Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov.
( Figs. 1–3
View FIGURE 1
View FIGURE 2
View FIGURE 3
)
Holotype. IEBR A.2013.55, adult male, collected on 29 April 2012 by Thomas Calame and Peter Jäger on a karst wall of a karstic massif, ca. 1.5 m above the forest floor, in a mixed secondary forest of hardwoods and shrubs near Thakhek Town (17o27.44’N, 104o55.44’E), Khammouane Province, Laos, at an elevation of 170 m a.s.l.
Paratype. NUOL R–2013.1, adult female, the same collection data as the holotype.
Diagnosis. A moderately sized
Cyrtodactylus
with a maximum SVL reaching 68.5 mm, distinguished from its congeners by a combination of the following characters: 1) dorsal pattern consisting of a dark nuchal loop and four narrow brown body bands between limb insertions; 3) dorsal tubercles in 15–17 irregular rows; 4) ventrals in 31– 32 longitudinal rows at midbody; 5) lateral skin folds present with interspersed tubercles; 6) precloacal–femoral pores 44 in the male, in a continuous series; 7) enlarged femoral scales and precloacal scales present; 8) postcloacal tubercles 3–6; and 9) subcaudals transversely enlarged.
Description of the holotype. Adult male, SVL 60 mm, body slender (TrunkL/SVL 0.41); head elongate (HL/ SVL 0.31), relatively narrow (HW/HL 0.61), depressed (HH/HL 0.4), distinguished from neck; loreal region inflated, frontonasal and posterior nasal regions concave; snout long (SE/HL 0.39), pointed, longer than diameter of orbit (OD/SE 0.65); snout scales small, rounded, homogeneous, granular, larger than those on frontal and parietal regions; eye large (OD/HL 0.26) with dark blue colour, pupils vertical; eyelid fringe with tiny spines posteriorly; ear in oval shape, small (EarL/HL 0.1); rostral wider than high (RW 2.9 mm, RH 1.3 mm, RW/RH 2.23) with a median suture; supranasals separated by a hexagonal internasal; rostral bordered by first supralabial and nostril on each side; nares oval, surrounded by supranasal, rostral, first supralabial, and two enlarged postnasals; mental triangular, slightly wider than rostral; postmentals in one pair, enlarged, longer than wide, in broad contact posteriorly, bordered by mental anteriorly, first two infralabials laterally, and one pair of distinctly enlarged gular scales posteriorly, which separated from each other by three small gular scales; supralabials 10/10; infralabials 9/9.
Dorsal scales granular to flattened; dorsal tubercles round, conical, present on occipital region, back and tail base, surrounded by 9–10 granular scales, in 15 irregular longitudinal rows at midbody; ventral scales smooth, medial scales 2–3 times larger than dorsal scales, round, subimbricate, largest posteriorly, in 31 longitudinal rows at midbody; ventrolateral folds present with interspersed tubercles; gular region with homogeneous smooth scales; precloacal groove absent; a series of distinctly enlarged femoral scales present; femoral and precloacal pores 44, in a continuous series.
Fore and hind limbs moderately slender (ForeL/SVL 0.17, CrusL/SVL 0.21); dorsal forelimbs with slightly developed tubercles; dorsal hindlimb covered by distinctly developed tubercles; fingers and toes without distinct webbing; lamellae under fourth finger 18/17, under fourth toe 19/19.
Tail longer than snout–vent length (TaL 82.4 mm, TaL/SVL 1.37); postcloacal tubercles 5/6; dorsal tail bearing distinct tubercles at base; subcaudals distinctly transversely enlarged, flat, smooth.
Coloration in ethanol. Ground coloration of dorsal head and back light brown; nuchal loop distinct, in U– shape, from posterior corner of eye, running partly above tympanum to the neck, dark brown, edged in white posteriorly; body bands between limb insertions four and another one at the tail base, all thin, dark brown, edged in white posteriorly; dorsal tail brown with four dark brown bands in the anterior part, edged in white posteriorly, the bands indistinct in the posterior part; chin, throat, and belly cream; ventral tail dark brown; upper and lower lips with dark brown bars. For coloration in life see Fig. 2
View FIGURE 2
.
Sexual dimorphism. The female paratype differs from the male holotype in having a larger size (SVL 68.5 mm vs. 60.0 mm), 21 femoral and precloacal-pitted scales in a continuous series, and the absence of an internasal scale as well as hemipenial swellings at the tail base (see Table 1
View TABLE 1
).
