identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
25042F0C4A0D1D451590102FFA7BF884.text	25042F0C4A0D1D451590102FFA7BF884.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Plestiodon	<div><p>PLACEMENT OF PLESTIODON</p> <p>Support for the monophyly of Scincidae is strong, and there is equally strong support for the subfamily Acontinae (represented here by Typhlosaurus sp.) as the sister taxon to all remaining skinks (Fig. 2). The basal relationships among the non-acontines are generally weak. There is no significant support for the placement of Ophiomorus and Brachymeles, although RAG1 supports the placement of both genera in a clade containing all other ‘scincines’ (Fig. S1). However, there is strong support for Lygosominae monophyly and a clade containing the remaining</p> <p>0.05 substitutions/site</p> <p>‘scincines’. We did not sample the monotypic Feylinae, but previous studies have strongly supported its placement in a clade with Melanoseps (included in this study) and Typhlacontias (not included in this study) (Whiting et al., 2003; Brandley et al., 2005). The ‘scincine’ clade splits into a strongly supported clade of African, Malagasy, and Seychellois taxa and a weakly supported clade (PP = 0.63), containing primarily northern hemisphere species, including all genera of Eumeces s.l. (Eumeces s.s., Eurylepis, Mesoscincus, and Plestiodon), Scincopus, and Scincus. The placement of Mesoscincus is weakly supported (PP = 0.50), but the primarily Northern African and Central Asian genera of Eurylepis, Eumeces s.s., Scincus, and Scincopus form a well-supported clade. The precise placement of Plestiodon is not strongly supported (PP = 0.63), but there is a strong support for its inclusion in the larger ‘scincine’ clade, to the exclusion of the Africa + Madagascar + Seychelles clade.</p> <p>Although numerous scincid relationships differ between the nine loci and concatenated analyses, only one of these differences is strongly supported (Fig. S1); most loci and the concatenated data infer strong support for Scincella (Sphenomorphus group) as the sister taxon to the remaining lygosomines, but the mtDNA infers strong support for the sister relationship between Scincella and Trachylepis (Mabuya group). There are three cases where the concatenated data and analyses of eight of the nine loci cannot estimate the phylogenetic placement of a taxon with</p> <p>0.05 substitutions / site strong support, yet this relationship is strongly supported in one locus. In the first case, RAG1 data support a basal split of the non-acontine skinks into lygosomines and all sampled ‘scincines’ (Fig. S1). In addition, these data strongly support the inclusion of Mesoscincus in a clade including Eumeces s.s., Eurylepis, Scincus, and Scincopus. The SNCAIP data strongly support the inclusion of Brachymeles in a clade containing lygosomines, but given the poor support within this clade, we cannot distinguish whether Brachymeles represents the sister lineage to lygosomines or disrupts lygosomine phylogeny (Fig. S1). We note that none of these relationships strongly conflicts with the concatenated data analysis (Fig. 2).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/25042F0C4A0D1D451590102FFA7BF884	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Brandley, Matthew C.;Fls, Hidetoshi Ota;Hikida, Tsutomu;Oca, Adrián Nieto Montes De;Fería-Ortíz, Manuel;Guo, Xianguang;Wang, Yuezhao	Brandley, Matthew C., Fls, Hidetoshi Ota, Hikida, Tsutomu, Oca, Adrián Nieto Montes De, Fería-Ortíz, Manuel, Guo, Xianguang, Wang, Yuezhao (2012): The phylogenetic systematics of blue-tailed skinks (Plestiodon) and the family Scincidae. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 165 (1): 163-189, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article-lookup/doi/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x
