14 research outputs found
A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka
No full textVidanapathirana, L.J. Mendis Wickramasinghe Dulan Ranga, Pushpamal, Vishan, Wickramasinghe, Nethu (2020): A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka. Zootaxa 4748 (2): 248-260, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4748.2.
FIGURE 3 in A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka
No full textFIGURE 3. Dryocalamus chithrasekarai sp. nov., holotype, NMSL-NH 2019.26.01, 328 mm SVL, head scalation: (A) lateral, (B) dorsal, (C) ventral aspects, respectively.Published as part of Vidanapathirana, L.J. Mendis Wickramasinghe Dulan Ranga, Pushpamal, Vishan & Wickramasinghe, Nethu, 2020, A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka, pp. 248-260 in Zootaxa 4748 (2) on page 252, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4748.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/369875
FIGURE 5. Dryocalamus gracilis holotype, BMNH 1946.1.13.86, 403 in A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka
No full textFIGURE 5. Dryocalamus gracilis holotype, BMNH 1946.1.13.86, 403 mm SVL: (A) lateral head; (B) dorsal, and (C) ventral aspects, respectively.Published as part of Vidanapathirana, L.J. Mendis Wickramasinghe Dulan Ranga, Pushpamal, Vishan & Wickramasinghe, Nethu, 2020, A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka, pp. 248-260 in Zootaxa 4748 (2) on page 253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4748.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/369875
FIGURE 8 in A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka
No full textFIGURE 8. Distinctive colour morphs of Dryocalamus nympha, in life (not collected) (A) the black and white form, from Girithale, (B) brown and off white form, from Vidataltivu, (C) brown and pale yellow form, from Mannar and (D) brown and yellow form, from Jaffna.Published as part of Vidanapathirana, L.J. Mendis Wickramasinghe Dulan Ranga, Pushpamal, Vishan & Wickramasinghe, Nethu, 2020, A new species of Dryocalamus (Serpentes: Colubridae) endemic to the rainforests of southwestern Sri Lanka, pp. 248-260 in Zootaxa 4748 (2) on page 256, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4748.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/369875
A new canopy-dwelling species of Dendrelaphis (Serpentes: Colubridae) from Sinharaja, World Heritage Site, Sri Lanka
No full textMendis Wickramasinghe, L. J. (2016): A new canopy-dwelling species of Dendrelaphis (Serpentes: Colubridae) from Sinharaja, World Heritage Site, Sri Lanka. Zootaxa 4162 (3): 504-518, DOI: http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4162.3.
FIGURE 11 in A new species of Rhinophis Hemprich, 1820 (Reptilia: Uropeltidae), from cloud forest of the Knuckles massif of Sri Lanka
No full textFIGURE 11. Holotype of Rhinophis philipsi, BMNH 1946.1.17.2 (formerly 29.2.5.1). Scale bar increments 1 mm. Photos by H. Taylor (BMNH).Published as part of Wickramasinghe, L.J. Mendis, Vidanapathirana, Dulan Ranga, Wickramasinghe, Nethu & Gower, David J., 2020, A new species of Rhinophis Hemprich, 1820 (Reptilia: Uropeltidae), from cloud forest of the Knuckles massif of Sri Lanka, pp. 65-80 in Zootaxa 4810 (1) on page 74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4810.1.3, http://zenodo.org/record/393708
Aspidura desilvai Mendis Wickramasinghe & Bandara & Vidanapathirana & Wickramasinghe 2019, sp. nov.
No full textAspidura desilvai sp. nov. (Figures 1–7) Holotype. NMSL-NH 2019.01.0 2, adult male, 168 mm SVL (Figure 2), from Riverstone, Knuckles, Matale District, Central Province, Sri Lanka (07°31’39” N, 80°44’01” E, elevation 1420 m). Collected by L.J.M. W and D.R.V. on 0 7 July 2018. Paratypes. NMSL-NH 2019.01.0 1, adult female, 208 mm SVL, from Panwila in Knuckles Mountain Range, Kandy District, Central Province in Sri Lanka (07°22'00.36’’ N, 080°41'00.10’’ E, elevation 995 m). Collected by L.J.M. W and I.N.B. on 13 March 2011; DWC 2019.05.0 1, adult female, 157 mm SVL, from Dotulugala, Knuckles Mountain Range, Kandy District, Central Province, Sri Lanka (07°27'00.30” N, 080°45'00.20” E, elevation 1700 m). Collected by L.J.M. W and I.N.B. on 17 March 2011; DWC 2019.05.0 2, juvenile male, 93 mm SVL, from Gombaniya Mountain, Knuckles Mountain Range, Matale District, Central Province, Sri Lanka (07°27'51.76’’ N, 080°45'51.79’’ E, elevation 1375 m). Collected by L.J.M. W and I.N.B. on 13 March 2011. Diagnosis. SVL 94–216 mm; snout to eye distance 2.5 times the eye width (SE/EW); prefrontals touching eye; preocular small, does not touch supraocular; postoculars 2, lower one larger than the upper; temporal 1+2/1+2; supralabials 6/6, 4 th touching eye; infralabials 6/6, first pair in contact, progressively increasing in size from 1 st to 6 th; anterior chin shields 2, large, touching 1–4 infralabials; posterior chin shields 2, anterior half in contact while the posterior half separated by 1 st ventral; ventrals 124–139; subcaudals 16–29; dorsal scale rows 15–15–15; laterally spine like tubercles present on two scale rows nearest to the subcaudals of the ischiadic, anal and tail base regions in adult males, feeble in juvenile males, and absent in females; entire dorsum brown colour, much paler towards anterior; three irregular dotted lines on dorsum. Description of holotype. Adult male; SVL 168 mm; TaL 25.1 mm; TL 193.1 mm; TaL/TL 0.13; body elongate and cylindrical; head short (SVL/HL 18.3), elliptical, indistinct from thick neck; snout long, narrowing anteriorly, pointed in