Journal of
Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 August 2018 | 10(9): 12147–12162
Appearances are deceptive: molecular phylogeny
recovers the Scaly Gecko Hemidactylus scabriceps (Reptilia: Squamata: Gekkonidae)
as a member of a scansorial and rupicolous clade
Achyuthan N. Srikanthan 1 ,
Gandla Chethan Kumar 2, Aishwarya J. Urs 3 & Sumaithangi Rajagopalan Ganesh 4
1 Center for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru,
Karnataka 560012, India
2 Wildlife Biology and Taxonomy Lab, Department of Zoology,
University College of Science, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana 500007,
India
2 Wildlife Institute of India, Post Box #18, Chandrabani, Dehradun,
Uttarakhand 248001, India
3 No. 94, 5th Cross, Raghavendra Colony, Vidyaranyapura, Bengaluru,
Karnataka 560097, India
4 Chennai Snake Park, Rajbhavan Post, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600022,
India
1 peltopelor@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 g.chethankumar@gmail.com,
3 aishwaryaj.urs@gmail.com, 4 snakeranglerr@gmail.com
doi: https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3964.10.9.12147-12162 | ZooBank:
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:03BEA8A8-A142-4E6A-AE94-CBEFF5C8D656
Editor: Salvador Carranza, Institute of
Evolutionary Biology (CSIC-UPF), Barcelona, Spain. Date
of publication: 26 August 2018 (online & print)
Manuscript details: Ms # 3964 | Received 18 December 2017 | Final received
01 June 2018 | Finally accepted 02 August 2018
Citation: Srikanthan, A.N., G.C. Kumar,
A.J. Urs & S.R. Ganesh (2018). Appearances are deceptive:
molecular phylogeny recovers the Scaly Gecko Hemidactylus scabriceps
(Reptilia: Squamata: Gekkonidae) as a member of a scansorial and rupicolous
clade. Journal of Threatened Taxa 10(9): 12147–12162; https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3964.10.9.12147-12162
Copyright: © Srikanthan et al. 2018.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows
unrestricted use of this article in any medium, reproduction and distribution
by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.
Funding: None.
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author Details: Achyuthan N. Srikanthan is currently working with the Indian
Institute of Science, studying the ecomorphology and evolutionary osteology and
specialized integument microstructure characterisation of the amphibian and
reptile groups. G. Chethan Kumar
is currently working in Wildlife Forensic and Conservation Genetics laboratory,
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, solving cases related to morphology and
DNA evidences. His research includes, studying reptiles, amphibians and
mammalian fauna of India. His primary research interest includes documenting
herpetofaunal diversity of under-explored eco-regions, ecology and
characterization of species by both classical and molecular approaches. Aishwarya
J. Urs works on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) developing models
and maps for wildlife biology and related fields. Dr. S.R.
Ganesh is working as Deputy Director & Scientist at the Chennai
Snake Park, conducting research on reptiles and amphibians of Southern India.
His research themes include documenting diversity of under-explored
eco-regions, updating and refining species characterizations and elucidating
modern day distribution patterns with respect to southern India’s herpetofauna.
Author Contributions: NSA, GCK conducted fieldwork and did the morphological as well as genetic
analyses. AJU conducted mapping analysis. SRG led the writing with inputs from
NSA, GCK and AJU. All the authors equally contributed in refining the
manuscript drafts and approved the final version.
Acknowledgements: We thank our respective organizations for
supporting our research activities. SRG thanks the Executive Secretary,
Chairman and Trustees of Chennai Snake Park for supporting his research
activities. The authors would like to
thank V. Abinaya Bharathi, A. Harishvara Venkat, Yunus Wagh, N.V. Srikanthan,
Raja Vetri, M. Nandini, G. B Pravalikha, the members of the “Mid-Week” Group,
Coimbatore for all the help and support with the fieldwork for this study. We
thank researchers at CES – IISc, Dr. Ishan Agarwal, Dr. S.P. Vijaykumar, Dr.
Kartik Shanker, Aparna Lajmi and Dr. Praveen Karanth, Indian Institute of
science for all the inputs and access to the specimens of CES. We are also thankful to the researchers at
VUB - Dr. Franky Bossuyt and at NCBS-TIFR - Dr. Varad Giri for their invaluable
inputs. We would also like to thank
Saunak Pal, V. Rahul Khot and V. Hegde for the inputs and help with depositing
the specimen at BNHS. Special thanks go
to Vivek Philip Cyriac, IISER Tiruvananthapuram and Yinxin Tok for helping with
the measurements and specimen information used in this study. GCK acknowledges UGC (University Grant
Commission, Delhi) for the research funding, Dr. C. Srinivasulu, Osmania
University for permitting the use of lab facilities for this study, Dr. S.K.
Gupta, Wildlife Institute of India for guidance. And our sincere thanks to Mr. Marcel Widmann
for sharing pictures of Hemidactylus imbricatus. We thank M. Rameshwaran for providing his
photograph that is used here. ANS
sincerely thanks Dr. Deepak Veerappan for his valuble Inputs.
Abstract: We reassess the systematics of Hemidactylus
scabriceps, a recently rediscovered and poorly known gecko, and elucidate
its phylogenetic position using molecular data for the first time. Contrary to previous speculations prompted by
its morphological resemblance to other terrestrial Hemidactylus, our
phylogenetic analyses recovered H. scabriceps to be a part of a clade
consisting of the large-bodied, rock-dwelling Hemidactylus – the H.
prashadi group. Hemidactylus
scabriceps also shows high levels of intraspecific genetic divergence,
indicative of cryptic diversity. We also
confirm the synonymy of the monotypic genus Lophopholis (erected for H.
scabriceps) with Hemidactylus.
We elaborate on the morphology of the type specimen and other recent
voucher specimens, and compare it with sister species and other ground-dwelling
Hemidactylus in peninsular India.
Species distribution of this ‘outlier’ clade member has been modeled
using MaxEnt. These exercises confirm
that it is primarily a smooth-scaled, plain-dwelling, terrestrial species
unlike other members in its clade. This
unexpected pattern of genetic alliance and contrasting body form plus habitat
associations further underscores the unstudied complexity of peninsular India’s
geological history. Historical
denudation of rock formations could have driven evolution of some of these
otherwise rupicolous, scansorial gekkonids into smaller terrestrial lizards.
Keywords: Clade member, distribution modeling,
habitat associations, Indian dry zone, morphology, phylogenetic position, rock
dwelling.
INTRODUCTION
Hemidactylus Oken, 1817 is one of the most speciose
gekkonid genera in the world, with about 150 congeners currently recognized, of
which around 34 are found in India (Carranza & Arnold 2006; Giri &
Bauer 2008; Bauer et al. 2010; Uetz & Hošek 2018; Chaitanya et al.
2018). The Indian Hemidactylus
are part of a tropical Asian radiation, and consist of five major clades - H.
prashadi, H. flaviviridis, H. brookii, H. frenatus and H. platyurus groups
(Bansal & Karanth 2010). Of these,
the H. brookii group encompasses all the thus-far sampled
ground-dwelling Hemidactylus that are found in central and peninsular
India (Bansal & Karanth 2010;
2013). Previous studies show that
the ground dwelling clade of geckos are sister to H. brookii, the clade
that consists of five currently recognized terrestrial species namely H.
reticulatus Beddome, 1870, H. albofasciatus Grandison & Soman,
1963, H. satarensis Giri
& Bauer, 2008, H. imbricatus Bauer,
Giri, Greenbaum, Jackman, Dharne & Shouche, 2008, H. gracilis Blanford,
1870 (Bansal & Karanth 2010).
Hemidactylus scabriceps was considered to be closely related to
the ground-dwelling Hemidactylus due to its superficial morphological
similarities such as a reduced subdigital scansorial apparatus, imbricate tail
scales, reduced subcaudal scales and a terrestrial lifestyle (Bauer et al.
