Biosystematica ISSN: 0973-7871(online)

Additional Records on the Distribution, Morphology and Morphometry of Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth (: Caeciliidae)

GOPALAKRISHNA BHATTA1, K.P. DINESH2, P. PRASHANTH3 AND NIRMAL, U. KULKARNI4 1. Department of Zoology, M. G. M. College, Udupi-576 102, Karnataka, India 2. Zoological Survey of India, Western Ghats Field Research Station, Annie Hall Road, Calicut- 673 002, Kerala, India 3. Agumbe Rainforest Research Station, Agumbe -577 411, Karnataka, India 4. Hiru Naik Bldg, Dhuler Mapusa, 403507, Goa, India corresponding author: [email protected]

In India the family Caeciliidae is represented by two Humbarli village, near Koyna, Satara District, endemic genera Gegeneophis Peters and Indotyphlus Maharashtra collected on 19th June 2003. Very recently Taylor. The genus Gegeneophis is represented by 9 Bhatta et al., (2007) discovered G. goaensis from Keri species and the genus Indotyphlus by 2 species (Frost, Village, Sattari Taluk, Goa based on 3 specimens collected 2007). Out of these eleven species, six new descriptions during 2004. were added to this family only in the last five years with During our field explorations on 25.7.2006, we could the advent of intensive explorations and studies in the collect 4 specimens of G. nadkarnii from different Western Ghats. Ravichandran et al., (2003) reported G. localities (Table - 1) of the border districts of Maharastra seshachari based on a single immature adult specimen and Karnataka states. These specimens were sharing collected by P.W. Soman on 12th August 1967 from the habitat with G. goaensis and another unidentified Dorle Village, Ratnagiri District, Maharastra. Giri et al., species of Gegeneophis and Ichthyophis sps. Their (2003) reported G. danieli based on a single mature identity (Figure 1) fits the description of Bhatta and female specimen collected by Varad Giri, Sameer Prashanth (2004): a medium sized Gegeneophis having Kehimkar, Isham Agarwal and Vithoba Hegde, in June many secondary annuli (around 80 annuli) on anterior 2002 from Sindhudurg District, Maharastra. Bhatta and part of the body with the anterior most primary annuli Prashanth (2004) reported G. nadkarnii based on two appearing incomplete mid-dorsally. Few morphological mature male specimens collected during September 2001 and morphometrical variations which were recorded from Bondla Wildlife Sanctuary, Goa. In 2004 Bhatta during the observation are mentioned below (Table – and Srinivasa, reported G. madhavaorum based on two 2). The habitat where the G. nadkarnii were found was mature male specimens collected during August, 2001 moist deciduous forest patches interspersed with from Doddinaguli locality, Mudur Village, Kundapura agricultural lands and homestead areas. Taluk, Udupi District, Karnataka adjacent to the Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary. Giri, et al., (2004) The specimens were measuring from 172 mm to reported Indotyphlus maharashtraensis based on 292 mm; circumference at mid body varying between twelve specimens collected near Dhanagarwada, 18 mm and 30 mm. Teeth count were found to be

© Prof. T.C. Narenderan Trust for Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1): 71-74 http://www.tcntrust.org/journal.php 71 72 GOPALAKRISHNA BHATTA, K.P. DINESH, P. PRASHANTH AND NIRMAL, U. KULKARNI to have a good population of G. nadkarnii, from the conservation point of view few specimens were collected for the documentation purpose. In future a baseline data for this species is required for a great many types of studies including, abundance and biodiversity which is currently of special concern for . Caecilians are occasionally encountered in the field due to their burrowing, secretive and nocturnal habit. This has made the researchers to think that caecilians are quite rare, despite being fairly common in certain habitats (Maurice and Burton 1988) and the diversity of caecilians remains poorly explored (Nussbaum and Wilkinson, 1989). The present investigation supports the remarks of Bhatta (1997) and Pillai and Ravichandran (1999) that for the proper assessment of the status of Figure 1. Gegeneophis nadkarnii in life from Wildernest locality. (ZSI/WGFRS/ V/A/638). the occurrence and abundance of caecilians an extensive systematic survey is necessary. The present report also variable compared to the original description of G. substantiates the observation of Bhatta, (1997, 1998), nadkarnii, premaxillary-maxillary teeth were varying Pillai and Ravichandran (1999), Oommen et al, (2000), from 21 to 29; vomeropalatine teeth between 22 and 23; Measey et al, (2003), Bhatta and Srinivasa (2004), Gower dentary teeth 20 and 21 and splenial teeth from 2 to 4. and Wilkinson (2005), Bhatta et al., (2007) that caecilians Total number of primary annuli was found to be ranging can be common in plantations that have maintained from 107 to 112 and secondary annuli ranging from 77 moisture and shade. In the light of very few quantitative to 84. Sex was determined by opening a slit into body estimates of abundances in India (Bhatta, 1997, cavity in search of gonads. Oommen et al., 2000), it is concluded that not all members of the Gegeneophis are rare, although more During the field study many sightings of G. field studies are needed to readdress the caecilians nadkarnii were made in the surroundings of type subterranean blind spot. locality. By their clear cut morphological characters all these individuals could be identified on the spot and even Earlier to 2000, most of the caecilian species from the young ones with traces of gill slits and tail fins could India were known from the southern part of Western be identified. Although the collection localities were found Ghats. The research work of Giri et al (2003),

