leviton et al. 1992; Anderson 1999).

The Mediterranean house gecko is native to countries sur-

rounding the Mediterranean Sea and extends east to India

and south to Somalia. However, H. turcicus has spread to

several New World countries including Cuba, Mexico,

Puerto Rico, Panama, and the United States (Anderson

1999; Farallo et al. 2009). In Iran, it has been collected

primarily in port towns of the Persian Gulf, although

there are scattered inland records (Shahbazan, Qazvin,

Rig Mati) as is also the case in Turkey, Jordan, and Iraq,

but all of these localities lie along trade routes (Ander-

son 1999). In Iran, this species has been recorded from

Sistan and Baluchistan, Kerman, Hormozgan, Bush-

ehr, Khuzestan, Ilam, and Qazvin Provinces (Rastegar-

Pouyani et al. 2006). Populations of this species in Iran

are considered as H. t. turcicus (Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

2006, 2008). Both H. turcicus and H. robustus have been

recorded for the herpetofauna of Iran by Rastegar-Pouy-

ani et al. (2008); however, populations of H. turcicus in

Iran are referred as H. robustus by Bauer et al. (2006) as

well as Sindaco and Jeremcenko (2008). Hemidactylus

robustus, of coastal Northeast Africa and Arabia, Iran and

Pakistan (Baha El Din 2005; Bauer et al. 2006; Carranza

and Arnold 2006), has often been regarded as conspecific

with H. turcicus, and its complex nomenclatorial his-

tory is most recently reviewed by Moravec and Bohme

(1997). Carranza and Arnold (2006) in their molecular

study confirmed separate status of both taxa. Accord-

ing to their study, H. robustus populations from Egypt

and the United Arab Emirates show approximately 14%

genetic divergence from H. turcicus, and the two taxa

have recently been found in sympatry on the Red Sea

coast of Egypt (Baha el Din 2005). Iran probably hosts

both H. turcicus and H. robustus. Presumably, popula-

tions of H. turcicus expanded their distributional range

from their area of origin, probably in the Mediterranean

region, to northwest of Iran and expanded, or were intro-

duced into other regions of Iran in different ways, and H.

robustus was introduced via Arabian Peninsula to Iran

and expanded in different directions, as its distribution

range is completed in the southern belt of the Iranian

Plateau. Baha El Din (2005) stated that human activity

highly influenced the current distribution pattern of H.

robustus. As well, Caravan routes had spread H. turcicus-

like geckos through much of the Middle East (Anderson

1999). However, the presence and definition of exact dis-

tributional ranges of these species, in Iran, needs more

material and DNA analyses. According to Moravec and

Bohme (1997), H. robustus differs markedly from H. t.

turcicus in its robust head, body, and tail, in very small

and weakly keeled tail tubercles and in having an incon-

spicuous color pattern. According to this study, it seems

that H. turcicus has a smaller distribution range than its

congeners in Fars Province.

Presumable routes of distribution of

Hemidactylus species in Fars Province

Based on the available evidence, H. flaviviridis has been

reported only from the northwestern regions of Fars

Province (Gholamifard et al. 2010). In this survey, as

mentioned above, it was recorded from a new locality in

the southwestern Fars Province. Since these localities are

near the borders with Bushehr Province, and as one of the

previously recorded localities of this species, probably

southern and western parts of Fars Province are within

the natural distributional range of this lizard. As another

possible mechanism of distribution, H. flaviviridis could

have been distributed to Fars Province incidentally via

human agency or by destruction and reduction of geo-

graphical barriers. The possible mechanisms of distribu-

tion, mentioned above, may also be considered for H.

tursicus. Probably this species colonized Fars Province

or expanded its distributional range from the southern

provinces (Bushehr and Hormozgan Provinces). Among

the three studied taxa here, H. persicus has the widest

range in Fars Province. The type locality of this spe-

cies is Iran, but no exact locality was given. Terra typica

probably is near Bushehr, Bushehr Province (Leviton et

al. 1992; Anderson 1999), and restricted to Shiraz, Fars

Province by Smith (1935). With regard to these ambi-

guities, as one of the possible mechanisms of distribu-

tion, H. persicus could have expanded its range into Fars

Province from Bushehr Province (southwest) or, alter-

natively, it originated in Fars Province and expanded its

range into neighboring provinces in different directions.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | el 9

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 004

Distribution of Hemidactylus geckos

Acknowledgments. — We thank H. R. Esmaeili and E.

Faraj Zadeh for their valuable help during field work. We

also thank the authorities of Shiraz University for finan-

cial support.

References

Anderson, S. C. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Contributions

to Herpetology 15:1-442.

Baha El Din, S. M. 2005. An overview of Egyptian spe-

cies of Hemidactylus (Gekkonidae) with the descrip-

tion of a new species from the high mountains of

South Sinai. Zoology in the Middle East 34:11-26.

Bauer, A. M., Jackman, T., Greenbaum, E., and Papen-

fuss, T. J. 2006. Confirmation of the occurrence of

Hemidactylus robustus Heyden, 1827 (Reptilia: Gek-

konidae) in Iran and Pakistan. Zoology in the Middle

East 39:59-62.

Carranza, S. and Arnold, E. N. 2006. Systematics, bio-

geography, and evolution of Hemidactylus geckos

(Reptilia: Gekkonidae) elucidated using mitochon-

drial DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and

Evolution 38:531-545.

Farallo, V. R., Swanson, R. L., Hood, G. R., Troy, J. R.,

and Forstner, M. R. J. 2009. New county records for

the Mediterranean house gecko (. Hemidactylus turci-

cus) in Central Texas, with comments on human-me-

diated dispersal. Applied Herpetology 6:196-198.

Gholamifard, A., Esmaeili, H. R., and Kami, H. G. 2009.

First record of Blanford’s semaphore gecko, Pristurus

rupestris Blanford, 1874 (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from

Fars Province, Iran. Iranian Journal of Animal Bio-

systematics 5(2):91-93.

Gholamifard, A., Gholamhosseini, A., Rastegar-Pouy-

ani, N., Esmaeili, H. R., and Kami, H. G. 2010. First

Records of Tropiocolotes steudneri Peters, 1869 and

Hemidactylus flaviviridis Ruppell, 1840 (Sauria: Gek-

konidae) from Fars Province, Iran. Asian Herpetolog-

ical Research l(l):61-63.

Giri, V. B. and Bauer, A. M. 2008. A new ground-dwell-

ing Hemidactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Ma-

harashtra, with a key to the Hemidactylus of India.

Zootaxa 1700:21-34.

Javed, S. M. M., Srinivasulu, C., Lakshmi Rao, K.,

Rases wari, T., and Tampal, F. 2010. A divergent

population of Hemidactylus frenatus Dumeril & Bi-

bron, 1836 (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) from the northern

Eastern Ghats, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa

2(10):1205-1213.

Largen, M. and Spawls, S. 2010. The Amphibians and

Reptiles of Ethiopia and Eritrea. Edition Chimaira,

Frankfurt, Octavo. 687 p.

Leviton, A. E., Anderson, S. C., Adler, K., and Minton,

S. A. 1992. Handbook to Middle East Amphibians and

Reptiles. Society for the Study of Amphibians and

Reptiles, Contributions to Herpetology 8:1-252.

McMahan, C. D. and Zug, G. R. 2007. Burmese Hemi-

dactylus (Reptilia, Squamata, Gekkonidae): geo-

graphic variation in the morphology of Hemidactylus

bowringii in Myanmar and Yunnan, China. Proceed-

ings of the California Academy of Sciences, Series 4,

58(24):485-509.

Moravec, J. and Bohme, W. 1997. A new subspecies of

the Mediterranean gecko, Hemidactylus turcicus from

the Syrian lava desert (Squamata: Sauria: Gekkoni-

dae). Herpetozoa 10 (3/4): 121-128.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Johari, M., and Parsa, H. 2006.

Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1: Lizards.

First edition. Iran, Razi University Publishing. 286 p.

(In Farsi).

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Johari, M., and Rastegar-Pouyani,

E. 2007. Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume

1: Lizards. Second edition. Iran, Razi University Pub-

lishing. 296 p. (In Farsi).

Rastegar-Pouyani, N, Kami, H. G., Rajabizadeh, M.,

Shafiei, S., and Anderson, S. C. 2008. Annotated

checklist of amphibians and reptiles of Iran. Iranian

Journal of Animal Biosystematics 4(l):43-66.

Sindaco, R., Razzetti, E., Ziliani, U., Wasonga, V., Caru-

gati, C., and Fasola, M. 2007. A new species of Hemi-

dactylus from Lake Turkana, Northern Kenya (Squa-

mata: Gekkonidae). Acta Herpetologica 2(l):37-48.

Sindaco, R., Ziliani, U., Razzetti, E., Carugati, C.,

Grieco, C., Pupin, F., Al-Aseily, B. A., Pella, F., and

Fasola, M. 2009. A misunderstood new gecko of the

genus Hemidactylus from Socotra Island, Yemen

(Reptilia: Squamata: Gekkonidae). Acta Herpetolica

4(l):83-98.

Sindaco, R. and Jeremcenko, V. K. 2008. The Reptiles of

the Western Palearctic. Annotated Checklist and Dis-

tributional Atlas of the Turtles, Crocodiles, Amphis-

baenians and Lizards of Europe, North Africa, Middle

East and Central Asia. Volume I. Monografie della

Societas Herpetologica Italica. Edizioni Belvedere,

Latina, Italy. 579 p.

Smith, M. A. 1935. Reptilia and Amphibia. Volume 2.

Sauria. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon

and Burma. Taylor and Francis, London, England,

United Kingdom. 440 p.

Zareian, H., Esmaeili, H. R., Gholamhosseini, A., Teimo-

ri, A., Zohrabi, H., and Kami, H. G. 2010. A prelimi-

nary study on the herpetofauna of Gorm mountain

non-hunting area in Fars Province. Journal of Tax-

onomy and Biosystematics 1(1): 1-8. (In Farsi).

Manuscript received: 5 January 2011

Accepted: 14 March 2011

Published: 18 May 2011

Final version: 13 September 2011

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 005

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | el 9

Appendix

Material examined

Gholamifard and Rastegar-Pouyani

Hemidactylus persicus (n= 12)

CBSU R014, R015: Iran, Fars Prov., SE Darab, Fork

[28°17’04.1” N, 55°13’24.1” E, alt. 897 m]. CBSU 4217:

Iran, Fars Prov., Jahrom [28°57’ N, 53°57’ E|. CBSU

5395, 8056.

R009: Iran, Fars Prov., Shiraz [29°37’ N, 52°32’ E].

CBSU 8055: Iran, Fars Prov., Kazeroon [29°37’6” N,

51°39’30” E]. CBSU 8068, 8071, 8083, 8091, B628

(Re. ex.): Iran, Fars Prov., NW Jahrom Township, Koohe

Gonn non-Hunting Area [28°33' N, 53°6' E].

Hemidactylus turcicus (n= 3)

CBSU R081- 83: Iran, Fars Prov., 25 km NW of Famerd,

Varavi [27° 28’ N, 53° 03’ E, ele. 421 m].

Hemidactylus flaviviridis (n= 3)

AM Gholamifard earned his B.S. in Animal Biology from

the Shahed University of Tehran, Iran, 2005 and his M.S.

in Animal Biosystematics from Shiraz University, Shiraz,

Iran in 2009, where he studied the reproductive biology

of the endemic Iranian cyprinid, Cyprinion tenuiradius

Heckel, 1849 under the advisement of Dr. Hamid Reza

Esmaeili. His research interests include taxonomy, ecol-

ogy, biology, conservation, and phylogeography.

CBSU B636, R004, R044: Iran, Fars Prov., Kazer-

oon, Ghaleh Seied village, 25 km NW Parishan Fake

[29°36'15” N, 51°32'51" E, ele. 900 m].

Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani earned his B.S. in Zoology

from Razi University Kermanshah, Iran in 1986 and his

M.S. in Zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran in

1991 , where he studied herpetology with the agamids as

the central object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg

University, Sweden in 1994 under the advisement of Pro-

fessor Goran Nilson and graduated in 1999, working on

taxonomy and biogeography of Iranian Plateau agamids

with Trapelus as the main object. His research interests

include taxonomy and biogeography of the Iranian Pla-

teau, the Middle East and Central Asian herpetofauna.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | el 9

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

006

of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in

any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):7-1 0.

On the occurrence of ectoparasite ticks on Trachylepis and

Eumeces (Reptilia: Scincidae) in Iran

HIVA FAIZI’, NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI 2 , AND REZA YARANI 3

i, 2 , 3 Department of Biology Faculty of Science, Razi University, 67149 Kermanshah, IRAN

Abstract. — During field work on the lizards of the Iranian Plateau, it was noticed that some of the

lizard specimens were infected by various species of ectoparasitic ticks. In this study the ecto-

parasites of the scincid lizards of western Iranian Plateau (Zagros Mountains) with regards to their

respective parasite loads, especially in Trachylepis aurata transcaucasica Chernov 1926, are dis-

cussed and compared with the other taxa of the Scincidae, e.g., Eumeces schneideri princeps Eich-

wald, 1839. A total of 70 adult lizards including 12 specimens of E. e. princeps and 58 specimens of

T. a. transcaucasica were examined for tick infection. For the first time, we identified a common tick,

Haemaphysalis parvum (Ixodidae), in the two above-mentioned lizard taxa. Since prevalence was

not 100%, in general, adult lizards host higher tick loads than juveniles and the number of ectopara-

sites found on abdominal and axial regions in all the infected lizards was between 3-5 per infected

host.

Key words. Lizards, ectoparasites, Scincidae, Ixodidae, Haemaphysalis parva, Iranian Plateau

Citation: Hiva, F., Rastegar-Pouyani, N., and Yarani, R. 2011 . On the occurrence of ectoparasite ticks on Trachylepis and Eumeces (Reptilia: Scincidae)

in Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):7-10(e20).

Introduction

Parasites comprise a vast diversity of organisms that are

specifically adapted to living in or on another living or-

ganism (the host). Over 50% of described organisms can

be classified as parasites (Price 1980). Reptiles may be

infested with a wide variety of ectoparasites, primarily

mites and ticks. The study of parasites’ effects on their

hosts is necessary for conservation of host populations as

is an understanding of host ecology. There have been no

parasitological studies of lizards in Iran up to now. Blood

parasites and gastrointestinal helminthes in different spe-

cies of lizards have been studied. (Amo et al. 2004, 2005;

Ibrahimm et al. 2005). Ticks of the genera Amblyomma

and Aponomma are most commonly found infesting

reptiles (McCracken 1994). Lizards are subjected to a

number of parasites and unfortunately this has been one

of the least studied areas of herpetology, at least in Iran.

Several studies have reported that lizard host numbers

greatly influence the densities and life histories of their

acarine parasites (Norval 1975; Bull 1978; Wilson et al.

1985), and their importance as a critical determinant of

lizard distributions is unlikely. The primary a im of this

study is to examine and study the ectoparasites of the two

scincid lizards, Trachylepis aurata transcaucasica and

Eumeces schneideri princeps. The identified tick species

Correspondence. 2 Email: nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

in our materials, Haemaphysalis parva Neumann, 1908,

belongs to the family Ixodidae.

Materials and methods

This study was carried out during spring and summer

2003-2005 in the western regions of the Iranian Plateau,

Zagros Mountains (Fig. 1). In this study we collected 70

lizard specimens belonging to both Trachylepis and Eu-

meces in rocky mountains with small shrubs in the form

of grassy and herbaceous steppes, and wooded areas

where lizards were captured included the common oak

Quercus libani and Q. boissieri. We examined the ecto-

parasites of lizards with regard to their respective para-

site loads. The collected ticks were first photographed

in lateral, dorsal, and ventral views using an Olympus

loop (Model: SzX12, Japan). Then, by cooperation with

the parasitology lab of the faculty of veterinary scienc-

es, Tehran University, the parasites were identified. The

identification of parasites was done by using the identifi-

cation key of Delpy (1938) and Walker et al. (2003). All

of the specimens were preserved 70% alcohol and depos-

ited in the collection of the Razi University Zoological

Museum (RUZM).

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e20

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 007

Faizi, Rastegar-Pouyani, and Yarani

Figure 1. Map of sampling localities (grey areas) for the collected parasites ( Haemaphysalis parva ). (1) Ghotur, (2)

Bukan, (3) Baneh, (4) Marivan, (5) Sarvabad, (6) Esalm Abad-e-Gharb, (7) Kermanshah, (8) Poldokhtar, (9) Dezful

and Andimeshk, (10) Masjed solaiman and Haft Gel.

Figure 2. Haemaphysalis parva (Family: Ixodidae), collected from the underarm region of Trachylepis aurata

transcaucasica and Eumeces schneideri princeps ; dorsal (A) and ventral (B) views.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e20

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 008

Ticks on Trachylepis and Eumeces

Table 1. Epidemiological indexes of Haemaphysalis parva in examined lizards (for details refer to text).

Host species

Class host

stage

No. of examined

specimens

No. of infected

specimens

No. of of ticks on

each individual

Prevalence

(%)

Mean

intensity

Mean

abundance

E. schneideri

Adult

9

5

3-5

55.5

3.67

18.35

(n= 12)

Juvenile

3

1

1-3

33.3

1.33

1

T. a. transcaucasica

Adult

40

18

3-5

45

3.38

60.84

{n= 58)

Juvenile

18

7

1-3

38.8

1.78

12.46

Results

The number of ectoparasites found on abdominal and

axial regions in lizards was between 3-5 for all the in-

vestigated lizard species e.g., E. schneideri and T. a.

transcaucasica. The number of larvae, nymphs, males,

and females of collected parasites were not considered.

Prevalence and infection intensity were higher in adults,

and also in larger lizards, than in juvenile lizards (Table

1). In this table, prevalence is expressed in percentage

and is the number of individuals of a host species in-

fected with a particular parasite species. Mean intensity

is the arithmetic mean, of the number of individuals of

a parasite species per host infected, and is counted for

each hosted individual (adult or juvenile of each species).

Mean abundance is the arithmetic mean, of the number

of individuals of a parasite species per host category

examined, and was counted for each examined hosted

group (in adults or juveniles of each species). These two

taxa host a common tick belonging to the genus Haema-

physalis (Family Ixodidae), identified as H. parva (Fig.

2, A and B).

Discussion

This parasitic tick found on lizards has been recorded

for the first time in the western Iranian lizard’s fauna.

As well, from the view point of geographic distribution,

Haemaphysalis parva has never been recorded from Ker-

manshah, Lorestan and Khuzestan Provinces (Telmadar-

rai et al. 2004).

In our examined specimens, adult lizards were usu-

ally carrying greater tick loads than juveniles. Because

most parasitological studies in Iran have been carried

out by veterinary sections of universities and institutes,

almost all the available data in this field are restricted

to ticks of paramount importance from view points of

health and veterinary medicine, not in the case of lizards,

snakes, turtles, and amphibians but for domestic animals.

Accordingly, there are records of these ticks on cattle,

but not on amphibians and reptiles (Nabian, et al. 2007).

Our study is one of the first attempts to determine the

ectoparasitic ticks on some lizards of the Iranian Plateau;

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 009

the exact degree of impact, of these ticks on their ecto-

thermic hosts, has yet to be revealed. Based on Rahbari et

al, 2007, the record is rare for western parts of Iran, and

mainly for Kurdistan and West Azerbaijan Provinces. H.

parva is reported from the Caspian Sea area, in moun-

tainous and semidesert zones, the immature stages are

frequently found on small rodents such as social voles

( Microtus socialis; Filopova et al. 1976).

Acknowledgments. — We wish to thank the Razi Uni-

versity authorities (Kermanshah) for their logistic and

financial support during field work in western regions of

the Iranian Plateau. We also thank Dr. Nabian and Dr.

Rahbari (Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Veteri-

nary Medicine, University of Tehran, Iran) for examina-

tion and identification of ticks. We also thank two un-

identified reviewers for improvements on the manuscript.

References

Amo, L., Lopez, R, and Martin, J. 2004. Prevalence and

intensity of haemogregarinid blood parasites in a pop-

ulation of the Iberian rock lizard, Lacerta monticola.

Parasitology Research 94(4):290-293.

Amo, L., Lopez, R, and Martin, J. 2005. Prevalence and

intensity of haemogregarine blood parasites and their

mite vectors in the common wall lizard, Podarcis mu-

ralis. Parasitology Research 96(6) : 3 7 8-3 8 1 .

Bull, C. 1978. Dispersal of the Australian reptile tick

Aponomma hydrosauri by host movement. Australian

Journal of Zoology 26:(2):305-322.

Delpy, L. 1938. Les especes iranienes du genre Haema-

physalis Koch 1844. Annales de Parasitologie Hu-

maine et Comparee (Paris) 16:1.

Filopova, N. A., Neronov, V. M., and Azad, F. 1976. Data

on Ixodid tick fauna (Acarina: Ixodidae) of small

mammals of Iran. Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie

55(2):467-479. (In Russian).

Ibrahim, H. M., Fadiel, M. M., and Nair, G. A. 2005.

Gastrointestinal helminths of the lizard Chalcides

ocellatus from Benghazi, Libya. Journal of Helmin-

thology 79(l):35-39.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e20

Faizi, Rastegar-Pouyani, and Yarani

McCracken, H. 1994. Husbandry and diseases of captive

reptiles, p. 461-547 in Wildlife. The Post Graduate

Committee in Veterinary Science Proceedings 233.

Nabian, S., Rahbari, S., Shayan, P., and Haddadzadeh,

H. 2007. Current status of tick fauna in north of Iran.

Iranian Journal of Parasitology 2(1): 12-17.

Norval, R. 1975. Studies on the ecology of Amblyomma

marmoreum Koch 1844 (Acarina: Ixodidae). Journal

of Parasitology 61:(4)737-742.

Price, P. 1980. Evolutionary Biology of Parasites. Princ-

eton University Press, Princeton. 256 p.

Rahbari, S., Nabian, S., and Shayan, P. 2007. Status of

Haemaphysalis tick infestation in domestic ruminants

in Iran. Korean Journal of Parasitology 45(2): 129-

132.

Telmadarrai, Z., Bahrami, A., and Vatandoost, H. 2004.

A survey on fauna of ticks in west Azerbaijan prov-

ince, Iran. Iranian Journal of Public Health 33(4) : 65-

69.

Walker, A. R., Bouattour, A., Camicas, J. L., Estrada, P.

A., Horak, I. G., Latif, A., Pegram, R. G., and Pres-

ton, P.M. 2003. Ticks of Domestic Animals in Africa:

a guide to identification of species. Biosience Reports,

United Kingdom. 157 p.

Wilson, M., Adler, G., and Spilman, A. 1985. Correlation

between abundance of deer and that of the deer tick,

Ixodes dammini (Acari: Ixodidae). Annals of the Ento-

mological Society of America 78:(2)172-176.

Manuscript received: 04 January 2011

Accepted: 12 April 2011

Published: 23 August 2011

Final version: 07 September 2011

Hiva Faizi earned his B.Sc. in plant biology from Sha-

hid Beheshti University (SBU) and his M.Sc. in Animal

Biosystematics from Razi University. He is currently em-

ployed as a specialist in ecological studies and environ-

ment at Mahab Ghodss Consulting Engineering Com-

pany. His special interests are morphology, systematics,

taxonomy, and biogeography of the Iranian Plateau with

special reference to reptiles and amphibians. During his

M.Sc. he studied the genus Trachylepis in Iran from dif-

ferent perspectives, including morphology, osteology,

parasitology, and systematics of Trachylepis aurata trans-

caucasica. Hiva has described a new species of Asaccus

lizard, Asaccus kurdistanensis with his supervisor Prof.

Nasrulla Rastegar-Pouyani and his collaborator Prof.

Goran Nilson. Hiva has also studied the near eastern fire

salamander, Salamandra infraimmaculata seminovi, from

Kurdistan province, western Iran. Hiva is collecting data

and samples of Neurergus microspilotus and Neurergus

kaiseri to start a Ph.D. project on population genetics and

genetic diversity of the two previously mentioned species.

Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani earned his B.S. in Zoology

from Razi University Kermanshah, Iran in 1986 and his

M.S. in Zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran in

1991 , where he studied herpetology with the agamids as

the central object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg

University, Sweden in 1994 under the advisement of Pro-

fessor Goran Nilson and graduated in 1999, working on

taxonomy and biogeography of Iranian Plateau agamids

with Trapelus as the main object. His research interests

include taxonomy and biogeography of the Iranian Pla-

teau, the Middle East and Central Asian herpetofauna.

Reza Yarani earned his B.Sc. in Animal Biology in 2009

from Razi University of Kermanshah, Iran. Reza is now

working toward a masters degree in cellular and molecu-

lar biology at Razi University, as well as working at the

Medical Biology Research Center, where he is working

on isolation and culture of skin cells, especially, melano-

cyctes and multipotent skin-derived precusor stem cells.

In addition, he works on actinidin isolation and purification

as a good protease for cell isolation. Furthermore, Reza

is working on anti-angiogentic effects of various drugs

and herbs. His research interests include cell culture,

cancer, angiogenesis, stem cell, pathology, and cellular

and molecular research.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e20

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 010

terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction

in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):11-14.

SHORT COMMUNICATION

A new record of Eremias montanus Rastegar-Pouyani &

Rastegar-Pouyani, 2001 (Sauria: Lacertidae) from Kurdistan

Province, Western Iran

ZAHED BAHMANI 1 , NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI 2 AND AHMAD GHARZI 1

department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Lorestan University, Khoramabad, IRAN

department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, Kermanshah, IRAN

Abstract . — During field work in western regions of the Iranian Plateau in the Zagros Mountains, a

single specimen belonging to the genus and subgenus Eremias Fitzinger, 1834 was collected from

the highlands of Badr and Parishan (at about 2466 m elevation) in south of the city of Qorveh, Kurd-

istan Province, western Iran (47°, 47’ E; 35°, 04’ N) in July 2010. This is the first record of occurrence

of Eremias (Eremias) montanus from Kurdistan Province.

Key words. Lacertidae, Eremias ( Eremias ) montanus , new record, Qorveh, Kurdistan Province, Iranian plateau,

Zagros Mountains

Citation: Bahmani, Z., Rastegar-Pouyani, N., and Gharzi, A. 2011 . A new record of Eremias montanus Rastegar-Pouyani & Rastegar-Pouyani, 2001

(Sauria: Lacertidae) from Kurdistan Province, Western Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1 ):1 1 -1 4(e21 ).

The lacertid lizards of the genus Eremias Fitzinger, 1834,

encompass about 37 species of mostly sand, steppe, and

desert-dwelling lizards which are distributed from north-

ern China, Mongolia, Korea, Central and southwest Asia

to southeastern Europe (Rastegar-Pouyani and Nilson

1997; Anderson 1999). This genus is Central Asian in

its relationships and affinities (Szczerbak 1974). About

16 species from this genus occur on the Iranian Plateau,

mostly in northern, central, and eastern regions (Ras-

tegar-Pouyani and Nilson 1997; Rastegar-Pouyani and

Rastegar-Pouyani 2001; Anderson 1999).

As a member of this genus, Eremias ( Eremias ) mon-

tanus is distributed in western Iran, in Kermanshah and

Hamadan Provinces (Rastegar-Pouyani and Rastegar-

Pouyani 2001, 2005; Rastegar-Pouyani, N. et al. 2006,

2007; Rastegar-Pouyani, E. et al. 2009).

So far, there are no further records of occurrence of

Eremias (Eremias) montanus in other regions of the Za-

gros Mountains, including Kurdistan Province, which is

located on the western periphery of the Iranian Plateau,

bordered by Iraq on the west (Fig. 1). In July 2010, we

collected a single specimen of this taxon from the high-

lands of southern Kurdistan Province from the Badr and

Parishan region, about 20 km south of Qorveh city near

the Aminabad village (47°, 47’ E; 35°, 04’ N; 2466 m).

The collected specimen was active during the day-

time, foraging on rocks and in rock crevices as well as

Correspondence. 2 Email: nasrullah.r@gmail.com

under bushes. The habitat is an upland area, character-

ized by steppe vegetation, being covered with snow from

late November until late March (in the snow covered

years) (Fig. 2).

Measurements in millimeters ( mm ) and pholidotic

characters, as well as color pattern of the collected speci-

men, are as follows:

Snout- vent length (SVL) 59.5; tail length 95.5;

axilla-groin distance 26; foreleg length 22.8; hind leg

length 37.4; head length 20; head width 11; head height

5.27; dorsal scales slightly converging posteriorly with

65 small granular scales across middle of dorsum; ven-

ter with 13-14 longitudinal and 27-28 transverse rows of

plates; subocular reaches mouth edge; one frontonasal;

two supraoculars which are not completely separated

from frontal and frontoparietals; 14 scales across widest

part of venter; lower surface of the fourth finger contain-

ing two rows of subdigital scales; the lateral scales of

the fourth finger without carinate lamellae; 25-26 scales

on the 11th annulus of the tail; 8-9 upperlabials, 4-5 of

which anterior to subocular; 7-8 lower labials; two supra-

oculars; 6-7 supracilliaries; 20-20 femoral pores, sepa-

rated by three scales; 11-12 collars; five pairs of submax-

illary shields.

Coloration: the collected specimen is an adult male,

dorsum dark-brown almost without spots and ocelli, in-

terrupted by five light longitudinal stripes, the vertebral

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e21

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org oil

Bahmani et al.

46 48

Figure 1. The red square is the location of the newly-collected specimen of E. ( Eremias ) montanus in Kurdistan prov-

ince.

Figure 2. The natural habitat of Eremias ( Eremias ) montanus (new record) in Badr and Parishan highlands, at about

2466 m elevation.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e21

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 012

A new record of Eremias montanus

Figure 3. Dorsal view of the collected specimen of Eremias ( Eremias ) montanus.

stripe bifurcating on the nape, a single paravertebral

stripe on each side and two dorsolateral stripes contain-

ing light spots; venter dirty- white; the proximal lower

caudal region being whitish-gray, becoming lighter dis-

tally. The collected specimen is preserved in 75% alcohol

and is deposited at the collection of the Razi University

Zoological Museum (RUZM-LE30.7) (Fig. 3).

Remarks: Eremias {Eremias) montanus was first de-

scribed in 2001 from the highlands of Kermanshah Prov-

ince, western Iran at an elevation of more than 2000 m

(Rastegar-Pouyani and Rastegar-Pouyani 2001). This liz-

ard belongs to the mountainous radiation of the Eremias

persica species complex inhabiting high elevations of the

Zagros Mountains (Rastegar-Pouyani, E. et al 2009). In

2005, Rastegar-Pouyani and Rastegar-Pouyani reported

a new and unknown population of Eremias from the high

elevations (about 2800 m above sea level) of the Alvand

Mountains in Hamedan Province. These authors tenta-

tively named the new population as Eremias novo (Ras-

tegar-Pouyani and Rastegar-Pouyani 2005). With further

morphological and molecular studies it was shown that

this new population is conspecific with Eremias {Eremi-

as) montanus (Rastegar-Pouyani, E. et al. 2009). Thus,

the original range of the species extended into highlands

of Hamedan Province, some 175 km toward the south.

Acknowledgments. — We thank Hiwa Faizi, Dr. Ah-

madi, and Taher Soltani for their kind cooperation during

field work in western Iran.

References

Anderson, S. C. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Contributions

to Herpetology 15:1-442.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 013

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Johari, M., and Parsa, H. 2006.

Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1: Lizards.

First edition. Iran, Razi University Publishing. 286 p.

(In Farsi).

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Johari, M., and Rastegar-Pouyani,

E. 2007. Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume

1: Lizards. Second edition. Iran, Razi University Pub-

lishing. 296 p. (In Farsi).

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. and Nilson, N. 1997. A new spe-

cies of Eremias (Sauria: Lacertidae) from Fars Prov-

ince, South-Central Iran. Russian Journal of Herpe-

tology 4{2):94-10l.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. and Rastegar-Pouyani, E. 2001.

A new species of Eremias (Sauria: Lacertidae) from

highlands of Kermanshah Province, western Iran. Asi-

atic Herpetological Research 9:107-112.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. and Rastegar-Pouyani, E. 2005.

A new form of Eremias from Alvand Mountains,

Hamedan Province, Western Iran. Iranian Journal of

Animal Biosystematics 1(1): 14-20.

Rastegar-Pouyani, E., Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Kazemi

Noureini, S., Joger, U., and Wink, M. 2010. Molecular

phylogeny of the Eremias persica complex of the Ira-

nian plateau (Reptilia: Lacertidae), based on mtDNA

sequences. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society

158(3):641-660.

Szczerbak, N. N. 1974. Yaschurki Palearcktiki [ The Pa-

learctic Desert Lizards]. Akadeimya Nauk Ukrain-

skoi SSR Institut Zoologii. Naukova Dumka, Kiev,

Ukraine. 92 photos, 296 p. (In Russian).

Manuscript received: 02 February 2011

Accepted: 19 February 2011

Revised: 23 March 2011

Published: 30 August 2011

Final version: 05 September 2011

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e21

Bahmani et al.

Zahed Bahmani earned his B.Sc. in General Biology from

Tabriz University of Eastern Azarbaijan Province, Iran, in

1996. Zahed is presently progressing toward an M.Sc.

degree in Animal Biosystematics at Lorestan University,

Khoramabad, Iran. His research thesis investigates the

lizard fauna of Kurdestan Province, Iran under the ad-

visement of Dr. Ahamd Gharezi and Professor Nasrullah

Rastegar-Pouyani. Zahed’s research interests include

taxonomy, ecology, conservation, and phylogeography.

Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani earned his B.S. in Zoology

from Razi University Kermanshah, Iran in 1986 and his

M.S. in Zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran in

1991 , where he studied herpetology with the agamids as

the central object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg

University, Sweden in 1994 under the advisement of Pro-

fessor Goran Nilson and graduated in 1999, working on

taxonomy and biogeography of Iranian Plateau agamids

with Trapelus as the main object. His research interests

include taxonomy and biogeography of the Iranian Pla-

teau, the Middle East and Central Asian herpetofauna.

Ahmad Gharzi graduated with an M.Sc. degree in Animal

Biology from Tehran University, where he worked on liz-

ard faunas of eastern Iran. Ahmad later received a Ph.D.

from Durham University, UK, in Developmental Biology

and is now an academic staff at Lorestan University, Iran.

His interests involve different aspects of biology including

histology, developmental biology, and taxonomy.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e21

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 014

the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any

medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):1 5-22.

Sexual dimorphism in Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus

(Sauria: Agamidae) with notes on the natural history

BEHZAD FATHINIA 1 AND NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI' 2

1 Department of Biology Faculty of Science, Razi University, 67149 Kermanshah, IRAN

Abstract .— We studied sexual dimorphism and some aspects of natural history and behavior of

the Persian agama ( Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus) from a population in Dehloran Township, Ham

Province, southwestern Iran. Findings were obtained by personal observations and using SPSS 13

statistical package. Based on the analyses, some characters show differences between males and

females. All findings for T. ruderatus in this paper are reported for the first time.

Key words. Agamidae, Trapelus ruderatus, statistical analyses, Ilam, Iran, dichromatism, sexual selection, natural

selection

Citation: Fathinia, B. and Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 2011 . Sexual dimorphism in Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus (Sauria: Agamidae) with notes on the natural

history. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):15-22(e22).

Introduction

The genus Trapelus Cuvier, 1816, comprises four species

on the Iranian Plateau as follows: T. agilis (Olivier 1804),

T. lessonae (De Filippi 1865), T. ruderatus (Blanford

1881) ( sensu Rastegar-Pouyani 2000) and T. megalonyx

(Gunther 1865). The distribution of T. ruderatus in Iran

is limited to southern and southwestern regions of the

Iranian Plateau (Anderson 1999; Rastegar-Pouyani 2000;

Fathinia 2007; Rastegar-Pouyani et al. 2008). Among the

Iranian species of the genus Trapelus the study of sexual

dimorphism has already been carried out in Trapelus

agilis (Rastegar-Pouyani 2005). In this relation, study

of sexual dimorphism, coloration and color pattern, and

natural history of the Persian agama ( Trapelus ruderatus)

is of interest and importance.

As genetic correlation between the sexes is very

high for most morphological traits, it is often believed

that long periods of time are required to overcome ge-

netic constraints and to evolve sexually dimorphic mor-

phological traits (e.g., Lande 1980; Hedrick and Temeles

1989; Kratochvfl et al. 2003). Moreover, the evolution of

sexual dimorphism may be limited by physiological and

ecological constraints as well (Kratochvfl et al. 2003).

In agamid lizards, both sexual selection and natural

selection influence the form of dimorphism in secondary

sexual traits (Stuart-Fox and Ord 2004). Sexual dimor-

phism (SD) in body shape as well as overall body size

is a widespread and common trait among animals (Ji et

al. 2006; Kaliontzopoulou et al. 2007), most species be-

ing dimorphic rather than monomorphic (Schoener 1977;

Mouton and van Wyk 1993; Andersson 1994). Different

evolutionary mechanisms have been proposed for the de-

Correspondence. 2 Email: nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

velopment of sexual dimorphism in various animal taxa.

However, most of these mechanisms can be summarized

by three major forces differentially acting on males and

females of a population: sexual selection, fecundity, and

natural selection (Olsson et al. 2002; Cox et al. 2003).

In many taxa, competition between males over resources

characteristically produces an asymmetry in body size

between the sexes. Thus, the advantages of larger size for

males typically results in sexual size dimorphism (SSD)

(Terry et al. 2001). Sexual selection acts on competi-

tion between males, often resulting in larger body size

and in larger sizes of morphological structures related to

fight (Darwin 1874; Verrastro 2004). Anderson and Vitt

(1990) suggest that the causes of sexual dimorphism in

size could be related to several factors: competition be-

tween males; differential mortality between sexes due to

differences in longevity; larger amount of energy allo-

cated by females for reproduction; males are more active

because they need to search for females and thus present

a larger predation risk.

In this paper, the patterns of sexual dimorphism in

the Persian agama, T. ruderatus, in relation to environ-

mental issues are discussed.

Materials and methods

This survey was carried out in Dehloran area at an eleva-

tion of 202 m, approximately 5 km around the city of De-

hloran, Ilam Province. The coordinates of study site are

33.5°39'N, and 45°18'E. The information was accessed

by a GPS model Etrix. The study area has an annual pre-

cipitation of 244.2 mm, and an annual average maximum

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 015

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Fathenia and Rastegar-Pouyani

SEX

* male

* female

Figure 1 (left). Dorsal view of a male (right) and a female

(left) of Trapelus r. ruderatus.

Figure 2 (above). Ordination of the individual males and

females of Trapelus r. ruderatus on the first two princi-

ple components. Note the relative degree of isolation of

males and females.

Figure 3. The color pattern of an adult male T. ruderatus during the hottest hours of the day.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 016

Sexual dimorphism in Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus

Figure 4. An adult male T. r. ruderatus capturing a spider while foraging.

