DOCSLIB.ORG

Evolution and Ecological Adaptations of Microornamentation in Australian Geckos (Gekkota, Squamata)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ResearchOnline@JCU This file is part of the following work: Riedel, Nils Jendrian (2020) Evolution and ecological adaptations of microornamentation in Australian geckos (Gekkota, Squamata). PhD Thesis, James Cook University. Access to this file is available from: https://doi.org/10.25903/3w26%2Dvv52 © 2020 Nils Jendrian Riedel. The author has certified to JCU that they have made a reasonable effort to gain permission and acknowledge the owners of any third party copyright material included in this document. If you believe that this is not the case, please email [email protected] Evolution and ecological adaptations of microornamentation in Australian geckos (Gekkota, Squamata) Thesis submitted by Nils Jendrian Riedel For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the College of Science and Engineering at James Cook University April 2020 Title page photographs First row: Left: Spatula at the tips of the setae from the Paluma-W lineage of Heteronotia binoei (credit: Jendrian Riedel) Middle: Saltuarius cornutus (credit: Rishab Pillai) Right: pits and struts between the setae stalks from the Paluma-W lineage of Heteronotia binoei (credit: Jendrian Riedel) Second row: Left: Oedura castelnaui (credit: Rishab Pillai) Middle: setae covered terminal subdigital scales of the Paluma-W lineage of Heteronotia binoei (credit: Jendrian Riedel) Right: Oedura coggeri (credit: Stephen Zozaya) Third row: Left: Spinules on a dorsal midbody scale of Lucasium immaculatum (credit: Jendrian Riedel) Middle: Phyllurus amnicola (credit: Rishab Pillai) Right: Cutaneous sensillum from Oedura coggeri (credit: Jendrian Riedel) Fourth row: Left: Lucasium immaculatum (credit: Stephen Zozaya) Middle: Spinules on a lateral mid-distal subdigital scale from the Blencoe lineage of Heteronotia binoei (credit: Kevin Blake) Right: Strophurus krisalys (credit: Stephen Zozaya) Statement of Contributions and Ethics Declaration AUTHORS CONTRIBUTIONS A PhD thesis is never a solo project, and I was blessed with the opportunity to collaborate fruitfully with other researchers, both inside and outside my department. Lin Schwarzkopf, my primary supervisor, provided invaluable advice throughout my project and therefore is a co-author on all my data chapters and the appendix chapters in my thesis. We constantly discussed all steps of my research from experimental design and statistical analysis to interpretation of results, and she assisted me with editing of the manuscripts resulting in this thesis. When I started working on my thesis, I was in the lucky situation to inherit a large data set from Matt Vucko, which he used for his master’s thesis in 2008, but never published. So, I could immediately start to analyse his dataset, a process, which resulted in the chapters 2 and 3 of my thesis. Therefore, Matt Vucko is a co-author on Chapter 2 and 3, in which he collected the data, gave advice on study design, and edited the manuscript. Simone Blomberg also is a co-author on these two chapters, as she helped me with statistical analysis and troubleshooting in R for these two projects. Simon Robson is a co-author on Chapter 2, where he edited the manuscript and helped with the original data-collection by Matt Vucko. Stephen Zozaya and Conrad Hoskin are both co-authors on Chapter 4, were I designed the study together with Stephen and Lin. Stephen also provided specimen for the project and we both collected specimen and data in the field. He conducted the phylogenetic part of the analysis (DNA extraction and phylogenetic tree reconstruction), took the macroscopic images of the digits of the specimen and measured toepad width, while I conducted the scanning electron microscopy work and analysed all the morphological data. Conrad Hoskin provided helpful advice on study design. I lead the writing of the manuscript while Stephen, Conrad and Lin edited the various drafts. Eric Nordberg is a co-author on Chapter 5, where we designed the study and analysed the data together. Of the field observations used for this study, Eric collected the data from Wambiana Research Station, while I collected the data from all other sampled locations. FUNDING I received an International Postgraduate Research Scholarship from the Australian government. My research was supported by funding I obtained through the College of Science and Engineering at James Cook University. My field work was partially funded by two research funds from the Skyrail Rainforest Foundation. ETHICS APPROVAL AND PERMITS All data was collected within the guidelines for ethical treatment of animals and approved by James Cook University (animal ethics permit No. 2409) and the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (research permit No. WA0005590) and the Department of National Parks, Sports, and Racing (research permit No. WTIK18258517). I Preface The following publication have resulted from this thesis. Thesis Chapters Chapter 2 – published: