identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03E36252C528FFF6F39BFE3FFED6FB8A.text	03E36252C528FFF6F39BFE3FFED6FB8A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus persicus Anderson 1872	<div><p>Hemidactylus persicus and similar species</p> <p>The type locality of Hemidactylus persicus was restricted to Shiraz, Persia (= Iran) by Smith (1935). Morphologically typical animals occur in Northeast Saudi Arabia (as far South as AI-Hufof and perhaps ar- Riyadh), in Bahrain, Kuwait, and lowland Iraq, Southern Iran, Pakistan and Gujarat (India) (Anderson 1999; Leviton et al. 1992; Minton 1966; Sindaco &amp; Jeremcenko 2008; Smith 1935; Vyas et al. 2006). They are characterized by relatively small size (up to 67 mm SVL), a low number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean 8.8, 8–9) and relatively numerous preanal pores in males (mean 9.2, 8–11) arranged in a V-shaped line in front of the vent (Appendix I). Other animals that have been assigned to H. persicus occur in isolation in the Jebel Akhdar region of North Oman (Arnold 1977, 1986; Arnold &amp; Gallagher 1977; see Figs. 1 and 2) and have recently been found in the adjoining mountains of the Eastern Hajars as far South as Jebel Qahwan. Morphology (Appendix I; Figs. 9–10, and 12), phylogenetic analysis of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5) and Dataset 3 (12S only; Appendix III) nuclear networks of three independent loci (c-mos, mc1r and rag2) (Fig. 6) indicate that there are two new species endemic to the Hajar Mountains in North Oman. These two new species are distinct both from each other and from typical H. persicus, and occur within 10–15 km of each other on the Jebel Akhdar. One is especially large and confined to the Jebel Akhdar area, while the other occurs here and in the Eastern Hajars, populations in the two areas of its distribution exhibiting marked genetic divergence (Fig. 5B 1 and B 2; Appendix IIIB1 and B2). These species are described below.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C528FFF6F39BFE3FFED6FB8A	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C528FFFAF39BFBC9FA0BF8EF.text	03E36252C528FFFAF39BFBC9FA0BF8EF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus luqueorum Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus luqueorum sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 2, 5A, 6, 9–11; Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix IIIA)</p> <p>MorphoBank M94288 – M94372 M94378 – M94393 M100049–M100093</p> <p>Hemidactylus persicus Arnold and Gallagher, 1977: 65; Arnold, 1977: 102; Arnold, 1986: 419; Leviton, Anderson, Adler and Minton, 1992: 38 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 112 (part.); Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 115 (part.).</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH2005.1660, male from Sayq, 1961 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.07639’ N 57.62861 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2005 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and D. Donaire (MorphoBank M94288–M94303). Paratypes: BMNH1971.41, female from Wadi Sayq, 1900 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), collected by M.D. Gallagher (MorphoBank M94304–M94312); BMNH1980.558, male from Wadi Sayq, 1900 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), collected by M.D. Gallagher (MorphoBank M94313 –M94350); BMNH1975.916, female from Birkat Sahfan, Jebel Akhdar (Oman), collected by D.L. Harrison (MorphoBank M94378 –M94384). BMNH2005.1661, juvenile from Sayq, 1961 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.07639’ N 57.62861 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2005 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and D. Donaire; BMNH2005.1658, female from Wadi Bani Habib, 2200 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.0711’ N 57.60417 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2005 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and D. Donaire (MorphoBank M94363–M94372); BMNH2005.1659, female from Wadi Bani Habib, 2200 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.0711’ N 57.60417 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2005 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and D. Donaire (MorphoBank M94363–M94372); IBES8068, female from Wadi al Khahafa, 492 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.07419’ N 57.12208 ’E WGS84, collected on the 10 th of October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M 100056–M100064); IBES7771, female from 1 km East of Hat, 1124 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.18292’ N 57.41627 ’E WGS84, collected by S. Carranza, E. Gómez-Díaz and F. Amat on the 9 th of May 2011 (MorphoBank M 100065–M100073); IBES6085, female, same collecting data as IBES7771 (MorphoBank M 100083– M00093); ONHM3705, female from Wadi Bani Habib, 2200 m, Jebel Akhdar (North Oman), 23.0711’ N 57.60417 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2005 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and D. Donaire (MorphoBank M94363–M94372).</p> <p>Other material examined</p> <p>Two vouchers listed in Appendix I under H. luqueorum sp. nov. and not mentioned above. Two unvouchered specimens (tissue codes S6080 and S7843) included in the molecular analyses only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A large-sized Hemidactylus with a maximum recorded SVL of 88 mm; with a mean of 14.2 (13–15) longitudinal rows of enlarged dorsal tubercles at mid-body; adhesive pads broad, in adults maximum width of pad on fourth toe of the pes more than half its length; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes mean 10.3 (10–11); lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes mean 13.6 (13–14); preanal pores mean 5.3 (5–6); expanded subcaudal scales extending proximally as far as the second whorl after the vent and starting just after the hemipenial bulge in males; dorsum grey–buff with irregular small spots; a dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear and often on to neck; tail with small irregular dark blotches basally and numerous transverse dark bands more distally, the total number being around 17. Underside of tail pale but large subcaudals suffused with grey formed by dark chromatophores that increase in intensity distally; underside of toe pads also grey.</p> <p>Hemidactylus luqueorum is generally similar to H. persicus in number of its moderately-sized dorsal tubercles across mid-body, and large adhesive pads on toes but differs from it in its much larger size (SVL mean 76.8 mm, max. 88 mm, compared with mean. 56.4 mm, max. 67 mm), reduced number of preanal pores in males (mean 5.3, 5–6, compared with mean 9.2, 8–11), and presence of more lamellae under the first toe of pes (mean 10.3, 10–11, compared with mean 8.8, 8–9). For differences from the second North Oman species of Hemidactylus see below.</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet " luqueorum " is a collective genitive plural Latin noun to honour Salvador Carranza’s wife, Maria Teresa Luque, and her family for all their love and support. Without their encouragement and help it would have been impossible to accomplish this work.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogeographic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus luqueorum is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5A) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIIA). In both phylogenetic trees it forms a clade together with H. persicus and the second North Oman species of Hemidactylus described below, although the bootstrap support and pp values are very low (see Fig. 5 and Appendix III). According to the results of the dating analysis inferred with Dataset 2, these three species split about 12.6 mya (95% HPD: 7.7–17.9). According to Fig. 5 and Appendix III, Hemidactylus luqueorum is more closely related to the second North Oman species of Hemidacytlus described below (Fig. 5B, Appendix IIIB), from which it split approximately 9.6 mya (95% HPD: 5.7–13.8). The level of genetic variability within H. luqueorum is 2% in the cytb and 0.2% in the 12S. The uncorrected genetic distances between H. luqueorum and the second North Oman species of Hemidactylus described below are 15.6% in the cytb and 6.9% in the 12S; and between H. luqueorum and H. persicus are 14.6% in the cytb and 9.8% in the 12S. The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig 6 and a network analysis including all specimens from Dataset 1 (data not shown) indicate that all alleles of H. luqueorum for all three independent loci analyzed (c-mos, mc1r and rag2) are private (not shared with any other species included in the present analyses).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Despite intensive surveys across the Hajar Mountain range and especially the Eastern Hajars, H. luqueorum has only been found in the Jebel Akhdar, the largest structural domain of the Western Hajar Mountains in North Oman (Figs. 1 and 2). It has been recorded from 492 m altitude (Wadi Al Khahafa) up to 2200 m (Wadi Bani Habib).</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>The species occurs on rocky sides of wadis and on buildings and occasionally on gravely wadi floors. Mainly nocturnal, several specimens were active during the day in a narrow wadi 1 km East of Hat (Fig. 11A). According to Arnold and Gallagher (1977), specimens BMNH 1971.41 and BMNH 1975.916 were caught during the day, one on an overhanging rock-face and the other in a shallow cave. It can be locally abundant inside large caves and share habitat with Asaccus platyrhynchus. In Wadi Bani Habib, at 2000 m, it has been found together with Asaccus montanus and at Wadi al Kahafa, at much lower altitude, it shares habitat with both A. platyrhynchus and Ptyodactylus hasselquistii. It moves relatively slowly and is quite confident, sometimes allowing one to approach quite closely to take pictures. It losses the skin very easily when being handled and sometimes specimens have large scars of regenerated skin on the back, probably as a results of fights with conspecifics or attacks from predators (Fig. 10D).</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Head and body markedly depressed; head broad, especially posteriorly and neck well defined. Head length about 24–28% of SVL (mean males 25%, mean females 26%), head width 70–78% of head length (mean males 75%, mean females 74%), and head height 36–51% of head length (mean males 46%, mean females 44%). Adhesive pads broad; in adults maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe more than half its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first supralabial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. One, occasionally 2 scales separating supranasals on midline. About 14–19 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. Small conical tubercles scattered in orbital area, crown of head and temporal area above the level of ear opening and immediately in front of the upper part of this. Ear opening with its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smooth-edged, usually half or more of eye diameter. Supralabial scales mean 11.8 (10–14), infralabials mean 9.1 (8–10). Mental scale broadly triangular posteriorly bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, all four with a smooth transverse posterior border, the postmentals contacting the first and second supralabials; second and more posterior infralabials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine.</p> <p>Enlarged tubercles present on back, arranged in 14.2 (mean) (13–15) longitudinal rows at mid-body, which also form backwardly directed oblique rows from near midline to flank, 12–16 across mid-body, and 16–18 in a paravertebral row from the level of the axilla to that of the groin, where they are separated by spaces of about their own length. Enlarged tubercles keeled and trihedral but becoming smaller and more pointed on flanks. Ventrals small, but larger than dorsals and more imbricate, about 48–50 in a transverse row at mid body between lateral folds. Males with 5–6 preanal pores (mean 5.3) separated by one or two scales giving a formula of 2+3, 3+2 or 3+3. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, interspersed with enlarged tubercles on distal section. Scales on front of thigh and beneath about same size as belly scales and imbricate, rather larger under tibia, enlarged tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia and also on posterior edge of foot. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 10.3 (10–11); 4 th toe mean 13.6 (13–14).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender, although sometimes thickened proximally; six enlarged, keeled and pointed tubercles on each whorl proximally, dropping to four around whorl 8 or 10. Tubercles about one third the length of basal whorls, becoming smaller and placed more posteriorly on whorls distally. About 10–11 small scales in longitudinal row on fourth whorl after vent, around seven small scales between tubercles on fourth and fifth whorls. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally as far as the second whorl after the vent and starting just after the hemipenial bulge in males.</p> <p>In spirit pale grey-buff; a dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear and often on to neck; body with irregular small spots; some tubercles on forebody and vertebral area have opaque white coloring on one side and dark coloring on the other. Belly pale but there may be a slight stipple at the sides, the dark punctate spots being smaller than the scales. Tail with small irregular dark blotches basally and numerous transverse dark bands more distally, initially on every other whorl and then on each one, the total number being around 17. Underside of tail pale but large subcaudals suffused with grey formed by dark chromatophores that increase in intensity distally. Underside of toe pads also grey.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Male, 80.4 mm SVL; tail truncated, 59 mm long. Supralabial scales 13/12; infralabials 9/9; 15 rows of enlarged tubercles at mid-back; 6 (3+3) preanal pores; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 10/11, 4 th toe of pes 14/13.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C528FFFAF39BFBC9FA0BF8EF	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C522FFC0F39BFF3AFA89FCDA.text	03E36252C522FFC0F39BFF3AFA89FCDA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus hajarensis Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus hajarensis sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 2, 5B, 6, 9B–D, 12–13; Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix IIIB)</p> <p>MorphoBank M94393 – M94415 M94459 – M94465 M94515 – M94542 M94558 – M94586 M94630 – M94643 M94649 – M94664 M94666 – M94684 M94700 – M94721 M99874 – M99917 M99921 – M99937 M99954 – M99993</p> <p>Hemidactylus persicus Arnold, 1986: 419; Leviton, Anderson, Adler and Minton, 1992: 38 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 112 (part.); Carranza and Arnold, 2006: 536; Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 115 (part.).