dorsal aspect, snout to nostril distance about 2.8 (EW/SN) times as long as nostril width; nasal divided; small, triangular nostril, touching divided nasal and first supralabial, not touching rostral; eye larger than horizontal diameter of nostril, distance between snout to eye about 2.6 (SE/EW) times the eye width, round pupil; snout to eye distance 0.3 times head length (SE/HL); tail short (TaL/SVL 0.1), robust at its base, tapering progressively to a single point. Head scalation. Head scalation includes 1 internasal, 2 prefrontals, 2 supraoculars, 1 frontal, and 2 parietals (Figure 3A). Rostral small, convex, wider than long and rounded in lateral, dorsal and ventral aspects. Nasal vertically divided by a groove above nostril (Figure 3B). Internasal large, irregular hexagonal; widely in contact with prefrontals. Two large prefrontals, longer and wider than internasals, largest distance along the longitudinal axis of prefrontals shorter than frontal (Figure 3A) in length, anterior-most corner of prefrontals touching nasal, bordered by 2 nd and 3 rd supralabial, preocular scale, eye, supraocular and frontal. Preocular small, not in contact with supraocular. Loreal and subocular scales absent. Supraocular smaller than frontal. Two postoculars, lower one larger than upper. Two parietals; largest scales on head. Temporals 1+2/1+2. Supralabials 6/6, 4 th touching eye, progressively increasing in size from 1 st to 6 th (Figure 3B). Mental small and triangular, wider than long. Infralabials 6/6, first pair in contact, progressively increasing in size from 1 st to 6 th. Anterior chin shields 2, large, touching 1–4 infralabials. Posterior chin shields 2, anterior half in contact, posterior portion separated by 1 st ventral (Figure 3C). Body scalation. Ventrals 124, 1 st ventral longer than wide; subcaudals 24, all single; anal single and large; dorsal scale rows 15–15–15; laterally prominent spine like tubercles present on two scale rows nearest to the subcaudals, and its protrusion reducing towards upper scale rows in the ischiadic, anal and tail base regions (Figure 4); vertebral rows and first coastal not enlarged; no apical pit. Hemipenis morphology. Based on Holotype specimen: right everted hemipenis extends for length of 3 subcaudals. Everted organ single subcylindrical, globular, sulcus spermaticus simple. Basal to apex region bearing prominent spines which are evenly distributed and are in uniform length (Figure 5). Colour in life. Supralabials and infralabials light yellow, with dark margins separating each scale (Figure 6A). Entire dorsum reddish brown colour, much paler towards anterior and each scale having tiny dark spots (Figure 2). Three irregular dotted lines on dorsum (Figure 6B). These are symmetrically placed and continues from neck to tail end. Prominent light brown stripe continues dorsolaterally from neck to tail end, marked due to much darker regions which constitutes of dotted lines below and above this region. These lines continue from neck to tail end. Venter primarily peach, with black blotching all over; gular region yellow. Colour in alcohol. Colour pattern remains unchanged. Pupil changes to off white. Darker regions fades to a light brown. Variations in colour. In an unpreserved male specimen (Figure 7D) except the head region and ventre the entire body was black. Natural History. Aspidura desilvai sp. nov. have been observed commonly in its habitat (Figure 1). The species is confined to Knuckles conservation area, and is found in and above the lower montane forests of Knuckles. Authors have observed the snake from 995 m up to 1700 m above sea level (Figure 8). The habitat of A. desilvai sp. nov. is closed canopy forests dominated by Syzigium sp. (Figure 9). The moist-cooler habitat is densely occupied with large and medium sized trees which are heavily covered with epiphytes. No direct sunlight falls to the forest floor, and the undergrowth was not well established where the individuals were found. Relatively thin litter cover was observed in the habitat. Commonly observed under leaf litter and loose soil while they were also observed under rocks, boulders, and decaying logs. Individuals come out to the surface during the day time. Reddish brown latosolic soil in the locality is more or less similar to the body colour of the snake. Etymology. The species is named in honor of Pilippu Hewa Don Hemasiri de Silva (Dr. P. H. D. H. de Silva), a former Director (1965-1981) of the National Museums of Sri Lanka. In recognition of his tireless services to the country, while in service and through his many publications specially as the author of the book titled “ Snake Fauna of Sri Lanka, with special reference to skull, dentition and venom in snakes ”. The species epithet desilvai is a noun in the genitive case. Suggested common names. desilvage madilla, and de Silva’s Rough-Side Snake in native Sinhala language and English language respectively. Comparison. The new species was compared with all known congeners of the genus Aspidura and the species most closely resembles A. ravanai, and A. trachyprocta, due to the following combination of characters: one preocular, two postoculars, 1+2 temporals, supralabials 6, 4 th supralabial in contact with the eye, infralabials 6, coastals 15, single cloacal scale, and overlapping ventral and subcaudal counts, but can easily be distinguished by the following morphological characters: from A. ravanai: entire dorsum brown colour, much paler towards anterior and each scale having tiny dark spots in Aspidura