Riedel, J., Vucko, M. J., Blomberg, S. P., Robson, S. K. A., & Schwarzkopf, L. (2019). Ecological associations among epidermal microstructure and scale characteristics of Australian geckos (Squamata: Carphodactylidae and Diplodactylidae). Journal of Anatomy, 234, 853–874. Chapter 3 – published: Riedel, J., Vucko, M. J., Blomberg, S. P. & Schwarzkopf, L. (2020). Skin hydrophobicity as an adaptation for self-cleaning in geckos. Ecology and Evolution, 00, 1-12. Chapter 4 – under review: Riedel, J., Zozaya, S. M., Hoskin, C. J., & Schwarzkopf, L. (under Review). Parallel evolution of toepads in rock dwelling lineages of a terrestrial gecko (Heteronotia binoei, Gekkota: Gekkonidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. Chapter 5 – published: Riedel, J., Nordberg, E. J., & Schwarzkopf, L. (2020). Ecological niche and microhabitat use of Australian geckos. Israel Journal of Ecology & Evolution, 1, 1–14. Apendix Chapters Appendix I – published: Fushida, A., Riedel, J., Nordberg, E. J., Pillai, R., & Schwarzkopf, L. (2020). Can Geckos Increase Shedding Rate to Remove Fouling? Herpetologica, 76, 22–26. Appendix II – published: Pillai, R., Nordberg, E. J., Riedel, J., & Schwarzkopf, L. (2020). Nonlinear variation in clinging performance with surface roughness in geckos. Ecology and Evolution, 10, 2597–2607. II Acknowledgments Moving to Australia from Germany to work on geckos for a PhD is like a dream for every reptile enthusiast. I am extremely grateful for this opportunity and to all the people who supported me traveling this path. It was also a big step to leave behind my family and many good friends to move to the other side of the world, but I did not need to take this step alone. My wife Linda Stanke joined me on this great adventure, pursuing her own career in Townsville. Linda has supported me in many ways throughout this process and encouraged me to follow this path. So, my deepest thanks go to you, Linda! Thank you for joining and supporting me these past 3.5 years! I am extremely grateful to my primary supervisor Lin Schwarzkopf, who made it possible for me to join her lab in the first place. I could not have asked for of better supervisor and mentor for my project and my degree. Lin created an extremely positive, supportive and welcoming atmosphere in her lab full of scientists from a diversity of backgrounds and many different research areas. Lin constantly encouraged me to improve my skills and abilities as a researcher, from designing and planning my research, to analysing data, to writing and presenting results in a precise, correct way, but also in a style that is interesting to read. She always had time to discuss projects, problems, or just random interesting topics, and to read and correct manuscripts over and over again. She was also really supportive in connecting me with other researchers in Australia. I am also thankful to my co-supervisors for support and helpful advice. Will Edwards, Deb Bower and Scott Keough where always there for me when I needed them. Will helped me to improve some of my manuscripts and grant proposals. Deb helped me planning the ecological part of my thesis, and also contributed greatly to the positive and welcoming atmosphere in My lab. Scott gave valuable advice on the morphological parts of my project, including data that did not make it into the thesis in the end… but will hopefully be published soon! Research nowadays is highly collaborative, and I had the privilege to collaborate with quite a few great researchers for the different chapters of my thesis. Matt Vucko was so kind to share unpublished data from his master’s thesis and gave me valuable support in analysing these datasets and writing the respective parts of my thesis. I’m also indebted to Simone Blomberg and her seemingly unlimited knowledge and expertise on statistics - I learned a lot about statistical analysis, while working with her. Simon Robson gave me valuable comments for one of the manuscripts for my thesis. Both Stephen Zozaya and Conrad Hoskin not only helped me with planning, conducting and writing one of my thesis chapters, but also provided helpful advice on where to go for my field trips to target the gecko species I was looking for. I am also very grateful to Eric Nordberg, who was the ‘senior’ PhD student in My lab, when I started. He not only contributed to one of my chapters and shared his data, but also generally supported me at different stages during my candidature form planning fieldwork to support and advice with R scripts. Additionally, I would like to thank Don McKnight and Michalis Mihalitis, who also helped me with discussing statistical analysis and writing or sharing R scripts at one point or another during my work. I am particularly thankful to Rishab Pillai, who started as a master’s III student in My lab, shortly after I started my project, and which I had the honour to co-supervise. He continued to assist me during my candidature by joining most of my field trips and supporting me with lab work or gecko husbandry.
Recommended publications
  • Extreme Miniaturization of a New Amniote Vertebrate and Insights Into the Evolution of Genital Size in Chameleons