Comparisons. We compare the new species with its congeners from Laos and neighbouring countries in the mainland Indochina region, including Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand based on examination of specimens (see Appendix) and data obtained from the literature (Table 2).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has enlarged subcaudals, which are absent in
C. bidoupimontis Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Phung, Nguyen, Hoang & Ziegler, 2012
,
C. buchardi David, Teynié & Ohler, 2004
,
C. bugiamapensis Nazarov, Poyarkov, Orlov, Phung, Nguyen, Hoang & Ziegler, 2012
,
C. cattienensis Geissler, Nazarov, Orlov, Böhme, Phung, Nguyen & Ziegler, 2009
,
C. cryptus Heidrich, Rösler, Vu, Böhme & Ziegler, 2007
,
C. huynhi Ngo & Bauer, 2008
,
C. irregularis ( Smith, 1921)
,
C. phuocbinhensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop, Macculloch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang, 2013
,
C. pseudoquadrivirgatus Rösler, Vu, Nguyen, Ngo & Ziegler, 2008
,
C. quadrivirgatus Taylor, 1962
,
C. taynguyenensis Nguyen, Le, Tran, Orlov, Lathrop, Macculloch, Le, Jin, Nguyen, Nguyen, Hoang, Che, Murphy & Zhang, 2013
, and
C. ziegleri Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen & Ho, 2008
.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. angularis ( Smith, 1921)
by having fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 versus 40–45 in
C. angularis
), the presence of femoral pores (absent in
C. angularis
), more femoral and precloacal pores in the male (44 vs. 3 in
C. angularis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has 44 femoral and precloacal pores in the male and thus differs from
Cyrtodactylus astrum Grismer, Wood, Quah, Anuar, Muin, Sumontha, Ahmad, Bauer, Wangkulangkul, Grismer & Pauwels, 2012
that has only 31–38 femoral and precloacal pores.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. auribalteatus Sumontha, Panitvong & Deein, 2010
by having more enlarged femoral scales (18–19 vs. 5–7 in
C. auribalteatus
) and more femoral and precloacal pores in the male (44 vs. 10–11 in
C. auribalteatus
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. can be distinguished from
C. badenensis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky, 2006
by having enlarged femoral scales, the presence of femoral and precloacal pores (absent in
C. badenensis
), and more ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 25–29 in
C. badenensis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. bichnganae Ngo & Grismer, 2010
by having more enlarged femoral scales (18–19 vs. 11–13 in
C. bichnganae
) and more femoral and precloacal pores (44 vs. 28 in
C. bichnganae
) in males.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has 44 femoral and precloacal pores in a continuous series and thus differs from
C. brevipalmatus ( Smith, 1923)
and
C. dumnuii Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya, 2010
, which are separated by poreless scales (6+9+ 7 in
C. brevipalmatus
and 6+5–6+ 6–7 in
C. dumnuii
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. caovansungi Orlov, Nguyen, Nazarov, Ananjeva & Nguyen, 2007
by its smaller size (60.0– 68.5 mm vs. 90.4–94.0 mm in
C. caovansungi
), fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 38–44 in
C. caovansungi
), and more femoral and precloacal pores in the male (44 vs. 15).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. chanhomeae Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003
in having fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 36– 38) and more femoral and precloacal pores in the male (44 vs. 32).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. chauquangensis Hoang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Hoang & Dau, 2007
by its smaller size (SVL 60.0– 68.5 mm vs. 90.9–99.3 mm), the presence of enlarged femoral scales and femoral pores (absent in
C. chauquangensis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. cucphuongensis Ngo & Chan, 2011
by its smaller size (SVL 60–68.5 mm vs. 96 mm), fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 42), and the precence of femoral and precloacal pores (absent in
C. cucphuongensis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has femoral and precloacal pores in males, which are absent in
C. eisenmanae Ngo, 2008
and
C. grismeri Ngo, 2008
.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. erythrops Bauer, Kunya, Sumontha, Niyomwan, Panitvong, Pauwels, Chanhome & Kunya, 2009
by having more ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 28), 44 femoral and precloacal pores in a continuous series which are separated by poreless scales in
C. erythrops
(10+9+9).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. huongsonensis Luu, Nguyen, Do & Ziegler, 2011
by having fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 41–48) and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 21–23).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. interdigitalis Ulber, 1993
