Cyrtodactylus phumyensis, Ostrowski & Do & Le & Ngo & Pham & Nguyen & Nguyen & Ziegler, 2020

Ostrowski, Sabrina, Do, Dang Trong, Le, Minh Duc, Ngo, Hanh Thi, Pham, Cuong The, Nguyen, Truong Quang, Nguyen, Van Thi Hong & Ziegler, Thomas, 2020, A new species of Cyrtodactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from southern Vietnam, Zootaxa 4789 (1), pp. 171-203 : 174-196

Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov.

( Figs. 2–7 )

Holotype. IEBR 4577 (Field No. BD2016.163 ), adult male, collected by Dang Trong Do and Tan Van Nguyen on 15 August 2016 near Chanh Dao Village , My Tho Commune (14 o 23.212’N, 109 o 14.982’E, elevation: 180 m asl.), Phu My District, Binh Dinh Province, southern Vietnam.

Paratypes. ZFMK 103153 (Field No. BD2016.162 ), adult male , IEBR 4578 (Field No. BD2016.165 ), adult male , IEBR 4579 (Field No. BD 2016. 169), adult female, same data as the holotype .

Diagnosis. The new species can be distinguished from other members of the genus Cyrtodactylus by a combination of the following characters: size small (SVL up to 66.8 mm); two internasals; dorsal tubercle rows 18 or 19 at midbody; ventral scale rows 33–41; ventrolateral folds slightly developed; each thigh with 5–7 enlarged femoral scales; femoral pores absent in males and female; a series of 5–7 precloacal pores plus a pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males; 6 pitted, enlarged precloacal scales in female; paravertebral tubercles 20–23; lamellae under toe IV 18–21; subcaudal scales small, not transversely enlarged; two irregular dark longitudinal stripes in the shoulder region.

Description of holotype. Adult male, snout-vent length 66.8 mm; tail regenerated, length 73.2 mm (37.05 mm regenerated); head distinct from neck, relatively long (HL: 19.9 mm; HL/SVL 29.8), 13.05 mm wide (HW/SVL 19.5), 7.8 mm long (KHH/SVL 11.7); snout long and rounded (SE: 7.8 mm; SE/HL 39.2); eye diameter 4.6 mm, relatively small compared to the head (OD/HL 23.1); rostral wider than high (RH: 1.75 mm, RW: 3.3 mm; RW/RH 1.9), with an inverse Y-shaped median suture, surrounded by two nostrils, two supranasals, two internasals and the first supralabial; mental wider than high (MH: 1.85 mm; MW: 2.65 mm; MW/MH 1.4) in contact with the first two infralabials and trapezoidal, elongated postmentals; supralabials 11/10; infralabials 9/8; nostrils surrounded by rostral, supranasal, internasal, the first supralabial and three postnasals; supranasals separated by two internasals; eye separated from supralabials by 2–5 scale rows; scales of loreal region small, elongated to oval shaped and granular; median snout scales round, about two times as larger than those in interorbital region; posterior region of the head with enlarged tubercles, two or three times larger than the surrounding granular scales; anterior ciliaria significantly larger and more pointed than the posterior ones; ear openings below the postocular stripes, slightly horizontal and oval; granular scales homogeneous, separated from infralabials by 2 or 3 larger scale rows; dorsal scales granular, about two times larger than interorbital scales; dorsal tubercles oval, from neck to posterior insertion of forelegs, clearly pronounced, not or only slightly keeled; tubercles from posterior insertion of forelegs to the base of tail more rounded, drop-shaped, slightly to increasingly keeled, about five times larger than the surrounding granular scales; 19 irregular tubercle rows at midbody; 22 paravertebral tubercles; each tubercle surrounded by 10–12 granular scales; tubercles of limbs flattened, not or slightly keeled; lateral skin folds distinctly developed; ventral scales smooth, imbricate, in 40 longitudinal rows at midbody; series of enlarged femoral scales 6/5, without pores; enlarged femoral scales separated by a diastema of 8 granular scales from precloacal scales; left enlarged femoral scales separated by a diastema of 7 granular scales from precloacal scales; an angled series of 5 pore-bearing, enlarged precloacal scales, left side with a pitted enlarged scale, posteriorly surrounded by 15 enlarged scales, forming a diamond shape, adjoining scales continuously decreasing in size; scales on palms and soles rounded, oval shaped, slightly granular; dorsal surface of hands with elongated and slightly imbricate scales; dorsal surface of hind limbs covered by round scales, partially imbricate; fore and hind limbs moderately long and narrow (FL/SVL 14.6; TibiaL/SVL 17.7); fingers and toes long, narrow; subdigital lamellae proximally larger, widened and basally merge into small, slightly granular scales of palms and soles; lamellae behind interphalangeal joint smaller, more elongated and distally increasingly imbricate; right and left fourth finger with 18 subdigital lamellae (left: proximal 8, distal 10; right: proximal 7, distal 11); right fourth toe with 19 (proximal 8, distal 11) and left fourth toe with 18 (proximal 7, distal 11) subdigital lamellae.