2010). Similar assumptions were made for
Dravidogecko anamallensis (Günther, 1875) which was later resolved and found
to be sister to the Indian Hemidactylus radiation (Bansal & Karanth
2013). In the past, H. scabriceps
has been misidentified on many occasions with other marginally co-occurring
terrestrial congeners such as H. reticulatus, despite its distinctive scalation
(Ganesh et al. 2017).
Annandale
(1906) originally described this species as Teratolepis scabriceps
based on its imbricate scalation, as the second congener next to T.
fasciatus (currently H. imbricatus, after Bauer et al. 2008). Later, a new monotypic genus Lophopholis
was erected by Smith & Deraniyagala, 1934 to accommodate this species as it
was considered quite unique (Smith 1935).
Parker & Taylor (1942) reassigned the species back to Teratolepis
along with various other African geckos such as H. isolepis and H.
ophiolepis, attributing this generic transfer to the imbricate
scalation. Due to the similarity of H.
scabriceps with other oriental Teratolepis and Hemidactylus
geckos, it was called the ‘Oriental imbricate-scaled Hemidactylus’. Subsequently, the generic allocation of
this species was debated and later the genus Lophopholis was synonymized
with Hemidactylus by Loveridge (1947).
Furthermore, Bauer et al. (2008) synonymized the genus Teratolepis
with Hemidactylus based on a multilocus molecular phylogeny and
mentioned the possible close relationship of H. scabriceps with H.
imbricatus (Image 5), along with other small-bodied, ground-dwelling
endemic geckos such as H. albofasciatus, H. gracillis and H.
reticulatus, which themselves are genetically-tested clade members (Bansal
& Karanth 2010).
Since
its description, H. scabriceps was not re-sighted for 104 years till an
uncollected specimen was reported from Mayiladuthurai in the Coromandel Coastal
Plains (Ganesh & Chandramouli 2010).
More recently, Ganesh et al. (2017) dug up some obscure publications
reporting this species under a wrong name, described a series of preserved
specimens including its hemipenal morphology, provided natural history notes
and mapped its locality based on newer fieldwork. Hemidactylus scabriceps, however,
still remains an intriguing gecko for both Indian and Sri Lankan herpetologists
due to its assumed rarity and unknown phylogenetic relationships, since it is
underrepresented and poorly sampled (Bauer et al. 2010). In this paper, we provide for the first time
data on its phylogenetic position, elaborate on its morphology, habitat
associations and distribution.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Specimens
of H. scabriceps were opportunistically collected from three ecoregions:
Coimbatore plateau, Thanjavur delta and Kalakad foothills, abutting Western
Ghats in peninsular India. The specimens were deposited in the collections of
BNHS (Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai), IISc - CES (Indian Institute of
Science, Bengaluru - Center for Ecological studies), and IISER (Indian
Institute of Science, Education and Research, Thiruvananthapuram). Tissue samples were collected from the tail tips
and liver of the specimens and sent for molecular analysis and sequencing at
the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru and Osmania University,
Hyderabad. The geographic coordinates of
the localities were obtained from Garmin 62 GPS. Other comparative materials, including the
type specimens, were examined at the Natural History Museum, London (BMNH).
Morphological analysis
Morphological
and meristic data were collected following methods described by Giri &
Bauer (2008) and Mahony (2009) with Mitutoyo™ digital calipers (to the nearest
0.1mm). The following measurements were
taken from collected specimens and the museum types: snout vent length (SVL;
from tip of snout to vent), trunk length (TRL; distance from axilla to groin
measured from posterior edge of forelimb insertion to anterior edge of hind
limb insertion), body width (BW; maximum width of body), crus length (CL; from
base of heel to knee); tail length (TL; from below vent to tip of tail), tail
width (TW; measured at widest point of tail near the tail base); head length (HL;
distance between retroarticular process of jaw and snout-tip), head width (HW;
maximum width of head), head height (HH; maximum height of head, from occiput
to underside of jaws), forearm length (FL; from base of palm to elbow); ear
length (EL; longest dimension of ear); orbital diameter (OD; greatest diameter
of orbit), nares to eye distance (NE; shortest distance between anterior most
point of eye and nostril), snout to eye distance (SE; distance between anterior
most point of eye and tip of snout), eye to ear distance (EE; distance from
anterior edge of ear opening to posterior corner of eye), internarial distance
(IN; distance between nares), interorbital distance (IO; shortest distance
between left and right supraciliary scale rows). Scale counts and external
observations of morphology, meristic characters were made using a Wild M5
dissecting microscope.
Species distribution modeling
Species distribution modeling was carried out
using MaxEnt v.3.3 (Phillips et al. 2006), which is based on maximum entropy
modeling. MaxEnt, a machine learning
program that estimates the probable species distribution based on constraints
of the environment. It uses
presence-only data for prediction and studies show that it has good success
rate for small sample sizes compared to other SDMs (Elith et al. 2006; Wisz et
al. 2008). We have considered 21
environmental variables - the 19 bioclimatic layers, one topographic layer
representing elevation (Hijmans et al. 2005) and one vegetation layer-NDVI
(NRSC, ISRO). The 13 location points used in the model were obtained from the
recent collections, literature which includes historical points Adayar (13.00120N
& 80.25650E), and Maricukatte (8.5880N & 79.9330E). The environmental layers were derived from
globally interpolated datasets observed from climate stations around the
world. All the layers are of
approximately 1,000m resolution, clipped for the Indian subcontinent including
Sri Lanka and projected on WGS84 Lat-Long map datum. The layers were subjected to a multicollinearity
test and 10 bioclimatic variables that were least correlated (Pearson’s
correlation coefficient r<0.85) were selected for the distribution modeling.
MaxEnt
program with following changes was used in the model: auto feature for
environmental variables was selected.
The random test percentage was set to 20%, making the training
percentage 75%. The regularization
multiplier and maximum number of background points for sampling was kept at 1
and 10,000 respectively. With
subsampling as replicating model, 15 replicates were used. Maximum iterations were set to 5,000, with 10-5
as convergence threshold with threshold rule of 10 percentile training presence
as it relatively better at predicting suitable habitat for endemic species
(Escalante et al. 2013). The logistic
output of the model shows the suitability of the habitat, graded over a range
of 0 to 1.
Molecular
analysis
Genomic
DNA was isolated from 95–100 % ethanol preserved liver tissue sample using
phenol: chloroform: isoamyl alcohol reagent (25:24:1 v/v) as described by
Sambrook & Russell (2001). Two
partial mitochondrial markers, cytochrome b (cyt b) and NADH
dehydrogenase 2 (ND2) along with two nuclear markers, Recombination Activation
Gene 1 (RAG-1), Phosducin (PDC) were used to infer the phylogeny of H.
scabriceps (see Agarwal et al. 2011).
These molecular markers were useful for resolving the phylogenetic
relationships at deeper nodes. Primers
and PCR conditions used were as described in Bauer et al. (2008). PCR products were purified and sequences were
obtained commercially from Bioserve Biotechnologies, Hyderabad, India. All PCR amplifications were carried out in
25µL reaction volumes, with 12.5µL of the 2X PCR master mix (Thermo
Scientific), 0.5µL forward primer, 0.5µL reverse primer (10 pm/ µL
concentration each) and 2µL template DNA added and the final volume was
adjusted with nuclease-free water.
Reactions were carried out with Thermo Scientific Mastercycler gradient
thermocycler. The sequence integrity was
analyzed by BLAST tool (Altschul et al. 1997), processed and submitted to NCBI
GenBank under the accession numbers given in Table 3 (Appendix 1).
Phylogenetic analysis
The
mitochondrial genes cyt b (379 bp), ND2 (981 bp) and the nuclear genes
PDC (400 bp) and RAG-1 (1000 bp) sequences of representative members of major,
well supported Hemidactylus groups - H. flaviviridis, H. brookii, H.
prashadi and H. frenatus (Bansal & Karanth 2010, 2013; Murthy et
al. 2015; Giri et al. 2017; Chaitanya et al. 2018) were downloaded from GenBank
(accession numbers listed in Table 3 in the appendix). Sequences were aligned
with default gap penalties using ClustalW (Thompson et al. 1994) in MEGA 7.0.
