Zootaxa 4320 (2): 289–304 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2017 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4320.2.5 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0898C298-1C6F-483A-8F80-1F4E98A82E97 A new of Wiegmann 1834 (Sauria: Scincidae) from

HIVA FAIZI1, NASRULLAH RASTEGAR-POUYANI1,7, ESKANDAR RASTEGAR-POUYANI2 ROMAN NAZAROV3, NASTARAN HEIDARI4, BAHMAN ZANGI5, VALENTINA ORLOVA6 & NIKOLAI POYARKOV3 1Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Razi University, 6714967346 Kermanshah, Iran E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] 2Department of Biology, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran. 3Zoological Museum of Moscow State University, Herpetology Department, 125009 Moscow, B. Nikitskaya, 2. E-mail [email protected] 4Department of Biology, Faculty of Biological Science, Kharazmi University, Karaj, Iran. E-mail: [email protected] 5Department of Environment, Aban-Pajouh Consulting Engineering Company, Tehran, Iran 6Department of Vertebrate , Biological faculty, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, GSP-1, 119991, . E-mail: [email protected] 7Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

We describe a new species of in the Eumeces Wiegmann 1834 from Iran. Eumeces persicus sp. nov. is a me- dium-sized skink, distinguished by two clear, wide, and brown lateral lines extending from the ear opening to the hindlimbs, with scattered light orange spots, and two median rows of dorsal scales broadly enlarged in eight longitudinal rows. The new species ranges from southern Tehran to Kerman Province along the eastern slopes of the Zagros Mountains towards the . We provide morphological comparisons of the new species with other Eumeces species from the region and molecular analyses of two mitochondrial markers (16S and Cytb). We also present taxonomic and phylo- genetic accounts, with an updated identification key for the genus Eumeces in Iran and surrounding regions.

Key words: Eumeces persicus sp. nov., Iranian Plateau, Morphology, Phylogeny, Skink

Introduction

The genus Eumeces (senso stricto) Wiegmann 1834 is classified as the Afro–Central Asian clade within old Eumeces sensu lato group, incorporating the type species of the genus (Schmitz et al. 2004; Brandley et al. 2011). Molecular and morphological studies on Eumeces have provided radical splitting of the genus (Griffith et al. 2000; Schmitz et al. 2004; Brandley et al. 2011 and 2012). The Afro–Central Asian clade is currently comprised of five species classified under Eumeces senso stricto: E. algeriensis Peters, 1864; E. blythianus (Anderson, 1871); E. cholistanensis Masroor, 2009; E. indothalensis Khan & Khan, 1997; and E. schneiderii (Daudin, 1802). Most researchers (e.g., Anderson 1999; Sindaco & Jeremcenko 2008; Kumlutas et al. 2007; Perera et al. 2012) have grouped two of the five species and classified them under the schneiderii group (i.e., E. schneiderii and E. algeriensis). The schneiderii group consists of seven : (1) E. schneiderii schneiderii (Daudin, 1802); (2) E. s. pavimentatus (Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1827); (3) E. s. princeps (Eichwald, 1839); (4) E. s. zarudnyi Nikolsky, 1899; (5) E. s. barani Kumlutas, Arikan, Ilgaz & Kaska 2007; (6) E. algeriensis algeriensis (Peters, 1864); and (7) E. a. meridionalis Domergue, 1901. Eumeces was presented as a paraphyletic genus in previous studies, and even after excluding many Oriental and Nearctic taxa (e.g., ), it still remains paraphyletic in respect to the genera Scincus and Scincopus (Schmitz et al. 2004; Carranza et al. 2008; Pyron et al. 2013). From sister group relationships, Arnold and Leviton (1977) stated that the genera Scincus and Scincopus are descendants of E. schneiderii and that the genus Scincopus is a sister group to E. algeriensis.

Accepted by A. Datta-Roy: 23 Jun. 2017; published: 15 Sept. 2017 289 The recognized Iranian members of the genus are E. schneiderii princeps and E. s. zarudnyi. The former taxon is widely distributed along the Zagros Mountains from northwestern to southwestern Iran and across the Elburz Mountains from western to eastern Iran (Anderson 1991; Smid et al. 2014). In these regions, it is known to be distributed in mountainous , hillsides, and margin of agricultural lands. The E. s. zarudnyi occurs in southern, southeastern, and eastern Iran, in flat plains and sandy deserts, but it is absent from mountains and foothills, which serve as barriers to their dispersal (Anderson 1991). (Fig. 1). In this study, we report a new species of Eumeces from Iran, found in the central Iranian plains and along the eastern slopes of the Zagros Mountains (Fig. 1) and provide taxonomic accounts of species of the genus Eumeces in Iran.

FIGURE 1. Distribution map for Eumeces persicus sp. nov. and other congeners. The red square represents the type locality in Tehran Province.