Figure 5. The occurrence of T. r. ruderatus with Uromastyx loricatus in the same hole.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 017

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Fathenia and Rastegar-Pouyani

CO

CD

"O

M—

o

0

o

c

0

|=

T3

M—

O

c

o

■o

M—

O

a

cf

0

E

M —

O

o

0

■a

c

iS

0

LU

CO

0

I

0

E

a

TD

d

0

0 ■

ii

- E

0 ©

a3 a)

o E

0 =

|'E

a E

<o 0

ZI

O 03

o P

o 03

!8

°5

0

Cl

CM

VO

M>F

OV

OO

Ov

vo

10

VO

25

CM

o

CO

vo

CM

o

CM

BS

o

Oj-

VO

M>F

ov

VO

V O

l>

vo

VO

X

Cl

o

i-H

VO

r-

or

l—H

M>F

VL

00

25

CO

o

VO

vd

vo

0.3

CM

X

oT

VO

o

VO

CM

O

M>F

LL

ci

VO

00

o*

vo

r-

o

_l

'sT

Cl

i-H

CO

i-H

vo

-1

i—H

ov

o\

Ov

VO

i>

CM

M>F

X

-J

5

VO

CM

cK

CO

vo

Ov

o

CO

vo

-1

oo

M3

VO

CM

CO

["■

vo

M>F

LL

VO

CO

o*

vo

00

CO

_l

CO

CM

f-H

CM

o

'xf

I

00

or

LU

00

o

CM

vo

00

M>F

OQ

(/)

vo

25

oj-

o

VO

vo

CO

o

CM

o

00

o

M>F

O

or

vo

00

SL

00

t-H

25

CM

o

M3

vo

t nT

o

q

f-H

CO

VO

l

o

Ov

CO

vo

M>F

RP

r- H

25

o

or

o

vo

t-H

o

r-

o

CO

M>F

q

VO

vo

CO

HL

ci

25

VO

o

Ov

vo

i-H

vo

o

CM

vo

CM

00

vo

M>F

_i

r-’

Cl

VO

o

M3

o

vo

00

CO

00

l-

Cl

of

CM

1—1

_i

VO

OV

VO

o

CM

M>F

I/O

VO

l>

vd

vo

00

Ov

CO

00

CM

ci

r-

CM

Ov

_l

00

of;

VO

co

CO

CM

vo

M>F

Q

CO

H

Cl

25

CO

o

H

CM

vo

^r

o

00

vo

CM

M>F

CL

z

oT

00

25

l>

o

00

CM

vo

i—H

r-

o

q

vo

or

CO

vo

CO

M>F

z

VO

CM

r-

vo

CO

o

VO

CM

o

VO

o

"xT

00

vo

o

00

M>F

1

M3

VO

CM

vd

vo

CO

C"

H

CM

o

f-H

o

■6

T3

c

(0

2

£

(0

m

**—

o

a>

LU

a )

LU

.

2

z

CO

s

Z

C 0

2

d

X

LU

CO

%

Of

and minimum temperature of 31.6°C and 17.8°C, respec-

tively (Abdali 2009). The study area classified as open

habitat based on Stuart-Fox and Ord (2004) which is a

semi-desert, alluvial fan area. A total of 40 adult speci-

mens of T. r. ruder atus (25 males, 15 females) were ex-

amined in this survey. Of these, three were borrowed from

RUZM (Razi University Zoological Museum, Kerman-

shah) while the 37 remaining specimens were collected

during September 2008 to September 2009 in the study

area. Many of the specimens (12 males and 8 females)

were dissected to determine sex and then preserved for

further studies. The largest male and female were 111.76

mm and 92.72 mm SVL, respectively. The 17 remaining

specimens were caught, measured, and released in the

study area. Measurements included 16 metric and mer-

istic characters, based on Rastegar-Pouyani (1999, 2005)

and Torki (2007). The metric characters included: SVL:

snout- vent length, from end of mental to cloaca; TL: tail

length, from cloaca to tip of tail; HL, head length, from

end of rostral to anterior border of ear opening; HW:

maximum head width; LFL: length of fore limb; LHL:

length of hind limb; LFH: length between fore limb and

hind limb, from axil to groin; VL: vent length.

The meristic characters included: CT: crossbars on

dorsal side of tail; IL: number of infralabial scales; SL:

number of supralabial scales; SBEH: scales between eyes

across head; SDL: subdigital lamellae under the fourth

toe; IN: number of intemasals; NP: number of preanal

callose scales; RP: rows of callose preanal scales. The

metric and meristic characters were measured in mm to

the nearest 0.01 mm using digital caliper model Shoka

Gulf and/or stereomicroscope. To test the significance

of sexual dimorphism, the ANOVA test as well as the

Principle Component Analysis (PCA: correlation matrix)

were employed. The SPSS software version 13 was used

for carrying out the statistical analyses. In addition to the

study of sexual dimorphism, some aspects of the ecology

of the species including color pattern and color changes

of concealed and exposed body regions, behavior, and

habitat type and vegetation were considered carefully.

According to Stuart-Fox and Ord (2004) the lateral re-

gions of the head, the throat, chest and ventral regions

were regarded as “concealed,” whereas the remaining

body regions were considered as “exposed.” Plant spe-

cies were determined based on “Flora of Ilam” (Mozaf-

farian 2008).

Results

Statistical analysis

A summary of the 16 measured characters is shown in

Table 1. There are obvious differences between males

and females for 10 characters NP, SVL, TL, HL, RP, SL,

LFL, LHL, VL, and CT. For all the significant characters

the males have greater values than females. Based on this

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 018

Sexual dimorphism in Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus

Table 2. Extraction of principle components 1-4 using

the component matrix.

Characters

PCI

PC 2

PC 3

PC 4

IL

0.239

0.575

-0.355

0.239

IN

-0.402

0.450

0.586

0.032

NP

0.715

0.370

-0.175

-0.322

SDL

-0.086

0.410

0.180

0.666

SVL

0.960

-0.206

0.096

-0.022

TL

0.955

-0.062

0.015

-0.043

HL

0.910

-0.204

0.264

-0.056

RP

0.542

0.648

-0.028

-0.205

SL

0.356

0.747

0.100

0.303

SBEH

-0.221

0.256

0.781

-0.372

LFL

0.601

-0.274

0.186

0.241

LHL

0.967

-0.070

0.006

0.110

LFH

0.937

-0.233

0.015

0.032

VL

0.877

0.201

0.088

0.075

HW

0.925

-0.255

0.156

0.054

CT

0.320

0.646

-0.269

-0.377

study, in most cases the color pattern in females is paler

than in males (Fig. 1).

The results of a PCA performed on I r. ruderatus

are summarized in Table 2. With 16 variables there are

16 principle components. Details of the first four prin-

ciple components are given in Table 3. As is shown, the

first four principle components (PC1-PC4) account for

48.57%, 16.41%, 8.57%, and 6.94% of the total infor-

mation, respectively. Jointly they explain 80.45% of the

total information.

In the PCI which contains 48.57% of the total infor-

mation, the characters NP, SVL, TL, HL, LHL, LFL, VL,

and HW having greater values, hence having more con-

tribution and importance in sexual dimorphism. The PCI

highlights a size (metric) difference. The scores of the

males along this axis (Fig. 2) show an overlap with those

for females, indicating that although sexual dimorphism

occurs between males and females, the two sexes are not

completely separated from each other in these characters.

The second axis (PC2) contains 16.41% of the total

variation and is a meristic axis that records individuals

at one end with relatively large IL, NP, RP, SL, and CT

and small SVL, HL, LFL, LFH, and HW, compared with

individual with relatively small IL, NP, RP, SL, and CT

and large SVL, HL, LFL, LFH, and HW.

The third axis (PC3) contains 8.57% of the total

variation, and is a meristic axis that records individuals

at one end with relatively large IN and SBEH and small

IL and CT, compared with individuals at the other end

with relatively small IN and SBEH and high values for

IL and CT.

The fourth axis (PC4) contains only 6.94% of the

total difference, highlighting a meristic axis showing in-

dividuals at one end with relatively large SDL and small

CT, SBEH, and NP, compared with individuals at the

other end with small SDL and large CT, SBEH, and NP.

Color changes

The Persian agamid, T. r. ruderatus , changes its color and

adjusts itself based on environmental requirements. Dur-

ing hot hours of the day, the dorsal color of T. ruderatus

turns to paler in comparison to the cooler hours. During

the hot hours, the vertebral stripe becomes lighter, dorsal

regions of the body and tail and temporal regions turn to

brick, color of flanks becomes vinous and ventral sur-

faces of body and head turn to whitish (Fig. 3).

The brick color of the dorsal region of tail is more

conspicuous than the rest of the body. Color changes look

more prominent when a lizard is alarmed. When fright-

ened, the lizard stands on forelimbs, protrudes gular fold

and gets ready to bite. The case is true for both males

and females. During this defensive posture, the dorsal

region of the tail turns brick red while flanks, gular fold,

lower surfaces of the eyes, and upper surfaces of limbs

(especially the forelimbs) turn to dark blue (Fig. 4). The

specimens that collected during September were lighter

in color than those collected in April. It seems that so

far color changing during reproductive season have not

yet been documented for T. r. ruderatus , hence this case

needs further investigation.

Natural history

The specimens were observed and collected in different

habitats, including sandy areas, alluvial fans, and gravel

areas in alluviums. Trapelus ruderatus occupies terri-

tories with special plants and bushes including Alhagi

camelorum, Malva parviflora, Ziziphus numularia, Cap-

paris spinosa, Chrozophora tinctoria, and hand-planted

trees such as Prosopis juliflora. Most specimens were

collected during the hot hours of midday under C. tincto-

ria. Trapelus ruderatus is sympatric with T. lessonae in

Table 3. Total variance for the first four principle components. Extraction method: Principle Component Analysis.

Component

Initial Eigenvalues

Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Total

% of Variance Cumulative %

Total

% of Variance

Cumulative %

PCI

7.772

48.575

7.772

48.575

PC2

2.626

16.411

64.986

2.626

16.411

64.986

PC3

1.371

8.570

73.555

1.371

8.570

73.555

PC4

1.105

6.904

80.459

1.105

6.904

80.459

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 019

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Fathenia and Rastegar-Pouyani

the Dehloran region. Some individuals make holes under

aforementioned plants and others use deserted holes of

other reptiles or rodents. Trapelus ruderatus sometimes

lives with Uromastyx loricatus in the same hole (Fig. 5).

Moreover certain species of reptiles, some arthropods

such as members of the family Gnaphosidae (ground spi-

ders) were observed during excavation of a hole of T.

ruderatus. It seems that T. ruderatus depends strongly

on the aforementioned vegetation, as they: A) provide

shelter against predators, B) provide shadow during hot

summer mid days, C) attract specific types of arthropods

and D) serve as ambush for prey. In one case, the senior

author found an adult T. ruderatus on C. spinosa a dis-

tance from its burrow of more than 20 meters. This may

be indicative of the importance of vegetation in the life

history of this lizard. Trapelus ruderatus is usually ter-

ritorial but in one case two adult male specimens were

observed under the same Z. numularia\ both were col-

lected while the tail of the smaller specimen was bitten

by the larger one.

Discussion

Sexual size dimorphism is the evolutionary result of se-

lection operating differently on the body size and other

characters of males and females (Andersson 1994, Torki

2007). Sexual and/or natural selection can act on both

sexes, resulting in the morphological patterns. Genetic

correlations between the sexes, as well as phylogenetic

inertia, could be factors affecting the observed morpholo-

gies (Kaliontzopoulou et al. 2007). Although direct sexu-

al selection can have a major role in the evolution of neo-

morphic structures, sexual differences are often related to

allometric patterns and heterochronic processes (Bruner

et al. 2005). Sexual dimorphism is widespread in lizards,

with the most consistently dimorphic traits being head

size (males have larger heads) and trunk length (Torki

2007). The case is true for T. r. ruderatus. Since head di-

mensions are directly related to bite force, it seems likely

that bite force, through its effect on dominance, is a per-

formance trait under sexual, and also, natural selection.

Bite force is decisive in species that engage in physical

combat (Huyghe et al. 2005). Theoretically, fecundity se-

lection favors large females and sexual selection favors

larger males. The two selective pressures could cancel

each other out and, consequently, result in a lack of SSD

between males and females. For example, selection via

male contest competition is the ultimate factor result-

ing in increased male size in Eumeces chinensis and E.

elegans , whereas selection acting on fecundity or fitter

mass is the main cause for increased female size in Phry-

nocephalus vlangalii (Ji et al. 2006). So the male contest

may be the main pressure resulting in larger SVL in the

males of T. r. ruderatus. Both sexes have evolved differ-

ent body or head sizes to use different niche dimensions,

such as habitat type, perch height, or diet (“intraspecific

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 020

niche divergence” hypothesis) (Smith and Nickel 2002).

This may explain the larger HL observed for males in T.

r. ruderatus. Sexual dimorphism can also be observed in

forelimbs and hindlimbs. Long limbs increase maximum

sprint speed, allowing lizards to catch prey or escape

predators more efficiently. However, shorter l im bs are

favored on narrow perches because they enhance agility

relative to longer limbs (Calsbeek and Smith 2003). Fe-

males, on the other hand, have to cope with the functional

challenges posed by egg bearing (Butler and Losos 2002).

Males tend to have larger limbs which can increase sprint

for an escape from predators or facilitate chasing females

for successful mating (Fathinia 2007). Sexual selection

for effective territory defense has favored males that are

more likely than females to stand their ground when ap-

proached by a predator and that this decreased wariness

led to predator-mediated natural selection for longer

legs and concomitant greater speed in males (Peterson

and Husak 2006). Taken together, the mentioned reasons

may explain sexual dimorphism in the limbs of T. r. ru-

deratus. The longer tail was assumed to be the result of

morphological constraints imposed by the male copula-

tory organs on tail autotomy, or it may have evolved as a

result of improved escape abilities in the sex more likely

subjected to heavier predation pressure (Kratochvfl et al.

2003). Males are territorial and large size enhances male

reproductive success (Shine et al. 1998). This may ex-

plain the longer tail and trunk in the male Persian agama.

Epidermal glands in the cloacal or femoral regions

of many lizards have semichemical function related to

sexual behavior and/or territorial demarcation. Signals

are passively deposited in the environment during loco-

motion of the animals within their territory (Imparato et

al. 2007). Most males are aggressive, territorial, and male

territories can contain several female home ranges. One

advantage of chemical signals is that they can be used to

obtain information about an individual even when other

sensory cues are absent. Thus, females might choose

where to establish their home ranges by relying on infor-

mation coming from the chemical signals left from ter-

ritorial males (Martin and Lopez 2000).

Animal color patterns have received significant at-

tention from different fields, including ecology, physi-

ology and systematic s. One of the main generalizations

reached is that color patterns constitute adaptive evolu-

tionary characters, representing a compromise between

two main selective forces, sexual and natural selection.

In reptiles, sexual selection through female mate choice

and/or male-male competition, usually determines the

occurrence of colorful males particularly during the re-

productive season; females can choose males based,

among others, on visual displays in which color patterns

are highly relevant. Natural selection acts through pre-

dation and thermoregulation. Thus, diurnal reptiles ex-

posed to visual predators experience an intense selection

for substrate matching to diminish their vulnerability to

these predators. On the other hand, dark colors, which

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Sexual dimorphism in Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus

absorb more heat, occur with higher frequency in ani-

mals from environments with lower temperature (Vidal

et al. 2007).

Two primary processes may drive the evolution of

color change: (1) natural selection for the ability to cam-

ouflage (crypsis) against variety of backgrounds and (2)

selection for conspicuous social signals. In many color-

changing lineages, color change is known to facilitate

both crypsis and social communication (Stuart-Fox and

Moussalli 2008). It seems that dichromatism of “ex-

posed” body regions is significantly associated with hab-

itat openness: species occupying open habitats are less

sexually dichromatic than species in more closed habitats

(Stuart-Fox and Ord 2004). The case is true for Trapelus

ruderatus. Dichromatism of “exposed” body regions is

constrained by natural selection, whereas dichromatism

of “concealed” body regions is driven by sexual selec-

tion. According to predation hypothesis, species occupy-

ing open habitats are more vulnerable to visual predators.

In the species which live in open habitats both sexes are

cryptic and therefore less dichromatic (Stuart-Fox and

Ord 2004). This case is observed in both males and fe-

males of T. ruderatus. Based on the predation hypothesis

the extent of sexual dichromatism is related to habitat

openness only for body regions exposed to visual preda-

tors. Concealed body regions have important roles in

intraspecific communication, for example most agamid

species flash dewlaps or perform head bobs in social in-

teractions (Stuart-Fox and Ord 2004). Regarding the fact

that the Persian agama is an open habitat dweller, afore-

mentioned strategies (natural selection for crypsis, selec-

tion for conspicuous social signals, and the predation hy-

pothesis) may explain the relatively weak dichromatism

observed in both males and females of this lizard.

Acknowledgments. — We thank Professor S. C. An-

derson, University of the Pacific, Stockton, California,

for his assistance in editing and improving this paper.

References

Abdali, G. 2009. Investigation of Density and Diversity

of Bats in Dehloran Natural Monument ( Ghar-e-Kho-

fash). M.Sc. Thesis, Islamic Azad University, Science

and Research Branch, Khuzestan. (In Farsi). 91 p.

Anderson, S. C. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Oxford, Ohio.

Vii + 442 p.

Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Size dimorphism, p. 246-

293 in Krebs, J. R. and Clutton-Brock, T. (editors).

Sexual Selection (Monographs in Behaviour and

Ecology). Princeton University Press, New Jersey.

624 p.

Anderson, R. A. and Vitt L. J. 1990. Sexual selection ver-

sus alternative causes of sexual dimorphism in teiid

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 021

lizards. Oecologia 84(2): 145-157.

Bruner, E., Costantini, D., Fanfani, A., and DelTOmo,

G. 2005. Morphological variation and sexual dimor-

phism of the cephalic scales in Lacerta bilineata. Acta

Zoologica 86(4):245-254.

Butler, M. A. and Losos, J. B. 2002. Multivariate Sex-

ual dimorphism, sexual selection, and adaptation in

Greater Antillean Anolis lizards. Ecological Mono-

graphs 72(4):541-559.

Calsbeek, R. and Smith, T. B. 2003. Ocean currents me-

diate evolution in island lizards. Nature 426:552-555.

Cox, R. M., Skelly, S. L., and John-Alder, H. B. 2003.

A comparative test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual

size dimorphism in lizards. Evolution 57(7): 1653-

1669.

Darwin, C. R. 1874. The Descent of Man, and Selection

in Relation to Sex. Second edition. J. Murray, London.

352 p.

Fathinia, B. 2007. Biosystematic Study of Lizards of

Ilam Province. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Lorestan,

Khoramabad, Iran. 126 p.

Hedrick, A. V. and Temeles, E. J. 1989. The evolution of

sexual dimorphism in animals: hypothesis and tests.

Trends in Ecology & Evolution 4(5):136-138.

Huyghe, K., Vanhooydonck, B., Scheers, H., Molina-

Borja, M., and Vandamme, R. 2005. Morphology,

performance and fighting capacity in male lizards,

Gallotia galloti. Functional Ecology 19(5):800-807.

Imparato, B. A., Antoniazzi, M. M., Rodrigues, M. T.,

and Jared, C. 2007. Morphology of the femoral glands

in the lizard Ameiva ameiva (Teiidae) and their pos-

sible role in semiochemical dispersion. Journal of

Morphology 268(7): 63 6-648.

Ji, X., Huilin, L., Lin, C. X., Boqiu, Q., and Du, Y. 2006.

Sexual dimorphism and female reproduction in the

many-lined sun skink ( Mabuya multifasciata) from

China. Journal of Herpetology 40(3):353-359.

Kaliontzopoulou, A., Carretero, M. A., and Liorente, G.

A. 2007. Multivariate and geometric morphometries

in the analysis of sexual dimorphism variation in Po-

darcis lizards. Journal of Morphology 268(2): 152-

165.

Kratochvfl, L., Fokt, M., Rehak, I., and Frynta, D. 2003.

Misinterpretation of character scaling: a tale of sexual

dimorphism in body shape of common lizards. Cana-

dian Journal of Zoology 81(6): 11 12-1 117.

Lande, R. 1980. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection

and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution

37(2):292-305.

Martin, J. and Lopez, P. 2000. Chemoreception, sym-

metry and mate choice in lizards. Proceedings of the

Royal Society B 267(1450): 1265-1269.

Mouton, N. and Van Wyk, J. H. 1993. Sexual dimorpism

in cordylid lizards: a case study of the Drakensberg

crag lizard, Pseudocordylus melanotus. Canadian

Journal of Zoology 71(9):1715-1723.

Mozaffarian, V. 2008. Flora of Ilam. General Office of

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Fathenia and Rastegar-Pouyani

Natural Resources of Ilam Province. ISBN 978-964-

8637-69-4. (In Persian).

Olsson, M., Shine, R., Wapstra, E., Ujvari, B., and Mad-

sen, T. 2002. Sexual dimorphism in lizard body shape:

the roles of sexual selection and fecundity selection.

Evolution 56(7):1538-1542.

Peterson, C. C. and Husak, J. F. 2006. Locomotor per-

formance and sexual selection: individual variation in

sprint speed of collared lizards ( Crotaphytus collaris ).

Copeia 2006(2):216-224.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1999. Analysis of geographic vari-

ation in the Trapelus agilis complex (Sauria: Agami-

dae). Zoology in the Middle East 19(1999):75-99.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 2000. Taxonomic status of Trape-

lus ruderatus (Olivier) and T. persicus (Blanford), and

validity of T. lessonae (De Filippi). Amphibia-Reptilia

21(1):91-102.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Kami, H. G., Rajabizadeh, M.,

Shafiei, S., and Anderson, S. C. 2008. Annotated

checklist of amphibians and reptiles of Iran. Iranian

Journal of Animal Biosystematics 4(l):43-66.

Schoener, T. W. 1977. Competition and the niche, p. 35-

136 in Gans, C. and Tinkle D. W. (editors). Biology

of the Reptilia, Volume 7: Ecology and Behaviour A.

Academic Press, New York. 727 p.

Shine, R., Harlow, P. S., Keogh, J., and Boeadi, S. 1998.

The allometry of life-history traits: insight from a

study of giant snakes {Python reticulatus ). Journal of

Zoology 244(3):405-414.

Smith, R. G. and Nickel, A. M. 2002. Sexual dimor-

phism in three Cuban species of curly-tailed lizards

( Leiocephalus ). Caribbean Journal of Science 38(1-

2): 140-142.

Stuart-Fox, D. and Moussalli, A. 2008. Selection for so-

cial signaling drives the evolution of chameleon color

change. PLoS Biology 6(l):e25.

Stuart-Fox, D. M. and Ord, T. J. 2004. Sexual selection,

natural selection and the evolution of dimorphic color-

ation and ornamentation in agamid lizards. Proceed-

ings of the Royal Society B 271(1554):2249-2255.

Terry, J. O., Blumstein, D. T. and Evans, C. S. 2001.

Intrasexual selection predicts the evolution of signal

complexity in lizards. Proceedings of the Royal Soci-

ety B 268(1468):7 37 -7 44.

Torki, F. 2007. Sexual dimorphism in the banded dwarf

gecko, Tropiocolotes helenae fasciatus (Gekkonidae)

on the western Iranian plateau. Zoology in the Middle

East 40(2007):33-38.

Verrastro, L. 2004. Sexual dimorphism in Liolaemus oc-

cipitalis (Iguania, Tropiduridae). Iheringia. Serie Zoo-

logia 94(l):45-48.

Vidal, M. A., Ortiz, J. C. and Labra, A. 2007. Sexual and

geographic variation of color patterns in Liolaemus

tenuis (Squamata, Liolaeminae). Gayana 71(1):27-

33.

Manuscript received: 04 December 2010

Accepted: 24 June 2011

Published: 04 September 2011

Appendix

Material examined

Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus (n= 3): RUZM-AT.12.1 to

RUZM-AT.12.3: Iran, Fars province, Lamerd, 20 km

south of Lamerd [27° 20 TM, 53° 10' E]. RUZM-AT.12.4

to RUZM- AT. 12.23 (n= 20): Iran, Ilam province, De-

hloran township [33.5°39' N, 45°18'E; 202 m above sea

level].

Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus (w=17): Examined and

then released in the study area.

Behzad Fathinia earned

his B.A. and M.S. from

Isfahan and Lorestan

universities, respectively.

His M.S. reaserch fo-

cused on “The Biosys-

tematic Study of Lizards

of Ilam Province.” For

the time being, he is a

Ph.D. student at Razi

University, Kermanshah,

western Iran under su-

pervision of Nasrullah

Rastegar-Pouyani, Mo-

zafar Sharifi, and Eskan-

dar Rastegar-Pouyani.

His dissertation research

involves ecology, phylogeography, molecular systemat-

ics, and population genetics of the Iranian viper Pseu-

docerastes urarachnoides in western Iran. He is also

interested in other reptiles, specially snakes.

Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani earned his

B.S. in Zoology from

Razi University Ker-

manshah, Iran in

1986 and his M.S. in

Zoology from Tehran

University, Tehran,

Iran in 1991, where

he studied herpetolo-

gy with the agamids as the central object. He started his

Ph.D. in Gothenburg University, Sweden in 1994 under

the advisement of Professor Goran Nilson and gradu-

ated in 1999, working on taxonomy and biogeography

of Iranian Plateau agamids with Trapelus as the main

object. His research interests include taxonomy and bio-

geography of the Iranian Plateau, the Middle East and

Central Asian herpetofauna.

September 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e22

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 022

Copyright: © 201 1 Kazemi et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Com-

mons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided

the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):23-33.

A new species of Ophiomorus (Squamata: Scincidae)

from Maranjab Desert, Isfahan Province, Iran, with

a revised key to the genus

'SEYED MAHDI KAZEMI, 2 MASOOD FARHADI QOMI, 3 HAJI GHOLI KAMI

AND 4 STEVEN CLEMENT ANDERSON

1 Department of Biology, College of Sciences, Qom Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qom, IRAN 2 Department of Biology, College of Sciences,

Damghan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Damghan, IRAN 3 Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Golestan University, Gorgan, IRAN

^Department of Biological Sciences, University of the Pacific, Stockton, California 95211, USA

Abstract . — A new species, Ophiomorus maranjabensis, is described from Maranjab in the Kavir

Desert in Iran. This new species is distinguished from other three-fingered, three-toed species by

having parietals in contact posteriorly; prefrontals not in contact with upper labials, 22 scale rows

at midbody, a large fifth supralabial, and a long preocular. A revised key to the genus is presented.

Key words. New species, Ophiomorus, Iran, Isfahan Province, Maranjab, habitat

Citation: Kazemi, S. M., Farhadi Qomi, M., Kami, H. G., and Anderson, S. C. 2011 . A new species of Ophiomorus (Squamata: Scincidae) from Maranjab

Desert, Isfahan Province, Iran, with a revised key to the genus. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):23-33(e23).

Introduction

The nocturnal burrowing skinks of the genus Ophio-

morus have been collected less often than most other

lizards in Iran. The first revision of the genus was that

of Boulenger (1887) and not reviewed again until 1966

when Anderson and Leviton (1966) undertook the task

and added an additional three species. They recognized

an eastern group of the genus inhabiting the desert areas

from Iran through southern Afghanistan and Pakistan to

the Punjab, and a western group extending through the

more mesic areas from Greece to the Zagros Mountains

of Iran. These authors provided diagnoses and synony-

mies for all then-known species. Anderson (1999) sum-

marized the Iranian species following the description of

another species from the Iranian Plateau, O. nuchalis Nil-

son and Andren 1978. A phylogenetic cladistic analysis

was published by Greer and Wilson (2001). Their analy-

sis confirmed Ophiomorus as a monophyletic genus and

the eastern species clade as monophyletic. The western

group of species was judged, somewhat tentatively, as

polyphyletic in origin.

Three specimens of Ophiomorus were collected by

Masood Farhadi Qomi and Seyed Mahdi Kazemi on 17

May 2011, in the Maranjab, south of Daryache Namak

(salt lake), north of Isfahan, Iran. This site is situated

about 52 km southwest of the type locality for O. nuch-

alis, the westernmost known species of the desert group.

Our specimens differ distinctly from other three-fin-

gered species in several morphological aspects, and we

here describe it as a new species.

The new species brings the number of species in

the genus to 11. The genus is distributed from Greece

to western India (see Sindaco and Jeremcenko 2008, for

spot maps of all known museum specimens and pub-

lished locality records of the genus).

Diagnosis of the genus Ophiomorus (from

Greer and Wilson 2001)

The genus Ophiomorus may be diagnosed

vis-a-vis the generally primitive scincid genus

Eumeces on the basis of the following derived

character states: nostril between an upper and

lower nasal scale, both of uncertain homology

...; prefrontal scales separated; frontal scale

hour-glass shaped due to constriction of frontal

by first supraocular (except in O. latastii ...)...;

supraoculars three (as opposed to four); supra-

ciliary row incomplete lateral to most posterior

supraocular, i.e., most posterior supraocular en-

ters supraciliary row: frontoparietals separated;

Correspondence. Emails: l Kazemi_ml 979@yahoo.com; 2 Masood.farhadi@y ahoo.com; 3 Hgkami2000@yahoo.com;

4 Asaccus@aol.com (Corresponding author).

This printed document was produced by a method that assures numerous identical and durable copies, and those copies were simultaneously obtainable for the purpose of providing a public and

permanent scientific record, in accordance with Article 8.1 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Date of publication: 07 October 2011.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 023

Kazemi et al.

pretemporal single: lower eyelid with clear cen-

tral disc; postsupralabial single; postmentals

two (variable in Eumeces, hence possibly prim-

itive in skinks): dorsal and lateral body scales

with one or sometimes two (in tandem) minute

pits in central posterior part of scale; digits 4/3

or less and phalanges 2. 3.4. 2/2. 3.4 or less; pre-

maxillary teeth modally < 6; presacral vertebrae

> 45; sternal/mesosternal ribs < 3/1; inscription-

al chevrons >7...; thoracic and sometimes an-

terior lumbar ribs with dorsoanterio accessory

processes.

Ophiomorus maranjabensis Kazemi,

Farhadi Qomi, Kami and Anderson

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:C05969FC-3873-4667-AB03-9B531C3D0DDE

Holotype: ZMGU (Zoological Museum Gorgan Uni-

versity) 2570, an adult female from Maranjab, south of

Daryache Namak, Iran, N 34°19’52.78”, E 51°53’20.44”.

Collected 17 May 2011 by M. Farhadi and S. M. Kazemi.

Paratypes: ZMGU 2571 and 2572, adult females,

from Maranjab, about 1 km southwest of holotype, N

34°18’56.50”, E 51°52’45.15”.

Diagnosis

An Ophiomorus with three fingers, three toes; distinctly

enlarged nuchals; snout bluntly spatulate; interparietal

broader than long; frontonasal septagonal; six supralabi-

als, the fifth, greatly enlarged, below the eye. Parietals

in contact behind interparietal; nuchals in contact behind

parietals. Preocular very large, about two-thirds distance

between eye and nostril, and in contact with third, fourth,

and fifth supralabials. Twenty-two scales round the mid-

dle of the body.

Description of holotype (ZMGU 2570)

Head depressed; snout cuneiform, with sharp angular

labial edge; mouth inferior. Rostral with a triangular,

convex, superior portion equal in length to two-thirds the

width, the inferior portion slightly concave, lying entire-

ly in front of the mouth, and equal in length to about two-

thirds the width; the posterior angle of the rostral does

not partially separate the supranasals; frontonasal septag-

onal, two thirds as broad as long, twice as long as the su-

ture formed by the supranasals; frontal ten- sided, broader

than long, interparietal slightly broader than long, equal

with frontal, its straight anterior border forming a broad

suture with the straight posterior border of the frontal;

a pair of elongate, curved parietals, about one-third as

broad as long, obliquely arranged, meet behind the inter-

parietal to form a short suture; a pair of enlarged nuchal

shields, in contact behind parietals. Nostril in the suture

between the nasal and the supranasal, narrowly separated

from the rostral: nasal three-fourths the length of the su-

pranasal, as high as long; supranasal broader than long;

prefrontals quadrangular and elongate, in broad contact

with preocular, not in contact with supralabials; preocu-

lar very large, about two-thirds distance between eye and

nostril, and in contact with third, fourth, and fifth supral-

abials; loreal as high as long, smaller than the preocular,

three small supraoculars, size is 2 > 1 > 3; no frontopari-

etal; four or five elongate supraciliaries on each side; up-

per eyelid rudimentary; lower lid with a larger transpar-

ent scale, two postoculars. Six supralabials, fifth is very

large, presumably as a result of fusion with the supral-

abial behind it, twice or more the size of adjacent labials

and in contact with eye, postocular and preocular (below

the eye, postocular and preocular), the 1st much smaller.

No ear opening. Parietal eye not discemable.

Three toes, three fingers. Four scales on longest fin-

ger, seven scales on longest toe.

Mental quadrangular, the posterior border concave;

two azygous postmentals, the posterior (second) much

larger, first postmental in contact with first pair of subla-

bials, second postmental in contact with first, second, and

third pairs of sublabials; a series of three enlarged shields

on either side of the chin, bordering the infralabials, six

supralabials, six sublabials.

The tail is broken approximately at one half its

length, and the broken part has been retained.

Color pattern

As in most of the eastern species, dorsal ground color

golden tan, venter cream- white without markings. A dark

stripe runs from nostril through eye along the length of

body and tail. A dark roughly Y-shaped mark on the fron-

tal and prefrontal; an approximately L- shaped mark on

the front and center of the interparietal and a spot on the

posterior part of that scale, ill defined spots on parietals

and nuchals. Each paravertebral scale with a dark spot,

these coalescing to form two dark lines down body onto

tail, where they break up into lines of discrete dots that

run the length of tail; two dorsolateral lines of discrete

dots on either side of body and tail (Table 1; Figs. 2-5).

Paratype (ZMGU 2571): same as holotype, except a

series of four enlarged shields on either side of the chin.

Parietal eye visible in interparietal.

Paratype (ZMGU 2572): same as holotype, except

third supralabial scale smallest, scales of second and

forth in contact with each other on the right side. Parietal

eye visible in interparietal.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 024

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

A new species of Ophiomorus from Iran

Figure 1. Places of specimen collection: black diamond, type locality of Ophiomorus nuchalis Nilson and Andren, 1978;

blue circle, type locality of Ophiomorus maranjabensis from Maranjab.

Figure 2. Live specimen. Holotype of Ophiomorus maranjabensis (ZMGU2570).

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 025

Kazemi et al.

r un fn pf f ip p n

Figures 3a and 3b. Head scale nomenclature for Ophiomorus maranjabensis\ cs - chin scale; fn-frontonasal; il - infral-

abial; ip - interparietal; la --upperlabial; lo - loreal; m - mental; n - nuchal; p - parietal; pm - postmental; po - preocular;

ps - postsupralabial; r - rostral; so - supraocular; t - temporal; un - upper nasal.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 026

A new species of Ophiomorus from Iran

lo la po t 1

Figure 3c. Head scale nomenclature for Ophiomorus maranjabensis : cs - chin scale; fn-frontonasal; il - infralabial;

ip - interparietal; la --upperlabial; lo - loreal; m - mental; n - nuchal; p - parietal; pm - postmental; po - preocular; ps

- postsupralabial; r - rostral; so - supraocular; t - temporal; un - upper nasal.

Figure 4. Ophiomorus maranjabensis, forelimb.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 027

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Kazemi et al.

Figure 5. Ophiomorus maranjabensis, hindlimb.

Distribution

Known only from the holotype and paratypes (Map, Fig.

1). Goren Nilson (pers. comm.) reports finding tracks of

an Ophiomorus (Fig. 7) in large numbers in a nearby re-

gion of the Kavir, Central Province, east of Abu Zeidabad

at N 33°58’7.36”, E 51°98’9.77” on 7 June 2000. They

spent one night searching for it unsuccessfully. He was

convinced, at the time, that it must have been an unde-

scribed species, because the sand dune habitat was very

different from that of O. nuchalis habitats, and geograph-

ical distance from other species. See Greer and Wilson

(2001) for comparative characters and measurements for

all species of the genus.

Habitat

The type locality is in the Maranjab, north of Isfahan,

Iran, situated south of salt lake (Daryache Namak).

Average yearly precipitation is 170.69 mm at the

nearest meteorological station in Kashan, about 55 km to

the southwest. During the hot summer months the mean

recorded summer maximum air temperature is 40.39°C

and the mean minimum winter temperature 0.54°C. The

highest recorded temperature was 46°C, and a minimum

temperature of -9°C. The collection site is in the lower

hills at the southern border of the salt lake, about 185 km

north of Isfahan.

The vegetation is low density. The vegetation in-

cludes Alhagi, Boraginaceae, Heliotropium aucheri,

Peganum harmala , Poaceae, and Rosularia. Soil loose

sandy, similar to substratum where other three-fingered,

three-toed species of the genus are found.

Natural History

The specimens collected were found at night in pitfalls.

ZMGU 2571 was dead, probably owing to the daytime

heat in the pitfall. Other reptile species, observed in the

same habitat and living syntopically with O. maranja-

bensis are Trapelus agilis agilis , Phrynocephalus macu-

latus maculatus, Eremias persica, Teratoscincus key-

serlingii , Varanus griseus caspius, and Spalerosophis

diadema shiraziana*

*Note on syntopy vs sympatry: As used here, syntopy refers to species living in the same lo-

cality and habitat that may hypothetically constrain the fundamental niches of one another.

Sympatry refers to species that share all or part of their distributional ranges. Sympatry, while it

may reflect historical biogeography, has little ecological relevance except, perhaps, at the most

general biome level (See Anderson 1999).

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 028

A new species of Ophiomorus from Iran

Discussion

The new species is closest morphologically to Ophio-

morus raithmai, following the characters listed by Greer

and Wilson (2001) and used in their cladistic analysis,

and along with O. raithmai is separated from other mem-

bers of the genus at their node 12. It is clearly distinct

from that species in its much larger preocular, which

blocks contact of the prefrontal with the supralabials, the

parietals in contact behind the interparietal, and the nu-

chals in contact behind the parietals. This morphological

resemblance is curious in light of the fact that O. maran-

jabensis is the westernmost species of the eastern clade,

while O. raithmai , found in Sind Pakistan, and in western

India, is the southeastemmost.

We were unable to obtain radiographs, and to com-

pare skeletal characters with those examined by Greer

and Wilson (2001) would require destructive dissection.

This comparison must wait for a later study. We are not

able to say what the similarities imply phylogenetically

or biogeographically. One might speculate that the most

evident head scale autapomorphies of the new species are

derived character states.

The substrates into which the three-fingered species

burrow are, at least superficially, similar. At this stage it

is not fruitful to speculate as to how the various mor-

phological specializations may be adaptively related to

substrate differences. Detailed studies of the habitats of

each of the species would be highly desirable.

For a detailed discussion of possible morphologi-

cal evolution in the genus see Greer and Wilson (2001).