Tail regenerated; postcloacal tubercles 3/3; dorsal tail base with strongly keeled tubercles, in 11 transverse rows, each row with 3 or 4 tubercles and separated by 6 or 7 scale rows; tubercles absent in regenerated part of tail; subcaudals about four to six times larger than the supracaudals, but not transversely widened.

Coloration in preservative. Dorsal surface of head, neck, dorsum, extremities and tail beige to grey-brown; dorsal head somewhat darker and more brownish than the lateral sides; posterior interorbital region dark brown with irregular shaped spots; rostral and mental dark brown; supralabials and infralabials cream white to light grey, anterior with dark brown patches; each side of head with a light brown preocular stripe extending to the second supralabial; each side of the head with a narrow, dark brown postocular stripe, extending towards neck; right stripe connected with neckband on the right side, interrupted on the left side; tubercles of head, dorsum, limbs and tail greyish brown, tubercles of flanks lighter; dorsal surfaces of limbs with dark brown, irregular stripes; dorsal surface of fingers and toes light grey to cream with dark brown stripes and marbling; two irregular stripes formed by dark spots behind neckband with two elongated dark brown spots in between; dorsum with dark brown; sacral region with two transverse, dark brown bands; ventral surface of body light beige to white; original part of tail with five transverse dark brown bands, ventrally not converging, marked by dark spots between bands; lateral sides of original tail marbled with dark brown; ventral side uniform cream anteriorly, marbled with brown spots posteriorly; regenerated part of tail uniformly dark brown.

For coloration in life see Figs. 2 , 7 .

Sexual dimorphism and variation. The female differs from male specimens in the absence of hemipenial swellings at the tail base. The males have 5–7 precloacal pores (versus 6 pitted scales in the female), which is absent in the female. For morphological variation see Table 1, and for color pattern variation see Figs. 2–7 . Paratype ZFMK 103153 has a neckband which is interrupted on the right side. The complete, original tail is longer than snout-vent length and bears 13 transverse bands, which converge ventrally only on the distal half of the tail. The paratype IEBR 4578 has light brownish dorsum with 5 transverse bands. Paratype IEBR 4579 has a continuous neckband and three dorsal transverse bands and the longitudinal stripes at the shoulder region are separated from the postocular stripes .

(* = regenerated or broken tail); bilateral meristic characters are given as (left/right).

Distribution. Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. is currently known only from the type locality in Phu My District, Binh Dinh Province, Vietnam ( Fig. 8 ).

Etymology. Specific epithet “ phumyensis ” is a toponym in reference to the type locality of the species. For the common names we suggest Phu My Bent-toed Gecko (English) and Thạch sùng ngón phù mỹ (Vietnamese).

Natural history. Specimens were found between 19:00 and 21:00, on trees or on stones near a stream, about 0.5–1.5 m above the ground, at elevations between 150 and 200 m a.s.l. The surrounding habitat was disturbed evergreen forest of small hardwood and shrub. The humidity was approximately 59–75% and the air temperature ranged from 28 to 33 oC.