Material and methods

The findings of this study incorporate two separate and parallel field expeditions in Iran from 2011 to 2014. The two expeditions independently found the current new species from two extreme distribution points, one from Tehran (the northern limit) and one from Kerman Province (the southern limit). Three specimens and one tail that belong to an escaped specimen were collected, in which the tail was used for the molecular analyses only. One of the three collected specimens was deposited in the Razi University Zoological Museum collection (RUZM; RUZM-SE-07) in 75% alcohol and the other two specimens were deposited in the collection of Zoological Museum of Moscow State University (ZMMU R-14723 and ZMMU R-15005). In addition, the single tail was deposited in Hakim Sabzavari University Zoological Museum with the code ERP 6506. Sampling localities are presented in Fig. 1 and corresponding details have been provided in Table 1. Morphological examinations. Morphological characters of the new species were compared with the other known congeners for which data were available from the literature (e.g., Taylor 1935; Minton 1966; Khan 1987, 2006; Masroor 2009). The following morphological characters (16 metric and 16 meristic characters) were examined as previously used in other studies (e.g., Taylor 1935; Minton 1966; Khan 1987, 2006; Masroor 2009). For morphometric measurements, we used a digital caliper to 0.01 mm accuracy as follows: Snout to vent length, from tip of snout to caudal edge of anal scales (SVL); Tail length, from caudal edge of anal scales to tip of tail, on complete original tails only (TL); Ratio of snout to vent length/Tail length (SVL/TL); Head length, from tip of

290 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. snout to posterior edge of tympanum (HL); Head width, at the widest point of head (HW); ratio of head length to head width (HL/HW); Head height, from upper surface of head to lower surface of chin (HH); length of forelimb (LFO); length of hindlimb (LHL); ratio of length of forelimb to length of hindlimb (LFO/LHL); Eye-nostril length, length from eye to nostril (ENL); Eye-ear length, length from eye to tympanum (EEL); Neck length, from tympanum to scapula bone (NL); Length of femur (LF); Length of leg (LL); Number of supralabials (NSL); Number of infralabials (NIL); Number of longitudinal rows of ventral scales (NVP); Number of dorsal scales at midbody (NDS); Number of postmental pairs (NPP); Pairs of nuchals (PN); subdigital lamella of 1–4th toe (SL1– 4thT); subdigital lamella of 1–4th finger (SL1–4thF).

TABLE 1. Specimens used in this study for the molecular analyses, including collecting locality, collection numbers, exact coordination and GenBank accession numbers. Museum code abbreviations: ERP (=Eskandar Rastegar -Pouyani); RUZM (Razi University Zoological Museum; ZMMU (Zoological Museum Moscow University). ●Data from Griffith et al. 2006; *Data from Carranza et al., 2008. Species Locality Museum Code Coordinates 16S/Cytb Eurylepis taeniolatus Iran, Khorasan Razavi MVZ246017● 35.24114 58.51394 JQ344268/JQ344269 Chalcides ocellatus Iran ERP 3052 27.88819 51.8856 KY436552/KY436524 E. s. princeps Iran, Khorasan Razavi ERP 914 36.31679 60.47604 KY436553/KY436525 E. s. princeps Iran, Fars province ERP 1437 30.23395 53.21785 KY436554/KY436526 E. s. princeps Iran, Khorasan Razavi ERP 1443 35.24114 58.51394 KY436555/KY436527 E. s. princeps Iran, Fars province ERP 1966 30.76483 51.4693 KY436556/KY436528 E. s. princeps Iran, Fars province ERP 1987 30.84595 52.53273 KY436557/KY436529 E. s. princeps Iran, Kermanshah province RUZM-SE-01 34.10438 46.56466 KY436558/KY436530 E. s. princeps Iran, Kurdistan province RUZM-SE-02 35.41896 46.95688 KY436559/KY436531 E. s. princeps Iran, Ilam prov., Dinarkouh RUZM-SE-03 32.9594 47.43134 KY436560/KY436532 E. s. princeps , Navoi district ZMMU 37.35035 68.45418 KY436565/KY436537 R-11048 E. s. pavimentatus , Karaotlak E8121.16 37.46358 34.46858 EU278069/EU278235 (BEV1594)* E. s. pavimentatus Turkey, Coastal dunes after E8121.17 38.00145 35.47796 EU278070/EU278234 Karatas (BEV1566)* E. s. zarudnyi Iran, Qeshm Island RUZM-SE-04 26.85097 55.99425 KY436573/KY436545 E. s. zarudnyi Iran, Zabol RUZM-SE-05 31.14677 61.80003 KY436574/KY436546 E. s. zarudnyi Iran, Qeshm Island RUZM-SE-06 26.85098 55.99433 KY436575/KY436547 E. persicus sp. nov Iran, Kerman province ZMMU 28.41604 58.30814 KY436576/KY436548 R-14723 E. persicus sp. nov Iran, Kerman province ZMMU 28.41604 58.30814 KY436577/KY436549 R-15005 E. persicus sp. nov Iran, Tehran province RUZM-SE-07 35.39758 51.30911 KY436578/KY436550 E. persicus sp. nov Iran, Tehran province ERP 6506 35.39758 51.30911 KY436579/KY436551 E. s. schneiderii-1 E1009.7● 30.24169 29.20791 EU278071/EU278236 E. s. schneiderii-2 Egypt E1009.6● 27.86844 30.46279 EU278072/EU278237

Molecular analyses. For the molecular analyses, 20 sequences of E. s. princeps (n= 9), E. zarudnyi (n=3), E. s. pavimentatus (n=2), E. s. schneiderii (n=2), and Eumeces persicus sp. nov. (n=4) were used in this study. One sequence each of Chalcides ocellatus and Eurylepis taeniolatus were retrieved from Genbank and were selected as outgroups based on a previous study (Carranza et al. 2008). The Eumeces sequences were used to clarify the phylogenetic position and validate the systematics and of the new species in comparison to other known congeners.

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 291 Genomic DNA was extracted from thigh muscles and isolated using non-organic DNA Extraction Procedure, Proteinase K and Salting out (Maurya et al., 2013). We performed PCR reactions to amplify partial regions of non- protein coding 16S rRNA (573 bp) and the protein-coding gene Cytochrome b (Cytb, 642 bp). The PCR conditions for both genes were as follows: 4 minutes at 94°C for denaturation, followed by 36 cycles of 40 seconds at 94°C, 40 seconds at 56°C for annealing and 1:30 minutes at 72°C for primer extension, then a final 10 minutes incubation at 72°C. Primers and source references are presented in Table 2. The compiled alignment comprised of 22 sequences of the partial sequences of the 16S and Cytochrome b. The amplified genes were sequenced with an automatic DNA sequencer by relevant protocols of Macrogen Company, South Korea.