There has not yet been a molecular study of the genus,

and we hope that such a study may help to resolve aspects

of the phylogeny, particularly about possible character

reversals, and to establish at least a tentative timeline of

speciation. Ophiomorus tridactylus is the most widely,

but discontinuously distributed species; molecular stud-

ies may reveal distinct populations or cryptic species

within this nominal taxon. To find most of the literature

dealing with Ophiomorus see the bibliography of South-

west Asian herpetology by Leviton and Anderson (2010).

Figure 6. Habitat of Ophiomorus maranjabensis.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 029

Kazemi et al.

Figure 7. Tracks of Ophiomorus maranjabensis (courtesy of Goren Nilson).

Table 1. Counts and measurements for specimens examined.

Measurements

ZMGU2572

Holotype

ZMGU2571

ZMGU2570

Supralabials

6

Infralabials

6

Supraoculars

3

Postoculars

2

Preoculars

1

Loreal

1

Mental

1

Postmental

2

Parietal

1+1

Frontoparietal

0

Scales round the middle of the body

22

One third of anterior

22 or 23

21

22

One third of posterior

20

21

22

Scales between interparietal and level of vent

110

Preanals

2

Fingers

3

Toes

3

Snout-vent (mm)

75.25

69.6

84

Tail (mm)

43.7

51.4

64

Length of head, from end of snout to angle of jaw (mm)

6.6

5.9

7.2

Length of snout, from tip of snout to anterior corner of eye (mm)

4.15

3.6

4.3

Hind limb length (mm)

14.4

12.8

15

Forelimb length (mm)

5

4.6

5.4

Width of head (mm)

5

4.8

4.9

Height of head (mm)

4.4

4.7

Axilla - groin (mm)

56.5

51.9

65.5

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 030

A new species of Ophiomorus from Iran

Revised key to the genus Ophiomorus

Based on Anderson and Leviton (1966), Nilson and Andren (1978), Anderson (1999).

la. Limbs absent, scale rows less than 20 at midbody 2

lb. Limbs present, scale rows 20 or more at midbody 3

2a. Prefrontals small; frontonasal half or less than half as long as the frontal; scale rows

18 around posterior third of body O. punctatissimus

2b. No prefrontals; frontonasal much more than half as long as the frontal; scale rows

16 around posterior third of body O. latastii

3a. Fingers 4, toes 3 4

3b. Fingers 3, toes 2 or 3 7

4a. Scale rows 20 at midbody O. blanfordi

4b. Scale rows 22 or more at midbody 5

5a. Scale rows 22 6

5b. Scale rows 24 O. chernovi

6a. Nuchals equal to or about 1-1/2 times size of dorsal scales O. brevipes

6b. Nuchals about 2-1/2 times size of dorsals O. nuchalis

7a. Toes 2 O. persicus

7b. Toes 3 8

8a. Parietals in contact posteriorly; prefrontals not in contact with upper labials 9

8b. Parietals not in contact; prefrontals in contact with upper labials 10

9a. 20 scales at midbody O. streeti

9b. 22 scales at midbody O. maranjabensis

10a. Parietal in contact with anterior temporal; postocular scale about as large: as

posterior suboculars; usually 7 or 8 scales on third (longest) toe O. tridactylus

10b. Parietal not in contact with anterior temporal (posterior temporal intervenes);

postocular scale much larger than posterior suboculars; usually 4 scales on third

(longest toe) O. raithmai

Etymology: The species name refers to the name of the

locality where it was discovered.

Acknowledgments. — We thank Goren Nilson for his

remarks cited above and for the photograph of the tracks

(Fig. 7).

References

Anderson, S. C. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca, New

York, USA. 137 text-figs., distribution maps [unnum-

bered], 25 col. pis., 442 p.

Anderson, S. C. and Leviton, A. E. 1966. A review of the

genus Ophiomorus (Sauria: Scincidae) with descrip-

tions of three new forms. Proceedings of the Califor-

nia Academy of Sciences, Series 4, 33(8 July):499-

534, 8 figs.

Boulenger, G. A. 1887. Les especes du genre Opiomore.

Bulletin de la Societe zoologique de France 12:519-

534. (In French).

Greer, A. E. and Wilson, G. D. F. 2001. Comments on

the scincid lizard genus Ophiomorus, with a cladis-

tic analysis of the species. Hamadryad 26(Decem-

ber):26 1-271, figs. 1-5, 2 tables.

Leviton, A. E. and Anderson, S. C. 2010. The Herpeto-

logical Literature for Southwest Asia an Indexed Bib-

liography. Occasional Papers of the California Acad-

emy of Sciences, no. 67, 9082 entries, 622 p.

Nilson, G. and Andren, C. 1978. Anew species of Ophi-

omorus (Sauria: Scincidae) from Kavir Desert, Iran.

Copeia 1978(December):559-564.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 031

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Kazemi et al.

Polaszek, A., Agosti, D., Alonso-Zarazaga, M., Beccalo-

ni, G., de Place Bj0m, R, Bouchet, R, Brothers, D. J.,

Earl of Cranbrook, Evenhuis, N. L., Godfray, H. C. J.,

Johnson, N. F., Krell, F. T., Lipscomb, D., Lyal, C. H.

C., Mace, G. M., Mawatari, S. F., Miller, S. E., Minel-

li, A., Morris, S., Ng, P. K. L., Patterson, D. J., Pyle,

R. L., Robinson, N., Rogo, L., Taveme. J., Thompson,

F. C., van Tol, J., Wheeler, Q. D., and Wilson, E. O.

2005a. Commentary: A universal register for animal

names. Nature 437:477.

Polaszek, A., Alonso-Zarazaga, M., Bouchet, R, Broth-

ers, D. J., Evenhuis, N. L., Krell, F. T., Lyal, C. H. C.,

Minelli, A., Pyle, R. L., Robinson, N., Thompson, F.

C., and van Tol, J. 2005b. ZooBank: the open-access

register for zoological taxonomy: Technical Discus-

sion Paper. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature

62(4):210-220.

Sindaco, R. and Jeremcenko, V. K. 2008. The Reptiles

of the Western Palearctic.l. Annotated Checklist and

Distributional Atlas of the Turtles, Crocodiles, Am-

phisbaenians and Lizards of Europe, North Africa,

Middle East and Central Asia. Monografie della So-

cietas Herpetologica Italica. Volume I. Edizioni Bel-

vedere, Latina, Italy. 248 col. photos, 226 col. maps,

579 p.

Manuscript received: 28 August 2011

Accepted:03 September 2011

Published: 07 October 2011

Seyed Mahdi Kazemi earned his bachelor of science de-

gree in animal biology from Qom Branch, Islamic Azad

University, Iran, in 2007. He is currently working with So-

heila Shafiei on Phrynocephalus scutellatus in Iran and

writing a new book about snakes of Iran. Seyed also

works on the taxonomy and biogeography of Iranian vi-

pers. His research interests include other reptiles, espe-

cially snakes, taxonomy, ecology, and biogeography of

the Iranian Plateau and the Middle East.

Masood Farhadi Qomi earned his bachelor of science

degree in animal biology from Qom Branch, Islamic Azad

University, Iran in 2008 and a masters degree of science

in animal biosystematics from Damghan Branch, Islamic

Azad University, Iran in 2011. His M.S. research focused

on “Some characteristics of Ophiomorus nuchalis of

Qom, Isfahan and Tehran Provinces.” His research inter-

ests include taxonomy and ecology of genus Ophiomorus

of the Iranian Plateau.

Haji Gholi Kami earned

his bachelor of science

degree in biology from Gi-

lan University, Rasht city,

Iran in 1987, and his mas-

ters of science degree

in animal sciences from

Tehran University, Teh-

ran, Iran in 1991, where

he studied amphibians

of Turkmen Sahra and

reviewed other Iranian

amphibians. He began

his Ph.D. program in Gor-

gan (Iran) and Astrakhan

(Russia) universities in 2001, under the advisement of

Professor Bahram Hassanzadeh Kiabi, and graduated in

2007. His research interests include taxonomy and ecol-

ogy of Iranian amphibians and reptiles.

Steven C. Anderson has been involved with the herpe-

tology and biogeography of Southwest Asia for more than

50 years. He first visited Iran, for nine months, in 1958 to

collect material and make observations for his Ph.D. dis-

sertation. At that time, his focus was on Khuzistan Prov-

ince in southwestern Iran. Steve received his doctorate

from Stanford University in 1966. Since that time, he has

visited all of the principal geographical regions of Iran, as

well as worked in Afghanistan and Turkey. Dr. Anderson

has published well over 100 papers on the herpetofauna

of Southwest Asia and three books. Many of these works

were written with his co-author and collaborator, Dr. Alan

E. Leviton of the California Academy of Sciences. From

1963 to 1970 Anderson worked as an associate curator

at the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco,

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 032

A new species of Ophiomorus from Iran

followed by 26 years as a professor at the University of

the Pacific, while continuing as a research associate and

fellow of the Academy. Since retirement in 1996, he has

focused on promoting herpetology in Iran and encourag-

ing and collaborating with students and faculty there. Dr.

Anderson has also been a contributor and consulting edi-

tor (fauna) with Encyclopaedia Iranica since its inception.

In accordance with section 8.6 of the ICZN’s International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, we have deposited printed durable copies of this paper at 35 (mostly) publicly accessible institu-

tional libraries. Digital archiving of this paper and a complete listing of institutions receiving the printed version are listed helow.

The separate print-only edition is available on request from ARC by sending a request to Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, 2525 Iowa Avenue, Modesto, CA 95358-9467, USA along with

a check for $20 (to cover printing and postage) payable to “Amphibian and Reptile Conservation.” NOTE: Please check the journal’s website at: http://www.redlist-ARC.org/ for a current mailing

address of the journal, before requesting documents.

In addition, this published work and the nomenclatural acts it contains have been registered in ZooBank, the proposed online registration system for the ICZN. The new species described herein

has been prospectively registered in ZooBank (Polaszek 2005a, b), the official online registration system for the ICZN. The ZooBank publication LSID (Life Science Identifier) for the new species

described herein can be viewed through any standard web browser by appending the LSID to the prefix “http://zoobank.org/”. The LSID for this publication is: um:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:53F0E912-

B11F-4842-BFBC-BFD6D5AB5322.

Printed durable copies of this paper are deposited at the following Institutions (35): American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York (USA); Australian Museum, Sydney (AUS-

TRALIA); Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawai’i (USA); California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California (USA); Chengdu Institute of Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences

(CHINA); Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois (USA); Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, Florida (USA); Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Bogota (Colombia); Instituto

Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazonia, Manaus (BRAZIL); Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (USA); Madras Crocodile Bank Trust and Centre for Herpetology (INDIA); Monte L. Bean Life Sci-

ence Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah (USA); Museo de Historia Natural, Lima (Peru); Museo de Zoologla, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City (MEXICO);

Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali, Torino (ITALY); Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (USA); Museum national d’histoire naturelle, Paris

(FRANCE); Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California (USA); National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. (USA); Natural

History Museum, London, England (UK); Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California (USA); National Library of Iran, Tehran (IRAN); Natural History Museum,

University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas (USA); Pakistan National Museum of Natural History, Islamadad (PAKISTAN); Raffles Museum of Biological Diversity, National University of Singapore

(SINGAPORE); Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario (CANADA); Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma (USA); San Diego Natural

History Museum, San Diego, California (USA); Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (PANAMA); Thailand Natural History Museum, National Science Museum (THAILAND); Universidade

Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro (BRAZIL); University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (AFRICA); Vietnam National Museum of Nature, Hanoi (VIETNAM); Zoological Institute, Russian

Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg (RUSSIA); Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Bonn (GERMANY).

A permanent digital archive of this paper can be found at the following institutions: Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, Florida (USA); Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazo-

nia, anaus (BRAZIL); Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (USA); Smithsonian Institution Libraries, Washington, D.C. (USA).

Amphibian and Reptile Conservation is a Content Partner with the Encyclopedia of Life (EOL; http://Avww.eol.org/) and submits information about new species to the EOL freely.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e23

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 033

Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):34-36.

SHORT COMMUNICATION

Notes on the natural history and distribution of

Carinatogecko stevenandersoni Torki, 2011

’■ 3 REZA SADEGHI AND 2 FARHANG TORKI

1,3 Department of Biology, Boroujerd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Boroujerd, Lorestan, IRAN 2 Ecology and Herpetology Center for Research

(FTEHCR), 68319-16589, P. O. Box 68315-139, Nourabad City, Lorestan Province, IRAN

Abstract. — Carinatogecko Golubev and Szczerbak, 1981 comprises three species: C. aspratilis (An-

derson 1973), distributed in Iran, C. heteropholis (Minton et al. 1970), distributed in a few areas in

Iran and Iraq, and C. stevenandersoni Torki 2011, distributed in the western Iranian plateau (Minton

et al. 1970; Anderson 1973, 1999; Golubev and Szczerbak 1981; Nazari-Serenjeh and Torki 2008;

Torki 2011). Carinatogecko stevenandersoni was recently described by Torki (2011) and at that time

known only from the type locality. In this study we report new localities and natural history for C. ste-

venandersoni in the western Iranian plateau. For natural history, we worked at the type locality and

three other new localites during spring 2010 through early spring 2011.

Key words. Carinatogecko stevenandersoni , distribution, natural history, western Iranian Plateau

Citation: Sadeghi, R. and Torki, R 2011. Notes on the natural history and distribution of Carinatogecko stevenandersoni Torki, 2011. Amphib. Reptile

Conserv. 5(1):34-36(e24).

Distribution

Carinatogecko stevenandersoni was described from a

single locality in the Tang-e-Gavshomar region (Ganj-

Dare), Delphan City, Lorestan Province. During our re-

cent fieldwork, we discovered three additional localities

for C. stevenandersoni in the western Zagros Mountains,

Lorestan Province, as follows: (1) Sepid-Koh mountain,

Khorramabad, 33° 43' N, 49° 54' E; 1500-1700 m a.s.l.;

this locality is covered by oak forest, syntopic reptiles

as follows: snakes: Rhynchocalamus melanocepha-

lus, Platyceps rhodorachis , Memphis (s.l.) andreanus ,

Typhlops vermicularis, Leptotyphlops macrorhynchus,

and Macrovipera lebetina; lizards: Laudakia nupta,

Ophisops elegans, Ablepharus pannonicus, Trachylepis

aurata, Tropiocolotes helenae, and Asaccus griseono-

tus. (2) Bababozorg, Nourabad-Kohdasht, 33° 55' N 47°

45' E; 1600-1900 m a.s.l., this locality covered by oak

forest, syntopic reptiles as follows: snakes: Rhyncho-

calamus melanocephalus, Platyceps najadum, Malpo-

lon monspessulanus, and Macrovipera lebetina ; lizards:

Laudakia nupta , Trapelus lessonae, Acanthodactylus

boskianus, Ophisops elegans, Ablepharus pannonicus,

Trachylepis aurata, and Varanus griseus. (3) Mehrab-

Koh, Nourabad, 33° 54' N 47° 45' E; 1700-1800 m a.s.l.,

this locality covered by oak forest, syntopic reptiles as

follows: snakes: Rhynchocalamus melanocephalus, Dol-

ichophis jugularis, Malpolon monspessulanus, Typhlops

Correspondence. Email: 3l rsadeghik@yahoo.com

vermicularis, and Macrovipera lebetina ; lizards: Lauda-

kia nupta , Trapelus lessonae, Lacerta media, Ophisops

elegans, Ablepharus pannonicus, Trachylepis aurata,

and Varanus griseus.

All localities are covered by oak forest, as is true for

the type locality (Torki 2011). Mountain structures in all

localities is sedimentary.

In general, C. stevenandersoni is distributed in four

localities, type locality, and three above localities. Based

on mountain structures, C. stevenandersoni may be dis-

tributed in similar habitats in Kermanshah and Illam

Provinces, as these same mountains continue into Illam

and Kermanshah mountains.

Based on previous reports (e.g., Anderson 1999;

Nazari-Serenjeh and Torki 2008; Torki 2011) C. hetero-

pholis and C. aspratilis are distributed in low elevation

(less than 1500 m). In contrast, C. stevenandersoni is dis-

tributed to above 1500 m a.s.l. Based on all available in-

formation about distribution of the genus Carinatogecko,

C. stevenandersoni occurs at higher elevations than other

species.

Natural History

Based on our fieldwork in all localities, C. stevenander-

soni has seasonal activity as follows: activity started in

late March to early September and in October, hiberna-

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e24

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 034

Sadeghi and Torki

tion began. This is the case for most reptiles in these re-

gions (e.g., Torki 2009; Torki et al. 2010; Torki and Ghar-

zi 2008). We did not observe any specimens during the

cold season (late autumn to winter), because temperature

at this time is very low. Therefore, hibernation occurred

for C. stevenandersoni for less than six months.

Shelter sites of C. stevenandersoni are limited to be-

tween sedimentary stones. In the type locality, C. steve-

nandersoni has the same shelter sites with Asaccus nas-

rullahi, because the shelter site of A. nasrullahi is limited

to cracks in sedimentary stones (Torki et al. 2010). Based

on our field observations, C. stevenandersoni feeds on

insects, larval insects, and spiders. In the type locality,

C. stevenandersoni appears to share similar food items

with A. nasrullahi, also a nocturnal gecko species. Tro-

piocolotes helenae is another gecko apparently in dietary

competition with C. stevenandersoni in the type locality

and Sepid-Koh. Nocturnal activity of C. stevenandersoni

began at sunset and extended to before sunrise. In con-

trast, nocturnal activities of A. nasrullahi started shortly

before sunrise and continued to morning, and in some

rare specimens, to midday. Important predators of C. ste-

venandersoni are Rhynchocalamus melanocephalus and

Hierophis (s.l.) andreanus. Under captive conditions,

Ophisops elegans and Trachylepis aurata eat C. steve-

nandersoni. Some large scorpions easily killed and ate

C. stevenandersoni (especially juvenile specimens). This

also occurred for other small geckos, such as Tropioco-

lotes helenae (e.g., Torki and Gharzi 2008).

Based on field observations, we see two eggs in most

female specimens, and a few specimens have one egg

in the abdomen. We transferred two female specimens

to lab conditions; both specimens had eggs in their ab-

domen. Eggs in C. stevenandersoni are spherical, white.

Egg laying in C. stevenandersoni occurred on the surface

of stones, in crack(s) of rocky stones. Egg laying in both

female specimens occurred in June. Hatching occurred

38-45 days after eggs were laid. Coloration of juvenile

specimens (lighter) is different from adult specimens

(mostly darker). This is similar to the genus Asaccus and

in contrast to Hemidactylus flaviviridis (Iranian popula-

tions; our observations, unpubl. data). The tail of juvenile

specimens of C. stevenandersoni is yellowish (different

from body); this is in contrast to adult specimens.

Acknowledgments. — The study was supported by

the Islamic Azad University, Boroujerd Branch, Iran. We

thank Professor C. Anderson (US; CA) for improving our

manuscript.

References

Anderson, S. C. 1973. A new species of B unopus (Rep-

tilia: Gekkonidae) from Iran and a key to lizards of the

genus Bunopus. Herpetologica 29:355-358.

Anderson, S. C. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Contributions

to Herpetology 15:1-442.

Golubev, M. L. and Szczerbak, N. N. 1981. Carinato-

gecko gen. n. (Reptilia, Gekkonidae): a new genus

from south-west Asia. Vestnik Zoologii (Kiev) 5:34-

41. (In Russian).

Minton, S. A, Jr., Anderson, S. C., and Anderson, J. A.

1970. Remarks on some geckos from southwest Asia,

with descriptions of three new forms and a key to the

genus Tropiocolotes. Proceedings of the California

Academy of Sciences, Series 4, 37:333-362

Nazari-Serenjeh, F. and Torki, F. 2008. Einige okolo-

gische Aspekte von Carinatogecko aspratilis (Ander-

son 1973) (Gekkonidae: Reptilia). Sauria 30(2):23-28

Torki, F. 2009. Lorestan Reptiles. Lorestan Department

of Environmental Project. 204 p. (In Farsi).

Torki, F. 201 1 . Description of a new species of Carinato-

gecko (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Iran. Salaman-

dra 47(2):63-70.

Torki, F., and Gharzi, A. 2008. Morphologische und

okologische Aspekte von Tropiocolotes helenae

(Nikolsky, 1907) (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Sauria

30(1): 13-20.

Torki, F., Heidari, N., and Khan, M. S. 2010. A morpho-

logical and ecological study of Asaccus nasrullahi

Werner, 2006 (Reptilia: Phyllodactylidae), in western

Iran. Russian Journal of Herpetology 17(3): 195-201.

Manuscript received: 05 May 2011

Accepted: 31 May 2011

Published: 15 October 2011

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 035

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e24

Carinatogecko stevenandersoni notes

Reza Sadeghi earned his B.Sc. in Animal Biology from

Tehran University and M.Sc. in Animal Biosystematics

from Tehran University. He is currently a member of the

faculty in the Department of Biology, Islamic Azad Univer-

sity of Boroujerd, Lorestan, Iran. In addition he studies

geometric morphometries, morphology, systematics, and

taxonomy of the Iranian Plateau fauna with special inter-

est in insects and reptiles. His M.Sc. thesis was a geo-

metric morphometric study on host plants associated with

variations of the codling moth ( Cydia pomonella) popula-

tions in parts of Iran.

Farhang Torki earned his Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.)

degree in animal biology from Lorestan University and

his Masters of Science (M.Sc.) degree in animal biosys-

tematics from Razi University. During his B.Sc. studies,

he worked on histological and embryological methods,

especially on spermatogenesis and oogenesis of reptiles,

and the herpetofauna of Lorestan Province. During his

graduate studies (M.Sc.) he worked on the systematics

of amphibians and reptiles of the southern and western

Iranian Plateau and continued developmental biology

work in herpetology. Following his graduate work he es-

tablished the Farhang Torki Ecology and Herpetology

Center for Research (FTEHCR) and the Farhand Torki

Herpetology Museum (FTHM). The purpose of his center

during 2007-201 0 was based on ecology and systematics

of Iranian herpetology. The FTEHCR is an independent

institution supported solely by a bequest from his father.

Currently, Farhang is studying the ecology and evolution

of geckos in Iran, especially the behavioral evolution of

Asaccus and Tropiocolotes.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 036

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e24

ative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any me-

dium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):37-46.

A brief history and current status of herpetology in Iran

1 4 NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI, ^IWA FAIZI, 2 HAMZEH ORAEI, ^ZAR KHOSRAVANI,

'BEHZAD FATHINIA, 'NASTARAN HEIDARI, 'RASOUL KARAMIANI, AND 3 ESKANDAR

RASTEGAR-POUYANI

1 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, 67149 Kermanshah, IRAN 2 Faculty of Biology, University College of Science, Univer-

sity of Tehran, Tehran, IRAN ^Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Teacher Training University, Sabzevar, IRAN

Abstract . — In this paper, we present a brief history of herpetology in Iran, discuss its current status,

and review some important works carried out by Iranian and non-Iranian herpetologists. Current

problems, information, and challenges associated with herpetology in Iran are presented. Finally,

current herpetological studies in Iran are introduced and potential biodiversity hotspots of herpe-

tofauna in Iran are identified. These potential hotspots are strongly recommended by experts in the

country to be considered for studies at the graduate level.

Key words. History, Iran, herpetology, status, studies, biodiversity hotspots, education

Citation: Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Faizi, H., Oraei, H., Khosravani, A., Fathinia, B., Heidari, N., Karamiani, R., and Rastegar-Pouyani, E. 2011. A brief his-

tory and current status of herpetology in Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):37-46(e25).

The herpetofauna of Iran is rich and diverse. In terms of

species richness and taxonomic diversity of reptiles, this

area harbors one of the most remarkable reptile faunas

within the western Palearctic region, owing to both high

habitat diversity and historical biogeographical factors.

Most amphibians and reptiles of Iran were originally

described by non-Iranian herpetologists in the “classical”

literature of scientific natural history, but recently, herpe-

tological studies by Iranian herpetologists have expanded

rapidly.

Unfortunately, despite the high diversity of the Ira-

nian Plateau herpetofaouna, the number of research stud-

ies carried out in this field has been limited. For the last

century, only a few reliable books have been published

by Iranian herpetologists: Amphibians of Iran (Balouch

and Kami 1995), Snakes of Iran (Latifi 1991, 2000), and

Field Guide to the Lizards of Iran (Rastegar-Pouyani et

al. 2006, 2007) are the main herpetological texts (in Farsi

and/or Persian) in Iran.

New molecular data and computational phylogenetic

methods are transforming the field of herpetology in a

number of ways, and many of these same transforma-

tions have occurred in other groups of organisms. These

approaches are overturning or questioning many tra-

ditional ideas about reptile and amphibian phylogeny

based on morphology. In recent years, Iranian herpetolo-

gists have been using these advanced methods to reveal

the species relationships of amphibians and reptiles of

Iran. Given current trends, we hope that the phylogeny

of most reptile and amphibian groups will be resolved

in the following years, at least at the level of currently

recognized genera.

Correspondence. 4 Email: nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 037

Recognizing the conservation status of endemic spe-

cies of amphibians and reptiles is of great importance.

The Iranian herpetofauna consists of about 15 species of

Anura (frogs and toads), seven species of Caudata (sala-

manders), nine species and six subspecies of Testudines

(Chelonia; turtles, terrapins, and tortoises), one species

of Crocodilian, one species of amphisbaenian, more than

135 species of Lacertilia (lizards), and about 85 species

of Serpentes (snakes). Of this great herpetofaunal diver-

sity, conservation status has been clearly delineated for

only two species of newts ( Neurergus microspilotus and

N. kaiseri ) from western Iran. Owing to causes including

lack of public knowledge about the significance of wild-

life, habitat destruction, overuse of natural resources,

road expansions, lack of public environmental knowl-

edge and education, legal and illegal use of firearms, and

environmental pollution, Iranian herpetofaunal biodiver-

sity is under serious threat.

Thus, it is necessary for Iranian herpetologists to take

special and effective steps in the study of the indigenous

herpetofaunal species of Iran to determine their conser-

vation status. The Iranian Plateau herpetofauna has suf-

fered from numerous devastating factors: the high rate of

human population growth in Iran, coupled with the rela-

tively low standard of living, create social conditions that

act to erode the remaining expanses of undisturbed veg-

etation, including those located within protected areas.

Deforestation rates in Iran are very high, and the amount

of forest in Iran is expected to decrease to a little more

than a third of its original total.

With regard to the limited distribution of endemic spe-

cies of the Iranian herpetofauna, determining the conser-

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

Figure 1. The spider viper Pseudocerastes urarachnoides in natural habitat, western Iran. Photo by Behzad Fathinia.

Figure 2. The Kermanshah cave gecko, Asaccus kermanshahensis , in natural habitat. Photo by Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 038

History and status of herpetology in Iran

Figure 3. The Loristan newt, Neurergus kaiseri. Photo by Bill Love; http://www.bluechameleon.org.

vation status of wide-ranging species like Mcicrovipera

lebetina, Pseudocerastes persicus, and Trapelus agilis is

easier than narrowly endemic taxa, such as P. urarach-

noides (Fig. 1), Bufo luristanica , B. kavirensis, Montivi-

pera latifi , Asaccus kermanshahensis (Fig. 2), A. nasrul-

lahi, A. kurdestanensis, and Tropiocolotes latifi.

A recent effort toward understanding the conservation

status of amphibians and reptiles in Iran was an IUCN-

SSC workshop in Antalya, Turkey to establish Red Book

status for all species of the Caucasus, Turkey, and Iran.

This workshop was attended by Iranian researchers, as

well as representatives from America and Europe in-

volved with the fauna of this region. Although this was

only a preliminary step, the workshop was useful in pro-

ducing tentative distribution maps for all species and

identifying areas of research needed to answer conserva-

tion problems. One definitive outcome was the develop-

ment of sufficient infonnation leading to a CITES listing

for the narrowly endemic endangered salamander, Neu-

rergus kaiseri (Fig. 3).

Based on long term surveys by researchers in dif-

ferent habitats and areas across Iran, regions with high

numbers of taxonomically problematic groups have been

identified. These problematic taxa need special attention

by researchers and young scientists of the country. Some

interesting reports include the rumored presence of Me-

salina guttulata in the plains of Khuzestan, southwestern

Iran, the possible presence of Phrynocephalus raddei

raddei in Kopet Dagh valleys on the border of Iran and

Turkmenistan, the presence of Cyrtopodion kotschyi in

northwestern Iran, and a high degree of individual varia-

tion in morphology in Tropiocolotes persicus ssp. south-

west of Minab in southern Iran. Further, the taxonomic

status of the relict genus Asaccus using molecular and

morphological approaches should be addressed within

the framework of a Ph.D. thesis. Also, the genus Ophio-

morus needs further studies and investigations employ-

ing morphological and molecular tools.

While there is an ongoing need to further ascertain

the range and distribution of all species, there are a num-

ber of geographic areas where additional exploration and

detailed collecting are particularly needed. The western

Zagros Mountains in Iran, Iraq, and southeastern Turkey

have been shown to be areas of high endemism and di-

versity, where new taxa are being described. The authors

consider that more herpetological surveys will produce

even more species. The Jaz Murian Depression in south-

eastern Iran, west of Iranshahr, although little-explored,

has yielded three narrowly distributed endemic species,

Mediodactylus sagittifer, Ophiomorus streeti, and an un-

described species of Scincus (Anderson 1999a). Few of

the many internal mountain ranges of the Central Pla-

teau of Iran have been explored zoologically. Some of

these may prove to be ecological islands of population

divergence. The Dasht-e Lut has been virtually impen-

etrable in the past, but the advent of improved field trans-

portation now enables faunal surveys. This region is not

expected to have great diversity or population densities,

owing to its extremely arid and severe conditions, but

studies will reveal interesting adaptations that provide

for the survival of fauna in these harsh environments.

The Makran Range forms the border of the southeastern

edge of the Iranian Plateau and has yet to be adequate-

ly surveyed for fauna in Iran, Afghanistan, or Pakistan,

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 039

Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

where tribal unrest and military intervention has made

the possibility of surveys problematic in the two last

countries. Over the last half century, a number of species

(such as Lytorhynchus maynardi , Eristicophis macmaho-

nii, and Rhinogecko misonnei ) previously known from

Pakistani Balochistan have been found in eastern Balu-

chistan, indicating that the ranges of more Pakistani and

Afghani fauna may extend west into Iranian Baluchistan.

The collections of the Afghan Boundary Commission

more than a century ago produced many species endemic

to that region, and only sporadic collection has occurred

along this border since. Kuh-e Taftan, also rarely visited,

yielded the lizard species Eremias lalezharica, described

less than 20 years ago; it has not been visited by herpe-

tologists since. Only random collecting has been done on

the islands of the Persian Gulf, apart from Qeshm Island.

Recent information suggests that the fauna of these is-

lands have much to reveal about trans-gulf connections.

In order to better promote herpetology in Iran, a na-

tional herpetological society that publishes, at least an-

nually, developments in Iranian herpetology is desirable.

A network to facilitate exchange of ideas and published

literature and a repository of electronic copies of past and

present world literature pertaining to the taxa of amphib-

ians and reptiles of Iran would be helpful. At least two

existing websites, Pars Herpetologists Institution (http://

www.pars-herp.org/) founded by Omid Mozaffari, and

Steven Anderson’s personal website (http://swasiazo-

ology.tripod), were begun with the intention of serving

some of these needs. Both are still in development, but

they require more time and effort than has proven pos-

sible thus far.

It may be worth noting that the attendance of Iranian

herpetologists at national and international meetings has

increased as research and publication have progressed.

The first herpetological meeting in Iran was held at Ker-

man in February 2009 and several faculty and students

attended the SEH meeting in Turkey in 2009.

At present, there is a lack of local suppliers of the

books and equipment necessary for professional herpe-

tologists and herpetoculturalists to maintain animals in

captivity.

There is also a developing interest by private or ama-

teur herpetologists towards herpetology in Iran. Although

not funded by the taxpayers, in recent years these indi-

viduals have made major contributions toward supple-

menting the studies of academic herpetologists.

Iran has a rather long histoiy of herpetological stud-

ies, from the 1700s until the present. The original sci-

entific herpetological studies were mostly carried out by

non-Iranian researchers (e.g., Olivier, Blanford, Zarudny,

De Filippi, and Nesterov) but modem studies have been

carried out mainly by young native herpetologists. Here

we present a brief history of contemporary herpetologists

who have made important contributions in the study of

the Iranian Plateau herpetofauna.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 040

Taxonomic and faunistic studies on the herpetofauna

of Iran were carried out by Steven C. Anderson (e.g.,

1963, 1966a,b,c, 1974, 1999a, b; Fig. 4) who spent about

nine months in Iran during 1958 and paid a shorter visit

to the country in 1975. In 1999, Anderson published the

results of his 40-year studies in a book entitled The Liz-

ards of Iran (Anderson 1999a). Currently, this book is

considered a key reference for all herpetologists in Iran,

both experts and amateurs, in spite of the fact that the

taxonomy of many taxa has been superseded as a result

of subsequent studies. Of the other contemporary herpe-

tologists, we mention Goran Nilson and Claes Andren

(Fig. 5), the Swedish herpetologists who visited Iran a

number of times (1973, 1976, 2000, 2002) and made im-

portant contributions in the study of the Iranian Plateau

Amphibians and Reptiles, describing Bufo kavirensis and

Ophiomorus nuchalis, among others.

The late Mahmoud Latifi (Fig. 6), a researcher of the

Razi Institute considered one of the pioneers in serum

production in the world, published a book entitled The

Snakes of Iran in 1984 (see also Latifi 1991, 2000), with

illustrations and an identification key for all recognized

species. As with Anderson’s book, many of the generic

names of these snakes have since changed.

Mohammed Baloutch, during a series of herpetologi-

cal expeditions in Iran, trained a generation of herpetolo-

gists and described two new species of lizards (Baloutch

1976, 1986). Together with Haji Gholi Kami (another

contemporary herpetologist), Baloutch published the

only textbook on Iranian amphibians entitled Amphib-

ians of Iran (Baloutch and Kami 1995) (in Persian). The

history of herpetological studies in Iran prior to the cur-

rent century has been presented by Anderson (1999a, b).

Since 1988, ongoing studies by N. Rastegar-Pouyani

and his younger brother E. Rastegar-Pouyani (Fig. 7)

have led to descriptions of numerous new taxa of reptiles

(e.g., N. Rastegar-Pouyani 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999; Ras-

tegar-Pouyani and Nilson 1997, 1998; Rastegar-Pouyani

and Rastegar-Pouyani 2001; Rastegar-Pouyani, Nilson,

and Faizi 2006) and are among the most comprehensive

studies in Iranian herpetology. Fortunately, today there

are some young and active herpetologists (co-authors of

this paper among them) devoting their studies to the Ira-

nian Plateau herpetofauna and conducting field research

in various parts of the country.

Various universities and institutions in Iran are of-

fering programs in order to enhance the knowledge of

herpetology among Iranian students, both undergraduate

and graduate. These include Shahid Bahonar University

and International Center for Science, High Technology

and Environmental Science Zoological Museum (IC-

STZM) in Kerman Province, which is directed by So-

heila Shafiei (a Ph.D. student in herpetology) and Mehdi

Rajabizadeh (M.Sc. in herpetology) respectively. Gorgan

University, directed by Haji Gholi Kami, also offers a

major collection of the amphibians and reptiles of Iran in

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

History and status of herpetology in Iran

Figure 4. Steven C. Anderson (left) and Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani (right) at the 3rd World Congress of Herpetology,

Prague, Czech Republic, August 1997. Photo by Natalia Ananjeva.

Figure 5. Claes Andren (left), N. Rastegar-Pouyani (middle) and Goran Nilson (right) at the 3rd Asian Herpetological

Meeting, Almaty, Kazakhstan, September 1998. Photo by Sahat Shamakov.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 041

Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

Figure 6. The late Mahmoud Latifi. Unknown photographer.

Figure 7. Type locality of Eremias montanus, 19 June 2004 (the senior author, left, and

Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani, right). Photo by Maysam Rastegar-Pouyani.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 042

History and status of herpetology in Iran

its zoological museum, providing a very good resource

for herpetological studies. This museum collection is

known as the Gorgan University Zoological Museum

(GUZM). In collaboration, the Razi University Zoologi-

cal Museum (RUZM) also provides a valuable collection

of amphibians and reptiles belonging to most families

and genera that have been collected over Iran. This col-

lection is directed and managed by the senior author. Fur-

ther, graduate programs in herpetology are also offered

by Department of Biology, Razi University, which has

produced various peer-reviewed herpetological papers,

M.Sc, theses, and Ph.D. dissertations. At Razi Univer-

sity, the masters program in herpetology was established

by the senior author in 2000 and a new Ph.D. program

in herpetology in 2010, the students of which are trained

in various aspects of herpetology in the Iranian Plateau,

mainly focusing on problematic taxa of amphibians and

reptiles. These broad studies employ morphological, mo-

lecular, and ecological approaches. The main authority in

molecular herpetology in Iran is one of us (E. Rastegar-

Pouyani) from the Teacher-Training University of Sabze-

var, Khorasan Province, who graduated from Heidelberg

University in Germany after studying the molecular phy-

logenetics of reptiles, with the Eremias persica complex

as the main subject of his doctoral dissertation.

There are also conservation programs and projects of-

fered by the Department of the Environment (DOE) that

try to expand and increase the knowledge of herpetology

in Iran. These programs and projects are mainly conduct-

ed and carried out by a variety of the above-mentioned

herpetologists, as well as by the co-authors of this pa-

per. The MMTT (Iranian National Natural History Mu-

seum), which once was a center of research with a very

nice exhibition in Tehran, is now incorporated into the

general collections and exhibitions of the Department of

the Environment. Some workers (e.g., N. Rastegar-Pouy-

ani, and S. C. Anderson) have been interacting with the

MMTT at various periods, and the senior author and Haji

Gholi Kami from Gorgan University worked as herpe-

tologists in the MMTT from 1989 to 1992.

An updated checklist of the reptiles and amphibians

of Iran (Rastegar-Pouyani et al. 2008) enumerated the

number of amphibians, lizards, snakes, and turtles of the

country. This paper was published in the recently estab-

lished Iranian Journal of Animal Biosystematics (IJAB).

In summary, Iran has a long-lasting history in herpe-

tological studies and, as a complicated and rich region

from the herpetological point of view, warrants more

comprehensive studies on its herpetofauna using vari-

ous disciplines. In this way, it is hoped that more new

taxa and new discoveries will be uncovered and that

more herpetologists will become devoted and active in

the study of Iranian amphibians and reptiles thus helping

protect these wonderful animals for future generations.

Acknowledgments. — We thank Steven C. Anderson

for all his help, suggestions, and comments on the earlier

drafts of this paper.

References

Anderson, S. C. 1963. Amphibians and Reptiles from

Iran. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sci-

ences, Series 4, 31(16):417- 98, 15 figs.

