Taxonomic Revision of Phrynocephalus Persicus (De
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
СОВРЕМЕННАЯ ГЕРПЕТОЛОГИЯ. 2013. Том 13, вып. 1/2. С. 34 – 46 UDK 598.112.13(535) TAXONOMIC REVISION OF PHRYNOCEPHALUS PERSICUS DE FILIPPI, 1863 COMPLEX WITH DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES FROM ZAGROS, SOUTHERN IRAN Daniel Melnikov 1, Ekaterina Melnikova 1, Roman Nazarov 2, and Mahdi Rajabizadeh 3, 4 1 Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences 1 Universitetskaya emb., St. Petersburg 199034, Russia E-mail: [email protected] 2 Zoological Museum, Moscow State University 6 B. Nikitskaya Str., Moscow 125009, Russia E-mail: [email protected] 3 Evolutionary Morphology of Vertebrates, Ghent University Ghent, Belgium 4 Department of Biodiversity Institute of Science and High Technology and Environmental Sciences, Graduate University of Advanced Technology Kerman, Iran E-mail: [email protected] Поступила в редакцию 22.05.2013 г. A new species from Phrynocephalus persicus De Filippi, 1863 complex from southern Iran is described. It differs morphologically from Ph. persicus in fewer number of supralabial scales, presence of longitudinal row of enlarged scales on the dorsal side of the body, in supra- and infranasals same size as surrounding scales and molecular distinc- tions. Key words: Squamata, Acrodonta, Agamidae, Phrynocephalus sp. nov., Iran, Zagros. INTRODUCTION In the monograph on herpetofauna of Arme- nia (Arakelyan et al., 2011), probably «to avoid pre- The Persian toad-headed agama Phynocepha- mature taxonomic changes» both names Ph. persicus lus persicus De Filippi, 1863 was described from Iran and Ph. persicus horváthi were presented equally. by Italian explorer and traveler Filippo de Filippi. But in the species article, however, «Ph. persicus Twenty nine years later, Hungarian researcher Lajos horvathi» is used, but with «Horvath’s Toad-headed Méhely described Horvath’s sun-watcher toad- agama» as the English name. Also there was a doubt headed agama Phynocephalus helioscopus (Pall.) var. about the type locality of Ph. horváthi: «P. p. horva- Horváthi Méhely, 1894 from the Araks river valley. thi: “Aralich, am Flusse des Ararat” [=Aralich, on After that some researchers consider these the Ararat River (sic!)].». We want to assure, that taxa as independent, others as synonyms, then all Ararat is a great well-known mountain, that in fact Phrynocephalus from Transcaucasia to Iranian pla- was part of Armenia at the time of the description, teau were named Ph. persicus. but later became Turkish; and that German word Based on the original molecular and morpho- «Fuße» is not the same as «Flusse», «(sic!)» nor- logical data, specific status of Ph. persicus and Ph. mally used if familiar with original source. horváthi was shown by us (Melnikov et al., 2008). Detailed review on history of the study Tran- Also it was mentioned about a new species from the scaucasian and Iranian Phrynocephalus was pre- southern Iran, which needs to be described on the sented in the aforementioned paper (Melnikov et al., basis of molecular differences. Some scientists 2008), that was published in the Russian language agreed with us and consider Ph. horváthi and Ph. as the proceedings of the Nikolsky Herpetological persicus as different taxa (Çiçek et al., 2011, 2012; Society Conference. We decide to repeat some of it Tosunoğlu et al., 2011), while other authors prefer parts here, together with a description of a new spe- to consider Ph. horváthi as subspecies of Ph. per- cies from southern Iran and with Lectotype and Neo- sicus (Arakelyan et al., 2011; Solovyeva et al., type designation for Ph. persicus and Ph. horváthi 2011; Milto, Barabanov, 2012), like it was consi- respectively with morphological description of all dered sixty years ago. these type specimens. © Melnikov Daniel, Melnikova Ekaterina, Nazarov Roman, and Rajabizadeh Mahdi, 2013 TAXONOMIC REVISION OF PHRYNOCEPHALUS PERSICUS DE FILIPPI, 1863 Important points in the history of study stricted the type locality of Ph. persicus to the flat deserts of Iran by the road from Sultaniyeh to Tehe- 1. Taxonomic characters. Filippo de Filippi ran (Anderson, 1872; Blanford, 1876; Boettger, (1863, 1865) proposed clear diagnostic characters 1886; Bedriaga, 1907; Laister, 1912) and noted that for Ph. persicus from Ph. helioscopus (Pallas, 1771): in Armenia he collected Ph. helioscopus. This very enlarged thorny scales protrude in groups on dorsal important specification of the type locality of Ph. side of the body and form one long row in the mid- persicus geographically separates it from the type dle of the neck, scales on the thighs not keeled, nos- locality of Ph. h. horváthi – Aralich village at the trils separated from each other by five scales in one base of Ararat mountain, that at the time of descrip- row, snout is more blunt. Researchers of XIX – be- tion of this form also was part of Armenia (Méhely, gining of XX, that knew well the description and 1894 a, b, 1899). having comparative specimens, distinguished Ph. per- 3. Little known papers. The description of sicus from Ph. helioscopus and even proposed their