TABLE 2. List of the primers, their sequences and references. Gene Primer Sequence 5′-3′ Reference Cytb L14724 (F) CGAAGCTTGATATGAAAAACCATCGTTG Kocher et al., 1998; Meyer et al., 1990 H16064 (R) CTTTGGTTTACAAGAACAATGCTTTA Burbrink et al. 2000 L14919 (F) AACCACCGTTGTTATTCAACT de Queiroz et al. (2002) Ei700r (R) GGGGTGAAAGGGGATTTT(AG)TC Rastegar Pouyani et al., 2009 16S 16SL (F) GCCTGTTTATCAAAAACAT Palumbi et al. (1991) 16SH (R) CCGGTCTGAACTCAGATCACGT Palumbi et al. (1991)

The alignment was performed using MAFFT v.7 (Katoh & Standley 2013). We used MEGA v.7 (Kumar et al. 2016) to translate the coding gene (Cytb) to amino acid to check for stop codons, and to calculate the inter-specific uncorrected p-distances. We used MrModeltest 2.3 (Nylander 2004) to identify the best evolutionary models under the Akaike information criteria (Posada & Buckley 2004) for each gene independently. Phylogenetic analyses were performed using maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian Inference (BI) methods. ML analysis was performed with RAxML v.7.2.8 (Stamatakis 2006) using the concatenated dataset (16S+Cytb). We implemented RAxML GUI v.1.3 (Silvestro & Michalak 2012) while using a GTRGAMMA model of sequence evolution, for 10 runs, using 1000 bootstrap replicates (Felsenstein 1985). The analysis involved 22 nucleotide sequences. Codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd+Noncoding. All positions with less than 95% site coverage were eliminated. That is, fewer than 5% alignment gaps, missing data, and ambiguous bases were allowed at any position. Bayesian Inference analysis run for 50*106 steps, sampling states every 1000 generations performed with BEAST v1.7.5 (Drummond & Rambaut 2007). Here we used a simple model of speciation, Calibrated Yule model (Heled & Drummond 2012) as the tree prior that is more appropriate when considering sequences from di?erent species. For clock model, we left the selection at the default value of a strict molecular clock. In the site model panel, GTR selected for 16S and HKY for Cytb both as invariant sites + gamma heterogeneity as substitution model. The convergence in runs was assessed using TRACER v.1.6 (Rambaut et al. 2014) wherein we checked for adequate effective sample sizes (ESS values>200). LogCombiner v.1.7.5 used to combine the runs and TreeAnnotator v.1.7.4 (Drummond et al. 2012) to summarize the sampled trees after discarding initial 25% ‘burn- in’ states, both implemented in the BEAST package.

Results

Molecular analyses. The final dataset for phylogenetic analyses included partial mitochondrial fragments of 16S and Cytb from 22 individuals. Selected evolutionary models and prior specifications were GTR+I+G for 16S and HKY+I+G for Cytb. The percentages of pairwise uncorrected p-distances of 16S and Cytb among studied taxa and two outgroups are presented in Table 3. Genetic differences among subspecies is 6–7% for Cytb and 1–2% for 16S. However, the same distance among Eumeces persicus sp. nov. and the current subspecies is 13–17% between for Cytb, and 11% for 16S. Similarly, the distance between E. zarudnyi and the current subspecies is 15–18 for Cytb and 12–13% for 16S. Also, the calculated genetic distance between E. persicus sp. nov. and E. zarudnyi was 12% for Cytb and 5% for 16S gene (Table 3).

292 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. TABLE 3. Uncorrected pairwise genetic differences (p-distance) for 16S (upper-right) and Cytb (lower-left) among different species/subspecies of the genus Eumeces. Taxa 1234567 1- Chalcides ocellatus 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.16 0.12 0.13 2- Eurylepis taeniolatus 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.12 3- E. s. princeps 0.16 0.18 0.03 0.13 0.02 0.11 4- E. s. pavimentatus 0.19 0.22 0.08 0.13 0.01 0.11 5- E. zarudnyi 0.22 0.20 0.16 0.18 0.12 0.05 6- E. s. schneiderii 0.17 0.18 0.06 0.07 0.16 0.11 7- Eumeces persicus sp.nov 0.17 0.18 0.14 0.17 0.12 0.15

The reconstructed trees using both ML and BI methods resulted in identical tree topologies with relatively high bootstrap and posterior probability values, respectively (Fig. 2). The evolutionary history inferred using ML was based on the General Time Reversible model. The tree with the highest log likelihood (-3163.8500) is shown (Fig. 2B).

FIGURE 2. The Bayesian tree (A) and the ML tree (B) based on the concatenated dataset. Numbers next to the nodes denote posterior probability (in A) and bootstrap support values (in B). Nodes without values have 100% support. The colors of the taxa are according to the distribution map in Figure 1.

