Darevskia mirabilis Arribas, Ilgaz, Kumlutaş, Durmuş, Avcı & Üzüm, 2013. stat. nov. (Fig. 12b). Type Locality: Ovit Pass, Kaçkar Mountains, Rize, Turkey. Distribution: It is known from the southern parts of Rize and Trabzon, especially around Kaçkar region. Comments: Distinctiveness of it already mentioned in other previous genetic studies (Rato et al. 2021; Candan et al. 2021), and whose isolated presence in the Kaçkar mountains, without contact with other forms, has made its classification oscillate between rudis and cf. valentini, and that has been genetically revealed in another distant locality (Sarıkamış, Kars, Turkey), a question that will be more deeply studied. Darevskia rudis rudis seems to be distinct from other forms that have been assigned to rudis s. lat., and that shall be considered now as nominally belonging to another taxon different from D. rudis: D. obscura stat. nov. (see below). Darevskia rudis would have as subspecies Darevskia rudis lantzicyreni (Darevsky & Eiselt, 1967) comb. nov. (Fig. 12d) and D. r. bolkardaghica (Fig. 12c). Darevskia bithynica, together with Darevskia b. tristis, perhaps paraphyletic and harboring more than one taxon within, or perhaps the results (paraphyly) are due to an ancient introgression that obscures its homogeneity. Darevskia valentini (s. str.) (Fig. 12f), monotypical, without any of its former subspecies (latzicyreni or spitzenbergerae) that belong to other species or are taxa on its own. Darevskia obscura (Lantz & Cyrén, 1936) stat. nov., including D. obscura bischoffi comb. nov. and D. obscura macromaculata comb. nov.. The latter seems to be identical in the different analyses done and could be synonymous with obscura s. str. (almost the Turkish populations). Must be mentioned that D. obscura has been postulated as a species on its own by other authors (Gabelaia et al. 2018 – by geometric morphometrics; Tarkhnishvili et al. 2020b - by head shape morphometrics-; Gabelaia 2019). It remains to clarify the status of the two forms of the Greater Caucasus (D. r. chechenica, and D. r. svanetica): independent from the others or probably closer to D. obscura, but not to the true D. rudis. This point has to be confirmed, however. DISCUSSION Phylogenetic reconstruction The complex structure of the studied group, D. valentini, D. rudis, and their relatives, has been recognized from the first studies to the present (Lantz & Cyren 1936; Darevsky & Eiselt 1967; Darevsky 1967; 1972; Darevsky & Lukina 1977; Eiselt et al. 1992; Arribas et al. 2013; Rato et al. 2021; Candan et al. 2021). This complexity has always been attractive to researchers who apply both kinds of markers, morphology and/or more recently genetics trying to solve it. Elaborated recent assessments using genetic markers point out that there are more lineages within the D. valentini / D. rudis complexes than the previously suspected (Candan et al. 2021; Rato et al. 2021). In this study, we aimed to increase the knowledge of the status of the currently recognized genetic lineages by creating the largest datasets, including a remote subspecies not studied so far – D. v. spitzenbergerae – for the first time, to use in both morphological and molecular analyses to clarify the problem. Our phylogenetic results show the presence of several monophyletic clades that reveal themselves as different species (Fig. 9). Of these distinct clades, some had been well-documented for the first time in a recently published study (Candan et al. 2021), and the authors have accepted that D. valentini s. lat. has more genetic lineages than previously suspected, two of which have been presented there as they should have to be described and named. However, two important shortcomings that we have tried to eliminate here prevented them from their taxonomic description: the lack of morphological study for diagnoses and the absence of samples of one of the up to now two unique subspecies of D. valentini (D. v. spitzenbergerae), whose study was unavoidable to make taxonomic decisions. As seen from the tree topology obtained here, genetically divergent lineages, clades A and B, were detected as monophyletic (Fig. 9). The occurrence of these two highly divergent monophyletic lineages is not only confirmed by the tree topology but also the species delimitation analyses revealed both clades as different species, which is one of the most important factors that paved the way for the here proposed taxonomic revision. Network analyses based on both genetic markers also supported this distinction. In Cyt-b, all clades were placed into their unique positions and they did not share any haplotypes (Fig. 10A). In MC1R, which