1,030 research outputs found
An evaluation of the nomina for death adders (Acanthophis Daudin, 1803) proposed by Wells & Wellington (1985), and confirmation of A. cryptamydros Maddock et al., 2015 as the valid name for the Kimberley death adder
No full textEllis, Ryan J., Kaiser, Hinrich, Maddock, Simon T., Doughty, Paul, Wüster, Wolfgang (2021): An evaluation of the nomina for death adders (Acanthophis Daudin, 1803) proposed by Wells & Wellington (1985), and confirmation of A. cryptamydros Maddock et al., 2015 as the valid name for the Kimberley death adder. Zootaxa 4995 (1): 161-172, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4995.1.
Hypogeophis montanus Maddock & Wilkinson & Gower 2018, sp. nov.
No full textHypogeophis montanus sp. nov. (Figs. 1–7; Table 1) Holotype. BMNH 2005.1824, adult male, collected from Congo Rouge, Mahé island, Seychelles (04°38’43.6” S, 55°26’03.3” E, ca. 718 m /asl) by D.J. Gower, R.G. Kamei, S.T. Maddock and M. Wilkinson on 20 March, 2015. Paratypes (n = 6). BMNH 2005.1823, male, same collection data as for holotype. BMNH 2005.1822, male, collected from Congo Rouge, Mahé island (04°38’43.6” S, 55°26’02.2” E, ca. 729 m /asl) by D.J. Gower, R.G. Kamei, S.T. Maddock and M. Wilkinson on 20 March, 2015. BMNH 2005.1820 and 2005.1821, males, collected from Congo Rouge, Mahé island (04°38’43.9” S, 55°26’02.9” E, ca. 731 m /asl) by J. Labisko and S.T. Maddock on 24 March, 2013. BMNH 2005.1926, male and 2005.1927, sex not determined, collected from Morne Seychellois, Mahé island (04°38’43” S, 55°26’33.2” E, ca. 729 m /asl) by R.M. Bristol, D.J. Gower, S.T. Maddock, J.W. Streicher and M. Wilkinson on 19 September, 2015. Diagnosis. A Hypogeophis with 76–78 vertebrae. Differs from its most similar congener H. brevis (71–75 vertebrae: Maddock et al. 2017) additionally in having a relatively smaller head (see below). Differs from H. pti (67–69 vertebrae: Maddock et al. 2017) additionally in having tentacular apertures relatively further from the eye (E-TA/E-N 0.77–0.87 versus 0.50–0.63 in known specimens). Differs from H. rostratus (> 95 vertebrae: Parker 1958) most obviously in being much smaller (maximum known total length 400 mm), and in having secondary annular grooves on most primary annuli (versus on posteriormost primary annuli only). Identification. The new taxon is a species of Hypogeophis because (following the generic diagnosis provided by Wilkinson et al. 2011) it is an indotyphlid with eyes not covered by bone, tentacular grooves covered by bone and mesethmoid not exposed dorsally between frontals (data from microCT scans, not shown). In external morphology the new species differs from species of the other Seychelles genera (Praslinia, Grandisonia) in having a small pointed head and far anterior tentacular apertures, anterior to the mouth (on that part of the snout projecting beyond the lower jaw). Description of holotype. Some meristic and morphometric data are given in Table 1. Male; condition good; c. 6 mm ventral incision into coelom c. 25 mm anterior to vent, another c. 3 mm incision c. 50 mm anterior to vent; mouth preserved slightly open; constriction of body c. 50 mm anterior of vent caused by field tag string; shallow, broad midventral groove on most of venter, more apparent on anterior half of body; small sections of few scale pockets opened dorsally. Slightly dorsoventrally compressed, body width uniform throughout except for narrower anterior third and posteriormost few mm. Head small, distinctly narrow in dorsal view; head length a little less than midbody width, head width much less than body width (less than half of midbody width). In dorsal view head strongly V-shaped, sides straight and converging substantially from back of head to just behind anterior limit of mouth (up to level of TPs), in front of this parallel sided rostrum ends in narrowly rounded snout tip. In ventral view lower jaw and upper lip more broadly rounded than snout, upper jaws visible from CMs forwards. In lateral view upper lip slightly concave (apex closer to eye than TP), lower lip slightly downturned. Snout very prominent in lateral view, projection anterior to mouth approximately two thirds as long as upper lip. Eyes slightly inset from edges of head in dorsal view (by distance not more than half diameter of eye), approximately halfway between snout tip and back of head; clearly visible; much larger than TAs, larger than TPs. TAs oval, centres slightly below imaginary lines between nares and CMs; slightly closer to imaginary lines between eyes and nares than to underside of snout; distinctly closer to nares than to lip. In lateral view, CMs slightly closer to bottom than top of head. Nares subcircular, approximately equidistant in lateral view from top, bottom and tip of snout; not visible in dorsal or ventral views. TPs visible in dorsal and ventral views, TAs not visible dorsally. TPs approximately equidistant between snout tip and anterior of mouth. As far as could be determined, all teeth are bicusped. Outer tooth rows longer than inner rows on both upper and lower jaw. PMs extend only a short distance posterior to choanae. No diastema between vomerine and palatine teeth. Palate only slightly concave transversely, generally pale; tongue unattached anteriorly, tip rounded, no plicae, narial plugs large and prominent with clearly delimiting grooves medially. Choanae subcircular to broadly oval, interchoanal distance a little more than the width of each choana; choanal valves not deeply set, visible. C2 slightly thicker than