Comparisons. We compared the new species with its congeners based on examination of specimens and data obtained from the literature ( Ziegler et al. 2002; Nguyen et al. 2006; Heidrich et al. 2007; Orlov et al. 2007; Nazarov et al. 2008; Ngo 2008; Ngo et al. 2008; Ngo & Bauer 2008; Rösler et al. 2008; Ngo et al. 2010; Ngo & Chan 2010; Ngo & Grismer 2010; Ziegler et al. 2010; Luu et al. 2011; Ngo & Chan 2011; Nazarov et al. 2012; Ngo & Grismer 2012; Ngo 2013; Ziegler et al. 2013; Phung et al. 2014; Nguyen et al. 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017a, b; Grismer et al. 2015; Le et. al. 2016; Grismer et al. 2017; Luu et al. 2017; Ngo et al. 2017; Nguyen et al. 2017; Pauwels et al. 2018; Murdoch et al. 2019; Pham et al. 2019). The new species can be distinguished from all other known species of Cyrtodactylus by morphological characters (see Tables 2–8).

In comparison with Vietnamese congeners Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. is distinguished from C. badenensis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky , C. bichnganae Ngo & Grismer , C. caovansungi Orlov, Quang, Nazarov, Ananjeva & Nguyen , C. condorensis (Smith 1921) , C. cucphuongensis Ngo & Onn , C. eisenmanae Ngo , C. grismeri Ngo , C. hontreensis Ngo, Grismer & Grismer , C. huongsonensis Luu, Nguyen, Do & Ziegler , C. intermedius ( Smith 1917) , C. kingsadai Ziegler, Phung, Le & Nguyen C. leegrismeri Chan & Norhayati , C. nigriocularis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky , C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler, Rösler, Herrmann & Thanh , C. phuquocensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop Macculoch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang , C. puhuensis Nguyen, Yang, Le, Nguyen, Orlov, Hoang, Nguyen Jin, Rao, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang , C. roesleri Ziegler, Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen, Vu, Dang, Dinh & Schmitz , C. septimontium Murdoch, Grismer, Wood, Neang, Poyarkov, Ngo, Nazarov, Aowphol, Pauwels, Nguyen & Grismer , C. soni Le, Nguyen, Le & Ziegler , C. sonlaensis Nguyen, Pham, Ziegler, Ngo & Le , C. takouensis Ngo & Bauer and C. taybacensis Pham, Le, Ngo, Ziegler & Nguyen by the lack of transversely enlarged subcaudals as in aforementioned species. Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. bobrovi Nguyen, Le, Van Pham, Ngo, Hoang, The Pham & Ziegler , C. chauquangensis Hoang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Hoang & Dau , C. cryptus Heidrich, Rösler, Vu, Böhme & Ziegler , C. gialaiensis Luu, Dung, Nguyen, Le & Ziegler and C. otai Nguyen, Le, Van Pham, Ngo, Hoang, The Pham & Ziegler , C. pseudoquadrivirgatus Rösler, Nguyen, Vu, Ngo & Ziegler and C. taynguyenensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop Macculoch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang by the presence of enlarged femoral scales (versus absence of enlarged femoral scales). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. huynhi Ngo & Bauer by the absence of femoral pores (versus presence of femoral pores).

Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. bidoupimontis Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Phung, Nguyen, Hoang & Ziegler by its smaller size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 74.0– 86.3 mm), the lower number of enlarged femoral scales (5–7 versus 8–10), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent), the presence of pitted precloacal scales in female (6 versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular transverse bands with light borders). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. bugiamapensis Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Phung, Nguyen, Hoang & Ziegler by the smaller number of precloacal pores (5–7 versus 7–11), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent) and the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular spots forming transverse bands). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. cattienensis Geissler, Nazarov, Orlov, Böhme, Phung, Nguyen & Ziegler by the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent), the presence of pitted precloacal scales in female (6 versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular dark brown transverse bands). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. dati Ngo by its lower number of ventral scale rows (33–40 versus 42–48), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular dark blotched). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. irregularis (Smith) by its smaller size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 72.0–86.0 mm), the lower number of enlarged femoral scales (5–7 versus 7–8), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus transverse bands with uneven margins in white binding, some bands can fall into separated spots). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. martini Ngo by its smaller size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 64.4–96.2 mm), the smaller number of enlarged femoral scales (5–7 versus 14–18), the higher number of precloacal pores in males (5–7 versus 4), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent), the presence of pitted precloacal scales in female (6 pitted versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular bands). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. phuocbinhensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop, Macculoch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang by its bigger size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 46.0– 60.4 mm), the lower number of ventral scale rows (33–40 versus 43–47), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absence), the presence of pitted, enlarged precloacal scales in female (6 pitted versus absent), and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus stripes). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. sangi Pauwels, Nazarov, Bobrovi & Poyarkov by its bigger size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 49.9–56.3 mm), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular bands and pattern). Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. differs from C. yangbayensis Ngo & Chan by its smaller size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 78.5–92.3 mm), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent), the higher number of sub-digital lamellae under the fourth toe (18–21 versus 15–17) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular rows of narrow, dark brown bands) and from C. ziegleri Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen & Ho by its smaller size (SVL of 63.5–66.8 versus 84.6–93.0 mm), the lower number of enlarged femoral scales (5–7 versus 8–10), the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, dorsum anteriorly irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus dark brown transverse irregular bands).

Morphologically, Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. resembles C. cucdongensis Schneider, Phung, Le, Nguyen & Ziegler. However , the new species can be distinguished from the latter by the presence of one pitted, enlarged precloacal scale in males (versus absent), the number of internasals (2 versus 1), the higher number of transverse tail bands (13 versus 7) and by the different dorsal color pattern (striped neck, anteriorly dorsum irregularly spotted and posteriorly banded versus irregular transverse bands, two of which consist of spots).

....Continued next page ....Continued next page ....Continued next page ....Continued next page

2005, 2008; Grismer & Long 2005; Youmans & Grismer 2006; Grismer et al. 2008, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016; Linkem et al. 2008; Rösler & Glaw 2008; Chan & Norhayati

2010; Johnson et al. 2012; Sumontha et al. 2012; Hartman et al. 2016; Mecke et al. 2016; Davis et al. 2019; Quah et al. 2019).The abbreviations are as follows: / = data not avail-

able in literature; — =; characteristic not present; + = characteristic present but not uniquely determined; * = broken or regenerated tail.

....Continued next page

2018; Harvey et al. 2015; Hartmann et al. 2016; Mecke et al. 2016, Riyanto et al. 2018 from Uetz et al. 2019). The abbreviations are as follows: / = data not available in literature;

— =; characteristic not present; + = characteristic present but not uniquely determined; * = broken or regenerated tail.

....Continued next page

tions are as follows: / = data not available in literature; — =; characteristic not present; + = characteristic present but not uniquely determined; * = broken or regenerated tail.

....Continued next page

are as follows: / = data not available in literature; — =; characteristic not present; + = characteristic present but not uniquely determined; * = broken or regenerated tail.

....Continued next page

Figures

FIGURE 2. The male holotype (IEBR 4577) of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in life. Photo D. T. Do.

FIGURE 3. The male holotype (IEBR 4577) of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in preservative. Photos T. Ziegler.

FIGURE 4. Head views of the holotype (IEBR 4379) of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in preservative. Photos T. Ziegler.

FIGURE 5. Dorsal snout surface (top) and cloacal region (bottom) of the holotype (IEBR 4379) of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in preservative. Photos T. Ziegler.

FIGURE 6. Dorsal view of type series of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in preservative (with holotype on the left). Photos T. Ziegler.

FIGURE 7. The female paratype (IEBR 4579) of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in life. Photo D. T. Do.

FIGURE 8. Map of Vietnam showing the type locality of Cyrtodactylus phumyensis sp. nov. in Binh Dinh Province, southern Vietnam.