The resultant trees revealed two main clades. One included E. persicus sp. nov. and E. zarudnyi, and the other included (E. s. princeps + E. s. pavimentatus + E. s. schneiderii) with high posterior probability (0.95) and relatively low bootstrap support value (70%). The phylogenetic position of E. zarudnyi and its genetic distance in comparison to other subspecies within the E. schneiderii complex points to the requirement of its assignment as a distinct species. Therefore, we hereafter consider E. schneiderii zarudnyi as a valid species and represent it as E. zarudnyi. It differs from the schneiderii group in coloration, and it occupies lower elevations. According to a phylogenetic species concept, mitochondrial DNA sequences distinguishes it as a distinct species from other

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 293 subspecies of E. schneiderii. Results of ML/BI analyses revealed a distinct phylogenetic position for E. persicus sp. nov. and revealed a sister relationship with E. zarudnyi as the result of Bayesian and ML analyses showed with statistically high Bayesian posterior probability (1.00) and bootstrap support values (100) (Fig. 2). Delineating E. persicus sp. nov. along with E. zarudnyi from E. schneiderii subspecies based on molecular data provides a strong basis for recognizing this lineage as distinct and well differentiated from E. schneiderii ssp. The taxonomy and systematic status of E. persicus and E. zarudnyi are presented in the following sections.

Eumeces persicus sp. nov. Proposed vernacular name: Persian striped skink (Figs. 3–6; Tables 3–5)

Holotype: RUZM-SE-07 (Razi University Zoological Museum), an adult male, collected 28 km southwest of Tehran Province from flat plains around the Imam Khomaini Airport (IKA), at 528078 E, 3917723 N, at an elevation of about 1100m, collected by Hiva Faizi, on 26th of June 2011. Paratypes: two specimens, one male ZMMU R-14723 (SVL: 101.8 mm; TL: 151.2 mm) and one female ZMMU R-15005 (SVL: 96.2 mm, TL:157 mm) were collocated by Roman Nazarov, 04.05.2014 in Kerman Province, about 20 km SE of Orzueeyeh city, N 28 26; E 56 10, h 1047m a.s.l. This locality is about 900 km from the type locality. Other material. A single tail (ERP 6506) was collected at the type locality by the authors. It was solely for the molecular analyses. Etymology. The species epithet “persicus” is an adjective that refers to the current known distribution of the new species—Iran (=Persia). Diagnosis (Table 4). The new striped, small-bodied Eumeces persicus sp. nov. differs in morphology, characteristics, and behavior from the uniform-colored, large-bodied E. s. princeps and E. zarudnyi. The new species is considered a desert dweller in the plains of central Iranian plateau in the eastern slopes of the Zagros Mountains. It is a medium-sized skink, (SVL: 103.27; TL: 115.45), distinguished by two clear, wide, and brown lateral lines extending from the ear opening to the hindlimbs, and two relatively less distinct brown lines along both sides of vertebral line, with scattered light orange spots in life, two median rows of dorsal scale widely enlarged, in eight longitudinal rows. Eyelids with transparent discs (Fig. 3). Due to relatively similarity in overall body forms in Eumeces persicus sp. nov. and E. cholistanensis and their geographical vicinity, we present some pholidosis characteristics to clarify the distinctness and validation of these species (Table 4). Some descriptive differences are as follows: the nasal scale slightly contacts the first supralabial, but not touching the second one; in contrast, in E. cholistanensis (and also in E. s. princeps) the nasal scale is in contact with first supralabial; the interparietal and frontal are in the same shape, the length of the former is more than half the length of the latter in E. cholistanensis, while in E. persicus sp.nov the length of frontal is greater than the length of interparietal; the frontonasal in E. cholistanensis is slightly smaller than each prefrontal, wider than long, its width less than one and one-half times its length, extending considerably forward between the supranasals, which are laterally in contact with nasals which is exactly in reverse situation in E. persicus sp. nov. There are trianglar prefrontals in E. persicus sp. nov. in comparison with hexagonal prefrontals in E. cholistanensis. Ear openings are vertical with five preauricular lobules in E. persicus sp. nov., in contrast to there being no lobules on the ear openings of E. cholistanensis. The number of subdigital lamellae under the toes and fingers are greater in E. persicus sp. nov. than in E. cholistanensis (Fig. 3 and Table 4). Description of Holotype. Upper head scales relatively convex; head relatively short (HL: 20.08 mm); nasal scale contacting the first supralabial not touching the second one; rhomboid frontonasal with equal length and width relatively larger than trianglar prefrontals; frontal hexagonal, distinctly longer than its width; rostral separating nasal shields, slightly broader than high, triangular, distinctly broader than frontonasal in dorsal view; frontal shield at middle of head as long as its distance from both rostral and occipital with median points into frontonasals anteriorly and frontoparietals posteriorly, distinctly longer than width, its length more than two times its greatest width; frontoparietals slightly smaller than prefrontals, relatively hexagonal with a median suture in line with the prefrontals; seven supraoculars with three enlarged median ones; frontal is bordered by three median supraoculars; 4–5 supra ciliaries on each side, in direct contact with supraoculars; interparietal is longer than broad,

294 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. more than half of the frontal and twice as long as frontonasal, bordered by first pair of nuchals posteriorly, abruptly truncated at both ends; parietals relatively flat and nearly as wide as its length; body scales regular in longitudinal rows juxtaposing relatively; two median dorsal rows enlarged, much wider than long and extended from the nuchals to tail dorsum; 67 paired middorsal enlarged scales, in a single longitudinal row, from interparietal to mid hindlimbs; 71 ventral scales in a single longitudinal row from postmental to anal; eight supra- and seven infralabials; 12 ventral series in longitudinal rows along the belly; 24 scales around midbody; 19 rows of lamella under the fourth finger and 18 under the fourth toe; ear openings vertical with five preauricular lobules, the first one above the largest and the last one the smallest; mental shield narrower than rostral; three azygous postmentals, being broader backward, all broader than mental shield; four pairs of chain shields, first pair not in contact fully, separated by one to four scales backward; two large median preanal shields, 26 scales around the tail base just posterior to vent. Coloration in life. Some scattered orange spots with very low density on the dorsal surface and a faint yellow/ orange color on supralabial scales on both sides of the body; two vivid wide, dark brown stripes on lateral sides, extended from ear opening to hindlimbs; two median light brown dorsal stripes from mid forelimbs to mid hindlimbs; head uniformly brown-olive; lips, chain, and ventral surfaces whitish (Fig. 4).