desilvai sp. nov. (vs. entire dorsum jet black in Aspidura ravanai), ventrolaterally darker region which constitutes of irregular longitudinal dotted lines (vs. ventrolaterally an irregular longitudinal yellow stripe), laterally prominent spine like tubercles present on two scale rows nearest to the subcaudals, and its protrusion reducing towards upper scale rows (vs. entire coastal rows coarsely keeled, with 1–3 peaks on each scale) in males (Figures 4 & 10 A–C), entire coastal rows of the ischiadic, anal and tail base regions smooth (vs. feebly keeled) in females, snout to eye distance about 2.5 times its eye width (vs. 3.2 times in A. ravanai) (Figures 3 & 10 D–E); from Aspidura trachyprocta: entire dorsum brown colour, much paler towards anterior and each scale having tiny dark spots in A. desilvai sp. nov. (vs. reddish-yellow to brown with a longitudinal black stripe on mid dorsum in Aspidura trachyprocta), ventrolaterally darker region which constitutes of irregular longitudinal dotted lines (vs. black stripe), laterally prominent spine like tubercles present on two scale rows nearest to the subcaudals, and its protrusion reducing towards upper scale rows (vs. bulging spine like tubercles prominent laterally which reduces towards dorsum) of the ischiadic, anal and tail base regions in males (Figures 4 & 11 A–C), entire coastal rows of the ischiadic, anal and tail base regions smooth (vs. feebly keeled) in females, snout to eye distance about 2.5 times its eye width (vs. twice in A. trachyprocta) (Figures 3 & 11 D–E); from A. brachyorrhos Boie, 1827, by having 15 coastals (vs. 17), preocular not in contact with supraocular (vs. contact), prefrontal contact with eye (vs. separate), single subcaudals (vs. paired); from A. copei Günther, 1864 by having coastals 15 (vs. 17), single subcaudals (vs. paired), single preocular (vs. absent); from A. deraniyagalae Gans & Fetcho, 1982 by having 15 coastals (vs. 17), ventrals 124–139 (vs. 117–122), single subcaudals (vs. paired); from A. drummondhayi Boulenger, 1904, by having single subcaudals (vs. paired), single preocular (vs. absent); from A. guentheri Ferguson, 1876 by having 15 coastals (vs. 17), ventrals 124–139 (vs. 100–127); from A. ceylonensis (Günther, 1858), by prefrontal touching eye (vs. not touching eye), preocular does not touch supraocular (vs. touches), lower postocular larger than the upper (vs. vise versa), mid body coastals not keeled (vs. coarsely keeled).Published as part of Mendis Wickramasinghe, L. J., Bandara, Imesh Nuwan, Vidanapathirana, Dulan Ranga & Wickramasinghe, Nethu, 2019, A new species of Aspidura Wagler, 1830 (Squamata: Colubridae: Natricinae) from Knuckles, World Heritage Site, Sri Lanka, pp. 265-280 in Zootaxa 4559 (2) on pages 266-272, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4559.2.3, http://zenodo.org/record/262697
Rhinophis roshanpererai Wickramasinghe, Vidanapathirana, Rajeev & Gower, 2017, sp. nov.
No full textRhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. Figs. 1–5; Table 1 Holotype. NMSL 2016.08.0 1 NH (Figs. 2–3; Table 1), adult male, 207.9 mm SVL, Galkanda, Beragala, Badulla District, Uva Province, Sri Lanka (6° 45’ 07.98” N, 80° 57’ 20.23” E, elevation 940 m). Collected by L.J. Mendis Wickramasinghe, Dulan Ranga Vidanapathirana, and M. D. Gehan Rajeev, 10 May 2010. Paratypes. DWC 2016.05.0 3, adult female, 205.2 mm SVL (Fig. 4 A); DWC 2016.05.0 4, adult female, 218.2 mm SVL (Fig. 4 B–5). Collection data as for holotype. Diagnosis. A Rhinophis restricted to the Central Highlands of Sri Lanka with 17 dorsal scale rows at midbody, more than 160 and fewer than 175 ventral scales, a small tail shield with spines, three or four of which prominent, and lacking yellowish markings laterally or dorsally. Identification. The new uropeltid species is referred to Rhinophis because it has an eye that lies within an ocular scale (not so in Platyplectrurus Günther, 1868), has a clearly discrete tail shield, lacks a mental groove (present in Melanophidium Günther, 1864), lacks supra- or postoculars or temporals (at least one of which is present in Brachyophidium Wall, 1921, Platyplectrurus, Plectrurus Duméril, 1851, and Teretrurus Beddome, 1886), lacks midline contact between the nasals (present in Brachyophidium, Melanophidium, Platyplectrurus, Plectrurus, Pseudoplectrurus Boulenger, 1890, Teretrurus, and Uropeltis), and it has midbody dorsal scales in 17 rows (15 in Brachyophidium, Melanophidium, Platyplectrurus, Plectrurus, Pseudoplectrurus, Teretrurus). Rhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. differs from all four Indian species of Rhinophis by having a very small tail shield with spines (versus relatively much larger tail shield without spines). It differs further in having a ventral count of 168 or 169 (versus more than 200 in R. goweri Aengals and Ganesh, 2013, fewer than 150 in R. travancoricus Boulenger, 1893, and more than 170 in R. fergusonianus Boulenger, 1896); and in having 17 midbody dorsal scale rows (versus 15 in R. sanguineus Beddome, 1863). Among Sri Lankan congeners, Rhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. differs from R. saffragamus (Kelaart, 1853) in not having a large and flat tail shield or midline contact between the opposite nasal shields, and by having dorsal scales in 17 rather than 19 rows at midbody. The new species differs from R. dorsimaculatus Deraniyagala, 1941, R. homolepis (Hemprich, 1820), R. lineatus, R. oxyrynchus (Schneider, 1801), R. porrectus Wall, 1921, R. punctatus Müller, 1832 and R. zigzag