Anderson, S. C. 1966a. The Turtles, Lizards, andAmphis-

baenians of Iran. Ph.D., Stanford University (Univer-

sity Microfilms International, Order no. 66-14, 629.

Ann Arbor). 660 p.

Anderson, S. C. 1966b. A substitute name for Agama

persica Blanford. Herpetologica 22(3):230.

Anderson, S. C. 1966c. The lectotype of Agama isolepis

Boulenger. Herpetologica 22(3): 230-231.

Anderson, S. C. 1974. Preliminary key to the Turtles, liz-

ards and Amphisbaenian of Iran. Fieldiana: Zoology

65(4):27-44.

Anderson, S. C., 1999a. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca, New

York. 415 p.

Anderson, S. C. 1999b. Fauna of Persia, p. 437-446 in

Yarshater, Ehsan (editor). Encyclopaedia Iranica.

Volume 9. Bibliotheca Persica Press, New York, New

York, USA. 672 p.

Baloutch, M. 1976. Une nouvelle espece de Lacerta (La-

certilia, Lacertidae) du sud-ouest de 1’Iran. Bulletin

du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle (Paris)

294:1379-1384.

Baloutch, M. and Kami, H. G. 1995. Amphibians of Iran.

University Publications, Tehran, Iran. 177 p. (hi Per-

sian).

Baloutch, M. and Thirean, M. 1986. Une espece nouvelle

de gecko Eublepharis ensafi (Sauria, Gekkonidae,

Eublepharinae) du Khouzistan (sud ouest de 1 Iran).

Bulletin Mensuel de la Societe Linneene de Lyon

55(8):281-288.

Latifi, M. 1984. [The Snakes of Iran]. Iran Department

of the Environment, Tehran, Iran. 221 p. (In Persian).

Latifi, M. 1991. The Snakes of Iran. English edition.

Contributions to Herpetology, Volume 7. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Oxford, Ohio,

USA. 24 text-figs, 25 col. pis., 3 tables, viii +159

p. (Translated from the Persian edition by Sajadian,

Sepideh; Volume editors, Leviton, A. and Zug, G.).

Latifi, M. 2000. [Snakes of Iran]. Edition 3. Iranian De-

partment of the Environment publications. Xviii +

478 p. (In Persian).

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1996. A new species of Asaccus

(Sauria: Gekkonidae) from the Zagros Mountains,

Kermanshah Province, western Iran. Russian Journal

of Herpetology 3(1): 1 1-17.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 043

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1997. [Abstract] Systematics and

distribution of the Trapelus agilis complex, p. 168-

169 in Rocek, Zbynek and Hart, Scott (editors). Her-

petology '97. Abstracts of the Third World Congress

of Herpetology, 2-10 August 1997 Prague, Czech Re-

public. Third World Congress of Herpetology, Prague,

Czech Republic. 252 p.

Rastegar-Pouyani N. 1998a. A new species of Acan-

thodactylus (Sauria: Lacertidae) from Qasr-e-Shirin,

Kermanshah Province, western Iran. Proceedings

of the California Academy of Sciences, Series 4,

50(9):257-265.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1998b. Systematics and distribu-

tion of the Iranian species of Trapelus (Sauria: Agami-

dae): a review. Russian Journal of Herpetology 5(2):

127-146.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1999a. Systematics and Biogeog-

raphy of Iranian Plateau Agamids (Sauria: Agami-

dae). Ph.D. Dissertation. Goteborg University, Gote-

borg, Sweden, v + 176 p.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1999b. Analysis of geographic

variation in the Trapelus agilis Complex (Sauria:

Agamidae). Zoology in the Middle East 19:75-99.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1999c. First record of the lacertid

Acanthodactylus boskianus (Sauria: Lacertidae) for

Iran. Asiatic Herpetological Research 8:85-89.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 1999d. Two new subspecies of

Trapelus agilis complex (Suaria: Agamidae) from

Lowland Southwestern Iran and Southeastern Paki-

stan. Asiatic Herpetological Reserch 8:90-101.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. 2000. Taxonomic status of Trape-

lus ruderatus (Olivier) and T. persicus (Blanford), and

validity of T. lessonae (De Filipp i). Amphibia-Reptilia

21:91-102.

Rastegar-Pouyani N. andNilson, G. 1997. Anew species

of Eremias (Sauria: Lacertidae) from Fars Province,

South-Central Iran. Russian Journal of Herpetology

4(2):94-101.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. and Nilson, G. 1998. A new spe-

cies of Lacerta (Sauria: Lacertidae) from The Zagros

Mountains, Esfahan Province, West-Central Iran. Pro-

ceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, Se-

ries 4, 50(10):267-277.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. and Nilson, G. 2002. Taxonomy

and biogeography of the Iranian species of Lauda-

kia (Sauria: Agamidae). Zoology in the Middle East

26:93-122.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Nilson, G., and Faizi, H. 2006.

A new species of Asaccus (Sauria: Gekkonidae)

from Kurdistan province, Western Iran. Hamadryad

30(1): 141-150.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Johari, M., and Parsa, H. 2006.

Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1: Liz-

ards. First edition. Razi University Press. 268 p. (In

Persian).

Rastegar-Poutani, N., Johari, M, and Rastegar-Pouyani,

E. 2007. Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1:

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 044

Lizards. Second edition. Razi University Publishing,

Iran. 296 p. (In Persian).

Rastegar-Pouyani, N, Kami, H. G., Rajabizadeh, M.,

Shafiei, S., and Anderson, S. C. 2008. Annotated

checklist of amphibians and reptiles of Iran. Iranian

Journal of Animal Biosystematics 4(l):43-66.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N. and Rastegar-Pouyani, E. 2001.

A new species of Eremias (Sauria: Lacertidae) from

the highlands of Kermanshah Province, western Iran.

Journal of Asiatic Herpetological Research 9:107-

112 .

Manuscript received: 08 June 2011

Accepted: 27 June 2011

Published: 1 7 October 2011

Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani Teamed his B.S. in Zool-

ogy from Razi University Kermanshah, Iran in 1986 and

his M.S. in Zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran

in 1991, where he studied herpetology with the agamids

as the central object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg

University, Sweden in 1994 under the advisement of Pro-

fessor Goran Nilson and graduated in 1999, working on

taxonomy and biogeography of Iranian Plateau agamids

with Trapelus as the main object. His research interests

include taxonomy and biogeography of the Iranian Pla-

teau, the Middle East and Central Asian herpetofauna.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

History and status of herpetology in Iran

Hiva Faizi earned his B.Sc. in plant biology from Shahid

Beheshti University (SBU) and his M.Sc. in Animal Biosys-

tematics from Razi University. He is currently employed

as a specialist in ecological studies and environment at

Mahab Ghodss Consulting Engineering Company. His

special interests are morphology, systematics, taxonomy,

and biogeography of the Iranian Plateau with special

reference to reptiles and amphibians. During his M.Sc.

he studied the genus Trachylepis in Iran from different

perspectives, including morphology, osteology, parasi-

tology, and systematics of Trachylepis aurata transcau-

casica. Hiva has described a new species of Asaccus

lizard, Asaccus kurdistanensis with his supervisor Prof.

Nasrulla Rastegar-Pouyani and his collaborator Prof.

Goran Nilson. Hiva has also studied the near eastern fire

salamander, Salamandra infraimmaculata seminovi, from

Kurdistan province, western Iran. Hiva is collecting data

and samples of Neurergus microspilotus and Neurergus

kaiserito start a Ph.D. project on population genetics and

genetic diversity of the two previously mentioned species.

Hamzeh Oraie is a Ph.D. student in the Department of

Zoology at the University of Tehran. He received his B.S.

in Biological Sciences from the University of Razi, Ker-

manshah. He obtained his M.S. in Animal Biosystemat-

ics from the University of Razi, Kermanshah, where he

researched the geographic variation of Cyrtopodion sca-

brum (Sauria: Gekkonidae) in Iran. His current research

interests include molecular systematics and phylogeog-

raphy of Ophisops elegans (Sauria: Lacertidae) in Iran.

Azar Khosravani earned her B.S. in Biological Sciences

from the University of Zabol. She received her M.S. in

Animal Biosystematics from the University of Razi, Ker-

manshah, where she researched the geographic varia-

tion of Mesalina watsonana (Sauria: Lacertidae) in Iran.

Currently she is a Ph.D. student in the Department of

Biology at the University of Razi, Kermanshah. Her cur-

rent research interests include molecular systematics and

phylogeography of Lacertid lizards in Iran.

Behzad Fathinia earned his B.A. and M.S. from Isfahan

and Lorestan universities, respectively. His M.S. reaserch

focused on “The Biosystematic Study of Lizards of llam

Province.” For the time being, he is a Ph.D. student at

Razi University, Kermanshah, western Iran under supervi-

sion of Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, Mozafar Sharifi, and

Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani. His dissertation research

involves ecology, phylogeography, molecular systemat-

ics, and population genetics of the Iranian viper Pseudo-

cerastes urarachnoides in western Iran. He is also inter-

ested in other reptiles, specially snakes.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 045 October 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 2 | e26

Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

Nastaran Heidari is a Ph.D student at the Department

of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, Kerman-

shah. She received her B.Sc. in biology from Zabol Uni-

versity in eastern Iran and her M.Sc. in environmental

sciences from Ahwaz Research and Science University.

She started her studies as an Environmental Engineer

but then began her professional life towards reptiles

during her M.Sc. in 2008. During this time as a masters

student she studied the lizard fauna of the Gando Pro-

tected Area (Southeastern Iran), with outstanding results.

In 2010 she was accepted as a Ph.D. student at Razi

University, Kermanshah under the advisement of Prof. N.

Rastegar-Pouyani. Her dissertation research project and

main focus will be the phylogeny and molecular systemat-

ics of the genus Acanthodactylus (Sauria: Lacertidae) in

the Iranian Plateau (an important and noticeable taxon of

lacertid lizard in Iran).

Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani earned his B.Sc. in Ani-

mal Science from Tehran University, Iran in 1995 and his

M.Sc. in Animal Biosystematics from Teacher Training

University of Tehran, Iran in 1997, where he studied the

herpetofauna of the Semnan Province, northeastern Iran.

In 2007 he received his Ph.D. from the University of Hei-

delberg, Germany under the advisement of Michael Wink

and Ulrich Joger. His doctoral dissertation investigated

the molecular phylogeny and phylogeography of the ge-

nus Eremias (Sauria, Lacertidae).

Rasoul Karmiani earned his B.S. in Animal Biology from

the Lorestan University of Lorestan province, Iran in 2004

and his M.S. in Animal Biosystematics from Razi Uni-

versity, Kermanshah, Iran in 2009. During his graduate

education he studied the systematics of the Family Eu-

blepharidae in Iran with special reference to Eublepharis

angramainyu Anderson and Leviton 1966. He also inves-

tigated skull comparison of the genera Eublepharis and

Asaccus under the advisement of Prof. Nasrullah Ras-

tegar-Pouyani. His research interests include taxonomy,

ecology, biology, conservation, and phylogeography.

October 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 2 I e26

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 046

Copyright; © 201 1 Fathinia et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Com-

mons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided

the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):47-53.

Sexual dimorphism in Carinatogecko heteropholis (Minton,

Anderson, and Anderson, 1970) (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from

Mam Province, western Iran

1 3 BEHZAD FATHINIA, 'NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI, AND 2 HOSSEIN MOHAMADI

'Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, Kermanshah, IRAN 2 Head of Natural History Museums and Genetic Resources, De-

partment of Environmental Protection Organization, Tehran, IRAN

Abstract . — Sexual dimorphism is a widespread phenomenon in animals, but so far undocumented

in Carinatogecko heteropholis. In this study, 52 specimens were collected in Karezan, Ham province,

western Iran. The uni- and multivariate analyses performed on the morphological data revealed

that females are larger than males. All of the sexual differences were female-biased, except for the

infralabial scales.

Key words. Carinatogecko heteropholis , sexual dimorphism, statistical analysis, morphology, Ilam Province, Iran

Citation: Fathinia, B., Rastegar-Pouyani, N., and Mohamadi, H. 2011. Sexual dimorphism in Carinatogecko heteropholis (Minton, Anderson, and Ander-

son, 1970) (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Ilam Province, western Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):47-53(e27).

Introduction

The genus Carinatogecko Golubev and Szczerbak, 1981

comprises three species, the Iranian keel-scaled gecko,

the Iraqi keel-scaled gecko, and Anderson’s keel-scaled

gecko; all of them are found on the Iranian Plateau (Szc-

zerbak and Golubev 1996; Anderson 1999; Torki 2011).

The Iraqi keel-scaled gecko, Carinatogecko heteropholis

(Minton, Anderson, and Anderson 1970) is a small spe-

cies; its type locality in Iran is western Zagros foothills

(Anderson 1999; Fathinia 2007; Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

2007). It is hypothesized that the genus Carinatogecko

has a double Iranian-Mesopotamian origin (Fathinia

2007).

Sexual dimorphism (SD) is a common and wide-

spread phenomenon in the animal world (Andersson

1994). Sexual size dimorphism (SSD) explains the sta-

tus in which the males and females differ in measured

values of certain morphological characteristics. Sexual

size dimorphism (SSD) has been extensively described

in reptiles (Andersson 1994; Kuo 2009). Sexual dimor-

phism in animals is revealed in three different aspects:

behavior, size, and shape (Selander 1972). Numerous

surveys have been earned out on sexual dimorphism in

lizards (Stamps 1983; Rocha 1996; Carothers 1984; Triv-

ers 1976; Molina-Borja 2003; Baird et al. 2003; Verrastro

2004; Bruner et al. 2005; Kaliontzopoulou et al. 2007).

Differences in the selective forces acting on male

versus female body size are the main causes of sex dif-

ferences in adult body size of animals (Cox 2006). Sex-

ual dimorphism in lizards may result from differences in

Correspondence. 3 Email: bfathinia@gmail.com

food resource partitioning and sexual differences in en-

ergy allocation to growth (Baird et al. 2003).

To our knowledge this is the first survey on the oc-

currence of sexual dimorphism in the genus Carinato-

gecko. Clarifying the sexually distinctive traits in C. het-

eropholis is of evolutionary and systematic importance;

in this paper, we report results of such a study.

Material and methods

A total of 52 (28c? and 24$) adult specimens were col-

lected during summer 2010. All of them were collected

by hand with the aid of an electric torch at night on rocky

mountain sides of the Zagros Mountains in Karezan,

Shirvan-Chardavol, Ilam Province, western Iran (Fig.

1). Of these, 22 specimens were fixed in ethanol 75%

and deposited in the RUZM (Razi University Zoological

Museum) for future studies, and the rest (30 specimens)

were released in their relevant habitat 24 hours after col-

lecting and analyzing. The coordinates of the study site

are 33°44' N, 46°29' El 325 m a.s.l. Eight metric and four

meristic variables were chosen and measured by digital

caliper and stereomicroscope to the nearest 0.01 mm (Ta-

ble 1). Except for overall shape differences which can be

used to distinguish males from females (Fig. 2), sex of

specimens was mainly determined based on presence of

two swellings at the base of tail just behind vent in males

and their absence in females (Fig. 3).

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 047

Fathinia et al.

Figure 1 . Map showing the coordinates of the study site in Karezan region at mountainsides of the Zagros.

To determine the significance of sexual dimorphism

in C. heteropholis, the ANOVA Table as well as Princi-

pal Component Analysis (PCA: correlation matrix) were

used. The SPSS statistical software (version 13) was

used for carrying out the statistical analyses.

Results

Twelve morphological characters (eight metric and four

meristic) were included in the analysis. The values for

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 048

the metric and meristic characters as well as the direction

of differences and the significant characters ( P < 0.05)

are summarized in Table 2.

ANOVA Table Analysis

Metric variables: obvious differences in the value of vari-

ables are observed between the sexes. Females have sig-

nificantly greater values than the males for eight metric

characters. In the case of body length and the distance

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

Sexual dimorphism in Carinatogecko heteropholis

Figure 2. Dorsal view of male (left) and female (right) of Carinatogecko heteropholis.

Figure 3. Presence of swelling in the male of C. heteropholis at base of the tail which accommodate hemipenes (left)

and their absence in female (right).

November 201 1 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 049

Fathinia et al.

• •

****** *

4 •* . . * .

-2 -06000 -1,00000 Q.DD0D0 1.00000 2.00000 3 00000

Factor 1

Figure 4. Ordination of the individual males and females

of Carinatogecko heteropholis on the first two principal

components. Note the relative degree of isolation be-

tween males and females, which is mainly attributed to

SVL, TL, HL, HW, LFL, LHL, FHL, and VL in the PCI and

SL and IL in the PC2.

between forelimb - hindlimb (i.e., SVL and FHL, respec-

tively) females had values of 36.34 + 0.63 and 18.02 +

0.41 and males had 32.53 + 0.33 and 15.41 + 0.20 (P

< 0.05). Regarding the differences in extremities (fore-

limb, hindlimb, and tail) between females and males we

observed that females had values of 12.96 + 0.22, 17.46

+ 0.30, and 39.11 + 0.80 and males had values of 11.86

+ 0.10, 15.95 + 0.19, and 36.74 + 0.68 for LFL, LHL,

and TL respectively. Head dimensions also show signifi-

cant differences between the sexes. Females had values

of 8.94 + 0.13 and 6.99 + 0.10 and males had 8.51 +

0.08 and 6.65 + 0.07 for HL (head length) and HW (head

width), respectively. Regarding the last metric character

(i.e., VL or vent length), we realized that this character is

significantly different between females and males, so that

females have significantly greater values for VL (3.58 ±

Table 1. The metric and meristic characters used in this

study.

Characters Definition

SVL

snout to vent length

TL

length of tail

o

HL

head length

£

HW

head width

V

2

LFL

length of forelimb

LHL

length of hindlimb

FHL

forelimb to hindlimb length

VL

the greatest horizontal length of vent

o

SL

number of supralabial scales

w

IL

number of infralabial scales

<D

CT

number of crossbars on the tail

CD

number of chevrons on dorsum

0.10) than males (3.34 + 0.04) (P < 0.05). All the metric

variables are female biased. Reasons for presence of fe-

male biased sexual size dimorphism in the species are

taken up in the discussion section.

Meristic variables: Significant differences were not

observed in meristic variables, but SL (8.20 + 0.12), CT

(12.16 + 0.24), and CD (7.45 + 0.17) in females are larger

than SL (8.07 + 0.10), CT (11.96 + 0.21), and CD (7.32

+ 0.14) in males. In other words, the three characters are

not significantly female biased. Only one out of twelve

variables (i.e., number of infralabials, IL) was male bi-

ased, which in turn was insignificant. The value of IL in

males (6.85 ± 0.09) was insignificantly greater than that

in females (6.79 + 0.13) (P < 0.05).

Principal Component Analysis

The PCA performed on the dataset yielded three axes,

which collectively explained 73.38% of the total varia-

tion. The PCI explains 50.788% of the total variation.

Inspection of the loadings indicates that correlations with

all morphological measurements have the same sign

(positive) but not the same magnitude (Table 3). The first

axis is a clear indicator of body size. All metric variables

in the first axis have greater values than meristic ones,

hence making a greater contribution in sexual discrimi-

nation. The scores of the females along this axis show

an overlap with those for males, indicating that although

sexual dimorphism occurs between males and females,

the two sexes are not completely separated from each

other regarding these characters (Fig. 4). The second axis,

which contains 12.5 1% of the total variation is a meristic

axis that records individuals at one end with large SL and

IL and relatively small SVL compared with individuals

with small SL and IL and relatively large SVL. The third

axis contains only 10.08% of the total variation, being a

meristic axis that records individuals with large CT and

CD and relatively small VL at one end, compared with

individuals at the other end with small CT and CD and

relatively high values for VL.

Discussion

Carinatogecko heteropholis presented marked sexual di-

morphism in general body size and several body parts,

with females being significantly larger than males in

eight out of 12 studied characters.

The evolutionary result of selection acting differ-

ently on body size and the rest of male and female traits

is sexual size dimorphism (SSD) (Andersson 1994). Both

the proximate (growth patterns) and ultimate (evolution-

ary payoffs) causes are responsible for sexual dimor-

phism (Stamps 1993; Cox et al. 2003; Kuo et al. 2009).

Regarding size dimorphism, the proximate cause is an

agent which creates intersexual differences in growth

rate. Among these proximate causes, two are mention-

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 050

Sexual dimorphism in Carinatogecko heteropholis

Table 2. Comparison of 1 2 morphological characters in males and females of Carinatogecko heteropholis. SE: standard

error, D of d: Direction of difference. All measurements in millimeter (mm). Abbreviations: SVL (snout-vent length), TL

(length of tail), HL (head length), HW (head width), LFL (length of forelimb), LHL (length of hindlimb), FHL (forelimb-

hindlimb length), VL (the greatest horizontal length of vent), SL (number of supralabial scales), IL (number of infralabial

scales), CT (number of crossbars on the tail), and CD (number of chevrons on dorsum).

SEX

SVL

TL

HL

HW

LFL

LHL

FHL

VL

SL

IL

CT

CD

Mean

32.53

36.74

8.51

6.65

11.86

15.95

15.41

3.34

8.07

6.85

11.96

7.32

N

28

21

28

SEM

0.33

0.68

0.08

0.07

0.10

0.19

0.20

0.04

0.10

0.09

0.21

0.14

Mean

36.34

39.11

8.94

6.99

12.96

17.46

18.02

3.58

8.20

6.79

12.16

7.45

$

N

24

SEM

0.63

0.80

0.13

0.10

0.22

0.30

0.41

0.10

0.12

0.13

0.24

0.17

D. of d.

F>M

M>F

F>M

P-value

0.000

0.027

0.008

0.009

0.000

0.030

0.386

0.691

0.530

0.542

able: differences in growth hormone concentrations and

trade-offs in allocating energy between growth and re-

production (John-Adler et al. 2007; Kuo et al. 2009).

Presence of dimorphism between males and females are

defined by three main forces including: sexual, fecundity,

and natural selection (Olsson et al. 2002; Cox et al. 2003;

Kaliontzopoulou et al. 2007).

Ectotherms grow continuously throughout life and

they show a tendency to produce abundant, varying

numbers of progeny, which results in a vigorous corre-

lation between fecundity and body size of females, and

Table 3. Loadings from a Principal Component Analysis

of metric and meristic characters of Carinatogecko het-

eropholis. Variables loading strongly on each principal

component are in bold. Abbreviations: SVL (snout-vent

length), TL (length of tail), HL (head length), HW (head

width), LFL (length of forelimb), LHL (length of hindlimb),

FHL (forelimb-hindlimb length), VL (the greatest horizon-

tal length of vent), SL (number of supralabial scales), IL

(number of infralabial scales), CT (number of crossbars

on the tail), and CD (number of chevrons on dorsum).

Variable

PCI

PC2

PC3

SVL

0.958

-0.133

-0.054

TL

0.791

0.061

0.003

HL

0.884

-0.057

-0.042

HW

0.848

-0.087

-0.032

LFL

0.907

-0.055

-0.031

LHL

0.911

-0.073

-0.028

FHL

0.833

-0.066

-0.007

VL

0.756

0.254

-0.195

SL

0.147

0.784

-0.064

IL

0.102

0.851

0.077

CT

0.286

-0.156

0.748

CD

0.140

0.174

0.771

Eigenvalue

6.095

1.502

1.210

% Variance

50.788

12.513

10.085

Cumulative

50.788

63.301

73.386

probably that is why SSD in ectotherms is predominant-

ly female-biased (Trivers 1972). The SVL (snout- vent

length) and FHL (forelimb to hindlimb length) in fe-

males of C. heteropholis are greater than those in males.

In other words, the two characters, SVL and FHL, are

female-biased which can be the result of fecundity se-

lection in the species. A larger abdominal volume is an

ultimate cause which is selected in females because this

feature enhances fecundity (Monnet and Cherry 2002,

Tague 2005; Kuo et al. 2009).

Head size in a variety of lizards is male-biased (e.g.

Verrastro 2004; Smith and Nickel 2002; Vial and Stew-

art 1989; Anderson and Vitt 1990; Castilla and Bauwens

1991; Mouton and van Wyk 1993; Vitt and Colli 1994;

Barbadillo et al. 1995; Hews 1996; Smith et al. 1997;

Shine et al. 1998; Kratochvfl and Frynta 2002). In the

cases of HL (head length) and HW (head width) in C.

heteropholis , females have significantly greater values

than males. As reported for other vertebrates, a phenom-

enon which can support niche divergence hypothesis is

dimorphism in head size (Selander 1972; Shine 1989).

Reproductive role hypothesis is a hypothesis that ex-

plains differences in head size. Females have a greater

contribution in reproduction (Darwin 1871) and a larger

head should maximize energy intake. This idea may ex-

plain the presence of larger heads in females of C. het-

eropholis.

Further, in C. heteropholis, the volumes of LFL

(length of forelimb) and LHL (length of hindlimb) in fe-

males are significantly greater than in males. Sexually

size-adapted dimorphism in traits such as head, limb, and

tail measurements are assigned to an artifact of the ac-

ceptance of SVL for scaling to body size (Kratochvfl et.

al. 2003). Moreover, we suggest that longer and stronger

limbs are necessary to support greater distance between

forelimb and hindlimb (i.e., greater FHL) either in fe-

males or in males.

Our results show that in the case of C. heteropholis

the VL (vent length) in females is significantly greater

than in males. During mating, females with a larger VL

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 051

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

Fathinia et al.

are chosen by males. According to Andersson (1994),

this character in geckos may be the result of selection

for fecundity as well as selection for a larger female VL

during evolution.

Additional studies are needed to determine which of

these alternatives best explain the occurrence of sexual

dimorphism in C. heteropholis.

Acknowledgments. — We thank Hamzeh Oraei (Ph.D.

student). Department of Biology, Faculty of Science,

Tehran University, for his assistance in the statistical

analysis and Rasoul Karamiani (M.Sc. student), Depart-

ment of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, for

his contribution in identifying the species (i.e., Carinato-

gecko heteropholis).

References

Anderson, R. A. and Vitt, L. J. 1990. Sexual selection

versus alternative causes of sexual dimorphism in te-

iid lizards. Oecologia 84(2): 145-157.

Anderson, S. C. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for

the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca, New

York, USA. 442 p.

Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton Univer-

sity Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 624 p.

Baird, T. A., Vitt, L. J., Baird, T. D., Cooper, W. E., Jr.,

Caldwell, J. P., and Perez-Mellado, V. 2003. Social

behavior and sexual dimorphism in the Bonaire whip-

tail, Cnemidophorus murinus (Squamata: Teiidae):

the role of sexual selection. Canadian Journal of Zo-

ology 81(ll):n SI -17 90.

Barbadillo, L. J., Bauwens, D., Barahona, F., and San-

chez-Herraiz, N. J. 1995. Sexual differences in caudal

morphology and its relation to tail autotomy in lacer-

tid lizards. Journal of Zoology ( London ) 236(1):83-

93.

Bruner, E., Costantini, D., Fanfani, A., and DelTOmo,

G. 2005. Morphological variation and sexual dimor-

phism of the cephalic scales in Lacerta bilineata. Acta

Zoologica (Stockholm) 86(4): 245 -254.

Carothers, J. H. 1984. Sexual selection and sexual dimor-

phism in some herbivorous lizards. American Natu-

ralist (Chicago) 124(2):244-254.

Castilla, A. M. and Bauwens, D. 1991. Observations on

the natural history, present status, and conservation

of the insular lizard Podarcis hispanica atrata on the

Colubretes Archipelago, Spain. Biological Conserva-

tion 58(l):69-84.

Cox, R. M. 2006. A test of the reproductive cost hypoth-

esis for sexual size dimorphism in Yarrow’s spiny liz-

ard Sceloporus jarrovii. Journal of Animal Ecology

75(6):1361-1369.

Cox, R. M., Skelly, S. L., and John-Alder, H. B. 2003.

A comparative test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 052

size dimorphism in lizards. Evolution 57(7): 1653-

1669.

Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Man, and Selection in

Relation to Sex. John Murray, London. Volume 1: 423

p., Volume 2: 476 p.

Fathinia, B. 2007. The Biosystematic Study of Lizards

of Ilam Province. M.Sc. Thesis, Lorestan University.

126 p.

Hews, D. K. 1996. Size and scaling of sexually-selected

traits in the lizard, Uta palmeri. Journal of Zoology

(London) 238(4):743-757.

Kaliontzopoulou, A., Carretero, M. A., and Llorente, G.

A. 2007. Multivariate and geometric morphometries

in the analysis of sexual dimorphism variation in Po-

darcis lizards. Journal of Morphology 268(2): 152-

165.

Kratochvfl, L. and Frynta, D. 2002. Body size, male

combat and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in eu-

blepharid geckos (Squamata: Eublepharidae). Biolog-

ical Journal of the Linnaean Society 76(2):303-314.

Kratochvfl, L., Fokt, M., Rehak, I., and Frynta, D. 2003.

Misinterpretation of character scaling: a tale of sexual

dimorphism in body shape of common lizards. Cana-

dian Journal of Zoology 81(6): 11 12-1 117.

Kuo, C., Lin, Y., and Lin, Y. 2009. Sexual size and shape

dimorphism in an Agamid lizard, Japalura swinhonis

(Squamata: Lacertilia: Agamidae). Zoological Studies

48(3):351-361.

Molina-Borja, M. 2003. Sexual dimorphism of Gallotia

atlantica atlantica and Gallotia atlantica mahoratae

(Lacertidae) from the eastern Canary Islands. Journal

of Herpetology 37(4):769-772.

Monnet, J. M. and Cherry, M. I. 2002. Sexual size di-

morphism in anurans. Proceedings of the Royal

Society of London Series B - Biological Sciences

269(1507):2301-2307.

Mouton, P. le F. N. and van Wyk, J. H. 1993. Sexual

dimorphism in cordylid lizards: a case study of the

Drakensberg crag lizard, Pseudocordylus melanotus.

Canadian Journal of Zoology 71(9): 1715-1723.

Olsson, M., Shine, R., Wapstra, E., Ujvari, B., and Mad-

sen, T. 2002. Sexual dimorphism in lizard body shape:

the roles of sexual selection and fecundity selection.

Evolution 56(7): 1538-1542.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Johari, S. M., and Rastegar-Pouy-

ani, E. 2007. Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Vol-

ume 1: Lizards. 2nd edition. Kermanshah. 119 plates

+ 139 p. (In Persian).

Rocha, C. F. D. 1996. Sexual dimorphism in the sand

lizard Liolaemus lutzae of southeastern Brazil, p. 131-

140 in Pefaur, J. E. (editor). Herpetologia Neotropical.

Actas del II Congresso Latinoamericano de Herpeto-

logia Merida , Universidad de los Andes, Conselho de

Publicaciones, Volume 2.

Selander, R. K. 1972. Sexual selection and dimorphism

in birds, p. 180-230 in Campbell, B. (Editor). Sexual

Selection and the Descent of Man, the Darwinian

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

Sexual dimorphism in Carinatogecko heteropholis

Pivot. Heinemann Educational Books, London. 388 p.

Shine, R. 1989. Ecological causes for the evolution of

sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. The

Quarterly Review of Biology 64(4):419-431.

Shine, R., Keogh, S., Doughty, P., and Giragossyan,

H. 1998. Costs of reproduction and the evolution of

sexual dimorphism in a ‘flying lizard’ Draco mela-

nopogon (Agamidae). Journal of Zoology (London)

246(2):203-213.

Smith, G. R., Lemos-Espinal, J. A., and Ballinger, R.

E. 1997. Sexual dimorphism in two species of knob-

scaled lizards (genus Xenosaurus ) from Mexico. Her-

petologica 53:200-205.

Smith, G. R. and Nickle, A. M. 2002. Sexual dimor-

phism in three Cuban species of curly-tailed lizards

( Leiocephalus ). Caribbean Journal of Science 38(1-

2): 140-142.

Stamps, J. A. 1983. Sexual selection, sexual dimorphism

and territoriality in lizards, p.169-204 in Huey, R. B.,

Pianka, E. R., and Schoener, T. W. (editors). Lizard

Ecology: studies on a model organism. Harvard Uni-

versity, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 512 p.

Stamps, J. A. 1993. Sexual size dimorphism in species

with asymptotic growth after maturity. Biological

Journal of the Linnean Society 50(2): 123-145.

Tague, R. G. 2005. Big-bodied males help us recognize

that females have big pelves. American Journal of

Physical Anthropology 127(4):392-405.

Torki, F. 2011. Description of a new species of Carinato-

gecko (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Iran. Salaman-

dra 47(2): 103-1 11.

Trivers, R. L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual se-

lection, p. 136-179 in Campbell, B. G. (editor). Sex-

ual Selection and the Descent of Man, the Darwinian

Pivot. Heinemann Educational Books, London. 388 p.

Trivers, R. L. 1976. Sexual selection and resource-accru-

ing abilities in Anolis garmani. Evolution 30:253-269.

Verrastro, L. 2004. Sexual dimorphism in Liolae-

mus occipitalis (Iguania, Tropiduridae). Iherin-

gia. Serie Zoologia 94(l):45-48. [Online].

Available: http://www.scielo.br/scielo. php?pid=S0073-

4721 2004000 1 00007 &script=sci_arttext [Accessed:

14 October 2011].

Vial, L. J. and Stewart, J. R. 1989. The manifestation and

significance of sexual dimorphism in anguid lizards: a

case study of Barisia monticola. Canadian Journal of

Zoology 67(l):68-72.

Vitt, L. J. and Colli, G. R. 1994. Geographical ecology of

a Neotropical lizard: Ameiva ameiva (Teiidae) in Bra-

zil. Canadian Journal of Zoology 72(11): 1986-2008.

Manuscript received: 21 January 2011

Accepted:05 September 2011

Published: 05 November 2011

Behzad Fathinia earned

his B.A. and M.S. from

Isfahan and Lorestan

universities, respectively.

His M.S. reaserch fo-

cused on “The Biosyste-

matic Study of Lizards of

llam Province.” At pres-

ent, he is a Ph.D. stu-

dent at Razi University,

Kermanshah, western

Iran under supervision

of Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani, Mozafar Sharif i,

and Eskandar Rastegar-

Pouyani. His disserta-

tion research involves

ecology, phylogeography, molecular systematics, and

population genetics of the Iranian viper Pseudocerastes

urarachnoides in western Iran. He is also interested in

Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani earned his

B.S. in Zoology from

Razi University Ker-

manshah, Iran in

1986 and his M.S. in

Zoology from Tehran

University, Tehran,

Iran in 1991, where

he studied herpetolo-

gy with the agamids as the central object. He started his

Ph.D. in Gothenburg University, Sweden in 1994 under

the advisement of Professor Goran Nilson and gradu-

ated in 1999, working on taxonomy and biogeography

of Iranian Plateau agamids with Trapelus as the main

object. His research interests include taxonomy and bio-

geography of the Iranian Plateau, the Middle East and

Central Asian herpetofauna.

J Hussein Mohamadi is

^ the Head of Natural His-

B tory Museums and genetic

resources, Environmental

Protection Organization,

Tehran, Iran. He earned

his B.A. and M.S. degrees

from the Natural Resource

College of Tehran Univer-

sity. His M.S. thesis was

I “The Ecological study of

I the marsh Crocodile, Croc-

odylus palustris, in Baluch-

j s t a n He is now continuing

his study as a Ph.D. student in environmental science,

branch of science and research at Islamic Azad Univer-

sity. The subject of his Ph.D. thesis is “The assessment

of changing trends and modeling of habitat preference in

yellow Persian deer, Dama dama mesopotamica.”

other reptiles, especially snakes.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 053

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e27

mons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided

the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):54-60.

Additional information on Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko,

Rhinogecko misonnei de Witte, 1973 (Squamata, Geckonidae)

in Iran

'NAEIM MORADI, 'SOHEILA SHAFIEI, 2 HADI FAHIMI, AND 2 SIAMAK BROMAND

l Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, IRAN 2 Pars Herpetologists Institute, Tehran, IRAN

Abstract .— Three adult specimens of Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko ( Rhinogecko misonnei) were

collected in the west of Dasht-e-Lut desert in eastern Iran during fieldwork conducted April to Au-

gust 2009. The new locality of the species is situated about 100 km west of the type locality. Infor-

mation on habitat, pholidosis, and coloration is given. This record indicates a wider distribution of

Rhinogecko misonnei in southeastern Iran.

Key words. Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko, Rhinogecko misonnei, Iran, distribution, new locality

Citation: Moradi N, Shafiei SA, Fahimi H, Bromand S. 2011 . Additional information on Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko, Rhinogecko misonnei de Witte,

1973 (Squamata, Geckonidae) in Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):54-60(e31).

Introduction

Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko ( Rhinogecko mison-

nei ) was first described from “Dasht-e-Lut” (30°13'N,

58°47'E) by de Witte (1973). The holotype (IRSNB

2514) is kept in the L ‘Institute Royal des Sciences Nna-

turelles de Belgiques (Brussels). Szczerbak and Golubev

(1996) placed this species in the genus Agamura, where-

as, according to Anderson (1999), Rhinogecko is a dis-

tinct genus. No other specimens have been available until

during fieldwork in Kerman Province from 30 April to 13

August 2009, three specimens of Rhinogecko misonnei

were collected. As there are no data on the distribution

and description of this species beyond that of the type

description, this information and some ecological data

are presented here.

Methods and materials

Three specimens were collected from three locali-

ties as follows: ZMSBUK 700 (<$): 30°34’40.18”N,

57°51’9.03”E, 306 m elevation. ZMSBUK 701 ($):

30°33’5.30”N, 57°51’50.24”E, 300 m elevation. ZMS-

BUK 702 (?): 30°29’42.03”N, 57°44’12.01”E, 368 m

elevation. This area is situated in the west of Lut block

(National Geosciences Database of Iran 2010) in south-

eastern Iran. Specimens were deposited in the Zoological

Museum Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman (ZMS-

BUK).

We examined a set of six morphometric, and eight

meristic characters and compared these characters with

the holotype. The following characters were used for

morphological analysis, (abbreviations and measurement

details are given in parentheses): snout-vent length (SVL;

from tip of the snout to cloaca), tail length (TaL; from

cloaca to tip of the tail), head height (HH; behind eyes),

head width (HW; behind eyes), orbit diameter (OrD;

from anterior to posterior margin of orbit), ear length

(EaL; at widest point of the ear opening). All measure-

ments were taken with calipers to the nearest 0. 1 mm .

For better comparison of the specimens, several ra-

tios were calculated. These are head ratio (HHW; head

height to width ratio x 100), ear ratio (EED; ear opening

to eye diameter ratio x 1 00), and body length ratio (SVL/

TL).

Meristic characters: number of transverse ventral

scales (TVe; across midbody), number of longitudinal

ventral scales (LVe; between mental and cloaca), number

of active precloacal pores (PPo; in male only), number

of supralabials (SLa), number of infralabials (ILa), num-

ber of enlarged scales on lower surface of thigh (LsT),

number of scales across the head (SaH; interorbital, the

scales on the ridge above the eyes were not counted), and

number of scales around dorsal tubercles (SdT).