    Extreme Miniaturization of a New Amniote Vertebrate and Insights Into the Evolution of Genital Size in Chameleons

    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Extreme miniaturization of a new amniote vertebrate and insights into the evolution of genital size in chameleons Frank Glaw1*, Jörn Köhler2, Oliver Hawlitschek3, Fanomezana M. Ratsoavina4, Andolalao Rakotoarison4, Mark D. Scherz5 & Miguel Vences6 Evolutionary reduction of adult body size (miniaturization) has profound consequences for organismal biology and is an important subject of evolutionary research. Based on two individuals we describe a new, extremely miniaturized chameleon, which may be the world’s smallest reptile species. The male holotype of Brookesia nana sp. nov. has a snout–vent length of 13.5 mm (total length 21.6 mm) and has large, apparently fully developed hemipenes, making it apparently the smallest mature male amniote ever recorded. The female paratype measures 19.2 mm snout–vent length (total length 28.9 mm) and a micro-CT scan revealed developing eggs in the body cavity, likewise indicating sexual maturity. The new chameleon is only known from a degraded montane rainforest in northern Madagascar and might be threatened by extinction. Molecular phylogenetic analyses place it as sister to B. karchei, the largest species in the clade of miniaturized Brookesia species, for which we resurrect Evoluticauda Angel, 1942 as subgenus name. The genetic divergence of B. nana sp. nov. is rather strong (9.9‒14.9% to all other Evoluticauda species in the 16S rRNA gene). A comparative study of genital length in Malagasy chameleons revealed a tendency for the smallest chameleons to have the relatively largest hemipenes, which might be a consequence of a reversed sexual size dimorphism with males substantially smaller than females in the smallest species.
  • (Squamata: Gekkota: Carphodactylidae) from the Pilbara Region of Western Australia

    (Squamata: Gekkota: Carphodactylidae) from the Pilbara Region of Western Australia

    Zootaxa 3010: 20–30 (2011) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2011 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) A new species of Underwoodisaurus (Squamata: Gekkota: Carphodactylidae) from the Pilbara region of Western Australia PAUL DOUGHTY1,3 & PAUL M. OLIVER2 1Department of Terrestrial Vertebrates, Western Australian Museum, 49 Kew Street, Welshpool, Western Australia 6106, Australia 2Australian Centre for Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, 5005, and Herpetology Section, South Australian Museum, Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia. 3Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Ongoing surveys and systematic work focused on the Pilbara region in Western Australia have revealed the existence of numerous unrecognized species of reptiles. Here we describe Underwoodisaurus seorsus sp. nov., a new species similar to U. milii, but differing in its relatively plain dorsal and head patterns with only sparsely scattered pale tubercles, a much more gracile build, including longer snout, limbs and digits, smaller and more numerous fine scales on the dorsum, and the enlarged tubercles on the tail tending not to form transverse rows. The new species is known from few specimens and has only been encountered at mid elevations in the Hamersley Ranges, widely separated from the closest populations of U. milii in the northern Goldfields and Shark Bay in Western Australia. Given its rarity and small (potentially relictual) distribution this species may be of conservation concern. Key words: conservation, gecko, Underwoodisaurus milii, relictual distribution Introduction The Pilbara region of Western Australia supports one of the most diverse reptile faunas on the Australian continent (How & Cowan 2006; Powney et al.
  • Sphaerodactylus Samanensis, Cochran, 1932) with Comments on Its Morphological Variation and Conservation Status