(Tamura et al. 2011). Protein-coding
genes were translated to amino acids to check for the reading frame and
premature stop codons. Uncorrected
pairwise distances were calculated using the inbuilt program in MEGA.
Sequences
of the members of the H. brookii sensu lato group that were published
prior to the revisions of the group (Mahony 2011; Lajmi et al. 2016) were
labeled as H. brookii due to the inability to trace and identify the
specimens from which the sequences were derived. The same revision, however, shows that the
group including the ground-dwelling Hemidactylus is monophyletic and is
sister to the H. frenatus group.
Hence, the H. brookii epithet is used here indicating individuals
that may represent H. murrayi, H. gleadowi, H. treutleri, H. kushmorensis
or H. parvimaculatus (Lanfear et al. 2012).
We used
Partition Finder 2.1.1 to pick the partitions and best substitution model for
the analysis. The concatenated gene
dataset (cyt b, ND2, PDC and RAG1) comprise a total of 2760 bp. We built a maximum likelihood (ML) tree in
RAxML HPC 7.4.2 through RAxMLGUI v1.3.1 (Silvestro & Michalak 2012) by
running ML + thorough bootstrap for 10 runs and 1000 repetitions.
RESULTS
Molecular phylogeny and relationships
Our
tree (Image 1) recovered H. scabriceps as member of a clade containing H.
triedrus of peninsular Indian plains, H. lankae of Sri Lankan
plains, H. maculatus of the northern Western Ghats, H. prashadi
of central Western Ghats, H. acanthopholis and H. vanam of
southern Western Ghats, H. hunae of Sri Lankan hill tracts, H.
graniticolus of southern Eastern Ghats, H. sushilduttai and H.
kangenerensis of northern Eastern Ghats and Chota Nagpur plateau, and more
closely with H. depressus of Sri Lanka.
From a
broader perspective, the ML analyses on the concatenated dataset with sequence
lengths of 2760 bp yielded a tree (Image 1) of similar topology to previous
studies (Chaitanya et al. 2018).
Comparing tree topologies from prior works corroborated the integrity of
our trees. Dravidogecko anamallensis is
sister to all Indian Hemidactylus that consists of four well-supported
groups, H. flaviviridis, H. brookii, H. prashadi and H. frenatus (Bansal
& Karanth 2010; 2013). As previously
known, H. brookii sensu lato is sister to the H. frenatus group;
while H. scabriceps falls within the H. prashadi group (support
seen in tree). The relationship of H.
scabriceps with other rock-dwelling Indian and Sri Lankan Hemidactylus is
strongly supported in our tree.
From a
species-specific viewpoint, the pairwise distance matrix revealed 6% divergence
in the cyt b gene between the two individuals of H. scabriceps
sampled from different localities (Thanjavur and Coimbatore). The genetic
distance between H. scabriceps and other species of the H. prashadi
and H. brooki clades are given in Table 1. The high genetic divergence between the
populations sampled may indicate that H. scabriceps could be a potential
species complex that requires further study.
Morphology and body configurations (n=7,
in mm) (Images 2 & 3)
A
small-sized Hemidactylus (30.1–41.3); head short (9.6–13.8); distinct
from neck; head broader (4.3–7.4) than high (3.9-6.9); forehead flat; snout
(3.5–4.6) longer than orbital diameter (1.0–2.7); snout concave; covered with
heterogeneous granular scales; scales on head keeled; small warty scales on
parietal region intermixed with granular scales; scales largest on canthal
region, size similar to tubercles on parietal region; pupil vertically
elliptical with sharp crenellated edges, supraciliaries large when compared to
scales on canthal region; pointed posteriorly; becoming smaller and less pointed
towards posterior; spinose posteriorly; nostrils close to snout-tip (2.8–3.0),
moderately wide (1.3–2.7), fairly close to eye (2.3–3.5); ear opening small
(0.2–1.5); orbital diameter slightly smaller than orbit to ear distance; eyes
distant from each other (1.4–3.8); rostral large; subrectangular to pentagonal
in shape; in contact with nostril and the 1st supralabial, medial
groove dorsally, extending more than half the length of the rostral depth;
supralabials 7/7 (left/right); infralabials 6/6 (left/right); mental
triangular; two pairs of post mentals, inner pair in contact with mental and
each other, outer pair not in contact with each other; a pair of smaller chin
shields in contact with the outer postmentals followed by elongated shields in
two rows in contact with the infralabials; no chin shields posterior to the
postmentals; a row of smaller, slightly elongated scales with slightly
pentagonal scales wedged in the intersection of the postmental scales; gular
covered with small granular scales; trunk of moderate size (13.1–20.7); body
slightly depressed, oval in cross-section, dorsolateral fold weak to
indistinct; dorsum covered with mildly keeled, imbricate scales with no
tubercles; granular scales from head gradually changing into sub-imbricate
scales on nape and imbricate scales towards torso; mild keels on dorsal scales
distinct, gradually disappearing towards ventral scales, scales at
paravertebral line comparatively smaller than other dorsal scales; ventral
scales imbricate till femoral region; slightly smaller, rounded sub-imbricate
scales posterior to femoral region; preanofemoral pores 2–4 on each side
separated by 1–2 pore-less scales; forelimbs slender, covered with small,
imbricate scales reducing in size and sub-imbricate to granular scales
ventrally, forelimbs moderate, crus (5.4–6.7) longer than forearm (4.0–5.1);
hindlimbs slender, covered with imbricate scales both ventrally and dorsally;
dorsal part of manus and pes covered with small granular scales; digits short,
free, with interdigital webbing absent, a distinct short curved claw present in
all the digit tips; all digits with initial few lamellae divided, other
lamellae fused; lamellar formula of manus 4-6-5-5-5 and pes 5-7-8-8-5; basal
lamellae narrow; tail fairly long, (21.2–43.2) subequal to body length, robust
and thickset in width (3.2–4.9); blunt at tip, round in cross section, covered
with imbricate scales subequal to size of scales on dorsum, tubercles absent;
dorsum light brown with dark brown bands extending from above the dorsolateral
fold region sometimes forming ‘x’s along the body from nape to vent region with
large white spots or scales sometimes forming stripes across the body found;
smaller white and black spots intermixed with the light brown parts of the
body; head covered with dark and light-colored spots, labials characterized
with a black patch forming a stripe pattern throughout the labials, sometimes
extending into stripes in the gular region; venter dirty white, rarely with
small black dots; mental shields with small black blotches; manus and pes
darker beneath.
Distribution and niche modeling
Hemidactylus
scabriceps has so far
been recorded from the dry, low-elevation plains of Tamil Nadu ranging from 10
to 380 m (Image 4). In the Coromandel
Coastal Plains this species is known from Adayar (in Madras) near Palar Bay,
southwards to Mannampandal near Cauvery Delta, further down in Ramanathapuram
and Thoothukudi north and south of the Palk Strait, respectively. Apart from the earlier records we sighted
this species from Thitai (11.0830N & 77.0310E; 44m)
in Thanjavur Delta region, Kalapatti (11.0830N & 77.03170E,
385m) further westwards in the Coimbatore Plateau, south in Pottal (8.6440N
& 77.4840E, 77m) just east of Tirunelveli foothills and Mariccukatte
(Marichchukkaddi) in Sri Lanka (8.5800N & 79.9460E).
The
input for species distribution modeling are nine least correlated bioclim
variables, altitude and NDVI layers with 13 sample locations of the
species. The logistic output of the
model shows the suitability of the habitat, graded over a range of 0–1. A binary map is created indicating suitable
and unsuitable habitat for occurrence of H. scabriceps. A threshold of 0.3491 was selected to
classify the suitability which is the average value of the threshold rule used
for the MaxEnt model. The AUC for the run/model is above 0.9 showing high
goodness of fit. The AUC value of the
model is 0.987 indicating that the resultant model is reliable.