first PA; C1 thinner than C2, thicker than back of head. In lateral view C1 approximately same length as first PA, distinctly shorter than C2. NG1, NG2 and NG3 clearly marked and complete except for narrow but distinct NG3 midventral gap. NG1 and NG2 largely orthoplicate, NG3 slightly posteriorly bowed ventrally. One TG clearly indicated on C2, halfway between NG2 and NG3, extends across most of dorsum. AGs inconspicuous to naked eye, slightly clearer posteriorly; conspicuous throughout under microscope. All PAGs complete (except perhaps last few). SAGs on all PAs, dorsolaterally on first PA, ventrolaterally on third PA, SAGs become complete on lateral apex on 20th PA, middorsally complete on 17th PA, midventrally complete on 22nd PA. No substantial regional variation in lengths of PAs. Each AG with irregular row of closely packed, pale, small and larger glands posterior to narrow darker band, darker band thicker posteriorly; larger pale glands on posterior annuli longer, more dense on ventral surface. Posterior edges of annuli increasingly raised far posteriorly, thin whitish line appears between darker band and paler glands on the middle 50% of the body. Posteriorly (within 15 AGs from TT) four rows of scales in pockets as deep as approximately three quarters the length of a PA at this point; anteriorly (15 PAGs behind collar region) two scale rows in pockets no deeper than one quarter the length of a PA. All observed scales oval, wider than long. Terminal cap approximately one and a half times length of posteriormost PAs. Posteriormost AG restricted to dorsum, approximately level with front of disc surrounding vent. No AGs on venter behind front of disc; last AG anterior to disc on venter midventrally incomplete. Terminus bluntly rounded, much more so than head; inconspicuous, narrow, shallow, longitudinal left of midline terminal groove behind disc onto posteroventral surface of TT. Denticles of vent slightly everted; disc approximately subcircular, with 11 (six posterior, two lateral, three anterior) approximately bilaterally symmetrical denticulations, those anterior and lateral longest; single large papillus on base of each anterolateral denticulation. Disc boundary difficult to discern, interpreted here as not extending beyond partly everted denticulations surrounding vent. Body brown to brown-grey in preservative, uniform along length, notably paler ventrally with transition lying more dorsolaterally than laterally. Disc and denticulations entirely pale, whitish. Head greyish brown dorsally, paler posteriorly (than centrally) where no paler than adjacent body. Conspicuous pale patches broadly encircle eyes and extend forwards as eye-tentacle stripe, fading out halfway to TP on right, extending as narrow stripe to TP on left. ST unpigmented, whitish dorsally; underside of rostrum whitish anteriorly, greyish posteriorly. Nares in pale spots; TPs pale. Pale upper and lower lip lines. Broad pale regular stripes on lateral and ventrolateral surfaces of mandibles continuous with pale lips. In life (Fig. 4), holotype dark brown, darker posteriorly and dorsally. Head paler brown and with whitish patches. Macroscopically, annular grooves marked above by whitish thin line anterior to row of large whitish glands, these glands fewer, smaller laterally. Variation among paratypes. Six paratypes, condition generally good except for some dehydration of skin causing some wrinkling. Small piece of body wall missing ventrally at approximately midbody in BMNH 2005.1927; head strongly flexed upwards, skin damaged on left upper lip of BMNH 2005.1820; left side of snout strongly squashed in BMNH 2005.1823. Paratypes agree with description of holotype presented above with following exceptions (see Table 1 for variation in quantitative characters). Sides of rostrum less parallel, more anteriorly converging in dorsal view in BMNH 2005.1927 and 2005.1821. Anterior of upper lip and of lower jaw more broadly rounded than ST in ventral view in BMNH 2005.1821 and especially 2005.1926. Upper lip in lateral view only very slightly concave in some specimens (e.g. BMNH 2005.1821, 2005.1823, and 2005.1926). In dorsal view eyes not separated from sides of head in BMNH 2005.1927, separated by distance approximately diameter of eye in BMNH 2005.1820, other paratypes similar to holotype (eye separated from sides of head by distance less than diameter of eye). In most paratypes (all but BMNH 2005.1823) C2 not thicker than C1 or back of head. In BMNH 2005.1926 C1 approximately as long as first PA. NG1 and NG2 with slight anterior bow ventrally in 2005.1927; NG3 orthoplicate in 2005.1821 and 2005.1927. NG3 complete in 2005.1823, 2005.1926, and 2005.1927, widely incomplete in 2005.1822. Three TGs on C 2 in BMNH 2005.1821. TG faint in 2005.1822. In 2005.1820 and 2005.1821 SAG on first PA is possibly complete middorsally, though SAGs middorsally incomplete on next few PAs. The conspicuousness of the darker and paler lines associated with AGs is variable across the sample. Terminal cap variable, a little over one (BMNH 2005.1820 and 2005.1821) or approximately two (2005.1822) times length of posteriormost PAs. Middorsal part of posteriormost AG approximately level with centre of vent in BMNH 2005.1821, otherwise generally level with somewhere on anterior half of disc surrounding vent. No AGs ventrally incomplete immediately anterior to vent in BMNH 2005.1823, two ventrally incomplete in 2005.1822 and 2005.1926, three in 2005.1820. Colour in preservative generally a little darker and more grey