    Sphaerodactylus Samanensis, Cochran, 1932) with Comments on Its Morphological Variation and Conservation Status

    New distributional records of the Samana least gecko (Sphaerodactylus samanensis, Cochran, 1932) with comments on its morphological variation and conservation status Germán Chávez1,2, Miguel A. Landestoy T3, Gail S. Ross4 and Joaquín A. Ugarte-Núñez5 1 Instituto Peruano de Herpetología, Lima, Perú 2 División de Herpetología, CORBIDI, Lima, Perú 3 Escuela de Biología, Universidad Autónoma de Santo Domingo, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic 4 Independent Researcher, Elko, NV, USA 5 Knight Piésold Consulting, Lima, Peru ABSTRACT We report here five new localities across the distribution of the lizard Sphaerodactylus samanensis, extending its current geographic range to the west, in the Cordillera Central of Hispaniola. We also report phenotypic variation in the color pattern and scutellation on throat and pelvic regions of males from both eastern and western populations, which is described below. Furthermore, based on these new data, we confirm that the species is not fitting in its current IUCN category, and in consequence propose updating its conservation status. Subjects Biodiversity, Biogeography, Conservation Biology, Ecology, Zoology Submitted 5 August 2020 Keywords New localities, Geographic range, Phenotypic variation, IUCN category, Conservation Accepted 31 October 2020 status Published 11 January 2021 Corresponding author Joaquín A. INTRODUCTION Ugarte-Núñez, Lizards of the genus Sphaerodactylus (107 recognized species, Uetz, Freed & Hosek, 2020), [email protected], [email protected] have diversified remarkably on Caribbean islands, and occur in Central and Northern Academic editor South America and in the Pacific Island of Cocos (Hass, 1991; Henderson & Powell, 2009; Richard Schuster Hedges et al., 2019; Hedges, 2020). This is a clade of small geckos (geckolet) containing also Additional Information and one of the smallest amniote vertebrates in the world with a maximum snout-vent length of Declarations can be found on 18 mm (Hedges & Thomas, 2001).
  • Integrative and Comparative Biology Integrative and Comparative Biology, Pp

    Integrative and Comparative Biology Integrative and Comparative Biology, Pp

    Integrative and Comparative Biology Integrative and Comparative Biology, pp. 1–17 doi:10.1093/icb/icz006 Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology SYMPOSIUM 2019 April 28 on user Cities Twin - Minnesota of by University https://academic.oup.com/icb/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/icb/icz006/5381544 from Downloaded Evolution of the Gekkotan Adhesive System: Does Digit Anatomy Point to One or More Origins? Anthony P. Russell1,* and Tony Gamble†,‡,§ *Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4; †Department of Biological Sciences, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA; ‡Bell Museum of Natural History, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55113, USA; §Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA From the symposium “The path less traveled: Reciprocal illumination of gecko adhesion by unifying material science, biomechanics, ecology, and evolution” presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Integrative and Comparative Biology, January 3–7, 2019 at Tampa, Florida. 1E-mail: [email protected] Synopsis Recently-developed, molecularly-based phylogenies of geckos have provided the basis for reassessing the number of times adhesive toe-pads have arisen within the Gekkota. At present both a single origin and multiple origin hypotheses prevail, each of which has consequences that relate to explanations about digit form and evolutionary transitions underlying the enormous variation in adhesive toe pad structure among extant, limbed geckos (pygopods lack pertinent features). These competing hypotheses result from mapping the distribution of toe pads onto a phylo- genetic framework employing the simple binary expedient of whether such toe pads are present or absent.
  • Resource Allocation to Reproduction in Animals