is a nuclear marker and has slower substitution rates, an agreement relatively with a more complex structure was showed. Clade A is represented by a single haplotype (Hap16), while clade B appears to have two haplotypes (Hap16 and Hap26) (Fig. 10B). Although these results were suggested by Candan et al. (2021), a definite conclusion could not be made due to the absence of subspecies D. v. spitzenbergerae, a problem now solved. Considering sampling data used in our phylogenetic construction, clade A consists of both D. s. spitzenbergerae from Mergan Plateau (type locality of this relevant and geographically extreme subspecies) and D. s. wernermayeri ssp. nov. from Narlıca Valley as sister taxa (Fig. 9). Although the population located in Narlıca Valley (Van, Turkey) is morphologically included in D. v. lantzicyreni (Eiselt et al. 1992), it is genetically more closely related to D. s. spitzenbergerae than to the former. In addition to this, the populations, which were assimilated to D. v. lantzicyreni according to morphology (Eiselt et al. 1992), represent a completely different lineage (clade B) according to genetics. Such discordant patterns called cryptic speciation are often shown in the lizards (Ahmadzadeh et al. 2013; Kornilios et al. 2018; Karakasi et al. 2021; Arribas et al. 2022). Another major point is the status of D. r. mirabilis (clade C). This subspecies was first described by Arribas et al. (2013) from Ovit Pass, a very isolated geographic region in Kaçkar Mountains. Its phylogenetic position is obvious here and reveals that it should be a species as different as clades A and B (Fig. 9). The genetic difference of this taxon was demonstrated by two independent studies. Firstly, Rato et al. (2021) suggested that a clade, called Trabzon-Rize in their study, is genetically distinct and that it should be considered one of the four main lineages of D. rudis. Since they did not distinguish any subspecies, they could not determine that this clade belongs to D. r. mirabilis. The fact that the D. rudis specimens used in their study share the same branch with a specimen we know for certain to be D. r. mirabilis, undoubtedly proves that this clade is a new taxon and the corresponding samples of Rato et al. (2021) belong to it. Secondly, Candan et al. (2021) has also mentioned that it has isolated genetic structure and that its distribution area may be wider than expected because a datum retrieved from GenBank (Tarkhnishvili et al. 2013), which is located around Sarıkamış (Kars, Turkey), clustered with D. r. mirabilis in the same branch. Similar to Candan et al. (2021), one of the interesting results obtained within D. valentini / D. rudis complexes is that the specimens belonging to D. r. rudis, D. r. bolkardaghica and D. v. lantzicyreni, cluster together with overlapping. This unexpected pattern makes it difficult to engage the complexity of the group, which unables to apply the current nomenclature and difficulties understanding the main processes underlying genetic variation. Considering the genetic (Fig. 9) and morphological (see results section) evidence together, the most possible scenario seems to accept that D. v. lantzicyreni is really a subspecies of D. rudis, not from D. valentini. Thus, nominal form of D. valentini is only limited to northeast Anatolia (with areas of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan), while the distribution of D. rudis sensu novo, extends from the northeastern Black Sea region to the inner Anatolia and from there to the south up to the Bolkar Mountains. Finally, the status of some former subspecies of D. rudis also inevitably needs revision. The claim that a member of this group, D. r. obscura, is different has been put forward in a previous study including phenotypic comparison (Gabelaia et al. 2018; Tarkhnishvili et al. 2020b). The phylogenetic results strongly support these morphological findings (clade G, Fig. 9). Above all, D. r. obscura has a phylogenetic position quite closely related to other two former D. rudis subspecies: D. r. bischoffi and D. r. macromaculata. Considering all these results, it seems that accepting the first described form, D. saxicola obscura Lantz & Cyren 1936, as a species: D. obscura will contribute positively to the clarification of this group. Morphology derived structure Considering the studied complex group it seems that there are three large groups, which obviously coincide with the current taxonomy based on morphology (we still use here the old nomenclature to refer them). The most different includes D. bithynica s. str. and D. b. tristis, which had longer heads both concerning its width, and