than holotype except paler, browner in BMNH 2005.1820. Only BMNH 2005.1820 resembles holotype in having relatively pale dorsum of head posteriorly. Head more grey than body in most specimens, same colour in BMNH 2005.1927 and 2005.1927, browner and paler than body in 2005.1821–1823. Pale stripe only halfway from eye to TA on left of BMNH 2005.1821. Pale ST with pigmented blotches in BMNH 2005.1926, flecks in 2005.1927. Rostrum more extensively pale in BMNH 2005.1820, 2005.1823. The two Morne Seychellois (and smallest known) specimens were a darker, less reddish brown than the other types in life. Etymology. The specific epithet is in reference to the restricted, high elevation distribution of the species, known only from above 700 m, on the highest mountains in the Seychelles. For nomenclatural purposes the specific epithet is considered to be a noun in apposition. Suggested ‘common’ names. Montane Mahé caecilian; montane hypogeophis (English), leverdter nwanr montanny (Creole). Distribution, natural history, and conservation. Hypogeophis montanus sp. nov. is known only from Morne Seychellois National Park on the island of Mahé, from elevations of ca. 718–731 m on Morne Seychellois (ca. 729 m) and nearby Congo Rouge (ca. 718–731 m). The former site is ca. 180 m below the highest peak in the Seychelles (Morne Seychellois, 905 m). The two sites are less than 1 km apart. The seven type specimens were collected during approximately 14 person hours of dedicated fieldwork in 2015 (Morne Seychellois) and 2013 and 2015 (Congo Rouge) above 700 m. We did not find specimens of H. montanus sp. nov. between 450 and 550 m during approximately 19 person hours of digging between Casse Dents and Congo Rouge in February and March 2013 and February 2014, during approximately two person hours of digging between 460 and 610 m on Morne Seychellois in September 2015, during four person hours of digging at ca. 612 m near the peak of Trois Frères in September 2015, during 100 minutes of digging at ca. 650 m near the peak of Morne Blanc in March 2015, or during approximately 18 person hours of digging at Mares aux Cochon (ca. 430 m) and along the path (ca. 290–410 m) leading up to Mares Aux Cochons from the Chemin le Niol road in March 2013, January and February 2014, and March and September 2015. Other than the H. brevis found at ca. 612 m near Trois Frères reported by Maddock et al. (2017), the only other caecilians we found during fieldwork between 600 and 703 m between 2013 and 2015 were three Grandisonia alternans (Congo Rouge and Morne Blanc) and one G. sechellensis (Congo Rouge). We found no species of caecilians other than H. montanus sp. nov. above 705 m. At Congo Rouge (loam soil, 3.04 pH) and Morne Seychellois the type specimens were dug from soil 350 m (the lowest known elevation for H. brevis: Maddock et al. 2017) and perhaps only occurring> 700 m. There is only ~ 1km 2 of land above 700 m elevation in the Seychelles, and it is possible that H. montanus sp. nov. has one of the smallest distributions of any extant caecilian species. Although the known range of H. montanus sp. nov. lies entirely within a national park, this range is very small and includes probably only a single threat-defined location. Thus, if there is any evidence of decline in extent or quality of habitat or declines in numbers of individuals the new species would qualify for at least Endangered status on the IUCN Red List. Given that there is no immediate prospect of estimating or monitoring population numbers, H. montanus sp. nov. might currently qualify for Near Threatened status. Paratype BMNH 2005.1821 has a small pit or foramen laterally on the collar region, close to NG2 and on both sides (Fig. 3d). This feature is in the approximate position where external embryonic or foetal gills or larval spiracles are found in other caecilian species. Among teresomatan caecilians, only the Ethiopian Sylvacaecilia grandisonae (Taylor, 1970) and some other indotyphlids of the Seychelles are known to have a larval stage (see San Mauro et al. 2014). BMNH 2005.1821 lacks other features typical of larval caecilians such as labial folds, tail fins and lateral line organs (see e.g. Wilkinson 1992). We do not think that the features in BMNH 2005.1821 are genuine spiracles because when gently probed they do not seem to pass through to communicate with the buccal cavity, and they are much narrower than unambiguous spiracles observed in other caecilians. We suggest that these features in BMNH 2005.1821 are instead developmental anomalies, perhaps incompletely ‘healed’ gill scars. The same specimen also has a more upturned and softer snout tip than in the other types, perhaps indicative of additional anomalous developmental features. None of the other known specimens of Hypogeophis montanus sp. nov. has a spiracle-like feature or any other external characteristics of larvae. In preservation BMNH 2005.1821 is 81 mm in total length, no shorter than BMNH 2005.1823 collected sympatrically and at the same time, and substantially longer than BMNH 2005.1926 (66 mm) and 2005.1927 (43 mm). We predict that H. montanus sp. nov. is oviparous, as are all Seychelles caecilians for which reproductive mode is known, but there is little basis for predicting whether it has biphasic or direct development. Morphometric and genetic differentiation of Hypogeophis montanus. The principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of all morphometric characters separates all three nominal diminutive species of Seychelles caecilian (Hypogeophis montanus sp. nov., H. brevis and H. pti) from one another (Fig. 6a). Hypogeophis pti does not overlap in the PCoA with either H. montanus sp. nov. or H. brevis. Although not overlapping in the PCoA plot there is a close proximity between the smallest H. montanus sp. nov. specimen (BMNH 2005.1927) and some of the smallest H. brevis specimens (Fig. 6a). There is no correlation between elevation and number of vertebrae within H. brevis (Fig. 6b) supporting our interpretation of H. montanus sp. nov. as not simply a higher elevational form of H. brevis. Overall head size (ST-NG1 and WH) in H. montanus sp. nov. is relatively small in comparison to both H. brevis and H. pti, though there is overlap (Fig. 6c, d). The position of the TA is in a somewhat intermediate position in Hypogeophis montanus sp. nov. when compared with H. brevis and H. pti (Fig. 6e). Genetic variation is substantial between H. montanus sp. nov. and the two species it most resembles phenotypically, H. brevis and H. pti. Curiously, the lowest mean genetic distance (16s) between H. montanus sp. nov. and any other Seychelles caecilian is with the morphologically distinct (and not obviously closely related) Grandisonia alternans (5.6%). For the partial 16s sequences that we generated there is a mean group p -distance of 14.9% between the sampled H. montanus sp. nov. and H. brevis and a mean of 18.8% between H. montanus sp. nov. and H. pti. The 16s phylogenetic tree supports a sister relationship between H. montanus sp. nov. and H. brevis, though with only moderate support (Fig. 7a). Other relationships within this 16s tree are generally weakly supported. Analysis of the nuclear data (Fig. 7b) supports the separation of all three of the diminutive, superficially similar species, H. montanus sp. nov., H. brevis, H. pti, and the closer phylogenetic relationship between the two former, Mahé species.Published as part of Maddock, Simon T., Wilkinson, Mark & Gower, David J., 2018, A new species of small, long-snouted Hypogeophis Peters, 1880 (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Indotyphlidae) from the highest elevations of the Seychelles island of Mahé, pp. 359-375 in Zootaxa 4450 (3) on pages 361-369, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4450.3.3, http://zenodo.org/record/144482
Recommended from our members
WATERBUD: A SPREADSHEET-BASED MODEL OF THE WATER BUDGET AND WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OF THE UPPER SAN PEDRO RIVER BASIN, ARIZONA
No full textThis report describes the development and application of a spreadsheet -based model of the water budget and water management systems of the Upper San Pedro River Basin in southeastern Arizona. The model has been given the name, WATERBUD.This report is revised from a thesis of the same title by the senior author prepared
in the Department of Hydrology and Water Resources at the University of Arizona. The
thesis committee consisted of Dr. William B. Lord and Dr. Thomas Maddock III,
directors, and Dr. Randy Bassett. The research was funded in part by the Cochise
County, Arizona, Flood Control District, who supported an Upper San Pedro
Interdisciplinary Study Team during 1990 and 1991 through the University of Arizona,
Water Resources Research Center. Dr. Lord and Dr. Maddock also served as directors of
the Study Team. The contents of this report express the views of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views or policies, either expressed or implied, of Cochise County;
nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute their endorsement
by Cochise County or the University of Arizona.
All of the students and staff on the Upper San Pedro Interdisciplinary Study Team
contributed to the work leading up to this report. The senior author especially wishes to
thank Ali Aljamal, Rick Dorrance, Dave Gillilan, Edella Schlager, Souad Sherif, Scott
Summerside, Leticia Vionnet, and Mary Wallace for their insights and assistance.See also related thesis at: http://hdl.handle.net/10150/291643This title from the Hydrology & Water Resources Technical Reports collection is made available by the Department of Hydrology & Atmospheric Sciences and the University Libraries, University of Arizona. If you have questions about titles in this collection, please contact [email protected]
Love patrol [Television series drama]
No full textLove Patrol is a ni-Vanuatu television series. It is the first ever locally produced television series in Vanuatu. Produced by Wan Smolbag Theatre with financial assistance from AusAID, NZAID and the Asian Development Bank, it is a soap opera with a serious message, intended primarily to educate viewers on the topic of AIDS. It also tackles 'youth unemployment, police brutality and the hypocrisy of keeping youth uninformed about sex'. UNAIDS reported that it explores 'the growing issues of high rates of STIs among young people, high teenage pregnancy, lack of discourse on sex and risk taking behaviours in Pacific communities'. It has been described as an 'edutainment' series.
Dr Daniel Maddock won the 2015 Australian Cinematographer’s Society Bronze Award for Love Patrol (Television Drama - S06) which broadcast on SBS/NiTV and is streaming on SBS On Demand
Incorporating Hydrodynamics into Ecohydraulics: The Role of Turbulence in the Swimming Performance and Habitat Selection of Stream-Dwellling Fish
No full text
The florist's directory : or, A treatise on the culture of flowers ; to which is added a supplementary dissertation on soils, manures, &c. / by James Maddock.