by having fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 37–42), more femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 30–32), and the presence of precloacal pitted scales in the female (absent in
C. interdigitalis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. intermedius ( Smith, 1917)
by having fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 40–50) and more enlarged femoral scales (18–19 vs. 6–10).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. jarujini Ulber, 1993
by its smaller size (60.0–68.5 vs. 85.0–90.0 in
C. jarujini
), fewer femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 52–54 in
C. jarujini
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. kingsadai Ziegler, Phung, Le & Nguyen, 2013
by its smaller size (60.0–68.5 vs. 83.0–94.0), fewer ventral scales (31–32 vs. 39–46), and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 0–16).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. lekaguli Grismer, Wood, Quah, Anuar, Muin, Sumontha, Ahmad, Bauer, Wangkulangkul, Grismer & Pauwels, 2012
and
C. lomyenensis Ngo & Pauwels, 2010
in having more femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 31–44 in
C. lekaguli
and 39–40 in
C. lomyenensis
), and fewer pitted scales in females (21 vs. 33–43 in
C. lekaguli
and 32 in
C. lomyenensis
). The new species differs from
C. martini Ngo, 2011
by having fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 39–43 in
C. martini
) and the presence of femoral pores (absent in
C. martini
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. nigriocularis Nguyen, Orlov & Darevsky, 2006
in having smaller size (SVL 60–68.5 mm vs. 82.7–107.5 mm in
C. nigriocularis
), fewer ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 42–49 in
C. nigriocularis
), and the presence of enlarged femoral scales and femoral pores (absent in
C. nigriocularis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. oldhami ( Theobald, 1876)
by having more femoral and precloacal pores (44 vs. 1–4 in
C. oldhami
) and the dorsal color pattern (banded vs. striped and spotted body in
C. oldhami
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. pageli Schneider, Nguyen, Schmitz, Kingsada, Auer & Ziegler, 2011
and
C. paradoxus ( Darevsky & Szczerbak, 1997)
by the presence of enlarged femoral scales and femoral pores (absent in
C. pageli
and
C. paradoxus
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler, Rösler, Herrmann & Vu, 2002
by its smaller size (SVL 60–68.5 mm vs. 85– 96.3 mm in
C. phongnhakebangensis
) and a higher number of femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 32–42 in
C. phongnhakebangensis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has 44 femoral and precloacal pores in the male and thus differs from
C. roesleri Ziegler, Nazarov, Orlov, Nguyen, Vu, Dang, Dinh & Schmitz, 2010
(20–28).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. sanook Pauwels, Sumontha, Latinne & Grismer, 2013
and
C. sumonthai Bauer, Pauwels & Chanhome, 2002
by the presence of femoral pores (absent in
C. sanook
and
C. sumonthai
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. takouensis Ngo & Bauer, 2008
by its smaller size (SVL 60–68.5 mm vs. 74.7–81.1 mm in
C. takouensis
), fewer number of ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 39–40), and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 3–6 in
C. takouensis
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. teyniei David, Nguyen, Schneider & Ziegler, 2011
by its smaller size (SVL 60–68.5 mm vs. 89.9 in
C. teyniei
), fewer number of ventral scale rows (31–32 vs. 38 in
C. teyniei
), and the presence of femoral pores (absent in
C. teyniei
).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has femoral and precloacal pores which are lack in
C. thirakhupti Pauwels, Bauer, Sumontha & Chanhome 2004
.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has 44 femoral and precloacal pores in a contiuous series and thus differs from
C. tigroides Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003
which are separated by poreless scales (6+8+ 7 in males and 5+9+ 7 in females).
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. has enlarged femoral scales and femoral pores which are absent in
C. wayakonei Nguyen, Kingsada, Rösler, Auer & Ziegler, 2010
.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. differs from
C. yangbayensis Ngo & Chan, 2010
by its smaller size (SVL 60–68.5 mm vs. 78.5–92.3 mm in
C. yangbayensis
) and more femoral and precloacal pores in males (44 vs. 4–14 in
C. yangbayensis
).
Distribution.
Cyrtodactylus jaegeri
sp. nov. is currently known only from the type locality in Khammouane Province, Laos ( Fig. 4
View FIGURE 4
).
Etymology. The new species is named in honour of our colleague Dr. Peter Jäger, arachnologist from the Research Institute Senckenberg, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, who collected the holotype.
Ecological notes. The type specimens were found at night, on karst cliffs ca. 1.5 m above the ground in a small belt of the secondary vegetation in front of a limestone cliff, at an elevation of 170 m a.s.l.