Results

Nasal shields of these specimens distinctly swollen and

erect, forming a short tube-like structure (Fig. 4, A); the

nasal caruncle formed by three nasal scales (Fig. 4, D);

Correspondence. Email: l naeim.moradi@y ahoo.com; website: 2 www.pars-herp.org

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 054

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Moradi et al.

Table 1 . Measurements for Rhinogecko misonnei. Character abbreviations as explained in the text. Asterisk indicates holotype and

paratype (Szczerbak and Golubev 1996).

IRSNB 2514, BZ

24.703 Reg. 25/6*

ZMSBUK 700

ZMSBUK 701

ZMSBUK 702

Sex

male

female

SLa

9-12

12-13

12-12

9-10

ILa

8-11

9-10

9-9

9-10

TVe

26-28

22

26

LVe

120

123

120

127

SdT

8-9

9-10

SaH

16

17

15

19

LsT

9-12

12

11

PPo

4-8

6

-

SVL

56.9-61 .0mm

56 mm

60 mm

56 mm

TaL

58.0-73.0mm

-

75 mm

-

HH

-

6.6 mm

7.7 mm

5.5 mm

HW

-

9.7 mm

11 mm

9.2 mm

OrD

-

4.6mm

4.1mm

4.0mm

EaL

-

2.0mm

SVL/TL

0.84-0.96

-

0.80

-

HHW

56

68

71

60

EED

53

43

48

50

22-26 scales across abdomen; a row of 11-12 enlarged

scales on lower surface of thigh (Fig. 4, G); Tail slightly

longer than body. Complete measurements of all speci-

mens are presented in Table 1 .

Color pattern

Dorsum gray, light brown to gray-brown, with five broad

dark brown crossbars, seven on tail, limbs with broad

brown bars less dark than those of body and tail, anterior

labial scales with dark brown spots, venter whitish (Fig.

3).

Distribution and habitat

This species is known from the remote Dasht-e Lut des-

ert in southeastern Iran (Fig. 2) and reported from Paki-

stan (Balochistan) (Anderson 1999; Khan 2004; Sindaco

and Jeremcenko 2008). Lut block is an elongated terri-

tory with general NS trend extending from Jazmurian in

the south to Gonabad in the north. This zone has a length

of 800 km and 200-250 km width. In the main Lut block,

only Permian limestone of the whole Paleozoic era is

exposed. Shallow marine Mesozoic sedimentary rocks,

as well as sporadic outcrops belonging to Shirgesht, Pa-

deha, Sardar, and Jamal fonnations are exposed. Conti-

nental Neogene-Quatemary deposits cover the surface of

Lut block (http://ngdir.ir; National Geosciences Database

of Iran 2010). These specimens were collected at mid-

night when air temperature was between 25°C to 41°C.

The vegetation is dominated by Seidlitzia rosmarinus

and Tamarix sp. (Fig. 1.). Syntopic lizard species are

Bunopus tuberculatus, Teratoscincus keyserlingii, and

Phrynocephalus maculatus maculatus.

Discussion

Except for the description of this species from the east

of Dasht-e-Lut by de Witte (1973) and reinvestigations

by Szczerbak and Golubev (1996) and Anderson (1974,

1999), no additional information has been available un-

til during fieldwork in the western area of Dasht-e-Lut,

three specimens of Rhinogecko misonnei were collected.

In pholidosis and coloration, specimens almost agree

with the descriptions of R. misonnei given by Anderson

(1999), Szczerbak and Golubev (1996), and Rastegar-

Pouyani et al. (2006), except for the number of scales

across abdomen (22-26 instead of 26-28), wider range

of LVe; (120-127 instead of 120), and number of scales

around dorsal tubercles (9-10 instead of 8-9).

Acknowledgments. — We are thankful to Mohammad

Ebrahim Sehati Sabet, Ah Hajizadeh, and Dr. Seyyed

Mansur Mirtajaddini, for collaborating with our group.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 055

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko, Rhinogecko misonnei

Figure 2. The habitat of Rhinogecko misonnei : (A) ZMSBUK 700 and 701; (B) ZMSBUK 702.

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

056

Moradi et al.

40'N

35°N

30’N

25°N

45‘E 50‘E 55‘E 60‘E

Figure 2. Distribution of Rhinogecko misonnei in Iran. Filled square: type locality (de Witte 1973). Filled circle: new locality.

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

057

Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko, Rhinogecko misonnei

(A)

(C)

Figure 3. Rhinogecko misonnei. (A) ZMSBUK 700; (B) ZMSBUK 701; (C) ZMSBUK 702.

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 058

Moradi et al.

Figure 4. Rhinogecko misonnei: (A) head from side; (B) head from below; (C) head from above; (D) snout from above; (E,F) dor-

sum; (G) femoral scale; (H) preanal pores; (I) ventral surface of digit; (J) tail from above; (K) tail from below; (L) belly.

Literature cited

Anderson SC. 1974. Preliminary key to the turtles, lizards and

amphisbians of Iran. Fieldiana: zoology 65(4):27-44.

Anderson SC. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for the Study

of Amphibians and Reptiles. Vii + 442 p.

de Witte GF. 1973. Description d’un Gekkonidae nouveau de

l’lran (Reptilia, Sauria). Bulitin d ’ Institut. Royal des. Sci-

ences Naturelles de. Belgique 49(1): 1-6.

Khan MS. 2004. Annotated checklist of amphibians and rep-

tiles of Pakistan. Asiatic Herpetological Research 10:191-

201 .

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 059

National Geosciences Database of Iran. 2010. Fut Block.

[Online]. Available: http://www.ngdir.com/GeoportalInfo/

SubjectInfoDetail.asp?PID=18&index=7 [Accessed: 24

August 2010].

PapenfussT, ShafieiBafti S, SharifiM. 2008 . Agamura mison-

nei. In IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Version 2010.4. [Online]. Available: http://www.iucnredlist.

org [Accessed: 10 May 2011].

Rastegar-Pouyani N, Johari SM, Parsa H. 2006. Field Guide

to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1: Lizards. Razi University,

Iran. 119 pis., 139 p. [In Persian],

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Misonne’s swollen-nose gecko, Rhinogecko misonnei

Sindaco R, Jeremcenko V. 2008. The Reptiles of the Western

Palearctic. Societas Herpetologica Italica. 579 p.

Szczerbak NN, Golubev LM.1996. The Gecko Fauna of the

USSR and Adjacent Regions [English edition; translated

from the Russian by Michael L. Golubev and Sasha A. Ma-

linsky; Alan E. Leviton and George R. Zug (editors)]. Soci-

ety for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca, New

York. 232 p.

Manuscript received: 09 July 2011

Accepted: 10 September 2011

Published : 14 November 2011

NAEIM MORADI earned his B.S. in Zoology from Shahid

Bahonar University Kerman, Iran in 2011. His B.S. research

focused on snake species diversity of Khabr National Park and

Ruchun Wildlife Refuge in Kerman Province under supervi-

sion of Soheila Shafiei. He collaborates with Shafiei’s group

in preparing an atlas on “Reptiles of southeastern Iran.” Naeim

gained tremendous experience in specimen locality data col-

lection and field techniques for catching various snakes. He is

interested in ecology, behavior, and conservation of reptiles,

especially snakes.

SOHEILA SHAFIEI earned her B.S. in Zoology from Tehran

University, Iran in 1990 and her M.S. in Zoology from Shahid

Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran in 1997. Soheila began her-

petology with a preliminary ecological study of lizard species

in some parts of Kerman Province, in southeastern Iran. Cur-

rently, she is a Ph.D. student at Tehran University, Iran, under

supervision of Prof. Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, Dr. Hasan

Rahimian, and Dr. Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani. Her disserta-

tion research focuses on geographic variation of Phrynocepha-

lus scutellatus (Olivier, 1807) (Sauria: Agamidae) in the Iranian

Central Plateau.

HADI FAHIMI has been studying reptiles in Iran since 2000

and is the chairman of Pars Herpetologists Institute. He finished

his B.A. in environmental engineering from Maybod Univer-

sity in Yazd Province and obtained an M.A. from Olum Tah-

ghighat University of Tehran.

SIAMAK BROOMAND has been studying reptiles in Iran

since 2006 with the Pars Hepetologists Institute and Mohitban

Society. He has an M.A. in English literature from Shahid Ba-

honar University of Kerman.

November 201 1 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e31

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 060

mons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided

the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):61-74.

A new species of Carinatogecko (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from

Mam Province, western Iran

'BEHZAD FATHINIA, 'RASOUL KARAMIANI, 2 HAMID DARVISHNIA, 3 NAGHI HEIDARI,

AND 1 “NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI

1 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, 67149 Kermansliah, IRAN department of Biology, Payam-e-Noor University, Talesh,

Guilan, IRAN 3 Department of Biology, Payam-e-Noor University, Ilam, IRAN

Abstract.— A new keel-scaled gecko, Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. (Squamata: Gekkonidae),

is described from the western foothills of the Zagros Mountains in the Zarinabad region, Dehloran

Township, Ilam Province, western Iran. It is a large Carinatogecko (snout-vent length exceeds 35

mm) which has distinct differences from other species of Carinatogecko: 1) postmentals absent, 2)

dorsal crossbars broad and equal to, or wider than, interspaces; broader than dorsal crossbars of

the three other Carinatogecko species. Some information about the habitat of the new taxon and the

role of the Zagros Mountains in isolation and subsequent evolution of Carinatogecko is provided.

Comparisons with other species of Carinatogecko and Bunopus tuberculatus, as representative of

the genus Bunopus, are presented. An updated key to the genus Carinatogecko is given.

Key words. Gekkonidae, Carinatogecko , C. ilamensis sp. nov., C. stevenandersoni, C. heteropholis, C. aspratilis,

Ilam Province, Iran

Citation: Fathinia B, Karamiani R, Darvishnia H, Heidari N, Rastegar-Pouyani N. 2011 . A new species of Carinatogecko (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Ilam

Province, western Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):61-74(e33).

Introduction

The first specimen of the keel-scaled gecko was collected

by Robert G. Tuck, Jr., and described by S. C. Anderson

(1973) from 35 km east of Gachsaran, Fars Province,

southwestern Iran. At that time, it was identified as Bu-

nopus aspratilis (Anderson 1973: 355-358). Then, this

taxonomic entity was elevated to the generic level, Cari-

natogecko, by Golubev & Szczerbak in 1981 (Golubev

& Szczerbak 1981: 35-37; Szczerbak and Golubev 1996:

127-130).

The genus Carinatogecko Golubev & Szczerbak,

1981 encompasses three species: C. aspratilis (Anderson

1973) distributed in southern and southwestern Iran, C.

heteropholis (Minton, Anderson, and Anderson 1970)

distributed in a few areas in the western Zagros foothills

of Iran and northeastern Iraq, and C. stevenandersoni

Torki, 2011, distributed in Lorestan Province, western

Iran (Torki 2011).

In this paper, we describe a new species of Carinato-

gecko Golubev & Szczerbak, 1981, point out some notes

on the habitat type and flora of the environment, and

compare the new species with other described species of

Carinatogecko.

According to the available data (Leviton et al. 1992;

Szczerbak and Golubev 1996; Anderson 1999; Fathin-

ia 2007; Rastegar-Pouyani et al. 2007; Cervenka et al.

2010; Torki 2011), the new species belongs to the ge-

nus Carinatogecko Golubev & Szczerbak, 1981 based

on having the following characters: All scales (except

rostral, mental, postnasals, and upper and lower labials)

strongly keeled; three nasal scales in contact with nostril;

digits weakly angular, clawed, not dilated, not webbed

nor ornamented, with keeled transverse subdigital lamel-

lae; dorsal scales heterogeneous, small juxtaposed scales

intennixed with tubercles; pupil vertical; tail segmented,

caudal tubercles with bases in the middle of each seg-

ment, separated from or in contact with one another,

separated by a ring of scales from the posterior margin

of a segment.

Methods and materials

During fieldwork on amphibians and reptiles of Ilam

Province, western Iran, two specimens of an unknown

gecko were collected in Zarinabad region, Dehloran

Township, Ilam Province (Fig. 1). The coordinates of the

type locality are 32°57'51" N, 47°03'23" E and 543 m

above sea level. The first specimen was collected active

at 23:00 p.m. and the second on the following day after

Correspondence. Email: 4 nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 061

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Fathinia et al.

Figure 1. The type locality of Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

in Ilam Province, western Iran.

excavating a hole at the foot of a Capparis spinosa at

10:00 a.m.

Both holotype and paratype specimens were pre-

served in 95% ethanol and deposited in RUZM (Razi

University Zoological Museum). Some of their char-

acters differ significantly from those of the other three

species of Carinatogecko (see below). The two unknown

specimens were compared with the other three species of

Carinatogecko (i.e., C. heteropholis, C. aspratilis , and C.

stevenandersoni ) as well as with the genus Bunopus ( B .

tuberculatus; Tables 1-2; Material examined).

Material examined

Bunopus tuberculatus (n = 5): RUZM-GB 140.1 - RU-

ZM-GB 140.5: Iran, Isfahan Province, Kashan.

Carinatogecko aspratilis (n = 3): RUZM-GC 10.1 - RU-

ZM-GC10.3: Iran, Kennanshah Province.

Carinatogecko heteropholis (n = 22): RUZM-GC. 110

- RUZM-GC. 131: Iran, Ilam Province, Shirvan and

Chardavol, Karezan, Sarab-e-Karezan village [33°44' N,

46°29' E and 1325 m above sea level].

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. (n = 2): RUZM-GC

120.1 - RUZM-GC 120.2: Iran, Ilam Province, Dehloran

Township, Zarinabad region [32°57'51" N, 47°03'23" E

and 543 m above sea level].

Results

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. (Figs. 2-7,

9b, lOa-d, 11c, 12d)

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:2E9C0362-DCA6-481B-B9BB-26C60FCE7D5F

Holotype

An adult male (RUZM-GC 120.1), collected by Hamid

Darvishnia on 8 August 2011, 500-600 m above sea

level, on the western gypsum foothills of the Zagros

Mountains, Zarin-Abad region, Dehloran Township,

Figure 2. The holotype of Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. in natural habitat.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 062

A new species of Carinatogecko

Figure 3. Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. a) polyhedral and multi-keeled scales on snout, b) semidivided rostral and five scales

between nostril, c) smooth supra- and infralabials, d) absence of postmentals.

Figure 4 . Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. a) keeled scales and tubercles on dorsum, b) juxtaposed, blunt, keeled ventral scales, c)

extending of dorsal tubercles onto nape and postorbital regions, but not onto occiput.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 063

Fathinia et al.

Figure 5. Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. a-b) relatively homogenous scales on upper arm and forearm, respectively, c-d) larger

dorsal scales and tubercles on thigh and shank, respectively.

Figure 6a. Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. a) mucronate, prominent tubercles on tail, b) comparison of tubercles on sacral region

and proximal part of tail.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 064

A new species of Carinatogecko

Figure 6b. Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. c) keeled scales on ventral part of tail, d) blunt, keeled scales at the base of tail just

behind the vent.

Figure 7. The paratype of Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. Dorsal view (left), ventral view (right).

Figure 8. Habitat of Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 065 December 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e33

Fathinia et al.

Figure 9. Comparison of dorsal pattern in a) Carinatogecko aspratilis, b) C. heteropholis, c) C. ilamensis sp. nov., and d)

C. stevenandersoni (d from Torki 2011).

Figure 10. Comparison of mental shape and postmental region in all four species of Carinatogecko. a) C. stevenandersoni , b)

C. aspratilis, c) C. heteropholis, and d) C. ilamensis sp. nov. (a and b from Torki 2011).

December 201 1 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 066

A new species of Carinatogecko

Figure 11. Comparison of dorsal pattern in (a) Bunopus tuberculatus and (b) Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 067

December 2011 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e33

Fathinia et al.

Figure 12. Comparison of al-a2) mental and gular scales, bl-b2) dorsal pholidosis, cl-c2) ventral pholidosis, dl-d2) preanal

pores, el-e2) upper caudal region, and fl-f2) ventral region of tail in Bunopus tuberculatus (left) and C. ilamensis sp. nov. (right).

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 068

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

A new species of Carinatogecko

Table 1. Comparison of morphological characters between C. ilamensis sp. nov. and Bunopus tuberculatus (as the representative

of the genus Bunopus, Blanford, 1874). Abbreviations: NGBM (number of granular scales behind mental); DS (dorsal scales); VS

(ventral scales); PP (preanal pores in males); CDBIN (comparison of dorsal bands in relation to interspaces); DB (dorsal bands); IN

(interspaces between dorsal bands); DCS (dorsal caudal scales); VCS (ventral caudal scales).

Characters

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

Bunopus tuberculatus

NGBM

6-7 keeled gular scales

3-7 smooth gular scales

DS

large and strongly keeled

small, juxtaposed, and smooth

BS

small, keeled, not imbricate

small, smooth, subcircular, juxtaposed

PP

weakly developed, few in number

well developed, more in number

CDBIN

DB > IN

DB much > IN

DCS

keeled

smooth

VCS

keeled, not platelike

smooth, some are platelike

Table 2. Comparison of morphological characters between C. ilamensis sp. nov. and the other three species of Carinatogecko.

Abbreviations: PM (postmentals); SHM (shape of mental); OT (tubercles on occiput); SVS (status of ventral scales); CDBIN (com-

parison of dorsal bands in relation to interspaces); DB (dorsal bands); IN (interspaces between dorsal bands).

Characters

C. ilamensis sp. nov.

C. aspratilis

C. heteropholis

C. stevenandersoni

PM

absent

three pairs

two pairs

3-4 pairs

SHM

simple

pointed posteriorly

not pointed posteriorly

pointed posteriorly

OT

absent

present

SVS

not imbricate, not pointed

strongly imbricate, weakly

pointed

weakly imbricate, not

pointed

weakly imbricate, pointed

CDBIN

DB >IN

DB < IN

DB <IN

Ilam Province, southwestern Iran at the coordinates of

32°57'51" N and 47°03'23" E.

Paratype

A subadult specimen (RUZM-GC 120.2), collected by

Behzad Fathinia on 9 August 2011 at the same locality

as holotype.

Diagnosis

Snout-vent length (SVL) in holotype and paratype 36.5

and 29.3 mm respectively. As in all congeners, scales and

tubercles all over the body strongly keeled (except up-

per and lower labials, nasals, rostral, and mental); dor-

sal scales heterogeneous, blunt; enlarged blunt tubercles

on dorsum; mucronate tubercules on tail more promi-

nent than tubercles on dorsum; homogeneous scales on

forelimbs smaller than those on hindlimbs; tubercles on

hindlimb few in number and all smaller than those on

dorsum; polyhedral, multi-keeled scales on the head in-

cluding rostral, prefrontal, and postfrontal regions; no

postmental; mental bordered by 6-7 small keeled scales;

scales on the ventral surface of head multi-keeled and

morphologically different from those on ventral region

of body and tail; ventrals equal to dorsals in length; ven-

tral side of tail without large plate-like scales, but with

keeled mucronate scales; 10-11 regular longitudinal rows

of tubercles on back; 30-32 ventral and ventrolateral

scales from side to side.

Dorsal regions brownish, ventral regions whitish;

complete regular chocolate crossbars across dorsum,

limbs, digits, and tail; dorsal side of head spotted; oc-

ciput with a transverse dark bar; supra- and infralabials

with dark spots; subdigital lamellae keeled.

Description of holotype

Snout-vent length (SVL) 36.5 mm.

a) head (Fig. 3): scales of frontal and supraocular

regions toward snout are multi-keeled (in some scales up

to six keels) and polyhedral, the keels meeting towards

the tip of the scale; rostral smooth and semidivided pos-

teriorly; nine smooth supralabials; nostril surrounded by

five smooth scales including: rostral, first supralabial,

and three postnasals; five scales between nostrils (first

and fifth are smooth, the others keeled); mental smooth;

no postmental; mental surrounded by seven small keeled

scales posteriorly; seven smooth infralabials.

b) trunk (Fig. 4): all tubercles and scales of dorsum

keeled, mostly blunt, a few mucronate; dorsal pholidosis

heterogeneous; tubercles of dorsum extending to nape

but absent in occiput; 1 1 longitudinal rows of tubercles

on dorsum; dorsal tubercles surrounded by 8-10 smaller

scales; 32 uniform ventrolateral and ventral keeled scales

in a single transverse row to the point where they are dis-

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 069

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Fathinia et al.

tinguished from dorsolaterals by different color and size;

ventral scales approximately equal to dorsals in length

(0.5 mm); five preanal pores.

c) fore- and hindlimbs (Fig. 5): scales on dorsal side

of forelimbs homogeneous and smaller than those on

hindlimbs; no tubercle on forelimbs; few tubercles on

hindlimbs; 17 keeled lamellae under the fourth toe.

d) tail (Fig. 6): caudal tubercles mucronate and more

prominent than tubercles on dorsum; six tubercles at

the middle of each whorl; tubercles in each whorl are in

contact or separated by a small scale; tubercle of each

whorl separated from preceding and succeeding whorls

by three rows of scales; ventral side of tail without large

plate-like scales, smaller blunt, keeled scales at the base

of tail just behind the vent, but becoming strongly mu-

cronate and keeled distally.

Color pattern (Figs. 2, 3c, 4b)

A transverse dark bar on occipital region; chocolate

spots and stripes on head; dark fine spots on supra- and

infralabials; dorsum light brown; five complete trans-

verse blackish bars from nape to sacral region, equal to,

or broader than, the lighter interspaces; complete dark

crossbars on dorsal side of limbs and digits; 10 distinct

brown transverse crossbars on the tail; ventral regions

uniformly whitish.

Description of paratype

Snout-vent length (SVL) 29.3 mm.

a) head: rostral smooth and semidivided posteriorly;

nostril surrounded by five smooth scales including ros-

tral, first supralabial, and three postnasals; five scales be-

tween nostrils, the first and fifth smooth, others keeled;

scales of prefrontal, pre- supra- and postoculars, and

those behind ears are coarse and multi-keeled, their keels

reducing toward parietal and occipital and gradually be-

ing replaced by uni-keeled scales; 10-10 smooth supra-

labials; a single smooth mental; no postmentals; mental

surrounded posteriorly by six small keeled scales; 8-8

smooth infralabials.

b) trunk: blunt, keeled tubercles and scales on dor-

sum, few are mucronate; dorsal scales heterogeneous;

10 longitudinal rows of tubercles; dorsal tubercles sur-

rounded by 8-9 keeled scales; 30 rows of keeled, uniform

ventrolateral and ventral scales at the point where they

are distinguished from dorsolaterals by different color

and size; ventral keeled scales equal to dorsal ones.

c) fore- and hindlimbs: dorsal scales on forelimb

homogeneous, smaller than those on hindlimb, tubercles

on hindlimb smaller than those on dorsum; 16 keeled tu-

bercles on the fourth toe.

d) tail: caudal tubercles mucronate and more promi-

nent than dorsal tubercles; six pointed tubercles at the

middle of each whorl, in contact with or separated from

each other by a small scale; each transverse row of tu-

bercles separated from anterior and posterior rows of

tubercles by three rows of keeled, usually blunt scales;

all sides of regenerated tail covered with blunt, keeled

scales; ventral side of tail without large, plate-like scales,

covered by small, pointed, and keeled scales.

Color pattern (Fig. 7)

Dark stripes and spots on dorsal side of head, postor-

bital, frontal, infra- and supralabials; dorsum brownish

white; six transverse chocolate bars on dorsum from nape

to sacral region, the fifth partial, others complete; width

of dark bars equal to or slightly smaller than light inter-

spaces; dark crossbars on limbs and digits, not reaching

ventral surfaces; ventral side of body whitish; dark trans-

verse bars on tail, extending to lateral tail region.

Habitat (Fig. 8)

At the type locality, the natural habitat is composed of

gypsum and lime sediments extending beyond the Ira-

nian border westwards into Iraq. According to Mozaffar-

ian (2008), a broad part of Ilam Province is a semi desert

region, while other parts have temperate climate and very

short winter frost. The type locality coincides with semi-

desert region.

Three climatic landscape and vegetation types occur

in the province: 1) vast plains of lowland semiarid region,

including plains and calcareous foothills, 2) more or less

dry Zagrosian oak forest dominated by Quercus brantii,

and 3) high mountains with cushion-like vegetation (Mo-

zaffarian 2008). The type locality is located within the

first of the three above-mentioned climatic types.

Different vegetation types mainly including grasses

(Gramineae), bushes and shrubs (Capparidaceae: Cap-

paris spinosa, Cleome oxypetala; Caryophyllaceae: Gyp-

sophyla linearifolia, G. pallida ; Chenopodiaceae: Halo-

charis sulphurea, Noaea mucronata, Salsola imbricate ;

Compositae: Achillea conferta; Rosaceae: Amygdalus

arabica ), and sparse trees ( Quercus brantii and Pistachia

atlantica) cover the area.

A permanent river (Gorazan River) flows through

this area. Both specimens were collected in the foothills

approximately 200-500 meters south of the river. The

type locality is under grazing by sheep and goat herds

belonging to the people of Cham-e-Sorkh village.

There is no information on the conservation status of

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

Sympatric lizards and snakes

Several species of lizards and snakes occur as sympat-

ric, or syntopic, with Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 070

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

A new species of Carinatogecko

Among lizards: Laudcikia nupta , Trapelus lessonae, Eu-

blepharis angramainyu , Asaccus elisae, Hemidactylus

persicus, Acanthodactylus boskianus, Trachylepis au-

rata, Uromastyx loricata, Varanus griseus; and among

snakes: Typhlops vermicularis, Spalerosophis diadema,

Walterinnesia morgani, Macrovipera lebetina , Pseudoc-

erastes urarachnoides.

Distribution

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. is as yet known only

from the type locality in the Zarinabad region, Dehloran

Township, Ilam Province, western Iran (Fig. 1).

Etymology

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. is so named as it has

been found, for the first time, in Ilam Province, western

Iran.

Comparisons

Comparison with the genus Bunopus Blan-

ford, 1874

The new species described here, at first glance, is similar

to Bunopus tuberculatus Blanford, 1874 in the absence of

postmentals and, to some extent, in overall body pattern

(Figs. 9- 10a). In order to reveal distinguishing characters

separating C. ilamensis sp. nov. from B. tuberculatus ,

some photographs from different body parts of both taxa

were taken and compared (Fig. 10). For this purpose,

spechnens of B. tuberculatus deposited in the RUZM

were analyzed and photographed.

In both compared species, postmentals are absent

and the mental has an irregular rear edge, bordered by

3-7 smooth granular scales in B. tuberculatus and 6-7

keeled granular scales in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (Fig. 10a);

dorsum covered by small, juxtaposed, smooth scales

intermixed with enlarged, keeled, trihedral tubercles

in B. tuberculatus, and tubercles are much larger than

surrounding scales, while dorsum is covered by keeled

scales intermixed with strongly keeled tubercles in C.

ilamensis sp. nov., and dorsal scales are approximately

half the size of tubercles (Fig. 10b); belly is covered with

small, smooth, subcircular, juxtaposed scales in B. tuber-

culatus and by small, keeled, approximately subimbri-

cate scales in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (Fig. 10c); preanal

pores present in males of both species and separated from

ventrals by several rows of scales, weekly developed in

C. ilamensis sp. nov. and lower in number than those of

B. tuberculatus (Fig. lOd); upper caudal scales smooth

in B. tuberculatus and keeled in C. ilamensis sp. nov.;

caudal tubercles more prominent in C. ilamensis sp. nov.

than in B. tuberculatus (Fig. 1 Oe); ventral part of tail in B.

tuberculatus covered by smooth scales and some scales

are more or less platelike and larger than adjacent ones,

while in C. ilamensis sp. nov. scales of ventral part of tail

are keeled, not plate-like, and almost the same size (Fig.

lOf). Table 1 represents comparison of some major mor-

phological characters between these two taxa.

Comparison with the other species of Cari-

natogecko Golubev & Szczerbak, 1981

In order to compare Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

with the other three species of Carinatogecko (C. aspra-

tilis, C. heteropholis, and C. stevenandersoni), the ma-

terial deposited at Razi University Zoological Museum

(RUZM-GC.110 - RUZM-GC.131) was examined and

combined with information obtained from the literature

(e.g., Leviton et al. 1992; Szczerbak and Golubev 1996;

Anderson 1999; Fathinia 2007; Rastegar-Pouyani et al.

2007; Cervenka et al. 2010; Torki 2011).

Based on the comparisons, C. ilamensis sp. nov. dif-

fers from its congeners by a combination of characters as

follows: The color pattern is different from those of C.

heteropholis, C. aspratilis, and C. stevenandersoni and

dark transverse bands on dorsum in C. ilamensis sp. nov.

are equal to, or wider than, light interspaces (in all other

three species the darker bands are much narrower than

interspaces; Fig. 11); the most obvious character differ-

entiating C. ilamensis sp. nov. from the other three men-

tioned species comes from postmentals. Carinatogecko

ilamensis sp. nov. has no postmentals (two pairs in C.

aspratilis, and C. heterophilis, and 3-4 pairs in C. steve-

nandersoni; Fig. 12); the mental is not pointed posteri-

orly in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (the opposite is true for the

three other species; Fig. 12); enlarged dorsal tubercles

extend onto nape and postorbital regions but absent on

occiput in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (extending on to occiput,

upper head, to between eyes, and onto temporal region

in C. stevenandersoni; extend onto occiput and run out

before reaching the interorbital region in C. heteropholis,

and run out in the occipital region in C. aspratilis); Ven-

tral scales not hnbricate in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (strongly

imbricate in C. aspratilis, weakly imbricate in C. hetero-

pholis, weakly imbricate in C. stevenandersoni ); ventral

scales not pointed in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (pointed in C.

stevenandersoni, not pointed in C. heteropholis, weakly

pointed in C. aspratilis ); scales posterior to the labials

not enlarged in C. ilamensis sp. nov. (not enlarged in C.

aspratilis, enlarged in C. heteropholis, much enlarged in

C. stevenandersoni); dorsal scales equal to ventrals in C.

ilamensis sp. nov. (larger in C. stevenandersoni, equal

or smaller in C. heteropholis, equal in C. aspratilis);

number of subdigital lamellae under fourth toe 16-18 in

C. ilamensis sp. nov (16-20 in C. stevenandersoni, 15

in C. heteropholis); SVL 36.53 mm in largest specimen

of C. ilamensis sp. nov. (41.10 mm in C. heteropholis,

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 071

Fathinia et al.

less than 27 mm in C. aspratilis , 36.49 mm in C. steve-

nandersoni ); all lower labials not divided in C. ilamensis

sp. nov. (fourth and fifth lower labials divided in C. ste-

venandersoni, not divided in both C. heteropholis and C.

aspratilis).

Summary

Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov. is a new taxonomic en-

tity within Carinatogecko Golubev & Szczerbak, 1981

based on having the following distinguishing characters:

1) mental not pointed posteriorly, 2) postmentals absent,

3) dorsal dark crossbars are equal to, or wider than, light

interspaces, 4) scales on upper side of forearm are homo-

geneous. These significant differences are indicative of

profound divergence of C. ilamensis sp. nov. from other

keel-scaled geckos of the genus Carinatogecko.

Biogeography

According to some workers (e.g., Macey et al. 1998,

2000; Rastegar-Pouyani 1999a, b, c; Rastegar-Pouyani

and Nilson 2002), occurrence of important and drastic

vicariant events, including uplifting of the Zagros and

Elburz Mountains in the late Tertiary, 15-9 million years

before present (MYBP), have affected distribution and

speciation of many of the Iranian Plateau lizards such as

Asaccus, Laudakia, Uromastyx, Trapelus, and others.

The keel-scaled geckos of the genus Carinatogecko ,

with four known species so far, are mainly found in the

Zagros Mountains and the adjacent foothills in western

Iran. The first logical speculation concerning biogeogra-

phy of the genus Carinatogecko is that they have had

a widespread distribution as an ancestral taxon before

the formation of the Zagros Mountains (15-9 MYBP).

The Zagros orogeny has caused geographic isolation of

ancestral populations leading to a reduced gene flow,

providing great opportunities for genetic divergence and

speciation in the keel-scaled geckos of the genus Cari-

natogecko.

Based on the available evidence, the Zagros Moun-

tains can be regarded as the center of origin and diversi-

fication for Carinatogecko.

Key to species of the genus Carinatogecko

Golubev & Szczerbak, 1981

Based on the available information (Leviton et al. 1992;

Szczerbak and Golubev 1996; Anderson 1999; Fathin-

ia 2007; Rastegar-Pouyani et al. 2007; Cervenka et al.

2010; Torki 2011) and comparison of the examined mate-

rial deposited in the RUZM, an updated key to the spe-

cies of Carinatogecko is provided.

Diagnosis of the genus

All scales of the body, with exception of intennaxillaries,

nasals, chin shields, and upper and lower labials, strongly

keeled; three nasal scales contact nostril; digits weakly

angularly bent, clawed, not dilated, not webbed, nor or-

Key to species of the genus Carinatogecko Golubev & Szczerbak, 1981

la Postmentals absent Carinatogecko ilamensis sp. nov.

lb Postmentals present 2

2a Presence of 3-4 pairs of postmentals Carinatogecko stevenandersoni (Torki 2011)

2b Presence of two pairs of postmentals 3

3a Scales in middle of back distinctly larger than abdominals; caudal tubercles pointed, raised, with en-

larged posterior facets; analogous dorsal tubercles present on forearms; 17-18 subdigital lamellae under

the 4 th toe Carinatogecko aspratilis (Anderson 1973)

3b Scales in middle of back negligibly smaller or alike in size to abdominals; caudal tubercles not point-

ed, posterior facets not raised; no analogous tubercles on forearms 4

4a Fifteen subdigital lamellae under the fourth toe; 11-13 bands on original tail

Carinatogecko heteropholis (Minton, Anderson, and Anderson 1970)

4b Sixteen to seventeen lamellae under the fourth toe; nine bands across original tail

Carinatogecko cf. heteropholis (Cervenka, et al. 2010)

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 072

A new species of Carinatogecko

namented, with keeled transverse subdigital lamellae;

dorsal pholidosis heterogeneous, small juxtaposed scales

intermixed with tubercles; pupil vertical; tail segmented,

caudal tubercles with bases in the middle of each seg-

ment, separated from posterior margin of segment by

ring of scales (Anderson 1999: 144).

Acknowledgments. — The authors thank the authori-

ties of Ilam Province Department of the Environment,

especially Mr. Fereydoon Baavir from Zarinabad city,

for his assistance during fieldwork. We thank the Razi

University authorities, Kermanshah, for their help and

support during field work in western Iran.

Literature cited

Anderson SC. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Contributions to Herpetolo-

gy, Volume 15. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles,

Saint Louis, Missouri, i-vii, 1-442 p.

Cervenka J, Frynta D, Kratochvil L. 2010. Phylogenetic relation-

ships of the gecko genus Carinatogecko (Reptilia: Gekkonidae).

Zootaxa 2636:59-64.

Fathinia B. 2007. Biosystematic Study of Lizards of Ilam Province.

M. Sc. Thesis, University of Lorestan, Khoramabad, Iran. 126 p.

(In Persian).

Golubev ML, SzczerbakNN. 1981. Carinatogecko gen. n. (Reptilia,

Gekkonidae): A new genus from south-west Asia. Vestnik Zoolo-

gii (Kiev) 5:34-41. (In Russian).

LevitonAE, Anderson SC, AdlerK, Minton SA Jr. 1992. Handbook

to Middle East Amphibians and Reptiles. Society for the Study

of Amphibian and Reptiles, Contributions to Herpetology 8. 33

plates, 252 p.

Mace y R J, S chulte JA, Ananje va NB , Larson A, Rastegar-Pouyani

N, Shammakov SM, Papenfuss TJ. 1998. Phylogenetic relation-

ships among agamid lizards of the Laudakia caucasia complex:

Testing hypotheses of biogeographic fragmentation and an area

cladogram for the Iranian Plateau. Molecular Phylogenetics and

Evolution 10(1):118-131.

MaceyRJ, Schulte JA, LarsonA, AnanjevaNB, Wang Y, Rastegar-

Pouyani N, Pethiyagoda R, Papenfuss TJ. 2000. Evaluating trans-

tethys migration: An example using acrodont lizard phylogenet-

ics. Systematic Biology 49(2):233-256.

Mozaffarian V. 2008. 2008. Flora of Ilam. General Office of Natural

Resources of Ilam Province, Tehran, Iran. 936 p. ISBN 978-964-

8637-69-4. (In Persian).

PolaszekA,AgostiD,Alonso-ZarazagaM,BeccaloniG, dePlace

Bjorn P, Bouchet P, Brothers D J, Earl of CranbrookEvenhuis

NL, Godfray HCJ, Johnson NF, Krell FT, Lipscomb D, Lyal

CHC, Mace GM, Mawatari SF, Miller SE, Minelli A, Mor-

ris S, Ng PKL, Patterson DJ, Pyle RL, Robinson N, Rogo L,

Taverne J, Thompson FC, van Tol J, Wheeler QD, Wilson EO.

2005a. Commentary: A universal register for animal names. Na-

ture Ml -All.

Polaszek A, Alonso-Zarazaga M, Bouchet P, Brothers D J, Even-

huis NL, Krell FT, Lyal CHC, Minelli A, Pyle RL, Robinson

N, Thompson FC, van Tol J. 2005b. ZooBank: The open-access

register for zoological taxonomy: Technical Discussion Paper.

Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 62(4):2 10-220.

Rastegar-Pouyani N. 1999a. Systematics and Biogeography of Ira-

nian Plateau Agamids ( Reptilia : Agamidae). Ph.D. Dissertation,

Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden, v + 177 p.

Rastegar-Pouyani N. 1999b. Analysis of geographic variation in Tra-

pelus agilis complex (Sauria: Agamidae). Zoology in the Middle

East 19(1999):75-99.

Rastegar-Pouyani N. 1999c. Two new subspecies of Trapelus agilis

complex (Sauria: Agamidae) from lowland southwestern Iran and

southeastern Pakistan. Asiatic Herpetological Research 8:90-101 .

Rastegar-Pouyani N, Nilson G. 2002. Taxonomy and biogeography

of the Iranian species of Laudakia (Sauria: Agamidae). Zoology in

the Middle East 26:93-122.

Rastegar-Pouyani N, Johari SM, Rastegar-Pouyani E. 2007. Field

Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1: Lizards. Second edition.

Razi University Publishing, Kermanshah, Iran. 119 plates +139

p. (In Persian).

SzczerbakNN, Golubev ML. 1996. Gecko Fauna of the USSR and

Contiguous Regions. English Edition. Editors, Leviton AE, Zug

GR. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca,

New York, USA. 8 plates, 232 p.

Torki F. 201 1 . Description of a new species of Carinatogecko (Squa-

mata: Gekkonidae) from Iran. Salamandra 47(2): 1 03-111.