    Resource Allocation to Reproduction in Animals

    Biol. Rev. (2014), 89, pp. 849–859. 849 doi: 10.1111/brv.12082 Resource allocation to reproduction in animals Sebastiaan A. L. M. Kooijman1,∗ and Konstadia Lika2 1Department of Theoretical Biology, VU University Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2Department of Biology, University of Crete, Voutes University Campus, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece ABSTRACT The standard Dynamic Energy Budget (DEB) model assumes that a fraction κ of mobilised reserve is allocated to somatic maintenance plus growth, while the rest is allocated to maturity maintenance plus maturation (in embryos and juveniles) or reproduction (in adults). All DEB parameters have been estimated for 276 animal species from most large phyla and all chordate classes. The goodness of fit is generally excellent. We compared the estimated values of κ with those that would maximise reproduction in fully grown adults with abundant food. Only 13% of these species show a reproduction rate close to the maximum possible (assuming that κ can be controlled), another 4% have κ lower than the optimal value, and 83% have κ higher than the optimal value. Strong empirical support hence exists for the conclusion that reproduction is generally not maximised. We also compared the parameters of the wild chicken with those of races selected for meat and egg production and found that the latter indeed maximise reproduction in terms of κ, while surface-specific assimilation was not affected by selection. We suggest that small values of κ relate to the down-regulation of maximum body size, and large values to the down-regulation of reproduction. We briefly discuss the ecological context for these findings.
  • An Intial Estimation of the Numbers and Identification of Extant Non

    An Intial Estimation of the Numbers and Identification of Extant Non

    Answers Research Journal 8 (2015):171–186. www.answersingenesis.org/arj/v8/lizard-kinds-order-squamata.pdf $Q,QLWLDO(VWLPDWLRQRIWKH1XPEHUVDQG,GHQWLÀFDWLRQRI Extant Non-Snake/Non-Amphisbaenian Lizard Kinds: Order Squamata Tom Hennigan, Truett-McConnell College, Cleveland, Georgia. $EVWUDFW %LRV\VWHPDWLFVLVLQJUHDWÁX[WRGD\EHFDXVHRIWKHSOHWKRUDRIJHQHWLFUHVHDUFKZKLFKFRQWLQXDOO\ UHGHÀQHVKRZZHSHUFHLYHUHODWLRQVKLSVEHWZHHQRUJDQLVPV'HVSLWHWKHODUJHDPRXQWRIGDWDEHLQJ SXEOLVKHGWKHFKDOOHQJHLVKDYLQJHQRXJKNQRZOHGJHDERXWJHQHWLFVWRGUDZFRQFOXVLRQVUHJDUGLQJ WKHELRORJLFDOKLVWRU\RIRUJDQLVPVDQGWKHLUWD[RQRP\&RQVHTXHQWO\WKHELRV\VWHPDWLFVIRUPRVWWD[D LVLQJUHDWIOX[DQGQRWZLWKRXWFRQWURYHUV\E\SUDFWLWLRQHUVLQWKHILHOG7KHUHIRUHWKLVSUHOLPLQDU\SDSHU LVmeant to produce a current summary of lizard systematics, as it is understood today. It is meant to lay a JURXQGZRUNIRUFUHDWLRQV\VWHPDWLFVZLWKWKHJRDORIHVWLPDWLQJWKHQXPEHURIEDUDPLQVEURXJKWRQ WKH $UN %DVHG RQ WKH DQDO\VHV RI FXUUHQW PROHFXODU GDWD WD[RQRP\ K\EULGL]DWLRQ FDSDELOLW\ DQG VWDWLVWLFDO EDUDPLQRORJ\ RI H[WDQW RUJDQLVPV D WHQWDWLYH HVWLPDWH RI H[WDQW QRQVQDNH QRQ DPSKLVEDHQLDQOL]DUGNLQGVZHUHWDNHQRQERDUGWKH$UN,WLVKRSHGWKDWWKLVSDSHUZLOOHQFRXUDJH IXWXUHUHVHDUFKLQWRFUHDWLRQLVWELRV\VWHPDWLFV Keywords: $UN(QFRXQWHUELRV\VWHPDWLFVWD[RQRP\UHSWLOHVVTXDPDWDNLQGEDUDPLQRORJ\OL]DUG ,QWURGXFWLRQ today may change tomorrow, depending on the data Creation research is guided by God’s Word, which and assumptions about that data. For example, LVIRXQGDWLRQDOWRWKHVFLHQWLÀFPRGHOVWKDWDUHEXLOW naturalists assume randomness and universal 7KHELEOLFDODQGVFLHQWLÀFFKDOOHQJHLVWRLQYHVWLJDWH
  • An Annotated Type Catalogue of the Dragon Lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Agamidae) in the Collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J