FIGURE 3. Holotype of Eumeces persicus sp. nov. RUZM-SE-07, dorsal (A) and ventral (B) views of the head, and a view of palmar region (C).

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 295 TABLE 4. Metric and meristic characters for Eumeces persicus sp. nov. (holotype) and its congeners. Measurements are presented in millimeter. References This study Minton, 1966 Khan, 1997, 2006 Masroor, 2009 Characters E. persicus sp. nov. E. s. princeps E. zarudnyi E. blythianus E. indothalensis E. cholistanensis SVL 103.27 106–140 69–145 85–111 57–60 88.2–102.7 TL 115.45 112–210 78–125 140–170 94–259 148.5 SVL/TL 0.9 0.9–0.7 0.89–1.16 0.61–0.65 0.20–0.61 0.7 HL 20.08 18.21–27.25 17.85–19.5 15 13–17 21.1–23.3 WH 16.21 10.02–18.45 11.7–15.91 - 9–11 13.1–15 HL/HW 1.23 1.8–1.48 1.3–1.52 - 1.4–1.5 1.6–1.5 HH 11.08 10.88–16.13 13.25–16.5 - - 11.6–12.4 LFL 30.14 25.94–37.44 28.65–34.1 - - - LHL 45.16 41.46–57.12 47.4–56.2 - - - LFL/LHL 0.67 0.6–0.7 0.6–0.61 - - - ENL 5.27 6.45–7.08 5.48–6.98 - 4 7.8–8.4 EEL 9.87 9.46–10.25 8.25–10.24 - 9 11–12.4 NL 15.18 16.78 –17.58 15.74–17.0 - - - LF 19.40 34.08–35.02 28.45–32.1 - - - LL 10.54 15.8–16.74 14.8–16.5 - - - LA 7.14 10.8–11.02 11.24–12.4 - - - NSL 8 8–9 9 8 8 8–10 NIL 7 6–8 8 6–7 6 7–8 NVP 71 67–75 68–70 - 60–63 64–67 NDS 24 26–30 32–34 28–30 26–27 26–28 NPP 3 2–3 2–4 1 2 2 PN 4 4–5 3–4 3 1 2–6 SL1F 8 8–10 10–11 - 6–7 6–7 SL2F 11 12–13 12–14 - 9–11 9–10 SL3F 16 16–18 15–16 - 10–11 10–11 SL4F 18 18–19 20–21 - 9–11 9–11 SL1T 9 10–11 12–14 - 6–7 6–8 SL2T 12 13–14 19–21 - 9–10 9 SL3T 16 17–18 21–22 - 12–13 12–13 SL4T 19 21–23 26–27 - 16–17 15–16

Variation and comparisons. There are some metric and meristic differences within the type series which are most likely due to geographic variation and the great distance between the localities of the holotype and paratypes (Table 5 and Fig. 5). E. persicus sp. nov. differs from all other species/subspecies of the genus Eumeces by some pholidosis characteristics described above with more details and distinctly different color pattern including regular brown lines dorsally and laterally. A comparison of the new species with some other species/subspecies is included in the phylogenetic tree presented in Fig. 5. There are some distinct morphological difference between E. persicus sp. nov. and most of its congeners (Table 4). The coloration of the new species differs from that of E. schneiderii ssp and E. algeriensis by the striped laterals with dark brown stripes. There are five distinct preauricular lobules in E. persicus sp.nov in comparison with the absence of lobules in the ear openings of E. cholistanensis. Three azygous postmentals in the new species differ from the single postmental in E. blythianus and a different color pattern and stripes in comparison with E. indothalensisis. Eumeces persicus sp. nov. is the third Eumeces species known from Iran, and the tenth taxon (includes species and subspecies) described within the genus.

296 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. Habitat characteristics (Fig. 6). The habitat of the new species is composed of broad flat vegetated plains with scattered bushes and soft soils. We noticed at least three borrows in the habitats that were most likely used for escaping and nesting. The species is usually found in the course of flood plains or seasonal waterways. E. persicus sp. nov was generally seen to inhibit lower elevations (from 1100–2100 m above sea level) in the central Iranian Plateau) and drier environment than the larger, uniform morphs (e.g., E. schneiderii).

FIGURE 4. (A) Holotype of Eumeces persicus sp. nov RUZM-SE-07. Inset shows close-up of the lateral side of the head. (B) Paratype specimen (ZMMU R-14723-1) alive in its habitat.

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 297 FIGURE 5. Photographs of live specimens of Eumeces persicus sp. nov. in comparison with some other species/subspecies included in phylogenetic tree presented in Figure 2. (A) E. persicus sp. nov. (B) E. zarudnyi (C) E. s. schneiderii (D) E. s. pavimentatus (E) E. s. princeps.

298 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. Distribution. The new species is widely distributed at the eastern Zagros Mountain slopes, in the central plains of Iran from the deserts of southern Tehran (holotype) to Kerman Province (paratypes) encompassing a distribution range of about 900 km (Fig.1). To date, only two localities are known for E. persicus sp. nov. and its distribution is most likely much wider. Further investigation is necessary to find more records in other regions with similar habitats situated between the two current localities. Eumeces persicus sp. nov. is also found in sympatry with other species including snakes and such as Bunopus crassicauda, Tenuidactylus caspium, Trachylepis aurata, Varanus griseus, Spalerosophis diadema, Malpolon insignitus, Lytorhynchus ridgewayi and Platyceps karelini, and specifically in close syntopy with Trapelus agilis.