No full textvii, 272 p., 6 leaves of plates
Acanthophis cryptamydros Maddock, Ellis, Doughty, Smith & Wüster, 2015, sp. nov.
No full text<i>Acanthophis cryptamydros</i> sp. nov. <p>Kimberley death adders Figs. 5–8</p> <p> <b>Holotype.</b> WAM R174083, medium-sized male collected 1 km north-west of Theda Station homestead, Western Australia (14°46'59.10"S, 126°29'22.02"E), on 8 March 2014 by R. Ellis, G. Bourke, and R. Barrett. Fixed in 10% formalin, stored in 70% ethanol at WAM. Liver samples stored in 100% ethanol at WAM and SAM.</p> <p> <b>Paratypes.</b> WAM R70690, sub-adult male, 45 km north-northeast Halls Creek, WA (17°51'00"S, 127°50'00"E); WAM R81245, adult male, Packsaddle Springs, near Kununurra, WA (15°54'00"S, 128°41'00"E); WAM R103755, adult male, Surveyors Pool, Mitchell River National Park, WA (14°39'46"S, 125°44'34"E); WAM R165567, adult male, Koolan Island, WA (16°08'04"S, 123°45'05"E); WAM R168918, adult female, Boongaree Island, WA (15°4'39.36"S, 125°11'13.56"E); WAM R172034, adult female, north-west Molema Island, WA (16°14'17"S, 123°49'49"E).</p> <p> <b>Diagnosis.</b> A moderately stout <i>Acanthophis</i> to 645 mm total length. Distinguished from all other Australian <i>Acanthophis</i> by a combination of midbody scales in 22 or 23 rows, 125–139 ventrals, undivided prefrontal scales, posterior edge of frontal scale not extending beyond posterior edge of supraoculars, laterally flared supraoculars, area of lower secondary temporal scale equal to or smaller than sixth supralabial, anterior dorsal scales with prominent keels, and ventrum unpigmented except for 1–3 rows of spots on ventrolateral edge.</p> <p> <b>Description of holotype (WAM R174083).</b> A medium-sized male <i>Acanthophis,</i> measurements and counts: ToL 482 mm; SVL 394 mm; TailL 88 mm (22% of SVL); HeadL 24.9 mm; HeadW 17.4 mm; MBSR 23; AntSR 20; PostSR 17; VS 129; ScST 54; SupLab 6; InfLab 7.</p> <p>From above, head pear-shaped and distinct from neck, widest at interparietal scale angling forward to rostral and back to posterior jaw edge, narrowing to body; tip of snout blunt, broadly rounded; head in profile deepest at interparietal scale, snout convex; top of snout slightly concave where rostral and internasals converge; head scales rugose; rostral scale twice as wide as high, apex rounded, distal edges with low straight sides, ventral edge concave above lingual fossa; nasal scales narrowly separated by two internasals, approximately twice as wide as tall, rugose; nostril centered on nasal scale, opening dorsally and posteriorly, a shallow divot posterior to nostril; internasals as wide as long, in broad contact with each other, narrow contact with rostral, broad contact with nasals and prefrontals; prefrontals 1.5 times long as wide, narrowing laterally, 0.75 times area of frontal, 1.5 times area of internasals; frontal scale roughly rectangular, anterior edge slightly wider than posterior edge, approximately 1.5 times as long as wide (FrL 4.7 mm, FrW 3.0 mm), apex of posterior edge not extending beyond posterior edge of supraoculars; two parietals, as wide as long, anterior edge in contact with posterior angles of frontal, anterior edge of parietal sharing border with posterior edge of frontal, anterolateral edge in broad contact with supraocular, narrow contact with upper postocular, posterior border irregularly scalloped; preocular single, supraocular single, postoculars two, suboculars two; preocular in contact with prefrontal, nasal, third supralabial and anterior subocular scales; supraocular much longer than wide (SupOcL 5.03 mm, SupOcW 2.90 mm), thicker and rugose in appearance to other head scales, angled upwards at 30º; primary temporal scales two, lower primary temporal 2.5 times larger than upper, upper primary temporal feebly keeled; secondary temporal scales four, gradually increasing in size from dorsalmost to ventralmost, first and second with moderate keels, third and fourth smooth, fourth secondary temporal larger than prior three, located in the notch formed by fifth and sixth supralabials, two times smaller than sixth supralabial; supralabials six, sixth largest, fifth slightly smaller; first supralabial in contact with rostral and nasal, second in contact with nasal; third in contact with nasal, preocular, primary subocular, secondary subocular; fourth in contact with secondary subocular and lower postocular; fifth in contact with lower subocular, second primary temporal, fourth secondary temporal and sixth supralabial; mental triangular; infralabials seven, fourth infralabial largest, first in contact with postmental scale; anterior chin shields in contact with infralabials one to four; posterior chin shields in contact with fourth infralabial only, anterior and posterior chin shields forming a butterfly-like shape; six rows of intergulars between chin shields and anteriormost ventral.