When AA contributors attend scientific conferences, we try our best to post about as many talks and posters as we can visit, but inevitably we simply can’t visit them all. I will be attending the annual meeting for the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology this upcoming January. This will be the third consecutive year in which I blog about SICB and I want to try a different approach this time. Rather than choosing the talks and posters myself, I want to get your input on what types of research most interest you. If you like to read about new research presented at conferences, then please take the survey provided below. Choose up to three different subject matters and I’ll decide my schedule based on the results. You can access a list of anole-related presentations here. Most presentations can fit into more than one category, but I just want a general idea of what most interests the readers. Now go vote!
Year: 2013 Page 3 of 37
I’m a little embarrassed to be writing this post, but I’m still unable to figure out some of the proposed changes to anole binomials in Nicholson et al.’s (2012) taxonomic revision of Anolis. I’m a real novice with implementation of “The Code” and the rules of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, so I’m looking for a bit of help from AA readers who are more expert than I.
I understand that some of Nicholson et al.’s proposed changes to specific epithets are necessitated by the fact that their taxonomic revision would change the gender of generic epithets (e.g., Anolis chlorocyanus would be Deiroptyx chlorocyana due to the fact that Anolis is masculine and Deiroptyx is feminine). These types of changes are demanded by The Code’s article 31.2. However, I am struggling to understand Nicholson et al.’s proposed changes to twelve binomials that – to my novice eyes – do not appear to be due strictly to changes in the gender of generic epithets (see table below). Because the authors of this paper include leading authorities on taxonomy and nomenclature, I trust that these changes are not simply the result of typographical errors.
In most cases cited in my table, Nicholson et al. add or change vowels in the correct original spellings of species epithets, where the “correct original spelling” is defined under The Code as “the spelling used in the work in which the name was established.” Based on my amateur reading of The Code, changes to correct original spellings are not permitted unless it can be shown that the original spelling was inadvertently incorrect due to a printer’s error or related mistakes unrelated to the authors lack of familiarity with Latin (ICZN, Article 32). Can somebody enlighten me about which articles in the code govern the changes in the table below?
In this table, I provide the genus to which Nicholson et al. assign each species, the gender of this genus, the exact spelling for the specific epithet used in their manuscript, the spelling of the specific epithet from the Reptile Database, the spelling of the specific epithet from the original publication (NAs indicate that I have yet to check the original citation4), the type of change that Nicholson et al. have proposed, and the citation of the original description. Below the table, I provide some additional details about three specific cases. Thanks in advance for your help.
| Genus | Gender | Nicholson et al. | Reptile Database | Original Spelling | Change | Description Citation |
| Anolis | Masculine | anfilioquioi | anfiloquioi | anfiloquioi | o to io | Garrido 1980 |
| Anolis | Masculine | maclientus | macilentus | macilentus | e to ie | Garrido and Hedges 1992 |
| Anolis | Masculine | pumilis | pumilus | pumilus4 | u to i | Garrido 1988 |
| Ctenonotus | Masculine | monoensis | monensis | monensis4 | e to oe | Stejneger 1904 |
| Ctenonotus | Masculine | nubilis | nubilus | nubilus4 | u to i | Garman 1887 |
| Dactyloa | Feminine | anatolorus | anatoloros | anatoloros | o to u | Ugueto et al. 2007 |
| Dactyloa | Feminine | euskalerrari | euskalerriari | euskalerriari | ia to a | Barros et al. 1996 |
| Deiroptyx | Feminine | domincanus [see comments for correction and clarification] | dominicanus | dominicanus | delete i | Rieppel 1980 [Note: the original version of this post incorrectly referenced de Quieroz et al. 1998] |
| Norops1 | Masculine | forbesi | forbesorum | forbesi | si to sorum | Smith & Van Gelder 1955 |
| Norops | Masculine | schiedei [see comments] | schiedii | schiedii4 | ei to ii | Wiegmann 1834 |
| Norops2 | Masculine | williamsi | williamsii | williamsii | ii to i | Bocourt 1870 |
| Norpos3 | ? | parvicirculatus | parvicirculata | parvicirculata4 | rops to rpos and a to us | Alvarex del Toro & Smith 1956 |
I have a bit more information about three cases in this table.
1. Anolis forbesi is the original spelling in Smith and Van Gelder (1955), but Michels and Bauer (2004) corrected this name to Anolis forbesorum due to the fact that this species is named after more than one person. Michels and Bauer (2004) suggest that this change is a “justified emendation” under Articles 31.1.2-3 and 33.2.2 of The Code. We know that at least one author of Nicholson et al. (2012) was aware of this report because Michels and Bauer thank Jay Savage for having provided thoughtful comments on their manuscript. I’m not sure why Nicholson et al. (2012) reject this proposed change by using forbesi.
2. Nicholson et al. (2012) delete the final ‘i’ from a species originally named Anolis williamsii, in spite of the fact that article 33.4 of the ICZN states that “[t]he use of the genitive ending -i in a subsequent spelling of a species-group name that is a genitive based upon a personal name in which the correct original spelling ends with -ii, or vice versa, is deemed to be an incorrect subsequent spelling, even if the change in spelling is deliberate.” Which part of this rule or related rules in The Code permits changes from ‘ii’ to ‘i’ under some conditions?