by having fewer than 175 ventral scales (versus more than 180), and by having a very small tail shield with spines (versus relatively much larger tail shield without spines). Rhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. differs from R. phillipsi (Nicholls, 1929) in having fewer than 190 ventrals and in lacking yellow lines on the dorsum. Rhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. resembles R. melanogaster in having a small tail shield, but the new species has a shield surface with four (or three) notably prominent spines, one pair above the other (versus two slightly larger spines ventrally); absence of yellowish lines laterally (versus present); perhaps more ventral scales (168–169 versus 152–166); and a distinct geographical distribution (central highlands of Badulla District vs Knuckles Range, Matale and Kandy Districts). The ventral scale count in R. roshanpererai sp. nov. is similar to or overlapping with those for R. blythii Kelaart 1853, R. drummondhayi Wall, 1921, R. philippinus (Cuvier, 1829), and R. tricolorata Deraniyagala, 1975, but the new species differs from these four Sri Lankan congeners by having a smaller tail shield with spines, three or four of which are prominent (versus large tail shield without notable spines). The new species differs from R. erangaviraji by having more than 165 ventrals (versus fewer than 155), a smaller tail shield, and by lacking substantial yellow areas on the lateral surface of the body and tail. Description of holotype. See Table 1 for morphometric and meristic data. A preserved specimen in good condition; 20 mm long left of ventral incision into coelom extending anteriorly from 10 mm anterior to vent; outer layer of scales loose and missing in parts; a few flank scales more profoundly damaged on left at approximately midbody. Head small, snout pointed (Figs. 2–3). Rostral pointed, longer than wide, without dorsal crest; widest at level of anterior superior corner of first supralabials. Rostral several times longer (in dorsal view) than rostralfrontal gap (Fig. 3). Frontal irregularly hexagonal, longer than wide, lateral (ocular) margins slightly converging posteriorly, posterolateral margins straight to very slightly concave; lateral (ocular) margin shortest, posterolateral edges longest. Frontal longer, wider than rostral. A pair of nasals, separated from each other by posterior half of rostral. External naris small, subcircular, slightly countersunk within small depression, located in anteroventral corner of nasal. Nasal in contact with first and second supralabials. Prefrontals (for most of their length) in contact with each other along midline (left overlapping right), separating frontal from rostral. Prefrontals wider than long, shorter than frontal. Supralabials four, first smallest, making the least contribution to margin of mouth; fourth much the largest. Ocular in contact with third and fourth supralabials. Eye distinct, diameter approximately one third length of ocular, located near anteroventral corner of ocular, bulging slightly from ocular surface, pupil circular. Paired parietals longer than wide, shorter, very slightly wider than frontal, posteriorly broadly rounded, angle between postermedial and posterolateral edges approximately 90°. Opposite parietals in brief midline contact, left overlapping right. Each parietal contacts four scales other than head shields. No mental groove; mental wider than long, smaller than infralabials, contacting first infralabials and single postmental (= first ventral); three pairs of infralabials, second largest, first smallest. First and second ventrals longer than wide, third approximately as long as wide, fourth and subsequent ventrals wider than long. Six or seven maxillary and approximately seven mandibular teeth on each side. Teeth simple, pointed, distinctly retrorse, straight, evenly spaced. Body cylindrical. Body scales generally evenly sized on dorsum and along body except for those involved in dorsal scale row reductions. Midline ventral scales between mental and anal of even size though anteriormost ones gradually narrow. Ventrals 168, posteriormost ventral notably smaller, penultimate ventral paired. Dorsal scale rows 19 anteriorly, reducing to 17 by level with 30th ventral and maintained along most of body; scale row reduction formula: 3 + 4 (30) 19 --------------- 17 3 + 4 (30) Dorsal scale rows approximately 14 at base of tail. Head and body scales macroscopically smooth, lacking keels. Inconspicuous keels on scales on posteriormost portion of body and on tail, increasingly prominent posteriorly, more obvious ventrally (including on anals) and ventrolaterally. Paired anal scales (right overlying left) considerably larger than posteriormost ventrals and subcaudals. Distal margin of each anal overlaps three other scales in addition to anteriormost subcaudals. Seven right and seven left subcaudals. Tail 'shield' mildly conical, forming tip of tail, small, longer than wide in dorsal view, shorter than the frontal in dorsal view, visible from below and especially above, base (much narrower than base of tail) surrounded by last pair of subcaudals and 6 other scales. In posterior view shield oval to slightly egg-shaped, wider ventrally than dorsally (Fig. 3). Shield surface sparsely spinose, most spines small, inconspicuous but four (arranged in two pairs, one above the other) much longer and substantial, pointing straight backwards; ventral pair of larger spines notably longer than dorsal pair (Fig. 3). Colour in life. Dorsum