</p> <p>Body width widest at midbody tapering gradually forward to base of head and posteriorly to cloaca; scale rows 23 at midbody (i.e., at 64th ventral scale from anterior), decreasing to 20 behind the head, 17 anterior to vent; 129 ventral scales; anal scale single; 54 subcaudal scales, first subcaudal paired, anteriormost 29 single, followed by 29 paired; scales on side of body diamond-shaped, scales in vertebral zone more narrow; dorsal keeling strongest on anterior quarter of body, 10–12 longitudinal scale rows wide; keeling weak along remainder of length; dorsolateral and lateral scales weakly keeled to smooth, ventral scales smooth (Figs. 5–7).</p> <p>Tail elongate, TailL 88 mm (22% of SVL), tapering from cloaca to laterally compressed caudal lure; ScST 54 (ScSS 30, ScSP 24). Caudal lure much higher than wide ending with terminal tail spine.</p> <p>Eyes small with vertically elliptic pupil, iris mottled in appearance, similar in coloration to surrounding ocular scales.</p> <p> <b>Coloration.</b> In life, ground color of dorsal and lateral surfaces pale orange-brown; 33 darker cross-bands (Fig. 5); cross-bands two to four midbody scales wide with dark brown border; dorsal scales edged with black anteriorly; tail coloration same as dorsum with 12 bands; tail tip and terminal spine black with white to cream flecks; first midbody scale dark in center, distal edge pale; ventral scales cream-white and lacking pigmentation other than lateralmost edges; ventral coloration of tail similar in appearance to ventrum with patches of dark pigment in center of posteriormost subcaudal scales prior to black tail tip and terminal spine; supralabials stippled with black, stronger stippling on posterior labials, ventral edge pale white; infralabials pale white with dark oblong vertical blotch in center of scale, on posterior scales the ventral edge of the blotch is angled posteriorly.</p> <p>In preservative, dorsal ground color dull orange brown; overall pattern is subdued with less contrast between light and dark cross-bands (Fig. 6).</p> <p> <b>Variation.</b> SVL up to 555 mm; TailL 15–24% of SVL, mean 20% (N = 22). FrW 47–73% of FrL, mean 59% (N = 26). Apex of posterior edge terminates equal to (N = 13) or prior to (N = 13) posterior supraocular edge, never post. Fourth secondary temporal equal to (N = 13) or smaller than (N = 13) sixth supralabial. MBSR 22–23 (N = 24), mostly 23 (N = 21), occasionally 22 (N = 3). AntSR 16–23, mean 19 (N = 24), PostSR 16–19, mean 18 (N = 24). Ventral scales 125–139, mean 130 (N = 23). First anterior subcaudal scale usually divided, not separated (N = 9), occasionally undivided (N = 5), divided and separated by two (N = 4), three (N = 3) or one (N = 1) by a small rounded scale. ScST 46–56, mean 50, ScSP 20–40, mean 30 and ScSS 14–32, mean 21 (N = 22).</p> <p>Ground color of dorsal and lateral surfaces variable from dull red-orange, tan-brown or gray in coloration with darker cross bands (Fig 6). Dorsal cross bands 44–61, mean 50 (N = 23); SVL 35–46, mean 39, Tail 9–15, mean 11 (N = 23). Tail tip black with white ventral surface, occasional small white lateral flecks (80%, N = 16), less often white (15%, N = 3) or banded (5%, N = 1). Ventral scales cream-white and lacking pigmentation other than lateralmost edges of ventral scale. Supralabials pale white, mottled in appearance fusing to darker markings on adjacent scales, lower edge of supralabials pale. Infralabials white-edged with dark pigment, both solid and mottled in appearance in center of scale extending to upper edge of scale.</p> <p>Sexual dimorphism is not obvious, although female TailL % of SVL is shorter than males: female TailL 15– 19% of SVL, mean 18 (N = 10); male TailL 21–24% SVL, mean 22% (N = 10). The tail tapers much more abruptly posterior to the vent in females, whereas in males the tail tapers gradually. The number of ventral and subcaudal scales is similar in both sexes (Table 3).</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> <i>Acanthophis cryptamydros</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is known from the Kimberley region of Western Australia. The species’ range in Western Australia is known to extend from Wotjulum (WAM R11241) in the west, 45 km north-north-east of Halls Creek in the south (WAM R70690), and Kununurra in the east (WAM R137470). <i>Acanthophis cryptamydros</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is also known to occur on some offshore islands including Koolan, Bigge, Boongaree, Wulalam, and an unnamed island in Talbot Bay (Palmer <i>et al.</i> 2013).</p> <p>A single specimen (NTM R29109) with incomplete data (no collection date or precise latitude and longitude) is reported as occurring from Adelaide River in the Northern Territory (Fig. 1); however, this locality may be in error. Further collecting from the area may resolve the issue.</p> <p> <b>Habitat and ecology.