also about their body length, but not in their pilei because other species (especially of the former rudis complex) had smaller (in size and length) but very wide heads. Similarly, the scales that cover the upper part of the crus are small and barely keeled. Also, they had comparatively longer hindlimbs (are the more climbing, based on this characteristic). Osteologically, they have very rarely any B-Type pre-autotomic vertebrae. The sternal fontanelle is frequently reduced or absent in D. b. bithynica. Postorbital and postfrontal are subequal or the postorbital is a bit smaller (different to D. valentini, clade B and D. v. spitzenbergerae). Squamosal and postorbital overlap commonly in half of the second’s length (as also in D. r. bolkardaghica), more usually than in other forms of the group. Darevskia b. bithynica and D. b. tristis are identical in ANOSIM. This species is also recovered by genetics. Genetics indicates the possibility that tristis is paraphyletic as presently understood. The former valentini complex has a broad overlap among the different forms in CDA. These valentini complex samples had comparatively longer limbs, comparatively smaller heads, a greater number of scales in the crus (which in this case corresponds also to smaller scale size, and are no or almost-none keeled), and less markedly, a greater number of ventral and dorsal scales. Anal index, a bit greater (scale comparatively wider) in D. valentini than in D. bithynica or the former rudis complex. One of their supposed taxa, D. v. lantzicyreni, perhaps due to its wide dispersal and the presence of isolated populations, appears somewhat heterogeneous. Darevskia v. lantzicyreni overlaps a few with D. r. bolkardaghica (in males, and even more in females, which would be in agreement with the genetic results and the taxonomic changes proposed above). In turn, D. v. lantzicyreni has the higher dorsalia among the former valentini complex and is the closer of this complex to D. rudis s. str., which would also agree with the genetic analysis (see above) and its relation as conspecific. Darevskia r. bolkardaghica is characterized by low lamellae (in males and females), and osteologically is characterized because not infrequently shows a weakly ossified rib associated to the third vertebra (an extremely rare character, probably atavistic, associated to small and isolated populations), and the sternal fontanelle adopt singular shapes in sand-clock, irregular cordiform or trilobate in its forepart.Also its squamosal and postorbital bones overlap commonly in half of the second’s length (as in D. bithynica). Genetically, it is related to D. v. lantzicyreni and D. r. rudis (all three are proposed here as subspecies of D. rudis) Darevskia v. spitzenbergerae, clade A (here treated as the nominal ssp. of D. spitzenbergerae), and clade B (here described as a new species) (in males) and in general, as all the former valentini complex (in females) have higher ventralia counts than in D. bithynica or the former rudis complex taxa. Osteologically, this singular form (spitzenbergerae) has the interclavicle lateral branches inclined forwards (with only this model in typical D. s. spitzenbergerae) and in “clade A” (coexisting with some branches backward). Postorbital and postfrontal are subequal or the postorbital is a bit greater (as in D. valentini s. str. or clade B). Nominal taxa spitzenbergerae +clade A, and clade B are recovered as two different species by genetics. Darevskia spitzenbergerae and clade A are primitive forms, among the closely related to D. rudis (sensu novo) and their subspecies (lantzicyreni and bolkardaghica, especially this latter). Darevskia valentini s. str. seems to be a different taxon (genetics) without its formerly assigned subspecies (is nominotypical). It has Temporalia2 a bit lower than in related taxa. In D. valentini s. str. not infrequently appear some B-Type autotomic vertebrae. Postorbital and postfrontal are subequal or the postorbital is a bit greater (as in clade B or D. spitzenbergerae). Darevskia rudis complex is characterized by smaller dorsalia in a great part of the rudis complex (except in D. r. rudis –yet indicated in Arribas et al. 2013, that also is recovered as a different species in genetic analyses), than in the former valentini complex and D. bithynica ssp. (except in D. v. valentini that has lower scores similar to the main former rudis complex). Hindlimb relative length is also comparatively smaller when compared with the former valentini complex and even more with D. bithynica. These differences shall be considered as characteristic of D. obscura and their newly assigned