    An Annotated Type Catalogue of the Dragon Lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Agamidae) in the Collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J

    RECORDS OF THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM 34 115–132 (2019) DOI: 10.18195/issn.0312-3162.34(2).2019.115-132 An annotated type catalogue of the dragon lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Agamidae) in the collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J. Ellis Department of Terrestrial Zoology, Western Australian Museum, Locked Bag 49, Welshpool DC, Western Australia 6986, Australia. Biologic Environmental Survey, 24–26 Wickham St, East Perth, Western Australia 6004, Australia. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT – The Western Australian Museum holds a vast collection of specimens representing a large portion of the 106 currently recognised taxa of dragon lizards (family Agamidae) known to occur across Australia. While the museum’s collection is dominated by Western Australian species, it also contains a selection of specimens from localities in other Australian states and a small selection from outside of Australia. Currently the museum’s collection contains 18,914 agamid specimens representing 89 of the 106 currently recognised taxa from across Australia and 27 from outside of Australia. This includes 824 type specimens representing 45 currently recognised taxa and three synonymised taxa, comprising 43 holotypes, three syntypes and 779 paratypes. Of the paratypes, a total of 43 specimens have been gifted to other collections, disposed or could not be located and are considered lost. An annotated catalogue is provided for all agamid type material currently and previously maintained in the herpetological collection of the Western Australian Museum. KEYWORDS: type specimens, holotype, syntype, paratype, dragon lizard, nomenclature. INTRODUCTION Australia was named by John Edward Gray in 1825, The Agamidae, commonly referred to as dragon Clamydosaurus kingii Gray, 1825 [now Chlamydosaurus lizards, comprises over 480 taxa worldwide, occurring kingii (Gray, 1825)].
  • E-Program DO NOT PRINT!

    E-Program DO NOT PRINT!

    e-program DO NOT PRINT! You’ll receive a pocket program at registration, so no need to print this one. This e-program includes all presentation sessions and the associated abstracts, which are hyperlinked to the name of the presenter. Plenary abstracts are included in the pocket program. The plan on a page Tuesday June 20 Wednesday June 21 Thursday June 22 Friday June 23 7:30-8:30 am Breakfast: 7:30-8:30am Breakfast: 7:30-8:30am Breakfast: Dining Hall Dining Hall Dining Hall 8:50-10:00am Plenary: 8:50-10:00am Plenary: 8:50-10:00am Plenary: Rick Sabrina Fossette-Halot - Renee Catullo - Chapel. Shine - Chapel. Introduced Chapel. Introduced by Nicki Introduced by Scott Keogh by Ben Philips Mitchell 10:00-10:25 am Tea break 10:00-10:15am Tea break 10:00-10:25am Tea break 10:30-11:54am Short 10:20am -12:00pm Mike Bull 10:30-11:42am Short Talks: Talks: Session 1 - Symposium - Chapel Session 8 - Clubhouse: Clubhouse: upstairs and upstairs and downstairs downstairs 11:45 Conference close (upstairs) 12:00-2:00pm Lunch 12:00-1:00pm Conference 12:00-1:00pm Lunch: Dining (Dining Hall) and ASH photo and lunch Hall or Grab and Go, buses AGM (Clubhouse upstairs) depart for airport from midday High ropes course and 1:00-2:00pm Short Talks: climbing wall open. Book at Session 5 - Clubhouse: registration on Tuesday if upstairs and downstairs interested 2:00 -4:00pm 2:00-3:00pm Speed talks: 2:00-3:00pm Speed talks: Registration, locate Session 2 Clubhouse Session 6 Clubhouse accommodation, light upstairs upstairs fires, load talks, book activities 3:00-3:25pm
  • Mitochondrial Genomes of Two Polydora