25042F0C4A011D4115D71097FB7EFC70.text	25042F0C4A011D4115D71097FB7EFC70.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Plestiodon	<div><p>OF PLESTIODON</p> <p>Although they constitute the largest lizard family in terms of species, skinks have only recently been the subject of molecular phylogenetic analysis. These studies (Whiting et al., 2003; Brandley et al., 2005, 2011; Austin &amp; Arnold, 2006; Siler &amp; Brown, 2011; Siler et al., 2011; Skinner et al., 2011) have both supported and refuted many of the relationships proposed by previous morphological analyses (Taylor, 1935; Greer, 1970a, b). However, many relationships, especially ‘deep’ relationships among the major skink lineages, have remained poorly supported, or in at least one case (the monophyly of Lygosominae), completely conflicting (Greer, 1986; Whiting et al., 2003; Brandley et al., 2005, 2011; Siler &amp; Brown, 2011; Siler et al., 2011; Skinner et al., 2011). In his pioneering evolutionary taxonomy of skinks, Greer (1970a, b) identified four scincid subfamilies: Acontinae, Feylinae, Lygosominae, and Scincinae, and assumed that Scincinae was a group from which the three other subfamilies were derived (thereby rendering it paraphyletic). Subsequent studies have demonstrated conclusively that the enigmatic Feylinae (not included in this study) is closely related to the southern African ‘scincines’ Melanoseps and Typhlacontias (Whiting et al., 2003; Brandley et al., 2005). However, a wellsupported phylogenetic placement of the lygosomines with major ‘scincine’ lineages has remained elusive. Our study does much to revise the existing phylogenetic framework of skinks resolving several additional ‘deep’ relationships, including the placement of Acontinae, Lygosominae, and ‘Scincinae’.</p> <p>Our results strongly support a basal split within Scincidae between the limbless acontines (represented by Typhlosaurus sp. in Figs 2 and S 1) and all other skinks, thereby corroborating the results of Whiting et al. (2003) and Skinner et al. (2011). This phylogenetic relationship has bearing on the evolution of limb reduction in skinks. Complete limblessness has evolved independently ~25 times among squamate reptiles, with the majority of these derivations ocurring within Scincidae (Greer, 1991; Wiens et al., 2006; Brandley et al., 2008; Siler et al., 2011). Although we lack sufficient phylogenetic evidence to evaluate the ancestral body plan of scincid lizards, that acontines represent one of the two earliest lineages of crown Scincidae suggests that limb reduction may have been a feature of scincid evolution for a very long time (79–114 Mya; Brandley et al., 2008, 2011).</p> <p>Lygosomines represent the bulk of species diversity in skinks. Although our sampling of lygosomines is low, we sampled four of its five major lineages: the Eugongylus group [represented by Emoia caeruleocauda (De Vis, 1892)], the Lygosoma group [Lygosoma brevicaudis Greer, Grandison, &amp; Barbault, 1985], the Mabuya group [Trachylepis perrotetii (Duméril &amp; Bibron, 1839)], and the Sphenomorphus group [Scincella lateralis (Say, 1823)]; but not the Egernia group. This therefore allows us to make a cursory evaluation of competing hypotheses of ‘deep’ lygosomine relationships. Molecular studies that have focused specifically on lygosomine relationships have supported the Sphenomorphus group as the sister lineage to all other lygosomine skinks (Honda et al., 2000, 2003; Reeder, 2003; Austin &amp; Arnold, 2006; Linkem, Diesmos &amp; Brown, 2011; Skinner et al., 2011), a result congruent with our analysis of the concatenated data (Fig. 2). However, the relationships of the remaining groups differ among these studies. With the caveat that we did not sample the Egernia group, our results support Reeder (2003) and Skinner et al. (2011) who inferred strong support for a clade composed of (Mabuya (Lygosoma + Eugongylus)) groups. That Austin &amp; Arnold (2006) did not sample the Lygosoma group makes comparison with our study uninformative. With the exception of the placement of the Sphenomorphus group, our results are completely incongruent with Honda et al. (2000, 2003), but we note that these relationships were not strongly supported in those studies.