</b> The holotype (WAM R174083) was collected early morning towards the end of the ‘wet season’ (early March) from among basalt boulders in savannah woodland at the edge of a low plateau near a small sandstone outcrop. Vegetation among the basalt boulder habitat was dominated by <i>Eucalyptus tectifica</i> and <i>Corymbia greeniana</i> amongst mixed shrubs over mixed groundcovers and annual/perennial grasses (Fig. 9). Shrub cover was dominated by <i>Grevillea mimosoides</i>, <i>Grewia retusifolia</i>, <i>Indigofera</i> sp. and <i>Olearia arguta</i> (Fig. 9). The specimen was observed retreating to grass tussocks after being disturbed. The specimen was tightly coiled within the grass tussock before attempting to move to another tussock when disturbed. WAM R145216 was collected from thick grasses on a creek bank subjected to minor sheet flooding at Little Mertens Falls. Collection notes and accession data of other specimens describe individuals collected from among grasses or leaf litter in sandstone habitats. One specimen was collected from under a rock in a vine thicket near a beach on an unnamed island in Talbot Bay (WAM R172034), and another from leaf litter in <i>Acacia</i> woodland on Wulalam Island (WAM R172035). Two specimens were collected from roads or tracks (WAM R70690, WAM R165567).</p> <p> Examination of the stomach contents of two specimens revealed a mixture of frogs, lizards, and mammals. A juvenile specimen (WAM R1251B) had an adult <i>Heteronotia</i> species (aff. <i>H. binoei</i>). In the gut of an adult specimen (WAM R141552), a subadult <i>Lophognathus</i> species (<i>L. gilberti</i>), an adult <i>Litoria</i> species (aff. <i>L. nasuta</i> or <i>L. watjulumensis</i>), and hair belonging to a native murid species, <i>Pseudomys</i> sp. (aff. <i>P. johnstoni</i> or <i>P. delicatulus</i>) were found. Two small reptilian eggs were also collected from the adult, possibly from the <i>Lophognathus</i> ingested. Accession data for WAM R116934 identified a <i>Ctenotus pantherinus</i> (WAM R117001) from examination of its stomach contents. An ecological study of Australian and Papuan death adders by Shine <i>et al</i>. (2014) included five specimens of <i>A. cryptamydros</i>; however, examination of stomach contents revealed no prey items, only a small quantity of dirt. Examination of the gut contents of other northern <i>Acanthophis</i> species indicated a diet consisting of a wide range of vertebrate species, especially lizards but also including frogs, mammals, and some birds (Shine <i>et al.</i> 2014).</p> <p>Examination of reproductive organs of an adult female specimen (WAM R106033) revealed 13 well-developed follicles approximately 10 x 14 mm in size (month of collection unknown).</p> <p> <b>Comparison with other species.</b> Distinguished from <i>A. pyrrhus</i> by higher average MBSR (23 vs. 21), fewer ventral scales (125–139 vs. 136–158), pigment on lateral periphery of ventral scales (vs. no pigment on ventral scales), presence of pigment patches on infralabials (infralabials unpigmented in <i>A. pyrrhus</i>), less prominent dorsal keeling (strongly keeled in <i>A. pyrrhus</i>, tapering to a sharp point on posterior edge), head scales less rugose, posterior edge of frontal scale not extending beyond posterior edge of supraoculars (equal to or beyond in <i>A. pyrrhus</i>), and undivided pair of prefrontal scales (divided in <i>A. pyrrhus</i>).</p> <p> <i>A. cryptamydros</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> <i>A.</i> ' <i>rugosus</i> group'</p> <p>Character N = 23 N = 14</p> <p>(9♂, 7♀) (9♂, 5♀)</p> <p>SVL 428±57 (322–555) N = 20 486±97 (375–690)</p> <p>♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 7 ♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 5 412±41 468±54 434±57 581±82 (374–496) (392–555) (375–530) (482–690)</p> <p>TailL 86±9 (72–110) N = 20 94±11 (80–110)</p> <p>♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 7 ♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 5 90.6±9 81.4±5 92±11 98±9 (79–110) (76–89) (79–110) (85–108)</p> <p>TailL/SVL 0.20±0.03 (0.15–0.24) N = 20 0.20±0.03 (0.15–0.23)</p> <p>♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 7 ♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 5 0.22±0.01 0.18±0.01 0.21±0.01 0.17±0.03 (0.21–0.24) (0.15–0.19) (0.20–0.23) (0.15–0.22)</p> <p>HeadL 26.1±2.4 (22.7–32.0) N = 20 31.1±5.5 (25.5–42.3)</p> <p>HeadW 16.4±2.2 (13.8–20.2) N = 20 19.4±4.6 (13.1–27.1)</p> <p>HeadW/HeadL 0.63±0.05 (0.54–0.71) N = 20 0.60±0.04 (0.51–0.66)</p> <p>VS 130±4 (125–139) N = 20 127±4 (123–136)</p> <p>ScST 50±3 (46–56) N = 20 46±6.14 (29–55)</p> <p>♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 7 ♂♂ N = 9 ♀♀ N = 5 53±2 49±2 47±7 45±3 (51–56) (46–51) (29–55) (42–49)</p> <p>MBSR 22.9±0.3 (22–23) 22.0 ±0.9 (21–23)</p> <p>AntSR 19.2±1.3 (16–23) 20.3±0.6 (19–21)</p> <p>PostSR 17.8±0.9 (16–19) 18.0±0.7 (17–19)</p> <p>PreOc 1.0±0 (1) 1.1±0.3 (1–2)</p> <p>SupOc 1.0±0 (1) 1.1±0.3 (1–2)</p> <p>PostOc 2.0±0.2 (2–3) 2.1±0.3 (2–3)</p> <p>SubOc 2.2±0.4 (2–3) 2.7±0.5 (2–3)</p> <p>Ptemp 2±0 (2) 2.0±0 (2)</p> <p>Stemp 4.4±0.5 (4–5) 4.0±0.4 (3–5)</p> <p>SupLab 6.0±0 (6) 6.0±0 (6)</p> <p>InfLab 7.0±0 (7) 7.1±0.3 (7–8)</p> <p>FrL 5.6±0.5 (4.7–6.7) N = 20 7.2±0.9 (6.0–9.0)</p> <p>FrW 3.3±0.3 (2.6–4.1) N = 20 3.4±0.5 (2.8–4.4)</p> <p>FrW/FrL 0.59±0.06 (0.47–0.73) N = 20 0.48±0.02 (0.45–0.52)</p> <p>SupOcL 5.5±0.5 (4.8–6.4) N = 20 6.4±0.7 (5.2–7.4)</p> <p> SupOcW 3.1±0.3 (2.8–3.7) N = 20 3.7±0.5 (3.0–4.6) Differs from <i>A. wellsi</i> by higher midbody scale rows (22–23 vs. 19–21), less prominent dorsal keeling, posterior edge of frontal scale not extending beyond posterior edge of supraoculars (equal to or beyond in <i>A. wellsi</i>), and more laterally flared supraocular (absent or less prominent in <i>A. wellsi</i>). Differs from melanistic forms of <i>A. wellsi</i> by the absence of prominent black coloration on head and black dorsal bands.