The
relative contribution (approx.) of the environmental variables to the MaxEnt
model is as shown in Table 4. It is
observed that the following variables are the major contributors to the model -
bio2 (mean diurnal temperature range), bio12 (Annual Precipitation) and alt12
(altitude) signifying that the habitat most suitable for H. scabriceps
is low altitudes, less rainfall and relatively less change in maximum and
minimum temperature with annual mean temperature of approximately around 28.50C.
As per
the output of MaxEnt modeling (Image 4), H. scabriceps is predicted to
be distributed from the far south of Tamil Nadu (including Tirunelveli and
Tuticorin) northwest till about Coimbatore, northeastwards till about Madras
(currently Chennai), with high possibilities of being present in dry parts of
northern Sri Lanka. This species is
possibly confined to this range within the dry parts of Tamil Nadu, Kerala and
Sri Lanka, bound by the Western and Eastern Ghats; and the highlands in central
Sri Lanka.
DISCUSSION
Hemidactylus
scabriceps is a member
of a clade comprising large-bodied, rock-dwelling, scansorial geckos, although
it has a small terrestrial body-build and is found in low-elevation plains that
are not dominated by rock formations.
Our new molecular phylogenetic analyses provide a radically different
and contrasting relationship for Hemidactylus scabriceps, as shown in
Image 1. To untangle this complex
interplay between morphology, habitat associations / distribution and genetic
relationships, we herein elaborate on these three seemingly disparate features
and discuss their dynamics in light of potential evolutionary trajectories that
might have acted upon this species shaping it into what it is now.
The
morphological characterization and ecological data of our new individuals are
for the most part in conformity with literature reports (Annandale 1906; Smith
1935; Ganesh & Chandramouli 2010; Ganesh et al. 2017). Another important facet of morphology of H.
scabriceps is the persistence of transverse series of white spots / dotted
lines across the trunk, typical of all the known members of H. prashadi
group and absent in H. albofasciatus, H. imbricatus, H. reticulatus and
H. sataraensis (Smith 1935; Bauer et al. 2008; Giri & Bauer 2008). We postulate that the white spots and barred
pattern on the back are a synapomorphy of the H. prashadi clade, present
either bold or diffuse in all of its members.
Based on our phylogeny we postulate that the under-developed or
rudimentary claws and digits in general, along with the partial fusion of
digital lamellae of H. scabriceps, are ecologically derived traits
consequent upon a strictly terrestrial lifestyle. Similar to the phenotypically biased
taxonomic allocations that taxa from the H. brookii clade have had, the
current study confirms that the genus Lophopholis, originally erected
for H. scabriceps, is actually a synonym of Hemidactylus (also
see Bauer et al. 2008).
We
observed this species in grassland/ dry thorn scrub jungle dominated by palmyra
trees, in coconut grove and paddy fields. The species is strictly nocturnal,
found resting under rocks during the day, preferably on mounds of gravel under
moderately large rocks. It was
repeatedly observed to be in a ‘s’ shaped position under rocks and trying to
stay still and not trying to get away while the rock was disturbed. This behavior was also observed in H.
reticulatus (Ganesh et al. 2017; this work) and H. sataraensis (see
Bauer & Giri 2008). It is
also common for H. scabriceps to be found in sympatry with H.
triedrus (Image 8). Some specimens were
also found inside termite-eaten and weathered palm and coconut logs, leaves and
fruits. This species was observed to be
highly territorial. Two individual male
specimens in the same vicinity showed territorial behavior, circling each other
making chirping calls to each other (the only time the species was heard
vocalizing) with a raised waving tail, stretched legs and arched body, and
trying to bite at the neck of opponent male.
Individuals were found to occur at quite a distance from one another (15–20
m). Thus our observations on the
microhabitat associations of H. scabriceps along with previously
published notes (Ganesh & Chandramouli 2010; Ganesh et al. 2017) do attest
its strictly terrestrial lifestyle.
We
found some of our adult male individuals to have either 2 or 4 pores on a
single side, whereas it usually numbers 3 (Ganesh et al. 2017). Such variations in characters of diagnostic
importance in gecko taxonomy, coupled with high levels (6% in cyt b) of
inter-individual genetic divergence point out to the possibility of cryptic
speciation within this complex. It is also noteworthy to highlight that though
the original description (Annandale 1906) and subsequent expanded
characterizations, both historical (Smith 1935) and recent (Ganesh & Chandramouli
2010; Ganesh et al. 2017) of this species still stems from Coromandel Coastal
Plains population, except for the sole record of a specimen from near Madurai
(see Ganesh et al. 2017).
Thus
the current study describes previously unsampled populations from Coimbatore
near the foothills of the Western Ghats, a different ecoregion altogether. Even here, we observed fine-scale landscape
partitioning between H. scabriceps and the ecologically similar H.
reticulatus (see Ganesh et al. 2017).
This makes H. scabriceps the only member of H. prashadi
clade to be distributed exclusively in a primarily sandy alluvial plains
terrain not dominated by rock outcrops.
The loose occurrence of individuals of H. scabriceps at some
distance between each other was observed to be similar to other Hemidactylus
species such as H. mabouia (see Regalado 2003). Our niche distribution model shows an
indication that rivers Cauvery and Amaravathi (a tributary of Cauvery) could be
geographic barriers between the Coimbatore plateau population and the Cauvery
delta and Palk Strait populations, which might explain the high genetic
divergence between the individuals sampled from these distinct populations.
Other
ground-dwelling Hemidactylus occur both in the H. prashadi and
the H. brookii clades. In the H.
prashadi clade, in as far as is known, only H. triedrus is
terrestrial and is currently known to be distributed in most of the dry zones
of peninsular India including the transitional zones of the Western Ghats. From the H. brookii clade, H.
reticulatus is a similarly distributed terrestrial species, closely
associated with rocky habitats. Hemidactylus
gracillis has its close affinities with black soil throughout its
distribution in central India and northern peninsular India, while H.
albofasciatus and H. satarensis are distributed in parts of the
northern Western Ghats occupying rocky plateaus. Hemidactylus scabriceps occupies the
dry zone of Tamil Nadu and northern Sri Lanka (rainfall <1,000mm/year),
restricting itself to the grasslands of the alluvial plains and sandy regions
in Northern Sri Lanka and towards the east of Tamil Nadu and red soils towards
its west in the Tamil Nadu uplands till the foothills of the Western
Ghats. The rocky outcrops in Tamil Nadu
(both Eastern and Western Ghats), though interrupted by H. scabriceps
habitat, are occupied by H. reticulatus.
Both the Western and Eastern Ghats in the west and north
respectively restrict H. scabriceps within Tamil Nadu. Informed by our MaxEnt analysis, we
hypothesize that the farthest inland locality of H. scabriceps disclosed
herein (Coimbatore) is inhabited by this species largely because of the deep
erosion of the plateau created by the Cauvery River system, engraving a low,
alluvial, plains ecosystem into the table-land, much far west than in other
nearby parts of the peninsula. This
scenario is comparable to the Moyar Gorge being an important biogeographic
barrier for terrestrial lizards such as Sitana sp. that are
predominantly plateau dwelling (Deepak & Karanth 2018). Hemidactylus scabriceps also shows the
contrast of shared fauna between the dry zones of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka
(Guptha et al. 2015; Deepak et al. 2016; Deepak & Karanth 2018).
Our findings
have a direct bearing on the evolutionary history of this species. The inferred trees from the current work
showed strong support for the previously known groups—H. prashadi, H.
flaviviridis, H. brookii, H. frenatus and H. platyurus. From our study, it is also
revealed that H. scabriceps belongs to the H. prashadi group
(recognized by Bansal & Karanth 2010).
The reduced subdigital scansoral apparatus, imbricate tail scales,
imbricate dorsal scales, reduced subcaudal scales and a terrestrial lifestyle
are traits that seem to be visually convergent within sub-groups of Hemidactylus
geckos both from Africa (H. isolepis, H. ophiolepis) and India (H.
imbricatus) (Bauer et al. 2008). The
ground dwelling clade of geckos that share similar traits was previously known
to be sister to the H. brookii group of geckos and H. scabriceps
was assumed to be related to this group (Bauer et al. 2008). Our phylogenetic analysis reveals that H.
scabriceps is related to the large rock dwelling clade of geckos contrary
to what was previously assumed prompted by morphological similarity.