</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH2008.714, male from Wadi Bani Khalid, 647 m, Eastern Hajar (North Oman), 22.61609’ N 59.09371 ’E WGS84, collected in May 2011 by S. Carranza, E. Gómez-Díaz and F. Amat (MorphoBank M99903 – M99917; Fig. 12D). Paratypes: ONHM3706, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M99885 – M99893); IBES7335, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M99894 – M99902; Fig. 11D); IBES7336, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M99969 – M99976).</p> <p>Other material examined</p> <p>Eighteen vouchers listed in Appendix I under H. hajarensis sp. nov. and not mentioned above. Specimens CAS 227612, CAS 227614, BMNH 2008.705 (juvenile) and samples JS65, JS81, JS98 JS99, S7321, and S6061 were included in the molecular analyses only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A medium-sized Hemidactylus with a maximum recorded SVL of 66.9 mm; with a mean of 14.2 (13–15) longitudinal rows of enlarged dorsal tubercles at mid-body; adhesive pads fairly broad, in adults maximum width of pad on the fourth toe about 0.4–0.5 of its length; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes mean 8.0 (7–9); lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes mean 12.1 (11–14); preanal pores mean 5.5 (4–6); expanded subcaudal scales extending proximally as far as the second or third whorl after the vent and starting just after the hemipenial bulge in males; dorsum grey-buff with irregular small spots; a dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear and often on to neck; tail with small irregular dark blotches basally and numerous transverse dark bands more distally, the total number being around 17. Underside of tail pale but large subcaudals may be suffused with grey formed by dark chromatophores that increase in intensity distally; underside of toe pads also grey.</p> <p>Hemidactylus hajarensis is generally similar to H. persicus in the number of its moderately-sized dorsal tubercles across mid-body, and large adhesive pads on toes but differs from it in its reduced number of preanal pores in males (mean 5.5, 4–6, compared with mean 9.2, 8–11). Hemidactylus hajarensis differs from H. luqueorum sp. nov. in its smaller size (SVL mean 54 mm, max. 66.9 mm, compared with mean. 76.8 mm, max. 88 mm), and in having fewer lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean 8.0, 7–9, compared with mean 10.3, 10–11), and under the 4 th toe of pes (mean 12.1, 11–14, compared with mean 13.6, 13–14)</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet “ hajarensis ” is an adjective that refers to the mountain range where the species is found, the Hajar Mountains.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogeographic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus hajarensis is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5B) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIIB). In both phylogenetic trees it forms a clade together with H. persicus and H. luqueorum sp. nov., although bootstrap support and pp values are very low (see Fig. 5 and Appendix III). According to the results of the dating analysis inferred with Dataset 2, these three species split about 12.6 mya (95% HPD: 7.7–17.9). According to Fig. 5 and Appendix III, H. hajarensis is more closely related to H. luqueorum (Fig. 5B, Appendix IIIB), from which it split approximately 9.6 mya (95% HPD: 5.7–13.8). The level of genetic variability within H. hajarensis is very high, 6.1% in the cytb and 2.6% in the 12S. As shown in Fig. 5B and Appendix IIIB, H. hajarensis consists of two very well differentiated and well-supported clades, B1 and B2. The uncorrected genetic distances between these two clades are 10.5% in the cytb and 5% in the 12S. As shown in Fig. 2, the geographical limits between clades B1 and B2 are not very clear, being clade B1 present in the Jebel Akhdar and in the coastal areas close to Muscat (Wadi Mayh, Jebel Abu Daud and a wadi North of Qurayyat), while clade B2 seems restricted to the Eastern Hajars. According to the calibrations, clades B1 and B2 split approximately 4.7 mya (95% HPD: 2.6–7.0). The uncorrected genetic distances between H. hajarensis and H. luqueorum are 15.6% in the cytb and 6.9% in the 12S; and between H. hajarensis and H. persicus 15.1% in the cytb and 10.7% in the 12S. The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig 6 and a network analysis including all specimens from Dataset 1 (data not shown) indicate that all alleles of H. hajarensis for all three independent loci analyzed (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) are private (not shared with any other species included in the present analyses). It is also interesting to notice that, although clades B1 and B2 share alleles of the c -mos gene, specimens of these two clades do not share a single allele of the mc1r and rag2 nuclear genes. The high genetic differentiation between clades B1 and B2 of H. hajarensis suggests long separation of the two units. However, the absence of clear morphological differences between these two clades and the relatively low number of available vouchers to carry out a thorough morphological analysis prevents us from taking any taxonomic decisions at present. Future studies should clarify the taxonomic status of these two clades (work in progress).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>The species is widespread in the mountains of North Oman from the Jebel Akhdar to the East. Despite intensive surveys across the Hajar Mountain range, it has never been found to the West of the Jebel Akhdar, in the Western Hajars or in the Musandam Peninsula. Several localities exist for the coastal wadis near Muscat and the Eastern Hajars, from Jebel Al Abyad in the West to Jebel Qahwan in the extreme East. Across its distribution range it has been recorded from almost sea level (22 m in Wadi Mayh) up to 1683 m in a locality 9 km North of Al Chayan (Table 1).</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>Hemidactylus hajarensis has been found at sides of wadis low on rocks that were interspersed and sometimes partly overhung with vegetation. The species was also sometimes seen on gravel floors of wadis (Fig. 13). Strictly nocturnal, it has never been recorded during the day. H. hajarensis moves quickly and is very agile, fleeing to a nearby refuge seconds after being spotted. In Wadi Tiwi and Wadi Hebaheba, H. hajarensis occurs also low on rocks. As H. luqueorum, it losses the skin very easily when being handled and sometimes specimens have scars of regenerated skin on the back, probably as a results of fights with conspecifics or attacks from predators (Fig. 12D). This species has never been found in sympatry with H. luqueorum, however, it shares habitat with Asaccus platyrhynchus and Ptyodactylus hasselquistii.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Head and body markedly depressed. Head breadth variable and neck well defined. Head length about 24–31% of SVL (mean males 28%, mean females 27%), head width 65–85% of head length (mean males 71%, mean females 72%), and head height 36–55% of head length (mean males and females 42%). Adhesive pads fairly broad; in adults maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe about 0.4–0.5 of its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first supralabial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. Usually one scale separating supranasals on midline. About 14–18 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. Small conical tubercles scattered in orbital area, crown of head and temporal area above the level of ear opening and immediately in front of the upper part of this. Ear opening with its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smooth-edged, usually about half or more of eye diameter. Supralabial scales mean 10.7 (9–12), infralabials mean 8.8 (7–10). Mental scale broadly triangular posteriorly bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, the postmentals contacting the first and second supralabials; second and more posterior lower labials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine.</p> <p>Enlarged tubercles present on back, arranged in 14.2 (mean) (13–15) longitudinal rows at mid-body, which also form backwardly directed oblique rows from near midline to flank, and 16–18 in a paravertebral row from the level of the axilla to that of the groin, where they are separated by spaces of about their own length. Enlarged tubercles strongly keeled and trihedral but becoming smaller and more conical on flanks. Ventrals small, but larger than dorsals and more imbricate, about 34–43 in a transverse row at mid body between lateral folds. Males with 4–6 preanal pores (mean 5.5) separated by one or two scales giving a formula of 2+2 or 3+3. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, interspersed with enlarged tubercles on distal section. Scales on front of thigh and beneath hind leg about same size as belly scales and imbricate, enlarged tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 8.0 (7–9), 4 th toe mean 12.1 (11–14).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender; between eight and six enlarged, keeled and pointed tubercles on each whorl on tail base, dropping to four from about 4–10 th whorl after vent. Tubercles about one third the length of basal whorls, becoming smaller and placed more posteriorly on whorls distally. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally as far as the second or third whorl after the vent and the starting just after the hemipenial bulge in males.</p> <p>In spirit pale grey-buff; a dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear and often on to neck; body with irregular small spots; some tubercles on forebody and vertebral area have opaque white coloring on one side and dark coloring on the other. Belly pale but there may be a very fine slight stipple at the sides, the dark punctuate spots being much smaller than the scales. Tail with small irregular dark blotches basally and numerous irregular dark bands more distally, the total number being around 17. Underside of tail pale but large subcaudals may be suffused in some places with grey formed by dark chromatophores that increase in intensity distally. Underside of toe pads also grey. In life, animals from many localities have dark blotches or bars on the upper surface that are suffused yellow-orange.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Male, 59.8 mm SVL; tail missing from the base. Supralabial scales 10/10; infralabials 9/9; 14 rows of enlarged tubercles at mid-back; 6 (3+3) preanal pores; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 8/8, 4 th toe of pes 12/12.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C522FFC0F39BFF3AFA89FCDA	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C51EFFC3F39BFC39FDA8FEFE.text	03E36252C51EFFC3F39BFC39FDA8FEFE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus yerburii Arnold 1977	<div><p>Hemidactylus yerburii and similar species</p> <p>According to Anderson, 1895: 636, the types of Hemidactylus yerburii come from “Haithalhim and Laheh” although the types were registered at the British Museum as from Haithalhim (BMNH 95.5.23.9) and Aden (BMNH 95.5.23.8) (Appendix I). Specimens from the type localities or near the type localities are characterized by relatively small size (SVL mean 63.6 mm, max. 67.6 mm), high number of enlarged tubercles present on back, arranged in 16.7 (mean) (16–17) longitudinal rows at mid-body, a high number of preanal pores in males (mean 12.8, 10–15) in a V-shaped line in front of the vent and the enlarged laterally expanded subcaudal scales often do not begin until 3–6 (average 4.5) tail whorls after the vent.</p> <p>According to Arnold (1980, 1986), there is a very marked geographical variation among specimens assigned to H. yerburii. For instance, the Northernmost populations assigned to H. yerburyii, which come from around an- Namas and Sabt Al Alaya in the Northern Asir Mountains (Saudi Arabia) are like Southern Asir animals in having fewer femoral pores (9–11) than typical H. yerburyii and in the expanded subcadual scales beginning closer to the vent, being separated from it by 2–4 whorls (average 2.5), (pers. observ.). However, they are distinctive from typical H. yerburii in being large (up to 72 mm from snout to vent), and in having dorsal tubercles that are reduced in size and not obviously trihedral, at least on the mid-back. These animals may also sometimes have more dark transverse bars on the intact tail than typical H. yerburyii. The taxonomic status of these distinct Saudi Arabian populations of H. yerburii is under study.</p> <p>Morphological variation of Yemeni populations formerly assigned to H. yerburii has been recently assessed using both morphological and molecular data by Busais and Joger (2011a,b). The results of these investigations led to the description of one new species: H. jumailiae, and one subspecies: H. yerburii montanus, endemic to the mountains of Southwest Yemen. Two other species of Hemidactylus that externally resemble H. yerburii but that are phylogenetically unrelated to it have also been described in the same work: H. shihraensis and H. saba. Before the studies by Busais and Joger (2011a,b), the only specimen of H. yerburii that had been included in a molecular phylogeny was a specimen from Najran, Saudi Arabia (Carranza &amp; Arnold 2006). According to the analysis by Carranza and Arnold (2006), H. yerburii branched outside the Arid clade, sister to H. mabouia. A closer examination of the mtDNA sequences revealed that the 12S mtDNA of H. yerburii was, in fact, from H. mabouia. The cytb sequence of H. yerburii from Carranza and Arnold (2006) was correct and it has been used in other studies (Moravec et al. 2011).</p> <p>Medium-sized Hemidactylus with numerous enlarged dorsal tubercles that occur in the Dhofar area of Southern Oman and neighboring East Yemen have been previously assigned to H. yerburyii. However, considerable geographic variation in the populations placed in this species has been noted including differences within Dhofar itself (Arnold 1980, 1986). Morphology (Appendix I; Figs. 14–15, 17–18), phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5) and Dataset 3 (12S only; Appendix III), and nuclear networks of three independent loci (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) (Fig. 7) indicate that two species are present in the Dhofar region in Southern Oman and neighboring East Yemen. Although they have been found in sympatry in one locality in East Yemen (Fig. 2), these two species usually differ in habitat.