</p> <p>With one exception, the individual gene tree analyses either support the same relationships as the concatenated data or are not strongly incongruent; the mtDNA gene tree (Fig. S2) supports a sister relationship between the Mabuya and Sphenomorphus group. We speculate that this relationship is explained by homoplasy resulting from a combination of the relatively rapid evolution of mtDNA and the relatively old age of lygosomines (see Brandley et al., 2011; Skinner et al., 2011): a problem that is probably exacerbated by our low level of taxon sampling. Even with explicit model-based methods (e.g. maximum likelihood and Bayesian), extreme homoplasy can nonetheless lead to high support for incorrect relationships (Felsenstein, 1978, 1985; Brandley et al., 2006, 2009).</p> <p>When compared with previous molecular phylogenetic studies of scincid relationships, perhaps the most notable result in the current study is an increased resolution among the ‘scincine’ genera. Our multilocus phylogenetic analysis reveals multiple, well-supported novel ‘scincine’ relationships. Although previous studies have inferred a close phylogenetic affinity of the ‘scincine’ genera inhabiting Africa, Madagascar, and the Seychelles, ours is the first to infer very strong support for the interrelationships of many of these lineages. We find the Seychellois Janetaescincus, North African and Mediterranean Chalcides (and presumably Sphenops; Brandley et al., 2005; Carranza et al., 2008), Southern African Melanoseps, and Malagasy Voeltzkowia and Amphiglossus + Paracontias form progressively more exclusive clades. Only the mtDNA gene tree (Fig. S2) supports a strongly incongruent relationship by supporting a clade that is exclusive of Melanoseps. The geographical distribution of these genera suggests that the break-up of Gondwana played a major role in the phylogenetic history of the clade; however, inclusion of the Indian and Sri Lankan genera in future analyses will be critical for testing this hypothesis. We note that we did not fully sample other African, Malagasy, and Mauritian ‘scincine’ genera, but we can infer from other studies that they too are members of this larger clade (Whiting et al., 2003; Brandley et al., 2005; Schmitz et al., 2005). We also infer strong support for the sister relationship of this putatively Gondwanan clade with the primarily Laurasian-distributed Eumeces s.l., Scincus, and Scincopus.</p> <p>The phylogenetic affinities of Ophiomorus and Brachymeles are complex. Although our concatenated data analysis did not infer strong support for the placement of either genus, inspection of the 95% credible set of unique topologies reveals that 837 of 2816 trees are compatible with ‘scincine’ monophyly (not shown). In other words, although we cannot strongly support the placement of these genera, we also cannot statistically reject their placement in a monophyletic Scincinae. The RAG1 gene tree (Fig. S 1g) also strongly supports ‘scincine’ monophyly. However, the SNCAIP tree strongly supports Brachymeles in a clade containing the four lygosomine genera (Fig. S1h). Brandley et al.’s (2011) timecalibrated analysis of a smaller data set (see Brandley et al., 2011: appendix IV) infers strong support for the sister relationship of Brachymeles and Lygosominae (PP = 1.0), and the sister relationship of Ophiomorus and all other ‘scincines’ (PP = 0.96).