The
unexpected and contrasting genetic relationship of the morphologically and
ecologically discordant H. scabriceps and H. prashadi group
underscores the complexity of peninsular India’s geological history. Previous studies on peninsular India’s
terrestrial lizard species have all revealed such discordant patterns of
genetic alliance and eco-morphology. Agarwal
& Karanth’s (2015) molecular
phylogenetic analyses revealed that the fat-bodied, forest-floor dwelling taxa
‘Geckoella’ is actually a part of primarily scansorial and rupicolous Cyrtodactylus
radiation. Deepak et al.’s (2015) study
on ‘Brachysaura’ minor also points out a similar structure, i.e.
the short body form and completely terrestrial habits of that taxon, contrary
to its arboreal congeners in the genus Calotes, is nothing but a result
of reduction in tree cover and other associated landscape changes (Stromberg
2011; Ponton et al. 2012). Similarly,
the Miocene landscape changes such as aridification of the Indian sub-continent
has shown large influence on lizard groups such as Cyrtodactylus, Ophisops,
Sitana and Sarada in the Indian subcontinent (Agarwal &
Karanth 2015; Agarwal & Ramakrishnan 2017; Deepak & Karanth 2018). Similar to the phenotypically biased
taxonomic allocations the above taxa have had, the current study confirms that
the genus Lophopholis, originally erected for H. scabriceps, is
actually a synonym of Hemidactylus (also see Bauer et al. 2008).
Although
previous studies on other peninsular Indian lizard taxa have revealed such
unexpected yet consistent patterns of genetic and eco-morphological
discordance, such an instance within the better-studied Indian Hemidactylus
radiation (Bansal & Karanth 2010; 2013; Bauer et al. 2008, 2010) exhibiting
this sharp a contrast is without precedent.
This is particularly intriguing, especially when another member of the H.
prashadi clade, H. triedrus, occurring in areas inhabited by H.
scabriceps (see Smith 1935) can afford to survive in sandy low-elevation
alluvial tracts without changing its body form too much. But it must be borne in mind that though H.
triedrus occurs in plains habitat it could still scale vertical rock
surfaces when such formations are present within its range, whereas H.
scabriceps cannot (Ganesh et al. 2017; this work). Additionally, in most of the range of H.
scabriceps, there are no other strictly-terrestrial geckoes, neither Hemidactylus
nor other genera (Smith 1935; Somaweera & Somaweera 2009; Ganesh et al.
2017; this work), thereby throwing open prospects of an empty niche for a
potential species to exploit. Thus the
current work brings to light a case of so far hidden historical competition
between a eurytopic (H. triedrus, H. lankae) versus a stenotopic (H.
scabriceps) clade member. These
species are geographically sympatric (Image 6), in India and Sri Lanka
respectively, genetically related but morphologically very different (see Image
1). This sharp discordance amply
illustrates the complex interplay of historical landscape changes,
eco-morphological reactions and resource-use competition.

Table 1. Percentage values of
uncorrected pairwise divergence (p-distance) for the cyt b,
RAG-1, PDC and ND2 genes between the closely related congeners of H.
scabriceps and morphologically similar members of H. prashadi and H.
brookii clades. The percentage
divergence of cyt b gene between the two specimens of H. scabriceps
used in this study is 6.3 %.
|
Pairwise genetic distance with H.
scabriceps from Coimbatore |
ND2 distances |
RAG-1 distances |
PDC distances |
cyt b distances |
|
H. scabriceps (Tanj)* |
- |
0.4 |
2.1 |
6.3 |
|
H. prashadi |
13.8 |
1.4 |
2.5 |
15.3 |
|
H. maculatus |
17.5 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
15.3 |
|
H. kangerensis |
- |
- |
- |
18.8 |
|
H. depressus |
8.8 |
1.8 |
3.8 |
18.2 |
|
H. vanam |
- |
1.4 |
2.5 |
19.3 |
|
H. sushilduttai |
- |
- |
- |
17.0 |
|
H. graniticolus |
- |
1.8 |
3.0 |
19.3 |
|
H. hunae |
15.0 |
1.8 |
3.0 |
21.6 |
|
H. triedrus ^ |
11.2 |
2.2 |
2.1 |
18.8 |
|
H. lankae # |
11.2 |
2.2 |
2.5 |
18.2 |
|
H. acanthopholis |
12.5 |
1.8 |
3.0 |
19.9 |
|
H. reticulatus |
|
|
|
24.4 |
|
H. albofasciatus |
|
|
|
19.9 |
|
H. gracilis |
|
4.7 |
5.5 |
22.2 |
|
H. imbricatus |
21.3 |
3.9 |
6.4 |
22.7 |
|
H. parvimaculatus |
16.2 |
3.6 |
5.1 |
21.1 |
Foot notes: * - intraspecific distance; ^
- syntopic clade-member in peninsular India; # - syntopic
clade-member in Sri Lanka.
Table 2. A comparison of synapomorphic
morphological characters that is convergent to H. scabriceps with the
ground-dwelling Hemidactylus clade and the H. prashadi clade.
Note the commonly shared characters of H. scabriceps with both the
ground dwelling Hemidactylus and the H. prashadi clade.
|
Species |
Series of white spots/ dotted line |
Series of black stripes in the
infralabials and gular |
|
H. scabriceps |
Present |
Present |
|
H. prashadi |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. parvimaculatus |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. maculatus |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. kangerensis |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. sushilduttai |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. graniticolus |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. hunae |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. triedrus |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. lankae |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. acanthopholis |
Present |
Absent |
|
H. reticulatus |
Absent |
Present |
|
H. albofasciatus |
Absent |
Present |
|
H. gracilis |
Absent |
Present |
|
H. imbricatus |
Absent |
Present |



Table 3. List of specimens used for the molecular
analysis and genetic comparison with the museum numbers, localities and GenBank
accession numbers. Highlighted species are the samples used in this study.