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C51EFFC3F39BFC39FDA8FEFE	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C51DFFC6F39BFE1AFC88F98A.text	03E36252C51DFFC6F39BFE1AFC88F98A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus alkiyumii Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus alkiyumii sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 2, 5C, 7, 14–16, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix IIIC)</p> <p>MorphoBank M95099 – M95289 M99609 – M99718</p> <p>Hemidactylus yerburii Arnold, 1977: 101 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 283 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 420 (part.); Schätti and Desvoignes, 1999: 52 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 113 (part.); Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 117 (part.).</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH2005.1662, male from Tawi Atair, 610 m, Dhofar region (South Oman), 17.11639’ N 54.54861 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2005 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and D. Donaire (MorphoBank M95264–M95275; Fig. 13A). Paratypes: ONHM3707, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95290 –M95304); BMNH2005.1663, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95276–M95289); IBES8078, female from Tawi Atair, 610 m, Dhofar region (South Oman) 17.11639’ N 54.54861 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M99654–M99660); IBES8079, female, same collecting data as IBES 8078 (MorphoBank M99661–M99667); IBES8080, female, same collecting data as IBES 8078 (MorphoBank M99668–M99674).</p> <p>Other material examined</p> <p>Twenty-three vouchers listed in Appendix I under H. alkiyumii sp. nov. and not mentioned above. Specimen CAS 227519, IBES 7666, IBES 7740 and samples S3337, S3472, S7789, JS2, JS3, JS4, JS7, JS62, JS63, JS64, JS77, JS78, JS79, JS80, JS87, JS88, JS89, JS90, JS91, JS92, JS93, JS94, JS95, JS96, JS97, and S7194 were included in the molecular analyses only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A medium-sized Hemidactylus with a maximum recorded SVL of 74.5 mm; with a mean of 12.9 (11–14) longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles at mid-body; adhesive pads medium-sized; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes mean 7.0 (6–9); lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes mean 10.8 (10–12); preanal pores mean 7.3 (6–10); expanded subcaudal scales usually beginning 1–4 verticils behind vent (average about 2); dorsum somber, sometimes with a pattern of irregular spots or dark transverse crosses with approximately one on neck, three on body and one or two on anterior sacrum (Fig. 15A), not diffused with yellow in life; tubercles on body sometimes with opaque white pigment, which may be on medial side of tubercles while lateral sides are dark; tail not light distally, with pattern of 11–14 dark bands that are not especially widely separated and only extend ventrally towards the tail tip where they are not very conspicuous.</p> <p>Hemidactylus alkiyumii differs from H. yerburii in its larger size (SVL max. 74.5 mm, compared with max. 67.6 mm), in having fewer longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles at mid-body (mean 12.9, 11–14, compared with mean 16.7, 16–17), fewer preanal pores in males (mean 7.3, 6–10, compared with mean 12.8, 10–15), and in having enlarged tubercles on tail that are not spinose. It differs from H. yerburii montanus, endemic to the highlands of Yemen, in its larger size (SVL max. 74.5 mm, compared with max. 68 mm), in having higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean. 7.0, 6–9, compared with mean 6.2 in both males and females, 5–7), in having fewer longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles at mid-body (mean 12.9, 11–14, compared with mean 15.1 in males and 15.4 in females, 14–16), and in having fewer preanal pores in males (mean 7.3, 6–10, compared with mean 10.1). It differs from H. jumailiae from Yemen (formerly H. yerburii) in its larger size (SVL max. 74.5 mm, compared with max. 47 mm), in having higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean. 7.0, 6–9, compared with mean 6.3, 6–7), and in having large trihedral tubercles present on back (small cycloid tubercles in H. jumailiae). It differs from H. shihraensis from Yemen in its larger size (SVL max. 74.5 mm, compared with max. 48.2 mm), in having higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean 7.0, 6–9, compared with 6), and more preanal pores in males (mean 7.3, 6–10, compared with 6). It differs from H. saba in its larger size (SVL max. 74.5 mm, compared with max. 59 mm), in having more preanal pores in males (mean 7.3, 6–10, compared with 6), and more supralabials (mean 10.0, 9–12, compared with 8–9). For differences from the second species of Dhofar Hemidactylus see below.</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet “ alkiyumii ” is a genitive Latin noun to honor Ali bin Amer Al Kiyumi, Director General of Nature Conservation of the Sultanate of Oman, for his knowledge and interest in the preservation of the biodiversity of Oman and for his help and support towards our ongoing studies on the reptile fauna of Oman.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogeographic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus alkiyumii is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5C) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIIC). In both trees it is not closely related to any specific taxa. According to Fig. 5, it is sister to a well- supported clade formed by H. robustus, H. sp. 1, lineages D, E, F, G and H. homoeolepis. In Appendix III it is also sister to a similar assemblage but in this latter case the sister clade of H. alkiyumii includes also H. sp. (OTU 7 in Busais &amp; Joger 2011a), H. shihraensis and H. saba; specimens for which only the 12S gene was available. Based on this molecular evidence, it is clear from Fig. 5 and Appendix III that H. alkiyumii is not phylogenetically closely related to H. y. yerburii, H. y. montanus, or to former members of H. yerburii: H. jumailiae and the other Dhofar Hemidactylus described below (Fig. 5D) or the two new species of Hemidactylus similar to H. yerburii described from Yemen by Busais and Joger (2011a) (H. shihraensis and H. saba). According to the results of the dating analysis inferred with Dataset 2, H. alkiyumii split from its sister clade about 11.1 mya (95% HPD: 7.1–15.9). Uncorrected genetic distances between H. alkiyumii and H. y. yerburii are 19.4% in the cytb and 9.7% in the 12S; between H. alkiyumii and H. y. montanus 9.3% in the 12S; between H. alkiyumii and H. jumailiae 9.3% in the 12S; between H. alkiyumii and the other Dhofar Hemidactylus described below (Fig. 5D) 14.1% in the cytb and 6.5% in the 12S; between H. alkiyumii and H. shihraensis 7.3% in the 12S; and between H. alkiyumii and H. saba 9.5% in the 12S.</p> <p>The level of genetic variability within H. alkiyumii is very high: 8.8% in the cytb and 2.5% in the 12S. As shown in Fig. 5C and Appendix IIIC, H. alkiyumii consists of three very well differentiated and well-supported clades, C1, C2 and C3; being in all the analyses C1 sister to a clade formed by C2 and C3. The uncorrected genetic distances between these three clades are 10.6%, 13.5% and 11% in the cytb (C1 vs. C2, C1 vs. C3 and C2 vs. C3, respectively) and 4.3%, 4.2% and 4.2% in the 12S (C1 vs. C2, C1 vs. C3 and C2 vs. C3, respectively). As shown in Fig. 2, clades C1, C2 and C3 are clearly delimited geographically from East to West. According to the calibrations, clade C1 split from the ancestor of C2 and C3 approximately 4.4 mya (95% HPD: 2.5–6.5), while clades C2 and C3 split about 3.1 mya (95% HPD: 1.6–4.8) (see Fig. 5C). The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig 7 and a network analysis including all specimens from Dataset 1 (data not shown) indicate that all alleles of H. alkiyumii for all three independent loci analyzed (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) are private (not shared with any other species included in the present analyses). It is also interesting to notice that, although clades C1, C2 and C3 share alleles of the c -mos and rag2 genes, specimens of clade C1 do not share alleles of mc1r with C2 and C3 and the latter two clades only share a single allele (AO129a) of the mc1r gene. Despite the genetic differentiation between clades C1, C2 and C3 of H. alkiyumii, which suggests long separation of these three units, the absence of clear morphological differences between these three clades and the relatively low number of available vouchers to carry out a thorough morphological analysis (Appendix I), prevents us from reaching any taxonomic conclusions at present. Future studies should clarify the taxonomic status of clades C1, C2 and C3 of H. alkiyumii (work in progress).</p> <p>As shown in Fig. 5C, Appendix IIIC and Fig. 7, the mitochondrial and nuclear DNA of specimens AO128 and AO129 turn out to be virtually identical with that of a specimen originally identified as H. macropholis from 11 km NW of Bargal, Bari region, Somalia (CAS227519) that was included in the phylogeny by Carranza and Arnold (2006; Fig. 1). This makes the original determination of the Bargal individual doubtful, especially as a second specimen of H. macropholis, from the Bari region, 11 km SE of Bosasso (CAS227511) also included in Carranza and Arnold (2006) and in the present study (Table 1; specimen CAS227511), has quite different mitochondrial and nuclear DNA with a genetic divergence from H. alkiyumii of 19% in cytb and 9% in 12S. As a result of that, and that the collector of the two specimens was the same and visited Tawi Atair (South Oman) and Somalia within the same trip, we consider specimen CAS227511 most probably from Tawi Atair (South Oman) and belonging to H. alkiyumii</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>This species inhabits the forested seaward face of the mountains of Dhofar and Eastern Yemen, from Damqawt (Yemen) in the West to North of Wadi Hasik in the East (Fig. 2). Across its distribution range it has been recorded from sea level (8 m in Salalah City, South Oman) up to 800 m in Taiq Cave (South Oman) (Table 1).</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>Often in relatively mesic forested areas, though also in more open wadis in East Dhofar and in the gardens within Salalah City (South Oman). Found on rock faces, in shallow caves and on buildings. Mainly nocturnal, several specimens were out during the day in the shadow in densely forested areas in Dalkut (South Oman) and hiding in the caves in Tawi Atair (South Oman) (Fig. 16). It can be locally abundant inside large caves. It is relatively quick and losses its skin when handled. Therefore, sometimes specimens have scars of regenerated skin on the back, probably as a result of fights with conspecifics or attacks from predators (Fig. 15F). Hemidactylus alkiyumii shares habitat with Ptyodactylus hasselquistii and small Hemidacytlus of the H. homoeolepis group, although the latter Hemidactylus are mainly ground-dwelling, while H. alkiyumii is rock-dwelling.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Males up to 74 mm SVL. Head and body markedly depressed (but less so than in H. luqueorum, H. hajarensis and H. persicu s and head less broad than in these species). Head length about 25–29% of SVL (mean males and females 27%), head width 68–85% of head length (mean males 78%, mean females 75%), head height 39–53% of length (mean males 47%, mean females 46%). Adhesive pads on digits quite broad; in adults maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe about half its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first supralabial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. Usually one scale separating the supranasals on midline. About 10–15 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. Small conical tubercles scattered on orbital area, on crown of head and larger on temporal area above the level of ear opening and immediately in front the upper part of this. Ear opening often elongated, its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smooth-edged, about half or more of eye diameter. Supralabial scales mean 10.0 (9–12), infralabials mean 7.9 (7–9). Mental scale broadly triangular, posteriorly bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, all four with a fairly smooth common transverse posterior border, which may be concave posteriorly, the postmentals contacting the first and second supralabials. Second and more posterior infralabials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine.</p> <p>Enlarged tubercles present on back, arranged in obliquely diagonal rows from near midline to flank, mean 12.9 (11–14) across mid-body and 13–15 in a paraventral row from the level of the axilla to that of the groin, where they are separated by spaces usually less than their own length. Tubercles strongly keeled, trihedral and striated, largest on the upper flanks but becoming smaller and more projecting and rounded lower down. Ventrals small, but larger than dorsals and imbricate, about 44–48 in a transverse row at mid-body between lateral folds (when these are discernible). Males with 6–10 preanal pores (mean 7.3), sometimes separated by one or two scales giving a formula of 3+3, 4+3, 4+4, or 5+5. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, interspersed with enlarged tubercles on distal section that are smaller in the East. Scales beneath hind leg about same size as belly scales and imbricate, rather larger on front surface of thigh, enlarged tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia where may be in contact, but smaller in East; also on posterior edge of foot. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 7.0 (6–9), 4 th toe mean 10.8 (10–12).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender, although sometimes clearly swollen at base; six enlarged, keeled and pointed tubercles on each whorl proximally, dropping to four around whorl 9–12. Tubercles about one half the length of basal whorls, becoming smaller and placed more posteriorly on whorls distally. Small dorsal scales on tail may be muticarinate, 8–9 in longitudinal row on fourth whorl after vent, around 2–5 small scales between tubercles on fourth and fifth whorls. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally as far as whorls 1–4 after the vent (average 2), and starting just after the hemipenial bulge in males.</p> <p>Color varying from brown-grey in the West to pale buff in the East; sometimes a dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to the cheek above ear and often on to neck; body sometimes with irregular spots; occasionally dark transverse crosses on mid-back (one on neck, three on body and one or two on anterior sacrum; Fig. 15A). Some opaque white pigment on tubercles in the East, where it may occur on one side of tubercles while the other is dark. Belly pale. Tail with numerous transverse dark bands more distally, initially on every other whorl and then on each one, the total number being around 11–14. Underside of tail pale but large subcaudals grey, the color increasing in intensity distally and made up of dark chromatophores. Underside of toe pads also grayish.