</p> <p>Different taxon and gene sampling may explain the discrepancies between Brandley et al. (2011) and the current study. An alternative explanation is that, unlike the current study, Brandley et al. (2011) used a relaxed molecular clock model of evolution that attempts to correct for rate heterogeneity amongst lineages for the purposes of divergence date estimation. Regardless, because the relationships of these two genera are strongly supported in Brandley et al. (2011), and our present phylogenetic results do not strongly conflict with that study, we argue that the Brandley et al. (2011) tree may be a better estimate of the relationships of Brachymeles and Ophiomorus in the absence of more phylogenetic evidence.</p> <p>We infer strong support for the hypothesis that Plestiodon and other Eumeces s.l. genera do not represent the earliest diverging lineage of skinks. These results therefore refute Greer’s (1970a) hypothesis that ‘Morphologically, Eumeces [s.l.] is very possible the most primitive living skink taxon and may, in fact, be quite similar to the ancestor of all skinks’. Although the genus ‘ Eumeces ’ was long considered to be monophyletic, numerous recent studies have rejected this hypothesis (Griffith et al., 2000; Schmitz et al., 2004; Brandley et al., 2005). These studies are also in concordance with karyotypic studies that have demonstrated that three of the four genera possess unique shared, derived karyotypes, 2 N = 32 in Eumeces s.s. (Gorman, 1973; Caputo et al., 1993; Caputo, Odierna &amp; Aprea, 1994), 2 N = 28 in Eurylepis (Ivanov &amp; Bogdanov, 1975; Kupriyanova, 1986; Eremchenko, Panfilov &amp; Tsarinenko, 1992), and 2 N = 26 in Plestiodon (e.g. Deweese &amp; Wright, 1970; McDiarmid &amp; Wright, 1976; Kato et al., 1998). The karyotype of Mesoscincus is unknown. However, these molecular and karyotype studies are only able to reject monophyly, and are unable to elucidate with strong support the phylogenetic affinities of the four genera that were once part of Eumeces s.l. (Eumeces s.s., Eurylepis, Mesoscincus, and Plestiodon). The concatenated data tree, and all nine gene trees, support a clade composed of Eumeces s.s., Scincopus, and Scincus, to the exclusion of all other skink genera. Moreover, the concatenated data also support Eurylepis as the sister lineage to this clade. The precise phylogenetic affinities of Mesoscincus and Plestiodon remain elusive, although we note that our concatenated data tree at least excludes them from lygosomines, acontines, Ophiomorus, and Brachymeles.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/25042F0C4A011D4115D71097FB7EFC70	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Brandley, Matthew C.;Fls, Hidetoshi Ota;Hikida, Tsutomu;Oca, Adrián Nieto Montes De;Fería-Ortíz, Manuel;Guo, Xianguang;Wang, Yuezhao	Brandley, Matthew C., Fls, Hidetoshi Ota, Hikida, Tsutomu, Oca, Adrián Nieto Montes De, Fería-Ortíz, Manuel, Guo, Xianguang, Wang, Yuezhao (2012): The phylogenetic systematics of blue-tailed skinks (Plestiodon) and the family Scincidae. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 165 (1): 163-189, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article-lookup/doi/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x
25042F0C4A131D57123B1327FBE9FD6C.text	25042F0C4A131D57123B1327FBE9FD6C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Plestiodon Dumeril & Bibron 1849	<div><p>PLESTIODON</p> <p>Plestiodon anthracinus (SDSU 802) – no locality. Plestiodon barbouri 1 (MCB 666) – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Tokunoshima: Foothills of Tanhatsu Mountain: 27.77897, 128.96381. Plestiodon barbouri 2 (MCB 669) – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Amamioshima: On unnamed road off of Highway 85 between Highways 79 and 58: 28.24003, 129.33823. Plestiodon barbouri 3 (MCB 644) – Japan: Okinawa Prefecture: Kumejima: On road to small dam: 26.36612, 126.76346. Plestiodon brevirostris bilineatus 1 (EMD 16) – México: Chihuahua: Namiquipa: 25.06967, -105.62869. Plestiodon brevirostris bilineatus 2 (EPR 1405) – México: Durango: Pueblo Nuevo: 23.71519, -105.48675. Plestiodon brevirostris brevirostris 1 (IDLH 16) – México: Tlaxcala: Huamantla: 