TABLE 5. Metric and meristic characters for Eumeces persicus sp. nov. type series. Measurements are presented in millimeter. Abbreviation of variables are detailed in the Materials and Methods section. Variable Holotype Paratype 1 Paratype 2 RUZM-SE-07 ZMMU R-14723-1 ZMMU R-14723-2 Male Female Female SVL 103.27 101.8 96.2 TL 115.45 151.2 157 SVL/TL 0.9 0.67 0.6 HL 20.08 20.0 19.7 HW 16.21 14.6 12.6 HL/HW 1.23 1.37 1.56 HH 11.08 11.8 8.8 LFL 30.14 30.2 27.2 LHL 45.16 45.8 42.5 LFL/LHL 0.67 0.65 0.64 ENL 5.27 5.2 4.8 EEL 9.87 8.7 7.3 NL 15.18 14.2 13.6 LF 19.40 15.2 14.7 LL 10.54 12.2 12.2 LA 7.14 8.7 9.5 NSL 8 8 8\8 NIL 7 6 6\7 NVP 71 68 71 NDS 24 29 30 NPP 3 3 3 PN 4 4 4 SL1F 8 6 6 SL2F 11 9 10 SL3F 16 11 14 SL4F 18 14 13 SL5F 8 8 9 SL1T 9 8 10 SL2T 12 9 11 SL3T 16 12 14 SL4T 19 17 18 SL5T 10 11 11

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 299 FIGURE 6. Habitat of Eumeces persicus sp. nov., south of Tehran (type locality, A) and Kerman (B).

Key to the species of Eumeces in Iran and neighboring regions

1a Series of dark brown stripes on sides and dorsum alternating with light narrower stripes...... 2 1b Nearly uniform grey or olive above, without dorsal stripes or with colored lateral lines...... Eumeces blythianus 2b Two or more azygous postmentals ...... 3

300 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. 3a Nasal scale reaches the second supralabial ...... Eumeces cholistanensis 3b Nasal scale dose not touch the second supralabial ...... 4 4a Dorsal pattern with 5–7 clear and distinct dark brown stripes separated by alternating light narrower stripes, extended on to the tail ...... Eumeces indothalensis 4b Two broad lateral brown stripes from ear opening to hind-limbs, not extending on to the tail ...... Eumeces persicus sp. nov. 5a No lateral light colored line (yellow or red orange) present ...... Eumeces algeriensis 5b A colored lateral line from mouth margins to middle of body ...... 6 6a A distinct, light yellow lateral line present ...... Eumeces schneiderii 6b A reddish or red brick lateralline present ...... Eumeces zarudnyi

Discussion

It is likely that ancestors of the genus Eumeces sensu lato originated in Asia and then spread in two directions, towards Africa (as a western lineage) and America (as an eastern lineage) (Taylor 1935; Brandley et al. 2012). The western lineage led to a group including Eumeces senso stricto (the E. schneiderii group of Taylor 1935), Scincus, and Scincopus. All these taxa form a clade that is hypothesized to have originated in or the Middle East (about 14 million years ago), and then spread out to (Carranza et al. 2008; Brandley et al. 2010). The far eastern forms mainly dispersed to North America through the Bering isthmus to form Plestiodon (about 18–30 million years ago) that is clearly an older radiation than Eumeces senso stricto (Brandley et al. 2011, 2012). The genus Eumeces sensu stricto has eastern and western geographic form. In fact, E. persicus sp. nov. has a series of dark brown stripes on its sides and dorsum alternating with narrower light stripes, which is phenotypically more similar to the eastern forms of the genus (E. indothalensis, E. blythianus and E. cholistanensis) which are distributed in and . Color patterns that are nearly uniform grey or olive above, without dorsal stripes or lines or with colored lines laterally are distinctive between eastern forms and the western forms and these characteristics, grouped E. zarudnyi with the western forms which are E. schneiderii ssp occurring in the Iranian Plateau, Caucasia and , and E. algeriensis subspecies occurring in Morocco and . Despite the similarities in overall external morphology, E. zarudnyi is phylogenetically closer to E. persicus sp. nov than to the us E. schneiderii complex. Unfortunately, there are no sequences available in GenBank for the eastern species. Therefore, the missing species/subspecies ranging in Pakistan and Afghanistan prevent us from revealing their phylogenetic positions in comparison with the existing Iranian and western forms of the genus. Eumeces persicus sp. nov. is restricted to flat habitats in central Iran and it seems that some ecological and biogeographic barriers have driven the evolution of this species. Dasht-e-Kavir and Kavir-e-Lout, are two large sand desert regions located at the central and eastern parts of the Iranian Plateau. These two deserts may have acted as biogeographic and physical barriers for dispersal of Eumeces persicus sp. nov. Furthermore, the mountainous ecosystems of the northern (i.e., the Elborz and Kopet Dagh mountains) and western (i.e., the Zagros Mountains) parts of these deserts are connected and restrict the distribution of Eumeces persicus sp. nov. These biogeographic barriers have been suggested to drive the cladogenesis of other in the region (e.g., Macey et al. 1998; Heidari et al. 2014; Rastegar-Poyani et al. 2009; Tamar et al. 2016). The phylogenetic tree and estimated genetic distances presented in this study suggest there is subspecific genetic variation and divergence in E. schneiderii populations in Iran and Turkey. However, analysis of these relationships is beyond the scope of the present study. A strongly supported ancestral dichotomy between a clade containing E. zarudnyi-Eumeces persicus sp. nov. and the clade of E. schneiderii subspecies is provided in all trees. There is strong support and stable phylogenetic position for the sister relationships and phylogenetic evidence to show species level for E. persicus sp. nov., and E. zarudnyi and elevating the latter to a fully separate species in all resulted trees.