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Half grown male; 56.4 mm SVL; tail 48 mm long with tip missing; some skin missing from mid-belly. Supralabial scales 11/12, infralabials 8/7; about 13 rows of enlarged tubercles at mid-back; 8 (4+4) preanal pores; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 8/8, 4 th toe of pes 12/12.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C51DFFC6F39BFE1AFC88F98A	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C518FFCCF39BF9C9FE27FAA2.text	03E36252C518FFCCF39BF9C9FE27FAA2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus festivus Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus festivus sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 2, 5D, 7, 17–19, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix IIID)</p> <p>MorphoBank M95305 – M95421 M99719 – M99810</p> <p>Hemidactylus yerburii Arnold, 1977: 101 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 283 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 420 (part.); Schätti and Desvoignes, 1999: 52 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 113 (part.); Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 117 (part.).</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH1977.977, female from Wadi Ayoun, 670 m, Dhofar region (South Oman) 17.24671’ N 53.88774 ’E WGS84, collected in October 1977 by E.N. Arnold (MorphoBank M95339 – M95353). Paratypes: BMNH1977.978, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95354 – M95367); BMNH1977.976, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95323– M95338); BMNH1977.979, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95368 – M95379); BMNH1977.980, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95380 – M95392); BMNH1977.981, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M95393 –M95407); IBES7419, female from 20 km South of Thumrait, 586 m, Dhofar region (South Oman) 17.4596’ N 54.0446 ’E, collected in October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M99801 – M99810); IBES7159, male from Wadi Ayoun, 670 m, Dhofar region (South Oman) 17.24671’ N 53.88774 ’E WGS84, collected in May 2011 by S. Carranza, E. Gómez-Díaz and F. Amat (MorphoBank M99733 – M99743); ONHM3708, male, same collecting data as IBES 7159 (MorphoBank M99744 – M99753); IBES7605, male, same collecting data as IBES 7159 (MorphoBank M99754 – M99763); IBES8062, male from Wadi Ayoun, 670 m, Dhofar region (South Oman) 17.24671’ N 53.88774 ’E WGS84, collected in October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M99764 – M99773).</p> <p>Other material examined</p> <p>Five vouchers listed in Appendix I under H. festivus sp. nov. and not mentioned above. Samples AO126, AO82, AO122, AO120, AO154, AO121, JS1, JS12, JS15, JS70, JS71, JS72, JS73, JS85, and JS86 were included in the molecular analyses only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A medium-sized Hemidactylus with a maximum recorded SVL of 53.6 mm; with a mean of 13.3 (12–15) longitudinal rows of enlarged dorsal tubercles at mid-body; adhesive pads on toes medium-sized; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes mean 6.9 (6–7); lamellae under the 4 th toe mean 11.3 (10–12); preanal pores 6; expanded subcaudals usually beginning 1–8 verticils behind vent (average about 4). Distinctive pattern of narrow dark bands – one on neck, three on body and one on anterior sacrum, often suffused with yellow in life; tubercles on body often with opaque white pigment, sometimes on medial side of tubercles, while lateral sides are dark. Tail very light distally with pattern of 7–9 widely separated dark bands, the more distal of which extend to the ventral surface.</p> <p>Distinguished from H. alkiyumii by its smaller adult size (SVL max. 53.6 mm, compared with max. 74.5 mm), fewer preanal pores in males (6, compared with mean 7.3, 6–10), more slender habitus and distinctive coloring of the tail and body. Hemidactylus festivus differs from H. yerburii in its smaller adult size (SVL max. 53.6 mm, compared with max. 67.6 mm in H. yerburii), in having fewer longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles at mid-body (mean 13.3, 12–15, compared with mean 16.7, 16–17), fewer preanal pores in males (6, compared with mean 12.8, 10–15), and in having enlarged tubercles on tail that are not spinose. It differs from H. yerburii montanus, endemic to the highlands of Yemen, in its smaller adult size (SVL max. 53.6 mm, compared with max. 68 mm in H. y. montanus), in having fewer longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles at mid-body (mean 13.3, 12–15, compared with mean 15.1 in males and 15.47 in females, 14–16), and in having fewer preanal pores in males (6, compared with mean 10.2). It differs from H. jumailiae from Yemen (formerly H. yerburii) in having large trihedral tubercles present on back (small cycloid tubercles in H. jumailiae), more slender habitus and distinctive coloring. It differs from H. shihraensis in having higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean 6.9, 6–7, compared with 6), higher number of lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes (mean 11.3, 10–12, compared with 10). It differs from H. saba in having lower number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (mean 6.9, 6–7 compared with 8), a higher number of ventral scales (about 45 in a transverse row at mid-body between lateral folds where these are discernible, compared with an average of 31 in males and 30 in females in H. saba).</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet “ festivus ” is an adjective that refers to the “happy” aspect of this species, with its bright coloring in the dorsal pattern of living animals and with the juveniles moving around leaping with the tail raised to show its conspicuous black and white coloring.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogeographic remark</p> <p>Hemidactylus festivus is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5D) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIID). The phylogenetic relationships of H. festivus are different in Fig. 5 and Appendix III, as a result of the different taxa included in Datasets 1 and 3. According to Fig. 5, H. festivus is sister to H. sp. 1, although bootstrap and pp support values are very low. However, the phylogenetic tree from Appendix III suggest that H. festivus is sister to H. shihraensis, a species recently described from the Hadramaut, Eastern Yemen (Busais &amp; Joger 2011a) and also closely related to H. saba from Northwest Yemen and to an undescribed Hemidactylus (Hemidactylus sp.) from Western Yemen (Busais &amp; Joger 2011a). Both phylogenetic trees (Fig. 5 and Appendix III) support the position of H. festivus between H. robustus and the small Hemidactylus of the H. homoeolepis group (H. homoeolepis plus the three new species described below belonging to clades E, F and G). The support for this clade in Fig. 5 is very high. The absence of the sister taxa of H. festivus, H. shihraensis, and also of H. saba and H. sp. from Dataset 2 (the dataset used for calibrations), prevents us from commenting on the dates of the possible origin of H. festivus. Uncorrected genetic distances between H. festivus and H. alkiyumii are 14.1% in the cytb and 6.5% in the 12S; between H. festivus and H. y. yerburii 19.4% in the cytb and 10% in the 12S; between H. festivus and H. y. montanus 9.5% in the 12S; between H. festivus and H. jumailiae 10.3% in the 12S; between H. festivus and H. shihraensis 5.3% in the 12S; and between H. festivus and H. saba 8% in the 12S. An individual of H. festivus from the Hadramaut (JS1; see Fig. 1), just 110 km North of the type locality of H. shihraensis (Ghayl Ba Wazir in Google Earth – Ghail Bawazeer in Busais &amp; Joger 2011a), is genetically very similar to the other individuals of H. festivus situated between 430 and 600 km further East and maintains its genetic distinctiveness with the geographically closer H. shihraensis. Despite the relatively large area occupied by H. festivus (more than 850 km in a straight line between specimens JS1 and BMNH1983.706), the level of genetic variability is rather low: 0.4% in the cytb and 0.1% in the 12S, suggesting that H. festivus probably has a continuous distribution between the Hadramaut area in Yemen and Oman. Alternatively, the specimens from Wadi Hadramaut may be the result of a human-meditaed introduction, although we consider this hypothesis very unlikely.</p> <p>The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig 7 and a network analysis including all specimens from Dataset 1 (data not shown) indicate that all alleles of H. festivus for all three independent loci analyzed (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) are private (not shared with any other species included in the analyses).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Hemidactylus festivus is distributed across 850 km, from the Hadramaut area in Southeastern Yemen to Southern Dhofar province in Oman, as far East as Sawqirah (Fig. 2). Although it can be found geographically very close to H. alkiyumii (even in sympatry at one locality; see Fig. 2 specimens JS7, JS12 and JS15), H. festivus mainly occupies the dry landward (Northern) side of the mountains, on the other side of the Dhofar Mountains and, in general, much dryer habitats than H. alkiyumii. Interestingly, Hemidactylus festivus is also found in Wadi Mughsayl on the Salalah coast, an area between clades C2 and C3 of H. alkiyumii in which this latter species has never been recorded.</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>The species occurs on rock pavements and low down on large boulders. At the type locality, H. festivus is replaced further from the ground by Hemidactylus lemurinus and Ptyodactylus (Arnold 1980) and newborns and juveniles share the ground with the much smaller H. homoeolepis. Although it occurs in drier habitats than H. alkiyumii, it is not found in really arid situations (Fig. 19). This species is particularly agile and subadults especially progress in a series of leaps when pursued, with the tail raised to show its conspicuous black and white coloring. Specimens from Wadi Ayoun collected in June were gravid but none had eggs in early October (Arnold 1980). According to our observations, H. festivus seems a strictly nocturnal gecko, as it has never been observed active during the day.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Up to 53.6 mm SVL. Head and body markedly depressed; head broad, especially posteriorly and neck well defined. Head length about 26–30% of SVL (mean males 28, mean females 27%), head width 63–81% of head length (mean males 71%, mean females 72%), and head height 38–54% of length (mean males 45%, mean females 44%). Adhesive pads quite narrow; in adults the maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe a third to a half its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first supralabial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. Usually one scale separating supranasals on midline. About 13–15 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. Small conical tubercles scattered in orbital area and on crown of head and often larger on temporal area above the level of ear opening, and immediately in front of the upper part of this. Ear opening often broad inverted comma shape with its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smoothedged, usually less than one third of eye diameter. Supralabial scales mean 9.8 (9–11), infralabials mean 8.4 (7–10). Mental scale broadly triangular, posteriorly bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, all four with a smooth common transverse posterior border; second postmentals contacting the first and second upper labials; third and more posterior lower labials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine, rounded with little overlap.</p> <p>Enlarged tubercles present on back, arranged in obliquely diagonal rows from near midline to flank, mean 13.3 (12–15) across mid-body, and 15–17 in a paravertebral row from the level of the axilla to that of the groin, and largest on upper flank, where they are separated by spaces of about their own length or less. Tubercles keeled, striated and trihedral but becoming smaller and more rounded on lower flanks. Ventral scales small, and flat, but larger than dorsals and imbricate, about 45 in a transverse row at mid body between lateral folds where these are discernible. Males with 6 preanal pores, sometimes separated by one or two scales giving a formula of 3+3. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, interspersed with enlarged tubercles of different sizes on distal section. Scales on front of thigh and beneath about same size as belly scales and imbricate, rather larger under tibia, enlarged tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia and also on posterior edge of foot. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 6.9 (6–7), 4 th toe mean 11.3 (10–12).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender; 6 enlarged, keeled and pointed tubercles on each whorl proximally, dropping to 4 around whorl 8 or 10. Tubercles about half the length of basal whorls, becoming smaller and placed more posteriorly on whorls distally. About 9–10 small scales in longitudinal row on fourth whorl after vent, around five small scales between tubercles on fourth and fifth whorls. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally as far as whorls 1–7 after the vent (average 4).</p> <p>In alcohol, often warm pale buff; sometimes a vague darker stripe from the nostril, through the eye and on to cheek above ear; neck and body with narrow darker bands that are convex posteriorly – one on neck, three on body and one on anterior sacrum, bars do not extend on to flanks and may be suffused with yellow in life. Tubercles away from midline with dense white pigment, often the medial surface white and the lateral one darker than background, where scattered dark chromatophores can be seen. Tubercles on limbs and basal tail also white. Belly white, throat limbs and tail pale buff beneath. Underside of adhesive pads on toes pale. Tail becoming much lighter towards tip, with 7–9 widely separated dark bars above, beginning around verticil 8 or 9, each about a whorl long and separated by one or two whorls from the next; bars much shorter than intervening areas; more posterior bars extend to ventral surface. Juveniles like adults but distal tail colouring more contrasting and intense.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Adult female, 49 mm SVL; tail intact 58 mm long; a longitudinal incision present on left side of belly. Supralabial scales 9/10, infralabials 9/9; 14 rows of enlarged tubercles at mid-back; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 7/7, 4 th toe of pes 11/11.