3. Nicholson et al. (2012) change both the generic and specific epithets of Anolis parvicirculata when they refer to this species throughout their manuscript as Norpos parvicirculatus (see pages 91 and 96). Although I have included this change in my table for completeness, it is the one change that I think we must attribute to a typo, even though the misspelling of Norops as Norpos appears at least twice. The change from parvicirculatus seems likely due to the fact that this species originally, and incorrectly, had a feminine rather than a masculine specific epithet.
4. This post was revised to include original spellings confirmed by Peter Uetz, thus no more NAs in the table. Thanks Peter!
Last week, while going through some old pictures I had stored on my computer , I happened upon a few photos of A. equestris that I must have saved back when I used to surf the web for pictures of anoles. Taking a second to glance through the pictures for old times sake, I realized something: A. equestris is actually a quite variable species. Now I’m sure others besides myself have realized this before, the people who went about naming the long list of subspecies that I just found out this species has for example, but I can’t seem to find pictures of some of these subspecies so as to identify the animals in the photos, if they are indeed different subspecies that is, so I decided to post them here in hopes of getting an ID. I have chosen one photo for each of the different forms that I have noticed. I have my guesses about many of them and I’m pretty sure about a couple others. I have written my guess, if any, under each photo along with the photo reference; could anyone who knows the ID of a particular animal post their opinion in the comments? Thanks in advance!
Anolis equestris potior
Anolis equestris equestris
(introduced to Miami)
Photo from:http://www.fotos.org/galeria/showphoto.php/photo/76326
?
probably Anolis equestris or A.luteogularis
Photo apparently taken at La Habana.
two other photos: (1,2)
Anolis equestris, photo by Henk Wallays.
license:CC BY-NC
photo from http://calphotos.berkeley.edu
Anolis equestris thomasi
photo from this pdf.
?
Other photos of this form (1, 2)
And another one taken near Playa Larga.
Photograph of Mantheyus phuwuanensis by S. Manthey from Ulrich Manthey’s book on agamids of SE Asia.
Posts about how other lizards have outdone anoles in one way or another are a common theme here on Anole Annals (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4). Keeping this trend going, I wanted to share a photograph of a remarkable species of lizard found in northeastern Thailand and Laos. This photograph of Mantheyus phuwuanensis is by S. Manthey and appears in Ulrich Manthey’s book Agamid Lizards of Southern Asia: Draconinae 2 Leiolepidinae. Very little is known about this species. The photo caption in the book notes that this is a male display. The Reptile Database has a few references, but most are not readily accessible. The one paper I could get my hands on is Ananjeva and Stuart’s (2001) paper from the Russian Journal of Herpetology that moves this species from Ptyctolaemus to its own monotypic genus based on the presence of femoral pores and other traits. Ananjeva and Stuart (2001) don’t comment on the belly dewlap, but do note that the species lives along rock streams and that it spreads its ribs and becomes dorsoventrally flattened when handled, a “behavior that is almost certainly an adaptation for fitting into rock crevices.”
Literature Cited:
Ananjeva, N. B. and B. L. Stuart. 2001. The agamid lizard Ptyctolaemus phuwuanensis Manthey and Nabhitabhata, 1991 from Thailand and Laos represents a new genus. Russian Journal of Herpetology 8:165-170.
We were long overdue for a little make-over here at Anole Annals, so we just updated our WordPress theme. We’re also going to be adding some new header images derived from this year’s photo contest. We will include a credit to the copyright holder on each image, but please let us know if you’d prefer not to see your image in our header. We hope you enjoy the new look and please let us know if you notice any problems.
Anolis blanquillanus. Photo by Martin Dávila.
Anolis blanquillanus is a rare lizard that occurs on the flattened Blanquilla Island and on Los Hermanos archipelago (the Brother’s Archipelago), which comprises a series of seven islets or Morros that emerge abruptly from the sea. These islands are ubiquitous in the Venezuelan Caribbean Sea and have never been connected to the mainland. A recent visit to Los Hermanos archipelago from 16-19th of August 2013, sponsored by the Laboratorio de Protección y Manejo de Cuencas at the Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas (IVIC), allowed us to make some observations of this interesting lizard. Specifically, we had the opportunity to visit Morro Fondeadero (36 ha, 0.5 Km2, 120 m of elevation), one of the seven Morros that make up Los Hermanos archipelago. This group of islands forms an arc to the southeast of Isla La Blanquilla and is located approximately 80 km NW of Isla de Margarita, 10 km SE of La Blanquilla, and 160 km N of the Venezuelan mainland (Puerto La Cruz).
Morro Pando seen from Morro Fondeadero. In the background is Morro grueso, behind this, El Rajao, one of the two Morochos (the Twins). Photo by Martin Davila.