19.39122, -97.92164. Plestiodon brevirostris brevirostris 2 (MFO 293) – México: Oaxaca: Macultianguis: 17.33000, -96.55000. Plestiodon brevirostris indubitus 1 (AMH 404) – México: Jalisco: Ciudad Guzmán: 19.61689, -103.56031. Plestiodon brevirostris indubitus 2 (MFO 303) – México: Morelos: Huitzilac: 19.02378, -99.28047. Plestiodon callicephalus (MFO 307) – México: Sonora: Approximately 4 km east of Uvalama: 26.99343, -108.97540. Plestiodon capito 1 (CAS 182575) – China: Shaanxi Province: Xian: base of the Qin Ling Mtns south of Xian: 34.26667, 108.90000. Plestiodon capito 2 (MCB 1051) – China: Sichuan Province: Nanjiang County In mountains ~ 13.5 miles north (by air) of Yangba town: 32.53437, 106.76136. Plestiodon chinensis 1 (MCB 675) – China: Taiwan: Hsingchu Province: road near Ji-Ding train station: 24.72158, 120.87086. Plestiodon chinensis 2 (MCZ Z39481) – China: Guangdong Province: Nan Ao Island. Plestiodon copei 1 (AMH 315) – México: México: Desierto de los Leones: 19.26733, -99.32183. Plestiodon copei 2 (MVZ 143455) – México: México: 1 mile west of Rio Frio on old road to Puebla: 19.33778, -98.67611. Plestiodon dicei 1 (MFO 316) – México: Tamaulipas: Ejido ‘La Cima’: 23.05814, -99.19375. Plestiodon dicei 2 (UOGV 552) – México: Cohuila: Rancho El Manzano: 24.35233, -100.19333. Plestiodon dugesii 1 (IDLH 105) – México: Jalisco: Atemajac de Brizuela: 20.11853, -103.72692. Plestiodon dugesii 2 (MCB 1054) – México: Michuocán: Quendaro Municipality: ~ 9.5 km west of the town of San José de la Cumbre: 19.68612, -100.87945. Plestiodon egregius onocrepis 1 (CAS 214309) – USA: Florida: Citrus County east. McMullen Rd. 28.69108, -82.33742. Plestiodon egregius onocrepis 2 (MVZ 150132) – USA: Florida: Highlands County north-west Avon Park, 3.6 miles north (by road) junction of Route 29 and Route 64, off Route 29: 27.59460, -81.50370. Plestiodon elegans 1 (MCZ Z39486) – China: Guangdong Province: Nan Ao Island: San Jian Shan. Plestiodon elegans 2 (MVZ 231241) – China: Fujian Province: Dehua: Dai Yun village: 25.66083, 118.22183. Plestiodon elegans 3 (MCB 673) – China: Taiwan: Hsingchu Province: Ji-Ding beach park near Ji-Ding train station: 24.72050, 120.86520. Plestiodon fasciatus (MCB 249) – USA: Kentucky: Henderson County Sloughs Wildlife Management Area, creek overpass on road west of Gary Aldrich Rd. 37.80861, -87.81333. Plestiodon gilberti A (MVZ 147888) – USA: California: Kern County, east slope Temblor Range, Highway 58, 11 miles north-west of Highway 33: 35.34427, -119.80670. Plestiodon gilberti I (MVZ 162079) – USA: California: Calaveras County 1.9 mi WNW Highway 4 at Avery on Avery-Sheep Ranch Rd. 38.22836, -120.37336. Plestiodon inexpectatus 1 (CAS 214312) – USA: Florida: Citrus County Inverness, Sandpiper Rd. Plestiodon inexpectatus 2 (MVZ 162086) – USA: North Carolina: Brunswick County 5 miles north of Supply: 34.09380, -78.26640. Plestiodon japonicus 1 (MCB 635) – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Yakushima: City of Nagata, road south of hotel: 30.40454, 130.43059. Plestiodon japonicus 2 (MCB 682) – Japan: Kyoto Prefecture: Kyoto City: East wall of Imperial Palace grounds: 35.01425, 135.75115. Plestiodon japonicus 3 (KUZ R61221) – Japan: Miyagi Prefecture: Sendai. Plestiodon kishinouyei 1 (MCB 652) – Japan: Okinawa Prefecture: Iriomotejima: 24.41701, 123.79899. Plestiodon kishinouyei 2 (MCB 658) – Japan: Okinawa Prefecture: Ishigakijima: Park off of Highway 79 in central part of island: 24.45178, 124.19494. Plestiodon lagunensis (SDNHM- CIBNOR 151) – México: Baja Califorinia del Sur: Sierra Guadalupe, San Jose de Magdalena. Plestiodon laticeps (CAS 218689) – USA: Florida: Liberty County Forest Road 181: 30.05889, 84.94731. Plestiodon latiscutatus 1 (KUZ R58387) – Japan: Tokyo Prefecture: Aogashima: 32.46811, 139.76421. Plestiodon latiscutatus 2 (MCB 683) – Japan: Shizuoka Prefecture: Numazu: 35.01425, 135.75115. Plestiodon longirostris 