|
Species |
Museum No. |
Locality |
cyt b |
ND2 |
RAG-1 |
PDC |
|
Cyrtodactylus ayeyarwadyensis |
CAS 216446 |
Myanmar, Rakhine State, Than Dawe
District |
EU268380 |
JX440526 |
JX440685 |
JX440634 |
|
Cyrtodactylus consobrinus |
LLG 4062 |
- |
EU268381 |
EU268349 |
EU268288 |
EU268318 |
|
Cyrtodactylus loriae |
FK 7709 |
Papua New Guinea: Milne Bay, Bunisi |
EU268382 |
EU268350 |
EU268289 |
EU268319 |
|
Hemidactylus scabriceps |
BNHS 2421 |
Kalapatti, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu |
KX902971 |
* |
KX902973 |
KX902972 |
|
Hemidactylus scabriceps |
VPC-GK-029 |
Tanjore, Tamil Nadu |
KX902975 |
BankIt2106186 |
KX902977 |
KX902976 |
|
Hemidactylus brasilianus |
MZUSP 92493 |
Brazil, Piauí, Parque Nacional Serra das
Confusões |
EU268383 |
EU268351 |
EU268290 |
EU268320 |
|
Hemidactylus imbricatus 1 |
JS11 |
Pakistan (captive specimen) |
EU268385 |
EU268353 |
EU268292 |
EU268322 |
|
Hemidactylus imbricatus 2 |
JFBM2 |
Pakistan (captive specimen) |
EU268386 |
EU268354 |
EU268293 |
EU268323 |
|
Hemidactylus flaviviridis 1 |
FMNH 245515 |
Pakistan, Punjab Province |
EU268387 |
EU268355 |
EU268294 |
EU268324 |
|
Hemidactylus flaviviridis 2 |
ID 7626 |
India, Rajasthan, Kuldhara |
EU268388 |
EU268356 |
EU268295 |
EU268325 |
|
Hemidactylus flaviviridis 3 |
ID 7640 |
India, Rajasthan, Jaisalmer |
HM559596 |
HM559628 |
HM559694 |
HM559661 |
|
Hemidactylus frenatus 1 |
AMB 7411 |
Sri Lanka, Pidipitiya 1 |
EU268389 |
EU268357 |
EU268296 |
EU268326 |
|
Hemidactylus frenatus 2 |
LLG 6745 |
Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Empangon Air
Hitam 2 |
EU268390 |
EU268358 |
EU268297 |
EU268327 |
|
Hemidactylus frenatus 3 |
AMB 7420 |
Sri Lanka, Rathegala 3 |
EU268391 |
EU268359 |
EU268298 |
EU268328 |
|
Hemidactylus frenatus 4 |
LLG 4871 |
Malaysia, Pahang, Bukit Bakong 4 |
GQ375289 |
GQ458049 |
GQ375308 |
GQ375301 |
|
Hemidactylus frenatus 5 |
CES07035 |
India, Tamil Nadu, Valparai 5 |
HM595655 |
|
HM622356 |
HM622371 |
|
Hemidactylus turcicus |
LSUMZ H-1981 |
USA, Louisiana, Baton Rouge |
EU268392 |
EU268392 |
EU268299 |
EU268329 |
|
Hemidactylus karenorum |
CAS 210670 |
Myanmar, Mandalay Division, Kyaukpadaung
Township, Popa |
EU268394 |
EU268362 |
EU268301 |
EU268331 |
|
Hemidactylus garnotii 3 |
CAS 215549 |
Myanmar, Sagaing Division, Mon Ywa
District 3 |
HM559597 |
HM559631 |
HM559697 |
HM559664 |
|
Hemidactylus garnotii 2 |
CAS 222276 |
Myanmar, Mon State, Kyaihto Township,
Kyait Hti Yo 2 |
EU268396 |
EU268364 |
EU268303 |
EU268333 |
|
Hemidactylus garnotii 1 |
CAS 223286 |
Myanmar, Rakhine State, Taung Gok
Township, Ma Ei Ywa 1 |
EU268395 |
EU268363 |
EU268302 |
EU268332 |
|
Hemidactylus brookii 1 |
LLG6754 |
|
EU268397.1 |
EU268365.1 |
EU268304.1 |
|
|
Hemidactylus brookii 2 |
LLG6755 |
|
EU268398.1 |
EU268366.1 |
EU268305.1 |
|
|
Hemidactylus angulatus 1 |
MVZ 245438 |
Nigeria, Togo Hills, Nkwanta |
EU268399 |
EU268367 |
EU268306 |
EU268336 |
|
Hemidactylus angulatus 2 |
EBG 746 |
Guinea, Daniah River at Koulete River |
HM559588 |
HM559620 |
HM559686 |
HM559653 |
|
Hemidactylus palaichthus |
LSUMZ 12421 |
Brazil, Roraima State |
EU268400 |
EU268368 |
EU268307 |
EU268337 |
|
Hemidactylus greefii |
CAS 219044 |
São Tome and Principe, São Tome Island,
Praia da Mutamba |
EU268401 |
EU268369 |
EU268308 |
EU268338 |
|
Hemidactylus fasciatus 1 |
WRB no number |
Gabon, Rabi 1 |
EU268402 |
EU268370 |
EU268309 |
EU268339 |
|
Hemidactylus fasciatus 2 |
CAS 207777 |
Equatorial Guinea, Bioko Island, 3.6 km
N of Luba 2 |
EU268403 |
EU268371 |
EU268310 |
EU268340 |
|
Hemidactylus bowringii 1 |
|
|
EU268405.1 |
EU268373.1 |
EU268312.1 |
|
|
Hemidactylus bowringii 2 |
|
|
EU268406.1 |
EU268374.1 |
EU268313.1 |
|
|
Hemidactylus robustus 1 |
MVZ 248437 |
Pakistan, Thatta District, 40km S of
Mipur Sakro 1 |
EU268408 |
EU268376 |
EU268315 |
EU268345 |
|
Hemidactylus robustus 2 |
FMNH 245519 |
Pakistan, Baluchistan Province, Gwadar
Division, Makran 2 |
HM559610 |
EU054287 |
EU054271 |
EU054255 |
|
Hemidactylus robustus 3 |
MVZ 234374 |
Iran, Lorestan Province, 99km SW (by
road) of KhorramAbah 3 |
HM559611 |
HM559644 |
HM559710 |
HM559677 |
|
Hemidactylus reticulatus 1 |
AMB 5730 |
India, Tamil Nadu, Vellore 1 |
EU268410 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus reticulatus 2 |
CES07016 |
India, Karnataka, Pavgada 2 |
HM595669 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus reticulatus 3 |
CES06024 |
India, Karnataka, Bangalore 3 |
HM595670 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus parvimaculatus 1 |
AMB 7475 |
Sri Lanka, Kandy 1 |
GQ375290 |
GQ458055 |
GQ375309 |
GQ375302 |
|
Hemidactylus parvimaculatus 2 |
ADS36 |
Sri Lanka, Kartivu 2 |
GQ375291 |
GQ458053 |
GQ375310 |
GQ375303 |
|
Hemidactylus parvimaculatus 3 |
AMB 7466 |
Sri Lanka, Mampuri 3 |
GQ375292 |
GQ458056 |
GQ375311 |
GQ375304 |
|
Hemidactylus craspedotus |
LLG 5613 |
Malaysia, Perak, Temengor |
HM559586 |
HM559618 |
HM559684 |
HM559651 |
|
Hemidactylus platyurus 1 |
KU 304111 |
Philippines, Lubang Id., Occidental
Mindoro Prov., Lubang 1 |
HM559587 |
HM559619 |
HM559685 |
HM559652 |
|
Hemidactylus depressus 1 |
ADS 29A |
Sri Lanka, Galkotte 1 |
HM559589 |
HM559621 |
HM559687 |
HM559654 |
|
Hemidactylus depressus 2 |
ADS 69A |
Sri Lanka, Kuruwekotha 2 |
HM559590 |
HM559622 |
HM559688 |
HM559655 |
|
Hemidactylus depressus 3 |
AMB 7440 |
Sri Lanka, Dumbulayala 3 |
HM559591 |
HM559623 |
HM559689 |
HM559656 |
|
Hemidactylus depressus 4 |
AMB 7445 |
Sri Lanka, Ritigala 4 |
HM559592 |
HM559624 |
HM559690 |
HM559657 |
|
Hemidactylus depressus 5 |
AMB 7481 |
Sri Lanka, Matale 5 |
HM559593 |
HM559625 |
HM559691 |
HM559658 |
|
Hemidactylus depressus 6 |
AMB 7524 |
Sri Lanka, Galle 6 |
HM559594 |
HM559626 |
HM559692 |
HM559659 |
|
Hemidactylus giganteus 1 |
JB03 |
India (captive specimen) 1 |
HM559598 |
HM559632 |
HM559698 |
HM559665 |
|
Hemidactylus giganteus 2 |
CES08013 |
India, Karnataka, Hampi 2 |
HM595657 |
|
HM622357 |
HM622372 |
|
Hemidactylus haitianus 1 |
AMB 4188 |
Dominican Republic, Santo Domingo 1 |
HM559599 |
HM559633 |
HM559699 |
HM559666 |
|
Hemidactylus haitianus 2 |
AMB 4189 |
Dominican Republic, Santo Domingo 2 |
HM559600 |
HM559634 |
HM559700 |
HM559667 |
|
Hemidactylus leschenaultii 1 |
AMB 7443 |
Sri Lanka, Polonnaruwa 1 |
HM559601 |
HM559635 |
HM559701 |
HM559668 |
|
Hemidactylus leschenaultii 2 |
JB05 |
India (captive specimen) 2 |
HM559602 |
HM559636 |
HM559702 |
HM559669 |
|
Hemidactylus leschenaultii 3 |
CES07041 |
India, Tamil Nadu, Chidambaram 3 |