Taxonomic accounts

Our phylogenetic analysis recovered E. persicus sp. nov. and E. zarudnyi at the base of the trees, whereas E. s. princeps, E. s. pavimentatus and E. s. schneiderii were nested at the most derived node, sister to the clade containing the new species. These results show that E. zarudnyi is misclassified and misplaced as a subspecies of

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 301 E. schneiderii, and even that they are not sister taxa. In fact, although Taylor 1935 grouped the four current subspecies into E. schneiderii complex when he published his revision in 1935, this does not automatically mean that the four subspecies are valid taxonomically as separate species or subspecies. Results of phylogenetic trees and genetic distances treat E. zarudnyi here as a full species and not as a subspecies of E. schneiderii. Eumeces persicus sp. nov. and E. zarudnyi, as sister taxa, form a deeply divergent lineage and well-supported clade that place E. zarudnyi outside the other subspecies of E. schneiderii complex rather than within it, contrary to our expectation. (Fig. 2). The clade consisting E. persicus sp nov. and E. zarudnyi is distributed in lowlands and true deserts of central and southern Iran, but the members of the clade consisting of the subspecies of E. schneiderii is widely distributed from Uzbekistan westward through Iran, and Turkey and occupies a variety of habitats including both lowlands and highland regions. The clade containing E. schneiderii subspecies represent some subclades corresponding to subspecific level and contained at least three subspecies as E. s. princeps, E. s. pavimentatus, and E. s. schneiderii. These taxa are in congruence with traditional taxonomy of the subspecies and show some geographical concordance. Perera et al. (2012) and Carranza et al. (2008) analyses based on mitochondrial DNA showed the same validation for these subspecies. Therefore, neither “E. persicus”, nor “E. zarudnyi” are nested among other subspecies of E. schneiderii subspecies and they are completely placed in a deeply divergent separate clade in all phylogenetic trees. Therefore, we conclude and strongly believe that “E. persicus” (and “E. zarudnyi”) are true and valid species and we assign these taxa to a full species. In addition, genetic distances among E. persicus sp. nov. along with E. zarudnyi with other subspecies is outside the range of subspecific level genetic distance range (Table 2). Additional molecular analyses with a broader sampling is required in order to determine the phylogenetic relationships among Eumeces lizards.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the funding received towards a PhD thesis research project from the Razi University and Science Ministry of Iran, research project of MSU Zoological Museum (АААА-А16-116021660077-3) and with financial support by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (РНФ, project 14-50-00029). We would like to thank Dr. Kraig Adler (Cornell University) and Dr. Karin Tamar for their very careful reading of the manuscript and giving such constructive comments that substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. The authors are also very grateful to wild life photographer Fariborz Heidari. We thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our manuscript and their many insightful comments and suggestions.

References

Anderson, S.C. (1999) The Lizards of Iran. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Ithaca, New York, 415 pp. Arnold, E.N. & Leviton, A.E. (1977) A revision of the genus Scincus (Reptilia: Scincidae). Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 3, 187–248. Beltz, E. (2006) Scientific and Common Names of the Reptiles and Amphibians of North America—Explained. Available from: http://ebeltz.net/herps/etymain.html#Snakes (accessed 12 June 2017) Brandley, M.C., Schmitz, A. & Reeder, T.W. (2005) Partitioned Bayesian analyses, partition choice, and the phylogenetic relationships of Scincid lizards. Systematic Biology, 54, 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150590946808 Brandley, M.C., Wang, Y., Guo, X., de Oca, A.N., Fería-Ortíz, M., Hikida, T. & Ota, H. (2011) Accommodating heterogenous rates of evolution in molecular divergence dating methods: an example using intercontinental dispersal of Plestiodon (Eumeces) lizards. Systematic Biology, 60, 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syq045 Brandley, M.C., Hidetoshi, O.F., Tsutomu, H., Adrián, N.M., Manuel, F.O., Xianguang, G. & Yuezhao, W. (2012) The phylogenetic systematics of blue-tailed (Plestiodon) and the family Scincidae. Zoological Journal of the Linnaean Society, 165, 163–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00801.x Burbrink, F.T., Lawson, R. & Slowinski, J.B. (2000) Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography of the polytypic North American ratsnake (Elaphe obsoleta): a critique of the subspecies concept. Evolution, 54, 2107–2118.