subspecies, which are very few differentiated. Darevskia r. obscura and D. r. macromaculata are near the same by morphology, as suggested in Arribas et al. (2013). They are so similar in all analyses (including non-significant differences in ANOSIM) that they appear to be the same (increased pigmentation in typical Georgian macromaculata, but perhaps not in Turkish specimens, a question to be studied in future). Temporalia1 is somewhat smaller in D. r. macromaculata and D. r. obscura (M, F), and SVL (size) is greater in D. r. bischoffi (M, F). Paradoxically, D. rudis s. str. is morphologically extreme and a differentiated form within “its” former complex, and is distinguished from the other former rudis complex taxa (now D. obscura sspp.) by its greater values of dorsalia. Also, it is basal to the group in UPGMA. Osteologically, in D. rudis s. str. postorbital and postfrontal are subequal or the first is smaller than the second (as in D. obscura and D. bithynica). The two extreme populations displaced towards the south of both classical complexes (D. rudis bolkardaghica and D. valentini spitzenbergerae) result in the ones that connect morphologically the former rudis and valentini complexes.This may be because they are the most primitive in both groups, or because of an ecoclimatic convergence in their scalation. Both live on calcareous substrates (siliceous, even volcanic in the other forms), so they have a lighter background color than other forms (darker). Concordance of genetic and morphological results a) The classic morphological groupings/species (rudis and valentini complexes) seem to be no longer valid, due to newly discovered “intermediate” taxa, recent speciation, and multiple past and present introgression. The situation is fairly more complex than previously expected. b) The above-mentioned morphological characteristics of D. bithynica are valid for this species. c) The above-mentioned morphological characteristics of D. rudis complex are valid for D. obscura (and its sspp. macromaculata and bischoffi). d) As stated above D. rudis s. str. is distinguished from the other former rudis complex taxa (hereinafter D. obscura sspp.) by its greater values of dorsalia. Also, it is basal to the group in UPGMA. e) Darevskia r. lantzicyreni comb. nov. and D. r. bolkardaghica are subspecies of D. rudis. f) Darevskia spitzenbergerae is a different taxon. The fourth axis of females analysis (at the limit of significance) discriminates specially clade A (D. s. wernermayeri nov. ssp.) and in a lesser degree D. v. spitzenbergerae (that genetically cluster together and are very similar in ANOVA), characterized by higher values of lamellae, preanalia and femoralia. Inside this spitzenbergerae genetic clade, preanalia is higher in clade A (D. s. wernermayeri nov. ssp.) and strongly characterizes it (M, F) concerning near all the taxa studied here (and if the Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison test is used instead of the much stricter of Scheffe, is significantly different to all the taxa, including the nominal D. s. spitzenbergerae) g) Darevskia mirabilis is another taxon, genetically singular, and only moderately differentiated in its morphology within the former rudis complex (morphologically seems more related to D. o. obscura or D. r. bolkardaghica –Anatolian diagonal effect? -), and longtime approached to D. valentini by its pattern, but well isolated genetically. In ANOVA, very low supraciliar granula (M, F) (especially distinctive of this taxon) and gularia (M), and higher circumanalia (M) counts are the most diagnostic characters. h) The number (tibialia), size and keeling of the crus scales was formerly used to distinguish between the forms assigned to “ rudis ” and “ valentini ” (sensu auctt.) and is distinctive with higher counts (and smaller scales size and keeling) in the former valentini complex (and D. b. bithynica), appearing, to the contrary, the lower counts (with big size and strong keeling) in part of the former rudis, Published as part of Arribas, Oscar, Candan, Kamil, Kornilios, Panagiotis, Ayaz, Dinçer, Kumlutaş, Yusuf, Gül, Serkan, Yilmaz, Can, Caynak, Elif Yildirim & Ilgaz, Çetin, 2022, Revising the taxonomy of Darevskia valentini (Boettger, 1892) and Darevskia rudis (Bedriaga, 1886) (Squamata, Lacertidae): a Morpho-Phylogenetic integrated study in a complex Anatolian scenario, pp. 1-68 in Zootaxa 5224 (1) on pages 25-29, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5224.