Manuscript received: 18 September 2011

Accepted: 19 October 2011

Published: 09 December 2011

In accordance with section 8.6 of the ICZN’s International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, we have deposited printed durable copies of this paper at 20 (mostly) publicly accessible

institutional libraries. Digital archiving of this paper and a complete listing of institutions receiving the printed version are listed below.

The separate print-only edition of this paper (reprint) is available from ARC by sending a request to: Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, 2525 Iowa Avenue, Modesto, CA 95358-9467,

USA, along with a check for $20 (to cover printing and postage) payable to “Amphibian and Reptile Conservation.” NOTE: Please check the journal’s website at: http://www.redlist-ARC.org/ for a

current mailing address of the journal, before requesting documents.

In addition, this published work and the nomenclatural acts it contains have been registered in ZooBank, the proposed online registration system for the ICZN. The new species described

herein has been prospectively registered in ZooBank (Polaszek 2005a, b), the official online registration system for the ICZN. The ZooBank publication LSID (Life Science Identifier) for the

new species described herein can be viewed through any standard web browser by appending the LSID to the prefix “http://zoobank.org/”. The LSID for this publication is: um:lsid:zoobank.

org:pub:647DCB2D-5E93-4737-8A58-2BD83FFlB851 .

Printed durable copies of this paper are deposited at the following Institutions (20): American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York (USA); California Academy of Sciences,

San Francisco, California (USA); Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois (USA); Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, Florida (USA); Institute Nacional de Pesquisas da

Amazonia, Manaus (BRAZIL); Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (USA); Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah (USA); Museo de Zoologia, Universi-

dad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City (MEXICO); Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (USA); Museum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris

(FRANCE); Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California (USA); National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C, (USA); Natural

History Museum, London, England (UK); Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California (USA); National Library of Iran, Tehran (IRAN); Natural History Museum, Uni-

versity of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas (USA); Royal Ontario Museiun, Toronto, Ontario (CANADA); Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

(USA); Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro (BRAZIL); Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg (RUSSIA).

Digital archiving of this paper are found at the following institutions: American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York (USA); Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville,

Florida (USA); Institute Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazonia, Manaus (BRAZIL); Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (USA); Smithsonian Institution

Libraries, Washington, D.C. (USA); Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro (BRAZIL).

Complete journal archiving is found at: American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York (USA); Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, Florida (USA); Institute Na-

cional de Pesquisas da Amazonia, Manaus (BRAZIL); Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro (BRAZIL).

Amphibian unci Reptile Conservation is a Content Partner with the Encyclopedia of Life (EOL: http:///www.eol.org/) and submits information about new species to the EOL freely.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 073

Fathinia et al.

BEHZAD FATHINIA earned his B.A. and M.S. from Isfahan

and Lorestan universities, respectively. His M.S. reaserch fo-

cused on “The Biosystematic Study of Lizards of Ilam Prov-

ince.” For the time being,

he is a Ph.D. student at

Razi University, Kerman-

shah, western Iran under

supervision of Nasrullah

Rastegar-Pouyani, Moza-

far Sharifi, and Eskandar

Rastegar-Pouyani. His dis-

sertation research involves

ecology, phylogeography,

molecular systematics, and

population genetics of the

Iranian viper Pseudoceras-

tes urarachnoides in western

Iran. He is also interested

in other reptiles, specially

snakes.

RASOUL KARMIANI earned his B.S. in animal biology from

the Lorestan University of Lorestan province, Iran in 2004

and his M.S. in animal biosystematics from Razi University,

Kermanshah, Iran in 2009. During his graduate education he

studied the systematics of

the Family Eublepharidae in

Iran with special reference

to Eublepharis angramainyu

(Anderson and Leviton

1966). He also investigated

skull comparison of the gen-

era Eublepharis and Asac-

cus under the advisement

of Prof. Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani. His research inter-

ests include taxonomy, ecol-

ogy, biology, conservation,

and phylogeography.

HAMID DARVISHNIA earned a B.A. from Booali University

of Hamadan and his M.S. from Shahid Beheshti University of

Tehran (his thesis

was on develop-

mental biology).

He is currently a

faculty member

of the Department

of Biology, Pay-

am-e-Noor Uni-

versity, Talesh,

Guilan, north of

Iran. Darvishnia

is interested in

systematics, ecol-

ogy, and ethology

of amphibians and

reptiles.

NAGHI HEIDARI (foreground) was bom in Aliabad, Shirvan

and Chardavol, Ilam Province, western Iran. He earned his

B.Sc. in biology from Payam-e-Noor University of Ilam, west-

ern Iran. He is interested in reptiles, especially snakes. Current-

ly, he is studying the reptiles of the Ilam Province and plans to

continue his studies towards higher degrees (M.Sc. and Ph.D.).

NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI earned his B.S. in zo-

ology from Razi University Kermanshah, Iran in 1986 and his

M.S. in zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran in 1991,

where he studied herpetology with the agamids as the central

object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg University, Sweden

in 1994 under the advisement of Professor Goran Nilson and

graduated in 1999, working on taxonomy and biogeography

of Iranian Plateau agamids with Trapelus as the main object.

His research interests include taxonomy and biogeography of

the Iranian Plateau, the Middle East and Central Asian herpe-

tofauna.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e33

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 074

Copyright; © 201 1 Oraie et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons

Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the

original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):75-87.

Analysis of sexual dimorphism in the Persian long-tailed

desert lizard, Mesalina watsonana (Stoliczka, 1872; Sauria:

Lacertidae)

'HAMZEH ORAIE, 'AZAR KHOSRAVANI, 1 3 NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI, AND

2 SAYED KAMRAN GHOREISHI

1 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, Kermanshah, IRAN department of Statistics, Faculty of Science, Razi University,

Kermanshah, IRAN

Abstract. — Mesalina watsonana is one of the most widely distributed lacertid lizards of Iran. To in-

vestigate patterns of sexual dimorphism in this taxon, 206 (99 female, 107 male) adult specimens

collected either from various regions of the Iranian Plateau during 2005-2008 or examined from mu-

seum collections were studied based on 19 morphometric and nine meristic characters. The results

suggest that in Mesalina watsonana, body size could be the product of sexual and natural selection

modified by ecological factors. Further, in all the studied populations, head size parameter has a

more pronounced effect on the degree of sexual dimorphism than the length factors.

Key words. Lacertidae, Mesalina watsonana , sexual dimorphism, Iranian Plateau, head size, statistical analysis

Citation: Oraie H, Khosravani A, Rastegar-Pouyani N, Ghoreishi SK. 2011 . Analysis of sexual dimorphism in the Persian long-tailed desert lizard,

Mesalina watsonana (Stoliczka, 1872; Sauria: Lacertidae). Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):75-87(e35).

Introduction

Between-sex differences in body size, coloration and

morphology, so-called sexual dimoiphism (SD), are

widespread among reptiles (Schoener 1977; Berry and

Shine 1980; Fitch 1981; Stamps 1983; Gibbons and Lov-

ich 1990; Shine 1991). Several hypotheses attempt to ex-

plain the evolution of sexual dimorphism. Shine (1989)

reviewed the literature and recognized two alternative

explanations for sexual dimorphism: “sexual selection”

and “intraspecific niche divergence.”

Sexual dimorphism is a much-studied topic in the

lacertid lizard literature (Brana 1996; Fitch 1981; Gvoz-

dik and Boukal 1998; Molina-Borja 2003; Molina-Borja

and Rodriguez-Dominguez 2004; Herrel et al. 2002; Ka-

liontzopoulou et al. 2007, 2010a, 2010b; Roitberg 2007).

Sexual head size dimorphism is common in lacertid liz-

ards, where an increased male head size may simultane-

ously be important in intersexual interactions (e.g., male-

male combat, territorial contests; Trivers 1976; Fitch

1981; Anderson and Vitt 1990; Mouton and Van Wijk

1993; Bull and Pamula 1996; Censky 1995), intersexual

interactions (copulatory bites, Herrel et al. 1996), and re-

source partitioning (e.g., males being able to eat larger

prey than female conspecifics; Schoener 1967 and 1977;

Stamps 1977; Best and Pfaffenberger 1987; Preest 1994).

Correspondence. Email: 3 nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

Mesalina, a monophyletic group with 14 species, is

a widespread lacertid occurring throughout the Saharo-

Sindian region from North Africa to Pakistan (Kapli et al.

2008). Based on recent literature, M. watsonana is one of

the two species of Mesalina whose occurrence has been

confirmed in Iran. Mesalina watsonana is distributed

widely on the Iranian Plateau and extends as far north

as southern Turkmenistan and occurs in Afghanistan

at elevations below 2500 m. This lizard is abundant on

hard soils of plains and alluvial fans throughout much of

Iran and is found on hillsides, valleys, and along stream

courses. It is absent only in high mountains, along the

Caspian coast and in the Azerbaijans as well as Kurdistan

and Kermanshah provinces (Anderson 1999; Rastegar-

Pouyani et al. 2007).

Little information is available on inter-population

variation and habitat of Mesalina watsonana in Iran ex-

cept that vegetation in areas where it occurs is usually

scanty desert or steppe shrub, or areas stripped bare of

perennial vegetation. To date no detailed information has

been reported on morphometric and pholidotic differ-

ences between males and females in Iranian populations

of Mesalina watsonana.

In this study, different aspects of sexual dimorphism

in Mesalina watsonana are analyzed and discussed.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

075

Oraie et al.

Table 1 . The morphological (19 morphometric and nine meristic) characters examined in both sexes of Mesalina watsonana.

Characters

SVL

TL

LHF

HL

HH

HW

LFL

LHL

LFO

LA

EL

RED

EED

NL

TD

IOR

LV

LBT

LWB

NSL

NIL

NGS

NCS

NEE

NVS

NDS

SDLT

NFP

Definition

Snout-vent length (from tip of snout to anterior edge of cloaca)

Tail length (from posterior edge of cloaca to tip of tail)

Trunk length (distance between hindlimb and forlimb)

Head length (from tip of snout to the posterior edge of tympanum)

Head height (maximum distance between upper head and lower jaw)

Head width (distance between posterior eye comers)

Length of forelimb (from top of shoulder joint to tip of 4 th finger)

Length of hindlimb (from hip joint to tip of 4 th toe)

Length of femur (from hip joint to top of knee)

Length of tibia (from top of knee to beneath wrist)

Length of eye (distance from anterior comer to posterior corner to its posterior)

Snout length (from tip of nostril to anterior comer of eye)

Distance between posterior edge of eye and tympanum

Length of neck (distance between posterior edge of tympanum and shoulder joint)

Tympanum diameter (largest size)

Interorbital distance (largest size)

Length of cloaca crevice (largest size)

Length of widest part of tail base

Length of widest part of belly

Number of labial scales anterior to the center of eye on the right side of head

Number of scales on the right lower labial region

Number of gular scales in a straight median series

Number of collar scales

Number of scales between posterior edge of eye and tympanum

Number of transverse series of ventral scales counted in straight median series between collar and the row of scales

separating the series of femoral pores

Number of dorsal scales across midbody

Number of subdigital lamellae along underside of 4 th toe (defined by their width, the one touching the claw included),

counted bilaterally

Number of femoral pores, counted bilaterally

Methods and materials

Source of material

We examined more than 250 specimens of M. watsonana

from its range on the Iranian Plateau (see Appendix). Of

these, 207 undamaged and fully-grown adults (107 males

and 99 females) were selected for the analyses. The

specimens were obtained from two sources: 1) our own

material collected in various parts of the Iranian Plateau

during field work in 2006-2008. The collected materials

are deposited at the Razi University Zoological Museum

(RUZM). 2) Museum material borrowed from various

museum collections throughout Iran, such as Iran Na-

tional Natural History Museum (MMTT), Razi Univer-

sity Zoological Museum (RUZM), Zoological Museum

of Tarbiat Moallem University of Sabzevar (SUZM), and

Tehran University Zoological Museum (ZUTC).

Statistical analysis

All the specimens were examined for 19 morphometric

and nine meristic characters (Table 1). Metric characters

were evaluated using vernier calipers with measure-

ments taken to the nearest 0.1 millimeter. During the

sampling time some females were gravid and apparently

had broader abdomens, thus width of body was not used

in analysis. Data analysis was performed using paramet-

ric analyses after the assumptions of this analysis were

checked and found to be met. Statistical analyses were

performed using the SPSS (16) and S-Plus (8) for Win-

dows.

All specimens used for the study of between-pop-

ulation variability in sexual dimorphism come from a

limited geographic area, thus belonging to the same pop-

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

076

Sexual dimorphism in Mesalina watsonana

45" E 5r E 55° E 60" E

Figure 1 . Geographic distribution of 19 Operational Taxonom-

ic Units (OTU) of Mesalina watsonana used in this study.

Table 2. The localities of 19 OTUs of the Mesalina watsonana

complex used in this study.

OTUs

Locality

Sample size

Female

Male

1

Arak, Markazi Province

2

4

2

Izeeh, Khuzestan Province

8

7

3

Dehdasht, Kohkiloye and Boyer

Ahmad Province

7

6

4

Shiraz, Fars Province

6

3

5

Kerman, Kerman Province

5

10

C

Khash, Sistan- Balochestan

D

Province

4

3

~7

Nehbandan, Southern Khorasan

A

1

Province

4

8

Sarbishee, Southern Khorasan

Province

7

9

Birjand, Southern Khorasan

Province

10

5

10

Ghaen, Southern Khorasan

Province

3

z

11

Ferdoos, Southern Khorasan

A

Province

4

3

12

Gonabad, Khorasan Razavi

13

A

Province

4

13

Kashmar, Khorasan Razavi

1

Province

O

14

Sabzevar, Khorasan Razavi

c

Province

3

15

Ghochan, Khorasan Razavi

o

Province

Z

3

16

Jajarm, Northern Khorasan

Province

4

3

17

Khartooran, Semnan Province

7

8

18

Semnan, Semnan Province

7

19

Unknown region in Central Zagros

5

14

Total

107

99

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 077

ulation of animals (analysis of sexual dimorphism was

carried out in three separate geographic regions of Iran;

Fig. 1 and Table 2).

1. Eastern populations (OTUs: 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)

2. Northeastern populations (OTUs: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18)

3. Zagros populations (OTUs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 19)

To reveal dispersion patterns among morphological

characters of both sexes, descriptive statistical parame-

ters, including minimum, maximum, mean, and standard

error were employed separately for each region.

The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to car-

ry out pair-wise comparisons of the characters between

males and females and significant characters were plot-

ted using the error bars.

Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was used

based on a correlation matrix of 17 characters for each

region separately. In order to show the contribution of

morphological characters to sexual dimorphism, all in-

dividuals of each region were subjected to a Principal

Components Analysis.

Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA) was also

used as a tool to determine which variable discriminates

between males and females. To investigate the impor-

tance of various parameters in sexual dimorphism, we

calculated the two components of head and length factors

in each population and then ran the DFA for each popula-

tion separately based on the following formula:

Head size parameter = (0.902 x HL) + (0.904 x HH) +

(0.890 x HW) + (0.763 x NL) + (0.790 x IOR) + (0.863

x EED) + (0.806 x RED)

Length size parameter = (0.896 x SVL) + (0.818 x LHF)

+ (0.900 x LFL) + (0.831 x LA) + (0.884 x LHL) +

(0.905 x LFO)

The weight of each character was gained from the PCA.

Results

Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive parameters of morphometric and meristic

characters are presented for males and females separate-

ly in each region. The comparison of characters between

male and female individuals is presented in Table 3.

Univariate Analysis

The results of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) carried out

for intra- sexual comparison of meristic and morphomet-

ric characters are presented in Table 4.

Analysis of Variance revealed significant differences

in 13 morphometric (HL, HH, HW, LFL, LA, LHL, LFO,

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Table 3. Descriptive parameters of some morphological characters including minimum, maximum, mean, and standard error in Mesalina watsonana.

Oraie et al

E

3

’><

4

in

ON

oo

CN

m

oo

q

m

co

NO

a

4

NO

CN

i !

oo

ON

t'

m

oo

g

> o

) o

re

in ,

c-

m

NO

O'

co

o

ON

4

>n

\T

>n

4

ON

q

CN

OO

CN

oo

NO

in co

2

CO

co

NO

in

O' -

oo

CN

co

CO

>n

in

1"'

>n

NO

in

C' -

NO

C-'-'

CO CO

ro

E

CO

oo

i>

in

co

t'-

CN

co

4

o

C\j

'O

OO

On

c^-

>n

6

co

4

in

ON

in

o

c

> o

</) po

= ii

.2 ©

i— ;

in

q

co

q

00

q

oo

q

oo

q

CN

in

q

o

NO

q

c

) o

3

E

"E

oo

CO

co

>n

in

CN

co

CN

's d

co

CO

CN

co

in no

CN CN

re re

3 2

2

Q. -

° 3

a. ^

v> "

3-

o 0 )

o) JS

1

o

3_

re

CN

ON

>C0

CN

I''

CN

NO

m

co

o

in

oo

4

O'

ON

o

m

o

CO

O'

§

co

CN

O'

CN

o

CO

co

CN

4

O'

>n

co

4

§

oo

a

NO

CN

oo

On

NO

O

>n

C'

NO

t'~

o

co

NO

o

C'

o

f'

ON

OO

o

oo

NO

On

O

C'

>n

CN

NO

CO

CN

O

NO

4

OO

m

ON

C'

>n

ON

o

ON

in,

CN

O

CN

O NO

OO NO

4 in

ON C"

CN CN

ll

o

< R

o

d

o

O

o

O

o

c

) o

' ’

</)

+l

41

41 41

+1

C

re

r-~

to

m

NO

co

o

NO

>n

CN

O'

4

NO

oo

O'

CN

OO

4

co

oo

in

r-'

o

oo

in

4

co

o

oo

On

m

4

oo

NO

oo

4

>n

4

oo

NO

CN

O

O'

NO

co

CN

NO

4

CN

4

C"

NO

O

<N

O

o

CN

>n

CN

§

OO

CN

OO

co

cq

ON

l>

OO

C'

CN

ON

q

>n

CN

4

in

3

CN

OO

4 CN

no in

OO

co in

re

2

o

4

NO

O' -

in

NO

OO

CN

co

ON

o

4

in

co

4

in

ON OO

CN CN

E

3

E

’><

NO

CN

OO

O'

CN

NO

CO

OO

CN

4

co

o

C'

ON

O

NO

co

i>

ON

>n

CN

ON

c

) o

> q

Vi

re

ON

O'

ON

O'

ON

in

ON

CN

m

q

OO

q

>n

OO

m

> cn

c oT

2

1 !

CN

4

in

O'

O' -

CN

co

oi

>n

in

't

in

•n

NO

4

NO

>n

NO

(T

j cn

o CN

E

co

o

NO

cf\

oo

in

o

CN

oo

>n

4

in

CN

co

o

NO

CN

in

OO

c

) o

t5 ■■

3 ®

o

t |

o

co

<— 1

CN

oo

O

in

q

4

cq

NO

o

in

q

OO

o

> o

3

E

oo

ON

CN

4

>n

CN

ON

CN

NO

C'"

co

CN

co

4

CN

co

r- in

CN CN

o. ns

c

o S

CL ,

2

r N

E «M

£ M

Vi m

(0

m ns

€i

o

re

ON

CN

s

co

4

CO

oo

O'

m

O'

NO

O'

o

4

CO

O'

m

o

oo

ON

in

4

CN

O

>n

CN

CO

NO

O'

oo

co

4

NO

(N

ON

in

co

NO

r-'

On

NO

CN

C'

CN

OO

4

oo

o

co

C'

o

On

ON

8

ON

OO

CN

OO

o

§

CN

NO

ON

O

o

oo

co

in

o

oo

m

CO

§

o

oo

co

CO NO

’— — 1 NO

ON 4

oo m

co co

O LL

to

o

O

o

d

O

o

c

) o

z w

41

41 41

+i

CN

m

O

CN

NO

CN

NO

OO

CN

OO

m

co

oo

4

O

C"

C'

t"

co

O

4

s a

CN

O'

On

OO

CN

co

C'

4

t>

o

NO

oo

co

4

co

c

CN

NO

m

NO

co

oo

co

4

o

ON

CO

C'

oo

C'

CO 'H

re

NO

o

NO

ON

in

o

O

in

>n

CN

in

o

co

in

q

4

re

2

ON

o

4

in

NO

4

in

CN

oo

CN

oo

ON

4

co

4

>n

co

4

in

o on

CO CN

E

3

E

OO

>n

CN

O'

NO

c

) o

’><

w 1

On

ON

O

4

oo

o

OO

o

oo

co

o

in

CN

co

CN

oo

o

c

> o

re

OO

ON

O

O'

oo

CN

4

q

o

oo

i

4

oo

NO

CN

q

IO

Vi 4

2

NO

co

>n

in

NO

O' -

co

ON

o

>n

in

't

q

>n

4

>n

in

NO

CO CO

E

CN

oo

in

CN

in

o

NO

o

>n

oo

t>

r^

>n

ON

o

4

co

. — i

o

CN

4

On

NO

c

> o

c II

oo

o

O'

ON

q

r-

o

CN

oo

NO

q

CN

OO

vq

q

c

> o

o 11

■- re

3

E

t'-'

O'"

CN

co

4

o

NO

o

CN

4

>n

co

CN

co

f" NO

CN CN

£ ns

"E

a s .

2

O 00

CL CM

C II

3_

o ®

w «

re E

o

co

On

O'

m

o

CN

oo

o

•n

m

5

co

CN

ON

CN

>n

m

CN

C'

OO

NO

m

co

ON

cn in

re

TT

CN

OO

CO

CN

co

CN

l

m

4

>n

§

O'

On

CN

in

O'

NO

co

4

co

o

(N

CN

4

O'

CO

oo

o

CN

4

oo

O

4

m

o

oo

4

oo

o

On

O

ON

C'

oo

s

ON

NO

CN

NO

co

4 4

CN

q q

LU 0

LL

W

to

o

c

> o

41

41 41

+1

c

r-~

On

co

ON

>n

in

4

oo

NO

CN

£

4

co

CN

oo

4

OO

NO

OO

NO

On

co

s

in

NO

OO

O

oo

co

NO

co

C'-

CN

NO

4

NO

OO

4

s

CO

NO

O

oo

NO

co co

4 co

* — 1 CO

re

4

oo

4

NO

co

ON

4

cq

q

in

cq

q

oo

re

2

ON

o

co

4

>n

NO

co

4

CN

NO

CN

NO

oo

4

co

4

co

4

ON OO

CN CN

re

75 £

E

re

£

re

£

re

E

re

E

re

E

re

£

re

E

re

£

re

£

re

£

re

F

re

S2

re

o

re

2

re

2

re

2

re

2

CD

2

re

2

re

2

re

2

re

2

re

2

re

2

re 2

LL

E

re

.c

O

HL

HH

HW

LFL

LHL

LFO

I0R

Q

LU

RED

LV

LBT

SAN

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

078

Table 4. The ANOVA based intra-sexual comparison of meristic and morphometric characters in three different groups of populations of Mesalina watsonana.

Oraie et al.

Table 5. Factor loadings on the first three principal components, extracted from the separated correlation matrix of morphological charac-

ters, for males and females of Mesalina watsonana.

Northeastern

Eastern

Zagros

Characters

PCI

PC2

PC3

PCI

PC2

PC3

PCI

PC2

PC3

Zscore (SVL)

0.813

0.070

0.176

0.927

0.059

-0.048

-

Zscore (HL)

0.882

0.040

-0.048

0.883

0.209

-0.039

0.936

0.029

0.048

Zscore (HH)

0.866

-0.110

-0.091

0.917

0.190

0.072

0.848

-0.168

-0.090

Zscore (HW)

0.890

-0.177

0.027

0.915

0.029

0.055

0.808

0.081

-0.133

Zscore (LFL)

0.774

0.276

0.226

0.920

-0.044

-0.102

0.795

0.060

0.244

Zscore (LA)

-

0.822

-0.049

0.252

0.678

-0.317

0.460

Zscore (LHL)

0.803

0.310

0.060

0.922

0.090

-0.101

0.842

0.112

-0.029

Zscore (LFO)

0.812

0.035

0.004

0.940

0.030

0.002

0.763

-0.007

0.366

Zscore (TD)

0.630

-0.481

0.276

0.699

0.011

0.339

-

Zscore (NL)

-

0.761

-0.128

-0.046

0.633

-0.388

0.009

Zscore (IOR)

0.818

-0.109

0.279

0.846

0.036

0.084

0.558

-0.374

-0.370

Zscore (EED)

0.811

-0.015

-0.190

0.816

-0.016

-0.147

0.836

-0.076

-0.016

Zscore (RED)

0.754

0.098

0.014

0.765

-0.229

-0.053

0.869

0.082

0.231

Zscore (LV)

0.814

-0.142

-0.290

0.855

-0.190

0.007

0.794

0.059

-0.253

Zscore (LBT)

0.858

0.135

-0.114

0.885

-0.162

-0.070

0.872

0.089

-0.191

Zscore (NDS)

-0.059

0.700

-0.439

-0.005

0.850

0.470

-

Zscore (NVS)

-0.331

0.377

0.758

-0.153

-0.566

0.749

-0.273

0.207

0.613

Zscore (NCS)

-

0.383

0.690

-0.227

Zscore (NEE)

0.282

0.588

0.099

-

Zscore (SDLT)

-

0.284

0.849

0.045

Eigenvalues

8.77

1.49

1.16

11.14

1.27

1.03

8.49

1.70

1.16

Accumulated

percent of trace

54.80

64.14

71.39

65.54

73.00

79.10

53.10

63.74

70.96

NL, IOR, EED, RED, LV, and LBT) and four meristic

characters (NFP, SDLT, NCS, and NYS) between the two

sexes at the level of 95% (p < 0.05) in the Zagros popula-

tions.

In the eastern populations, the ANOVA showed sig-

nificant differences in 15 morphometric (SVL, HL, HH,

HW, LFL, LA, LHL, LFO, NL, TD, IOR, EED, RED,

LV, and LBT) and two meristic characters (NVS and

NDL) between the two sexes at the level of 95 % (p <

0.05), and in the northeastern populations, the ANOVA

revealed significant differences in 13 morphometric

(SVL, HL, HH, HW, LFL, LHL, LFO, TD, IOR, EED,

RED, LV, and LBT) and three meristic characters (NVS,

NEE, and NDS) between the two sexes at the level of

95% (p < 0.05).

Some characters (HL, HH, HW, LFL, LHL, LFO,

IOR, LV, LBT, NVS, RED, and EED) show significant

differences (p < 0.05) between the two sexes. Most of

these characters (HL, HH, HW, IOR, RED, and EED) are

related to head size, so that males have greater absolute

head size than the females in all the three studied popu-

lations (Figure 2A-D). Also, males have proportionately

longer limbs (LFL, LHL, and LFO) than females.

Multivariate Analysis

Comparing the two sexes at multivariate level, the PCA

was used plotting individual males and females from

each of the three separated populations to explore the

patterns of sexual dimorphism in each region.

For the entire three geographic regions most of char-

acters loaded heavily on the first three components. The

first component (PCI) is interpretable as a general body

size factor providing a good measure of overall size. In

almost all the OTUs, males tend to be larger than females

in general body size and often have higher scale counts in

various parts of body except NVS (number of transverse

series of ventral scales, counted in strait median series

between collar and the row of scales separating the se-

ries of femoral pores) which is lower in males. The first

component (PCI) addresses 53-65% of the total variation

within all three populations. In the case of the Zagros

populations, the PCI explains 53.1%, and the first three

principal components address 70.9% of the total varia-

tion (Table 5). The magnitude and sign of the loadings on

PCI and PC2 show a consistent pattern between samples

and the high degree of sexual dimorphism is easy to in-

terpret (Figure 3A).

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 080

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Sexual dimorphism in Mesalina watsonana

PH

a

Zagros Northeastern Eastern

GROUP

I Female

I Male

I Female

I Male

fMi

ea

Zagros Northeastern Eastern

GROUP

B

Figure 2. The mean and standard error (bars) for significantly different head size characters between males and females of Mesalina

watsonana, revealed from the analysis of variance (ANOVA). Head length (A), head width (B), head height (C), and snout length

(D).

In the northeastern populations, PCI explains

54.1%, and the first three principal components address

71.4% of the total variation (Table 5). The magnitude and

sign of the loadings on PCI and PC2 show a consistent

pattern between samples and the high degree of sexual

dimorphism is easy to interpret (Figure 3B).

In the eastern populations, the PCI explains 65.5%,

and the first three principal components address 79% of

the total variation (Table 5). The magnitude and sign of

the loadings on PCI and PC2 show no consistent pattern

between samples and are difficult to interpret. In some

instances PC3 does have a little contribution in discrimi-

nation between males and females (Figure 3C).

Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA)

Based on this analysis, head size parameter has more ef-

fect on sexual dimorphism than the length size param-

eter in all populations. Based on the Discriminant Func-

tion Analysis, the head size parameter could classify the

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 081

original grouped cases almost correctly, so that 70.1% of

the Zagros populations, 73.2% of the northeastern popu-

lations, and 67.1% of the eastern populations were cor-

rectly classified into their relevant groups. As well, based

on this analysis, the length size parameter classified the

original grouped cases almost correctly: 62.3% of the Za-

gros populations, 64.3% of the northeastern populations,

and 64.4% of the eastern populations were correctly clas-

sified into their relevant groups. Although, the head size

parameter separates the males and females better than

the length size parameter, its effect is obviously related

to environmental conditions. So that the head size in the

eastern populations has less effect in separation in rela-

tion to the other populations. Interestingly in the eastern

populations, the length size parameter also has a weak

effect in separation of the groups.

Scatterplots of head length (HL) against the snout-

vent length (SVL) for each population is shown in Figure

4A-C.

In the northeastern and Zagros populations, in an in-

dividual male and female with the same SVL, obviously

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Oraie et al.

Ofemale

a MALE

B

Figure 3. Ordination of individual male (A) and female (o)

specimens of the Zagros populations (A) Northeastern popu-

lations (B) Eastern populations (C) on the first two principal

components.

the males having larger heads (HL) than the females, but

in the eastern populations the head size of both sexes

is nearly the same. This pattern is repeated in the other

head size characters (HW, HH, IOR, RED, and EED) but

with different influences. Finally we may conclude that

the rate of head size growth relative to the SVL growth,

though not significantly different ( p > 0.05) in all popula-

tions, was faster in males than in females (Fig. 4).

Discussion

Body size variation (e.g., SVL) among populations of

lizards is a common phenomenon. Variation in body size

has even been observed among individuals living in dif-

ferent habitats in the same population (Smith 1996 and

1998).

Variation in sexual dimorphism among popula-

tions is less well investigated; however, it is apparent

that it does occur (McCoy et al. 1994; Molina-Borja et

al. 1997). In Mesalina watsonana, interestingly in each

group of populations we found a distinct pattern of sexu-

al dimorphism (Table 4). Some characters (HL, HH, HW,

LFL, LHL, LFO, IOR, LV, LBT, NVS, RED, and EED)

show significant differences (p < 0.05) between the two

sexes in all populations. Most of these characters (HL,

HH, HW, IOR, RED, and EED) are related to head size.

Sexual differences in head size are common within

the clade of lacertid lizards (e.g., Castilla et al. 1989;

Brana 1996; Molina-Borja et al. 1997; Gvozdik and

Boukal 1998; Huang 1998) with obvious implications.

It is likely that sexual dimorphism in head size was pres-

ent in a common ancestor of lacertids. We propose that

sexual dimorphism in head size did not evolve de novo

in M. watsonana but as a result of phylogenetic history.

However, as demonstrated here, the actual extent of the

dimorphism may be maintained through competition

over mates (sexual selection) and environmental con-

ditions (ecology). Environmental conditions (ecology,

competition, and so on) affected the pattern of head size

sexual dimorphism in different populations of M. watso-

nana in various regions of Iran. Our results illustrate that

unlike other cases (Shine 1990; Stamps 1993; Gvozdik

and Damme 2003), proximate environmental factors can

be important determinants of sexual dimorphism in head

size and other characters (ecological conditions having

different effects on sexual dimorphism in different popu-

lations of M. watsonana ).

Our results suggest that decreased sexual dimor-

phism in M. watsonana from the Zagros populations

to the eastern and northeastern populations was under-

standable and this pattern may be due to environmental

changes and hence changes in sexual selection in differ-

ent habitats. On the other hand, individuals of the Zagros

populations have larger heads than the other populations.

It may be related to differences in environmental condi-

tions in each region. Ecological causes have been used to

explain sexual dimorphism in some lizards (Shine 1989;

Schoener 1977). Butler and Losos (2002) explained the

relationship between habitat use and extent of sexual di-

morphism by two hypotheses:

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 082

Sexual dimorphism in Mesalina watsonana

Figure 4. Scatter plots of the head length (HL) against the

snout- vent length (SVL) for the Zagros populations (A) North-

eastern populations (B) Eastern populations (C) Male = (A)

and Female = (o). Regression lines are shown whenever the

slopes are significantly different from zero.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 083

1) Males and females may interact in different ways

with the environment, thus leading to a quantitative sex

difference in the relationship between morphology and

habitat use. This implies that sexes may or may not differ

in habitat use, but regardless, the relationship between

morphology and ecology will differ between the sexes.

2) The relationship between morphology and habi-

tat use does not differ between the sexes, but the sexes

differ in microhabitat use more in some habitats than in

others. The amount of ecological difference between the

sexes may differ qualitatively among habitats, leading to

greater morphological difference in habitats where sexes

are more ecologically distinct.

Further, differences in sexual dimorphism between

populations of Mesalina watsonana may be due to dif-

ferences in the level of competition experienced by these

populations. Sexual dimorphism may be due to other rea-

sons, such as higher survival rates of one sex compared

to the other (Vitt 1983), or the differential allocation of

energy to reproduction after sexual maturity in males

versus females (Cooper and Vitt 1989; Vial and Stewart

1989). It seems that Mesalina watsonana feeds on spi-

ders, crickets, beetles, ants and ant larvae and other small

insects (Anderson 1999).

The authors in this paper have attempted to explore

several aspects of sexual dimorphism patterns in Me-

salina watsonana in Iran. Key to further understanding

entails further field work and behavioral observation es-

pecially during the breeding season and the integration of

comparative, demographic, and experimental techniques

designed to simultaneously address both the ultimate

evolutionary causes and proximate developmental mech-

anisms for sexual dimorphism and unknown aspects of

this phenomenon.

Acknowledgments. — We thank the Razi University

authorities for financial support during field work in vari-

ous parts of Iran. We would also like to thank the curators

of zoological collections in the Tehran University (Hasan

Salehi) and Iran National Natural history Museum (Ali-

reza Motesharei) for borrowing material. We appreciate

Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani and Soheila Shafiei for pro-

viding some material for our study. We thank Ali Gomar,

Hamid Reza Oraie, and Hamid Reza Yazdani for their

help and cooperation in material examination and sta-

tistical analysis. An anonymous reviewer provided criti-

cal information and comments on an initial draft of the

manuscript.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Oraie et al.

Appendix

Material examined ( Mesalina watsonana)

RUZM, LM 10 / 25-36 (71 = 11, around Nehbandan,

South Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 37-45 (n = 9, Darmian, Asad-Abad,

South Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 46-53 {n = 8, around Sarbishe, South

Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 54-59 ( n = 6, Biijand, Khorashad Vil-

lage, South Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 60-65 (n = 6, around Khosf, South Kho-

rasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 66-76 (n= 11, Gonabad, Khezri Village,

South Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 77-82 (n = 6, around Ferdoos, South

Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM10 / 83-90 (n = 8, Ghaen, Haji-abad Village,

South Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 91-92 (n = 2, Khash, Nook-abad, Sis-

tan-Baloochestan Province, southeastern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 93-94 (n = 2, Darab, Fars Province,

southern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 95-100 (n = 6, Fasa, Jellian Village, Fars

Province, Southern Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 1-24 (n = 24, central Iran)

RUZM, LM 10 / 101 ( n = 1, Masjed Solyman, Golgir

Village, Khuzestan Province, southwestern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1026 ( n = 10, Biarjmand, Semnan Province,

Northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1023 (n= 1, Khartoran, Kalate Taleb, Sem-

nan Province, northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1024 ( n = 2, around Damghan, Semnan

Province, northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1025 (n = 1, Khartoran, Belbar, Semnan

Province, northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1027 ( n = 1, Khartoran, Delbar, Khosh-

Chah Village, Semnan Province, northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1028 ( n = 1, Khartoran, Kal e Datjerd Vil-

lage, Semnan Province, northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1079 (n = 1, Shiraz, Fars Province, southern

Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1332 in = 1, Arak, Delijan, Markazi Prov-

ince, eastern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1117 {n = 3, Dehdasht,Koh- bord Village,

Kohkiloye and Boyer Ahmad Province, southwstem

Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1118 (n = 3, Arond Dehbasht, Kohkiloye

and Boyer Ahmad Province, southwestern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1119 in = 1, Dehdasht, Ab-Kaseh Village,

Kohkiloye and Boyer Ahmad Province, southwestern

Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1120 ( n = 1, Dehdasht, Likak, Kohkiloye

and Boyer Ahmad Province, southwestern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1121 {n = 3, Dehdasht, Kohkiloye and Boyer

Ahmad Province, southwestern Iran)

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 084

ZUTC, REP 1122 (n = 1, Dehdast, Sogh Village, Koh-

kiloye and Boyer Ahmad Province, southwestern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1123 {n = 1, Dehdasht, Kohkiloye and Boy-

er Ahmad Province, southwestern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1124 ( n = 1, Dehdasht, Ghal e Madrese Vil-

lage, Kohkiloye and Boyer Ahmad Province, southwest-

ern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1175 (n= 1, Ghom, Ghom Province, central

Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1180 ( n = 1, Shahr E Babak, Kerman Prov-

ince, southern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1260 ( n = 4, Garmsar, Semnan Province,

northern Iran)

ZUTC, REP 1334 ( n = 2, Gheshm Island, Hormozgan

Province, southern Iran)

MMTT 1111-1119 ( n = 9, Bidokht, South Khorasan

Province, eastern Iran)

MMTT 1210-1211 (n = 2, Soltan Abad, Northern Kho-

rasan Province, northeastern Iran)

MMTT 860-861 ( n = 2, Khash, Sistan-Baloochestan

Province, southeastern Iran)

MMTT 712 (n = 1, Khash, Sistan-Baloochestan Prov-

ince, southeastern Iran)

MMTT 856 (n = 1, Khash, Sistan-Baloochestan Prov-

ince, southeastern Iran)

MMTT 98 {n - 1, Khash, Sistan-Baloochestan Province,

southeastern Iran)

MMTT 623-624 ( n = 2, Kerman, Hosein Abad, Kerman

Province, central Iran)

MMTT 230 (n = 2, Bardesir, Kerman Province, central

Iran)

MMTT 1586-1587 {n = 2, Kerman, Kerman Province,

central Iran)

MMTT 224-226 (n = 3, Izeh, Pole Jeh-Jeh, Khuzestan

Province, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 1745 (n = 1, Izeh, Pole Jeh-Jeh, Khuzestan Prov-

ince, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 1725-1728 ( n = 4, Izeh, Mordeh Fill, Khuzestan

Province southwestern Iran)

MMTT 2111-2112 (n = 2, Izeh, Mordeh Fill, Khuzestan

Province, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 2115 (n= 1, Izeh, Mordeh Fill, Khuzestan Prov-

ince, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 1703 {n = 1, Izeh, Morde Fill, Khuzestan Prov-

ince, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 1675 in = 1, Izeh, Morde Fill, Khuzestan Prov-

ince, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 1716 in = 1, Izeh, Morde Fill, Khuzestan Prov-

ince, southwestern Iran)

MMTT 251-254 in = 4, Shahrod, Semnan Province,

northern Iran)

MMTT 258-262 in = 5, Shahrod, Semnan Province,

northern Iran)

MMTT 735-738 in = 4, Sirjan, Kerman Province, south-

ern Iran)

MMTT 785-787 in = 3, Sirjan, Kerman Province, south-

ern Iran)

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Sexual dimorphism in Mesalina watsonana

MMTT 967-969 ( n = 3, Kashan, Isfahan Pro vine, central

Iran)

MMTT 721 (n = 1, Kashan, Isfahan Pro vine, central Iran)

SUZM 87 {n = 1, around Eshghabad, 70 km on the road

to Tabas, eastern Iran)

SUZM 116, SUZM 122 (n = 2, Deyhook, 5 km on the

road to Ferdows, southern Khorasan Province, eastern

Iran)

SUZM 252 (n= 1, around Mayamai, 60 km E Shahrood,

Semnan Province, northeastern Iran)

SMP 200-203 ( n = 3, Jorbat Village, 35 km E Jajarm,

northen Khorasan, northeastern Iran)

SUZM 612, SUZM 614 ( n = 2, Golgir Village, Khuzestan

Province, southwestern Iran)

SUZM 1-2, SUZM 5 (n = 3, 25 km E Bardaskan, Kho-

rasan Province, Northeastern Iran)

SUZM 18 (n =1, 70 km E Bardaskan, Khorasan Prov-

ince, northeastern Iran)

SUZM 51, SUZM 53, SUZM 55 (n = 3, around Birjand,

10 km on the Sarbisheh, Khorasan Province, eastern Iran)

SUZM 118-119 ( n = 2, 35 km SW Bam on the road to

Jiroft, Kerman Province, southern Iran)

SUZM 69, SUZM 77, RFK 76, RFK 75 {n = 4, 20 km

E Jajarm, northen Khorasan Province, northeastern Iran)

SUZM 131, SUZM 136 ( n = 2, 25 km NW Sabzevar,

Beed Village, northen Khorasan Province, northeastern

Iran)

SUZM 148, SUZM 151 (n = 2, 10 km S Sabzevar, Meh-

rshahi Village, northen Khorasan Province, northeastern

Iran)

SUZM 92-93 ( n = 2, 50 km W Sabzevar, Yosefabad Vil-

lage, northen Khorasan Province, northeastern Iran)

SUZM 100-101 (n = 2, 80 km NW Sabzevar, Kahaneh

Village, northen Khorasan Province, northeastern Iran)

SUZM 132 (n = 1, 90 km W Sabzevar, around Abasabad,

northen Khorasan Province, northeastern Iran)

SUZM 324, SUZM 339 (n = 2, around Sabzevar, northen

Khorasan Province, northeastern Iran)

Literature cited

Anderson SC. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for the Study of

Amphibians and Reptiles. Oxford, Ohio. 442 p.