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C518FFCCF39BF9C9FE27FAA2	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C512FFCCF39BFA21FED6F85B.text	03E36252C512FFCCF39BFA21FED6F85B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus homoeolepis	<div><p>The Hemidactylus homoeolepis group</p> <p>Until 1977, Hemidactylus homoeolepis was regarded as endemic to Socotra Island, but the revision of Arabian geckos by Arnold (1977) reported it from the Arabian mainland. This work suggested that it might have an extensive if interrupted distribution along the Southeastern seaboard of the peninsula. On Socotra, H. homoeolepis is relatively large and robust with small, sometimes slightly imbricate, dorsal scales and ventrals that occasionally show a slight serration at their edges. Socotran H. homoeolepis have SVL up to 42 mm, a low number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 4–5 and under the 4 th toe of pes 7–8; preanal pores in males 3–6, arranged in a V-shaped line in front of the vent (Appendix I and pers. observ.). Morphological differences between Arabian mainland populations of H. homoeolepis were investigated in depth by Arnold (1977, 1980), who concluded that the differences between some of the known populations are greater than those between some recognized species of Hemidactylus. Morphology (Appendix I; Figs. 20–22, 24–25, 27–28), phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5) and Dataset 3 (12S only; Appendix III), and nuclear networks of three independent loci (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) (Fig. 8) indicate that there are three new species of the H. homoeolepis group, all endemic to Oman (Fig. 3). These three new species are distinct both from each other and from typical H. homoeolepis and, as a result of that, are described below.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C512FFCCF39BFA21FED6F85B	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C511FFD0F39BFF3AFF72FB2C.text	03E36252C511FFD0F39BFF3AFF72FB2C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus homoeolepis Blanford 1881	<div><p>Hemidactylus homoeolepis Blanford, 1881</p> <p>(Figs. 3, 5, 8, 19–21, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix III)</p> <p>MorphoBank M95683 – M95823 M100000–M100038 M102031–M102145</p> <p>Hemidactylus (Liurus) homoeolepis Blanford, 1881: 464. (Syntypes: BMNH1946.9.6.99 male, and 1946.9.7.1 female; Socotra Island, Yemen; collected by I.B. Balfour)</p> <p>Hemidactylus homoeolepis: Arnold, 1977: 103 (part.); Arnold, 1980: 279 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 419 (part.); Schätti and Desvoignes, 1999: 50 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 111 (part.); Carranza and Arnold, 2006: 536; Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 115 (part.).</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Twenty-seven vouchers listed in Appendix I under the name H. homoeolepis. Juvenile specimens AO81, AO85, AO119 and samples S4209, S3399, S7091, JS5, JS6, JS8, JS75 were included in the molecular analyses only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A small member of the H. homeolepis group with a maximum recorded SVL of 42 mm. Undepressed head; scaling fine without tubercles with the exception of specimen BMNH 1953.1.6.9 from Shaqara, Southwest Yemen, which presents large tubercles on the hind back, tail base and hind limbs. Lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes mean 4.7 (4–5); lamellae under the 4 th toe mean 8.4 (7–10); preanal pores mean 5.5 (3–6); expanded subcaudal scales beginning some way from tail base; dorsal pattern spotted. For differences from the three new species described herein formerly part of H. homoeolepis (clades E–G in Fig. 5 and Appendix III) see below.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogeographic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus homoeolepis is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5) and Dataset 3 (Appendix III). According to both Fig. 5 and Apendix III, H. homoeolepis is sister to a clade formed by two of the new species described below (clades F and G). This topology is very well supported and is maintained even if the two endemic Hemidactylus from the island of Abd Al Kuri (Socotra Archipelago), H. oxyrhinus Boulenger, 1899 and H. forbesii Boulenger, 1899 are included in the analyses (Gómez-Díaz et al. in press). According to the analyses by Gómez-Díaz et al. (In press), the two endemics from Abd Al Kuri are sister taxa and branch within the “ H. homoeolepis group”, in a position between the new species from clade E (described below) and a monophyletic assemblage formed by clades F, G and H. homoeolepis. According to the results of the analysis of Dataset 2 (dates inserted in Fig. 5), H. homoeolepis split from its sister clade approximately 6.6 mya (95% HPD: 4.2–9.6) and the species colonized the Socotra Archipelago about 4.3 mya (95% HPD: 2.5–6.4). Since at that time Socotra was already close to its actual position (Bosworth et al. 2005; Laughton 1966; Samuel et al. 1997), our data suggests that, similar to the skinks of the genus Trachylepis and the ancestor of the two endemic Hemidactylus from Abd Al Kuri, H. homoeolepis arrived to the archipelago by transmarine dispersal from Southeast Arabia (Gómez-Díaz et al. in press; Sindaco et al. in press.). The dates of origin of H. homoeolepis and colonization of the Socotra Archipelago by H. homoeolepis do not differ much from the inferred dates of these two events by Gómez-Díaz et al. (In press) using the same methods and calibrations but including H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii (5.9 mya [95% HPD: 3.6–8.6] and 4.3 [95% HPD: 2.5–6.4], respectively).</p> <p>Uncorrected genetic distances between H. homoeolepis and the other three members of the “ H. homoeolepis group” (described as new species below) are very high: H. homoeolepis vs. the new species from clade G (Fig. 5, Appendix III) 13% in the cytb and 8.4% in the 12S; H. homoeolepis vs. the new species from clade F (Fig. 5, Appendix III) 11.2% in the cytb and 8.8% in the 12S; H. homoeolepis vs. the new species from clade E (Fig. 5, Appendix III) 11% in the cytb and 8.5% in the 12S. The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig. 8 and a network analysis including all members of Dataset 1 (data not shown) clearly show that all alleles of H. homoeolepis for all three independent loci analyzed (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) are private (not shared with any other species included in the analyses).</p> <p>The level of genetic variability within H. homoeolepis is rather high: 3.2% in the cytb and 1.3% in the 12S, and is the result of the relatively high level of genetic differentiation between mainland Arabia and Socotra Island populations of H. homoeolepis (uncorrected genetic distances of 10.4% in the cytb and 5.7% in the 12S). This genetic differentiation at the mtDNA level is also supported by differentiation at the nuclear level and by morphological differences in size, tuberculation, number of lamellae under the toes of pes, which suggests that Arabian mainland populations may, in fact, represent a new species (data not shown; work in progress). Although most specimens of H. homoeolepis across its distribution range in mainland Arabia are morphologically very uniform, one single isolated specimen from the coastal city of Shaqra (13.35’ N 45.70 ’E; Southwest Yemen, 850 km to the West of the main distribution range of the species; BMNH1953.1.6.9; see Appendix I; MorphoBank: M102031–M102050) presents several differences from Eastern H. homoeolepis. The main differences are: dorsal scales flatter and slightly more imbricate; ventrals markedly larger with distinct serrated edges; presence of numerous enlarged unkeeled tubercles on the hind parts, just in front of the pelvic region that increase in size and frequency posteriorly. These are much bigger than the intermediate scales and are irregularly arranged although they tend to form transverse rows on tail base (rest of the tail is missing). Similar large scales occur on the tibia. Although no material is available for genetic comparisons, all these differences suggest that the specimen from Shaqra, Yemen may be part of yet another undescribed species of the H. homoeolepis group.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Hemidacytlus homoeolepis is found in Socotra, Samha and Darsa Islands (Socotra Archipelago), Shaqra in Southwest Yemen, extreme Eastern Yemen, Dhofar region in South Oman and adjoining Central Oman and North Oman (Asylah) (Fig. 3). Across its distribution range it has been recorded from sea level (4 m in Wadi Mughsayl) up to 670 m in Wadi Ayoun (Table 1).</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>Hemidactylus homoeolepis is a small and strictly nocturnal gecko found in usually dry places on rock surfaces near the ground and on sandy and stony substrates close by. At Wadi Ayoun it occupies stony ground and sloping rock pavements and at Thumrait was found on screes of small stones (Fig. 19B). According to Arnold (1980), at these localities 62% of sixty-four animals checked were first sighted on the ground and all but one of the others were lower than 60 cm from it. At Wadi Ayoun H. homoeolepis is sympatric with three other nocturnal geckos: H. lemurinus, H. festivus and Ptyodactylus; although only newborns and juveniles of H. festivus are found in the same microhabitat (stony ground). Hemidacytlus homoeolepis is very agile, often proceeding in a series of leaps when pursued.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C511FFD0F39BFF3AFF72FB2C	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C50EFFD4F39BFAA1FF6BF8B1.text	03E36252C50EFFD4F39BFAA1FF6BF8B1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus paucituberculatus Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus paucituberculatus sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 3, 5, 8, 20, 22–23, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix III)</p> <p>MorphoBank M100347–M100537</p> <p>Hemidactylus homoeolepis: Arnold, 1977: 103 (part.); Arnold, 1980: 279 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 419 (part.); Schätti and Desvoignes, 1999: 50 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 111 (part.); Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 115 (part.).</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH1977.935, male from Khor Sawli, Salalah plain, Dhofar (South Oman), 17.04’ N 54.32 ’E WGS84, collected in October 1977 by E.N. Arnold (MorphoBank M 100347–M100363). Paratypes: BMNH1977.930, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100364–M100380); BMNH1977.937, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100381–M100397); BMNH1977.931, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100416–M100431); BMNH1977.936, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100432–M100447); BMNH1977.933, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100448–M100464); BMNH1977.944, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100465–M100479); BMNH1977.941, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100480–M100496); BMNH1977.942, female, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100497–M100501); ONHM3709, female from Khor Sawli, Salalah plain, Dhofar (South Oman), collected in October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M 100502–M100515); IBES7646, female, same collecting data as ONHM 3709 (MorphoBank M 100530–M100537);</p> <p>Other material examined</p> <p>Five vouchers listed in Appendix I under H. paucituberculatus sp. nov. and not mentioned above. Juvenile specimens IBES 7988, IBEAO 104 IBES 7364, IBES 7336, IBES 7183 IBEAO 91, IBES 7492 and samples AO162, S3261, S3235, S7812, S7201 were included in the molecular analyses only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A small, moderately depressed Hemidactylus with a maximum recorded SVL of 38.4 mm. Usually with flat enlarged tubercles on sides of dorsum as far forwards as mid-body that are also present on sides of dorsal tail base and on the hind legs where they are raised, and may also occur on the lower forelimb; lamellae under the 1 st finger of pes mean 4.9 (4–5); lamellae under the 4 th toe mean 8.3 (7–9); preanal pores 6 in all males analyzed (Appendix I); expanded subcaudal scales usually extend almost to tail base. Dorsum with a pattern of irregular dark spots and streaks; tail with around 8–9 dark bands that increase in intensity distally and contrast strongly with smaller pale interstices.</p> <p>Hemidactylus paucituberculatus differs from neighboring populations of H. homoeolepis from South Oman in its rather larger adult size (SVL mean 32.2 mm, max. 38.4, compared with mean 30.1 mm, max. 33.4 mm), presence of enlarged tubercles and expanded subcaudal scales usually extending almost to tail base (expanded subcaudal scales beginning some way from tail base in H. homoeolepis). Not distinguished in its maximum adult body size from populations of H. homoeolepis from the Socotra Archipelago (SVL max. 39.7 mm) or from the single specimen from Shaqra (SVL 36.4 mm). For differences from the other two new species described herein formerly part of H. homoeolepis (clades F–G in Fig. 5 and Appendix III) see below.</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet “ paucituberculatus ” is an adjective derived from Latin that refers to the presence of few tubercles on sides of dorsum as far forward as mid-body that are also present on sides of dorsal tail base and on the hind legs.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogeographic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus paucituberculatus is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5E) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIIE). According to Fig. 5 and Appendix III, H. paucituberculatus is sister to a monophyletic group formed by H. homoeolepis and the two new species described below (clades F and G). However, this topology is altered when the two endemic Hemidactylus from the island of Abd Al Kuri (Socotra Archipelago), H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii, are included in the analyses (Gómez-Díaz et al. in press). According to Gómez-Díaz et al. in press), the two endemic Hemidactylus from Abd Al Kuri form a clade that branches between H. paucituberculatus and the monophyletic assemblage formed by clades F, G and H. homoeolepis. According to the results of the analysis of Dataset 2 (dates inserted in Fig. 5), H. paucituberculatus split from its sister clade approximately 8.2 mya (95% HPD: 5.1–11.7). This date of origin of H. paucituberculatus does not differ much from the inferred date by (Gómez-Díaz et al. in press) using the same methods and calibrations and including H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii (7.4 mya; 95% HPD: 4.6–10.8).</p> <p>Uncorrected genetic distances between H. paucituberculatus and the other members of the “ H. homoeolepis group” (two of them described as new species below) are very high: H. paucituberculatus vs. H. homoeolepis 11% in the cytb and 8.5% in the 12S; H. paucituberculatus vs. the new species from clade F (Fig. 5, Appendix III) 12.9% in the cytb and 9.2% in the 12S; H. paucituberculatus vs. the new species from clade G (Fig. 5, Appendix III) 13.5% in the cytb and 8.9% in the 12S.