302 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2000.tb01253.x Carranza, S., Arnold, E., Geniez, P., Roca, J. & Mateo, J. (2008) Radiation, multiple dispersal and parallelism in the skinks, Chalcides and Sphenops (: Scincidae), with comments on Scincus and Scincopus and the age of the Sahara Desert. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 46, 1071–1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2007.11.018 De Queiroz, A., Lawson, R. & Lemos-Espinal, J.A. (2002) Phylogenetic relationships of North American garter snakes: how much DNA is enough? Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 22, 315–329. https://doi.org/10.1006/mpev.2001.1074 Drummond A.J. & Rambaut, A. (2007) BEAST: Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 7, 214. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-214 Griffith, H., Ngo, A. & Murphy, R.W. (2000) A cladistics evaluation of the cosmopolitan genus Eumeces Wiegmann 1834 (Reptilia, Squamata, Scincidae). Russian Journal of Herpetology, 7 (1), 1–16. ["Novoeumeces gen nov.", p. 11] Heidari, N., Rastegar Pouyani, N., Rastegar-Pouyani, E. & Faizi, H. (2014) Molecular phylogeny and biogeography of the genus Acanthodactylus Fitzinger, 1834 (Reptilia: Lacertidae) in Iran, inferred from mtDNA Sequences. Zootaxa, 3860 (4), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3860.4.6 Katoh, K. & Standley, D.M. (2013) MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30 (4), 772–780. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst010 Khan, M.S. & Ahmed, N. (1987) On a collection of amphibians and reptiles from Baluchistan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 19 (4), 361–370. Khan, M.S. & Khan, M.R.Z. (1997) A new skink from the Thal desert of Pakistan. Asiatic Herpetological Research, 7, 61–67. https://doi.org/ 10.5962/bhl.part.18856 Khan, M.S. (2006) Amphibians and reptiles of Pakistan. Krieger Publishing Company. Malabar, Florida, 311 pp. Kumar, S., Stecher, G. & Tamura, K. (2016) MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 33 (7), 1870–1874. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw054 Kumlutas, Y., Arikan, H., Ilgaz, C. & Kaska, Y. (2007) A new subspecies, Eumeces schneiderii barani n. ssp (Reptilia: Sauria: Scincidae) from Turkey. Zootaxa, 1387 (1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1387.1.2 Kocher, T.D., Thomas, W.K., Meyer, A., Edwards, S.V., Pääbo, S. & Villablance, F.X. (1989) Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in : Amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 86, 6196–6200. [PMCID: PMC297804] https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.86.16.6196 Lanfear, R., Calcott, B., Ho, S.Y. & Guindon, S. (2012) Partition Finder: combined selection of partitioning schemes and substitution models for phylogenetic analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 29, 1695–1701. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mss020 Masroor, R. (2009) Description of a new species of Eumeces (Sauria: Scincidae) from Pakistan. Zootaxa, 2161, 33–46. Maurya, R., Kumar, B. & Sundar, S. (2013) Evaluation of salt-Out method for the isolation of DNA from whole blood a pathological approach of DNA based diagnosis. International Journal of Biological & Pharmaceutical Research, 2 (2), 53–57. Macey, J., Robert, J.A., Schulte, J.A., Ananjeva, N.B., Larson, A., Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Sakhat, M.S. & Papenfuss, T.J. (1998) Phylogenetic Relationships among Agamid Lizards of the Laudakia caucasia Species Group: Testing Hypotheses of Biogeographic Fragmentation and an Area Cladogram for the Iranian Plateau. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 10 (1), 118–131. https://doi.org/10.1006/mpev.1997.0478 Meyer, A. & Wilson, A.C. (1990) Origin of tetrapods inferred from their mitochondrial-DNA affiliation to lungfish. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 31, 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02106050 Minton, S.A. (1966) A contribution to the herpetology of Western Pakistan. The Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 134 (2), 28–184. Nei, M. & Kumar, S. (2000) Molecular Evolution and Phylogenetics. Oxford University Press, New York, 352 pp. Nylander, J.A.A. (2004) Mrmodeltest v2. Program distributed by the author. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University. Palumbi, S.R., Martin, A., Romano, S., McMillan, W.O., Stice, L. & Grabowski, G. (1991) The Simple Fool's Guide to PCR. Version 2.0. Privately published, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, 45 pp. Perera, A., Sampaio, F., Costa, S., Salvi, D. & Harris, D.J. (2012) Genetic variability and relationships within the skinks Eumece salgeriensis and Eumeces schneideri using mitochondrial markers, African Journal of Herpetology, 61, 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/21564574.2011.583284 Posada, D. & Buckley, T. (2004) Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantages of Akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Systematics Biology, 53, 793–808.

NEW EUMECES FROM IRAN Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press · 303 https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150490522304 Pyron, R.A., Burbrink, F.T. & Wiens, J.J. (2013) A phylogeny and revised classification of Squamata, including 4161 species of lizards and snakes. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 13, 93. https://doi.org/ 10.5061/dryad.82h0m/4 Rastegar Pouyani, E., Rastegar Pouyani, N., Kazemi Noureini, S., Joger, U. & Wink, M. (2009) Molecular phylogeny of the Eremias persica complex of the Iranian plateau (Reptilia: Lacertidae), based on mtDNA sequences. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 158 (3), 641–660. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2009.00553.x Schmitz, A., Mausfeld, P. & Embert, D. (2004) Molecular studies on the genus Eumeces Wiegmann, 1834: phylogenetic relationships and taxonomic implications. Hamadryad, 28, 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0056-0 Silvestro, D. & Michalak, I. (2012) RaxmlGUI: A graphical front-end for RAxML. Organisms Diversity and Evolution, 12 (6), 335–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0056-0 Sindaco, R. & Jeremcenko, V.K. (2008) The reptiles of the Western Palearctic. Edizioni Belvedere, Latina, 579 pp. Stamatakis, A. (2006) Maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models, Bioinformatics, 22, 2688–2690. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl446 Tamar, K., Carranza, S., Sindaco, R., Moravec, J., Trape, J.F. & Meiri, S. (2016) Out of Africa: Phylogeny and biogeography of the widespread genus Acanthodactylus (Reptilia: Lacertidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 103, 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2016.07.003 Taylor, E.H. (1935) A taxonomic study of the cosmopolitan lizards of the genus Eumeces with an account of the distribution and relationship of its species. University of Kansas Science Bulletin, 23 (14), 1–643.

304 · Zootaxa 4320 (2) © 2017 Magnolia Press FAIZI ET AL.