One of the goals of this trip was to study the terrestrial herpetofauna, which is mainly composed of lizards, although marine turtles also inhabit the surrounding areas (but there are not nesting beaches). My personal goal was to collect an undescribed species of Gymnophthalmid lizard, observed more than 70 years ago in this archipelago by the Dutch naturalist P. Wagennar Hummelinck, but never collected until our recent survey work. Los Hermanos and La Blanquilla were surveyed by Hummelinck during the late 1930s, which resulted in the description of Anolis blanquillanus and Phyllodactylus rutteni. More recently, these islands are rarely visited, although on occasion fishermen climb to Morro Fondeadero mainly to make a prayer to the Virgen del Valle (the Valley Virgin) in order that she protect them during the time they are working on the sea.
During the five days we spent at Morro Fondeadero, we had the opportunity to take some data on Anolis blanquillanus, the most commonly observed reptile on the island. The vegetation in this Morro is composed of cactuses, some bushes and isolated trees (Ficus sp.). Temperatures can reach over 40ºC and the relief possesses much inclination. For this reason, we decided to sleep on a little less inclined rocky surface that would be a safer place to sleep, although not comfortable.
During the first day, after we found the place for our provisional camp, we opened a small trail in search for the summit to verify vegetation data we had obtained using satellite images. On this trail we saw the first individual of A. blanquillanus; after that first encounter, many additional juveniles and adults appeared before our eyes, including males fighting! Some individuals were very curious, approaching us very close, head bobbing and displaying their dewlaps.
Female A. blanquillanus. Photo by Martin Dávila.
To my surprise, all individuals observed were in good condition in spite of the very dry habitat resulting from the particularly long and dry season. I observed some individuals jumping from their perch trying to catch insects. Also I had the opportunity to see a big male swallowing a small fruit of Ficus sp. One individual that we collected defecated digested fruit of Ficus sp. while it was in the bag. Also, I was surprised with how two males were fighting only approximately two meters away from us without caring much for our presence. Anolis blanquillanus, along with Gonatodes naufragus, Phyllodatylus rutteni and Iguana iguana, are the only species (all natives) that have colonized Morro Fondeadero. Interestingly, species such as Cnemidophorus leucopsammus, the most common lizard in La Blanquilla, is absent, although Hummelinck reported the species there. Nine of us worked intensively during the day for four days, and no Cnemidophorus were observed, nor were P. rutteni (also observed by Hummelinck in 1940). Our findings suggest that it is unlikely C. leucopsammus ever existed there; however, it might exist in low densities, or it might have been extirpated by exotic species, such as domestic rats (Rattus rattus) that are very common on the island.
Editor’s Note: The sale has been extended until midnite Saturday night!
If you’re going to buy a Anoles 2014 calendar, do it now. Zazzle.com is having a Black Friday sale, and calendars are 60% off until 2 pm Eastern time. Order your calendars here with code BLKFRIZAZZLE.
Book-ended by this year’s photo contest winners, the 2014 anole calendar features 13 spectacular anole photographs selected by you, Anole Annals’ readers. Unlike previous year’s calendars, this year’s edition has a heavy South American influence thanks to photographs by Lucas Bustamante and Diana Troya. In addition to the two contest winning snaps of A. chrysolepis and A. gemmosus, other pin-ups include A. princeps, A. proboscis, and A. biporcatus. That’s not to say that some of our favorite Caribbean species don’t also make an appearance. Hispaniola is particularly highlighted, thanks to several photos by Cristian Marte, including stunning shots of A. bahorucoensis and A. coelestinus. in addition, there’s a lovely silhouette of A. sagrei displaying and an intriguing vignette of a tree boa and a sleeping A. aeneus. Check them all out at zazzle.com, where the calendars are now on sale. Til midnite tonight, you can get 20% with the discount code “TDAYPOSTSALE.”
Editor’s Note, Monday, Dec. 2: 60% off until 1 pm Eastern time today, code : ZAZZLEMONDAY
Sorry to post this right before Thanksgiving dinner, but here is something to think about the next time you eat after handling an anole: approximately 30% of anoles in Japan carry salmonella, twice the level in feral goats and more than ten times greater than that found in public toilets. Read the complete (freely available) study here.
Sitana at Manimutharu, Tamil Nadu (photo by Ambika Kamath)
Earlier this year, I lamented not having any cameras when I witnessed the most epic fight in 5 months of Sitana fieldwork. As luck would have it, I saw an equally impressive fight on the last day of my sixth month of Sitana observation, and this time I had a video camera! I was working in Manimutharu, Tamil Nadu, at the Agasthyamalai Community-Based Conservation Centre, home to Sitana with partially-coloured dewlaps.
A map of the Sitana populations I’ve sampled.
This male-male interaction lasted over 11 minutes, and ended only because I disturbed the lizards. Neither male was injured at all when I caught them after the fight. I’ve broken the video into two parts, one short and one long. The video begins when I realised I was watching two lizards–one is on the large rock to the right, and the other just below the rock on the left. Apologies for the shaky camera-work.
In between the two videos is over two minutes of the lizards biting each other ceaselessly. This length of fighting is atypical–actual combat between Sitana males is usually over in seconds, though the displays and staring-competitions can persist for much longer. This second video gives a better feel for the pace of these interactions. The lizards start out near the rocks on the right of the screen.