De Filippi (1863) became well known, and all re- own diagnostic characters (Anderson, 1872; Blan- cent researchers, which consider Ph. persicus and ford, 1876; Boettger, 1886; Bedriaga, 1907). Lajos Ph. h. horváthi as identical forms, cited it. Mono- Méhely (Méhely, 1894 a, b, 1899) also clearly sepa- graphy (1865) is less common – it is cited only by rated his Ph. h. horváthi from Ph. h. helioscopus: earlier researchers, that clearly separated these smaller body size and extremities, scales on the ex- forms. The description of Ph. h. horváthi was sepa- tremities strongly keeled, clear white throat and rated in two parts in different volumes of «Zoologi- breast, rusty red belly, nostrils separated from each scher Anzeiger», so that subsequent scientists (Bed- other by three small scales. A. M. Nikolsky (1905, riaga, 1907; Laister, 1912; Nikolsky, 1913, 1915) 1907 a, b, 1909), used characters proposed by knew only the first, less significant part (XVII. J. Bedriaga (1907), distinguished Ph. persicus from Jahrg. 5 Marz. 1894. № 441. S. 79 – 80). While the Ph. helioscopus, and later proposed new characters second more important part of the description for Ph. h. horváthi (Nikolsky, 1913, 1915). Later (XVII. Jahrg. 19 Marz. 1894. № 442. S. 81 – 82) scientists used characters proposed by A. M. Nikol- was published together with snakes and turtles de- sky and made ambiguous conclusions about rela- scriptions. In 1899 Méhely repeated his description tionships between these forms (Laister, 1912; and even presented first image of Ph. h. (Pall.) var. Carevskij, 1914). After his study of more than 300 horváthi in Tab. XIV (Fig. 1 a), but this paper also specimens of toad-headed agamas, S. F. Carevskij was not cited by subsequent researchers. (1926, 1929) clearly separated all three forms geo- 4. Fragmented material. After synonymy of graphically and morphologically. In early papers Ph. h. horvahi with Ph. persicus, specimens from Tran- S. A. Chernov consider Ph. persicus, Ph. h. helios- scaucasia, and especially from Armenia, were actively copus and Ph. h. horváthi as distinctive forms (Teren- used for different studies of «Ph. persicus» (Darev- tyev, Chernov, 1936, 1940; Chernov, 1937, 1939). But sky, 1960; Arronet, 1965; Alekperov, Galaeva, 1975; later he critically reviewed characters used for taxon- Mezhzherin, Golubev, 1989; Ananjeva et al., 2006) omy of Phrynocephalus by Ya. V. Bedriaga, A. M. Ni- because it was incomparably easier than getting ma- kolsky and S. F. Tsarevsky and synonymized Ph. h. terial from Iran. It is necessary to mention, that in horváthi (Terentyev, Chernov, 1949; Chernov, 1959). the scientific literature there are no photographs of After that the opinion about synonymy of these the real Ph. persicus from central Iran until now, forms became accepted in all subsequent papers, only painting from old papers, for example in An- giving new ambiguous data in morphology (Alek- derson, 1872, P. 388, Fig. 5 (Fig. 1 b) and Bedriaga, perov, Galaeva, 1975; Bannikov et al., 1977; Golu- 1909, Table IX, Fig. 9, 9 a, 9 b. All known photo- bev, Baranov, 1991; Golubev, Mezhzherin, 1999), graphs of «Ph. persicus» in fact are photographs of cytophysiology (Ushakov, 1962), caryology (Ar- Ph. h. horváthi from different parts of its range (Anan- ronet, 1965; Sokolovsky, 1974, 1975; Manilo et al., jeva et al., 1998, 2004 – Armenia; Basoglu, Baran, 1991; Eremchenko, Panfilov, 1999) and molecular ge- 1977; Anderson, 1999; Baran et al., 2004; Baran, netics (Mezhzherin, Golubev, 1989; Golubev, Me- 2005 – Turkey; Schleich, 1976 – north-western Iran). zhzherin, 1999) studies. 2. Type localities. In his work 1863 Filippo MATERIAL AND METHODS de Filippi designated type locality of Ph. persicus as road from Armenia to Teheran (Basoglu, Baran, Morphological analysis 1977; Anderson, 1999; Ananjeva et al., 2004; Bara- Locality data. All known localities of Tran- banov, Ananjeva, 2007). But later, in 1865, he re- scaucasian and Iranian sun-watcher toad-headed aga- СОВРЕМЕННАЯ ГЕРПЕТОЛОГИЯ 2013 Том 13, вып. 1/2 35 Daniel Melnikov, Ekaterina Melnikova, Roman Nazarov and Mahdi Rajabizadeh mas were analyzed. In some cases (for example, ZISP 8844 – 1 specimen (Bedriaga, 1907 – marked as specimens of F. De Filippi and N. A. Zarudny) original original specimen Ph. persicus De Filippi, 1863, re- routes and exact localities were reconstructed, using ceived in 1896, communication from L. Camerano to original papers (with Encarta Interactive World Atlas Ya. Bedriaga). From these specimens we studied 2000 and old geographic maps). three: one from ZISP and two from Genoa Museum (photographs of Nikolai Orlov). Type specimens of Phynocephalus helioscopus (Pall.) var. horváthi Méhely, 1894 – male and female (Méhely, 1894 a, b, 1899) – were lost in 1956 together with the whole herpetological materials of the Hunga- rian Museum (communication from Judit Voros to Natalia Ananjeva, 29.06.2005). But in the catalogue of the available scientific names for Phrynocephalus (Ba- rabanov, Ananjeva, 2007) for Phynocephalus helio- scopus (Pall.) var. horváthi Méhely, 1894 was propo- sed the Neotype – ZISP 5544.1, which was studied by us.