Anderson RA, Yitt LJ. 1990. Sexual selection versus alterna-

tive causes of sexual dimorphism in Teiid lizards. Oecologia

84(2): 145-157.

Berry JF, Shine R. 1980. Sexual size dimorphism and sexual selec-

tion in turtles (Order: Chelonia). Oecologia 44(2): 185-191.

Best TL, Pfaffenberger GS. 1987. Age and sexual variation in diet

of collared lizards ( Crotophytus collaris). Southwestern Natural-

ist 32(4):415-426.

Brana F. 1996. Sexual dimorphism in lacertid lizards: Male head in-

crease vs female abdomen increase? Oilcos 75(3):511-523.

Bull CM, Pamula Y. 1996. Sexually dimorphic head size and repro-

ductive success in the sleepy lizard Tiliqua rugosa. Journal of Zo-

ology (London) 240(3):5 11-521.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 085

Butler MA, Losos JB. 2002. Multivariate sexual dimorphism, sexual

selection, and adaptation in greater Antillean anolis lizards. Eco-

logical Monographs 72(4):541-559.

Castilla AM, Bauwens D, Van damme R, Verheyen R. 1989. Notes

on the biology of the high altitude lizard Lacerta bedriagae. Her-

petological Journal 1:400-403.

Censky EJ. 1995. Mating strategy and reproductive success in the

teiid lizard, Ameiva plei. Behaviour 132(7-8):529-557.

Cooper WE Jr, Vitt LJ. 1989. Sexual dimorphism of head and body

size in an Iguanid lizard: Paradoxical results. The American Natu-

ralist 133(5):729-735.

Gibbons WJ, Lovich JE. 1990. Sexual dimorphism in turtles with

emphasis on the slider turtle ( Trachemys scripta ). Herpetological

Monographs 4: 1-29.

Gvozdik L, Boukal M. 1998. Sexual dimorphism and intersexual

food niche overlap in the sand lizard, Lacerta agilis Squamata,

Lacertidae. Folia Zoologica 47(3): 189-195.

Gvozdik L, Damme RY. 2003. Evolutionary maintenance of sexual

dimorphism in head size in the lizard Zootoca vivipara: A test of

two hypotheses. Journal of Zoology (London) 259(1):7-13.

Herrel A, Van Damme R, De Vree F. 1996. Sexual dimorphism of

head size in Podarcis hispanica atrata: Testing the dietary diver-

gence hypothesis by bite force analysis. Netherlands Journal of

Zoology 46(3-4):253-262.

Herrel A, Spithoven R, Van Damme R, de Vree F. 2002. Sexual di-

morphism of head size in Gallotia galloti: Testing the niche di-

vergence hypothesis by functional analyses. Functional Ecology

13(3):289-297.

Huang WS. 1998. Sexual size dimorphism and microhabitat use of

two sympatric lizards, Sphenomorphus taiwanensis and Takydro-

mus hsuehshanensis , from the central highlands of Taiwan. Zoo-

logical Studies 37(4):302-308.

Kaliontzopoulou A, Carretero MA, Llorente GA. 2007. Multi-

variate and geometric morphometries in the analysis of sexual

dimorphism variation in Podarcis lizards. Journal of Morphology

268(2):152-165.

Kaliontzopoulou A, Carretero MA, Llorente GA. 2010. Sexual

dimorphism in traits related to locomotion: Ontogenetic patterns

of variation in Podarcis wall lizards. Biological Journal of the

Linnean Society 99(3):530-543.

Kaliontzopoulou A, Carretero MA, Llorente GA. 2010. Intraspe-

cific ecomorphological variation: Linear and geometric morpho-

metries reveal habitat-related patterns within Podarcis bocagei

wall lizards. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 23(6): 1234-1244.

Kapli P, Lymberakis P, Poulakakis N, Mantziou G, Parmakelis A,

Mylonas M. 2008. Molecular phylogeny of three Mesalina (Rep-

tilia: Lacertidae) species (M. guttulata, M. brevirostris and M.

bahaeldini ) from North Africa and the Middle East: Another case

of paraphyly? Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 49(1): 102-

110.

Mccoy JK, Fox SE, Baird TA. 1994. Geographic variation in sexual

dimorphism in the collared lizard, Crotaphytus collaris (Sauria:

Crotaphytidae). The Southwestern Naturalist 39(4):328-335.

Molina-Borja M. 2003. Sexual dimorphism of Gallotia atlantica at-

lantica and Gallotia atlantica mahoratae (Lacertidae) from the

eastern Canary Islands. Journal of Herpetology 37(4):769-772.

Molina-Borja M, Rodriguez-Dominguez MA. 2004. Evolution of

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Oraie et al.

biometric and life-history traits in lizards Gallotia from the Ca-

nary Islands. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary

Research 42:44-53.

Molina-BorjaM, Padron-Fumero M, Al-Fonso-MartinMT. 1997.

Intrapopulation variability in morphology, coloration, and body

size in two races of the lacertid lizard, Gallotia galloti. Journal of

Herpetology 31(4):499-507.

Molina-BorjaM, Padron-Fumero M, Al-Fonso-MartinMT. 1998.

Morphological and behavioural traits affecting the intensity and

outcome of male contests in Gallotia galloti galloti (Family Lac-

ertidae). Ethology 104(4):3 14-322.

Mouton FN, Van Wijk JH. 1993. Sexual dimorphism in cordylid liz-

ards: A case study of the Drakensberg crag lizard, Pseudocordylus

melanotus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 71(9):1715-1723.

Preest MR. 1994. Sexual size dimorphism and feeding energetics

in Anolis carolinensis : Why do females take smaller prey than

males? Journal of Herpetology 28(3):292-298.

Rastegar-Pouyani, N, Johari, M, and Rastegar-Pouyani, E. 2007.

Field Guide to the Reptiles of Iran. Volume 1: Lizards. Second

edition. Razi University Publishing, Iran. 296 p. (In Persian).

Roitberg ES. 2007. Variation in sexual size dimorphism within a

widespread lizard species. In: Sex, Size, and Gender Roles: Evo-

lutionary Studies of Sexual Size Dimorphism. Editors, Fairbrain

DL, Blackenhorn WU, Szekely T. Oxford University Press, New

York, New York. 280 p. 143-217.

Schoener TW. 1966. The ecological significance of sexual dimor-

phism in size in the lizard Arcolis conspersus. Science 155:474-

477.

Schoener TW. 1977. Competition and the niche. In: Biology of the

Reptilia, Volume 7: Ecology and Behaviour A. Editors, Gans C,

Tinkle DW. Academic Press, London, UK. 727 p. 35-136.

Shine R. 1988. The evolution of large body size in females: A critique

of Darwin’s “fecundity advantage” model. The American Natu-

ralist 131(1):124-131.

Shine R. 1989. Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimor-

phism: A review of the evidence. Quarterly Review of Biology

64(4):419-461.

Shine R. 1990. Proximate determinants of sexual differences in adult

body size. The American Naturalist 135(2):278-283.

Shine R. 1991. Inter sexual dietary divergence and the evolu-

tion of sexual dimorphism in snakes. The American Naturalist

138(1): 103-122.

Smith GR. 1996. Habitat use and its effect on body size distribution

in a population of the tree lizard, Urosaurus omatus. Journal of

Herpetology 30(4):528-530.

Smith GR. 1998. Habitat-associated life history variation within a

population of the striped plateau lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Acta

Oecologica 19(2): 167-173.

Stamps JA. 1977. The relationship between resource competition, risk

and aggression in a tropical territorial lizard. Ecology 58(2):349-

358.

Stamps JA. 1983. Sexual selection, sexual dimorphism and territorial-

ity. In: Lizard Ecology: Studies of a Model Organism. Editors,

Huey RB, Pianka ER, Schoener TW. Harvard University Press,

Cambridge, Massachusetts. 512 p. 169-204.

Stamps JA. 1993. Sexual size dimorphism in species with asymptotic

growth after maturity. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

50(2):123-145.

Stoliczka F. 1872. Notes on reptiles, collected by Surgeon F. Day in

Sind. Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 1872(May):85-

92.

Trivers RL. 1976. Sexual selection and resource accruing abilities in

Anolis garmani. Evolution 30(2):253-269.

Vial JL, Stewart JR. 1989. The manifestation and significance of

sexual dimorphism in Anguid lizards: A case study of Barisia

monticola. Canadian Journal of Zoology 67(l):68-72.

Vitt LJ. 1983. Reproduction and sexual dimorphism in the tropical

Teiid lizard Cnemidophorus ocellifer. Copeia 1983(2):359-366.

Manuscript received: 17 January 2011

Accepted: 10 September 2011

Published: 29 December 2011

HAMZEH ORAIE is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Zo-

ology at University of Tehran. He received his B.S. in biological

sciences from the University of Razi, Kermanshah. He obtained

his M.S. in animal biosystematics from the University of Razi,

Kermanshah, where he researched the geographic variation of

Cyrtopodion scabrum (Sauria: Gekkonidae) in Iran. His cur-

rent research interests include molecular systematics and phy-

logeography of Ophisops elegans (Sauria: Lacertidae) in Iran.

December 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 086

Sexual dimorphism in Mesalina watsonana

AZAR KHOSRAVANI earned her B.S. in biological sciences

from the University of Zabol. She received her M.S. in ani-

mal biosystematics from the University of Razi, Kermanshah,

where she researched the geographic variation of Mesalina

watsonana (Sauria: Lacertidae) in Iran. Currently she is a Ph.D.

student in the Department of Biology at the University of Razi,

Kermanshah. Her current research interests include molecular

systematics and phylogeography of Lacertid lizards in Iran.

SAYED KAMRAN GHOREISHI obtained B.Sc., M.Sc., and

Ph.D. degrees in statistics from the University of Shahid Be-

heshti in Tehran, Iran. His main research interests are experi-

mental design, multivariate analysis, and categorical data anal-

ysis and he has supervised several graduate students working in

related areas of statistics and biostatistics. Ghoreishi has con-

sulted and collaborated with various companies and organiza-

tions in Tehran, and has given a number of talks at international

statistical conferences on association models in contingency

tables. Presently, Ghoreishi is chairman of the Statistics Depart-

ment at Qom University. He has twice received (consecutively)

the university’s award for top researcher.

NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI earned his B.S. in zo-

ology from Razi University Kermanshah, Iran in 1986 and his

M.S. in zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran in 1991,

where he studied herpetology with the agamids as the central

object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg University, Sweden

in 1994 under the advisement of Professor Goran Nilson and

graduated in 1999, working on taxonomy and biogeography of

Iranian Plateau agamids with Trapelus as the main objective.

His research interests include taxonomy and biogeography of

the Iranian Plateau, the Middle East and central Asian herpe-

tofauna.

December 201 1 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e35

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 087

Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(4):88-91.

New record of the Western leopard gecko, Eublepharis

angramainyu Anderson & Leviton, 1966 (Sauria:

Eublepharidae) from southeastern Iran

'NAEIM MORADI AND SOHEILA SHAFIEI

Department of biology, Faculty of sciences, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, IRAN

Abstract.— One adult male specimen of the Western leopard gecko (Eublepharis angramainyu) was col-

lected in southeastern Iran during fieldwork conducted from June 2009 to September 2010. The new

locality of the species is situated about 600 km east of the type locality. This record indicates a wider

distribution of Eublepharis angramainyu on the Iranian plateau than previously thought. Information on

morphological characters and habitat is presented.

Key words. Western leopard gecko, Eublepharis angramainyu, Iran, distribution, color pattern

Citation: Moradi N, Shafiei S. 2011. New record of the Western leopard gecko, Eublepharis angramainyu Anderson & Leviton, 1966 (Sauria: Eublephari-

dae) from southeastern Iran. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 5(1):88-91(e36).

Introduction

The Leopard gecko, Eublepharis angramainyu was

originally described from an old road between Masjed-

Suleiman and Batwand, Khuzestan Province, Iran by

Anderson & Leviton (1966). E. angramainyu occurs in

western foothills of the Zagros Mountains and in the up-

per Tigris-Euphrates basin in Iran, Iraq, and northeast

Syria. Recently, a new specimen of this species was re-

corded from southeastern Anatolia and Kara Dagh-Ar-

sanli of Sanliurfa Province, Turkey (Uzum et al. 2008).

Grismer (1989) placed Eublepharis ensafi Baloutch and

Thireau, 1986, in the synonymy of Eublepharis angram-

ainyu (Anderson 1999). During field work on the her-

petofauna of the southeastern Iranian Plateau from June

2009 to September 2010 one specimen of Eublepharis

angramainyu was collected from Kerman Province. The

new locality of this species is situated about 600 km east

of the type locality.

Material and methods

One male specimen of Eublepharis angramainyu was

collected from Khabr National Park (28°42’ N, 56° 18’

E) in Kerman Province. The specimen was deposited in

the Zoological Museum, Shahid Bahonar University of

Kerman (ZMSBUK). The specimen was fixed with 96%

ethanol, and after 10 days was transferred to 80% ethanol

for storage. Morphometric measurements were taken by

Correspondence. Email: l naeim.moradi@y ahoo.com.

calipers to the nearest 0.1 mm, and meristic characters

were recorded by stereomicroscope in the Zoological

Lab of the University of Kerman.

Results

Pholidosis

Supranasal scales separated by single intemasal scales;

40-41 eyelid fringe scales; 11 supralabials; 11-12 infral-

abials; chin shield in contact with first lower labials; 10-

12 smaller scales surround each dorsal tubercle; hexago-

nal ventral scales in 25 longitudinal rows; 7 discernible

precloacal pores; 24 smooth subdigital lamellae; three

transverse rows of ventral scales in each caudal whorl;

dorsal scales of regenerated tail circular and slightly con-

vex.

Color pattern

Dorsum dark lemon-yellow with a continuous light ver-

tebral stripe, bordered on each side by a broken black

stripe from occiput to base of tail; dorsum with dark

longitudinal stripes arranged in six rows, some complete

and others broken; head with a pattern of dark and light

reticulations; limbs light lemon-yellow with numerous

dark spots; tail whitish with numerous irregular dark

transverse marks; and venter light tan (Fig. 1).

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e36

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 088

Moradi and Shafiei

Figure 1. Eublepharis angramainyu.

Measurements

SVL (snout- vent length): 140 mm; HL (head length):

34.79 nun; HH (height of head: from top of head to the

lower base of jaw): 19.34 mm; HW (width of head: from

widest part): 28.41 mm; INTNOST (internostril dis-

tance): 5.52 mm; EYENOST (distance between anterior

edge of eye to nostril): 11.31 mm; NOSTIP (distance

between anterior edge of the nostril to the tip of snout;

TED (transverse eye diameter): 10.11 mm; Thigh length:

28.38 mm; Crus length: 28.04 mm; Arm length: 22.05

mm; Foreann length: 22.05 mm .

Habitat

The specimen was found in rocky desert and arid grass-

lands, two hours after sunset, when air temperature was

29 °C. The specimen was observed at 1868 m above sea

level (asl). The vegetation at the site is dominated by Ar-

temisia sp., Amygdalus scoparia , Cousinia stocksii, and

Ebenus stellata (Fig. 2).

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 089

Discussion

The range of Eublepharis angramainyu is the western

foothills of the Zagros Mountains and northern Mesopo-

tamian Plain in Iran and Iraq (Szczerbak and Golubev

1996; Anderson 1999) connecting Afrotropical and Pa-

laeractic elements of the herpetofauna in the eastern

Mediterranean (Disi and Bohme 1996). This record indi-

cates a wider distribution of Eublepharis angramainyu in

Iran than previously thought (Fig. 3).

In pholidosis and coloration, the Khabr specimen

agrees in general with the descriptions of Eublepharis

angramainyu given by Anderson and Leviton (1966),

Leviton et al. (1992), Goc^men (2002), Szczerbak and

Golubev (1995), and Anderson (1999), except for the

eyelid fringe scale count (40-41 instead of 41-48) and

ventral scales at midbody (25 instead of 27-38). In com-

parison with E. angramainyu , E. macularius has 46-57

eyelid fringe scales and subdigital lamellae each with

several distinct small tubercles. The range of E. macular-

ius is in eastern Afghanistan, Pakistan, Khandesh District

of India, and possibly eastern Iran.

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e36

New record of Eublepharis angramainyu from southeastern Iran

Figure 2. Habitat of Eublepharis angramainyu.

Western specimens seen in the wild were found

in rocky deserts and arid grasslands. They occur in the

small caverns in the gypsum deposits (Karamiani et al.

2010). The habitats are similar despite the wide distances

between localities except for elevational range (1868 m

instead of 300-1427 m).

The new locality of the species is situated about 600

km east of the type locality, therefore this specimen may

represent a cryptic species and require a population study.

Literature cited

Anderson SC. 1999. The Lizards of Iran. Society for the Study

of Amphibians and Reptiles. Oxford, Ohio, vii+442 p.

Anderson SC, Leviton AE. 1966. Anew species of Eublepha-

ris from southwestern Iran (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Occa-

sional Papers of the California Academy of Sciences, Series

4, 53:1-5.

Disi AM, Bohme W. 1996. Zoogeography of the amphibians

and reptiles of Syria, with additional new records. Herpe-

tozoa 9(l/2):63-70.

Grismer LL. 1989. Eublepharis ensafi Baloutch and Thireau,

1986; A junior synonym of E. angramainyu Anderson and

Leviton, 1966. Journal of Herpetology 23(l):94-95.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 090

45E 50E 55E 60E

Figure 3. Eublepharis angramainyu type locality, square

(Anderson and Leviton 1966), new locality, circle.

November 2011 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e36

Moradi and Shafiei

Go^men B, Tosunoglu M, Ayaz D. 2002. First record of the

Leopard gecko Eublepharis angramainyu (Reptilia: Sau-

ria: Eublepharidae) from Anatolia. Herpetological Journal

12(2):79-80.

Karamiani R, Rastegar-Pouyani N. 2010. New specimens of

the Leopard gecko, Eublepharis angramainyu Anderson

and Leviton, 1966 (Sauria: Eublepharidae), in southwestern

regions of the Iranian plateau. In: 4th International Confer-

ence of Biology (14-16 September 2010). Mashhad, Iran.

565 p.

LevitonAE, Anderson SC, Adler K, Minton SA. 1 992. Hand-

book to Middle East Amphibians and Reptiles. Contribu-

tions to Herpetology, Volume 8. Society for the Study of

Amphibians and Reptiles, Oxford, Ohio, vii + 252 p.

Szczerbak NN, Golubev LM. 1996. The Gecko Fauna of the

USSR and Adjacent Regions (English edition; translated

from Russian by Golubev ML, Malinsky SA; Editors, Levi-

ton AE, Zug GA). Society for the Study of Amphibians and

Reptiles, Ithaca, New York. 232 p.

Uzum N, Ave A, Hgaz C, Olgun K. 2008. A new specimen

of Eublepharis angramainyu Anderson et Leviton, 1966

(Reptilia: Sauria: Eublepharidae), Leopard gecko, in south

eastern Anatolia, Turkey. Russian Journal of Herpetology

15(2): 129-132.

Manuscript received: 31 August 2011

Accepted: 17 October 2011

Published: 29 November 2011

NAEIM MORADI earned his B.S. in zoology from Shahid

Bahonar University Kerman, Iran in 2011. His B.S. research

focused on snake species diversity of Khabr National Park and

Ruchun Wildlife Refuge in Kerman Province under supervi-

sion of Soheila Shafiei. He collaborates with Shafiei’s group

in preparing an atlas on “Reptiles of southeastern Iran.” Naeim

gained tremendous experience in specimen locality data col-

lection and field techniques for catching various snakes. He is

interested in ecology, behavior, and conservation of reptiles,

especially snakes.

SOHEILA SHAFIEI earned her B.S. in zoology from Tehran

University, Iran in 1990 and her M.S. in zoology from Shahid

Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran in 1997. Soheila began her-

petology with a preliminary ecological study of lizard species

in some parts of Kerman Province, in southeastern Iran. Cur-

rently, she is a Ph.D. student at Tehran University, Iran, under

supervision of Prof. Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, Dr. Hasan

Rahimian, and Dr. Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani. Her disserta-

tion research focuses on geographic variation of Phrynocepha-

lus scutellatus (Olivier 1807; Sauria: Agamidae) in the Iranian

Central Plateau.

November 201 1 I Volume 5 I Number 1 I e36

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 091

mons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided

the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):92-97.

Sexual size dimorphism in Rana (Pelophylax) ridibunda

ridibunda Pallas, 1771 from a population in Darre-Shahr

Township, Mam Province, western Iran

’BEHZAD FATHINIA, 14 NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI, 2 HAMID DARVISHNIA,

3 HOSSEIN MOHAMADI, AND 'HIWA FAIZI

1 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, 6714967346 Kermanshah, IRAN department of Biology, Payam-e-Noor University,

Talesh, Guilan, IRAN; 3 Head of Biodiversity and Wildlife Management, Department of the Environment, Tehran, IRAN

Abstract .— In this survey we investigated occurrence of sexual size dimorphism (SSD), in a popula-

tion of Rana ( Pelophylax ) ridibunda ridibunda Pallas, 1771 from Darre-Shahr Township, Ham Prov-

ince, western Iran. Ninety-six specimens (52 females and 44 males) were captured, measured and

released into their natural habitat. Twelve metric characters were measured by digital calipers to

the nearest 0.01 mm. Statistical analyses showed considerable differences between sexes for mea-

sured characters. The largest female and male were 89.55 and 73.16 mm SVL, respectively, while the

smallest female and male were 68.52 and 61 .65 mm SVL, respectively. SPSS version 16 was used for

running the analysis. The Independent-Sample f-test (2-tailed) showed that each character has sig-

nificant differences between the sexes (p < 0.01), and for each variable the female value was larger

than for males on average.

Key words. Sexual size dimorphism (SSD), Rana (Pelophylax) ridibunda ridibunda , Principal Component Analysis

(PC A), Ilam Province, western Iran

Citation: Fathinia B, Rastegar-Pouyani N, Darvishnia H, Mohamadi H, Faizi H. 2012. Sexual size dimorphism in Rana (Pelophylax) ridibunda ridibunda

Pallas, 1771 from a population in Darr-Shahr Township, Ilam Province, western Iran. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):92-97(e44).

Introduction

Sexual dimorphism refers to the existence of phenotyp-

ic differences between males and females of a species,

and is widespread in animals (Andersson 1994; Faizi et

al. 2010). Kuo et al. (2009) considers the presence of

morphological differences between males and females

of species to have two aspects, size and shape, but Se-

lander (1972) credits behavioral aspects as well. Differ-

ent factors can influence sexual dimorphism including

female reproductive strategy (Tinkle et al. 1970; Ver-

rastro 2004), sexual selection (Carothers 1984; Verrastro

2004), and competition for food resources (Schoener

1967; Verrastro 2004). Sexual size dimorphism (SSD)

is a common and widespread phenomenon in animal

taxa, but highly variable in magnitude and direction

(Andersson 1994; Fairbairn 1997; Brandt and Andrade

2007). Sexually dimorphic traits have been surveyed

in different classes of vertebrates, including birds (Se-

lander 1966, 1972; Temeles 1985; Temeles et al. 2000),

primates (Crook 1972), amphibians (Shine 1979; Wool-

bright 1983; Monnet and Cherry 2002; Schauble 2004;

Vargas- Salinas 2006; McGarrity and Johnson 2008), liz-

ards (Stamps 1983; Rocha 1996; Carothers 1984; Trivers

1976; Molina-Borja 2003; Baird et al. 2003; Verrastro

Correspondence. Email: 4 nasrullah.r@ gmail.com

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 092

2004; Bruner et al. 2005; Kaliontzopoulou et al. 2007),

and snakes (Shine 1978, 1993, 1994; Feriche et al. 1993;

Kminiak and Kaluz 1983; Shine et al. 1999).

To our knowledge, such a survey has not yet been

documented for the Marsh frog, Rana ridibunda ridibun-

da in Iran. The Marsh frog, Rana ( Pelophylax ) ridibunda

ridibunda Pallas, 1771, has a relatively wide distribution

throughout Iran, except for southeastern regions (i.e., Sis-

tan and Baluchistan Province; Baloutch and Kami 1995).

We analyzed sexual size dimorphism in this species to

reveal sexually dimorphic traits that can be important in

systematic and evolutionary research.

Materials and methods

The current survey was carried out about five km from

Darre-Shahr city, flam province, western Iran (Fig. 1),

33°11' N and 47°22' E, 620 m above sea level (asl) and

with 486 millimeter (mm) annual precipitation. All 96

specimens (52 $ and 44 S) were collected using a hand-

made butterfly net in streams, brooks, and cultivation

waterways. Twelve morphometric characters were cho-

sen and measured by a digital caliper to the nearest 0.01

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e44

Fathinia et al.

mm and are presented in Table 1 . Morphometric varible

measurements were obtained from as many specimens as

possible per locality and released unharmed at the origi-

nal capture location. The same procedure was repeated in

localities separated as far as possible to ensure that none

of the individuals were counted twice. Two distinctive

characters were used to distinguish males from females:

first, the vocal pouches at the ends of buccal slits, just

under the tympana at the sides of head and second, the

digital pads on thumbs (Fig. 2). To test significance of

sexually dimorphic characters, Independent Sample t-

test (2-tailed) as well as Principal Component Analysis

(PCA: correlation matrix) at the significance level of

0.01 were employed. SPSS software version 16 was used

for running the statistical analyses.

Results

Independent-Samples f-test (2-tailed)

The results of the Independent-Samples /-test (2-tailed)

show all variables differed significantly between sexes (p

< 0.01), with each variable being greater in females than

males (Table 2).

Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

The two axes of the PCA explain 82.08% of the total

variation. The Principal Component One (PCI) accounts

for 73.95% and the Principal Component Two (PC2) for

8.13% of the total variation (Table 3). For PCI, the vari-

ables SVL, LHL, LFL, FHL, HL, HW, NNL, TL, and

L4T (see Table 1 for the morphometric characters used

in the study) are the most sexually dimorphic characters.

All these variables have the same direction (positive =

larger females) but not the same magnitude (Fig. 3). The

values of the females along PCI do overlap, to some ex-

tent, with those for males, indicating that the sexes are

Table 1 . The morphometric characters used in this study.

Characters

Definition

SVL

Snout to vent length

LHL

Length of hindlimb

LFL

Length of forelimb

FHL

Forelimb to hindlimb length

HL

Head length

HW

Head width

EEL

Eyelid to eyelid length

SEL

Snout to eye length

ELW

Eyelid width

NND

Distance between nostrils

TL

Tympanum length

L4T

Length of the 4 th toe

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 093

Figure 1 . Map showing the study area in Ilam province, west-

ern Iran.

not fully separated from each other. The first axis is a

reflection of size with about 45% of males and 23% of

females inseparable in these characters. The PC2 on the

other hand shows almost no discrimination between the

sexes, explaining only 8.13% of the total variation in

which the characters EEL and ELW having the most im-

portant role (Fig. 3, Table 3).

Conclusion

There is an accepted hypothesis that explains the sta-

tus and direction of sexual size dimorphism in anurans,

where males are usually smaller than females as a result

of sexual selection (Monnet and Cherry 2002). In 90%

of the anuran species, the females are larger than males

(Shine 1979). As is obvious from Table 2, each character

tested for Rana r. ridibunda was significantly (p < 0.01)

different for males and females on average and 100% of

the measured characters are indicative of the presence of

sexual dimorphism in size.

In some species of frogs, males are much smaller than

females and it is not necessary to carry out statistical

analyses (Hayek and Heyer 2005). But for R. r. ridibunda

it was not completely clear that males are smaller than

females without the help of statistical analyses. Shine

(1979) showed that in species exhibiting male combat,

males are often larger than females, but in our analyses

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e44

Sexual size dimorphism in Han a ( Pelophylax ) ridibunda ridibunda

Table 2. Comparison of morphometric characters (mm) in males and females of Rana ridibunda ridibunda. n: number; SEM: stan-

dard error of mean; * = significant at level 0.01. Morphometric abbreviations: SVL (snout- vent length), LHL (length of hindlimb),

LFL (length of forelimb), FHL (forelimb to hindlimb length), HF (head length), HW (head width), EEF (eyelid to eyelid length),

SEE (snout to eye length), ELW (eyelid width), NND (distance between nostrils), TL (tympanum length), L4T (length of the 4 th toe).

SEX

SVL*

LHL*

LFL*

FHL*

HL*

HW*

EEL*

SEL*

ELW*

NNL*

TL*

L4T*

“IT

mean

67.16

103.33

36.27

30.36

18.80

23.12

3.33

10.50

4.82

3.97

4.74

18.54

(n = 44)

SEM

0.48

0.70

0.25

0.32

0.16

0.18

0.05

0.09

0.04

0.05

0.14

?

mean

78.36

120.14

41.12

36.04

21.71

26.52

3.94

12.29

5.19

4.47

5.45

21.13

(n = 52)

SEM

0.78

1.01

0.37

0.43

0.24

0.31

0.07

0.22

0.07

0.05

0.06

0.17

p-value (< 0.001)

0.000

0.002

0.000

Difference between

means

11.2

16.81

4.85

5.68

2.91

3.4

0.61

1.79

0.37

0.5

0.71

2.59

here, all measured characters in Table 2, size of female

characters are significantly larger than males. Accord-

ing to Shine (1979), in most cases the causes of sexual

dimorphism in frogs are not known and also in R. r. ri-

dibunda the actual causes of this high degree of sexual

dimorphism in our data are not fully understood. Given

this, it seems that there is an outstanding problem in sta-

tistical significance versus biological significance when

evaluating sexual dimorphism in measured characters of

R. r. ridibunda. Regardless of any evolutionary or eco-

logical causes of observed sexual dimorphism in Rana

r. ridibunda, with respect to the three usual and accepted

hypotheses of sexual size dimorphism in all animals: (1)

fecundity selection on female body size (Wiklund and

Karlsson 1988; Fairbaim and Shine 1993), (2) sexual

selection on male body size (Cox et al 2003), and (3)

ecological divergence between sexes due to intraspe-

cific competition (Butler et al. 2000; Bolnick and Doe-

beli 2003); there is an uncertainty in clarifying the main

force(s) causing a high degree of sexual size dimorphism

in this species. More profound surveys are needed to un-

cover the main cause(s) of SSD in R. r. ridibunda.

Figure 3. Ordination of the individual males and females of

Rana ( Pelophylax ) ridibunda ridibunda on the first two princi-

pal components. Note the relative degree of isolation between

males and females, which is mainly attributed to SVL, LHL,

LFL, HL, and HW in the PCI and EEL and ELW in the PC2.

Figure 2. The presence of vocal pouches (a) and digital pads (b) in male Rana ( Pelophylax ) ridibunda ridibunda distinguishes them

from females.

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 094 April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e44

Fathinia et al.

Table 3. Extraction of Principal Components 1-3 using the

component matrix. Variables loading strongly on each principal

component are bold. Abbreviations: SVL (snout-vent length),

LHL (length of hindlimb), LFL (length of forelimb), FHL (fore-

limb to hindlimb length), HF (head length), HW (head width),

EEF (eyelid to eyelid length), SEE (snout to eye length), ELW

(eyelid width), NND (distance between nostrils), TL (tympa-

num length), T4T (length of the 4 th toe).

Variables

PC 1

PC 2

PC 3

SVL

0.964

0.002

0.041

LHL

0.941

-0.164

-0.124

LFL

0.900

-0.230

-0.121

FHL

0.877

-0.134

0.069

HL

0.953

0.145

0.068

HW

0.951

-0.087

0.042

EEL

0.678

-0.540

0.311

SEL

0.766

0.128

-0.431

ELW

0.669

0.660

0.106

NNL

0.848

0.105

0.311

TL

0.866

0.210

0.037

L4T

0.841

-0.225

-0.269

Eigenvalue

8.857

0.976

0.507

% variation

explained

73.956

8.130

4.225

Acknowledgments. — The authors wish to thank the

Ilam Province Department of the Environment for their

support during field work in Ilam Province.

Literature cited

Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton Univer-

sity Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 624 p.

BairdTA, VittLJ, Baird TD, Cooper Jr WE, Caldwell

JP, Perez-Mellado V. 2003. Social behavior and

sexual dimorphism in the Bonaire whiptail, Cnemi-

dophorus murinus (Squamata: Teiidae): The role

of sexual selection. Canadian Journal of Zoolology

81(11):1781-1790.

Baloutch M, Kami HG. 1995, Amphibians of Iran. Teh-

ran University Publication, Tehran. Ill p. (In Per-

sian).

Bolnick DI, Doebeli M. 2003. Sexual dimorphism and

sympatric speciation: Two sides of the same ecologi-

cal coin. Evolution 57(ll):2433-2449.

Brandt Y, Andrade MCB. 2007. Testing the gravity hy-

pothesis of sexual size dimorphism: Are small males

faster climbers? Functional Ecology 21(2):379-385.

Bruner E, Costantini D, Fanfani A, Dell’omo G. 2005.

Morphological variation and sexual dimorphism of

the cephalic scales in Lacerta bilineata. Acta Zoolog-

ica (Stockholm) 86(4):245-254.

Butler MA, Schoener TW, Losos JB. 2000. The rela-

tionship between sexual size dimorphism and habi-

tat use in greater Antiliean Anolis lizards. Evolution

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 095

54(l):259-272.

Carothers JH. 1984. Sexual selection and sexual dimor-

phism in some herbivorous lizards. American Natu-

ralist (Chicago) 124(2):244-254.

Cox RM, Skelly SL, John- alder HB. 2003. A compara-

tive test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual size dimor-

phism in lizards. Evolution 57(7): 1653-1669.

Crook JH. 1972. Sexual selection, dimorphism, and so-

cial organization in the primates In: Sexual Selection

and the Descent of Man. Editor, Campbell R. Chica-

go, Aldine. 231-281.

Fairbairn DJ. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimor-

phism: Pattern and process in the coevolution of body

size in males and females. Annual Review of Ecology

and Systematics 28:659-687.

Fairbairn DJ, Shine R. 1993. Patterns of sexual size

dimorphism in seabirds of the southern hemisphere.

Oikos 68:139-145.

Faizi H, Rastegar-Pouyani N, Rajabizadeh M, Heidari

N. 2010. Sexual dimorphism in Trachylepis aurata

transcaucasica Chernov, 1926 (Reptilia: Scincidae)

in the Zagros Mountains, western Iran. Iranian Jour-

nal of Animal Biosystematics 6(1): 1-8.

Feriche M, Pleguezuelos JM, Cerro A. 1993. Sexual

dimorphism and sexing of mediterranean Colubrids

based on external characteristics. Journal of Herpe-

tology 27(4):357-362.

Hayek L-A, Heyer RW. 2005. Determining sexual di-

morphism in frog measurement data: Integration of

statistical significance, measurement error, effect size

and biological significance. Annals of the Brazilian

Academy of Sciences 77(l):45-76.

Kaliontzopoulou A, Carretero MA, Llorente GA.

2007. Multivariate and geometric morphometries in

the analysis of sexual dimorphism variation in Podar-

cis lizards. Journal of Morphology 268(2): 152-165.

Kminiaic M, Kaluz S. 1983. Evaluation of sexual di-

morphism in snakes (Ophidia, Squamata) based on

external morphological characters. Folia Zoologica

32:259-270.

Kuo C-Y, Lin Y-T, Lin Y-S. 2009. Sexual size and shape

dimorphism in an agamid lizard, Japalura swinhonis

(Squamata: Lacertilia: Agamidae). Zoological Studies

48(3):351-361.