and lateral background uniform black, with sparse, very small yellow flecks (Fig. 2). Ventral background dark brown for most of length, gradually paler anteriorly, darker posteriorly (similar to dark colour of dorsum). Anterior and underside of snout paler than rest of head. Venter with conspicuous yellow blotching, blotches notably larger than on dorsum and lateral surfaces of body; ventral blotching absent on tail, head and anteriormost and posteriormost of body. Colour in alcohol. Colour pattern remains with a little fading, black to dark brown, yellow to off white and brown to a paler brown (Fig. 3). Paratypes and variation. Paratype DWC 2016.05.0 3 is slightly longer (218.2 mm SVL) than the holotype and the other paratype (DWC 2016.05.04) slightly shorter (205.2 mm SVL), both are female. The two paratypes are very similar to the holotype with respect to the description presented above, including identical scale row reductions (19 to 17 rows by level of 30th ventral). DWC 2016.05.0 3 differs from the holotype in having: parietals more notably wider than frontal (Fig. 4 A); seven rather than six scales plus last pair of subcaudals surround base of tail shield; posteriormost ventral paired; supernumerary scale between second pair of subcaudals (Fig. 4 A). DWC 2016.05.0 4 differs from the holotype in having six rather than seven subcaudals on right side, and in having three rather than four major spines on the tail shield, two posteroventrally and one posterodorsally (Fig. 5). Both paratypes appear to have seven maxillary teeth on each side; mandibular counts are more difficult but are estimated at six or seven on each ramus. Paratypes closely resemble holotype in colour pattern. Etymology. The species epithet roshanpererai is named for the late Roshan Perera, who was an Instructor of the Reptiles group of the Young Zoologist’s Association of Sri Lanka, Department of National Zoological Gardens, in recognition of his dedicated services to wildlife conservation in Sri Lanka. The species name roshanpererai is a noun in the genitive case. Suggested vernacular names. Roshan Pererage thudulla, Roshan Pereravin nilakael pambu, Roshan Perera’s sheildtail (or Roshan Perera’s Rhinophis) in Sinhala, Tamil, and English, respectively. Distribution, habitat and threats. The first author first encountered the new species as a single roadkill specimen at the type locality in 1999. In five or six subsequent visits to the type locality approximately 30 individuals of Rhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. have been observed, including a second roadkill specimen. The type series of R. roshanpererai sp. nov. was found within a 1 m radius, dug during the day from soil ca. 150 mm deep among banana plants in a home garden. Other specimens have been seen at or close to (within a couple of kilometers) of this site in a wide range of habitats, including shaded patches of grassland, tea plantations, and disturbed riverine forest, always dug from soil or leaf litter during the day. A few specimens have been seen moving on the surface, only at night. Several other individuals of the new species were dug from soil in disturbed riverine forest in 1999 from Uda Diyaluma, approximately 10 km away (6° 44’ 08.55” N, 81° 01’ 57.10” E, elevation 750 m), and from Haldummulla, approximately 6 km from the type locality (6° 45’ 39.95” N, 80° 54’ 05.73” E, elevation 938 m). Despite a substantial amount of fieldwork (including digging through soil and leaf litter) at similar altitudes, we have not observed this species outside this region, including at, for example, Haputale, less than 2 km North of the type locality but approximately 400 m higher in elevation. Rhinophis roshanpererai sp. nov. has not been found in sympatry with other uropeltid species. The nearest observation of other species that we know of (L.J.M.W., pers. obs.) is for R. drummondhayi at 960 m elevation at Kubalwela, approximately 16 km to the northeast by north (bearing of 30°) of the type locality of R. roshanpererai sp. nov.. We suspect that the vertical and horizontal distributional range of the new species is small, and that substantial human disturbance in the form of intensive agriculture and urbanization represent the likely greatest conservation threats.Published as part of Mendis Wickramasinghe, L. J., Vidanapathirana, Dulan Ranga, Gehan Rajeev, M. D. & Gower, David J., 2017, A new species of Rhinophis Hemprich, 1820 (Serpentes: Uropeltidae) from the central hills of Sri Lanka, pp. 153-164 in Zootaxa 4263 (1) on pages 155-161, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4263.1.7, http://zenodo.org/record/57259
Rhinophis dorsimaculatus Deraniyagala 1941
No full text<i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> Deraniyagala, 1941 <p> <i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> Deraniyagala, 1941: Deraniyagala (1941: 800–802, fig. 1, plate 1); Smith (1943: 88, 526); Taylor (1950: 533); Deraniyagala (1955: 12, 15, plate 36); Gans (1966: 13–14); de Silva (1980: 113, 131, 183, 190, 191, 195); Mahendra (1984: 63, 65); de Sliva (1990: 45, 69); Cadle <i>et al</i>. (1990); de Silva (1996: 70); de Silva (1998: 111); McDiarmid <i>et al</i>. (1999: 136); Abeysiriwardana <i>et al</i>. (2000: 195); Bambaradeniya & Samarasekara (2001: 36); de Silva (2001: 63); Bossuyt <i>et al</i>. (2004: fig. 2C); Somaweera (2006: 227, 234, 235) (in part); Wickramasinghe <i>et al</i>. (2009: 1, 6, 11) (in part); Gower & Maduwage (2011: 55, 59, 60, 63, 65); Pyron <i>et al</i>. (2013: 977, fig. 1); Wallach <i>et al</i>. (2014: 638).