</p> <p>The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig. 8 are very interesting and, while all alleles of H. paucituberculatus for the nuclear genes c -mos and mc1r are private (not shared with its closermost taxa (Fig. 8) or with any other species of Hemidactylus from Dataset 1 or the two endemics from Abd Al Kuri (data not shown)), 18 alleles of H. paucituberculatus out of a total of 20 alleles for the nuclear gene rag2 are shared with the new species of clade G described below (Figs. 5 and 8). Given the fact that there is complete lineage sorting for the mtDNA (Appendix III) and in the nuclear networks of c -mos and mc1r (H. paucituberculatus even forms an independent network not connected to the other three species in mc1r; see Fig. 8), and that no hybrids have been detected, all evidence at hand points towards ancestral polymorphism rather than ongoing interspecific gene flow.</p> <p>The level of genetic variability within H. paucituberculatus is very low: 0.6% in the cytb and 0.2% in the 12S, and coincides with the high level of morphological homogeneity of this species (Appendix I).</p> <p>The morphological investigation of a juvenile Hemidactylus (BMNH 1974.4051) from Al-Hasikiyah island (spelling from Google Earth), Dhofar (South Oman), suggests that it may belong to H. paucituberculatus (data not shown). Although it would make sense biogeographically, the juvenile specimen is not very well preserved and therefore it cannot be indentified with confidence. Future exploration of Al-Hasikiyah Island and the nearby islands of Al-Sawda, Al-Hallaniyah, and Al-Qibliyah should clarify the taxonomic status of the populations of Hemidactylus inhabiting this interesting archipelago.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Hemidacytlus paucituberculatus is endemic to South Oman and is found in Central Dhofar (Salalah plain), from Salalah to Hasik (Fig. 3). Like H. alkiyumii sp. nov., it inhabits the forested seaward (Southern) face of the Dhofar Mountains (Fig. 1) but in this case it is restricted to the area East of Salalah. Across its distribution range it has been recorded from sea level (9 m in Khor Sawli) up to 211 m in Wadi Darbat (Table 1)</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>A small and strictly nocturnal gecko found in usually dry places on rock surfaces near the ground and on the beach on sandy substrates with some rocks present (Fig. 23). In several places H. paucituberculatus is sympatric with H. alkiyumii and Ptyodactylus; although neither of these two gecko species occupy the same microhabitat (stony ground). Hemidacytlus paucituberculatus is very agile, often proceeding in a series of leaps when pursued.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Up to 38.4 mm SVL. Head and body strongly depressed; head not especially broad posteriorly and neck well defined. In adults head length about 24–29% of SVL (mean males and females 25%), head width 60–78% of head length (mean males 70%, mean females 71%), and head height 38–49% of head length (mean males 39%, mean females 41%). Adhesive pads moderate; in adults maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe around a third its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first supralabial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. One scale separating supranasals on midline. About 10–13 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. No enlarged scales or tubercles on head (occasionally very few weakly enlarged scales); ear opening with its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smooth-edged, usually half of eye diameter or less. Supralabial scales mean 8.9 (8–10), infralabial scales mean 7.4 (6–9). Mental scale broadly triangular posteriorly bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, the large postmentals contacting the first, or first and second, supralabials; second and more posterior infralabials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine, imbricate posteriorly</p> <p>Weakly enlarged flat smooth scales scattered on sides of mid-and posterior dorsum of body, becoming larger on sacral region and tail base, and on hind limbs where they are conical. Ventral scales small, but larger than dorsals and imbricate, about 32 in a transverse row at mid body between lateral folds (often not very apparent). All males analyzed have 6 preanal pores (Appendix I); usually 2 cloacal tubercles on each side. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, often some enlarged tubercles on lower limb; scattered enlarged raised tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia; scales on front of thigh and beneath about same size as belly scales or rather smaller; scales rather larger and more imbricate under tibia. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 4.9 (4–5); 4 th toe mean 8.3 (7–9).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender with no tubercles after whorl 6. About 7 small scales in longitudinal row on fourth whorl after vent. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally almost to tail base and starting soon after the hemipenial bulge in males.</p> <p>In alcohol pale grey-buff or buff; a broad dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear and often on to neck; body with irregular dark spots and streaks that are often stronger anteriorly; belly pale. Tail with six or more dark bands each covering two or more whorls, being rather broader than pale intervening areas and increasing in intensity distally; ventral surface of tail pale and often irregularly blotched or stippled, the most distal four or so dorsal bands extending on to it.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Adult male 33.5 mm SVL, tail 39 mm long, broken about half way along its length with a regenerated tip. Supralabial scales 10/9, infralabials 7/7; 6 preanal pores; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 4/4, under the 4 th toe of pes 7/7.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C50EFFD4F39BFAA1FF6BF8B1	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C509FFDBF39BFF3AFCF8FA74.text	03E36252C509FFDBF39BFF3AFCF8FA74.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus masirahensis Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus masirahensis sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 3, 5, 8, 24–26, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix III)</p> <p>MorphoBank M10094 –M100230</p> <p>Hemidactylus homoeolepis: Arnold, 1977: 103 (part.); Arnold, 1980: 279 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 419 (part.); Schätti and Desvoignes, 1999: 50 (part.); van der Kooij, 2000: 111 (part.); Sindaco and Jeremcenko, 2008: 115 (part.).</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH1975.2080, male from East of R.A.F. camp, North end of Masirah Island (Oman), collected by T. D. Rogers (MorphoBank M10094–M100115). Paratypes: BMNH1975.2081, female, same collecting data as Holotype; BMNH1975.2082, male from Wadi dhu Mayhi, Masirah Island (Oman), 700 m, collected by T. D. Rogers (MorphoBank M 100116–M100137); BMNH1975.2084, female, same data as BMNH 1975.2082 (MorphoBank M 100158–M100175); BMNH1975.2083, female, same data as BMNH 1975.2082 (MorphoBank M 100176–M100196); IBES7710, female from Wadi Maahdi, Masirah Island (Oman), collected in October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M 100220–M100226); ONHM3710, female, same collecting data as IBES 7710 (MorphoBank M 100227–M100230).</p> <p>Other material examined</p> <p>One voucher listed in Appendix I under H. masirahensis sp. nov. and not mentioned above. Juveniles or badly preserved specimens IBES 7707, BMNH 2008.713, IBES 7661, IBES 2004 and one sample (S3412) were included in the molecular analysis only (Table 1).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A small, slender, depressed Hemidactylus with a maximum recorded SVL of 42 mm. Usually with scattered weakly enlarged scales on sides of dorsum of body that become larger posteriorly especially on sacral region, tail base, and hind legs where they are raised and tuberculate; adhesive pads narrow; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6; lamellae under the 4 th toe mean 10.0 (10–11); preanal pores 4 in the two males analyzed (Appendix I); expanded subcaudal scales usually extend almost to tail base. Dorsum with a pattern of irregular dark spots and streaks; tail with 8–9 dark bands that increase in intensity distally contrasting with smaller pale interstices, more distal 4–6 bands extend to ventral surface, each covering two or more whorls distally and being rather broader than interstices.</p> <p>Hemidactylus masirahensis differs from H. homoeolepis in its larger adult size (SVL mean 32.2 mm, max. 45 mm, compared with mean 31.8 mm, max. 39.7 mm), greater depression of the head and body, more usual presence of dorsal tubercles on the body, lower number of preanal pores in males (4 compared with mean 5.5, 3–6), higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (6 compared with mean 4.7, 4–5), and under the 4 th toe of pes (mean 10.0, 10–11, compared with mean 8.4, 7–11), presence of enlarged tubercles and expanded subcaudal scales usually extend almost to tail base (expanded subcaudal scales beginning some way from tail base in H. homoeolepis), different coloring (dark bands of the tail more conspicuous and marked in H. masirahensis, especially on the underside of tail). Distinguished from H. paucituberculatus by its larger adult size (SVL mean 32.2 mm, max. 45 mm, compared with mean 32.2 mm, max. 38.4 mm), greater depression of head and body, more usual presence of dorsal tubercles on body, lower number of preanal pores in males (4 compared with 6), higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (6 compared with mean 4.9, 4–5), and under the 4 th toe of pes (mean 10.0, 10–11, compared with mean 8.3, 7–9), different coloring (dark bands of the tail more conspicuous and marked in H. masirahensis, especially on the underside of tail).</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet “ masirahensis ” is an adjective that refers to the place where the species is found, Masirah Island off the coast of Central Oman.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogenetic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus masirahensis is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5F) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIIF). According to Fig. 5 and Appendix III, it is sister to a new species described below (clade G). This topology is very well supported and is maintained even if the two endemic Hemidactylus from the island of Abd Al Kuri (Socotra Archipelago), H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii, are included in the analyses (Gómez-Díaz et al. in press). According to the analyses by Gómez-Díaz et al. (In press), the two endemics from Abd Al Kuri are sister taxa and branch within the “ H. homoeolepis group”, in a position between H. paucituberculatus and a monophyletic assemblage formed by H. masirahensis, clade G and H. homoeolepis. According to the results of the analysis of Dataset 2 (dates inserted in Fig. 5), H. masirahensis split from its sister taxa approximately 4.4 mya (95% HPD: 2.6–6.5). This date of origin of H. masirahensis does not differ much from the inferred date by Gómez-Díaz et al. (In press) using the same methods and calibrations and including H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii (4.2 mya; 95% HPD: 2.4–6.3).</p> <p>Uncorrected genetic distances between H. masirahensis and the other members of the “ H. homoeolepis group” (one of them described as new species below) are very high: H. masirahensis vs. H. homoeolepis 11.2% in the cytb and 8.8% in the 12S; H. masirahensis vs. H. paucituberculatus 12.9% in the cytb and 9.2% in the 12S; H. masirahensis vs. the new species from clade G (Fig. 5, Appendix III) 14.8% in the cytb and 6% in the 12S.</p> <p>The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig. 8 are very interesting and, while all alleles of H. masirahensis for the nuclear genes c -mos and mc1r are private (not shared with its closermost taxa (Fig. 8) or with any other species of Hemidactylus from Dataset 1 or the two endemics from Abd Al Kuri (data not shown)), all 14 alleles of H. masirahensis of the nuclear gene rag2 are shared with H. paucituberculatus. Given the fact that there is complete lineage sorting for the mtDNA (Appendix III) and in the nuclear genes c -mos and mc1r, and that no hybrids have been detected, all evidence at hand points towards ancestral polymorphism rather than ongoing interspecific gene flow.</p> <p>The level of genetic variability within H. masirahensis is very low: 0.3% in the cytb and 0.1% in the 12S, and coincides with the high level of morphological homogeneity of this species (Appendix I).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Hemidactylus masirahensis is endemic to Masirah Island, Central Oman (Fig. 3). It has been found in very arid terrain of igneous rocks like basalt, serpentine, pyroclastics and some radiolarite almost completely devoid of vegetation (Fig. 26). Specimens for whom data is available indicate that it has been found between 40–52 m altitude.</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>Hemidactylus masirahensis is a small and strictly nocturnal gecko found in dry places on rock surfaces near the ground. Hemidactylus masirahensis is sympatric with Bunopus spatalurus hajarensis Arnold, 1980, with whom it shares the same spatial niche. Like all the other members of the “ H. homoeolepis group” it is very agile, often proceeding in a series of leaps when pursued.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Up to 45 mm SVL. Head and body strongly depressed; head not especially broad posteriorly and neck well defined. In adults head length about 24–28% of SVL (mean males and females 26%), head width 64–73% of head length (mean males 68%, mean females 69%), and head height 35–49% of head length (mean males 39%, mean females 42%). Adhesive pads moderate; in adults maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe less than a third of its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first upper labial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border or not. One scale separating supranasals on midline. About 11–13 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. No more than a few slightly enlarged scales on dorsum of head. Ear opening with its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smooth-edged, usually half of eye diameter or less. Supralabial scales mean 9.0 (8–10), infralabials mean 7.3 (7–8). Mental scale broadly triangular posteriorly, bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, the large postmentals contacting the first or first and second upper labials; second and more posterior lower labials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine, imbricate posteriorly</p> <p>Weakly enlarged flat smooth scales scattered on sides of mid-and posterior dorsum of body, becoming larger and tuberculate on sacral region and tail base, and on hind limbs where conical. Ventral scales small, but larger than dorsals and imbricate, about 30–34 in a transverse row at mid body between lateral folds (often not very apparent). The only two males available have 4 preanal pores; 2–3 cloacal tubercles on each side. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, with no enlarged tubercles. Scales on front of thigh and beneath about same size as belly scales or rather smaller, larger and imbricate under tibia; scattered enlarged raised tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 6.0 (6), 4 th toe mean 10.0 (10–11).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender with no tubercles away from base. About 7–10 small scales in longitudinal row on fourth whorl after vent. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally as far as about the second whorl after the vent and starting soon after the hemipenial bulge in males.</p> <p>In alcohol pale grey-buff or buff; a broad dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear and often on to neck, where narrower and more medial; body with irregular dark spots and streaks that may form a coarse irregular reticulation; Belly pale. Tail with 8–9 dark bands that increase in intensity and contrast with pale ground color distally; more distal 4–6 bands extend to ventral surface, each covering two or more whorls distally and being rather broader than interstices. Pale areas on underside of tail may be irregularly blotched or stippled.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Adult male 42.1 mm SVL; tail complete, 50 mm long; supralabial scales 9/8, infralabials 7/8; 4 preanal pores; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6/6, under the 4 th toe of pes 10/10.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C509FFDBF39BFF3AFCF8FA74	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C505FFDEF39BF999FA91F997.text	03E36252C505FFDEF39BF999FA91F997.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus inexpectatus Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus inexpectatus sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 3, 5, 8, 27–29, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix III)</p> <p>MorphoBank M100233–M100346</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH2008.711, male from 2.5 km Southeast of Ar Rumayliyah, 20.3319’ N 57.78989 ’E, collected on the 29 th of October 2008 by S. Carranza, E.N. Arnold and S. Alrabiei (MorphoBank M 100257–M100280). Paratypes: BMNH2008.712, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100233–M100256); IBES1798, male, same collecting data as Holotype (MorphoBank M 100281–M100301); IBES7722, male from the same locality as the Holotype, collected on the 11 th of October 2010 by S. Carranza and F. Amat (MorphoBank M 100302–M100310); IBES7700, female, same collecting data as IBES 7722 (MorphoBank M 100311–M100315); IBES7735, female, same collecting data as IBES 7722 (MorphoBank M 100316–M100320); ONHM3711, female, same collecting data as IBES 7722 (MorphoBank M 100321–M100328).</p> <p>Other material examined Specimen BMNH1979.467 from Hamar-an-Nafur Island, Oman (see Appendix I).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>A small, slender, depressed Hemidactylus growing up to 44.1 mm SVL. Low conical or weakly keeled tubercles on back and neck, arranged in 14 regular rows at mid-body, largest on lateral dorsum compared with midback and flank; larger tubercles present on hind limbs and tail; adhesive pads narrow, lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6, lamellae under toe 4 th toe mean 10.5 (10–11); preanal pores 4; expanded subcaudal scales extend to about 2–4 whorls from tail base. Dorsum with a pattern of irregular dark spots and streaks; tail with 8–9 dark bands that increase in intensity distally contrasting with pale interstices, the final 5–6 extending to the ventral surface.</p> <p>Hemidactylus inexpectatus differs from H. homoeolepis by its larger adult size (SVL mean 37.5 mm, max. 44.1 mm, compared with mean 31.8 mm, max. 39.7 mm), presence of conical or weakly keeled and extensive tubercles on the body, nape hind legs and tail (generally absence of tubercles in H. homoeolepis), lower number of preanal pores in males (4 compared with mean 5.5, 3–6), higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (6 compared with mean 4.7, 4–5), and under the 4 th toe of pes (mean 10.5, 10–11, compared with mean 8.4, 7–11). Distinguished from H. paucituberculatus by its larger adult size (SVL mean 37.5 mm, max. 44.1 mm, compared with mean 32.2 mm, max. 38.4 mm), larger conical or weakly keeled and more extensive tubercles on the body, nape, hind legs and tail, lower number of preanal pores in males (4 compared with 6), higher number of lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes (6 compared with mean 4.9, 4–5), and under the 4 th toe of pes (mean 10.5, 10–11, compared with mean 8.3, 7–9). Distinguished from H. masirahensis by having a less depressed head and body, larger conical or weakly keeled and more extensive tubercles on the body, nape, hind legs and tail, different coloring (dark bands of the tail less conspicuous and marked in H. inexpectatus, especially on adults and in the underside of the tail).</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The species epithet “ inexpectatus ” refers to the unexpected finding of this distinct new species of Hemidactylus in this area of Central Oman.</p> <p>Genetic and phylogenetic remarks</p> <p>Hemidactylus inexpectatus is monophyletic in the phylogenetic analyses of Dataset 1 (Fig. 5G) and Dataset 3 (Appendix IIIG). According to Fig. 5 and Appendix III, it is sister to H. masirahensis sp. nov. This topology is very well supported and is maintained even if the two endemic Hemidactylus from the island of Abd Al Kuri (Socotra Archipelago), H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii, are included in the analyses (Gómez-Díaz et al. in press). According to the analyses by Gómez-Díaz et al. (In press), the two endemics from Abd Al Kuri are sister taxa and branch within the “ H. homoeolepis group”, in a position between H. paucituberculatus and a monophyletic assemblage formed by H. masirahensis, H. inexpectatus and H. homoeolepis. According to the results of the analysis of Dataset 2 (dates inserted in Fig. 5), H. inexpectatus and H. masirahensis split approximately 4.4 mya (95% HPD: 2.6–6.5). This date does not differ much from the inferred date of the same split by Gómez-Díaz et al. (In press) using the same methods and calibrations and including H. oxyrhinus and H. forbesii (4.2 mya; 95% HPD: 2.4–6.6).</p> <p>Uncorrected genetic distances between H. inexpectatus and the other members of the “ H. homoeolepis group” are very high: H. inexpectatus vs. H. homoeolepis 13% in the cytb and 8.4% in the 12S; H. inexpectatus vs. H. paucituberculatus 13.5% in the cytb and 8.9% in the 12S; H. inexpectatus vs. H. masirahensis 14.8% in the cytb and 6% in the 12S.</p> <p>The results of the nuclear networks presented in Fig. 8 and networks including all the specimens from Dataset 1 (data now shown) indicate that all alleles of H. inexpectatus for all three independent loci analyzed (c -mos, mc1r and rag2) are private (not shared with any other species included in the analyses).</p> <p>The level of genetic variability within H. inexpectatus is relatively high: 1.4% in the cytb and 0.5% in the 12S, especially if one considers that all the specimens have been collected within an area of less than 0.1 km 2.</p> <p>The assignation of specimen BMNH1979.467 from the offshore island of Hammar-an-Nafur to H. inexpectatus is based exclusively on morphological grounds. It will be very important to compare fresh material from this small island with the mainland specimens of H. inexpectatus (work in progress).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Known only from a single locality in Mainland Arabia (on the coast of the Gulf of Masirah, West of Barr al Hikman, Central Oman) and from the offshore island of Hammar-an-Nafur, situated 58 km Southeast of the type locality (Fig. 3). The altitude at the type locality is 65 m above sea level.</p> <p>Habits</p> <p>Very little is known about this species of Hemidactylus. On the mainland, it is active after dark on low bare rock outcrops with very little or no vegetation. The only mainland locality known for this species is in a wadi and specimens were quite close to water (Fig. 29). Like all the other members of the “ H. homoeolepis group” it is very agile, often proceeding in a series of leaps when pursued.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Up to 44.1 mm SVL. Head and body depressed; head not especially broad posteriorly and neck well defined. In adults head length about 26–29% of SVL (mean males 26% mean females 27%), head width 63–70% of head length (mean males 67%, mean females 68%), and head height 34–41% of head length (mean males 35%, mean females 40%). Adhesive pads moderate; in adults maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe less than a third of its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first upper labial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. One scale separating supranasals on midline. About 13–14 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. No more than a few slightly enlarged scales or tubercles on dorsum of head. Ear opening with its longest axis running upwards and backwards, smooth-edged, usually half of eye diameter or less. Supralabial scales mean 10.4 (9–11), infralabials scales mean 8.2 (7–9). Mental scale broadly triangular posteriorly, bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind it, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, the large postmentals contacting the first or first and second upper labials; second and more posterior lower labials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars fine, imbricate posteriorly</p> <p>Low conical or weakly keeled tubercles on back and neck, arranged in 14 regular rows at mid-body, largest on lateral back compared with mid-back and flank; larger tubercles present on hind limbs. Ventral scales small, but larger than dorsals and imbricate, about 35–42 in a transverse row at mid body between lateral folds (often not very apparent). Preanal pores in males 4; 2–3 cloacal tubercles on each side. Scales on upper forelimb small and imbricate, with a few enlarged tubercles or not. Scales on front of thigh and beneath about same size as belly scales (or rather smaller), rather larger and imbricate under tibia; enlarged raised tubercles present on upper surface of both femur and tibia. Lamellae under the toes of pes: 1 st toe mean 6.0 (6), 4 th toe mean 10.5 (10–11).</p> <p>Tail relatively slender with 8 to 6 tubercles at the base, the number dropping to 4 and then to 2 about half way to tip and being absent distally. About 10–11 small scales in a longitudinal row on fourth whorl after vent. Subcaudal scales enlarged and broad, extending proximally as far as whorl 2–4 after the vent.</p> <p>In alcohol pale grey; a broad dark stripe from the nostril, through the eye, on to cheek above ear; body with irregular dark spots and streaks. Belly pale. Tail with 8–9 dark bands that increase in intensity and contrast with pale ground color distally; more distal 5–6 bands extend to ventral surface, each covering the equivalent of two or more whorls distally and being equal or rather broader than interstices. Pale areas on underside of tail may be irregularly blotched or stippled.</p> <p>Distinctive features of Holotype</p> <p>Adult male, 44.1 mm SVL; tail intact 50 mm long; 14 rows of enlarged tubercles at mid-back; supralabial scales 10/10, infralabials 8/7; 4 preanal pores; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6/6, 4 th toe of pes 11/11.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C505FFDEF39BF999FA91F997	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C57FFFA3F39BFC21FAF5FD55.text	03E36252C57FFFA3F39BFC21FAF5FD55.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus endophis Carranza & Arnold 2012	<div><p>Hemidactylus endophis sp. nov.</p> <p>(Fig. 30, Appendix I)</p> <p>MorphoBank M101997–M102030</p> <p>Hemidactylus sp: Arnold, 1977: 102; Arnold, 1980: 279 (part.); Arnold, 1986: 420; van der Kooij, 2000: 110.</p> <p>Holotype</p> <p>BMNH1976.1323, male, lodged in the gullet of a Platyceps rhodorachis (BMNH 85.11.7.16) labeled as “ Muscat ”, collected by A.S.G. Jayakar (MorphoBank M 101997–M102030).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Hemidactylus endophis can be distinguished from all currently described Arabian members of Hemidactylus based on the following combination of characters: A medium-sized Hemidactylus (only known specimen 59 mm SVL); large tubercles on dorsum relatively weakly keeled, arranged in 16 regular rows at mid-body, largest on lower flanks; scaling on belly coarse (about 26–28 in transverse row at mid-belly), coarse bluntly pointed and imbricate scales in front of vent similar to those on belly; adhesive pads on digits not especially broad, about half as wide as long on 4 th toe of pes; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6, lamellae under the 4 th toe 9; 7 femoral pores under each thigh (14 in total), broadly separated medially by 6 scales.</p> <p>Etymology From the classical Greek prefix end ŏ - meaning inside, and ŏ phis, a snake.</p> <p>Distribution Presumably the Muscat region of North Oman.</p> <p>Habits Unknown.</p> <p>Description of Holotype</p> <p>Fifty-nine mm SVL. Head and body apparently not very markedly depressed; head not especially broad or neck well defined. Head length about 24% of SVL, head width 68% of head length, and head height 46% of head length. Adhesive pads on digits not especially broad, maximum width of pad on fourth hind toe about a third of its length.</p> <p>Nostril between rostral, supranasal and two superposed postnasals, with the first upper labial scale usually also entering narrowly into its border. One scale separating supranasals on midline. About 12–13 scales in a straight line from postnasal to edge of orbit. Small rounded and slightly keeled tubercles scattered in posterior interorbital, crown of head and temporal area above the level of ear opening and immediately in front of the upper part of this. The anterior part of the palpebral fold with very coarse scales. Ear opening with its smooth-edged, fairly rounded, longest axis less than half diameter of eye. Supralabial scales 9/11, infralabials 9/10. Mental broadly triangular posteriorly, bordered by two large postmentals making contact behind this, a second pair of more lateral postmentals also present, their hind borders rounded and extending posterior of those of the larger more medial postmentals which contact the first and second supralabials; second and more posterior infralabials bordered by more irregular and smaller enlarged scales. Gulars small and imbricate.