Mcgarrity ME, Johnson SA. 2008. Geographic trend in

sexual size dimorphism and body size of Osteopilus

septentrionalis (Cuban treefrog): Implications for in-

vasion of the southeastern United States. Biological

Invasions 11(6): 141 1-1420.

Molina-Borja M. 2003. Sexual dimorphism of Gallotia

atlantica atlantica and Gallotia atlantica mahoratae

(Lacertidae) from the eastern Canary islands. Journal

of Herpetology 37(4):769-772.

Monnet J-M and Cherry MI. 2002. Sexual size dimor-

phism in anurans. Proceedings of the Royal Society of

London B Biological Sciences 269(1507):2301-2307.

Rocha CFD. 1996. Sexual dimorphism in the sand lizard

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e44

Sexual size dimorphism in Han a ( Pelophylax ) ridibunda ridibunda

Liolaemus lutzae of southeastern Brazil In: Herpeto-

logia Neotropical. Editor, Pefaur JE. Merida, Univer-

sidad de los Andes, Conselho de Publicaciones. Vol-

ume 2. 131-140.

Schauble CS. 2004. Variation in body size and sexual

dimorphism across geographical and environmental

space in the frogs Limnodynastes tasmaniensis and

L. peronii. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

(London) 82(l):39-56.

Schoener TW. 1 967. The ecological significance of sexu-

al dimorphism in size in the lizard Anolis conspersus.

Science 155(3761):474-477.

Selander RK. 1966. Sexual dimorphism and differential

niche utilization in birds. Condo 68(2): 113-151.

Selander RK. 1972. Sexual selection and dimorphism

in birds In: Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man.

Editor, Campbell, B. Chicago, Aldine. 180-230.

Shine R. 1978. Sexual size dimorphism and male combat

in snakes. Oecologia 33(3):269-277.

Shine R. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism

in the Amphibia. Copeia 1979(2): 297-306.

Shine R. 1993. Sexual dimorphism in snakes In: Snakes:

Ecology and Behavior. Editors, Seigel RA, Collins JT.

McGraw-Hill, New York. 49-86.

Shine R. 1994. Sexual size dimorphism in snakes revis-

ited. Copeia 1994(2):326-346.

Shine R, Olsson MM, Moore IT, Lemaster MP, Mason

RT. 1999. Why do male snakes have longer tails than

females? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London

B 266:2147-2151.

Stamps JA. 1983. Sexual selection, sexual dimorphism

and territoriality in lizards In: Lizard Ecology: Studies

on a model organism. Editors, Huey RB, Pianka ER,

Schoener TW. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mas-

sachusetts. 169-204.

Temeles EJ. 1985. Sexual size dimorphism of bird-eat-

ing hawks: The effect of prey vulnerability. American

Naturalist 125(4):485-499.

Temeles EJ, Pan IL, Brennan JL, Horwitt JN. 2000. Ev-

idence for ecological causation of sexual dimorphism

in a hummingbird. Science 289(5478):441-443.

Tinkle D, Wilbur H, Tilley S. 1970. Evolutionary strat-

egies in lizard reproduction. Evolution 24:55-74.

Trivers RL. 1976. Sexual selection and resource-accru-

ing abilities in Anolis garmani. Evolution 30:253-269.

Vargas-Salinas F. 2006. Sexual size dimorphism in the

Cuban treefrog Osteopilus septentrionalis. Amphibia-

Reptilia 27(3):419-426.

Verrastro L. 2004. Sexual dimorphism in Liolaemus

occipitalis (Iguania, Tropiduridae). Iheringia. Serie

Zoologia 94(l):45-48.

Wiklund C, Karlsson B. 1988. Sexual size dimorphism

in relation to fecundity in some Swedish satyrid but-

terflies. American Naturalist 13 1(1): 132- 138.

Woolbright LL. 1983. Sexual selection and size di-

morphism in anuran Amphibia. American Naturalist

121(1):110-119.

Received: 19 September 2011

Accepted: 22 November 2011

Published: 07 April 2012

BEHZAD FATHINIA earned his B.A. and M.S. from Isfahan and Lorestan universities, respectively.

His M.S. research focused on “The Biosystematic Study of Lizards of Ilam Province.” He is a Ph.D.

student at Razi University, Kermanshah, western Iran under the supervision of Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani, Mozafar Sharifi, and Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani. His dissertation reaserch involves ecology,

phylogeography, molecular systematics, and population genetics of the Iranian viper Pseudocerastes

urarachnoides in western Iran. He is also interested in other reptiles, especially snakes.

NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI earned his B.S. in zoology from Razi University Kerman-

shah, Iran in 1986 and his M.S. in zoology from Tehran University, Tehran, Iran in 1991, where he

studied herpetology with the agamids as the central object. He started his Ph.D. in Gothenburg Univer-

sity, Sweden in 1994 under the advisement of Professor Goran Nilson and graduated in 1999, working

on taxonomy and biogeography of Iranian Plateau agamids with Trapelus as the main objective. His

research interests include taxonomy and biogeography of the Iranian Plateau, the Middle East and

central Asian herpetofauna.

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e44

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 096

Fathinia et al.

HAMID DARVISHNIA earned a B.A. from Booali University of Hamadan and his M.S. from Shahid

Beheshti University of Tehran (his thesis was on developmental biology). He is currently a faculty

member of the Department of Biology, Payam-e-Noor University, Talesh, Guilan, north of Iran. Dar-

vishnia is interested in systematics, ecology, and ethology of amphibians and reptiles.

HUSSEIN MOHAMADI is the Head of Natural History Museums and genetic resources, Environ-

mental Protection Organization, Tehran, Iran. He earned his B.A. and M.S. degrees from the Natural

Resource College of Tehran University. His M.S. thesis was “The Ecological study of the Marsh

crocodile, Crocodylus palustris, in Baluchistan.” He is now continuing his study as a Ph.D. student

in environmental science, branch of science and research at Islamic Azad University. The subject of

his Ph.D. thesis is “The assessment of changing trends and modeling of habitat preference in yellow

Persian deer, Dama dama mesopotamica .”

HIVA FAIZI earned his B.Sc. in plant biology from Shahid Beheshti University (SBU) and his M.Sc.

in Animal Biosystematics from Razi University. During his M.Sc. he studied the genus Trachylepis

in Iran from different perspectives, including morphology, osteology, parasitology, and systematics

of Trachylepis aurata transcaucasica. He studied the Near Eastern fire salamander, Salamandra in-

fraimmaculata seminovi, from Kurdistan province, western Iran. Currrently, he is collecting data and

samples of Neurergus micro spUotus and Nearer gus kaiseri to start a Ph.D. project on population ge-

netic and genetic diversity of the two mentioned species.

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e44

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

097

Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

provided the original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):98-1 04.

Notes on reproduction and conservation of

Testudo graeca ibera Pallas 1814 (Reptilia: Testudinidae)

in Zagros, western Iran

'REZA SADEGHI AND 2 FARHANG TORKI

1 Department of Biology, 815 Boroujerd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Boroujerd, Lorestan, IRAN

Abstract . — During longtime fieldwork in the Zagros Mountains, we studied tortoises of the western

Iranian plateau. In this paper we focus on Testudo graeca ibera. We present the first information

about mating behavior, timing of mating, egg shape, and hatching of this subspecies. In general,

our results on reproduction in T. g. ibera are different from previous reports. Additionally, we report

anomalous reproductive behavior in T. g. ibera.

Key words. Testudo graeca ibera, mating, eggs, Zagros Mountains, Iran

Citation: Sadeghi R, Torki F. 2012. Notes on reproduction and conservation

western Iran. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1):98-104(e45).

Introduction

Testudo graeca includes two subspecies on the Iranian

plateau: T. g. ibera, distributed in western Iran, and T. g.

zarudnyi, distributed on the eastern Iranian Plateau (An-

derson 1979; Torki 2010). We realize that the nomencla-

ture of southwest Asian tortoises is in flux, as there seems

not to be a recognized consensus as yet; here we use the

conventional taxonomy of the older literature.

Jasser-Hager and Winter (2007) reported results re-

garding incubation in tortoises, including a Greek popu-

lation of T. g. ibera. Information on reproduction of this

species in Iran is very rare (Pritchard 1966). In this paper

we focus on husbandry of T. g. ibera on the western slope

of the central Zagros Mountains, western Iranian plateau.

Materials and methods

To study reproduction in T. g. ibera, we worked in the

natural habitat from 2002-2010 in this region. After egg

deposition by one female specimen under natural con-

ditions, we transferred all eggs into our lab. Thus, our

results are based on our observations under natural and

laboratory conditions.

Results and discussion

Mating activity time

Mating of T. g. ibera in the Zagros population occurred

from early spring to late summer. Pritchard (1966) ob-

served copulation in the Zagros population of T. graeca

Correspondence. Email: Horkifarhang@yahoo.com

of Testudo graeca ibera Pallas 1814 (Reptilia: Testudinidae) in Zagros,

in late August and early September, whereas Nikolsky

(1915) recorded mating in April and May in the Trans-

caucasian area. Mating behavior for T. g. ibera in Greece

was observed during two time periods: March-April and

late autumn (Jasser-Hager and Winter 2007). In contrast,

we did not see any tortoises in natural habitats in the

central Zagros Mountains during mid- and late autumn.

Temperatures during this time are low and most species

of herpetofauna are going into hibernation (e.g., Torki

2007a, b). Thus, there is a difference in timing of mating

and courtship between the Zagros and Greek populations

of T. g. ibera.

Most mating occurred in shady places, such as under

trees or other vegetation, large stones, etc. Jasser-Hager

and Winter (2007) reported maximum mating of T. g.

ibera in Greece during morning hours. Maximum mating

in the Zagros populations mostly occurred near mid-day,

from 11:00 to 15:00. Mating in T. g. ibera usually oc-

curred after feeding.

Mating behavior

Based on our observations (from 2002-2010) of 35 pairs

(female: 35; male: 35) of T. graeca, we classified court-

ship behavior into four phases as follows:

1. Aggressive phase : aggression is the first step in

courtship; in this step, the male attacks the rear of fe-

male’s carapace and females attempt to escape during this

phase. In our observations, this behavior occurred repeat-

edly several times. The duration of this phase differed

among specimens; in general, duration was between 10

and 50 minutes. Biting occurred during this phase; the

male bit the limbs, neck, or head of the female. Duration

of the aggressive phase was related to (a) agility of male,

as agile males were successful with a decreased aggres-

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

098

Sadeghi and Torki

sive phase; and (b) place of mating, as minimum dura-

tion occurred in uneven terrain (such as in mountains)

and maximum duration occurred in flatter terrain (such

as agricultural land).

2. Submission phase : after the aggressive phase, the

female remains in one place and the male can start the

mating step. The duration of this phase was related to the

terrain; in even places, the duration of this step was less

than in uneven terrain, as the male has to rest for a few

minutes on rougher ground.

3. Copulation phase : copulation occurred between

5 and 21 times for each pair. The rate of coupling was

related to duration of the first phase, which may reduce

energy of the male for mating. The duration of each cop-

ulation was between approximately 10 and 70 seconds.

The duration of this time was in inverse relationship to

the duration of the aggressive phase; if the duration of

the aggressive phase was short, then duration of the mat-

ing step was longer (because males have maximal en-

ergy for mating); in contrast, if duration of the aggressive

step phase was longer, then duration of the mating step

was short (presumably because males were tired due to

running and did not have sufficient energy for as many

copulations).

4. Resting : the resting step occurred in most speci-

mens, because both sexes, especially males, expend

much energy for successful mating. After mating, the

male and female rest close together. The duration of the

resting time is related to duration of mating; duration of

the resting step was minimal when mating occurred in

the morning and maximal when mating occurred in the

afternoon, possibly because individuals must sleep, or

perhaps because afternoon temperatures are higher.

Douglas et al. (1994) reported courtship behavior in

the Desert tortoise ( Gopherus agassizii ) and described

several phases for courtship behavior: trailing , biting,

rear ram, soliciting, mount. These phases occurred for T.

graeca and the aggressive phase in this study is the same

as the trailing, biting, rear ram, and soliciting phases

of Douglas et al. (1994). Douglas et al. (1994) reported

the final step of courtship behavior as follows: mount by

male while female does head-swing. Head-swing of fe-

male occurred in T. graeca during the copulation phase.

In this study we reported a resting phase; also, this phase

is outside of mating behavior, but we cite this phase in

mating (or courtship) behavior because, the resting phase

occurred as the result of all previous phases of this study.

We see this phase in other reptiles, such as Lacerta media

and Laudakia nupta.

Anomalous mating behavior

Both in captivity and in the natural habitat, we saw sev-

eral unsuccessful mating or courtship attempts in T. grae-

ca: (a) Unsuccessful mating: males sometimes directed

mating behavior toward an inappropriate part of the fe-

Figure 1 . Mating of Testudo graeca ibera, Zagros populations. Photo by Farhang Torki.

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 099

Notes on reproduction and conservation of Testudo graeca ibera

male body, such as dorsolateral or anterior of females,

(b) Anomaly: male specimen attempted to mate with

other animals (not females of T. graeca ), for example,

under captive conditions, a male T. graeca attacked and

repeatedly showed mating behaviors toward Mauremys

caspica. (c) Male-male courtship and mating: under cap-

tive condition some male specimens showed courtship

and mating behaviors with other males.

In general, mating anomalies occurred only in male

specimens. Therefore, in this study we report anomalous

mating behavior in T. graeca for the reason that males of

T. graeca showed courtship and mating behavior toward

other animals, materials, etc. (e.g., inappropriate parts of

female body). We observed maximum anomalous behav-

ior under captive conditions.

Hatching

During our fieldwork in the Zagros Mountains, we ob-

served one female during egg laying. Egg laying occurred

on 13 May 2010 at 1630 h in even terrain. The female

excavated a nest cavity during less than 10 minutes. She

laid four eggs (Fig. 3) during ten minutes, and covered

the eggs in five minutes. The nest cavity is shown sche-

matically in Fig. 4. Egg shape was oval (Fig. 3) as is true

for most tortoises, such as other subspecies of Testudo

graeca and Indotestudo forstenii (Kruger 2007; Jasser-

Hager and Winter 2007; Struijk 2009). Hiley and Foum-

bourdis (1988) reported egg size, shape, and weight of

Testudo graeca from northern Greece (Table 2). Our

comparison with this population showed that eggs of the

Iranian T. graeca population have greater length, width,

and especially, mass. Jasser-Hager and Winter (2007) re-

ported that eggs average 25 g (range 14-33 g) for a north-

ern Greek population. Both reports about egg weight of

T. graeca ibera in Greece record less weight than in the

Zagros population.

Figure 2. Anomalous mating behavior of Testudo graeca ibera.

(a) Mating behavior of T. g. ibera with Mauremys caspica ; (b)

Mating behavior of T. g. ibera with anterior body of other

specimen; (c) Mating behavior of male T. g. ibera with another

male. Photos by Farhang Torki.

We transferred eggs from natural habitat to laboratory

conditions. We preserved one egg and provided a nest

cavity for the other eggs. We inserted the three eggs into

the cavity and covered them with soil. No further care of

the eggs was provided. We only covered eggs with soil

(similar to natural conditions; see Fig. 4). All environ-

mental conditions of the laboratory were similar to those

of the natural habitat. We did not touch the eggs, because

handling stops egg development, as our experiments with

other reptiles had confirmed. Therefore, we transferred

all eggs using paper or wood. Duration of incubation of

eggs varied from 72 to 76 days (Tab. 1; Fig. 5). In com-

parison, Jasser-Hager and Winter (2007) reported the in-

cubation period for Testudo graeca in Greece as between

54 and 89 days (average 62 days), for T. hermanni boett-

geri between 49 and 72 days (average 56 days), and for

T. horsfieldii between 54 and 102 days (average 68 days).

We preserved one egg the first day and measured

thickness of the shell. We recorded shell thickness for

other eggs after hatching. Our results show that the egg

shell has a maximum thickness during the first day af-

ter laying (middle of egg: 0.25 mm) and has minimum

thickness at hatching (middle of other eggs: 0.12, 0.10,

and 0.07 mm). Decreased shell thickness is probably im-

portant for easy hatching and/or drawing essential ele-

ments from the shell. After egg-laying, the egg shell was

soft and flexible; this is in contrast to the following days,

especially at hatching. During this time, egg shells were

stiff and breakable.

Juvenile specimens have a circular shape, with cara-

pace length and width and plastron length and width be-

ing similar (Table 1). This is true for other tortoises, es-

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

100

Sadeghi and Torki

Table 1. Measurements and information on four eggs of Tes-

tudo graeca ibera after egg-laying (13 May 2010) and after

hatching (24-27 July 2010). The third egg did not hatch.

Measurements

1 st egg

2 nd egg

3 rd egg

4 th egg

Length (mm)

45.9

45.1

44.9

43.4

Width (mm)

33.8

34.4

34.9

31.6

Weight (g)

28

30

26

Hatching date

24 Jul 10

25 Jul 10

-

27 Jul 10

Time of day

sunset

afternoon

-

sunset

Carapace length

40.8

35.8

-

35.7

Carapace width

37.1

35.2

-

34.8

Plastron length

34.9

32.1

-

31.6

Plastron width

33.2

31.1

-

30.7

Figure 3. (a) Four eggs of Testudo graeca ibera, after oviposi-

tion, (b) One egg of T. g. ibera, under captive conditions. Pho-

tos by Farhang Torki.

pecially for other subspecies of Testudo graeca (Kruger

2007; Jasser-Hager and Winter 2007). Plastrons of hatch-

ling specimens were covered by yolk sacs. After hatch-

ing, the yolk sac was distinct from plastron of juveniles

(Fig. 6). The bodies of juveniles during the first days after

hatching are soft. The plastron and especially the cara-

pace of juveniles harden after more than one month.

Conservation

Several factors pose threats to T. graeca in the Zagros

Mountains; we classified these factors as follows.

Natural threats

(a) Drought indirectly and directly affected survival of

T. graeca, especially juvenile specimens. (1) Directly :

physical activity of T. graeca was reduced during high

temperature, especially during mid-day (especially in

summer). Temperature during recent years has increased

(IMO). Therefore, daily biological activity of T. graeca

was reduced. This is true for juvenile specimens. Juve-

nile specimens must obtain more food. Hence, during

high temperatures, physical activity of juvenile speci-

mens is strongly reduced. Therefore, some juvenile spec-

imens are not successful in obtaining food and survival

of juveniles is endangered due to drought. (2) Indirectly :

Drought occurred during several recent years. Density

and longevity of vegetation during droughts is reduced

(our observation). Therefore, the rate of food production

is reduced during the warm season (summer). Juvenile

specimens could not obtain enough food. Some adults

and juvenile specimens could not store enough fat for

hibernation periods; this occurred due to loss of food in

natural habitats.

(b) Predators : based on our observations and life his-

tory of T. graeca, we divided predators of T. graeca into

three types, as follows: (a) egg predators, including some

snakes ( Eryx ) and scincid lizards; (b) predators of young,

including birds (crows, ravens, etc.), and mammals (some

carnivores; Fig. 7c); (c) and predators of adult T. graeca,

such as birds (eagles) and mammals (some carnivores).

Eagles grab adults and fly to high altitudes (more than

a

b 5-6 cm

‘1.G<2.Gcm , i

Figure 4. Schematic of egg-site in Testudo graeca ibera, Za-

gros Mountains. Abbreviation: a: air; b: surface; c: soil; d: hol-

low egg-site; e: eggs.

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 101

Notes on reproduction and conservation of Testudo graeca ibera

Table 2. Egg size and weight comparison of northern Testudo graeca ibera between two popula-

tions: western Iran (Zagros) and northern Greece.

Hiley and Loumbourdis 1988

Present study

Population

Year assessment

1985-1986

2010

fitness: Iran

Location

northern Greece

western Iran (Zagros)

and Greece

Weight (g)

17.5 + 2.0

28 + 0.80

1.6

Length (mm)

35.4 ± 2.0

44.8 + 0.50

1.2

Width (mm)

29.2+1.9

33.68 + 0.7

1.1

Shape

1.22 + 0.1

1.32 + 0.02

1.1

Figure 5. Hatching of Testudo graeca ibera. a-f: arrangement of broken egg shell (during hatching). Photos by Farhang Torki.

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 102

Sadeghi and Torki

Figure 6. Hatchling specimens of Testudo graeca ibera under

captive conditions, (a-b) carapace and plastron of juvenile spec-

imens (after one week); (c-d) plastron of juvenile specimens

(one day old), showing narrow yolk sac; (e) juvenile specimens

after one month. Photos by Farhang Torki.

100 m) and release them. Due to this action, the shell of

T. graeca is broken and eagles easily eat adults. Several

predators such as birds, dogs, and wolves eat T. graeca;

this occurs due to loss of food in the natural habitat.

(c) Ectoparasites : the main ectoparasites of T. graeca

in this region are several taxa of Acari ( Acarina , ticks;

Fig. 7d). Ticks attach to carapace, plastron, and limbs.

We see most ticks on soft parts, such as joints of scutes

or lim bs.

Human threats

(a) Habitat destruction : habitat destruction occurs due

to several important factors. (1) Ashayer (nomadic herd-

ers): the lifestyle of some peoples in the Zagros Moun-

tains is similar to that of other herders elsewhere; they do

not build homes, but live together in nature. Ashayer, for

migratory periods of their lives, only use natural mate-

rial; for example: they cut trees for fire. Ashayer and their

animals, such as goats, are in competition with most wild

animals, such as T. graeca , for food resources. (2) Build-

ing roads: many animals are killed on roads during day

and night. We could see several corpses of T. graeca on

roads or near roads (Fig. 7b). All specimens were killed

due to various vehicles. Based on our observation on one

road in northern Lorestan Province, more than 20 corpses

of T. graeca were seen on roads or near roads; all speci-

mens were killed by vehicles. (3) Recreation : some areas

are good places for recreation. People play a negative

role during recreation, for example, some people bring

juvenile specimens of T. graeca home and some people

release their trash and other waste into the environment.

Some wastes, such as oils and grease, are released into

the natural habitat of T. graeca. These materials have a

negative role in the survival and life of T. graeca, espe-

cially juveniles.

(b) People’s beliefs (outlandish stories): this factor oc-

curred during past years in the Zagros Mountains, but

we could not see or hear any reports about this threat

in recent years. Mostly people killed turtles for some

purposes, such as to make love potions, increased milk

production of cows, etc. These are ancestral beliefs, and

today no one pays attention to these outlandish stories.

(c) Agriculture: (1) destruction of eggs and juvenile

specimens by agricultural elements during planting and

harvest; (2) killing tortoises by plough (agriculture el-

ements); (3) chemical materials; these are important

threats to most animals, because most farmers use chem-

ical materials for their farmland. In some cases some

farmers release the runoff of chemical materials out of

their farmland into the habitat. Poison is distributed to

nature and T. graeca (and other animals) are affected di-

rectly or indirectly by these poisons, (d) Fire (Fig. 7a):

During recent years, human-caused fire has occurred in

the central Zagros Mountains. Due to fire, the habitat of

T. graeca and other animals is damaged. In some cases

we could see corpses of some animals such as T. graeca,

killed due to fire. Most fires occur after harvest; this time

is synchronous with hatching of most reptiles, such as T.

graeca. In addition, due to fire, juvenile reptiles cannot

obtain an abundance of necessary fat. Therefore, these

specimens cannot live through their hibernation period

(and die in mid-hibernation).

Acknowledgments. — This study was supported by Is-

lamic Azad University, Boroujerd Branch, Iran. We wish

to thank S. C. Anderson (USA) for editing our manu-

script.

Literature cited

Anderson SC. 1979. Synopsis of the turtles, crocodiles,

and amphisbaenians of Iran. Proceedings of the Cali-

fornia Academy of Sciences, Series 4, 41(22):501-528.

Hiley A, Loumbourdis NS. 1988. Egg size and shape,

clutch dynamics, and reproductive effort in European

tortoises. Canadian Journal of Zoology 66(7): 1527-

1536.

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org

103

Notes on reproduction and conservation of Testudo graeca ibera

Figure 7. Natural (a, b) and human (b, c) threat factors in Testudo graeca ibera. (a) Fire: human-caused fire in natural habitat of T.

g. ibera and agriculture land; (b) Building roads: one specimen killed on road by cars; (c) Predators: one specimen killed by birds;

(d) Exoparasites: one species of Acari on plastron of I! g. ibera. Photos by Farhang Torki.

IMO: Iran Meteorological Organization. [Online]. Avail-

able: http://www.irimo.ir/farsi/ [Accessed: 02 No-

vember 2011].

Jasser-Hager I, Winter A. 2007. Results of the tortoise

incubation project for 2002 through 2007. Radiata

16(3):2-41.

Kruger E. 2007. Near-natural incubation of Testudo

graeca soussensis Pieh, 2000, eggs. Radiata 16(3):

42-48.

Nikolsky AN. 1915. Fauna de la Russie. Reptiles. Vol-

ume 1. Petrograd. 532 p.

Pritchard PCH. 1966. Note on Persian turtles. British

Journal of Herpetology 3:271-275.

Ruby DE, Niblick HA. 1994. A behavioral inventory of

the desert tortoise: Development of an ethogram. Her-

petological Monographs 8:88-102.

Torki F. 2007a. The role of hibernation on the testicular

cycle and its activation in Trapelus lessonae (Reptilia:

Agamidae) during dormancy. Salamandra 43 (4): 245-

248.

Torki F. 2007b. Reproduction of the snake-eye liz-

ard, Ophisops elegans Menetries, 1832 in western

Iran (Squamata: Sauria: Lacertidae). Herpetozoa

20(l/2):57-66.

Torki F. 2010. Distribution, lifestyle, and behavioral

aspects of the Iranian fat-tailed gecko, Eublepharis

angramainyu Anderson and Feviton, 1966. Gekko

6(l):18-22.

Received: 25 October 2011

Accepted: 18 December 2011

Published: 21 April 2012

Reza Sadeghi Farhang Torki

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 104

April 2012 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e45

Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the

original author and source are credited.

Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):1 05-1 07.

Book Review of The Wildlife Techniques Manual

HOWARD O. CLARK, JR.

H. T. Harvey & Associates, 7815 North Palm Avenue, Suite 310, Fresno, CA 93711, USA

Key words. Capture techniques, conservation genetics, experimental design, population estimation, telemetry, urban

wildlife management, vegetation analysis, wildlife damage management, wildlife health and disease

Citation: Clark, HO Jr. 201 2. Book review of The Wildlife Techniques Manual. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 5(1 ):1 05-1 07(e47).

The Wildlife Techniques Manual. 2 Volumes.

Editor, Silvy NJ. The Johns Hopkins University

Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Seventh edition, Feb-

ruary 7, 2012.

Product dimensions: 11.3 x 8.9 x 3.0 inches. 1136

pages. Hardcover: US$150.00. ISBN-10: 1-4214-

0159-2; ISBN-13: 978-1-4214-0159-1.

The 7 th edition of The Wildlife Techniques Manual is a

landmark publication that will certainly become a classic

and highly recommended tool (Figure 1). The 7 th edition

is completely revised and updated, and for the first time

appears as a two- volume set. Volume 1, with 22 chapters,

covers techniques in wildlife research, and Volume 2,

with 15 chapters, covers techniques in wildlife manage-

ment (see the appendix for a complete list of chapters).

Since its original publication in 1960, The Wildlife

Techniques Manual, a concept created by The Wildlife

Society, has remained the cornerstone text for the profes-

sional wildlife biologist. Every decade or so (Figure 2)

the book is revised, edited, and updated. As new tech-

niques are developed, new chapters are warranted. Ed-

ited by Nova J. Silvy, the new edition covers new meth-

odologies used in the field and laboratory. Topics include

experimental design, wildlife health and disease, capture

techniques, population estimation, telemetry, vegetation

analysis, conservation genetics, wildlife damage man-

agement, and urban wildlife management.

As I read through the manual, one chapter in particu-

lar caught my attention: Chapter 5, use of dogs in wild-

life research and management (Dahlgren 2012). I have a

keen interest in the use of dogs in conservation because I

worked with a dog handler in the early 2000s searching

for the often elusive San Joaquin kit fox ( Vulpes macrotis

mutica; Smith et al. 2006). My dog handler colleague, Dr.

Deborah A. Smith, was indeed a co-author on this chap-

ter and I was very pleased to see her work mentioned in

this manual. Certainly, the use of dogs in wildlife studies

is a new thing? In assuming this, I am wrong. The 4 th edi-

tion was the first to have a chapter specifically on the use

of dogs in wildlife biology (Zwickel 1980). However, a

chapter specific to dogs as wildlife management tools did

not appear again until the 7 th edition. The ebb and flow of

chapter topics represents how the wildlife research com-

munity perceives demand for various field techniques

and methods.

Chapter 6 is an important example of how relevant The

Wildlife Techniques Manual is to current events (Sheffield

2012). At 9:45 PM, CDT, on 20 April 2010, the Deepwater

Horizon offshore oil drilling rig exploded and resulted

in a significant oil spill along the Gulf Coast. Chapter 6

addresses how to identify and handle contaminant-related

wildlife. Various contaminants are addressed including

mercury, lead, cadmium, solvents, ethylene glycol, and

petroleum products. As new environmental catastrophes

develop due to demands of our ever-changing world, The

Wildlife Techniques Manual will be right there to provide

Figure 1 . All editions of The Wildlife Techniques Manual, with the 7 th edition featured as two volumes (far right).

Correspondence. Email: hclark@harveyecology.com

May 201 2 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e47

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 105

Clark

Figure 2. All editions of The Wildlife Techniques Manual

plotted by year and edition; 1 st and 2 nd editions Mosby (1960,

1963); 3 rd edition Giles (1969); 4 th edition Schemnitz (1980);

5 th edition Bookhout (1994); 6 th edition Braun (2005); and 7 th

edition Silvy (2012).

guidance and techniques to preserve and conserve our

natural resources.

The second volume of the 7 th edition is key in under-

standing wildlife in the landscape and how it relates to

the human dimension. With habitat loss, fragmentation,

and modification, wildlife species are becoming dis-

placed and have fewer places to go. The second volume

discusses wildlife management on a variety of landscape

types, including rangelands, inland and coastal wetlands,

farmlands, and urban environments. As impacts to the

remaining wildland areas continue, these chapters will

become cornerstone guides on informing wildlife man-

agers how to address a variety of wildlife management

issues. Region- wide management plans will quickly be-

come vital to the continued conservation of natural re-

sources, and tools like Habitat Conservation Plans will

(and should be already) be a paramount force in wildlife

preservation (Randel et al. 2012).

In summary, this new and revised 7 th edition could

not have been published at a better time. The dynamic

and changing landscape needs wildlife managers with a

passion for wildlife conservation and preservation; this

two volume techniques manual set is a vital tool in ac-

complishing the goals and aspirations of local and global

wildlife biologists to the betterment of our planet. As

this 7 th edition is field-tested and exercised to its limits, I

predict an 8 th edition will soon need to be developed, as

loss of habitat, disappearing biodiversity, and the ever-

expanding human population will create new challenges

that will need to be quickly addressed before it’s too late.

Literature cited

Bookhout TA. (Editor). 1994. Research and Manage-

ment Techniques for Wildlife and Habitat. 5 th edition.

Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas, USA.

Braun CE. (Editor). 2005. Techniques for Wildlife In-

vestigations and Management. 6 th edition. Port City

Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Dahlgren DK, Elmore RD, Smith DA, Hurt A, Arnett

EB, Connelly JW. 2012. Use of dogs in wildlife re-

search and management. In: The Wildlife Techniques

Manual. 7 th edition. Editor, NJ Silvy. The Johns Hop-

kins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

140-153.

Giles RH Jr. (Editor). 1969. Wildlife Management Tech-

niques. 3 rd edition. Edward Brothers, Inc., Ann Arbor,

Michigan, USA.

Mosby HS. (Editor). 1960. Manual of Game Investiga-

tional Techniques. Edward Brothers, Inc., Ann Arbor,

Michigan, USA.

Mosby HS. (Editor). 1963. Wildlife Investigational Tech-

niques. 2 nd edition. Edward Brothers, Inc., Ann Arbor,

Michigan, USA.

Randel CJ, ClarkHO Jr, Newman DP, Dixon TB. 2012.

Environmental impact assessment and habitat conser-

vation plans. In: The Wildlife Techniques Manual. 7 th

edition. Editor, NJ Silvy. The Johns Hopkins Univer-

sity Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 307-318.

Schemnitz SD. (Editor). 1980. Wildlife Management

Techniques Manual. 4 th edition. The Wildlife Society,

Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Silvy NJ. (Editor). 2012. The Wildlife Techniques Manu-

al. Two volumes, 7 th edition. The Johns Hopkins Uni-

versity Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Smith DA, Ralls K, Cypher BL, Clark HO Jr, Kelly

PA, Williams DF, Maldonado JE. 2006. Relative

abundance of endangered San Joaquin kit foxes

( Vulpes macrotis mutica ) based on scat-detection dog

surveys. Southwestern Naturalist 51(2):210-219.

Zwickel FC. 1980. Use of dogs in wildlife biology. In:

Wildlife Management Techniques Manual. 4 th edition.

Editor, SD Schemnitz. The Wildlife Society, Bethes-

da, Maryland, USA. 531-536.

Received: 20 April 2012

Accepted: 21 April 2012

Published: 1 May 2012

May 201 2 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e47

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 106

Review of The Wildlife Techniques Manual

Appendix: List of chapters

Volume 1

Research and analytical techniques

Chapter 1

Research and experimental design

Chapter 2

Management and analysis and wildlife biology data

Capture and handling techniques

Chapter 3

Capturing and handling wild animals

Chapter 4

Wildlife chemical immobilization

Chapter 5

Use of dogs in wildlife research and management

Chapter 6

Identifying and handling contaminant-related wildlife mortality or morbidity

Chapter 7

Wildlife health and disease: surveillance, investigation, and management

Identification and marking techniques

Chapter 8

Criteria for determining sex and age of birds and mammals

Chapter 9

Techniques for marking wildlife

Chapter 10

Wildlife radiotelemetry and remote monitoring

Measuring animal abundance

Chapter 11

Estimating animal abundance

Chapter 12

Use of remote cameras in wildlife ecology

Chapter 13

Radar techniques for wildlife research

Chapter 14

Invertebrate sampling methods for use in wildlife studies

Chapter 15

Population analysis in wildlife biology

Measuring wildlife habitat

Chapter 16

Vegetation sampling and measurement

Chapter 17

Modeling vertebrate use of terrestrial resources

Chapter 18

Application of spatial technologies in wildlife biology

Research on individual animals

Chapter 19

Animal behavior

Chapter 20

Analysis of radiotelemetry data

Chapter 21

Reproduction and hormones

Chapter 22

Conservation genetics and molecular ecology in wildlife management

Volume 2

Management perspectives

Chapter 23

Human dimensions of wildlife management

Chapter 24

Communications and outreach

Chapter 25

Adaptive management in wildlife conservation

Managing landscapes for wildlife

Chapter 26

Managing forests for wildlife

Chapter 27

Managing rangelands for wildlife

Chapter 28

Managing inland wetlands for wildlife

Chapter 29

Managing coastal wetlands for wildlife

Chapter 30

Managing farmlands for wildlife

Chapter 31

Managing urban environments for wildlife

Chapter 32

Assessing and managing wildland recreational disturbance

Managing wildlife populations

Chapter 33

Harvest management

Chapter 34

Identification and management of wildlife damage

Chapter 35

Ecology and management of small populations

Chapter 36

Captive propagation and translocation

Chapter 37

Habitat conservation planning

May 201 2 | Volume 5 | Number 1 | e47

Amphib. Reptile Conserv. | amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 107

CONTENTS

Administration, journal information (Instructions to Authors), and copyright notice Inside front cover

Craig Hassapakis and Howard O. Clark, Jr. — E ditorial i

Steven C. Anderson — G uest Editorial ii

Ali Gholamifard and Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani — D istribution of Hemidactylus geckos (Reptilia: Gek-

konidae) in Fars Province, Southern Iran 1

Hiva Faizi, Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, and Reza Yarani — O n the occurrence of ectoparasite ticks on

Trachylepis and Eumeces (Reptilia: Scincidae) in Iran 7

Zahed Bahmani, Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, and Ahmad Gharzi — A new record of Eremias montanus

Rastegar-Pouyani & Rastegar-Pouyani, 2001 (Sauria: Lacertidae) from Kurdistan Province, Western Iran.

11

Behzad Fathinia and Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani — S exual dimorphism in Trapelus ruderatus ruderatus

(Sauria: Agamidae) with notes on the natural history. 15

Seyed Mahdi Kazemi, Masood Farhadi Qomi, Haji Gholi Kami, and Steven Clement Anderson — A new

species of Ophiomorus (Squamata: Scincidae) from Maranjab Desert, Isfahan Province, Iran, with a re-

vised key to the genus 23

Reza Sadeghi and Farhang Torki — N otes on the natural history and distribution of Carinatogecko steve-

nandersoni Torki, 2011 34

Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, Hiva Faizi, Hamzeh Oraei, Azar Khosravani, Behzad Fathinia, Nas-

taran Heidari, Rasoul Karamiani, and Eskandar Rastegar-Pouyani — A brief history and cur-

rent status of herpetology in Iran 37

Behzad Fathinia, Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, and Hossein Mohamadi — S exual dimorphism in Cari-

natogecko heteropholis (Minton, Anderson, and Anderson, 1970) (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Ilam Province,

western Iran 47

Naeim Moradi, Soheila Shafiei, Hadi Fahimi, and Siamak Bromand — A dditional information on Misonne’s

swollen-nose gecko, Rhinogecko misonnei de Witte, 1973 (Squamata, Geckonidae) in Iran 54

Behzad Fathinia, Rasoul Karamiani, Hamid Darvishnia, Naghi Heidari, and Nasrullah Rastegar-

Pouyani — A new species of Carinatogecko (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Ilam Province, western Iran .... 61

Hamzeh Oraie, Azar Khisravani, Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, and Saed Kamran Ghoreishi — A nalysis

of sexual dimorphism in the Persian long-tailed desert lizard, Mesalina watsonana (Stoliczka, 1872) (Sauria:

Lacertidae) 75

Naeim Moradi and Soheila Shafiei — N ew record of the Western leopard gecko, Eublepharis angramainyu An-

derson & Leviton, 1966 (Sauria: Eublepharidae) from southeastern Iran 88

Behzad Fathinia, Nasrullah Rastegar-Pouyani, Hamid Darvishnia, Hossein Mohamadi, and Hiwa

Faizi — S exual size dimorphism in Rana (Pelophylax) ridibunda ridibunda Pallas, 1771 from a population

in Darre-Shahr Township, Ilam Province, western Iran 92

Reza Sadeghi and Farhang Torki — N otes on reproduction and conservation of Testudo graeca ibera Pallas

1814 (Reptilia: Testudinidae) in Zagros, western Iran 98

Howard O. Clark, Jr. — B ook Review of The Wildlife Techniques Manual 105

Table of Contents Back cover

volume 5

2011-2012

NUMBER 1