</p> <p> <b>Holotype.</b> The “ type ” designated by Deraniyagala (1941). NMSL 86, collected 1938 or 1941 from “the coastal village of Marichchukate [= Marichchikattuwa; Marichchukkaddi], North Western Province, Ceylon [= Sri Lanka]”, now lost (Gans, 1966: 14). Approximate coordinates from maps: 8º 35’ N, 79º 57’ E, <40 m elevation.</p> <p> <b>“Paratype”.</b> NMSL unnumbered, collected 1938 or 1941 from the type locality. In his description of the species, Deraniyagala (1941) mentioned a second specimen. However, he did not explicitly designate it as a type or report a specimen number. There is no evidence that any of the data or figures reported for <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> pertain to this second specimen, which we thus do not consider a paratype. The second specimen, which is also lost (Gans 1966: 14), was referred to as a paratype by Gans (1966: 13).</p> <p> <b>Referred material.</b> Ten specimens, all from the type locality, newly referred here. CAS 225802, 225803 and 225804 (collected 27 November, 1974), 225842 and 225843 (29 April, 1976), 226077 and 226078 (9 February, 1977), 226662 (29 May, 1974), and 244583 and 244584 (4 December, 1974). These specimens were in the personal collection of, and under tight proprietary control by, Carl Gans until they were donated to the CAS shortly before his death (C.J. Bell pers. comm. 2016). The CAS material is referable to <i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> on account of it being topotypic, and matching the holotype in its long and dorsally carinate rostral, large posteriormost ventral projecting between the posterior margins of the anal scales, high number of ventrals (227+), and distinctive colour pattern with a highly regularly punctate flanks and belly and approximately midvertebral, somewhat irregular black blotches lying in a broad, pale, middorsal stripe.</p> <p> <b>Revised diagnosis.</b> In having 227 or more ventral scales, <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> differs from all congeners except <i>R. punctatus</i> Müller, 1832 and <i>R. porrectus</i> Wall, 1921. <i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> differs from <i>R. porrectus</i> in having fewer than 260 (227–250 among the only known material) versus more than 260 ventral scales (283 in holotype of <i>R. porrectus</i>). <i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> differs from <i>R. punctactus</i> in its colour pattern. Although both species have a broad pale dorsal stripe, in the former this bears dark dorsal blotches and in the latter a continuous narrow dark vertebral line. Additionally, the colour of <i>R. punctatus</i> resembles that of <i>R. porrectus</i> in that the pale dorsal stripe is bordered by a broad dark, dorsolateral stripe (broader than the dark lines on the lower flanks and belly), whereas in <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> the pale stripe is bordered by a narrow dark line that is undifferentiated from the similar lines on the lower flanks and belly.</p> <p> <i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> also differs clearly from the non- <i>Rhinophis</i> Sri Lankan uropeltids that, although currently classified in other genera (<i>Pseudotyphlops</i>, <i>Uropeltis</i>, e.g., McDiarmid <i>et al</i>., 1999), likely form part of the Sri Lankan uropeltid radiation together with Sri Lankan <i>Rhinophis</i> (Cadle <i>et al</i>. 1990; Bossuyt <i>et al</i>. 2004; Pyron <i>et al</i>. 2013). Thus, <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> differs (beyond in its distinctive colour pattern) from <i>Pseudotyohlops philippinus</i> Müller, 1832, <i>Uropeltis phillipsi</i> (Nicholls, 1929) and <i>U. melanogaster</i> (Gray, 1858) in having far more than 170 ventrals and a strongly dorsally carinate rostral. The same differences apply to <i>U. ruhunae</i> Deraniyagala, 1954, known from a single specimen that otherwise bears features found only among some Indian uropeltids.</p> <p> <b>Description of referred specimen CAS 225842.</b> Generally good condition; split ventrolaterally and ventrally at vent. Head small; snout pointed. Rostral large, protruding far anterior (1.8 mm) to mouth, pointed, trihedral anteriorly, much longer than wide, dorsally strongly carinate and raised/arched (in lateral view); rostral widest at level of anterior superior corner of first supralabials. Rostral many times longer (in dorsal view) than short rostralfrontal gap. Frontal subtriangular with convex anterior margin, distinctly longer than wide, little break in angle between anterolateral (ocular) and posterolateral (parietal) margins. Frontal much shorter than, as wide as, rostral. Paired nasals (and most of prefrontals) separated from each other by rostral. External naris small, subcircular, slightly countersunk within small depression, located in anteroventral corner of nasal. Nasal contacts supralabials 1 and 2. Prefrontals briefly (for less than 25% of their length) in contact with each other along midline, briefly separating frontal from rostral. Prefrontals taller than long, longer than frontal. Supralabials four, first smallest, making the least contribution to margin of mouth; second larger but only slightly longer at mouth; fourth much the largest. Ocular contacts supralabials 3 and 4. Eye small but distinct, diameter less than one third length of ocular, located near anteroventral corner of ocular, bulging slightly from ocular surface, pupil subcircular. Paired parietals longer than frontal, broadly rounded posteriorly (a little> 90°). Opposite parietals in brief midline contact, left overlapping right. Parietals a little longer than wide, wider than frontal and rostral. Each parietal contacts four scales other than head shields and supralabials. Three infralabials, first and third subequal in length, notably shorter than second. First infralabials not in midline contact behind mental. First ventral longer than wide, second to fourth approximately as long as wide, fifth and subsequent ventrals wider than long. First ventral not in contact with mental.