tot de Dierkunde 58 7-11 — 1988 Bijdragen , (1):

The skull of Chamaeleo nasutus adds more information to

the relationship of Chamaeleo with Rhampholeonand

Brookesia (Chamaeleonidae, Reptilia)

by

D. Hillenius

Institute of Taxonomic Zoology (Zoologisch Museum), University of Amsterdam,

P.O. Box 4766, 1009 AT Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract In the of a foregoing paper on relationships

Brookesia and Rhampholeon with Chamaeleo The form of the skull of Chamaeleo nasutus, especially the (Hillenius, 1986) I concluded that both former broad, trigonal parietal, is strikingly similar to the skull of derived from Chamaeleo and that the Rhampholeon. This supports the hypothesis (Hillenius, genera are

1986) that of all chameleons the of species around group probably nearest relatives can be found in the Ch. is the related nasutus most closely to Rhampholeon. Ch. group of species around nasutus.

Microcomplement fixation has confirmed the Résumé first of this conclusion: Brookesia and Rham- part

Le crâne de Chamaeleo nasutus est absolument similaire — à — in pholeon probably originally one taxon celui valable le de Rhampholeon, ce qui est surtout pour have split off from Chamaeleo long after other pariétal qui est large et triangulaire. Ceci vient à l’appui branches of Chamaeleo originated (Hofman et de les Caméléons les l’hypothèse (Hillenius, 1986) que plus in ceux du al., press). étroitement apparentés Rhampholeon sontàgroupe The skulls of and how- d’espèces gravitant autour de Ch. nasutus. Rhampholeon Brookesia,

differ from all Chamaeleo ever, considerably

skulls that were examined until recently. So I INTRODUCTION considered it of importance to obtain a skull of

member of the of around Ch. a group species On several occasions it has been pointed out nasutus to see ifany indication of relationship to that Brookesia Gray, 1864 and Rhampholeon Giin- the deviating form of skulls of Rhampholeon ther, 1874 share a number of characters with and/or Brookesia might be found. the group of species around Chamaeleo nasutus

Dumeril Klaver & Bibron, 1836. (1979) argued that the but in MATERIAL AND METHOD agreements were parallellisms fact he did not the arguments for this provide Thanks to the courtesy ofDr. E. R. Brygoo, curator of the

In later Klaver of the Museum National assumption. a paper (1981) con- herpetological department d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris, I received in cluded that Chamaeleo was derived from exchange a

specimen of Chamaeleo nasutus. The skull was carefully Brookesia. macerated in the Zoological Museum of Amsterdam and

inscribed under number 16170. It has been compared to

Note added A. — Dr. D. Hillenius skulls of of all the t by Zuiderwijk. unex- representatives species groups belonging

Chamaeleo described Klaver, and to pectedly died on May 4th, 1987. This posthumous to (as by 1981),

contributes the discussion the of the Brookesia + publication to on taxonomy representatives group Rhampholeon.

Skulls of the all with the collection of as did the main of his scientific work. following specimens, chameleons, part

The of this in number of the Museum of Amsterdam, have text paper is, essential, an unchanged Zoological

that found in his Drs. W. been examined in detail: manuscript was papers.

Chamaeleo basiliscus Ch. chamaeleon no. Bergmans was helpful to select the skulls for the illustra- no. 15223, 10267, tions. Mr. L. van der Laan made the photographs and Ch. fischeri no. 14409, Ch. jacksonii no. 16172, Ch. johnstoni

Ch. lateralis Ch. montium Mr. J. Zaagman composed the figures. We thank Drs. no. 15216, no. 10168, no. 16174,

Ch. Klaver for nomenclatural corrections in Ch. nasutus oustaleti 15215 and making some no. 16170, Ch. no. no. the manuscript. 10165, Ch. oweni no. 15221, Ch. pardalis no. 14332, Ch.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/24/2021 11:26:01AM via free access 8 D. HILLENIUS - CHAMAELEO SKULLS

lateral view view of the Fig. 1. Rhampholeon spectrum, (a) and dorsal (b) same skull.

Ch. Ch. Ch. pumilus no. 15217, senegalensis no. 15224, tigris no lateralis Gray, 1831, Ch. pardalis Cuvier, 1829, Ch. kerstenii 16173, zeylanicus no. 15222, Rhampholeon no Ch. fischeri Reichenow, 1887 and Ch. tigris 15565, and Rh. spectrum no. 10264. Kuhl, 1820;

group C: Ch. chamaeleon (Linnaeus, 1758), Ch.

DESCRIPTION AND DISCUSSION chamaeleon zeylanicus Laurenti, 1768, Ch.

basiliscus Cope, 1868, and Ch. senegalensis

The skull of Chamaeleo be nasutus proves to quite Daudin, 1802;

different from skulls of other chameleons of the E: Ch. oweni Ch. montium group Gray, 1831,

genus Chamaeleo (see figs. 2 and 3), and less dif- Buchholz, 1874, and Ch. johnstoni Boulenger,

ferent from skulls of members of Klaver's group 1901;

of Brookesia F: Ch. Ch. A, consisting and Rhampholeon. The group jacksonii Boulenger, 1896,

likeness of the nasutus skull with that of Rham- bitaeniatus Fischer, 1884, Ch. hoehnelli Stein- pholeon in particular is striking (see figs. 1 and dachner, 1891, and Ch. ellioti Giinther, 1895.