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7517907, {"references":["Arribas, O., Ilgaz, C., Kumlutas, Y., Durmus, S. H., Avci, A. & Uzum, N. (2013) External morphology and osteology of Darevskia rudis (Bedriaga, 1886), with a taxonomic revision of the Pontic and Small-Caucasus populations (Squamata: Lacertidae). Zootaxa, 3626 (4), 401 - 428. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3626.4.1","Rato, C., Stratakis, M., Sousa-Guedes, D., Sillero, N., Corti, C., Freitas, S., Harris, D. J. & Carretero, M. A. (2021) The more you search, the more you find: Cryptic diversity and admixture within theAnatolian rock lizards (Squamata, Darevskia). Zoologica Scripta, 50 (2), 193 - 209. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / zsc. 12462","Candan, K., Kornilios, P., Ayaz, D., Kumlutas, Y., Gul, S., Yildirim-Caynak, E. & Ilgaz, C. (2021) Cryptic genetic structure within Valentin's Lizard, Darevskia valentini (Boettger, 1892) (Squamata, Lacertidae), with implications for systematics and origins of parthenogenesis. Systematics and Biodiversity, 19 (7), 665 - 681. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 14772000.2021.1909171","Darevsky, I. S. & Eiselt, J. (1967) Ein neuer Name fur Lacerta saxicola mehelyi Lantz & Cyren 1936. Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien, 70, 107.","Lantz, L. A. & Cyren, O. (1936) Description of Darevskia bithynica tristis. In: Contribution a la connaissance de Lacerta saxicola Eversmann. Bulletin de la Societe Zoologique de France, Paris, 61, pp. 159 - 181.","Gabelaia, M., Tarkhnishvili, D. & Adriaens, D. (2018) Use of three-dimensional geometric morphometrics for the identification of closely related species of Caucasian rock lizards (Lacertidae: Darevskia). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 125, 709 - 717. https: // doi. org / 10.1093 / biolinnean / bly 143","Tarkhnishvili, D., Gabelaia, M. & Adriaens, D. (2020 b) Phenotypic divergence, convergence and evolution of Caucasian rock lizards (Darevskia). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 130, 142 - 155. https: // doi. org / 10.1093 / biolinnean / blaa 021","Gabelaia, M. (2019) Phylogeny and morphological variation in the rock lizards of the genus Darevskia. Thesis, Ilia State University and Ghent University, Tbilisi, 121 pp.","Darevsky, I. S. & Lukina, G. P. (1977) Rock lizards of the Lacerta saxicola Eversmann group (Sauria, Lacertidae) collected in Turkey by Richard and Erica Clark. Proceedings of the Zoological Institute of the Academy of Sciences, U. S. S. R., 1977, 60 - 63.","Eiselt, J., Darevsky, I. S. & Schmidtler, J. F. (1992) Untersuchungen an Felseneidechsen (Lacerta saxicola komplex) in der ostlichen Turkei, I. Lacerta valentini Boettger. Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien, 93 (B), 1 - 18.","Ahmadzadeh, F., Flecks, M., Carretero, M. A., Mozaffari, O., Bohme, W., Harris, D. J., Freitas, S. & Rodder, D. (2013) Cryptic speciation patterns in Iranian Rock Lizards uncovered by integrative taxonomy. Plos One, 8 (12), 1 - 17. https: // doi. org / 10.1371 / journal. pone. 0080563","Kornilios, P., Kumlutas, Y., Lymberakis, P. & Ilgaz, C. (2018) Cryptic diversity and molecular systematics of the Aegean Ophiomorus skinks (Reptilia: Squamata), with the description of a new species. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 56 (3), 364 - 381. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / jzs. 12205","Karakasi, D., Ilgaz, C., Kumlutas, Y., Candan, K., Guclu, O., Kankilic, T., Beser, N., Sindaco, R., Lymberakis, P. & Poulakakis, N. (2021) More evidence of cryptic diversity in Anatololacerta species complex Arnold, Arribas and Carranza, 2007 (Squamata: Lacertidae) and re-evaluation of its current taxonomy. Amphibia-Reptilia, 42 (2), 201 - 216. https: // doi. org / 10.1163 / 15685381 - bja 10045","Arribas, O., Candan, K., Kurnaz, M., Kumlutas, Y., Yildirim-Caynak, E. & Ilgaz, C. (2022) A new cryptic species of the Darevskia parvula group from NE Anatolia (Squamata, Lacertidae). Organisms Diversity & Evolution, 22, 475 - 490. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 13127 - 022 - 00540 - 4","Tarkhnishvili, D., Murtskhvaladze, M. & Gavashelishvili, A. (2013) Speciation in Caucasian lizards: Climatic dissimilarity of the habitats is more important than isolation time. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 109 (4), 876 - 892. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / bij. 12092","Murphy, R. W., Fu, J., MacCulloch, R. Darevsky, I. S. & Kupriyanova, L. (2000) A fine line between sex and unisexuality: the phylogenetic constraints on parthenogenesis in lacertid lizards. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 130, 527 - 549. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / j. 1096 - 3642.2000. tb 02200. x"]}