</p> <p>Seven maxillary and seven or eight mandibular teeth on each side. Teeth simple, pointed, distinctly retrorse, straight, evenly spaced. Anteriormost maxillary tooth aligned approximately with posterior end of lower margin of second supralabial, posteriormost maxillary tooth close to posterior edge of lower margin of third supralabial; mandibular row similar in length and alignment, with anteriormost member a little further forward than maxillary row. Inside of mouth, including tongue, unpigmented.</p> <p>Body subcylindrical to slightly dorsoventrally compressed. Head and body scales macroscopically smooth, lacking keels. Body scales generally evenly sized on dorsum and along body. Midline ventral scales between mental and anal of even size though anterior- and posteriormost ones gradually narrow. Posteriormost ventral much larger, V-shaped, separating posterior margins of paired anals. Right anal possibly slightly overlaps left, but overlap almost entirely absent. Ventrals 230, at midbody same width as exposed part of adjacent first dorsal scale row. Posteriormost three or four ventrals slightly wider, 1.05 times as wide as adjacent first dorsal row; final ventral much wider, V-shaped, 1.5 times as wide as first dorsal row. Dorsal scale rows 19 anteriorly, reducing to 17 along most of body, until slightly anterior of vent. Scale row formula:</p> <p>4+5 (11) 3+4 (224)</p> <p>19 ------------------- 17 ------------------- 15</p> <p>4+5 (11) 3+4 (225)</p> <p>Dorsal scale rows approximately 13 at base of tail. Paired anal scales slightly larger than posteriormost dorsal scales and subcaudals, slightly smaller than last ventral; only briefly in midline contact, substantially overlapped by last ventral. Distal margin of each anal overlaps three other scales in addition to anteriormost subcaudals. Subcaudals 7 (left), 8 (right), either all paired/divided with posteriormost on right much wider than others, or under an alternative interpretation posteriormost subcaudals all single/undivided. Tail scales macroscopically smooth though many with two or three inconspicuous, low keels on posterior portion of posteriormost subcaudals on lower flanks. Caudal 'shield' bluntly conical, forming tip of tail, longer than wide in dorsal view, only slightly shorter than shielded part of head, more visible from above than below, base (only a littler narrower than base of tail) surrounded by last pair of subcaudals and 10 other scales. In posterior view shield regular broad oval, widest point approximately mid height. Shield surface matt, covered with tiny tubercles in approximately radial distribution. Narrow halo around base of shield glossy and without tubercles.</p> <p>Left hemipenis everted, perhaps not fully. Moderately long (ca. 4.8 mm), slender, subcylindrical, slightly tapering distally. Asulcate surface ornamented with short, slender, curved, proximally-directed, evenly spaced spines extending to base of organ. Sulcate surface mostly lacking spines or other ornamentation, more encroachment of spines towards sulcus margins distally than proximally. Sulcus spermaticus shallow, inconspicuous, walls smooth.</p> <p>In alcohol, background body colour pale tan with much darker (brown to blackish) markings. Broad, regular, pale middorsal stripe/band across five scale rows extending from shortly behind head to tail shield. Pale middorsal band marked with asymmetrical dark blotches, mostly discontinuous, more continuous anteriorly, darker posteriorly, becoming blackish on tail. All other dorsal scale rows of body and all ventrals each with single dark dot together forming series of regular, narrow, punctate lines along length of body. Dark spots on body scales confined to scale bases, distal margins paler and translucent. Tail with more unmarked scales laterally and ventrolaterally than on body. Anals coloured as posteriormost ventrals and dorsal scales of lower flanks. Tail shield matt, mostly pale orange with broad, irregular, subterminal pale brown ring. Head brownish grey with small pale flecks, pale borders to many shields. Rostral somewhat yellowish, paler anteriorly and ventrally. Posteromedial parts of parietals pale. Edges of mouth (‘lips’) paler than dorsal and ventral surface of head.</p> <p> <b>Variation.</b> See Table 1 for meristic and morphometric details. CAS 225843 and 226077 (the latter with much of inside of mouth blackish, this atypical condition possibly artefactual) in generally good condition; other CAS specimens dehydrated or otherwise damaged. CAS 225804 incomplete, in several parts, and poorly preserved; CAS 244583 eviscerated, largely skinned and missing anterior of head; CAS 244584 partly eviscerated and lacking most of vertebral column, end of tail including shield missing. CAS 225842 and the other new specimens closely match the lost holotype. The holotype was seemingly less attenuate than the best-preserved CAS specimens (Table 1). The number and disposition of head shields (including left over right overlap of parietals) is similar in all specimens as far as can be ascertained. Mental notably more prominent in CAS 225843 and separated from anteriormost chin shields (as also in CAS 226078) by midline contact between first pair of infralabials.