</p> <p> Distinguished from <i>A. antarcticus</i> by higher average MBSR (23 vs. 21), more ventral scales (125+ vs. 124-), and more prominent anterior dorsal keeling (vs. smooth or very weakly keeled in <i>A. antarcticus</i>).</p> <p> Most similar to <i>A. rugosus</i> group in appearance, but differs through higher average ventral scale counts (130 vs. 127), despite considerable overlap in range, lacking dark pigment on the ventrum other than lateral edge (vs. distinct blotching of dark pigment), posterior edge of frontal scale not extending beyond posterior edge of supraoculars (beyond in 13 of 14 specimens, equal in one specimen) and size of lower secondary temporal not larger than sixth supralabial in area (<i>A. cryptamydros</i> equal in 13 specimens, smaller in 13 vs. <i>A. rugosus</i> equal in 10, larger in 4). See Table 3 for further details.</p> <p> Comparisons of <i>A. cryptamydros</i> <b>sp nov.</b> to the <i>A. rugosus</i> group are complicated by the likely existence of a number of undescribed species within the latter, which greatly increases variation within this complex. We comment on morphological characters that are useful in distinguishing these two taxa.</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> The specific epithet is modified from the Greek words <i>kryptos</i> (cryptic, hidden) and <i>amydros</i> (indistinct, dim) in reference to the cryptic nature of the species and its indistinct appearance relative to its surroundings making its presence unknown to predators and prey. Used as a noun in apposition.</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The <i>A. rugosus</i> group is likely to contain a number of undescribed species. Taxonomic resolution of this group will further define differences between individual species within the group and <i>A. cryptamydros</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> The discovery of <i>A. cryptamydros</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> as a previously undescribed major lineage within <i>Acanthophis</i> highlights the incompleteness of our understanding of phylogenetic structure and species limits within the genus. At the same time, it also highlights the importance of the Kimberley region of Western Australia as a center of endemism (Doughty 2011; Oliver <i>et al.</i> 2012; Pepper & Keogh 2014).</p> <p> Lethal ingestion of the cane toad (<i>Rhinella marina</i>) has been documented in previous studies on <i>Acanthophis</i> specimens from the Kimberley region and Northern Territory (Phillips & Shine 2007; Hagman <i>et al.</i> 2009; Phillips <i>et al.</i> 2010; Pearson <i>et al.</i> 2014) indicating the species is likely to be at risk of significant decline as cane toads continue to move west across the Kimberley region. A detailed assessment on potential threats to the species including cane toads will identify the need for listing as a species requiring protection under state or federal legislation.</p>Published as part of <i>Maddock, Simon T., Ellis, Ryan J., Doughty, Paul, Smith, Lawrence A. & Wüster, Wolfgang, 2015, A new species of death adder (Acanthophis: Serpentes: Elapidae) from north-western Australia, pp. 301-326 in Zootaxa 4007 (3)</i> on pages 308-315, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4007.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/243397">http://zenodo.org/record/243397</a>
Extension of the proximity-quotient control law for low-thrust propulsion
Get PDFIn this paper, the proximity quotient control law, first developed by Petropoulos, is extended to account for both third body effects and solar radiation pressure based on the mission requirements for a hypothetical NEO deflection mission to the asteroid Apophis using a solar sublimation deflection technique. The perturbing effect of solar radiation pressure becomes relevant when dealing with large optics in space. Equations for the disturbing acceleration are derived for the perturbations, then analytically incorporated into the equations determining the rate-of-change in time of the orbital elements, and tested using a
Earth-asteroid transfer. Another specific variant of the control law is developed for the orbital maintenance
of the spacecraft formation in the vicinity of the NEO
- …