TABLE 1. Collection localities for G. nadkarnii Sl No Registration No. Collection locality Dist. from type Latitude Longitude Altitude locality (km) (N) (E) (a msl) 1 ZSI/CLT/V/A/573 (holotype) Bondla 0 15o 25.9’ 74o 6.5’ 168 2 BNHS 4234 (paratype) 3 ZSI/WGFRS/V/A/638 Wildernest 20 15o 38.9’ 74o 7.1’ 600 4 BNHS/4641 Virdi Village, Dodamarg Taluk, Sindhudurg Dist. Maharastra State 5 ZSI/WGFRS/V/A/639 Chorla- Chavatyar. 22 15o 39.6’ 74o 8.7’ 732 6 BNHS/4642 Chorla Village, Khanapur Taluk, Belgaum Dist. Karnataka State

Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1) Additional Records of Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth 73 TABLE 2. Some morphometric (in mm) and meristic data for G. nadkarnii. Measurements were made to the nearest 0.1 mm with dial calipers, except for length and circumference, which were measured with a ruler and a piece of thread. Values in the last column: mean ± standard deviation (range). ZSI/ BNHS/ ZSI/ BNHS/ Total of 4 WGFRS/ 4641 WGFRS/ 4642 specimens V/A/638 Wildernest V/A/639 Chorla Wildernest Chorla Chavatyar Chavatyar Sex Mature Mature Mature Mature female male female male Total length 290 280 245 172 246.8 ± 53.4 (172 – 290) Head length 7.0 7.0 6.2 4.6 6.2 ± 1.1 (4.6 – 7.0) Head width at jaw angle 5.2 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.8 ± 0.5 (4.0 – 5.2) Circumference at mid-body 30 24 22 18 23.5 ± 5.0 (18.0 – 30.0) Width of the body at 1st annular groove 6.2 5.8 5.6 4.4 5.5 ± 0.8 (4.4 – 6.2) Width of the body at broadest region 8.2 9.0 7.0 5.4 7.4 ± 1.6 (5.4 – 9.0) Width of the body at the level of vent 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.0 3.1 ± 0.8 (2.0 – 4.0) Length divided by width 35.3 31.1 35.0 31.8 33.3 ± 2.2 (31.1 – 35.3) Length of the snout projecting beyond mouth 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.3 ± 0.3 (1.0 – 1.6) Distance between jaw angle and top of head 1.8 1.2 1.8 1.0 1.5 ± 0.4 (1.0 – 1.8) Distance between jaw angle and ventral 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.8 ± 0.3 (1.4 – 2.0) surface of lower jaw Distance between jaw angle and tip of lower jaw 6.3 6.0 5.2 4.2 5.4 ± 0.9 (4.2 – 6.3) Distance between nostrils 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.2 1.7 ± 0.4 (1.2 -2.0) Distance between nostril and snout tip 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.9 ± 0.3 (0.6 – 1.2) Distance between tentacles 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.0 3.7 ± 0.5 (3.0 – 4.2) Distance between tentacle and snout tip 3.0 2.8 3.0 2.4 2.8 ± 0.3 (2.4 – 3.0) Distance between tentacle and jaw angle 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.0 3.7 ± 0.5 (3.0 – 4.0) Distance between tentacle and nostril 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.8 ± 0.2 (1.6 – 2.0) Distance between tentacle and margin of upper lip 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 ± 0.0 (0.6 – 0.7) Distance between tentacle and top of head 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.8 ± 0.2 (0.6 – 1.0) Width at 1st nuchal groove 6.2 5.6 5.2 4.2 5.3 ± 0.8 (4.2 – 6.2) Width at 2nd nuchal groove 6.8 6.0 5.4 4.6 5.7 ± 0.9 (4.6 – 6.8) Length of 1st nuchal collar (laterally) 2.4 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.1 ± 0.3 (1.8 – 2.4) Length of 2nd nuchal collar (laterally) 4.2 3.8 3.2 2.2 3.4 ± 0.9 (2.2 – 4.2) Distance between snout tip and 1st nuchal groove 9.0 9.0 7.2 6.2 7.9 ± 1.4 (6.2 – 9.0) Distance between snout tip and 2nd nuchal groove 11.0 11.0 10.0 7.6 9.9 ± 1.6 (7.6 – 11.0) Distance between snout tip and 3rd nuchal groove 13.6 13.2 13.0 10.0 12.5 ± 1.7 (10.0 – 13.6) Total number of primary annuli 112 110 110 107 109.8 ± 2.1 (107 – 112) Total number of secondary annuli 81 84 77 78 80.0 ± 3.2 (77 – 84) Anterior most primary annulus with 32 27 34 30 30.8 ± 3.0 (27 – 34) secondary groove Number of complete secondary annuli in 12 12 12 13 12.3 ± 0.5 (12 -13) front of vent Width of disc surrounding vent 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.2 1.6 ± 0.3 (1.2 – 1.8) Length of disc surrounding vent 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.0 1.7 ± 0.5 (1.0 – 2.0) Width of vent 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.2 1.6 ± 0.4 (1.2 – 2.0) Number of denticles surrounding the vent 9 10 12 9 10.0 ± 1.4 (9.0 - 12) Number of premaxillary-maxillary teeth 13-1-12 15-1-13 12-1-13 11-0-10 25.5 ± 3.3 (21 – 29) Number of vomeropalatine teeth 10-1-11 11-0-11 11-0-11 11-1-11 22.2 ± 1.3 (22 – 23) Number of dentary teeth 10-0-10 11-0-10 10-0-10 10-0-10 20.3 ± 0.5 (20 – 21) Number of splenial teeth 2-2 1-1 2-2 2-2 3.5 ± 1.0 (2 – 4)

Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1) 74 GOPALAKRISHNA BHATTA, K.P. DINESH, P. PRASHANTH AND NIRMAL, U. KULKARNI Ravichandran et al.(2003) and the extensive field work research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.php. of Bhatta and Prashanth (2004), Bhatta and Srinivasa American Museum of Natural History, New York, (2004), Giri et al.(2004) and Bhatta et al. (2007) has USA. added six new species to the list of caecilian diversity of Giri, V., M. Wilkinson and D. J. Gower. 2003. A new India from the central and northern part of Western species of Gegeneophis Peters (Amphibia: Ghats. These studies endorse the remarks of Bhatta Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) from southern (1997) who stated that there is good chance of Maharashtra, India, with a key to the species of the discovering new species of caecilians with additional genus. Zootaxa, 351: 1-10. samplings and using Chao’s estimate he predicted this number to rise up to 27. Certainly more and more Giri, V., D. J. Gower and M. Wilkinson. 2004. A new explorations in newer areas will enable us to know the species of Indotyphlus Taylor (Amphibia: caecilian distribution better. Gymnophiona; Caeciliidae) from the Western Ghats, India. Zootaxa, 739: 1-19. Acknowledgements Gower, D.J. and M. Wilkinson. 2005 Conservation GB is grateful to The Department of Science and Biology of Caecilian . Conservation Technology, Government of India for encouraging Biology, 19: 45–55. research on caecilians of Western Ghats. DKP is thankful to the Director Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Maurice and R. Burton. 1988. Caecilia. In “Encyclopedia Kolkata and the Officer-in-Charge, ZSI, Calicut; and of the Animal Kingdom”. Macdonald and Company, PP to The Director, ARRS, Agumbe, for the London. pp. 231. encouragement. Measey, G.J., D.J. Gower, O.V. Oommen and M. Wilkinson. 2003. Quantitative surveying of References endogenic limbless vertebrates - a case study of Bhatta, G. 1997. Caecilian diversity of the Western Ghats: (Amphibia: In search of the rare . Current Science, 73 Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) in southern India. (2): 183-87. Applied Soil Ecology, 23: 43 – 53. Bhatta, G. 1998. A Field guide to the Caecilians of the Nussbaum, R. A. and M. Wilkinson. 1989. On the Western Ghats, India. J. Biosci. 23(1): 73-85. Classification and Phylogeny of Caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona), A Critical Review. Bhatta, G. and P. Prashanth. 2004. Gegeneophis Herpetological Monograph. 3: 1-42. nadakarnii – a caecilian (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) from Bondla wild life sanctuary, Oommen, O.V., G. J. Measey, D. J. Gower and M. Western Ghats. Current Science. 87 (3): 388-392. Wilkinson. 2000. Distribution and abundance of the caecilian Gegeneophis ramaswamii (Amphibia: Bhatta, G. and R. Srinivasa. 2004. A new species of Gymnophiona) in southern Kerala. Current Science, Gegeneophis Peters (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: 79 (9): 1386-1389. Caeciliidae from the surroundings of Mookambika wildlife sanctuary, Karnataka, India. Zootaxa, 644: 1-8. Pillai, R. S. and M.S. Ravichandran. 1999. Gymnophiona (Amphibia) of India: A Taxonomic Study. (ed. Bhatta, G., K.P. Dinesh, P. Prashanth and N. U. Director, ZSI) Records of the Zoological Survey Kulkarni. 2007. A new species of Gegeneophis of India. 172:1-117. Peters (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) from Goa, India. Zootaxa. 1409: 51-59. Ravichandran, M.S., D.J. Gower and M. Wilkinson. 2003. A new species of Gegeneophis Peters Frost, D.R. 2007. Species of the World: an (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) from Online Reference. Version 5.0 (1 February, 2007). Maharashtra, India. Zootaxa, 350: 1-8. Electronic Database accessible at http://

Biosystematica, 2007, 1(1)