HM595662 |
|
HM622360 |
|
|
Hemidactylus longicephalus |
CAS 218939 |
São Tomé et Principe, São Tomé |
HM559603 |
HM559637 |
HM559703 |
HM559670 |
|
Hemidactylus mabouia 1 |
AMB 8301 |
South Africa, Limpopo Prov., nr. Huntleigh
1 |
HM559604 |
HM559638 |
HM559704 |
HM559671 |
|
Hemidactylus mabouia 2 |
YPM 14798 |
USA, Florida, Monroe Co., Little Torch
Key 2 |
HM559605 |
HM559639 |
HM559705 |
HM559672 |
|
Hemidactylus hunae |
AMB 7416 |
Sri Lanka, Pitakumbura |
HM559606 |
HM559640 |
HM559706 |
HM559673 |
|
Hemidactylus maculatus |
BNHS1516 |
India, Maharashtra, Raigad District,
Zirad |
HM559607 |
HM559641 |
HM559707 |
HM559674 |
|
Hemidactylus prashadi 1 |
CES07037 |
India, Maharashtra, Ratnagiri 1 |
HM595666 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus prashadi 2 |
CES06170 |
India, Karnataka, Udupi 2 |
HM595667 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus prashadi 3 |
CES07040 |
India, Karnataka, Castle Rock 3 |
HM595668 |
|
HM622364 |
HM622378 |
|
Hemidactylus prashadi 4 |
JB02 |
India (captive specimen) 4 |
HM559608 |
HM559643 |
HM559708 |
HM559675 |
|
Hemidactylus prashadi 5 |
JB30 |
India (captive specimen) 5 |
HM559609 |
HM559644 |
HM559709 |
HM559676 |
|
Hemidactylus lankae |
AMB 7453 |
Sri Lanka, nr. Medavachchiya |
HM559615 |
HM559648 |
HM559714 |
HM559681 |
|
Hemidactylus triedrus 1 |
JB09 |
India (captive specimen) 1 |
HM559616 |
HM559649 |
HM559715 |
HM559682 |
|
Hemidactylus triedrus 2 |
JB08 |
Pakistan (captive specimen) 2 |
HM559617 |
HM559650 |
HM559716 |
HM559683 |
|
Hemidactylus triedrus 3 |
CES07007 |
India, Karnataka, Ramnagar 3 |
HM595673 |
— |
HM622365 |
HM622379 |
|
Hemidactylus aaronbaueri 1 |
CES08022 |
India, Maharashtra, Pune 1 |
HM595640 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus aaronbaueri 2 |
CES08016 |
India, Maharashtra, Raigad District 2 |
HM595641 |
|
HM622352 |
HM622367 |
|
Hemidactylus albofasciatus 1 |
CES07038 |
India, Maharashtra, Sindhudurg District,
Malvan 1 |
HM595642 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Hemidactylus albofasciatus 2 |
CES08018 |
India, Maharashtra, Sindhudurg District,
Malvan 2 |
HM595643 |
— |
— |
— |
|
Dravidogecko anamallensis |
CES08029 |
India, Kerala, Eravikulam, |
HM595644 |
|
HM622353 |
HM622368 |
|
Hemidactylus gracilis |
CES07039 |
India, Maharashtra, Pune |
HM595660 |
— |
HM622359 |
HM622374 |
|
Hemidactylus persicus |
CES08027 |
India, Rajasthan, Jaisalmer |
HM595665 |
— |
HM622362 |
HM622376 |
|
Hemidactylus yajurvedi 1 |
CES12006 |
Kanker, Chhattisgarh, India 1 |
KT601564 |
— |
KT601569 |
KT601566 |
|
Hemidactylus yajurvedi 2 |
CES12007 |
Kanker, Chhattisgarh, India 2 |
KT601565 |
— |
KT601568 |
KT601567 |
|
Hemidactylus treutleri |
CES06108 |
India, Telangana, Hyderabad |
KU720681 |
— |
KU720742 |
|
|
Hemidactylus graniticolus |
CES08028 |
India, Tamil Nadu, Nilgiri Hills |
HM595664 |
— |
HM622361 |
HM622375 |
|
Hemidactylus vanam |
BNHS2329 |
India, Tamil Nadu, Meghamalai |
MG711527.1 |
MG711532.1 |
MG711540.1 |
MG711535.1 |
|
Hemidactylus sushilduttai |
ESV 112 |
Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam District,
Andhra Pradesh, India |
MF668228.1 |
|
|
|
|
Hemidactylus kangerensis |
BNHS 2486 |
Kanger Valley National Park, Bastar
District, Chhattisgarh |
KY938009.1 |
|
|
|
|
Hemidactylus acanthopholis |
CES17066 |
Tamil Nadu, India |
MG711526.1 |
MG711531.1 |
MG711539.1 |
MG711534.1 |
*accession
number pending
Table 4. Analysis of variable
contributions of H. scabriceps Maxent model. The names of the variables
are as follows: _bio3_28 = Isothermality, _bio2_28 = Mean diurnal range,
_bio1_28 = Annual mean temperature, _bio15_28 = Precipitation seasonality,
_bio14_28 = Precipitation seasonality, _bio19_28 = Precipitation of coldest
quarter, _bio18_28 = Precipitation of the warmest quarter, _bio8_28 = Mean
temperature of the wettest quarter and _bio12_28 = Annual temperature
|
Variable |
Percent contribution |
Permutation importance |
|
bio2 |
43.5 |
49.3 |
|
bio12 |
23 |
26.5 |
|
alt |
11.9 |
20.5 |
|
bio1 |
9.7 |
2.9 |
|
bio18 |
6.5 |
0 |
|
bio3 |
4.8 |
0.2 |
|
veg |
0.5 |
0.3 |
|
bio19 |
0.1 |
0 |
|
bio14 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
bio8 |
0 |
0.1 |

REFERENCES
Agarwal,
I. & K.P. Karanth (2015). A phylogeny of the only ground-dwelling
radiation of Cyrtodactylus (Squamata, Gekkonidae): diversification of Geckoella
across peninsular India and Sri Lanka. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
82: 193–199; http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.09.016
Agarwal, I. &
U. Ramakrishnan (2017). A phylogeny of open-habitat lizards (Squamata: Lacertidae: Ophisops)
supports the antiquity of Indian grassy biomes. Journal of Biogeography 44(9):
2021–2032.
Agarwal,
I., V.B. Giri & A.M. Bauer
(2011). A new
cryptic rock-dwelling Hemidactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from south
India. Zootaxa 2765: 21–37.
Altschul,
S.F., T.L. Madden, A.A. Schäffer, J. Zhang, Z. Zhang, W. Miller
& D.J. Lipman (1997). Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search
programs. Nucleic AcidsRresearch 25(17): 3389–3402; http://doi.org/10.1093/nar/25.17.3389
Annandale, N. (1906). Notes on the fauna of a desert tract in
southern India. Part. I. Batrachians and reptiles, with remarks on the reptiles
of the desert region of the north-west frontier. Memoirs of Asiatic Society
of Bengal, Calcutta 1: 183–202.
Bansal, R. & K.P. Karanth (2010). Molecular phylogeny of Hemidactylus
geckos (Squamata: Gekkonidae) of the Indian subcontinent reveals a unique
Indian radiation and an Indian origin of Asian house geckos. Molecular
Phylogenetics and Evolution 57(1): 459–465; http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2010.06.008
Bansal, R. & K.P. Karanth (2013). Phylogenetic analysis and molecular dating
suggest that Hemidactylus anamallensis is not a member of the Hemidactylus
radiation and has an ancient late Cretaceous origin. PloS ONE 8(5):
e60615; http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060615
Bauer, A.M., T.R. Jackman, E. Greenbaum,
V.B. Giri & A. De Silva (2010). South Asia supports a major endemic
radiation of Hemidactylus geckos. Molecular Phylogenetics and
Evolution 57(1): 343–352; http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2010.06.014
Bauer, A.M., V.B. Giri, E. Greenbaum, T.R.
Jackman, M.S. Dharne & Y.S. Shouche (2008). On the systematics of the gekkonid genus Teratolepis
Günther, 1869: another one bites the dust. Hamadryad 33: 13–27.