</p> <p>Enlarged tubercles present on back, arranged in obliquely diagonal rows running from near midline posteriorly to flank, 16 across mid-body, and 19 in a paravertebral row from the level of the axilla to that of the groin, where they are separated by spaces of about their own length. Tubercles weakly keeled. The largest and most backwardly pointed on posterior flanks where tubercles finely striated and spaces between them smaller than tubercles themselves. Belly scales much larger than dorsals and flat and imbricate, about 26–28 in a transverse row at midbody between lateral folds. Femoral pores 7 under each thigh (14 in total), broadly separated medially by 6 scales. Scales on upper forelimb flat and imbricate above and largest distally, where there are a few enlarged tubercles posteriorly. Seven large tubercles on dorsal surface of femur and eleven on tibia. Underside of hindlimb with flat overlapping scales more or less like those on belly. Lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6, under the 4 th toe of pes 9. Tail missing</p> <p>In alcohol beige grey above and paler below. No pattern discernible, probably because of partial digestion.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C57FFFA3F39BFC21FAF5FD55	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C57DFFA3F39BFC8FFA16F847.text	03E36252C57DFFA3F39BFC8FFA16F847.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus turcicus (Linnaeus 1758)	<div><p>The Hemidactylus turcicus group</p> <p>(Figs. 4, 5, 31, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix III)</p> <p>Hemidactylus turcicus turcicus (Linnaeus, 1758) has a mainly circum-Mediterranean distribution including many islands and with populations extending to the South along the Nile River up to the border with Sudan (Sindaco &amp; Jeremcenko 2008). They have also been introduced recently in the Canary Islands, Mexico, Cuba, Florida, and in other areas of the United States (Kraus 2009). According to a recent phylogenetic study from Carranza and Arnold (2006), H. turcicus may have originated in the Middle East from where it moved Westwards across the whole Mediterranean, eventually reaching the Atlantic Ocean. In this same study, the authors obtained two distinct mtDNA lineages of H. turcicus with little genetic divergence between them, suggesting that the phylogeographic pattern obtained was the result of a very rapid and recent spread. Results obtained for the European populations of another gecko, Tarentola mauritanica had, until recently, been interpreted to support the same scenario. However, Rato et al. (2010, 2011) have shown that the phylogeographic pattern of both T. mauritanica and H. turcicus are not solely the result of a recent colonization but represent two unprecedented cases of selective sweeps taking place in the same geographic area (Rato et al. 2010, 2011). While the circum-Mediterranean populations of H. turcicus represent two closely related lineages, the dark-colored H. lavadeserticus was described from the black Syrian basal desert, H. mindiae was reported from Southern Jordan (Amr et al. 2007) and a new morphologically and genetically distinct species, H. dawudazraqi, was recently described from a wide area ranging from Southern Syria to Southwestern Jordan (Moravec et al. 2011). Some inland North Arabian Hemidactylus may also form part of the H. turcicus assemblage, including ones from (spelling copied from the BMNH records) Qunfidah, Saudi Arabia (BMNH1992.170–171); 150 km south of Taymah, Saudi Arabia (BMNH1992.169); Hali, Saudi Arabia (18º 44’ N 41º 24’ E; BMNH1992.200–2001); 20 km East of Hail (BMNH1988.209) and Riyadh (BMNH1986.215). An animal from Hail is illustrated by Leviton et al. (1992; plate 5).</p> <p>Interestingly, H. lemurinus described from Wadi Ayoun in Central Dhofar, South Oman (Figs. 4 and 31) turns out to be part of the H. turcicus group (Fig. 5; Appendix III), closely related to a clade formed by H. turcicus and H. dawudazraqi. According to the results of the dating analysis inferred with Dataset 2, H. lemurinus and the ancestor of H. turcicus and H. dawudazraqi split about 5.9 mya (95% HPD: 3.4–8.7). Uncorrected genetic distances between H. lemurinus and H. turcicus are 14% in the cytb and 4.6% in the 12S; between H. lemurinus and H. dawudazraqi 13.8% in the cytb and 4.4% in the 12S. As shown in Fig. 31, superficially H. lemurinus is unlike other members of the group, differing by its relatively large size, big head, slender limbs and tail, absence of enlarged tubercles on the dorsum, and in its pallid coloration. Since H. lemurinus was described, it has been recorded from near Mughsayl in Western Dhofar, South Oman (A.S. Gardner, pers. comm.; not shown in Fig. 4 as no specimens are available and its presence could not be confirmed in any of our trips), and close to the Southern coast of Yemen at Sayhut and Wadi Hajr (Schatti &amp; Desvoignes 1999). The latter record is about 650 km west of the type locality.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C57DFFA3F39BFC8FFA16F847	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C57CFFA4F39BF90CFDF5FDA6.text	03E36252C57CFFA4F39BF90CFDF5FDA6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus robustus Heyden 1827	<div><p>Hemidactylus robustus</p> <p>(Figs. 4, 5, 32, Table 1; Appendix I; Appendix III)</p> <p>The distribution of H. robustus is difficult to predict with certainty due to the confusion with H. turcicus and other similar taxa (Sindaco &amp; Jeremcenko 2008; Bauer et al. in press). In Arabia it is widely distributed, with populations on the Western coast starting from at least 22º N Southwards to the Aden region. It is also present in Socotra Island, the Hadramaut and occurs in Oman in coastal Dhofar, on Masirah Island and the neighboring mainland, around the Sharqiya Sands (formerly Wahiba Sands) and Northwards to the Eastern United Arab Emirates. Hemidactylus robustus also occurs in costal Iran, Pakistan, in Gurajat (India), along the African Red Sea coast of Southern Egypt and Sudan, in Eritrea, East Ethiopia, Djibuti, Somalia and extreme Northeast Kenya.</p> <p>Available material from widely separated localities (Fig. 4) in the United Arab Emirates, Al Azaiba in North Oman, 8 km W of Shannah (opposite Masirah), Dhofar (South Oman) and Yemen form a clade (Fig. 5) and are all genetically very similar, showing a low divergence from a specimen from Safaga, Egypt. In contrast, animals from Masirah Island and one from Shannah, on the nearby mainland, form a separate clade that differs by 8.7% in the cytb and 3.6% in the 12S. According to the results of the dating analysis inferred with Dataset 2, the two clades of H. robustus split approximately 3.0 mya (95% HPD: 1.8–4.6).</p> <p>Such divergence and restricted known coexistence at Shannah suggests that the two clades may represent separate species but, as yet, they are not associated with known morphological differences. The presence of two distinct mtDNA clades in Arabia suggests that H. robustus originated there. The genetic uniformity of the geographically widespread clade of H. robustus may indicate that it has spread over its very large range only quite recently. The frequent occurrence of this form in anthropogenic situations suggests that such dispersal may have been by inadvertent transport with people.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C57CFFA4F39BF90CFDF5FDA6	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
03E36252C577FFA8F39BFE8AFA18FE23.text	03E36252C577FFA8F39BFE8AFA18FE23.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hemidactylus Oken 1817	<div><p>Key to the genus Hemidactylus from Oman</p> <p>1a - No enlarged tubercles on upper surface of body, hind legs and tail or, if present, tubercles on body few and weak.......... 2</p> <p>1b - Numerous enlarged tubercles, which are usually raised and keeled, on the upper surface of the body, limbs and tail; those on the body usually arranged in regular longitudinal rows........................................................ 8</p> <p>2a - Adults up to about 45 mm from snout to vent; 3–6 preanal pores in males only; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 4–6; 4 th toe of pes 7–11............................................................................................. 3</p> <p>2b - Adults over 50 mm from snout to vent, often considerably so; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6–10; 4 th toe of pes 9–14.... 6</p> <p>3a - Adults from Oman up to 34 mm from snout to vent; scaling fine, without any tubercles; expanded subcaudal scales beginning some way from tail base, dorsal pattern spotted.................................................. H. homoeolepis</p> <p>3b - Adults larger than 34 mm (up to 45 mm) from snout to vent; tubercles present on the body, nape, and hind legs; expanded subcaudal scales usually extend almost to tail base.............................................................. 4</p> <p>4a - Adults larger than 39 mm (up to 45 mm) from snout to vent; presence of enlarged tubercles beyond mid-body; 4 preanal pores in males; lamellae under the 1 st finger of pes 6; lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes 10–11............................... 5</p> <p>4b - Adults up to 39 mm from snout to vent; usually with flat enlarged tubercles on sides of dorsum as far forwards as mid-body that are also present on sides of dorsal tail base and on the hind legs, and may also occur on the lower forelimb; 6 preanal pores in males; lamellae under the 1 st finger of pes 4–5; lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes 7–9........ H. paucituberculatus sp. nov.</p> <p>5a - Low conical or weakly keeled tubercles on back and neck, arranged in 14 regular rows at mid-body, largest on lateral dorsum compared with mid-back and flank; larger tubercles present on hind limbs and tail; adhesive pads narrow; 4 preanal pores in males, lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6; lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes 10–11................. H. inexpectatus sp. nov.</p> <p>5b - Presence of flat enlarged tubercles mainly on the sides of the body and hind limbs; very contrasting tail with black bands with pale interstices, even in adults, that extend to the ventral surface; 4 preanal pores in males; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6; lamellae under the 4 th toe of pes 10–11; Masirah Island..................................... H. masirahensis sp. nov.</p> <p>6a – Enlarged tubercles present on sides of tail; tail depressed; males with a series of femoral pores interrupted on the preanal region, 4–16 pores on the underside of each thigh….......................................................... 7</p> <p>6b - No enlarged tubercles on the sides of the tail; tail round (not depressed); 3–8 pores present in front of vent in both sexes.............................................................................................. H. lemurinus</p> <p>7a - Adults up to 95 mm from snout to vent; tubercles never present on back; tail with clear regular segments; 4–14 femoral pores on the underside of each thigh; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 7–10; dorsal coloration yellowish-gray, pale yellow or yellowish-green, unmarked or with rather feeble dark wavy transverse bands; underside pale to bright yellow....... H. flaviviridis</p> <p>7b - Adults up to 80 mm from snout to vent; upper surface of body covered with small granules, uniform or intermixed with more or less numerous scattered round tubercles; 10–20 femoral pores on the underside of each thigh; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6–7, under the 4 th toe 9–12; dorsal coloration grey, with darker markings, forming undulating cross bars, rhomboidal spots on the middle of the back, or regular longitudinal bands; a dark stripe form the eye tothe shoulder; lower surface white…............................................................................................ H. leschenaultii</p> <p>8a - Femoral pores present, at least in males, 7 under each thigh, broadly separated medially by 6 scales; tubercles on the back large, strongly keeled and striate; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6; 4 th toe of pes 9................. H. endophis sp. nov.</p> <p>8b - Preanal pores 4–10 in males, either in a continuous row or separated by one or two scales but never extend on to thighs.... 9</p> <p>9a - Adults up to 55 mm from snout to vent; adhesive pads not strongly expanded, not much wider than toe; claws short; tubercles on back rather small and not clearly striated; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 5–7; 4 th toe of pes 9–11; a very distinctive black streak running from the nostril through the eye to the ear opening....................................... H. robustus</p> <p>9b - Adults up to 88 mm from snout to vent, although one species does not exceed 53 mm; adhesive pads on digits strongly expanded, much wider than toe; tubercles on back of moderate to large size and striated; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6–11; 4 th toe of pes 10–14.................................................................................. 10</p> <p>10a - Lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 7–11; 4 th toe of pes 11–14; endemic to the Hajar Mountains, North Oman.............. 11</p> <p>10b - Lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 6–8; 4 th toe of pes 10–12; South Oman......................................... 12 11a - Adults up to 67 mm from snout to vent; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 7–9...................... H. hajarensis sp. nov.</p> <p>11b - Adults up to 88 mm from snout to vent; lamellae under the 1 st toe of pes 10–11.................... H. luqueorum sp. nov.</p> <p>12a - Adults up to 53.6 mm from snout to vent; preanal pores 6; slender habitus; distinctive pattern of narrow dark bands—one on neck, three on body and one on anterior sacrum, often suffused with yellow in life; tail very light distally with a pattern of 7–9 widely separated dark bands, the more distal of which extend to the ventral surface................... H. festivus sp. nov.</p> <p>12b - Adults up to 74.5 mm from snout to vent; preanal pores 6–10; more robust habitus; tail not light distally, with pattern of 11–14 dark bands that are not especially widely separated and only extend ventrally towards the tail tip where they are not very conspicuous............................................................................. H. alkiyumii sp. nov.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E36252C577FFA8F39BFE8AFA18FE23	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Carranza, Salvador;Arnold, Edwin Nicholas	Carranza, Salvador, Arnold, Edwin Nicholas (2012): 3378. Zootaxa 3378: 1-95