2). The only deviating skull known until now

In in most chameleons the parietal is a narrow was Ch. pumilus c.s. (group B, see fig. 4),

curved crestlike bone, horizontally straight or which the parietal forms a broad bone with

in vertical We this of skull in lateralborders. This of a plane. find type parallel parietal was one

(see fig. 3): the main arguments of several herpetologists

Ch. whom South group B: oustaleti Mocquard, 1894, (among most Africans, see Raw,

Fig. 2. Chamaeleo nasutus, lateral (a) and dorsal view (b) of the same skull.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/24/2021 11:26:01AM via free access - 1988 9 BIJDRAGEN TOT DE DIERKUNDE, 58 (1)

3. of E and Left lateral side: dorsal view of Fig. Representatives species group B, C, F, respectively. side: view; right the b: Ch. d: Ch. f: Ch. h: Ch. same specimen; a & oustaleti, c & senegalensis, e & oweni, g & jacksonii.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/24/2021 11:26:01AM via free access 10 D. HILLENIUS - CHAMAELEO SKULLS

Fig. 4. Chamaeleo pumilus, lateral (a) and dorsal view (b) of the same skull.

1976) to regard pumilus c.s. as belonging to - inguinal pits in some species (not occurring

in other of separate genera (Microsaura, Bradypodion etc.). groups Chamaeleo).

that such broad The Klaver (1981) argued a only important difference between

would be and parietal a plesiomorphic character Rhampholeon Ch. nasutus c.s. is the deviating but I that broad and which has in (1986) pointed out narrow squamation Rhampholeon common

in the related with Brookesia. Brookesia differs from parietals occur families Iguanidae Ch. nasutus

and and in the flexible the Agamidae that, moreover, Sphenodon lacking appendages on snout,

the conservative the of Brookesia be Gray, 1872, very represen- although snout nasus may tative of the and Rhynchocephalia (Romer, 1956), regarded as more or less similar. Axillary

of the also do in Brookesia and the sister-group Squamata, possesses a inguinal pits not occur

which form of the is somewhat narrow parietal, makes it more probable parietal different from that is Micro- and Ch. a narrow parietal plesiomorphic. that of Rhampholeon nasutus c.s., complement fixation (Hofman et al., in press) although it is closer to both these groups than to

indicates that Ch. of Chamaeleo. also pumilus c.s. are a younger other species branch within Chamaeleo than the confirmed groups C, E At the end of my 1986 paper I and F. Klaver's (1979) suggestion that Rhampholeon is

The parietal of Ch. nasutus is trigonal, like intermediate between Chamaeleo and Brookesia. that of Rhampholeon. The only difference is that The form of the skull of Chamaeleo nasutus adds

skull the nasutus as a whole is narrower than the more argument to this confirmation.

of all and Ch. one Rhampholeon. So Rhampholeon nasutus have the following characters in common: REFERENCES

- the form trigonal of the parietal (not occur-

in other of HILLENIUS, D., 1986. The relationship of Brookesia ring groups Chamaeleo), Rhampholeon and Chamaeleo (Chamaeleonidae - the small size (Ch. nasutus and related species Reptilia). Bijdr. Dierk., 56 (1): 29-38. are the smallest chameleons, Rhampholeon is HOFMAN, A., L. R. MAXSON, D. HILLENIUS & J. W. ARN-

even smaller), in evidence TZEN, press. Immunological pertaining to

- the of occurrence flexible appendages on the the taxonomic relationships within the family

Chamaeleonidae (Sauria, to snout in some of the species (not occurring in Reptilia). (Submitted Amphibia-Reptilia.) other groups of Chamaeleo), KLAVER, CH. J. J., 1979. A review of Brookesia

- in axillary pits some of the species (also pres- systematics with special reference to lung-

ent in several other of Madagascan species morphology (Reptilia: Sauria: Chamaeleonidae).

Chamaeleo), Bonn. zool. Beitr., 30 (1/2): 162-175.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/24/2021 11:26:01AM via free access BIJDRAGEN TOT DE DIERKUNDE, 58 (1) - 1988 11

1981. Lung-morphology in the Chamaeleonidae ofNatal, South Africa, with descriptions of three new ,

and its Durban Mus. (Sauria) bearing upon phylogeny, systematics species (Sauria: Chameleonidae).

and zoogeography. Z. zool. Syst. EvolForsch., 19 Novit., 11 (7): 139-161.

(1): 36-58. ROMER, A. S., 1956. Osteology ofthe reptiles: i-xxi, 1-772

L. R. 1976. A the dwarf chameleons of RAW, G., survey of (University Chicago Press, Chicago).

Received: 10 April 1988

Downloaded from Brill.com09/24/2021 11:26:01AM via free access