Carranza, S. & E.N. Arnold (2006). Systematics, biogeography, and evolution
of Hemidactylus geckos (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) elucidated using
mitochondrial DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 38(2):
531–545: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2005.07.012
Chaitanya, R., A. Lajmi & V.B. Giri
(2018). A new
cryptic, rupicolous species of Hemidactylus Oken, 1817 (Squamata:
Gekkonidae) from Meghamalai, Tamil Nadu, India. Zootaxa 4374 (1):
049–070.
Deepak, V. & K.P. Karanth (2018). Aridification driven diversification of
fan-throated lizards from the Indian subcontinent. Molecular
Phylogenetics and Evolution 120: 53–62.
Deepak, V., R. Vyas, V.B. Giri & K.P.
Karanth (2015). A
taxonomic mystery for more than 180 years: the identity and systematic position
of Brachysaura minor (Hardwicke & Gray, 1827). Vertebrate Zoology
65(3): 371–381.
Deepak, V., V.B. Giri, M. Asif, S.K.
Dutta, R. Vyas, A.M. Zambre, H. Bhosale & K.P. Karanth (2016). Systematics and phylogeny of Sitana
(Reptilia: Agamidae) of Peninsular India, with the description of one new genus
and five new species. Contributions to Zoology 85(1): 67–111.
Elith, J., C.H. Graham, R.P. Anderson, M.
Dudík, S. Ferrier, A. Guisan, R.J. Hijmans, F. Huettmann, J.R. Leathwick, A.
Lehmann & J. Li (2006). Novel methods improve prediction of species’
distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29: 129–151.
Escalante, T., G. Rodríguez-Tapia, M.
Linaje, P. Illoldi-Rangel & R. González-López (2013). Identification of areas of endemism
from species distribution models: threshold selection and Nearctic
mammals. TIP 16(1): 5–17.
Ganesh, S.R. & S.R. Chandramouli
(2010). Rediscovery
of Hemidactylus scabriceps (Annandale, 1906) (Reptilia: Sauria:
Gekkonidae) from Eastern Tamil Nadu, India. Russian Journal of
Herpetology 17(1): 70–74.
Ganesh, S.R., M. Rameshwawaran, N.A.
Joseph & A.M. Jerith (2017). On the little-known terrestrial South Asian geckoes Hemidactylus
reticulatus and Hemidactylus scabriceps (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Journal
of Threatened Taxa 9(5): 10171–10177; http://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3163.9.5.10171-10177
Giri, V.B. & A.M. Bauer (2008). A new ground-dwelling Hemidactylus
(Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Maharashtra, with a key to the Hemidactylus of
India. Zootaxa 1700: 21–34.
Giri, V.B., A.M. Bauer, P. Mohapatra, C. Srinivasulu & I. Agarwal
(2017). A new species
of large-bodied, tuberculate Hemidactylus Oken (Squamata: Gekkonidae)
from the Eastern Ghats, India. Zootaxa 4347 (2): 331–345.
Guptha, B., N.V.S. Prasad, S.T. Maddock & V. Deepak (2015). First record of Chrysopelea taprobanica Smith, 1943 (Squamata:
Colubridae) from India. Check List 11(1): 1523.
Hijmans, R.J., S.E. Cameron, J.L. Parra,
P.G. Jones & A. Jarvis (2005). Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land
areas. International Journal of Climatology 25: 1965–1978; http://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1276
Lajmi, A., V.B. Giri & K.P. Karanth
(2016). Molecular
data in conjunction with morphology help resolve the Hemidactylus brookii complex
(Squamata: Gekkonidae). Organisms Diversity and Evolution 16(3):
659–677; http://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-016-0271-9
Lanfear, R., B. Calcott, S.Y. Ho & S.
Guindon (2016).
Partition-Finder: Combined selection of partitioning schemes and substitution
models for phylogenetic analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29(6):
1695–1701.
Loveridge, A. (1947). Revision of the African lizards of
the family Gekkonidae. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 95:
1–469.
Mahony, S. (2009). A new species of gecko of the genus Hemidactylus
(Reptilia: Gekkonidae) from Andhra Pradesh, India. Russian Journal of
Herpetology 16(1): 27–34.
Mahony, S. (2011). Taxonomic revision of Hemidactylus
brookii Gray: a re-examination of the type series and some Asian synonyms,
and a discussion of the obscure species Hemidactylus subtriedrus Jerdon
(Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Zootaxa 3042: 37–67.
Murthy, B.H.C.K., A. Bauer, A. Lajmi, I.
Agarwal & V.B. Giri (2015). A new rock dwelling Hemidactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from
Chhattisgarh, India. Zootaxa 4021 (2): 334–350; http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4021.2.5
Parker, H.W. & R.H.R. Taylor (1942). The lizards of British Somaliland:
with an appendix on topography and climate. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative
Zoology 91 (1): 1–101.
Phillips, S.J., Dudik, M., & R.E.
Schapire (2012). A
brief tutorial on Maxent. AT&T Labs-Research, Princeton University, and the
Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History.
Ponton, C., L. Giosan, T.I. Eglinton, D.Q.
Fuller, J.E. Johnson, P. Kumar & T.S. Collett (2012). Holocene aridification of India. Geophysical
Research Letters 39: L03–704; http://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL050722
Regalado, R. (2003). Roles of visual, acoustic, and chemical
signals in social interactions of the tropical House Gecko (Hemidactylus
mabouia). Caribbean Journal of Science 39(3): 307–320.
Sambrook, J. & D. Russell (2001). Preparation of genomic DNA from mouse
tails and other small samples, pp. 6.23–6.27. In: Molecular Cloning: A
Laboratory Manual. 3rd Edition. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Press, New York.
Silvestro, D. & I. Michalak (2012). RAxMlGUI: A graphical front-end for
RAxML. Organisms Diversity and Evolution 12(4): 335–337.
Stromberg, C.A.E. (2011). Evolution of grasses and grassland
ecosystems. Annual Reviews of Earth & Planet Sciences 39: 517–544; http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-040809-152402
Smith, M.A. (1935). The fauna of British India,
including Ceylon and Burma. Taylor and Francis, Red Lion Court, London,
440pp.
Somaweera, R. & N. Somaweera (2009). Lizards of Sri Lanka: A Colour
Guide with Field Keys. Edition Chimaira, Germany, 303pp.
Tamura, K., D. Peterson, N. Peterson, G.
Stecher, M. Nei & S. Kumar (2011). MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics
analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony
methods. Molecular Biology and Evolution 28: 2731–2739; http://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr121
Thompson, J.D., D.G. Higgins, & T.J.
Gibson (1994).
CLUSTAL W: Improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment
through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix
choice. Nucleic Acids Research 22(22): 4673–4680.
Uetz, P. & J. Hošek (2018). The Reptile Database. http://www. reptile-database.
org. Accessed August 2017.
Wisz, M.S., R.J. Hijmans, J. Li, A.T.
Peterson, C.H. Graham & A. Guisan (2008). Effects of sample size on the performance
of species distribution models. Diversity and Distributions 14(5): 763–773.
Appendix 1. Hemidactylus scabriceps material
examined
Syntype: BMNH 1946.8.22.40, adult female,
Ramnad, Madras District (=Ramnad, Tamil Nadu, India), collected by Col.
Annandale, 1906.
BMNH 1920.12.14.2, adult female, Adiyar,
Madras (= Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India), collected by D.W. Devanesan, 1920.
BMNH 1933.11.24.1, adult male,
Mariccukatti, Northern Province, Ceylon (= Sri Lanka), collected by P.E.P.
Deraniyagala, 1934.
CESL 503 & CESL 504, Adult male and
female, Kalakad, Tamil Nadu, India, Collected by Saunak Pal, 2012.
BNHS 2421, Adult Male, Kalapatti,
Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India, Collected by Achyuthan, N. Srikanthan and
Chethan Kumar Gandla, 2014.
VPC-GK-029 (IISER, Thiruvananthapuram), Adult male, Thanjavur, Tamil
Nadu, India, collected by Gopal Murali, 2014.