</p> <p> Ventrals 230 <i>–</i> 250; subcaudals 6 to 8 on each side. In some specimens (e.g., CAS 225843) it is difficult to determine whether some of the posteriormost scales on the ventral surface of the tail are ‘true’ subcaudals or not. Anals always paired, making little or no midline contact except slight right over left overlap in CAS 226662. Dorsal scale rows always 19 anteriorly, 17 by level of 13th ventral and then without reductions until close to the vent (see Appendix). Tail shield slightly variable in shape and size, for example it is more squarely-ended and strongly overhangs the posteriormost subcaudal in CAS 225843 and, to a lesser extent, in 226077. The shield tubercles are all small but vary from being low and worn (e.g., CAS 225842, 226662) to more prominent, pointed and spine-like (e.g., CAS 225843).</p> <p>Colour pattern generally constant and matching holotype (as figured by Deraniyagala 1941). Posteromedial edges of parietals generally pale (as in holotype and CAS 225842), pigmented in CAS 225843. Tail shield always somewhat orange, but brown marks more or less diffuse and variable in shape (e.g., U- rather than O-shaped in CAS 226662). Pale dorsal band on body always present but variable. For example, it is three (rather than five) scales wide on the anterior half of CAS 226662 and anterior two thirds to three quarters of CAS 225843, 226077, and 244584. The narrow, punctate, darker lines on the other dorsal scale rows and ventrals are a constant feature. Last ventral unpigmented in CAS 225843, 226077, 226662, and 244584.</p> <p> <b>Suggested ‘common’ names:</b> Blotched Rhinophis, Marichchukate Rhinophis (English). The names ‘orange shield tail’ (English) and ‘thambapanni walga ebaya’ (Sinhalese) were used by Wickramasinghe (2012: 112).</p> <p> <b>Distribution, natural history, and conservation:</b> The lost types and only known existing museum specimens of <i>Rhinophis dorsimaculatus</i> are all from a single locality, Marichchukate, on the northwestern coast of Sri Lanka (Fig. 3). This is lowland and in the dry zone (<i>sensu</i> Legg & Jewell 1995), in contrast to most Sri Lankan uropeltids that occur in the hills of the wet zone. We here report a second locality for <i>R. dorsimaculatus.</i> On 21 and 23 January 2014, eight live <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> were seen at Sannar near Vidattalativu, Northern Province (8º 59’ 30.69” N, 80º 06’ 26.34” E, <20 m elevation) while digging in loose soil and/or on the surface at night following monsoon rainfall. This locality is also northwestern coast dry zone lowland, approximately 40 km north of the type locality (Fig. 3). The habitat was typical dry-zone evergreen forest mixed with shady home garden vegetation. None of the animals was collected but two were photographed (Fig. 4). Data were not recorded for the two photographed animals but their colour pattern, head shields, and vertebral scale counts (235 and 238) closely match those of the lost holotype and the CAS specimens of <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> reported here. One of the photographed specimens (Fig. 4, left panel) has a more orange dorsal band (as reported for the type material by Deraniyagala 1941, 1955) and the other (Fig. 4, right panel) a paler tan band. Both specimens differ slightly from the CAS specimens in that the dark dorsal blotches are more continuous and less asymmetric, and the pale band has more scales with dark marks.</p> <p> The type and the newly reported locality were, until recently, inaccessible during three decades of civil unrest in Northern Province. After the war (itself cited as a cause of habitat degradation by Abeysiriwardana <i>et al</i>. 2000), the region has experienced rapid deforestation for human settlement. Much of the forest cover in the region of Marichchukate has been cleared. In addition to expanding human settlements, forest has been cleared for agriculture, which might also pose a conservation threat to <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> (see also Abeysiriwardana <i>et al</i>. 2000). The second author and colleagues have also seen roadkill specimens of <i>R. dorsimaculatus</i> in the region.</p>Published as part of <i>Gower, David J. & Mendis Wickramasinghe, L. J., 2016, Recharacterization of Rhinophis dorsimaculatus Deraniyagala, 1941 (Serpentes: Uropeltidae), including description of new material, pp. 203-212 in Zootaxa 4158 (2)</i> on pages 204-209, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4158.2.3, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/272212">http://zenodo.org/record/272212</a>
Rediscovery of <i>Pseudophilautus hypomelas</i> (Günther, 1876) (Amphibia: Anura: Rhacophoridae) from the Peak Wilderness, Sri Lanka, a species thought to be extinct!
No full textPseudophilautus hypomelas (Günther, 1876), was previously known from the type collection of 14 specimens deposited in the Natural History Museum, London. There has been no record of this species since the original description by Günther in 1876, and subsequently this species was considered extinct. In recent explorations however, the species has been rediscovered from the Peak Wilderness, Central Hills of Sri Lanka, with a rediscription of the species from fresh collections