    Mitochondrial Genomes of Two Polydora

    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Mitochondrial genomes of two Polydora (Spionidae) species provide further evidence that mitochondrial architecture in the Sedentaria (Annelida) is not conserved Lingtong Ye1*, Tuo Yao1, Jie Lu1, Jingzhe Jiang1 & Changming Bai2 Contrary to the early evidence, which indicated that the mitochondrial architecture in one of the two major annelida clades, Sedentaria, is relatively conserved, a handful of relatively recent studies found evidence that some species exhibit elevated rates of mitochondrial architecture evolution. We sequenced complete mitogenomes belonging to two congeneric shell-boring Spionidae species that cause considerable economic losses in the commercial marine mollusk aquaculture: Polydora brevipalpa and Polydora websteri. The two mitogenomes exhibited very similar architecture. In comparison to other sedentarians, they exhibited some standard features, including all genes encoded on the same strand, uncommon but not unique duplicated trnM gene, as well as a number of unique features. Their comparatively large size (17,673 bp) can be attributed to four non-coding regions larger than 500 bp. We identifed an unusually large (putative) overlap of 14 bases between nad2 and cox1 genes in both species. Importantly, the two species exhibited completely rearranged gene orders in comparison to all other available mitogenomes. Along with Serpulidae and Sabellidae, Polydora is the third identifed sedentarian lineage that exhibits disproportionally elevated rates of mitogenomic architecture rearrangements. Selection analyses indicate that these three lineages also exhibited relaxed purifying selection pressures. Abbreviations NCR Non-coding region PCG Protein-coding gene Metazoan mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes) usually encode the set of 37 genes, comprising 2 rRNAs, 22 tRNAs, and 13 proteins, encoded on both genomic strands.
  • A Further Break-Up of the Australian Gecko Genus

    A Further Break-Up of the Australian Gecko Genus

    Australasian Journal of Herpetology 3 Australasian Journal of Herpetology 34:3-35. ISSN 1836-5698 (Print) Published 20 July 2017. ISSN 1836-5779 (Online) A further break-up of the Australian gecko genus Oedura Gray, 1842 sensu lato as currently recognized, from four to seven genera, with two new subgenera defined, description of fourteen new species, four new subspecies and formalising of one tribe and five subtribes. RAYMOND T. HOSER 488 Park Road, Park Orchards, Victoria, 3134, Australia. Phone: +61 3 9812 3322 Fax: 9812 3355 E-mail: snakeman (at) snakeman.com.au Received 15 January 2017, Accepted 20 May 2017, Published 20 July 2017. ABSTRACT The genus Oedura Gray, 1842 sensu lato has been the subject of numerous taxonomic reviews in recent years. These have resulted in division of the genus into deeply divergent, but distantly related groups at the genus level as well as numerous new species being formally named. In light of the preceding and including results of molecular studies indicating significant divergence between species groups within Oedura as recognized in 2012 and 2016, the genus as recognized prior to 2012 is further divided to become seven (from four in 2016). These all have known divergences well in excess of 15 MYA, making genus-level subdivision inevitable. Divergent subgenera with divergences in the order of 13-15 MYA are also formally named for the first time. Within this new generic arrangement, fourteen new species are formally described for the first time in accordance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (Ride et al. 1999) on the basis of obvious morphological differences from similar species, which they have been treated as until now and also based on the known genetic divergences ascertained from earlier cited literature, all of which are measured in the millions of years (2.5 MYA or more).
  • Reptile Rap Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile Network ISSN 2230-7079 No.15 | January 2013 Date of Publication: 22 January 2013 1

    Reptile Rap Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile Network ISSN 2230-7079 No.15 | January 2013 Date of Publication: 22 January 2013 1