1 (SK1) – Bermuda: Castle Island. Plestiodon longirostris 2 (SK2) – Bermuda: Castle Island. Plestiodon lynxe 1 (LSUMZ H14823) – México: San Luis Potosi. Plestiodon lynxe 2 (LSUMZ H14966) – México: Hidalgo. Plestiodon marginatus marginatus (MCB 646) – Japan: Okinawa Prefecture: Kumejima: 26.33560, 126.76669. Plestiodon marginatus oshimensis 1 (MCB 639) – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Kodakarajima: 29.22642, 129.33011. Plestiodon marginatus oshimensis 2 (MCB 672) – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Amamioshima: unnamed road at the eastern terminus of Highway 607: 28.32269, 129.52980. Plestiodon marginatus oshimensis 3 (MCB 668 – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Tokunoshima: City of Amagi, near the port: 27.81952, 128.89296. Plestiodon marginatus oshimensis 4 (MCB 632) – Japan: Kagoshima Prefecture: Yoronjima: City of Nankaiso: 27.04921, 128.41551. Plestiodon multivirgatus (ADL 274) – USA: Colorado: Montezuma County US Route 666, Yellow Jacket Canyon: 37.52000, -108.70122. Plestiodon obsoletus (MVZ 137633) – USA: Arizona: Cochise County Highway 80, 15– 20 miles south Rodeo: 31.63070, -109.19830. Plestiodon ochoteranae 1 (MFO 287) – México: Guerrero: Agua del Obispo: 17.32192, -99.47006. Plestiodon ochoteranae 2 (UOGV 250) – México: Guerrero: Agua del Obispo: 17.32192, -99.47006. Plestiodon parviauriculatus (IDLH 85) – México: Sonora: Los Alamos: 26.99342, -108.97539. Plestiodon parvulus 1 (ANMO 1141) – México: Michoacán: Pueblo Nuevo: 18.56130, -103.59437. Plestiodon parvulus 2 (ANMO 1173) – México: Colima: Manzanillo: 21.60425, -105.17211. Plestiodon quadrilineatus (MVZ 230445) – China: Hong Kong: Cheung Chau: 22.20000, 114.01667. Plestiodon reynoldsi 2 (NR390) – Florida: Highlands County Archbold Biological Station Plestiodon reynoldsi 1 (NR383) – Highlands County Archbold Biological Station. Plestiodon septentrionalis 1 (LSUMZ H1231) – USA: Wisconsin. Plestiodon septentrionalis 2 (LSUMZ H1230) – USA: Wisconsin. Plestiodon skiltonianus F (MVZ 162314) – USA: California: Mendocino County 6.6 miles west of Willits on Highway 20: 39.39721, -123.45057. Plestiodon skiltonianus G (MVZ 162089) – USA: California: San Diego County 1 mile west of junction Route S6 on Route S7: 33.31347, -116.88200. Plestiodon stimpsonii 1 (MCB 657) – Japan: Okinawa Prefecture: Iriomotejima: 24.41701, 123.79899. Plestiodon stimpsonii 2 (MCB 664) – Japan: Okinawa Prefecture: Ishigakijima: Park off of Highway 79 in the northwest part of the island: 24.44786, 124.13341. Plestiodon sumichrasti (JLAL 141) – México: Veracruz: 2 km south of Cañahuatal: 18.83497, -98.85067. Plestiodon tamdaoensis 1 (ROM 25817) – Vietnam: Hia Duong, Chi Linh. Plestiodon tamdaoensis 2 (ROM 26948) – Vietnam: Cao Bang, Qyang Thanh. Plestiodon tetragrammus (UOGV 525) – México: Tamaulipas: ~ 1 km east of Marmolejo: 24.62217, -99.03194. Plestiodon tunganus 1 (MCB 1020) – China: Sichuan Province: Luding County ~ 5 km south-east (by air) of Pengba town on mountain road following the eastern shore of the Tung River: 29.99377, 102.21052. Plestiodon tunganus 2 (MCB 1025) – China: Sichuan Province: Luding County ~ 0.5 km south of Pengba on side of highway: 30.01844, 102.18371.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/25042F0C4A131D57123B1327FBE9FD6C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Brandley, Matthew C.;Fls, Hidetoshi Ota;Hikida, Tsutomu;Oca, Adrián Nieto Montes De;Fería-Ortíz, Manuel;Guo, Xianguang;Wang, Yuezhao	Brandley, Matthew C., Fls, Hidetoshi Ota, Hikida, Tsutomu, Oca, Adrián Nieto Montes De, Fería-Ortíz, Manuel, Guo, Xianguang, Wang, Yuezhao (2012): The phylogenetic systematics of blue-tailed skinks (Plestiodon) and the family Scincidae. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 165 (1): 163-189, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article-lookup/doi/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x