    Reptile Rap Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile Network No.15 | January 2013 ISSN 2230-7079 Date of publication: 22 January 2013 1. Crocodile, 1. 2. Crocodile, Caiman, 3. Gharial, 4.Common Chameleon, 5. Chameleon, 9. Chameleon, Flap-necked 8. Chameleon Flying 7. Gecko, Dragon, Ptychozoon Chamaeleo sp. Fischer’s 10 dilepsis, 6. &11. Jackson’s Frill-necked 21. Stump-tailed Skink, 20. Gila Monster, Lizard, Green Iguana, 19. European Iguana, 18. Rhinoceros Antillean Basilisk, Iguana, 17. Lesser 16. Green 15. Common Lizard, 14. Horned Devil, Thorny 13. 12. Uromastyx, Lizard, 34. Eastern Tortoise, 33. 32. Rattlesnake Indian Star cerastes, 22. 31. Boa,Cerastes 23. Python, 25. 24. 30. viper, Ahaetulla Grass Rhinoceros nasuta Snake, 29. 26. 27. Asp, Indian Naja Snake, 28. Cobra, haje, Grater African 46. Ceratophrys, Bombina,45. 44. Toad, 43. Bullfrog, 42. Frog, Common 41. Turtle, Sea Loggerhead 40. Trionychidae, 39. mata Mata 38. Turtle, Snake-necked Argentine 37. Emydidae, 36. Tortoise, Galapagos 35. Turtle, Box 48. Marbled Newt Newt, Crested 47. Great Salamander, Fire Reptiles, illustration by Adolphe Millot. Source: Nouveau Larousse Illustré, edited by Claude Augé, published in Paris by Librarie Larousse 1897-1904, this illustration from vol. 7 p. 263 7 p. vol. from 1897-1904, this illustration Larousse Librarie by published in Paris Augé, Claude by edited Illustré, Larousse Nouveau Source: Millot. Adolphe by illustration Reptiles, www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/ReptileRap.htm OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD REPTILE RAP #15, January 2013 Contents A new record of the Cochin Forest Cane Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica (Henderson, 1912) from Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary, Kerala, India Arun Kanagavel, 3–6pp New Record of Elliot’s Shieldtail (Gray, 1858) in Seshachalam Biosphere Reserve, Eastern Ghats, Andhra Pradesh, India M.
  • Body-Size Effect on Egg Size in Eublepharid Geckos (Squamata

    Body-Size Effect on Egg Size in Eublepharid Geckos (Squamata

    Blackwell Publishing LtdOxford, UKBIJBiological Journal of the Linnean Society0024-4066The Linnean Society of London, 20062006 884 527532 Original Article EGG-SIZE ALLOMETRY IN EUBLEPHARID GECKOS L. KRATOCHVÍL and D. FRYNTA Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2006, 88, 527–532. With 2 figures Body-size effect on egg size in eublepharid geckos (Squamata: Eublepharidae), lizards with invariant clutch size: negative allometry for egg size in ectotherms is not universal LUKÁT KRATOCHVÍL1* and DANIEL FRYNTA2 1Department of Ecology, Charles University, Vinidná 7, CZ-128 44 Praha 2, the Czech Republic 2Department of Zoology, Charles University, Vinidná 7, CZ-128 44 Praha 2, the Czech Republic Received 1 February 2005; accepted for publication 5 December 2005 Within a single clutch, smaller species of ectotherms generally lay a smaller number of relatively larger eggs than do larger species. Many hypotheses explaining both the interspecific negative allometry in egg size and egg size– number trade-off postulate the existence of an upper limit to the egg size of larger species. Specifically, in lizards, large eggs of large species could have too long a duration of incubation, or they could be too large to pass through the pelvic opening, which is presumably constrained mechanically in larger species. Alternatively, negative allometry could be a result of limits affecting eggs of smaller species. Under the latter concept, hatchling size in smaller species may be close to the lower limit imposed by ecological interactions or physiological processes, and therefore smaller species have to invest in relatively larger offspring. Contrary to these lower limit hypotheses, explanations based on the existence of an upper limit always predict negative egg-size allometry even in animals with invariant clutch size, in which naturally there is no egg size–number trade-off.